Lucifer in Isaiah 14 can't be anyone else but Satan...

ewq1938 · Feb 17, 2017

PastorFreud said:
If I said "modern" then I am sorry it confused you.

There isn't any confusion. The idea that Satan is Lucifer is not modern. Again, the lack of anyone actually trying to dispute the evidence offered is very telling. The evidence has yet to even be challenged.

DamianWarS · Feb 17, 2017

ewq1938 said:
This is nothing but opinion with nothing behind it to support the claim. The OP has many citations offering evidence and no one has gone one by one and disputed any of them.

then let's do it

ewq1938 said:
Isaiah 14:12 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!

Who else but Satan will literally fall from heaven?

Lucifer is latin not english so let's be careful to not misrepresent this text. The KJV uses "O Lucifer" but why? What is that based on? Is is an accurate translation or from scriptural revelation?

"who else but Satan..." is not exactly proof it is opinion. Jesus uses the text to refer to the town of capernaum showing the text can be used figuratively and this is the best scriptural support to explain it's meaning outside of its literal use for the King of Babylon. As for the interpretation of Satan scripture does not connect the two.

ewq1938 said:
Isaiah 14:13 For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:

Who else but Satan could ascend into heaven like he did in Job?

there's that "who else..." again. This is not proof based on what scripture reveals it is conjecture

ewq1938 said:
Isaiah 14:14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.

Paul wrote that the Antichrist will also seek to do this and whether the AC is Satan or a Satan possessed man it still is a reference to Satan.

No doubt this Isaiah text can figuratively point to Satan but scripture does not come right out and tell us this. Pauls makes some analogous references but does not refer to this text so in the end Paul does not link the two.

ewq1938 said:
Isaiah 14:15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.

Exactly what Rev 20 depicts happening to Satan!

I would recommend a study on the use of "sheol" in the OT which the KJV translates as Hell. The bible is written for the living not for the dead or for fallen angels and we need to approach it that way. It gives us broad strokes of the afterlife or of fallen angels but we have no fine detail as to what they really looks like. The afterlife in the OT is even more mysterious than in the NT. The OT presents a indiscriminate place for the dead where all pass through and very unknown; it does not present clear references to 2 dominions of the traditional hell/heaven.

I suggest you are interpreting this text base on your bias and the words the translation uses but to understand the words used in the Hebrew we need to cast off our bias and a deeper study of those words will be of greater benefit to understand its context.

ewq1938 said:
Isaiah 14:16 They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, and consider thee, saying, Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms;
Isaiah 14:17 That made the world as a wilderness, and destroyed the cities thereof; that opened not the house of his prisoners?

Satan bound for a thousand years and I can easily imagine people saying this about him!

imagination is not the voice of proof and it seems this is where your main premise lies within your thoughts and opinion. You see scripture as explanation of the Isaiah text yet scripture itself does not show us this and you must include conjecture as well to come to those conclusion.

ewq1938 said:
That's far too many coincidences to just be about some old king of Babylon as all of it exactly pertains to Satan and what is going to happen to him and what he tries to accomplish.

the text explicitly refers to the fall of the king of babylon yet it is clear there are examples in the text that obvious are metaphors since they are beyond the limits of human. I don't have a problem applying this text to Satan but I don't see it revealing that his proper name is Lucifer or that this is a list of events that literally took place with Satan but rather metaphors.

Jesus quote this text and uses it figuratively but doesn't point to Satan but rather judgment upon a city, not unlike the judgment that was upon the King of Babylon. This is the only scriptural support outside of direct context that gives us more explanation and what he shows is metaphor.

ewq1938 · Feb 17, 2017

DamianWarS said:
then let's do it

This isn't the Op, just something I wrote up after.

Lucifer is latin not english so let's be careful to not misrepresent this text.

I misrepresented nothing. Lucifer is an English word as well.

"who else but Satan..." is not exactly proof it is opinion.

It is evidence and it has gone unanswered. You fail to explain why Satan fulfills everything written concerning Lucifer.

No doubt this Isaiah text can figuratively point to Satan but scripture does not come right out and tell us this. Pauls makes some analogous references but does not refer to this text so in the end Paul does not link the two.

You contradict yourself when you said, "No doubt this Isaiah text can figuratively point to Satan"

Yes there is no doubt so why try to shed doubt upon it? Paul clearly (no doubtly) does refer to the text concerning Lucifer.

I suggest you are interpreting this text base on your bias and the words the translation uses but to understand the words used in the Hebrew we need to cast off our bias and a deeper study of those words will be of greater benefit to understand its context.

There was no bias. I could care less if Lucifer is Satan etc. I merely took related scriptures that "no doubt" referenced the same things written about Lucifer and compare them to things written about Satan and guess what? It's a match!

imagination is not the voice of proof and it seems this is where your main premise lies within your thoughts and opinion. You see scripture as explanation of the Isaiah text yet scripture itself does not show us this and you must include conjecture as well to come to those conclusion.

Sorry but using scripture to interpret scripture is quite the valid way of biblical study.

I don't have a problem applying this text to Satan but I don't see it revealing that his proper name is Lucifer or that this is a list of events that literally took place with Satan but rather metaphors.

You contradict yourself again when you state, "I don't have a problem applying this text to Satan"...you agree with me and at the same time disagree lol...

toLiJC · Feb 18, 2017

ewq1938 said:
Isaiah 14:12 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 14:13 For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:
Isaiah 14:14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.
Isaiah 14:15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.
Isaiah 14:16 They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, and consider thee, saying, Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms;
Isaiah 14:17 That made the world as a wilderness, and destroyed the cities thereof; that opened not the house of his prisoners?

1966

01966 heylel {hay-lale'}
from 01984 (in the sense of brightness); TWOT - 499a; n m
AV - Lucifer 1; 1

Lucifer = "light-bearer"
1) shining one, morning star, Lucifer
1a) of the king of Babylon and Satan (fig.)
2) (TWOT) 'Helel' describing the king of Babylon

OT:1966
heylel (hay-lale'); from OT:1984 (in the sense of brightness); the morning-star:

KJV - lucifer (the king of Babylon).

2 Corinthians 11:14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.

The Hebrew word for Satan's original name is Heylel, Lucifer in the English tongue. Lucifer in Latin originates from two words, "Lux" and "Ferre" or "Lux-ferre" (from lux, "light", and ferre, "to bear, bring"). When we speak of Lucifer in English we are talking about the one known as Heylel in the Hebrew. The same individual with a name spanning a few, if not more, languages.

Lucifer was created "full of wisdom" meaning very smart, "perfect in beauty" and he "sealed up the sum" which means he was created as a "full pattern" which is thought to mean "perfect", with nothing lacking. But, all those things together caused Lucifer to think he was greater than he really was so he sought to have a greater status.

He then is said to want to have his throne above God's and be like the Most High but is cast down to the pit. If that doesn't remind you of what happens to Satan then nothing I say will.

2 Thessalonians 2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
2 Thessalonians 2:4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

2 Thessalonians:

"exalteth himself above all that is called God"
"shewing himself that he is God"

Isaiah:

"I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God"
"I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High"

Types or foreshadows are used in scripture. It is common for someone to have done something which really points forward to someone else fulfilling a prophecy. There have been many foreshadows of Christ, and there are many of Satan. The King of Babylon may have been a real human being or might have literally been Satan, but whoever it was they did some of the things that are speaking of things Satan will do in the end times. Both tried/will try to be God but it will be Satan who will do it on a far grander, and worldwide scale.

Ezekiel 28:1 The word of the LORD came again unto me, saying,
Ezekiel 28:2 Son of man, say unto the prince of Tyrus, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Because thine heart is lifted up, and thou hast said, I am a God, I sit in the seat of God, in the midst of the seas; yet thou art a man, and not God, though thou set thine heart as the heart of God:

Here another man (or possibly Satan himself by another name) is the foreshadow of the endtimes Satan. Again, the same type of thing occurring. Things repeat over and over to teach us!

Ezekiel 28:3 Behold, thou art wiser than Daniel; there is no secret that they can hide from thee:
Ezekiel 28:4 With thy wisdom and with thine understanding thou hast gotten thee riches, and hast gotten gold and silver into thy treasures:
Ezekiel 28:5 By thy great wisdom and by thy traffick hast thou increased thy riches, and thine heart is lifted up because of thy riches:
Ezekiel 28:6 Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD; Because thou hast set thine heart as the heart of God;
Ezekiel 28:7 Behold, therefore I will bring strangers upon thee, the terrible of the nations: and they shall draw their swords against the beauty of thy wisdom, and they shall defile thy brightness.
Ezekiel 28:8 They shall bring thee down to the pit, and thou shalt die the deaths of them that are slain in the midst of the seas.

Remember Isaiah?

Isaiah 14:14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.
Isaiah 14:15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.

Ezekiel 28:9 Wilt thou yet say before him that slayeth thee, I am God? but thou shalt be a man, and no God, in the hand of him that slayeth thee.
Ezekiel 28:10 Thou shalt die the deaths of the uncircumcised by the hand of strangers: for I have spoken it, saith the Lord GOD.
Ezekiel 28:11 Moreover the word of the LORD came unto me, saying,
Ezekiel 28:12 Son of man, take up a lamentation upon the king of Tyrus, and say unto him, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Thou sealest up the sum, full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty.
Ezekiel 28:13 Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering, the sardius, topaz, and the diamond, the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper, the sapphire, the emerald, and the carbuncle, and gold: the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created.
Ezekiel 28:14 Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire.

How many people were in the garden of God and had been an anointed Cherub?

Ezekiel 28:15 Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee.
Ezekiel 28:16 By the multitude of thy merchandise they have filled the midst of thee with violence, and thou hast sinned: therefore I will cast thee as profane out of the mountain of God: and I will destroy thee, O covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire.
Ezekiel 28:17 Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness: I will cast thee to the ground, I will lay thee before kings, that they may behold thee.
Ezekiel 28:18 Thou hast defiled thy sanctuaries by the multitude of thine iniquities, by the iniquity of thy traffick; 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.
Ezekiel 28:19 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.

Luke 10:18 And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven.

This isnt literal lightning but a falling or shooting star. One that has that long tail of light that appears like a bolt of lightning, which also denotes how bright he is, or at least how bright he likes to think he is.

lightning
796

796 astrape {as-trap-ay'}

from 797; TDNT - 1:505,86; n f

AV - lightning 8, light shining 1; 9

1) lightning
1a) of the gleam of a lamp

"the gleam of a lamp"

Revelation 8:10 And the third angel sounded, and there fell a great star from heaven, burning as it were a lamp, and it fell upon the third part of the rivers, and upon the fountains of waters;
Revelation 8:11 And the name of the star is called Wormwood: and the third part of the waters became wormwood; and many men died of the waters, because they were made bitter.

"burning as it were a lamp"

Christ himself documenting satans future fall.

Rev 2:26 And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations:
Rev 2:27 And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father.
Rev 2:28 And I will give him the morning star.

I believe that "morning star" is a title many can have not just one person. It's a title that means a person is important and has authority. Lucifer was someone who was a morning star but he fell and cannot be called this any longer.

Some men throughout history have matched some of these things but only one being fits them all and that is Satan, Lucifer or whatever name you want to use. Only that fallen Cherub is the one this is fully directed at.

satan is not a (be)souled being, but an unsouled spirit, albeit very rational, while the "king of babylon" spoken of in Isaiah 14 is a human, more precisely, a typical image of the soul that has gotten to the stage of decline as to its position in the course of the eternal circle - every soul of the infinite universe goes through the same things, of course, not all souls simultaneously, but successively and alternately in a circle, and from this perspective every soul was (in the position of) a most glorious holy being in the "heaven" in previous eternities, namely a cherub, but when gets to the stage of decline in the course of the eternal circle it descends to a lower position, including (in the position) of a sinner, losing its attainments, and in Isaiah 14 God intimates this through His prophet calling the sinners to repentance, but especially/mostly those who commit great spiritual wickedness, which is most typical of "babylon"

satan is not and was never a cherub, but it is a "dragon", the cherubim are mentioned in the same chapter of Genesis where satan is presented for the first time, namely in the third one

Genesis 3:1-24 "Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made..... he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims"

Blessings

ewq1938 · Feb 18, 2017

toLiJC said:
satan is not a (be)souled being, but an unsouled spirit, albeit very rational, while the "king of babylon" spoken of in Isaiah 14 is a human, more precisely, a typical image of the soul that has gotten to the stage of decline as to its position in the course of the eternal circle - every soul of the infinite universe goes through the same things, of course, not all souls simultaneously, but successively and alternately in a circle, and from this perspective every soul was (in the position of) a most glorious holy being in the "heaven" in previous eternities, namely a cherub, but when gets to the stage of decline in the course of the eternal circle it descends to a lower position, including (in the position) of a sinner, losing its attainments, and in Isaiah 14 God intimates this through His prophet calling the sinners to repentance, but especially/mostly those who commit great spiritual wickedness, which is most typical of "babylon"

satan is not and was never a cherub, but it is a "dragon", the cherubim are mentioned in the same chapter of Genesis where satan is presented for the first time, namely in the third one

Genesis 3:1-24 "Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made..... he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims"

Blessings

Satan has a soul and he was a Cherub. That Cherubim protected Eden in no way means Satan was not a former Cherub.

DamianWarS · Feb 18, 2017

ewq1938 said:
This isn't the Op, just something I wrote up after.

I misrepresented nothing. Lucifer is an English word as well.

It is evidence and it has gone unanswered. You fail to explain why Satan fulfills everything written concerning Lucifer.

You contradict yourself when you said, "No doubt this Isaiah text can figuratively point to Satan"

Yes there is no doubt so why try to shed doubt upon it? Paul clearly (no doubtly) does refer to the text concerning Lucifer.

There was no bias. I could care less if Lucifer is Satan etc. I merely took related scriptures that "no doubt" referenced the same things written about Lucifer and compare them to things written about Satan and guess what? It's a match!

Sorry but using scripture to interpret scripture is quite the valid way of biblical study.

You contradict yourself again when you state, "I don't have a problem applying this text to Satan"...you agree with me and at the same time disagree lol...

It is your dogmatic approach that I disagree with not that the text has a possibility of referring to Satan.

I will say this bluntly that you are abusing language and specific translations that agree with your position by not presenting the due diligence needed to come to these conclusions. Lucifer is a proper noun and can be found in an english dictionary but it is not a natural english word; it is a latin word superimposed in english biblical culture and adopted as a name for Satan.

This is easily discovered by minimal research and it feels like you are misrepresenting this information. The name is a misnomer as a "tin can" is a misnomer. Those things we refer to as "tin cans" are not actually made out of tin [insert mind blow here], instead they are steel. But a tin can is still thought of as correct when referencing these cans. In the similar way "Lucifer" is a misnomer for Satan but it can be used correctly to refer to Satan. It's a misnomer because Satan's name is not actually "Lucifer"; this name is a church adopted word influenced by the Latin bible and the KJV reflects this culture.

ewq1938 · Feb 18, 2017

DamianWarS said:
It is your dogmatic approach that I disagree with not that the text has a possibility of referring to Satan.

Yet again a contradiction. My position is that "the text has a possibility of referring to Satan" minus the possibility of course. Why agree with me then attempt to disagree as well?

toLiJC · Feb 18, 2017

ewq1938 said:
Satan has a soul and he was a Cherub. That Cherubim protected Eden in no way means Satan was not a former Cherub.

where in the Bible can you read that satan/the devil himself was a cherub and has a soul?!

Blessings

ewq1938 · Feb 18, 2017

toLiJC said:
where in the Bible can you read that satan/the devil himself was a cherub and has a soul?!

Blessings

All angels have souls but there is no way to prove this as far as I know. But to say he has no soul or lost it is equally unproveable.

It is written that Lucifer was a Cherub and Lucifer is the Devil's name, at least one of many names.

toLiJC · Feb 18, 2017

ewq1938 said:
All angels have souls but there is no way to prove this as far as I know. But to say he has no soul or lost it is equally unproveable.

It is written that Lucifer was a Cherub and Lucifer is the Devil's name, at least one of many names.

if you cannot prove that satan/the devil himself was a cherub and has a soul, then why must you believe in and try to convince others of such things?! - every misbelief/heresy is of the devil and to the detriment of the worshipers that follow/support it, which is why the second of the ten commandments is against the misbeliefs/heresies

Romans 14:22-23 "Hast thou faith? have it to thyself before God. Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth. And he that doubteth(i.e. that believes wrong) is damned if he eat(i.e. if they practice the faith so), because he eateth not of faith(i.e. because thus they practice the faith not according to the tradition coming from the true Lord God): for whatsoever is not of faith is sin(i.e. all spiritual unrighteousness/lawlessness/wickedness is sin)."

Blessings

ewq1938 · Feb 18, 2017

toLiJC said:
if you cannot prove that satan/the devil himself was a cherub and has a soul,

I have already proven the Devil was a Cherub....as for the soul it can't be proven or disproven so that doesn't aid your position at all.

toLiJC · Feb 18, 2017

ewq1938 said:
I have already proven the Devil was a Cherub....as for the soul it can't be proven or disproven so that doesn't aid your position at all.

man, you know that the king of babylon is a human being, how can a man be satan/the devil itself?!, satan is a spirit on an universal scale, while the man is a being on a regional(much smaller) scale

Blessings

ewq1938 · Feb 18, 2017

toLiJC said:
man, you know that the king of babylon is a human being, how can a man be satan/the devil itself?!, satan is a spirit on an universal scale, while the man is a being on a regional(much smaller) scale

Blessings

Satan is a man not a bodiless spirit.

toLiJC · Feb 18, 2017

ewq1938 said:
Satan is a man not a bodiless spirit.

this is crazy - it is so plainly written in scripture that satan is a "dragon" on an universal scale, you talk about human being?!, it is presented as a "serpent" from the beginning of scripture, and is nowhere presented (expressly) as a human being there

Revelation 16:13-14 "I saw three unclean spirits like frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet. For they are the spirits of devils, working miracles, which go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty."

this is how satan is presented as a spirit on an universal scale trying to possess all the world, there is no biblical verse stating (expressly) satan is a human being, moreover, if the devil was a cherub, it would be presented as a cherub in the 3th chapter of Genesis, because, taking into consideration what has been claimed by some christians (namely that satan was created by God as well as having been a cherub that sinned and became a kind of fallen angel), it is not possible that satan sinned without there having been any tempter to tempt it, because it is written in the Bible that God created every thing by having made it be good/righteous from the beginning (Genesis 1:31), which is why there must have been a tempter to seduce the first humans into sinning, for they had been righteous since God created them yet before the devil managed to seduce them into beginning and continuing to sin great sin, so from this perspective there must have been another tempter to seduce satan, but it is not written anywhere in scripture that there was/is a tempter earlier than the devil - satan is presented as the earlier/primordial tempter, this is how there is no way that satan were a cherub, because if it was such, it would be a (be)souled being, and only some (be)souled being can be seduced into sinning, but there must be some tempter to seduce it, otherwise it won't sin, because God made every thing be good/righteous from the beginning:

Romans 14:14-20 "I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean... All things indeed are pure; but it is evil for that man who eateth with offence."

remember that every thing was clean to adam and eve until the day satan seduced them into sinning, because it is written that in the beginning they were not ashamed of any thing God created and they had, but after having started to sin they began to perceive creation as unclean, including their own nature created by God, which is why they made for themselves a human religion(the "approns") in order to be able to overcome the shame

and this proves that there must be some tempter to seduce the creature into sinning so that it may sin, otherwise it won't (be able to) sin, but if the tempter of the humans is satan, then who or what was/is the tempter of satan?!, because if God created satan as a cherub, then it must have been righteous in the beginning, which suggests that there must also have been/be some tempter that seduced satan into sinning, but it is not written anything about a tempter earlier than satan, so this proves there is no way that satan were a cherub/angel, but the devil is rather the temptation/seduction itself, an unsouled spirit whose nature is to tempt/seduce and deceive/lie, which is why it is presented as a "serpent/dragon" from the beginning of scripture, and there is no scriptural verse stating (expressly) that satan was/is a cherub/angel or a (be)souled being

Blessings

DamianWarS · Feb 18, 2017

ewq1938 said:
Yet again a contradiction. My position is that "the text has a possibility of referring to Satan" minus the possibility of course. Why agree with me then attempt to disagree as well?

so do you mean to say "the text is referring to Satan"??

I agree with the line "the text has a possibility of referring to Satan" but do not agree with "the text is referring to Satan" Do you see the difference? Do you understand my disagreement?

The OP has clear enough language in the title "Lucifer in Isaiah 14 can't be anyone else but Satan"

and conclusion

ewq1938 said:
Some men throughout history have matched some of these things but only one being fits them all and that is Satan, Lucifer or whatever name you want to use. Only that fallen Cherub is the one this is fully directed at.

it is your dogma I disagree with.

Alawishis · Feb 18, 2017

Anto9us said:
In Zechariah 5 is a case for "lady angels" -- the winged women in the vision carrying the wicked woman in a basket to Shinar/Babylon

What Zechariah saw does not sound like human females to me...

If the Sons of God in Gen 6 are fallen angels -- they do indeed have gender, sex organs, whole nine yards -- they impregnate the "daughters of men" and Nephilim/giants are the result

The Bible says that angels DO NOT MARRY in heaven -- the fallen ones violated this while on earth -- Bible never said angels don't have SEX/GENDER

I think that's reading a lot into the verse that's not there.
Nowhere are these beings called angels, even if they do fit man's cliched image of what angels should look like. They are specifically called "women" not angels to say otherwise is reading in what is not there. Wings are often used as symbolism for speed. There are many prophetic visions (for example Daniel 7) that include animals with wings. We don't jump to call them angels too.

We have to be very careful when we read scriptures that we are not bringing our own pre-conceptions into our understanding. We have to let the scriptures speak for themselves. This is one of the most difficult things to do.

The same goes for the reference to the "Sons of God" in Gen 6. Nowhere is there any suggestion these are fallen angels or angels at all even. Repeatedly human followers of God are called "Sons of God". You and I are "Sons and Daughters of God" are we not? Why do we make it fallen angels all of a sudden in this passage? Even if they were angels why would they want to get married? Marriage is a life-long commitment. If they were "fallen" would they want to get married? Marriage is specifically mentioned, it's an important detail, especially since marriage is one of the specific institutions from Eden that was given to man.

Anto9us · Feb 18, 2017

OK -- the "winged women" were something that ZECHARIAH SAW 'IN A VISION'

I don't know that they "physically existed"

When Jesus told disciples coming down from MT of Transfiguration "not to discuss the VISION" with anyone -- does that mean that Moses and Elijah were NOT REALLY THERE?

I don't want to be dogmatic about angelology or demonology, I was just posting how things seemed to me

ewq1938 · Feb 18, 2017

toLiJC said:
this is crazy - it is so plainly written in scripture that satan is a "dragon" on an universal scale, you talk about human being?!,

I said man not human man. Satan is sbolically a dragon which means a large serpent. That is not what he looks like.

this is how satan is presented as a spirit on an universal scale trying to possess all the world, there is no biblical verse stating (expressly) satan is a human being, moreover, if the devil was a cherub, it would be presented as a cherub in the 3th chapter of Genesis,

Nope. He was a former Cherub so he would not be presented as a Cherub.

and this proves that there must be some tempter to seduce the creature into sinning so that it may sin, otherwise it won't (be able to) sin, but if the tempter of the humans is satan, then who or what was/is the tempter of satan?!,

This is false. One can sin without a tempter because you only have to have a temptation. In Lucifer's case it was pride that caused him to sin.

ewq1938 · Feb 18, 2017

DamianWarS said:
so do you mean to say "the text is referring to Satan"??

I agree with the line "the text has a possibility of referring to Satan" but do not agree with "the text is referring to Satan" Do you see the difference? Do you understand my disagreement?

The OP has clear enough language in the title "Lucifer in Isaiah 14 can't be anyone else but Satan"

and conclusion

it is your dogma I disagree with.

Yet after all this time and you still haven't disputed that Satan ultimately fulfills everything written about Lucifer which proves what's written about him is fulfilled by satan.

Sammy-San · Feb 18, 2017

ewq1938 said:
Anything is biblical if it's in the bible....but you will have to be more specific for me to say anything further.

Lucifer being a morning star was a reference to what he was before his fall which is what my previous post was saying.

Do you agree with what this article says?

Why Does Satan Hates Humanity So Much?

Lucifer in Isaiah 14 can't be anyone else but Satan...

I love you three.

Follower of Isa Al Masih

I love you three.

Senior Member

I love you three.

Follower of Isa Al Masih

I love you three.

Senior Member

I love you three.

Senior Member

I love you three.

Senior Member

I love you three.

Senior Member

Follower of Isa Al Masih

Newbie

Well-Known Member

I love you three.

I love you three.

Newbie

Similar threads