Lucifer - fallen angel?

[JeffG]

Interestingly enough, many people are quite happy believing whatever someone tells them without studying for themselves.

Lucifer is not a proper name for a created being at all.

While Revelation mentions the "serpent of old"... there's no link to the specific serpent in the Garden of Eden.

Nowhere in Genesis does scripture call the serpent Satan.

While the serpent & Eden are mentioned in the NT, surprising enough there is no mention of Satan in Eden.

As another poster has indicated - someone came up with this concept of Lucifer, and his fall in the two OT passages, then taught others. There is no way the traditional Lucifer story could be understood from the scripture without someone "explaining" the "deeper meaning behind the scripture". A study of this passage without the "benefit" of this "teaching" would not reveal any such history of Satan, or Lucifer.

But getting people to understand that they have to study for themselves, and not simply buy into everything they've heard is like ... :BangHead:

 

[tinytim]

What were the ancient Jew's take on this?

Anything in Rabbis' writings?

 

[Ed Edwards]

Interestingly enough, many people are quite happy believing whatever someone tells them without studying for themselves.

Lucifer is not a proper name for a created being at all.

While Revelation mentions the "serpent of old"... there's no link to the specific serpent in the Garden of Eden.

Nowhere in Genesis does scripture call the serpent Satan.

While the serpent & Eden are mentioned in the NT, surprising enough there is no mention of Satan in Eden.

As another poster has indicated - someone came up with this concept of Lucifer, and his fall in the two OT passages, then taught others. There is no way the traditional Lucifer story could be understood from the scripture without someone "explaining" the "deeper meaning behind the scripture". A study of this passage without the "benefit" of this "teaching" would not reveal any such history of Satan, or Lucifer.

But getting people to understand that they have to study for themselves, and not simply buy into everything they've heard is like ... :BangHead:

While you are absolutely correct for adults and for
the Baptist Distinctive Doctrine "Soul Competency"
(which is for adults /and 'of age'/) - the problem in
the OP about the 5-year-old still stands. And it
isn't a simple problem and my winning of the
'Lucifer error' argument doesn't help a bit about
the 5-year-old & the concerned parents.
So I'm going to pray for that 5-year-old who
can in NO WAY figure out stuff that is hard for
University &/or Bible College students.

I had the same problem with a 5th Grader but it
was The Church School Principal (an Independent Fundamental
Baptist Pastor), the 5th Grader's Daddy and the
First Chapter of Genesis. We both believed what it
said In Genesis One: that God was the Creator.
But that Pastor & I disagreed he thinking that Genesis One
told all about the details of how God did it & I thought
that Genesis One didn't touch the surface about all the
wonderful things God created when God Created the
Universe(s) and how he put it all together. Of course,
I had two Bachelor of Science degrees; and he was working
on a college English course (Freshman English)
[for which I commend him, as some IFB clergy don't
bother to even graduate from High School].

 

[LeBuick]

This passage is addressed to the King of Babylon (Isaiah 14:4) not the Adversary (satan).

If I understand you, you are implying Lucifer is the King of Babylon? I can't argue with this since the Bible gives us no real definition of who Lucifer is but I want you to hang on to that thought for a bit. Scripture does make other references to something or someone being cast out. Cast out of what? I believe heaven. Who is being cast out, I believe the devil and his angels. Again, I can't argue with anyone who says the Bible doesn't say this specifically.

Jude 1:6 (KJV) And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.

Rev 12:9 (KJV) 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.

Now as for Babylon, I believe you are wrong on the biblical reference to Babylon being an earthly king or kingdom. Babylon has to be a reference to the Satan or his earthly kingdom because it later becomes the object of great focus as far as final victory over evil.

Rev 18:1 (KJV) And after these things I saw another angel come down from heaven, having great power; and the earth was lightened with his glory.
2 And he cried mightily with a strong voice, saying, Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird.
3 For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies.

 

[standingfirminChrist]

Interestingly enough, many people are quite happy believing whatever someone tells them without studying for themselves.

Lucifer is not a proper name for a created being at all.

While Revelation mentions the "serpent of old"... there's no link to the specific serpent in the Garden of Eden.

Nowhere in Genesis does scripture call the serpent Satan.

While the serpent & Eden are mentioned in the NT, surprising enough there is no mention of Satan in Eden.

As another poster has indicated - someone came up with this concept of Lucifer, and his fall in the two OT passages, then taught others. There is no way the traditional Lucifer story could be understood from the scripture without someone "explaining" the "deeper meaning behind the scripture". A study of this passage without the "benefit" of this "teaching" would not reveal any such history of Satan, or Lucifer.

But getting people to understand that they have to study for themselves, and not simply buy into everything they've heard is like ... :BangHead:

The poster that said Lucifer was just a concept is wrong. Lucifer is in the Word of God. It is told he was cast out of heaven. He was in the garden, yet the only voices in the garden are God's (certainly not Lucifer), Adam and Eve (not Lucifer either) the cherubim's placed by God after man was driven out, and the serpent. The serpent is Lucifer. He lied to man, and continues to lie to man to this day.

Greensboro, huh? I have family there and lived there 14 years of my life.

 

[standingfirminChrist]

While you are absolutely correct for adults and for
the Baptist Distinctive Doctrine "Soul Competency"
(which is for adults /and 'of age'/) - the problem in
the OP about the 5-year-old still stands. And it
isn't a simple problem and my winning of the
'Lucifer error' argument doesn't help a bit about
the 5-year-old & the concerned parents.
So I'm going to pray for that 5-year-old who
can in NO WAY figure out stuff that is hard for
University &/or Bible College students.

I had the same problem with a 5th Grader but it
was The Church School Principal (an Independent Fundamental
Baptist Pastor), the 5th Grader's Daddy and the
First Chapter of Genesis. We both believed what it
said In Genesis One: that God was the Creator.
But that Pastor & I disagreed he thinking that Genesis One
told all about the details of how God did it & I thought
that Genesis One didn't touch the surface about all the
wonderful things God created when God Created the
Universe(s) and how he put it all together. Of course,
I had two Bachelor of Science degrees; and he was working
on a college English course (Freshman English)
[for which I commend him, as some IFB clergy don't
bother to even graduate from High School].

and you are wrong as well, EdEdwards...

Lucifer is satan.

 

[Brother Bob]

Could someone prove Lucifer is Satan???

 

[standingfirminChrist]

Could someone prove Lucifer is Satan???

One day, Lucifer will.

It has already been proven, Bob, in the Word of God.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Lucifer is in the Word of God.

Isa 14:12 (Latin Vulgate, 0484 Version )
quomodo cecidisti de caelo lucifer qui mane
oriebaris corruisti in terram qui vulnerabas gentes

'Lucifer' is NOT the Holy Written Word of God;
'Lucifer' is the word of the Roman Catholic Church (RCC).
The Latin Vulgate has been the most used Bible
in the World since before 0500AD - for 1,500 years
It has been the word of the Pope.
(Recall that many Protestants have consider that
the Antichrist is the RCC Pope and the RCC Pope
is the Antichrist).

Even the spelling hasn't changed from the Antichrist Bible
to the KJV. (except the KJV1611 has the REAL MEANING
that is BAPTIST and non-RCC).

Isa 14:12 (KJV1611 Edition):
How art thou fallen from heauen,
||O Lucifer, sonne of the morning?
how art thou cut downe to the ground,
which didst weaken the nations?

Translator's Margin Note:
|| Or, O daystarre.

This notation means that the following is a
perfectly good reading moving from Greek to
Early Modern English

Isa 14:12 (KJV1611 Edition, alternative):
How art thou fallen from heauen,
O daystarre, sonne of the morning?
how art thou cut downe to the ground,
which didst weaken the nations?

Please pray for the 5-year-old & her parents.
5-year-olds are going to have problem when old
men can't even agree.

 

[Brother Bob]

One day, Lucifer will.

It has already been proven, Bob, in the Word of God.__________________

Sorry Sfic but not in what you have posted. Lucifer if mentioned one time in the Scripture as King of Babylon.

Please pray for the 5-year-old & her parents.
5-year-olds are going to have problem when old
men can't even agree.

:laugh: :laugh:

 

[Ed Edwards]

Interestingly enough, many people are quite happy believing whatever someone tells them without studying for themselves.

Lucifer is not a proper name for a created being at all.

While Revelation mentions the "serpent of old"... there's no link to the specific serpent in the Garden of Eden.

Nowhere in Genesis does scripture call the serpent Satan.

While the serpent & Eden are mentioned in the NT, surprising enough there is no mention of Satan in Eden.

As another poster has indicated - someone came up with this concept of Lucifer, and his fall in the two OT passages, then taught others. There is no way the traditional Lucifer story could be understood from the scripture without someone "explaining" the "deeper meaning behind the scripture". A study of this passage without the "benefit" of this "teaching" would not reveal any such history of Satan, or Lucifer.

But getting people to understand that they have to study for themselves, and not simply buy into everything they've heard is like ... :BangHead:

Amen, Brother JeffG -- Preach it! :thumbs:

When you read some more here you will find out
there are certain Baptists here who don't even know
about the Clearly Baptist Doctrine: Competency of the
Believer (which with Priesthood of the Believer) totally
teach what you said - they have to study for themselves.

BTW - welcome to Baptist Board

 

[LeBuick]

If you were able to take away all mankind, Satan would cease to exist for he only exist as an evil spirit in the hearts and minds of men. When God destroyed the earth by water, did He say I will destroy man because he has gone the way of Satan, or did He say I will destroy man because his heart is evil??

BBob,

Then who were the fallen angels? Are you saying God made Adam with sin in him? If not, who tempted man in the garden?

 

[Brother Bob]

Then who were the fallen angels? Are you saying God made Adam with sin in him? If not, who tempted man in the garden?

Man was made subject to vanity. God required obeidance of man but made him subject to vanity and therefore could choose disobeidance, which would be sin.
When God made what was obeidance and "good", disobeidance existed at that moment, because of how he had created man subject to vanity. Man chose sin or evil over good.

Not saying God made evil, but when He said "thou shalt not eat", (which was good) at that moment, because man had a choice, "thou shalt eat" came into existance, which was sin against God. Man had the power on his own to eat of the tree, Satan only put the thought in Eve's mind, she ate of her own power of which she was created with.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Lucifer could not have been one of the cherubims placed in the garden to guard it, for God placed the faithful cherubim in the garden to guard every way to the garden lest man return and partake of the tree of life.

'cherub' is a type of angel
'cherubim' is the plural (more than one) of 'cherub'

Heb 9:5 (KJV1611 Edition):
And ouer it the Cherubims of glory shadowing
the Mercyseat; of which we cannot now
speake particularly.

In my dictionary, the entry under 'cherub' says
the plural is frequently 'cherubim'
AND in the KJV is 'cherubims'.
Frankly the KJV translators coined th
word 'Cherubims'.

BTW, by the KJV1769 Edition, the word in
Heb 9:5 was lowercase 'c' 'cherubim'.

 

[standingfirminChrist]

Ed,

You need to think before you post. Cherubims was coined much earlier than the KJV translators... unless those translators were hundreds of years old when they translated the KJV.

And ouer it, the Cherubins of glorie, shadowyng the mercie seate: Of which thynges we can not nowe speake particulerlie. Bishops NT 1568


And ouer the Arke were the glorious Cherubims, shadowing the mercie seat: of which things we will not nowe speake particularly. Geneva Bible 1599


Cherubis (cherubims)
Over the arcke were the cherubis of glory shadowynge the seate of grace. Of which thynges we wyll not now speake perticularly. (Hebrews 9:5) Tyndale early 1534

Cherubyns (cherubims)
on whiche thingis weren cherubyns of glorie, ouerschadewinge the propiciatorie; of whiche thingis it is not now to seie bi alle. (Hebrews 9:5) Wyclyffe 1384


Same word, different spelling. Cherubis, cherubyns, cherubims

Granted most of these the spelling is different, but the Geneva Bible is not different in spelling. That was not the KJV translators.

 

[blackbird]

Of course Daddy believes the Bible, that is why he is making sure she understands that the Bible doesn't always say what others believe it says and that she begins to understand that her teacher isn't perfect.

Also get her to understand that this why the Bible says to "study to show yourself approved".

I had something along the same lines happen to me ---- I was teaching a course on "The Names of God" and made the comment ---- something like

"Did you know that God's name is JEALOUS??"

Some "Sister" came unglued----started havin' a Hissy fit

Says to me

"God's name is not Jealous!!!"

"Yes M'am it is!!!"

She was eyeballin' me like she were Mohammed Ali and I were Smokin' Joe Fraser!!!!

"The Bible does not say that God's name is Jealous!!"

"M'am --- look over in (such and such) passage and read that particular verse for me, Please!!!!"

She never got over her "Hissy Fit!!" Know what I mean???

 

[menageriekeeper]

LOL Blackbird! It was quite a shock to me also when I read that God was a jealous God.

Jealousy is a negative emotion not to be used in connection with our wonderful God! And to find that God calls Himself jealous! Well! That one took some time and prayer and figuring out. :laugh: