Do demons get a bad rap?

[Willum]

So we all know all know the tale of how Satan, who will be defined as the Serpent or the Devil or Lucifer, or etc. for purposes of this OP, led 1/3 of the angels in heaven to the fall. This is also an assumption of the OP.

Satan, Lou Cypher, et &al., is often depicted in media as not evil, but a rebel against God, even a champion for freewill.
And who could blame him seeing the antics of this God? God drowns the world because he lets his angels breed, then doesn't have the good sense to start over with another garden...

When we look at these events, we, and certainly the media has often expressed sympathy for the Devil. Maybe he did simply want man to know the truth and is getting a bad rap.

But that is not what the OP is about.

This is about the demons or his fallen angels.

These folks are always depicted as deviant and chaotic and evil.
But isn't it more likely that they fall about some kind of spectrum?

Perhaps the best of demons, were they to chose again, would really have chosen not to rebel, and conversely, some angels would, given a choice, choose to rebel.

I know I would.

So, is it more likely that demons, if they actually existed, are not all as they are depicted in media, fathomless malevolent evil, but there are ambivalent, even good demons? Or losing the bias:

It is possible there are ambivalent, even good fallen angels?
Is there anything, other than logic, to support this view?

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 1 by Willum]

Hmm...I'm seeing a flaw in your OP Willum. You say

Satan, Lou Cypher, et &al., is often depicted in media as not evil, but a rebel against God, even a champion for freewill.

then just a few lines later you say

This is about the demons or his fallen angels.

These folks are always depicted as deviant and chaotic and evil.

Can you tell me which is it? I'm seeing both sides represented in media, it's not all one or the other.

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 1 by Willum]

As we all know history is written by the victor. Perhaps, everything written about demons is a lie. God has the biggest kill count in the bible anyways. What if those that rebelled against God were morally compelled win or lose tofight against such Tyranny?

Read Philip Pullman's 'His Dark Materials' trilogy. Guarantee you will love it.

[rikuoamero]

It is possible there are ambivalent, even good fallen angels?
Is there anything, other than logic, to support this view?

I suppose anything is possible. Except most people don't accept the notion of a universal standard of what "good" is, so it would be hard to establish objectively what a "good fallen angel" would theoretically look like.

The bible presents "fallen angels" as powerful intelligent beings of superhuman force that are not adverse to presenting themselves in a favorable light. One could argue that the most logical thing for them to do is indeed pretend to be "good" as defined by any given group in order to manipulate those in that group, if that were their aim.

Of course, if you're granting this logical possibility to the 'fallen angels', what of applying it to God and the "non"-fallen angels? If 'fallen angels' can cast themselves in a favourable light to others (read humans) and deceive, who's to say that God isn't doing the same?

[Yahu]

So we all know all know the tale of how Satan, who will be defined as the Serpent or the Devil or Lucifer, or etc. for purposes of this OP, led 1/3 of the angels in heaven to the fall. This is also an assumption of the OP.

Satan, Lou Cypher, et &al., is often depicted in media as not evil, but a rebel against God, even a champion for freewill.
And who could blame him seeing the antics of this God? God drowns the world because he lets his angels breed, then doesn't have the good sense to start over with another garden...

When we look at these events, we, and certainly the media has often expressed sympathy for the Devil. Maybe he did simply want man to know the truth and is getting a bad rap.

But that is not what the OP is about.

This is about the demons or his fallen angels.

These folks are always depicted as deviant and chaotic and evil.
But isn't it more likely that they fall about some kind of spectrum?

Perhaps the best of demons, were they to chose again, would really have chosen not to rebel, and conversely, some angels would, given a choice, choose to rebel.

I know I would.

So, is it more likely that demons, if they actually existed, are not all as they are depicted in media, fathomless malevolent evil, but there are ambivalent, even good demons? Or losing the bias:

It is possible there are ambivalent, even good fallen angels?
Is there anything, other than logic, to support this view?

There is a problem with your assumptions. Not all consider demons as fallen angels. As a matter of fact, that is NOT supported in scripture. Demons are 'evil spirits' and all fallen angels are in prison until the final judgement. There was never a fall of 1/3 of the angels. That is a misinterpretation of a single verse in Revelation that pertains to a future even during the tribulation and isn't even about angels but about the pagan 'hosts of heaven' that are part of the sun god, moon goddess, planets, constellations and all the 'hosts of heaven', ie the pagan deities in the 2nd heaven.

The books of Enoch clearly state that the demons, evil spirits are the ghosts of the dead nephilim, the children of the fallen angels that fell and took wives in Gen 6 during the time of Jared. They were all killed before or by the flood and they get assigned as 'evil spirits' to torment mankind.

They are also assigned to carry out Yah's judgements on those that violate His laws. So, they can be operating as an agent of Yah to carry out His will. It is only when they lead people into error so they can inflict that judgement that they are truly evil.

The current Satan, ie Lucifer, is just the son of a powerful fallen angel. He is the greatest of the nephilim the 'son of Shachar (The Morning)', who was a Canaanite deity that was a 'ben Elohyim'. Lucifer equates to Apollo in the Greek pantheon, the ancient pagan sun god.

[JehovahsWitness]

Of course, if you're granting this logical possibility to the 'fallen angels', what of applying it to God and the "non"-fallen angels? If 'fallen angels' can cast themselves in a favourable light to others (read humans) and deceive, who's to say that God isn't doing the same?

Nothing. Jesus however presented a logical means for differentiating true from false, he said "by their fruit you shall know them" in other words, it doesn't matter what you CALL them, that which is good will ultimately be beneficial and produce what is good and what is bad will produce the opposite. That which is truly good, (truth) will set you free and lies will enslave. What is bad cannot ultimately help but revert to its true nature (see below)

Therein lies the indicator of what is good and what is bad.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 23 by rikuoamero]

The principle holds true that what comes from bad will ultimately be revealed as such. In short, if something comes from Satan it may look good but ultimately if applied it will not result in anything but long term harm. Can the Devil (and the demons) not just "pretend" to be good? Yes, but in the end, one's true nature must be revealed . This reminds me of the well known story of the frog (fox or turtle... depending on the version) and the scorpion.

A scorpion was walking along the bank of a river, wondering how to get to the other side. Suddenly, he saw a frog. He asked the frog to take him on his back across the river. The frog said, "No. If I do that, you'll sting me, and I'll drown." The scorpion assured him, "If I do that, we'll both drown."

The frog thought about it and finally agreed. So the scorpion climbed up on his back, and the frog began to swim. But halfway across the river, the scorpion stung him. As poison filled his veins, the frog turned to the scorpion and said, "Why did you do that? Now you'll drown, too."

"I couldn't help it," said the scorpion. "It's my nature."

The moral of the story, one cannot long act against ones basic nature. Satan and the demons can do a pretty good imitation of "good", they can fool the godless and the ignorant, but they cannot and will not do do anything that that results in the long good because that would be against their nature.

[rikuoamero]

Of course, if you're granting this logical possibility to the 'fallen angels', what of applying it to God and the "non"-fallen angels? If 'fallen angels' can cast themselves in a favourable light to others (read humans) and deceive, who's to say that God isn't doing the same?

Nothing. Jesus however presented a logical means for differentiating true from false, he said "by their fruit you shall know them" in other words, it doesn't matter what you CALL them, that which is good will ultimately be beneficial and produce what is good and what is bad will produce the opposite. That which is truly good, (truth) will set you free and lies will enslave. What is bad cannot ultimately help but revert to its true nature (see below)

Therein lies the indicator of what is good and what is bad.

Can one determine what is good and what is bad, what good and bad even mean, without having to check against Jesus, God or the Bible?
What if I determine Satan or whatever you call him telling Adam and Eve to eat the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil to be a good thing?

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 23 by rikuoamero]

The principle holds true that what comes from bad will ultimately be revealed as such. In short, if something comes from Satan it may look good but ultimately if applied it will not result in anything but long term harm. Can the Devil (and the demons) not just "pretend" to be good? Yes, but in the end, one's true nature must be revealed . This reminds me of the well known story of the frog (fox or turtle... depending on the version) and the scorpion.

A scorpion was walking along the bank of a river, wondering how to get to the other side. Suddenly, he saw a frog. He asked the frog to take him on his back across the river. The frog said, "No. If I do that, you'll sting me, and I'll drown." The scorpion assured him, "If I do that, we'll both drown."

The frog thought about it and finally agreed. So the scorpion climbed up on his back, and the frog began to swim. But halfway across the river, the scorpion stung him. As poison filled his veins, the frog turned to the scorpion and said, "Why did you do that? Now you'll drown, too."

"I couldn't help it," said the scorpion. "It's my nature."

The moral of the story, one cannot long act against ones basic nature. Satan and the demons can do a pretty good imitation of "good", they can fool the godless and the ignorant, but they cannot and will not do do anything that that results in the long good because that would be against their nature.

The problem with this reply is that you presume to know their nature. How do you know their nature? Is it down to what the Bible says? If so, why rely on that? I asked Claire Evans this several months ago - I asked her something along the lines of how does she know Satan is bad if all she has to go on is what Satan's enemy says?

[Willum]

[Replying to Yahu]

The books of Enoch clearly state that the demons, evil spirits are the ghosts of the dead nephilim, the children of the fallen angels that fell and took wives in Gen 6 during the time of Jared. They were all killed before or by the flood and they get assigned as 'evil spirits' to torment mankind.

Can't Yahweh get anything right?
So he drowns mankind, omnikind, let's not forget the freshwater fishies, and those beings he used the flood to kill aren't really dead but come back and possess little girls in New York, pigs, cause disease, and cause humans to get really deep creepy voices?

Is there anyway we can stop this god from doing good?

[Willum]

It is interesting that 2/3 of people vote that they were bad, and 1/3 thing they might not be...
1/3 of us sympathize with 1/3 of the fallen angels...