Noble Realms

spirituality - physics - conspiracy - philosophy - wisdom - and more...

You are not logged in.

Announcement

Noble Realms Forum is now closed. It will remain online as a searchable archive of posts spanning 3/25/04 to 2/22/08. Members may still log in to use email functions, but there will be no further posting activity. Thank you to everyone who has contributed over the years. - Tom/montalk

#1 2005-02-23 02:54:52

ShawnMcCaffrey
Member
From: VA, USA
Registered: 2005-02-22

Satan's real name? It wasn't Lucifer.

Ok, here's the deal.  Me and a friend were talking about how cool the new movie Constantine was and then I brought up how Lucifer was the only angel who's name didn't end in EL.  I allways thought that maybe that was part of the reason he fell.  Now my friend said no, all angels names end in EL, Lucifer appeared one in the bible to replace the phrase "bright star".  In the passage: "Oh why have you fallen bright star?" To quote my friend exactly. "But here is the thing... the bright star passage had nothing to do with Satan. It was talking about soemthing completely different. Whoever edited in probably got the idea that "Well since Satan was kicked out of Heaven... then this is what this passage is refering to... hmmm.... so Lucifer must be his angelic name!"" hah.  Anyways That rules out Lucifer and Satan as simply "nicknames" or aliases since it must end in EL "The most unclean" Is more of a title or description.  So what is it?  I know the theories of his fall into reptilian Annunakki form and Draconian presence.  I want His Angelic name.... This is open to debate and discussion...  What was Lucifer's name before he was cast out of heavan?

Offline

 

#2 2005-02-23 08:00:38

Haven
bull in a china shop
Registered: 2004-11-24

Re: Satan's real name? It wasn't Lucifer.

Jerome translated the Hebrew helel (bright or brilliant one) as "lucifer," which was a reasonable Latin equivalent.

http://www.theosophy-nw.org/theosnw/wor … -ibel2.htm

Or Azazel, according to Enoch.

And these next parts are just plain interesting.

If there is no sound biblical basis for associating Lucifer with Satan, where then does the story come from that he is a rebellious angel and fell because of pride? The Christian Church made the interpretation that Isaiah 14:12 is connected with Luke 10:18: "He said to them, I watched Satan fall from heaven like a flash of lightning." This unfounded, non-biblical connection of Lucifer with Satan has led to the popular misunderstanding that Lucifer is another name for the Devil (cf. "Lucifer," Harper's Bible Dictionary, Paul Achtemeier, gen. ed., Harper & Row, San Francisco, 1985).

As Lucifer is the morning star, daystar, or Venus, the absurdity of connecting him with the Devil is revealed in the three New Testament passages where morning star or daystar is mentioned:

So we have the prophetic message more fully confirmed. You will do well to be attentive to this as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. -- 2 Peter 1:19

. . . from my Father. To the one who conquers I will also give the morning star. -- Revelation 2:28

It is I, Jesus, who sent my angel to you with this testimony for the churches. I am the root and the descendant of David, the bright morning star. -- Revelation 2 2:16

All three references to the morning star point to Jesus or things Jesus says or gives. In the Vulgate the word "morning star" in 2 Peter is even translated as lucifer. In the other two references it is stella matutina.

The planet Venus is the lightbringer, the first radiant beam that does away with the darkness of night. It is a symbol of the development of the divine light in man, for the first awakening of self-consciousness, for independent thinking and the real application of free will. It means the bringing of the light of compassionate understanding to the human mind. In this broader view the connection of the morning star with Jesus makes good sense, because compassion is the essence of Jesus' teaching. This teaching shows the greatest consensus throughout the New Testament: it is mentioned in Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Romans, Galatians, 1 Thessalonians, Hebrews, 1 John, James, and 1 Peter. The best known reference is in Matthew (22:37-40):

Compare to the most widely known source of Lucifer:

Ezekiel 28:13-17a KJV
.
28:13 Thou (Lucifer, Satan, Devil)  hast been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering, the sardius, topaz, and the diamond, the Beryl, the onyx, and the jasper, the sapphire, the emerald, and the carbuncle, and gold: the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created. 14.  Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I (God)  have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire.  15.  Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity (sin) was found in thee. 16.  By the multitude of thy merchandise they have filled the midst of thee with violence, and thou hast sinned: therefore I will cast thee as profane out of the mountain of God: and I will destroy thee, O covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire. 17.  Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness: I will cast thee to the ground...
.
and in Isaiah 14:12-14 KJV
.
14:12.  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.

Some theories:

Christ is against the Jehovah agenda, in that he wants man to be free and enlightened and free to make mistakes, and either he won over Jehovah or he's freeing man from Jehovah.  Or, Christ is a usurper God and battling Jehovah, another usurper God.  Or Christ is against what might be a very callous existence and a very indifferent God.

You know, I tend to think that perhaps Jehovah was a bad guy, or someone entirely misguided, like a messenger that garbled God's word.  I also tend to think that there's some credence into the theory that Jesus worshipped as God is a mistake.

Or maybe it's all legit and this Lucifer is some evil, fallen angel, and Jesus did do what has been told.

Or it could be that Lucifer is more of a title that was taken by different beings or people or whatever, and Christ showed the way to be at one with God.  I can't say that Jesus ever wanted to be God or better than God.  In fact, it seems the opposite.  Maybe it is human nature being described here, or some negative thought that makes us exalt a person, even Jesus, above God.

Helel, I don't know.  I swear, days like these...

Last edited by Haven (2005-02-23 08:37:30)


* When we start identifying wisdom with our ability to comprehend its form, what wisdom is that?
* Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
* People want platitudes, not progress.

Offline

 

#3 2005-02-24 17:20:17

ShawnMcCaffrey
Member
From: VA, USA
Registered: 2005-02-22

Re: Satan's real name? It wasn't Lucifer.

Here is an interesting link I found on the Subject: http://www.cresourcei.org/lucifer.html

And thank you Haven for putting so much thought into it.   Too bad it looks dead now. heh.

Offline

 

#4 2005-02-24 19:09:28

ermolai
soul surfer
From: sw tz rl nd
Registered: 2004-03-25
Website

Re: Satan's real name? It wasn't Lucifer.

lucifer symbolizes the eastern illusions of spirituality, satan the western illusions of materiality. both forces seek a total control of reality and work together toward that aim. theosophy / the new age is basically a luciferian religion (alice bailey's organization was first named "lucifer trust", then renamed to "lucis trust").

Last edited by ermolai (2005-02-24 19:15:46)

Offline

 

#5 2005-02-24 20:58:30

mist929292
Member
From: richmond, va
Registered: 2005-02-23
Website

Re: Satan's real name? It wasn't Lucifer.

Do you speculate that Lucifer was given that part in the bible to enhance his role as the anti-christ?

Offline

 

#6 2005-02-24 21:00:40

Alushe
Guest

Re: Satan's real name? It wasn't Lucifer.

Christ is against the Jehovah agenda, in that he wants man to be free and enlightened and free to make mistakes, and either he won over Jehovah or he's freeing man from Jehovah.  Or, Christ is a usurper God and battling Jehovah, another usurper God.  Or Christ is against what might be a very callous existence and a very indifferent God.

You know, I tend to think that perhaps Jehovah was a bad guy, or someone entirely misguided, like a messenger that garbled God's word.  I also tend to think that there's some credence into the theory that Jesus worshipped as God is a mistake.

Gnosticism holds these beliefs also, rather than writing it out here, I will direct you to a website which explains the "myths" well, also alluding to the archetypal sides of things:

http://www.kheper.net/topics/Gnosticism … ciple.html

Take heed to the writings about the demiurge, whom is comparable and equated with the god of the old testament for his deeds and stature:

In the standard Gnostic myth, the Demiurge or Yaltabaoth - whether out of ignorance or active malice - denies the transcendent spiritual Powers of the Pleroma and claims to be the one Supreme God.  This is clearly a dig at the Old Testament Deity who seems like a cosmic dictator when he says "you shall have no other Gods before me".

You can see why Lucifer/Satan would be invented to take the proverbial "heat" away from Jehovah/Yahweh etc:
"The old scapegoat"

Last edited by Alushe (2005-02-24 21:20:15)

 

#7 2005-02-25 21:03:41

T-Ren
work in progress
From: Earth Lab
Registered: 2004-11-18

Re: Satan's real name? It wasn't Lucifer.

Biblically speaking I have not read about the devil being the anti-christ just those who do not acknowledge Christ having come in the flesh.

As much as jehovah appears to be a "negative" (by the Law), which really points to our outward actions even standard. There is the Spirit or "positive" inner implications right beside it. That's why the prophets were needed. "I desire mercy not sacrifice" as an example said by Samuel.

Jesus own words "I came to fulfill the law not abolish it." I think Christ is/was against what the Pharisee's, sadducee's etc made Jehovah words to be. Which is not what Jehovah wanted them to be. I think Lucifer, Satan or the devil, got to the Pharisees and successfully twisted things so that the focus was redirected and askewed.

I am no theologian, just my take on things.

That was a lot of effort Haven, thanks, some interesting thoughts to think about.


Peace,
Teddy

"It means the Matrix can't tell you who you are" - Trinity

Offline

 

#8 2005-02-26 01:48:08

Haven
bull in a china shop
Registered: 2004-11-24

Re: Satan's real name? It wasn't Lucifer.

Galatians 4 says some things on the subject of the Law.

Book of Galatians
Chapter 4

4:1
Now I say, That the heir, as long as he is a child, differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all;

4:2
But is under tutors and governors until the time appointed of the father.

4:3
Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world:

4:4
But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,

4:5
To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.

4:6
And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.

4:7
Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.

4:8
Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did service unto them which by nature are no gods.

4:9
But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?

4:10
Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years.

4:11
I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain.

4:12
Brethren, I beseech you, be as I am; for I am as ye are: ye have not injured me at all.

4:13
Ye know how through infirmity of the flesh I preached the gospel unto you at the first.

4:14
And my temptation which was in my flesh ye despised not, nor rejected; but received me as an angel of God, even as Christ Jesus.

4:15
Where is then the blessedness ye spake of? for I bear you record, that, if it had been possible, ye would have plucked out your own eyes, and have given them to me.

4:16
Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?

4:17
They zealously affect you, but not well; yea, they would exclude you, that ye might affect them.

4:18
But it is good to be zealously affected always in a good thing, and not only when I am present with you.

4:19
My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you,

4:20
I desire to be present with you now, and to change my voice; for I stand in doubt of you.

4:21
Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?

4:22
For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.

4:23
But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.

4:24
Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.

4:25
For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.

4:26
But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.

4:27
For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband.

4:28
Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.

4:29
But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.

4:30
Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.

4:31
So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.


It could very well be that this was the intention of the Law.  And it is said by Paul that the Law caused sin so that there could be grace, because the promise of faith, and faith in God, is the only thing that saves.  Following the Law is impossible, it is said, and it is supposed to prove that one cannot ever be good by their own efforts, hence the need for God.

I think the Law came into being, at least superficially, because people kept coming to Moses asking what God wanted them to do, so it turned into a babysitting job.  They couldn't think for themselves, and when it came time to, they didn't want to.

Last edited by Haven (2005-02-26 01:49:14)


* When we start identifying wisdom with our ability to comprehend its form, what wisdom is that?
* Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
* People want platitudes, not progress.

Offline

 

#9 2005-02-26 17:25:05

T-Ren
work in progress
From: Earth Lab
Registered: 2004-11-18

Re: Satan's real name? It wasn't Lucifer.

Haven, I like your thoughts.

I think it could be said that Jesus transcended the Law because he fulfilled the Law. The way I see it, he fulfilled the Law by not specifically worrying about the Law. Like you said and I agree, people probably wanted to know what to do, so Moses gave the some guidelines and if you 'meditate' on them which, Daniel, David etc, etc, and culminated in Jesus, who by meditating on the Law, sought to become like the Law maker and have those characteristics, those attributes.

So even though we are not saved by the Law (which I agree is impossible to follow 100%) it still doesn't negate it or what our actions should be. I think thats why even some of the early church Fathers recognized Buddha and his high degree of sanctification (Not held by all early church Fathers). 

My whole point of my previous post was just that I don't see the Angry vindictive, dictator only God of the old testament. One can choose to focus on that.  I also see the loving caring compassionate God Jesus puts forth in the new testament, present in the old testament. The type of God perceived is dependant on if you look at the whole picture and which path you will choose to follow (my opinion).

I also wanted to point out that Satan(or whatever name you choose) isn't the anti-christ or the only antichrist.

Last edited by T-Ren (2005-02-26 17:26:47)


Peace,
Teddy

"It means the Matrix can't tell you who you are" - Trinity

Offline

 

Board footer

Powered by PunBB
© Copyright 2002–2005 Rickard Andersson