What Form Or State Does Satan Morph Into An Angel Of Light From?

[Michael37]

The question, "What Form Or State Does Satan Morph Into An Angel Of Light From?" arises from these verses:

2Co 11:13-15  For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into apostles of Christ.  (14)  And no wonder! For Satan himself transforms himself into an angel of light.  (15)  Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also transform themselves into ministers of righteousness, whose end will be according to their works.

Opinions vary as to whether Satan is actually an angelic being, so this could be interesting.

[OneLight]

I see a few points that need to be considered. 

First, scripture is silent pertaining to the answer to your question, so you are only looking for opinions.

Second, scripture does not tell us what Satan "normally" looks like so there is no real base to work from.

Third, I prefer to use the idea of Satan disguising himself. 

Now, to answer your question - I have no idea.  Maybe his "Normal" appearance, whatever that is. 

[appy]

In this particular passage, Paul is telling like it is. That the the character of his rivals were impostors. They pretended to be Apostles but instead were pretenders, putting on deceitful appearances of holiness. He isn't speaking of satan and his demon's “shape shifting” into holy angels per se, but of the character and nature of false teachers who imitated satan's character.

Satan's character and nature employs error and wickedness. Paul here is saying that the ability of the false teachers to give themselves the appearance of being holy is nothing extraordinary, as if they were people with special abilities. False teachers introduce error and wickedness through disguises, in the same deceitful manner as satan.

Here, Paul is saying satan through deceit, disguises himself as of having a form holiness and religion, in his attempts to deceive man. We have this picture, from Paul's rivals who were bent on claims of having extrinsic superiority to him and thus like satan give the appearance of being apostles.

 

 

[Kelly2363]

6 hours ago, Michael37 said:

The question, "What Form Or State Does Satan Morph Into An Angel Of Light From?" arises from these verses:

2Co 11:13-15  For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into apostles of Christ.  (14)  And no wonder! For Satan himself transforms himself into an angel of light.  (15)  Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also transform themselves into ministers of righteousness, whose end will be according to their works.

Opinions vary as to whether Satan is actually an angelic being, so this could be interesting.

 

From ashes upon the earth - reduced in the sight of those that beheld him when he corrupted his sanctuaries through his trade. 

[Michael37]

9 minutes ago, Kelly2363 said:

 

From ashes upon the earth - reduced in the sight of those that beheld him when he corrupted his sanctuaries through his trade. 

From your post, Kelly, I infer your meaning is that Lucifer the covering cherub is destroyed to reform as Satan 

Eze 28:16-19  By the multitude of thy merchandise they have filled the midst of thee with violence, and thou hast sinned: therefore I will cast thee as profane out of the mountain of God: and I will destroy thee, O covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire.  (17)  Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness: I will cast thee to the ground, I will lay thee before kings, that they may behold thee.  (18)  Thou hast defiled thy sanctuaries by the multitude of thine iniquities, by the iniquity of thy traffick; therefore will I bring forth a fire from the midst of thee, it shall devour thee, and I will bring thee to ashes upon the earth in the sight of all them that behold thee.  (19)  All they that know thee among the people shall be astonished at thee: thou shalt be a terror, and never shalt thou be any more.

[Kelly2363]

20 minutes ago, Michael37 said:

From your post, Kelly, I infer your meaning is that Lucifer the covering cherub is destroyed to reform as Satan 

Eze 28:16-19  By the multitude of thy merchandise they have filled the midst of thee with violence, and thou hast sinned: therefore I will cast thee as profane out of the mountain of God: and I will destroy thee, O covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire.  (17)  Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness: I will cast thee to the ground, I will lay thee before kings, that they may behold thee.  (18)  Thou hast defiled thy sanctuaries by the multitude of thine iniquities, by the iniquity of thy traffick; therefore will I bring forth a fire from the midst of thee, it shall devour thee, and I will bring thee to ashes upon the earth in the sight of all them that behold thee.  (19)  All they that know thee among the people shall be astonished at thee: thou shalt be a terror, and never shalt thou be any more.

 

Lucifer doesn't exist anymore. It's one of the mistaken beliefs that even believers uphold and with it we give credence to his former beauty as though he still were perfect in wisdom and beauty - as in the day he was created. Satan is a name - but it is reflective of all naming conventions of created beings and denoted character - being an opponent of God. He does of course have a supernatural charge and so can transport physical boundaries including in his appearance. But it seems to me that the bible tells us very little of who he was or who he is other than his trade - be that the timbral and the pipes as a Covering Cherub directing worship of God or as Satan feeding upon the dust of the ground. 

[Hopefully]

“The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist”—Charles Baudelaire.

[Kelly2363]

2 minutes ago, Hopefully said:

“The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist”—Charles Baudelaire.

The Devil - the Serpent and the Accuser of the Brethren does exist - Lucifer, however, doesn't. That is where necessity lies. Not in trying to counter a former Occult Theosopher with your corrections. 

[Hopefully]

4 minutes ago, Kelly2363 said:

a former Occult Theosopher

Are you calling me this? If you are what is it?

[Kelly2363]

2 minutes ago, Hopefully said:

Are you calling me this? If you are what is it?

 

No - I wasn't calling you an Occult Theosopher. The direction of words or their dial is generally best understood when we remember what we have said and what we are saying now. I am the former Occult Theosopher not yourself. That was one direction and the other direction was the predicative clause.