Redefining the question... maybe

This is one of those issues that I always thought I understood until I thought about it :-). Here are a couple of starting points (I can find [additional] verses to back them up if you so desire; otherwise, we can just accept them as postulates):

God is perfect and holy; He abides no sin and no evil within Himself (it goes against His character) and His presence.

Therefore, God cannot be tempted, nor does He tempt anyone (straight out of James 1).

Yet sin entered the world, and death through sin (Romans, I believe).

So where did sin, evil and death come from?

Typically, discussions of this topic go back to the Garden. It's quite a logical place to begin, but not, I think, the right one. Considering the Garden, I think it is inevitable that we come to the conclusion that God created the choice. By creating the tree and speaking the commandment, He created the choice. But for a choice to exist, there must be options. From whence came the options?

Delving farther back into the history of eternity*, we find the fall of Lucifer**, and with that, what I believe is the central question: how did Lucifer begin to think that he ought to be like God? Where did that thought come from?

I've typically defined evil as the absence of God, as dark is the absence of light. This is fairly logical, and makes a lot of sense (and keeps God from creating evil, or creating something that "became" evil, as if evil were a substance). If that is true, how did Lucifer fall, as he was ensconced in God's very presence? Or did God remove Himself, causing - in a sense - evil? Or is another definition better-though all the others I've heard have less explaining power in other areas?

Here's another question... where did the thought "I ought to be like God" come from? It couldn't have come from Satan-we're talking about the origin of Satan. It couldn't be God, for "He Himself [does not] tempt anyone" (James 1). It must have come from within Lucifer... (James helps again "each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed") Yet how in the presence of perfection could Lucifer have become imperfect? How in the presence of ultimate satisfaction could he become unsatisfied? And he too was perfect, wasn't he? Probably something we'll never figure out... but I'm curious to hear your theories!

Why am I calling this post "re-defining the question"? Because Ethan already defined it- any of you interested in debating this should go to his blog.

*One of these days I'll get a post out that explains why I think "eternity past/future" or "the history of eternity" (as history is usually defined) is flawed... at least an oxymoron. For now, I'll just note that I think it is :-).
**I've always heard/thought that Ezekial 28:12-19 was about Satan...the passage says it's about the king of Tyre, but that doesn't make much sense, given what it says... Isaiah 14:12-15 (NKJV helps) is clearer.