It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Satan vs Lucifer

page: 5
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 03:42 PM
As it has been pointed out, Lucifer and Satan are two different entities. One is a prince of Light and the other is a prince of Darkness. I guess they hadn't invented Democrats and Republicans just yet.

Anyway, I am not sure god is the good one and satan is the bad one either. We know that god is good because, um, he tells us so in his book. But looking at his record in the same book it doesn't add up:

According to C. Scott Litleton, a Professor of Anthropology at Occidental College, Los Angeles, CA, there was a divine being (Lucifer, Prometheus, Quétzalcoatl) who defies his supperiors and assists humans despite orders and is later punished for it:

The best-known, albeit most misunderstood, of my three examples is Lucifer, the "Fallen Angel" who rebelled against the divine authority of Yahweh and was exiled from Heaven. Soon thereafter, disguised as a serpent, he tricked Adam and Eve into becoming fully sentient, that is, over and above an immediate awareness of their sexual natures. This violated God's policy of "non- interference" in the newly-created humans' affairs, and Lucifer remained an outcast as far as the supreme--and eventually monotheistic--Hebrew deity was concerned.


[edit on 31-7-2009 by tungus]

posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 03:51 PM
Satan is multiple personalities with multiple bodies. You can say Satan has one soul. The bible only provides hints, yet the rest of said "evil" Satan is so said to be so "evil" only by peer pressure into false witness. By peer pressure, people repeat what is wrote and heard. They fear what they really don't know about Satan.

Easier to think of Lucifer as a personification than to pinpoint somebody. There are very romantic and lustful experiences to be found about this. Discover them if you explore.

There is another Satan, and maybe this is where some confusion comes from. Think of yourself in a mirror. When you read the bible and read about Satan, then consider any personal judgment you make about that Satan in the bible is actually a mirror of you. In effect, you judge yourself. Now you got to live with such judgment until you can overcome it.

Life gets better when you can learn not to bare false witness. *wink*

How many of you can say absolutely positive things about Satan? Hmmm. Oh the virtue of love and compassion...

Oh look, I didn't say anything 'far out there' in this post. *smile*

[edit on 31-7-2009 by dzonatas]

posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 04:07 PM
I think that the Bible cannot be read literally. It just doesn't make sense.


Everything we view as reality is a virtual reality experiment in time to experience emotion experienced through consciousness and the eye.

Reality is myth, math, and metaphor. The Garden of Eden is a metaphoric legend linked to creation by the patterns of sacred geometry. The story is laced with metaphors for the reader to beli'eve', then to unravel arriving at the truth behind the illusion.

The obvious metaphors are male/female, duality, polarity of our experience in a bipolar electromagnetic experiment.

The serpent represents spiraling DNA or Dragon symbology.

The 'Fall' is consciousness slowing down as it spirals/falls into the Tree of Life or Physical Experience/Experiment from which it is about to evolve in the alchemy of time.
Flower of Life
Tree of Life - patterns creating by sacred geometry that repeat in time creating consciousness programs with the same pattenrs in which humanity can experience virtually.

The Apple is Knowledge - the Seed of Life, etc.

I also read somewhere that Garden of Eden is metaphor of the self and the ego and the story is part of the collective unconcious.

posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 04:14 PM
Lucifer and Satan are different words.

Satan means adversary. Lucifer means light-bringer.

I think the Hymn of Lucifer describes this best:

"He has two heads. One is the king of hell. The other is Jesus of Nazareth."

I made a thread a while ago about it here:

The Meaning Of Lucifer

posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 06:44 PM

Originally posted by starwarp2000

Originally posted by Devino

Originally posted by starwarp2000
reply to post by silent thunder

Lucifer was the name of one of the covering Cherubim depicted on the Ark of the Covenant. He was one of the angels that stood on either side of God's throne.

Lucifer: "Bringer of light"

Satan: "Enemy of God"

Correct me if I'm wrong but the names of the Cherubim, or Angles, on the Ark of the Covenant were Gabriel and Michael. Does this mean Lucifer was also the angle Michael?

Sorry but i am about to correct you

Where in the Bible does it say that Michael or Gabriel are or ever were one of the covering Cherubim on the throne of God?

As i understand Gabriel is God's messenger and Michael is Captain of God's Armies!!!!

But it does say that Lucifer was one of the "Covering Cheribum"!!!!!

I am interested in understanding this more but let me clear up what I meant. I was watching a religious documentary which described the lid on the Ark of the Covenant as having two figures, or Cherubim, in the likeness of, or were named after, the two angles Michael and Gabriel. I didn't mean to indicate that they were the two angles.

posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 06:50 PM
I would rather not offend the spiritual forces among us by making myself out to be an expert on this particular subject, but, I do however have a question. There are many references to a morning star in the EAST in reference to Lucifer. There are many other ancient cultures and religions who also make reference to an eastern star like Zoastarianism and the Egyption Horus/Osirus Story. The Horus story shows the star Sirius as the Eastern star in this latter generation as it really used to be the North Polar Star above the the capstone in the ancient times before the deluge. Now the Star named Polaris is the Northern Polar Star. The Horus story and the Mithras story both show the same premessianic background with a reference to the star in the East, or morning star. My Question is, where is how does break down with Sirius and Venus? Its understandable to find Sirius near Orions Belt (Three Kings) near the horizon in the morning hours. Venus also make a bright if not brighter appearace at the morning hour horizon. It is understood that the Horus, Mithras and Christian stories all make reference to the bright eastern star near Orions belt, (Three Kings), but the Lucifer story only has reference to Venus. It gets weirder though. The Bible Book of Job makes reference to Orion and the Pleades which many writers have speculated in reference too over the years, most of them which refer to Orion as the origin of fallen angels. All the while the interpretation of these stars and planets incur the same astaral meaning at certain times of year. The zenieth cycle of Venus is on a 8 year return orbit (XXXXXXXX). My final question. When Sirius and Venus reach alignment at the peak zenieth of the second plant, WHAT HAPPENS?

posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 07:00 PM
I'm not going to even try to get involved in a literary argument because, quite frankly, it's a fruitless venture. But since the op is asking for our specific understanding, I'll just say that it is my belief that Satan, Lucifer, the Devil, or what have you, are all the same being. Different cultures, stories, and/or renditions may have used different lables, but in the end I believe them to be refering to the one and only fallen angel. The Devil himself.

posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 07:15 PM
What a wonderful topic! There is a lot of confusion because the interpretations and meanings given to the two names have come about over time and multiple sources, including the apocrypha. Here is a great article about this very thing, I am going to try to quote it here:

"Some Light on Lucifer

By Ina Belderis

[Unless otherwise indicated, all Bible quotes are from the New Oxford Annotated Bible (New Revised Standard Version).]
Is there any difference between Lucifer and Satan? Westerners generally would say they are one and the same. Especially those in fundamentalist Christian circles consider Lucifer an archangel who fell from grace and was thrown out of heaven because of "sinful pride." His "sin" was thinking he was equal to God and rebelling against Him. This rebellious angel is known as Satan, Lucifer, or the Devil, who tempts us to do evil. Supposedly, one of the most evil things Lucifer tempts us to do is to think that we are God. So those who believe in the essential divinity of all life are often accused of committing Satan's sin, and of being under the influence of Lucifer. Where do these ideas about Satan and Lucifer come from? Is there a biblical basis for them?

Lucifer means lightbringer, from the Latin lux "light" and ferre "to bear or bring." The word Lucifer is found in only one place in the Bible -- Isaiah 14:12 -- but only in the King James and related versions: "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! . . ." The New Revised Standard Version translates the same passage as "How you are fallen from heaven, O Day Star, Son of Dawn!" In other translations we find: "O shining star of the dawn!" (Moffatt) or "O morning-star, son of the dawn!" (Hebrew Bible). The King James Version is based on the Vulgate, the Latin translation of Jerome. Jerome translated the Hebrew helel (bright or brilliant one) as "lucifer," which was a reasonable Latin equivalent. And yet it is this lucifer, the bright one or lightbearer, that came to be understood by so many as the name for Satan, Lord of Darkness.

In Isaiah 14 the prophet is taunting the king of Babylon: "In the figurative language of the Hebrews, . . . a star, signifies an illustrious king or prince . . . The monarch here referred to, having surpassed all other kings in royal splendour, is compared to the harbinger of day, whose brilliancy surpasses that of the surrounding stars" (A Cyclopedia of Biblical Literature, John Kitto ed., 3rd ed., J. B. Lippincott and Co, Philadelphia, 1866, 2:857-8). There are those who claim that the real entity addressed in this passage is Satan, but there is no evidence for this. On the contrary, Isaiah (14:16) says: "Is this the man who made the earth tremble, . . . ?" and (14:18) "All the kings of the nations lie in glory, each in his own tomb; but you are cast out . . ." These seem clear references to a man, the king of a nation, not an archangel.

There is yet another reason why it makes no sense to read the Devil into Isaiah 14: the traditional role of Satan in the Old Testament. Satan comes from the Hebrew satan, which means "opponent" or "adversary." According to Strong's Concordance, this word appears in 1 Chronicles, Job, Psalms, and in Zechariah. In Psalms "satan" is used both in the plural (accusers) and in the indefinite sense (an accuser). In Chronicles and Zechariah its usage is ambiguous, while in Job "satan" as The Accuser appears only in the first two of its 42 chapters. It is important, however, to keep in mind that the texts of the Old Testament did not reach their "final" version until after the Babylonian exile. Before this exile there is no evidence in Hebrew scriptures of an Accuser as a force that opposes God, and even after the exile it is still doubtful. Though the story of Job is very old, its final version is dated after the exile, after the Hebrews came into contact with the dualist Zoroastrian religion with its god of good and its god of evil."


posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 07:16 PM
"There is even division among Old Testament scholars as to whether evil should be associated with Satan at all. Some say that Satan was originally not considered evil but gradually became identified with his unpleasant functions. According to this approach, Satan is still God's servant. There is much in the Book of Job that tends to support this view. Satan appears only in the first two chapters and then disappears. Some believe the first two chapters were added much later, for in the last chapter we read: ". . . they showed him sympathy and comforted him for all the evil that the Lord had brought upon him" (42:11).

It appears that the Hebrews did not have a devil-like power opposed to God. Satan, or the Satan as he is often called, is an angel in the court of God with the function of an accuser (see Job 1:6). There are also indications that along with all that is "good," all that is "evil" comes from God, not Satan. In Isaiah 45:7 God says: "I form light and create darkness, I make weal and create woe; I the Lord do all these things." Valentine's Jewish Encyclopedia confirms the idea that there is a radical difference between how Satan is conceived in the Old Testament and how he is conceived in the New Testament, and that his new role did not develop from his original role: there are no references "to rebellious angels in any pre-Christian book. . . . The figure of Satan in the Hebrew Bible and in the New Testament respectively emphasizes the difference in conception. There is no development, but basic difference. . . . It is only in Christian literature that the Persian idea of two opposing empires, with Satan as God's enemy, has persisted" (Valentine's Jewish Encyclopedia, A. M. Hyamson & A. M. Silberman eds., Shapiro, Valentine & Co, London, 1938, p. 36).

There is actually very little in the Old Testament to support the idea of Satan as a rebellious angel and the power opposing God. He is generally depicted as a heavenly attorney general (accuser) functioning under God, and this only strengthens the argument for not reading Satan into the passage about Lucifer in Isaiah 14:12. Isaiah is one of the older books in the Bible and is definitely pre-exile.

If there is no sound biblical basis for associating Lucifer with Satan, where then does the story come from that he is a rebellious angel and fell because of pride? The Christian Church made the interpretation that Isaiah 14:12 is connected with Luke 10:18: "He said to them, I watched Satan fall from heaven like a flash of lightning." This unfounded, non-biblical connection of Lucifer with Satan has led to the popular misunderstanding that Lucifer is another name for the Devil (cf. "Lucifer," Harper's Bible Dictionary, Paul Achtemeier, gen. ed., Harper & Row, San Francisco, 1985).

As Lucifer is the morning star, daystar, or Venus, the absurdity of connecting him with the Devil is revealed in the three New Testament passages where morning star or daystar is mentioned:

So we have the prophetic message more fully confirmed. You will do well to be attentive to this as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. -- 2 Peter 1:19
. . . from my Father. To the one who conquers I will also give the morning star. -- Revelation 2:28
It is I, Jesus, who sent my angel to you with this testimony for the churches. I am the root and the descendant of David, the bright morning star. -- Revelation 2 2:16
All three references to the morning star point to Jesus or things Jesus says or gives. In the Vulgate the word "morning star" in 2 Peter is even translated as lucifer. In the other two references it is stella matutina."


posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 07:17 PM
"It is puzzling that "lightning" should be used in relation to Satan in Luke 10:18, especially when one considers two other references to lightning in the New Testament: Matthew 24:27 and Luke 17:24. These two references connect lightning with the Son of Man or Jesus and his second coming, which is understandable when one studies ancient religious symbolism: "In Judeo-Christian thought lightning is a symbol of God's immediate presence . . . or of the last Judgment" ("Lightning," Dictionary of Symbolism, Hans Biedermann, Penguin Books, New York, 1992). Even when we put aside the question of what God's "opponent" should be called, the fact remains that the story of a rebellious angel who fell because of pride is not in the Bible at all. Some claim that the fallen Satan is present from the very beginning, even though his name does not appear in Genesis. Paul suggested that the serpent was Satan, the implication being that Satan tempted Adam. Yet most of the early Church Fathers believed that Satan fell after Adam. It took the Church over 200 years to establish that Satan's sin was pride, that he fell before the creation of man, and that he was the serpent that tempted Adam and Eve.

To find the story of the fall of Satan, we must go to sources other than the Bible. There was a great deal of literature produced roughly between 200 BC and 150 AD, including the Apocrypha and the Pseudepigrapha. Some of these are apocalyptic -- they prophesy cataclysmic events and the end of the world. In this literature one can see the development of the idea of an evil spirit, but even in the apocalyptic literature the Devil does not become entirely evil in his origin and essence. Many of the books from this period reflect the misery of the Jewish people under the oppression of Syria and Rome. Their writings deal with visions of the end of the world, the world being in the power of the Devil, and the Messiah conquering the Devil and bringing a new era of justice. The Book of Enoch is seen by many as one of the earliest and most important accounts of the mishaps of the Heavenly Court (of angels). It also describes the rebellion of the angel Satanail, and his being hurled from heaven (2 Enoch, ch. 29, long MSS only). Some scholars take this to mean that the amalgamation of Satan and Lucifer goes back to the first century. A redating of 2 Enoch, however, puts it later than the third century, perhaps even in the seventh. For this reason others suggest that Origen (Exhort. 18) was probably the inventor of the identification of Lucifer with Satan (Satan: The Early Christian Tradition, Jeffrey Burton Russell, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, 1991, p. 130 & fn). The Life of Adam and Eve (Vita), a Jewish scripture that scholars date between 200 BC and 200 AD, relates that Satan tells Adam and Eve that his fall from heaven is the result of his refusal to worship Adam, the image of God. A similar account is also found in the Koran (S 2:34). These legends reflect a theme close to the primordial "pride" that led to the so-called fall of Satan.

Since the Old Testament does not connect pride or the Fall with Satan, the Devil, or the Adversary, the only scriptural "support" for this notion is the misinterpretation of the fall of Lucifer (the king of Babylon), and certain passages in the New Testament. But the New Testament does not give any clear information on the fall of Satan through pride either. One place where Lucifer is connected with pride is in Milton's Paradise Lost. He "applied the name to the demon of sinful pride" ("Lucifer," A Dictionary of Angels, Gustav Davidson, The Free Press, New York, 1967)."


posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 07:19 PM
"It appears that the whole story of Lucifer as Satan, the fallen rebellious angel, is based entirely on non-canonical sources: the so-called Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha. There are also many pre-Christian myths and allegories that include stories about Lucifer, which is the Latin name for the Greek Eosphoros. In his Theogony Hesiod speaks of two divine beings, the brothers Eosphoros (the morning star) and Hesperos (the evening star). They are the children of Astraios (the starry heaven) and Eos (the dawn). The morning star, like the Virgin of the Sea, is one of the titles given to Divine Mother goddesses such as the Roman Venus, the Phoenician Astarte, the Jewish Ashtoreth, and the later Christian Holy Virgin. In the oldest Zoroastrian allegories, Mithra is supposed to have conquered the planet Venus. In the Christian tradition, Michael defeats Lucifer.

The planet Venus is the lightbringer, the first radiant beam that does away with the darkness of night. It is a symbol of the development of the divine light in man, for the first awakening of self-consciousness, for independent thinking and the real application of free will. It means the bringing of the light of compassionate understanding to the human mind. In this broader view the connection of the morning star with Jesus makes good sense, because compassion is the essence of Jesus' teaching. This teaching shows the greatest consensus throughout the New Testament: it is mentioned in Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Romans, Galatians, 1 Thessalonians, Hebrews, 1 John, James, and 1 Peter. The best known reference is in Matthew (22:37-40):

"You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the greatest and first commandment. And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets."
(From Sunrise magazine, October/November 1996. Copyright © 1996 by Theosophical University Press.)"

Source: ""

posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 07:21 PM
reply to post by gwynnhwyfar

that's the EXACT source i posted in the beginning of the thread. People either don't read it or simply dismiss the information. I thought the issue of the difference between Satan and Lucifer was already clarified in this thread? did i miss something???

(thanks for posting it here though, it will help those who decide to read from the last pages. and sorry if the tone of my post seems to be anger, it's actually neutral

posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 07:28 PM
Sorry about that! Great minds... I did read the whole thread here on ATS, but I had read the summary you provided but did not drill down to the link so I had not realized it was the same one.

posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 07:48 PM
Has anyone contrived the possible effects of the possible energy flux which could come out of the alignment of Sirius and Venus during Christmas time. Being the lack of sunspot activity is allowing cosmic radiation to enter the SOL system, the idea of these two giant light bearers combining a twin dragon light stream upon the Earth is very profoundly interesting. I do wonder if this may have actually occred in the past with some kind of King making ritual? Not all rituals being the same as we have good and bad Kings, but the thought is a tad above trivial if you ask me.

posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 08:07 PM

Originally posted by inregardstoo
Has anyone contrived the possible effects of the possible energy flux which could come out of the alignment of Sirius and Venus during Christmas time. Being the lack of sunspot activity is allowing cosmic radiation to enter the SOL system, the idea of these two giant light bearers combining a twin dragon light stream upon the Earth is very profoundly interesting. I do wonder if this may have actually occred in the past with some kind of King making ritual? Not all rituals being the same as we have good and bad Kings, but the thought is a tad above trivial if you ask me.

that's a good question

posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 08:17 PM

Originally posted by nunya13

Originally posted by Apache-Yaqui

only slave is ppl who accept everything they're told instead of listenin' to reason and their hearts.

Haha...that's so funny you said that because a born again Christian friend once told me that following my heart was the work of the devil after she asked me why I believe what I do and that I should just believe what the bible teaches and I told her that i believe what I do because my heart tells me it's right and that some things in the bible I do believe are right but not everything.

She left saying that the devil was influencing me. I cried. What a horrible thing to say to a friend. It's people like that the devil works through, if there is a devil.

i believe you. i grew up in a catholic family, not my parents, but my tias, tios, cousins, and others, and us mexicans are big into whole catholic thing so i'veseen first hand how christians can be. christians r always tryin' to convert you into their religion like this one time my gf at the time told her pastor i had devil in me (believe me she was snake ongue one) newayz that pastor wanted to bapitze me in a cold ass water swimmin' kiddie pool, and i was like no, i don't want to do this, but he didn't listen and slam me backwards into the water when i didn't even have my hand over my nose. that piss me off big time. other time before that i was at a christian church my so called born again christian friend was tryin' to get us homies into. and they were touchin' foreheads and ppl would fall to the ground sayin' they had the holy spirit in them and when it came my turn i wouldn't fall 'cause i didn't feel nothing so the preacher tried to push me down but i wouldn't.

it was because i will not lie about God. but in my journey i learn God is me and I'm him/she, and God is avaible to me at all time. i've more respect really for muslims they treat you with aot respect and i got love for that. christians judge you for how you dress. i've friends who talk how good this one church is 'causethey don't care how you dress.

posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 08:19 PM

Originally posted by starwarp2000
Well firstly Lucifer doesn't exist anymore! His name was changed to Satan, so any reference to Lucifer is just a historical reference.

Satan is an Arch-Angel (albeit a fallen one) and is made of spirit.

make up children's book conceptualizations of archetypical characters all you want.
still silliness and lacks depth and literal practical meaning that one can gain anything worth-while form spiritually.

Satan sits on the throne of the Earth at this moment!!! He will remain there until Christ returns and removes him.

true.. but in a symbolic sense.
satan being the current form of body/mind we're in right now...
christ as in the future liberated body/mind we will in habit with awakening to a literally new body and consciousness.

no "people" or "spirits" named jesus and satan..

I know it's kinda sad when you have to let go of that perception of them.. saying bye-bye to the gossip-oriented action-film type interpretation... might leave you feeling a lil hollow inside...

who represent something you can "learn from" in a very deep sense.. and PRACTICAL MANNER in which you can derive actual literal unimagineable ascendance from...

NOT actual "beings"

nothing personal.. but i pray for the death of your type of perception of the mythology.


[edit on 31-7-2009 by prevenge]

posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 08:48 PM
Lucifer was his name when he was an angel in Heaven

Satan is his name in his fallen state...IMO

posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 09:37 PM
reply to post by tungus

Hi tungus/

This Graph you have just reminded me of the song ''Sympathy of the Devil''

Its not SATAN that is causing this, but people who are SLAVES to SATAN.
If Satan was a living body, he would be sentenced straight to jail!
Satan is a Spirit being, he has no body.
Lucifer-Eosphoros(Greek) is the name GIVEN before his fall.
Satan-Satanas(Greek) is the name given AFTER the fall.
Makes sense with the name change....It is done throughout the Bible.
I guess people will only read and pick and choose to their LIKING at not what is being said.

God speaks to Job, "When the stars were created,
all My angels sang praises to Me" (Job 38:7).

Are Angelic beings visible?
the angel who was accompanying Tobit and his son says of himself:"All these days I was visible to you,
but I did not eat or drink,
and only by your eyes was this imagined" (Tobit 12:19).

Angels are created immortal,
as is witnessed by the Scriptures,
teaching that they cannot die (Luke 20:36).

Angels are intellectual and posses higher powers then man, as the Apostle Peter explains, they surpass all earthly authorities and governments (2 Peter 2:11).

The prophet Isaiah was honored to see "the Lord sitting on the high extolled throne, the hems of His vestments filling the whole temple.
Surrounding Him were the Seraphim,
each having six wings; with two they covered His face,
with two they covered His feet,
and they flew with the other two.
And they called to each other and said: Holy, Holy, Holy, the Lord Sabaoth! The whole world is filled with His Glory'"
(Esais /Isaiah 6:1-4; Ezekiel ch. 10).

The words of the Savior, "I saw Satan,
fallen from heaven as a bolt of lightning,"
refers to this prehistoric event,
the rebellion by Lucifer and other angels against God.
This is described in the book of Revelation with the following details: "There occurred a war in the heavens.
Michael and his angels fought against the dragon,
and the dragon and his angels fought against them.
However they did not prevail,
and there was no room for them in heaven.
The great dragon was cast down,
that ancient snake,
known as devil and satan …
and his angels were also cast down with him" (Revelation 12:7-9).
From the initial words of chapter 12 of the book of Revelation,
where it is said that the dragon drew after him one third of the stars in heaven (Revelation 12:4),
some conclude that at that time Lucifer seduced one third of the angels. These fallen angels are called demons.

"He who sins is from the devil,
because the devil himself sinned first … Anyone who commits sin is a slave of sin" (1 John 3:8; John 8:34).
The presence of evil spirits among us presents a constant danger.
That is why the Apostle Peter extols us: "Be sober and watchful,
for your adversary the devil,
as a roaring lion,
goes about seeking someone to devour" (1 Peter 5:8).
The Apostle Paul expresses the same thoughts on discretion,
saying, "Put on the armor of God,
so that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.
For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood,
but against the principalities and the powers, against the world rulers of this darkness,
against the spiritual forces of wickedness on high" (Ephesians 6:11-12).

Revelation mentions Lucifer as that ANCIENT DRAGON.

posted on Jul, 31 2009 @ 10:28 PM
I get confused by all this sort of stuff.
Wasn't Lucifer a bright morning star at one time. And then Jesus was the same bright morning star? Aw, jeeze, gimme a new religon based on old stories where everything makes sense, please? Naw, ain't gonna happen.

top topics

<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in