One simple question

[Abdon]

Yes, I can.

Good too few people can read this beautiful language.

In context it is referring to the awareness of Christ. Read the three verses that precede it. So "lucifer" is a metaphor for Christ (or at least the Gospel of Christ).

It is referring to faith in Christ, is that what you mean by awareness?

As for its metaphorical meaning, that's exactly my point. "Lucifer" is not a proper name ANYWHERE in the Bible. It's a metaphor, and a Latin translation of a metaphor at that. Neither the OT nor the NT were written in Latin, and consequently, neither use "lucifer" as a proper name for anything.

So the traditions about who and who is not "lucifer" are all from the time of Vulgate forward, since this would have been the first time any metaphors in the books of the Bible were translated into Latin.

In sum, there is no person or being identified by the proper name "Lucifer" anywhere in the Bible, though there are a few occasions where "lucifer" is used as a Latin translation of "day star" or "morning star" used as a metaphor. The idea that "Satan" is "Lucifer" is not based on the Bible but on a tradition that emerged long after the books were written.

I never claimed otherwise.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

doppelgänger and Abdon, since you both are knowledgeable on scripture, what is your take on this piece from Rev. 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."

 

[doppelganger]

The Vulgate renders morning star in Rev. 22:16 as stella splendida et matutina rather than lucifer. The Greek in that verse is orthinos aster. The Greek in 2 Pet. 1:19 is phosphoros.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

doppelgänger, I'm gobsmacked, thank you!
However I must follow up by informing you that according to my present understanding, the Greek 'Phosphorus' and the Latin 'Lucifer' both represent the same planet of our solar system,...Venus?

 

[doppelganger]

doppelgänger, I'm gobsmacked, thank you!
However I must follow up by informing you that according to my present understanding, the Greek 'Phosphorus' and the Latin 'Lucifer' both represent the same planet of our solar system,...Venus?

Correct. Which is also very like the intended meaning of the reference to the "morning star" in Isaiah 14 (Hebrew heylel). Because of the tradition that arose after the Vulgate (and long after these books were originally composed in Greek and Hebrew), it has become a common practice of translating heylel as though it were a proper name "Lucifer." That is a translation error and a rather obvious one. It is simply impossible that the Latin word lucifer was a proper name in Ancient Hebrew, and if it had been, then the Hebrew in Isaiah 14 would have had a word of Latin inserted into it originally by the author.

"Satan" as "Lucifer" is not supported by the Bible. Jesus as "lucifer" (a metaphor) is supported by the Bible, just as I said in my first post in this exchange.

 

[doppelganger]

It is referring to faith in Christ, is that what you mean by awareness?

The context is referring to Christ and possibly "faith in Christ" but only by a stretched interpretation. Pistis doesn't even appear in the chapter after the fifth verse. And the three verses preceding verse 19 all speak directly of Christ.

Though frankly, IMO, there is no difference between "Christ" and "faith in Christ" so from my perspective it doesn't really matter anyway.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Yes, and since 'heylel' means morning star in Hebrew, then it is still referring to the planet Venus. And it is my understanding that the use of it as a metaphor in Isaiah 14.12. is due to its periodic 'fall' from being the bright morning star in the east at dawn to that of being the evening star in the west at sunset, and thus prophesying the fall of Babylon at the appointed time.

 

[SonofSatan]

Is Satan the corrupt angel Lucifer?

I do not believe he is. I believe that making Satan look like a corrupt angel makes it look like God is bigger, greater, and stronger then Satan. I think that is what the myth was made for. I do believe that Satan and Lucifer are the same being under different names (after all, "light-bearer" makes a lot more sense if you think about it).

 

[fallen angel zar'roc]

Is Satan the corrupt angel Lucifer?

To me, no satan and lucifer are two different beings as stated in the revelation of Lucifer the divine.

"A powerful, gruff voice boomed from behind, “Troubled, Lucifer?”
Lucifer looked around at the powerfully built, black-bearded angel
standing behind him. The angel’s complexion was dark. His one eye
glistened black. The other was covered with a leather patch. Satan
stood out amongst all of the angels by his brutally harsh appearance.
Only Satan wore a dark and heavy beard. The other angels were fair,
smooth-skinned, and youthful in appearance. Satan’s skin was of
reddish and ruddy nature, and very thick and callused as if worn rough
by eons. Compared to the presence of mighty Satan, mountains seemed
fragile and impermanent. Though Lucifer was the eldest of all the​

angels, Satan looked far older than Lucifer to the unknowing."
(QUENTIN MARK PIERSON 67)
Satan is showen to be different from Lucifer in almost all ways. In this book it is Lucifer leading the rebellion and Satan is following.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Lucifer looked around at the powerfully built, black-bearded angel
standing behind him. The angel’s complexion was dark. His one eye
glistened black. The other was covered with a leather patch.​

For some reason, I can't help seeing this Satan also having a prosthetic hook for a hand.

 

[DiabloNightcraft]

Greetings
I view that there is no difference in the two but it depends on the persons point of view to begin with.

To add something on the character of Satan

To quote:

In the ancient past the Aryans gave mankind the oldest scriptures the Vedic literature the Upanishads used to day by the Hindus.

A treaty was written 1.400 BC by two Aryan nations of the western Asia the Hitties and Mitannis. In this region these ancients worshipped a god maned Enikidu ( a Sumarian God also worshipped by the pre-Aryan Harrapans of the Indus Valley) who was a man-god with horns a tail andthe rear hooves of a bull which has been then western world's image of Satan

Interesting to note that in some part the lucifer was known to have hoofs for feet?

I'm not making a comparison but just to add something that I may add hear.

Reagrds

DiabloNightcraft