• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Is Lucifer Satan?

Vanguard PCD

Progressive Christian Deist
Jan 27, 2013
825
98
Alabama, USA
✟23,992.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Let's explore this topic with a little history and background info:

Isaiah 14:12...

KJV: 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!

NIV: How you have fallen from heaven, morning star, son of the dawn!
You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations!

NASB: How you have fallen from heaven, O [a]star of the morning, son of the dawn! You have been cut down to the earth, You who have weakened the nations!
[a] Heb Helel, i.e. "shining one"

ESV: 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!

(this list goes on and on)

Notice anything? Only the KJV uses the name Lucifer. The rest have removed that name in the course of their revisions. Why?

The monk Jerome, in the 4th century CE, was translating his Latin Vulgate for the Roman Catholic Church, from the Greek heosphorus, and in the course of it he capitalized the L in lucifer, giving it a proper noun identity. The original rendering of lucifer simply means "day star, morning star, or dawn star," a reference to the planet Venus. Other translations include "light-bringing, and bringer of dawn."

Why Jerome chose to capitalize the L in the word lucifer and make it a proper noun, no one knows. Thanks to literary works such as the 1611 KJV, Dante's Inferno and Paradise Lost, the name Lucifer became symbolic with Satan.

However, Jerome's interpretation was incorrect.

The entire chapter 14 of Isaiah is actually talking about a Babylonian king (most likely Nebuchadnezzar II). If you look at the original Hebrew that has been translated into English, you'll find that it states this:

"On the day the Lord gives you relief from your suffering and turmoil and from the harsh labour forced on you, you will take up this taunt against the king of Babylon: How the oppressor has come to an end! How his fury has ended! How you have fallen from heaven, morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations! You said in your heart, 'I will ascend to the heavens; I will raise my throne above the stars of God; I will sit enthroned on the mount of assembly, on the utmost heights of Mount Zaphon. I will ascend above the tops of the clouds; I will make myself like the Most High.' But you are brought down to the realm of the dead, to the depths of the pit. Those who see you stare at you, they ponder your fate: 'Is this the man who shook the earth and made kingdoms tremble, the man who made the world a wilderness, who overthrew its cities and would not let his captives go home?'"

It is VERY important to understand that paragraph in context. The Classical Hebrew text says nothing about Satan. It is quite literally talking about a Babylonian king, his enslavement of the Hebrews, the labors they were forced to endure, and that king's death. The writers are mocking that fallen king.

Furthermore, the Hebrews did not believe in the concept of Satan as the devil or a place called hell. Satan, according to them (and Judaism), is an angel of God, and his name in Hebrew is Ha-SaTan, but it's not a name...it's his title: Ha = The, SaTan = Accuser..."The Accuser." His job is to accuse those of sin, and bring them before God for judgment. Satan can't do anything without God's permission. To give him power outside of God's authority is to make him a god unto himself.

Since the Hebrews did not believe in the concept of the devil or hell, why would they write about Satan being viewed as such? They wouldn't. Jerome got it wrong and the KJV butchered it, along with incorrectly translating the Hebrew word sheol (grave) and the Greek word hades (realm of the dead) as hell (or at least our interpretation of it with fire and torment). Jesus actually refers to a futuristic lake of fire called Gehenna (not hell) but I'll cover that in another thread.

It's also why modern translations have revised the verse and removed the word lucifer. Incidentally, Isaiah 14:12 is the ONLY verse in the KJV that uses the word lucifer. Since it was wrong to begin with, and has been removed by more accurate, modern translations, lucifer does not = Satan.

Christians have a tendency to borrow from the OT, and then liberally apply verses to NT ideas or denominational doctrines. Learn to read the Bible in context if you truly want to study the Word.
 
Last edited:

Knee V

It's phonetic.
Sep 17, 2003
8,417
1,741
43
South Bend, IN
✟115,823.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I agree with you that Isaiah 14 is not about Satan, and that "Lucifer" is a poor translation and is not, and has never been, a name of Satan. It is my belief that "Lucifer" should be stricken from the English vocabulary.
 
Upvote 0

ebia

Senior Contributor
Jul 6, 2004
41,711
2,142
A very long way away. Sometimes even further.
✟54,775.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
AU-Greens
I agree with you that Isaiah 14 is not about Satan, and that "Lucifer" is a poor translation and is not, and has never been, a name of Satan. It is my belief that "Lucifer" should be stricken from the English vocabulary.

I once met a teacher who didn't know the difference between Lucifer and Luther, and wondered how come Satanists got to run a school without anyone objecting to it.
 
Upvote 0

Knee V

It's phonetic.
Sep 17, 2003
8,417
1,741
43
South Bend, IN
✟115,823.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I once met a teacher who didn't know the difference between Lucifer and Luther, and wondered how come Satanists got to run a school without anyone objecting to it.

Nice!
 
Upvote 0

Knee V

It's phonetic.
Sep 17, 2003
8,417
1,741
43
South Bend, IN
✟115,823.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Yes Lucifer is Satan.
See Lucifer as what we would understand to be a name. I.e. Lucifer smith.
Satan is his title.

Part of the point of this thread is that there is no actual basis for saying that Satan's "name" is Lucifer.
 
Upvote 0

ebia

Senior Contributor
Jul 6, 2004
41,711
2,142
A very long way away. Sometimes even further.
✟54,775.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
AU-Greens
Yes Lucifer is Satan.
See Lucifer as what we would understand to be a name. I.e. Lucifer smith.
Satan is his title.
The trouble is that Lucifer is not given name in that sense, and it's not from the bjblical languages even. . It's derived from the Latin for the morning star - Venus - used to refer to the king of Babylon, not Satan.
 
Upvote 0

ebia

Senior Contributor
Jul 6, 2004
41,711
2,142
A very long way away. Sometimes even further.
✟54,775.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
AU-Greens
Yes well that part of this thread would be wrong then and contrary to scripture. :)

But that's the point - scripture doesn't use the word "lucifer" and isn't talking about satan at the point where "morning star" was rendered "lucifer" By the KJV
 
Upvote 0

Lilly Owl

Since when is God's adversary a curse word here?
Dec 23, 2012
1,839
97
✟2,609.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Libertarian
Isaiah 14:12

Lucifer cast from heaven after the war of angels, the war in heaven, became the Satan. The adversary of God. Satan became the lord of this world.

He wasn't always a 'bad guy'. Satan is a title, not a name.
 
Upvote 0

ebia

Senior Contributor
Jul 6, 2004
41,711
2,142
A very long way away. Sometimes even further.
✟54,775.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
AU-Greens
Isaiah 14:12

Lucifer cast from heaven after the war of angels, the war in heaven, became the Satan. The adversary of God. Satan became the lord of this world.

He wasn't always a 'bad guy'. Satan is a title, not a name.

How you've fallen from heaven,
morning star, son of dawn!
You are cut down to earth,
helpless on your back!

No mention of "Lucifer" because its not Hebrew word. It's derived from the Latin Vulgate name for Venus, the morning star.

Now look back to the beginning of the chapter - who is it talking about? Not Satan but the earthly King of Babylon
 
Upvote 0

Lilly Owl

Since when is God's adversary a curse word here?
Dec 23, 2012
1,839
97
✟2,609.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Libertarian
How you've fallen from heaven,
morning star, son of dawn!
You are cut down to earth,
helpless on your back!

No mention of "Lucifer" because its not Hebrew word. It's derived from the Latin Vulgate name for Venus, the morning star.

Now look back to the beginning of the chapter - who is it talking about? Not Satan but the earthly King of Babylon

Yes, a lot of Christians believe that is so. However, there is no way an earthly King could have resided in Eden. Ezekiel 28:11-19
Or be any of those other things described. The "King of Tyre" is Satan. The actual King of Tyre, the mortal sovereign, was a metaphor and a true King on earth.

Heylel - Old Testament Hebrew
 
Upvote 0

ebia

Senior Contributor
Jul 6, 2004
41,711
2,142
A very long way away. Sometimes even further.
✟54,775.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
AU-Greens
"Daddy, daddy, the child" said. "It's a car." Dad was puzzled - the dot to dot book contained only pictures of animals. His daughter passed him the book and sure enough, she'd drawn a car across two pages by connecting some of the dots on one picture with some of the dots in the picture on the opposite page, ignoring the clues in each.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Knee V
Upvote 0

Vanguard PCD

Progressive Christian Deist
Jan 27, 2013
825
98
Alabama, USA
✟23,992.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Lilly Owl is entitled to her opinion. Some will never accept the information that is outlined in the OP. I can respect her opinion and point of view, and when it comes to arguing over who is right or wrong in situations like these, there is no winner.

Some people do not like change or contradicting views to what they hold dear. KJVO advocates are willing to burn people like me at the stake for even suggesting the idea that the KJV got it wrong...nevermind the fact that the 1611 KJV was authored by 47 scholars/scribes, all of whom were members of the Church of England and were biased in their interpretations, in an effort to please King James I of England.

For the rest of us, never forget to look at the bigger picture.
 
Upvote 0