Is Satan The "anti-god"?

JohnC said:
[...] but it's kinda funny how nobody notices that in Revelation - when Satan is bound for 1,000 years - Man STILL finds a way to rebel against God....

Why?

Well... WE still have The Flesh, and we still have The World..... [...]
Click to expand...

Very interesting point.

This remind of Father Jose Antonio Fortea's Summa Daemoniaca in which the famous priest said that even if Satan didn't exist, there would still be sin in the world. Maybe there would be less sin, but it would still exist.

Sin is indeed within our nature, with or without the devil. 'Now those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.' (Galatians 5:24)

James Agboola, who went through a NDE, aledgedly told God that he didn't want to return to his physical body because it caused him to sin.
 
Godspell said:
Well, that's essentially what I was trying to say. You can choose to reject God, it doesn't necessarily mean your as evil as Satan. Though the person that rejects God is punished in hell just like Satan, but it is a punishment of their own making, not Satan's. Satan, as I see him, is just a very prolific sinner, the prince of sinners. But he is not lord of anything.
Click to expand...

But GS....the Bible says that he is the "PRINCE" of the power of the air. Does that not indicate that he is evil royality or Lord of sinners to you?
 
Godspell said:
Eh... that's still a bit of a stretch. The


I suppose what I am really objecting to is the notion that if you don't belong to God you belong to Satan.

I feel as though this purports a dualistic nature of Christianity, which it is not. Not belonging to God means you don't belong to God, or you belong to sin, not necessarily "Satan" who I don't believe is the "Anti-God".
Click to expand...

Revelation 3:15...esv
"I know your works: you are neither cold nor hot. Would that you were either cold or hot! 16 So, because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth."

According to the Bible, there is NO middle of the road or if you prefer, "Neutral". It actually is either God or Satan.
 
Major said:
But GS....the Bible says that he is the "PRINCE" of the power of the air. Does that not indicate that he is evil royality or Lord of sinners to you?
Click to expand...

"Prince" from the Latin "Princeps" is more akin to "Leader" or "First Among Equals" (Primus inter pares: Notice the similarity in Princeps and Primus) rather than the Latin "Rex" which means King and implies royalty. In fact the Roman principate was a period in time in which the Roman Emperors collectively took the style Princeps, and always absolutely refused to take the style Rex. Other titles included Caesar, Augustus, Imperator, etc. Most of the titles were after actual persons.

So, no for me, Prince doesn't mean royalty or lordship as it were, but rather just means that of all the sinners, Satan is the worst (or best depending on your perspective). But, God is God of Jews as well as Gentiles, and sinners as well as saints.

Major said:
Revelation 3:15...esv
"I know your works: you are neither cold nor hot. Would that you were either cold or hot! 16 So, because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth."

According to the Bible, there is NO middle of the road or if you prefer, "Neutral". It actually is either God or Satan.
Click to expand...

In some ways. However, there is also a verse where Christ says, "Whoever is not against us is for us." Though He also says a converse statement elsewhere.

Early Christian history had a long history of honoring Martyrs who were not baptized into the Church, but who were believed to be Saints nonetheless for their sacrifice, therefore being "Baptized in Blood".

So, its a more complex relationship, but certainly we should serve God with all our hearts, all our minds and all our strength. Refusing to do so, however, doesn't mean you worship Satan, though. Satan is not that powerful.
 
Godspell said:
"Prince" from the Latin "Princeps" is more akin to "Leader" or "First Among Equals" (Primus inter pares: Notice the similarity in Princeps and Primus) rather than the Latin "Rex" which means King and implies royalty. In fact the Roman principate was a period in time in which the Roman Emperors collectively took the style Princeps, and always absolutely refused to take the style Rex. Other titles included Caesar, Augustus, Imperator, etc. Most of the titles were after actual persons.

So, no for me, Prince doesn't mean royalty or lordship as it were, but rather just means that of all the sinners, Satan is the worst (or best depending on your perspective). But, God is God of Jews as well as Gentiles, and sinners as well as saints.



In some ways. However, there is also a verse where Christ says, "Whoever is not against us is for us." Though He also says a converse statement elsewhere.

Early Christian history had a long history of honoring Martyrs who were not baptized into the Church, but who were believed to be Saints nonetheless for their sacrifice, therefore being "Baptized in Blood".

So, its a more complex relationship, but certainly we should serve God with all our hearts, all our minds and all our strength. Refusing to do so, however, doesn't mean you worship Satan, though. Satan is not that powerful.
Click to expand...

Your comment was.....
"So, its a more complex relationship, but certainly we should serve God with all our hearts, all our minds and all our strength. Refusing to do so, however, doesn't mean you worship Satan, though. Satan is not that powerful."

Now that is your opinion and you are certainly welcome to it but However the Bible says in Revelation 3:15-16........
15 “‘I know your works: you are neither cold nor hot. Would that you were either cold or hot! 16 So, because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth."

Clearly then all men are either children of God or children of Satan. There is no neutral ground.

Then as for the definition of "prince" in Ephesians 2:2. Paul uses that word there to denote who is dominated by the devil. Prince implies "Dominance, or ruler ship, or even owned by". It is Satan who administers the corrupt power of the unholy spirits. He is a real person whose many aliases actually show us his true character. The conduct and actions of lost men mark themselves as children of disobedience.

The verse you did not post is Matt. 12:30......
"He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad".

Jesus tells us that there is no middle ground. That is the same thing He said in Revelation 3.

Then He says in Mark 9:40............
"For he that is not against us is on our part. For whosoever shall give you a cup of water to drink in my name, because ye belong to Christ, verily I say unto you, he shall not lose his reward."

That is not a contradictory statement.

IMO that verse means that even though men may have minor denominational differences, we can still work together to stand against Satan.
It is a proverbial expression, the enemy of my enemy is my friend!
 
With all due respect, Rev 3:15-16 is not about whether you are for God or for Satan.... It makes absolutely no sense when you substitute "I would that you be For God or For Satan... but because you are For both, I will spew you out of my mouth"..... I guarantee you that Jesus does not prefer you to be for Satan....

That verse talks about being Zealous for Christ.... Zeal translates into action.... We can be absolutely zealous for Christ and be Liberal - this Zeal translates into action... We can be absolutely zealous for Christ and be Conservative - and this Zeal also translates into action....

Try to mix the Zealous Liberals and the Zealous Conservatives in the same church pew and keep things civil... It turns into a trainwreck and a shouting match.... The only way it works is when you stamp down all the Zeal so people don't argue - NOBODY does ANYTHING for Christ because the Zeal for Christ is beaten into mushy, lukewarm complacency.....
 
Major said:
Your comment was.....
"So, its a more complex relationship, but certainly we should serve God with all our hearts, all our minds and all our strength. Refusing to do so, however, doesn't mean you worship Satan, though. Satan is not that powerful."

Now that is your opinion and you are certainly welcome to it but However the Bible says in Revelation 3:15-16........
15 “‘I know your works: you are neither cold nor hot. Would that you were either cold or hot! 16 So, because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth."

Clearly then all men are either children of God or children of Satan. There is no neutral ground.

Then as for the definition of "prince" in Ephesians 2:2. Paul uses that word there to denote who is dominated by the devil. Prince implies "Dominance, or ruler ship, or even owned by". It is Satan who administers the corrupt power of the unholy spirits. He is a real person whose many aliases actually show us his true character. The conduct and actions of lost men mark themselves as children of disobedience.

The verse you did not post is Matt. 12:30......
"He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad".

Jesus tells us that there is no middle ground. That is the same thing He said in Revelation 3.

Then He says in Mark 9:40............
"For he that is not against us is on our part. For whosoever shall give you a cup of water to drink in my name, because ye belong to Christ, verily I say unto you, he shall not lose his reward."

That is not a contradictory statement.

IMO that verse means that even though men may have minor denominational differences, we can still work together to stand against Satan.
It is a proverbial expression, the enemy of my enemy is my friend!
Click to expand...

Satan is not a creator. He has no children.
 
Godspell said:
Satan is not a creator. He has no children.
Click to expand...

Of course Satan is not a creator in any way whatsoever and was not implied that he is. That would be heresy of the highest level.

Now, as for children. I think that if we consult the Word of God we can also answer that question clearly.

Would you like to respond to these Bible verses?

Genesis 3:15King James Version (KJV)
15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed;(Satans people) it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel."

John 8:44King James Version (KJV)
"Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it."

Acts 13:10King James Version (KJV)
10 And said, O full of all subtilty and all mischief, thou child of the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord?

1 John 3:10King James Version (KJV)
10 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.
 
I'm pretty confused by this thread. Are some arguing that Satan is the evil equivalent to God? Are some arguing that he's the Anti-Christ?

What's the argument and where is it going?
 
JohnC said:
With all due respect, Rev 3:15-16 is not about whether you are for God or for Satan.... It makes absolutely no sense when you substitute "I would that you be For God or For Satan... but because you are For both, I will spew you out of my mouth"..... I guarantee you that Jesus does not prefer you to be for Satan....

That verse talks about being Zealous for Christ.... Zeal translates into action.... We can be absolutely zealous for Christ and be Liberal - this Zeal translates into action... We can be absolutely zealous for Christ and be Conservative - and this Zeal also translates into action....

Try to mix the Zealous Liberals and the Zealous Conservatives in the same church pew and keep things civil... It turns into a trainwreck and a shouting match.... The only way it works is when you stamp down all the Zeal so people don't argue - NOBODY does ANYTHING for Christ because the Zeal for Christ is beaten into mushy, lukewarm complacency.....
Click to expand...

It seems that you do not understand the verse you spoke of in the Revelation.

Rev.3:15 says.........
"So then because I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth."

IT does NOT say anything at all about being for both!!! It says that because you are for neither, then you are in fact neutral or as Jesus said, "Luke warm", and there is no such thing in the Bible as being neutral with God. You are with Him for with Satan but no one can be for both.

It also confirms the many Bible passages that no one can be saved by works. It is faith in Christ that saves and nothing what man can do to be saved.
 
Major said:
You are with Him or with Satan but no one can be for both.
Click to expand...

So... You are going to tell me that Jesus would prefer that you be wholly with Satan?
and that the real sin is trying to be for both at once?

No. Jesus never prefers that someone is with Satan.. Either in part, or in whole.... PERIOD. Both of those positions are clearly called "Enemies" in other scriptures... Being "Wholly" with Satan does not keep people from trying to cause problems within the church....

If the scripture read:
I would that you were Hot - NOT cold OR lukewarm, but since you are - I will spew you out of my mouth....

Then, your statement would make sense....
 
JohnC said:
So... You are going to tell me that Jesus would prefer that you be wholly with Satan?
and that the real sin is trying to be for both at once?
Click to expand...

He did not suggest anything of the sort. You cannot serve two masters, pick one and deal with the consequences, that is the point.
Jesus would prefer that you give yourself completely to Him, but that rarely happens.

If the scripture read:
I would that you were Hot - NOT cold OR lukewarm, but since you are - I will spew you out of my mouth.....
Then, your statement would make sense....
Click to expand...

That is the whole point of that bit of scripture. If they had been either hot or cold, Jesus would have been able to work with them, but being that they were "lukewarm" they were not in a position where much could be done with or for them.
The symbolism refers to food, which most prefer to be either hot or cold, not middlin neither.
 
JohnC said:
So... You are going to tell me that Jesus would prefer that you be wholly with Satan?
and that the real sin is trying to be for both at once?

No. Jesus never prefers that someone is with Satan.. Either in part, or in whole.... PERIOD. Both of those positions are clearly called "Enemies" in other scriptures... Being "Wholly" with Satan does not keep people from trying to cause problems within the church....

If the scripture read:
I would that you were Hot - NOT cold OR lukewarm, but since you are - I will spew you out of my mouth....

Then, your statement would make sense....
Click to expand...

Are you kidding me????

What are you reading????

I had NO statement at all my friend. I posted the words of the Lord Jesus Christ!

As a Christian, and you know that I am a Christian as well....why would you say.....
"You are going to tell me that Jesus would prefer that you be wholly with Satan?

NO!!!! I am having trouble believing that you would suggest that at all. I never said that and never even suggested it neither thought it.

READ the Scripture in Rev. 3:15-16!!!

The sin is that the people(Church) that Jesus is talking were NOT FORE JESUS. They were "neutral, lukewarm" and HE...JESUS said that because they had not chosen Him they had in effect chosen Satan. For THAT reason He rejected them.
 
Glomung said:
He did not suggest anything of the sort. You cannot serve two masters, pick one and deal with the consequences, that is the point.
Jesus would prefer that you give yourself completely to Him, but that rarely happens.



That is the whole point of that bit of scripture. If they had been either hot or cold, Jesus would have been able to work with them, but being that they were "lukewarm" they were not in a position where much could be done with or for them.
The symbolism refers to food, which most prefer to be either hot or cold, not middlin neither.
Click to expand...

Thank you Glo! You are absolutely correct as usual.
 
Moving forward, can we not assume the bizarre on one another? If someone holds a doctrinal disagreement, don't jump to the conclusion that that person believes something entirely separate. By someone does that, all he is doing is trying to smear the other person. It does no good, creates sore division, and puts the discussion to a halt.
 
Major said:
Of course Satan is not a creator in any way whatsoever and was not implied that he is. That would be heresy of the highest level.

Now, as for children. I think that if we consult the Word of God we can also answer that question clearly.

Would you like to respond to these Bible verses?

Genesis 3:15King James Version (KJV)
15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed;(Satans people) it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel."

John 8:44King James Version (KJV)
"Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it."

Acts 13:10King James Version (KJV)
10 And said, O full of all subtilty and all mischief, thou child of the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord?

1 John 3:10King James Version (KJV)
10 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.
Click to expand...

As I read these scriptures, I don't hear this in a familiar relationship, but rather as the inheritance of evil passion. For someone to truly be a son or father their must be love directed at one another. In the case of God, there is the Father and the Son and the love between them generating the Holy Spirit. But Satan does not have an outward expression of love, only an inward expression, so it is not possible for him to have children. Servants, perhaps yes, but only insofar as they follow his suit with self-love, but it is a disorderly and anarchic relationship, not the typical servant-master one we think of. Presumably why the anti-christ is known also as the "Lawless one".
 
LysanderShapiro said:
I'm pretty confused by this thread. Are some arguing that Satan is the evil equivalent to God? Are some arguing that he's the Anti-Christ?

What's the argument and where is it going?
Click to expand...

Lysander, I'm sort of challenging the common notion of God v. Satan = good v. evil. This IMO raises a dualistic interpretation of faith.

I was purporting one of the dogmas of the catholicism that evil is the godlessness not devilishness. And essentially that being of Satan is a misnomer, as really all that means is self-love and anarchy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top