Isaiah 14:12-14 "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: I wil ascend above the heights of the clouds: I will be like the most High."
According to these verses Satan was jealous of God and wanted to be more powerful than God. This is why he rebelled against God because he wanted to be God himself.
Beeslo, The matching of Lucifer with the morning star rises not from the Hebrew bible but from classical mythology, a fount of bitter water not intended by God as our "fountain of living waters" (Jeremiah 17:13). Reference works concede that the switch is based on ".. .classical mythology for the planet Venus." Just because Satan has convinced the heathen world to connect him with Venus, the morning star, is no basis for the repetition of that "myth" by Christian scholars. But II Timothy 4:3, 4 says the time for myths has come.
For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. [muthos: from which we get the word 'myths']
An examination of the original Hebrew will dispel any illusion that "morning star" is an acceptable substitute for the word "Lucifer." The Hebrew is "helel, ben shachar," which is accurately translated, "Lucifer, son of the morning." The NIV and NASB give an English translation as if the Hebrew said, "shachar kokab, ben shachar" or morning star, son of the morning (or dawn). Yet the word for star (kokab) appears nowhere in the text. Also 'morning' appears only once, as the KJV shows, not twice as new versions indicate. The word kokab is translated as 'star' dozens of other times by NIV translators; morning or dawn is likewise used hundreds of times. New version editors know boger kokab is 'morning star' since it is used in Job 38:7. If God had intended to communicate 'morning star', he could have repeated it here. The word he chose, helel, appears nowhere else in the Old Testament, just as "Lucifer" appears nowhere else.
The ultimate blasphemy occurs when the "morning star" takes "Lucifer's" place in Isaiah 14. Jesus Christ is the "morning star" and is identified as such in Revelation 22:16, 2:28 and II Peter 1:19. With this slight of hand switch, Satan not only slyly slips out of the picture but lives up to his name "the accuser" (Revelation 12:10) by attempting to make Jesus Christ the subject of the diatribe in Isaiah 14. The NASB compounds its role as malefactor by placing the reference, II Peter 1:19, next to Isaiah 14:12 to solidify the notion that the passage refers to Jesus Christ rather than Lucifer.
Comments
so so so so true
by mememe on March 23rd, 2008
Any man who sleeps with a woman failed the test.
We where never supposed to evolve passed the garden of Eden.
The apple was not a fruit of a tree but the test.
The apple represents a womans Virginia.
God tested man, with woman.
The devil wanted to destroy the woman.
That is why he was cast out.
(He knew man would fail the test and that purgatory would be created.)
Jesus tried to free the world but was sent too soon.
The only way for the world to be at peace is too free all the lost souls.
So long as earth exists there will be suffering.
The only way to set things right is to destroy the earth. And pass the test.
So that all souls can be at peace.
(There is a reason the earth is round and not flat, and why there is only one planet. And why we are alone.)
Its a circle.
The only way to pass the test is to break the circle.
What I find ironic is that people praise the one who tested them and curse the one who tried to free them.
People pray to Satan thinking its god and curse god thinking its Satan.
This saddens me the worst.
Sincerely
Joshua A.D. Whittington
by Anonymous on October 30th, 2008
How did a being created without any free will whatsoever "rebel" against God without God's full knowledge and consent?
by eternal0void on November 2nd, 2008
Yes, Satan chose to defy God. Why would he do this unless he thought it was actually possible though, is the better question to me. Either he was ignorant to the fact that God could not be defeated, or it was possible, but Satan failed.
by wthamilt on November 8th, 2008
Also, eternal0void, where do you get that Satan or the angels did or didn't have free will? I will only ask you this once, despite your copy and pasting on nearly every answer on here...
by wthamilt on November 8th, 2008
Psalm 103:20-21 declares that God's Angels are completely obedient to God's Will, preventing "free will" in Angels.
.
The tapdancing to try and explain how "Lucifer" somehow managed to have "free will" anyway is very entertaining though doomed to failure: the basic argument is "despite the fact that the Bible says Angels have no free will, our statement that Satan was a fallen angel and not ordered to rebel by God 'proves' Angels have free will [even though this goes against the Bible's teachings on the subject]".
.
Isaiah is mentioned frequently, despite the passages about the "morning star" being so clearly about a local Babylonian King and not about any "Fallen Angel".
by eternal0void on November 12th, 2008
2 Corinthians 4:4 is used to declare "Satan is God of this World" and to make the claim that Angels have the free will to decide to become Gods. This of course runs smack into the Old Testament claim that there are no other Gods.
.
So what it all boils down to is that Angels have no free will, and that reinterpretations of the Bible to give them "free will" typically result in Bible contradictions, invalidating the "proofs".
by eternal0void on November 12th, 2008
God has given free moral agency to all His creations, including angels. Out of the entire host of angels in heaven, there are three archangels (head angels): Lucifer (who later became Satan), Gabriel and Michael.
Each archangel is in charge of one-third of the host of heaven. Lucifer and his one-third rebelled against God, but the other two-thirds did not follow suit. They chose to remain loyal and obedient to God.
If angels did not have the free agency to decide on their own to disobey and were just robots, they would have never rebelled.
by gowriter on December 27th, 2008
gowriter, the Bible states that angels have no free will. Are you seriously trying to say that the Bible is WRONG about something?
.
I understand that you have a made-up story with no Bible backing whatsoever claiming that some of the angels rebelled without God willing that they rebel, but that story just isn't backed up by anything in the Bible.
by eternal0void on January 7th, 2009
eternal0void, and where do you get the bible backing that states that God DOESN'T give his creation free moral agency? Please do provide some.
Oh and here: Romans 2:12-16
Theres some backing for God giving us the capability to create our own thoughts- therefore giving us free will.
by Kittyy on April 15th, 2009
OH! and Psalm 103:20-21? It says that he blesses the angels that do actually listen to his word and keep it. It doesn't say that they are incapable of choosing to do otherwise.
by Kittyy on April 15th, 2009
eternal0void, the fact that satan (an angel) rebelled against God, tells me that he indeed had free will to do so. God didn't "make" satan rebel. The biggest reason that satan tried to dethrone God was because of pride. Satan fell from grace and a third of all the angels decided to follow him. If that isn't free will then what is?
by The Galaxy Hitchhiker on June 14th, 2009
Avatar Kittyy and Gowriter, amen and I agree.
by The Galaxy Hitchhiker on June 14th, 2009
PRIDE! Same reason why people refuse his mercy.
by itisihere on November 5th, 2009
Ok so when Gods the one who wants ultimate power that makes Satan selfish????? Wow.
by OK3 on January 19th, 2010