5short8deep

First of all, I would like to thank the Siddha corporation that sends free lessons to those incarcerated. I was incarcerated myself, and read a few lessons. I practiced those lessons, and went further with the main idea behind those lessons, and about a year later: Badabing, my mind stopped it's stupid dialogue/monologue.
Here is something which I found later in my incarceration. I cannot get an answer, or anything, but some sort of denial\misdirection from all the Christians I have asked. I wish to understand what your opinions are of my view that Jesus is equating himself with Satan. First,
Revelation 22:16 (KJV) 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.
Now, looking back at:
Isaiah 14:12 (KJV) 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!
Which Jesus is the only one in the whole Bible to equate to Satan in:
Luke 10:18 (KJV) And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven.
Now, if you are to actually look at what Lucifer means: it is a translation of the Hebrew Heylel:
H-1966. heylel, hay-lale';
from H-1984 (in the sense of brightness); the morning-star:--lucifer.

.... H-1984. halal, haw-lal';
a prim. root; to be clear (orig. of sound, but usually of color); to shine; hence to make a show, to boast; and thus to be (clamorously) foolish; to rave; causat. to celebrate; also to stultify:--(make) boast (self), celebrate, commend, (deal, make), fool (-ish, -ly), glory, give [light], be (make, feign self) mad (against), give in marriage, [sing, be worthy of] praise, rage, renowned, shine

Now, I wish to listen to your opinion of why this is. So far I have only heard “No, it cannot be. Those are two different writers, etc. etc.” In a book inspired by God when the writer of Revelation clearly states in two different and differing terms the exact meaning of Heylel, i.e. bright and morning star.
I have really only studied the King James version of the Bible because it was the only thing around for over 200 years, neh? Nowadays, versions are springing up like morning flowers. But the question of the matter is not the Bible, it is the wording… The Hebrew word is still the same, and so is the Greek translation of it.
P(ost)S(oulsearch): I am not trying to sway anybody, or anything of the sort. I am merely trying to understand why I see what I see.
It equates the Brahman trinity with the Christian trinity perfectly, i.e. Jesus is Shiva. I cannot understand how this could have slipped by 1500+ years of intense study. Please actually consider what I am saying.

kiwimac

This thread will do better in GRD, I think.

Demigawd

Biblical Criticism might be a better forum for this question as it seems to revolve around translation accuracy.

BTW, welcome to the site, 5short8deep.

kiwimac

I might at that but I wonder if the point is not wider than simple Biblical Criticism.

Stacey Melissa

Mod note: After some discussion, the mods decided to move the thread to BC&H.

Stacey Melissa
Supervisor

Toto

I've renamed this thread to clarify the question.

Some threads from the past on this: Was Jesus in league with Satan?

Is Jesus Satan?

which references http://lds-mormon.com/lucifer.shtml

bacht

Here are the passages from the RSV translation (1952):


How you are fallen from heaven,
O Day Star, son of Dawn!
How you are cut down to the ground,
you who laid the nations low!

Isaiah 14:12


"I Jesus have sent my angel to you with this testimony for the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, the bright morning star."

Revelation 22:16


And [the Lord] said to them, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven.”

Luke 10:18


The Luke passage seems unrelated. But it does seem like the author of Revelation used the same imagery as Isaiah (sorry 5s8d I don't know Hebrew or Greek)

Sign Related

Star, morning, lightening. In common the brightness.

Isaiah-Revelation-Luke (Is Rev Luke. Implying, the reader as like their reading equal to a rising or lowing therm. where the mercury in center is the weight behind the up or down indication.) Every human play the role of a Rev. Luke in how a person absorbs what lies in writing before them. Certain say warm (lukewarm) a person is when close, then hot when dead on, but cold when so afar off.

May even get "Lu Je Sa" from Lucifer-Jesus-Satan. Only in a meaning for infolding for a wise reader. A key in the gospels is the word "likewise" which is a lot which is saying something to the reader wise. Hear the main quote and note the "33" how it aid as if fallen in the right place too well:

"33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors."--Matt 24:33

At doors is the names Lucifer, Jesus, Satan, one may say for a history or timeline or order account. Certain (the lukewarm) keep the door closed to certain in those names. And certain (the lukewarm) open the door to certain in those names. And plus, certain (the cold) keep the door shut to each name those names. But then, certain (the hot) open the door to each name those names.

show_no_mercy

Hey! This thread is a mirror of my first post on IIDB.

The reason why Jesus is "equated" with Lucifer/Satan is because the writer of Revelation, writing in Greek, was unaware of any creature called "Lucifer" (a Latin word) in Isaiah 12:14 (a Hebrew text). Lucifer is Latin for "morning star", not an evil being. Satan is Hebrew for "adversary" or "stumbling block". It's a later Christian tradition to equate "adversary" with "morning star"; equating the character "Satan" with the title "Lucifer", which still persists to this day.

It's nice for pointing out the unreliability of language translations and how the bible is actually errant, but other than that it doesn't have any theological connotations.

Cesc

I find this subject fascinating.
The idea of the Morning Star of Isaiah's time (OT) is much different from the meaning of the Morning Star at the time of the NT writers, where it evidently had a highly symbolic value on a divine, mystical level.


Most cultures have a myth about Venus, the morning star astrological phenomenon (and Venus, the evening star). The Massai tribes of Africa has Venus in a myth called "the Orphan Boy" (because Venus characteristically appears alone in the sky, drifting away from the sun and moon), some American Indian tribes believe the morning and evening stars were put there as guiding lights to indicate when to return with the herds at night and to indicate sunrise and east and west. The Latin term for "Morning Star" is "Lucifer".

The Greeks had the morning and evening stars as sons of the dawn goddess, Eos. Same thing in Canaan at the time of Isaiah, where "Eos" was called "Shakar" (Dawn). Her son, the morning star, was Helel (Shining, etc.), known as Helel ben Shakar (that Isaiah talks about).

It would seem that at Isaiah's time Helel ben Shakar had a myth, where he had tried to rise to the heavens but had fallen. Because it corresponds to the way Venus is seen from earth: The brightest object in the sky (after the sun and moon), though perplexingly it can never rise much above the horizon to the highest regions of the heavens (because Venus is between the earth and the sun) like the other great lights of the sky. It seems to be permanently fallen or excluded from heaven.
Isaiah then compares the future fate of Babylon's king to this popular Canaanite myth about the Morning Star.

In any case, this "fallen Morning Star" from Isaiah is not to be confused with the general myth of the "fallen angels" (perhaps originally a shooting star myth). But this is exactly what has happened.
This myth of the "fallen angels" developes independantly over time (Book of Enoch) and explains the whole "Nephilim" deal from Genesis 6. And to the Gospel writers, the chief conspirator among this heavenly rebellion of fallen angels was Satan, who consequently fell from heaven. To the NT writers the Morning Star had nothing whatsoever to do with this "fallen angels" myth.
Phosphoros, the Morning Star, was something divine and highly symbolic:
Jerome in his Latin Vulgate translated both "Helel ben Shakar" of Isaiah and the "morning star" in the NT (Phosphoros) as "Lucifer" and thus began the real confusion. The KJV kept the word "Lucifer" in Isaiah's verse, which has helped to peddle the more modern tradition of Satan being "Lucifer".