posted on Jul, 23 2004 @ 11:11 AM
AS YOU MUST KNOW BY NOW...
The word "Lucifer" is a compound LATIN word (Luci-Fer) derived from TWO separate Latin words: LUX =”light” + FERO =”I carry” ) hence: LUCIFER:
“Bearer of the Light”... (NB the term has BOTH positive AND negative connotations: "obscene boaster" and "gloriously divine").
But....it is NOT Greek. It is NOT Hebrew. It is NOT English.
And the word LUCIFER does NOT occur in ANY of the the known Greek texts of the Apocalypse of Yohanon the Elder, whoever he was, i.e. the so-called
“Book of Revelation.”
There are more than 6 contradictory Manuscript families in Greek for the book "of revelation". The word LUCIFER is not used in ANY of them:
The word "LUCIFER" only starts to occur in the Latin Version of the Book of Revelation completed by Jerome in AD 405---who used the official
Christian Greek Old Testament (Septuaginta, or LXX) to translate the phrase derived from Isaiah 14:12
Of course, the “Book of Revelation” (of course) could not possibly have used the word “LUCIFER” anyway since the book was NOT originally written in
Latin, but crude Koine Greek badly translated out of Hebrew and Aramaic original material from OT scraps of Hezekiel and Jeremiah, the Books of
Henoch, the Plagues of Egypt, the Morning and Evening Tamid Psalms of the Jewish 2nd Temple Ritual, the books of Proto and Trito Isaiah, Zechariah,
Malachi, Joel and Daniel etc.)
The gramatically awkward Greek of the “book of Revelation” ("full of Greek Howlers" as C.K.Barrett used to say to us) does not say “Bearer of the
The text actually says, “I AM IESOUS THE BRIGHT AND MORNING STAR” which points back to a non-Septuagint non authorised Greek LXX phrase in the later
Hebrew Proto Masoretic Text Version of Isaiah 14:12
O, how art thou fallen, Thou Son of the Morning Star, from Heaven !
One wonders why the book of "Revelation" did not use the LXX Greek official translation of the Old Testament (the book was written in Greek, however
crude): it would have been easier for the author (whose Greek is poor) just to copy it out word for word.
But he chose another text family...possibly one more familiar to the earliest Nazorean Christians in Palestine prior to the AD 66 War against Rome.
This would point to the conclusion that "Revelation" was originally written in Aramaic and/or Hebrew using a different version of the Old Testament
(like some of Matthew's Prophecies and OT citations) than the LXX, perhaps some kind of Aramaic Targum paraphrase set into Greek.
As you may already know--- the familiar Masoretic Hebrew (MT) text of Isaiah 14:12 used by Jews today in the synagogues and also by Protestant
Christians worldwide (which can be dated from AD 800 in Leningrad from SINGLE manuscript) is A MUCH LATER CLEANED UP TEXT ( WITH VOWELLS ADDED) than
the Hebrew underlay text ("LXX Vorlage")which was used to make the Greek Translation (LXX) of the Old Testament in BC 200, some of which was found
still in tact in Hebrew among the Dead Sea Scrolls.
The phrase :”Bearer of the Light” derives from the LATIN VULGATE TRANSLATION BY JEROME OF THE TEXT OF ISAIAH 14 TAKEN NOT FROM THE PROT MASORETIC BUT
FROM THE EARLIER GREEK LXX Septuaginta Greek Old Testment (LXX) of BC 200 of Isaiah 14:12: itself derived from an OLDER Hebrew Text Version of Hebrew
Scriptures predating the year 200 BC.
The LATIN VULGATE OF JEROME chose to translate passage from Isaiah chapter 14 from the CATHOLIC CHURCH AUTHORISED GREEK LXX rather than merely
translate into Latin what the author(s) of the Book of Revelation wrote in Revelation chapter 24: which was lifted from a PROTO-Masoretic Hebrew text
The MT was a Hebrew pointed (vowelled) text which was not formally finished for another 400 years, but were certainly circulating in some kind of
Proto-Masoretic Form during the time of Jerome in 405 AD (the proto Masoretic Text or P-MT emerged into recogniseable shape ONLY after the 2nd failed
Jewish War, i.e. the Bar Kokhba Revolt, after 138 AD).
Why did JEROME USE A DIFFERENT OLD TESTAMENT VERSION in REV 24 when he quotes the passage from ISAIAH 14:12 i.e. DIFFERENT THAN OUR AUTHOR OF "The
Apocalypse" or Book of "REVELATION" USED????
The Greek phrase “ho 'Eosphoros ho proianatellon” is rendered in the Latin Vulgate as “Lucifer” (i.e. bearer of the Light”i.e. that rose in the
morning) and is ONLY derived from the LXX GREEK TRANSLATION OF THE OLDER HEBREW VERSION OF ISAIAH THAN THE MASORETIC TEXT USED BY JEWS TODAY.
So...the term “LUCIFER” comes ONLY from a LATIN TRANSLATION of the Greek LXX phrase “Bearer of the Light” (but NOT the Masoertic Hebrew phrase “Son of
the Morning Star”)
Perhaps that’s what's confusing so many people on this thread about this curious phrase "Luci-Fer"...
AGAIN: THE AUTHOR OF REVELATION (whoever he was) in chapter 24 actually ignores the "official hristian" "Alexandrian Egyptian" Septuaginta LXX
Greek rendering and sides more in with a DIFFERENT version of the Masoretic OLD TESTAMENT Text family --which may be one of the reasons why the book
of "Revelation" was considered "heretical" for the first 300 years of its existence !
The phrase: “I AM IESOUS: THE OFFSPRING AND ROOT OF DAVID: THE BRIGHT AND MORNING STAR” is in fact a “Messianic confession” used by Messianic Jews
long before “Jesus” was even born as a FORMULA for the expected MESSIAH OF THE JEWS, descended from KING DAVID, who was to overthrow the Persians,
later the Greeks, and later the Romans, all of whom had occupied Palestine.
The “Son of the Morning Star” originally meant to describe what we call today the Planet Venus, but which they thought was the brightest "star" in
the sky just before dawn, which pre-figured the rising of the Sun each morning, and Arbarbanel points out that this star, namely Venus, is the
“heavenly prince of Babylon” in other words, Babylon’s protective Deity or god.
Many cultures worshipped Venus in this regard, not the least of which were the Maya to judge from the few Mayan texts that survived the Massive
Burnings of Mayan and Aztec literature by the Catholic Church (AD 1520-1620) which had been written on rolls of Tree Bark (4 are now housed in Museums
in and around Berlin).
The Apocalypse of Yohanon the Elder (aka the Book of Revelation) spends a great deal of the text on the subject of the overthrow by the Elect of
Israel of the Symbolic Babylon (i.e. Rome) taking verses from Jeremiah and Hezekiel as his model (the author quotes most of it in Midrashic Fashion).
Don’t forget that the socalled “Book of Revelation” was compiled from Apocalyptic “end of days” old testament and apocryphal scraps originally DURING
the failed 1st Jewish Revolt Against Rome (AD 66-72) using Babylon as a code name for the Empire.
The Hebrew Masoretic Text word of Isaiah 14:12 that the "book of Revelation" seems to be translating is HEYLEL. It means the morning star or the day
star from the sense of brightness : HALAL can mean clear and hence “to shine with clarity.”
HENCE: it has BOTH positive AND negative applications in that it can mean to boast or to glorify, to glory, to give light. In other words, this verse
gave rise to the Praise of the Messiah (bringer of the Light) as well as to Denounce the Boaster (i.e. Satan).
It can mean to feign madness in the negative application. In the sense that it is used in a positive sense and applied in the form as it developed
over time: Heylel, it is as Morning star or Day star.
Historically, the phrase “How you have fallen down from the heavens, O shining star son of the morning !” originally meant to indicate (by the author
of Proto (1st) Isaiah) the “prophetic fall” of the King of Assyria who had militarily occupied the Israelites of northern Kingdom in Ephraim in 722
The 10 Tribes who were LOST as a result of Assyria’s conquering the Northern Kingdom of Israel were supposed to be BROUGHT BACK to Israel by the
MESSIAH (or “Christ”), so this verse was used in various ways to draw these ideas together by Messianic Jews and early Christians.
But t originally the phrase had nothing to do with SATAN (or to the MESSIAH for that matter). These were LATER reflections on the text of Isaiah 14:12
The phrase as used in the Greek “Book of Revelation” refers to a WARRIOR DAVIDDIC KING MESSIAH who was expected to liberate Palestine from the Yoke of
Rome (see Luke chapter 24: “and we thought he (“Iesous”) would be the One who would Redeem Israel from its enemies…”)
This was one of the expected functions of the Jewish Messiah (Gk: Christ) to overthrow the “gentile” Occupation in Israel, and Bring Back the Elect of
the Lost Sheep of the House of Israel Scattered among the Gentiles (i.e. Jews of the Diaspora).
The historical “Jesus” failed in his armed coup attempt against Rome and was crucified as an armed seditionist in breach of the Roman Lex Maiestatis
(no King by Caesar law) during the reign of Tiberius, see Luke chapter 22:10-20), but that did not keep his followers "from revering his memory" (to
quote Josephus) and using Messianic Slogans which they placed into his mouth ("I am Iesous the Bright and Morning Star...")
The Hebrew Masoretic Text phrase “Son of the the Dawn” (sometimes in the plural “Sons of the Dawn” possibly the followers of the Son of the Dawn,
where they are warned by the Teacher of Righteousness to repent or else) was used as early as the Dead Sea Scrolls (BC 250 to AD 68) NOT ONLY as a
pejorative against proud Rulers, but ALSO as a kind of Title for the Jewish Warrior Messiah to Come (“bearer of the Light”) i.e. as a kind of Herald
to the Coming “Messianic” Kingdom, in which all the gentile “Kittim” (Romans) would be annhialated.
So, in summation:
The curous Latin phrase “Son of the Morning Star" has both a POSITIVE as well as a NEGATIVE connotation to 1st century Messianic Jews and “Jewish
Christians” who made use of books like “Revelation” to foster hope in the hearts and minds of the Jews who were fighting for the Rebellion against
Rome during the Jewish War.
Which by the way........they lost.
Just a little background is all.