Lucifer

Originally posted by jaywill
[b]================================
In, a way, Lucifer is the light bearer in the sense that he exemplifies God and Christ attributes.
=================================

Actually, this being became the opposite of all that God is. God is a God of truth. Satan became a god of lying and decption. God is a God of righteousness. Satan beame the ...[text shortened]... s then the terrible sin against God's holiness - to become morally unclean and sinful.[/b]

Opposites highlight each other is the point I was trying to get at. You would not have the same qualities and associations pinned to God if you didn't have this Lucifer/Satan guy as a reference, going against his will, tormenting us humans etc.

If there was no bad, what makes God a good, benevolent being? What is there for him to save us from?

God reveals himself through his creation, everything exemplifying godnature for he "created man in his own image."

Do not forget, we are all here doing our part, expressing and representing god here

Originally posted by divegeester
Names are important in the Bible obviously and people were given new names Peter, Paul for obvious examples. God himself has many names throughout the Bible. I don't see any contradiction in Lucifer having this heavenly name and being given another to describe his fallen position. I believe that there are organisations who believe that Lucifer is actually Jesus.

Well my original point was that Lucifer was not the correct name for the being called Satan/The Devil ect........ LOL





Manny

Originally posted by ua41
Opposites highlight each other is the point I was trying to get at. You would not have the same qualities and associations pinned to God if you didn't have this Lucifer/Satan guy as a reference, going against his will, tormenting us humans etc.

If there was no bad, what makes God a good, benevolent being? What is there for him to save us from?

God reveals ...[text shortened]... mage."

Do not forget, we are all here doing our part, expressing and representing god here

=====================================
Opposites highlight each other is the point I was trying to get at. You would not have the same qualities and associations pinned to God if you didn't have this Lucifer/Satan guy as a reference, going against his will, tormenting us humans etc.
==================================

Satan is certainly a dark backround against whom God shines the more brightly if that is possible.


========================
If there was no bad, what makes God a good, benevolent being? What is there for him to save us from?
============================

Did you notice though that the dichotomy in Genesis is not between good and evil. Good and evil are on one tree. Curious.

The dichotomy is between the knowledge of good and evil on one side and LIFE on the other.

Had anyone of us written the story we probably would have had Adam between a tree of GOOD and a tree of EVIL. But the knowledge of good and evil are on one source - a tree which brought death.

So actually the contest is between life and death.

What do you think about this ?

=================================
God reveals himself through his creation, everything exemplifying godnature for he "created man in his own image."

Do not forget, we are all here doing our part, expressing and representing god here
====================================

Okay. Thanks.

Traditionally, Lucifer is a name that in English generally refers to the devil before being cast from heaven, although this is not the original meaning of the term. In Latin, from which the English word is derived, Lucifer means "light-bearer" (from the words lucem ferre). It was the name given to the dawn appearance of the planet Venus, which heralds daylight. For this meaning, English generally uses the names "Morning Star" or "Day Star", and rarely "Lucifer".
The Bible does not name the devil as Lucifer. The use of this name in reference to the devil stems from an interpretation of Isaiah 14:3-20, a passage that does not speak of any fallen angel but of the defeat of a particular Babylonian King, to whom it gives a title that refers to what in English is called the Day Star or Morning Star (in Latin, lucifer).[2] In 2 Peter 1:19 and elsewhere, the same Latin word lucifer is used to refer to the Morning Star, with no relation to the devil. It is only in post-New Testament times that the Latin word Lucifer was often used as a name for the devil, both in religious writing and in fiction, especially when referring to him prior to his fall from Heaven.


Taken from wikipedia

Manny

Originally posted by jaywill
[b]=====================================
Opposites highlight each other is the point I was trying to get at. You would not have the same qualities and associations pinned to God if you didn't have this Lucifer/Satan guy as a reference, going against his will, tormenting us humans etc.
==================================

Satan is certainly a ...[text shortened]... essing and representing god here
====================================[/b]

Okay. Thanks.[/b]

You always post quotes so neat and clean and easy to follow 🙂
I will try to do a similar fashion

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Satan is certainly a dark backround against whom God shines the more brightly if that is possible.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Certainly a way I can look it. It's a helpful analogy
To keep the brain going, what was there to begin with for Satan to be a dark background against, what emptiness did God and Satan preoccupy with their presence? 🙂

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Did you notice though that the dichotomy in Genesis is not between good and evil. Good and evil are on one tree. Curious.

The dichotomy is between the knowledge of good and evil on one side and LIFE on the other.

Had anyone of us written the story we probably would have had Adam between a tree of GOOD and a tree of EVIL. But the knowledge of good and evil are on one source - a tree which brought death.

So actually the contest is between life and death.

What do you think about this ?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I was never convinced there was a dichotomy in the first place. I mean I was saying that God was a refuge (good) for all the suffering in the world caused by Satan (evil), but my bigger picture perspective on it is just these are aspects held in context- two polarities reflecting the same single entity.

Same with life and death. There wouldn't be much significance to anything if it never ended.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
=================================
God reveals himself through his creation, everything exemplifying godnature for he "created man in his own image."

Do not forget, we are all here doing our part, expressing and representing god here
====================================

Okay. Thanks.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sorry, this was more of a general statement and not purely directed at you or anything

Originally posted by ua41
You always post quotes so neat and clean and easy to follow 🙂
I will try to do a similar fashion

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[b]Satan is certainly a dark backround against whom God shines the more brightly if that is possible.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Certainly a way I can look it. It's a helpful analogy
To keep the brain going, what was there to begin with for Sat ...[text shortened]... ~~

Sorry, this was more of a general statement and not purely directed at you or anything[/b]

Thanks just the same.

I'm needy.

Originally posted by jaywill
Thanks just the same.

I'm needy.

Good and Evil are certainly two sides of the same thing namely Truth. We change our aspect/stance and Good gets transformed into Evil and vice versa.
Hindu theology considers Rudra( another name for Shiva) as the God of Destruction and Death. Rudra literally means the one who makes you cry. There is a hymn in the Yajurveda,the second of the four Vedas, about Rudra which specifically prays to Rudra and calls him as the King of Evil doers,King of thieves and so on.Hindu thought recognizes the existence of Evil and says that this is also a version of the Godhead and is not ashamed to pray to it !

The name Lucifer occurs once in the Scriptures and only in some versions of the Bible. For example, the King James Version renders Isaiah 14:12: “How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!”
The Hebrew word translated “Lucifer” means “shining one.” The Septuagint uses the Greek word that means “bringer of dawn.” Hence, some translations render the original Hebrew “morning star” or “Daystar.” But Jerome’s Latin Vulgate uses “Lucifer” (light bearer), and this accounts for the appearance of that term in various versions of the Bible.
Who is this Lucifer? The expression “shining one,” or “Lucifer,” is found in what Isaiah prophetically commanded the Israelites to pronounce as a “proverbial saying against the king of Babylon.” Thus, it is part of a saying primarily directed at the Babylonian dynasty. That the description “shining one” is given to a man and not to a spirit creature is further seen by the statement: “Down to Sheol you will be brought.” Sheol is the common grave of mankind—not a place occupied by Satan the Devil. Moreover, those seeing Lucifer brought into this condition ask: “Is this the man that was agitating the earth?” Clearly, “Lucifer” refers to a human, not to a spirit creature.—Isaiah 14:4, 15, 16.
Why is such an eminent description given to the Babylonian dynasty? We must realize that the king of Babylon was to be called the shining one only after his fall and in a taunting way. (Isaiah 14:3) Selfish pride prompted Babylon’s kings to elevate themselves above those around them. So great was the arrogance of the dynasty that it is portrayed as bragging: “To the heavens I shall go up. Above the stars of God I shall lift up my throne, and I shall sit down upon the mountain of meeting, in the remotest parts of the north. . . . I shall make myself resemble the Most High.”—Isaiah 14:13, 14.
“The stars of God” are the kings of the royal line of David. (Numbers 24:17) From David onward, these “stars” ruled from Mount Zion. After Solomon built the temple in Jerusalem, the name Zion came to apply to the whole city. Under the Law covenant, all male Israelites were obliged to travel to Zion three times a year. Thus, it became “the mountain of meeting.” By determining to subjugate the Judean kings and then remove them from that mountain, Nebuchadnezzar is declaring his intention to put himself above those “stars.” Instead of giving Jehovah credit for the victory over them, he arrogantly puts himself in Jehovah’s place. So it is after being cut down to the earth that the Babylonian dynasty is mockingly referred to as the “shining one.”
The pride of the Babylonian rulers indeed reflected the attitude of “the god of this system of things”—Satan the Devil. (2 Corinthians 4:4) He too lusts for power and longs to place himself above Jehovah God. But Lucifer is not a name Scripturally given to Satan.

Originally posted by galveston75
The name Lucifer occurs once in the Scriptures and only in some versions of the Bible. For example, the King James Version renders Isaiah 14:12: “How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!”
The Hebrew word translated “Lucifer” means “shining one.” The Septuagint uses the Greek word that means “bringer of dawn.” Hence, some translati ...[text shortened]... longs to place himself above Jehovah God. But Lucifer is not a name Scripturally given to Satan.

It is true that both in Ezekiel 28 and Isaiah 14 there are things said by God which apparently refer to a human being. However, there are also some things said which are not appropriate except for a supernatural being.

For example, no human being was created perfect in his ways from the first moment of existence (Ezek. 28:15)

Other things are said by God which would only be appropriate of a superhuman creation. God would not set a Gentile king in an idol worshipping land as the "anointed cherub" which covers. (Covering the ark is probably signified).

But I agree that some other things said could apply to a very proud human monarch.

The thing is that BEHIND all of the proud human kings who are in rebellion to God is the ORIGINAL rebellous one. So God is speaking to man yet spiritually at times speaking beyond man to the original rebel behind all of history's rebels - Satan.

Jesus turned to Peter and called him Satan in Matthew 16:23 - "But He turned and said to Peter, Get behind Me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to Me, for you are not setting your mind on the things of God, but on thge things of men."

Jesus addressed Satan, but turned and spoke to Peter. In other words Jesus was addressing the Satanic spirit BEHIND Peter's wrong headed effort to save Jesus from doing God's will.

The principle is the same in both Ezekiel 28 and Isaiah 14. Some rebellious king is indeed in the forefront. But God takes the opportunity to speak something to Satan the Devil, the original rebellious and proud ruler.

This is how we should understand the passages.
Yes, a rebellious Nebachdressor serves as a backdrop. Yes, a proud King of Tyre or Prince of Tyre serves as a backdrop. But God is uttering something to Satan in the midst of those passages.

Originally posted by galveston75
. But Lucifer is not a name Scripturally given to Satan.[/b]

I agree.
The 2 religions I know of which could be called Luciferean define Lucifer as a light bearer. Misguided Christians think he is Satan.

Originally posted by caissad4
I agree.
The 2 religions I know of which could be called Luciferean define Lucifer as a light bearer. Misguided Christians think he is Satan.

The being called Lucifer (Latin Vulgate) is Satan. We are not deceived in that realization.

If he were called Bullwinkle he would still be Satan. Isaiah 14:12-14 is exposing Satan. You know Satan likes to be concealed.

"How you are fallen from heaven O Daystar, son of the dawn!

How you have beem hewn down to the earth, You who made nations prostrate !

But you, you said in your heart:

I will ascend to heaven; Above the stars of God I will exult my throne.

And I will sit upon the mount of assembly in the uttermost parts of the north.

I will ascend above the heights of the clouds, I will make muself like the Most High ."

The direction north here may indicate God's administration. We see this when we compare the passage to Psalm 75:6:

"For neither from the EAST nor from the WEST, And neither from the SOUTH, does exaltation come, For God is the Judge: And He puts this one down and exalts that one."

Here we see EAST, WEST, SOUTH, and GOD. Satan sought "sit upon the mount if assembly in the uttermost parts of the north." I believe the symbolism is that Satan sought to usurp the authority of God.

Five times is uttered "I will ... ".

Satan set his will to "make myself like the Most High" . Of course no being can be higher then the Most High. But Satan sought to be LIKE the Most High.

Yes. In the backround of the scripture there is the king of Babylon. But God for a moment is addressing the real supernatural SOURCE of all of man's pride. The evil proud monarch behind all of the earthly monarchs is the being who sought to be like the Most High God.

He was there in the early moments of the creation, in the dawn of the world. So he is called "O Daystar, son of the dawn".

In the dawn of the universe Satan was previously the Daystar. And the passage in Isaiah 14 is an instance of the prophetic past, speaking over what is earthly, to expose the Devil's origin.

The eternal damnation has been prepared for the devil and his angels (Matt. 25:41; Rev. 20:10)


He knows that he is going there. He does not rule there as popular religous fiction might portray. He knows his eternal destiny is eternal damnation. He desires to take with him as many deceived human sinners as he can.

The evil angels and the demonic beings know that they are going into eternal damnation too. The demons protested to Jesus Christ, asking if He had come to torment them before the proper time:

"And behold they [demons] cried out, saying, What do we have to do with You, Son of God? Have You come here before the time to torment us ?" (Matthew 8:24)



"

More Bogeyman stories.

Originally posted by caissad4
I agree.
The 2 religions I know of which could be called Luciferean define Lucifer as a light bearer. Misguided Christians think he is Satan.

Thanks... 🙂

***Satan is also known as the "Father of all lies". The greatest lie is that he exists!

***Satan and all forms of such is humanity's greatest denial of its own mind-born pathologies and the dark side. .

***The Satan concept is born and dies in our own hearts and minds.

***Where is this Satan?

***To say that "The devil made me do it" is either moral cowardice or a form of ideational insanity.

***Satan concept has been used by the Christian Church and other religions to perform the most horrible of human acts against others. It ever enslaves reason.

***Without dark light can not shine. We do not pursue mind-born darkness that is an unavoidable aspect of existence, but we proceed towards the mind's light, that ultimately liberates and perfects all, including the Satan concept.

***Neither love nor hate "Satan", and "he" will die immediately.

Originally posted by Taoman
***Satan is also known as the "Father of all lies". The greatest lie is that he exists!

***Satan and all forms of such is humanity's greatest denial of its own mind-born pathologies and the dark side. .

***The Satan concept is born and dies in our own hearts and minds.

***Where is this Satan?

***To say that "The devil made me do it" is either mora the Satan concept.

***Neither love nor hate "Satan", and "he" will die immediately.

===================================
***To say that "The devil made me do it" is either moral cowardice or a form of ideational insanity.
=======================================

I suppose the above is good advice for anyone wants to seriously follow the comedian Flip Wilson.

Satan is interested in two kinds of people:

1.) Those who deny his existence.

2.) Those with an inordinate preoccupation with it.

In otherwords, just like C.S. Lewis said. Satan sends errors into the world as two opposite extremes. This is to trap people on one extreme side or trap people on the opposing extreme side.

If your too interested in his existence, he'll trap you up in that.
If you deny his existence he'll trap you up in that.