-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Why Lucifer?
- Thread starter desideraht
- Start date
desideraht
Hellspawn
Thank you!
Also no, I never said links were bashing. It was the way people were talking to Me for not Googling. Saint_Frankenstein did the civil, mature thing, and passed along his Knowledge.
@ Thrice Great: Thanks for your posts as well.
Last edited:
RobertAlexander
I am living fire.
Lucifer stole the light of God and gave it to man. He enlightened them. He is in a way "the lightning thief." The bearer of light and of the "bad fruit" through which man awoke and gained the knowledge of "good and evil" from God.
EtuMalku
Abn Iblis ابن إبليس
Lucifer really has no place within the Abrahamic religions.
The word Lucifer is treated as morning star in Isa 14:12, then this is a denial of the deity of Christ. As in Revelation 22:16: "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."
The Vulgate uses the same word in contexts where it clearly has no reference to a fallen angel: 2 Peter 1:19 (meaning "morning star"), Job 11:17 ("the light of the morning").
The KJV translators did not actually translate the Hebrew word ‏הילל as Lucifer. This word occurs only in the "Hebrew" Old Testament. They simply duplicated the word used in the Latin Vulgate that translated ‏הילל.
In the Vulgate, Isa 14:12 reads as follows: "quomodo cecidisti de caelo lucifer qui mane oriebaris corruisti in terram qui vulnerabas gentes." Lucifer in this context is not a proper name but the Latin word for morning star.
Morning Star literally refers to Venus, but metaphorically it is being associated with earthly kings, emperors, and pagan deities. Peter uses this word to show that the real morning star was Jesus, not Caesar. In Isaiah 14:12 it references the Babylonian king as the morning star and predicts his fall.
The word Lucifer is treated as morning star in Isa 14:12, then this is a denial of the deity of Christ. As in Revelation 22:16: "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."
The Vulgate uses the same word in contexts where it clearly has no reference to a fallen angel: 2 Peter 1:19 (meaning "morning star"), Job 11:17 ("the light of the morning").
The KJV translators did not actually translate the Hebrew word ‏הילל as Lucifer. This word occurs only in the "Hebrew" Old Testament. They simply duplicated the word used in the Latin Vulgate that translated ‏הילל.
In the Vulgate, Isa 14:12 reads as follows: "quomodo cecidisti de caelo lucifer qui mane oriebaris corruisti in terram qui vulnerabas gentes." Lucifer in this context is not a proper name but the Latin word for morning star.
Morning Star literally refers to Venus, but metaphorically it is being associated with earthly kings, emperors, and pagan deities. Peter uses this word to show that the real morning star was Jesus, not Caesar. In Isaiah 14:12 it references the Babylonian king as the morning star and predicts his fall.
Adept
Member
Why lucifer? Simply because of the translation and the symbolism associated with light. I've always liked Luciferianism, the title itself is more of a symbol than anything. It's the one LHP perspective that makes any sense, being concerned with light and human evolution rather than darkness and selfishness. I'd have no issues calling myself a Luciferian, it's an extension of the Law.