Isaiah 14: What say you

[quantumfaith]

Reading in Isaiah, today in Chapter 14:

Question 1: Is this scripture a "duble entendre" meant to address "lucifer" and his fall? Or is it simply a prophetic indictment against Babylon?

Question 2: What are some of the reasons that Babylon plays such a significant role in the representation of wickedness, as opposed to other nations and empires?

Question 3: For you "archaelogical" types. Have there been any definitive discoveries as to the location of ancient Babylon?

Thanks in advance. Trying to give some context to my reading of Isaiah.

 

[Greektim]

"Lucifer" needs to be removed from English vocabulary, and the concept of Lucifer as Satan needs to be forgotten since it was never believed before English translations botching this up.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

"Lucifer" needs to be removed from English vocabulary, and the concept of Lucifer as Satan needs to be forgotten since it was never believed before English translations botching this up.

Did you know the KJV translators didn't actually "translate" the word? They simply repeated what was printed in the Latin Vulgate, since they had no idea what the word meant.

The Hebrew word ‏הילל is rendered "Lucifer" in the KJV. Everyone knows that. The word occurs only here in the Hebrew Old Testament. Most likely, the KJV translators were not sure what to make of it, and simply duplicated the word used in the Latin Vulgate that translated ‏הילל. In the Vulgate, Isaiah 14:12 reads as follows:

quomodo cecidisti de caelo lucifer qui mane oriebaris corruisti in terram qui vulnerabas gentes.
​

Notice the fifth word of the text -- "lucifer." It is not a proper name but the Latin word for "morning star." The Latin word lucifer occurs four times in the Vulgate: Isaiah 14:12, Job 11:17, Job 38:32, and 2 Peter 1:19. In Job 11:17, the KJV renders the Hebrew word ‏בקר as "morning":

et quasi meridianus fulgor consurget tibi ad vesperam et cum te consumptum putaveris orieris ut lucifer​

In Job 38:32, the KJV renders the Hebrew word ‏מזרות as mazzaroth. This is another word that occurs only once in the Hebrew Bible. The KJV translators did not know what it meant, so they simply transliterated the Hebrew into English characters. Even though Jerome, the translator of the Vulgate, knew Hebrew better than the KJV translators did, he was not exactly sure what to make of it either. But he at least tried, rather than simply leave the word untranslated as the KJV translators did. He translated the word as lucifer—or"‘morning star," which is very close to the meaning of the Hebrew ‏מזרות:

numquid producis luciferum in tempore suo et vesperum super filios terrae consurgere facis​

The word means "constellations" or "crowns" (modern translators are not sure, though "constellations" is usually preferred). The fact that Jerome recognized that at least the ‏מזרות probably referred to stars is far better than the KJV translators did by leaving the word completely untranslated. There is of course no conspiracy on Jerome’s part here. He was simply being faithful to the Hebrew Bible and translated it as accurately as he could.

 

[Greektim]

Did you know the KJV translators didn't actually "translate" the word? They simply repeated what was printed in the Latin Vulgate, since they had no idea what the word meant.

The Hebrew word ‏הילל is rendered "Lucifer" in the KJV. Everyone knows that. The word occurs only here in the Hebrew Old Testament. Most likely, the KJV translators were not sure what to make of it, and simply duplicated the word used in the Latin Vulgate that translated ‏הילל. In the Vulgate, Isaiah 14:12 reads as follows:

quomodo cecidisti de caelo lucifer qui mane oriebaris corruisti in terram qui vulnerabas gentes.
​

Notice the fifth word of the text -- "lucifer." It is not a proper name but the Latin word for "morning star." The Latin word lucifer occurs four times in the Vulgate: Isaiah 14:12, Job 11:17, Job 38:32, and 2 Peter 1:19. In Job 11:17, the KJV renders the Hebrew word ‏בקר as "morning":

et quasi meridianus fulgor consurget tibi ad vesperam et cum te consumptum putaveris orieris ut lucifer​

In Job 38:32, the KJV renders the Hebrew word ‏מזרות as mazzaroth. This is another word that occurs only once in the Hebrew Bible. The KJV translators did not know what it meant, so they simply transliterated the Hebrew into English characters. Even though Jerome, the translator of the Vulgate, knew Hebrew better than the KJV translators did, he was not exactly sure what to make of it either. But he at least tried, rather than simply leave the word untranslated as the KJV translators did. He translated the word as lucifer—or"‘morning star," which is very close to the meaning of the Hebrew ‏מזרות:

numquid producis luciferum in tempore suo et vesperum super filios terrae consurgere facis​

The word means "constellations" or "crowns" (modern translators are not sure, though "constellations" is usually preferred). The fact that Jerome recognized that at least the ‏מזרות probably referred to stars is far better than the KJV translators did by leaving the word completely untranslated. There is of course no conspiracy on Jerome’s part here. He was simply being faithful to the Hebrew Bible and translated it as accurately as he could.

All I said is that the word should be removed from English translations. I know it was transliterated from the Latin translation. My point is that Isa. 14 is not about Satan, and Satan's name (even if Isa. 14 was about Satan) is not revealed there. That is more KJV error.

 

[convicted1]

According to the Nave's Topical bible, they state it as referring to King Nebuchadnezzer.....

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

All I said is that the word should be removed from English translations. I know it was transliterated from the Latin translation. My point is that Isa. 14 is not about Satan, and Satan's name (even if Isa. 14 was about Satan) is not revealed there. That is more KJV error.

I'm the farthest you can get from a KJV-Onlyist. I'm an NASB user myself. But the reality is, Isaiah 14:12 does refer to Satan being cast out of heaven. "Morning star" is a euphemism for his egocentric character.

 

[OldRegular]

Reading in Isaiah, today in Chapter 14:

Question 1: Is this scripture a "duble entendre" meant to address "lucifer" and his fall? Or is it simply a prophetic indictment against Babylon?

Question 2: What are some of the reasons that Babylon plays such a significant role in the representation of wickedness, as opposed to other nations and empires?

Question 3: For you "archaelogical" types. Have there been any definitive discoveries as to the location of ancient Babylon?

Thanks in advance. Trying to give some context to my reading of Isaiah.

It is simply a prophetic indictment against Babylon, in particular Nebuchadnezzar.

 

[Winman]

Reading in Isaiah, today in Chapter 14:

Question 1: Is this scripture a "duble entendre" meant to address "lucifer" and his fall? Or is it simply a prophetic indictment against Babylon?

I believe it is also speaking of Satan. By the way, Satan has not fallen from heaven yet as many believe, he can still travel between earth and heaven as shown in the book of Job. He will not be cast out of heaven until Revelation 12;

Rev 12:7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,
8 And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.
9 And 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.
10 And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.

Question 2: What are some of the reasons that Babylon plays such a significant role in the representation of wickedness, as opposed to other nations and empires?

A good book you might enjoy on this subject is The Two Babylons.

http://www.cbcg.org/franklin/The-Two-Babylons.pdf

Scroll down and look at many of the images, many of which you will recognize, especially if you were a Catholic at one time.

Question 3: For you "archaelogical" types. Have there been any definitive discoveries as to the location of ancient Babylon?

Yes, the location of ancient Babylon is known, I believe it is southeast of Baghdad on the Euphrates River in modern Iraq.

Thanks in advance. Trying to give some context to my reading of Isaiah.

Read The Two Babylons, the author argues that all false religions ultimately came from Babylon about the time of Nimrod. Fascinating study.

 

[OldRegular]

I believe it is also speaking of Satan. By the way, Satan has not fallen from heaven yet as many believe, he can still travel between earth and heaven as shown in the book of Job. He will not be cast out of heaven until Revelation 12;

Rev 12:7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,
8 And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.
9 And 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.
10 And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.



A good book you might enjoy on this subject is The Two Babylons.

http://www.cbcg.org/franklin/The-Two-Babylons.pdf

Scroll down and look at many of the images, many of which you will recognize, especially if you were a Catholic at one time.





Yes, the location of ancient Babylon is known, I believe it is southeast of Baghdad on the Euphrates River in modern Iraq.



Read The Two Babylons, the author argues that all false religions ultimately came from Babylon about the time of Nimrod. Fascinating study.

The opening passages of Revelation 12 picture the birth of jesus Christ and the New Testament Church! If Satan ever was in Heaven, which is debatable, he is not there now.

 

[Winman]

The opening passages of Revelation 12 picture the birth of jesus Christ and the New Testament Church! If Satan ever was in Heaven, which is debatable, he is not there now.

You need to read the whole chapter. It speaks of Jesus being caught up to heaven. Later we are told that the Serpent goes to persecute Christians.

Rev 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

The woman is Israel, and the remnant of her seed is those Jews who will be saved during the tribulation.

Satan will bring all nations against Jerusalem, the Lord will set foot on Mt. Olives and create a great valley for these Jews to escape, just as they escaped Pharaoh.

15 And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood.
16 And the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his mouth.

These events are future.

 

[OldRegular]

You need to read the whole chapter. It speaks of Jesus being caught up to heaven. Later we are told that the Serpent goes to persecute Christians.

Rev 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

The woman is Israel, and the remnant of her seed is those Jews who will be saved during the tribulation.

Satan will bring all nations against Jerusalem, the Lord will set foot on Mt. Olives and create a great valley for these Jews to escape, just as they escaped Pharaoh.

15 And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood.
16 And the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his mouth.

These events are future.

That is a dispensational interpretation and is incorrect!