Lucifer

The revelation of Yeshua The Messiah (Jesus Christ), which God gave to him, to show his servants what had been given to soon occur, and he symbolized it when he sent by his Angel to his servant Yohannan (John), who witnessed the word of God and the testimony of Yeshua The Messiah: everything whatever he saw.

In a Greek text, Revelation Chapter 1, Verse 1 begins:

αποκαλυψις ιησου χριστου (apokalupsis iesou christou)

The Greek word αποκαλυψις (apokalupsis) is transliterated into English as the ominous phrase, "The Apocalypse." It simply and directly translates into English as disclosure, manifestation, or revelation. Thus we have "The revelation of Jesus Christ" given to the apostle John.

And he seized The Dragon and The Ancient Serpent, which is The Devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years...

Jesus referenced Satan more than a dozen times in the Gospels, and an additional 7 times in the book of Revelation. He called Satan the Dragon, the Great Dragon, the Ancient Serpent, the Chief Serpent and the Devil...

...all referring to the same entity...

...without a single mention of the word lucifer!

Jesus NEVER called Satan lucifer, not in the book of Matthew, not in the book of Mark, not in the book of Luke, not in the book of John, nor in the book of Acts. He NEVER used the word lucifer, not when he was speaking to his disciples, not when he was speaking to the religious leaders, not when he was speaking to the crowds, not when he was speaking to Paul or any of the Apostles or Prophets, and not when he shared the revelation with John.

Our LORD Jesus NEVER used the word lucifer in any translation of any Bible!

Satan, according to our LORD Jesus, is Satan.

Can you pause long enough to question why our LORD Jesus would have apparently neglected to ever mention the allegedly special, secret, insider's club name of the entity purported to have perpetrated the greatest act of treason and sedition in all the history of both God and man? Did Jesus simply forget to train His followers in the story of the supposed origins of the very being said to be His own greatest enemy, and the sworn enemy of mankind? Why did He never utter the name?

In keeping with their Master's teaching, none of the apostles used the word lucifer. The word lucifer and its variations may even be more popular today among certain Christian groups than the name of Jesus. With this being such a significant word to so many religious people today, and such a significant part of Christian doctrine, why did our LORD or any of His apostles seemingly neglect to ever use it?

Simply put: lucifer is NOT a name for Satan. Lucifer is NOT even a name!

Satan is not lucifer, nor was he ever named lucifer. Satan is Satan. There never was an entity named lucifer - not according to the Scriptures!

WARNING: For those who have ears to hear... There are plenty of entities that will answer to whatever you insist on calling them, in whatever language you call them, should you be foolish and disobedient enough to call them!

I was a slave to sin as a young man, before the LORD Jesus apprehended me (if you wish, you can read my story here). In all my efforts of calling on demons, encountering many entities, and learning many names, I was never introduced to one called lucifer. The word never even came up, though a lot of other words did.

So how did the word lucifer get associated with Satan? With so many people actively using the word today, be they Freemasons, occultists, authors, screenwriters, theologians, preachers, Sunday School teachers, Bible study leaders, the uninformed and the superstitious alike - surely the Bible, God's holy Word, must teach us about lucifer?

Let's look at the lone occurrence of the word lucifer, the only instance of the word found anywhere in any English translation of the Bible.

In the year 1611, the newly completed Authorized (“King James”) version of the Bible read:

How thou art fallen from heaven, O Lucifer...

76 years earlier, Myles Coverdale is credited with having produced the most complete English language translation of the Bible to date, built on William Tyndale's English translation of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy and Jonah from Hebrew and the entirety of the New Testament from Greek, along with Coverdale's own translations of the remaining books of the Old Testament from German and Latin. In the year 1535, Coverdale's version of the Bible read:

How art thou fallen from heauen (o Lucifer...

153 years earlier, in 1382, John Wycliffe is credited with hand printing the first complete translation of the Bible into English. He presented a literal English translation of the Latin Vulgate (being, itself, a translation). His Bible included the following text, from a passage in Isaiah:

O! Lucifer, who risedest up early, how thou hast fallen down from heaven...

There is no doubt, the word lucifer appears in most if not all of the early English translations of the Bible. It can only be found in a single occurrence in Isaiah 14:12, but it can be found!

"Aha!", men will exclaim. "See? The word lucifer DOES appear in the Scriptures! Even you admit it."

It may come as a surprise to you to learn that the Scriptures were not originally penned in the English language (in fact, it may even come as a surprise to some of you that not everyone alive today speaks the English language). We need to look farther back in time, prior to the appearance of the English language:

In 725 BC the prophet Isaiah was instructed by The Living God to take up a proverb, or taunt, against the king of Babel/Babylon. For reference, this event occurred more than 2,336 years before the King James version of the Bible was published.

I realize that some of you think that Isaiah actually wrote the word lucifer in the only place it ever appears in the entirety of any English translation of the Bible. What language did Isaiah record the prophecy in? What, exactly, did Isaiah say?

To answer that question, we need to have a better understanding of the language(s) the Bible was authored in. It is generally accepted that most of the Old Testament was written originally in Hebrew, so we will start there.

HINT: The Assyrian Empire was in full glory at the time of Isaiah. The lingua franca of Assyria, indeed, of all Padan Aram (or Mesopotamia in Greek, the area known today as the Levant) where Isaiah lived, was Aramaic, a language similar to Hebrew.

Isaiah didn't speak or write in English. Regardless of whether Isaiah recorded his prophecy in Hebrew or in Aramaic, what is clear is that he most certainly did NOT speak or write the word lucifer. Even more significantly, Isaiah did NOT make any reference whatsoever to Satan.

The word lucifer did not originate in the ancient Hebrew or Aramaic languages, the original language(s) of the Scriptures. It did not originate in Greek, let alone English. Rather, the word lucifer is of Latin origin, a language that wasn't yet spoken in the Earth at the time Isaiah took up his proverb against the king of Babylon!

NOTE: If you were under the impression that the oldest texts we have of the Scriptures, assumed to be the original language texts or the closest thing we have to the original language texts, contained the word lucifer, or anything even resembling the word lucifer, in the lone Isaiah 14:12 passage, you would be quite mistaken.

In our quest to resolve the origin of the Latin word lucifer, let's begin by pronouncing it correctly.

In classical Latin, the letter “c” is hard, like the English “k”. Therefore, in classical Latin, the word lucifer would have been pronounced lū kee fare.

However, in ecclesiastical Latin, when the letter “c” precedes the vowels ae, e, oe, or i, it is pronounced as “ch”. The word lucifer is correctly pronounced lū chee fare.

Before we dig deeper, let's pause for a brief refreshment, refreshing our understanding of two distinct tools used when encountering another language.

• To Translate: To convey the closest meaning or sense of a word or phrase in another language.
• To Transliterate: To visually map the letters of a word in one language to the closest corresponding letters in another language, independent of pronunciation.

The Latin word lucifer was transliterated into English and is generally mispronounced / re-pronounced lū sǝh fur. And a whole backstory was invented around it, stepping completely outside of the TRUTH into fantasy and falsehood. In the end, I couldn't care less if the word is pronounced correctly, or not. What I care about is the power of the distraction of the false teaching, and that is what the rest of this article is about.

Lucifer is not an English word. It is not a Hebrew word. It is not an Aramaic word. It is not a Greek word. Lucifer is a Latin word.

Jerome used the word (or a derivation of it) five (5) times in his Latin translation of the Scriptures in 405 AD, called the Vulgate.

"Wait!," you may say. "Didn't you claim that lucifer can only be found once in the Bible, and yet you say Jerome used it five times?"

• The Latin word lucifer can only be found once in any English translation of the Bible, in Isaiah 14:12
• In Jerome's Latin translation of the Bible, he never uses the word lucifer to refer to the Devil or Satan
• Our LORD Jesus never used the word lucifer when speaking of the Devil or Satan
• Our LORD Jesus never even used the word lucifer
• The Latin word lucifer does not refer to the Devil or Satan

So what does the word lucifer mean?

Lucifer is most often translated into English as ‘light bearer’, ‘day star’, ‘morning star’, ‘morning’, ‘the dawn’, etc, depending upon who is doing the translating.

Lucifer is most definitely not a proper name. In fact, of those five (5) occurrences of the word in Jerome's Vulgate, NONE infer any connection to a name, let alone a name of the Devil, Satan, the accuser of the brethren. To view all five (5) verses, see the Addendum at the end of this article.

In 1382 AD, 977 years after Jerome's translation, John Wycliffe (along with several who assisted him) encountered the Latin Vulgate text of Isaiah, which read:

In Wycliffe's English translation of Jerome's Latin translation of the Scriptures, the Latin word lucifer was transliterated from Jerome's Isaiah 14:12 passage, retaining its Latin lettering. Ironically, today John Wycliffe is known as "The Morning Star of the Reformation!" Reversing the translation, in Latin, the word for morning star is lucifer.

153 years later, in 1535 AD, Myles Coverdale encountered the same Latin text in his attempt to translate Jerome's Vulgate.

Neither Wycliffe nor Coverdale chose to translate the word lucifer into English, preserving its meaning. Instead, they both opted to transliterate it, retaining its spelling, capitalizing the first letter as a proper name, and inferring another meaning - a completely false meaning.

But why? By what authority did John Wycliffe or Myles Coverdale do this? Remember, the word lucifer was not even in the Earth at the time of Isaiah, and would not be in the Earth until the Latin language was introduced. The word lucifer did not exist in any passage of the Scriptures. The word lucifer was NEVER mentioned by God to any of the patriarchs or prophets. Jesus NEVER mentioned the Latin word lucifer. The apostles NEVER mentioned the Latin word lucifer.

But we have not reached the bottom. This well goes even deeper.

The KJV translators began their work on the English Bible in 1604 AD, 69 years after Coverdale's Bible was published. Having several English translations of the Bible as a reference (including Wycliffe, Tyndale, Matthew, Coverdale), they translated afresh the Hebrew (Bomberg), Greek (various) and Latin (Vulgate) texts in order to compile what we now possess as the Authorized Version of the Bible.

Let’s see what they saw when they read through Isaiah 14:12 in Hebrew:

What was that? הֵילֵל (hā lale)?

The translators encountered a word in the Hebrew text of the Isaiah passage that does not exist anywhere else in the Hebrew bible or in Hebrew literature! This is astonishing! This lone, unknown word, הֵילֵל (hā lale), is now claimed to be derived from the known Hebrew word הָלַל (halal) which translates into English as ‘to be clear’ or ‘to shine.’ But is that the case? The single occurrence of hā lale in Isaiah 14:12 is now said to translate directly into English as ‘the morning star.’

HINT: If you would prefer to skip the exhaustive etymology that follows of what has turned into a completely false teaching throughout the Earth, and see what Isaiah actually wrote, you can jump forward to the section: Isaiah 14:12 - Explained.

Let's assume (as apparently those translators did) that this lone occurrence of an otherwise unknown word in Hebrew (or any other language, for that matter), hā lale, is a legitimate word and not, perhaps, a simple mistake on the part of a copyist. In a mash-up of interpolated English and transliterated Hebrew, this verse could read:

How you have fallen from heaven, hā lale ben shachar.

In plain English, when translated from Hebrew into English, that mash-up could then read:

How you have fallen from heaven, morning star son of dawn.

"Aha!," you may exclaim. "See? There it is! Lucifer the morning star!" Please don't step off the platform yet, as we are still descending down this well...

Tradition holds that around the middle of the 3rd century BC, some 650 years before Jerome's Latin Vulgate, a Greek translation of the Hebrew bible was begun, and would be completed around 132 BC. Eventually, this translation would become known as the Septuagint, from the Latin septuaginta, meaning "seventy", presumably because it was said that there were 72 translators involved. This translation offers some fascinating insight into our topic, as we can see in this version of Isaiah 14:12:

The translators of the Septuagint had demonstrated their ability to interpret the text, as opposed to translating, or even transliterating it. An example of this interpretation is seen in the replacement of Sheol, the place of the dead, with the mythological Hades. Continuing this course, the translators opted to interpret the unusual Hebrew word hā lale as the Greek word ἑωσφόρος (eosphoros). According to Greek mythology, the dawn goddess Eos (Aurora in Latin) had two sons; namely, Esperos, the evening star (Venus in the evening) and his brother Eosphoros, the morning star (Venus in the morning).

Rather than translate the Hebrew hā lale into Greek using phosphoros (‘light bearer/bringer’ or ‘morning star’), which the New Testament Greek translators would later do in 2Peter 1:19, the translators of the Septuagint chose to insert the name of a mythological character, a Greek god, into the Isaiah passage. By what authority?

HINT: In the event it is not obvious, please note that the Greek translators did not introduce the Latin word lucifer in 132 BC. If today's superstitious practitioners wished to be historically accurate, they would be faithfully uttering the older Greek name (a mythological name, mind you) Eosphoros, not the Latin word (a word - not a name) lucifer which came about much, much later.

Understanding the timing of the introduction of this Latin word is important.

Here, again, is the Latin text of Isaiah 14:12, as seen in Jerome’s translation from 405 AD:

Jerome, who had complete access to the Greek Septuagint translated hundreds of years earlier, assumed the Hebrew word hā lale referred to the morning star, the dawn, daybreak, and translated the word using the closest Latin equivalent, lucifer. He did NOT capitalize the first letter in some effort to present it as a proper name. In other words, the Latin translation of the Bible in which the world is introduced to the word lucifer does not present the word as the name of the Devil.

We have already established that, after Jerome's Latin Vulgate Bible was published, both John Wycliffe and Myles Coverdale opted to simply transliterate the Latin word lucifer in their respective English versions of the Bible, retaining the spelling.

They did NOT opt to transliterate the (alleged) original Hebrew word hā lale (can you imagine: O! hā lale...), nor did they opt to transliterate the Greek word Eosphoros (O! Eosphoros...).

Unlike Jerome, who apparently DID attempt to translate the Hebrew word hā lale into his target language, Latin, Wycliffe and Coverdale did NOT attempt to translate the Hebrew word hā lale into their target language, English. Nor did they attempt to translate the name of the Greek god Eosphoros into English. They just absorbed Jerome's use of the Latin word lucifer into English through transliteration.

Likewise, 1200 years after Jerome's translation, the KJV translators also opted to transliterate the Latin word lucifer. They did NOT translate the Hebrew word hā lale into English as ‘the morning star.’ Like Wycliffe and Coverdale, they simply maintained the spelling of the Latin word.

This word had apparently taken on quite a life of its own. By what authority did these English-speaking translators do this?

To reiterate: the Hebrew (hā lale), Greek (eosphoros) and Latin (lucifer) words of Isaiah 14:12 allegedly all reference the morning star that brings the dawn. Rather than translate (what a word means) any of these three words into English as ‘the morning star’ the KJV translators (who had access to all three languages) chose to transliterate (what a word looks like) the Latin word lucifer into English, and further promulgate the mythology of someone supposedly called ‘O Lucifer.’ Remember, the word lucifer is a Latin word that refers to the morning star, or the dawn. It is not a person's name. It is not a demon's name. And it certainly is NOT the name of the Devil!

Again I ask, by what authority did any of them do this?

VEER: It is curious to note that the creativity of the KJV translators was applied entirely differently when it came to the name of the Son of God. Coverdale transliterated a combination of the Greek Iesous (“Yay-soos”) and the Latin Jesu(s) (“Yesoo”) into Iesus, presenting his rendition of the English Name of the Son of God. Rather than retain the spelling and/or an approximation of the pronunciation of His Name in English (Joshua, in the Old Testament), Aramaic (Yeshu), Hebrew (Yeshua), Greek (Iesous “Yay-soos”) or Latin (Jesu(s) “Yesoo”), the KJV translators opted for the oddly-spelled and pronounced Jesus “Jee-zzus” (odd for English, as the Spanish pronunciation of J-e-s-u-s, “Hay-soos”, is very similar to Greek, “Yay-soos”).

Thankfully, however mankind insists on spelling or pronouncing His name, the Living God knows Who He is. He knows Who we all are calling upon and He answers, accordingly.

Consider this New Testament passage from 2 Peter:

We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and The Day Star arise in your hearts...

The day star? In this passage from 2Peter, the author is referring to the prophetic Word, a Light that shines in a dark place; you know: the morning star.

In the Greek translation of that verse, in the place of the KJV’s English phrase ‘the day star’, we find the word φωσφόρος (phosphoros), not the mythological Eosphoros from the Isaiah passage.

You may already be aware that, in place of 'the day star' found in the KJV, most English Bibles now translate these words to read ‘the morning star’:

But wait until you see this... 1200 years prior to the KJV translation, the Latin Vulgate translated this same verse, containing this gem:

Are you seeing this?

"et lucifer" ???

In a mash-up of Latin and English, this verse would read:

...pay attention (to that true word of prophecy) as at a lamp that shines in a dark place, until the day dawns and lucifer arises in your hearts...

Do you have understanding, yet?

NOTE: In what should be a crystal clear reference to the reader, ‘the day star / the morning star’, ‘the Light of the world’, and ‘the Word’ all appear in Latin in the lone word lucifer. This verse makes NO reference whatsoever to the Devil/Satan, because it most certainly is NOT referring to the Devil/Satan. And yet, here we find precisely the same Latin word the KJV translators encountered in Jerome’s translation of Isaiah 14:12!

When referencing the phrase ‘morning star’ in both Isaiah 14:12 and 2Peter 1:19, the Latin translators selected to employ translation, not transliteration, using the Latin word lucifer, meaning 'the morning star.'

It is that simple.

NOTE: If you agree with the transliterator/translator logic employed by early English language translators of the Bible, then consider the following:

Since the Latin word lucifer translates into English as 'the morning star', and John Wycliffe is known as 'the morning star of the Reformation', one could release a new version of 2Peter 1:19 that could read, "...until the day dawns and John Wycliffe arises in your hearts..."

Nonsense? I heartily agree!

Unlike the Latin translators, the Greek translators had been a bit more creative, employing interpretation when inserting the name of the Greek god Eosphoros into the Isaiah 14:12 passage, though they opted for translation when they chose to use phosphoros for 2Peter 1:19.

The King James translators apparently liked the Latin translation enough to simply transliterate it, maintaining the spelling. Following Wycliffe and Coverdale's lead, they preceded the transliterated word lucifer with the addition of the word ‘O’ and capitalized the first letter of the Latin word, with the obvious intent of formally referencing a character seemingly addressed as ‘O Lucifer’

By what authority?

Upon encountering the 2Peter passage, the KJV translators utterly abandoned their transliteration approach used for the Isaiah passage and, rather than stay with the Latin word lucifer (as they had done in Isaiah!) they opted to loosely translate the word lucifer of 2Peter into ‘the day star.’

As we have seen, the Latin word lucifer is not a proper name at all. It readily translates into English as ‘the morning star’, just as we are told that hā lale in Hebrew translates into English as ‘the morning star’ and just as both eosphoros and phosphoros in Greek translate into English as ‘the morning star.’

But there is more...

In Revelation chapter 2, verse 18 to the end of the chapter, speaking to the angel who is in the assembly of Thyatira, the Son of God tells "...those who have not known the depths of Satan...":

...To him who is victorious and keeps my works...I shall give him the Morning Star

• English: Morning Star; elsewhere: O Lucifer
• Latin: stellam matutinam; elsewhere: lucifer
• Greek: astera ton proinon; elsewhere: eosphoros, phosphoros)

Did you get that?

Jesus speaking, here: "I shall give him the MORNING STAR"

Jesus did NOT just promise, "...those who have not known the depths of Satan... I will give them Satan!"

What or Who is the ‘Morning Star’ that our LORD and Savior promised to give to those who had not known the depths of Satan, to the one who is victorious and keeps His works? We are not left to speculate. According to the Scriptures, the Messiah says of Himself:

I am ...the Bright and Morning Star.

The verbose Latin of this verse from Revelation reads “stella splendida et matutina”, meaning ‘the bright, splendid star that brings the day (star of the morning)’. That is precisely what the Latin word lucifer refers to - IN THE LATIN BIBLE - where the word is derived from, and it is absolutely not a reference to the Devil/Satan!

The Greek of Revelation 22:16 reads “aster o lampros o proinos” meaning, ‘the bright, splendid star of dawn/morning’.

Lest any of you begin to panic, those who have been thoroughly brainwashed to believe the Latin word lucifer is a name of the Devil, I state most emphatically: the Scriptures DO NOT teach that our LORD Jesus is the Devil! Please read on...

NOTE: The Scriptures do not explicitly describe the creation of ha satana (Satan), the Devil. Two (2) distinct prophecies from two (2) distinct prophets are commonly stitched together to form the basis of the most widely accepted fable of the origins of the Devil; namely, Isaiah 14:12-15 and Ezekiel 28:12-15.

Isaiah 14:12 follows God’s injunction in Isaiah 14:4 to the prophet Isaiah to “…take up this proverb against the king of Babylon...”

The Ezekiel passage is addressed to the king of Tyre.

NOTE: Two distinct kings are addressed by God via two distinct prophets. If you would simply stop there and allow that to be what it is, you would take your first step toward being released from this whole "lucifer" nonsense.

Employing the switchboard operator/jumper cable approach to so-called Biblical Exegesis, forcing connections between several Bible passages that are simply not there, and filling in the blanks with some fantasy and mythology, you might be able to follow the popular storyline of the alleged origins of the Devil which goes something like this:

Back before the time of men there once was an archangel, a good guy, named Lucifer (WAIT... how is that possible, as Latin wouldn’t even be a language in the Earth for several thousand years to come, and the Latin Bible would not even present the word lucifer as a name?) who was the Minister of Music in heaven (Note that he is purported to be a top dog of the angelic host who, unlike Adam we are told by many, do not possess some capacity they call free will. But don’t allow that to get in the way of the story). One day, all on his own, of his own free will, this archangel decided he wanted to become like God and this decision cost him everything. There was a battle in heaven and he was cast down to the earth (according to the story, Jesus witnessed the event), taking a third of God’s angels with him. His newly discovered bad self became Satan (which isn't a name, either), the author of all evil, the Yin to God’s Yang, and those former angels that came with him became demons. Satan, having changed his name and taken on a new role, apparently convinced the first man to become sinful by deceiving the man's wife; indeed, the story would have us believe that man, just like Lucifer/Satan, evolved himself from perfect and sinless to sinful, all on his own.

According to the story, there is very little creating, but a whole lot of becoming going on. God's own archangel Lucifer evolves himself into God's own arch enemy, Satan. God, who suddenly now faces a powerful contemporary who is allegedly responsible for all evil and all sin, ends up scrambling for a way to fix everything that went wrong, and devises a plan (of salvation) that will take thousands of years to implement, probably due to His having been caught completely by surprise!

Additional details allegedly supporting this (and variations of this) ridiculous fable can be found in various apocryphal (as in, non-canonical, not included in the Bible) works, such as the second century Gnostic book of secret knowledge titled, "The Apocryphon of John", and the so-called 3rd Book of Enoch, written by rabbi Ismael Ben Elisha around 400 AD (not to be confused with the Book of Enoch referenced by Jude, our LORD's brother).

Here are ten (10) passages from the Scriptures (KJV) that are used to stitch this tale together:

And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years. There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.

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 will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High. Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.

Son of man, take up a lamentation upon the king of Tyrus, and say unto him, Thus saith the LORD GOD; Thou sealest up the sum, full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty. Thou 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. Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I 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. Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee.

And he (Jesus) said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven.

In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not...

And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.

For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;

And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.

And another sign appeared in heaven: behold, a great, fiery red dragon having seven heads and ten horns, and seven diadems on his heads. His tail drew a third of the stars of heaven and threw them to the earth.

And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven. 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. And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.

In Isaiah chapter 14, the prophet Isaiah is instructed by God to bear a parable against the king of Babel/Babylon. Reading through this passage, think: prophecy, not history lesson.

When the LORD has given you rest from your pain and turmoil and the hard service with which you were made to serve, you will take up this taunt against the king of Babylon: “How the oppressor has ceased, the insolent fury ceased! The LORD has broken the staff of the wicked, the scepter of rulers, that struck the peoples in wrath with unceasing blows, that ruled the nations in anger with unrelenting persecution. The whole earth is at rest and quiet; they break forth into singing. The cypresses rejoice at you, the cedars of Lebanon, saying, ‘Since you were laid low, no woodcutter comes up against us.’ Sheol beneath is stirred up to meet you when you come; it rouses the shades to greet you, all who were leaders of the earth; it raises from their thrones all who were kings of the nations. All of them will answer and say to you: ‘You too have become as weak as we! You have become like us!’ Your pomp is brought down to Sheol, the sound of your harps; maggots are laid as a bed beneath you, and worms are your covers.

How you are fallen from heaven, O Day Star, son of Dawn! How you are cut down to the ground, you who laid the nations low!

You said in your heart, ‘I will ascend to heaven; above the stars of God I will set my throne on high; I will sit on the mount of assembly in the far reaches of the north; I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will make myself like the Most High.’ But you are brought down to Sheol, to the far reaches of the pit. Those who see you will stare at you and ponder over you: ‘Is this the man who made the earth tremble, who shook kingdoms, who made the world like a desert and overthrew its cities, who did not let his prisoners go home?’ All the kings of the nations lie in glory, each in his own tomb; but you are cast out, away from your grave, like a loathed branch, clothed with the slain, those pierced by the sword, who go down to the stones of the pit, like a dead body trampled underfoot. You will not be joined with them in burial, because you have destroyed your land, you have slain your people. “May the offspring of evildoers nevermore be named! Prepare slaughter for his sons because of the guilt of their fathers, lest they rise and possess the earth, and fill the face of the world with cities.” “I will rise up against them,” declares the LORD of hosts, “and will cut off from Babylon name and remnant, descendants and posterity,” declares the LORD. “And I will make it a possession of the hedgehog, and pools of water, and I will sweep it with the broom of destruction,” declares the LORD of hosts.

Isaiah was NOT instructed to describe in hidden, figurative speech, thousands of years after the fact, some fantasy story where an archangel innately possessed a Darwinian ability to transform himself from a good guy name Lucifer into a bad guy named Satan who would then grow even more powerful to become God’s personal rival, God's number one adversary, the author and creator of all evil.

According to God, this king’s (the king of Babel/Babylon) dead body would one day be buried, covered in worms and men would ask, ‘Is this the man who made the nations tremble?’ Note that this prophecy (Prophecy - not history lesson), these words from God to Isaiah, refer to a man - not some former archangel!

Isaiah had witnessed the destruction of Israel at the hands of the Assyrians. The Northern kingdom was no more, as a result of the inhabitants having forsaken and angered God. Warnings were now being issued to the Southern kingdom, Judah, who would soon be carried off into captivity at the hands of a nation who would also conquer Assyria. The king of Babel/Babylon, the subject of the prophecy, would be:

• a man, not an angel or spirit (v. 16)
• a man whose physical body would be buried (v. 19-20)
• a man whose physical body would be eaten by worms (v. 11)

By extreme contrast, the Devil’s fate is not burial, according to Jesus:

And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

• Satan’s body is not covered in worms
• Satan does not descend into Sheol (the place of the dead),
• Men do not mock Satan asking if ‘this is the man that made the nations tremble?’

Rather, Satan is cast into the Lake of Fire and Brimstone!

Thus, Satan fails to fulfill any of the 3 criteria from the Isaiah passage.

According to the Word of God Satan is NOT lucifer!

HINT: In verse 22 God said, ...I will cut off from Babylon name and remnant..." Do any of you happen to recall the name of the king Isaiah was prophesying against? And yet you all know the word lucifer?

In Ezekiel 28:2-19 the prophet Ezekiel was speaking prophetically against the ruler and king of Tyre, not the king of Babel/Babylon.

The word of the LORD came to me: “Son of man, say to the prince of Tyre, Thus says the Lord GOD: “Because your heart is proud, and you have said, ‘I am a god, I sit in the seat of the gods, in the heart of the seas,’ yet you are but a man, and no god, though you make your heart like the heart of a god — you are indeed wiser than Daniel; no secret is hidden from you; by your wisdom and your understanding you have made wealth for yourself, and have gathered gold and silver into your treasuries; by your great wisdom in your trade you have increased your wealth, and your heart has become proud in your wealth — therefore thus says the Lord GOD: Because you make your heart like the heart of a god, therefore, behold, I will bring foreigners upon you, the most ruthless of the nations; and they shall draw their swords against the beauty of your wisdom and defile your splendor. They shall thrust you down into the pit, and you shall die the death of the slain in the heart of the seas. Will you still say, ‘I am a god,’ in the presence of those who kill you, though you are but a man, and no god, in the hands of those who slay you? You shall die the death of the uncircumcised by the hand of foreigners; for I have spoken, declares the Lord GOD.”

Moreover, the word of the LORD came to me: “Son of man, raise a lamentation over the king of Tyre, and say to him, Thus says the Lord GOD: “You were the signet of perfection, full of wisdom and perfect in beauty. You were in Eden, the garden of God; every precious stone was your covering, sardius, topaz, and diamond, beryl, onyx, and jasper, sapphire, emerald, and carbuncle; and crafted in gold were your settings and your engravings. On the day that you were created they were prepared. You were an anointed guardian cherub. I placed you; you were on the holy mountain of God; in the midst of the stones of fire you walked. You were blameless in your ways from the day you were created, till unrighteousness was found in you. In the abundance of your trade you were filled with violence in your midst, and you sinned; so I cast you as a profane thing from the mountain of God, and I destroyed you, O guardian cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire. Your heart was proud because of your beauty; you corrupted your wisdom for the sake of your splendor. I cast you to the ground; I exposed you before kings, to feast their eyes on you. By the multitude of your iniquities, in the unrighteousness of your trade you profaned your sanctuaries; so I brought fire out from your midst; it consumed you, and I turned you to ashes on the earth in the sight of all who saw you. All who know you among the peoples are appalled at you; you have come to a dreadful end and shall be no more forever.”

This is a prophetic lament spoken to the sovereign of Tyre, not a reconstruction of history so ancient it is not even recorded in the Genesis account of the creation of the heavens and the Earth. God referred to the ruler of Tyre as ‘...a man’ (v. 2), not some spirit being or former archangel. The end of the great Phoenician (Canaanite) civilization was at hand.

"In the abundance of your trade (merchandise)... you sinned." Do you still want to believe some angel allegedly named lucifer engaged in merchandizing, and that's what this was all about?

"I exposed you before kings", God told the king of Tyre. "I turned you to ashes on the Earth... you have come to a dreadful end, and shall be NO MORE, forever."

So, what shall it be? Prophecy, or history lesson?

If you believe the otherwise non-existent and unknown Hebrew word hā lale to be the original and accurate word in the Isaiah 14 passage, and you are intent upon reading into that prophecy a double meaning (I would prefer you not do that - see the section that follows titled, Isaiah 14:12 - Explained), then the reference in Isaiah to the morning star would be closer to a prophecy concerning Messiah than a history lesson regarding the origins of the Devil, as our LORD Jesus declares Himself to be the morning star. The Devil never does. And our LORD Jesus never refers to the Devil as the morning star. Jesus calls Himself the Morning Star!

Imagine being among the religious leadership of the Judeans around 30 AD. Read these words of Isaiah again from that perspective and see if anyone comes to mind:

For you have said in your heart: ‘I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne... I will ascend above the heights of the clouds, I will be like the Most High.’ Yet you shall be brought down to Sheol, To the lowest depths of the Pit.

Who was consistently accused of blasphemy, of making himself out to be God Almighty, to the point where he was ultimately executed via crucifixion for having allegedly broken the law? Who spoke of being seated upon His throne? Who said, ‘If I be lifted up I will draw all men to me’? And, after his execution, who was in Sheol, the place of the dead for three days and three nights? Certainly not Satan, the accuser of the brethren!

However...

The LORD Jesus’ body was NOT eaten by worms, as He rose from the dead!

For you will not abandon my soul to Sheol, or let your holy one see corruption.

Jesus would only fulfill 2 out of 3 criteria from the Isaiah passage, but that is 2 more than Satan!

• Question: Who fulfilled 3 out of 3 criteria from the Isaiah passage?
• Answer: The one to whom the prophecy was addressed: the king of Babel/Babylon!

Why can you not let prophecy be prophecy? Why is this myth regarding lucifer so hard to let go of?

Speaking to his disciples who were marveling at how “even the demons must obey us”, the Messiah told them he “was beholding Satan himself, who fell like lightning from heaven”. You may recall that two millennia earlier Satan had come to Him for permission to afflict Job (Job 1:6-12). Yes, it was Satan - in heaven - conversing with God - in heaven. Satan, not lucifer. The Devil himself, "a sinner" (1John 3:8), is having conversation with God in heaven... read it for yourself. God told Satan that all that Job had was in his power and Satan “went out from the presence of the LORD”. Next thing we hear, messengers are reporting, “the fire of God fell from heaven and burned up the sheep and the servants, and consumed them.” If you are going to use "jumper cable" techniques to relate one passage to another, is it not more likely that this is the event the Messiah was referring to? Why resort to making up a fantasy story?

The book of Job contains the passage:

When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

The Hebrew word for morning or dawn is בֹּקֶר (bo'-ker), and occurs 214 times in the OT. The Hebrew word for star is כּוֹכָב (ko-kawb'). As you can see, the Hebrew phrase for "the morning star", כּוֹכָב בֹּקֶר, looks nothing like the lone occurrence of the strange and otherwise completely unknown word הֵילֵל (hā lale) of Isaiah 14:12, the word that ends up translated in Latin as lucifer, which is then transliterated into English as O Lucifer, the one and only word responsible for this whole issue.

But there is a remarkably similar looking and sounding Hebrew (and Aramaic) word that occurs 26 times in the Old Testament, with most of those occurrences being found in the prophecies of Ezekiel, Jeremiah and... wait for it... Isaiah!

• הֵילֵל - hā lale - allegedly: to shine
• יָלַל - yā lale - to howl, to wail

Just add the "H" sound at the beginning of yā lale and you get... hā lale.

Isaiah chapters 13, 14 and 15 contain 3 of those 26 injunctions from God to wail, or to howl.

Howl (wail) ye; for the day of the LORD is at hand; it shall come as a destruction from the Almighty.

Howl (wail), O gate; cry, O city; thou, whole Palestina, art dissolved...

Moab shall howl (wail) over Nebo...

Throughout Jeremiah, Ezekiel and Isaiah, men are commanded by the Living God to howl, to wail at their plight as God brings judgement upon them. Isaiah 13:6 - yā lale - Howl! Wail! Isaiah 14:31 - yā lale - Howl! Wail! Isaiah 15:2 - yā lale - Howl! Wail! And there, right in the middle of those three injunctions is Isaiah 14:12, with this lone existence of some remarkably similar, yet utterly unknown word, hā lale? Is it any stretch to consider that the promotion of this single verse; indeed, this single word as the basis for one of the most outlandish tales in Christendom might be yet one more example of a simple misreading of a handwritten text?

You needn't wonder. The Aramaic of the Peshitta never even introduces this ‘morning star’ issue in Isaiah chapter 14. Instead, this verse reads as you might have suspected:

How you have fallen from Heaven! Wail at dawn! You are fallen into the ground, Infamous One of the nations!

Here it is, again, from another Peshitta translation:

How are you fallen from Heaven! Howl in the morning! For you have fallen down to the ground, O reviler of the nations!”

Do you acknowledge Who, exactly, is speaking in Isaiah 14:12? God Himself has made a declaration (via Isaiah) to the king of Babylon. God did not just call this man the Bright and Morning Star, a title that is reserved for His own Son - as uttered by our LORD Jesus Himself. And God most certainly never called Satan the Bright and Morning Star!

In the New Testament, note that the Aramaic of 2Peter, in place of the “day star/morning star” of most English versions, simply translates שמשא (W’ShemSha) as: “until the sun will rise in your hearts” (Aramaic, like Hebrew, reads from right to left).

And we have moreover a sure word of prophecy; and ye will do well, if ye look to it as to a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day shall dawn, and the sun shall arise in your hearts

In full agreement with the Greek texts and English translations from Greek, the Aramaic words of Revelation 22:16, spoken by our LORD regarding Himself, reads וכוכב צפרא נהירא (NaaHeeyRaA TsaaPHRaA WKhaWk’aav) which being translated into English means: “the Bright Morning Star”.

One of the most heralded verses used amongst those who would blasphemously seek to elevate the Devil to the status of our LORD Jesus, He Who has declared Himself to be the Morning Star, is found in Paul's second letter to the assembly at Corinth:

And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.

False teaching, not TRUTH, would lead you to believe there are two Morning Stars (aka Latin: lucifer): one being the Devil as an imposter and the other being the real thing, the Son of God - with the Devil getting preeminent attention. If you still believe such false teaching, and you insist on using the word lucifer, you would be forced to acknowledge that there are two "lucifers," but I digress...

Do not blaspheme and call the Devil the Morning Star!

Let's look harder at brother Paul's statement:

And not to wonder at this, for if he who is Satan resembles an Angel of light, it is not a great matter if also his Ministers imitate Ministers of righteousness, those whose end will be like their works.

The preceding verses in 2Corinthians reference false apostles, those deceitful, treacherous workers who are not apostles. Having ulterior motives they step in to harvest previously sowed and watered seed. They present themselves as ministers of the Gospel of Christ, with all the credentials that gullible sheep love to applaud when, in TRUTH, they are ravenous wolves.

These liken themselves to the apostles of the Messiah. This should not be surprising as Satan likens himself to an angel of light. He is not an angel of light! He just makes himself out to resemble one.

Nowhere is it written that Satan makes himself out to resemble the Bright Morning Star, our LORD Jesus!

What did Jesus say regarding Satan? Here is what Matthew recorded Him as saying:

But the Pharishee, when they heard, said, This (man) doth not cast forth demons unless by Beelzebub, the prince of the devils. But Yeshua knew their reasonings, and said to them, Every kingdom that is divided against itself is destroyed, and every city that is divided against itself shall not stand. And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then standers his kingdom? And if I by Beelzebub cast forth demons, your sons... by whom do they cast them forth? On this account they shall be your judges. But if I by the spirit of Aloha cast forth demons, the kingdom of Aloha has come nigh to you.

And here is Luke's account of that same conversation:

But some from them said, By Beelzebub, the prince of the devils, he casteth out devils; while others, tempting him, the sign from heaven demanded of him. But Yeshu, who knew their thoughts, said to them, Every kingdom which is divided against itself will be desolated, and a house that is against its own self is divided falleth. And if Satana against himself be divided, how will his kingdom stand? Because you say that through Beelzebub I cast out devils. But if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, your sons... by what do they cast them out? On account of this they shall be your judges. But if by the finger of Aloha I cast out devils, there hath drawn nigh upon you the kingdom of Aloha.

According to our LORD Jesus, Satan (ha Satana), and Beelzebub, the prince of the devils, are one and the same.

Satan has a kingdom, but he is no king! He is not the king of Babylon (Isaiah 14). He is not the king of Tyre (Ezekiel 28). Those kings were both men. However, he is a prince; a ruler...

• Jesus called him the Prince of the devils (Matthew 9:34, Matthew 12:24, Mark 3:22, Luke 11:15)
• Jesus called him the Prince of darkness (Luke 22:53 - lit. sultana: ruler, authority)
• Jesus called him the Prince of this world (John 12:31, John 14:30 John 16:11)
• Paul called him the Prince of the power of the air (Ephesians 2:2)

But where, you may ask, did Satan come from? To answer that question one need only answer these two questions: Who is the Creator... of all things? Do you believe God, or not?

In the origin The Word had been existing and That Word had been existing with God and That Word was Himself God. This One Himself was at the origin with God. Everything was in His hand, and without Him not even one thing existed of the things that existed.

What is written specifically regarding Satan?

Satan is a sinner from the beginning. The Son of God appeared for this reason: To destroy the works of Satan.

For Satan, there is no “becoming”, no “evolving” referenced here; no metamorphosis from one entity into another. Satan was always Satan - right from the beginning, and still is Satan. He is not some archangel formerly named Lucifer who turned himself into Satan, later. He is not a man whose corpse rotted, and he most certainly is not the Bright Morning Star; that title is reserved solely for the Living God, our LORD Jesus Christ!

The earliest mention of Satan in the Scriptures is found in the book of Job:

Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came among them.

Satan, not some entity allegedly named lucifer, had a conversation with God regarding the man Job. Lucifer was not the serpent in the garden who had the infamous conversation with Eve, the wife of adam. In fact, there is no direct Scriptural reference to Satan even being in the garden. Any belief this was the case is based on conjecture, derived from theological jumper cables being attached between the nahash (serpent, snake) of the Genesis account and the Dragon, the old Serpent, of Revelation. I am not saying Satan and the Serpent are not one and the same; I am saying there is no direct reference in the Scriptures to Satan being in the garden. And I am saying there is certainly no mention of the word lucifer in the Genesis account.

NOTE: There are many who claim to be Christian who have been thoroughly indoctrinated in the mythology, not the TRUTH regarding God and the Devil. Believing that an impotent, not sovereign God created an angel named lucifer who evolved himself into God's own rival, changed his name and led an insurrection, a series of events that God not only didn't anticipate but was powerless to stop, these poor souls panic in fear when they hear a Catholic representative (who still insists on making use of the Latin language) speak the word lucifer as they read from or quote Latin writings. Be it ignorance or superstition/false teaching, they are convinced that the Catholics are equating the Devil with Jesus. I shake my head in sorrowful compassion. While it was definitely introduced at some point in history, to my knowledge it wasn't the Catholics who inserted the mythology of lucifer being the Devil into an English translation of the Scriptures.

If you are a servant of the LORD Jesus, you have no Scriptural support to use the Latin word lucifer when referring to the Devil. You have no authority to do so. A servant is not greater than his master, and our LORD Jesus never spoke the word lucifer. He called him the Tempter, Satan, the Adversary, the Accuser of the brethren, the ancient Serpent, the Dragon, etc. (none of which are names, either, by the way). Stop making things up!

While far from an exhaustive treatise on the subject, I trust enough has been presented here to cause the believer to recognize that the Scriptures do not teach or even infer that the Latin word lucifer is or ever was a name for Satan. Those who do teach this nonsense are obviously getting authority to do so from somewhere other than the Word of God, our LORD Jesus and God Himself.

At the very least, the reader must acknowledge that the Latin language was not yet in use in the Earth when God spoke to the prophet Isaiah, let alone thousands of years earlier (according to the story) when some archangel with a Latin name changed himself into the Devil, and then abandoned his old Latin name, only to revive it from time to time because it would add a sense of ominous mystery to novels, movie scripts and religious arguments!

Modern English translations of the Bible correctly no longer include the Latin word lucifer in the verse of Isaiah 14:12, choosing instead to translate the passage using 'morning star.'

If you will honestly and TRUTHfully attribute the meaning of the Latin word lucifer (the morning star, the dawn, or light-bearing) to the Creator (as He refers to Himself) instead of the created thing, you may be able to acknowledge what could be said to be a more responsible use of the Latin word - having nothing to do with Satan.

Raphaël Dubois (1849-1929) invented the terms Luciferin and Luciferase to describe the substrate and enzyme responsible for bioluminesence (fireflies, jelly fish, etc). Alas, fireflies are not from the Devil, so drop it! For those who have been stung by jelly fish, I may be more sympathetic and understanding...

Entire works have been devoted to the wrongful use of the Latin word lucifer, all dependent upon turning a descriptive phrase into a person. Various religious efforts, both for and against, have developed out of this. A Luciferian (noun) is said to be a believer in or disciple of Luciferianism. Amongst their adherents are those who consider Lucifer to be a literal entity, promoting Lucifer as a god deserving of worship, while others use the term figuratively in their pursuit of so-called enlightenment. On the other side of tracks, there are those who believe Luciferian (adjective) deeds and agendas are those nefarious acts whose source is the personage of Lucifer, whom they believe to be the Devil, and they use the word Luciferian as an adjective to describe most everything they disagree with.

NOTE: These people appear to have forgotten that, according to their own story, Lucifer was allegedly the good version of the angel before he turned himself into Satan! Their own hypocrisy over a mythological belief is near unbelievable! To be clear: the Latin word lucifer is not the former name of the Devil, back when he was a good guy. The Devil never was a good guy! And lucifer is not a name! Not of an angel! Not of a demon! Not of anyone!

If you have a vested interest in clinging to the false teaching that lucifer is a name of the Devil, derived from the mistranslation of a lone passage in Isaiah, indeed, a mistranslation of a single letter in that lone passage, to the point of inventing a non-existent word, I humbly ask that you let it go. I don't care if you have written books on the topic, made movies, given seminars or printed T-shirts. I forgive you. From here forward just swap out any and every reference to the word lucifer with the Devil and you are back on track.

Lest any be confused regarding what I have written: I do not converse in Latin. I have no use for the Latin translation of the Scriptures (except to refute false teachings). I certainly do not use the word lucifer to refer to Satan. Satan is not the Bright Morning Star! Satan is not the Light of the world! Though it would constitute the only accurate use of the word, I do not even use the word lucifer to refer to the Bright Morning Star, our LORD Jesus Christ. The words Bright Morning Star are perfectly sufficient.

There are five (5) total occurrences of the word lucifer/luciferum in the Latin Vulgate, the first two (2) of which have been explored in detail, above.

Isaiah 14:12

(KJV) How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!

(Latin) quomodo cecidisti de caelo lucifer qui mane oriebaris corruisti in terram qui vulnerabas gentes

(Hebrew) הֵילֵל (hā lale) - allegedly, "the morning star" (?) - The only instance of this otherwise unknown word in all the history of the Hebrew language.

2Peter 1:19

(KJV) We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts

(Latin) et habemus firmiorem propheticum sermonem cui bene facitis adtendentes quasi lucernae lucenti in caliginoso loco donec dies inlucescat et lucifer oriatur in cordibus vestris

(Hebrew) N/A

Job 11:17

(KJV) And thine age shall be clearer than the noonday; thou shalt shine forth, thou shalt be as the morning.

(Latin) et quasi meridianus fulgor consurget tibi ad vesperam et cum te consumptum putaveris orieris ut lucifer

(Hebrew) בֹּקֶר boqer - dawn

Psalm 110:3

(KJV) Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power, in the beauties of holiness from the womb of the morning: thou hast the dew of thy youth.

(Latin - 109:3) tecum principium in die virtutis tuae in splendoribus sanctorum ex utero ante luciferum genui te

(Hebrew) מִשְׁחָר mishchar - dawn

Job 38:32

(KJV) Can you lead forth the Mazzaroth in their season, or can you guide the Bear with its children?

(Latin) numquid producis luciferum in tempore suo et vesperum super filios terrae consurgere facis

(Hebrew) מַזָּרוֹת mazzarah - a constellation (NASB)