The Devil, the Serpent, Satan, and Lucifer,

[Rough Beast Sloucher]

Gotta ask the Bible believers.


But couldn't that just be writing that the early church used to create an image of a villain to help keep control of their flock?

.

Read my Post 39 just above. The idea of Satan as evil already existed before there was an early church.

 

[Skwim]

Read my Post 39 just above. The idea of Satan as evil already existed before there was an early church.

Yes, I know.

.

 

[TheBannerofHomuraAkemi]

But couldn't that just be writing that the early church used to create an image of a villain to help keep control of their flock?

.

Funny the Church organization that I use to belong too explained it that way in the study bible they released.

 

[Rough Beast Sloucher]

Funny the Church organization that I use to belong too explained it that way in the study bible they released.

Read post 39

 

[Anubis follower]

I made a deal with the devil when i was 16. i asked for tree things. i got them all. i feel guilty now. when i get my economy straight am tattooing a crucifix-deviltype on my forearm.


And by the way ....Anubis has also haunted my dreams for a long time. i believe in something bigger than god.

 

[74x12]

Your problem there, - is that there is no name Lucifer in Tanakh.

That was a mistranslation problem in Isaiah 14:12.

There is no fallen angel in that text. It is a fallen Babylonian King. The text even says he is a MAN.

Isaiah 14 starts -

Isa 14:1 For YHVH will have mercy on Jacob, and will yet choose Israel, and set them in their own land: and the strangers shall be joined with them, and they shall cleave to the house of Jacob.

Isa 14:2 And the people shall take them, and bring them to their place: and the house of Israel shall possess them in the land of YHVH for servants and handmaids: and they shall take them captives, whose captives they were; and they shall rule over their oppressors.

The Hebrews captivity came when the king of Babylon destroyed Jerusalem in 586 B.C.

Obviously not about a fallen angel.
*

However, satan has adopted the name Lucifer. Satan adopts names. Lucifer one of his favorites. The scripture says no marvel for satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Lucifer is the "light bearer". The so called Venus the "morning star".

Satan is Bel Marduk the "king of babylon".

 

[74x12]

i believe in something bigger than god.

You must mean the

Tanakh does NOT say the serpent is Satan, - anywhere.

And obviously it calls Satan by his name everywhere else. Why the discrepancy if it was Satan?

Tanakh NEVER refers to Satan as a serpent.

Those are later additions tacked onto the Tanakh Satan.

*

I think in the book of Job he Leviathan is Satan. He's called the king of the children of pride (Job 41:34) and it is said of him that those who curse are ready to wake Leviathan up. (Job 3:8) Meaning he could be brought out by witchcraft. The Leviathan is a sea serpent the same as Lotan. He's a 7 headed sea serpent possibly considered by the ancient Canaanites as the aspect of Yam. Yam(the sea) pictured as a serpent encircling the earth. His little pet leviathan swimming within. The God of the Bible takes another approach. The idea that Yam is a god is contested and God cuts Rahab. Rahab is a monster that typifies the sea. When God caused the Israelites to cross the Red sea on dry land it was considered an attack against Rahab the sea. (Isaiah 51:9) This showed that God ruled the waves of the sea and could still them or part the sea or do anything. (Psalm 89:9) Even though Leviathan is invincible from human weapons (because he's really a spirit: satan). (Job 41:27) Satan is nothing to God and will be destroyed when it's time. The Zodiac shows us that God will "pierce the fleeing serpent" and slay the dragon that is in the sea. The Zodiac has been misinterpreted as being about Hercules and the hydra and many other topics of mythology etc. Many ancient myths had the Hydra as 7 headed. He's just memories of Leviathan the 7 headed dragon we know of as satan. Hercules is not Hercules. It's Jesus the "Son of man" the "seed of the woman" who would bruise the serpent's head. If you study the Zodiac, line it up with scriptures then it all makes sense. Yes the dragon satan is very real.

 

[Ingledsva]

Really. Well this isn't how the Bible tells it.

Luke 13:16
16 This woman that I healed is a true descendant of Abraham. But Satan has held her for 18 years. Surely it is not wrong for her to be made free from her sickness on a Sabbath day!”

John 8:42-44
42 Jesus said to them, “If God were really your Father, you would love me. I came from God, and now I am here. I did not come by my own authority. God sent me. 43 You don’t understand the things I say, because you cannot accept my teaching. 44 Your father is the devil. You belong to him. You want to do what he wants. He was a murderer from the beginning. He was always against the truth. There is no truth in him. He is like the lies he tells. Yes, the devil is a liar. He is the father of lies.

John 13:2
During supper, the devil having already put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon, to betray Him,

2 Thessalonians 2:9
9 When that Man of Evil comes, it will be the work of Satan. He will come with great power, and he will do all kinds of false miracles, signs, and wonders. 10 The Man of Evil will use every kind of evil to fool those who are lost. They are lost because they refused to love the truth and be saved.

1 Thessalonians 2:17–18
17 Brothers and sisters, we were separated from you for a short time. But even though we were not there, our thoughts were still with you. We wanted very much to see you, and we tried very hard to do this. 18 Yes, we wanted to come to you. I, Paul, tried more than once to come, but Satan stopped us.

1 Peter 5:8
8 Control yourselves and be careful! The devil is your enemy, and he goes around like a roaring lion looking for someone to attack and eat.

2 Corinthians 11:3
3 But I am afraid that as the serpent deceived Eve by his cunning, your thoughts will be led astray from a sincere and pure devotion to Christ.

Revelation 12:9-10
9 It was thrown down out of heaven. (This giant dragon is that old snake, the one called the devil or Satan, who leads the whole world into the wrong way.) The dragon and its angels were thrown to the earth.

If the verses talk about Tanakh verses, - they are just wrong.

Most of the other verses are a later addition to the Satan character.

Also, - some are using it like the Hebrew, - opposition, - rather then a being. For instance I Thessalonians 2:17-18 which you have above.

1Th 2:1 For yourselves, brethren, know our entrance in unto you, that it was not in vain:

1Th 2:2 But even after that we had suffered before, and were shamefully abused/entreated, as ye know, at Philippi, we were bold in our God to speak unto you the gospel of God with much contention.

1Th 2:14 For ye, brethren, became followers of the churches of God which in Judaea are in Christ Jesus: for ye also have suffered like things of your own countrymen, even as they have of the Jews:

1Th 2:15 Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men:

1Th 2:16 Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins alway: for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost.

1Th 2:17 But we, brethren, being taken from you for a short time in presence, not in heart, endeavoured the more abundantly to see your face with great desire.

1Th 2:18 Wherefore we would have come unto you, even I Paul, once and again; but opposition/satan hindered us.

They describe that OPPOSITION in the earlier verses. Thus 1Th 2:18 has nothing to do with a being called Satan.

Obviously neither is Luke 13:16, and some of the others.
scribe

 

[Ingledsva]

However, satan has adopted the name Lucifer. Satan adopts names. Lucifer one of his favorites. The scripture says no marvel for satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Lucifer is the "light bearer". The so called Venus the "morning star".

Satan is Bel Marduk the "king of babylon".

Nope. They mistranslated a text about a real war, and the fall of Babylon and her king.

The idea that "Satan" adopted the name is baloney. It says that nowhere. That is Christianity trying to get around the fact that they fouled up those verses.

Bel Murduk is a God, - not Satan.

*

 

[Ingledsva]

Satan as evil already appeared in Jewish Apocrypha before there was such a thing as the early church. This idea was in the popular imagination and naturally showed up in Christian literature. See the Jewish Encyclopedia

Yep, - later people, - after Tanakh, - picked these ideas up through mixing with other religions.

*

 

[Rough Beast Sloucher]

Yep, - later people, - after Tanakh, - picked these ideas up through mixing with other religions.

*

What matters is what is in the entire Bible not just the Tanakh. The NT includes ideas found in the Jewish Apocrypha, that is, not made up by Christians but inherited from Jews. Where ideas in both the Tanakh and the NT originally came from does not matter for this discussion. As I said it is what is in the entire Bible that matters. The concept of Satan (or Satan himself) evolved over time,. The NT Satan, inherited from ongoing Jewish thought, is definitely evil. And the scriptural evidence supporting this is much larger than the scriptural evidence to the contrary in the Tanakh.

 

[74x12]

Nope. They mistranslated a text about a real war, and the fall of Babylon and her king.

Yes, and just so happened to describe the king in terms recognized as being about the immortal beings messengers from the sky; known as "sons of God"(Genesis 6) that is what we now call angelic beings. It's not an accident. Ezekiel 28 definitely isn't an accident. When you connect this with the obvious prophetic symbolic significance of Babylon such as portrayed in Revelation then you see how it's about satan "king of Babylon".

The idea that "Satan" adopted the name is baloney. It says that nowhere.

Why does it have to say it? It's true. You know what lucifer means? Light bearer. And you know what Paul said about satan? "And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light." (2 Cor. 11:14) So although some Luciferians might believe they are worshiping a god who is higher than satan; yet it's really the same. He's the false god of dualities. He portrays himself both good(lucifer) and evil(satan) so that he can please all people who want to worship him. He's a fraud though.

Bel Murduk is a God, - not Satan.
*

But could be easily identified by ancient Hebrews with Satan. Remember Isaiah would not believe in any gods except Yah. The prophets like Isaiah were against all the "baals" or "bel". By Jesus time period we see that the prince of devils was known commonly in Judea as beelzebul. (Matthew 10:25)

Psalm 82 speaks of those called "gods" but have gone against the Most High's fair ways and have begun to judge unjustly. In consequence they will "die like men". Which is reminiscent of Isaiah 14:15.

 

[Ingledsva]

You must mean the

I think in the book of Job he Leviathan is Satan. He's called the king of the children of pride (Job 41:34) and it is said of him that those who curse are ready to wake Leviathan up. (Job 3:8) Meaning he could be brought out by witchcraft. The Leviathan is a sea serpent the same as Lotan. He's a 7 headed sea serpent possibly considered by the ancient Canaanites as the aspect of Yam. Yam(the sea) pictured as a serpent encircling the earth. His little pet leviathan swimming within. The God of the Bible takes another approach. The idea that Yam is a god is contested and God cuts Rahab. Rahab is a monster that typifies the sea. When God caused the Israelites to cross the Red sea on dry land it was considered an attack against Rahab the sea. (Isaiah 51:9) This showed that God ruled the waves of the sea and could still them or part the sea or do anything. (Psalm 89:9) Even though Leviathan is invincible from human weapons (because he's really a spirit: satan). (Job 41:27) Satan is nothing to God and will be destroyed when it's time. The Zodiac shows us that God will "pierce the fleeing serpent" and slay the dragon that is in the sea. The Zodiac has been misinterpreted as being about Hercules and the hydra and many other topics of mythology etc. Many ancient myths had the Hydra as 7 headed. He's just memories of Leviathan the 7 headed dragon we know of as satan. Hercules is not Hercules. It's Jesus the "Son of man" the "seed of the woman" who would bruise the serpent's head. If you study the Zodiac, line it up with scriptures then it all makes sense. Yes the dragon satan is very real.

Turning Leviathan,-Lotan,-Tiamat,-Jörmungandr, etc., into Satan, - is again, - just later people trying to make everything "Pagan" that they consider "evil," into what they think Satan is.

The Leviathan connection to Babylon is that it is actually the fierce navy and warships.

These verses symbolically refer to those people, whom were a powerful seafaring nation, - as a sea monster.

Isa 2:12 For the day of the LORD of hosts shall be upon every one that is proud and lofty, and upon every one that is lifted up; and he shall be brought low:

Isa 2:16 And upon all the ships of Tarshish, and upon all pleasant pictures.

Isa 27:1 In that day YHVH with his severe and mighty and strong sword shall punish leviathan the piercing (fugitive)(noble) serpent, even leviathan that crooked(tortuous) serpent; and he shall slay the sea monster that is in the sea.

Isa 27:12 And it shall come to pass in that day, that the LORD shall beat off from the channel of the river unto the stream of Egypt, and ye shall be gathered one by one, O ye children of Israel.

Psa 104:26 Thence with the ships which depart for abroad, Leviathan doth make sport.

Isa 43:2 When thou passest through the waters, I will be with thee; and through the rivers, they shall not overflow thee: when thou walkest through the fire, thou shalt not be burned; neither shall the flame kindle upon thee.

Isa 43:14 Thus saith the LORD, your redeemer, the Holy One of Israel; For your sake I have sent to Babylon, and have brought down all their nobles, and the Chaldeans, whose cry is in the ships.


Isa 43:16 Thus saith the LORD, which maketh a way in the sea, and a path in the mighty waters;

Isa 44:28 That saith of Cyrus, He is my shepherd, and shall perform all my pleasure: even saying to Jerusalem, Thou shalt be built; and to the temple, Thy foundation shall be laid.

Isa 48:14 All ye, assemble yourselves, and hear; which among them hath declared these things? The LORD hath loved him: he will do his pleasure on Babylon, and his arm shall be on the Chaldeans.

If their ships came across yours - you were in deep do-do. They/Leviathan made sport of other ships.

We are talking Phoenicians, Assyrians, Tarshish, Tyre, Babylon, - and a real war. Read Isaiah 23 carefully.

"(2.) The Chaldeans shall be the instruments of it (Isa_23:13): Behold the land of the Chaldeans; how easily they and their land were destroyed by the Assyrians. Though their own hands founded it, set up the towers of Babylon, and raised up its palaces, yet the Assyrians brought it to ruin, whence the Tyrians might infer that as easily as the old Chaldeans were subdued by the Assyrians so easily shall Tyre be vanquished by those new Chaldeans. Babel was built by the Assyrians for those that dwelt in the wilderness. It may be rendered for the ships (the Assyrians founded it for ships and shipmen that traffic upon those vast rivers Tigris and Euphrates to the Persian and Indian seas), for men of the desert, for Babylon is called the desert of the sea, Isa_21:1. Thus Tyrus was built upon the sea for the like purpose. But the Assyrians (says Dr. Lightfoot) brought that to ruin, now lately, in Hezekiah's time, and so shall Tyre hereafter be brought to ruin by Nebuchadnezzar. If we looked more upon the falling and withering of others, we should not be so confident as we commonly are of the continuance of our own flourishing and standing." Matthew Henry's Commentary On The Whole Bible
*
War with Babylon is inevitable. In a single swift campaign, Cyrus destroys the mighty kingdom. The army of King Nabonidus is defeated and Babylon surrenders without resistance in October 539.

Soon after his conquest of the empire of the Medes, Cyrus, king of Persia, is attacked by a coalition of the other great powers of the day: Babylon, Egypt and Lyclia who come to fear him, joined by Sparta, the greatest military power of Greece. In the spring of 546 B.C. the richest and most powerful man in the world, Croesus, king of Lydia, advances into Cappadocia, Asia Minor while the other kings are still feverishly gathering their troops for battle. But Cyrus cleverly attacks first, marches one thousand miles overland, even through the outlying provinces of Babylon. He defeats Croesus and follows him to his capital city. In the autumn of 546 Cyrus storms Sardis and orders that Croesus be taken alive. The Lydian kingdom henceforth becomes a province of Persia.

The gateway to Greece and the Near East now lies open before the Persian king. The Ionian Creek cities of Asia Minor, the Carians, the Lycians and the king of Cilicia humbly acknowledge Persian supremacy.



*

 

[Ingledsva]

What matters is what is in the entire Bible not just the Tanakh. The NT includes ideas found in the Jewish Apocrypha, that is, not made up by Christians but inherited from Jews. Where ideas in both the Tanakh and the NT originally came from does not matter for this discussion. As I said it is what is in the entire Bible that matters. The concept of Satan (or Satan himself) evolved over time,. The NT Satan, inherited from ongoing Jewish thought, is definitely evil. And the scriptural evidence supporting this is much larger than the scriptural evidence to the contrary in the Tanakh.

As I said all later, - long after Tanakh, - from contact with other religions.

As you yourself said - "evolved over time." It is Not in Tanakh.

Later groups not understanding and ADDING evil - does not make him evil.

*

 

[Ingledsva]

Yes, and just so happened to describe the king in terms recognized as being about the immortal beings messengers from the sky; known as "sons of God"(Genesis 6) that is what we now call angelic beings. It's not an accident. Ezekiel 28 definitely isn't an accident. When you connect this with the obvious prophetic symbolic significance of Babylon such as portrayed in Revelation then you see how it's about satan "king of Babylon".

Why does it have to say it? It's true. You know what lucifer means? Light bearer. And you know what Paul said about satan? "And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light." (2 Cor. 11:14) So although some Luciferians might believe they are worshiping a god who is higher than satan; yet it's really the same. He's the false god of dualities. He portrays himself both good(lucifer) and evil(satan) so that he can please all people who want to worship him. He's a fraud though.

But could be easily identified by ancient Hebrews with Satan. Remember Isaiah would not believe in any gods except Yah. The prophets like Isaiah were against all the "baals" or "bel". By Jesus time period we see that the prince of devils was known commonly in Judea as beelzebul. (Matthew 10:25)

Psalm 82 speaks of those called "gods" but have gone against the Most High's fair ways and have begun to judge unjustly. In consequence they will "die like men". Which is reminiscent of Isaiah 14:15.

People making up crap that it doesn't say is just baloney.

It could be.... Sounds like....

As I already said Satan is not the king of Babylon. That is later people mistranslating-misunderstanding Isaiah 14. See post # 53.

*

 

[Ingledsva]

Yes, and just so happened to describe the king in terms recognized as being about the immortal beings messengers from the sky; known as "sons of God"(Genesis 6) that is what we now call angelic beings. It's not an accident. Ezekiel 28 definitely isn't an accident. When you connect this with the obvious prophetic symbolic significance of Babylon such as portrayed in Revelation then you see how it's about satan "king of Babylon".

Both Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28 are talking about the same war.

El also means mighty, and godlike.

Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28, both tell us this is a MAN.

Isa 14:16 They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, and consider thee, saying, Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms;

Eze 28:2 Son of man, say unto the prince of Tyrus, Thus saith Adonay YHVH; Because thine heart(pride/intellect) is lifted up, and thou hast said, I am el(mighty/godlike), I sit in the seat of Elohiym(kings, mighty, judges, etc.), in the midst of the seas; yet thou art a man, and not el (mighty godlike), though thou set thine heart as the heart of Elohiym(kings, mighty, judges, etc.) :

Eze 28:5 By thy great wisdom and by thy trade hast thou increased thy riches, and thine heart is lifted up because of thy riches:

Both of these texts use flowery language to recount an actual war.

*

 

[Rough Beast Sloucher]

As I said all later, - long after Tanakh, - from contact with other religions.

As you yourself said - "evolved over time." It is Not in Tanakh.

Later groups not understanding and ADDING evil - does not make him evil.

*

It is irrelevant whether it is in the Tanakh. I have previously documented Jewish sources concerning the evolution of Satan. Have you or . someone else documented influences from other religions? Is the Tanakh free from external influences? How about the early parts of Bereisheit?

 

[Rough Beast Sloucher]

As I said all later, - long after Tanakh, - from contact with other religions.

As you yourself said - "evolved over time." It is Not in Tanakh.

Later groups not understanding and ADDING evil - does not make him evil.

*

If you think the Jewish Apocrypha and the NT got it wrong, maybe it is the other way around.. Maybe the Tanakh got it wrong and the much more extensive descriptions of Satan in the later texts arose from discovering the truth.

 

[74x12]

Both Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28 are talking about the same war.

El also means mighty, and godlike.

Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28, both tell us this is a MAN.

Isa 14:16 They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, and consider thee, saying, Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms;

Eze 28:2 Son of man, say unto the prince of Tyrus, Thus saith Adonay YHVH; Because thine heart(pride/intellect) is lifted up, and thou hast said, I am el(mighty/godlike), I sit in the seat of Elohiym(kings, mighty, judges, etc.), in the midst of the seas; yet thou art a man, and not el (mighty godlike), though thou set thine heart as the heart of Elohiym(kings, mighty, judges, etc.) :

Eze 28:5 By thy great wisdom and by thy trade hast thou increased thy riches, and thine heart is lifted up because of thy riches:

Both of these texts use flowery language to recount an actual war.

*

They might be speaking of the same war(if you're taking all Nebuchadnezzar's conquests as one war) too some extent; but one prophecy is for the king of Babylon and the other for the king of Tyrus. The thing both these pagan cities have in common is they would have had both a human ruler and a patron deity for their city that they would call the king/queen of their city as well. So in Babylon it was Bel Marduk and in Tyrus; although I don't know the name off the top of my head; he would commonly be called Baal by the Phoenicians.

Ezekiel 28 is actually split between two different prophecies. First it is to "the prince of Tyrus" (Ezekiel 28:2) and afterwards the "king of Tyrus". (Ezekiel 28:12) So, you're apparently claiming these are the same person. However, that's not a fact. It is only when prophesying about the "king of Tyrus" that the prophesy begins to sound like it's speaking of an angelic being. A "cherub" to be precise.

 

[Ingledsva]

It is irrelevant whether it is in the Tanakh. I have previously documented Jewish sources concerning the evolution of Satan. Have you or . someone else documented influences from other religions? Is the Tanakh free from external influences? How about the early parts of Bereisheit?

Read back - I've already said this.

Tanakh is supposedly the God given source. All other later texts adding to what it says - are through their contact with other religions.

That is just FACT.

*