Is Lucifer Satan?

[Lilly Owl]

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.

It's not a matter of holding allegiance to KJV.
It's a matter of scripture and Hebrew.
Absurd Metaphors that attempt to insult someone because they're not sharing an opinion of the metaphors author, who now imagines someone likens their effort to parable, is unnecessary.

 

[ebia]

It's not a matter of holding allegiance to KJV.
It's a matter of scripture and Hebrew.
Absurd Metaphors that attempt to insult someone because they're not sharing an opinion of the metaphors author, who now imagines someone likens their effort to parable, is unnecessary.

It is a parable. Whether or not its a well written or successful one is another matter, but it's undeniably a parable.

 

[Lilly Owl]

And it matters little.
Care to stay on topic? Or do you prefer to focus on the parable that proves you hate to be proven wrong?!

 

[ebia]

And it matters little.
Care to stay on topic? Or do you prefer to focus on the parable that proves you hate to be proven wrong?!

You've proved something?

 

[pshun2404]

Where is the name Lucifer in the Bible (Hebrew or Greek)? PLease give a scripture using this name

Paul

 

[Vanguard PCD]

I agree, it is a matter of knowing the Hebrew. I am in my MA program of Theology, and will soon after enter my PhD program, with a semi-related MA in Ancient History. I skip the Latin completely (even though my handle is in Latin) and go straight to the source: Classical Hebrew (OT) and Koine Greek (NT).

The Hebrew does not reference Satan in any shape or form, and Jewish scholars (whether they are Orthodox or Messianic) will quickly tell you that Isaiah 14:12 is about Nebuchadnezzar II (who destroyed the temple in Jerusalem btw). That entire chapter is about Babylon and Neb II. You think they were doing a whole chapter about Neb II, knowing their hatred of him, and then in the middle of that chapter they go off on a wild tangent for 1 verse, about a being and doctrine that they don't believe in to begin with, and then right back to Neb II? Uh, no.

Jerome, and later the Church of England (who copied Jerome on that interpretation), incorrectly referenced the OT Isaiah verse to the NT verses found in Luke 10:18 and Revelation 12:7-9. Modern translations caught that mistake (and others) and have worked to revise it (them). Neither the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Rosetta Stone or any other archaeological find were around in 1611.

Facts are facts.

 

[Vanguard PCD]

Where is the name Lucifer in the Bible (Hebrew or Greek)? PLease give a scripture using this name

Paul

It's not in the Hebrew or Greek because it is a Latin term. It came from the Greek word heosphorus, but that was covered in the OP. But I understand what you're asking!

Just wait until I post my other threads on various topics that old school, hard line Christianity has gotten...wrong. Well, wrong may be harsh...misinterpreted or misrepresented.

However, I am seeing several people here with open minds and that think outside of the box. That is a good thing! Narrow minded people can't really learn because they have biased views going into a study.

 

[horrace99]

well actually lucifer is really translated as ''one who brings light'' and Paul ''for no wonder even satan himself poses as an angel of light'' and in luke Jesus said ''I saw satan fall like lightening from heaven'' John of patmos wrote in revelation ''And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him''.

And the Bible says satan is the lord of evil and the father of lies and the accuser of our brethren and the one who leads the nations astray.

''Laid low the nations'' and ''leads the world astray'' sound alike.

many verses say that satan was once in heaven but was cast down.

Many Jews and Hebrews may not have a belief in satan but are you certain that the prophets didn't?

 

[Vanguard PCD]

well actually lucifer is really translated as ''one who brings light'' and Paul ''for no wonder even satan himself poses as an angel of light'' and in luke Jesus said ''I saw satan fall like lightening from heaven'' John of patmos wrote in revelation ''And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him''.

The bold is the KJV translation. The KJV is notorious for referencing hell, which it erroneously translated from the Hebrew "sheol" and the Greek "hades." Modern translations have revised that bold part to read "down to earth" instead of into the earth.

''Laid low the nations'' and ''leads the world astray'' sound alike.

It's talking about the Nations [tribes] of Israel, under Neb II's captivity. Most think it means the nations of the world. Keep in mind that Isaiah 14:12 was written from a Hebrew perspective.

many verses say that satan was once in heaven but was cast down.

Many Jews and Hebrews may not have a belief in satan but are you certain that the prophets didn't?

I can't speak for the prophets of either the OT or the NT.

There's not a single OT verse in the Classical Hebrew that speaks of Satan being cast anywhere.

 

[Vanguard PCD]

Thanks for moving it to a more appropriate forum!

 

[he-man]

The bold is the KJV translation. The KJV is notorious for referencing hell, which it erroneously translated from the Hebrew "sheol" and the Greek "hades." Modern translations have revised that bold part to read "down to earth" instead of into the earth.

Sorry but that actually reads

Rev 12:4 και η ουρα αυτου συρι το τριτον των αστερων του ουρανου και εβαλεν αυτους εις την γην και ο δρακων εστηκεν ενωπιον της γυναικος της μελλουσης τεκειν ϊνα οταν τεκη το τεκνον αυτης καταφαγη

Rev 12:4 And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did throw them down upon the earth: and the "reptile" stood in the presence of the woman which shall give birth to so that to eat away her child when it is brought forth.

Rev 17:18 And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.

First, it is an impossability that this happened before the creation of the earth, or even immediately after it was created. John says it would happen to the future of his time. "five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come"

...Come up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter. Rev 4:1

Secondly it was a dragon having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads. The crowns are symbolical of Kings or the countries they represented.

Rev 12:3 And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads.

4 And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did throw them down upon the earth: and the "reptile" stood in the presence of the woman which shall give birth to so that to eat away her child when it is brought forth.
13 And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child.

Rev 17:9 And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth.

10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.
Rev 17:18 And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.

There's not a single OT verse in the Classical Hebrew that speaks of Satan being cast anywhere.

 

[Vanguard PCD]

I find it interesting (and odd) that Christian doctrine is often based off an English translation, rather than what the actual Hebrew or Greek says. Kind of makes for some bad doctrine if you ask me.

 

[football5680]

Yes. Lucifer is the name of the angel, Satan means adversary.

 

[Vanguard PCD]

Yes. Lucifer is the name of the angel, Satan means adversary.

Uhm, no. Read the OP.

Lucifer is Latin for the morning star [Venus], light bringer, etc.

Revelation 22:16 I, Jesus, have sent My angel to testify to you these things for the churches. I am the root and the descendant of David, the bright morning star [lucifer].

Jesus even refers to himself as lucifer.

 

[mmksparbud]

OK--what do you do about Job 1:6--All translations say Satan. Throughout the book, Satan is named by all translations. If the Jews did not believe in Satan, did they not believe in the book of Job? If they did not believe in Satan, what were the demons that they kept trying to caste out?

 

[Vanguard PCD]

Again, read the OP.

Satan is a title, not a name (in Hebrew). HaSaTan.

Ha = the
SaTan = accuser

He is "the accuser." It is his title, and he has a job given to him by God.

In the Book of Job, Satan accuses Job of lacking faith. God allows Satan to test his faith.

Jews believe in Satan as the accuser. They do not believe in him as the devil, or as a fallen angel. The Christian idea of Satan is not supported anywhere in the OT.

 

[mmksparbud]

Again, read the OP.

Satan is a title, not a name (in Hebrew). HaSaTan.

Ha = the
SaTan = accuser

He is "the accuser." It is his title, and he has a job given to him by God.

In the Book of Job, Satan accuses Job of lacking faith. God allows Satan to test his faith.

Jews believe in Satan as the accuser. They do not believe in him as the devil, or as a fallen angel. The Christian idea of Satan is not supported anywhere in the OT.

It may be a title--doesn't mean it is not also his name. And where does it state that God gave him the job of accuser? And of course, God allowed Job to be tested, he can't do anything without God's permission.

And who were the demons that were cast out?


And you really believe that the following is strictly about the King of Tyre?

Ez 28:11-15--"The word of the Lord came to me: Son of man, take up a lament concerning the King of Tyre and say to him: This is what the Lord says:
You were the model of perfection, full of wisdom and perfect in beauty. You were in Eden, the Garden of God, every precious stone adorned you: ruby, topaz, and emerald, chrysolite, onyx and jasper, sapphire, turquoise and beryl. Your settings and mountings were made of gold: on the day you were created they were prepared. You were anointed as a guardian cherub, for so I ordained you. You were on the holy mount of God; you walked among the fiery stones. You were blameless in your ways from the day you were created till wickedness was found in you."
I guess this is all a metaphore of some kind.
Was the King in Eden? Was the king anointed as a gaurdian cherub?
Cherubs were winged creations that covered the intense light of God from the eyes of the other angels. Also called covering cherubs.

The tabernacle was all very symbolic. Everything had a reason--what was the scapegoat?

And who was the serpent in the garden of Eden that tempted Eve?

 

[Vanguard PCD]

It may be a title--doesn't mean it is not also his name. And where does it state that God gave him the job of accuser? And of course, God allowed Job to be tested, he can't do anything without God's permission.

Christians named him Satan, after taking that word from the Hebrew HaSaTan. They took it out of context. You can thank Jerome, the corrupt Latin Vulgate and later the KJV.

And who were the demons that were cast out?

Unknown, but the Bible uses demons and devils interchangeably in English.

And you really believe that the following is strictly about the King of Tyre?

Ez 28:11-15--"The word of the Lord came to me: Son of man, take up a lament concerning the King of Tyre and say to him: This is what the Lord says..."

It's not what about I believe. People always take verses out of context and apply them to a singular theory. If you read Ezekiel in its entirety, several of those chapters are talking about the judgment of Gentile nations, and their kings/pharaohs. That's it. Tyre wasn't alone in that judgment.

And who was the serpent in the garden of Eden that tempted Eve?

It was a serpent. We have no reason to believe that it was anything other than a biological being (animal). It started off with legs or wings, but then was made to crawl on its belly. It would forever be stepped on by man, but it would also bite man on the heel. Every descriptor indicates a snake, although the Bible doesn't say snake. Dragons and dinosaurs are also referred to as serpents.

This is, of course, if Genesis is literal (which I highly doubt).

 

[mmksparbud]

Christians named him Satan, after taking that word from the Hebrew HaSaTan. They took it out of context. You can thank Jerome, the corrupt Latin Vulgate and later the KJV.



Unknown, but the Bible uses demons and devils interchangeably in English.



It's not what about I believe. People always take verses out of context and apply them to a singular theory. If you read Ezekiel in its entirety, several of those chapters are talking about the judgment of Gentile nations, and their kings/pharaohs. That's it. Tyre wasn't alone in that judgment.



It was a serpent. We have no reason to believe that it was anything other than a biological being (animal). It started off with legs or wings, but then was made to crawl on its belly. It would forever be stepped on by man, but it would also bite man on the heel. Every descriptor indicates a snake, although the Bible doesn't say snake. Dragons and dinosaurs are also referred to as serpents.

This is, of course, if Genesis is literal (which I highly doubt).

So, then, you do not believe that the old and new testament should be used together??--You believe in the bible at all? Who was it that tempted Jesus in the wilderness? It says the devil, the tempter, do you believe that God created beings for the sole purpose of tempting and accusing us?--Who did Jesus caste out of people who were possessed? Do you not believe what Jesus Himself says? Or do you believe that Jesus is a made up story by Christians? Just trying to figure out what you believe.

 

[Vanguard PCD]

So, then, you do not believe that the old and new testament should be used together??--You believe in the bible at all? Who was it that tempted Jesus in the wilderness? It says the devil, the tempter, do you believe that God created beings for the sole purpose of tempting and accusing us?--Who did Jesus caste out of people who were possessed? Do you not believe what Jesus Himself says? Or do you believe that Jesus is a made up story by Christians? Just trying to figure out what you believe.

Satan tempted Jesus in the wilderness. That is part of his job...to see if you will lose faith. If you do, he accuses you of your sin before God, so that you may be judged.

As to what I believe: http://www.christianforums.com/t7719643/

It's not that I don't believe...I just have issues with English translations that butcher the Hebrew and Greek. Translators are tasked with picking and choosing the most appropriate word or phrases. This leaves room for error. Not to mention you lose idioms when you translate.

Idiom example: we use the word "cool" to mean awesome or interesting. Let's say you get zapped back to 1100 AD. You come across a blacksmith making a sword in his forge. You say "that's cool!" He's say you're insane...that forge is fiery hot.

Pick and choose example: take the English word "sale." How many variations are there of that word that are pronounced identically?

Sale
Sell
Sail
Cell

This phenomenon is called a homonym, and the Greek language is loaded with them. Translators have to try and figure out which word they are referring to. To further complicate this, the word may not have any variations in spelling, but still has multiple meanings.

Now imagine doing this before computers, dictionaries, thesauruses, the telephone, email, the internet, etc. A book such as the Bible could take a lifetime to translate, and even then you may not have it right.