Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
The KJV followed Jerome's lead from the Vulgate - an early-5th-century translation of the Bible into Latin from Greek (note: NOT from the original Hebrew). In Jerome's translation - "Lucifer" occurs in Isaiah 14:12-14 as a translation of the Greek word heosphorus ("dawn-bearer"), an epithet of Venus. The actual Hebrew text says הילל בן שחר (heilel ben-schahar), meaning "Helel son of Shahar."
Helel was a Babylonian / Canaanite god who was the son of another Babylonian / Canaanite god named Shahar.
Helel was the god of the morning star and his father was Shahar, god of the dawn. Some translations of Isaiah 14:12 "How art thou fallen from heaven, O day-star, son of the morning!" American Standard Version translating Hebrew Helel as "day-star" and the Hebrew word Ben as son and the Hebrew word Shahar as "of the morning."
In Isaiah, this title is specifically used, in a prophetic vision, referring the king of Babylon's pride and to illustrate his eventual fate by referencing Babylon's own mythological accounts of the planet Venus' fall from grace from among the gods.
There is just centuries of Christian tradition (non-biblical) attached to the subject and the obvious meaning has been covered over in favor of things which make great science fiction but very poor theology.
Ezek 28:2 "Son of man, say to the ruler of Tyre, `This is what the Sovereign LORD says: "`In the pride of your heart you say, "I am a god; I sit on the throne of a god in the heart of the seas." But you are a man and not a god, though you think you are as wise as a god.
The problem some people have when it comes verses like these is that they have trouble distinguishing poetic language from literal language. When they see something like:
Ezek 28:14-15 You were anointed as a guardian cherub, for so I ordained you. You were on the holy mount of God; you walked among the fiery stones. You were blameless in your ways from the day you were created till wickedness was found in you.
They jump from the subject previously defined (that being Tyre) to a literalistic definition of a guardian cherub. They think the answer must be "It's Satan". But then the literalistic approach falls apart in the next verse:
Ezek 28:16 Through your widespread trade you were filled with violence, and you sinned. So I drove you in disgrace from the mount of God, and I expelled you, O guardian cherub, from among the fiery stones.
It no longer works to say that Satan was expelled from heaven because of his widespread trade and violence. In context it is impossible to make these verses refer to Satan. There are no Biblical statements which identify Satan as a guardian cherub, that is only a result of the reader inserting their preconceived ideas into the verse.
The chapters around the references used by those who support the Lucifer myth (in both Isaiah and Ezekiel) are prophecies dealing with other nations. Many with the same kind of poetic language. For instance:
Ezek 31:2-9 "Son of man, say to Pharaoh king of Egypt and to his hordes: "'Who can be compared with you in majesty? 3 Consider Assyria, once a cedar in Lebanon, with beautiful branches overshadowing the forest; it towered on high, its top above the thick foliage...8 The cedars in the garden of God could not rival it, nor could the pine trees equal its boughs, nor could the plane trees compare with its branches-- no tree in the garden of God could match its beauty. 9 I made it beautiful with abundant branches, the envy of all the trees of Eden in the garden of God. (NIV)
Now maybe one could read these verses and say that again we have a reference to Satan. But that kind of creative exegesis would just lead to other problems - such as who are those which envy the mighty tree in Eden.
Now when the above information is presented someone may say "yes the prophecy is about Babylon or Tyre but it is also about the power which is behind their kingdoms, and that is Satan". But should we ignore all we know about Biblical interpretation so that we can keep a myth about Lucifer that no one prior to the second century had any idea of? A myth which no New Testament author even vaguely referred too?
Some supporters of the Lucifer myth point these verses in Isaiah 14:
You said in your heart, "I will ascend to heaven; I will raise my throne above the stars of God; I will sit enthroned on the mount of assembly, on the utmost heights of the sacred mountain. I will ascend above the tops of the clouds; I will make myself like the Most High." (NIV)
It is suggested that this is referencing Satan since these ambitions clearly exceed the reach of any human ruler. But of course - they exceed the reach of Satan also. Besides, delusions of grandeur are not uncommon among earthly rulers. We must remember that these and other verses are filled with poetic language.
Ezek 28:2 "Son of man, say to the ruler of Tyre, `This is what the Sovereign LORD says: "`In the pride of your heart you say, "I am a god; I sit on the throne of a god in the heart of the seas." But you are a man and not a god, though you think you are as wise as a god.
The problem some people have when it comes verses like these is that they have trouble distinguishing poetic language from literal language. When they see something like:
Ezek 28:14-15 You were anointed as a guardian cherub, for so I ordained you. You were on the holy mount of God; you walked among the fiery stones. You were blameless in your ways from the day you were created till wickedness was found in you.
They jump from the subject previously defined (that being Tyre) to a literalistic definition of a guardian cherub. They think the answer must be "It's Satan". But then the literalistic approach falls apart in the next verse:
Ezek 28:16 Through your widespread trade you were filled with violence, and you sinned. So I drove you in disgrace from the mount of God, and I expelled you, O guardian cherub, from among the fiery stones.
It no longer works to say that Satan was expelled from heaven because of his widespread trade and violence. In context it is impossible to make these verses refer to Satan. There are no Biblical statements which identify Satan as a guardian cherub, that is only a result of the reader inserting their preconceived ideas into the verse.
The chapters around the references used by those who support the Lucifer myth (in both Isaiah and Ezekiel) are prophecies dealing with other nations. Many with the same kind of poetic language. For instance:
Ezek 31:2-9 "Son of man, say to Pharaoh king of Egypt and to his hordes: "'Who can be compared with you in majesty? 3 Consider Assyria, once a cedar in Lebanon, with beautiful branches overshadowing the forest; it towered on high, its top above the thick foliage...8 The cedars in the garden of God could not rival it, nor could the pine trees equal its boughs, nor could the plane trees compare with its branches-- no tree in the garden of God could match its beauty. 9 I made it beautiful with abundant branches, the envy of all the trees of Eden in the garden of God. (NIV)
Now maybe one could read these verses and say that again we have a reference to Satan. But that kind of creative exegesis would just lead to other problems - such as who are those which envy the mighty tree in Eden.
Now when the above information is presented someone may say "yes the prophecy is about Babylon or Tyre but it is also about the power which is behind their kingdoms, and that is Satan". But should we ignore all we know about Biblical interpretation so that we can keep a myth about Lucifer that no one prior to the second century had any idea of? A myth which no New Testament author even vaguely referred too?
Some supporters of the Lucifer myth point these verses in Isaiah 14:
You said in your heart, "I will ascend to heaven; I will raise my throne above the stars of God; I will sit enthroned on the mount of assembly, on the utmost heights of the sacred mountain. I will ascend above the tops of the clouds; I will make myself like the Most High." (NIV)
It is suggested that this is referencing Satan since these ambitions clearly exceed the reach of any human ruler. But of course - they exceed the reach of Satan also. Besides, delusions of grandeur are not uncommon among earthly rulers. We must remember that these and other verses are filled with poetic language.
Good post first....but as you stated in another post....for the church...traditions die hard. When you are taught something over and over it`s hard to look at it with an open heart and mind. Some people just absolutely refuse to think that the modern day christian church could be wrong in their interpretation of scripture. I mean after all....these world famous evangelist and theologians went to bible schools to learn the truth.
Good post first....but as you stated in another post....for the church...traditions die hard. When you are taught something over and over it`s hard to look at it with an open heart and mind. Some people just absolutely refuse to think that the modern day christian church could be wrong in their interpretation of scripture. I mean after all....these world famous evangelist and theologians went to bible schools to learn the truth.
Yeah, my wife said one time "How come all these famous preachers don't know this stuff and you do?" and I answered "For the same reason you chose to marry me and not them"
I'm not even going to touch this, all this increase in "knowledge" in the last days. It's the SAME devil from long ago! One and the same! Time winding up so quickly and you're concern with his origin, still? Read the back of the book! What does it tell you about his ENDING? And his ultimate faith? And all unbeliever like him? Don't you think our focus should be on prevention? Preventing one soul from cohabitating with him?
I'm not even going to touch this, all this increase in "knowledge" in the last days. It's the SAME devil from long ago! One and the same! Time winding up so quickly and you're concern with his origin, still? Read the back of the book! What does it tell you about his ENDING? And his ultimate faith? And all unbeliever like him? Don't you think our focus should be on prevention? Preventing one soul from cohabitating with him?
Well, I believe truth = freedom and that freedom is from God. I'm helping to stop religious myths from interfering with the knowledge of God which will change the world until the whole earth of full of His glory (which is justice for the oppressed and all who are cast down).
I'm confused by this thread, are you claiming that Satan doesn't exist or are you just saying that lots of OT verses we think are talking about him are not really?
I'm confused by this thread, are you claiming that Satan doesn't exist or are you just saying that lots of OT verses we think are talking about him are not really?
The 2nd - These OT verses we are taught are referring to him are not. I see that these types of doctrines concerning the origin of satan are at the heart of eternal torment doctrine (a doctrine which I believe is false) so I point out the non-scriptural-ness for that reason.
Some of us have to occasionally say "I don't know". I'm compelled to admit my knowledge is limited here due to speculation, limited biblical info
and distracting concoctions from various religions,spiritualists and a whole
bunch mythology senselessness. In basic terms it is clear that Satan and Lucifer are synonymous. Biblically referred to frequently as one in the same. Satan or Lucifer was a "lead" apparent cherubim (a major player in
the angelic hierrarchy ) He became jealous and arrogant regarding his role
and sought power over God. About 6000 years ago God tossed him out of
heaven along with 1/3 of all the angels who supported him. We first see him in the garden as a serpent, and the fallen angels according to scripture are in dark caves of hell until judgement. It probably would have been useless to send satan to earth when it was void of humans (just a thought). Satan/Lucifers next big gig will be instilling himself into antchrist
chronologically around the mid tribulation segment (3.5 yr) and Armegedon
where he tries to destroy God and His Kingdom. Moral to the story "don't
mess with God He will fry your bid fat antichrist butt). God slam dunks the
little geek into the Lake of Fire ok.....hell. No its not! yes it is! no it's not
....................go away.
The 2nd - These OT verses we are taught are referring to him are not. I see that these types of doctrines concerning the origin of satan are at the heart of eternal torment doctrine (a doctrine which I believe is false) so I point out the non-scriptural-ness for that reason.
So who is he then? If he is not what "church tradition" states he is, then who is he, what did he do to be removed from God's presence, and why is he still a threat?
Second, where are your sources coming from? I would like to take a look myself.
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.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
The Lucifer myth
