|
|
Post by Johnny Edwards on Jun 2, 2011 13:04:58 GMT -5
The name Lucifer in Hebrew is HEYLEL . According to Strong Dictionary it means (brightness); the morning star: lucifer. The word HEYLEL in Hebrew has the same meaning in Arabic. HILAL (Arabic) : is an Arabic term, associated with the crescent moon, first developed in pre- Islamic Arabia.
The phrase in Isaiah 14:12 means the shining/brightness born of the morning/dawn. What is that shining brightness? It could be the rays of the sun but it could also be the day star or morning star, Venus, which is how some translations render it. In Latin, the word "Lucifer", meaning "Light-Bringer" (from lux, lucis, "light", and ferre, "to bear, bring"), is a name for the "Morning Star" (the planet Venus in its dawn appearances).
Lucifer means light bringer.
Heylel means brightness. So it that is a mistranslations when it doesn't say morning star. Lucifer just can't be attributed to Isaiah 14:12 from every single source I have checked.
About the Mormon faith Ryan, have to get back to ya on that one. Im going to get my buddy to study it with me. Get his insight and opinions since he is Mormon, he got mad when I ask him about it last night, so I'll have to wait till I see him face to face to talk.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Thames on Jun 2, 2011 15:03:17 GMT -5
That happens when you shake a faith built on sand brother
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnny Edwards on Jun 2, 2011 16:08:49 GMT -5
^That is true. From what I am gathering so far, Lucifer is just and irrelevant term.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Thames on Jun 2, 2011 16:29:01 GMT -5
How is it irrelevant if Satan has deceived the world into calling him the bearer of light.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Thames on Jun 2, 2011 16:31:37 GMT -5
Ok guys what do you make of this scripture?
2 Corinthians 11:14-16
14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. 15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Thames on Jun 2, 2011 16:32:44 GMT -5
FYI
It was an angel of light that appeared to Joseph Smith
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnny Edwards on Jun 2, 2011 17:03:03 GMT -5
You took it the wrong way, I know he deceived people. What im saying is the term Lucifer in the Bible is not relevant it shouldn't be there. But it backs up II Corinthians. Your right he can pretend thats what im saying the word should not have been there which is kinda freaky in the big spectrum of things.
|
|
|
|
Post by Michael Wells on Jun 2, 2011 17:08:13 GMT -5
Along with the talks about "Lucifer", has any of yall done studies on the relation between Christianity and Astrology?
|
|
|
|
Post by Robert Bishop on Jun 2, 2011 17:54:07 GMT -5
the whole Satan being a cherub that covers like Ezk 28
it makes sense to me because he was very beautiful and for some reason he was able to convince a third of the angels to follow him and that would lead me to believe he wasnt a angel or they would not have been tricked
my guess is that on the ark of the covenant it had 3 cherubims instead of two like was shown when Moses built it and Satan was the one that covered in which God sat in the middle on the mercy seat and because of his beauty and his position some angels were fooled
|
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Thames on Jun 3, 2011 7:56:41 GMT -5
Johnny I can't seem to find the post where you referenced the crescent moon.
What do you think is the connection from our study here to Islam?
|
|
|
|
Post by Hungry Hippo on Jun 3, 2011 10:06:49 GMT -5
Satan = an opposing spirit. He's not an entity as people make him. The only entities are evil spirits and they are tools of God. It is the heart of man that is evil continually the Bible says. God called Peter Satan when He said "Get behind thee". He called the Jews a generation of vipers. People tend to assign names in the Bible to one thing when they are actually applicable to an array of things. Jesus is assigned lots of names (Jehovah, Prince of peace, Daystar etc.) He called Peter Satan because he was in an "opposing spirit". I can be Satan. Anyone can be Satan( an opposing spirit) who is a follower of Christ. The Bible says wickedness comes from the heart of man so whats that tell me? That we are the opposing spirit to God until we eradicate all sin from our temple. God made man perfect until he chose to do evil. We are passed down this curse and must reverse it as an individual. The Bible says we must work out our own salvation.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Thames on Jun 3, 2011 10:14:14 GMT -5
You almost make sense. But I must disagree as I see you have misinterpreted a couple scriptures and as a result you may have a skewed view of the core gospel.
I don't think Jesus was calling Peter Satan...... I'm open for correction on that.
The word says we must work out our own salvation yes, but salvation only comes through faith in Christ and him crucified.
You must work out your salvation but you cannot produce, provide, create your own salvation.
You cannot purge yourself of evil. Only Christ can do that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hungry Hippo on Jun 3, 2011 10:46:33 GMT -5
You almost make sense. But I must disagree as I see you have misinterpreted a couple scriptures and as a result you may have a skewed view of the core gospel. I don't think Jesus was calling Peter Satan...... I'm open for correction on that. Here are a few that come to mind.... Matthew 16:23 But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men. Mark 8:33 But when he had turned about and looked on his disciples, he rebuked Peter, saying, Get thee behind me, Satan: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men. Luke 4:8 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Get thee behind me, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. |
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Thames on Jun 3, 2011 12:24:49 GMT -5
Have you ever personally witnessed an exorcism of sorts.
This is common.... Jesus was talking to Satan who was using Peter at that moment.
He was not talking TO Peter
|
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Thames on Jun 3, 2011 12:26:03 GMT -5
I do understand your perspective and why you might think this.
|
|
