It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Helel ben Shachar

page: 1
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 21 2016 @ 01:26 AM
link   
If you where a Christian in early times you'd of thought an angel named Lucifer tried to takeover heaven and was transformed into Satan after being expelled from heaven.

Now that we know this is not true instead of reading "Lucifer, son of the morning star" we read :

Isaiah 14:12

"How you are fallen from heaven,
O Day Star, son of Dawn."

Helel ben Shachar= Day Star, son of Dawn

I know who Shachar (Dawn,Venus) is in Ugaritic mythology. The goddess of Venus at dawn, dusk is Shalim (from where we get Shalom), her twin sister. Both mated with El, the El known today as God.

I have never heard anyone satisfactorily explain who Helel is in Isaiah. It's in an Oracle about the downfall of Babylon and not the actual name of the person spoken to who is the King of Babylon and not an angel.

Anything ending in el like Helel means something about God/El, and I have never heard of an angel or human with that name. It's said to mean "shining one" and is the source of Hallelujah so I think it is an adjective that means shining one and Halal is the appropriate spelling. Vowels are guesses in translating ancient Hebrew to English and no Helel exists.

So if anyone actually knows anything about this Helel I would love to hear it. I think it is just an adjective and Halal the correct spelling due to "shining one" being absent of God in English and is not a name. I think Isaiah was using sarcasm.

How do people feel knowing that so much of Christianity believed in a non existent angel named Lucifer for so long?

And does anyone still believe it (besides Islam)?
edit on 21-7-2016 by ZoeEleutheria because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 21 2016 @ 05:07 AM
link   
a reply to: ZoeEleutheria

I suspect if you were a follower of either the gnostics or one of the many branches of what developed into christianity after it was formally put together you would have used many words differently with different meanings than the ones we assume them to mean today.

However you need to go far back into what is known from the ancient peoples to clarify their myths and see how twisted the bible is in its versions of them, especially Genesis etc.

There was a saying of Christ "Be thee wise as serpents" which no one ever seems to want to fully explain from the various religious houses when is fascinating and I think may tie into the idea of the Shining Ones. Christian O'Brien's books are illuminating on these people.



posted on Jul, 21 2016 @ 05:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Shiloh7

There is a class of angels called "shining serpents" or Seraphim.

You have a point, I just wonder how people can follow something that is said to be infallible but has misinterpreted the OT so much?

The Shining Ones makes me think of the movie the shining. Maybe Helel is the shining one of God, a forgotten myth.

Definitely not Satan though.



posted on Jul, 21 2016 @ 05:25 AM
link   
a reply to: ZoeEleutheria

Perhaps the term "shining" is one used to depict angelic and godlike individuals. ut I am still fascinated by what O'Brien says about this group. Well worth a read.



posted on Jul, 21 2016 @ 06:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: Shiloh7
a reply to: ZoeEleutheria

Perhaps the term "shining" is one used to depict angelic and godlike individuals. ut I am still fascinated by what O'Brien says about this group. Well worth a read.


Shining Ones, Blessed Ones, Energized Ones. Same root idea from my point of view.



posted on Jul, 21 2016 @ 06:14 AM
link   
a reply to: Shiloh7

Tell me about this O'Brien , I am not familiar. What is something of interest you can tell me about the shining ones?



posted on Jul, 21 2016 @ 06:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: LittleByLittle

originally posted by: Shiloh7
a reply to: ZoeEleutheria

Perhaps the term "shining" is one used to depict angelic and godlike individuals. ut I am still fascinated by what O'Brien says about this group. Well worth a read.


Shining Ones, Blessed Ones, Energized Ones. Same root idea from my point of view.



This sounds like terms used to describe initiates of esoteric orders.

I strive to shine independently. Not that I don't "seek wise counsel", I just, "don't believe them."



posted on Jul, 21 2016 @ 06:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: ZoeEleutheria

originally posted by: LittleByLittle

originally posted by: Shiloh7
a reply to: ZoeEleutheria

Perhaps the term "shining" is one used to depict angelic and godlike individuals. ut I am still fascinated by what O'Brien says about this group. Well worth a read.


Shining Ones, Blessed Ones, Energized Ones. Same root idea from my point of view.



This sounds like terms used to describe initiates of esoteric orders.

I strive to shine independently. Not that I don't "seek wise counsel", I just, "don't believe them."


Wise. Many people create fakes emulating others. If it is real then you can seek it and know it.



posted on Jul, 21 2016 @ 07:02 AM
link   
a reply to: ZoeEleutheria

I propose that the chapter in question is indeed addressed to the King of Babylon (verse 4), but actually references a page out of the Canaanite religion (verses 12-14). A clearer picture is revealed by referring to the original Hebrew language of the verse, along with Canaanite mythology.



4. That thou shalt take up this proverb against the king of Babylon, and say, How hath the oppressor ceased! The golden city ceased!
.......
.......
.......
.......
.......
.......
.......
12. 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!

13. For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:

14. I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.

15. Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit."

Isaiah 14 (King James Version)


[Verse 12] The figure in question literally "fell from Heaven": [naphalta (נָפַ֥לְתָּ) (fell)] [mis'sa mayim (מִשָּׁמַ֖יִם) (from Heaven)]. This rules out any human being.

[Verse 12] "Lucifer, son of the morning", is an outdated and inaccurate translation, originating with St. Jerome's Latin Vulgate Bible, and perpetuated by the King James Version of the Bible, Dante Alighieri's "Divine Comedy", and John Milton's "Paradise Lost".

In place of "Lucifer", the original Hebrew actually states: "Heylel (הֵילֵ֣ל) Ben (בֶּן־) Shachar (שָׁ֑חַר)", which literally means;
"Heylel, the son of Shachar".

The word, "Heylel" (הֵילֵ֣ל), is rather enigmatic. According to several Concordances, Heylel is defined as: "a shining one" and "star of the morning".

According to "The Ancient Hebrew Lexicon of the Bible", by Jeff A. Benner, the roots for "Heylel" center around the concepts; "Behold", "Look toward", and "Shining".





Literally, we can say (Heylel Ben Shachar):
"Behold the Shining One of El/God, son of Shachar"


Shachar is a Canaanite deity representative of the "Morning Star," which is Venus on the eastern horizon before sunrise. This deity is synonymous with the Greek deity Phosphorus.

Now we have, "Heylel son of Shachar/Phosphorus/Morning Star".

As we have the "Morning Star," we also have the "Evening Star." Venus, as the evening star, sits on the western horizon after sunset. The evening star was known in the Levant as the deity Shalim, and to the Greeks as the deity Hesperus.

The Greeks treated the morning star as one deity, and the evening star as a separate deity,... although they knew that both were the planet Venus. In tale and story, Venus was separated into Phosphorus and Hesperus, but always understood, intellectually, to both be Venus. The same can be said about the Levantines regarding Shachar and Shalim. Both cultures knew the morning and evening stars to be Venus.

So now we can deduce, "Heylel, son of Venus."

According to Greek mythology, Venus was a prominent goddess. And through archetype and correlation, we parallel the goddess Venus to the goddesses Inanna, Ishtar, Athirat, and Asherah.

Now we deduce, "Heylel son of Asherah/Athirat."

Asherah/Athirat is the consort of El.

We can now derive: "Heylel, son of Asherah/Athirat and El"

 

 

 


Heylel, in my opinion, is a direct reference to Baal Hadad. This can be concluded by reading the context of the verse and correlating it with the Canaanite religion.


How you have fallen from heaven, Helel Ben Shahar! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations!

You said in your heart, “I will ascend to the heavens; I will raise my throne above the stars of El (אֵ֖ל [God]); I will sit enthroned on the mount of assembly, on the utmost heights of Mount Zaphon. I will ascend above the tops of the clouds; I will make myself like El Elyon (לְעֶלְיֽוֹן׃ [Most High]).”

- Isaiah 14:12-14


The two following phrases should be self-evident:

"I will raise my throne above the stars of El."

"I will ascend above the tops of the clouds; I will make myself like El Elyon."

Examining Isaiah 14:12-14,... we must think about which son of Asherah/Athirat has his throne on Mount Zephon,... and who wants to usurp both El and Elyon.

Now, let us examine "Mount Zaphon."

Mount Zephon is known today as Mount Aqraa. It is upon this mountain that Baal Hadad, son of El and Athirat/Asherah, established his throne and sanctuary. From this event of the Baal Cycle, we get the name/title: Baal-Zephon.

Baal Hadad was indeed a son of El and Venus/Shahar/Asherah, who sought to usurp El's authority, succeed Elyon, and establish a throne on Mount Zephon. Isaiah 14:12-14 illustrates this perfectly.


"Heylel Ben Shachar"

"The Shining One of El, son of Asherah"

"Baal Hadad"


edit on 7/21/16 by Sahabi because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 21 2016 @ 07:22 AM
link   
a reply to: Sahabi

That actually makes perfect sense, the point of confusion brought forth from that quite satisfactory explanation is that Baal Haddad is actually Yahweh, who the Jews worshipped in place of El as the Phoenicians did Iao who is also Baal.

So El actually was usurped by Baal/Iao/Yahweh but nobody seems to notice or care. Asherah was even worshipped in the Temple for a long time, outside longer before her worship was eventually denounced.

But thanks, I think as explanations go yours is on point as it gets.



posted on Jul, 21 2016 @ 07:37 AM
link   
a reply to: ZoeEleutheria

Through interpreting the original Hebrew or reading the "Names of God" version of the Bible, we can quite easily see that YHWH is indeed a separate deity than both El and Elyon. We can even find support for this through the Documentary Hypothesis, i.e., Elism from the Elohist sources, and Yahism from the Yahwist sources.

I've found several parallels between YHWH, Baal Hadad, and Marduk.



posted on Jul, 21 2016 @ 07:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sahabi
a reply to: ZoeEleutheria

Through interpreting the original Hebrew or reading the "Names of God" version of the Bible, we can quite easily see that YHWH is indeed a separate deity than both El and Elyon. We can even find support for this through the Documentary Hypothesis, i.e., Elism from the Elohist sources, and Yahism from the Yahwist sources.

I've found several parallels between YHWH, Baal Hadad, and Marduk.


Funny you say that, I was going to say that Isaiah is an Elohistic source, and older than most texts outside of the Torah. I have a Bible that tells you the source, Elohist, Yahwist, Deuteronomist and priestly.


EDIT: I believe I meant to say Yahwistic. This is a point where Yahweh is considered Most High. Considered being the key word.
edit on 21-7-2016 by ZoeEleutheria because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 21 2016 @ 08:26 AM
link   
I can't remember where I read this but I heard that Isaiah was written after Persia conquered Babylonia and set free the Jews to Israel. They had been exposed to a dualistic faith in what would come to be called Zoroastrianism and decided that One God rules both good and evil and it's in Isaiah that Yahweh takes credit for causing all good and evil.

They semi retained the dualistic philosophy of Zarathustra but did not believe in an evil God like Ahriman except for some fringe sects. They developed angelic hierarchies and made Yahweh the only God.

Isaiah is, to me, announcing that there is only one God who created and rules everything.



posted on Jul, 21 2016 @ 08:37 AM
link   
a reply to: ZoeEleutheria
The Preserved word of God says this. perverted versions of men for profit should not be considered valid.

Isaiah 14:12 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!

Isaiah 14:13 For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:

Isaiah 14:14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.

Isaiah 14:15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.



posted on Jul, 21 2016 @ 09:29 AM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn

I have obviously read that if I am basing a thread on it, no?

Had I not read it I would not have made the thread. The Bibles I have are better than the King James edition, which is corrupt because it's based on the Masoretic texts which are not as accurate to the original Hebrew and Greek. Changes had to be made to several parts upon discovery of Hebrew texts in Qumran that agree with the Septuagint.

The Masoretic is no older than 1000 AD. The Qumran texts are from BC and the Septuagint is from 3-400 AD in our oldest versions.

Obviously the Hebrew original agreeing with the Greek is significant enough to decide the inferiority of the Masoretic.

It is not terrible, just not as accurate to the original Hebrew as the Greek is. I am not trying to get into a debate about versions but my Bibles are not perverted or corrupt.

Lucifer is not a real character in Judaism.

Helel son of Shachar is old Canaanite mythology and only Venus in the morning.

Shalim is Venus at dusk, so who is the equivalent of Shalim in Latin or Greek and in Christianity?



posted on Jul, 21 2016 @ 01:01 PM
link   
a reply to: ZoeEleutheria


Isaiah was written after Persia conquered Babylonia and set free the Jews to Israel. They had been exposed to a dualistic faith in what would come to be called Zoroastrianism and decided that One God rules both good and evil and it's in Isaiah that Yahweh takes credit for causing all good and evil.



cliffsnotes deuteroisaiah
Chapters 40–55 in the Book of Isaiah are believed to be the work of a prophet who lived with the Hebrew exiles during the Babylonian captivity. Because this prophet's real name is unknown and his work has been preserved in the collection of writings that include the prophecies of the earlier Isaiah, he is usually designated as Deutero-Isaiah — the second Isaiah...
The prophet was a pure monotheist. Rejecting the idea of Yahweh as a god who belonged only to the Hebrews, Deutero-Isaiah boldly proclaimed Yahweh as the only true God of the entire universe. He maintained that the so-called gods of foreign nations were but figments of the imagination. His conception of the people of Israel was also unique in that he regarded them as Yahweh's servants, whose primary function in the world is to carry religion to the ends of the earth.
...
Yahweh is the supreme ruler of the universe, and all the nations of the earth are subject to him: "Surely the nations are like a drop in a bucket; they are regarded as dust on the scales." And again, "Before him all the nations are as nothing; they are regarded by him as worthless and less than nothing."


edit on 21-7-2016 by pthena because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 21 2016 @ 01:11 PM
link   
a reply to: pthena

There is also the well known Isaiah scroll written sometime around 300 BC I am guessing.

Nice clip, it seems to concur with my own observations on Isaiah.

The Persian Empire is one of histories most mysterious. The most territory conquered by one Empire until Alexander and we know very little about them. We do know that they had a tremendous impact on the beliefs of the Israelites.

Thank you.
edit on 21-7-2016 by ZoeEleutheria because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 21 2016 @ 02:01 PM
link   
a reply to: ZoeEleutheria
No the Bible I hold in my hand and has all of God's words in it is Bible is the preserved Bible because unlike the ones you are quoting it has ALL the verses in it.

You do not believe God's word therefore you have to go to the Greek and the Hebrew copies of unverifiable copies of some Ancient original no one has seen and become god in place of the true God to decide what is good in the Bible in your own eyes.

In short you have no faith in God and therefore cannot be saved and have not the Holy Ghost to teach you and thereby you are in your fleshly mind trying to deduce Spiritual things

1 Corinthians 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.



edit on 21-7-2016 by ChesterJohn because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 21 2016 @ 02:06 PM
link   
a reply to: ZoeEleutheriayou know Gnosisisfaith I would believe you if you could show me an ORIGINAL, not a copy an ORIGINAL that actually dates back and is verified to be from Moses himself.

But that is impossible because there are no ORIGINALS all you have is a copy of a copy of a copy and not one can be verified as accurate because you have no original to compare it too.

That is why you must trust God that he preserved his words as he promised to every generation that there is one English version that is accurate, inspired and preserved.

Until then you shall search in vain, and twist scriptures, and privately interpret them, and argue and battle wits to no end and eventually drive yourself insane.



posted on Jul, 21 2016 @ 02:09 PM
link   
a reply to: pthena


Yahweh is the supreme ruler of the universe, and all the nations of the earth are subject to him: "Surely the nations are like a drop in a bucket; they are regarded as dust on the scales." And again, "Before him all the nations are as nothing; they are regarded by him as worthless and less than nothing."


According to the oldest examples of Deuteronomy 32:8-9, the nations of the earth are actually subject to Elyon, while the Tribe/Children of Israel is the only nation allotted to YHWH.

8 When Elyon (the Most High) allotted peoples for inheritance, When He divided up the sons of man, He fixed the boundaries for peoples, according to the number of the sons of El.

9 Yahweh’s portion is his people, Jacob (Israel), His own inheritance.




top topics



 
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join