Heyle (hay-lale'} is the Hebrew name for Lucifer

[link to www.ubm1.org]

If you were yoked to the Holy Spirit, the answer would have come to you. YHWH is the one who raises up earthly leaders and brings them down:

Ezekiel 30:24-25 And I will strengthen the arms of the king of Babylon and put my sword in his hand, but I will break the arms of Pharaoh, and he will groan before him like a man mortally wounded. I will strengthen the arms of the king of Babylon, but the arms of Pharaoh shall fall. Then they shall know that I am the Lord, when I put my sword into the hand of the king of Babylon and he stretches it out against the land of Egypt.

Isaiah 45:1 Thus says the LORD to his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have grasped, to subdue nations before him and to loose the belts of kings, to open doors before him that gates may not be closed.

Ezra 1:2 "Thus says Cyrus king of Persia: The LORD, the God of heaven, has given me all the kingdoms of the earth, and he has charged me to build him a house at Jerusalem, which is in Judah."

In the Book of Daniel, the King of Babylon thought himself the one who conquered the known world ("shining one"=proud one, "son of the dawn"=favored by the heavens, seeing himself as a god) and brought down low, just as it was foretold in Isaiah. Nothing more...

While it is fine to study ancient history for clarity, we cannot go to far in assigning the will of YHWH in the actions and beliefs of man. The tree of the knowledge of good and evil is the tree of DEATH, for knowledge and "soul power" outside of Him and His will does not save the spirit. Eating of the tree of life means to take the will of the Almighty and have it become your nature. In eternity, we have forever to obtain knowledge and power.

Its not about being right or wrong. To understand Heyle is important. The more we understand the more awake we are. Yes it is also about the King of Babylon who is a lot of different characters in different religions, which all have half truths. We can find the truth about an individual by putting all the truths together. It brings us up to our time, who is Heyle in our present time? The search for historical truths help us to understand how we can solve our own problems.

Death existed before Adam and Eve. Yahoshua makes it plain that know one has ever known his father, He came to reveal him. Yahoshua the Nazoraion is the savior of all. Heyle will not win in the end, though he is the God of this world his Kingdom will fail.

Stauros not a Cross. Nazoraion not Christian, hmm

Last Edited by NZREva on 11/12/2012 06:48 PM

this is get, but...

...where does this story come from? is that from hebrew texts?

i highly recommend 'belzebub's tales to his grandson'.

gurdjieff's writing style is superb, compared to any other writer i've read. no other author has managed to construct sentences half a page long, while keeping them both linguistically and logically correct, with room for double-entendres and many symbolic layers...

Heyle is the son of Shachar. Lucifer is a Latin word you will not find this name in any other text except Latin. Before Latin was Hebrew and Heyle is the name of the son of Shachar.
As far as Shachar which translates shachar {shakh'-ar}
Meaning: 1) dawn at dawn (as adverb)
Origin: from 07836; TWOT - 2369a; n m
Usage: AV - morning 12, day 6, early 2, dayspring 1, light 1, riseth 1, Shahar 1; 24 also black

No one knows how many sons or daughters Shachar has, we only hear about Heyle which ther has been a huge cover up about Heyle..

Last Edited by NZREva on 11/13/2012 11:40 AM

Satan means advasary, it does not apply to just one person.

Writings from Gilgamesh and Genesis accounts
Thread: Writings from Gilgamesh and Genesis accounts

Early Hebrew used different markings, we have no way of knowing how to pronounce it.

[link to www.ancient-hebrew.org]
Look at the Hhet it looks like a latter poorly built, then look at the El a sprouted grain also, it later becomes an Aleph, look at the lam, later to become the lamed, it looks like a sloppy L, why is it a shepard staff in early Hebrew?

Remember early Hebrew did not use vowels so the to remove the a and e which is a vowel in late Hebrew is a question we should consider unless they are not counted as vowels in early Hebrew.
What I am saying is there a alot of things to consider, as of now this world looks like a Strong power rot leader or El which = a God. Gods to the early people had a different meaning than what we have today, the Gods then were bigger stronger smarter and lived much longer than their subjects. They were a type of flesh, and they died.

yelal above,
This is the root
yalal
[link to www.blueletterbible.org]

Last Edited by NZREva on 09/30/2013 11:30 PM

MLK no vowels in early Hebrew = King
[link to www.blueletterbible.org]

MLK in Hebrew is Moloch
[link to www.blueletterbible.org]

The word King and Moloch is a tyrant. Jesus or Yehoshua is not King he is an elected official of the highest order, he never has nor will he every force you to bow. As the Apostle Paul met him Paul realized however, he was worth following.
The system to has Moloch in charge in almost every part of our life. Those who are of the Truth hear his voice.

Eze 28:13
Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering, the sardius, topaz, and the diamond, the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper, the sapphire, the emerald, and the carbuncle, and gold: the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created.

This scripture says The King of Babylon was in Eden, The Garden of Elohim (God) He had 9 stones not 12 as Israel had. It goes on to say he was perfect that means he was created to have only 9 stones. the three that are missing are.... to be continued

Halal meat as well.

Interesting, never thought about that.

Satan didnt fall
He was CAST OUT

7And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, 8And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven. 9And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him

Also satan means adversary NOT SHINING

Strong's Concordance
satan: adversary, also the name of the superhuman adversary of God
Original Word: שָׂטָן
Part of Speech: Noun Masculine
Transliteration: satan
Phonetic Spelling: (saw-tawn')
Short Definition: Satan
NAS Exhaustive Concordance
Word Origin
of uncertain derivation
Definition
adversary, also the name of the superhuman adversary of God
NASB Translation
accuser (1), adversary (8), Satan (18).

Brown-Driver-Briggs
שָׂטָן noun masculinePsalm 109:6
1 adversary.

2 Satan (Late Hebrew שָׂטָן, סָטָן; Aramaic שָׂטָנָא, סָטָנָא, Syriac (Hebrew); Late Hebrew verb סָטַן, Aramaic סְטַן; Arabic is be remote, especially from the truth, and from the mercy of God; Satan, Ethiopic :); —

1 adversary, in General, personal or national; (ל) ׳הָיָה לְשׂ Numbers 22:22 (JE), 1 Samuel 29:4 (compare NesMarg. 15), 2 Samuel 19:23, ׳יָצָא לְשׂ Numbers 22:32 (JE); ׳שׂ 1 Kings 5:18; 1 Kings 11:25; ל ׳הֵקִים שׂ, subject God 1 Kings 11:14,23, compare Psalm 109:6 ("" רָשָׁע).

2 superhuman adversary, ׳הַשּׂ:

a. of Job, one of בְּנֵי אֱלֹהִים Job 1:6,7 (twice in verse); Job 1:8,9,12 (twice in verse); Job 2:1,2(twice in verse); Job 2:3,4 (twice in verse); Job 2:6,7.

b. of high priest of Israel before ׳י, Zechariah 3:1,2(twice in verse); ᵐ5. ὁ διάβολος.

c. as proper name ׳שׂ Satan 1 Chronicles 21:1 (interpret 2 Samuel 24:1), ᵐ5 διάβολος (ᵐ5 σατάν 1 Kings 11:14,23; Σατανᾶς Matthew 4:10; Mark 1:13; Luke 10:18 33t. NT).



Strong's Exhaustive Concordance
adversary, Satan, withstand
From satan; an opponent; especially (with the article prefixed) Satan, the arch-enemy of good -- adversary, Satan, withstand.

see HEBREW satan

Forms and Transliterations
הַשָּׂטָ&#142​8;ן הַשָּׂטָ&#143​0;ן הַשָּׂטָ&#143​1;ן הַשָּׂטָ&#143​5;ן הַשָּׂטָ&#144​4;ן הַשָּׂטָ&#150​3;֙ השטן וְ֝שָׂטָ&#143​1;ן וְהַשָּׂ&#149​6;ָ֛ן והשטן ושטן לְשָׂטָ֑&#150​3; לְשָׂטָ֔&#150​3; לְשָׂטָ֖&#150​3; לְשָׂטָ֣&#150​3; לשטן שָׂטָ֔ן שָׂטָ֖ן שָׂטָ֤ן שָׂטָן֙ שטן haś·śā·ṭān hassaTan haśśāṭān lə·śā·ṭān lesaTan ləśāṭān śā·ṭān saTan śāṭān vehassaTan vesaTan wə·haś·śā·ṭān wə·śā·ṭān wəhaśśāṭān wəśāṭān
Links
Interlinear Greek • Interlinear Hebrew • Strong's Numbers • Englishman's Greek Concordance • Englishman's Hebrew Concordance • Parallel Texts

[link to biblehub.com]

The word lucifer has NOTHING TO DO WITH SATAN
NEVER HAS NEVER WILL

How's those Catholic fairy tales working out for you?

The reason IS the original word USED for shining in Isaiah HELEL
IT WAS NOT A PERSONAL NAME
IT IS DESCRIPTIVE

SHINING IS A GODLIKE QUALITY

GOD WAS MOCKING THE KING OF BABYLON AND HIS FALSE SHINING GODS
AND IDENTIFYING THE KING WITH THEM
GOD WAS MOCKING THE FALSE GODS

THE SHINING ONES SO CALLED OF BABYLON

THE WORD USED INNTHE ORIGINAL TEXT
HEYLE
Only denoted the quality of something that shines

It had nothing to do with the quality of satan
Only in that the king of babylon thought of himself to be shining like a god and like his false gods of babylon
Who were known as the shining ones.



Just about every Christian I know takes for granted that "Lucifer" is the devil. If you look up the name "Lucifer" in the dictionary, you will find him defined as "…a proud, rebellious archangel, identified with Satan, who fell from heaven."
Throughout much, though not all of, Christian history, it has been thought and taught that "Lucifer" is one of the names for the devil. In Christian writing, Lucifer’s identify as the devil is taken for granted: "His name is Lucifer (Satan)…" and "Lucifer, known as Satan after his rebellion…" etc. etc. Typically, "Lucifer" is depicted as a goat-like figure with horns, cloven hoofs, and a tail.

The fact of the matter is that Satan the devil is no where described in the Bible as Lucifer. The only Scriptural reference to a "Lucifer" is in Isaiah 14:12 – and then only in some translations. The proper name "Lucifer" does not appear in the original text of Isaiah.

Isaiah 14 Not About Satan’s Origins
It is also commonly taught in Christian circles that Isaiah 14 includes a description of the origins of Satan the devil. It does not. The subject of Isaiah 14 is the "King of Babylon" (v. 4) and he is not a "type of Satan." The Lord is telling Israel through the prophet Isaiah that a time will come when the cruel yoke of Babylon will be lifted from the national shoulders. The language is dramatic and poetic. Isaiah tells of the demise of the tyrant by saying, "The grave below is all astir to meet you at your coming; it rouses the spirits of the departed to greet you…" (v. 9). Should we take this language literally?

The king is doomed. All of his vaunted worldly and political power will avail him nothing. The great military strength through which he oppressed the nations will do him no good in the "weakness" of death: "…all those who were leaders in the world…will say to you…you also have become weak, as we are; you have become like us…" (vs. 9,10).

That these verses are talking about a mere mortal is obvious from verse 11: "All your pomp has been brought down to the grave, along with the noise of your harps; maggots are spread out beneath you and worms cover you." This is not a description of an archangel, but of a mortal man lying in a grave decaying in death.

Now we come to the key verse (12). The King James Version renders it as follows: "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! How art though cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations."

In spite of this rendering, the proper name "Lucifer" is not in the original Hebrew text. In Hebrew "Lucifer, son of the morning" is helel ben shachar. It could be translated "Shining one, son of the dawn." It is not a proper name, but an epithet for the king of Babylon.

Why then did the King James translators translate "Lucifer" for "Shining one" in this passage?

The answer lies in two earlier translations. In the third century B.C.E., Ptolemy Philadelphus (285-247 B.C.E.), the Greek-speaking Pharoah of Egypt, commissioned a Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures for his own library. Seventy-two scholars performed the work. They became known as "The Seventy." Their translation itself was called "The Septuagint" or "LXX," which are the Roman numerals for "70."

In translating Isaiah 14:12, the Seventy chose the word Heosphoros for the Hebrew helel ben shachar. Heos means "in or of the morning" and phoros means "that which is borne, or bearing." This is not an exact translation of the original Hebrew, but it’s reasonably close.

Jerome’s Translation
As mentioned above, the Septuagint (LXX) translation was commissioned during the reign of Ptolemy Philadelphus. The Prophets section wasn’t completed until around 200 B.C.E. By the time of Jesus and the apostles, the LXX was in common use throughout Palestine. It is clear from the wording that many of the New Testament’s quotations from the Old Testament are taken from the Greek (LXX), rather than the Hebrew, text.

Because Greek is a very different language than Hebrew, much of the original meaning and intent was lost in the LXX.

As empires rose and fell, the fortunes of languages rose and fell with them. The longer the Romans ruled, the more prominent Latin became. During Constantine’s reign, the Roman Empire took over gentile Christianity, politicized it, and made it the state religion. By the fourth century C.E., the Latin "father" Jerome (340 AD – 419 AD) had risen to prominence within the Roman Catholic Church. At the suggestion of Pope Damasus, Jerome began work on a Latin translation of the Bible. After 20 years of toil, the translation now known as the Vulgate was completed in the year 405 C.E.

Jerome used the LXX version, along with the Hebrew, in making his translation. As Church historian Schaff explains, "From the present stage of biblical philology and exegesis the Vulgate can be charged, indeed, with innumerable faults, inaccuracies, inconsistencies, and arbitrary dealing, in particulars…"

When he translated Isaiah 14:12, Jerome did not strictly translate the Hebrew helel ben shachar, nor did he use the Greek (LXX) Heosphoros, which term, by his day, had fallen largely into disuse. Instead he translated as though the original word had been lukophos. Lukophos, by Jerome’s time, had become an epithet for the gods Apollo and Pan. Earlier, Catholic theologians Tertullian and Origen had begun to read Satan into the story of the King of Babylon in Isaiah 14. Jerome’s selection of words may have been influenced by this theology.

As a result of Jerome’s translation, the images of Pan and the Devil were morphed together. Today, the devil is often depicted as "Lucifer," and his appearance is similar to the ancient god Pan, with goat-like features including horns and cloven hoofs. Yet there is nothing in the text itself that would indicate that a figure named "Lucifer" is intended. Nor do these verses in Isaiah 14 represent an account of the fall of the devil. As Dr. John D. Watts explains in his commentary on Isaiah: "…the OT [Old Testament] knows nothing of attempts to dethrone Yahweh…" Watts also observes, "When the poem has been used in apocryphal and Christian circles to picture the fall of the angelic Satan, the reference must be to the shadowy mythical background of the poem rather than to the poem itself. It is significant that the account of the fall of Satan (Rev. 12) makes no reference to Isa 14" (ibid. p. 212).

Who then is Lucifer?
Dr. Roy Blizzard, a well-known Hebrew roots scholar, offers some insightful background, "The history of the origin of a being called Lucifer is interesting. The word Lucifer comes from the Latin verb, luceo, lucere, luxi, which means to shine, to glow, glitter, to be clear. It is light, day dawning. The adjective, lucidus-a-um, means shining, bright, clear, lucid. The noun, lucifer-eri, means the morning star, the planet Venus, or a day. It comes from the adjective lucifer-era-erum, shiny."

The Bible includes no character named Lucifer. Isaiah had never heard of such a being. Nor had the apostles of Jesus’ day. Lucifer, as a manifestation of the devil, is a later invention. We find no association between helel ben shachar of Isaiah 14:12 and Satan until the time of Tertullian (c. 160-230 C.E.) and Origen (c. 185-254 C.E.). The proper name "Lucifer" does not find its way into a translation until Jerome’s time, some 150 years later.

Dr. Watts summarizes, "The apparent reflection of a ‘Lucifer myth’ in v. 12 is just that. It is a simile to picture the fall and disgrace of the tyrant." We learn nothing of the origins of Satan from this story.

Is There a Real Lucifer?
Isaiah 14 is not speaking about the devil, or Lucifer. It is a prophecy against the King of Babylon. The prophecy is delivered in almost florid language. It is colorful and poetic, but it contains no "type of the devil," and no figure called Lucifer. The question then arises, could there be a real Lucifer who is not the devil?

The name Lucifer has been closely associated with various pagan gods including the planet Venus, Apollo and Pan. Venus of course is the morning star which "brings light." Pan was the god who looked like a goat and who entered the fields where peasants worked, frightening them with his presence. This is where the word "panic" originates.

Scripture tells us that pagan idolatry is, in fact, the worship of demons (Deuteronomy 32:17; Psalm 106:36-37; I Corinthians 10:20). The gods of the Romans were not new. They were simply the same ancient gods of earlier peoples – the Sumerians, Babylonians, Egyptians, Canaanites, Persians and the Greeks. With the introduction into new cultures, these gods were renamed and new, culturally relevant, stories were attached to their mythology. In ancient times, the stars and planets were thought to be celestial beings to whom one must sacrifice to be blessed. The planet later known as Venus had been worshipped from very early times. She was always a "light-bringer" of some sort.

In the Sumerian religion, the most important goddess in the pantheon was Innana or Ninanna, the "mistress of heaven." "As an astral deity Inanna represents the planet Venus, the morning and evening star." Later, she becomes known as Ishtar, the goddess of the morning and evening star (ibid. p. 56). Says Ringgren, "Ishtar, identified with the Sumerian Ananna, is as an astral deity the planet Venus, the morning and evening star…Her name is etymologically identical with the West Semitic Astarte…and with the South Arabian male deity ‘Athtar or Astar, who in Arabia may perhaps be Venus, but in Ethiopia the god of heaven in general…It is possible that originally this was a bisexual deity"(ibid. p. 59).

This false deity crops up in "…several local forms, which to a certain extent at least may be regarded as having their own individuality, rather in the same way as do the local Madonna’s in Roman Catholicism. There was an Ishtar of Nineveh, an Ishtar of Arbela, and an Ishtar of Bit-kitmuri" (ibid. p. 59).

The bi-sexuality of the "god" may have to do with the morning and evening aspects of Venus. Says Ringgren, "…we are dealing with a differentiation of a deity who was originally bisexual or of indeterminate sex. (In Ugarit there are personal names which describe ‘Athtar both as ‘father’ and as ‘mother’.) Since Ishtar-Astarte was in any case very early connected with the planet Venus, it has been suggested that we are dealing with the role of the planet as morning and evening star" (ibid. p. 142).

Venus worship was prominent in neo-Babylon as much as it was in most other ancient cultures. "Stars" such as Venus were often looked upon as living entities – guardian angels or deities to whom worship was owed. Nebuchadnezzar had such an angel who was known as Kal. Says Dr. Blizzard; "It would appear that the prophet, in attributing to the king of Babylon boastful pride followed by a fall, borrowed from a popular legend connected with the morning star."

According to Scripture, behind the gods of the ancients were in unclean spirits of varying ranks who continued to influence pagan cultures down through history. A high-ranking demon known as "Lucifer" could have been behind Venus worship – or Apollo worship, or Pan worship. There could be many demons named "Lucifer." One demon can have many names, or many demons can have one name (i.e. "Legion").

Aftermaths
We may conclude, then, that Isaiah 14 tells us nothing about the origin and fall of Satan, and that it does not identify Satan as "Lucifer." The subject of the chapter is the king of Babylon, whom God is about to punish. The king will join other deceased world leaders in Sheol, the place of the dead. Though in life he exalted himself to god-like status, in death all of his strength will disappear. People will look at this "corpse trampled underfoot" (Isaiah 14:19b) and ask each other, "Is this the man who shook the earth and made kingdoms tremble?"(v. 16).

All of the kings of Babylon were idolaters. They worshipped gods behind which were demonic spirits. In the face of divine wrath, none of these was able to help the king of Babylon. The mighty neo-Babylonian Empire itself disappeared into the sands of history when the city of Babylon reluctantly opened its gates to the conquering king of Persia in 539 B.C.E. It had lasted just 86 years (625-539 B.C.E.). Though Nebuchadnezzar was not the last king of Babylon, there is a tradition, preserved by Ibn Ezra, that he was dragged out of his grave and cast about just as Isaiah 14:19 suggests.

Under one of his successors, Nabonidus, and Nabonidus’s son, Belshazzar, the Babylonian Empire fell incrementally apart. Nabonidus had undertaken a religious reform to rededicate the nation to the worship of the moon god, Sin. His own mother became high priestess to the moon god in the city of Harran.

The last years of the Babylonian Empire were years of tragedy, palace intrigue and royal murders. Nebuchadnezzar’s son, Evil-Merodach (II Kings 25:27) was assassinated after reigning only two years. Neriglassar survived only one year longer on the throne of Babylon. Labashi-Marduk, who ascended the throne as a child was murdered within a year of his accession.

Nabonidus prayed to one god to preserve him from another. In an inscription found cut into a rock face at the side of and old road used by both Assyrian and Babylonian armies as they traveled to reach the Mediterranean north of Beirut, Nabonidus prays, "(O Moon god) preserve me, Nabonidus, king of Babylon, from Sin. To give me the gift of long life, and as regards Belshazzar, my first born, my dear offspring, put in his heart reverence for thy high divinity."

This same king refers to Marduk as "the lord of the gods" and to Sin as the "lamp of heaven and earth"(ibid.).

The "lamp of heaven and earth" was of no help to the "shining ones" of Babylon. God had asserted His supremacy over the false deities of that great kingdom, and over the kings that worshiped them. Reverence for their "high divinity" accomplished nothing in the face of God’s wrath. The Lord broke the rod, or scepter, of the wicked kings of Babylon (Isaiah14: 5) and freed the children of Israel from Babylonian oppression.

Though ha Satan – the Adversary – stands behind all the ungodly rulers of this world’s system, there is no evidence in Isaiah 14 that the Bible calls him Lucifer, or that this chapter speaks of the origins of the devil. In reality, there is no competition between God and the devil. God can, and does, overrule him any time he wishes to do so. He elevates leaders to office, and removes them (Daniel 2:21, 4:32). Satan operates only with the express permission of God. He is enabled or empowered by human disobedience to God. He is defeated by those who submit themselves to God – in fact, he actually flees from those who resist him in this way (James 4:7). Our Lord defeated Satan and his hordes of demons and subsequently made an open show of them, parading them through cosmic streets like a Roman Centurion with a defeated enemy in tow (Colossians 2:15).

Today, ha Satan is living on borrowed time. When Messiah comes, Satan will exit the scene for a thousand years (Revelation 20:1-2). Peace will break out when the true Light Bringer is on the scene.


Hebrew roots
[link to www.godward.org]

Ezekiel 28 is about the King of Tyre.

Jerome used the LXX version, along with the Hebrew, in making his translation. As Church historian Schaff explains, "From the present stage of biblical philology and exegesis the Vulgate can be charged, indeed, with innumerable faults, inaccuracies, inconsistencies, and arbitrary dealing, in particulars…"

When he translated Isaiah 14:12, Jerome did not strictly translate the Hebrew helel ben shachar, nor did he use the Greek (LXX) Heosphoros, which term, by his day, had fallen largely into disuse. Instead he translated as though the original word had been lukophos. Lukophos, by Jerome’s time, had become an epithet for the gods Apollo and Pan. Earlier, Catholic theologians Tertullian and Origen had begun to read Satan into the story of the King of Babylon in Isaiah 14. Jerome’s selection of words may have been influenced by this theology.

As a result of Jerome’s translation, the images of Pan and the Devil were morphed together. Today, the devil is often depicted as "Lucifer," and his appearance is similar to the ancient god Pan, with goat-like features including horns and cloven hoofs. Yet there is nothing in the text itself that would indicate that a figure named "Lucifer" is intended. Nor do these verses in Isaiah 14 represent an account of the fall of the devil. As Dr. John D. Watts explains in his commentary on Isaiah: "…the OT [Old Testament] knows nothing of attempts to dethrone Yahweh…" Watts also observes, "When the poem has been used in apocryphal and Christian circles to picture the fall of the angelic Satan, the reference must be to the shadowy mythical background of the poem rather than to the poem itself. It is significant that the account of the fall of Satan (Rev. 12) makes no reference to Isa 14" (ibid. p. 212).

Who then is Lucifer?
Dr. Roy Blizzard, a well-known Hebrew roots scholar, offers some insightful background, "The history of the origin of a being called Lucifer is interesting. The word Lucifer comes from the Latin verb, luceo, lucere, luxi, which means to shine, to glow, glitter, to be clear. It is light, day dawning. The adjective, lucidus-a-um, means shining, bright, clear, lucid. The noun, lucifer-eri, means the morning star, the planet Venus, or a day. It comes from the adjective lucifer-era-erum, shiny."

The Bible includes no character named Lucifer. Isaiah had never heard of such a being. Nor had the apostles of Jesus’ day. Lucifer, as a manifestation of the devil, is a later invention. We find no association between helel ben shachar of Isaiah 14:12 and Satan until the time of Tertullian (c. 160-230 C.E.) and Origen (c. 185-254 C.E.). The proper name "Lucifer" does not find its way into a translation until Jerome’s time, some 150 years later.


The "lamp of heaven and earth" was of no help to the "shining ones" of Babylon. God had asserted His supremacy over the false deities of that great kingdom, and over the kings that worshiped them. Reverence for their "high divinity" accomplished nothing in the face of God’s wrath. The Lord broke the rod, or scepter, of the wicked kings of Babylon (Isaiah14: 5) and freed the children of Israel from Babylonian oppression.

Dr. Watts summarizes, " The apparent reflection of a ‘Lucifer myth’ in v. 12 is just that. It is a simile to picture the fall and disgrace of the tyrant." We learn nothing of the origins of Satan from this story.


HEBREW ROOTS
[link to www.godward.org]

So long occult myths

THE LORD jesus destroys you all.

Satan was thrown out of heaven
understand satan was thrown out
SATAN WAS KNOWN AS SATAN
HE WAS NEVER GOOD
HE WAS CAST OUT OF HEAVEN

SEE REVELATIONS

NOTICE HE DID NOT FALL
FROM BEING A GOOD ANGEL TO A BAD ANGEL
HE WAS CAST OUT AS SATAN AND KNOWN AS SATAN BEFORE HE WAS CAST OUT !
Did did NOT fall from being good to bad
But was known to be THAT ANCIENT SERPENT , WHO IS CALLED THE DEVIL AND SATAN

And the great dragon was thrown out, the ancient serpent, who is called the devil and Satan, deceiving the whole inhabited world. He was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him.

[link to biblehub.com]

The only REBELLION GOD IS REFERRING TO IN THE PASSAGES OF ISAIAH AND EZEKIEL IS THE REBELLION OF KINGS
WHICH HE LIKENS TO THE EVIL OF SATAN
NOT ANY SATANIC REBELLION OF SATAN
FOR NOWHERE IS THE ENTIRE SCRIPTURES IS THERE ANY MENTION OF SATAN REBELLING
HE JUST IS KNOW AS SATAN FRON THE BEGINNING

IN OTHER WORDS
THE ACTIONS OF MEN ( KINGS ) WHO ARE OPPOSING GOD
ARE GIVEN AS BEING OF SATAN
WHO ALWAYS IS KNOWN TO OPPOSE GOD.

The good descriptions such as the state of TYRUS AND ITS ROINE TRYE
HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH SATAN EITHER
BUT ARE USED TO SHOW THE PARADISE THE KINGS HAVE LOST
HENCE WE GET
FRON BEING LIKE THE ANOINTED CHERUB IN THR GARDEN OF EDEN, THE PARADISE OF GOD
TO BEING DOOMED TO DESTRUCTION BY GODS WRATH
BECAUSE OF THEIR EVIL.

GOD IS GOOD AND HIS WORD IS A LAMP FOR OUR STEPS
AND GIVES UNDERSTANDING

SO FLEE FRON HEEDING ROMAN CATHOLIC MYTHS WHICH ARE DESIGNED TO PRVERT KNOWLEDGE , THAT IS THE TRUE KNOWLEDGE WHICH COMES FROM GOD AND HIS WORDS RATHER THAN THE MYTHS OF MEN, WHICH IS WHAT THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH INVENT TRADE IN AND DECEIVE WITH.

Satan was thrown out of heaven
understand satan was thrown out
SATAN WAS KNOWN AS SATAN
HE WAS NEVER GOOD
HE WAS CAST OUT OF HEAVEN

SEE REVELATIONS

NOTICE HE DID NOT FALL
FROM BEING A GOOD ANGEL TO A BAD ANGEL
HE WAS CAST OUT AS SATAN AND KNOWN AS SATAN BEFORE HE WAS CAST OUT !
Did did NOT fall from being good to bad
But was known to be THAT ANCIENT SERPENT , WHO IS CALLED THE DEVIL AND SATAN

And the great dragon was thrown out, the ancient serpent, who is called the devil and Satan, deceiving the whole inhabited world. He was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him.

[link to biblehub.com]


You cannot talk of the bible and what it is saying
if you ignore what it says.
Those who do show the height of ignorance.

that sounds like supermans dads name??? or was that what his parents called him/superman?

CHRISTIANS UNDERSTAND THIS

Men who are deceived by satan
Have done satan's bidding and turned transformed satan into an angel of light based upon a roman catholic lie AND myth.
A ROMAN CATHOLIC MYTH WHICH HAS NO BASIS IN ANY SCRIPTURAL TRUTH WHATSOEVER!

All this was done in revenge for the wisdom of christ given to the church
That made PAUL FORE warn of such deception.

12But what I do, that I will do, that I may cut off occasion from them which desire occasion; that wherein they glory, they may be found even as we. 13For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. 14And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. 15Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.




So satan got his CHILDREN THE ROMAN CATHOLIC FALSE TEACHERS TO DO JUST THAT,
AND SO THEY INVENTED THE MYTH OF LUCIFER..
[link to biblehub.com]