Isn't Lucifer the Good Guy?

[NightDreamer]

I am tired of you people!

I was trying to do a mental exercise with popular Christian theology!!!!!

No I do not believe that the Bible is true; and I certainly do not believe that the Lucifer from popular christian theology is real!

By the Bringer of Light himself you all completely missed the point!

Ugh! I was not trying to debate whether or not popular christian theology lines up with what the Bible says!

If you read the Bible; Lucifer, the Serpent, and the Devil are completely entities and Sheol existed before Hell (Hades).

Wow...27 posts and you are tired of all the posters here who have been here months to years. Not very resilient are you? And then there is the fact that people have been trying to tell you that your view of Lucifer is erroneous, see posts by Jay and so on. Lucifer is NOT the devil or the serpent. Perhaps if you were not so clouded by wanting to follow the devil you might have a more open view. As it stands, you seem to not care one whit about any other opinion than your own. Boring, to say that least.

I said that "No I do not believe that the Bible is true; and I certainly do not believe that the Lucifer from popular christian theology is real!"

I do not worship the devil.

and if you where legally blind then why would you turn your font up?

I was here to compare the popular christian view with mine. You are the one being the idiot not me.

 

[JoStories]

I said that "No I do not believe that the Bible is true; and I certainly do not believe that the Lucifer from popular christian theology is real!"

I do not worship the devil.

and if you where legally blind then why would you turn your font up?

I was here to compare the popular christian view with mine. You are the one being the idiot not me.

Because enlarging the font makes it easier to see for me. Clearly you don't understand the difference between legally blind and blind. There is a vast difference. So compare your views with Christian views but when you 'tire' of posts after so few of your own, it only points to the fact that you have no patience and are not here to really discuss the differences but rather to find those who agree with you. Sorry. You may find some who do agree but you will also find those who don't. If you cannot handle that, get out of the water. And btw, resorting to insults is really low class. It points to a person with no tolerance and limited ability to debate in the first place.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

I am tired of you people!

That's fair. I'm a bit tired of incredibly simplistic would-be criticisms that rely on inaccurate claims and deep-seated ignorance.

I was trying to do a mental exercise with popular Christian theology!!!!!

You might try using popular Christian theology rather than some conception of what this is that you equate with biblical claims (and which are found in Jewish texts).

No I do not believe that the Bible is true

Clearly. You don't seem to feel the need to determine whether your statements about what it contains are even accurate, let alone true.

Ugh! I was not trying to debate whether or not popular christian theology lines up with what the Bible says!

Hm...

Let's assume that the Bible is like an honest news station...

Um...

you read the Bible; Lucifer, the Serpent, and the Devil are completely entities and Sheol existed before Hell (Hades).

I'll admit that my Hebrew isn't as good as it should be (although I no longer feel the need check the Vulgate or the LXX whenever I read a passage in Hebrew because of a lack of confidence in my familiarity with Hebrew). However, I've read the Bible in Hebrew, Greek, English, German, Gothic (this is actually not at all impressive; the only real extant Gothic texts are translations of the Bible), and even some Sanskrit (I inherited the Sanskrit translation). Yet it seems that despite having read the bible in various editions and languages, I seem to have missed what you claim it contains. Perhaps I should read more carefully...[/QUOTE]

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I am tired of you people!

I was trying to do a mental exercise with popular Christian theology!!!!!

Disingenuous rubbish !!!!!

 

[ether-ore]

Let's assume that the Bible is like an honest news station... It tells you part of the story and it's opinion on it. The only part that is objectively true is the information about the story not the opinion.

The person who wrote the story where the prophets of Yahweh. So it was Yahweh's commentary mixed in with the events.

If you just look at the events it can be broken down to this.

1. Yahweh makes the angels in heaven.

2. Yahweh tells them what to do.

3. Lucifer (an archangel) speaks out against Yahweh with a third of the angels.

4. Yahweh casts the rebels from heaven.

5. Yahweh makes men and women as creatures ignorant of good and evil.

6. Lucifer convinces men and women to have the power to choose.

7. Yahweh punishes Lucifer, men, and women.

It seems to me that Lucifer is the great rebel trying to defeat an omnipotent tyrant.

To me Lucifer is a hero.

Why would you deliberately alter the story or the sequence of events as reported in the Bible so as to aid and abet the enemy of your soul?
God did not "make" the angels in heaven and you are also making an incorrect assignment of terms.

The hosts of heaven of which we are a part are the children of God. Angels have some power and authority granted by God in terms of administration and order. But, there is only one "archangel" mentioned in the Bible and that is Michael, not Lucifer. You are giving Lucifer (Satan) a status he never had.

If God had made us, there could be no free agency because a thing made can only do that which it was made to do. We (all of us) have always existed and therefore we have agency and the power to choose as part of our intrinsic nature. Also, we like matter can neither be created or destroyed, we can only change state. God our Heavenly Father creates this change of state for us, since we were incapable of doing it for ourselves. He made us His children and now has given us the opportunity to gain physical bodies.

God did not make us ignorant of good and evil. In our previous state we simply and naturally had no concept of good and evil because in our previous state we had no power to act. The power to act on a choice is distinct from mentally making a choice. You can want something without having the power to get it. The power to act required these physical bodies.

In the Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve were given a choice and the power to act on that choice, but the choice had to be theirs. God could only provide the options, He could not and did not make the choice for them. By Adam and Eve making that choice and using the power of their bodies to act on that choice, they made it possible for the rest of God's children to gain bodies as well.

It must be kept in mind that the reason for God doing it this way is because we are independent agents whom God is helping to progress. But in doing so, God cannot violate His own law by violating our agency. He will help when asked, but He will not preemptively force us to do anything against our will. To get His help, we must voluntarily conform to God's will as described and outlined in scripture.

Lucifer (Satan) rebelled against God and he did manage to get a third of the hosts of heaven to rebel with him. These rebels were indeed cast out of heaven into the earth and are allowed by God to be the instrument for giving us alternatives for choices which are contrary to God's commands. We could not make choices unless we were presented with alternatives to God's commands, but the choices have to be ours.

Again, God will not make choices for us. This mortal existence is not a punishment for us. It is an opportunity to progress. "We" make this life good or bad according to the choices we make, both individually and collectively.

While it is true that God allows Satan the ability to tempt us, Satan's motive is not for good. Satan hates us and wishes to destroy our souls by getting us to go contrary to God's commands. Satan hates us because we did not support his rebellion. Because of their rebellion, Satan and his followers will never get the opportunity to have physical bodies. Satan and his followers hate us because they covet the physical bodies we have because we did not rebel while we were still with God before we came to this earth.

Satan is no hero and the only "arch" that can be attached to his name is that of archenemy. Are you wishing to rebel against God now that He has granted to you a physical body?

God will judge us after this life is over according to the choices we have made, but more importantly, on the actions we have done pursuant to those choices in terms of the guidelines (God's law) we have been given in scripture.

 

[Jumi]

@ether-ore Where in the Bible do you find Lucifer equals Satan?

 

[ether-ore]

@ether-ore Where in the Bible do you find Lucifer equals Satan?

The connection between Lucifer and Satan in the Bible may be considered by some to be somewhat oblique, but it is there.
Isaiah 14:12-15:
12 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!
13 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:
14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.
15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.
Luke 10:18: And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven.
Revelations 12:7-9:
7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,
8 And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.
9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
According to all of these references, Lucifer became the Devil and Satan (also the dragon or serpent) because of his rebellion.
Lucifer rebelled over his own selfish ambition to aggrandize himself at the expense our agency.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

The connection between Lucifer and Satan in the Bible may be considered by some to be somewhat oblique, but it is there.
Isaiah 14:12-15:
12 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!
13 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:
14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.
15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.
Luke 10:18: And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven.
Revelations 12:7-9:
7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,
8 And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.
9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
According to all of these references, Lucifer became the Devil and Satan (also the dragon or serpent) because of his rebellion.
Lucifer rebelled over his own selfish ambition to aggrandize himself at the expense our agency.

Nonsense.

 

[Riverwolf]

Let's assume that the Bible is like an honest news station... It tells you part of the story and it's opinion on it. The only part that is objectively true is the information about the story not the opinion.

The person who wrote the story where the prophets of Yahweh. So it was Yahweh's commentary mixed in with the events.

If you just look at the events it can be broken down to this.

1. Yahweh makes the angels in heaven.

2. Yahweh tells them what to do.

3. Lucifer (an archangel) speaks out against Yahweh with a third of the angels.

4. Yahweh casts the rebels from heaven.

5. Yahweh makes men and women as creatures ignorant of good and evil.

6. Lucifer convinces men and women to have the power to choose.

7. Yahweh punishes Lucifer, men, and women.

It seems to me that Lucifer is the great rebel trying to defeat an omnipotent tyrant.

To me Lucifer is a hero.

Dude, that story isn't in the Bible. It's part of Western Christian tradition, sure, but it's largely derived from other sources. The Serpent in the story of Adam and Eve is just that: a snake. Not a devil or ex-angel; just a snake.

Personally, I think this story of Lucifer is more derived from the story of Prometheus, than anything Jewish or Christian.

I think you should check out Paradise Lost. That's, I think, where the story first got codified at least in English. That poem is whence came this, one of my favorite pieces of wisdom:

"Here we may reign secure, and in my choyce
To reign is worth ambition though in Hell:
Better to reign in Hell, then serve in Heav'n."

Declared Lucifer after being cast down. Regardless of the source, or whether it's Lucifer rebelling against the Christian God or Prometheus stealing fire from Zeus, I absolutely agree that this Robin Hood is the hero.


...also, fun fact. In the Vulgate (the Latin translation of the Bible), there's a bit in 2 Peter where the author refers to Jesus literally with the word 'lucifer'.

 

[ChristineES]

The good guy? Lucifer was mentioned once, in Isaiah. He was a prince of Babylon.

 

[ether-ore]

Nonsense.

That's an interesting one word response. Why is it nonsense... to you? I suppose I should hasten to add that I (being LDS) subscribe to other scripture which confirms the story I've related and makes it clearer.

 

[Paranoid Android]

Let's assume that the Bible is like an honest news station... It tells you part of the story and it's opinion on it. The only part that is objectively true is the information about the story not the opinion.

The person who wrote the story where the prophets of Yahweh. So it was Yahweh's commentary mixed in with the events.

If you just look at the events it can be broken down to this.

1. Yahweh makes the angels in heaven.

2. Yahweh tells them what to do.

3. Lucifer (an archangel) speaks out against Yahweh with a third of the angels.

4. Yahweh casts the rebels from heaven.

5. Yahweh makes men and women as creatures ignorant of good and evil.

6. Lucifer convinces men and women to have the power to choose.

7. Yahweh punishes Lucifer, men, and women.

It seems to me that Lucifer is the great rebel trying to defeat an omnipotent tyrant.

To me Lucifer is a hero.

I don't know if Lucifer is a hero. Satan, however, is not. When the Last Prophet arrives to set up his/or her kingdom, people will resist him/her. The reason is because they like to behave like animals and fight, instead of humans, and live in nonviolent peace. Those who choose to climb Jacob's Ladder and are disabled will find salvation. Jacob's Ladder is a seven point (seven rung) code of nonviolence. People that seek to be peaceful will do it, and those who don't will go to Hell where the violent go.

 

[Politesse]

Let's assume that the Bible is like an honest news station... It tells you part of the story and it's opinion on it. The only part that is objectively true is the information about the story not the opinion.

The person who wrote the story where the prophets of Yahweh. So it was Yahweh's commentary mixed in with the events.

If you just look at the events it can be broken down to this.

1. Yahweh makes the angels in heaven.

2. Yahweh tells them what to do.

3. Lucifer (an archangel) speaks out against Yahweh with a third of the angels.

4. Yahweh casts the rebels from heaven.

5. Yahweh makes men and women as creatures ignorant of good and evil.

6. Lucifer convinces men and women to have the power to choose.

7. Yahweh punishes Lucifer, men, and women.

It seems to me that Lucifer is the great rebel trying to defeat an omnipotent tyrant.

To me Lucifer is a hero.

I feel like you're making a false equivalency here; even if it were a real news story about human beings, I would be wary of trusting a simplistic "the rebels are ALWAYS the good guys" attitude. That has the ring of an American action movie where the rebels are always a plucky band of heroes facing up against a BIG BAD VILLAIN. In real life, the tyrant is usually a bit more complex, and the rebels aren't always nice, or commendable. Sometimes they are murderous drug-dealers who only want the government gone so they can exploit people more easily, or religion-crazed jihadists whose virtues ar outweighed by the horrifying world they intend to create once they are in power.

And that's just people. If you're going to (sort of) take a Bible story for the center of your thought experiment, you also have to take into account the parts of the story you are conveniently ignoring here; like the fact that God is defined infinitely good and Lucifer at best a being made to condemn humanity or at worst actually evil. And that God was in fact providing for everyone, whereas Lucifer's action resulted in every evil known to man. Including, for instance, the tyrants to exploit and abuse people on your news at night. You think they are "bad", but their creator and master is "good"? How is that even consistent? Not wanting God to rule is not in any way synonymous with wanting everyone to be free. There's no indication anywhere in the folk version or the scriptural version that Lucifer wanted any such thing. He's a rival demagogue, not a democrat.

Is Pandora the hero of the myth of Pandora's box, because she bravely challenged the order not to open the box? Or should we acknowledge that her curiosity, though admirable in the right context, resulted in all evil and would have destroyed humanity altogether save for happenstance and luck?

 

[Jumi]

The connection between Lucifer and Satan in the Bible may be considered by some to be somewhat oblique, but it is there.
Isaiah 14:12-15:
12 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!

This is a Babylonian king described in poetic language using the "morning star" Venus. Misinterpreted to be an angel->Devil.

Revelations 12:7-9:
7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,
8 And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.
9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

There is no Lucifer mentioned here.

According to all of these references, Lucifer became the Devil and Satan (also the dragon or serpent) because of his rebellion.
Lucifer rebelled over his own selfish ambition to aggrandize himself at the expense our agency.

This may go fine in same faith debate, but there is an infinitely more likely interpretation which most posters in this thread know about.

 

[ether-ore]

This is a Babylonian king described in poetic language using the "morning star" Venus. Misinterpreted to be an angel->Devil.


There is no Lucifer mentioned here.


This may go fine in same faith debate, but there is an infinitely more likely interpretation which most posters in this thread know about.

What is the reference for that verse meaning a Babylonian king? And, are you serious in using poetry as source material. Somebody wants to wax poetic and you think that is a valid reference? The only source material that matters here is scripture. Any fanciful literature reference is nothing more that someone's speculation where the motive for writing it is entertainment.

You left out the Luke reference.Those three scripture verses taken together make the connection between Lucifer and Satan. The Isaiah reference says that Lucifer was "fallen" and did subsequently "weakened the nations". That weakening is a malicious activity associated with Satan and it also gives the reason for Lucifer's desire which was his ambition.

The Luke reference makes the connection with the word "fallen" by using the word "fell" in connection to Satan, thus being one corroboration that Lucifer and Satan are the same being. But that is not all...

Revelations speaks of the war in heaven before this earth was prepared for our habitation and speaks to why that being referred to as Satan was "cast out". All of these "taken together" make the connection between the two names. But there is more scripture...

D&C 76:25-27:
25 And this we saw also, and bear record, that an angel of God who was in authority in the presence of God, who rebelled against the Only Begotten Son whom the Father loved and who was in the bosom of the Father, was thrust down from the presence of God and the Son,
26 And was called Perdition, for the heavens wept over him—he was Lucifer, a son of the morning.
27 And we beheld, and lo, he is fallen! is fallen, even a son of the morning!

Moses 4:1-4:
1 And I, the Lord God, spake unto Moses, saying: That Satan, whom thou hast commanded in the name of mine Only Begotten, is the same which was from the beginning, and he came before me, saying—Behold, here am I, send me, I will be thy son, and I will redeem all mankind, that one soul shall not be lost, and surely I will do it; wherefore give me thine honor.
2 But, behold, my Beloved Son, which was my Beloved and Chosen from the beginning, said unto me—Father, thy will be done, and the glory be thine forever.
3 Wherefore, because that Satan rebelled against me, and sought to destroy the agency of man, which I, the Lord God, had given him, and also, that I should give unto him mine own power; by the power of mine Only Begotten, I caused that he should be cast down;
4 And he "became" Satan, yea, even the devil, the father of all lies, to deceive and to blind men, and to lead them captive at his will, even as many as would not hearken unto my voice. (Italics added)

This scriptural reference in the Doctrine & Covenants and Moses concerning Satan make the connection with the events described in Isaiah associated with Lucifer.

Satan is not called the "father of lies" without reason. Because Satan is a spirit, he has the power to speak directly to people's minds. He can give the impression that his thoughts are their thoughts thus tempting people to do things. Do not imagine for a moment that he does not use this power to the full and has not caused people to write lies and to cause transcribing monks to leave out important information from scripture.

On a more personal note: I'm always amazed at some atheist who wants to tell a theist what scripture means. The message of scripture is discerned by the power of the spirit which thing no atheist has any conception of.

 

[JoStories]

What is the reference for that verse meaning a Babylonian king? And, are you serious in using poetry as source material. Somebody wants to wax poetic and you think that is a valid reference? The only source material that matters here is scripture. Any fanciful literature reference is nothing more that someone's speculation where the motive for writing it is entertainment.

A very large part of the Bible is poetic. Song of Solomon is a book of love poetry, and there are more, such as Psalms. Proverbs is a collection of moral ideals. Isaiah is also full of poetry. It is not until one gets to the NT that the writing becomes more do this or die kind of thinking. IMO, the NT writing is very harsh, save the Sermon of the Mount of course. It seems apparent to me you have never taken a college course in the Bible. A great deal of those courses, both graduate and undergraduate, deal with the Bible as literature, poetry, and much more. I know because I have taken many of them.

 

[JoStories]

You left out the Luke reference.Those three scripture verses taken together make the connection between Lucifer and Satan. The Isaiah reference says that Lucifer was "fallen" and did subsequently "weakened the nations". That weakening is a malicious activity associated with Satan and it also gives the reason for Lucifer's desire which was his ambition.

That is your opinion only. Many see this as the prince who 'fell' as in someone either deposed or actually killed and that action did weaken the nation. You may wish to see this as being Satan but that is merely your opinion and I don't know of any Jewish person who would agree with you. I kind of think that the Jews would know what their book has to say. Or are you claiming to know the Tanahk better than the Jews themselves?

 

[JoStories]

This scriptural reference in the Doctrine & Covenants and Moses concerning Satan make the connection with the events described in Isaiah associated with Lucifer.

Satan is not called the "father of lies" without reason. Because Satan is a spirit, he has the power to speak directly to people's minds. He can give the impression that his thoughts are their thoughts thus tempting people to do things. Do not imagine for a moment that he does not use this power to the full and has not caused people to write lies and to cause transcribing monks to leave out important information from scripture.

Using Mormon literature has no bearing whatsoever on the interpretation of what you speak. The book of Moses and the Doctrine and Covenant are unique to your faith alone. They are found in no other faith. Claiming they support your argument is nonsensical.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

What is the reference for that verse meaning a Babylonian king?

There are lots. Here's one:
"Isaiah may be drawing upon the imagery of a Canaanite myth, for lore about the Day Star, or Morning Star, has been found among the texts unearthed from Ras Shamra in Syria. It could be, then, that Isaiah alludes to a lost Canaanite myth about a failed cosmic rebellion led by Morning Star in order to lend a mythic grandeur to the account of the Babylonian monarch’s fall. For as Isaiah describes it, the king of Babylon does not merely fall from his elevated royal seat to the cold, hard ground; rather, he falls from celestial heights all the way to the innermost depths of the underworld:
How are you fallen from heaven,
O Day Star, son of Dawn! . . .
You are brought down to Sheol,
to the depths of the Pit. (Isa 14:12, 15)
This is where we get the name “Lucifer” for Satan, because the Greek translation of the Hebrew term translated above as “Day Star” is “Lucifer” (“Light-Bearer”). Postbiblical interpreters are responsible for connecting the dots between “Day Star”/Lucifer and Satan, an identification that was never made in the Hebrew Bible, however." (emphases added).
Wray, T. J., & Mobley, G. (2005). The Birth of Satan: Tracing the Devil's Biblical Roots. Macmillan.

 

[ether-ore]

There are lots. Here's one:
"Isaiah may be drawing upon the imagery of a Canaanite myth, for lore about the Day Star, or Morning Star, has been found among the texts unearthed from Ras Shamra in Syria. It could be, then, that Isaiah alludes to a lost Canaanite myth about a failed cosmic rebellion led by Morning Star in order to lend a mythic grandeur to the account of the Babylonian monarch’s fall. For as Isaiah describes it, the king of Babylon does not merely fall from his elevated royal seat to the cold, hard ground; rather, he falls from celestial heights all the way to the innermost depths of the underworld:
How are you fallen from heaven,
O Day Star, son of Dawn! . . .
You are brought down to Sheol,
to the depths of the Pit. (Isa 14:12, 15)
This is where we get the name “Lucifer” for Satan, because the Greek translation of the Hebrew term translated above as “Day Star” is “Lucifer” (“Light-Bearer”). Postbiblical interpreters are responsible for connecting the dots between “Day Star”/Lucifer and Satan, an identification that was never made in the Hebrew Bible, however." (emphases added).
Wray, T. J., & Mobley, G. (2005). The Birth of Satan: Tracing the Devil's Biblical Roots. Macmillan.

Isaiah "may be" drawing upon imagery of a Canaanite myth? It "could be" then that Isaiah alludes to a lost Canaanite myth? If it was lost, how then does what was found have any credibility? This is a very weak attempt at making a connection between Isaiah and something which is guesswork at best. What this really is, is an attempt to equate scripture with myth thereby discrediting scripture. To give some half baked speculation by some "scholar" equal credibility with scripture is quite a stretch.