Originally Posted by Torpedos
Does Ezekiel and Isaiah really speak of the fall of "satan" aka the adversary, slanderer. i dont see where is speaks of such a thing. I used to think that the prince of tyre was satan but Ezek.28:2,9 makes it clear it was a man that is the subject of this chapter. What are your thoughts on this supposedly fall of satan? did it happen or was he a liar from the beggining?
Getting back to the original question/topic...
The only Scriptural reference to a "Lucifer" is in Isaiah 14:12 – and then only in some translations.
(The proper name "Lucifer" does not appear in the original text of Isaiah.)
The fact of the matter is that Satan the devil is no where described in the Bible as Lucifer.
Lucifer literally means “Day Star” and the only Scriptural reference to a "Lucifer" is in Isaiah 14:12 –
and then only in some translations. (The proper name "Lucifer" does not appear in the original Hebrew text of Isaiah.)
Go and look at Isaiah 14:12. From verse 4 we can read that this prophecy is pertaining to the King of Babylon; Nebuchadnezzar!
Daniel 5:20-21 confirms this. So Isaiah 14 is not About Satan’s Origins even though today it is commonly taught in Christian circles
that Isaiah 14 includes a description of the origins of Satan the devil. It does not.
Many also ascribe Ezekiel 28:13 as referring to Satan; especially because of verse 13. But if one reads that entire passage in context,
we are repeatedly told in verses 2 and 12 that it is a prophecy against the ruler of Tyre!
Furthermore, we are told his heart became proud because of his wealth in trading (verses 5 and 16).
Thus, this passage appears to be similar to when Jesus rebuked Peter on the way to Jerusalem calling Peter “Satan” –
it is a figure of speech and not meant to be taken literally!
The subject of Isaiah 14 is not Satan but the "King of Babylon" (v. 4) and he is not a "type of Satan." The Lord is telling Israel
through the prophet Isaiah that a time will come when the cruel yoke of Babylon will be lifted from the national shoulders.
The language is dramatic and poetic. Isaiah tells of the demise of the tyrant by saying, "The grave below is all astir to meet you at
your coming; it rouses the spirits of the departed to greet you…" (v. 9). We are not meant to take this symbolic Old Testament
language of prophecy literally, rather we are supposed to understand what the symbols stand for.
It is saying the king (of Babylon) is doomed. All of his vaunted worldly and political power will avail him nothing. The great military strength
through which he oppressed the nations will do him no good in the "weakness" of death: "…all those who were leaders in the world…
will say to you…you also have become weak, as we are; you have become like us…" (vs. 9,10).
That these verses are talking about a mere mortal, a man, is obvious from verse 11: "All your pomp has been brought down to the grave,
along with the noise of your harps; maggots are spread out beneath you and worms cover you." This is not a description of a fallen archangel
who is now a demon, but of a mortal man lying in a grave decaying in death.
Now we come to the key verse (12). The King James Version renders it as follows: "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!
How art though cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations."
In spite of this rendering, the proper name "Lucifer" is not in the original Hebrew text. In Hebrew "Lucifer, son of the morning" is helel ben shachar.
It could be translated "Shining one, son of the dawn." It is not a proper name, but an epithet for the king of Babylon.
Why then did the King James translators translate "Shining one" as "Lucifer" in this passage?
The answer lies in two earlier translations.
In the third century B.C.E., Ptolemy Philadelphus (285-247 B.C.E.), the Greek-speaking Pharoah of Egypt, commissioned a Greek translation of the Hebrew
Scriptures for his own library. Seventy-two scholars performed the work. They became known as "The Seventy." Their translation itself was called
"The Septuagint" or "LXX," which are the Roman numerals for "70."
In translating Isaiah 14:12, the Seventy chose the word Heosphoros for the Hebrew helel ben shachar.
Heos means "in or of the morning" and phoros means "that which is borne, or bearing." This is not an exact translation of the original Hebrew,
but it’s reasonably close. OK, so the Septuagint (LXX) translation was commissioned during the reign of Ptolemy Philadelphus. The Prophets section
wasn’t completed until around 200 B.C.E. Because Greek is a very different language than Hebrew, much of the original meaning and intent was lost in the LXX.
As empires rose and fell, the fortunes of languages rose and fell with them. The longer the Romans ruled, the more prominent Latin became.
During Constantine’s reign, the Roman Empire took over gentile Christianity, politicized it, and made it the state religion. By the fourth century C.E.,
the Latin "father" Jerome (340 AD – 419 AD) had risen to prominence within the Roman Catholic Church. At the suggestion of Pope Damasus,
Jerome began work on a Latin translation of the Bible. After 20 years of toil, the translation now known as the Vulgate was completed in the year 405 C.E.
Jerome used the LXX version, along with the Hebrew, in making his translation. When he translated Isaiah 14:12, Jerome did not strictly translate
the Hebrew helel ben shachar, nor did he use the Greek (LXX) Heosphoros, which term, by his day, had fallen largely into disuse. Instead he translated as
though the original word had been lukophos.
Lukophos, by Jerome’s time, had become an epithet for the gods Apollo and Pan. Earlier, Catholic theologians Tertullian and Origen had begun to read
Satan into the story of the King of Babylon in Isaiah 14. Jerome’s selection of words may have been influenced by this theology.
As a result of Jerome’s translation, the images of Pan and the Devil were morphed together. Today, the devil is often depicted as "Lucifer," and his
appearance is similar to the ancient god Pan, with goat-like features including horns and cloven hoofs. Yet there is nothing in the text itself that would
indicate that a figure named "Lucifer" is intended. That is something man has added to scripture.
Nor do these verses in Isaiah 14 represent an account of the fall of the devil and it is significant that the account of the fall of Satan in Rev. 12
makes no reference to Isa 14.
Who then is Lucifer?
Dr. Roy Blizzard, a well-known Hebrew roots scholar, offers some insightful background, "The history of the origin of a being called Lucifer is interesting.
The word Lucifer comes from the Latin verb, luceo, lucere, luxi, which means to shine, to glow, glitter, to be clear. It is light, day dawning. The adjective,
lucidus-a-um, means shining, bright, clear, lucid. The noun, lucifer-eri, means the morning star, the planet Venus, or a day. It comes from the adjective
The Bible includes no character named Lucifer. Isaiah had never heard of such a being. Nor had the apostles of Jesus’ day.
Lucifer, as a manifestation of the devil, is a later invention of man. We find no association between helel ben shachar of Isaiah 14:12 and Satan until the
time of Tertullian (c. 160-230 C.E.) and Origen (c. 185-254 C.E.).
The proper name "Lucifer" does not find its way into a translation until Jerome’s time, some 150 years later.
Is There a Real Lucifer?
Isaiah 14 is not speaking about the devil, or Lucifer.
It is a prophecy against the King of Babylon. The prophecy is delivered in almost florid language. It is colorful and poetic, but it contains no "type of the devil,"
and no figure called Lucifer.
The question then arises, could there be a real Lucifer who is not the devil?
Possibly one of the fallen angels who went with Satan adopted this name because Satan promised the fallen angels that they would be worshiped as gods
themselves and would have positions of power and prominence. So behind every idol there is a real demon who receives the worship aimed at the idol and
the name Lucifer has been closely associated with various pagan gods including the planet Venus, Apollo and Pan. Venus of course is the morning star which "brings light."
Pan was the god who looked like a goat and who entered the fields where peasants worked, frightening them with his presence. (This is where the word "panic" originates.)
Scripture confirms that behind these gods of the ancients were unclean spirits of varying ranks who continued to influence pagan cultures down through history
and that pagan idolatry is, in fact, the worship of demons (Deuteronomy 32:17; Psalm 106:36-37; I Corinthians 10:20).
Even the gods of the Romans were not new. They were simply the same ancient gods of earlier peoples – the Sumerians, Babylonians, Egyptians, Canaanites,
Persians and the Greeks with new Latin names. With the introduction into new cultures, these gods were renamed and new, culturally relevant,
stories were attached to their mythology.
In ancient times, the stars and planets were thought to be celestial beings to whom one must sacrifice to be blessed.
The planet later known as Venus had been worshipped from very early times. She was always a "light-bringer" of some sort.
In the Sumerian religion, the most important goddess in the pantheon was Innana or Ninanna, the "mistress of heaven."
As an astral deity ‘Inanna’ represents the planet Venus, “the morning and evening star." Later, she becomes known as Ishtar, the goddess of the morning and evening star.
Venus worship was prominent in neo-Babylon as much as it was in most other ancient cultures. "Stars" such as Venus were often looked upon as living entities – guardian angels
or deities to whom worship was owed. Nebuchadnezzar had such an angel who was known as Kal. It would appear that the prophet Isaiah, in attributing to the king of Babylon
boastful pride followed by a fall, borrowed from a popular pagan legend connected with the morning star. (This goddess, the mistress of heaven, star of the sea,
is still worshipped today by the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches under the name “The Virgin Mary”)
We may conclude, then, that Isaiah 14 tells us nothing about the origin and fall of Satan, and that it does not identify Satan as "Lucifer."
The subject of the chapter is the king of Babylon, whom God is about to punish. The king will join other deceased world leaders in Sheol, the place of the dead.
Though in life he exalted himself to god-like status, in death all of his strength will disappear. People will look at this "corpse trampled underfoot" (Isaiah 14:19b)
and ask each other, "Is this the man who shook the earth and made kingdoms tremble?"(v. 16).
All of the kings of Babylon were idolaters. They worshipped gods behind which were demonic spirits. In the face of divine wrath, none of these was able to help the
king of Babylon. The mighty neo-Babylonian Empire itself disappeared into the sands of history when the city of Babylon reluctantly opened its gates to the conquering
king of Persia in 539 B.C.E. It had lasted just 86 years (625-539 B.C.E.). Though Nebuchadnezzar was not the last king of Babylon, there is a tradition
that he was dragged out of his grave and cast about just as Isaiah 14:19 suggests.
Under one of his successors, Nabonidus, and Nabonidus’s son, Belshazzar, the Babylonian Empire fell incrementally apart.
Nabonidus had undertaken a religious reform to rededicate the nation to the worship of the moon god and his own mother became high priestess
to the moon god in the city of Harran.
Interesting enough, the name of this moon god was Sin.
The ancient Sumerians worshipped a Moon-god who was called many different names. The most popular names were Nanna, Suen and Asimbabbar.
His symbol was the crescent moon.
Worship of this Moon-god was the dominant religion in Sumeria. The cult of the Moon-god was also the most popular religion throughout ancient Mesopotamia.
The Assyrians, Babylonians, and the Akkadians took the word Suen and transformed it into the word Sin as their favorite name for the Moon-God!
In ancient Syria and Canna, the Moon-god Sin was usually represented by the moon in its crescent phase. At times the full moon was placed inside the
crescent moon to emphasize all the phases of the moon. The sun-goddess was the wife of Sin and the stars were their daughters. For example, Istar
was a daughter of Sin.
(The Muslim false god Allah is based on this moon god Sin and they still use the crescent moon symbol – it is on top
of every mosque and on every Islamic nation’s flag. While the popularity of the Moon-god has waned everywhere else, the Arabs have remained true
to their conviction that the Moon-god was the greatest of all gods. While they worshipped 360 gods at the Kabah in Mecca, the Moon-god was the
chief deity. Mecca was in fact built as a shrine for the Moon-god. When Mohammed came on the scene he convinced them that all those gods were
false except the moon god who was the one true god. According to numerous inscriptions, while the name of this Moon-god was Sin,
his Arabic title was al-ilah, i.e. "the deity," meaning that he was the chief or high god among the gods. Al- ilah, i.e. the god, was shortened to Allah in
pre-Islamic times and it was as Allah that Mohammed knew him.)
The last years of the Babylonian Empire were years of tragedy, palace intrigue and royal murders. Nebuchadnezzar’s son, Evil-Merodach (II Kings 25:27)
was assassinated after reigning only two years. Neriglassar survived only one year longer on the throne of Babylon. Labashi-Marduk, who ascended
the throne as a child was murdered within a year of his accession.
Nabonidus prayed to one god to preserve him from another. In an inscription found cut into a rock face at the side of and old road used by both
Assyrian and Babylonian armies as they traveled to reach the Mediterranean north of Beirut, Nabonidus prays, "preserve me,
Nabonidus, king of Babylon, from Sin (The Moon god). To give me the gift of long life, and as regards Belshazzar, my first born, my dear offspring,
put in his heart reverence for thy high divinity."
This same king refers to Marduk as "the lord of the gods" and to Sin as the "lamp of heaven and earth"
The "lamp of heaven and earth" was of no help to the "shining ones" of Babylon.
God had asserted His supremacy over the false deities of that great kingdom, and over the kings that worshiped them.
Reverence for their "high divinity" accomplished nothing in the face of God’s wrath. The Lord broke the rod, or scepter, of the wicked kings of
Babylon (Isaiah14: 5) and freed the children of Israel from Babylonian oppression.
Though Satan – (which means “the Adversary”) – stands behind all the ungodly rulers of this world’s system, there is no evidence in Isaiah 14 that the
Bible calls him Lucifer, or that this chapter speaks of the origins of the devil.
In reality, there is no competition between God and the devil. God can, and does, overrule him any time he wishes to do so. He elevates leaders to office,
and removes them (Daniel 2:21, 4:32).
Satan operates only with the express permission of God.
He is enabled or empowered by human disobedience to God. Satan’s goal is domination and he uses Plan A and Plan B to obtain it.
Plan A is manipulation, which is used from a position of weakness, where he appeals to people’s vanity and offers them the world.
When manipulation doesn’t work, he uses Plan B which is intimidation through strength and violence.
He appealed to Jesus through manipulation in the desert with temptations. When that didn’t work, he incited violence against Jesus which resulted in
Satan is defeated by those who submit themselves to God – in fact, he actually flees from those who resist him in this way (James 4:7).