Re: OT: Re: Who is Lucifer? Who is the Devil? Who is Satan?

On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 10:51:01 +1200, in sci.archaeology, Eric Stevens
wrote:

On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 22:12:17 +0100, Doug Weller
<dweller@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 09:44:40 +1200, in sci.archaeology, Eric Stevens
wrote:

On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 19:27:24 GMT, prd <X_header@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

In sci.archaeology message
news:oqrre2dcn9tiesk3jpvsgt8ti5fvbl30tv@xxxxxxx by Doug Weller
<dweller@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> . . . :

On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 15:31:01 +1000, in sci.archaeology, Peter
Jason wrote:


Come back and clean up your mess!


"Garry Denke" <garrydenke@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote
in message
news:31bcdbb74a53940ad0735d196b8f1aba.106283@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
..
My work on this planet is done.
The son of perdition,
Garry Denke

Denke's nuts, but the question is interesting. I became aware of
this yesterday:

http://www.physorg.com/news75128924.html
What the Devil? Prince of Darkness Is Misunderstood, Says UCLA
Professor
He's not the enemy of God, his name really isn't Lucifer and he
isn't even evil. And as far as leading Adam and Eve astray, that
was a bad rap stemming from a case of mistaken identity.

"There's little or no evidence in the Bible for most of the
characteristics and deeds commonly attributed to Satan," insists
a UCLA professor with four decades in what he describes as "the
devil business."

In "Satan: A Biography" (Cambridge Press), Henry Ansgar Kelly
puts forth the most comprehensive case ever made for sympathy
for the devil, arguing that the Bible actually provides a
kinder, gentler version of the infamous antagonist than
typically thought.

"A strict reading of the Bible shows Satan to be less like Darth
Vader and more and more like an overzealous prosecutor," said
Kelly, a UCLA professor emeritus of English and the former
director of the university's Center for Medieval and Renaissance
Studies. "He's not so much the proud and angry figure who turns
away from God as [he is] a Joseph McCarthy or J. Edgar Hoover.
Satan's basic intention is to uncover wrongdoing and treachery,
however overzealous and unscrupulous the means. But he's still
part of God's administration."

...

"His job is to test people's virtue and to report their
failures," Kelly said.

...

Ironically, the only mentions of Lucifer in the New Testament ?
and there
are three of them ? refer to Jesus, Kelly said. "Jesus is called
'Lucifer' or 'the morning star' because he represents a new
beginning."

The morning star is Venus.

That's a modern interpretation. For the original see Isaiah 14:12.
From the King james version of the Bible:

Hold on. Modern? Lucifer is a Roman word.

Hang on a minute Doug. You have misunderstood me. What I said was a
modern interpretation is the statement "The morning star is venus". I
am fully aware that the name Lucifer is Roman in origin and cited the
Isaiah to show that even at the time of the King James translation
Lucifer was something quite different.

And I don't think the King James
version is the 'original'. The term Lucifer occurs in the 5th century
Vulgate. But that's hardly original either.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucifer

Agreed. The concept of the morning star which fell to earth and, as
described in Isaiah, made the world a wilderness, destroying cities,
destroying the land and slaying people, is an old one which far
predates the bible. My point is that, whatever it was, it was not
Venus.

Do you mean you aren't discussing Lucifer? And I'm sure you used to get
cross with me for changing the subject!

Doug


Origins in Isaiah

In the Vulgate, an early-5th-century translation of the Bible into Latin
by Jerome, Lucifer is a Latin word that appears in many translations of
Isaiah 14:12-14. The original Hebrew text of this verse was ???? ?? ???
(heilel ben-schahar), meaning "Helel son of Shahar." Helel was a
Babylonian / Canaanite god who was the son of another Babylonian /
Canaanite god named Shahar.

Helel was the god of the morning star and his father was Shahar, god of
the dawn. Some translations of Isaiah 14:12 "How art thou fallen from
heaven, O day-star, son of the morning!" American Standard Version
translating Hebrew Helel as "day-star" and the Hebrew word Ben as son and
the Hebrew word Shahar as "of the morning." Others translate it as
"Lucifer, son of the morning" 21st Century King James.

The Hebrew does not speak of a devil named Lucifer. Lucifer appears
nowhere in Isaiah. It is Helel, a fallen Babylonian god which appears in
the original text.

The term Lucifer first appeared in Latin translations of the Book of
Isaiah in the 4th century. Through the years most translators kept the
latin word "lucifer" in Isaiah 14 rather than properly translating it as
"god of the morning star" or even leaving it as the Hebrew Helel.

14:4 You will recite this parable about the king of Babylonia: How has
the oppresor come to an end, the arrogance been ended?
14:10 They will all proclaim and say to you, "You also have been
stricken as we were; you are cmpared to us.
14:11 Brought down to the nether-world were your pride and the tumult
of your stringed instruments; maggots are spread out under you, and worms
are your covers.
14:12 How have you fallen from the heavens, O glowing morning star;
been cut down to the ground O conqueror of nations?
(Isaiah, Artscroll Tanakh)

The Jewish Encyclopedia reports that "it is obvious that the prophet in
attributing to the Babylonian king boastful pride, followed by a fall,
borrowed the idea from a popular legend connected with the morning
star".[1] However, this metaphorical "falling from the heavens" was later
interpreted as a literal fall from heaven by Christians when the passage's
original meaning was made opaque by retranslations and eventually
forgotten.

Judaism does not believe in fallen angels (as do Christians). In Judaism
angels do not possess free will and thus cannot rebel against God. It is
only in folk tales and homily called Midrashim aggadah where such tales
are found in Judaism.

Helel in Isaiah 14 has nothing to do with the Jewish concept of HaSatan
(the adversary). The prohet is speaking of the fall of Babylon and along
with it the fall of her false gods Helel and Shahar. In Judaism there is
no concept of a devil or a fallen god. There is satan which is a Hebrew
word meaning "adversary" and in the Tanakh one will find many instances of
the word used to describe human and angelic adversaries to man.


"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.
15 Yet thou shall be brought down to hell,
to the sides of the pit.
16 They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee,
and consider thee saying, Is this the man which
made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms;
17 That made the world as a wilderness, and destroyed
the cities thereof; that opened not the house of his prisoners
[ ... ]
20 Thou shalt not be joined with them in burial, because
thou hast destroyed thy land, and slain thy people: the
seed of evildoers shall never be renowned."

Venus fits the description as far as ascending into heaven is
concerned, and also being associated with Heaven. But Venus
traditionally cannot be descibed as 'son' of anything. Nor is Venus
assocaited with a 'pit'. As for making the world a wilderness,
destroying cities, destroying the land and slaying people - no, that's
not Venus.

I know that many people will be inclined to say that all the mayhem is
mere poetic license, but maybe it is not. Maybe it really happened.
But whatever, it is not Venus.


--- snip ---



Eric Stevens
--
Doug Weller --
A Director and Moderator of The Hall of Ma'at http://www.hallofmaat.com
Doug's Archaeology Site: http://www.ramtops.co.uk
Amun - co-owner/co-moderator http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Amun/

.

Relevant Pages