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.

 

Lucifer , a title or an entity ?

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 15 2009 @ 12:54 PM
link   
I have herd mention that Lucifer is another name for the devil and I have also herd some try and make the argument the Lucifer is in fact a title , so which is it , is it a title or an entity ?

I did some searching and here is what I came up with .

First source , online etymology dictionary

"O.E. Lucifer "Satan," also "morning star," from L. Lucifer "morning star," lit. "light-bringing," from lux (gen. lucis) + ferre "carry" (see infer). Belief that it was the proper name of Satan began with its used in Bible to translate Gk. Phosphoros, which translates Heb. Helel ben Shahar in Isaiah xiv.12 -- "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!" [KJV] The verse was interpreted by Christians as a reference to "Satan," because of the mention of a fall from Heaven, even though it is literally a reference to the King of Babylon (cf. Isaiah xiv.4). Lucifer match "friction match" is from 1831. "

The book of Revelation makes a number of references about the term " morning star " . This one perhaps more then any other could be used as an example of the term being a title rather then an entity , " Revelation 22:16  
I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star. "

Some have brought up the issue of esoteric teachings , such as morals and dogma by Albert Pike or some of H. P. Blavatsky works in which they make use of the term " Lucifer " . Some will take this as evidence that these people are in fact worshiping the Devil yet others who have studied these , and other works , state that that is just plain silly and taken out of context . They make the case that the term is more of a title and not to be taken as devil worshiping .

The term " Lucifer " in these instances seems to relate more to wisdom or enlightenment rather then some evil entity . The term " enlighten " , as per the online etymology dictionary states
" 1382 (O.E. had inlihtan), "to remove the dimness or blindness (usually figurative) from one's eyes or heart," from en- + lighten. Enlightenment is 1669 in the spiritual sense; 1865 as a translation of Ger. Aufklärung, a name for the spirit and system of Continental philosophers in the 18c.
"The philosophy of the Enlightenment insisted on man's essential autonomy: man is responsible to himself, to his own rational interests, to his self-development, and, by an inescapable extension, to the welfare of his fellow man. For the philosophes, man was not a sinner, at least not by nature; human nature -- and this argument was subversive, in fact revolutionary, in their day -- is by origin good, or at least neutral. Despite the undeniable power of man's antisocial passions, therefore, the individual may hope for improvement through his own efforts -- through education, participation in politics, activity in behalf of reform, but not through prayer." [Peter Gay] "

So as we see the term enlighten refers to an a wisdom bestowed , removing a blindness . In the realm of the esoteric teachings it would seem that this is what's being implied by there use of the term " Lucifer " . Do these teachings think of the Devil as the " Lucifer " for opening the eyes of man back in the garden of Eden , perhaps .

Do christians look at the term morning star as stated in the book of Revelation as a reference to Jesus ushering in a new age of wisdom , perhaps .

So does the term " Lucifer " refer to a title of light barer , bestower of wisdom , or is it a reference to the entity known as " the Devil " ?

I am left with the impression that the term " Lucifer " or light bearer seems to be more of a reference to a title rather than a reference to an entity .

I am very interested in hearing some of your thoughts on this matter .




posted on May, 15 2009 @ 12:57 PM
link   
I don't believe he is an organic person, he is an entity that can only consume the body of a human in it's form by offering...free will, of course.

but, there are a million other theories. what am I to know.



posted on May, 15 2009 @ 01:32 PM
link   
nice question lol

im not an expert on the devil but i heard 1 theorie that he is a fallen angel that was banished from heaven..

i have also heard that he was god's other son and jesus's oposite

i dont really know what to think about these but im sure they'r both false lol



posted on May, 15 2009 @ 01:41 PM
link   
reply to post by shadowwolf0
 


I believe in Milton's Paradise Lost logic...

he was tossed for confronting , jealousy of God, his power and then Jesus's power.

he causes trouble,

he is locked below, from his head (an idea) he births Sin (his daughter)

he has sex with his daughter, she gives birth to death (before that, in the Garden of Eden there was no death),

the hounds keep Him, Sin and Death below the gates of hell.

The hounds ravish and attack Sin and Death on a constant basis, eating their gutts.

now, someone has released the hounds that guard.

like in the Simpsons, Mr. Burns often says "release the hounds" haha



posted on May, 15 2009 @ 03:35 PM
link   
lucifer - latin for morning star, not found in any of the original hebrew transcripts.

the chapeter itself is actually refering to the babylonian king



posted on May, 15 2009 @ 04:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by miriam0566
lucifer - latin for morning star, not found in any of the original hebrew transcripts.
the chapeter itself is actually refering to the babylonian king


Go back far enough and it refers to Inanna, a Mesopotamnian goddess.

I take the whole thing with a grain of salt, but one set of coincidences I find more than a bit creepy revolves around the company "Lucent Technologies." First, the word "Lucent" is a bit too close to the word "Lucifer" for my taste. second, the company's headquarters = 666 fifth ave, NYC. Quite a numerical address there in the "New Babylon." Third, they are involved in biochipping and RIFD stuff...you know, like implants that could be put into your right hand or skull...mark of the beast, much?



posted on May, 15 2009 @ 08:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by miriam0566
lucifer - latin for morning star, not found in any of the original hebrew transcripts.

the chapeter itself is actually refering to the babylonian king


Very Good Miriam. An "A" for an response.

You are quite well versed

For others!

www.crivoice.org...


The name Lucifer has often been understood to be another name for the devil or the satan. This identification has a long history in the church, going back to at least the fourth century. Its origin is actually from a passage in the Old Testament from the book of Isaiah that, to some, speaks of a being cast out of heaven because of pride. Since some people see a reference to the devil being cast out of heaven in the New Testament (Rev 12:9-12; cf. Lk 10:18), they assumed that the Isaiah passage referred to the same thing.


Assuming something, always lead to problems.

The Original Text from the King James 1611

www.jesus-is-lord.com...


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!
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:
14:14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.
14:15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.


lucifer is only used ONCE in Scripture and in the Original text the word that Lucifer represented is heylel, much as Miriam had noted

www.eliyah.com...


1966 heylel hay-lale' from 1984 (in the sense of brightness); the morning-star:--lucifer.

and the prime 1984

1984 halal haw-lal' a primitive root; to be clear (orig. of sound, but usually of color); to shine; hence, to make a show, to boast; and thus to be (clamorously) foolish; to rave; causatively, to celebrate; also to stultify:--(make) boast (self), celebrate, commend, (deal, make), fool(- ish, -ly), glory, give (light), be (make, feign self) mad (against), give in marriage, (sing, be worthy of) praise, rage, renowned, shine.


There does seem to be some charateristics of Satan expressed from the Prime halal, but nowhere is it noted or directed to suggest it has anything to do with a name for Satan or the Devil.

Again.. www.crivoice.org...


The term Lucifer was popularized in English from this King James translation. However, the name does not come from the Hebrew or even from the Greek translation (Septuagint), but from the fourth century AD Latin translation of this verse:

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


This link goes on, and maybe if interest to those "Christains" who figure Lucifer means Satan or the Devil. It is actually quite an accurate assessment of the Term, and has some related terms that "Christians" tend to have misconceptions about, due solely to the wolves leading the flock astray with Doctrine and Theology, apposed to just teaching the WORD of God.

But I digress......

Ciao

Shane



posted on May, 15 2009 @ 09:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by silent thunder

Go back far enough and it refers to Inanna, a Mesopotamnian goddess.


Actually, they just found a likeness of her in Germany, and as mostlyspoons notes


I'm not surprised that it is a depiction of Venus/Aphrodite/Astarte/Ishtar/Inana/Hathor/Ashtaroth/Frig/LILITH...
there are other names for the harlot but couldnt think of them


It is all reference to Venus.

The Post
www.abovetopsecret.com...
and the News Link
www.msnbc.msn.com...
And wait for the Photo. Quite of piece of work!

"She's still a pin-up after 35,000 years"! Really

Ciao

Shane



posted on May, 16 2009 @ 02:08 AM
link   
In certain esoteric literature (like Crowley's for example, though I can't remember specific works) it's expressed that the name of something is the entity, or creates it is maybe a better way of putting it, through creative expression of meaning that is derived from consciousness itself.

This is like in Hinduism, any destructive energy or force whatsoever can be seen as the god Shiva, and in fact IS that god in the most real sense given the true "meaning" of the name.

Lucifer = light bearer, and when used in this context, the name is always bestowed upon that which brings light. The old phrase "speak of the devil" (because he then appears, you know) may even be some corruption of this same idea. To paraphrase Crowley, "I am my name," or the name is the thing itself simply by embodying that particular creative energy. Thus a "name" can be absolutely any symbol or symbolic reference, etc. Say an entity's name, and you "summon" it; it comes to you by "spirit" (the "vibes" associated with that particular entity's characteristics, emotional energies, altered perception, etc.).

Zen Buddhism even approaches this idea in the koan about the stick. If you call it a stick, as the koan goes, and you deny it's ultimate reality ("stick" is simply one way of "naming" or categorizing the Thing), but don't call it a stick, and you ignore the obvious fact. Really the only "name" of the thing that isn't arbitrary, is the thing itself. Realizing to look past the names and words to the actual mystery itself is the key, though the names serve to guide our minds.

This is also exactly why people refer to god symbolically (like a symbol of a symbol
) by saying out the Hebrew letters Yod He Vau He, for example, or spelling it "G-D," etc. I saw one person say that this is done out of "respect" for god, but really the practice stems from a more intimate relation than that. We don't truly know the divine, thus our current state of awareness, and to forget that is to set ourselves up for disaster. We suppose ourselves too familiar with the Absolute when we call Its name secularly.


[edit on 16-5-2009 by bsbray11]



posted on May, 16 2009 @ 03:45 PM
link   
Occam's razor, al thing's being equal, the simplest explanation is the best. Lucifer, lightbearer, the one who carries the "Light". I tend to think it is a title conferred upon the one appointed to resurrect Jesus (The Light) and to carry him to Heaven. I also believe it to be a recent event.



posted on May, 16 2009 @ 04:15 PM
link   
There is one other option:

Myth

But there is one entity with that name I know of, my cat: Luci Fur

Seriously, enjoyed the thread OP and the thoughtful posts by silent thunder and bsbray11.

silent thunder: very curious about your comments of Inanna. I've done extensive research on the Sumerian goddess Inanna also known as Ishtar. In fact, I have a tattoo of Inannas cunniform. I've never read any association of her and Lucifer. A classic story of hers in Gilgamesh is her travels to the underworld. Could you provide any resource for your connection? Thanks in advace.



posted on May, 16 2009 @ 07:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whisper67

silent thunder: very curious about your comments of Inanna. I've done extensive research on the Sumerian goddess Inanna also known as Ishtar. In fact, I have a tattoo of Inannas cunniform. I've never read any association of her and Lucifer.


Not the Person you asked, but the association of the word Lucifer is a routed connection thru Venus (The Morning Star). In the realm of Pagan dieites, Venus is the Roman equal of the Greek Aphrodite, who is a equal of Ishtar and Inanna.

There are many links to each of these in Wiki, if you wished to follow the Morning Star thru all the dieties. Aphrodite seems to have the best setup with links.

en.wikipedia.org...


Aphrodite has numerous equivalents: Inanna (Sumerian counterpart), Astarte (Phoenician), Turan (Etruscan), and Venus (Roman). She has parallels to Indo-European dawn goddesses such as Ushas or Aurora.


Ciao

Shane



posted on May, 16 2009 @ 07:37 PM
link   
I'm not even gonna bother reading this thread, but in short the answer is Title.
Sorry for the one-liner.



posted on May, 16 2009 @ 07:45 PM
link   
Well like mostly all monotheistic religions, I think the idea of Satan is simply a label that people of ancient times required to understand or cope with the events they lived through.

We clearly see the evolution of religion with Sun/Moon worship, which then turned into multiple gods for multiple things, which later turned into just a few gods and now back to worshipping the Sun.

That's just my opininon, and to to tell you the truth, I don't know the answer to your question, I don't think anybody does.

There are those who will claim to have seen him and experienced the Devil or whatever you wanna call it, mostly along the lines of negative entities and ghosts, which I believe in strongly.

However, anything spiritual or religious that man has given a name to is false at the core, simply because it's our best guess at the time, much like science. There is evil that exists in this world, however it's not a physical being, just like God isnt' a physical all powerful being (in my opinion).

It's a series of energies and thoughts that are negative and manifest themselves in the presence of human weakness.

~Keeper



posted on May, 16 2009 @ 09:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Shane
 


Thanks Shane - duh, I knew this - I just hadn't connected A to C or rather I to L in this case! Thanks for the refresher - it's appreciated!



posted on May, 16 2009 @ 09:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Max_TO
 


Lucifer is old-hat my friend.
Apparently, Lucifer was called as such when he was still God's( which God-I'm not really sure)" sidekick'.
Not tolerant to his disobedience he was cast from Heaven with the other fallen angels.
When he became a terrestrial dweller, then he was known as Satan.
Now he's probably known as Scratch (or something).



posted on May, 16 2009 @ 10:06 PM
link   
I found this:


Lucifer means “light-bearer” and it is used in various places in the Vulgate Bible as a reference to the planet Venus, a sign of the Zodiac, and “the aurora” (Job 11:17, Job 38:32, Psalm 109:3), and also, most significantly for this list, as the name of the King of Babylon (Isaiah 14:12) which is considered in Christianity to be a metaphor for the Prince of Devils (Lucifer is not considered to be the Devil’s name in Christianity - merely the state from which he fell). The use of the Morning Star metaphor is symbolic of the fall of the light-bearer - as the morning star vanishes in the daylight, so the devil fell from heaven. Interestingly, the word is also used to refer to Jesus in 2 Peter 1:19.


Link to article.



posted on May, 18 2009 @ 12:28 AM
link   
There wasn't really a "Lucifer" indicated in the Bible except in Isaiah 14:12 so where did this "Lucifer" start. Well, this fellow should be in the book of Genesis since this is the entity that is presumed as Satan as well. Unfortunately, no such name appears in Genesis.

However, such a name is indicated in Book of Enoch's creation.


Book of Enoch II (Slavonic) Chapter 18v3
3And they said to me: These are the Grigori, who with their prince Satanai l rejected the Lord of light, and after them are those who are held in great darkness on the second heaven, and three of them went down on to earth from the Lord’s throne, to the place Ermon, and broke through their vows on the shoulder of the hill Ermon and saw the daughters of men how good they are, and took to themselves wives, and befouled the earth with their deeds, who in all times of their age made lawlessness and mixing, and giants are born and marvellous big men and great enmity.


Notice the name "Satanail". This has been translated as "Lucifer" by Laurence (The translator of the Books of Enoch). Hence, this is a different entity as proven below:


Book of the Secrets of Enoch II Chapter 29v3-4
3And one from out the order of angels, having turned away with the order that was under him, conceived an impossible thought, to place his throne higher than the clouds above the earth, that he might become equal in rank to my power.

4And I threw him out from the height with his angels, and he was flying in the air continuously above the bottomless.


Since Chapter 29v3-4 is taken from the Creation myth in the Book of the Secrets of Enoch, it is safe to assume that this angel that wanted to be of equal standing to God has been thrown out beforehand due to Chapter 18v3 being pre-antediluvian in timeline.

If you notice, the creation chapter is later than the watchers' mating with humans. The reason for this is that Enoch was brought in the presence of God after the mating happened in order for God to tell Enoch how God created everything so Enoch can document it.

Then again, there is a contradiction to this as indicated in:

Book of the Secrets of Enoch Chapter 31v1-6

1Adam has life on earth, and I created a garden in Eden in the east, that he should observe the testament and keep the command.

2I made the heavens open to him, that he should see the angels singing the song of victory, and the gloomless light.

3And he was continuously in paradise, and the devil understood that I wanted to create another world, because Adam was lord on earth, to rule and control it.

4The devil is the evil spirit of the lower places, as a fugitive he made Sotona (9) from the heavens as his name was Satanail (10), thus he became different from the angels, but his nature did not change his intelligence as far as his understanding of righteous and sinful things.
(9) Sotona. Or, "Diana."
(10) Satanail. Or, "the impious one." Ha-satan in Hebrew means "the adversary" referring here to the "lead" adversary, or Lucifer.

5And he understood his condemnation and the sin which he had sinned before, therefore he conceived thought against Adam, in such form he entered and seduced Eva, but did not touch Adam.

6But I cursed ignorance, but what I had blessed previously, those I did not curse, I cursed not man, nor the earth, nor other creatures, but man’s evil fruit, and his works.


This is odd to say the least since there is a contradiction between the two. It may be safe to assume that this "Lucifer" or Satan is a designation for anything in spirit that has fallen from God's grace.

Source: reluctant-messenger.com...

[edit on 18-5-2009 by Unregistered]



posted on May, 18 2009 @ 12:52 AM
link   
It would seem that the majority of posters that think that Lucifer is an entity also believe that Lucifer is one in the same as the Satan . Myself , I am not to sure of this . If we look at each of the words Satan and Lucifer they have more differences then similarities .

There word meanings are different , Lucifer meaning morning star and Satan means.. Satan (Standard Hebrew: השָׂטָן ha-Satan ("the accuser")) is a term that originates from the Abrahamic religions .

Also as stated earlier , the word Lucifer is mentioned only once in the whole bible meanwhile Satan is mentioned numerous times .

Baal is even mentioned more then Lucifer in the bible .

If morning star , Lucifer , is a title , then how and why did the devil end up with it .

If Lucifer is an entity then how and why is that name given to Satan when the term is mentioned only once , in reference to a Babylonian king ?



posted on May, 18 2009 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Max_TO
If Lucifer is an entity then how and why is that name given to Satan when the term is mentioned only once , in reference to a Babylonian king ?


It was based upon ASSUMING that the Term implied Satan/The Devil.

www.crivoice.org...


Since some people see a reference to the devil being cast out of heaven in the New Testament (Rev 12:9-12; cf. Lk 10:18), they assumed that the Isaiah passage referred to the same thing.


This is what I would refer to as Biblical Ignorant, and it is a great problem with "Religion" today.

From behind Pulpits, we, as Christians, are told things, without any support offered to verify the presumption.

Some examples many would tend to believe and accept as a fact.

Adam and Eve where the first people of Earth
Eve ate an Apple
Cain's wife was his sister
Likewise with Seth
Thou shall not Kill

Just some things many have heard from childhood, but yet no one has taught the truth about any of these.

Six Day Man was here long before Adam
The Serpent wholely seduced Ms Eve
Cain's Wife was from the Sixth Day Peoples
So was Seth's
Thou shall not commit Premeditated Murder, (To lie in wait)

They believe, what comes from the Pulpit, because, if you do not get told the truth in Church, where would you expect to be told the truth? The good news is for those who are in just a situation as this, we will all be taught by Jesus in the Millenium Kingdom. You can not make informed decisions without all the Information.

But it is from this Ignorance, along with the Dogmas of Theology and Doctrines conceived by Man, that misunderstanding occurs and lies become tenets of the Faith.

Ciao

Shane



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join