Questions about the fall of Satan and original sin?

[JC333]

So I've been wondering lately how the fall of Satan works? One day he decided to rise up and try to dethrone God (according to Ezekial and Isaiah?) But then wouldn't that mean that Satan created sin? Does Satan have such a power (to create something where there was nothing)?

Then he just passed sin on to Adam and Eve?


EDIT:Feel free to take discussion in any direction.

[zoegirl]

Sin is not creating something but rather the corruption of something already made. It is a rebellion of a world created by God. Satan cannot create, he can only rebel against His own creator.

And he did not pass on the sin. Adam and Eve sinned of their own accord. He tempted them but they fell themselves.

[JC333]

Thank you for the answer zoegirl.

[JC333]

Are there any Bible verses that mention this specifically?

Sin is not creating something but rather the corruption of something already made. It is a rebellion of a world created by God.

[Canuckster1127]

Are there any Bible verses that mention this specifically?

Sin is not creating something but rather the corruption of something already made. It is a rebellion of a world created by God.

The concept actually comes from the Greek word for sin, which means "missing the mark." The picture is one of an archer who misses the target. The miss itself is only meaningful in the context of the fact that there is a target and any shot that fails to hit that target is by definition sin.

The concept too is similar to the idea that there really is no such thing as "cold". What we call cold is really just the absence of heat. Likewise there really isn't a substance of "darkness." It is just the absence of light.

The original hearers in their language and culture would understand this without the explanation we need.

The easiest verse to see his clealy in would be the standard, Rom 3:23. "for all have sinned and fall short of the Glory of God." The "fall short" portion of that verse is simply a restatement and clarification of "sinned".

[JC333]

Thanks for the post Canuckster1127. That makes sense.

The concept too is similar to the idea that there really is no such thing as "cold". What we call cold is really just the absence of heat. Likewise there really isn't a substance of "darkness." It is just the absence of light.

I've heard this analogy before. It was used in the story with a professor and a student. Probably fiction, but still very true (if that made sense). I think it ends with, evil is just the absence of good (God) in this world.

Thanks again

[Cross.eyed]

I read this in a book from Ravi Zacharais, but I can't remember which one (I really need to start re-reading some of my books)

Evil does not exist on it's own- it is not of it's own essence.
Nobody ever did evil for the sole express purpose of comitting an evil act. For example, a serial killer may find pleasure in the act of murder. Pleasure is a good thing. Another may seek personal gain through an evil endeavor. Personal gain (by it's self) is good.

In other words, evil must borrow from good to exist since evil cannot come into being on it's own.

Good is of it's own essence, many people have done good deeds for no other reason than to do something that is good. They didn't need to tell anyone about it, they didn't do it because it was fun, or for any other reason apart from doing something that was good (I suspect there are people here who have experienced this of their own accord) Good can work for good and need not borrow from anything.

I didn't quote Ravi word for word as I don't have his book with me at this time, but as much as I can comprehend, I think he is on the right track with this.

By this criteria, I think good (God) must have existed before evil.

[cslewislover]

I was just going to look this up in Lewis' book, Mere Christianity, but then realized I gave it to someone (to borrow) but they didn't give it back, lol (It's been quite awhile, so I should've replaced it by now!). Anyway, what you describe about pleasure and evil, Lewis discussed before Ravi. I wonder if he gave him credit? (It sounded so close to Lewis!)

Reading these posts reminded me, too, of Tolkien's Lord of the Rings. The orcs were created by the Satan figure (and his powerful followers) by corrupting the goodness of the Elves. This was after the earth and its order were finished, and nothing good came from them. Dwarves, on the other hand, were created by an angelic being before the creation was finished; the God figure forgave him because of the angel's motives (and the Dwarves were allowed to continue as a race), and the Dwarves ended doing good. One of the major themes, if not the major theme, in LOTR (and its related works), is that good will eventually come out of bad. When the earth was being created, the Satan figure kept interfering with it and caused all kinds of difficulties, like very cold and hot climates. Because of the very cold climate the earth's inhabitants were now able to experience the beauty and delicacy of the snowflake. (I'm getting this mostly from The Silmarillion, the prequel to LOTR.)

Anyway, these books by Tolkien are fiction, but he definitely wrote them with scripture in mind. The newer edition of The Silmarillion has a letter in it by Tolkien, where he describes much of his intent in writing a Christian-based story. The beginning of The Silmarillion reads like Tolkien's thoughts on Genesis, only with a mythological flavor. His stories can be very stimulating and even encouraging when you read them. Especially the character of Frodo, who by constantly warding off evil becomes a being that light can be seen coming through.

Sorry if I got too off-topic. It's related, but in a conversational way

[zoegirl]

I, too, hav read that section in MEre CHristianity. I do have my copy I shall have to see if I can find it.

ONe of my goals for this summer is to reread a couple of favorite books

"ordering the prviate world"
Some Lewis books
and finish "The LAnguage of God"

[cslewislover]

I've never read To Kill A Mockingbird, so I'm going to try and read that this summer. I recently finished Darwin's Nemesis, and am working (slowly) on How Chritianity Changed the World and Reel Spirituality: Theology and Film in Dialogue. There used to be this bumper sticker: "So many books, so little time"

Well, I'm definitely off-topic now. Maybe no moderators are lurking.

PS : I'm fairly positive those things are in Mere Christianity, but it's always possible I'm remembering them from another of Lewis' books; that's why I wanted to look them up.

[JC333]

Well, I'm definitely off-topic now. Maybe no moderators are lurking.

EDIT:Feel free to take discussion in any direction.

Problem solved.

I was just going to look this up in Lewis' book, Mere Christianity, but then realized I gave it to someone (to borrow) but they didn't give it back, lol (It's been quite awhile, so I should've replaced it by now!). Anyway, what you describe about pleasure and evil, Lewis discussed before Ravi. I wonder if he gave him credit? (It sounded so close to Lewis!)

I have that book in my room! But I've only read like the first 4 chapters and I've had it for 4 months. I don't really remember anything so I'll have to restart it. I am borrowing it from a friend (hey maybe it's you jk )

I've never read To Kill A Mockingbird, so I'm going to try and read that this summer.

I recommend the movie over the book. The book was boringggg...

I recently finished Darwin's Nemesis

Is this a good apologetic book to read? I am still young and have only recently (like past 6 months) been getting into knowing the "why" behind the "what" I believe. I've read "The Case for Christ (Student edition)" and "10 Most Common Objections to Christianity" (by Alex Mcfarland).

In other words, evil must borrow from good to exist since evil cannot come into being on it's own.

Moral argument for existence of God? If evil exists, then good must exist. If good and evil exists then we must be able to differentiate between the two. We call this the moral law. If there is a moral law, there is a moral lawgiver (God).

Am I completely off? Or did I get it right (my friend explained something like this to me the other day, I just hope I remembered it right?)

[cslewislover]

I recently finished Darwin's Nemesis

Is this a good apologetic book to read? I am still young and have only recently (like past 6 months) been getting into knowing the "why" behind the "what" I believe. I've read "The Case for Christ (Student edition)" and "10 Most Common Objections to Christianity" (by Alex Mcfarland).

Darwin's Nemesis is a collection of essays in honor of Phillip Johnson, the founder of the Intelligent Design movement. It's partly apologetical of Intelligent Design; it is not a Christian apologetics book. It's a neat book - I learned a lot from it - but I wouldn't start with it if you want to learn about Intelligent Design.

There is a "moral argument" for God, but I actually can't remember all the specifics of it right now (I shouldn't even be on the computer), so I'm not going to look it up now. I think it has a lot to do with most people knowing the difference between right and wrong, in a nutshell. If no one answers well by the time I get on next, I'll look it up.

[Canuckster1127]

CS Lewis' Mere Christianity is a classic in aplogetics.

[zoegirl]

Absoloutely!! Read through that again!!

[JC333]

Darwin's Nemesis is a collection of essays in honor of Phillip Johnson, the founder of the Intelligent Design movement. It's partly apologetical of Intelligent Design; it is not a Christian apologetics book. It's a neat book - I learned a lot from it - but I wouldn't start with it if you want to learn about Intelligent Design.

I did a english persuasive speech about how ID should be taught in schools along side with evolution (got an A) and did a good amount of research in order to get all my facts and info down. I even convinced some of my close friends (non-christians) that evolution isn't fact and that many scientists are starting to like the theory of intelligent design. It started some great conversations. But, I am still only in high school. I don't need to know the logistics of ID yet (thank God).