You will take up this taunt against the king of Babylon: Isaiah 14:3
How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth...Isaiah 14:12
Compare with Revelation 12:9
The great dragon was hurled down--that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him.
So this is a double reference prophecy.
Why is there so much controversy over it?
All of the devout preachers before about 1950 believed the KJV of the Bible to be the inerrant Word of God. They would not accept the 1881 ASV (Wescott-Hort) edition, because of the many changes and deletions. It is since that time that there has been so much controversy concerning many Scriptures of the Bible--all the bibles are not all saying the same thing.
When men believed the KJV to be inerrant, there were many great moves of the Spirit, and there have been none since. Finney, Moody, Whitefield, Wigglesworth, Murray--all of the preachers believed the Word of God.
I did not invent the name of Satan, it is recorded in the Word of God. The center references in the KJV show that scholars and theologians believed the name of Lucifer refers to the fall of Satan.
"Did the king of Babylon fall from heaven? Was he the bright shining one that said he would ascend above the heavens and above the heights of the clouds and would be like God? I think not!"
No disrespect intended, Abigail, but the context of Isaiah 14 demands that Lucifer be understood as the King of Babylon. Why would you disregard the context and then go on a speculation spree? I don't ask this to be insulting but I really am shocked that so many people won't take the context of the prophets seriously. This seems to fly in the face of proclaiming the bible to be inerrant, internally consistant, self defining and free of contradiction.
Instead of dogmatically tossing out the strong implications of Isaiah 14 that a king of Babylon was at the very least a type of Lucifer simply because you "think" you know everything there is to know about Satan; why not first make sure you know everything the bible has to say about Babylon and the Caldeans?
A good place to start might be to cross reference the prophecy Paul cited in Acts 13:40-41 with its source prophecy in Habakkuk 1:5 and its context to the end of the chapter. (And, no, I will not comment on what I believe this cross reference teaches.)
O.E. Lucifer "Satan," also "morning star," from L. Lucifer "morning star," lit. "light-bringing," from lux (gen. lucis) + ferre "carry" (see infer).
Belief that it was the proper name of Satan began with its used in Bible to translate Gk. Phosphoros, which translates Heb. Helel ben Shahar in Isaiah xiv.12 -- "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!" [KJV] The verse was interpreted by Christians as a reference to "Satan," because of the mention of a fall from Heaven, even though it is literally a reference to the King of Babylon (cf. Isaiah xiv.4).
ORIs his name phosphorus???Is his name helel ben shahar???
Why do we require his name?
There are other Scriptures that tell of Satan and his fall from heaven; therefore it is hard to understand why people refuse to believe his name is Lucifer.
We have been given the names of the Archangels, the cherubim--Michael and Gabriel. Why do people think it is presumptous to know the once heavenly name of Satan?
All of these scholars only tell us, "who Lucifer is not". I have never heard an explanation of who they think He is.
H.P.Blavatsdy (1831-1891) Spiritualist and theosophist, then editor of "Lucifer" magazine is called "Godmother of the New age Movement". She said "One of the most hidden secrets..involved the so-called fall of Angels, Satan and his rebellious host..will thus prove to have...become direct Savior and Creator of divine man...Thus Satan, once he ceased to be viewed in the superstitious spirit of the church, grows into the grandiose image..It is Satan who is the God of our planet and the only God. Satan, or Lucifer represents...the Centrifugal Energy of the Universe...this ever living symbol of self-sacrifice...Lucifer represents life..thought..progress..civilization..liberty..independence..Lucifer is the Logos..the Serpent..the Savior. Much more could be added--but lack of space)
Who do you think Lucifer is? Not--who he is not?
The Ancient Hebrew Canon of the patriarchs disappeared with the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. But a century or more prior to the Incarnation, the Jews embraced the Septuagint, which is a Greek translation of the Ancient Hebrew Canon.
Jesus and the apostles authenticated the Septuagint by quoting from it. Thus, the Septuagint is a faithful representation of the Ancient Hebrew, whereas the Masoretic Text is not.
Regarding the lion and the lamb: it is (1) the wolf and the lamb, and (2) the lion and the calf and the ox, and (3) the leopard and the kid which feed together.
The idea that Lucifer is Satan is one of those ideas that everyone knows but no-one ever bothers to find out evidence for. It reminds me of the lion-lying-down-with-the-lamb phrase which is repeated among Christians, but which is not in the Bible.
Freemasonry is Luciferian though many of its members will not admit it. They are the ones that have formed the secret societies--Skull and Bones, Trilateral Commission, CFR, Priory of Sion, and many more.Satan goes about as a roaring lion seeking shom he may devour. (I Peter 5:8)
The 'eye in the triangle' is not the eye of the Christian God. This is the 'Eye of Horus' in Egyptian mythology and in reality represents the eye of Lucifer ...The 'eye in the triangle' is not the eye of the Christian God. This is the 'Eye of Horus' in Egyptian mythology and in reality represents the eye of Lucifer ...www.caterpillar.org.uk/warning/fseals.htm