Talk:War in Heaven

Free will

I once read that one of the major causes of the war in heaven was that Satan and his apostate angels did not believe in free will, at least not in the sense that most religious people do, and sought to construct a society in which men and women were essentially placed on the same level as farm animals. ADM (talk) 01:45, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Sourcing

I removed this:

A website that says the War in Heaven occurred between the Old and New Testaments, rather than at either the beginning or the end of time, says that this number was later affirmed by fifteenth-century scholar Alphonso de Spina. In going through the opinions on the number of fallen angels, theologian John Gill shows no awareness of the existence of this very precise idea of their number (bringing the total of angels in existence to 399,920,004 i.e. 79,996 short of 400 million), which Ashley's book and a number of websites attribute to two famous figures, one of the thirteenth, the other of the fifteenth century, without indicating in what writings they made the statement.

because websites are usually not Wikipedia:Reliable sources (see WP:SPS) and the criticism of Gill seems to be given undue weight in any case. A.K.Nole (talk) 20:47, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Combat myth

This article currently presents a narrowly Christianist view: the fully encyclopedic theme is the subject of Neil Forsyth, The Old Enemy: Satan and the combat myth, which discusses the transformations of all the parallel narratives.--Wetman (talk) 18:43, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Causes of Satan's rebellion

Just to sum up the issue; I opened by questioning the value of an entry with: Not sure why a tiny fringe sect's view is presented alongside established theology. Especially when it's in the context of a racist beliefs system (blacks being decedents of "neutral angels.") 15:14, 5 March 2010

The response received was "The Mormon church is hardly "tiny"." 16:05, 5 March 2010 Cuchullain

and I responded with an actual fact proving that it actually is very tiny (large for a cult perhaps, tiny for a religion):

Mormonism =14 million out of 6 billion. 0.0023% is pretty darn small actually; and it's hardly mainstream theology besides.) 02:07, 6 March 2010

So I think I won the "size" issue there, anybody else have anything to add?Cosmickingpin (talk) 10:38, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing the question for discussion here. I think that numbers alone are insufficient grounds for deciding one way or another. Milton was just one man, but his writing is certainly well enough known for the picture he presented to be included here. The same holds for Origen, who was a highly influential early theologian. I think the LDS too have a certain importance because of being widely known - more widely indeed than many other groups with a larger membership - so that their view can be included, all the more if it is controversial. Their view should, I think, be put last in the list, for chronological reasons, if for no other. It should also be inserted only when someone cites a source for what is here attributed to them. In Wikipedia, statements not backed up with a reliable source can be deleted (after giving other editors a reasonable amount of time to find a source). Esoglou (talk) 12:04, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Well Size being one Issue, Milton was one man, but his writing's impact transcended that of a simple poem. The way the entry read it seemed little more than a an attempt at Proselytizing with nothing but a link to the LDS Wiki page so without a source, I agree it's problematic. Not trying to discourage diversity, just questioning it falsification. The topic itself deals the theological 'problem of evil' as it were, and this 'view' such as it is, has no history in any theological tradition, heretical or otherwise. Is the entry intended simply to catalog each and every fringe or occultist on a given subject, or even confine itself to the Judaic-Christian-Islamic traditions as they relate to the problem of evil, if so then would a link to Zoroastrian interpretations of metaphysical conflict be appropriate? And perhaps widen the subject matter that way? And if the LDS View is to be included can some its more unflattering aspects be included (such as Lucifer and Jesus being brothers, Africans being descended from angels who refused to be involved in the conflict- completely sourced of course)? Cosmickingpin (talk) 21:02, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

We must keep to the War in Heaven topic, so this is not the place for the "problem of evil" topic nor for discussion of LDS beliefs other than about what started the supposed War in Heaven. I think the LDS view (if sourced) on what gave rise to that supposed event is notable enough for inclusion. But I await the opinions of others. Esoglou (talk) 21:39, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

You did the math wrong - 14 million out of 6 billion is 0.23%; I would argue that more that 2 out of a thousand people is a sizable ratio in global terms. 8 Dec 2010 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.0.193.15 (talk) 15:42, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Judeo-Christian

Really? Does anyone have any sources on a Jewish War in Heaven tradition? Because I'm not familiar with it and the examples given are all, you know, about Jesus. --134.173.14.247 (talk) 19:20, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

The article quotes the Jewish Encyclopedia, does it not? Esoglou (talk) 22:30, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

No, but, that's about fallen angels (which are definitely part of Jewish culture!) The War in Heaven is a different, distinct thing. The Jewish Encyclopedia does not describe a fight in heaven, just angels who sin (sometimes in groups) and who are kicked out. --134.173.14.247 (talk) 04:33, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Would you please point me to where the article speaks of a Jewish tradition of a war in heaven. All I have found in the article is "The Judeo-Christian religions have stories about angelic beings cast down from heaven by God, often presenting the punishment as inflicted in particular on Satan." Esoglou (talk) 08:51, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Um, it's classified as a Judeo-Christian topic? --134.173.14.247 (talk) 18:46, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Easily fixed. Esoglou (talk) 19:57, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

..and easily restored: Satan means "Adversary".--Wetman (talk) 19:58, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

As the anonymous user said, the article is about a supposed war in heaven. It isn't the article about Satan. Please re-revert. Esoglou (talk) 20:02, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

I have recently purchased Neil Forsyth, The Old Enemy: Satan & the Combat Myth, which was good enough for Princeton University Press,1987, and might be good enough for Esoglou. I recommend it, to take off the perfect bloom of innocence. The familiar attitude that items in Christianity are unrelated to anything else, because those are "just" myths is discrediting.--Wetman (talk) 20:47, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

This lofty but vague language about taking the bloom off innocence I fail to follow. Do you actually mean that anything and everything Christian is a "Judeo-Christian topic"? If not, what do you mean? Or do you mean that the book you refer to says the war in heaven theme was part of Jewish story-telling also? In that case, would you please be so good as to put that information into the article and in that way justify calling the war in heaven a Judeo-Christian and not just a Christian topic? And who said that the war in heaven is unrelated to anything else? And in what way is your remark "Satan means 'Adversary'" supposed to justify classifying the war in heaven story as Judeo-Christian? As the anonymous editor pointed out, the Satan story is Jewish as well as Christian, but where is the source that says that the war in heaven story is Jewish? Esoglou (talk) 21:10, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Since, even in spite of a reminder on the editor's talk page, he has neither explained nor defended his revert, I have now undone his change. Esoglou (talk) 10:12, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Iblis in the Quran

Under the subtitled paragraph "Causes of Satan's Rebellion" there is a parenthetical note "(and as is said of Iblis in the Qur'an)." This comment is incorrectly located. It is a Non-Judeo-Christian interpretation of a Christian and non-Islamic religious text. As such it should be placed in the paragraph below with the subtitle "Similar motifs outside Judeo-Christian faiths." In addition, this item needs a reference providing credibility that it does indeed come from the Quran. For these two reasons, I am removing it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rvallimo (talk • contribs) 20:31, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Information

I am looking for information on a few things, these are terms that I have come across in many religions (in diffrent definitions) "The Fallen, Grigori, War in Heaven, and Nephilim". Also if anyone has information on two terms i've come across that I can't really find definitions for (religiously) I would appreciate it, the terms are "Shadows of Heaven and Guardians/resolute protectors". Gizmo8024 (talk) 07:43, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

Edit

I have edited War in Heaven to include references to the King of Babylon in Isaiah 14, Satan as one of the sons of god, and the use of hyperbolic language. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aisforatheist (talk • contribs) 19:30, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

I think your edit is out of place in the lead section. It should first be developed in the body of the article and then a summary added to the lead. You would also have to supply citations to support statements of yours such as the applicability of the supposed polytheism of the early Jewish people to the belief expressed in the later Hebrew Bible. The logic of your argument "Considering heaven is viewed as 'paradise' among Christian believers, and if heaven is paradise, then having a war in heaven would not only be illogical, a war in heaven would be impossible" is not self-evident, or at least is not evident to me. More important in Wikipedia, it is presented as an argument of yours, not as a statement made by a reliable source. Please read WP:OR. If "sons of God" is to be developed, I think the fact that the Septuagint used the concept of "angels" to translate it should be mentioned. There are valuable elements in what you have written, but it needs reworking in line with Wikipedia norms. Esoglou (talk) 07:44, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Your talk about "sons of God" and original polytheism seems to be related to the concept of devils rather than to be about a war in heaven. It should inserted, with cited sources, in a more appropriate article. Esoglou (talk) 14:08, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Background of the War in Heaven

What exactly happened in the War in Heaven, what exactly did we do to deserve this? Would be good for the article.--78.156.109.166 (talk) 20:41, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Anthroposophical worldview provides contextual background and explanations

Check out the anthroposophical or theosophical worldview that explains the evolution of the solar system and mankind. This gives an answer to all the questions asked here.

These are not matters that can be explained in short and simple terms, as the evolution of spiritual beings and influences on mankind is of a rather high complexity.

But in short, a high level introduction for the open mind.

On this planetary embodiement Earth, mankind received the Ego or I or mental body, the ability to have self-consciousness and hence be de-coupled from spiritual realities. This Ego or I, or soul, is threefold in that it includes the awareness of the other bodies: physical, etheric or life body, and astral body. This threefold soul is hence constituted by a sentient soul (astral body), intellectual soul (etheric), and consciousness soul (physical). These new faculties were woven onto and granted to mankind by the Spirits of Form and enabled by the first hierarchy (of Thrones, Seraphim and Cherubim). Now as these components were added in previous epochs Lemuria, Atlantis, and the current postatlantean epoch, some influences 'sneaked in' to the threefold soul, respectively called Luciferian, Ahrimanic and Asuric influences. These influences put stress on the normal evolution of mankind and challenge and thereby strengthen its anticipated evolution. In other words: by having to face these challenges, the development of mankind is served in its ultimate finality (even if it makes for a hefty and painful journey).

The war in heaven is this stress field between the main spiritual beings that guide the development of mankind, and the countering spiritual beings (named above). Proponents of this are ao Lucifer or Satan at the time of the Fall, in Lemuria .. when the awareness through senses seduced mankind by infusing desires, urges. Similarly Ahriman or Mephisto convinces man to focus on the material only (see the current material physical worldview). And the Asuric influences that come with the infusion of the consciousness soul make for an over-increase in egotism (which will ultimately lead to the destruction of by mankind at the end of this epoch; this is called the 'war of all against all' in revelation).

The goal of the whole affair is to allow mankind to be free of spiritual guidance (we don't believe in the spiritual reality these days because our current sensory experience is blind to it), the key point is that freedom is a requirement for love. And Mankind is to develop as the next hierarchy in creation, to ultimately become the 'Spirits of freedom and love'. This is the core of what we are to develop, this is our task at hand. Now this freedom is 'a first' in creation and the cosmos. And to enable this feat, something exceptional had to happen, a high spiritual being had to go through the gate of death. This spiritual being is called Christ, the sun-spirit, who has been guiding the development of mankind by making corrective actions at each stage of development of the threefold soul, in order to warrant a balanced evolutionary progression. This happened in Lemuria, Atlantean periods, and finally also at Golgotha which was truly a cosmic event and not something that can be understood in human mundane terms.

Michael is a being of the order of the archangels, and is the representative of this sun spirit Christ. He represents the battle for balance, against the dragon which represents the opposing influences mentioned above. In practice, what all this means, is that Man has to fight these influences in himself, to find a way of balance through these opposing influences that push and tear his development sidesways. Hence Christ represents the seed in every human being that allows us to, through the conscious control by our Ego or I, to refine our lower bodies (astral: by controlling urges and growing out of emotional drives; then etheric, ultimately the physical). That way the ego is pivotal in creating a higher (spiritual) self by refining and letting go of the lower bodies.

It is important to realize that our physical reality is a Maya reflection of what is going in in this War in Heaven. So everything you see around you, from Hitler and the second World War, to current mobile internet computing with Facebook/Google and Apple .. in all such things, we can find a reflection of the above-mentioned spiritual influences. They are not good or bad, but the challenge us to retain balance in our development as mankind. As in: retain focus on our task at hand, and not be carried away left or right off center. If you doubt it: check the world around you and see how people focus only on the material, or the virtual world on their small smartphone screen .. and realize none of that was this way only hundred years ago. So to keep a clear course through that storm is not for everyone. The key to the door is called Initiation, and some people are awakening spiritually in one way or another to this.

Sorry if this was too lengthy or too far fetched for most readers not into esoteric or metaphysical worldviews, I guess I was just in a flow there for a minute or two. For what it's worth. May those who are ready to hear, hear.