tja@mungunni.cs.mu.oz.au (Tim ARNOLD) (12/12/90)
lums@wheat-chex.ai.mit.edu (Andy Lumsdaine) writes: >In article <Dec.4.01.11.26.1990.977@athos.rutgers.edu> tdaniels@athena.mit.edu (Troy E Daniels) writes: > The only scriptural reference that I could find is > LUK 10:18 And [Jesus] said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning > fall from heaven, > referring to when Satan was cast out after losing the war. There may > be some OT references (Isiah comes to mind as a good place to check), > but I don't have a good reference program/bible here to check that > out. The passage which talks most clearly about this heavenly battle is Revelation 12. esp vv.7 ff. The event of throwing Satan down to earth coincides with the proclamation of God's salvation and the showing of the Messiah's authority (v. 10). This can only be refering to Jesus (whether it be his life on earth or his death and ressurection). The Luke passage shows that Jesus was seeing this authority now. The war over Satan is won now! There is no battle at Armageddon. The battle was fought at Golgotha and won at the ressurection. If you want further explanation of this victory over Satan an excellent start is the relevant chapter in John Stott's "Cross of Christ" (IVP). >I think alot of the ideas about Lucifer / Satan in our culture are >primarily due to Milton and _Paradise_Lost_. For instance, it is very >common to say the Serpent in the Garden was Satan -- but this is not >in the Genesis text at all. I believe this idea is originally due to >Milton, but it is so pervasive in our culture (or, I should say, in >the churches which I attend), that most people talk about the Serpent >and Satan interchangeably. In the above quotation from Luke, Jesus >just says that he "beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven." I see >no implication of a war in this passage. Now, admittedly, Milton >based his work on Scripture (and Tradition, I assume), and he >undoubtedly had very good reasons for the conclusions he made. >However, his work is not Scripture, and one must be very careful in >using such sources in explaining the Scripture. Try reading all of Luke 10. Jesus sends out 72 people in pairs to heal the sick and proclaim the Kingdom (v. 9), giving them his message and his authority (v. 16). The messengers return with great joy delighted that they also had the power to cast out demons in Jesus name. Then Jesus answers them. Why? Jesus is concerned that the disciples rejoice not in the power they have over these demons but in their current status before God (v.20). Why is such a power not surprising or spectacular? The ability to cast out demons is an authority given to them by Jesus to "crush the serpents head". That is VERY familiar language for those of you who know your Genesis as well as your typical 1st century Jew. It refers to the curse in Genesis 3. The curse of the serpent is that Eve's offspring will crush it's head. Jesus is saying that what his followers (not just the twelve) had just been doing in casting out demons and healing was a partial fulfilment of this Genesis prophecy. And he relates all of this to a defeat of Satan. Why? Because Satan was unable to interfere with his earthly ministry and that of his faithful servants. I think that goes further than the interpretation suggested by our moderator. It is not just a foretaste of the victory. It is part of the victory. Every time the Kingdom is proclaimed whether before or after the cross Satan "falls like lightning from the sky". I must disagree with Andy on the development of these ideas. I think Luke 10 shows that Jesus very clearly understood the serpent of Genesis to be either a metaphor or a realization of Satan. Either way it is acceptable and indeed Christ-like to treat them interchangeably. Milton is not responsible for making the connection between Satan and the Serpent. Jesus is! >Peace, >Andrew > Andrew Lumsdaine "We don't understand the software, and > lums@rice-chex.ai.mit.edu sometimes we don't understand the hardware, > MIT RLE but we can *see* the blinking lights!" Peace with God and victory over Satan to you all, Tim ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tim Arnold Law/Science (Computer Science Hons) Undergrad tja@cs.mu.oz.AU The University of Melbourne =============================================================================
wagner@karazm.math.uh.edu (David Wagner) (12/14/90)
>lums@wheat-chex.ai.mit.edu (Andy Lumsdaine) writes: > >>I think alot of the ideas about Lucifer / Satan in our culture are >>primarily due to Milton and _Paradise_Lost_. For instance, it is very >>common to say the Serpent in the Garden was Satan -- but this is not >>in the Genesis text at all. I believe this idea is originally due to >>Milton, but it is so pervasive in our culture (or, I should say, in >>the churches which I attend), that most people talk about the Serpent >>and Satan interchangeably. Just for the record: Rev. 12:9 "The great dragon was hurled down--**that ancient serpent** called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray." Rev. 20:2 "He seized the dragon, **that ancient serpent**, who is the devil, or Satan,.." I hope this makes it clear that Milton did not originate the idea that the serpent in the garden was Satan. David H. Wagner a confessional Lutheran. My opinions and beliefs on this matter are disclaimed by The University of Houston.