Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Is Satan really a fallen angel or Lucifer?

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    west coast
    Posts
    72
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Rep Power
    45

    Default Is Satan really a fallen angel or Lucifer?

    In my opinion it is a myth that Satan is a fallen angel and also known as Lucifer.
    The Bible directly contradicts this assumption. See;

    Joh 8:44
    Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.


    So the question is where is the beginning?
    Go to Genesis 1; 1 In the beginning……….

    This is before anyone was created and the earth was still void and without form. So Satan was a liar and murderer from then. If God created Satan and he was an angel, then he would have had truth in him, if and when, God created him.

    The Bible clearly gives us two scriptures where He gives us all the names of Satan and not once is Lucifer mentioned. See;

    Rev 20:2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,

    Re 12:9
    And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world:


    Let us break down Isaiah 14;4

    ISAIAH 14:4 That thou shalt take up this proverb against the king of Babylon, and say, How hath the oppressor ceased ! the golden city ceased ! …………….

    We can see that this passage is directed to the king of Babylon

    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;

    So this king is clearly a man and not a fallen angel. This man was brought down because of his vanity.
    The ancient Syrians practiced a religion where they called themselves ” the children of heaven” see how the Bible backs this up.

    Genesis 11:4
    And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; ……………
    11:9 Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the LORD did there confound the language of all the earth:……………..
    11:8 So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth:


    So we can see that these people in Babel were scattered in all the earth each with their own language and build their own kingdoms,
    One being Babylon, after their vain thoughts of exalting themselves and referring to themselves as gods. We know this is true as we need to just look at Greek mythology and their worship of the Zodiac and referring to themselves as "Children of heaven" aswell as the ancient Babylonian religions, which is an in depth study all on it’s own. See;
    Two Babylons or Papal Worship by Rev Alexander Hyssop

    Here are some more links if you are interested in investigating this topic.
    These links are on my blog, click here

    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:


    Observe the direct correlation of “ who’s top may reach into heaven” and “ ascend into heaven” The King of Babylon had the same mind set and speech as those at Babel, which many historians and scholars consider the abode of ancient Babylon.

    So in conclusion Lucifer is a man not a spirit being, so in no way can Lucifer be Satan. Satan does not have a fleshly body that can be in a grave and covered with worms See ISAIAH 14; 11
    There is allot more evidence on this subject on my blog, it is five pages long so i think too long to paste here.
    please click here to keep reading

    Blessings in truth
    Bee777

  2. #2
    Stefanus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Bloemfontein
    Age
    57
    Posts
    1,606
    Blog Entries
    1
    Total Downloaded
    477.1 KB
    Videos
    128
    Rep Power
    10

    Default Re: Is Satan really a fallen angel or Lucifer?

    Die woord Lucifer kom slegs een keer voor in die KJV en word vertaal as môrester in die meeste bybels:

    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 14:12 Hoe het jy uit die hemel geval, o môrester, seun van die dageraad! Hoe lê jy teen die aarde neergeslaan, oorweldiger van die nasies!
    Die profeet Jesaja beskryf die Babeloniese koning as "o môrester, seun van die dageraad" wat tot 'n val sou kom, Petrus egter gebruik die term "môrester" om Jesus aan te gee:

    In Latin, the word "Lucifer", meaning "Light-Bringer" (from lux, lucis, "light", and ferre, "to bear, bring"), is a name for the "Morning Star" (the planet Venus in its dawn appearances).[2] The Latin Vulgate version of the Bible used this word twice to refer to the Morning Star: once in 2 Peter 1:19 to translate the Greek word "Φωσφόρος" (Phosphoros), which has exactly the same literal meaning of "Light-Bringer" that "Lucifer" has in Latin; and once in Isaiah 14:12 to translate "הילל" (Hêlēl), which also means "Morning Star". In the latter passage the title of "Morning Star" is given to the tyrannous Babylonian king, who the prophet says is destined to fall.

    2Pe 1:19 En ons het die profetiese woord wat baie vas is, waarop julle tog moet ag gee soos op ‘n lamp wat in ‘n donker plek skyn, totdat die dag aanbreek en die môrester opgaan in julle harte;
    Openbaring verwys twee keer na die "môrester" en in geen geval word die "môrester" enigsins na Satan verwys nie maar na Jesus self:

    Rev 2:26-29
    En aan hom wat oorwin en my werke tot die einde toe bewaar, sal Ek mag oor die nasies gee, en hy sal hulle regeer met ‘n ysterstaf; soos erdegoed word hulle verbrysel, net soos Ek ook van my Vader ontvang het.
    En Ek sal hom die môrester gee.
    Wie ‘n oor het, laat hom hoor wat die Gees aan die gemeentes sê.


    Rev 22:16 Ek, Jesus, het my engel gestuur om hierdie dinge aan julle voor die gemeentes te betuig. Ek is die wortel en die geslag van Dawid, die blink môrester.
    Dus is dit duidelik dat Lucifer verwys na 'n koning van Babilon en dat Jesus die môrester is!

    Die volgende vraag wat egter opkom is waarom Jesus na homself verwys as "Ek is die wortel en die geslag van Dawid, die blink môrester" en nie na Abraham nie?


    Liefdegroete,
    Stefanus

  3. #3
    Stefanus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Bloemfontein
    Age
    57
    Posts
    1,606
    Blog Entries
    1
    Total Downloaded
    477.1 KB
    Videos
    128
    Rep Power
    10

    Default "Lucifer" in Isaiah 14:12

    The word "Lucifer" in Isaiah 14:12 presents a minor problem to mainstream Christianity. It becomes a much larger problem to Bible literalists.

    "Lucifer makes his appearance in the fourteenth chapter of the Old Testament book of Isaiah, at the twelfth verse, and nowhere else: "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 first problem is that Lucifer is a Latin name. So how did it find its way into a Hebrew manuscript, written before there was a Roman language? To find the answer, I consulted a scholar at the library of the Hebrew Union College in Cincinnati. What Hebrew name, I asked, was Satan given in this chapter of Isaiah, which describes the angel who fell to become the ruler of hell?

    The answer was a surprise. In the original Hebrew text, the fourteenth chapter of Isaiah is not about a fallen angel, but about a fallen Babylonian king, who during his lifetime had persecuted the children of Israel. It contains no mention of Satan, either by name or reference. The Hebrew scholar could only speculate that some early Christian scribes, writing in the Latin tongue used by the Church, had decided for themselves that they wanted the story to be about a fallen angel, a creature not even mentioned in the original Hebrew text, and to whom they gave the name "Lucifer."

    Why Lucifer? In Roman astronomy, Lucifer was the name given to the morning star (the star we now know by another Roman name, Venus). The morning star appears in the heavens just before dawn, heralding the rising sun. The name derives from the Latin term lucem ferre, bringer, or bearer, of light." In the Hebrew text the expression used to describe the Babylonian king before his death is Helal, son of Shahar, which can best be translated as "Day star, son of the Dawn." The name evokes the golden glitter of a proud king's dress and court (much as his personal splendor earned for King Louis XIV of France the appellation, "The Sun King").

    The scholars authorized by ... King James I to translate the Bible into current English did not use the original Hebrew texts, but used versions translated ... largely by St. Jerome in the fourth century. Jerome had mistranslated the Hebraic metaphor, "Day star, son of the Dawn," as "Lucifer," and over the centuries a metamorphosis took place. Lucifer the morning star became a disobedient angel, cast out of heaven to rule eternally in hell. Theologians, writers, and poets interwove the myth with the doctrine of the Fall, and in Christian tradition Lucifer is now the same as Satan, the Devil, and --- ironically --- the Prince of Darkness.

    So "Lucifer" is nothing more than an ancient Latin name for the morning star, the bringer of light. That can be confusing for Christians who identify Christ himself as the morning star, a term used as a central theme in many Christian sermons. Jesus refers to himself as the morning star in Revelation 22:16: "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."

    And so there are those who do not read beyond the King James version of the Bible, who say 'Lucifer is Satan: so says the Word of God'...."

    Henry Neufeld (a Christian who comments on Biblical sticky issues) went on to say,

    "this passage is often related to Satan, and a similar thought is expressed in Luke 10:18 by Jesus, that was not its first meaning. It's primary meaning is given in Isaiah 14:4 which says that when Israel is restored they will "take up this taunt against the king of Babylon . . ." Verse 12 is a part of this taunt song. This passage refers first to the fall of that earthly king...

    How does the confusion in translating this verse arise? The Hebrew of this passage reads: "heleyl, ben shachar" which can be literally translated "shining one, son of dawn." This phrase means, again literally, the planet Venus when it appears as a morning star. In the Septuagint, a 3rd century BC translation of the Hebrew scriptures into Greek, it is translated as "heosphoros" which also means Venus as a morning star.

    How did the translation "lucifer" arise? This word comes from Jerome's Latin Vulgate. Was Jerome in error? Not at all. In Latin at the time, "lucifer" actually meant Venus as a morning star. Isaiah is using this metaphor for a bright light, though not the greatest light to illustrate the apparent power of the Babylonian king which then faded."

    Therefore, Lucifer wasn't equated with Satan until after Jerome. Jerome wasn't in error. Later Christians (and Mormons) were in equating "Lucifer" with "Satan".

    So why is this a problem to Christians? Christians now generally believe that Satan (or the Devil or Lucifer who they equate with Satan) is a being who has always existed (or who was created at or near the "beginning"). Therefore, they also think that the 'prophets' of the Old Testament believed in this creature. The Isaiah scripture is used as proof (and has been used as such for hundreds of years now). As Elaine Pagels explains though, the concept of Satan has evolved over the years and the early Bible writers didn't believe in or teach such a doctrine.

    The irony for those who believe that "Lucifer" refers to Satan is that the same title ('morning star' or 'light-bearer') is used to refer to Jesus, in 2 Peter 1:19, where the Greek text has exactly the same term: 'phos-phoros' 'light-bearer.' This is also the term used for Jesus in Revelation 22:16.



    On a lighter note, Arthur Clarke, in his fictional book 2061 correctly uses the word "Lucifer". He uses it as a name for a new sun in the solar system which is correct since the new sun is a second 'morning star' of 'original' 'light-bearing' substance -- not some evil being of religious mythology.

    David Grinspoon comments on the historical aspects of the word as follows: "The origin of the Judeo-Christian Devil as an angel fallen from heaven into the depths of hell is mirrored in the descent of Venus from shining morning star to the darkness below. This underworld demon, still feared today by people in many parts of the world, is also called Lucifer, which was originally a Latin name for Venus as a morning star." (Venus Revealed p. 17) Actually, Grinspoon should just refer to the "Christian Devil" since the Jews never believed in such a creature and still don't to this day.

  4. #4
    Member Pionier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Boerland
    Posts
    141
    Total Downloaded
    0
    Rep Power
    51

    Default Re: Is Satan really a fallen angel or Lucifer?

    Quote Originally Posted by Stefanus View Post
    Die woord Lucifer kom slegs een keer voor in die KJV en word vertaal as môrester in die meeste bybels:


    Die profeet Jesaja beskryf die Babeloniese koning as "o môrester, seun van die dageraad" wat tot 'n val sou kom, Petrus egter gebruik die term "môrester" om Jesus aan te gee:


    Openbaring verwys twee keer na die "môrester" en in geen geval word die "môrester" enigsins na Satan verwys nie maar na Jesus self:


    Dus is dit duidelik dat Lucifer verwys na 'n koning van Babilon en dat Jesus die môrester is!

    Die volgende vraag wat egter opkom is waarom Jesus na homself verwys as "Ek is die wortel en die geslag van Dawid, die blink môrester" en nie na Abraham nie?


    Liefdegroete,
    Stefanus
    Stefanus, vir my is die verwysing na Lucifer as die Babeloniese koning in 'n geestelike konteks. Maw die gees wat ín die koning was, net so ken ons die Christus wat in Jesus die mens was.

    Groetnis

  5. #5
    Stefanus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Bloemfontein
    Age
    57
    Posts
    1,606
    Blog Entries
    1
    Total Downloaded
    477.1 KB
    Videos
    128
    Rep Power
    10

    Default Re: Is Satan really a fallen angel or Lucifer?

    Who Are the Sons of God?

    Let us look at the “Sons of God” mentioned in Genesis 6:2, 4; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7 and Psalm 89:6. We will find that they are NOT angels. The phrase “Sons of God” can refer to one of two things. Since it is clearly possible for ordinary human beings to be called the “Sons” or the “Children” of God, these “Sons of God” were either human beings called by that name, or they were part of a group of other spiritual beings in heaven with a special rank that designates them as the “Sons of God” (though, NOT angels).

    These “Sons of God” are described by Paul in Hebrews 1:9 as being Christ’s “fellows.” They are in the same type of celestial position as Christ. Indeed, Christ is in a firstborn relationship to them. They are shown to be companions and partners with Christ Jesus. Paul called them Christ’s “Fellows.” The word “Fellow” does not mean (as we often use the term) “fella, guy or bloke.” In the time of the King James Version a “Fellow” was a distinguished member of an academic or political group that had special privileges and honors bestowed on them by the King or some prestigious group. And so it was with these “Fellows” in Psalm 45. They are honored members and “Fellows” of the Family of God. Since God is a great king with children called the “Sons of God,” these “Fellows” are to be reckoned as having a right to be called members of the royal Family who governs heaven and earth.


    These “Sons of God,” like Christ, are “princes” of God. Their “Fellowship” gives them a royal relationship with Christ before He ever became a human being. They are actually equals of Christ in the sense of being Family members, though Christ has the superiority by being reckoned the firstborn. Equals of Christ? Yes, equals by token of being Christ’s brothers in heaven, while Christ is the Firstborn and has a designation rank over them because of His Firstborn position. Indeed, this is precisely what Paul stated they were. He referred to them as the “Fellows” of Christ. They were associated with Christ even before His birth in Bethlehem. They were His brothers as far back as when Psalm 45 was written.

    God has anointed you [Christ] with the oil of gladness above YOUR FELLOWS.”


    That’s right, Christ was the exalted Firstborn, but these other spiritual beings within the divine Family of God associated with Christ in heaven were His “Fellows” (companions or partners). And they are in many ways like Christ. As rendered in the King James Version, the word “Fellows” in Hebrew is chaver;and it means to be companions, but in the sense of being equal partners to one another. In the Bible the word means to be “knit together” (chaver) in the same fellowship and appearing as “one man” in rank and position (see Judges 20:11).

    These biblical indications show that there are other “Sons of God” in heaven who are “Sons” of the Father and brothers of Christ. Christ, however, is the firstborn of the “Fellows” (see Colossians 1:15). He was created before the rest of these “Sons of God” and He “has been anointed ... above your fellows.” Christ was created as a Firstborn “Son” just as Adam was created a firstborn “Son of God” (Luke 3:38). These other Sons of God are NOT intercessors between us humans and God the Father. Only Christ is our mediator (1 Timothy 2:5; Romans 8:34).


    God’s Sons Are Morning Stars

    “Sons of God” of the Old Testament are parallel to the “Morning Stars” referred to in the Book of Job as rejoicing when the earth was created. These “Morning Stars” are not angels because they have the same designation as Christ who is certainly not an angel. Christ is called the Bright and Morning Star” (Revelation 22:16). Christ is also called the “day spring” (Luke 1:78) and the “day star” (2 Peter 1:19), terms synonymous with the phrase “Morning Star.” These “Morning Stars” (similar to if not identical with the term “Sons of God”) were with Christ at the earth’s creation (Job 38:7). Though Christ has the eminence among them by being called the Bright and Morning Star” (Revelation 22:16, definite article in Greek). Christ is also called a bridegroom with the splendor of the Sun in His glory (Psalm 19:4–5).

    These “Sons of God” have the opportunity to congregate at scheduled times before God and sometimes for judgment. Psalm 82 shows such a judgment of them for injustice. Satan appeared among them in the time of Job (Job 1:6 and 2:1). And though these other “Morning Stars” and “Sons of God” are in existence, we know from later revelation that Christ is the One sitting in a higher position than all these other “Fellows of Christ.” He is seated at the right hand of the Father (Colossians 3:1).

    God formerly anointed Christ above His “Fellows” (Psalm 45:7). Christ’s rank was made higher still by becoming a human and then returning to His divine status after His resurrection. Without doubt, Christ is eminently exalted in rank above these other “Fellows” at the present moment. This is because He was the only one to become flesh by being born of a human female (Mary). It is by physical birth that human Sons of God are now created, but it is by their resurrection from the dead that humans assume a divine status as spiritual Sons of God.

    The New Testament calls Christ the “only born,” or, as translated in the KJV, the “only begotten” Son of God (John 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; 1 John 4:9). The others are actually created “Sons”; created in a similar way that Adam was brought into existence. Not one of those other created “Sons of God” has ever been born of a human woman. Christ Jesus, on the other hand, was the only one (the only begotten of those equals) born in the same fashion as we humans when He gave up His majestic position in heaven to be born into this world (Philippians 2:6–9). And remember, Christ “thought it not robbery to be equal with God” (Philippians 2:6). But never forget, these other “Sons of God” and “Morning Stars,” the “Fellows” of Hebrews 1:9 who are “Brothers” of Christ, are also part of the Family. While these other equals are members of the Household of God, they are NOT mediators between the Father and the human Family. That right and privilege was reserved for Christ alone — who alone was crucified for us. Christ has become our only mediator (1 Timothy 2:5).

    Some of these “Sons of God” in the Godhead are referred to in Genesis 6:1–4 and Job 1:6, 2:1 and 38:7. Remember, they are NOT angels! They are higher in power than any angel. And though angels can carry the general name “stars” (Revelation 1:20), they are NOT the “Morning Stars” whose symbol is that of dominating the prophetic day to come, that New Day of God. Remember, NO angel has been elevated by God to be a “Son of God” (Hebrews 1:4–14) nor to be a “Bright and Morning Star” (Revelation 22:16).

Similar Threads

  1. A: Jahweh of Satan?
    By Die Ou Man in forum Boervolk Teologie:
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 19th March 2011, 21:24
  2. About Satan Early history: 300 BCE to 100 CE
    By Stefanus in forum Christianity
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12th October 2009, 22:46

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •