"war in heaven" - real or metaphorical?

[Guest]

Satan went alone to mature plans that would most surely secure the fall of Adam and Eve. He had fears that his purposes might be defeated. And again, even if he should be successful in leading Adam and Eve to disobey the commandment of God, and thus become transgressors of his law, and no good come to himself, his own case would not be improved; his guilt would only be increased. He shuddered at the thought of plunging the holy, happy pair into the misery and remorse which he was himself enduring. He seemed in a state of indecision; at one time firm and determined, then hesitating and wavering. {ST, January 16, 1879 par. 15}

Satan would invent means to annoy the heavenly angels, and show contempt for his (God's) authority. As he could not gain admittance within the gates of Heaven, he would wait just at the entrance, to taunt the angels and seek contention with them as they should pass in and out. {ST, January 16, 1879 par. 12}

[Guest]

Satan tried to repent, but it was too late.

Satan trembled as he viewed his work. He was alone in meditation upon the past, the present, and his future plans. His mighty frame shook as with a tempest. An angel from Heaven was passing. He called him, and entreated an interview with Christ. This was granted him. He then related to the Son of God that he repented of his rebellion, and wished again the favor of God. He was willing to take the place God had previously assigned him, and be under his wise command. Christ wept at Satan's woe, but told him, as the mind of God, that he could never be received into Heaven. Heaven must not be placed in jeopardy. ......

The wretchedness he realized in losing the sweet light of Heaven, and the sense of guilt which forced itself upon him, and the disappointment he experienced himself in not finding his expectations realized, were the cause of his grief. To be commander out of Heaven, was vastly different from being thus honored in Heaven. The loss he had sustained of all the privileges of Heaven seemed too much to be borne. He wished to regain these. {1SP 30,31}

[karl]

Rebellion was not to be overcome by force. Compelling power is found only under Satan's government. The Lord's principles are not of this order. His authority rests upon goodness, mercy, and love; and the presentation of these principles is the means to be used. God's government is moral, and truth and love are to be the prevailing power.

I think this paragraph refers to the ultimate overcoming of rebellion. Rebellion is an attitude of the mind.

This wrestling below seems to be mental:

"While Satan was striving to influence the highest powers in the kingdom of Medo-Persia to show disfavor to God's people, angels worked in behalf of the exiles. The controversy was one in which all heaven was interested. Through the prophet Daniel we are given a glimpse of this mighty struggle between the forces of good and the forces of evil."

"For three weeks Gabriel wrestled with the powers of darkness, seeking to counteract the influences at work on the mind of Cyrus; and before the contest closed, Christ Himself came to Gabriel's aid. "The prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one and twenty days," Gabriel declares; "but, lo, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me; and I remained there with the kings of Persia." Daniel 10:13. All that heaven could do in behalf of the people of God was done. The victory was finally gained; the forces of the enemy were held in check all the days of Cyrus, and all the days of his son Cambyses, who reigned about seven and a half years."

There's lots I can't understand. For instance, when the Assyrians are arrayed against God's chosen people, a single angel wipes them out. Now, you know the Assyrians were inspired by evil angels to go against Israel. Where are those evil angels when this single angel of God wreaks havoc amongst their human minions? Or maybe they are just in it for the body count, so when there's killing going on, they are all for it no matter who gets the axe. Prophets and Kings (1917), page 571

[Robert]

those who KNEW God's will and then were sent to hell - receiving MANY stripes, much TORMENT - while those who did NOT know God's will and were found guilty and sent to hell - would receive FEW.

Nothing in Luke's quote stated anything about hell. That's your addition....

[Robert]

James 2 quotes the same thing calling in the ROYAL LAW.

The royal law isn't the moral law....

[Robert]

As was pointed out here it was "strength against strength"

Lucifer was no match for an all powerful God....This is nonsense...EGW is wrong here, just like she was was wrong when she said, "wicked children God does not love...the Lord sees you, and will not love you if you do wrong. “

[Robert]

Your view of this is far too narrow.

Yes, it is, but your view is sadistic.

Rob

[Robert]

{SR 18.2} White, E. G. (1947; 2002). The Story of Redemption (18). Review and Herald Publishing Association. PATRIARCHS AND PROPHETS, P. 40.] {SR 16.2} {SR 17.1} 1SP 22. {TA 43.1} {TA 43.2} {SR 19.1}

“The Lord loves those little children who try to do right, and he has promised that they shall be in his kingdom. But wicked children God does not love. He will not take them to the beautiful City, for he only admits the good, obedient, and patient children there…. When you feel tempted to speak impatient and fretful, remember the Lord sees you, and will not love you if you do wrong. “ [AY 63, 1860]

“Do not teach your children that God does not love them when they do wrong….Do not terrify your children by telling them of the wrath of God, but rather seek to impress them with his unspeakable love and goodness….” [bible Echo and Signs of the Times, 02-01-1892]

Do not think that, because we have a glimmer of the light of God, that we have it all.--Ms. 3, 1889, pp. 1-3. (Morning Talk at Ottawa, Kansas, May 14, 1889.)

The question has been asked me, "Do you think that the Lord has any more light for us as a people?" I answer that He has light that is new to us, and yet it is precious old light that is to shine forth from the Word of truth [the Bible]. We have only the glimmerings of the rays of the light that is yet to come to us. [1SM 401]

We have many lessons to learn, and many, many to unlearn. God and heaven alone are infallible. Those who think that they will never have to give up a cherished view, never have occasion to change an opinion, will be disappointed. [CW 37]

[BobRyan]

Yesterday I posted a reply to something that Richard Holbrook wrote, and I remarked at the time that it could be that Satan went elsewhere before coming to this earth.

I believe that the Bible evidence shows that at some point God did throw him and the other evil angels to this earth. That means God eventually made them come to this world. The evidence is found in Rev. 12: 4, 9; 2 Peter 2: 4 and Jude 6. All of these verses refer to the fallen angels being forced to come to the earth. There could have been-- and most likely was-- an indeterminate amount of time between leaving heaven and coming to this earth. It's reasonable that God would have done this after they had had time to visit the other planets and attempt unsuccessfully to get them to join his rebellion.

Some Bible scholars have suggested that Satan and his angels were thrown to this earth while it was still in a state of chaos, that is, in the conditon as seen in Gen. 1: 1, when it was "formless and desolate," prior to the first day of creation. This condition would seem to agree with the descriptions of the kind of place where they were "hurled" or "cast." 2 Peter says they were "cast to Tartarus," or hell, and "committed to pits of darkeness," or "dark dungeons" or "chains of darkness" to "be kept under guard for judgment." Jude 6 speaks of their having been reserved or kept "bound beneath the thick gloom," or the "darkness" "until the judgment of the great day." Let's also not forget that Rev. 12 says at least 4 times that they were cast out of heaven to the earth. So for me it's not a question of whether they were cast to this earth but rather of when they were cast down to it. I don't know the answer.

[BobRyan]

Originally Posted By: BobRyan

James 2 quotes the same thing calling in the ROYAL LAW.

The royal law isn't the moral law....

hint: Throw the scissors away - just read James 2 -- and "notice" the quotes of the Old Testament that you find there.

in Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

Originally Posted By: BobRyan

As was pointed out here it was "strength against strength"

Lucifer was no match for an all powerful God....This is nonsense...EGW is wrong here, “

hint: And so Ellen White explains why it is that God did not use the "all powerful God" bits to zap out the rebellion. INSTEAD of that open warfare was "allowed".

You have sooo many things you are anxious to ignore...no matter how obvious the problem for your position. Why keep doing that?

Your logic is very illusive in that regard.

in Christ,

Bob

[Woody]

Originally Posted By: BobRyan

{SR 18.2} White, E. G. (1947; 2002). The Story of Redemption (18). Review and Herald Publishing Association. PATRIARCHS AND PROPHETS, P. 40.] {SR 16.2} {SR 17.1} 1SP 22. {TA 43.1} {TA 43.2} {SR 19.1}

“The Lord loves those little children who try to do right, and he has promised that they shall be in his kingdom. But wicked children God does not love. He will not take them to the beautiful City, for he only admits the good, obedient, and patient children there…. When you feel tempted to speak impatient and fretful, remember the Lord sees you, and will not love you if you do wrong. “ [AY 63, 1860]

“Do not teach your children that God does not love them when they do wrong….Do not terrify your children by telling them of the wrath of God, but rather seek to impress them with his unspeakable love and goodness….” [bible Echo and Signs of the Times, 02-01-1892]

Do not think that, because we have a glimmer of the light of God, that we have it all.--Ms. 3, 1889, pp. 1-3. (Morning Talk at Ottawa, Kansas, May 14, 1889.)

The question has been asked me, "Do you think that the Lord has any more light for us as a people?" I answer that He has light that is new to us, and yet it is precious old light that is to shine forth from the Word of truth [the Bible]. We have only the glimmerings of the rays of the light that is yet to come to us. [1SM 401]

We have many lessons to learn, and many, many to unlearn. God and heaven alone are infallible. Those who think that they will never have to give up a cherished view, never have occasion to change an opinion, will be disappointed. [CW 37]

You make a good point here Rob.

[pnattmbtc]

There are other quotes from Ellen White in GC 499-504 which show that God could not immediately destroy Satan because the angels would have served God from fear and not understood the issues of the great controversy. But after Satan has proved his true character, all the universe can see the justice and rightness of God's judgment against Satan and all who follow him. Ellen White says "the utter extermination of sin" "now vindicates God's love and establishes His honor before the whole universe." It wouldn't have before, but it does after Satan is completely unmasked and everyone knows what he really represents.

[pnattmbtc]

Quote:

"Wishful thinking does not eliminate the details that point to the contrary." (Why say this?)

Because it's true?

You mean when I said it, right? But it was false when Bob said it. So he should have left it out.

I'm being tongue and cheek here, to illustrate the point. It's rather childish to be writing "No, you're wrong! I'm right!" What's next? "You're rubber and I'm glue?"

[pnattmbtc]

B:As already pointed out - War in heaven was real as Rev 12 states and Satan was in fact cast out - after "they fought" just as the Bible says.

p:Yes, the war was real, and "they fought," just as the Bible says, but the war was not and is not one which is decided by physical force.

B:Please see the 1SP 22 and SR 16-19 so recently posted here and respond to the "details" that apprently totally refute your statement above.

[pnattmbtc]

You are conflating two seperate points while ignoring each of the inconvenient details found in SR 16-19 and 1SP22 that so explicitly address the topic and refute your argument. You also missing another detail about how the war in heaven with all of its force and violence is a perfect example of God NOT using His own infinite power to solve a problem.

First the conflation --

The Rev 12 text (as in the case of 2Peter 3) takes the war in heaven BEFORE Eden and the events that took place AFTER the death of Christ (where Satan is then charged as a murderer) and combines them.

Clearly the physical war in heaven was over long before the death of Christ - and no one is arguing that at Christ's death another war was fought.

Your argument above is to point out that at the death of Christ - there is no physical violence - no "might against might" war in heaven itself.

A point everyone agrees with. (I think you also know this is true.)

What you have ignored is the fact that we are very clearly told about the physical war that took place in heaven prior to creation of this world.

Thus your argument is not really getting off the ground.

Second the "Power of God" issue.

Again in the inspired quotes you are ignoring.

The statements quoted explicitly state how God's allowing for force against force and strength against strength - is an example of His NOT simply zapping out the bad guys with His own power.

[pnattmbtc]

Yesterday I posted a reply to something that Richard Holbrook wrote, and I remarked at the time that it could be that Satan went elsewhere before coming to this earth.

I believe that the Bible evidence shows that at some point God did throw him and the other evil angels to this earth.

1.All the worlds had trees of the knowledge of good and evil, where Satan was able to tempt them.

2.He was only successful here.

Doesn't it make more sense that Satan set up his kingdom here because it was here that he had success? This is such an obvious explanation as to what happened, I don't see why an alternative would be considered. Suppose Satan had been unsuccessful here, but was successful elsewhere. Would God still have forced him to come here? Does that make any sense?

[BobRyan]

Originally Posted By: John317

There are other quotes from Ellen White in GC 499-504 which show that God could not immediately destroy Satan because the angels would have served God from fear and not understood the issues of the great controversy. But after Satan has proved his true character, all the universe can see the justice and rightness of God's judgment against Satan and all who follow him. Ellen White says "the utter extermination of sin" "now vindicates God's love and establishes His honor before the whole universe." It wouldn't have before, but it does after Satan is completely unmasked and everyone knows what he really represents.

The idea seems to be that God decided not to destroy Satan right away, because it wouldn't have been clear that Satan deserved to be destroyed, but in the end, when it's safe, God can destroy him. This idea has a couple of difficulties. One is it supposes that an artificial, imposes, separate destroying action is necessary, as opposed to simply allowing Satan to reap the final result of his sin. It makes sin innocuous of itself, as opposed to a force which inevitably results in death.

[John317]

Satan would invent means to annoy the heavenly angels, and show contempt for his (God's) authority. As he could not gain admittance within the gates of Heaven, he would wait just at the entrance, to taunt the angels and seek contention with them as they should pass in and out. {ST, January 16, 1879 par. 12}

I think the key phrase here is that Satan "could not gain admittance." (Notice it doesn't say "would not.") The only logical reason for this, it seems to me, is that God prohibited his admittance. It wouldn't make sense to me that the reason he "could not gain admittance within the gates" is simply his own choice due to the loyal angels not listening to him or not liking him there.

This agrees perfectly with her many other statements that God had "banished," or "expelled" Satan from heaven. That is certainly a type of force. Based on this statement alone, it is clear that Satan would like to get within the gates of Heaven, but God forces him to stay out. In human terms, it's kind of like God has a sign on the gate saying, "Satan, Do not Enter. If you try to enter, you will be arrested and thrown out again."

[John317]

In 2Peter 3 - the text "merges" the 2nd coming and the Lake of Fire - as these are all God's end time executive judgment.

In the same way in Rev 12 - John merges both the physical War in heaven (before the creation of earth) and the additional defeat of Satan at the cross.

Good points. The Scriptures, particularly the OT, do this often, as in Isaiah where the first and second coming are sometimes merged.

[teresaq]

You also missing another detail about how the war in heaven with all of its force and violence is a perfect example of God NOT using His own infinite power to solve a problem.

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: pnattmbtc

The idea seems to be that God decided not to destroy Satan right away, because it wouldn't have been clear that Satan deserved to be destroyed, but in the end, when it's safe, God can destroy him. This idea has a couple of difficulties. One is it supposes that an artificial, imposes, separate destroying action is necessary, as opposed to simply allowing Satan to reap the final result of his sin. It makes sin innocuous of itself, as opposed to a force which inevitably results in death.

Not true.

Your problem is in trying to be God "enough" to know the heart and soul of what it means to create a Universe of Free Will Intelligent beings.

[John317]

Satan tried to repent, but it was too late.

... Christ wept at Satan's woe, but told him, as the mind of God, that he could never be received into Heaven. Heaven must not be placed in jeopardy. ......

The wretchedness he realized in losing the sweet light of Heaven, and the sense of guilt which forced itself upon him, and the disappointment he experienced himself in not finding his expectations realized, were the cause of his grief. To be commander out of Heaven, was vastly different from being thus honored in Heaven. The loss he had sustained of all the privileges of Heaven seemed too much to be borne. He wished to regain these. {1SP 30,31}

Very instructive and significant. This shows that God was not trying to persuade Satan to stay in heaven right up to the time he left heaven. Some time before that, God had aleady decided Satan could not possibly remain in heaven. This is very important to realize.

[John317]

One observation - it is obvious that not all angels were created equal. at least one third were below average.

I agree that not all were created equal. Lucifer was the highest creature that God ever created.

But if we say that the angels who sinned were "below average," it seems to me that we would be implying that there was a relationship between their rebellion and the way God made them. We can't explain the rebellion in heaven because it doesn't have a cause. Free, perfect beings chose to sin.

There is this, though: We're told that Lucifer was jealous of Michael the Archangel, which is another name for the pre-incarnate Christ. Since Michael appeared to be just another angel,-- though the leader,-- Lucifer didn't realize His actual identity. Of course Michael's real identity was the Creator of the universe. Naturally that means Michael was Lucifer's creator. But Lucifer didn't know this.

Question: would Lucifer had gotten jealous of Michael and wanted to take his place if Lucifer had known from the start who Michael was?

My answer to this is that Lucifer's attitude toward God the Father shows that the Devil would have been jealous and eventually wanted to replace Michael, or Christ, even if he'd known from the start who Michael was. It didn't change Lucifer's plans or feelings even after he knew Christ is God. It seems insane for Satan to have ever imagined that he could win a war against the Creator of the universe, but that's exactly what the Devil thought.

But that is what sin is, a kind of insanity.

[teresaq]

B:As already pointed out - War in heaven was real as Rev 12 states and Satan was in fact cast out - after "they fought" just as the Bible says.

p:Yes, the war was real, and "they fought," just as the Bible says, but the war was not and is not one which is decided by physical force.

B:Please see the 1SP 22 and SR 16-19 so recently posted here and respond to the "details" that apprently totally refute your statement above.

The SOP references are similar to Scripture. How they should be interpreted hinges on the question of whether the war is like a human one, a war of force, where human-like weapons are used, or if the character of the war is different. The following statement quotes Rev. 12:10 and comments in such a way as to definitively answer this question:

Quote:

"And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of His Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night." Rev. 12:10.

Satan saw that his disguise was torn away. His administration was laid open before the unfallen angels and before the heavenly universe. He had revealed himself as a murderer. By shedding the blood of the Son of God, he had uprooted himself from the sympathies of the heavenly beings. Henceforth his work was restricted. Whatever attitude he might assume, he could no longer await the angels as they came from the heavenly courts, and before them accuse Christ's brethren of being clothed with the garments of blackness and the defilement of sin. The last link of sympathy between Satan and the heavenly world was broken. (DA 761)

If the war were one of physical force, this wouldn't make any sense. But if the war is one of ideas and influence, it makes perfect sense. Satan was "cast down" because he uprooted himself from the sympathies of the heavenly beings.