posted on Mar, 23 2006 @ 10:46 PM
I disagree. The verse in Isaiah is dual reference and cannot apply in it's entirety to Nebuchadnezzer. The King of Babylon is treated (much like
Abraham and Isaac) as a "type" of Christ- he reedms himself, get's his kingdom back (does the prophecy in Isaiah not say that Lucifer would be cast
aside to the pit like an abominable branch?) and then goes to battle against the prince of Tyre who is in turn defeated (a "type" of Satan). This is
very clear if you read Daniel in which Nebuchadnezzer is clearly pardoned and restored to a good standing before God. In fact Daniel's source of
Revelation clearly says he was fighting on the side of an earthly kingdom along with his other angelic companions, which Satan opposed with another
empire. It all fit's in. Nimrod, Pharaoh, and so forth- all types of Satan (who loves empires). Is not the Antichrist a king gone berserk in a huge
tyranny? Lastly, Lucifer was interpreted by ancient rabbinic sources as the covering Cherub in a plot against the almighty by upsetting the mercy seat
, this is the belief of Christianity- nothing changed(the name Lucifer is also a Canaanite God in case many of you don't know, which lends credence
to the view that Isaiah was like Elijah slandering a pagan idol by calling them demons, which is ok for me to be honest). It's a parable to some
degree, people should pay attention to the Bible, every single little tiny detail matters. Every detail, even those genealogies which people just skip
over have more info than just who was born from who and when.
ps: 666 is a sacred number to Muslims. It supposedly illustrates the Quran's "mathematical miracle". Interesting if you ask me.
[edit on 23-3-2006 by Nakash]