ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

Rebelling Angels In Bible

Is God replacing the third of angels (Rev. 12:3-9) that rebelled with Lucifer?

Join Our Free Chat and Take The Demons Bible Quiz
 ---Leon on 6/27/12
     Helpful Blog Vote (7)

Reply to this BlogPost a New Blog



Micha, may not agree but as usual, great job responding to the major point of Phil's blog.

Phil,
Often, responders(not Micha here) aren't interested at all in being challenged with knowledge that may require them to change perspective publically.
Your points about the word HOWL are important and don't need to be dismissed lightly.
It's common practice on this site to ignore a studied, hard-to-argue-against perspective then proceed to negatively MAGNIFY some minor flawed aspect of a blog while totally refusing to address very valid MAJOR arguments.
The translation issue of bet-yad-lamed-lamed HORRIBLY translated to the LATIN word lucifer is THE cornerstone of a BAD DOCTRINE.
---Legends on 7/21/12


Phil, you've done great awesome in answering, I agree with most of what you've said, only a few I disagree. You are to hard on believers. First you said they were cursed, now you say,

"Those who mislead others by adding to the Word of God are deprived of light. They walk in darkness. This is an evil thing from God. 2Th 2:11-12"

You had previously given a passage and spoke of many things not in that passage at all. Were you deceiving others? I don't think you are curse because you did that. You misrepresent that passage with things not there. That doesn't make you curse because you did that. Nor do I think you were speaking evil. We are discussing godly matters between believers, helping or been helped by others.
---Mark_V. on 7/21/12


"The name "Lucifer" is not in any of the manuscripts. It has been added by the translators, who themselves were compelled to a support a creed."-Phil on 7/20/12
Supporting a creed?
Even back past 200BC?
and yet, "howl, O son of morning" does sound appropriate.
Even so, translators since 200BC accepted this as lucifer (Latin), ewsphoros (Greek), heylel (Hebrew).
We often forget in our culture that names were often commen words back then.
Also notice in the Hebrew, it is Bet-Yod-Lamed-Lamed as also in Zch 11:2.
Other verses translate "howl" without the "Bet."
So why is the "Bet" there if this is a correct translation?
"oil" and "boil"?
---micha9344 on 7/21/12


---Mark_V. on 7/20/12
There are over 5,300 Greek manuscripts.

I have Scriverners Textus Receptus 1894, the Nestle-Aland Greek Text, the Westcott-Hort text from 1881, combined with the Nestle/Alland 27 variant. Understanding Greek is not difficult today.

The name "Lucifer" is not in any of the manuscripts. It has been added by the translators, who themselves were compelled to a support a creed.

The Hebrew word 'eill' means to howl, not Lucifer. Try transposing Lucifer in Zch 11:2 where it is found. It does not work.

It is an addition.

Those who mislead others by adding to the Word of God are deprived of light. They walk in darkness. This is an evil thing from God. 2Th 2:11-12
---Phil on 7/20/12


Bro. Phil, don't you not think that you are taking this a little to far to call it a curse? You do not have the originals books, how can you possibly know? The books have been translated a lot of times using names appropiate for that time into English. Also satan was given at least 40 different names by different writers at the time. Lucifur found in (Isiah 14:12-14) can be understood to be satan depending on the interpretation. And what if a person interprets it to be satan, is he cursed? What if the other is wrong, is he cursed for interpreting the passage wrong? I just don't see your logic.
---Mark_V. on 7/20/12




Just to reiterate, Lucifer is not in the Bible, it has been added to the Word of God, and doing so brings on a curse. It is not good to entertain this doctrine of Lucifer, being birthed out of a deception.

Please study the Word so this fable can be removed from your thinking. It only encourages more darkness where God is seeking to bring light.
---Phil on 7/19/12


Psa 51:10 Create (bara) in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a right spirit within me.
Psa 102:18 This shall be written for the generation to come: and the people which shall be created (bara) shall praise the LORD.
Isa 43:1 But now thus saith the LORD that created (bara) thee, O Jacob, and he that formed thee, O Israel, Fear not: for I have redeemed thee, I have called [thee] by thy name, thou [art] mine.
Isa 43:7 [Even] every one that is called by my name: for I have created (bara) him for my glory, I have formed him, yea, I have made him.
Mal 2:10 Have we not all one father? hath not one God created (bara) us? why do we deal treacherously every man against his brother, by profaning the covenant of our fathers?
John 5:19
---micha9344 on 7/10/12


Leon, please give us a break. God stopped creation in Genesis. There is only three orginal creative (bara) acts of God recorded, The first is the heavens and the earth, the second was animal life, and the third the creation of man.
(Jer. 1:4,5) does not say He created Jeremiah, It actually says, that "before He formed him in the womb He knew him, sanctified him, and ordained him a prophet to the nations"
All who are born were ordained to be born, and God knows all of them before they are formed. All is in the plan of God already. He didn't forget someone and suddenly finds out His error and so creates him. That is shear nonsense. God is God, not some human being who makes extra backup plans in case the first one doesn't work.
---Mark_V. on 7/10/12


"Phil, great answer. I oppose what Eloy said,

'The Everliving Creator has not ceased in his creating:'

The God of the Bible is sovereign, who created and stopped creating which is already written in Genesis..."
---Mark_V. on 7/9/12


God stopped creating? That's unbiblical insanity! If that were true, then who created you...Mark? (Jeremiah 1:4-5)
---Leon on 7/9/12


Mark_V. on 7/9/12
"To declare that the Creators original plan has been frustrated by sin, is to dethrone God. To even suggest that God was taken by surprise in Eden and that He is now attempting to remedy an unforeseen calamity, it to degrade the Most High to the level of a finite, erring mortal."

I Exalt in God My Saviour!!!The Lamb of God, Slain Before the Foundation of the Earth!!!
---Phil on 7/9/12




Phil, great answer. I oppose what Eloy said,

" The Everliving Creator has not ceased in his creating:"

The God of the Bible is sovereign, who created and stopped creating which is already written in Genesis. God created a plan. The plan is complete before Him, and gives us the details what comes first, second and so on. He is not a general who has a backup plan in case the first one fails. We have the facts before us in His Word.
To declare that the Creators original plan has been frustrated by sin, is to dethrone God. To even suggest that God was taken by surprise in Eden and that He is now attempting to remedy an unforeseen calamity, it to degrade the Most High to the level of a finite, erring mortal.
---Mark_V. on 7/9/12


Firstly, Lucifer is not an insprited name in scripture, it has been added to the Originals, and is a perversion of the Word of God. The Bible assures us that we will be judging and reigning over and above the messengers (angels KJV). They will be subservient to us and their work will pale in comparison to what our portion will be with Him.
---Phil on 7/8/12


"Eloy, can you confirm what you said:

'...I like the odds, 2/3 of good angels triumphing over 1/3 of bad angels thrown down & destroyed. When any of God's creation chooses sin & thereby is destroyed, his creative nature is to replace that which has been destroyed.'

Can you [prove] what you say is [Bible truth]? Where [does it say] God replaced the 1/3 [of bad] angels? Where does [the Bible say they] were destroyed?"
---Mark_V. on 7/6/12


Mark: I believe Eloy meant the angels were "defeated", not utterly "destroyed". He didn't say God has replaced them, but said it's God's nature to replace that which is destroyed. That's clearly seen throughout the Bible.
---Leon on 7/8/12


Eloy, can you confirm what you said,

"Yes, I like the odds, 2/3 of good angels triumphing over 1/3 of bad angels thrown down and destroyed. When any of God's creation chooses sin and thereby is destroyed, his creative nature is to replace that which has been destroyed"

Can you proof what you say is Truth by using the Word of God? Where are we taught that God replaced the third of the angels who rebelled? And where does it say in Scripture that the angels were destroyed?
---Mark_V. on 7/6/12


\\Do you suppose it's something we can or can not know?
---Leon on 6/30/12\\

"Despite the introduction of Gloria in the series TOUCHED BY AN ANGEL, this [isn't] something revealed in either Scripture or [tradition].

It's best not speculated upon.

Glory to Jesus Christ!"
---Cluny on 7/1/12


So, you're saying the traditions of men reveal truth, but meditating upon (speculating) the word of God doesn't? To the contrary, Phil 4:8 says we're to think upon (reason, reckon, SUPPOSE/speculate) what is written in the Bible.

TV shows & the traditions of men are best not speculated upon! :)
---Leon on 7/2/12


\\Do you suppose it's something we can or can not know?
---Leon on 6/30/12\\

Despite the introduction of Gloria in the series TOUCHED BY AN ANGEL, this is not something revealed in either Scripture or tradidtion.

It's best not speculated upon.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 7/1/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Products


"...God is capable of making more angels. Whether He is or is not is something we don't know.
Glory to Jesus Christ!"
---Cluny on 6/30/12


Do you suppose it's something we can or can not know?
---Leon on 6/30/12


Leon, I gave St. Augustine's opinion about how God is "replacing" the angels. (I'm not saying I agree with it.)

God is capable of making more angels. Whether He is or is not is something we don't know.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 6/30/12


"Leon, how does one know one can trust what the book of Revelation says about angels?"
---Catholicus on 6/28/12


Sorry Cat' for overlooking your question. I know I can trust the Bible because I'm born again. "One" must be born again to trust (have faith in) God's word.

I'm no longer on the outside looking in & wondering about God's family. I'm now in the family too.

I have a teacher who instructs me in the knowledge of God. My teacher is God, the Holy Spirit. So, I don't have to depend upon myself to try in vain to figure out life before I die. I've learned "one" doesn't have to know everything, but just the "One" who knows everything. I trust Him! Who do you trust?
---Leon on 6/30/12


Very good analogy Eloy! :)
---Leon on 6/30/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Divorce


Yes, I like the odds, 2/3 of good angels triumphing over 1/3 of bad angels thrown down and destroyed. When any of God's creation chooses sin and thereby is destroyed, his creative nature is to replace that which has been destroyed. The Everliving Creator has not ceased in his creating: as evil is cast out, new life is formed in his presence. When the tares are removed and gathered up and thrown into the fire, this allows the wheat to grow and spread and prosper in God's presence.
---Eloy on 6/30/12


Leon, I was not poking you in the eye, or hitting you with a stick. I wanted you to think for a minute but it seems you do not want peace, for on the other blog, you first threw me the demons, because I was trying to correct another brother with something that was in Scripture, but that really got you all worked up. Why not let go of what is causing you to do this, if you don't, it can only hurt your walk with Christ. Put it behind you, I tell you as a brother in Christ.
---Mark_V. on 6/29/12


"Could this question be past the realm of knowledge...the Bible has [given] us?...when we argue a useless point...anger & harsh words are produced...it would seem...evil fruit has been born rather than the love that They will know us by."
---Poppa_Bear on 6/29/12


Sir: If the question exceeds the realm of biblical knowledge, then we need not go any further because it would indeed be a fruitless endeavor. But, what if there's a kernel of truth in the Bible relating to the question, but because of preconceived notions & personal biases, some choose to overlook & miss it? Truth isn't something easily & instantly received by all. Many here love to kick against the pricks (argue uselessly). (Acts 9:5)
---Leon on 6/29/12


A man is walking past a sanitarium (mental hospital) when he suddenly hears voices of many people on the other side of the wall shouting in unison, "13, 13, 13, 13...!!!" The man looks towards the very tall, wide concrete wall that separates him from the people on the other side. He sees a small hole in the wall. Curiously, he goes over to it wanting to see what's happening in there. As he peers thru the golf ball size hole, a lunatic suddenly pokes him in the eye with a broomstick. Immediately, the eye poker & the other lunatics victoriously change their chant to, "14, 14, 14, 14...!!!"

Marky: I'm not going to let you poke me in the eye. :D
---Leon on 6/29/12


Locate Christian Home Based Business Opportunities


Leon, I know you don't like my answers but you have to be realistic, you ask questions to get people's opinions, not the Truth. You want to know what they think and when they answer you, you don't like it. Concerning the question you ask now and before, believers can answer you by their opinions as Scott 1, did, and others have, because nothing is written that God replaced the angels with more angels, so how can he answer you with chapter and verse? He can only answer you with his opinion and you don't like that either.
Why ask those dumb questions, if you are not going to like anyone's opinions and turn around and ask for chapter and verse?
Don't you get it?
---Mark_V. on 6/29/12


Could this question be past the realm of knowledge that the Bible has provided for us? Some of the answers seemed to be presumptively based on opinions that dont directly relate to the Bibles record of Angels, their position or their fall and, extra biblical sources that are based on speculation from people standing outside of the facts of scripture. Even when using inductive or deductive reasoning, one still risks crossing a line, authoring ideas that may be not true. The reason I mention it is because when we argue a useless point, and anger and harsh words are produced from the discussion, it would seem that evil fruit has been born rather than the love that They will know us by.
---Poppa_Bear on 6/29/12


"I would say no. God created those rebelious angels for the exact purpose that he created them to rebel. Hell was created specificly for Satan and these angels. These angels served there purpose and thus are no longer needed. Humans were not designed to go to hell but choose to go to hell by not choosing Jesus. Gensis Ch. 1"
---Scott1 on 6/28/12


I'm not familiar as to where in Scripture it says God made the angels to rebel. Please provide Bible book(s), chapter(s) & verse(s). Thx!
---Leon on 6/28/12


I would say no. God created those rebelious angels for the exact purpose that he created them to rebel. Hell was created specificly for Satan and these angels. These angels served there purpose and thus are no longer needed. Humans were not designed to go to hell but choose to go to hell by not choosing Jesus. Gensis Ch. 1
---Scott1 on 6/28/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Marriage


I would say that if "one third" of the angels rebelled, this leaves twice as many to serve God and fight against them. Except . . . I don't think who wins has to do with numbers. One holy angel with God could easily whip Satan and all his foolish followers. So, does God "need" to replace any fallen angels? Possibly, because God is the Potter with power to make "one vessel for honor and another for dishonor" (Romans 9:21), He made the fallen angels to serve as vessels . . . sewer buckets . . . for containing the spirit of evil (Ephesians 2:2), so it is organized and not just anywhere, but on its way to the flaming sewer which burns with fire and brimstone.
---willie_c: on 6/28/12


"Leon, Rev.12 says nothing about "one third" of the angels!"
---1st_cliff on 6/28/12


I'm truly sorry you can't see what is plainly written in Scripture Cliff.

Mark: I haven't a clue as to what you're rambling about. It appears, true to form, you're just being your usual obstinate (way off the mark) self. So be it!
---Leon on 6/28/12


\\By the way, you bring no glory to the Lord Jesus Christ with an unbridled rash tongue.
---Leon on 6/27/12\\

And you think you do, Leon?

You show how carnal you are because you didn't really understand my answer.

Actually, St. Augustine of Hippo opined that the number of saved human beings in heaven will equal the number of angels who rebelled. So saved humans replace angels.

THIS is what I wanted clarified. This could be what you were asking, but it was not clear. Remember, writing clearly means thinking clearly.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 6/28/12


Leon, how does one know one can trust what the book of Revelation says about angels?
---Catholicus on 6/28/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Debt Consolidation


Elder: No! Cluny's response was nothing short of snide & absurd.

1.) You don't believe God creates anymore? The fact is the Bible says He "rested" after creating the heavens & earth. That in no way implies He no longer creates (makes preparation). His very nature is being Creator past, present & future ~ ad infinitum. What was Jesus talking about in Jn. 14:2-3?

2.) I didn't imply God "had to" replace the 1/3 of the angels. Instead I asked "is He replacing...".

Cat': Yes! There are angels.(?) See Rev. 12:3-9 regarding the rebellious ones.

I too have a sense of humor, but I'm not amused by Cluny's "bah! humbug!" silly surliness. :)
---Leon on 6/28/12


Leon, Rev.12 says nothing about "one third" of the angels!
---1st_cliff on 6/28/12


Elder, I agree, why even suggest if God replaced the third of the angels? It's like asking if those who died in their sins will have a second chance after death. A doctrine invented by the RCC right out of the blue. He created and was happy with His creation. This supposes that God was not happy with His creation suddenly found out this angels disobeyed and had to go to His second plan to make up what was lost. And if that third disobeyed go to the next plan.
---Mark_V. on 6/28/12


Leon. Cluny's answer may make more sence than it appears. If God was replacing the 3rd part of angels that rebelled He would not do it by creating more angels since He rested from His creating.
Why would He have to replace them anyway?
---Elder on 6/27/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Refinancing


Leon, it's just Cluny's curmudgeon-like sense of humor. I rather enjoy it!
---Catholicus on 6/27/12


Luny: Don't be so ridiculous (foolish)! You're already trying too hard to be in opposition to understanding the question. What else would God replace them (the angels) with other than "ANGELS"? See how easy that was? :)

By the way, you bring no glory to the Lord Jesus Christ with an unbridled rash tongue.
---Leon on 6/27/12


Do you really think there are angels, let alone rebellious ones?
---Catholicus on 6/27/12


Replacing them with what?

Aardvarks?

Blowfish?

More angels?

Please be specific.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 6/27/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Franchises


Copyright© 1996-2015 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.