1. Hello Guest! You are browsing the forums as a guest; you will have limited permissions as a guest so we advise registering to enjoy the forums fully. Remember: we are a Christian ONLY site - any user who is not Christian will not be approved. Blessings, Christian Forum Site Staff
    Dismiss Notice

Thoughts On Lucifer

Discussion in 'Bible Study' started by Etu Malku, Oct 15, 2013.

  1. Hello,

    I've been reading through the many posts regarding Lucifer and it is my opinion that the entity Lucifer has no place in the Christian paradigm, he is not the Abrahamic Satan and/or Devil.

    As already stated numerously by members, the word Lucifer is found in only one place in the Christian bible -- Isaiah 14:12 -- but only in the King James and related versions: "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning?" The King James Version is based on the Vulgate, the Latin translation of Jerome. Jerome translated the Hebrew helel (bright or brilliant one) as "Lucifer," which was a reasonable Latin equivalent. The association is clearly in regards to King Nebuchadnezzar and is in reference to the Morning Star which is a title that Jesus uses for himself as well.
    Revelation 22:16: "I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star."

    Lucifer is mentioned in Publius Ovidius Naso's "Metamorphoses", and the Roman poet Virgil mentions him as far back as 29 BCE. He is a Roman deity and in my opinion shouldn't be involved in the Abrahamic paradigm.

    In Greek mythology, Hesperus, the Evening Star is the son of the dawn goddess Eos (Roman equivalent: Aurora) and brother of Eosphorus the Morning Star (Eosphoros "dawn-bearer"; also Phosphorus, Lucifer "light-bearer"), further demonstrates that Lucifer is not a Satan or a fallen angel (which comes from the Book of Enoch).
     
  2. OK. Now we see your agenda and your intentions as was asked of your on the other thread.

    I feel as though I need to tell you that you have stumbled onto a Christian web site where most all the members are well rooted in their Bible and they will certainly challenge your opinion.

    Actually.....the first deception of Satan to man is to convince man that he does not exist.

    HEADS UP........INCOMING!

    Actually.....the first deception of Satan to man is to convince man that he does not exist.
     
    Etu Malku likes this.
  3. I don't mind as long as the others don't mind discussing this.
     
  4. Lets go!

    You are correct in that there is no verse or passage in the Bible that says, “Lucifer is Satan,”. That same uuderstanding is applied to the word "Trinity" and of course "Rapture". Neither are mentioned by word but are found in what is called....."Inferred Theology".
    An examination of several passages reveals that Lucifer can be none other than Satan. The fall of Lucifer described in Isaiah 14:12 is IMO the same that Jesus referred to in Luke 10:18: "I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven.” A similar fall is depicted in Ezekiel 28.

    Isaiah 14:12-18, is as we all know, describes the fall from heaven of one called “Lucifer” in the King James Version and the “morning star, son of the dawn” in the NIV. Well there is where the problem begins. Other Bible versions call him “Day Star,” “shining star,” and “the bright morning star.” These variations are due to differences of opinion about how to translate the Hebrew word helel.

    Having said that, the description of the one referred to shows us it can be none other than Satan. Again we must recall the purpose of "Inferred Theology/Teaching". That means that even though the specific word is not found, all the things about the word are found or inferred.

    We know from Jesus’ own words in Luke 10 that Satan fell from heaven. So, when Isaiah refers to Lucifer or helel being cast down to earth (Is. 14:12), it can be none other than Satan. The reason for his fall is found in verses 13 and 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.’”

    This has always been Satan’s desire – to be God, and it is the very temptation he used in the Garden of Eden to get Eve to disobey God: “You shall be as God” (Gen. 3:5).

    the Hebrew word helel is translated "Lucifer." He was cast out of heaven for his sin of pride and his desire to be God. Jesus referred to seeing Satan being cast out of heaven. Therefore, we can conclude that Lucifer and Satan are one and the same.

    There is more about this at http://www.gotquestions.org/Lucifer-Satan.html.
     
    KingJ likes this.
  5. If the word ‘Lucifer’ is treated as ‘morning star’ in Isa 14:12, then this is a denial of the deity of Christ. As in
    Revelation 22:16: "I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star."

    The Vulgate uses the same word in contexts where it clearly has no reference to a fallen angel: 2 Peter 1:19 (meaning "morning star"), Job 11:17 ("the light of the morning").

    The KJV translators did not actually translate the Hebrew word ‏הילל as ‘Lucifer.’ This word occurs only in the "Hebrew" Old Testament. They simply duplicated the word used in the Latin Vulgate that translated ‏הילל.
    In the Vulgate, Isa 14:12 reads as follows: "quomodo cecidisti de caelo lucifer qui mane oriebaris corruisti in terram qui vulnerabas gentes." Lucifer in this context is not a proper name but the Latin word for ‘morning star.’

    Morning Star’ literally refers to Venus, but metaphorically it is being associated with earthly kings, emperors, and pagan deities. Peter uses this word to show that the real morning star was Jesus, not Caesar. In Isaiah 14:12 it references the Babylonian king as the morning star and predicts his fall.

    To associate the Morning Star with Lucifer (a Roman pagan deity) and thus with Satan/Devil
    is then calling Jesus (2 Peter 1:19) the devil, and we don't want that! ;)
     
  6. This is what my Bible says.

    Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do. Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned: From which some having swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling; 1Ti 1:4-6 KJV

    ...nor to give heed to fables and endless genealogies (which provide doubts rather than the nurture of God in faith). But the end of the commandment is love out of a pure heart, and a good conscience, and faith unfeigned, from which some, having swerved, have turned aside to foolish talking, 1Ti 1:4-6 NKJV

    So my question is, how does this thread edify God and build up our faith in love from a undeceitful heart, in good conscience so as not to cause doubts and stumble the children and weak in faith?

    Blessings,

    Gene
     
    KingJ likes this.
  7. Zechariah 8:16 These are the things that you shall do: Speak the truth to one another; render in your gates judgments that are true and make for peace;
     
  8. I don't think God minds if we call satan 'Bob' and not Lucifer. I don't see the relevance. This is sounding like the Christmas discussions :p.
     
  9. Agreed.........
    KJ, Have you ever looked up how many names that Satan is referred to in the Scriptures. It is over 20 me thinks!
     
  10. I think I am with KingJ on this, but I'm curious as to the relevance. What is the purpose of distinguishing between the Devil, Satan, Lucifer, etc?
     
  11. There are some out there involved with Luciferian type movements that are pretty eager to disconnect the name of Lucifer from Satan, since it is believed by them that Lucifer is actually good. I've heard some of these type arguments in the past. I wouldn't presume to know the motivations of our friend here in posting this thread, and no insinuations are intended. I have known Christians who argued that Lucifer is not Satan's name, but I hold to a traditional view on this.
     
    Major likes this.
  12. There is a thing. It has a name. The name is unimportant, but the thing is. As far as I'm concerned, I really don't care who Lucifer is/was or if there is any connection to Satan. If, however, there is an argument to be made that would cause someone to worship any created being and/or forsake the worship of God, then I would very much object to that.
     
  13. ...
    You may call me Terry, you may call me Jimmy
    You may call me Bobby, you may call me Zimmy
    You may call me R.J., you may call me Ray
    You may call me anything but no matter what you say.

    You're gonna have to serve somebody, yes indeed
    You're gonna have to serve somebody,
    Well, it may be the devil or it may be the Lord
    But you're gonna have to serve somebody.

    :D:D:D:D:D:ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::cool::cool::cool::cool::cool:

    Gene
     
    Major likes this.
  14. True . . . names/titles are words that we use to connect symbolic representations to ideas. Objective reality is assigned meaning by us, through our subjective universes.

    Objectively, a house is simply a geometrically-coordinated, gravitationally-braced and weatherproof arrangement of certain kinds of molecules. As various individuals design, decorate, occupy, or view the house, however, it is imbued with characteristics assigned to it by them. It now exists in their several subjective universes, and it may continue to exist there even after the 'objective' house has been demolished.
     
  15. "The Thing". I loved that movie.......the original back in 1956 is a classic!!!
     
  16. Seems to me that the relevance is part of the liberal thinkers of today in that if we can change the name of something so that is does not sound or represent something sinister, we can more readily accept it with the end result that the "thing'" simply does not exist.

    Example:

    "Gay" has taken the place of homosexuals.
    "Mistake" has taken the place of SIN.
    "Life style choice" has replaced living in sin.
    "Pro choice" has replaced killing the unborn.

    When something hideous and repulsive has its name changed to make it more acceptable, therein lies the problem, IMHO.
     
    Mr. Darby and KingJ say Amen and like this.
  17. While that may be true of liberal moderns today, it is not the intention of my post which was stating that the connection of Lucifer with Satan was wrong in the first place.
     
  18. I think we are just too da'gum sensitive these days. Everyone is afraid of words. Words are just words. Words are simply our way of describing and categorizing things. The problem is we live in a world that is overly-enlightened to the point that we question everything and walk around on eggshells the whole time.
     
  19. Political Correctness!
     
  20. How would we differentiate between today's modern liber which you state is wrong and what you have stated?
     

Share This Page