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.

 

King Lucifer

page: 2
1
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 01:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Techsnow
I am trying to understand what TJ144 meant by,"There was indeed a being named Lucifer (or rather his spiritual name was close to the modern word “Lucifer”). Lucifer was created by God and he had a great spiritual potential. When God creates a being, God names that being according to his or her spiritual potential. Lucifer was given a name that means the one who has the potential to bring light, meaning that Lucifer had the potential to become the one who would awaken human beings to the light within themselves." and how he can draw this conclusion.


I think I heard about this on a Coast-to-Coast relatively recently. I sorta recall aliens or Annunaki having something to do with it but I could be wrong. The whole idea of this being was that he was the light-bringer... along the same lines as the Prometheus story but that he wasn't an actual divine being, just an extra-terrestrial.

Maybe it connects in someway to Lucifer or even the being that TJ144 was talking about.. I have no idea.




posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 08:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by firebat

Originally posted by Techsnow
I am trying to understand what TJ144 meant by,"There was indeed a being named Lucifer (or rather his spiritual name was close to the modern word “Lucifer”). Lucifer was created by God and he had a great spiritual potential. When God creates a being, God names that being according to his or her spiritual potential. Lucifer was given a name that means the one who has the potential to bring light, meaning that Lucifer had the potential to become the one who would awaken human beings to the light within themselves." and how he can draw this conclusion.


I think I heard about this on a Coast-to-Coast relatively recently. I sorta recall aliens or Annunaki having something to do with it but I could be wrong. The whole idea of this being was that he was the light-bringer... along the same lines as the Prometheus story but that he wasn't an actual divine being, just an extra-terrestrial.

Maybe it connects in someway to Lucifer or even the being that TJ144 was talking about.. I have no idea.


IDK what to think either... I'm not sure if there are evil vs. good ET races at war for our planet although I do have wild speculations that there are.

One thing I know for sure.
There are evil and good spirits that are at war. I known that life is eternal.. praise the great creator. I just pray the good spirits watch over this planet and help us all through this evolution known as life.

*add* ...because I know there are more probelms in the universe than just us evolving... *cough* AI.. are real... the universe is in chaos.. *coughs* AI is real.

[edit on 12-9-2006 by Techsnow]



posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 08:55 PM
link   
Hello techsnow,


Originally posted by Techsnow
We can now assume that the Roman priests probably changed the 14th chapter of Isaiah for certain reasons. The only reason Lucifer was changed to Satan is because of misstranslation by late Christians while using the original hebrew text.


The confusions we have about Lucifer and Satan are not a result of a mistranslation.

As you correctly state later in your post, Jerome was not in error when he translated the Morning Star to Lucifer, since they are interchangeable words.

The confusions that arise in Orthodox Christian theology about Lucifer and Satan are the result of viewing Satan and Lucifer as the same being. You make this same mistake at the end of your post.


So whered "lucifer" come from? This word comes from Jerome's Latin Vulgate. In Latin, "lucifer" actually means Venus as a morning star. Isaiah is using this metaphor for a bright light.


Correct, which is why Lucifer is not a mistranslation.


Now that everyone knows that Lucifer/Satan.. W/E... was just some Babylonian King...


You're making the same mistake that the Christians who first associated Satan with Lucifer made.

There is nothing in the Bible which indicates that Lucifer is Satan.

Therefore Satan is not a Babylonian King since Isaiah 14:12 does not apply to it.

There is great knowledge to get from all of this, but only if we look at it with an open mind.

Thank you techsnow for once again bringing this subject attention. Your original post inspired me to make my first real post in months.

Inverencial Peace,
Akashic


[edit on 12/9/2006 by AkashicWanderer]



posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 09:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by AkashicWanderer
Hello techsnow,


Originally posted by Techsnow
We can now assume that the Roman priests probably changed the 14th chapter of Isaiah for certain reasons. The only reason Lucifer was changed to Satan is because of misstranslation by late Christians while using the original hebrew text.


The confusions we have about Lucifer and Satan are not a result of a mistranslation.

As you correctly state later in your post, Jerome was not in error when he translated the Morning Star to Lucifer, since they are interchangeable words.

The confusions that arise in Orthodox Christian theology about Lucifer and Satan are the result of viewing Satan and Lucifer as the same being. You make this same mistake at the end of your post.


So whered "lucifer" come from? This word comes from Jerome's Latin Vulgate. In Latin, "lucifer" actually means Venus as a morning star. Isaiah is using this metaphor for a bright light.


Correct, which is why Lucifer is not a mistranslation.


Now that everyone knows that Lucifer/Satan.. W/E... was just some Babylonian King...


You're making the same mistake that the Christians who first associated Satan with Lucifer made.

There is nothing in the Bible which indicates that Lucifer is Satan.

If Satan is not Lucifer then he has nothing to do with Isaiah 14:12, which means that he is not a Babylonian King.

Inverencial Peace,
Akashic


You're contradicting me and yourself.
The mistranslation came from: "heleyl, ben shachar" which can be literally translated "shining one, son of dawn." This phrase means the planet Venus when it appears as a morning star.

When they tried to translate "heleyl, ben shachar" they turned Lucifer into "shachar" or "Satan".

I agree with you that, "There is nothing in the Bible which indicates that Lucifer is Satan." as you said.

Again, I am not saying that Lucifer was a babylonian king, I am saying that the name Lucifer has been a misstranslation and from then on it has been a name missused and assuiated with the mighy fallen angel from heaven (aka theb Morning Star, Lucifer, Satan, it is all the same thing!!!).

So wake up and realize its all just a story.. its a joke.. its mythology.



posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 09:30 PM
link   
Hello Techsnow,

Thank you for your quick reply.


Originally posted by Techsnow
You're contradicting me and yourself.


I can assure you I'm not, I have come to these conclusions through indepth study of the article you based your original post on.


The mistranslation came from: "heleyl, ben shachar" which can be literally translated "shining one, son of dawn." This phrase means the planet Venus when it appears as a morning star. The Jewish word heleyl means the morning star.


From Strong's Dictionary:

H1966
הילל
hêylêl
hay-lale'

From H1984 (in the sense of brightness); the morning star: - lucifer.

As you can see, Lucifer is a synonim for the morning star. There is no mistranslation here.



When they tried to translate "heleyl, ben shachar" they turned Lucifer into "shachar" or "Satan".


Shachar was translated by Jerome as "of dawn", not "Lucifer" or "Satan". Lucifer was not turned into shachar, nor did Satan have anything to do with it.

It's all quite simple. Jerome used the label Lucifer instead of the morning star. As time went by, Lucifer was associated with another character in the Bible, Satan.

Inverencial Peace,
Akashic

[edit on 12/9/2006 by AkashicWanderer]



posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 09:47 PM
link   
I must be reading something wrong because it appears that Jesus is the fallen one according to the scripture quoted from Rev.22 it said that jesus the root of david and the morning star. If the morning star fell did Jesus fall? I must be mixed up.



posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 09:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by interestedalways
I must be reading something wrong because it appears that Jesus is the fallen one according to the scripture quoted from Rev.22 it said that jesus the root of david and the morning star. If the morning star fell did Jesus fall? I must be mixed up.


No, I don't believe it was refering to Jesus as the morning star. I believe that whatever was refered to as the Morning Star/Lucifer in Revelations was meant to hint at the "Devil". I personally do not believe in the Devil.. Satan, Lucifer, the Morning Star.. so if you do thats your opinoin and I must respect that...



posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 09:56 PM
link   
But how can Jesus and Lucifer and Venus all be the morning star unless they are representing the same thing?



posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 10:00 PM
link   
i explained this in my original thread. Please reread my threads!

...Lucifer was the latin translation which meant morning star... Satan was a mistranslation from the Greek text... It's hard to repeat but I have explained this all in my original posts.



posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 10:09 PM
link   
No, you re-read my question. I didn't ask about Lucifer or Satan similarities I asked about why Jesus is included as the morning star. Jesus not lucifer not satan but jesus. OK?



posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 10:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by interestedalways
But how can Jesus and Lucifer and Venus all be the morning star unless they are representing the same thing?


I've thought about this and I think I know what you are insuating.

First let me say this... Jesus, Lucifer, Venus, the title "Morning Star" ARE NOT THE SAME THING!

Not once did I say this.

First let me say that I am saying nothing about Jesus.
This has to do with the 14th chapter of Isaiah.
The Roman Priests changed the 14th chapter of Isaiah.
In the original Hebrew text the 14th chaber of Isaiah referred to a King that persecuted the people of Israel... his name was not Lucifer!
The Roman priests changed the name of the king to Lucifer and I want to know why!

Latter... misstranslation changed the name Lucifer to the name Satan.. I explained how in earlier posts.

WHAT I WANT TO KNOW IS THIS!
Why did the Roman priests change the book of Isaiah and why did they invent this demon called the Morning Star (AKA Lucifer, Satan)!??



posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 10:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by interestedalways
But how can Jesus and Lucifer and Venus all be the morning star unless they are representing the same thing?


Hello interestedalways,

You're getting to the core of the matter.

If Jesus, Lucifer, and Venus all represent the morning star, then either Lucifer does not represent a negative concept, or Jesus does. Which do you think is more probable?



Latter... misstranslation changed the name Lucifer to the name Satan.. I explained how in earlier posts.


No version of the bible translates Lucifer or Morning Star to Satan. It is simply an association that is not written in the Bible. Isaiah 14 was not changed by Jerome or "Roman Priests". It was not mistranslated. The problem is with people associating Satan with Lucifer.

Inverencial Peace,
Akashic


[edit on 12/9/2006 by AkashicWanderer]



posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 10:16 PM
link   
Thank you for the validation
Rev. 22:16 I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the offspring of David and the bright morning star.
Is he saying that he is the root and the offspring or is he referring to his angel as the root and the offspring?

Are Jesus and Lucifer the same thing?

my edit: I don't recall knowing that Jesus ever said he had an angel. Is he an offspring of David and the morning star having a child together? Is Lucifer a female?

[edit on 12-9-2006 by interestedalways]



posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 10:19 PM
link   
Thats right. I'm not saying it was mistranslated by the Roman Priests either... I'm saying it was CHANGED!

The reason that people "associate Satan with Lucifer" was explained in earlier posts... the latter Christians tried to retranslate the text into a new language but in the process of the translation they changed the original Latin name of "Lucifer" into "Satan".



posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 10:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by interestedalways
Thank you for the validation
Rev. 22:16 I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the offspring of David and the bright morning star.
Is he saying that he is the root and the offspring or is he referring to his angel as the root and the offspring?


Jesus is referring to himself as the Root and the offspring of David and the bright morning star.


Are Jesus and Lucifer the same thing?


If you want my opinion, then no I don't think they're the same thing.

It is definitely something worth investigating.

Inverencial Peace,
Akashic



posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 10:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by interestedalways
Thank you for the validation
Rev. 22:16 I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the offspring of David and the bright morning star.
Is he saying that he is the root and the offspring or is he referring to his angel as the root and the offspring?

Are Jesus and Lucifer the same thing?


Dalways.. I have to admit that I really don't know.
Through out the years.. I must admit that it is VERY hard to understand the prophecy in the language I have learned (English).



posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 10:24 PM
link   
TechSnow, STOP IT!!!!!

I understand about the wrongful connection about Satan and Lucifer. Why can't you see my question. Why are you ignoring the Jesus part of being called the morning star? Am I not asking clearly? See my edit to the last post I made, please.



posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 10:25 PM
link   
Hello Techsnow,


Originally posted by Techsnow
The reason that people "associate Satan with Lucifer" was explained in earlier posts... the latter Christians tried to retranslate the text into a new language but in the process of the translation they changed the original Latin name of "Lucifer" into "Satan".


When the Vulgate was translated into English, Lucifer remained Lucifer, it was not changed to Satan. To verify this open a KJV Bible and go to Isaiah 14:12. Actually open any Bible and go to Isaiah 14:12, I assure you that you will not see the word Satan.

Inverencial Peace,
Akashic



[edit on 12/9/2006 by AkashicWanderer]



posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 10:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by interestedalways
TechSnow, STOP IT!!!!!

I understand about the wrongful connection about Satan and Lucifer. Why can't you see my question. Why are you ignoring the Jesus part of being called the morning star? Am I not asking clearly? See my edit to the last post I made, please.


Perhaps Jesus is claiming that he has taken the spot of "Lucifer" the "Morning Star".
Perhaps Jesus is proclaiming he is the new Morning Star...



posted on Sep, 12 2006 @ 10:28 PM
link   
AkashicWanderer
That's it! I just said that same thing when I edited my post. He is saying that he is the offspring of David and the Morning Star!
Mind Blowing. Oh my!!!
This is crazy. Thank you. I know which direction to go now.

Peace



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join