When did Satan rebel?

Steve53

Well-Known Member
I agree on all points. I believe one reason God created humans is to tell a "story" illustrating His character. 1 Peter 1:12 says that "angels long to look into these things". They are eager to see the chapters that unfold in this whole drama - from creation all the way to the end. I think it was Hal Lindsey who posits that when satan rebelled, he accused God that He is unloving and that He is unjust. In response, God created the world and humans to show that He IS loving and Just.
Agree. Also notable is that Matt 25:41 describes the lake of fire as being created for Satan and his fallen angel following. Therefore it only seems logical that Satan's fall preceded the Creation of humanity.
 

RonJohnSilver

Well-Known Member
Hello Len,

Yes, I agree with this as well, that the angels existed well before mankind, as well as their fall. It doesn't seem plausible that the rebellion of Satan and his angels took place during the same week of the creation of mankind, but was an event that took place somewhere in eternity pre Adam and Eve.

The problem putting angelic rebellion before Adam/Eve is that after creation, God proclaimed it as "very good". Why would something that involves a major rebellion be considered good? Also, the Job passage (38:7), that, at the time of creation, all the angels sang together? It makes no sense to have rebellious and faithful angels all singing together. I think the idea of a gap has some merit (some), and putting that (small, not billions of years) gap right after day 7 works, however, I'm still tossing it around mentally and just, well, seeing how it all fits. Still a work in progress.
 

Steve53

Well-Known Member
The problem putting angelic rebellion before Adam/Eve is that after creation, God proclaimed it as "very good". Why would something that involves a major rebellion be considered good? Also, the Job passage (38:7), that, at the time of creation, all the angels sang together? It makes no sense to have rebellious and faithful angels all singing together. I think the idea of a gap has some merit (some), and putting that (small, not billions of years) gap right after day 7 works, however, I'm still tossing it around mentally and just, well, seeing how it all fits. Still a work in progress.
I think it's a mistake or misinterpretation to conflate the Creation with a concurrently created Heavenly domain where God's throne is and Angels dwell simply because the few clues the Bible does give us are clearly referring to eternity past. So yeah, that leaves the gap theory to fit in Satanic rebellion except that the Bible itself lends more credence to a literal 6 day Creation than it does to a gap theory. IMHO, Satan's rebellion may have actually prompted the Creation...
 

Ahwatukee

Active Member
The problem putting angelic rebellion before Adam/Eve is that after creation, God proclaimed it as "very good". Why would something that involves a major rebellion be considered good? Also, the Job passage (38:7), that, at the time of creation, all the angels sang together? It makes no sense to have rebellious and faithful angels all singing together. I think the idea of a gap has some merit (some), and putting that (small, not billions of years) gap right after day 7 works, however, I'm still tossing it around mentally and just, well, seeing how it all fits. Still a work in progress.

Hello RonJohnSilver,

I don't see that as a problem, because Satan and the angels are not apart of that 6 days of creation. The creation only included everything that was created on the earth, the sun moon and stars, etc. It had nothing to do with the creation of the angels, who could have been created millions of years prior to when God created all of those things during those six days. So, when the Lord said that everything was good that he had created, specifically during those 6 days, it was true, because the creation and fall of the angels was not apart of it.
 

clouds

Well-Known Member
The problem with trying to determine then "when" of something done by a supernatural creature, such as Satan, is that the Bible sometimes indicates that another dimension of time still exists for them.
I could point to (Luke 4:5), "And the devil, taking Him (Jesus) up into an high mountain, shewed unto Him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time."
This supernatural "moment of time" must have included ALL the kingdoms past, present, and future, which is not how natural linear time works for this earth. The devil's immediate transporting of Jesus up into a high mountain is also from another dimension which must be supernatural.
 

Len

Well-Known Member
So, when the Lord said that everything was good that he had created, specifically during those 6 days, it was true, because the creation and fall of the angels was not apart of it.
I could point to (Luke 4:5), "And the devil, taking Him (Jesus) up into an high mountain, shewed unto Him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time."
These thoughts and pointers are a wonderful illustration of why RF is so helpful to many other seekers and saints.....
 

Soulkid

New Member
The trouble with talking about such an eternal distinction between heaven and earth is that I'm not convinced such a divide always existed. I believe that in the beginning heaven and earth were perfectly united, but the fall fractured that unity. The new heavens and the new earth will restore that harmony (Isa 66:22-23, and powerfully represented as the New Jerusalem coming to earth in Rev 21:9 onwards). My point being, we are assuming a divide that I doubt existed in the beginning, but I believe began as a consequence of the fall of man (concurrently with the fall of Satan).

And don't think that Satan is not bound by time, or runs to a different time - though the latter is possible. But time is still linear for him; it can run slower or faster, physics tell us, but not backwards. Time is a property of the whole of creation itself, not just the physical world we are familiar with. You can see this in 1 Cor 2:8, "None of the rulers of this age understood this, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory." (The rulers of this age are those described in Eph 6, "spiritual forces of evil in heavenly places," chief of whom is Satan himself.) If Satan had known the full effects of the death of Jesus, no way would he have gone through with it! Thus we conclude that Satan and his helpers are limited in time.

Lastly I think we need to consider the 'spiritual ancestry' of this whole gap theory idea. It was created (!) as means to try and harmonize Scripture with evolution; a dangerous compromise. Now I know this application of it is different, but the spiritual fruit is still attached to the tree: to allow any kind of fall before mankind's fall undermines the need for the cross, since, as others have alluded to, there would be sin and death before Adam's sin. See Rom 5:12, "Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned..." I know you can argue against this by treating the heavens and the earth separately, but Rom 8:22 says that "all creation groans" in expectation of the redemption of saved humans. Not angels.

I'm sorry, but I personally see too many holes, and even gospel damage, bundled up with this idea. But you are all still my brothers and sisters! Just a bit of food for thought :)
 
Last edited:

Steve53

Well-Known Member
The trouble with talking about such an eternal distinction between heaven and earth is that I'm not convinced such a divide always existed. I believe that in the beginning heaven and earth were perfectly united, but the fall fractured that unity. The new heavens and the new earth will restore that harmony (Isa 66:22-23, and powerfully represented as the New Jerusalem coming to earth in Rev 21:9 onwards). My point being, we are assuming a divide that I doubt existed in the beginning, but I believe began as a consequence of the fall of man (concurrently with the fall of Satan).

And don't think that Satan is not bound by time, or runs to a different time - though the latter is possible. But time is still linear for him; it can run slower or faster, physics tell us, but not backwards. Time is a property of the whole of creation itself, not just the physical world we are familiar with. You can see this in 1 Cor 2:8, "None of the rulers of this age understood this, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory." (The rulers of this age are those described in Eph 6, "spiritual forces of evil in heavenly places," chief of whom is Satan himself.) If Satan had known the full effects of the death of Jesus, no way would he have gone through with it! Thus we conclude that Satan and his helpers are limited in time.

Lastly I think we need to consider the 'spiritual ancestry' of this whole gap theory idea. It was created (!) as means to try and harmonize Scripture with evolution; a dangerous compromise. Now I know this application of it is different, but the spiritual fruit is still attached to the tree: to allow any kind of fall before mankind's fall undermines the need for the cross, since, as others have alluded to, there would be sin and death before Adam's sin. See Rom 5:12, "Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned..." I know you can argue against this by treating the heavens and the earth separately, but Rom 8:22 says that "all creation groans" in expectation of the redemption of saved humans. Not angels.

I'm sorry, but I personally see too many holes, and even gospel damage, bundled up with this idea. But you are all still my brothers and sisters! Just a bit of food for thought :)
I think I get how you got to concurrence but for me, well, I'd have to ignore a whole lot of Scriptures to come to the understanding that God's abode and the Angelic host were concurrently created.

From the late Jack Kelley:

https://gracethrufaith.com/ask-a-bible-teacher/angels-created/

https://gracethrufaith.com/ask-a-bible-teacher/angels-created-follow/
 

clouds

Well-Known Member
And don't think that Satan is not bound by time, or runs to a different time - though the latter is possible. But time is still linear for him; it can run slower or faster, physics tell us, but not backwards. Time is a property of the whole of creation itself, not just the physical world we are familiar with.
I agree that Satan is bound by time and that he can not go backwards. Satan can not predict the future by going there first as God does. That is obvious by his argument with God that he could make Job curse God to His face. His prediction failed.

When Satan offered and showed all of the kingdoms of this world, it seems that he must have included the even greater glory of future kingdoms shown to Jesus in that moment of time. God gave Satan the right to be the prince and power of all governments in this world and it is hard for me to believe that God would not have also revealed how extensive that possession was to Satan. God allowed Satan to use tremendous power against Job as Satan tried to argue and prove that Job did not truly love God for Who God was. It almost seems as if God was sort of leveling the playing field enough, so that Satan could not later claim that he was cheated as he tried to prove his point against God and man.


You can see this in 1 Cor 2:8, "None of the rulers of this age understood this, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory." (The rulers of this age are those described in Eph 6, "spiritual forces of evil in heavenly places," chief of whom is Satan himself.) If Satan had known the full effects of the death of Jesus, no way would he have gone through with it! Thus we conclude that Satan and his helpers are limited in time.
This verse seems to be referring more to why Christians should not stand in the wisdom of the world, "but in the power of God", which is in the previous verse 1 Cor 2:5. The wisdom of the world is self-centered and without obedience to God, and so it is evil, even if it might appear otherwise. The princes of this world can not ever understand the hidden mystery which God's wisdom ordained, since they are of the world as Jesus said. We are told to be in the world but not of it.
 

clouds

Well-Known Member
Now I know this application of it is different, but the spiritual fruit is still attached to the tree: to allow any kind of fall before mankind's fall undermines the need for the cross, since, as others have alluded to, there would be sin and death before Adam's sin. See Rom 5:12, "Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned..." I know you can argue against this by treating the heavens and the earth separately, but Rom 8:22 says that "all creation groans" in expectation of the redemption of saved humans. Not angels.
I understand what you are trying to point out about sin not being able to exist before Adam's sin, which then resulted in death entering the world we live in today. The main problem with this idea is that Satan still sinned first when he lied to Eve about God. Since Satan was the first sinner, I would ask, "Why does the Bible say that sin came into the world through one man (Adam)?" The first sinner was definitely Satan with his lies about God's goodness. It must be that Satan's sin could not cause death to enter the world of mankind, since Satan was not yet the prince of this world until after Adam lost his position of original headship over the earth because of his sin. It could only be by man that death came, not by Satan.
We are all subject to the penalty of death because we were effectively in Adam when he sinned.
We needed the Second Adam (Jesus Christ) to be delivered from eternal death.
1 Cor 15:21 "For since by man (Adam) came death, by man (Jesus) came also the resurrection of the dead."
 

Soulkid

New Member
I think I get how you got to concurrence but for me, well, I'd have to ignore a whole lot of Scriptures to come to the understanding that God's abode and the Angelic host were concurrently created.

From the late Jack Kelley:

https://gracethrufaith.com/ask-a-bible-teacher/angels-created/

https://gracethrufaith.com/ask-a-bible-teacher/angels-created-follow/


Hi Steve.

I'd love to see the verses you are thinking of.

Looking at the Jack Kelley references I'll address the ones he refers to in those links: (by the way, I love Jack Kelley, but I don't agree with everything he wrote, like on this point...)

Job 38:7
If the angels were created on day 1, immediately before the earth was, what’s the problem? We need to read what the text says and not import ideas about how long it may take for angels to be able to sing like that or whatever. But Jack calls this a misunderstanding of this verse, but I’m not sure how he meant that. Perhaps it’s the idea that angels celebrated their own creation, which is not necessary anyway since it’s the laying of the earth’s/land's foundation that is being celebrated (which may well have happened on day 3 anyway, Gen 1:9-10)

Exo 20:11
Certainly he could be right about this one. But it’s not a proof against the ‘gapless’ argument. I would explain it that Gen 1:1 states that everything (all 3 heavens and the earth floating in their midst) were brought into being on day 1, as ‘heavens’ in that verse is a plural, as it always is in Hebrew (which means you can translate it plural or singular depending on context). Then from v2 on He focuses on the earth specifically (whilst the newly made angels cheer him on). Then in naming the sky ‘heaven’ he is simply using the name that already existed since it is part of the 3-fold heavens anyway.

Col 1:16 – this is clearer. The Greek word ‘uranois’ is specifically plural, meaning heavens, thus more than just the atmosphere. The reference to thrones and dominions etc always refers to supernatural beings in these contexts. The problem is, though, that the time they each were created is not implied here (but consistent with both views), so again it doesn’t prove anything, unfortunately.

So, the crux of Jack’s argument is that God’s naming of the atmosphere ‘heaven’ in Gen 1:8 is the definition we should apply back to Gen 1:1, and therefore Exo 20:11. I’m not sure I can prove that wrong, but it seems odd to me. Still praying through that…
 

Steve53

Well-Known Member
We need to read what the text says and not import ideas
Could not agree more....Are you sure that's not what you're doing?

Unfortunately time does not permit me enough latitude this morning to expound upon my thinking but I do suggest a re-read of Jack's comments if you're still having trouble getting his meaning...
 
Back
Top