Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Larry Cotrell said:

So you're saying that he was a g-d (lower case g) but no longer is?

Larry, the fact is that you're trying to get us to say in some deluded manner that we worship Satan.  Obviously not.

Traveler likes to go out on a limb quite often with his interpretation of things.  He uses terminology that NO ONE else uses.  If you really want to do some mental gymnastics, sure, anything could be defined as anything else if you use words in the right way.  I could define you as a hermit crab if I am skilled enough in false logic and verbal legerdemain.

The bottom line is that Satan was never a "god" as we think of "gods" -- not in LDS theology.  We think of him as a fallen angel in a manner similar to how you think of him.  Nothing more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

Larry, the fact is that you're trying to get us to say in some deluded manner that we worship Satan.  Obviously not.

I am not trying to get you to say that you worship Satan. I was just trying to understand what @Traveler meant.

1 hour ago, Carborendum said:

Traveler likes to go out on a limb quite often with his interpretation of things.  He uses terminology that NO ONE else uses.

This terminology must have been what confused me.

1 hour ago, Carborendum said:

 I could define you as a hermit crab if I am skilled enough in false logic and verbal legerdemain.

I actually am a hermit crab. There was a mutation that made it so that I have thumbs. That's how I'm typing. :D

1 hour ago, Carborendum said:

The bottom line is that Satan was never a "god" as we think of "gods" -- not in LDS theology.  We think of him as a fallen angel in a manner similar to how you think of him.  Nothing more.

Thanks for clarifying. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On September 7, 2016 at 2:08 PM, curious_mormon said:

...did Satan get tempted by another angel or something? how did he know how to do evil and oppose God if he was perfect. Does that mean that in heaven at that time, the angels had free will?

Is it necessary to start with the premise that Satan 'got tempted'? The premise seems to examine the issue from the view in which most people (who believe in the existence of Satan) see humanity in general, i.e. that human beings are tempted by Satan (or Satan's servants) in order that we ultimately subject ourselves to Satan's rule. That view draws the (erroneous?) conclusion that Satan subjected himself to the rule of some being (other than God).  But I don't see why the premise is necessary in the first place. I think we could just as easily start from the premise that Satan simply conceived a rebellion and chose to execute the rebellion. At any point it may be said that to choose to conform to God's will is "good" and to choose to rebel against God's will is "bad". I don't perceive that in all cases and at all times in eternity the choice must originate outside of one's own heart. 

Edited by UT.starscoper
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On Thursday, September 08, 2016 at 6:08 AM, curious_mormon said:

In the beginning, when all else was perfect, Satan was also an angel...and I know he was cast down from heaven because he opposed God. But my question is...did Satan get tempted by another angel or something? how did he know how to do evil and oppose God if he was perfect. Does that mean that in heaven at that time, the angels had free will?

D&c 93:29-31

I need to say no more

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Larry Cotrell said:

I understand eternal progression (even if I don't agree with it) but @Traveler said that a cherub was a type of g-d. Because the Bible says that Satan was a cherub, I assume that he is saying that the word cherub refers to Satan as a g-d (in his interpretation of the word cherub). I understand that he is not saying that Satan has anything to do with the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

My point was that if the Bible is to have “historic” relevance and creditability it must be interpreted consistently within its proper historic context.  In that historic context a cherub was a g-d of lessor order.  I do not recall the specific Hebrew term (I believe it begins with a k).  The Hebrew term has no other translation other than cherub. 

I will plead guilty to deliberately challenging various traditional interpretations that are inconsistent with scriptural symbolism.  This is because many “Christians” claim to believe in the Bible – but in reality only believe certain parts that fit their particular paradigm.  I will give example:

Cherubim is plural and in Biblical text (for example – Covering Cherubim at the Mercy Seat which is also symbolic of the Judgment throne of G-d) there are two Cherubim.  Since Satan is a covering cherub that is identified by Ezekiel (most likely to represent those at the left hand side of G-d) – who is the other Cherub representative of those at the right hand side of G-d?  Hint – a variant reading of ancient scripture reads “oppose” rather than “face” each other – in other words they are the mirror opposites of each other. 

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, UT.starscoper said:

Is it necessary to start with the premise that Satan 'got tempted'?

No.

 

Quote

The premise seems to examine the issue from the view in which most people (who believe in the existence of Satan) see humanity in general, i.e. that human beings are tempted by Satan (or Satan's servants) in order that we ultimately subject ourselves to Satan's rule. That view draws the (erroneous?) conclusion that Satan subjected himself to the rule of some being (other than God).  But I don't see why the premise is necessary in the first place. I think we could just as easily start from the premise that Satan simply conceived a rebellion and chose to execute the rebellion. At any point it may be said that to choose to conform to God's will is "good" and to choose to rebel against God's will is "bad". I don't perceive that in all cases and at all times in eternity the choice must originate outside of one's own heart. 

Human beings, on the other hand, is tempted by Good or Evil.  The Light of Christ draws us to good.  The natural man draws us to bad.  This is the purpose of mortality and the purpose of the veil - 2 conditions that does not apply to Satan.  Just like heavenly beings and the Holy Ghost draws us to the light of Christ, Satan and his angels can draw us further from the light of Christ as well.  We are subject to influence as we lack knowledge in our exercise of free wil.  Satan, on the other hand, has not had the veil put upon him and, therefore, has all the knowledge in his exercise of free will.

Edited by anatess2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Human beings, on the other hand, is tempted by Good or Evil.  The Light of Christ draws us to good.  The natural man draws us to bad.  This is the purpose of mortality and the purpose of the veil - 2 conditions that does not apply to Satan.  Just like heavenly beings and the Holy Ghost draws us to the light of Christ, Satan and his angels can draw us further from the light of Christ as well.  We are subject to influence as we lack knowledge in our exercise of free wil.  Satan, on the other hand, has not had the veil put upon him and, therefore, has all the knowledge in his exercise of free will.

So, I see no disagreement between our remarks.  Do you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, anatess2 said:

I didn't post that comment to agree or disagree.  I posted the comment as an answer to the questions you posted.

Then I suppose we misunderstood one another because my question was rhetorical and posted as introduction to my own opinion as a response to the OP. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a ancient maniscript that states that in the beginning God slept, or was asleep, in the void there existed a people of darkness blind to light, that fought with each other trying to destroy each other, the day came that they found God sleeping, and he was of light, seeing this they lusted after the light so that they would be able to to see, This awoke God to their presence and he stopped that happening, but to late to save that part that were stolen from him, It his said that these dark ones were those that were cast down to Earth by God, the God that created the universe, (Yarwa?) that God was the child of the sophia the image of the God, that awoke, Sophia being the image of the first God, yet female.

This is a condenced version of the fable! as (Yarwa!) was born of Sophia in anquish, It is said that, that is why God (Yarwa) stated that he was the only God, and there was none before him. (It goes on to say that God created the image of himself, to look upon himself, and was pleased with what he see)

Why cast down!, because that part of God that was stolen was part of the spirit of God, and were cast down that they could be seperated from the darkness that infested that those darkest being that were all that God was not.

If anyone knows where i can find versions of this fable?!, do please let me know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, UT.starscoper said:

Then I suppose we misunderstood one another because my question was rhetorical and posted as introduction to my own opinion as a response to the OP. 

Yes, I knew they were rhetorical... I answered them anyway to expand on it.  So I guess in that sense you can say we agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, UT.starscoper said:

@anatess2 Reviewing this thread I see that I overlooked you're very first post.  Had I observed more closely I would have realized that my post was redundant and unnecessary. ?

I do not think it is redundant nor unnecessary.  The uniqueness of your mind makes it so that when we are talking about the same thing, we are corroborating our unique thoughts...  so, I say it was absolutely necessary if nothing else but to elevate my post's credibility.  ;)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is an assumption that Lucifer fell because he was tempted, that is not the case.  He fell because of Pride, Pride in his connections , his Power and his greatness. His even having a voice in the counsel as the Savior. I had a choice who to follow but did not have the right to present a plan.  What did he ask for in exchange for seeing that "none were lost" " the honor" the very power of G_d  Himself.  Just as the Savior stood in total Humility giving the Father the glory, Lucifer stood in total Pride wanting it all, always in direct opposition yet always trying to deceive as being such a  close copy that even the elect could be deceived. He appeared to Moses as an angel of light , and as Moses had already seen the Lord He could discern the difference. To Adam and Eve he was the G_d of this world. Pride the sin we were warned about from Pres. Benson , Pride goeth before the fall. It is the sin that stops some from true repentance, and this is backed up by scripture.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • pam unfeatured this topic
  • 2 years later...

I would say that, the spirits In heaven made Satan, more than satan being tempted. Just like Hitler. The people made Hitler, they rallied behind his ideas and the more he said a certain type of idea, the more the people followed him. I would say satan was the same, he had an idea that thought was better than Jesus'. when God chose the other idea, the people complained to satan and further enforced what Satan had thought was a good idea, to be the only practical solution. So Satan, fought against God for his idea. He may have also thought that, the more the people follow hhim, the more influence he has.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share