Where did Lucifer come from?
Moderator: Moderators
Where did Lucifer come from?
Post #1If Satan is/was a fallen angel, why wasn't the battle in Heaven mentioned in Genesis?
Post #41
probably the same as the reasons for my lackof beleif in the christian god - all part of the same mythology. I can see no reason to believe ineither god or Lucifer.nikolayevich wrote:What are your reasons for this unbelief?bernee51 wrote:aaahhhmmmm, she/he/it didn't come from anywhere...she/he/it doesn't existhiramabbi2 wrote:
Let us just go back to the original topic - "Where did Lucifer come from?" s
I do find it very interesting though the lengths some people go to, and their erudition, when exporing the origins of the Lucifer myth.
Quite impressive.
I have not requested god's absence - nor it is his absence the result of a decision on my part. It is a conclusion that I have arrived at.nikolayevich wrote:I believe God will sometimes appear absent if it is requested of Him. It has been said that God will be wherever you want Him to be in the end, in relation to you. He will be your enemy if you so desire; your Savior if you choose.bernee51 wrote:god has blessed me with his absence.hiramabbi2 wrote:
God Bless
then I am not one of his subjects - my 'avoidance' is totaly passive. This, of course, fits with my theory that god only exists in the minds of believers. I'm sure it is would require activity on your part, for instance, to 'avoid' god's influence.nikolayevich wrote:However, there is a kind of persistence on His part which I think requires more active avoidance on the part of His subjects.
-
- Student
- Posts: 82
- Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 7:20 am
Post #42
The question poster implies that things said about the beginnings of Satan are not true because they are not written in Genesis chapter 1.
This is bad logic.
If I start meeting with you and on the first day tell you about my adulthood. On the second day that we meet I tell you about my childhood. Did my childhood not exist because I told you about it?
This is bad logic.
If I start meeting with you and on the first day tell you about my adulthood. On the second day that we meet I tell you about my childhood. Did my childhood not exist because I told you about it?
-
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 25089
- Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 10:38 pm
- Location: Bible Belt USA
- Has thanked: 40 times
- Been thanked: 73 times
Post #43
.
When WAS the concept of "Satan" introduced?
The implication exists in the reader. I see no implication that the tales are not true -- only a question. If the question cannot be addressed convincingly, I may conclude that an inconsistency exists.officer2002 wrote:The question poster implies that things said about the beginnings of Satan are not true because they are not written in Genesis chapter 1.
When WAS the concept of "Satan" introduced?
.
Non-Theist
ANY of the thousands of "gods" proposed, imagined, worshiped, loved, feared, and/or fought over by humans MAY exist -- awaiting verifiable evidence
Non-Theist
ANY of the thousands of "gods" proposed, imagined, worshiped, loved, feared, and/or fought over by humans MAY exist -- awaiting verifiable evidence
Post #44
The first mention of the word satan in the bible is ( 1 Chron 21:1) It is a Hebrew word meaning adversaryZzyzx wrote:.The implication exists in the reader. I see no implication that the tales are not true -- only a question. If the question cannot be addressed convincingly, I may conclude that an inconsistency exists.officer2002 wrote:The question poster implies that things said about the beginnings of Satan are not true because they are not written in Genesis chapter 1.
When WAS the concept of "Satan" introduced?
The first and only mention of the word Lucifer is in Isa 14:12
The word Lucifer is the English translation of the Hebrew word "heylel" which according to the strongs concordance means "light-bearer", shining one, morning star.
The word Lucifer is actually a Latin word. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucifer
The word "heylel" is derived from a root word "halal" which is used 165 times in the Old Testament and it is translated as follows in the KJV:
117 times = Praise
14 times = Glory
10 times = Boast
8 times = Mad
3 times = Shine(d)
3 times = Foolish
2 times = Fools
2 times = Commended
2 times = Rage
1 time = Celebrate
1 time = Give
1 time = Marriage
1 time = Renowned
Please click the above link to verify the places it is used in the bible. You will find the links to the scriptures on that site.
Obviously translators have attached all those different meanings to the word "Halal." The meanings are obviously, good and bad; as well as positive and negative.
Some people believe the word Lucifer refers to satan/the devil. Others believe it refers to Jesus.
Both are referred to as lights in the bible.
Jesus as the light of the world ( John 8:12)
Satan as an angel of light which deceives the world. (2 Cor 11:14)
- Goat
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 24999
- Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
- Has thanked: 25 times
- Been thanked: 207 times
Post #45
Apparently, the concept was introduced in the first disporia, and was introduced into Judaism around 300 bce.. and for the next 300 years went through a transformation.Zzyzx wrote:.The implication exists in the reader. I see no implication that the tales are not true -- only a question. If the question cannot be addressed convincingly, I may conclude that an inconsistency exists.officer2002 wrote:The question poster implies that things said about the beginnings of Satan are not true because they are not written in Genesis chapter 1.
When WAS the concept of "Satan" introduced?
Mind you, the Jewish concept of Satan is not the same as the Christian concept. The Christian concept is Satan is a fallen angel, in Judaism, angels have no free will, and can not fall. Satan is a servant of God, who has a specific job, and that is to provide bad choices for people, so that by rejecting those bad choices, and choosing Good, they can lift themselves from leading a 'mundane' life, and live a 'sanctified' life, closer to God. Satan is more like the 'imp of the perverse' rather than this malevolent being trying to tear you away from God..
The name 'lucifier' came from taking the term 'morning star' in Isaiah, and putting it into Latin. That term in Isaiah does not refer to Satan, but rather it is referring to an old phonetician God who reached too high for power and fell. This God was being compared to King Nebuchadnezzar, and it was mocking King Neb.
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�
Steven Novella
Steven Novella
Post #46
The Bible doesn't tell us. Obviously God created him, and obviously he used his freedom to disobey God, but other than that we really don't know much because God hasn't chosen to tell us.ST88 wrote:...where did Lucifer come from?
Many people believe that the book of Job is one of the earliest books (if not the earliest book) in the Hebrew Bible. Satan is already present in this very early book.
- Goat
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 24999
- Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
- Has thanked: 25 times
- Been thanked: 207 times
Post #47
There is evidence that Job was redacted.. and like I said, the Jewish concept of 'the accuser' is much different than the Christian one.EduChris wrote:The Bible doesn't tell us. Obviously God created him, and obviously he used his freedom to disobey God, but other than that we really don't know much because God hasn't chosen to tell us.ST88 wrote:...where did Lucifer come from?
Many people believe that the book of Job is one of the earliest books (if not the earliest book) in the Hebrew Bible. Satan is already present in this very early book.
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�
Steven Novella
Steven Novella