No announcement yet.

The myth of Lucifer in the Bible

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The myth of Lucifer in the Bible

    Ok let's go, I would like to clarify here what h0bby1 said about my works in this boring thread. Several elements has already said on IS (here form example)


    It is frequently considered that the myth of the fallen of the “highiest” angel known under the personal expression “Lucifer” is founded in the Middle Age. Between the Xth and XIIIth centuries, all religious currents seem preoccupied by celestial hierarchy. Compared to islamic theology, jewish mysticism and others cultural movements, christian thinking about these questions was not really established. We traditionaly advance that this doctrine is fully formulated by Anselm. But it was enormously influenced by unorthodox currents (as Bogomils and Cathars). The main impulsion before them is surely Dionysius the Areopagyte, in the context of very serious polemics about angelic nature and metaphysical questions concerning the degrees of being. It is explained in detail by Jeffrey B. Russel (Lucifer. The devil in the Middle Age, 1984, Cornell University Press).

    My early work, in 2006, tries to remind the story of the doctrine which associated two biblical verses, Isaiah 14:12 and Ezekiel 28:12 and following verses. J. F. Russel, in his Introduction, confirms the kinship of this point to Origen and Clement of Alexandria. It’s on their interpretation that we might discuss about the building of this myth.

    Which is the “hardware" that will constitute, in the time, the myth of Lucifer?

    1)the Vulgate

    Isaiah 14:12
    quomodo cecidisti de caelo lucifer qui mane oriebaris corruisti in terram qui vulnerabas gentes

    Latin text on Bibliotheca Augustana

    English translation of this passage of the Vulgate (Stuttgart edition): "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, who didst rise in the morning? how art thou fallen to the earth, that didst wound the nations? "

    Compare with:

    The American Standard Version (1901): "14:12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O day-star, son of the morning!"

    The Revised Standard Version: ""How you are fallen from heaven, O Day Star, son of Dawn!"

    (I think these versions don't translate from the Vulgate but they seem to be established from the Septuagint for the ASV and from the hebrew for the RSV)

    Ezekiel 28:12 and following (latin text - english text)

    I didn’t compare all the recensions of St Jerome work (he began his work during the IVth century, but the text has been subject of many little changes till the XVth century), and I don’t think there is some great differences. However, I think that we have to verify what the old latin versions offer (these texts are not easy to get).

    Concerning the latin expression «lucifer», we can find two meanings in the whole ancient roman literature:

    a) lucifer: all that is shining, brighting with powerfull, on the model of the «morning star», the planet Venus

    example: Vitruvius Pollio, De Architectura book 9, chapter 1, section 7

    Id autem ita esse maxime cognoscitur ex Veneris stella, quod ea, cum solem sequatur, post occasum eius apparens in caelo clarissimeque lucens vesperugo vocitatur, aliis autem temporibus eum antecurrens et oriens ante lucem lucifer appellatur. (3.79)

    english translation:

    This fact may best be recognized from Venus. When she is following the sun, she makes her appearance in the sky after his setting, and is then called the Evening Star, shining most brilliantly. At other times she precedes him, rising before daybreak, and is named the Morning Star.
    (these texts are avalaible online on Perseus website: latin version and english transl.)

    b) Lucifer as a personal name, a minor deity of the pantheon.

    example: Ovidius Naso, Metamorphoses (ed. Hugo Magnus) book 4, line 627

    Iamque cadente die, veritus se credere nocti,
    constitit Hesperio, regnis Atlantis, in orbe,
    exiguamque petit requiem, dum Lucifer ignes
    evocet Aurorae, currus Aurora diurnos.

    english translation:

    Time came, when day
    declining, he began to fear the night,
    by which he stopped his flight far in the west—
    the realm of Atlas—where he sought repose
    till Lucifer might call Aurora's fires;
    Aurora chariot of the Day.

    I agree with Edouard Dhorme who wrote, in the footnotes of his OT translation, that this “lucifer" has been assimilated with the demon of the star Venus. As we will see, the noun “lucifer" occurs in some other places of the Bible, and it seems evident that on Isaiah 14:12 there was a real work of “demonization" from the part of earlier Fathers of Christianism.


    2) Septuagint

    The “tradition” says that 72 rabbis wrote each one a greek translation of the Old Testament; and the legend says that the 72 translations were exactly identics...

    Isaiah 14:12

    πως εξεπεσεν εκ του ουρανου ο εωσφορος ο πρωι ανατελλων συνετριβη εις την γην ο αποστελλων προς παντα τα εθνη


    pōs exepesen ek tou ouranou o eōsphoros o prōi anatengōn sunetribē eis tēn gēn o apostengōn pros panta ta ethnē

    the new academic translation published by Oxfor University Press: "How is fallen from heaven the Day Star, which used to rise early in the morning!"

    see also Ezekiel 28:12

    Here we have the same thing that in the Vulgate, but there are some few differences:

    -it is clear that the word is used as a common name, and not as a personal; the expression means “you who’s shining” and is not adressed to the deity known as “ ‘Eosphoros”; it’s just a comparison, not an identification.

    -the decomposition luci - fere is corresponding to the greek eos - phoros, but the parallelism is not fully exact : the greek eos means dawn, while the latin lux means light. However, we must note that greek vocabulary knows the expression phos - phoros which is a synonym and is corresponding exactly to the latin lucifer.

    -as in the roman cultur, greek mythology knows an astral deity named ‘Eosphoros


    Hesiod, Theogony card 371

    tous de met' astera tikten Heôsphoron Êrigeneia
    astra te lampetoônta, ta t' ouranos estephanôtai.

    english translation:

    And after these Erigeneia1 bare the star Eosphorus (Dawn-bringer), and the gleaming stars with which heaven is crowned.

    with an another form:

    Pindar, Odes, Isthmian book I., poem 4, line 23

    all' anegeiromena chrôta lampei,
    Aôsphoros thaêtos hôs astrois en allois:

    english translation: For she had fallen asleep, but now she has awakened and her body shines, marvellous to see, like the morning-star among other stars.

    Plato, Laws book 7, section 821c

    Kleinias en gar dê tôi biôi pollakis heôraka kai autos ton te Heôsphoron kai ton Hesperon kai allous tinas oudepote iontas eis ton auton dromon alla pantêi planômenous, ton de hêlion pou kai selênên drôntas tauth' ha aei pantes sunepistametha.


    3) hebraïcal versions.

    Here will begin the difficulties. There are two important textual traditions: the Dead Sea Scrolls (II BCE - II CE) and the Massoretic text (near the 8th century CE)

    Isaiah 14,12 (Massorah)

    ‎איך נפלת משמים הילל בן_שחר
    ‎נגדעת לארץ חולש על גוים

    AYK NPLT MSMYM HYLL BN SJR NGDIT LARC JVLS IL GVYM: (Is 14,12) (J= Heth; S= Shin; I= 'Ain)

    Here, the expression ”ben shahar“ seems to be connected with other semitic culturs, where Shahar is known as the Goddess of the Dawn (the hebrew word shahar means dawn). In the Bible, there is no other occurence of a hyll or a bn shr. They are some occurences of a hyll as deity in cuneiform texts, but it doesn’t seem to be an important figure of the divine pantheon. In this text of Isaiah, it’s clear that hyll bn shr is a kind of satirical mockery about the King of Babylon, who is only a human and sins because of his pride and blasphemous attitude while he proclaims he is equal to God. It is as if the writer said ”ha ha ha!! what a shame on you, poor Shining Star who felt dawn on the ground, at the feet of all nations!“

    Concerning the text of Ezekiel, here too, the connection with ugaritic cultur is evident:
    -the mountain of God can be connected with the mountain of the Assembly (of Gods), the mount ”Saphon“
    -the figure of the Cherubim : it is known that angelical orders came from mythological examples, like the Keroub or the Saraf; they are frequently associated with firing and/or brighting phenomenons (see also God’s manifestation to Moses in the burning Tree)
    -the allusion to the jewelry of the Prince of Tyr, reminding those of priests of Israel and other hierophants (this point is also applied in some descriptions of Ishtar, as we’ll see later).

    These elements (and others), with the effect of time, will give the first matter to the confusion. But there is an other important point concerning Ezekiel : what is said in the Septuagint is not the same story which is related in the massoretic version. The main scene is the same. In the Septuagint, there is a distinction between the Prince/King of Tyr and the Keroub, while the Massoretic text said: ”You where the Keroub [...] I hunted you, Keroub“ etc... There are other difficulties, I won’t expose them in details; just a word about the legendar knowledge of ”Lucifer“; this point is inspired by the text of Ezekiel, while the wisdom of the Prince is compared to Daniel’s. We traditionaly believe that the writer was talking about the prophet Daniel, but it could be wrong; it would be preferable to consider that the text, actualy, is talking about ”Danel“ (we can read this or this for more informations) - and not Daniel - who was a famous wise man in ancient literature of the Near East (Dhorme has probably said it, but I’m not sure). But on this point of confusion, Septuagint and Massorah versions are equals (the Zadok Kahn's translation of the Massorah into french gives ”Daniel“).

    Biblical occurences.

    Hebrew text (Massorah)

    the hebrew HYLL occurs only in Isaiah 14:12
    the hebrew ShHR (”dawn“ - shin heth resh) occurs
    Genesis 19:15
    Genesis 32:25, 27
    Levitic 13:31, 37
    Joshua 6:15 - 13:19
    Judges 19:25
    1 Samuel 9:26
    Isaiah 8:20 - 14:12 - 23:3 - 47:11 - 58:8
    Hosea 6:3 - 10:25
    Joel 2:2
    Amos 4:13
    Jona 4:7
    Psalms 22:1 - 57:8 - 108:2 - 110:3 - 139:9
    Proverbs 7:15 - 11:27
    Job 3:9 - 8:5 - 30:30 - 38:12 - 41:10
    Nehemiah 4:15
    1 Chronicles 7:10 (see also, perhaps, 8:8)

    (I’ll give a more complete list later; note that the hebrew Psalms 110 chap. corresponds to the 109 chap. of the Vulgate)

    The greek text

    We find eosphoros in :

    1 Samuel 30:17
    Job 3:9 - 11:17 - 38:12 - 41:10
    Psalms 109:3 (hebrew => 110:3)
    Isaiah 14:12

    In 1 Samuel 30:17, the word seems to be translated ”twilight“ and no ”dawn“. In other occurences, the word seems to correspond with the hebrew ”shahar“ (and here we can see the difficulty concerning Isaiah 14,12 where eosphoros doesn’t translate shahar but hyll according to the major part of specialists; I tried to resolve this point in 2006 but I’m not enough advanced to do it well).

    The latin text

    Concerning the Old Testament, we find lucifer in:

    Job 11:17 - 38:32
    Psalms 109:3
    Isaia 14:12

    Concerning the New Testament, we find lucifer in:

    II Peter 1:19

    We can make a comparison between Isaiah 14:12 and II Peter 1:19. Here, lucifer is used as subject; and I still wondering why St Jerome didn’t translate ”Lucifer“ in II Peter 1:19 as he did in Isaiah 14:12. This point constitute, for me, a sufficient argument to reject the common interpretation that supports the myth of Lucifer is well founded in the Bible. I thank you by advance if someone can propose a good explaination...

    But there are other points. Can someone tell me who said ”sicut et ego accepi a Patre meo et dabo illi stellam matutinam” (As I also have received of my Father. And I will give him the morning-star Rev. 2:28)?
    Or again: “ego Iesus misi angelum meum testificari vobis haec in ecclesiis ego sum radix et genus David stella splendida et matutina” (I, Jesus, have sent my angel, to testify to you these things in the churches. I am the root and stock of David, the bright and morning star Rev 28:16)?

    Probably a kind of fool or an anarchist (hu hu ... I beg you to forgive me, but I couldn’t resist to this temptation). More seriously, we can affirm that Isaiah and Ezekiel are talking to a single human, assimilated to an angelic being, but foremost a human.

    I don’t agree with the interpretation that says that here, the Bible is talking about a Lucifer as a Devil and master of rebel angels. But I think it is evident that the writers wanted to draw our attention to the tyrant. And, before the Bible writings, there is a myth which describes the same drawing of our luciferian myth. We can read in the Baal Epic:

    When the parley is finished,
    Lady Asherah of the Sea declares:
    "Let Us make Ashtar the Terrible king!
    Let Ashtar the Terrible reign!"

    Thereupon Ashtar the Terrible
    Goes into the heights of Saphon
    That He may sit on the throne of Aliyan Baal.
    His feet do not reach the footstool,
    Nor does His head reach it's top.
    And Ashtar the Terrible says:
    "I cannot rule in the heights of Saphon!"
    Ashtar the Terrible goes down,
    Goes down from the throne of Aliyan Baal,
    That He may rule over all the grand earth.

    note: I prefer the transliteration 'Athtart - Theurapon the Tyrant given by the Dictionary of Deities and Demons in The Bible and yet discussed in the works of Edouard Dhorme in the 50‘s.

    This myth is the archetype of cosmic rebellion myths in oriental, greek and roman literature. We can evidently make the comparison Baal vs Athtar // Yavhe vs King of Babylon/Tyr (note that the epithet “Aliyan” is very near of the “El Elyon” denomination in Exodus, while Moses met the Priests of Madian).

    The Ugaritic texts:

    -In KTU 1.24: 41-42 it is question of a hyll as a “Brightning Lord Of the Moon Rising”; but there is nothing else fery significant
    -In an other tablet, there is a story about Anat; she’s guest on the Roof of the Sky in the aim to smash the stars (a “march” is mentionned just before; and don’t know why its reminds me the StarWars Luc Skywalker...). These stars are destinated to fall like bricks and are personified as “The Stongs”, described as “very brighting” (taqqîp, also meaning “strong” in aramaic).

    This last point could confirm the position of Edouard Dhorme in his footnotes of Ezekiel 28:2-20, explaining the text is talking about the city as personified. I’ve read in other works the same idea: a kind of metaphor of a geopolitical situation. In the Ancient Near East, cities were like little kingdoms. Sometimes, one of them “shone” like the brightest star among all, pointing in the sky: Venus, the one that “heralds” the rising sun. We can replace this scheme in History with Tyr and Babylon at the time of Ezekiel and Isaiah. Since my last publication (2006), I’ve found a sumerian text, The Cursing of Agade; I was deeply interested by the proximity of the tone of the text with Isaiah 14:12. (Note: Inanna is the sumerian name of Ishtar / Aphroditê / Venus). By associating Agade with its patron deity, Innana, and the destruction of the town with the Enlil’s wrath, there are many similarities. We could talk again about the Gutean invaders as tools of heaven’ scourge (I noted that the word Guti has a phonic proximity with the german Gott; they were reputed to ignore the fear and the authority. I’m not linguist, this point must to be studied more deeply).

    There is again another track, perhaps the more significant, concerning a cult render to a Baal of Hermon, but I didn’t yet work on it. This point is mentionned in an apocryphal text (gnosticism, judaïcal mystic currents etc...).

    Concerning the apocryphal literature, it has frequently been called as justifying the work of early Fathers. I take this opportunity to make a correction. G. J. Riley, in the article “Devil” of the DDD, refers to II Henoch 39 :4-5 ; it is probably a mistake during the editing because nothing in these verses can explain Riley’s words. It's in the verses 1 and 2 of the same text that there are some elements that can be linked with Ezekiel chap. 28. At the Creation, after extracting “some great stones” from the waters (Ez 28:1), God brought forth “a great fire”, from which He makes “the militia of intangibles and the whole stars militia. “And the Cherubim and the Seraphim and the Ophanim, all of that, I brought it forth from fire”. Here, the kinship between stars and angels is indubitable.

    There are surely a full of examples that could confirm the two position in apocryphal texts; last week, I curiously found an other interesting element. In II Henoch again (also known as the Book of Henoch Secrets, or sometimes as the “Slavic Henoch”), it is said that each morning, God orders the sun to rise up:

    “Provider of Light,
    give Light to the universe!”

    This expression (“provider of Light”, “Dispensateur de la lumiere” in french) sounds like a literal translation of the latin luci - fere or the greek phos - phoros. It can be linked to an other passage of the Greek Revelation of Baruch (also known as III Baruch): each evening, four angels take the crown of the sun in the aim to purify it. I haven’t got the exact references, but I’ll try to find them. As I said in “Presentations” I’m very openmind, but I’m still searching where is evil here...

    A last word about II Peter 1:19. For this verse, the Septuagint gives phosphoros anateile. It has been an other point of confusion, in the christian thinking as for those satanists called ”luciferians“ whom I discussed on the web, and even for modern writers as M. Centini (presented as ”graduated in Anthropology“), who affirms that the greek version of Isaiah 14:12 gives ”phosphoros“. It shows me that gazoil is not good to drink... sorry for this poor joke. I was wondering for a long time why they affirm a so stupid thing. A luciferian priestess told me that, among greek mysteries, they was one where the ceremonies were given around a Hecatê - Phosphoros, and that christianism took this and built the myth... The first part of her words is not strong, but I find no element that could confirm the second part.

    I think that the building of this myth has no theoligical reasons, but political and ideological. Inanna / Ishtar / Astarté / Aphroditê / Venus was evidently a concurent. The cults render to this goddess were the most widespread. In Religions of Babylon and Assyria, Dhorme gives us very interesting informations. Ishtar was known as the Lady of Heaven, the Brightest Star. She was sometimes called “The Brilliant”. She identifies herself as the morning and evening star:

    “Ishtar at the morning: it’s me!
    Ishtar at the evening: it’s me!”

    As for other deities, there were several attributes for a same divine being; Ishtar had a male attribute, and in the time, her manhood has been mixed with into her warriors attributes; it is not impossible that these attributes are in relation with the figure of 'Athtar the Tyrant, but we can not really affirm this position (it’s a difficult question concerning etymological roots), and I don’t think that the writers of Isaïe and Ezekiel wanted to identify Ishtar with Tyr and Babylon’s kings (however, it’s well known that several “kings” of the Ancient Near Esat identified themselves to a deity). We can find these warriors attributes in the figure of Diana the Hunter for example.

    An other point could have contributed to the confusion: the Descent of Ishtar to the Netherworld; it has evidently inspired gnostic tradition as we can see it with The Descent of Christ to the Netherworld, and we can consider that has an echo into the fallen of the Star into the Sheol of Isaiah 14:12.

    Some common points between priestly clothes and Ezekiel 28:13 were underlined by Dhorme. Sometimes, Ishtar wears “a splendid crown”, "earnings", "a pearl necklace", "an ornemental pectoral" a "birthstone" belt, bracelets on the wrists and ankles.
    Last edited by Arlequin; 02-06-2011, 09:05 AM.
    "If you can't even #?@! yourself, how do you gonna #?@! someone else?" (Steve Vai, Flex-Able Leftovers)

  • #2
    Is there some purpose to debating such a topic? I am curious as to what you are trying to teach by untangling the origins of a mythical entity?

    *shrugs shoulders*


    • #3
      I am lucifer!!
      Akhuna matata! The care free philosophy.


      • #4
        I've always liked this explanation of Lucifer:

        Lucifer is a Latin word meaning "light bearer" (from lux, lucis, "light", and ferre, "to bear, bring"), a Roman astrological term for the "Morning Star" the planet Venus.[1] The word Lucifer was the translation of the Septuagint Greek heosphoros, ("dawn-bearer"; cf. Greek phosphoros, "light-bearer"; itself the translation of the Hebrew Helel ben Shahar,[2] Son of Dawn), used by Jerome in the Vulgate, having mythologically the same meaning as Prometheus who brought fire to humanity.

        Passage 14:12 from the Book of Isaiah (see below) referred to one of the popular honorific titles of a Babylonian king; however, later interpretations of the text, and the influence of embellishments in works such as Dante's Inferno and Milton's Paradise Lost, led to the common interpretation in Christian belief that Lucifer was a poetic appellation of Satan.

        Modern and late Medieval Christian thought derived from this interpretation the idea that Lucifer is a fallen angel who is Satan, the embodiment of evil and an enemy of God. In Christian literature and legend, Lucifer is generally considered to have been a prominent archangel in heaven, although Book of Ezekiel 28:14 says: "You were the anointed cherub who covers, And I placed you there." In the fully-developed theme of "The War of Heaven", Lucifer had been motivated by pride to lead a revolution against God. When the rebellion failed, Lucifer was cast out of heaven, along with a third of the heavenly host, and came to reside in the world.

        Lucifer is a poetic name for the "morning star", a close translation of the Greek eosphoros, the "dawn-bringer" (son of Eos, "dawn"), which appears in the Odyssey and in Hesiod's Theogony. Venus is characterized as the morning star because it rises on the early morning horizon before the sunrise. This very fact led the ancients to give it the name lucifer, as it announced the coming of the morning light.

        A classic Roman use of "Lucifer" appears in Virgil's Georgics (III, 324-5):

        Luciferi primo cum sidere frigida rura
        carpamus, dum mane novum, dum gramina canent"
        "Let us hasten, when first the Morning Star appears,
        To the cool pastures, while the day is new, while the grass is dewy"
        And similarly, in Ovid's Metamorphoses:

        "Aurora, watchful in the reddening dawn, threw wide her crimson doors and rose-filled halls; the Stars took flight, in marshaled order set by Lucifer, who left his station last."
        Statius expanded this trope into a brief but profuse allegory, though still this is a poetical personification of the Light-Bearer, not a mythology:

        "And now Aurora, rising from her Mygdonian resting-place, had scattered the cold shadows from the high heaven, and, shaking the dew-drops from her hair, blushed deep in the sun's pursuing beams; toward her through the clouds, rosy Lucifer turns his late fires, and with slow steed leaves an alien world, until the fiery father's orb be full replenished and he forbid his sister to usurp his rays." (Statius, Thebaid 2.134)

        In the Vulgate, an early-5th-century translation of the Bible into Latin by Jerome, Lucifer ("light-bearer") occurs in Isaiah 14:12-14 as a translation of the Septuagint Greek word heosphoros ("dawn-bearer"), an epithet of Venus. The original Hebrew text of this verse was הילל בן שחר (heilel ben-shachar), meaning "Helel (bright one, or praising one, son of Shachar (dawn)". Helel, the morning star, was a Babylonian / Canaanite god who was the son of another Babylonian / Canaanite god Shahar, god of the dawn. Isaiah 14:12 is translated "How art thou fallen from heaven, O day-star, son of the morning!" in the American Standard Version translating Hebrew Helel as "day-star" and the Hebrew word ben as "son" and the Hebrew word shahar as "morning." The 1611 King James Version translates it as "Lucifer, son of the morning", carrying over lucifer from the Latin Vulgate, one of the Bibles used by King James' translators.

        In Isaiah, this title is specifically used, in a prophetic vision, to allude to the king of Babylon's pride and to illustrate his eventual fate by referencing mythological accounts of the planet Venus:

        14:4 You will recite this parable about the king of Babylonia: How has the oppressor come to an end, the arrogance been ended?
        14:10 They will all proclaim and say to you, "You also have been stricken as we were; you are compared to us.
        14:11 Brought down to the nether-world were your pride and the tumult of your stringed instruments; maggots are spread out under you, and worms are your covers.
        14:12 How have you fallen from the heavens, O glowing morning star; been cut down to the ground O conqueror of nations?
        (Isaiah, Artscroll Tanakh)
        In modern Jewish theology, Helel in Isaiah 14 is not equated with the Jewish concept of HaSatan (the adversary). Instead, the prophet is speaking of the fall of Babylon and along with it the fall of her false gods Helel and Shahar. There is satan which is a Hebrew word meaning "adversary" and in the Tanakh one will find many instances of the word used to describe human and angelic adversaries to man.

        Later Jewish tradition, influenced by Babylonian mythology acquired during the Babylonian captivity, elaborated on the fall of the angels under the leadership of Samhazai ("the heaven-seizer") and Azael (Enoch, book vi.6f). Another legend, in the midrash, represents the repentant Samhazai suspended star-like between heaven and earth instead of being hurled down to Sheol.

        It is noteworthy that the Tanakh does not at any point actually mention the rebellion and fall of Satan by name. The name Satan itself merely means "enemy", apparently more of a title. A passage in Ezekiel 28 contains a lament over an "anointed cherub" who was in the "holy mountain of God". The passage goes on to describe this being's expulsion from the "mount of God." In the literal sense, this passage refers to the King of Tyre. However, ancient Christian commentators would frequently interpret Scripture allegorically and anagogically, as well as literally, and it was common for them to extend the meaning of this passage beyond the literal sense, and see an allegory of the fall of Satan in it.

        The Helel-Lucifer (i.e. Venus) myth was later transferred to Satan, as evidenced by the first-century pseudepigraphical text Vita Adae et Evae (12), where the Adversary gives Adam an account of his early career,[4] and the Slavonic Book of Enoch (xxix. 4, xxxi. 4), where Satan-Sataniel (Sataniel/Satanel "The Keeper of Hell") (Samael?) is also described as a former archangel. Because he contrived "to make his throne higher than the clouds over the earth and resemble 'My power' on high", Satan-Sataniel was hurled down, with his hosts of angels, to fly in the air continually above the abyss.

        Christian tradition of a literal fall from heaven drew upon the Homeric tradition, familiar to many.

        "the whole day long I was carried headlong, and at sunset I fell in Lemnos, and but little life was in me" Iliad
        Homer's description of the parallel supernatural fall relates the fall of Hephaestus from Olympus in the Iliad I:591ff; the fall of the Titans was similarly described by Hesiod. Through popular epitomes these traditions were drawn upon by Christian authors embellishing the fall of Lucifer.[citation needed]

        St. Jerome, with the Septuagint close at hand and a general familiarity with the pagan poetic traditions, translated Heylel as Lucifer in the Vulgate. This may also have been done as a pointed jab at a bishop Saint Lucifer, a contemporary of Jerome who argued against forgiving those condemned of the Arian heresy, but had returned to catholic Christianity. Much of Christian tradition also draws on interpretations of Revelation 12:9 ("He was thrown down, that ancient serpent, who is also called the Devil and Satan"; see also 12:4 and 12:7) in equating the ancient serpent with the serpent in the Garden of Eden and the fallen star, Lucifer, with Satan. Accordingly, Tertullian (Contra Marrionem, v. 11, 17), Origen (Ezekiel Opera, iii. 356), and others, identify Lucifer with Satan.

        In the fully-developed Christian tradition, Jerome's Vulgate translation of Isaiah 14:12 has made Lucifer the name of the principal fallen angel, who must lament the loss of his original glory as the morning star. This image at last defines the character of Satan, where the Church Fathers had maintained that lucifer was not the proper name of the Devil, and that it referred rather to the state from which he had fallen; St. Jerome gave it Biblical authority when he transformed it into Satan's proper name.

        Identification with Satan

        The "Sigil of Lucifer" (alternatively, the "Seal of Satan"), a magical symbol used by modern Satanists. Originates from sixteenth century Italian "Grimoire of Truth".
        Many modern Christians have followed tradition and equated "Lucifer" with Satan, or the Devil. The King James Version of the Bible, which has been enormously influential in the English speaking world for several centuries, retains the reference in Isaiah 14:12. In addition, a parallel description of Lucifer's fall is thought to be found in Ezekiel chapter 28 ("A Prophecy Against the King of Tyre"), which contains a lament over an "anointed cherub" who was in the "holy mountain of God". He is described as "perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee." The passage goes on to describe this being's expulsion from the "mount of God", apparently because his "heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness." Afterwards the passage describes the eventual fate of this corrupted cherub: "therefore will I bring forth a fire from the midst of thee, it shall devour thee, and I will bring thee to ashes upon the earth in the sight of all them that behold thee. All they that know thee among the people shall be astonished at thee: thou shalt be a terror, and never shalt thou be any more."

        There is dispute between the accurate translations in Ezekiel 28 concerning who is being addressed and the description of the address itself. At-khĕruwb (את-כרוב) [Above Hebraic translation of "Thou [art] the cherub") breaks gender violations in the written language. Ath, as it is used in the previous translation, is feminine as a pronoun; while kĕruwb is a masculine noun. Ath can also be used as a genderless direct object of a verb, yielding its objective form. For these reasons, some translations interpret this passage as "The cherub I created for you (King of Tyre)." This distinguishes the fall of the man who was protected, and brought to great wealth by God's graces and overseeing hand (given the cherub he was appointed), from the cherub. In this translation, God's wrath was directed at the man who gave up his perfection for commerce and self-ratified intelligence. The cherub was both the agent of protection for the King and also facilitated the destruction of him. On the same platform, the use of Eden (עדן) as a proper noun is argued to be out of context, and most likely takes the descriptive form: pleasure, luxury, or delight.

        In addition to Isaiah and Ezekiel, various Old Testament scriptures referring to occult powers such as witchcraft, more theological details about fallen angels can be found in the Pseudepigrapha, which are generally not considered canon. In the book of Job, Satan, who has been wandering the earth, has a discussion with God and makes a deal with him regarding Job, the terms of which change in increments throughout the story of Job.

        Latter-day Saints (Mormons) hold to the belief, confirmed by the teachings of their modern prophets, that Lucifer (Helel in Hebrew) was a particularly brilliant and powerful archangel, a son of Elohim (God the Father) and brother to Yahweh (God the Son, Jehovah or Jesus) and to all of the children of Elohim including all of the souls of humanity. This "bright god" (direct translation of Helel) according to LDS teaching became obsessed with pride and attempted to take over Elohim's family and subvert The Father's plan for His children which was to give them freedom of choice coupled with a law of consequences, to allow them to fall into darkness or to ascend to divinity (or any state in-between those extremes) through the mediation of a Savior. Lucifer tried to persuade Elohim's children to accept his plan of guaranteed righteousness, returning to Heaven without risk, but losing their chances of becoming divine and making him, Lucifer, their God to replace Elohim. This offer was in contrast to that made by Yahweh (Jehovah), the Father's eldest and most obedient son, to follow the Father's (Elohim's) plan and allow Elohim's children to be tested, offering himself as the sacrificial Savior to bring the faithful back into the Father's presence. A great struggle of wills ensued (war in heaven) in which the Father's plan was upheld and Lucifer with his followers were cast out of Heaven and exiled to Earth where they were permitted to tempt Elohim's children. When the purposes of Elohim are fulfilled and his children have been adequately tried, Lucifer and his followers will be further exiled to a state called "Outer Darkness", which is described as a state in which they will be completely cut off (by their own choice) from the Light and Love of Elohim (the Father), Yahweh (The Son) and the Holy Spirit. (References include LDS Standard Works, LDS Gospel Principles, and [])

        De-identification with Satan

        Many modern Christians note that the Old Testament itself does not actually contain a literal account of the rebellion and fall of Satan. Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28 are directly concerned with the temporal rulers of Babylon and Tyre, rather than a supernatural being; allegorical readings of these and other passages were typical of medieval scholarship but are usually not considered legitimate in modern critical scholarship. Accordingly, in most modern English versions of the Bible (including the NIV, NRSV, NASB and ESV) the proper noun "Lucifer" is not found; the Hebrew word is rendered "day star", "morning star" or something similar.

        Revelation 12, meanwhile, is taken as a reference to Christ's triumph over Satan at his crucifixion rather than a description of a pre-historic event. Christians who reject the Lucifer myth generally believe that the origin of evil (theodicy) is unexplained in Scripture.

        Liberal Christian scholarship often denies the existence of a literal personal being called "Satan" altogether, rendering the Lucifer myth irrelevant. It is argued that the name Satan itself (Hebrew: שָׂטָן) merely means "adversary" or "accuser", which may be a personification.

        Other instances of the Morning Star in the New Testament

        In the Vulgate, the word lucifer is used elsewhere: it describes the Morning Star (the planet Venus), the "light of the morning" (Job 11:17); the constellations (Job 38:32) and "the aurora" (Psalms 109:3). In the New Testament, Jesus Christ (in II Peter 1:19) is associated with the "morning star" (phosphoros).

        Not all references in the New Testament to the morning star refer to phosphoros, however; in Revelation:

        Rev 2:28 And I will give him the morning star (aster proinos).

        Rev 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 (aster orthrinos).

        In the Eastern Empire, where Greek was the language, "morning star" (heosphoros) retained these earlier connotations. When Liutprand, bishop of Cremona, attended the Byzantine Emperor Nicephorus II in 968, he reported to his master Otto I the greeting sung to the emperor arriving in Hagia Sophia:

        "Behold the morning star approaches, Eos rises; he reflects in his glances the rays of the sun— he the pale death of the Saracens, Nicephorus the ruler."[5]

        The Morning Star in the Qur'an

        At-Tariq, "The Night Comer", is the 86th surah (chapter) in the Quran. It begins:

        Bismillah ir-Rahman ir-Rahim

        1. By the heaven and the Morning Star

        2. Ah, what will tell thee what the Morning Star is!

        3. The piercing Star!

        4. No human soul but hath a guardian over it.[6]

        The latter verse is sometimes interpreted as a reference to the personal guardian angel.[7]

        The four crown princes of Hell

        Lucifer has been acknowledged by the Satanic Bible as one of the Four Crown Princes of Hell, particularly that of the East. Lord of the Air, Lucifer has been named "Bringer of light, The morningstar, Intellectualism, Enlightenment."

        Freemasonry and Luciferianism

        Freemasons have been accused by various Christian organizations of worshipping Lucifer, despite the fact that Freemasonry does not consider itself a religion, and has members from many religions including Christianity. This theory originates with the famous Taxil hoax perpetrated by Léo Taxil, who had himself been expelled from Freemasonry within months of joining. According to the theory, leading Freemason Albert Pike had addressed "The 23 Supreme Confederated Councils of the world" (Taxil's invention), instructing them that Lucifer was God, and was in opposition to the evil god Adonai. Taxil also promoted a book by Diana Vaughan (actually written by him) that purported to reveal a highly secret ruling body called the Palladium which controlled the organization and had a Satanic agenda. As described by Freemasonry Disclosed in 1897:

        With frightening cynicism, the miserable person we shall not name here [Taxil] declared before an assembly especially convened for him that for twelve years he had prepared and carried out to the end the most sacrilegious of hoaxes. We have always been careful to publish special articles concerning Palladism and Diana Vaughan. We are now giving in this issue a complete list of these articles, which can now be considered as not having existed.[8]
        Despite the fraud having been revealed for over a century, Pike's spurious address and other details of the hoax continue to be quoted by anti-masonic groups.[9]

        Arthur Edward Waite wrote an exposé of this hoax, titled Devil-Worship in France. Waite produces evidence that this was what today we would call a tabloid story, replete with logical and factual inconsistencies.

        See also "Lucifer and Satan" at the Grand Lodge of British Columbia and Yukon website.

        Persian and Sufi Traditions

        Joseph Campbell (1972: p.148-149) illustrates an unorthodox Islamic reading of Lucifer's fall from Heaven which champions Lucifer's eclipsing love for God:

        One of the most amazing images of love that I know is Persian – a mystical Persian representation as Satan as the most loyal lover of God. You will have heard the old legend of how, when God created the angels, he commanded them to pay worship to no one but himself; but then, creating man, he commanded them to bow in reverence to this most noble of his works, and Lucifer refused – because, we are told, of his pride. However, according to this Muslim reading of his case, it was rather because he loved and adored God so deeply and intensely that he could not bring himself to bow before anything else, and because he refused to bow down to something that was of less superiority than him. (Since he was made of fire, and man from clay.) And it was for that that he was flung into Hell, condemned to exist there forever, apart from his love.

        This interpretation of the satanic rebellion described in the Quran is seen by some Sufi teachers such as Mansur Al-Hallaj (in his 'Tawasin') as a predestined scenario in which Iblis-Shaitan plays the role of tragic and jealous lover who, unable to perceive the Divine Image in Adam and capable only of seeing the exterior, disobeyed the divine mandate to bow down. His refusal (according to the Tawasin) was due to a misconceived idea of God's uniqueness and because of his refusal to abandon himself to God in love. Hallaj criticized the staleness of Iblis' adoration. Excerpts from Sufi texts expounding this interpretation have been included along with many other viewpoints on Shaitan (by no means all of them apologetic) in an important anthology of Sufi texts edited by Dr. Javad Nurbakhsh, head of the Nimatullahi Sufi Order.[10]

        The Sufi teacher Pir Vilayat Inayat Khan taught that 'Luciferian Light' is Light which has become dislocated from the Divine Source and is thus associated with the seductive false light of the lower ego which lures humankind into self-centred delusion.[citation needed] Here Lucifer represents what the Sufis term the 'Nafs', the ego.

        Occult beliefs

        In the modern occultism of Madeline Montalban Lucifer's identification as "The Morning Star" (Venus) equates him with Lumiel, whom she regarded as the Archangel of Light, and among Satanists he is seen as The "Torch of Baphomet" and Azazel. In this modern occult teaching, an obvious appropriation of Christian soteriology, it is stated that it is Lucifer's destiny to incarnate in human form at certain key times in world history as a savior and redeemer for humanity. A symbol for this process is the Tudor Rose. The Tudor Rose can be red, representing Lucifer, or white representing Lilith. The Tau cross is also a symbol of Lumiel/Lucifer and his role as an avatar for the human race.

        Astronomical significance

        Because the planet Venus (Lucifer) is an inferior planet, meaning that its orbit lies between the orbit of the Earth and the Sun, it can never rise high in the sky at night as seen from Earth. It can be seen in the eastern morning sky for an hour or so before the Sun rises, and in the western evening sky for an hour or so after the Sun sets, but never during the dark of midnight.

        Venus (Lucifer) is the brightest object in the sky after the Sun and the Moon. As bright and as brilliant as it is, ancient people couldn't understand why they couldn't see it at midnight like the outer planets, or during midday, like the Sun and Moon. Some believe they invented myths about Lucifer being cast out from Heaven to explain this. Lucifer was supposed to shine so bright because it wanted to take over the thrones or status of Saturn and Jupiter, both of which were considered most important by the worshippers of planetary deities at the time.

        In Romanian mythology, Lucifer (Romanian: Luceafăr) means the planet "Venus" and some other stars. It is also linked with Hyperion, a figure who animates bad spirits (but is not the Devil himself).

        See also

        Luzbel is another name for the rebel angel Lucifer in Spanish (Lusbel in Portuguese).
        Luciferin and luciferase are two substances involved in the chemical production of light.

        In my hands I hold a candle whose flame is small to see,
        And if I give but one light to you my life is filled for me.
        But...In your hands you hold a torch for many eyes to see,
        So hold it high that they may light their candlewicks from thee... موم γλυφή !

        - By Faye


        • #5
          Nah, maybe Satan but definitely NOT Lucifer

          Originally posted by akashaa View Post
          I am lucifer!!

          In my hands I hold a candle whose flame is small to see,
          And if I give but one light to you my life is filled for me.
          But...In your hands you hold a torch for many eyes to see,
          So hold it high that they may light their candlewicks from thee... موم γλυφή !

          - By Faye


          • #6
            sorry my first post was not correctly edited
            "If you can't even #?@! yourself, how do you gonna #?@! someone else?" (Steve Vai, Flex-Able Leftovers)


            • #7
              Originally posted by 1month1day11 View Post
              Is there some purpose to debating such a topic? I am curious as to what you are trying to teach by untangling the origins of a mythical entity?

              *shrugs shoulders*
              I'm not trying to teach anything (it's not my purpose); I've just tried to bring precisions about what h0bby1 said concerning the study I've done in 2006. Nothing else.

              Originally posted by tmt
              Helel, the morning star, was a Babylonian / Canaanite god who was the son of another Babylonian / Canaanite god Shahar, god of the dawn.

              Originally posted by tmt
              The "Sigil of Lucifer" (alternatively, the "Seal of Satan"), a magical symbol used by modern Satanists. Originates from sixteenth century Italian "Grimoire of Truth".
              It's the first time I read this; have you got more informations about this "grimoire"?

              Originally posted by tmt
              There is dispute between the accurate translations in Ezekiel 28 concerning who is being addressed and the description of the address itself. At-khĕruwb (את-כרוב) [Above Hebraic translation of "Thou [art] the cherub") breaks gender violations in the written language. Ath, as it is used in the previous translation, is feminine as a pronoun; while kĕruwb is a masculine noun. Ath can also be used as a genderless direct object of a verb, yielding its objective form.
              Thanks a lot for this precision, I'll work on it; maybe this incoherent male/female expression is voluntary (androgyn?), a point similar to the plurial Elohim with singular verb form

              Originally posted by tmt
              In the book of Job, Satan, who has been wandering the earth, has a discussion with God and makes a deal with him regarding Job, the terms of which change in increments throughout the story of Job.
              Just a precision, in Job it's talked about Hé-Shatan "The Adversary", not "Satan"; the personification appears only since II Chronicles. Note that we have here the first document of a satanic pact (conclued by God )

              Originally posted by tmt
              This "bright god" (direct translation of Helel)
              not really, it's not a theophoric name; it's a present particip for of the verb "yll", to shine"

              Originally posted by tmt
              Arthur Edward Waite wrote an exposé of this hoax, titled Devil-Worship in France. Waite produces evidence that this was what today we would call a tabloid story, replete with logical and factual inconsistencies.
              good reference on this polemic ^^
              you can read it here Arthur Edward Waite - Devil Worhisp in France

              or download it Arthur Edward Waite - Devil Worhisp in France
              "If you can't even #?@! yourself, how do you gonna #?@! someone else?" (Steve Vai, Flex-Able Leftovers)


              • #8
                @ Arlequin, the information all came from the same page, I put the link at the bottom of the post:


                It lists all of the sources of information on the page itself. Thank you for the additional commentary on the information. I find it all very fascinating and I really appreciate the links you provided for Waite. I take it this is the same Waite that the famous Tarot deck is named after?
                Last edited by tmt; 02-06-2011, 12:39 PM.
                In my hands I hold a candle whose flame is small to see,
                And if I give but one light to you my life is filled for me.
                But...In your hands you hold a torch for many eyes to see,
                So hold it high that they may light their candlewicks from thee... موم γλυφή !

                - By Faye



                • #9
                  Originally posted by tmt View Post

                  ...I take it this is the same Waite that the famous Tarot deck is named after?
                  It is the same man.

                  He wrote this when he was 39, about 8 years after joining The Golden Dawn, and about 15 years before he created his Tarot deck.
                  "Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'"
                  — Isaac Asimov


                  • #10
                    Good stuff mate!

                    One third of heaven that fell into matter - hey maybe thats us? Not worth bringing up this topic? BS - its proably one of the most important things for people to understand.

                    Every Batman needs a Joker......

                    Kindest Regards
                    White Raven


                    • #11
                      I know Satan....actually his name is Sasha, and he's a pretty intense entity...a little emo, but a nice dude.


                      • #12
                        Quote Originally Posted by tmt
                        Helel, the morning star, was a Babylonian / Canaanite god who was the son of another Babylonian / Canaanite god Shahar, god of the dawn.

                        I just asked it because it's false; among all the cuneiform texts we have, there is no information about the genealogy ascending of Hêlel, we just know that he's got daughters (and it's probably a metaphor for his priestesses). To be confirm or disprove
                        "If you can't even #?@! yourself, how do you gonna #?@! someone else?" (Steve Vai, Flex-Able Leftovers)


                        • #13
                          I have my own theories on the Fall and the Fallen, being the angels of the Harvest of man, if you will. I see it as a whole theme pertaining to the seasons of the natural cycle: spring, summer, fall, winter. To me, it makes much more sense that a third of the angels would be dedicated to each season of growth, development, and fruition of that development; with winter being the time of possibilities/in between/pre life self. I think the association with 'evil' and 'good' is more a perspective of misunderstanding the larger view of the development of a viable spiritual being from the human perspective of learning from within.

                          Besides Lucifer has been nothing but kind (though a bit intense on concepts) in my experience with him. I don't know why he gets described as nothing but negative context.
                          In my hands I hold a candle whose flame is small to see,
                          And if I give but one light to you my life is filled for me.
                          But...In your hands you hold a torch for many eyes to see,
                          So hold it high that they may light their candlewicks from thee... موم γλυφή !

                          - By Faye



                          • #14
                            Well here is my two cents.. Yes Lucifer is an angel of light. Why? Because he was once one of God' angels known as Cherub back then. Now why an angel of light on Earth? Well simply because he disguises himself as light to many who aren't aware that he really has become dark. Such as a precious diamond in which someone gets so attracted to because of it's beauty and priceless "worldly value". He is of the world and the world is his because he inherited it. It's only a matter of recognising where he stands. God' kingdom is from above and pure. Yes God created man but it's an ongoing battle between Earth and heaven in who man will choose...


                            • #15
                              Christianity = Prophets on some really good hallucinogens.
                              Paganism = Sex fiends on some really good hallucinogens.
                              Hinduism = Enlightened bad-asses who wield soul snakes on some really good hallucinogens.
                              Buddhism = Enlightened gentlemen on some really lame hallucinogens.
                              Islam = On some really good opium.
                              Judaism = The bullied kid who poisons everyone with some really bad Amanita Muscaria mushrooms.
                              Hippies = Enlightened realists on the best hallucinogens.
                              Toaism = A watered down version of some Buddhism/Hinduism hybridization, also, some really good hallucinogens.
                              Mormonism = Pagans pretending to be Christian on some really good hallucinogens.
                              Catholicism = Terrorists with some really great schizophrenia.
                              Agnostic = On some really lame hallucinogens.
                              Athiest = Realists on some really old hallucinogens.
                              Wicca = Abominations who were rejected by Christianity.
                              Satanism = D) All of the above.