Lucifer is not a pre-fallen Satan

[Deleted member 6]

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:[Isaiah 14:3-4]

Notice in vs 4 who Isaiah is referring to, the king of Babylon, not a pre-fallen Satan.

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.[vs 11]

Here is the king of Babylon's body laid in the ground to be "worm food". This is a human body, not a pre-fallen Satan.

"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.”[vs 21]

Satan never had any sons, and this is God making sure to wipe out his lineage so that none of them can assume the throne.

“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.[vss 22-23]

Here is further proof that God was going to cut off the king of Babylon's lineage and also wipe them off the face of the earth. The Medeo-Persian empire defeated them in 539 B.C.

This is a Cliff's notes version as I am pressed for time, but I will add more later this morning, good Lord willing. @CrazyCalvinistUncle

 

[CrazyCalvinistUncle]

Where is Lucifer named?

 

[Deleted member 6]

Where is Lucifer named?

That’s the thing, Lucifer isn’t in the original Hebrew mss, any of them. The KJV translators took that name from Jerome’s Latin Vulgate. It really means “bright morning star” or “morning star” may be more apt.

 

[Deleted member 6]

Where is Lucifer named?

“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![/i][vs 12] That’s where the KJV uses “Lucifer”.

 

[Deleted member 6]

From Adam Clarke’s commentary…

Verse 12

Verse Isaiah 14:12 . O Lucifer, son of the morning — The Versions in general agree in this translation, and render הילל heilel as signifying Lucifer, Φωσφωρος, the morning star, whether Jupiter or Venus; as these are both bringers of the morning light, or morning stars, annually in their turn. And although the context speaks explicitly concerning Nebuchadnezzar, yet this has been, I know not why, applied to the chief of the fallen angels, who is most incongruously denominated Lucifer, (the bringer of light!) an epithet as common to him as those of Satan and Devil. That the Holy Spirit by his prophets should call this arch-enemy of God and man the light-bringer, would be strange indeed. But the truth is, the text speaks nothing at all concerning Satan nor his fall, nor the occasion of that fall, which many divines have with great confidence deduced from this text. O how necessary it is to understand the literal meaning of Scripture, that preposterous comments may be prevented! Besides, I doubt much whether our translation be correct. הילל heilel, which we translate Lucifer, comes from ילל yalal, yell, howl, or shriek, and should be translated, "Howl, son of the morning;" and so the Syriac has understood it; and for this meaning Michaelis contends: see his reasons in Parkhurst, under הלל halal.

 

[CrazyCalvinistUncle]

Ah...I see. This I have heard of. Just been a long time. So this is the one that has been prophesied but has not yet come. There hasn't been a "King of Babylon" like who is described here. The Anti-Christ or one possessed by Satan. Or at least that is how the commentaries read.

How you have fallen from heaven,
O star of the morning, son of the dawn!
You have been cut down to the earth,
You who have weakened the nations!
But you said in your heart,
‘I will ascend to heaven;
I will raise my throne above the stars of God,
And I will sit on the mount of assembly
In the recesses of the north.
I will ascend above the heights of the clouds;
I will make myself like the Most High.’
Nevertheless you will be brought down to Sheol,
To the recesses of the pit.

But interesting none the less. Thanks, SG.

 

[Deleted member 6]

John Calvin…


Verse 12

12.How art thou fallen from heaven! Isaiah proceeds with the discourse which he had formerly begun as personating the dead, and concludes that the tyrant differs in no respect from other men, though his object was to lead men to believe that he was some god. He employs an elegant metaphor, by comparing him to Lucifer, and calls him the Son of the Dawn; (220) and that on account of his splendor and brightness with which he shone above others. The exposition of this passage, which some have given, as if it referred to Satan, has arisen from ignorance; for the context plainly shows that these statements must be understood in reference to the king of the Babylonians. But when passages of Scripture are taken up at random, and no attention is paid to the context, we need not wonder that mistakes of this kind frequently arise. Yet it was an instance of very gross ignorance, to imagine that Lucifer was the king of devils, and that the Prophet gave him this name. But as these inventions have no probability whatever, let us pass by them as useless fables.

Casting the lot upon the nations, or weakening the nations. (221) Translators have mistaken the meaning of this clause, by rendering the participle הולש (holesh) passively, Thou art become weak, for its signification is active. But as the verb from which it is derived signifies to cast a lot, and as the preposition על, (gnal,) upon, is here added, it is best to take it in this meaning, that, as the ruler and disposer of all countries, he directed them by lot, or held them as his own possessions. And yet I do not reject the other meaning, that he weakened the nations

 

[Deleted member 6]

Ah...I see. This I have heard of. Just been a long time. So this is the one that has been prophesied but has not yet come. There hasn't been a "King of Babylon" like who is described here. The Anti-Christ or one possessed by Satan. Or at least that is how the commentaries read.

How you have fallen from heaven,
O star of the morning, son of the dawn!
You have been cut down to the earth,
You who have weakened the nations!
But you said in your heart,
‘I will ascend to heaven;
I will raise my throne above the stars of God,
And I will sit on the mount of assembly
In the recesses of the north.
I will ascend above the heights of the clouds;
I will make myself like the Most High.’
Nevertheless you will be brought down to Sheol,
To the recesses of the pit.

But interesting none the less. Thanks, SG.

But this is talking about someone contemporary with Isaiah, not a future ruler. The context of the chapter bears this out.

 

[Deleted member 6]

Matthew Poole…


From heaven; from the height of thy glory and royal majesty. As kings are sometimes called gods in Scripture, so their palaces and thrones may be fitly called their heavens.

O Lucifer; which properly is a bright and eminent star, which ushers in the sun and the morning; but is here metaphorically taken for the high and mighty king of Babylon. And it is a very usual thing, both in prophetical and in profane writers, to describe the princes and potentates of the world under the title of the sun or stars of heaven. Some understand this place of the devil; to whom indeed it may be mystically applied; but as he is never called by this name in Scripture, so it cannot be literally meant of him, but of the king of Babylon, as is undeniably evident from the whole context, which certainly speaks of one and the same person, and describes him as plainly as words can do it.

Song of Solomon of the morning: the title of son is given in Scripture not only to a person or thing begotten or produced by another, but also in general to any thing which is any way related to another; in which sense we read of a son of stripes, Deu 25:2, the son of a night, Jonah 4:10, a son of perdition, John 17:12, and, which is more agreeable to the present case, the sons of Arcturus, Job 38:32.

 

[Deleted member 6]

Matthew Henry…

How hast thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer! son of the morning! v. 11, 12. The king of Babylon shone as brightly as the morning star, and fancied that wherever he came he brought day along with him; and has such an illustrious prince as this fallen, such a star become a clod of clay? Did ever any man fall from such a height of honour and power into such an abyss of shame and misery?" This has been commonly alluded to (and it is a mere allusion) to illustrate the fall of the angels, who were as morning stars (Job 38:7), but how have they fallen! How art thou cut down to the ground, and levelled with it, that didst weaken the nations! God will reckon with those that invade the rights and disturb the peace of mankind, for he is King of nations as well as of saints. Now this reception of the king of Babylon into the regions of the dead, which is here described, surely is something more than a flight of fancy, and is designed to teach these solid truths:—[1.] That there is an invisible world, a world of spirits, to which the souls of men remove at death and in which they exist and act in a state of separation from the body. [2.] That separate souls have acquaintance and converse with each other, though we have none with them: the parable of the rich man and Lazarus intimates this. [3.] That death and hell will be death and hell indeed to those that fall unsanctified from the height of this world's pomps and the fulness of its pleasures. Son, remember, Lu. 16:25.

 

[CrazyCalvinistUncle]

But this is talking about someone contemporary with Isaiah, not a future ruler. The context of the chapter bears this out.

None of the rulers of Babylon came close to the person described here, SG.

-Fallen from Heaven
-Cut down to earth
-"I will ascend ( back ) to Heaven.
-"I will raise my throne above the stars of God"
etc..etc...

That is some very specific hubris my friend. That can only be a human ( brought to Sheol = grave ) who desires to place himself above God. Most rulers were satisfied with simply being God. Not this one. So I'm inclined to go with that. Appreciate the reminder hugely though. Learned some new stuff and remembered a few things.

That's what I really appreciate about this site/group.

 

[Deleted member 6]

John Gill…

Isaiah 14:12
How art thou fallen from heaven
This is not to be understood of the fall of Satan, and the apostate angels, from their first estate, when they were cast down from heaven to hell, though there may be an allusion to it; see ( Luke 10:18 ) but the words are a continuation of the speech of the dead to the king of Babylon, wondering at it, as a thing almost incredible, that he who seemed to be so established on the throne of his kingdom, which was his heaven, that he should be deposed or fall from it. So the destruction of the Roman Pagan emperors is signified by the casting out of the dragon and his angels from heaven, ( Revelation 12:7-9 ) and in like manner Rome Papal, or the Romish antichrist, will fall from his heaven of outward splendour and happiness, of honour and authority, now, possessed by him: O Lucifer, son of the morning!
alluding to the star Venus, which is the phosphorus or morning star, which ushers in the light of the morning, and shows that day is at hand; by which is meant, not Satan, who is never in Scripture called Lucifer, though he was once an angel of light, and sometimes transforms himself into one, and the good angels are called morning stars, ( Job 38:7 ) and such he and his angels once were; but the king of Babylon is intended, whose royal glory and majesty, as outshining all the rest of the kings of the earth, is expressed by those names; and which perhaps were such as he took himself, or were given him by his courtiers. The Targum is,

``how art thou fallen from on high, who was shining among the sons of men, as the star Venus among the stars.''
Jarchi, as the Talmud F3, applies it to Nebuchadnezzar; though, if any particular person is pointed at, Belshazzar is rather designed, the last of the kings of Babylon. The church of Rome, in the times of the apostles, was famous for its light and knowledge; its faith was spoken of throughout all the earth; and its bishops or pastors were bright stars, in the morning of the Gospel dispensation: how art thou cut down to the ground;
like a tall tree that is cut down, and laid along the ground, and can never rise and flourish more, to which sometimes great monarchs and monarchies are compared; see ( Isaiah 10:18 Isaiah 10:19 ) ( Ezekiel 31:3 ) ( Daniel 4:10 Daniel 4:22 ) and this denotes that the king of Babylon should die, not a natural, but a violent death, as Belshazzar did, with whom the Babylonish monarchy fell, and never rose more; and this is a representation of the sudden, violent, and irrecoverable ruin of the Romish antichrist, ( Revelation 18:21 ) : which didst weaken the nations!
by subduing them, taking cities and towns, plundering the inhabitants of their substance, carrying them captive, or obliging them to a yearly tribute, by which means he weakened them, and kept them under. So the Romish antichrist has got the power over many nations of the earth, and has reigned over the kings of it, and by various methods has drained them of their wealth and riches, and so greatly enfeebled them; nay, they have of themselves given their power and strength unto the beast, ( Revelation 17:12 Revelation 17:13 Revelation 17:15 Revelation 17:17 Revelation 17:18 ) . Several of the Jewish writers observe, that the word here used signifies to cast lots; and so it is used in the Misna F4, and explained in the Talmud F5; and is applied to the king of Babylon casting lots upon the nations and kingdoms whom he should go to war with, and subdue first; see ( Ezekiel 21:19-23 ) . The Targum is,
``thou art cast down to the earth, who killedst the people:''
a fit description of antichrist, ( Revelation 11:7 ) ( Revelation 13:7 Revelation 13:10 Revelation 13:15 ) .

 

[Deleted member 6]

None of the rulers of Babylon came close to the person described here, SG.

-Fallen from Heaven
-Cut down to earth
-"I will ascend ( back ) to Heaven.
-"I will raise my throne above the stars of God"
etc..etc...

That is some very specific hubris my friend. That can only be a human ( brought to Sheol = grave ) who desires to place himself above God. Most rulers were satisfied with simply being God. Not this one. So I'm inclined to go with that. Appreciate the reminder hugely though. Learned some new stuff and remembered a few things.

That's what I really appreciate about this site/group.

That’s not literal language used but figurative. Even the Roman emperors thought of themselves as gods, just like the king of Babylon did.

 

[Deleted member 6]

Now, those commentaries do not supplant scripture but I posted them to show that well respected scholars did not think this was about a pre-fallen Satan. Dr. John MacArthur is the only noteworthy scholar to hold that view, that I know of.

 

[CrazyCalvinistUncle]

That’s not literal language used but figurative. Even the Roman emperors thought of themselves as gods, just like the king of Babylon did.

Maybe figurative. We've no idea. But that fact that whoever this is was not satisfied with simply being among the gods and placing himself above God ( we have to assume Yahweh ) is very very specific.

Brother I do appreciate the work put in to this. I have commentaries as well. But I'm sorta set on this. So *thank you*.

 

[CrazyCalvinistUncle]

Now, those commentaries do not supplant scripture but I posted them to show that well respected scholars did not think this was about a pre-fallen Satan. Dr. John MacArthur is the only noteworthy scholar to hold that view, that I know of.

I could dig around but I'm not interested in dueling. The information was the prize and I truly do appreciate it.

 

[Deleted member 6]

Maybe figurative. We've no idea. But that fact that whoever this is was not satisfied with simply being among the gods and placing himself above God ( we have to assume Yahweh ) is very very specific.

Brother I do appreciate the work put in to this. I have commentaries as well. But I'm sorta set on this. So *thank you*.

When stars are said to fall from heaven that’s not to be taken literally, but figurative language to describe the fall of a king and/or kingdom.

 

[CrazyCalvinistUncle]

He threw in the

No wait, the

No wait, the

No, wait, the

(just kidding!)

Sure

Seriously you two...Despite all that I've read and debated over this was never a thing. Odd but true. And I'm happy to take an "L" here if it makes y'all happy. But it's not going to shift me.

/mule

 

[ChristB4us]

That’s the thing, Lucifer isn’t in the original Hebrew mss, any of them. The KJV translators took that name from Jerome’s Latin Vulgate. It really means “bright morning star” or “morning star” may be more apt.

The Latin Vulgate's reference to Lucifer is just another name for Venus; hence that morning star.

Just think how many Biblical scholars, freemasons, and Satanic cults derived that name of Lucifer thinking that was the original name for Satan.

See what happens when we do not prove all things with the Lord Jesus Christ. As you provided the scripture in context, obviously, the Lord was addressing a man who will die and his corpse be left unburied. Hardly Satan at all.

 

[CrazyCalvinistUncle]

Do you believe that Satan can possess an unregenerate man @ChristB4us ?