Q:Cast out of heaven?

[BuffaloBill]

Hi,

For some reason, I have thought there is a biblical passage that claims some people who have made it to heaven after the end times will try to lead a revolt and be kicked out.

Can you help me?

[Amaleq13]

Originally posted by BuffaloBill
For some reason, I have thought there is a biblical passage that claims some people who have made it to heaven after the end times will try to lead a revolt and be kicked out.

That sounds to me like the description of Satan et. al. in Revelation. The story, I believe, is understood to have taken place before the creation of humans but the fact that it is contained in a prophecy about the End Times may be the source of your confusion.

[BuffaloBill]

Originally posted by Amaleq13
That sounds to me like the description of Satan et. al. in Revelation.

Hi Ameleq,

I am not talking about the revolt of Lucifer and his angels, which I believe is in Genesis.

I am pretty sure that it is not in Revelation.

I thought I read it in "The Late, Great Planet Earth" with supporting verse, but have been unable to find it in scriptures.

[Doctor X]

Buffalo Bill:

Welcome to the forums . . . mind the hounds.

The "revolt against heaven" is really not in the Bible, particularly any lead by a "Lucifer." The source is actually an extra-biblical Book of Jubilees. If you are interested in this stuff, particularly the development of the modern conception of Satan from his various origins--such as where "Lucifer" comes from, a great book is:

The Old Enemy: Satan and the Combat Myth (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0691067120/thesecularweb)

--J.D.

{edited by Toto to remove pesky linefeed from URL}

[BuffaloBill]

Hi Doc,

Lucifer had nothing to do with this revolt. It's a revolt after the wheat and chaff has been separated. The way I recall it, God has one last fit of anger and expels these unfortunate people, for unexplained reasons.

Maybe I'm mistaken.

I thought I also recalled Robert Ingersoll commenting why. He thought perhaps some tender souls might look over the balcony of heaven and witness the horrors of hell, see their loved ones in pain, and demand it to stop.

[Doctor X]

Well, I would need a specific passage. I do not have Jubilees in front of me so I cannot say whether or not it occurs there. I am not aware of it though--it may be a rather "loose" interpretation of something. To give an example, some try to frame the "sons of the gods" who come down to earth to mate with "da wimminfolk" in Genesis--and found a race of "mighty men" as "fallen angels" ala Milton! It really does not work, but the passage is cited by those who believe the "fallen angels" story is in the OT.

I corrected "Lucifer" because you suspected that the "revolt of Lucifer and his angels" is in Genesis. It is not.

--J.D.

[Picture]

As far as Lucifer's revolt: This is in the Bible, in the NT and I can't be for sure, but I think it's in the Epistles (really narrowed it down, huh?) The Word says that Lucifer would "exalt myself above the stars of God" and that God cast him and one-third of the angels out of Heaven.

The seperation of the chaff and the wheat is talking not about a revolt as I understand (I might be wrong), but as God seperating his people from the other people of the earth (that would be, non-beleviers)...


....but that's just what I think...

[Doctor X]

Picture:

As far as Lucifer's revolt: This is in the Bible, in the NT and I can't be for sure, but I think it's in the Epistles (really narrowed it down, huh?) The Word says that Lucifer would "exalt myself above the stars of God" and that God cast him and one-third of the angels out of Heaven.

I do not know how well the "Search" function is working in this place . . . it seems to die whenever it is needed . . . but some threads dealt with the issue. "Lucifer" results from a creative translation of a taunt. The revolt is not really there.

I would recommend Forsythe's book as well--he devotes a chapter to the minutae of this--also where Satan comes from stn: a thing you trip over, obstacle. It is interesting that Mk retains a bit of this flavor in his PUNishing attack on "Rock head" with the "get behind me, Satan!" He also explains the development of the myth.

Incidentally, Satan as a character or entity first appears . . . and only appears . . . in the Chronicles' rewriting of the Deuteronomistic History--C has "Satan" make David take a census so YHWH can punish him where as in the earlier DH version, YHWH himself does it! The "prosecutor/adversary" of Job is not the "evil bad guy" that the modern conception of Satan is--or the one implied by the Chronicler.

--J.D.

[BuffaloBill]

Well, I'm about ready to chalk it up to a figment of my imagination then. If it's in "Jubilee" I guess it doesn't count Doc.

[judge]

Originally posted by BuffaloBill


I thought I read it in "The Late, Great Planet Earth" with supporting verse, but have been unable to find it in scriptures.

Hmmm...that may explain it:confused: :rolleyes: ;) :p

[Toto]

Jubilees (http://www.earlyjewishwritings.com/jubilees.html) online, courtesy of Peter Kirby's www.earlyjewishwritings.com .

[Jackalope]

I finally found what you were looking for. It's in Enoch (http://www.johnpratt.com/items/docs/enoch.html). The story you're thinking of starts at Chapter 7. It starts with:

1It happened after the sons of men had multiplied in those days, that daughters were born to them, elegant and beautiful.

2And when the angels, the sons of heaven, beheld them, they became enamoured of them, saying to each other, Come, let us select for ourselves wives from the progeny of men, and let us beget children.

3Then their leader Samyaza said to them; I fear that you may perhaps be indisposed to the performance of this enterprise;

4And that I alone shall suffer for so grievous a crime.

5But they answered him and said; We all swear;

6And bind ourselves by mutual execrations, that we will not change our intention, but execute our projected undertaking.

7Then they swore all together, and all bound themselves by mutual execrations. Their whole number was two hundred, who descended upon Ardis, which is the top of mount Armon.

[BuffaloBill]

Thanks Jackalope,

Enoch won't do seeing it's not canon. I am debating a Christian who stated it was impossible for anyone to be thrown out of heaven. I was attempting to find a biblical scripture about my hunch that it was, but it appears to be futile.

Thanks to all.

[Doctor X]

Ah! Enoch interprets the passage of the bene elohim--"sons of gods"--mating with the women from Genesis.

However, it is the "angels" in Enoch rather than humans who "revolt." Anyways, people can reinterpret however they want.

--J.D.

[Jeremy Pallant]

Originally posted by BuffaloBill
Hi,

For some reason, I have thought there is a biblical passage that claims some people who have made it to heaven after the end times will try to lead a revolt and be kicked out.

Can you help me?

Well, I don't recall such a passage in the Bible, but the concept can be found in Pilgrim's Progress by John Bunyan, which makes it at least 350 years old.

[Paul5204]

Doctor X:

In think that Maimonides would dispute your characterization of the adversary of Job fame. Please see his Guide for the Perplexed.

[Wayne Delia]

Originally posted by Paul5204
Doctor X:

In think that Maimonides would dispute your characterization of the adversary of Job fame. Please see his Guide for the Perplexed. You got stomped in your post here (www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1351482#post1351482) by my response immediately following, when you tried to rely on Maimonides to resolve the "deadly trilemma" problem of 1 John 4:8, 1 Corinthians 13:4, and Exodus 20:5 combining to define the Judeo/Christian God out of logical existence. You haven't addressed any of my criticisms, which ended with the conclusion that perhaps you would be much better off not relying on Maimonides at all. Perhaps this is another standard loony Christian apologetic, "Argument from Maimonides," which refutes any Biblical criticism with "Maimonides would disagree!"

WMD

[Doctor X]

In think that Maimonides would dispute your characterization of the adversary of Job fame.

Irrelevant.

--J.D.

[Tytummest]

Revelation 20 speaks of the "devil or Satan" leading a revolt of "the nations". This is pretty much near the end of the Bible so perhaps this is the passage you are refering to.


REV 20:1 And I saw an angel coming down out of heaven, having the key to the Abyss and holding in his hand a great chain. 2 He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil, or Satan, and bound him for a thousand years. 3 He threw him into the Abyss, and locked and sealed it over him, to keep him from deceiving the nations anymore until the thousand years were ended. After that, he must be set free for a short time

REV 20:4 I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony for Jesus and because of the word of God. They had not worshiped the beast or his image and had not received his mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years. 5 (The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.) This is the first resurrection. 6 Blessed and holy are those who have part in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with him for a thousand years.


REV 20:7 When the thousand years are over, Satan will be released from his prison 8 and will go out to deceive the nations in the four corners of the earth--Gog and Magog--to gather them for battle. In number they are like the sand on the seashore. 9 They marched across the breadth of the earth and surrounded the camp of God's people, the city he loves. But fire came down from heaven and devoured them. 10 And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

[rlcjhardesty]

About Lucifer's fall from Heaven:

From Isaiah 14:
How you are fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! How you are cut down to the ground, You who weakened the nations! For you have said in your heart: 'I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God; I will also sit on the mount of the congregation On the farthest sides of the north; I will ascend above the heights of the clouds, I will be like the Most High.' Yet you shall be brought down to Sheol, To the lowest depths of the Pit. "Those who see you will gaze at you, And consider you, saying: 'Is this the man who made the earth tremble, Who shook kingdoms?

From Revelation 12:
Then there was war in heaven. Michael and the angels under his command fought the dragon and his angels. And the dragon lost the battle and was forced out of heaven. This great dragon – the ancient serpent called the Devil, or Satan, the one deceiving the whole world – was thrown down to the earth with all his angels.

Also from Revelation 12:
Rejoice, O heavens! And you who live in the heavens, rejoice! But terror will come on the earth and the sea. For the Devil has come down to you in great anger, and he knows that he has little time." And when the dragon realized that he had been thrown down to the earth, he pursued the woman who had given birth to the child.

From Revelation 20:
But fire from heaven came down on the attacking armies and consumed them. (clear indication that the coming rebellion will take place on earth - not in heaven)

About a Christian's security:

From John 10:
My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father's hand.

[spin]

Originally posted by Doctor X
Ah! Enoch interprets the passage of the bene elohim--"sons of gods"--mating with the women from Genesis.

I won't let you get away with this. What makes you think that Enoch's Watchers is an interpretation of Gen 6?? Why isn't Gen 6 an obfuscation of the Enoch story??

And why do you translate BNY 'LHYM as "sons of gods"? Enoch 6:2 reads: "And the angels, the children of the heaven, saw and lusted after them..."

The angels are normally taken as representing priests in scholarly circles. You know, priests serve God on earth as angels serve him in heaven. There are lots of parallels between angels and priests in the Dead Sea Scrolls.

Some priests have been naughty and fallen from their rightful state of grace, so are no longer fit to serve in the temple. If you read the text from Qumran known as MMT, you'll find references to priests, the sons of Aaron, having done naughty things.


spin

However, it is the "angels" in Enoch rather than humans who "revolt." Anyways, people can reinterpret however they want.

[Amaleq13]

Originally posted by rlcjhardesty
About Lucifer's fall from Heaven

The author of Isaiah makes it clear from the beginning that what is written is about the king of Babylon:

“that you will take up this taunt against the king of Babylon” (Is 14:4)

Even the passage you quoted clearly indicates this is not about any supernatural creature:

“'Is this the man who made the earth tremble, Who shook kingdoms” (Is 14:16, emphasis added)

The reference to "lucifer" is a reference to the planet Venus that the ancients took to be a star (i.e. morning star). The reference in Isaiah appears to be a sarcastic use of a title applied to royalty. The same title is used, non-sarcastically, in reference to Jesus in Revelation.

[Amos]

Originally posted by BuffaloBill
Hi,

For some reason, I have thought there is a biblical passage that claims some people who have made it to heaven after the end times will try to lead a revolt and be kicked out.

Can you help me?

That would be those who are saved but are not able to work out their own salvation such as the children of Isreal who were led into the promised land where they died nonetheless. Jesus uses this in John 6 when he claims that manna may have come from heaven it sure was not the bread of life.

[Amlodhi]

Hello spin,

Originally posted by spin

I won't let you get away with this.

I don't know spin, it seems to me that there is more support for Doctor X's view of Gen. 6 than there is for the angels as mortal priests theory.

The MMT does say, "And he shall not sow his field and vine[yard] with two kinds. For they are holy and the sons of Aaron are most h[oly]. And you know that some of the priests and [the people mingle.] [And they] unite and defile the [holy] seed and also their [seed] with whores . . ." (The Complete DSS in English, Geza Vermes)

There are also many general separation doctrines in the DSS:

(4Q181) ". . . He caused some of the sons of the world to draw near (Him) . . . to be counted with Him in the com[munity of the 'g]od's as a congregation of holiness in service for eternal life and (sharing) the lot of His holy ones . . . each man according to his lot which He has cast for . . . for eternal life. . ." (ibid)

The first instance above is certainly talking about not defiling the purity of the Aaronic priestly line. The second instance is talking about separation from what was considered to be the wickedness of the religious leadership of Jerusalem.

And, as you say, nowhere in these passages does it speak of any of these priests or separated people being anything beyond mortal human beings.

The beings spoken of in Enoch, in contrast, are depicted in a much different light.

In I Enoch 15:2 for instance, God tells Enoch to say to the Watchers of heaven: "It is meet for you that you should intercede on behalf of man, and not man on your behalf."

IOW, God is saying (through Enoch) that these (former) angels should properly have been interceding for mankind, instead of the sorry state of affairs which now exists resulting in man (Enoch) having to intercede for them. This passage alone makes the clear distinction between the fallen angels and mankind.

I Enoch 15:3 "For what reason have you (the fallen angels) abandoned the high, holy, and eternal heaven . . .?"

I Enoch 15:6 "Indeed, formerly you were spiritual, having eternal life, and immortal in all the generations of the world."

I Enoch 15:8 "But now the giants who are born from the (union of) the spirits and the flesh . . ."

So these verses indicate that these beings abandoned heaven, were immortal, were spirits that cojoined with flesh and, for some reason, the resultant offspring were anything but normal human beings.

And if this isn't enough, I Enoch 69 even names the angels and describes their misdeeds. For instance, I Enoch 69:6 reads:

"The third was named Gader'el; this one is he. . . who misled Eve."

I don't think it was a mortal Aaronic priest that misled Eve in Eden.

Then I Enoch 69:13 names Taba'ta, the son of the serpent.

And 14-15, Kasb'el who induced the Archangel Michael to reveal to him his secret name so that he could reveal it in an oath of power to the children of the people.

We're clearly not talking mortal priests here.

The DSS speak of maintaining the purity of the Aaronic priestly lineage and general separation.

The beginning verses of Gen. 6 could conceivably be an interpolation post-dating Enoch, but I, personally have seen no serious scholarly suggestion that this is so.

And it seems more than clear that, in the book of the watchers, Enoch is describing angelic beings, rather than simply recounting the naughty shenanigans of some mortal members of the Aaronic priesthood.

Thus, unless further and contrary information is presented, I have to stand with Doctor X on this point.

Namaste'

Amlodhi

[spin]

Originally posted by Amlodhi
The MMT does say, "And he shall not sow his field and vine[yard] with two kinds. For they are holy and the sons of Aaron are most h[oly]. And you know that some of the priests and [the people mingle.] [And they] unite and defile the [holy] seed and also their [seed] with whores . . ." (The Complete DSS in English, Geza Vermes)

They are condemned for their sexual lusts, as the watchers were.

There are also many general separation doctrines in the DSS:

(4Q181) ". . . He caused some of the sons of the world to draw near (Him) . . . to be counted with Him in the com[munity of the 'g]od's as a congregation of holiness in service for eternal life and (sharing) the lot of His holy ones . . . each man according to his lot which He has cast for . . . for eternal life. . ." (ibid)

The first instance above is certainly talking about not defiling the purity of the Aaronic priestly line. The second instance is talking about separation from what was considered to be the wickedness of the religious leadership of Jerusalem.

And, as you say, nowhere in these passages does it speak of any of these priests or separated people being anything beyond mortal human beings.

The beings spoken of in Enoch, in contrast, are depicted in a much different light.

Yes, one is talking literally, the other metaphorically.

In I Enoch 15:2 for instance, God tells Enoch to say to the Watchers of heaven: "It is meet for you that you should intercede on behalf of man, and not man on your behalf."

Priests intercede on behalf of man in the temple.

IOW, God is saying (through Enoch) that these (former) angels should properly have been interceding for mankind, instead of the sorry state of affairs which now exists resulting in man (Enoch) having to intercede for them. This passage alone makes the clear distinction between the fallen angels and mankind.

The comparison is between fallen priest and fallen angel.

I Enoch 15:3 "For what reason have you (the fallen angels) abandoned the high, holy, and eternal heaven . . .?"

I Enoch 15:6 "Indeed, formerly you were spiritual, having eternal life, and immortal in all the generations of the world."

I Enoch 15:8 "But now the giants who are born from the (union of) the spirits and the flesh . . ."

So these verses indicate that these beings abandoned heaven, were immortal, were spirits that cojoined with flesh and, for some reason, the resultant offspring were anything but normal human beings.

Priests involved in illicit activities have abandoned their rightful position within the temple.

And if this isn't enough, I Enoch 69 even names the angels and describes their misdeeds. For instance, I Enoch 69:6 reads:

"The third was named Gader'el; this one is he. . . who misled Eve."

I don't think it was a mortal Aaronic priest that misled Eve in Eden.

Then I Enoch 69:13 names Taba'ta, the son of the serpent.

And 14-15, Kasb'el who induced the Archangel Michael to reveal to him his secret name so that he could reveal it in an oath of power to the children of the people.

We're clearly not talking mortal priests here.

The DSS speak of maintaining the purity of the Aaronic priestly lineage and general separation.

I think you are leaning far too hard on a literary work which has to criticise part of the priesthood, yet maintain its "cover" of talking about fallen angels. It is the angels who minister to God in heaven, just as the priests minister to God on earth. When ostensibly talking of angels, you give them angelic trappings.

However, Kazabel's revealing information to ordinary people can be seen as a metaphor for the breaking down of the wall in the temple under Alcimus, the wall which separated priests from ordinary people. There is a lot that we don't know about the period, which could elucidate some of the more obscure parts of the narrative.

The beginning verses of Gen. 6 could conceivably be an interpolation post-dating Enoch, but I, personally have seen no serious scholarly suggestion that this is so.

Perhaps you don't consider the table of nations reflective of Greek thought, nor the tale of Joseph being a Greek style novella, but I consider the Melkizedek story a Hasmonaean inclusion. I think there is some scholarly consideration of Greek and Hasmonaean involvement in the formation of the HB.

And it seems more than clear that, in the book of the watchers, Enoch is describing angelic beings, rather than simply recounting the naughty shenanigans of some mortal members of the Aaronic priesthood.

Not just "naughty shenanigans". Literature in the field can be quite vociferous. Ezra against marriages with "foreign women" is a good example. The Psalms of Solomon are very anti the priesthood in Jerusalem for their dirty deeds, which incur God's wrath through Pompey.

I think the notion of "mixing" in MMT is quite important, for one should not mix blood, ie priestly blood with non-priestly. Those priest who did are condemned squarely for doing so, just as the angels are condemned for mixing with ordinary mortals.


spin

[Doctor X]

I would just add that the Enoch story is later than the Genesis story.

The Genesis story is akin to other introductions to Flood Myths where the people on the earth start to piss off "the Powers that Be." There is no contemporary textual excuse to consider the bene elohim anything but "sons of the gods." If one wishes to argue for "sons of God"--fine--but I think wherever the original story came from, "gods" is more original.

--J.D.