Jump to content


Lucifer = The Devil..why?


  • Please log in to reply
67 replies to this topic

#21 Guest_Alcatraz_*

Guest_Alcatraz_*
  • Guests

Posted 07 November 2009 - 05:41 AM

Ike,

I'm not maikng a point that you are wrong. I was simply wondering where in the Bible 'Lucifer' is refered to as a name in relation to the Devil, as opposed to lucifer the word which means 'Light-Bearer' and was a Latinised phrase to describe a leader (or the Planet Venus).

#22 Fred Williams

Fred Williams

    Administrator / Forum Owner

  • Admin Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,540 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Broomfield, Colorado
  • Interests:I enjoy going to Broncos games, my son's HS basketball & baseball games, and my daughter's piano & dance recitals. I enjoy playing basketball (when able). I occasionally play keyboards for my church's praise team. I am a Senior Staff Firmware Engineer at Micron, and am co-host of Pseudo Science Radio.
  • Age: 53
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Broomfield, Colorado

Posted 07 November 2009 - 07:56 AM

As per Ikester, and Dave's follow up, I believe Isaiah 14:12 certainly makes a strong case that Satan is Lucifer. The full description in this Isaiah passage fits other characteristics in the Bible already associated with Satan, such as “I will be like the Most High” (see Genesis 3). Often times throughout scripture God attaches parallel truths to a passage, to describe both a king, and some event or person in the past. For example, Ezekiel 31 not only describes the king of Eygyt, it also describes the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. See this thread: http://www.evolution...wtopic=204&st=0

Yet another example is in Ezek 28:12-13, where God is describing BOTH the king of Tyre, and Lucifer "king of Tyre…You were the seal of perfection, Full of wisdom and perfect in beauty. You were in Eden, the garden of God;”

Now either you accept that the Bible employs parallel truths to a passage, or you try to make a case how the king of Tyre was in Eden. :rolleyes:

Fred

#23 jason777

jason777

    Moderator

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,670 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Machining, Engine Building, Geology, Paleontology, Fishing
  • Age: 40
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Springdale,AR.

Posted 14 March 2010 - 10:46 PM

Now either you accept that the Bible employs parallel truths to a passage, or you try to make a case how the king of Tyre was in Eden.


People are spiritual temples. Who was driving the king of Tyres' car around? If he was filled with Satans spirit,then God saw him as Satan.

#24 Scanman

Scanman

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 641 posts
  • Age: 49
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • West Virginia

Posted 15 March 2010 - 05:24 AM

Now either you accept that the Bible employs parallel truths to a passage, or you try to make a case how the king of Tyre was in Eden.


People are spiritual temples. Who was driving the king of Tyres' car around? If he was filled with Satans spirit,then God saw him as Satan.

View Post


This whole thread has it wrong...The Hebrew הילל (eill) means 'howl you'...not 'Lucifer'. Everywhere else in scripture where this Hebrew word is used...that is how it is translated.

This all came about because of the way the Vulgate was translated and has never been corrected.

Link

... I will list the King James renderings of the word that is found in the "Hebrew" texts and transliterations of its various forms in every occurrence in the entire KJV Bible. Now you can be the judge. In all Hebrew of Aramaic texts of Isa. 14:12, the only word found is "heh-lehl," eill, which is a form of the Hebrew stem "yah-lahl," ill, meaning howl. Here is Kittel’s Hebrew Text for the Hebrew Stem ill — "yah-lahl" — HOWL:
Isa. 13:6 eiliu Howl ye
Isa. 14:31 eili Howl
Isa. 15:2 iilil shall howl
Isa. 15:3 iilil shall howl
Isa. 16:7 iilil Howl
Isa. 16:7 iilil shall howl
Isa. 23:1 eililu Howl ye
Isa. 23:6 eililu Howl ye
Isa. 23:14 eililu Howl ye
Isa. 52:5 eililu make to howl
Isa. 65:14 eililu shall howl
Jer. 4:8 ueililu Howl
Jer. 25:34 eililu Howl
Jer. 47:2 ueill and shall howl
Jer. 48:20 eilili Howl
Jer. 48:31 ailil will I howl
Jer. 48:39 eililu They shall howl (Howl ye)
Jer. 49:3 eilili Howl (Howl ye)
Jer. 51:8 eililu howl
Ezek.30:2 eililu Howl ye
Hos. 7:14 iililu They howled
Joel 1:5 ueililu And howl
Joel 1:11 eililu howl
Joel 1:13 eililu And shall be howlings
Amos 8:1 ueililu and howl
Micah 1:8 uailile howl ye
Zeph. 1:11 aililu Howl
Zech.11:2 eill howl
Zech.11:2 eililu howl
Isa. 14:12 eill Lucifer (??)

I don’t believe one has to be a Hebrew scholar to see at a glance that "Lucifer" is totally out of place in this list. The meaning of this word is clear; eill is a verb that means "howl", and not a noun than can be twisted into a personal name such as "lucifer"!


And yes, it is referring solely to the Babylonian king...not to Satan.

Jesus is our bright and morning star...not Satan.

Peace

#25 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 15 March 2010 - 09:29 AM

So I see you are one of these people who are a Bible soffer against the kjv. You also probably think kjv only people are members of a cult. If I'm not mistaken, one thread was shown you were wrong and I believe it was closed because it was basically derailed with that discussion (From memory). I hope you are not trying to do the same here.

In fact your whole thing in the Bible section is to attack the kjv. Why not just start a thread based own your belief that kjv is a bunch of lies and mistakes and get it over with?

#26 Scanman

Scanman

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 641 posts
  • Age: 49
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • West Virginia

Posted 15 March 2010 - 03:48 PM

So I see you are one of these people who are a Bible soffer against the kjv. You also probably think kjv only people are members of a cult. If I'm not mistaken, one thread was shown you were wrong and I believe it was closed because it was basically derailed with that discussion (From memory). I hope you are not trying to do the same here.

In fact your whole thing in the Bible section is to attack the kjv. Why not just start a thread based own your belief that kjv is a bunch of lies and mistakes and get it over with?

View Post


Are you addressing me or Alcatraz?

Peace

#27 AFJ

AFJ

    AFJ

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,625 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Baton Rouge, LA
  • Interests:Bible, molecular biology, chemistry, mineralogy, geology, eschatology, history, family
  • Age: 51
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Baton Rouge, LA

Posted 15 March 2010 - 07:52 PM

Is refering to a Babylonian King, not the Devil, when read in context in the original Hebrew הילל. In this context a 'Light Bearer' is traditionally used to refer to a leader such as a King.

Also other than that, nowhere else in either the NT or OT is the Devil specifically named as Lucifer.

I have no problem with the Judeo.Christian concept of The Devil or Satan, I was just curious how an non-canonical name (Lucifer) became equated to the Devil, when the name is not used in that context in either the Torah (OT) or Gospel (NT).

View Post

Hey alcatraz,

Just a note before I go to bed. Your going to get all kinds of interpretations depending on the school of theological thought. I don't get into all those commentaries, unless they are devotional--like Spurgeon, or offer historical background. But my favorite is the apostle Paul.

I'm getting to a point here. Have you studied types and shadows (allegories) in the scripture? Paul used a shadow in Galatians to teach about the law and grace. He used the 'free woman' and the 'bond woman' referring to the OT story of Sarah and Hagar, mothers of Issac and Ishmael from Abraham. He equates Sarah the free woman who had a son by promise as grace. But Hagar the bondwoman, who had a son by the will of Abraham (flesh) and not by the promise of God as the law--bondage and temporary.

Also, Revelation says that Jerusalem is spiritually called Sodom in one passage. Sometimes the scripture will interpret itself, sometimes it won't--but one has to compare scripture with scripture to find the meaning.

Paul also taught the law and tabernacle was "a shadow of the good things to come..." in Hebrews. These are all just examples of allegories, types and shadows. But these allegories are pictures and are able to be defined--they are not floating in space with an uncertain interpretation.

So to get to Satan. Lucifer could be Satan's (lit. Adversary) original name or an allegorical description taken from your 'king light bearer.'

In Revelation (Apocalyse) the dragon which is Satan is thrown from heaven by Michael the archangel. He drags a third of the stars to Earth with him. Now obviously 'stars' are not literal in this context, so it has been traditionally taught that this is the number of fallen angels that rebelled against God.

This passage corresponds with the passage in Isaiah. Also Paul said that Satan can transform himself into an "angel of light"---light bearer.

I have heard it taught that Satan was at one time Lucifer in the courts of God as an archangel, possibly a choirmaster, as there is reference to musical instruments in him in Isaiah.

Anyway that is how I understand that subject.

#28 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 15 March 2010 - 08:02 PM

Are you addressing me or Alcatraz?

Peace

View Post


You. I remember having this same type of argument in another thread. Why not start a thread listing all the mistakes with every translation you disagree with instead of bringing this up in ongoing threads? This way you can promote the translation you agree with as absolute perfection while destroying all others.

#29 Scanman

Scanman

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 641 posts
  • Age: 49
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • West Virginia

Posted 15 March 2010 - 08:28 PM

You. I remember having this same type of argument in another thread. Why not start a thread listing all the mistakes with every translation you disagree with instead of bringing this up in ongoing threads? This way you can promote the translation you agree with as absolute perfection while destroying all others.

View Post


My point was not concerning the KJV Bible but the mistranslation of this particular word. I do notice that the quote that I referenced, does mention the KJV and the translation of this particular Hebrew word (or variations thereof) throughout the King James Bible.

My intent, however, was not necessarily to bash the KJV, but in keeping in line with the original OP, to make a case that not only was the individual referenced in Isaiah 14 actually only the Babylonian king, but that the word itself was a total mistranslation, thus nullifying the whole 'Lucifer' naming conflict.

If the truth derails the back and forth volleying between two misconceptions, then so be it.

Peace

#30 AFJ

AFJ

    AFJ

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,625 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Baton Rouge, LA
  • Interests:Bible, molecular biology, chemistry, mineralogy, geology, eschatology, history, family
  • Age: 51
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Baton Rouge, LA

Posted 15 March 2010 - 08:29 PM

This whole thread has it wrong...The Hebrew הילל (eill) means 'howl you'...not 'Lucifer'. Everywhere else in scripture where this Hebrew word is used...that is how it is translated.

This all came about because of the way the Vulgate was translated and has never been corrected.

Link

And yes, it is referring solely to the Babylonian king...not to Satan.

Jesus is our bright and morning star...not Satan.

Peace

View Post


Scanman,
I appreciate your knowledge of the original languages. The NIV translates it as Lucifer, and there were I believe 110 scholars from many denominations. I'm not understanding--you are saying that Lucifer should be "howl you?"

At any rate, it would be a bit hard for the Babylonian king to fall from heaven. Not saying that it's not referring to the Babyonian king, but many times God takes a allegorical description of something on earth to explain something spiritual (e.g. the parables). These are allegories, types and shadows. The scripture has many--but they are not without reference or foundation. They are many times interpreted by other scriptures (e.g. the symbols in Revelation are revealed in Daniel).

Jesus is our bright and morning star--but he didn't fall from heaven, nor rebel against God. The character Lucifer or howl you did. Satan can transform himself into an angel of light. I believe that is in 1 or 2 Corinthians.

#31 Scanman

Scanman

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 641 posts
  • Age: 49
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • West Virginia

Posted 15 March 2010 - 09:12 PM

Scanman,
I appreciate your knowledge of the original languages.  The NIV translates it as Lucifer, and there were I believe 110 scholars from many denominations.  I'm not understanding--you are saying that Lucifer should be "howl you?"


As you can see from the list...almost every other use of the Hebrew word, is translated as a verb...'howl'...there is nowhere else in scripture where this particular word is translated 'Lucifer'. Don't you find this odd?

"How you have fallen from the heavens! Howl, son of the dawn! You are hacked down to the earth, defeater of all nations." Concordant Literal Translation

At any rate, it would be a bit hard for the Babylonian king to fall from heaven.


This is obviously metaphorical...to show how greatly the demise of the king of Babylon was....how far he had fallen.

Peace

#32 jason777

jason777

    Moderator

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,670 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Machining, Engine Building, Geology, Paleontology, Fishing
  • Age: 40
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Springdale,AR.

Posted 15 March 2010 - 09:41 PM

I disagree with that.

When the Lord has given you rest from your pain and turmoil and the hard service with which you were made to serve, you will take up this taunt against the king of Babylon: How the oppressor has ceased! How his insolence has ceased! … How you are fallen from heaven, O Day Star, son of Dawn! How you are cut down to the ground, you who laid the nations low! You said in your heart, "I will ascend to heaven; I will raise my throne above the stars of God; I will sit on the mount of assembly on the heights of Zaphon; I will ascend to the tops of the clouds, I will make myself like the Most High." But you are brought down to Sheol, to the depths of the Pit. Those who see you will stare at you, and ponder over you: "Is this the man who made the earth tremble, who shook kingdoms, who made the world like a desert and overthrew its cities, who would not let his prisoners go home?


God refers to all pagan nations that serve Satan as Babylon. Satan is the one that influences them all.

#33 Scanman

Scanman

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 641 posts
  • Age: 49
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • West Virginia

Posted 16 March 2010 - 04:21 AM

God refers to all pagan nations that serve Satan as Babylon. Satan is the one that influences them all.

View Post


While it is true that Satan may be the influence and source for their rebellion against God...it is not true that they are all referred to as Babylon.

Babylon...Isaiah 13,14

Moab...Isaiah 15,16

Damascus...Isaiah 17

Cush...Isaiah 18

Egypt...Isaiah 19

Tyre...Isaiah 23

Each nation has a judgement prophesied against them.

That is not to say that there is not a shadow of warning for those who follow a similar path,

All of these nations serve as an example of discipline and judgement.

Peace

#34 AFJ

AFJ

    AFJ

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,625 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Baton Rouge, LA
  • Interests:Bible, molecular biology, chemistry, mineralogy, geology, eschatology, history, family
  • Age: 51
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Baton Rouge, LA

Posted 16 March 2010 - 07:07 PM

As you can see from the list...almost every other use of the Hebrew word, is translated as a verb...'howl'...there is nowhere else in scripture where this particular word is translated 'Lucifer'.  Don't you find this odd?

View Post

Never heard that before, and I don't know Hebrew--have to use the concordance. The NIV is the most touted, although I prefer reading NKJV or NASV. But NIV is a multi denominational effort by many scholars. It is translated Lucifer.


This is obviously metaphorical...to show how greatly the demise of the king of Babylon was....how far he had fallen.

View Post

You know that prophecy can have a dual or multiple fulfillment. AN example would be Antiochus Epiphanes, who lived before Christ. He offered a pig on the temple alter--he did many things to fulfill prophecies in Daniel concerning the abomination of desolation. But the antichrist will ultimately fulfill those prophecies. Jesus said "and when you see the abomination of desolation standing in the holy place, let those in Judea flee to the mountains..."

Point being, it is a dual fulfillment or interpretation in this case --both the king of Babylon and the fallen archangel Lucifer--Light Bearer.

#35 AFJ

AFJ

    AFJ

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,625 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Baton Rouge, LA
  • Interests:Bible, molecular biology, chemistry, mineralogy, geology, eschatology, history, family
  • Age: 51
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Baton Rouge, LA

Posted 16 March 2010 - 07:25 PM

Scanman,

I did a little research. I found that 'Lucifer' is not in the original, but 'day star.' I was wrong about the NIV. It is translated day star there also. Lucifer is a Latin word (hence vulgate) which is what they used to call Venus--the day star.

#36 Scanman

Scanman

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 641 posts
  • Age: 49
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • West Virginia

Posted 16 March 2010 - 07:44 PM

But the antichrist will ultimately fulfill those prophecies. Jesus said "and when you see the abomination of desolation standing in the holy place, let those in Judea flee to the mountains..."


Actually the antichrist did fulfill that prophecy in 70AD....it was Nero.

Peace

#37 Scanman

Scanman

    Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 641 posts
  • Age: 49
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • West Virginia

Posted 16 March 2010 - 08:22 PM

Scanman,

I did a little research.  I found that 'Lucifer' is not in the original, but 'day star.'  I was wrong about the NIV.  It is translated day star there also.  Lucifer is a Latin word (hence vulgate) which is what they used to call Venus--the day star.

View Post


It is always good to do research...and I really appreciate someone who is willing to verify something for themself, rather then to just assume.

Strongs Link

H3213 is the true Strongs number reference for 'לליה'(yalal).

H1966 was created solely to take into account the Vulgate mistranslation. The explanation is that it has it's root is in H1984 (halal)...which throughout Hebrew scripture, translates to 'Praise' or 'Boast'. It is not a far leap to associate 'praise' and 'boast' with 'howl'. How they make the jump to 'light-bringer', is beyond me.

The Hebrew spelling for Isaiah 14:12 (לליה:yalal) is exactly the same as Zech 11:2" Howl, fir tree; for the cedar is fallen; because the mighty are spoiled: howl, O ye oaks of Bashan; for the forest of the vintage is come down."

Peace

#38 ikester7579

ikester7579

    Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,500 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Interests:God, creation, etc...
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • I'm non-denominational

Posted 16 March 2010 - 09:05 PM

My point was not concerning the KJV Bible but the mistranslation of this particular word. I do notice that the quote that I referenced, does mention the KJV and the translation of this particular Hebrew word (or variations thereof) throughout the King James Bible.

My intent, however, was not necessarily to bash the KJV, but in keeping in line with the original OP, to make a case that not only was the individual referenced in Isaiah 14 actually only the Babylonian king, but that the word itself was a total mistranslation, thus nullifying the whole 'Lucifer' naming conflict.

If the truth derails the back and forth volleying between two misconceptions, then so be it.

Peace

View Post


I certainly don't see you posting against any other translation.

I also get the impression that you are defending lucifer. Do you think he was a good angel for opposing God?

#39 Bex

Bex

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,066 posts
  • Interests:God, creation, friends/family, animals, health topics, auto/biographies, movies (horror, comedy, drama, whatever, just as long as it's good), music, video games (mainly survival horror, or survival/adventure types), crossword puzzles, books on real life crime/serial killers/etc. Prophecy/miracles/supernatural/hauntings etc, net surfing/forums etc.<br /><br />One of my favourite forums for information on many topics:<br /><br />http://orbisvitae.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=cfrm
  • Age: 38
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • New Zealand

Posted 16 March 2010 - 09:06 PM

Actually the antichrist did fulfill that prophecy in 70AD....it was Nero.

Peace

View Post


Nero is not The antichrist himself (the man of sin/perdition), but an antichrist. There have been plenty of them throughout history. However, the man of sin himself? THE antichrist has yet to show himself on the scene and when he does, he will come like a man of peace and set up a false peace treaty and appear to be THE answer to the world's problems. There will be a one-world government set up. It will only be during the last 3 and a half years of his 7 year reign where people will have no doubts about who he is. And those who have refused to accept the mark on their hand or forehead and have refused to worship him will not only not be allowed to buy or sell, but will suffer persecution/death (those who are found).

Thankfully Christ will come again to destroy the antichrist and his works and the false prophet with him and usher in a 1000 years reign of peace (Some say it's symbolic for an indefinite amount of time, I believe God's word as is). But whatever it is, it is a temporary period of time (however long it maybe). During this time Christ Himself will rule in our minds and hearts. Meanwhile Satan will be bound up and will not be able to cause harm. Only at the end of that time will he be let loose to gather the pagan nations into waging war against the holy city.

Then will come the time of the end. The final ressurection. Judgement day.

#40 jason777

jason777

    Moderator

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,670 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Machining, Engine Building, Geology, Paleontology, Fishing
  • Age: 40
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Springdale,AR.

Posted 16 March 2010 - 09:19 PM

Another name appears in the Old Testament in the King James Version:

    How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! How art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! (Isaiah 14:12, KJV)

This is the only passage that uses the name Lucifer to refer to Satan. This name doesn’t come from Hebrew but Latin. Perhaps this translation into English was influenced by the Latin Vulgate, which uses this name. In Latin, Lucifer means “light bringer.” The Hebrew is heylel and means “light bearer, shining one, or morning star.” Many modern translations translate this as “star of the morning” or “morning star.”

Some believe that Lucifer was a heavenly or angelic name that was taken from Satan when he rebelled. The Bible doesn’t explicitly state this—though Satan is nowhere else referred to as Lucifer, but instead is called other names like the devil, Satan, etc. This tradition may hold some truth, although this verse is referring to him during and after his fall—not before. Since other scriptural passages refer to him as Satan, Lucifer wasn’t necessarily his pre-Fall name—any more than Satan would be.

Even though Satan is first mentioned by name in Job, other historical accounts record his actions (see Genesis 3–4; 1 John 3:12; and Revelation 12:9). In the New Testament, other names reveal more about Satan’s current nature. Devil (diabolos) means “false accuser, Satan, and slanderer” in Greek and is the word from which the English word diabolical is formed.

Satan is called “dragon” in Revelation 12:9 and 20:2, as well as “the evil one” in several places. Other names for Satan include “ancient serpent” and “serpent of old” (Revelation 12:9), “Beelzebub” and “Beelzebul” (Matthew 12:27), “Belial” (2 Corinthians 6:15), and “tempter” (Matthew 4:3). Satan is also referred to as the “god of this world/age” (2 Corinthians 4:4), “prince of this world” (John 12:31), and “father of lies” (John 8:44).


Here we have a source that says the Hebrew name is heylel not eill. :)





Enjoy.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users