Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Are Lucifer and satan the same person?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Are Lucifer and satan the same person?

    Lucifer is mentioned only once in Isaiah 14:12. Is this the same person referred to as satan and the devil throughout scripture?

    ------------------
    Range Rat 7
    Member GOA, NRA

    "God who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation
    be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are a gift of God? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God
    is just, and that His justice cannot sleep forever." --Thomas
    Jefferson
    Veritas vos Liberabit

  • #2
    Yes, lucifer was his name when he was an angel. He was renamed satan after he thrown out of Heaven

    ------------------
    No coward soul is mine
    No trembler in the world's storm troubled sphere
    I see heavens glories shine
    And faith shines equally
    Arming me from fear
    ----Jane Bronte-----

    Comment


    • #3
      http://www.tegart.com/brian/bible/kjvonly/isa14_12.html

      Isaiah 14:12, Job 38:7 & Revelation 22:16
      Will The Real "morning star" Please Stand Up...

      After reading this article, be sure to check out:

      UPDATE 1: The LXX and "Lucifer" - ancient support of the "morning star" reading http://www.tegart.com/brian/bible/kj...eosphoros.html
      UPDATE 2: "Lucifer" Identified! **HOT** - the REAL meaning of this verse, the issue put to rest, and the NIV and NASB completely
      vindicated! http://www.tegart.com/brian/bible/kjvonly/helel.html

      Most KJV-only supporters, and even many others, think Isaiah 14:12 is referring to Satan because of the KJV's use of the word "Lucifer":

      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!"

      However, here's how the verse appears in some modern translations:

      Isaiah 14:12 (NIV) "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!"

      Isaiah 14:12 (NASB) "How you have fallen from heaven, O star of the morning, son of the dawn! You have been cut down to
      the earth, You who have weakened the nations!"

      Isaiah 14:12 (Young's Literal Translation) "How hast thou fallen from the heavens, O shining one, son of the dawn! Thou hast
      been cut down to earth, O weakener of nations."

      Some KJV-only supporters have pointed to Isaiah 14:12 in the other English versions, and accuse them of a great mistranslation error. Some even suggest that these
      versions are suggesting that Christ and Satan are one in the same, and that Satan himself is responsible for inspiring these translations. This extreme view is because
      of where, in the KJV, Christ calls himself the "morning star" in Revelation 22:16:

      Revelation 22:16 (KJV) "I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the
      offspring of David, and the bright and morning star."

      Revelation 22:16 (NIV) "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, are the accusations of some KJV-only supporters justified? Have these versions taken Christ's title and given it to Satan in Isaiah 14:12? Let's look at this in a
      little detail, then you can decide for yourself.

      One distinction that can be seen right away is that the title "morning star" in Isaiah 14:12 of the NIV is in all lower-case letters, while the title "the bright Morning Star"
      in Revelation 22:16 is capitalized. Another distinction is that in the Revelation verse, the title is qualified with the definite article "the", as well as the descriptor "bright",
      both of which are not present in Isaiah 14:12. These differences seem minor, but they are more than enough to distinguish between the KJV's "sons of God" and
      "Son of God", "lord" and "Lord", "god" and "God", "spirit" and "Spirit", etc.

      So where did the name "Lucifer" come from?

      The Hebrew word translated as "Lucifer" in Isaiah 14:12 in the KJV is heylel (hay-lale', Strong's #1966), and literally means "shining one", "morning star", "light
      bearer", etc. Isaiah 14:12 is the only place in scripture where this Hebrew word appears.

      The use of "Lucifer" appears to have originated from the Latin Vulgate. The Vulgate was produced by Jerome (c. 347-420) by translating available Greek and
      Hebrew manuscripts into Latin. It was started in approximately 382 A.D. and was completed in approximately 405 A.D. It was the scriptures used by the Catholic
      Church for nearly 1000 years. Here's what the Vulgate says (note the lower case):

      Isaiah 14:12 (Latin Vulgate) "quomodo cecidisti de caelo lucifer qui mane oriebaris corruisti in terram qui vulnerabas gentes"

      It would seem that Jerome understood the meaning of the Hebrew word heylel, and translated it into "lucifer", the Latin word meaning "light bearer" (from the Latin
      lux "light" and ferre "to bear or bring."). Because many people thought this passage was referring to Satan, people began to think of the term of "lucifer" as a proper
      name "Lucifer". However, this is not what "lucifer" meant. "lucifer", at the time of the Vulgate and even at the time of the KJV translation, meant "morning star" or
      "day star" in reference to Venus. Even though Jerome himself (and others before him) thought the passage was referring to Satan, he did not use the word "lucifer"
      to mean "Satan" - his view that the passage was referring to Satan was purely an interpretational issue of the entire passage - the term "lucifer" was not used to
      indicate Satan in any way. This can be shown by of how he used "lucifer" elsewhere in the Vulgate. Although "Lucifer" only occurs once in the KJV, "lucifer" occurs
      three times in the Vulgate: once as shown above, and also in:

      Job 11:17 (Latin Vulgate) "et quasi meridianus fulgor consurget tibi ad vesperam et cum te consumptum putaveris orieris ut
      lucifer"

      2 Peter 1:19 (Latin Vulgate) "et habemus firmiorem propheticum sermonem cui bene facitis adtendentes quasi lucernae lucenti
      in caliginoso loco donec dies inlucescat et lucifer oriatur in cordibus vestris"

      What is interesting about those two verses where "lucifer" is used, is what the term is referring to. The KJV was not translated from the Vulgate (although verses like
      Isaiah 14:12 show that it was used and borrowed from), but here's those two verses in the KJV for comparison, to illustrate what the Latin word "lucifer" meant in
      the Vulgate:

      Job 11:17 (KJV) "And thine age shall be clearer than the noonday; thou shalt shine forth, thou shalt be as the morning."

      2 Peter 1:19 (KJV) "We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that
      shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: "

      What's quite interesting is the Vulgate's use of the word "lucifer" in 2 Peter 1:19, a passage that is understood as referring to Christ. Also of interst to KJV-onlyism in
      general is that some KJV-onlies say the Spanish Riena Valera Bible was/is the inerrant word of God in Spanish, yet it too has the same Spanish word for "lucifer"
      ("lucero") in both Isaiah 14:12 and 2 Peter 1:19. If the NIV has given Christ's title to Satan, has the Spanish RV given Satan's title to Christ?

      So, we learn that the name "Lucifer" (as a proper name) in the KJV is not an accurate word translation, but rather a word transliteration (a new word derived from
      a foreign word). This transliteration is not even from the original Hebrew, but instead from the Latin Vulgate! If "Lucifer" refers to Satan, that means the Bible has
      changed meaning! Thus, the term "Lucifer" in the KJV is more of a paraphrase and actually less accurate than the terms used in other translations, especially when
      you consider the change in meaning since the KJV was first published. However, the use of the word "lucifer" is perfectly acceptable if you understand what "lucifer"
      really means, and realize it is not referring to Satan, but a king of Babylon, and comparing him to the morning star, or Venus. (Click Here to read why I don't
      think this passage could be about Satan in the first place.)

      But "morning star" is Christ's title....

      However, many KJV-only supporters still object to the use of the NIV's "morning star" and the NASB's "star of the morning" to refer to Satan in Isaiah 14:12,
      saying that the title is Christ's alone. However, the KJV is quite clear that it isn't:

      Job 38:7 (KJV) "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?"

      In Job 38:7, the KJV indicates that this is not just a title for Christ, as it is also given to other angelic beings. One could return the "argument" and say that if "morning
      star" is only Christ's title, then the KJV tell us there are many Christs because of Job 38:7! (Of course that is ridiculous, but no more ridiculous than saying the NIV
      and NASB are equating Christ and Satan). Even if you remain unconvinced that Isaiah 14:12 is not referring to Satan, is it such a stretch to suggest that "morning
      star" or a similar term may be applied to Satan, since he too can appear this way? Consider:

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

      Therefore, to accuse the NIV and the NASB of giving "Christ's title" to Satan is to accuse the KJV of giving Christ's title to angels. Of course, we then see that
      "morning star" is simply a title that can be given to others as well.

      Even if Isa 14:12 is about Satan, since "morning star" is a title the KJV uses for angels, what's wrong with with using the title for Satan? Most argue (erroneously)
      that "Lucifer" was Satan's name before he fell. Thus, before he fell, he was "Lucifer", an angel, a "morning star". Whoops. How do KJV-onlies know that the implied
      analogy is to Christ in Rev 22:16 and not to angels in Job 38:7??? Whoops again.

      Also, Satan is called a lion in one passage (1 Peter 5:8), while the Lord Jesus is called a lion in one passage (Revelation 5:5). Isn't it kind of a double-standard for
      KJV-onlies to ignore this while jumping on the NIV's "morning star"?:

      1 Peter 5:8 (KJV) "Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he
      may devour:"

      Revelation 5:5 (KJV) "And one of the elders saith unto me, Weep not: behold, the Lion of the tribe of Juda, the Root of
      David, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof."

      Of course, Jesus is "the bright Morning Star" (NIV, Rev. 22:16), and the NIV makes a strong distinction between the title as used in Isaiah 14:12, as mentioned near
      the top of this article. The KJV also makes distinctions between the title as in Rev. 22:16 and Job 38:7, but because it does not use the upper-case letters as the
      NIV does in Rev. 22:16, the NIV in fact makes a stronger distinction when the title is given to Christ.

      So, accusing new versions of a strange error or even blasphemy when it comes to Isaiah 14:12 seems wholly unjustified. But don't take my word for it, let's see what
      some people with credentials that even KJV-only supporters recognize have to say:

      1. James Strong, S.T.D., LL.D. (author of Strong's concordance)

      Here's what the Strong's Hebrew Dictionary (that accompanies Strong's exhaustive concordance of the KJV) says about the Hebrew word heylel (hay-lale',
      Strong's #1966), translated as "Lucifer" in Isaiah 14:12 of the KJV:

      1966.

      heylel, hay-lale'; from 1984 (In the sense of brightness); the morning-star:--lucifer.


      It seems that Strong agrees that heylel means morning-star.

      2. The KJV Translators Themselves

      Here's how the verse looks in the original 1611 KJV:

      Isaiah 14:12 (1611 KJV) "How art thou fallen from heauen, O Lucifer, fonne of the morning? how art thou cut downe to the
      ground, which didft weaken the nations?"

      In the original 1611 edition of the KJV, there is a marginal note for the words "O Lucifer". The marginal note reads:

      Or, O daystarre.

      Clearly the KJV translators themselves understood the meaning of the Hebrew word heylel (hay-lale', Strong's #1966), and even provided "daystarre" for us as an
      alternate translation!

      Comment


      • #4



        Reasons I think Isaiah 14:4-27 is not talking about Satan


        http://www.tegart.com/brian/bible/kjvonly/lucifer.html

        Reasons I think Isaiah 14 has problems if understood as referring to Satan, especially the origin (fall) of Satan:

        verse 4 - says the passage is about the king of Babylon

        verse 6 - the fall in the passage happens *after* he has ruled over people and nations - people and nations are in existence before the subject of this passage falls

        verses 7-8 - nature, including the "cedars of Lebanon" rejoices when he falls. If this is referring to Satan falling prior to creation, how could creation rejoice before
        creation existed? And why would they rejoice in the first place when Satan became evil and came to them - wouldn't creation mourn instead? Wouldn't rejoicing be
        more appropriate if it was the end of a cruel king?

        verses 9-10 - hell, including it's inhabitants, are stirred at his fall. Who was in hell before Satan fell? No-one! So who are these people in hell?

        verse 11 - mentions worms - decay of his physical body in a grave.

        verse 12 (the "Lucifer" verse) - falls *after* weakening nations

        verse 13 - his pride makes him want to ascend *into* heaven. Yet the idea is that Satan was *already in* heaven before he fell.

        verse 16 - he is called a "man"

        verse 18 - others have already died - death is the result of sin, which couldn't have happened *before* Satan's fall.

        It appears therefore that the passage in Isaiah is not referring to Satan at all, but to a king of Babylon just as the text explicitly says in verse 4 (and
        enforces throughout the passage by referring to him as a man, not a spiritual being).


        Comment


        • #5
          Is the Morning star the SUN?

          Comment

          Working...
          X