49
   

The Fallen Angel - A true story about Lucifer

 
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Jul, 2014 10:20 pm
@neologist,
My bible gave Lucifer a starring role in the whole ball o wax. Isn't he a major player in your bible? (Not sure we're from the same branch of Christian)
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Jul, 2014 11:08 pm
@Lash,
Well, Lucifer is not a name of any individual. It is a latin word meaning 'shining one'. No one in the bible actually has that name.
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Jul, 2014 08:36 am
@neologist,
The legion of Baptists who lived in my area and read the bible quite fervently recognize Lucifer as the Fallen Angel.

So does wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucifer
George
 
  2  
Reply Tue 29 Jul, 2014 08:53 am
@Lash,
Very interesting wikipedia article.
Here's the Latin Vulgate rendition of Isiah 14:12
Quomodo cecidisti de caelo Lucifer, qui mane oriebaris?
Corruisti in terram qui vulnerabas gentes?
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Jul, 2014 09:40 am
@Lash,
I should say wiki acknowledges Lucifer is recognized as a name for Satan. Of course, only an interview with the dude who wrote the passages could confirm if he was talking about the king of Babylon, Satan, or something/someone else...
0 Replies
 
worldtraveler24
 
  0  
Reply Tue 29 Jul, 2014 02:09 pm
@neologist,
Isaiah 14:12 --He is in the Bible Neo!
worldtraveler24
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Jul, 2014 02:12 pm
@lucifers girlfriend,
You are another deceived one--sadly to say. If you love Lucifer so much just wait you will be with him for eternity!
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Jul, 2014 08:36 pm
@worldtraveler24,
I realize the word lucifer appears in some translations. It means 'shining one' and may refer directly to Satan. But it is no one's name.

Years ago, I might have been referred to as 'huge one'. But that never was my name.
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Jul, 2014 08:37 pm
@George,
Thank you George. For reminding us that lucifer is a Latin word.
Not Hebrew
Not Aramaic
Not Greek
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Jul, 2014 08:38 pm
@Lash,
There were many fallen angels
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Jul, 2014 08:40 pm
@neologist,
One seemed to garner special attention.
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Jul, 2014 12:01 am
@Lash,
True
That would probably be the reason for equating the title with the original adversary, rebel, the one we have come to know more specifically as Satan.
But Satan has a Hebrew equivalent, (śātān) while lucifer does not.
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Jul, 2014 08:56 am
@neologist,
I admit that I get a rush explicating poetry and lit - and if you haven't checked out Milton's Paradise Lost, I think you'd love it. (If you were one of the thread participants who said he found Lucifer charming. I really did as portrayed in Milton's poem.)

It's a little weird that I find myself seeming to have a dog in this fight. I thought the "fall of Lucifer" was a sexy, human-type story embedded in all the other dogma. These Christian people have a similar opinion, so I will leave you with it.
______from some Christian site_____________
Question: "Why are both Jesus and Satan referred to as the morning star?"

Answer: The first reference to the morning star as an individual is in Isaiah 14:12: “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!” (NIV). The KJV and NKJV both translate “morning star” as “Lucifer, son of the morning.” It is clear from the rest of the passage that Isaiah is referring to Satan’s fall from heaven (Luke 10:18). So in this case, the morning star refers to Satan. In Revelation 22:16, Jesus unmistakably identifies Himself as the morning star. Why are both Jesus and Satan described as the “morning star”?

It is interesting to note that the concept of the “morning star” is not the only concept that is applied to both Jesus and Satan. In Revelation 5:5, Jesus is referred to as the Lion of the tribe of Judah. In 1 Peter 5:8, Satan is compared to a lion, seeking someone to devour. The point is this, both Jesus and Satan, to a certain extent, have similarities to lions. Jesus is similar to a lion in that He is the King, He is royal and majestic. Satan is similar to a lion in that he seeks to devour other creatures. That is where the similarities between Jesus, Satan, and lions end, however. Jesus and Satan are like lions in very different ways.

The idea of a “bright morning star” is a star that outshines all the others. Satan, as perhaps the most beautiful creation of God, probably the most powerful of all the angels, was a bright morning star. Jesus, as God incarnate, the Lord of the universe, is THE bright and morning star. Jesus is the most holy and powerful “light” in all the universe. So, while both Jesus and Satan can be described as “bright morning stars,” in no sense is this equating Jesus and Satan. Satan is a created being. His light only exists to the extent that God created it. Jesus is the light of the world (John 9:5). Only Jesus’ light is self-existent. Satan may be a bright morning star, but he is only a poor imitation of the one true bright morning star, Jesus Christ, the light of the world.

link http://www.gotquestions.org/morning-star.html

Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/morning-star.html#ixzz38xnyOLR9
George
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Jul, 2014 09:21 am
@neologist,
neologist wrote:
Thank you George. For reminding us that lucifer is a Latin word.
Not Hebrew
Not Aramaic
Not Greek

For what it's worth, that was Jerome's translation of הֵילֵל
George
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Jul, 2014 09:22 am
@George,
Translated in the Septuagint as ἑωσφόρος.
George
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Jul, 2014 09:24 am
@George,
There is, of course, no Aramaic translation since this did not appear in the
New Testament.
worldtraveler24
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Jul, 2014 01:06 pm
@George,
The New Testament uses the word devil!
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  2  
Reply Wed 30 Jul, 2014 01:20 pm
@Lash,
For what its worth, both Jesus and the one called Satan are also "gods", in the generic sense. Neither of them would correctly be called God.

This is no doubt where trinitarians and others who equate Jesus with his father have strayed from the truth.
worldtraveler24
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Jul, 2014 02:58 pm
@neologist,
Neo,
What is truth?

How do you come up with the idea that Jesus is not GOD? Evidently you are reading another source of material.

How is it that you cannot even read and understand the scripture for what it is saying?

In no wise is Jesus ever alluded to as an angel. Where is that founded in scripture?

Please deal with these scriptures: John 8:58 & 59.

58Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. 59Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.

They took up stones why? Because He claimed to be God--they were going to stone Him for blasphemy.
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Jul, 2014 04:07 pm
@worldtraveler24,
Quote:
Col. 1:15, 16, “He [Jesus Christ] is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation; for in him all things were created, in heaven and on earth
First to be created, first born. This implies he has a creator

Just as a father might give his son a tool kit and teach him proper use, our heavenly father gave to his firstborn the use of the most powerful force in the universe, his own holy spirit. By this, he allowed Jesus to be a creator according to his will.

So, of course, Jesus was there before Abraham.

BTW, Jesus, or Yeshua, or Joshua all have essentially the same meaning: Salvation of Jehovah or Jehovah's salvation. We should be aware that Jesus has other names.

If you do not consider Jesus to be an angel, please define angel before we proceed.
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 10/21/2019 at 03:22:42