if lucifer was the most beautiful angel jesus is most beautiful human, right

[want-love]

If you believe this then you have a conflict between Psalms and Isaiah.

isaiah says that because jesus in this earth was poor and his body was not glorified, but in the glorified bodies of the children of god jesus is the most handsome and beautiful in spirit too

 

[want-love]

u compared

you just lie

 

[ViaCrucis]

and they both are called morning star in the bible
obviously satan lost that name after his falling

but it's curious how both are called the same way

Satan is never called "morning star", this epithet, used by the Prophet Isaiah, refers to the king of Babylon, not the devil. Its use by Isaiah is satirical/sarcastic--the king of Babylon, an ordinary human being, claimed to be divine, among the gods, among the stars in the heavens--but ultimately he is nothing and would amount to nothing.

Its use in reference to Jesus is sincere; the planet Venus (the "morning star") is the last "star" we see just before the sun rises, hence "morning star" or "dawn star"--it signals the dawn, brings the dawn. Which is why in Greek it is called eosphoros ("dawn-bringer") and phosphoros ("light-bringer"), translated into Latin as lucifer (also meaning "light-bringer" and a reference to the planet Venus).

None of these are names, titles, or epithets given to Satan in the Bible. The reason many people think Satan's name is "Lucifer" is because of a rather peculiar interpretation of Isaiah 14 that arose in the middle ages in which Isaiah 14 was viewed as speaking, mystically and cryptically, about the fall of Satan--but this view is entirely eisegetical and has no basis in the text itself.

For most of Christian history the term "lucifer" in the Latin-speaking West was used to refer to Jesus Christ (on account of 2 Peter 1:19), and on a few occasions was a proper name given to Christians, for example there were several bishops in antiquity named Lucifer, for example the 4th century Sardinian bishop, St. Lucifer of Caligari.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Thedictator]

what are your arguments to say his body and face is not the most beautiful of the children of god? you only say that without arguments. i have no arguments too, but i believe it

Again If you believe this you have a conflict with two parts of God's Word. Psalms and Isaiah so there is a problem with your interpretation because God's Word has no conflict.

 

[want-love]

Satan is never called "morning star", this epithet, used by the Prophet Isaiah, refers to the king of Babylon, not the devil. Its use by Isaiah is satirical/sarcastic--the king of Babylon, an ordinary human being, claimed to be divine, among the gods, among the stars in the heavens--but ultimately he is nothing and would amount to nothing.

Its use in reference to Jesus is sincere; the planet Venus (the "morning star") is the last "star" we see just before the sun rises, hence "morning star" or "dawn star"--it signals the dawn, brings the dawn. Which is why in Greek it is called eosphoros ("dawn-bringer") and phosphoros ("light-bringer"), translated into Latin as lucifer (also meaning "light-bringer" and a reference to the planet Venus).

None of these are names, titles, or epithets given to Satan in the Bible. The reason many people think Satan's name is "Lucifer" is because of a rather peculiar interpretation of Isaiah 14 that arose in the middle ages in which Isaiah 14 was viewed as speaking, mystically and cryptically, about the fall of Satan--but this view is entirely eisegetical and has no basis in the text itself.

For most of Christian history the term "lucifer" in the Latin-speaking West was used to refer to Jesus Christ (on account of 2 Peter 1:19), and on a few occasions was a proper name given to Christians, for example there were several bishops in antiquity named Lucifer, for example the 4th century Sardinian bishop, St. Lucifer of Caligari.

-CryptoLutheran

is interesting how many people have different interpretations of the bible, they are small important details, i believe isaiah is talking about satan former lucifer

 

[want-love]

Again If you believe this you have a conflict with two parts of God's Word. Psalms and Isaiah so there is a problem with your interpretation because God's Word has no conflict.

didnt read my previous answer: isaiah says that because jesus in this earth was poor and his body was not glorified, but in the glorified bodies of the children of god jesus is the most handsome and beautiful in spirit too

 

[ViaCrucis]

i believe isaiah is talking about satan former lucifer

And my followup question to this would be why? What leads you to believe this?

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Instrument150]

and they both are called morning star in the bible
obviously satan lost that name after his falling

but it's curious how both are called the same way

This comes to mind:

I can say Jesus is like a lion, and I can say Lucifer is like a lion. Jesus is like a lion because He is the king, and He is majestic in His risen glory. Lucifer is like a lion because he want to devour his prey

 

[Jenniferdiana]

Maybe because he has a beautiful spirit...

 

[friend of]

Don't complain, the man got a brief reply as to why "both are called morning star in the bible." I didn't push it.

I think the whole notion of Satan being the morning star was fabrication from a long time ago in order to confuse people today.

 

[AnticipateHisComing]

you just lie

I didn't lie. You lie and slander. Read your OP. If you don't see a comparison, you shouldn't be writing OP's.

How about a meaningful dialog instead of a [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]ing match?

 

[want-love]

I didn't lie. You lie and slander. Read your OP. If you don't see a comparison, you shouldn't be writing OP's.

How about a meaningful dialog instead of a [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] match?

dont twist the things

And my followup question to this would be why? What leads you to believe this?

-CryptoLutheran

because i believe what i read and dont try (failing) to go further with other recherche interpretations, but god bless you

 

[GUANO]

The 'Lucifer' text in the Bible is not talking about the Devil. It was in reference to a Babylonian king—more specifically, the spirit of a Babylonian King. This king, like many others in his day, was worshiped as the avatar of one of the gods and such an act can certainly be attributed to the Devil. Venus as the morning star is an ancient omen or sign and it represents a King or other [ruling] figure who appears before and ushers in the "sunrise" or a 'golden age' in his kingdom. It was a common title (Morning Star) given to a new ruler who was the first of their lineage. Lucifer is a Latin word. The text should be read in English: "star of the morning".

Lucifer is also the name of the Devil as he's known to Theistic Satanists and Luciferians and has more to do with his [extra-biblical] association to the Greek god Prometheus who was the 'bringer of light'. It also echos the Biblical scripture that states that the Devil appears as an 'angel of light'.

Jesus Christ is the true Morning Star and you will often hear Catholic renditions in Latin that refer to Jesus Christ as Lucifer. Luciferians (specifically Rosicrucians), as opposed to Satanists, believe that Jesus and Lucifer are the same being.

In addition, the Bible never says he was the highest or most beautiful angel. The text only says that "[he was] the anointed cherub who covers". This is the title given to him in the Bible because he is the "Prince of the Powers of the Air" (new testament language). The anointed cherub who covers is the same concept as Ma'at and Anu, the Egyptian and Sumerian sky-gods. If you were to write "Lord of the Air" in Sumerian it would be "Baal-Anu". The "air" has nothing to do with the physical sky, the best translation in English of the concept of the 'Lower Aether' ('Aer' in Greek) would be the word "atmosphere" defined as the "mood" of a given thing—the emotional/mental/spiritual atmosphere. I believe that in the time of this writing, Anu was lifted up as the 'Most High' god in Sumeria so in addition the text in Isaiah certainly has a 2 or 3-fold meaning.

In regards to the angelic rebellion in the book of Enoch, it wasn't "Satan" who led the rebellion and took wives of the daughters of men, it was "Samyaza"... The Devil is also associated with spirit Azazel and many others. Daemonology is quite complex.

In regards to 'what', in essence, the Devil [of the Bible] actually is, it is the sense of self preservation and self-importance (the old definition of the word "Ego" before it was updated to 'sense of self'). Paul simplifies it as "the flesh"... The "flesh" is the ruler of the individual and collective mood. So, The Devil is/was obviously a very importing 'thing that exists' (being) and a fundamental part of nature as well as ourselves. It is a primal spirit responsible for ensuring the survival of species. The message of Jesus Christ is the complete polar opposite—humility and self-sacrifice.

 

[nonaeroterraqueous]

is interesting how many people have different interpretations of the bible, they are small important details, i believe isaiah is talking about satan former lucifer

because i believe what i read and dont try (failing) to go further with other recherche interpretations, but god bless you

This is the preface to the prophecy, from verses 3 and 4:

"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:"

The verse you quote then follows in that text. Others have told you that it was a taunt (he was being sarcastic), and that it was intended for the King of Babylon. Don't pull that stuff about interpretation with me, man. It is written plainly.

 

[GUANO]

if lucifer was the most beautiful angel jesus is most beautiful human, right

Sorry, in regards to the comparison in the subject line:
Certainly, the ministries of Jesus and Satan/The Devil are at direct odds with each other and deeper connections can be drawn thinking somewhere in that manner.

The confusion about the morning star title is quite a mess. Depending on what kind of Christian or 'devil worshiper' you come across you will get all kinds of information like my rantings above. Most of the stories about the Devil being the most beautiful angel and other stories of Lucifer and the fallen angels are a product of the Enlightenment which was influenced heavily by the Rosicrucians. Rosicrucianism is Luciferian Satanism and it is disguised as a religion of Christian Enlightenment—the 'steps' of initiation slowly introduce a person of Christian background to a full-on wonderful-sounding religion with Lucifer as the prime deity.

Rosicrucians heavily influenced the foundation of the USA. Goddess Columbia (The "Watcher/Archangel" of the New World) was apparently revealed to them as Lucifer/Prometheus and in their mythology the USA represents their Luciferian New Jerusalem. I blame the French =P

 

[GUANO]

Isaiah 14 is most likely in reference to Shalmaneser, the name of this King literally means: "Shalmanu (the underworld, fertility, and war) is the most high" lol.

 

[Faith Alone 1 Cor 15:1-4]

And my followup question to this would be why? What leads you to believe this?

-CryptoLutheran

Because that king was not in garden of eden ? Or maybe you think that king was 2000 year old ?

 

[ubicaritas]

If Jesus were ugly, I'd expect it would have been mentioned in the Gospels. Isaiah 53 is usually interpreted to mean his appearance during his Passion after he was beaten.

 

[IT REALLY SAYS]

The Bible states that Jesus Christ was not a Physically beautiful person, it states that he was very common in his looks.

What verse is this?

 

[S.O.J.I.A.]

if lucifer was the most beautiful angel jesus is most beautiful human, right

this statement is a non-sequitur