Satan,Devil and Evil ???

[Jaison]

Who is Satan? Who is Devil? Who is Evil?
How they are related?

 

[Tamara224]

Who is Satan? Who is Devil? Who is Evil?
How they are related?

Well... do you want the Sunday School version or a more 'theological' response? I'll give the short answer, as I understand it....

Satan is a fallen angel. He used to be good but he rebelled against God and he became pretty much the epitome of evil. He is known as the Father of Lies and the Adversary. Satan is the Devil. They are generally understood to be the same thing.

Evil is not a 'who', it is the opposite of (or absence of) good, although lots of people have been evil.

I hope that answers your questions.

 

[JTM3]

Satan is the same as the "devil," and his demons are sometimes collectively referred to as "devils."

Satan was Lucifer before he fell.

 

[Tamara224]

Satan was Lucifer before he fell.

I knew someone was going to say this... IMO, this isn't necessarily true, it's a commonly held misconception.

So, I have some questions for you... Where does the Bible say that Satan's name was Lucifer before he fell? Do you know what lucifer means? Do you know who else in the Bible was called 'lucifer'?


[Be open-minded and open-hearted about this... you might learn something interesting ]

 

[holo]

Who is Satan? Who is Devil? Who is Evil?
How they are related?

Satan is the father of Evil, and Devil is Evil's cousin. Devil also has a niece called Malice.

 

[JTM3]

Satan is the father of Evil, and Devil is Evil's cousin. Devil also has a niece called Malice.

 

[PastorMike]

Lucifer was the one who fell from heaven... Is. 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!

The only one we read about as fallen from heaven is Satan himself...

Rev. 12:9 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.

 

[Tamara224]

Lucifer was the one who fell from heaven... Is. 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!

The only one we read about as fallen from heaven is Satan himself...

Rev. 12:9 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.

Yeah... but are you aware of the 'controversy' surrounding the word 'lucifer'? I find it an interesting study.

 

[Mark2010]

Yeah... but are you aware of the 'controversy' surrounding the word 'lucifer'? I find it an interesting study.

No, please do tell. Inquiring minds want to know.

 

[Tamara224]

No, please do tell. Inquiring minds want to know.

Okay, since you asked .

The word 'lucifer' means "light bearer" or "light bringer"; it's a word of Latin origin. The word appears one time in the Bible (but not in the modern English versions such as the NIV and the NASB).

The word appears in Isaiah 14:12. If you read the whole chapter of Isaiah 14 you'll see some things worth noting:

3 On the day the LORD gives you relief from suffering and turmoil and cruel bondage,
4 you will take up this taunt against the king of Babylon:
***
10 They will all respond,
they will say to you,
"You also have become weak, as we are;
you have become like us."
11 All your pomp has been brought down to the grave,
along with the noise of your harps;
maggots are spread out beneath you
and worms cover you.
12 How you have fallen from heaven,
O morning star, son of the dawn!
You have been cast down to the earth,
you who once laid low the nations!
13 You said in your heart,
"I will ascend to heaven;
I will raise my throne
above the stars of God;
I will sit enthroned on the mount of assembly,
on the utmost heights of the sacred mountain. [c]
14 I will ascend above the tops of the clouds;
I will make myself like the Most High."
15 But you are brought down to the grave,
to the depths of the pit.
16 Those who see you stare at you,
they ponder your fate:
"Is this the man who shook the earth
and made kingdoms tremble, 17 the man who made the world a desert,
who overthrew its cities
and would not let his captives go home?"​

The first thing we should notice about this passage is that it is directly addressed to the king of Babylon and it is a taunt. The passage never mentions Satan or the Devil but only the king of Babylon. In fact it asks "is this the man" ... obviously, on its face this passage is not talking about Satan. (It is possible that the passage has a double meaning which applies both to the king of Babylon and to Satan, but IMO, that is reading INTO the text).

The second thing we should notice is that, rather than "O Lucifer" the NIV (which I've used here) says "O morning star." The reason for the difference is simple. The original Hebrew used the word heylel which referred to the planet Venus and literally meant "the morning star". (The planet Venus was worshipped as a deity by many ancient religions. Some scholars speculate that the king of Babylon followed the practice of many kings by setting himself up as a deity and thus may have been addressed as heylel). However, imo, as this passage is a taunt it makes perfect sense to me that they were calling the king of Babylon the "morning star" to make fun of him.

The word 'lucifer' was a Latin word that was often used to refer to the planet Venus (it also referred to various gods and goddesses in Roman mythology). It was used by ancient Romans as well as by such writers as Milton, Chaucer and Wycliff to refer to Venus.

The 'controversy' over this word stems from those who believe that the King James Version of the Bible is the ONLY inspired English translation and that all others (such as the NIV and the NASB) are straight from Satan. The problem arises because the NIV and NASB use the phrase "morning star" instead of 'Lucifer.' Since so many people believe that the "Lucifer" spoken of in Isaiah 14 is Satan, they assume that the entire passage is about Satan and therefore they assume that the NIV is calling Satan the "morning star". The problem with that is that in Revelation 22:16 it says:

"I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star."​

So, the problem is that in the Bible we (apparently) have one passage that calls Satan the morning star and another passage that calls Jesus the morning star. So... this is a potential problem, no? But, only if we start with the presumption that Lucifer and Satan are one and the same. The original Hebrew text does not contain the word "Lucifer", however, so there is NO WAY that 'Lucifer' is or was Satan's name.

In any event... IMHO, Isaiah 14 is not talking about Satan, but even if it is the word 'lucifer' is not a proper name for a person... it should never have been capitalized in the Vulgate. IOW 'lucifer' is not and never was Satan's name. Lucifer means 'light bringer' and for most of history it referred to the planet Venus.

 

[TheGloryisHere]

I knew someone was going to say this... IMO, this isn't necessarily true, it's a commonly held misconception.

So, I have some questions for you... Where does the Bible say that Satan's name was Lucifer before he fell? Do you know what lucifer means? Do you know who else in the Bible was called 'lucifer'?


[Be open-minded and open-hearted about this... you might learn something interesting ]

Oh my goodness. The things ppl come up with.

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

Everyone who studies the Bible knows Lucifer was the cherb that covers and he exalted himself above God and was cast down to the earth. His name is now Satan.

Shouldn't this be done in the general theology forum?

 

[TheGloryisHere]

Yeah... but are you aware of the 'controversy' surrounding the word 'lucifer'? I find it an interesting study.

Lucifer isn't a bad name. It's not the name that's bad. It's the angel who had the name. Just that one being with that name is bad. I think the name Lucifer means son of morning, and yes, I have heard Jesus is the Son of morning. It's not the name that's bad, it's just that one angel.

 

[TheGloryisHere]

Lucifer is used only once in the KJV, and in the same verse is also son of the morning.

Isa 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!

And that is clearly Satan. As Mike said, there was only one who was accused of doing those things.

Lucifer means morning star. Just because it's a pretty name and is connected to Jesus name, doesn't mean this particular person isn't Satan. You've offered no proof that says otherwise. Lucifer could well have been the number one angel so it would make perfect sense that he had all that power. He was over a third of the angels, and he had musical instruments built right into him. Only a very powerful angel could have enticed a third of the angels to do something so stupid as to follow him.

 

[Tamara224]

Oh my goodness. The things ppl come up with.

I didn't "come up" with it... I just read the actual text and looked at what it really said, instead of what I thought it said.

Everyone who studies the Bible knows Lucifer was the cherb that covers and he exalted himself above God and was cast down to the earth. His name is now Satan.
Shouldn't this be done in the general theology forum?

First of all... I never disputed the idea that Satan was a cherub and fell from heaven. Look at my first post in this thread. Second... there is no reason why we can't discuss in the congregational forum.

Lucifer isn't a bad name. It's not the name that's bad. It's the angel who had the name. Just that one being with that name is bad. I think the name Lucifer means son of morning, and yes, I have heard Jesus is the Son of morning. It's not the name that's bad, it's just that one angel.

I never said Lucifer was a "bad name" (please re-read my posts) I just said it was never Satan's name.

Lucifer is used only once in the KJV, and in the same verse is also son of the morning.

I never said Lucifer means "son of the morning" I said it means "light bringer" and it refers to the planet Venus.

This is just a simple, easily verifiable word study I'm talking about. It's like saying that the word tamara means "palm tree".

Isa 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!

Did you look at it in any other translations?

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

Also, context, context, context... Do you dispute the fact that verse 4 makes it clear that the taunt is directed specifically toward the "king of Babylon".

And that is clearly Satan. As Mike said, there was only one who was accused of doing those things.

Lucifer means morning star.

It's not as clear as you think, imo. The text (context) never specifically mentions Satan... but it DOES specifically mention the king of Babylon. It is possible that it also refers to Satan (but that is not on the face of the passage).

Just because it's a pretty name and is connected to Jesus name, doesn't mean this particular person isn't Satan.

That was never my argument. I never said that. All I said was that it presents a problem for people who are KJV Only (which I am not). (That problem is the 'controversy' I spoke of).

I said it wasn't Satan for two reasons:

1) The passage never mentions Satan, it DOES mention the king of Babylon.

2) The ORIGINAL HEBREW does not contain the word lucifer. So it CANT be his name. If anything, his name would have been heylel (because that is the word in the original text). 'lucifer' is just a translation of the word heylel (both mean the morning star aka Venus).

You've offered no proof that says otherwise. Lucifer could well have been the number one angel so it would make perfect sense that he had all that power. He was over a third of the angels, and he had musical instruments built right into him. Only a very powerful angel could have enticed a third of the angels to do something so stupid as to follow him.

Okay, I'm not talking about Satan's attributes here... I'm only talking about his name. It's really not that big of a deal. I have presented plenty of proof... it's in the passage itself. The original Hebrew text never used the word (not name, word) lucifer. It uses the word heylel. And most scholars agree that the word refers to the morning star (aka Venus).

Take another look at the passage and think about it for a minute. (I'm not trying to be condescending at all!! I hope it doesn't sound that way).

Before any of us read that passage in the Bible, we all had learned from other people that Satan's name used to be Lucifer. Consequently, when we read the passage and we see the word Lucifer, we assume/presume that the passage is talking about him. However, if you read it in a different translation...that conclusion isn't as obvious. I know it's difficult to do... but try to read it again with a fresh mind. Read the whole chapter in the NIV or the NASB. It puts it in a whole new light.

Believe me, this whole idea was somewhat shocking to me when I first encountered it too. But really, it just comes down to actually reading the passage for what it says and not letting a theologian from 1500 years ago taint our reading of the passage. (It was Jerome who first put the capital L in Lucifer and decided that the passage refers to Satan).

 

[Questioning Christian]

oops

 

[PastorMike]

HOW ART THOU FALLEN FROM HEAVEN, O LUCIFER,



We who believe and defend the King James Bible as being the preserved, pure and inspired words of the living God are often accused of not relying on facts to support our views. Such is the case with the name Lucifer as found in the passage of Isaiah 14:12-15.

The KJV reads: "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! 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: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High. Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit."

The reason this passage is attacked by the modern bible version proponents is because the nasb and niv (per) versions have translated this section of Isaiah in a very different way, and they say that the KJV is wrong. Instead of "How art thou fallen from heaven, O LUCIFER..." the nasb and niv have: "How you have fallen from heaven, O MORNING STAR..."

There are several problems with the translation "O morning star", but first let me point out that if you look at the multitude of Bible commentaries there are as many opinions, as to who or what is being referred to, as there are bible versions. Some believe this passage refers to the king of Babylon, whom many identify as king Nebuchadnezzar, others believe it refers to Belshazzar, and still others as the kingdom of Babylon itself and not to any specific king. Many others see Isaiah 14:12 as referring to the spiritual power behind the king and kingdom of Babylon. The "facts" are that there is little agreement among the so called scholars as to who or what is addressed in this passage, let alone how to translate it.

The problem with the MORNING STAR of the niv, nasb and nkjv footnote is that the words morning and star are not found here in any Hebrew text. Morning is # 1242 boker and star is #3556 kokawb. The word for star is found in the very next verse of 13 where it says: "I will exalt my throne above the stars of God." The two words, morning and star, are found together in Job 38:7 where God is asking Job in verse 4 "Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth?... When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" This seems to be a reference to the angles who rejoiced at God's creation.

Another serious problem with rendering this word #1966 Haylale as "morning star" is that Jesus Christ himself is called the morning star in Rev. 22:16 where he says: "I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star." The niv and nasb make it possible to identify Satan and Jesus Christ as one and the same persons. This is what Lucifer's ultimate game plan is, and the new versions have taken a giant step forward in advancing Satan's deception.

The word translated as Lucifer in the KJV occurs only one time in the Hebrew, just as the word Lucifer only occurs one time in the Holy Bible. It is a noun and it comes from a very interesting verb #1984 hawlal. This verb is used many times and has many very different meanings including: "to shine, to be foolish, to boast, to glory, to praise, and to be mad (insane or crazy). Isn't it interesting that Satan boasts and glories in his wisdom and power, wants to receive praise as god, shines as an "angel of light" to deceive, and his madness in wanting to be like the most High is ultimately the height of foolishness?

 

[TheGloryisHere]

HOW ART THOU FALLEN FROM HEAVEN, O LUCIFER,




The KJV reads: "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! 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: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High. Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit."

The reason this passage is attacked by the modern bible version proponents is because the nasb and niv (per) versions have translated this section of Isaiah in a very different way, and they say that the KJV is wrong. Instead of "How art thou fallen from heaven, O LUCIFER..." the nasb and niv have: "How you have fallen from heaven, O MORNING STAR..."

There are several problems with the translation "O morning star", but first let me point out that if you look at the multitude of Bible commentaries there are as many opinions, as to who or what is being referred to, as there are bible versions. Some believe this passage refers to the king of Babylon, whom many identify as king Nebuchadnezzar, others believe it refers to Belshazzar, and still others as the kingdom of Babylon itself and not to any specific king. Many others see Isaiah 14:12 as referring to the spiritual power behind the king and kingdom of Babylon. The "facts" are that there is little agreement among the so called scholars as to who or what is addressed in this passage, let alone how to translate it.

The problem with the MORNING STAR of the niv, nasb and nkjv footnote is that the words morning and star are not found here in any Hebrew text. Morning is # 1242 boker and star is #3556 kokawb. The word for star is found in the very next verse of 13 where it says: "I will exalt my throne above the stars of God." The two words, morning and star, are found together in Job 38:7 where God is asking Job in verse 4 "Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth?... When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" This seems to be a reference to the angles who rejoiced at God's creation.

Another serious problem with rendering this word #1966 Haylale as "morning star" is that Jesus Christ himself is called the morning star in Rev. 22:16 where he says: "I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star." The niv and nasb make it possible to identify Satan and Jesus Christ as one and the same persons. This is what Lucifer's ultimate game plan is, and the new versions have taken a giant step forward in advancing Satan's deception.

The word translated as Lucifer in the KJV occurs only one time in the Hebrew, just as the word Lucifer only occurs one time in the Holy Bible. It is a noun and it comes from a very interesting verb #1984 hawlal. This verb is used many times and has many very different meanings including: "to shine, to be foolish, to boast, to glory, to praise, and to be mad (insane or crazy). Isn't it interesting that Satan boasts and glories in his wisdom and power, wants to receive praise as god, shines as an "angel of light" to deceive, and his madness in wanting to be like the most High is ultimately the height of foolishness?

I often wondered about Jesus being called the morning star and how Lucifer is called that too. It not being properly translated was a possibilty. Thanks for clearing this up for me.

 

[TheGloryisHere]

Websters Dictionary on Lucifer

Lucifer
LU'CIFER, n. [L. lux, lucis, light, and fero, to bring.]
1. The planet Venus, so called from its brightness.
2. Satan.

King James says the same thing as all the others, son of the morning. All the translations are in agreement. Lucifer does mean son of the morning; I just looked it up in Strongs.

hay-lale` in the sense of brightness, the morning star, lucifer

morning used in this verse according to Strongs means day spring, dawn

son has a bunch of definations. The one that stood out to me is anointed. Lucifer was highly anointed until iniquity was found in him and he was expelled from the presence and the anointing of God.

 

[Tamara224]

Uh-huh... You're KJV only. That explains a lot. This isn't the right thread for this topic but I'll just make a couple points and then leave you to your views (which, imho, are not supported by any evidence or logic or Biblical text).

The first thing I would like to point out is that even the translators who worked on the original 1611 King James Version understood that the passage could be translated as "morning star". In their margins/footnotes in the passage they included the note that it could read "How are thou fallen from heave, o day star."

There are several problems with the translation "O morning star", but first let me point out that if you look at the multitude of Bible commentaries there are as many opinions, as to who or what is being referred to, as there are bible versions. Some believe this passage refers to the king of Babylon, whom many identify as king Nebuchadnezzar, others believe it refers to Belshazzar, and still others as the kingdom of Babylon itself and not to any specific king. Many others see Isaiah 14:12 as referring to the spiritual power behind the king and kingdom of Babylon. The "facts" are that there is little agreement among the so called scholars as to who or what is addressed in this passage, let alone how to translate it.

I'm sorry, but this is just not supported at all. The passage itself, Isaiah 14:4 says it is talking about the "king of Babylon". You can argue about what scholars think of it all you want, but the plain truth of the matter is that the Bible itself says it is addressed to the "king of Babylon"... whoever he may have been, Satan is never called the "king of Babylon" as far as I know.

The problem with the MORNING STAR of the niv, nasb and nkjv footnote is that the words morning and star are not found here in any Hebrew text.

Morning is # 1242 boker and star is #3556 kokawb. The word for star is found in the very next verse of 13 where it says: "I will exalt my throne above the stars of God." The two words, morning and star, are found together in Job 38:7 where God is asking Job in verse 4 "Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth?... When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?" This seems to be a reference to the angles who rejoiced at God's creation.

Again, this is just completely unsupported by any textual proof.

Here's what studylight has on that verse:

How art thou fallen (8804) from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning * (8676) (8685) ! how art thou cut down (8738) to the ground, which didst weaken (8802) the nations!

Click on "Lucifer" and you get:

"heylel"
Lucifer = "light-bearer"

1. shining one, morning star, Lucifer
   1. of the king of Babylon and Satan (fig.)
2. 'Helel' describing the king of Babylon

http://www.studylight.org/isb/bible...on=0&it=kjv&ot=bhs&nt=na&Enter=Perform+Search

Another serious problem with rendering this word #1966 Haylale as "morning star" is that Jesus Christ himself is called the morning star in Rev. 22:16 where he says: "I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star." The niv and nasb make it possible to identify Satan and Jesus Christ as one and the same persons. This is what Lucifer's ultimate game plan is, and the new versions have taken a giant step forward in advancing Satan's deception.

This is only a big problem for people who are trying to discredit the NIV and NASB.

Have you ever noticed that both Jesus and Satan are called lions in the Bible as well?

It's a metaphor. And, again, in context, the passage calling the king of Babylon (or figuratively, Satan, maybe) is a TAUNT... they are making fun of him. So, calling him the morning star could very well be sarcastic...it is also very likely that they are taunting him with the titles he took for himself.

I suggest people forget about what they think about the 'rightness' or 'wrongness' of calling Satan the 'morning star' and concentrate on what the Bible actually says. Get your doctrine from the Bible, don't decide what the Bible says based upon your predetermined doctrine. But, that's just my suggestion.

 

[TheGloryisHere]

I never said Lucifer was a "bad name" (please re-read my posts) I just said it was never Satan's name.

Lucifer is being addressed as a person according to the verse Mike and I have posted. So, yes, that was his name. Not while he was Satan though. As Satan that name was stripped from him. He loves that name and makes his followers call him that. Even satan knows that's his name. Even Satan himself says that's his name. In that, he is not lying. But... it's no longer his name. And in him continuing to say it's his name, he is wrong. The name Lucifer was stripped from him along with his anointing and he was kicked out of Heaven by Michael. His form was changed from the cherub which covers (he was never an arch angel; no idea why ppl say that) to the form of a dragon.