Lucifer...

[zunshynn]

I thought I'd open this question up to everyone, since I'm not finding anything definitive by the Church.

Do you think Lucifer was really an archangel? Because if he was the highest of the angels it seems like it would make more sense for him to have been a seraph. Because how could an archangel be the highest in the hierarchy? It seems absurd that an archangel could have led all of those angels to rebel. And it'd be kind of cool if Michael the Archangel was strong enough to throw out a seraph from heaven because he was on God's side... like God strengthens the week kind of thing.

[Church Punk]

I always thought he was above all other angels. He was Gods #2, but then he turned....evil.

(sorry about all the Austin Powers referances)

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='Church Punk' date='Mar 28 2006, 10:45 PM']I always thought he was above all other angels. He was Gods #2, but then he turned....evil.

(sorry about all the Austin Powers referances)
[right][snapback]926168[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
God is non-corporeal, He doesn't have poo.





Well...Jesus does...but yeah...we won't go there.

[scardella]

I've never really given it much thought.
Supposedly there are 7 archangels who sit before the throne of God (from Tobit). It's rather unclear what archangels actually are in relation to other angels...

Of course, you can take what I say w/ a grain of HCl because it's rather fuzzy in my mind...

Does it really matter what kind of angel he was?

[prose]

HCl.... Isn't that hydrochloric acid?

No you mean NaCl?

[Era Might]

I don't think it would matter if he were an Archangel.

Edited March 29, 2006 by Era Might

[ReinnieR]

[quote name='Raphael' date='Mar 28 2006, 08:49 PM']God is non-corporeal, He doesn't have poo.
Well...Jesus does...but yeah...we won't go there.
[right][snapback]926182[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
lol

[ReinnieR]

[quote name='prose' date='Mar 28 2006, 11:00 PM']HCl....  Isn't that hydrochloric acid? 

No you mean NaCl? 
[right][snapback]926469[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
hehe

good point

[cappie]

Lucifer



(Hebrew [b]helel; [/b]Septuagint [b]heosphoros[/b], Vulgate [b]lucifer[/b])

The name Lucifer originally denotes the planet Venus, emphasizing its brilliance. The Vulgate employs the word also for "the light of the morning" (Job 11:17), "the signs of the zodiac" (Job 38:32), and "the aurora" (Psalm 109:3). Metaphorically, the word is applied to the King of Babylon (Isaiah 14:12) as preeminent among the princes of his time; to the high priest Simon son of Onias (Ecclesiasticus 50:6), for his surpassing virtue, to the glory of heaven (Apocalypse 2:28), by reason of its excellency; finally to Jesus Christ himself (2 Peter 1:19; Apocalypse 22:16; the "Exultet" of Holy Saturday) the true light of our spiritual life.

The Syriac version and the version of Aquila derive the Hebrew noun helel from the verb yalal, "to lament"; [b]St. Jerome agrees with them (In Isaiah 1:14), and makes Lucifer the name of the principal fallen angel who must lament the loss of his original glory bright as the morning star. In Christian tradition this meaning of Lucifer has prevailed; the Fathers maintain that Lucifer is not the proper name of the devil, but denotes only the state from which he has fallen [/b](Petavius, De Angelis, III, iii, 4).

[Didacus]

Very interesting post Cappie.

Another question:

A friend of mine was telling me the other that seraphin angels cannot change (or never could change) their rightcheouness before God, whereas Archangels whrer the highest ranked angels who had free-will in the sense that they could become evil if they desired.

Is there any truth to this?

[toledo_jesus]

I fail to understand how Lucifer needed to be cast out of Heaven...quite frankly, if God is omnipotent and his creations are not, then couldn't an instantaneous banishing have occurred, minus St. Michael and all that?

[Peccator]

Hehehehe....I only quickly glanced the title and though the thread was about Luther!

[Desert Walker]

Lucifer was an archangel. It does matter because angels were created with varying intellectual capacities. Some are what we would term "moronic."

I've heard that Michael was a lower angel of some kind.

Our biggest problem these days (especially in American culture) is that the theory of Darwinian evolution has so dulled our ability to comprehend supernatural realities that most of us, deep down, don't even want to admit that God created anything but ourselves and our material universe.

Most people would be shocked to learn that there are many people in this world, Christian or otherwise, who are in near constant interaction with suprarational, supernatural, non-physical realms, powers and beings. They would deny the fact that they themselves are also influenced, but the fact is kept hidden from most for one reason or another.

[Paladin]

[quote name='Didacus' date='Mar 29 2006, 06:17 AM']Very interesting post Cappie.

Another question:

A friend of mine was telling me the other that seraphin angels cannot change (or never could change) their rightcheouness before God, whereas Archangels whrer the highest ranked angels who had free-will in the sense that they could become evil if they desired.

Is there any truth to this?
[right][snapback]926570[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
I've always heard that the Heavenly Host doesn't have free will like we do, but they have one shot at will: either entirely obey, or entirely rebel. Lucifer rebelled, and so he and his followers fell after they were created.