Satan or God?

Going off of Christian lore...

I do not consider myself a satanist, but I believe that Lucifer from tradition Christian lore represents humanity better than Christ.

Basically the stories go that Lucifer led a rebellion of angels against God, they were defeated, and condemned to hell as they fell from the heavens.

Besides that, a couple of things are maintained about Lucifer...

1. He does not view God as perfect, nor does he recognize God's sovereignty

2. He often tries to demonstrate the imperfection of man, presumably to prove the imperfection of God

3. He presumably views God's role as king of the universe as evil

This brings up a lot of questions...

1. How would anybody know that God is perfect?

2. How does God know that he is perfect?

3. Has man been proven to be imperfect?

4. If God is not perfect and all knowing, then is his continued rule justified?

I view the story of rebellion in terms of our own human history. God for example, could be like an Egyptian Pharoah who claims they are a God, but in reality are no different than there subjects, besides possessing more powers. Lucifer for example, could be related to the many rebels in human history which fought against absolute authority figures.

The only way the worship of God could be justified in my mind, is if God himself proved himself to be truly perfect. I cannot find any evidence to God's claim of perfection, and therefore I could not worship God willful ignorance.

If God were not perfect on the other hand, then you can very easily make the argument that his hierarchy is a fundamental evil, and Lucifer's cause is actually just. We all are taught to hate Satan and worship God, just like how we all hate the anarchist and worship the state. The state controls all the PR. So does God, because what brave souls would dare question the validity of what God says?

It is very thought provoking if you think about it. I would be interested in hearing someone who is not Christian to give their thoughts on the philosophical struggle between God and Lucifer.

Crow: Not sure here. A few things come to mind, assuming we accept Lucifer = the devil (which I understand is something of a debate, as there are other interpretations also - personally I think Lucifer is better identified with the Greek Prometheus, bringer of fire, as the morning star Venus heralds the night as well as the dawn - hence why Lucifer is also applied in title to the Christ). Sorry if this is poorly organized, I did a bit of thinking after your post and a few Bible checks.

I struggle to think of where in the Bible Satan actually does not recognize the authority of God. Much of Isiah's and Ezekiel's narratives were built on the foundation of the Jewish exile to Babylon. Isiah in particular has Lucifer actually literally being the king of Babylon (presumably supposed to be a metaphor) and has him boasting about going on to become Godlike - 2 Corinthians randomly echos this by claiming that Satan was somehow at head of the governments of the world (bearing in mind, Christians were probably HEAVILY persecuted at the time it was written). Certainly not humility, but surely you can't make a claim like that unless you recognize a degree of authority you aspire to, ie that of God. Ezekiel called it pride, and Proverbs (Wisdom) calls it envy that caused Satan to act as he did. Either way, you need to recognize that authority first in order to aspire to it. Pride & envy (not strictly the same) are variously named by commentators also (per Armstrong).

In the opening of Job, God is presumably having a cosmic tea-party with Satan and in this context we get a clue as to his motivations in demonstrating the imperfection of man. It is very clear in these passages that he does not question God in the slightest, rather, he question's man's devotion to God, hoping to turn people against Him. This is particularly consistent with the Genesis narrative, as the devil draws people away from God, rather than this being an outright challenge to God. When Jesus goes to the desert, the temptations he endures do not question the power of Jesus - indeed, they wholeheartedly accept it. But Satan instead focuses on Jesus' human heart, driving him to become like a king (and for the more critical readers, it is obvious that this is an attempt by the gospel writers to dispel the earlier Jewish idea about the messiah coming as some sort of a warrior-king).

The flaw is actually one of the smarter things in the Bible. If people are created in God's image, and "I am a jealous God", then so too do people have those same character traits. The rationale being that Satan isn't actually trying to prove anything to God at all (except when God directly asked for Satan's opinion one time) but rather trying to prove something to himself - that the envious, proud Lucifer is justified in those feelings he holds about God, because God himself would have held them were He in his position. A small number of plot holes notwithstanding, I firmly believe this view has the most Biblical support.

Being hostile to God is DEFINED in the Bible as being "evil", at least in a moral standpoint. By such definition, ie God = good, of course there is no other view one can hold, including Lucifer. That's logical. What other morals we may ascribe to these labels is an open question. In narratives like Genesis, Chronicles and Revelation, it is heavily implied that Lucifer is KNOWINGLY acting wrongly, but this is of course according to the Biblical definition of good for whatever that is worth.

It is useful to consider again the historical context in which these stories were told. For all their achievements, God really did lead the Jews to a pretty awful spot. Every empire wanted to conquer that land and numerous empires did, enslaving the Jews for long periods of time. For example, the Book of Exodus appears to date, nearly exactly, to the time of the Babylonian captivity. Which sure would be a useful thing for the Jews to have at that time! A story about overcoming an evil king enslaving them, great, maybe the Jews can overcome THIS evil king with the power of God also. Satan is the ultimate evil king. He is the trope incarnate, as early Jews saw much the same character in successive conquerors of the Holy Land.

One of the hallmarks Jews saw in such characters was a lust for power - an unquenchable thirst to be the ultimate authority and arbitrator over all the affairs of man. Against this Jews set a single divine opponent who was greater than anything these tyrants could dare to be. Indeed the very comparison of themselves to such power is sinful. God fitted the bill of such an opponent nicely. The whole "rebellion" narrative is certainly present in the bible but is wrapped around a message to Israel, that being (ultimately) to honor God and in so doing, prevent their little kingdom from falling to ruin. Likewise the fall of the great deceiver, the great empires of Egypt or Babylon or Rome, would be the final consequence of the pride and envy the rulers of such (in the Jewish view) tyrannical states espoused.

This is practically the opposite of your view, and there is a simple problem with this reversal - that God in the bible is not challenged by Lucifer. Lucifer instead challenges man. Like in Job for example, Zechariah has Satan and God just casually chilling in the Divine Lounge of heaven or something (presumably watching a movie together or something when they were rudely interrupted by some guy in bad need of a wash), and the tone of voice God uses there is very much frustrated with Satan if anything. Satan is accuses Joshua, not God. It is God who accuses Satan. If the Bible had Satan saying "Nah, I'm the real God!" or "There should be no God!" or something, then I could certainly see the merit in your view. This is far removed from the Satan I see when I read the Bible, however.

Interestingly, in Islam, Satan TOTALLY fits your description. Satan there literally proclaims to be superior to God on numerous occasions. There it is also made clearer that Satan is mad at God at being "lesser" in His eyes than man, because as he argued, both are the creations of God and therefore God should not be picking favorites. Which makes sense as well in a historical context of early Arabia, where social classes were more normalized. It is poignant that in Islam, Satan alone refuses to bow to Adam when all the other angels do.

Obviously my view is not built on any theological foundation as a non-Christian, but there is a strong theme in the Bible that human power is not important, so let us not be proud accusers like Satan, calling out others (God; Israel) for our worldly ends. More pragmatically, the stories of the Bible were often written to encourage Jews, so Satan was used to help explain the problem of evil in a society that was very aware of it, as well as touching on themes like slander, pride, envy and the nature of jealousy.

That's my two cents anyway.

admin: Lucifer was attributed to a lot of ancient figures, and the King of Babylon story is a notable one. None of them can really be used, but they are interesting. Biblically, Lucifer came before man, and it has been claimed that he was a member of the first generation of angels.

The thing about your post is that Satan actually does deny God's power. I had been taught this my entire life, and read about it in Witness Nee's commentary of the NIV translation bible. There are many places where this can be heavily interpreted in the bible. For example, the temptation of Christ.

The claim is that Satan is in denial . That he is aware of God's perfection, but is too proud to admit it. In fact, a man known as Peter Binsfield actually created a classification of demons in which Lucifer controlled the sphere of pride.

The primary description of the struggle between God and Satan is shown through sin.

Lucifer showed his power over God by enticing man to sin. God cannot actually admit to making an imperfect species, so it was maintained in the bible that Lucifer had actually created sin. In my opinion, the example of Adam and Eve was clearly an indication of an imperfect species, and not some ritual creation of sin instigated by Lucifer. Apparently Jesus's death was supposed to counter this, as the self-sacrifice would restore man to perfection. That logic doesn't make any sense at all, whereas Lucifer's logic does.

Obviously I am viewing this from the perspective that God and Satan do exist. Not that both characters were invented, even though I am not arguing that may of happened. It is just beside the point when it comes to what I am trying to discuss.

Anyways, it is impossible to gauge Lucifer's true motivations, but I believe that he made some very convincing arguments to some of the points he was trying to make. Definitely moreso than God did to defend the original perfection of man, which is a reflection of his perfection as well.

It makes me wonder something else too. If Lucifer really did corrupt mankind to sin, and mankind is a reflection of God's image, then is God not equally vulnerable to corruption?

Crow: As I mentioned, pride and envy are certainly key themes of the story. But I don't see a direct Biblical reference for Satan being in denial. I addressed the Jesus narrative already but I'm happy to go into further detail. Satan is putting Jesus "to the test", but not because he does not believe God could not change stones into bread or whatever, rather because he wants Jesus (and who better?) to demonstrate that all hearts are prideful as Satan's own.

I'm also not sure that enticing to sin = having power over. This would imply that free will does not exist, and I don't see that in the source material. Rather the significance is that of pride, the thirst to have more than what you have. Satan wasn't like "see God, told you so!" - the proof was to himself, to validate his own beliefs. I don't really see Jesus death as countering sin, so much as forgiving it. The NT talks a lot about forgiveness.

Of course, being a non-theological perspective, that is not to say that the view you're talking about can't be paratextual and valid. Sometimes the tradition with which a text is associated can be more powerful than the text itself. Taken as written the Bible is absolutely insane, but most Christians aren't, after all.

Crow: I think the idea in the Bible is that Satan has no power over people who make the choice to be with God. Again I'd refer to Job on that.

Crow: Whoa whoa, hold your horses, I think it's already been proven many times over that man is imperfect.

admin: As I mentioned, pride and envy are certainly key themes of the story. But I don't see a direct Biblical reference for Satan being in denial

Most of the bible isn't written in direct language. Especially if you go off of the older and less touched translations, in which everything was left cryptic and interpretive.

The bible is one of the most interpretative books in existence, especially if you go by what you can read from theologians. That is why there are issues with people who take things by face value.

rather because he wants Jesus (and who better?) to demonstrate that all hearts are prideful as Satan's own.


Never heard this from anybody. If that is the grand scheme of what satan is attempting to do, then I would say that measures pretty low.

I'm also not sure that enticing to sin = having power over. This would imply that free will does not exist, and I don't see that in the source material.

Not sure how I am supposed to explain it, since it is a pretty simple concept.

It is more of a psuedo power if that is what you are caught up on. When mankind sins, they separate themselves from God. Satan revealing mankind's nature to sin not only proved his implicit point on mankinds imperfection, but also severed humanities supposed connection with God.

Taken as written the Bible is absolutely insane, but most Christians aren't, after all.

Yes, I agree. I used to always say that unless you treat the bible as interpretive and recognize that it is written by actual humans, using it as a tool of worship would be founded on ignorance.

Crow: God, by definition, is perfect. The eternal and necessary being that is the moral standard. This doesn't mean the God of the bible isn't an imperfect creator, but then the creator wouldn't be God. There would have to be a moral standard above the creator. So, if its Satan vs God, God would be the law, Satan would reject it and be evil. Accepting the story as truth, Lucifer would represent humanity better than Christ because of man's imperfection and sins.

Dassault Papillon: Right, but the question is whether man was created perfect.

Did satan create sin in mankind when he gave Eve the apple, or was mankind always liable to inevitably sin? It goes a bit deeper than that too, because if God himself were not a supreme being, wouldn't his own claims to power be considered sin in itself.

If I led a cult of devout followers, it wouldn't really matter what I did, because they would always believe I was infallible no matter what.

Crow: I think we need to have a proper context of what the Bible means by "perfect". People were perfect because they were in the exact place and position that they were meant to be in. Once removed from this place and position, they would be subjected to the harsh realities of life and human nature outside of fellowship with God.

It was conditional perfection.

Bi0Hazard: I feel you are not actually following...

That definition of God you just made up is based on the Abrahamic God, who is claimed to be perfect. The whole point of what I am discussing is to see whether there is any validity to that claim.

If there is not, then who is to say that Satan or any other man or angel is beneath God?

Dassault Papillon: I think we need to have a proper context of what the Bible means by "perfect".

I think so too.

If God is perfect, how would he know?


It was conditional perfection.

If mankind was liable to inevitably sin, without intervention from Lucifer, that would be very good evidence of core imperfection. We know it is possible for someone in communion with God to fault to sin. It is nonsense to think that the examples of this happening are only due to the intervention of Satan in the Garden of Eden.

In other words, forget Satan. Humanities free will makes mankind imperfect, and if humanity had no free will, mankind would be even more evidently imperfect.

I often say that evil is one half of a perfect stick, but if sin is devoid of perfection according to the bible, then the Abrahamic belief in a perfect God is illogical.

Crow: So, in this thread, your assuming God and Satan exist?
That definition of God you just made up is based on the Abrahamic God, who is claimed to be perfect. The whole point of what I am discussing is to see whether there is any validity to that claim.
You can't really know if it's valid, either the Abrahamic God is the moral standard, or is just a cruel liar. You would have to know the moral standard and know if the Abrahamic God follows it.

Crow: Perfection does not mean an inability to pick the bad option. Rather, picking the bad option forfeits perfection.

Dassault Papillon: As you yourself said, if man was unable to choose the bad option, then he'd have no free will. Technically robots are perfect if they design exactly as they're supposed to, but part of God's design for the "human robot" was for people to have as much free will as this universe will physically allow. In exercising free will people are exercising perfection, but only so long as they freely choose to do good. Perfection is ceded both by being machines or choosing to do what is evil in God's eyes.

Dassault Papillon: *if they act exactly as they're designed to