Day Star

[Molly]

ISA 14:12 HowH349 art thou fallenH5307 from heaven,H4480 H8064 O Lucifer,H1966 sonH1121 of the morning!H7837 how art thou cut downH1438 to the ground,H776 which didst weakenH2522 H5921 the nations!H1471

This is the King James version.  Lucifer is translated from Heylel, as we have said, and son of the morning is from the Hebrew words bên[son] shachar [morning].

Other translations call Lucifer: morning star, shining star, day star, star of the morning, and shining one.

These are all translations based on the word hêylêl.

King James calls Lucifer, son of the morning, translated from ben shachar.  Other translations substitute for son of the morning--son of the dawn, son of Dawn, who didst rise in the morning.

There is no doubt in my mind that there are shining ones, also called morning stars.  We see them first in Job 38:7--when the morning stars sang together...   We are told Satan can present himself as an angel of light in the NT.

Michael Heiser calls these shining ones the divine council, as we see them in council with YHWH in various places such as Gen 1, Job 1, Job 38, and Psa 82.

Jesus has promised his overcomers the morning star, meaning that some day we will become one of the shining ones.  We also see that in Isa 14 Lucifer has power over the nations.  This, too, will change when Jesus gives his overcomers the power over the nations.

26And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations:

27And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father.

28And I will give him the morning star.

29He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.

--Rev 2



PS There is a reason why Lucifer wants a New World Order.  As always, he is mimicing God and seeking to replace Christ and his overcomers.

[eaglesway]

9 (What does "he ascended" mean except that he also descended to the lower, earthly regions[c]? 10 He who descended is the very one who ascended higher than all the heavens, in order to fill the whole universe.)Bridegroom 11 So Christ himself gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers, to equip his people for works of service(gestate sons), so that the body of Christ may be built up until we all reach unity in the faith(woman clothed with the sun) and in the knowledge of the Son of God(woman clothed with the Son) and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ(a child is born a man).

14 Then we will no longer be infants(like we are now ;o), tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of people in their deceitful scheming(dragons flood). 15 Instead, speaking the truth in love(ah there's the rub), we will grow to become in every respect the mature body of him who is the head, that is, Christ. 16 From him the whole body, joined and held together by every supporting ligament, grows and builds itself up in love, as each part does its work(manchild, reconciling men unto God, destroying the works of the devil, setting the whole creation free into the glorious liberty of the sons of God).

[sheila]

   A wise woman builds her house up. The foolish woman tears it down.Unless the Lord build the house,the workers work in vain[it will be torn down]

[micah7:9]

If what George M. Lamsa "Holy Bible From the Ancient Eastern Text" Translation form the Aramaic of the Pecrapta, has any weight, and I believe it does simply because it takes the reasoning of Day Star, Morning Star, Shinning One, and even brightness out of the way of thinking.

In Isa.14:12 the Aramaic word for "ailel" to howl, is confused by the Hebrew word "helel", light. The refeence here is to the King of Babylon and not to Lucifer.

[Beloved Servant]

That's why the scripture admonishes: "...neither give place to the devil" (Eph. 4:27).

[Beloved Servant]

If what George M. Lamsa "Holy Bible From the Ancient Eastern Text" Translation form the Aramaic of the Pecrapta, has any weight, and I believe it does simply because it takes the reasoning of Day Star, Morning Star, Shinning One, and even brightness out of the way of thinking.

In Isa.14:12 the Aramaic word for "ailel" to howl, is confused by the Hebrew word "helel", light. The refeence here is to the King of Babylon and not to Lucifer.

And all God's people say, Amen!
The Amplified Bible states it the same way.

[Molly]

If what George M. Lamsa "Holy Bible From the Ancient Eastern Text" Translation form the Aramaic of the Pecrapta, has any weight, and I believe it does simply because it takes the reasoning of Day Star, Morning Star, Shinning One, and even brightness out of the way of thinking.

The king of Babylon liked to howl?  lol

King James uses heylel as do many other translations.  The shining ones aren't going away, they are referenced in too many other places.  They are called morning stars and sons of God.  They are placed by YHWH over the nations when he takes Israel for himself.  For this reason, Daniel calls them Princes.  Paul refers to them in Eph 6.


And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
--2 Cor 11:14

In Isa.14:12 the Aramaic word for "ailel" to howl, is confused by the Hebrew word "helel", light. The refeence here is to the King of Babylon and not to Lucifer.

OT was written in Hebrew.

[sheila]

 WOW! according to my concordance....there's a whole lotta howling going on :mshock:

[eaglesway]

What the howl is Howl?

[Molly]

name for Satan

O Lucifer, son of the morning!

hêylêl bên shachar

the Shining One, son of the dawn!

[WhiteWings]

Lucifer is Latin: lucis-ferre => light-bringer  I guess it orginates from the Vulgate. Romans had there own Lucifer. Venus.


Lucifer is a good translation on itself. It's Latin. And when you say Latin you say Roman. And when you say Roman....

Lucifer is a Latin word (from the words lucem ferre), literally meaning "light-bearer", which in that language is used as a name for the dawn appearance of the planet Venus, heralding daylight. Use of the word in this sense is uncommon in English, in which "Day Star" or "Morning Star" or "The Star of the East" are more common expressions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucifer


So the translation is not really wrong. But using it elsewhere is what's wrong.
I've even seen a view Jesus is Lucifer. Jesus is the light of the world. Lucifer means bringer of light. Jesus also brings light. And that basicly mean Jesus=Venus....

[Molly]

Lucifer is only used once in the King James Bible.  Jesus is never referred to as Lucifer.  Nor does Jesus fit into the context of Isa 14.  You know that, ww.

Jesus is not a bearer of light.  He is light.  He is the light of the world.

I showed the other translations for heylel, all referring to a bright and shining star.

The idea of a star as producing its own very bright light is what is important here.  Hence the idea of humans being blinded by the god of this world--Satan.  The light is what deceives them. 

Again, a reminder:  Adam was not deceived.

[Molly]

The sons of God are divine beings, lesser gods, a different class of heavenly beings than messenger angels.  This is understood and accepted by Hebrew scholars.  They are divine, not human.  They are referred to as elohiym--'gods.'

Everywhere in the OT Bible where this phrase occurs, the context tells us these are divine beings and not human.   Gen 6:2,4, Job 1:6, and 2:1, Job 38:7, Psa 29:1, Psa 89:6-7, Psa 82:1, Psa 82:6-7.  This was understood until the late 3rd century ad.  In 2Peter 2:4, they are called 'angels' [aggelos]  and they are sentenced to tarturus after they sin.  In Jude 6, they are also called 'angels.'  The referrent sin is to Gen 6:2, the sin of the sons of God.  I'm wondering if this is an implication that they have been demoted.  Jesus tells us he has placed the serpent under our feet.

Immortality is the fundamental  characteristic of a divine being.  When Jesus offers men the right to become sons of God in John 1, he is offering them divinity and immortality,  the status of 'gods'--elohiym.

It is humanity that is meant to replace Satan and his minions as the shining ones--as Y'shuah elohiym.  Satan postponed this in the garden.  But he could not prevent it. And, now we have a story that makes sense, with a beginning, a middle, and an end.

22But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,

23To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,

24And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.


--Heb 12

[Molly]

We see the word 'howl' used in Isaiah 13.. So if the word was meant to be howl, it seems they would have used the word they used in the chapter before.  It's not like this was an unknown word in the Hebrew.

6Howl ye; for the day of the LORD is at hand; it shall come as a destruction from the Almighty. [Isa 13]

"howl"

H3213
ילל
yâlal
yaw-lal'
A primitive root; to howl (with a wailing tone) or yell (with a boisterous one): - (make to) howl, be howling.

[WhiteWings]

Lucifer is only used once in the King James Bible.  Jesus is never referred to as Lucifer.  Nor does Jesus fit into the context of Isa 14.  You know that, ww.

I never said that. I only said there are articles that (try to) prove that.

Jesus is not a bearer of light.  He is light.  He is the light of the world.

Yes and no.
Yes: He was/is the light.
No: HS is the light. Jesus brought (bearer) that Light.

So in that context I see no problem calling Jesus light bearer.
But.... that does NOT mean I'm saying that Isa verse is about Jesus.

The idea of a star as producing its own very bright light is what is important here.

Venus is  planet that at best reflects light like the moon. It doesn't have light of itself like a star. In a way reflection can eb seen as 'bearing' perhaps....
My whole point is and was that Lucifer is Latin. And that word with 100% certainty means light bringer/bearer.
But ofcourse the Bible wasn't originally written in Latin.

[WhiteWings]

We see the word 'howl' used in Isaiah 13.. So if the word was meant to be howl, it seems they would have used the word they used in the chapter before.  It's not like this was an unknown word in the Hebrew.

I would like to see teh Hebrew word for Howl and light bringer.
If those words are very similar and the original documents teh Bible was translated from were in bad condition that may have caused the misunderstanding.
Or.... just corruption due to pagan influence...

[Molly]

We see the word 'howl' used in Isaiah 13.. So if the word was meant to be howl, it seems they would have used the word they used in the chapter before.  It's not like this was an unknown word in the Hebrew.

I would like to see teh Hebrew word for Howl and light bringer.
If those words are very similar and the original documents teh Bible was translated from were in bad condition that may have caused the misunderstanding.
Or.... just corruption due to pagan influence...

Take a look at the two words, howl and heylel, in Hebrew.  If they were both written out, there is no way you would mistake them.  But, if part of heylel were missing then it's possible, I guess, although at that point, you would be guessing anyways.

Ithought Lucifer was just a made up word but what's important is that this translator was looking for a word that would make a good name, and also descriptive of the brightness of the morning star..  So he considered that word a name for someone who is also described as son of the morning--ben shachar.

Like I said, other translators used morning star, shining star, day star, star of the morning, and shining one--for heylel.
None of those mean 'light bearer'.

I think 'shining one' is the best myself. :winkgrin:

[WhiteWings]

Ithought Lucifer was just a made up word but what's important is that this translator was looking for a word that would make a good name, and also descriptive of the brightness of the morning star..  So he considered that word a name for someone who is also described as son of the morning--ben shachar.

I can also say Lucifer is good translation because it does mean morning star.
Later, church gave Lucifer the meaning of satan or devil. At that point things went wrong. Perfect translation, corrupted defenition.
Basicly teh same problem as hell. Hell is a good translation for sheol. Both mean unseen (or similar). But later church started to add torture, fire and demons to that hell.

[WhiteWings]

הילל
hêylêl
BDB Definition:
Lucifer = "light-bearer"
1) shining one, morning star, Lucifer
1a) of the king of Babylon and Satan (figuratively)
2) (TWOT) 'Helel' describing the king of Babylon
Part of Speech: noun masculine
A Related Word by BDB/Strong's Number: from H1984 (in the sense of brightness)
Same Word by TWOT Number: 499a

ילל
yâlal
BDB Definition:
1) (Hiphil) to howl, wail, make a howling
Part of Speech: verb
A Related Word by BDB/Strong's Number: a primitive root
Same Word by TWOT Number: 868


1 letter difference. At least in the lexicons the satan part is not a primary meaning.

[micah7:9]

It is my opinion that a lot of people who say they believe in I AM, offer far to much recognition to the adversary. :sigh:

And remember these are the same translators who gave us "hell" "for ever."  IF Lamsa is correct that the misunderstanding is in the Aramaic and Hebrew problem solved; whether we can understand the use of "howl" in Isa.14 I dont know, but I believe that if one took that path as diligently as some believe that "lucifer" is correct , we may know more. I just dont understand why the translators threw a Latin word smack dab in the middle of Hebrew. As far as it is for me I do not like the idea of changing the word "adversary" and giving it a proper name like "satan." Seems to me there is/was a lot of "leading to water" in the translations.

[Molly]

Ithought Lucifer was just a made up word but what's important is that this translator was looking for a word that would make a good name, and also descriptive of the brightness of the morning star..  So he considered that word a name for someone who is also described as son of the morning--ben shachar.

I can also say Lucifer is good translation because it does mean morning star.
Later, church gave Lucifer the meaning of satan or devil. At that point things went wrong. Perfect translation, corrupted defenition.
Basicly teh same problem as hell. Hell is a good translation for sheol. Both mean unseen (or similar). But later church started to add torture, fire and demons to that hell.

well I happen to believe that passage in Isa 14 is referring to Satan.  So from my point of view, the church didn't go wrong.  It doesn't matter to me what you call him, Lucifer or Shining One. 

[Molly]

I just dont understand why the translators threw a Latin word smack dab in the middle of Hebrew :dontknow:

The Latin word is not thrown smack dab into the middle of Hebrew.  It is thrown smack dab into the middle of English by the King James translators who liked the name.  We have plenty of English words that come from Latin.

[micah7:9]

I just dont understand why the translators threw a Latin word smack dab in the middle of Hebrew :dontknow:

The Latin word is not thrown smack dab into the middle of Hebrew.  It is thrown smack dab into the middle of English by the King James translators who liked the name.  We have plenty of English words that come from Latin.

Whatever, its a square circle in the midst of round holes.
And I repeat  It is my opinion that a lot of people who say they believe in I AM, offer far to much recognition to the adversary. :sigh:

[Molly]

I just dont understand why the translators threw a Latin word smack dab in the middle of Hebrew :dontknow:

The Latin word is not thrown smack dab into the middle of Hebrew.  It is thrown smack dab into the middle of English by the King James translators who liked the name.  We have plenty of English words that come from Latin.

Whatever, its a square circle in the midst of round holes.
And I repeat  It is my opinion that a lot of people who say they believe in I AM, offer far to much recognition to the adversary. :sigh:

And, a lot of people give too little recognition.  For me, I like to keep track of roaring lions who consider me lunch.

Stay alert! Watch out for your great enemy, the devil. He prowls around like a roaring lion, looking for someone to devour.
--1Peter 5:8

[eaglesway]

What's in a name?

One person says they believe in the I AM and thay are referring to their own being

Another person speaks of believing in the I AM and they are speaking of the one true invisible almighty Creator- YHWH