On Fallen Angels

@Alif Balaam Yashin -

Could you please tell me from where you copied and pasted the Hebrew of Isaiah 14:12. I'd like to know who transliterated into the Hebrew "Lucifer".
 
@Alif Balaam Yashin -

Could you please tell me from where you copied and pasted the Hebrew of Isaiah 14:12. I'd like to know who transliterated into the Hebrew "Lucifer".
It's from my Blog . . . I thought I stated that in 382 AD, Pope Damasus I commissioned St. Jerome to write a revision of the old Latin translation of the Bible. This task was completed sometime during the 5th century AD, and eventually, it was considered the official and definite Latin version of the Bible according to the Roman Catholic church. By the 13th century, it was considered the versio vulgate – the common translation.

St. Jerome misunderstood the meaning of the Hebrew word 'heylel', and translated it into "Lucifer", the Latin word meaning "light bearer" (from the Latin lux "light" and ferre "to bear or bring"). The word Lucifer at the time of the Vulgate and even at the time of the KJV translation, meant "morning star" or "day star" in reference to Venus. Jerome thought the passage was referring to Satan in addition to the king of Babylon, and because of this, the use of the word "Lucifer" made the transition from a term referring to Venus and the Morning Star to also refer to the Abrahamic Satan.
 
I think you misunderstood what I am asking.

In your post you included a Hebrew version of Isaiah 14:12. In that text Lucifer has been substituted in the Hebrew text. Lucifer, transliterated, not translated, using Hebrew letters. I am asking where did you come up with the altered Hebrew.
 
You have used verse translation from what calls itself "The Orthodox Jewish Bible." Don't be fooled by the name. It is not Jewish and it is decidedly not Orthodox. It is dishonest in its intention. Those responsible for it should be ashamed.

You can probably guess that I am not exactly a fan of it.
Are you referring to that one that is really Messianic? I've seen it around. I can't remember whether I bought a copy for Kindle and then realized what it really was.
 
St. Jerome misunderstood the meaning of the Hebrew word 'heylel', and translated it into "Lucifer"...
What does the Hebrew word mean? And what does the epithet 'helel ben shahar' mean?

Why, if Jerome saw lucifer as equivalent to Satan, does he use it in a positive sense in translating Job 11:17 and in a clear reference to Jesus in 2 Peter 1:19?

As to the rest, I've shown how the correlation occurred – mistakenly or otherwise – referring to Jewish msytical speculation, and the idea of 'falling' ...
 
What does the Hebrew word mean? And what does the epithet 'helel ben shahar' mean?

Why, if Jerome saw lucifer as equivalent to Satan, does he use it in a positive sense in translating Job 11:17 and in a clear reference to Jesus in 2 Peter 1:19?

As to the rest, I've shown how the correlation occurred – mistakenly or otherwise – referring to Jewish msytical speculation, and the idea of 'falling' ...
First, isn't this book supposedly the 'word' of god? Why all the inaccuracies?
Secondly, I have no explanation as to why stupid people (Jerome) write stupid things.

Helel ben Shahar is Hebrew for "Son of the Morning or Dawn"
Shahar is the God of the Ugarit pantheon, the twin brother of Shalim, the god of Dusk. Together they were understood as representing the temporal structure of the day.
Greco-Roman world Lucifer is the son of the Dawn or Aurora as the Roman’s knew her. Shahar, the God or phenomena mentioned by name in the Hebrew, is a male deity in contrast to Aurora.

Lucifer’s father is often given as Cephalus, a mortal, himself often the son of the Semitic Mercury. Lucifer as well was depicted bearing a torch which may or may not suggest him akin in some ways to the Semitic fire God Prometheus.
Greek equivalent of Lucifer was Phosphorus. Hesiod gives Phosphorus father as Astraeus (“starry”), the Titian God of the Dusk, presumably an equivalent of Shalim.

Other writers indicate his father Cephalus or the Semitic Atlas. Lucifer and Phosphorus are entirely obscure or minor figures, with hardly any Myth attributed to them. Helel or “shining one” describes a primary Sun God like Utu/Shamash or Apollo. Here perhaps it is meaningful as well that Shamash was known in Mesopotamia from early on as Babbar or “shining one.”
Hebrew word for sun, remains, to this day, Shamash or Shemesh, שמש Shamash’s temple was called E-Babbar translated variously as “shining house” or “white house.” Indeed, this should be Apollo’s seat again.
 
First, isn't this book supposedly the 'word' of god?
Well I don't hold the book to be inerrant, so no, not in that sense.

"Therefore, since everything asserted by the inspired authors or sacred writers must be held to be asserted by the Holy Spirit, it follows that the books of Scripture must be acknowledged as teaching solidly, faithfully and without error that truth which God wanted put into sacred writings for the sake of salvation."
(Dei Verbum, III, 11, 2)

Secondly, I have no explanation as to why stupid people (Jerome) write stupid things.
I rather think your opinion of Jerome reflects badly on you, as the use of 'lucifer' is not at all stupid.

Helel ben Shahar is Hebrew for "Son of the Morning or Dawn"
Do we have to do this again?

Isaiah 14:12 is a reference to the Morning Star.

Shahar is the God of the Ugarit pantheon, the twin brother of Shalim, the god of Dusk. Together they were understood as representing the temporal structure of the day.
Together they were understood as the morning star and the evening star – Venus.

You're just affirming the point that 'lucifer' was the logical term to refer to the Day or Morning Star.

The correlation between helel/lucifer falling, and the fall of Satan, is derived from Luke 10:18.
 
Well I don't hold the book to be inerrant, so no, not in that sense.

"Therefore, since everything asserted by the inspired authors or sacred writers must be held to be asserted by the Holy Spirit, it follows that the books of Scripture must be acknowledged as teaching solidly, faithfully and without error that truth which God wanted put into sacred writings for the sake of salvation."
(Dei Verbum, III, 11, 2)


I rather think your opinion of Jerome reflects badly on you, as the use of 'lucifer' is not at all stupid.


Do we have to do this again?

Isaiah 14:12 is a reference to the Morning Star.


Together they were understood as the morning star and the evening star – Venus.

You're just affirming the point that 'lucifer' was the logical term to refer to the Day or Morning Star.

The correlation between helel/lucifer falling, and the fall of Satan, is derived from Luke 10:18.
No, we don't have to do this again if you'd rather not . . .

Otherwise, the idea that Lucifer is some fallen angel is absurd, I find no scripture anywhere that posits this. This idea has been fabricated through stupidity and political agenda.

Luke 10:18
18 And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven.
Where do you see anything whatsoever implying Satan is Lucifer?

εἶπεν δὲ αὐτοῖς Ἐθεώρουν τὸν Σατανᾶν ὡς ἀστραπὴν ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ πεσόντα.
eípen dé aftoís Etheóroun tón Satanán os astrapín ek toú ouranoú pesónta.

"And he said unto them, Behold Satan as lightning fall from heaven."
 
Lucifer enters common usage very late, as far as I can tell.

The idea of the 'star that fell' is there in Isaiah, it's there in Mesopotamian mythology and 'fallen angels' are in the books of Enoch. It's there in Luke 10:18: "I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven." As pride was seen as significant vice, and pride was the cause of the angel's fall in Enoch, and pride clearly underpins ideas of self-glorification, then Helel/Heosphosphoros/Lucifer is an analogy of that archetype.

Nevertheless, Lucifer as a name of the devil doesn't really enter Christian popular literature in the Middle Ages. He's in Dante's Inferno, written in the 14th century, and later literary texts. Medieval Christianity seems to see Lucifer and Satan in a master/vassal relationship.

The origin of the Person known as Lucifer probably belongs to Aquila of Sinope, (aka Onkelos, the two names referring to the same person in Jewish writings of the time), a Roman nobleman who converted to Judaism around 35–120CE. He translated the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek, and also Aramaic, his translation of the Torah being known as the Targum Onkelos.

He derives hêlêl from the verb yalal ('to lament'), and this derivation was adopted as a proper name for an angel who laments the loss of his former beauty, an idea presumably influenced by Enochian texts. Jerome's use then is quite different, as Jerome employs lucifer in the New Testament as a synonym for Jesus – keeping the impersonal 'Day Star' inference.

Origen (184/185–253/254) interpreted Isaiah 14:12 as a manifestation of the devil, the fruit of his genius in scripture study. He compared the morning star Helel/Eosphorus/Lucifer with Satan. Origen took Hubris as his key – pride – rejecting the earlier idea that Satan derives from Genesis 6 (he's there as a serpent in Genesis 3), and other Biblical references to link pride as a singular vice and "Pride comes before a fall" in Proverbs 16:18. Thus he linked pride to a fall, be they fallen angels, Satan in Luke, the Fall of Babel, and so on.

Cyprian (c. 400CE) and , Ambrosius (around 340–397) and a few other church fathers essentially subscribed to this view supported by both Biblical texts and Greek mythology.

If the Jewish apocryphal literature speaks of a war in heaven, or fallen angels, then when did Satan, named in Luke, actually, fall, and why? The same Jewish apocalyptic literature identified his fall with that of the Watcher Angels of Genesis 6, and his sin was lust for the 'daughters of men'. But if Satan was there in the Garden to tempt Adam and Eve, then he had already sinned before Genesis 6. Other Christians had suggested Satan’s sin was envy of the new creatures God had made in his own image. This again meant that his fall would have to come after the creation of Adam and Eve, but there's no Biblical evidence for that.

In the Bible, Satan had promised Adam and Eve that they would be like gods. This was a parallel to the idea of hubris in the Greek myths, and specifically of a pride that comes before a fall. Bellerophon wanted to ride Pegasus to the top of Mount Olympus, but the deities struck him down. In the Bible, architects of the Tower of Babel wanted to reach the heavens, but God stopped them. Thus, to him it was clear that Stan's sin was pride. Satan saw himself in God's place, God saw this and expelled him from heaven. From then on, Satan decided to revenge himself on God by attacking those creatures made in the divine image – their weakness was his weakness (they are not God) – he tempted Adam and Eve, he tempted the King of Babylon, he is everywhere pride over-reaches itself.

Origen used philosophical logos to unlock Biblical mythos. According to Origen, rational creatures were created hierarchically from the top down, angels first, then humans. Origen opposed the Valentinian Gnostic view that suffering in the world is beyond God's grasp, and that the devil is an independent actor. For him, evil has no ontological reality, but is defined by its deficits or a lack of existence. The devil is considered the most remote from the presence of God in the order of rational and intellectual subjectivity, a negative tendency somewhat akin to a black hole, drawing everything in and down to nothingness.

+++

Much of the lore and our understanding of Lucifer, Satan and Devil is not biblical. It stems from post-medieval Christian expansions on Scripture influenced by popular mythologising.

The Middle Ages saw the Bible appearing in vernacular languages, and there was a great deal of secondary material adapted from biblical themes. Dramatic forms – Mummers and Mystery Plays – were used to convey ideas to an audience unable to read Latin and not schooled in philosophy.

Quite naturally these tended to 'fill the gaps' where the Bible did not offer complete explanations or expositions – what was the fruit Adam and Eve ate, for example – the apple is pure folklore.

Medieval Europe's Bible-based sagas, legends and fairy tales simplified tales by opposing good and evil, the Devil vies with God, and creates all manner of temptations for unwary humans. The ability of the Devil, in folktales, to appear in any animal form, to change form, or to become invisible, are not mentioned in the Bible, but were happily assigned without serious ecclesiastic dispute ªalthough witches, in Catholic cirles, were said to be the fruit of ignorance and superstition).

+++

To blame Lucifer on Jerome is disputed by the facts and does him far too much credit.
 
Otherwise, the idea that Lucifer is some fallen angel is absurd, I find no scripture anywhere that posits this. This idea has been fabricated through stupidity and political agenda.
Or perhaps you're too entrenched in your opinions to see the logical, reasonable and rational connections.
 
It's from my Blog . . . I thought I stated that in 382 AD, Pope Damasus I commissioned St. Jerome to write a revision of the old Latin translation of the Bible. This task was completed sometime during the 5th century AD, and eventually, it was considered the official and definite Latin version of the Bible according to the Roman Catholic church. By the 13th century, it was considered the versio vulgate – the common translation.

St. Jerome misunderstood the meaning of the Hebrew word 'heylel', and translated it into "Lucifer", the Latin word meaning "light bearer" (from the Latin lux "light" and ferre "to bear or bring"). The word Lucifer at the time of the Vulgate and even at the time of the KJV translation, meant "morning star" or "day star" in reference to Venus. Jerome thought the passage was referring to Satan in addition to the king of Babylon, and because of this, the use of the word "Lucifer" made the transition from a term referring to Venus and the Morning Star to also refer to the Abrahamic Satan.
It could also be that Isaiah 10 and 14 reference the coming anti-Christ AKA the King of Babylon.
 
Or perhaps you're too entrenched in your opinions to see the logical, reasonable and rational connections.
Or perhaps my logical mind refuses to see the illogic spouted by faiths that have zero proof behind their 'logic'?
 
Lucifer enters common usage very late, as far as I can tell.

The idea of the 'star that fell' is there in Isaiah, it's there in Mesopotamian mythology and 'fallen angels' are in the books of Enoch. It's there in Luke 10:18: "I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven." As pride was seen as significant vice, and pride was the cause of the angel's fall in Enoch, and pride clearly underpins ideas of self-glorification, then Helel/Heosphosphoros/Lucifer is an analogy of that archetype.

Nevertheless, Lucifer as a name of the devil doesn't really enter Christian popular literature in the Middle Ages. He's in Dante's Inferno, written in the 14th century, and later literary texts. Medieval Christianity seems to see Lucifer and Satan in a master/vassal relationship.

The origin of the Person known as Lucifer probably belongs to Aquila of Sinope, (aka Onkelos, the two names referring to the same person in Jewish writings of the time), a Roman nobleman who converted to Judaism around 35–120CE. He translated the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek, and also Aramaic, his translation of the Torah being known as the Targum Onkelos.

He derives hêlêl from the verb yalal ('to lament'), and this derivation was adopted as a proper name for an angel who laments the loss of his former beauty, an idea presumably influenced by Enochian texts. Jerome's use then is quite different, as Jerome employs lucifer in the New Testament as a synonym for Jesus – keeping the impersonal 'Day Star' inference.

Origen (184/185–253/254) interpreted Isaiah 14:12 as a manifestation of the devil, the fruit of his genius in scripture study. He compared the morning star Helel/Eosphorus/Lucifer with Satan. Origen took Hubris as his key – pride – rejecting the earlier idea that Satan derives from Genesis 6 (he's there as a serpent in Genesis 3), and other Biblical references to link pride as a singular vice and "Pride comes before a fall" in Proverbs 16:18. Thus he linked pride to a fall, be they fallen angels, Satan in Luke, the Fall of Babel, and so on.

Cyprian (c. 400CE) and , Ambrosius (around 340–397) and a few other church fathers essentially subscribed to this view supported by both Biblical texts and Greek mythology.

If the Jewish apocryphal literature speaks of a war in heaven, or fallen angels, then when did Satan, named in Luke, actually, fall, and why? The same Jewish apocalyptic literature identified his fall with that of the Watcher Angels of Genesis 6, and his sin was lust for the 'daughters of men'. But if Satan was there in the Garden to tempt Adam and Eve, then he had already sinned before Genesis 6. Other Christians had suggested Satan’s sin was envy of the new creatures God had made in his own image. This again meant that his fall would have to come after the creation of Adam and Eve, but there's no Biblical evidence for that.

In the Bible, Satan had promised Adam and Eve that they would be like gods. This was a parallel to the idea of hubris in the Greek myths, and specifically of a pride that comes before a fall. Bellerophon wanted to ride Pegasus to the top of Mount Olympus, but the deities struck him down. In the Bible, architects of the Tower of Babel wanted to reach the heavens, but God stopped them. Thus, to him it was clear that Stan's sin was pride. Satan saw himself in God's place, God saw this and expelled him from heaven. From then on, Satan decided to revenge himself on God by attacking those creatures made in the divine image – their weakness was his weakness (they are not God) – he tempted Adam and Eve, he tempted the King of Babylon, he is everywhere pride over-reaches itself.

Origen used philosophical logos to unlock Biblical mythos. According to Origen, rational creatures were created hierarchically from the top down, angels first, then humans. Origen opposed the Valentinian Gnostic view that suffering in the world is beyond God's grasp, and that the devil is an independent actor. For him, evil has no ontological reality, but is defined by its deficits or a lack of existence. The devil is considered the most remote from the presence of God in the order of rational and intellectual subjectivity, a negative tendency somewhat akin to a black hole, drawing everything in and down to nothingness.

+++

Much of the lore and our understanding of Lucifer, Satan and Devil is not biblical. It stems from post-medieval Christian expansions on Scripture influenced by popular mythologising.

The Middle Ages saw the Bible appearing in vernacular languages, and there was a great deal of secondary material adapted from biblical themes. Dramatic forms – Mummers and Mystery Plays – were used to convey ideas to an audience unable to read Latin and not schooled in philosophy.

Quite naturally these tended to 'fill the gaps' where the Bible did not offer complete explanations or expositions – what was the fruit Adam and Eve ate, for example – the apple is pure folklore.

Medieval Europe's Bible-based sagas, legends and fairy tales simplified tales by opposing good and evil, the Devil vies with God, and creates all manner of temptations for unwary humans. The ability of the Devil, in folktales, to appear in any animal form, to change form, or to become invisible, are not mentioned in the Bible, but were happily assigned without serious ecclesiastic dispute ªalthough witches, in Catholic cirles, were said to be the fruit of ignorance and superstition).

+++

To blame Lucifer on Jerome is disputed by the facts and does him far too much credit.
I thought I supplied this information, I apologize . . . here it is

LUCIFEREVOLUTION​


Abstract
Lucifer is a poetic Latin descriptive noun used in place of various words
associated with the Morning Star in mythology. The Latin word 'Lucifer
may translate to "light-bearer", however, the earliest association with the
word Lucifer is with the Morning/Evening Star, Phophorus/Hesperus.

The Morning/Evening star was a poetic device used by ancient
Mesopotamians and Greeks to describe a bright but lesser deity that
attempts to usurp a greater deity but ultimately fails to do so.

LUCIFER the MORNING STAR
There remains much confusion as to what Lucifer is and is not. Most of
this confusion comes from the Abrahamic world which has
misinterpreted several words and jumbled their meanings into a negative
light. First, Lucifer is not and has never been a proper noun (name) it is a
descriptive noun used throughout the ancient world for various reasons.
The main verses in question here are from the Christian bible and I will
explain how the word Lucifer is not the Christian devil, Satan, or much of
anything to do with the Abrahamic faiths.


Isaiah 14:12
“How you are fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!
How you are cut down to the ground, You who weakened the nations!"

Hebrew
!איך נפלת מהשמיים, הו לוציפר, בן הבוקר"
" !כמה אתה נכרת עד האדמה, אתה שהחלישת את האומות
הלל בן שחר

Hêlêl ben Šāḥar
son of the morning star


Revelation 22:16
"I, Jesus, have sent my angel to testify to you about these things for the
churches. I am the root and the descendant of David, the bright morning
star.”



Greek
"Εγώ, ο Ιησούς, έστειλα τον άγγελο μου να σας μαρτυρήσει για αυτά τα
πράγματα για τις εκκλησίες. Είμαι η ρίζα και ο απόγονος του Δαβίδ, του
λαμπρού πρωινού αστέρα."
πρωϊνός λαμπρός ἀστὴρ
lampros prōinos astēr
bright morning star


Isaiah 14:12 was written in Hebrew, the original text uses the words
Helel ben Shahar which means 'son of the morning star', it was translated
into Latin and used the Latin noun 'lucifer' which means the same thing
'morning star'. However, this verse is in reference to the King of Babylon,
not a fallen angel or Satan.


Revelation 22:16 was written in Greek, the original text uses the words
"lampros prōinos astēr" which means 'bright morning star' and is in
reference to the planet Venus. The Morning Star is a poetic device used
throughout ancient history to symbolize the bright star (planet), Venus,
during the dawn which brings the light of the new day.


The words Morning Star in both instances, and in reference to the many
ancient myths that also use the term 'morning star', symbolize something
brilliant, majestic, royal, and kingly. In Isaiah, it references a once-great
king (Nebuchadnezzar) that has fallen from power, and in Revelation, it
references Jesus simply as a great king.


In 382 AD, Pope Damasus I commissioned St. Jerome to write a revision
of the old Latin translation of the Bible. This task was completed
sometime during the 5th century AD, and eventually, it was considered
the official and definite Latin version of the Bible according to the Roman
Catholic church. By the 13th century, it was considered the versio vulgate
– the common translation.


St. Jerome misunderstood the meaning of the Hebrew word 'heylel', and
translated it into "Lucifer", the Latin word meaning "light-bearer" (from
the Latin lux "light" and ferre "to bear or bring"). The word Lucifer at the
time of the Vulgate and even at the time of the KJV translation, meant
"morning star" or "day star" in reference to Venus. Jerome thought the
passage was referring to Satan in addition to the king of Babylon, and
because of this, the use of the word "Lucifer" made the transition from a
term referring to Venus and the Morning Star to also referring to the
Abrahamic Satan.


MORNING STAR in ANCIENT MYTHOLOGY
The earliest use of the Morning Star mythology is the Mesopotamian
myths of the Sumerian King Etana, the Canaanite myth from Phonecia
called the "Fall of the day star", and the Ugaritic myth called the Baal
Cycle.


Each of these myths describes the attempt of a lesser deity to usurp a
greater deity to which the Morning Star always fails to do so. This
allegory can be seen in the way that Venus (both Morning and Evening
Star) attempts to overtake the Sun or the Moon but always loses the
battle.

It wasn't until thousands of years later that the Gnostics elevated Lucifer
to the Principle of Compassion for Life and Creation, the Defiance of
Corrupt Authority, the Current of Spiritual Evolution. Luciferianism has
personified the idea of Lucifer as the Principle of Self-development, the
model of individuality, individuation, and independence.

GNOSTIC LUCIFER
The idea of Lucifer as a fallen angel comes from the Enochian myth of
fallen angels combined with Dante Alighieri (Dante's Inferno) and John
Milton's (Paradise Lost) epic works that solidified Satan with the name
Lucifer.


The Gnostics never explicitly used the names “Lucifer” or “Eosphoros”
(or Phosphoros) in the age in which they lived. The association of the
Serpent in the Garden of Eden with Lucifer in Gnosticism came later
when Gnostic scholars associated the name Lucifer with planetary
archons. Their new identity of the Lucifer/Serpent became that of
spiritual enlightenment, the principle of compassion for life and creation,
and the defiance of corrupt authority. In this respect, Lucifer becomes a
Current/Energy/Thoughtform.


The Gnostic Christians believed in the Light of Lucifer which they viewed
as the enlightenment which he, as the Serpent, (an Egyptian phallic form
as the serpent Ami‑Hemf "Dweller in the Flame,"), who enlightened the
first parents, Adam and Eve, against God's Will. Here Lucifer is likened to
Prometheus who stole fire from heaven to give civilization to humanity.
God denied the first two people the fruit of the tree of knowledge, but
Lucifer gave them the Light of Wisdom.


These Gnostic sentiments and beliefs for Lucifer were held by the
Persians as well. Unlike Orthodox Christians, they did not hold Jehovah as
the good‑God of mankind, but the Demiurge who created man for his
own selfish interest. Lucifer was regarded as the hero, savior, and friend
of man, who revealed the sacred mysteries which the Heavenly Father
jealously withheld. Some, such as the Gnostic Luciferians, held that
Lucifer was the brother of God.


These Gnostic beliefs persisted throughout the first half of the Christian
era and well into the second half. German theologian Meister Eckhart
said, "Lucifer, the angel, who is in hell, has the perfect intellect and to this
day knows much."


The name Lucifer also appears in Aradia, or the Gospel of the Witches
made famous by Charles Godfrey Leland. The work is based on myths
and legends of ancient Italian witchcraft (La Vecchia Religione /
Stregheria). Lucifer was the son and consort of Diana, goddess of the
night. Their daughter is Aradia, the witch‑messiah in the myth.


Gnostic Gospels of Nag Hammadi
‑from the Gospels of Nag Hammadi: Testimonial of Truth (TOT)
"the God whom most Christians worship, the God of the Hebrew Bible, is
'himself' one of the fallen angels, from whose tyranny Christ came to set
human beings free.


TOT (3:4‑5)
it reveals truth only when one reads it in reverse, recognizing that God is
actually the villain, and the Serpent the holy one


Reality of Rulers (Nag Hammadi)
"It is Samael and his fellow 'rulers' of the Darkness (Eph.6:12), not the
true God, who formed Adam's physical body, set him to work in Paradise,
"to till and cultivate it" then put him to sleep and fashioned his female
partner out of his rib.


God commanded Adam not to eat of the Tree of Knowledge, which could
open his eyes to the Truth. However, Eve became enlightened by the
feminine spiritual principle who appeared to her in the form of the
Serpent and deified them both . . . against God's Will.

God threw mankind into great distraction and into a life of toil, so that
humankind might be occupied with worldly affairs, and might not have
the opportunity of being devoted to the Holy Spirit / Higher‑Self
Platonic Ideologies/First Form Ideals/Authentic Thoughtforms. Meaning,
just as the etymology of a word can usually provide you with the
authentic, first reality of that word, so does there exist the original,
authentic ideal of a thoughtform.



"What is more absurd and more impious than to attribute the name of Lucifer to the devil, that is, to personified evil. The intellectual Lucifer is the spirit of intelligence and love; it is the paraclete, it is the Holy Spirit, while the physical Lucifer is the great agent of universal magnetism.”
- Eliphas Levi



ROMAN-GRECO LUCIFER
Publius Ovidius Naso
Publius Ovidius Naso's "Metamorphoses" was written 8 B.C.E.

The planet Venus, the second in the solar system, is called Lucifer when it
precedes the sun in the morning, and Hesperus when it follows the sun in
the evening.

Nunlius Noctis. modo lotus, undis Hesperus, pulsis iterum tenebris
Lucifer idem.— Senec. in Hippol. Statione codi: from his station in
heaven. When the morning star, Lucifer is the last to disappear.
The stars which lay obscured under Chaos, now begin to shine forth.
Hesiod, in like manner, speaks of the stars as last formed. Last Lucifer
Sprang radiant from the dawn-appearing morn, And all the glittering
stars that gird the heaven.



Publius Vergilius Maro 29 B.C.E.
Eclogue VIII: Damon and Alphesiboeus

"Lucifer, arise, precursor of kindly day, while I, shamefully cheated of my
lover Nysa’s affection, complain, and call, still, to the gods, in the hour of
my death, though their witnessing these things has been no help to me."



Timaeus by Plato in 360 B.C.E.
"First, there was the moon in the orbit nearest the earth, and next the
sun, in the second orbit above the earth; then came the morning star and
the star sacred to Hermes, moving in orbits which have an equal
swiftness with the sun, but in an opposite direction; and this is the
reason why the sun and Hermes and Lucifer overtake and are overtaken
by each other."

*This Lucifer is also portrayed as a Lunar deity unlike his usual association with Venus.



Transliteration:

"Hermes and Lucifer overtake and are overtaken by each other"
"Ο Ερμής και ο Εωσφόρος προσπερνούν και προσπερνούν ο ένας τον
άλλον" "O Ermís kai o Eosfóros prospernoún kai prospernoún o énas ton
állon"

ATTAR
The ancient Semitic deity of Attar sometimes appearing as a rain and
water god is cited as a possible identification for Helel. Attar, it’s worth
mentioning, is etymologically and mythologically related to the Goddess
Ishtar. Likewise, Attar in his various forms might have been related either
to the morning or evening stars or the planet Venus more generally.

Lucifer is the Morning Star announcing daily birth of the sun. The
Canaanites called him Shaher, the Hebrews Shaharit, “Morning Service”
commemorating him. His twin brother, Shalem, the Evening Star,
announced the daily death of the sun. These two may be identified as the
heavenly twins of the Greeks, Castor and Pollux, born of Leda's World
Egg. They also played a prominent role in Persian sun worship as two
torch‑bearers, one with an ascendant torch, the other pointing
downward. The image of Baphomet should come to mind.


In Canaanite legend, Shaher and Shalem were born of the great mother
Asherah, in her world‑womb aspect as Helel, "the Pit." Shaher coveted
the superior glory of the sun god and attempted to usurp his throne, but
was defeated and cast from heaven like a lightening bolt. There is a 7th
Century B.C. scriptural account of this story of the Morning Star, which
eventually becomes the biblical Isaiah 14:12‑15. Lucifer is told, "Thou
shall be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit." The pit, here, is
symbolizing, or the same as, Helel (Asherah), the Mother‑bride's womb.

The Morning Star was the god, at times referred to as a bird, Benu to the
Egyptians. He was the dying‑and‑reborn Phoenix, called the "Soul of
Ram" who died on the World Tree in order to renew himself so to "shine
on the world." It is said his spirit dwelled in the phallic obelisk, called
Benu or the Benhen Stone, representing the god's sexual union with the
Mother. One finds Plato knew the morning star as Aster which appeared
as the Evening Star (the planet Venus). He saw Aster as a
dying‑and‑reborn deity, "Aster, once, as Morning‑Star, light on the living
you shed. Now, dying, as Evening‑Star, you shine among the dead."






CONCLUSION

Lucifer is not an Adversary as the word Satan (Shaitan) describes, Lucifer
is the 'Bringer of Light' in other words Lux Lucis (Lucifer) is gnosis,
truth, and Divine knowledge. Lucifer brought us the Truth and Freedom
from the Will of Another, and showed us the way to either be One with
God / Nature / Objective Universe or to become a god ourselves. Lucifer
is the principle of progress and intellectual inquiry, the divine inspiration
behind spiritual enlightenment. Through Lucifer's spirit humanity first
climbed down from the trees and The Luciferian Principle has
represented the flow of progress ever since.
 
Last edited:
Nebuchadnezzar lived between 605 BC and 562 BC
Quite a bit before the invention of Christianity . . . a MOOT Point
I didn't say anything about Nebuchadnezzar. Try again. What does the invention of Christianity have to do with it? talk about reading into somebody's replies - WOW!
 
Interestingly there is an order of nuns called Sisters of Mary Morningstar
 
I didn't say anything about Nebuchadnezzar. Try again. What does the invention of Christianity have to do with it? talk about reading into somebody's replies - WOW!
I'll give you WOW
YOU SAID: "Isaiah 10 and 14 reference the coming anti-Christ AKA the King of Babylon"
Who do you think this King of Babylon was?
Duh . . . Nebuchadnezzar.
 
Back
Top