As you can see above this speculation does interest me quite a bit, because it developed naturally from the more central question of how did God create beings with free will. To be sure, I strongly oppose the presumption that life or free will is some kind of magical ingredient added to things by God at whim.
Not in the OT. There is only Revelation in the NT which places this rebellion at the time of Jesus. And truth be told, Jewish speculations in such as the Midrash (not to mention the later addition of the Kabbalah) is a broader spectrum of speculation and ideas than most people realize and certainly not representing some consistent understanding of Jewish scripture.
Indeed. Enoch lends support to an anti-evolution understanding of Genesis 6:1-4 which I am particularly opposed to, inventing preposterous sexual relations between angels and women and fairy tale giants (in conflict with the Christian canon) when there is a much more natural interpretation of this as addressing the simple question of who did Cain and Seth marry. It lends support to a racist interpretation of scripture which sees evil as a genetic contamination which I think is particularly poisonous to Christian theology.
Some will use the epistle of Jude to support this interpretation. But while the author may have accepted the idea put forth in Enoch this support is not set down clearly in the epistle, because the purpose of the epistle is to address the behavior of men not angels.
The naming of “Lucifer” has no support in the text but the name is of little importance. But Revelation does support the idea that the devil was the snake of the Garden and was an angel who was thrown down though it places this rebellion and defeat at the time of Jesus rather than Genesis.
P.S. The Mormons seem to like the Enoch literature because it makes the angels look more human and they prefer to think of angels as representing a human pre-existence – all a part of some big divine family from before creation.
The Bible really doesn’t tell us anything about angels apart from what they do with respect to the plan of redemption. What they do in Heaven or even in Creation that has nothing to do with us, we are not told.
The work of an artist serves to “declare the glory” of the artist, but few artists only due art to show how great they are.
That’s the philosophical definition of omnipotence, but it isn’t the biblical one. The Greek term Παντοκράτωρ indicates not unlimited power but the totality of what power exists. So the biblical concept is that whatever power there is, is God’s.
That some/many people portray Him that way does not mean He really is. Indeed it’s a bit idolatrous to think that because it puts human being on a par with God.
What I find in the scriptures is a God whose plan allowed that His critters got into a real mess and that trusting Him is the only way out of it – He isn’t threatening, He’s warning and supplying the exit from our own mess.
Describing that as “a protection racket” is about as sensible as saying God likes to punish people.
Maybe. As a rabbi I knew observed one day, it may be the case that Lucifer came down to have a look at these creatures that were made in God’s image and assessed them as inferior and was insulted that God would make such weak beings to share His glory – and at that point decided he was going to trash this plan of God.
For what it’s worth, grammatically “The Angel of YHWH” can be rendered as “The Angel who is YHWH”. It was taken that way by more than a few rabbis in second temple Judaism.
That is a conclusion not warranted given the literary type of Genesis; “the beginning” is everything from “Let there be light” to (at least) God calling Creation “very good”.
I am certainly interested in pre-existence as a theory but Mormons among other ugly things teach that our God once was a sinner who dwell on Earth but worked up Himself to God and expects us to do the same.