U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-27-2008, 04:07 PM
 
Location: South Florida
553 posts, read 111,583 times
Reputation: 85
Default Cain, son of Satan???

A Christian friend of mine posted this on another website. Now before anyone gets too carried away, he is a VERY devout Christian and seminary student who has ALWAYS defended Christianity and is as objective as I think any Christian can be. We have had our back and forths, but he has always remained true to his faith and generally not afraid to debate or discuss even the most controversial subjects.

I've read about the information below before, but I never really gave it much thought beyond reading it but he brought it up and wanted my response. Has anyone else here ever heard of this interpretation? See below (his post).

================================================== =======
OK...I know like myself, you read a lot, so just want your take on a couple of things, and what your sources may say about them.

1) Genesis 4:1 "And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD."

A book I'm reading at the moment makes an interesting point, and that is the word translated "from" should have read "with", and that the expression "the LORD" was used in reference to angels (has to do with Biblical Criticism and more, but I'm not going there at the moment), and should have read "the angel of the LORD", as per angelic names Gabriel, Michael, Sammael, etc.

Also, the Targum Pseudo-Johnathan translation of this text reads: "And Adam knew that his wife Eve had conceived from the angel Sammael [=Satan] and she became pregnant and gave birth to Cain. He was like the angels and not like humans, so she said, I have acquired a man, indeed, an angel of the Lord."

Tertullian, in On Patience 5:15 also is said to have written, "Having been made pregnant by the seed of the devil ... she brought for a son."

Interestingly, in 1John 3:10-12, reference is made to Cain "who was of the evil one and murdered his brother".

A couple of things that provoked the issue were: 1) the use of the word "man" in Genesis 4. In Hebrew, the word was man is never used in reference to a baby/child; and 2) why would Cain become so angry at his offering not being accepted.

Apparently, the ancients understook the text to mean that Cain was the seed of Satan, which explain the offering rejection, and how he was able to be so incensed as to murder his brother.

Have you come across this 'interpretation'?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-27-2008, 07:27 PM
 
7,765 posts, read 9,362,364 times
Reputation: 3388
Yes, there are many false teachers that teach this.

Arnold Murray comes to mind, but he's not alone.

EDIT: There's some info here if you're inclined The Serpent Seed and the Kenites.

I'm sure there's more somewhere else. If I see any, I'll post it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-28-2008, 03:23 PM
 
Location: New Zealand
2,933 posts, read 2,099,632 times
Reputation: 315
I have heard of this as well.



There are parts to it that make no sense. Where they say that "the LORD" should read angel of the LORD, the word used in the bible is

H3068
יהוה
yehôvâh
yeh-ho-vaw'
From H1961; (the) self Existent or eternal; Jehovah, Jewish national name of God: - Jehovah, the Lord. Compare H3050, H3069.

which has nothing to do with the angel of the Lord.

A question:- was Eve talking about Cain or was she referring to Adam as being her "man"? Was this like a consummation of the marriage - the birth of the first born son?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-28-2008, 03:39 PM
 
Location: All around the world.....
2,895 posts, read 5,351,069 times
Reputation: 988
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by yydanay515 View Post
A Christian friend of mine posted this on another website. Now before anyone gets too carried away, he is a VERY devout Christian and seminary student who has ALWAYS defended Christianity and is as objective as I think any Christian can be. We have had our back and forths, but he has always remained true to his faith and generally not afraid to debate or discuss even the most controversial subjects.

I've read about the information below before, but I never really gave it much thought beyond reading it but he brought it up and wanted my response. Has anyone else here ever heard of this interpretation? See below (his post).

================================================== =======
OK...I know like myself, you read a lot, so just want your take on a couple of things, and what your sources may say about them.

1) Genesis 4:1 "And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD."

A book I'm reading at the moment makes an interesting point, and that is the word translated "from" should have read "with", and that the expression "the LORD" was used in reference to angels (has to do with Biblical Criticism and more, but I'm not going there at the moment), and should have read "the angel of the LORD", as per angelic names Gabriel, Michael, Sammael, etc.

Also, the Targum Pseudo-Johnathan translation of this text reads: "And Adam knew that his wife Eve had conceived from the angel Sammael [=Satan] and she became pregnant and gave birth to Cain. He was like the angels and not like humans, so she said, I have acquired a man, indeed, an angel of the Lord."

Tertullian, in On Patience 5:15 also is said to have written, "Having been made pregnant by the seed of the devil ... she brought for a son."

Interestingly, in 1John 3:10-12, reference is made to Cain "who was of the evil one and murdered his brother".

A couple of things that provoked the issue were: 1) the use of the word "man" in Genesis 4. In Hebrew, the word was man is never used in reference to a baby/child; and 2) why would Cain become so angry at his offering not being accepted.

Apparently, the ancients understook the text to mean that Cain was the seed of Satan, which explain the offering rejection, and how he was able to be so incensed as to murder his brother.

Have you come across this 'interpretation'?

No,
Because one thing I personally am learning as a believer in Christ, is to follow the instruction To trust the Lord with all thine heart,........and lean not unto my own understanding.
As long as the world exists, there will always be reasoning and theory;
I'm pretty satisfied with the Holy Spirit, who leads me and is a guide to all
things; including the Holy Bible.
when I in the past attempted to pick it apart , I've basically exhausted my efforts, and wind up back to where I started and that is the original question;
Too much work for me; I'll just have to trust God on this
And I can't see how Cain could have been Lucifer; since Satan is Lucifer;in his fallen state.
Thanks for letting me share my $.02 cents
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2008, 04:51 PM
 
1,492 posts, read 4,395,030 times
Reputation: 1278
Don't believe the Bible should be interpreted again and again, it's been interpreted enough.

And I don't think Satan can have children, even in a spiritual sense...he can't reproduce.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2008, 08:11 PM
 
Location: All around the world.....
2,895 posts, read 5,351,069 times
Reputation: 988
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by VegasGrace View Post
Don't believe the Bible should be interpreted again and again, it's been interpreted enough.

And I don't think Satan can have children, even in a spiritual sense...he can't reproduce.


Good post"
God Bless You
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2008, 12:14 AM
 
Location: Beaumont, Texas
539 posts, read 1,199,645 times
Reputation: 273
I'm easily confused in this matter.
I've Heard or read that Satan is Lucifer. Isn't Lucifer another name for Venus? Isn't Venus a woman? Is the Devil a woman thus explaining the Churches relegation of women to a lower post?
Who is Lillith and what was her part in all of this ?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2008, 01:53 AM
 
Location: Texas
4,345 posts, read 3,553,420 times
Reputation: 816
Quote:
Originally Posted by uglyblackjohn View Post
I'm easily confused in this matter.
I've Heard or read that Satan is Lucifer. Isn't Lucifer another name for Venus?
That's why we're confused. There is no fallen angel devil as suggested by confused theologians. Check this out:

Lucifer is a Latin word meaning "light-bearer" (from lux, lucis, "light", and ferre, "to bear, bring"), a Roman astrological term for the "Morning Star", the planet Venus. The word Lucifer was the direct translation of the Septuagint Greek heosphoros, ("dawn-bearer"); (cf. Greek phosphoros, "light-bearer") and the Hebrew Helel, ("Bright one") used by Jerome in the Vulgate, having mythologically the same meaning as Prometheus who brought fire to humanity.

That passage, Isaiah 14:12 (see below) referred to one of the popular honorific titles of a Babylonian king; however, later interpretations of the text, and the influence of embellishments in works such as Dante's Inferno and Milton's Paradise Lost, led to the common idea in Christian mythology and folklore that Lucifer was a poetic appellation of Satan.

In modern and late Medieval Christian thought, Lucifer is a fallen angel who is Satan, the embodiment of evil and an enemy of God. In Christian literature and legend, Lucifer is generally considered to have been a prominent archangel in heaven (although some sources (Book of Ezekiel 28:14) say he was a cherub or a seraph), who had been motivated by pride to lead a revolution against God, in "The War of Heaven". When the rebellion failed, Lucifer was cast out of heaven, along with a third of the heavenly host, and came to reside in the world.

In the Vulgate, an early-5th-century translation of the Bible into Latin by Jerome, Lucifer ("light-bearer") occurs in Isaiah 14:12-14 as a translation of the Septuagint Greek word heosphoros ("dawn-bearer"), an epithet of Venus. The original Hebrew text of this verse was הילל בן שחר (heilel ben-shachar), meaning "Helel (bright one) son of Shachar (dawn)". Helel, the morning star, was a Babylonian / Canaanite god who was the son of another Babylonian / Canaanite god Shahar, god of the dawn. Isaiah 14:12 is translated "How art thou fallen from heaven, O day-star, son of the morning!" in the American Standard Version translating Hebrew Helel as "day-star" and the Hebrew word ben as "son" and the Hebrew word shahar as "morning." The 21st Century King James translates it as "Lucifer, son of the morning".

In Isaiah, this title is specifically used, in a prophetic vision, to allude to the king of Babylon's pride and to illustrate his eventual fate by referencing mythological accounts of the planet Venus:

14:4 You will recite this parable about the king of Babylonia: How has the oppressor come to an end, the arrogance been ended?
14:10 They will all proclaim and say to you, "You also have been stricken as we were; you are compared to us.
14:11 Brought down to the nether-world were your pride and the tumult of your stringed instruments; maggots are spread out under you, and worms are your covers.
14:12 How have you fallen from the heavens, O glowing morning star; been cut down to the ground O conqueror of nations?
(Isaiah, Artscroll Tanakh)

The Jewish Encyclopedia reports that "it is obvious that the prophet in attributing to the Babylonian king boastful pride, followed by a fall, borrowed the idea from a popular legend connected with the morning star".[1]

In modern Jewish theology, Helel in Isaiah 14 is not equated with the Jewish concept of HaSatan (the adversary). Instead, the prophet is speaking of the fall of Babylon and along with it the fall of her false gods Helel and Shahar. There is satan which is a Hebrew word meaning "adversary" and in the Tanakh one will find many instances of the word used to describe human and angelic adversaries to man.

Later Jewish tradition, influenced by Babylonian mythology acquired during the Babylonian captivity, elaborated on the fall of the angels under the leadership of Samhazai ("the heaven-seizer") and Azael (Enoch, book vi.6f). Another legend, in the midrash, represents the repentant Samhazai suspended star-like between heaven and earth instead of being hurled down to Sheol.

It is noteworthy that the Tanakh does not at any point actually mention the rebellion and fall of Satan by name. The name Satan itself merely means "enemy", apparently more of a title. A passage in Ezekiel 28 contains a lament over an "anointed cherub" who was in the "holy mountain of God". The passage goes on to describe this being's expulsion from the "mount of God." In the literal sense, this passage refers to the King of Tyre. However, ancient Christian commentators would frequently interpret Scripture allegorically and anagogically, as well as literally, and it was common for them to extend the meaning of this passage beyond the literal sense, and see an allegory of the fall of Satan in it.

The Helel-Lucifer (i.e. Venus) myth was later transferred to Satan, as evidenced by the first-century pseudepigraphical text Vita Adae et Evae (12), where the Adversary gives Adam an account of his early career,[2] and the Slavonic Book of Enoch (xxix. 4, xxxi. 4), where Satan-Sataniel (Sataniel/Satanel "The Keeper of Hell") (Samael?) is also described as a former archangel. Because he contrived "to make his throne higher than the clouds over the earth and resemble 'My power' on high", Satan-Sataniel was hurled down, with his hosts of angels, to fly in the air continually above the abyss.

Christian tradition of a literal fall from heaven drew upon the Homeric tradition, familiar to many.

"the whole day long I was carried headlong, and at sunset I fell in Lemnos, and but little life was in me" Iliad

Homer's description of the parallel supernatural fall relates the fall of Hephaestus from Olympus in the Iliad I:591ff; the fall of the Titans was similarly described by Hesiod. Through popular epitomes these traditions were drawn upon by Christian authors embellishing the fall of Lucifer.[citation needed]St. Jerome, with the Septuagint close at hand and a general familiarity with the pagan poetic traditions, translated Heylel as Lucifer in the Vulgate. This may also have been done as a pointed jab at a bishop named Lucifer, a contemporary of Jerome who argued to forgive those condemned of the Arian heresy.[citation needed] Much of Christian tradition also draws on interpretations of Revelation 12:9 ("He was thrown down, that ancient serpent, who is also called the Devil and Satan"; see also 12:4 and 12:7) in equating the ancient serpent with the serpent in the Garden of Eden and the fallen star, Lucifer, with Satan. Accordingly, Tertullian (Contra Marrionem, v. 11, 17), Origen (Ezekiel Opera, iii. 356), and others, identify Lucifer with Satan.

In the fully-developed Christian tradition, Jerome's Vulgate translation of Isaiah 14:12 has made Lucifer the name of the principal fallen angel, who must lament the loss of his original glory as the morning star. This image at last defines the character of Satan, where the Church Fathers had maintained that lucifer was not the proper name of the Devil, and that it referred rather to the state from which he had fallen; St. Jerome gave it Biblical authority when he transformed it into Satan's proper name.

any modern Christians have followed tradition and equated Lucifer with Satan, or the Devil. The King James Version of the Bible, which was enormously influential in the English speaking world for several centuries, retains the name "Lucifer" in Isaiah 14:12. In addition, a parallel description of Lucifer's fall is thought to be found in Ezekiel chapter 28 ("A Prophecy Against the King of Tyre"), which contains a lament over an "anointed cherub" who was in the "holy mountain of God". He is described as "perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee." The passage goes on to describe this being's expulsion from the "mount of God", apparently because his "heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness." Afterwards the passage describes the eventual fate of this corrupted cherub: "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. 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."

There is dispute between the accurate translations in Ezekiel 28 concerning who is being addressed and the description of the address itself. Ath-kĕruwb (את-כרוב) [Above Hebraic translation of "Thou [art] the cherub") breaks gender violations in the written language. Ath, as it is used in the previous translation, is feminine as a pronoun; while kĕruwb is a masculine noun. Ath can also be used as a genderless direct object of a verb, yielding its objective form. For these reasons, some translations interpret this passage as "The cherub I created for you (King of Tyre)." This distinguishes the fall of the man who was protected, and brought to great wealth by God's graces and overseeing hand (given the cherub he was appointed), from the cherub. In this translation, God's wrath was directed at the man who gave up his perfection for commerce and self-ratified intelligence. The cherub was both the agent of protection for the King and also facilitated the destruction of him. On the same platform, the use of Eden (עדן) as a proper noun is argued to be out of context, and most likely takes the descriptive form: pleasure, luxury, or delight.

In addition to Isaiah, Ezekiel, Job (in which Satan appears but his origin and purpose are not stated), and various Old Testament scriptures referring to occult powers such as witchcraft, more theological details about fallen angels can be found in the Pseudepigrapha, which are generally not considered canon.

Many modern Christians note that the Old Testament itself does not actually contain a literal account of the rebellion and fall of Satan. Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28 are directly concerned with the temporal rulers of Babylon and Tyre, rather than a supernatural being; allegorical readings of these and other passages were typical of medieval scholarship but are usually not considered legitimate in modern critical scholarship. Accordingly, in most modern English versions of the Bible (including the NIV, NRSV, NASB and ESV) the proper noun "Lucifer" is not found; the Hebrew word is rendered "day star", "morning star" or something similar.

Revelation 12, meanwhile, is taken as a reference to Christ's triumph over Satan at his crucifixion rather than a description of a pre-historic event.

In the Vulgate, the word lucifer is used elsewhere: it describes the Morning Star (the planet Venus), the "light of the morning" (Job 11:17); the constellations (Job 38:32) and "the aurora" (Psalms 109:3). In the New Testament, Jesus Christ (in II Peter 1:19) is associated with the "morning star" (phosphoros).

Not all references in the New Testament to the morning star refer to phosphoros, however; in Revelation:

Rev 2:28 And I will give him the morning star (aster proinos).

Rev 22:16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, [and] the bright and morning star (aster orthrinos).

In the Eastern Empire, where Greek was the language, "morning star" (heosphoros) retained these earlier connotations. When Liutprand, bishop of Cremona, attended the Byzantine Emperor Nicephorus II in 968, he reported to his master Otto I the greeting sung to the emperor arriving in Hagia Sophia:

"Behold the morning star approaches, Eos rises; he reflects in his glances the rays of the sun— he the pale death of the Saracens, Nicephorus the ruler."

Another example of getting in trouble by taking the bible (especially faulty translations) literally

Lucifer in Isaiah 14:12-17


Blessings,
- Byron

Last edited by firstborn888; 07-01-2008 at 02:21 AM.. Reason: add link
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2008, 12:40 PM
 
Location: Whiteville Tennessee
8,257 posts, read 10,875,118 times
Reputation: 9722
Quote:
Originally Posted by firstborn888 View Post
That's why we're confused. There is no fallen angel devil as suggested by confused theologians. Check this out:

Lucifer is a Latin word meaning "light-bearer" (from lux, lucis, "light", and ferre, "to bear, bring"), a Roman astrological term for the "Morning Star", the planet Venus. The word Lucifer was the direct translation of the Septuagint Greek heosphoros, ("dawn-bearer"); (cf. Greek phosphoros, "light-bearer") and the Hebrew Helel, ("Bright one") used by Jerome in the Vulgate, having mythologically the same meaning as Prometheus who brought fire to humanity.

That passage, Isaiah 14:12 (see below) referred to one of the popular honorific titles of a Babylonian king; however, later interpretations of the text, and the influence of embellishments in works such as Dante's Inferno and Milton's Paradise Lost, led to the common idea in Christian mythology and folklore that Lucifer was a poetic appellation of Satan.

In modern and late Medieval Christian thought, Lucifer is a fallen angel who is Satan, the embodiment of evil and an enemy of God. In Christian literature and legend, Lucifer is generally considered to have been a prominent archangel in heaven (although some sources (Book of Ezekiel 28:14) say he was a cherub or a seraph), who had been motivated by pride to lead a revolution against God, in "The War of Heaven". When the rebellion failed, Lucifer was cast out of heaven, along with a third of the heavenly host, and came to reside in the world.

In the Vulgate, an early-5th-century translation of the Bible into Latin by Jerome, Lucifer ("light-bearer") occurs in Isaiah 14:12-14 as a translation of the Septuagint Greek word heosphoros ("dawn-bearer"), an epithet of Venus. The original Hebrew text of this verse was הילל בן שחר (heilel ben-shachar), meaning "Helel (bright one) son of Shachar (dawn)". Helel, the morning star, was a Babylonian / Canaanite god who was the son of another Babylonian / Canaanite god Shahar, god of the dawn. Isaiah 14:12 is translated "How art thou fallen from heaven, O day-star, son of the morning!" in the American Standard Version translating Hebrew Helel as "day-star" and the Hebrew word ben as "son" and the Hebrew word shahar as "morning." The 21st Century King James translates it as "Lucifer, son of the morning".

In Isaiah, this title is specifically used, in a prophetic vision, to allude to the king of Babylon's pride and to illustrate his eventual fate by referencing mythological accounts of the planet Venus:

14:4 You will recite this parable about the king of Babylonia: How has the oppressor come to an end, the arrogance been ended?
14:10 They will all proclaim and say to you, "You also have been stricken as we were; you are compared to us.
14:11 Brought down to the nether-world were your pride and the tumult of your stringed instruments; maggots are spread out under you, and worms are your covers.
14:12 How have you fallen from the heavens, O glowing morning star; been cut down to the ground O conqueror of nations?
(Isaiah, Artscroll Tanakh)

The Jewish Encyclopedia reports that "it is obvious that the prophet in attributing to the Babylonian king boastful pride, followed by a fall, borrowed the idea from a popular legend connected with the morning star".[1]

In modern Jewish theology, Helel in Isaiah 14 is not equated with the Jewish concept of HaSatan (the adversary). Instead, the prophet is speaking of the fall of Babylon and along with it the fall of her false gods Helel and Shahar. There is satan which is a Hebrew word meaning "adversary" and in the Tanakh one will find many instances of the word used to describe human and angelic adversaries to man.

Later Jewish tradition, influenced by Babylonian mythology acquired during the Babylonian captivity, elaborated on the fall of the angels under the leadership of Samhazai ("the heaven-seizer") and Azael (Enoch, book vi.6f). Another legend, in the midrash, represents the repentant Samhazai suspended star-like between heaven and earth instead of being hurled down to Sheol.

It is noteworthy that the Tanakh does not at any point actually mention the rebellion and fall of Satan by name. The name Satan itself merely means "enemy", apparently more of a title. A passage in Ezekiel 28 contains a lament over an "anointed cherub" who was in the "holy mountain of God". The passage goes on to describe this being's expulsion from the "mount of God." In the literal sense, this passage refers to the King of Tyre. However, ancient Christian commentators would frequently interpret Scripture allegorically and anagogically, as well as literally, and it was common for them to extend the meaning of this passage beyond the literal sense, and see an allegory of the fall of Satan in it.

The Helel-Lucifer (i.e. Venus) myth was later transferred to Satan, as evidenced by the first-century pseudepigraphical text Vita Adae et Evae (12), where the Adversary gives Adam an account of his early career,[2] and the Slavonic Book of Enoch (xxix. 4, xxxi. 4), where Satan-Sataniel (Sataniel/Satanel "The Keeper of Hell") (Samael?) is also described as a former archangel. Because he contrived "to make his throne higher than the clouds over the earth and resemble 'My power' on high", Satan-Sataniel was hurled down, with his hosts of angels, to fly in the air continually above the abyss.

Christian tradition of a literal fall from heaven drew upon the Homeric tradition, familiar to many.

"the whole day long I was carried headlong, and at sunset I fell in Lemnos, and but little life was in me" Iliad

Homer's description of the parallel supernatural fall relates the fall of Hephaestus from Olympus in the Iliad I:591ff; the fall of the Titans was similarly described by Hesiod. Through popular epitomes these traditions were drawn upon by Christian authors embellishing the fall of Lucifer.[citation needed]St. Jerome, with the Septuagint close at hand and a general familiarity with the pagan poetic traditions, translated Heylel as Lucifer in the Vulgate. This may also have been done as a pointed jab at a bishop named Lucifer, a contemporary of Jerome who argued to forgive those condemned of the Arian heresy.[citation needed] Much of Christian tradition also draws on interpretations of Revelation 12:9 ("He was thrown down, that ancient serpent, who is also called the Devil and Satan"; see also 12:4 and 12:7) in equating the ancient serpent with the serpent in the Garden of Eden and the fallen star, Lucifer, with Satan. Accordingly, Tertullian (Contra Marrionem, v. 11, 17), Origen (Ezekiel Opera, iii. 356), and others, identify Lucifer with Satan.

In the fully-developed Christian tradition, Jerome's Vulgate translation of Isaiah 14:12 has made Lucifer the name of the principal fallen angel, who must lament the loss of his original glory as the morning star. This image at last defines the character of Satan, where the Church Fathers had maintained that lucifer was not the proper name of the Devil, and that it referred rather to the state from which he had fallen; St. Jerome gave it Biblical authority when he transformed it into Satan's proper name.

any modern Christians have followed tradition and equated Lucifer with Satan, or the Devil. The King James Version of the Bible, which was enormously influential in the English speaking world for several centuries, retains the name "Lucifer" in Isaiah 14:12. In addition, a parallel description of Lucifer's fall is thought to be found in Ezekiel chapter 28 ("A Prophecy Against the King of Tyre"), which contains a lament over an "anointed cherub" who was in the "holy mountain of God". He is described as "perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee." The passage goes on to describe this being's expulsion from the "mount of God", apparently because his "heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness." Afterwards the passage describes the eventual fate of this corrupted cherub: "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. 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."

There is dispute between the accurate translations in Ezekiel 28 concerning who is being addressed and the description of the address itself. Ath-kĕruwb (את-כרוב) [Above Hebraic translation of "Thou [art] the cherub") breaks gender violations in the written language. Ath, as it is used in the previous translation, is feminine as a pronoun; while kĕruwb is a masculine noun. Ath can also be used as a genderless direct object of a verb, yielding its objective form. For these reasons, some translations interpret this passage as "The cherub I created for you (King of Tyre)." This distinguishes the fall of the man who was protected, and brought to great wealth by God's graces and overseeing hand (given the cherub he was appointed), from the cherub. In this translation, God's wrath was directed at the man who gave up his perfection for commerce and self-ratified intelligence. The cherub was both the agent of protection for the King and also facilitated the destruction of him. On the same platform, the use of Eden (עדן) as a proper noun is argued to be out of context, and most likely takes the descriptive form: pleasure, luxury, or delight.

In addition to Isaiah, Ezekiel, Job (in which Satan appears but his origin and purpose are not stated), and various Old Testament scriptures referring to occult powers such as witchcraft, more theological details about fallen angels can be found in the Pseudepigrapha, which are generally not considered canon.

Many modern Christians note that the Old Testament itself does not actually contain a literal account of the rebellion and fall of Satan. Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28 are directly concerned with the temporal rulers of Babylon and Tyre, rather than a supernatural being; allegorical readings of these and other passages were typical of medieval scholarship but are usually not considered legitimate in modern critical scholarship. Accordingly, in most modern English versions of the Bible (including the NIV, NRSV, NASB and ESV) the proper noun "Lucifer" is not found; the Hebrew word is rendered "day star", "morning star" or something similar.

Revelation 12, meanwhile, is taken as a reference to Christ's triumph over Satan at his crucifixion rather than a description of a pre-historic event.

In the Vulgate, the word lucifer is used elsewhere: it describes the Morning Star (the planet Venus), the "light of the morning" (Job 11:17); the constellations (Job 38:32) and "the aurora" (Psalms 109:3). In the New Testament, Jesus Christ (in II Peter 1:19) is associated with the "morning star" (phosphoros).

Not all references in the New Testament to the morning star refer to phosphoros, however; in Revelation:

Rev 2:28 And I will give him the morning star (aster proinos).

Rev 22:16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, [and] the bright and morning star (aster orthrinos).

In the Eastern Empire, where Greek was the language, "morning star" (heosphoros) retained these earlier connotations. When Liutprand, bishop of Cremona, attended the Byzantine Emperor Nicephorus II in 968, he reported to his master Otto I the greeting sung to the emperor arriving in Hagia Sophia:

"Behold the morning star approaches, Eos rises; he reflects in his glances the rays of the sunó he the pale death of the Saracens, Nicephorus the ruler."

Another example of getting in trouble by taking the bible (especially faulty translations) literally

Lucifer in Isaiah 14:12-17

Blessings,
- Byron
Stories brought out of Babylon by Jewish priests after thier enslavement ended. Quite a bit of the Old Testement is the retelling of these stories. Including the Creation and the Flood.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2008, 03:05 PM
 
Location: NW Arkansas
3,981 posts, read 5,210,232 times
Reputation: 3651
I have never been of the understanding that Satan and Lucifer were one and the same. It has never been taught that way where I worship.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top