Has anyone been to the Sherryshriner Website??

Replies are closed for this discussion.

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by cathy kornman on August 23, 2008 at 8:10pm

Hi Corey!

So much info!! What to believe??? Want some good advice? Believe in yourself! Trust your intuition! What does your heart tell you is the truth? Go with your heart feelings and you cannot go wrong. Be very discerning about information. It is easy to twist the truth, or partial truth, into something very different than the original message. The major religions have been doing it for years.

Live in the Love! Fear not! Bless you!!

Cathy

Permalink Reply by Angela Dawn on August 23, 2008 at 8:56pm

Hi dear sibling,

Here is some info on Lucifer:

Trust yourself. There is no mean God who created you the way you are, with the mind you have, waiting to punish you for not interpreting what you see correctly. Unconditional love is the only "Truth". "Everything is as it should be, because Universe is as it should Be."

Loving blessings,

Angela Dawn
Who is Lucifer in Isaiah 14:12? (from
http://www.apostolic.net/biblicalstudies/isaiah1412.htm )

by
Jason Dulle
JasonDulle@sbcglobal.net


Question:

I have heard, with some pretty good argument, that in Isaiah 14 "Lucifer" is
not Satan, nor any angel at all, but is actually King Nebuchadnezzar of
Babylon. Have you heard of this, and what do you think?


Answer:

There is no doubt about it that Isaiah 14, which speaks of "Lucifer," is
referring to the king of Babylon. In fact, the name "Lucifer" does not even
appear in the Hebrew text. The Hebrew behind this translation consists of
three words meaning "Helel son of Shachar", which is probably a name for the
morning star (Venus), and thus is translated as "son of the morning star" by
most translations. The translation of "Lucifer" was carried over from the
reading in Jerome's Latin Vulgate, not the Hebrew text.

The NET Bible offers the following comments concerning this passage:

This whole section (vv. 4b-21) is directed to the king of Babylon, who is
clearly depicted as a human ruler. Other kings of the earth address him in
vv. 9ff., he is called "the man" in v. 16, and, according to vv. 19-20, he
possesses a physical body. Nevertheless the language of vv. 12-15 has led
some to see a dual referent in the taunt song. These verses, which appear to
be spoken by other pagan kings to a pagan king (cf. vv. 9-11), contain
several titles and motifs that resemble those of Canaanite mythology,
including references to Helel son of Shachar, the stars of El, the mountain
of assembly, the recesses of Zaphon, and the divine title Most High.
Apparently these verses allude to a mythological story about a minor god
(Helel son of Shachar) who tried to take over Zaphon, the mountain of the
gods. His attempted coup failed and he was hurled down to the underworld.
The king of Babylon is taunted for having similar unrealized delusions of
grandeur. Some Christians have seen an allusion to the fall of Satan here,
but this seems contextually unwarranted. (Footnote 23 of Isaiah 14, found at
http://www.bible.org/netbible/index.htm).

The idea that this pericope is also a reference to Satan's fall is due to
the fact that Isaiah said, "Look how you have fallen from the sky" (Isaiah
14:12), which is reminiscent of Jesus' words, "I beheld Satan as lightning
fall from heaven." It is speculated that Jesus drew His words from Isaiah
14, thus making the connection that this passage was not only referring to
the king of Babylon, but also to Satan's fall.

Another reason for believing Isaiah 14 is a reference to Satan's fall is
because of the parallels that exist between the Isaiah passage and Ezekiel
28 (the concept of a fall and expulsion-Ezekiel 28:16), which has more clear
references to the fall of Satan (although the historical figure being spoken
of there was a man: the king of Tyre [vs. 2, 9]). Such references include
the fact that the king of Tyre is said to have dwelt in Eden, been created,
and is called the anointed cherub which covers (Ezekiel 28:13-15). Such
descriptions are obviously poetic in regards to the king of Tyre, but seem
to have a more direct reference to Satan himself.

Although Isaiah 14 most definitely refers to the king of Babylon, we must
not reason that because a prophecy had an immediate fulfillment in the lives
of those to whom it was directed, that it denies any other possible
referents. Many prophecies in the OT had dual referents. In hermeneutics
this phenomenon is termed the "double-reference principle." Some of the most
famous prophecies of the coming Messiah had both a literal, near fulfillment
in mind, and also a more distant, future fulfillment. God's words to the
serpent in the Garden, "And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and
between your offspring and her offspring; it will bruise your head, and you
will bruise his heel," had a literal fulfillment. First and foremost this is
a reference to the literal hostility that would exist between people and
serpents. People would attack the head of the serpent (indicating a fatal
blow), while the serpent would only be able to attack their heels (non-fatal
blow). Of course this statement also had a future fulfillment in Jesus
Christ, the ultimate seed of the woman who crushed the Devil himself at
Calvary.

Another such example is the prophecy found in Isaiah 7:14, 16 where
theprophet declared, "Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and
you will call his name Immanuel. .... But before the boy knows enough to
reject the wrong and choose the right, the land of the two kings you dread
will be laid waste." These words were in regards to a sign being promised to
King Ahaz that the Lord would deliver him from the powers of Syria
(Damascus) and Ephraim. Matthew applied this prophecy to be referring to
Jesus Christ (Matthew 1:23), but the historical referent of this prophecy
was the birth of Mahershalalhashbaz, the son of Isaiah through a prophetess
(Isaiah 8:1-4). That this prophecy had a literal, short-term fulfillment is
evident from the context. Isaiah's son was the sign to Ahaz. The Lord said
to Isaiah concerning Mahershalalhashbaz, "For before the child knows how to
cry out, `My father' or `My mother,' the wealth of Damascus and the plunder
of Samaria will be carried off by the king of Assyria."

The above examples serve to demonstrate that even though a passage indeed
had a literal fulfillment in the days of the people it was spoken to, this
does not rule out any secondary, future fulfillment. We must not rule out a
double-reference fulfillment of prophecy, although each prophecy does not
always have a dual-reference. In the case of Isaiah 14, it is questionable
whether or not this is indeed a reference to the fall of Satan in addition
to the direct prophecies to the king of Babylon.


_______________________________________________________

Some Light on Lucifer (from
http://www.theosophy-nw.org/theosnw/world/christ/xt-ibel2.htm )

By Ina Belderis

[Unless otherwise indicated, all Bible quotes are from the New Oxford
Annotated Bible (New Revised Standard Version).]
Is there any difference between Lucifer and Satan? Westerners generally
would say they are one and the same. Especially those in fundamentalist
Christian circles consider Lucifer an archangel who fell from grace and was
thrown out of heaven because of "sinful pride." His "sin" was thinking he
was equal to God and rebelling against Him. This rebellious angel is known
as Satan, Lucifer, or the Devil, who tempts us to do evil. Supposedly, one
of the most evil things Lucifer tempts us to do is to think that we are God.
So those who believe in the essential divinity of all life are often accused
of committing Satan's sin, and of being under the influence of Lucifer.
Where do these ideas about Satan and Lucifer come from? Is there a biblical
basis for them?

Lucifer means lightbringer, from the Latin lux "light" and ferre "to bear or
bring." The word Lucifer is found in only one place in the Bible -- Isaiah
14:12 -- but only in the King James and related versions: "How art thou
fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! . . ." The New Revised
Standard Version translates the same passage as "How you are fallen from
heaven, O Day Star, Son of Dawn!" In other translations we find: "O shining
star of the dawn!" (Moffatt) or "O morning-star, son of the dawn!" (Hebrew
Bible). The King James Version is based on the Vulgate, the Latin
translation of Jerome. Jerome translated the Hebrew helel (bright or
brilliant one) as "lucifer," which was a reasonable Latin equivalent. And
yet it is this lucifer, the bright one or lightbearer, that came to be
understood by so many as the name for Satan, Lord of Darkness.

In Isaiah 14 the prophet is taunting the king of Babylon: "In the figurative
language of the Hebrews, . . . a star, signifies an illustrious king or
prince . . . The monarch here referred to, having surpassed all other kings
in royal splendour, is compared to the harbinger of day, whose brilliancy
surpasses that of the surrounding stars" (A Cyclopedia of Biblical
Literature, John Kitto ed., 3rd ed., J. B. Lippincott and Co, Philadelphia,
1866, 2:857-8). There are those who claim that the real entity addressed in
this passage is Satan, but there is no evidence for this. On the contrary,
Isaiah (14:16) says: "Is this the man who made the earth tremble, . . . ?"
and (14:18) "All the kings of the nations lie in glory, each in his own
tomb; but you are cast out . . ." These seem clear references to a man, the
king of a nation, not an archangel.

There is yet another reason why it makes no sense to read the Devil into
Isaiah 14: the traditional role of Satan in the Old Testament. Satan comes
from the Hebrew satan, which means "opponent" or "adversary." According to
Strong's Concordance, this word appears in 1 Chronicles, Job, Psalms, and in
Zechariah. In Psalms "satan" is used both in the plural (accusers) and in
the indefinite sense (an accuser). In Chronicles and Zechariah its usage is
ambiguous, while in Job "satan" as The Accuser appears only in the first two
of its 42 chapters. It is important, however, to keep in mind that the texts
of the Old Testament did not reach their "final" version until after the
Babylonian exile. Before this exile there is no evidence in Hebrew
scriptures of an Accuser as a force that opposes God, and even after the
exile it is still doubtful. Though the story of Job is very old, its final
version is dated after the exile, after the Hebrews came into contact with
the dualist Zoroastrian religion with its god of good and its god of evil.

There is even division among Old Testament scholars as to whether evil
should be associated with Satan at all. Some say that Satan was originally
not considered evil but gradually became identified with his unpleasant
functions. According to this approach, Satan is still God's servant. There
is much in the Book of Job that tends to support this view. Satan appears
only in the first two chapters and then disappears. Some believe the first
two chapters were added much later, for in the last chapter we read: ". . .
they showed him sympathy and comforted him for all the evil that the Lord
had brought upon him" (42:11).

It appears that the Hebrews did not have a devil-like power opposed to God.
Satan, or the Satan as he is often called, is an angel in the court of God
with the function of an accuser (see Job 1:6). There are also indications
that along with all that is "good," all that is "evil" comes from God, not
Satan. In Isaiah 45:7 God says: "I form light and create darkness, I make
weal and create woe; I the Lord do all these things." Valentine's Jewish
Encyclopedia confirms the idea that there is a radical difference between
how Satan is conceived in the Old Testament and how he is conceived in the
New Testament, and that his new role did not develop from his original role:
there are no references "to rebellious angels in any pre-Christian book. . .
. The figure of Satan in the Hebrew Bible and in the New Testament
respectively emphasizes the difference in conception. There is no
development, but basic difference. . . . It is only in Christian literature
that the Persian idea of two opposing empires, with Satan as God's enemy,
has persisted" (Valentine's Jewish Encyclopedia, A. M. Hyamson & A. M.
Silberman eds., Shapiro, Valentine & Co, London, 1938, p. 36).

There is actually very little in the Old Testament to support the idea of
Satan as a rebellious angel and the power opposing God. He is generally
depicted as a heavenly attorney general (accuser) functioning under God, and
this only strengthens the argument for not reading Satan into the passage
about Lucifer in Isaiah 14:12. Isaiah is one of the older books in the Bible
and is definitely pre-exile.

If there is no sound biblical basis for associating Lucifer with Satan,
where then does the story come from that he is a rebellious angel and fell
because of pride? The Christian Church made the interpretation that Isaiah
14:12 is connected with Luke 10:18: "He said to them, I watched Satan fall
from heaven like a flash of lightning." This unfounded, non-biblical
connection of Lucifer with Satan has led to the popular misunderstanding
that Lucifer is another name for the Devil (cf. "Lucifer," Harper's Bible
Dictionary, Paul Achtemeier, gen. ed., Harper & Row, San Francisco, 1985).

As Lucifer is the morning star, daystar, or Venus, the absurdity of
connecting him with the Devil is revealed in the three New Testament
passages where morning star or daystar is mentioned:

So we have the prophetic message more fully confirmed. You will do well to
be attentive to this as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day
dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. -- 2 Peter 1:19
. . . from my Father. To the one who conquers I will also give the morning
star. -- Revelation 2:28
It is I, Jesus, who sent my angel to you with this testimony for the
churches. I am the root and the descendant of David, the bright morning
star. -- Revelation 2 2:16
All three references to the morning star point to Jesus or things Jesus says
or gives. In the Vulgate the word "morning star" in 2 Peter is even
translated as lucifer. In the other two references it is stella matutina.

It is puzzling that "lightning" should be used in relation to Satan in Luke
10:18, especially when one considers two other references to lightning in
the New Testament: Matthew 24:27 and Luke 17:24. These two references
connect lightning with the Son of Man or Jesus and his second coming, which
is understandable when one studies ancient religious symbolism: "In
Judeo-Christian thought lightning is a symbol of God's immediate presence .
. . or of the last Judgment" ("Lightning," Dictionary of Symbolism, Hans
Biedermann, Penguin Books, New York, 1992). Even when we put aside the
question of what God's "opponent" should be called, the fact remains that
the story of a rebellious angel who fell because of pride is not in the
Bible at all. Some claim that the fallen Satan is present from the very
beginning, even though his name does not appear in Genesis. Paul suggested
that the serpent was Satan, the implication being that Satan tempted Adam.
Yet most of the early Church Fathers believed that Satan fell after Adam. It
took the Church over 200 years to establish that Satan's sin was pride, that
he fell before the creation of man, and that he was the serpent that tempted
Adam and Eve.

To find the story of the fall of Satan, we must go to sources other than the
Bible. There was a great deal of literature produced roughly between 200 BC
and 150 AD, including the Apocrypha and the Pseudepigrapha. Some of these
are apocalyptic -- they prophesy cataclysmic events and the end of the
world. In this literature one can see the development of the idea of an evil
spirit, but even in the apocalyptic literature the Devil does not become
entirely evil in his origin and essence. Many of the books from this period
reflect the misery of the Jewish people under the oppression of Syria and
Rome. Their writings deal with visions of the end of the world, the world
being in the power of the Devil, and the Messiah conquering the Devil and
bringing a new era of justice. The Book of Enoch is seen by many as one of
the earliest and most important accounts of the mishaps of the Heavenly
Court (of angels). It also describes the rebellion of the angel Satanail,
and his being hurled from heaven (2 Enoch, ch. 29, long MSS only). Some
scholars take this to mean that the amalgamation of Satan and Lucifer goes
back to the first century. A redating of 2 Enoch, however, puts it later
than the third century, perhaps even in the seventh. For this reason others
suggest that Origen (Exhort. 18) was probably the inventor of the
identification of Lucifer with Satan (Satan: The Early Christian Tradition,
Jeffrey Burton Russell, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, 1991, p. 130 &
fn). The Life of Adam and Eve (Vita), a Jewish scripture that scholars date
between 200 BC and 200 AD, relates that Satan tells Adam and Eve that his
fall from heaven is the result of his refusal to worship Adam, the image of
God. A similar account is also found in the Koran (S 2:34). These legends
reflect a theme close to the primordial "pride" that led to the so-called
fall of Satan.

Since the Old Testament does not connect pride or the Fall with Satan, the
Devil, or the Adversary, the only scriptural "support" for this notion is
the misinterpretation of the fall of Lucifer (the king of Babylon), and
certain passages in the New Testament. But the New Testament does not give
any clear information on the fall of Satan through pride either. One place
where Lucifer is connected with pride is in Milton's Paradise Lost. He
"applied the name to the demon of sinful pride" ("Lucifer," A Dictionary of
Angels, Gustav Davidson, The Free Press, New York, 1967).

It appears that the whole story of Lucifer as Satan, the fallen rebellious
angel, is based entirely on non-canonical sources: the so-called Apocrypha
and Pseudepigrapha. There are also many pre-Christian myths and allegories
that include stories about Lucifer, which is the Latin name for the Greek
Eosphoros. In his Theogony Hesiod speaks of two divine beings, the brothers
Eosphoros (the morning star) and Hesperos (the evening star). They are the
children of Astraios (the starry heaven) and Eos (the dawn). The morning
star, like the Virgin of the Sea, is one of the titles given to Divine
Mother goddesses such as the Roman Venus, the Phoenician Astarte, the Jewish
Ashtoreth, and the later Christian Holy Virgin. In the oldest Zoroastrian
allegories, Mithra is supposed to have conquered the planet Venus. In the
Christian tradition, Michael defeats Lucifer.

The planet Venus is the lightbringer, the first radiant beam that does away
with the darkness of night. It is a symbol of the development of the divine
light in man, for the first awakening of self-consciousness, for independent
thinking and the real application of free will. It means the bringing of the
light of compassionate understanding to the human mind. In this broader view
the connection of the morning star with Jesus makes good sense, because
compassion is the essence of Jesus' teaching. This teaching shows the
greatest consensus throughout the New Testament: it is mentioned in Matthew,
Mark, Luke, John, Romans, Galatians, 1 Thessalonians, Hebrews, 1 John,
James, and 1 Peter. The best known reference is in Matthew (22:37-40):

"You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your
soul, and with all your mind. This is the greatest and first commandment.
And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these
two commandments hang all the law and the prophets."
(From Sunrise magazine, October/November 1996. Copyright © 1996 by
Theosophical University Press.)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----

World Spiritual Traditions Menu

_________________________________________________________

"Lucifer" in Isaiah 14:12-17
Translation and Ideology
(from http://www.cresourcei.org/lucifer.html )
Dennis Bratcher
The name Lucifer has often been understood to be another name for the devil
or the satan. This identification has a long history in the church, going
back to at least the fourth century. Its origin is actually from a passage
in the Old Testament from the book of Isaiah that, to some, speaks of a
being cast out of heaven because of pride. Since there is a reference in the
New Testament to the devil being cast out of heaven (Rev 12:9-12; cf. Lk
10:18), it was assumed that the Isaiah passage referred to the same thing.
The passage (NRSV): 14:12
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! 13 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 north; 14 I will ascend
above the heights of the clouds, I will make myself like the Most High.’ 15
But you are brought down to Sheol, to the depths of the Pit. 16 Those who
see you will stare at you, and ponder over you: ‘Is this the man who made
the earth tremble, who shook kingdoms, 17 who made the world like a desert
and overthrew its cities, who did not let his prisoners go home?’
In the King James translation, verse 12 reads:
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!
Here is where we find the name Lucifer. The term Lucifer was popularized in
English from this King James translation. However, the name does not come
from the Hebrew or even from the Greek translation (Septuagint), but from
the 4th century AD Latin translation of this verse:
quomodo cecidisti de caelo lucifer qui mane oriebaris corruisti in terram
qui vulnerabas gentes.
But this is not quite as obvious as it sounds even in Latin. The term
Lucifer in fourth century Latin was a name for Venus, especially as the
morning star. The Latin word Lucifer is composed of two words: lux, or in
the genitive form used lucis, (meaning "light") and ferre, which means "to
bear" or "to bring." So, the word Lucifer means bearer of light. The same
word is used in other places in the Latin Vulgate to translate Hebrew terms
that mean "bright," especially associated with the sky:
Job 11:17: And your life will be brighter than the noonday; its darkness
will be like the morning.
2 Peter 1:19: You will do well to pay attention to this as to a lamp shining
in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your
hearts.
This reflects how the Latin word Lucifer was used in classic Roman poetry,
such as this passage from Virgil (Georgics, III, 324-325):
Luciferi primo cum sidere frigida rura
carpamus, dum mane novum, dum gramina canent"
Let us hasten, when first the Morning Star appears,
To the cool pastures, while the day is new, while the grass is dewy.
The term also occurs in the plural (luciferum) in Job 38:32 to refer to an
astral constellation. Other forms of the word are used in similar ways to
refer to light or the stars. And this reflects the Greek (Septuagint)
translation’s use of heosphoros, "morning star" to translate the Hebrew of
Isaiah 14:12.
There is some debate about the exact origin of the original Hebrew word in
Isaiah 14:12 (helel). The strongest possibility is that it comes from a
verbal root that means "to shine brightly," as well as "to offer praise"
(where we get the phrase hallelu yah). In any case, the noun form is the
Hebrew term for the morning star, in most cases the planet Venus. Both the
second century BC Greek translation in the Septuagint, and the fourth
century AD Latin translation in the Latin Vulgate understand this to be the
meaning of the Hebrew word helel.
So, how did we get from Venus, the morning star, to Lucifer being associated
with the devil, especially since that term is used in positive ways even in
the New Testament? Well, if we begin with some New Testament passages and
incorrectly assume that using the New Testament along with a lot of
accumulated tradition is the best way to interpret the Old Testament, then
add some of our assumptions, it is not a long trip at all.
In 2 Corinthians 11:14, Paul writes about false apostles:
And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light.
And in Luke 10:18-19, at the return of the 70 as they comment on their
success, Jesus says:
And he said to them, "I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven. Behold, I
have given you authority to tread upon serpents and scorpions, and over all
the power of the enemy; and nothing shall hurt you."
So, without ever stopping to examine either of those passages to see what
was being said in them, and what was meant by the references, we could
conclude that the devil/the satan is somehow associated with light and the
sky.
If we then add the passage from Revelation 12 about the devil/satan/red
dragon/serpent, the symbols begin to run together, again before we have done
any real study on any of these passages separately to see what each of them
are saying. In Revelation 12 the red dragon with seven heads appears in the
sky, and his tail sweeps down a third of the stars to earth, and is then
later cast down to the earth along with his angels. Of course, at this
point, a great many assumptions are introduced into the reading even of the
Revelation passage, even though this is obviously extremely figurative
language; we just assume what it means.
By adding these three passages together without regard to context, and read
them as if they were all speaking in the same way about the same thing to
make the same point, we can conclude that we have here a jigsaw picture of a
long ago historical event described in great detail (but of course we have
to put the pieces together from various bits scattered through literature
written 800 years apart!).
Then, if we take that assumption about the meaning of all these texts, and
the assumption that adding texts together is the way to understand them (a
drastic perversion of the "Scripture interprets Scripture" principle!), and
bring that back to the Isaiah text, then it is very easy to reach the
conclusion that Isaiah is also describing the same event. There are similar
metaphors of light, stars, conflict, and being cast down. Earlier
translations (KJV) mistakenly took the Hebrew term sheol in verse 15 as
"hell" (in Hebrew it is simply the place where the dead go, a metaphor for
death, specifically burial; see Sheol, Hell, and the Dead
), which is another piece of the
puzzle. So of course, since there is no mention of the "devil" or the
"satan" in Isaiah, "Lucifer" must be the name Isaiah uses for him! So,
Isaiah is talking about the devil being cast out of heaven!
This is the position that prevailed throughout much of the history of the
church until the time of the Reformation and the Enlightenment, when we
began asking more direct questions of the biblical text. We also gained more
information in new archaeological discoveries of ancient civilizations,
including thousands of tablets from Mesopotamia giving us a great deal of
information about ancient Mesopotamian and Babylonian religion.
We learned that Babylonian religion was an astral religion, closely related
to Canaanite practices, although more focused on the sun, moon, and stars
and their motion than on the immediate cycles of nature as it was in Canaan.
The Babylonians worshipped as gods the manifestations of celestial bodies.
It is from Babylon that we get the signs of the Zodiac representing the
constellations. We now know that the two terms used in the Hebrew text of
Isaiah, Helel, morning star, and Shahar dawn, were Babylonian astral deities
(which is reflected in most modern translations).
Now, if we look at the text of Isaiah 14 in context, and without the
assumptions we brought to it from the New Testament, the meaning of the
passage becomes more obvious and goes a radically different direction. The
book of Isaiah has spent the first chapters denouncing the sins of Israel
and its failure to be God’s people. There have also been expectations that
God will work in new ways in the life of the nation to help them recover
their mission as God’s people. One of those ways would be through a new king
to replace the corrupt Ahaz. Because of his pro-Assyrian policies, the
nation was teetering upon the brink of catastrophe as Assyria expanded to
the West (see Assyrian Dominance
).
Isaiah 13 begins a long section of the book known as "Oracles Against
Foreign Nations." This is a standardized format in the prophets for
universalizing responsibility to God. Not only Israel, but all nations, were
accountable to God and would fall under the same judgment Israel would. As
is typical in other prophetic books (Amos, Jeremiah, Ezekiel) not all of
these oracles come from the same time period as Isaiah of Jerusalem, but
they do follow a similar pattern and serve the same function in the book.
Isaiah 13 is part of the oracle directed against Babylon, probably from a
time after the Exile. In very flowery, poetic, and highly figurative
language, Babylon is denounced for her arrogance and lack of concern for
other nations as she built her empire. It is interesting that in 13:10,
specific mention is made of the failure of the Babylonian gods
(constellations, sun, moon) to help them when God calls then to
accountability.
Chapter 14 then begins with the promise of Israel’s return from Babylonian
exile, a theme that dominates the middle section of Isaiah (40-55). Part of
that return would involve the downfall of the tyrant king of Babylon (v. 4;
probably Nebuchadrezzer; for the same language used of a later Babylonian
ruler, Belshazzar, see Dan 5:20). In that context, verses 12-21 are a poetic
picture of that downfall. Helel, morning star, and Shahar, dawn, then, are
references to the Babylonian gods who could not save the king, and are
themselves to be cast down. In fact, there is probably a reference here to
the habit of ancient Near Eastern kings proclaiming themselves incarnations
of the gods; with the fall of the kings, the gods also fell, often
physically as the images that represented them were pulled down and
destroyed (recall the symbolism of the overthrow of Saddam Hussein's statue
in Baghdad).
So, the Isaiah passage does not connect, either historically or
theologically, with the New Testament passages about the devil or the satan.
By listening to the Old Testament passage on its own terms within its own
context, we discover that Lucifer is not an Old Testament name for the devil
or the satan. The passage in Isaiah 14:12-17 is directed at the downfall of
the arrogant Babylonian rulers who took Israel into exile. By beginning with
the New Testament, by making assumptions not supported by a closer
examination of Scripture itself, and by using external theological
categories as a lens through which to read Scripture, we may end up badly
misreading Isaiah.
-Dennis Bratcher, Copyright © 2006, Dennis Bratcher, All Rights Reserved
See Copyright and User Information Notice
Related pages
Bible in the Church
Old Testament
The Unity and Authorship of Isaiah

Top of page
Send mail to ?subject=CRI web"the site director
with questions or comments about this web site.
Copyright © 2006, CRI / Voice, Institute
Last modified: July 18, 2006

Permalink Reply by AngelsWeAre on August 24, 2008 at 12:02am

You know, I researched the scriptures a bit specially prophecies. I have found My own answers, I believe the reincarnation of Christ already occurred in the manifestation of two twin manifestation, at the same time. The Bab (The Gate), he sealed the old age and Opened a new gateway to the new in 1844, I see the evidence all around me. Look for yourself the technological jump we have taken since then. Then Baha'ullah meaning the Glory of the Father established this new world order. I have studied the Baha'i faith profoundly and all this that we are hearing has already been thought to us. Love, unity, all this is nothing new to me. Baha'i teachings are very profound, they certainly come from a higher plane. Fullfilling all prophecies. The Prince of Peace came ... like a thief in the night ... come and gone... but he for the first time a Manifestation of God left hundreds of books For you to find your own Path make your own judgment. we are here to learn.
As for the Galactic federation ... I am pleased to see them here, and for them too progress is inevitable, regardless that they are more advanced than us both spiritually and technologically. we are all part of the tree of life ... we can never regress. Mankind is gowing through a change. You can see the old world fragmenting right before our eyes, old religions have been burdened with so much human input ... for the first time humans now can have their own communion with God Directly ... the Supreme being ... with no need for clergy free will to make up your own mind.

But Sananda is not the return of Christ ... he is powerful yes ... I so wish to talk to him .......
One thing here regardless of our religions creeds and beliefs ... Unity ... Unity with all galactic races

It's a very long subject ... but you know what your intution says ... listen to it ... there is no Evil. Lack of love.

Permalink Reply by Barron on August 24, 2008 at 6:01am

Hi.
Yes, i came across "her" website sometime ago but after reading a fair bit of material on it that i knew to be complete fabrication, i never bothered going back to it. It is one of the biggest disinformation sites there is.
Cheers
barron

Permalink Reply by Ivan on August 24, 2008 at 11:43am

Well from what you posted its clear that she herself is actually a mirror for her own fears. The only victim and tool for the dark forces such as the Annunaki or illuminati would be her as she predicts a dark future of no hope... Sadly people who do this and they always play the "your angel is really a demon!" card of confusion as it puts people off and makes them doubt their own intuitions... By doing what she says you essentially have to follower her teachings and that would make her a false massiah.

I dont get to caught up in the bible as most of it has been changed and distorted. She should know christianity become corrupt and a control system so we have to be careful with some of the prophecies and reading to much into one single sentance or word. To my knowledge other sacred teachings from around the world do no predict any dark being taking over the world, only christianity... hmmm

I think its far more likely that the doomsayers like this who are very paranoid and never seem to mention the fact we create our own reality and have already shifted the future away from some very famous preditions are infact channeling dark entities or their own egos. The old energies do not want us to change so they will do whatever it takes to keep you locked in your lower chakras.

I am saying that yes there are negative people, beings and star people and yes do not believe everything you hear and read and always use your discerment. I dont personaly think we need any saviours, ask any Indigo or crystal and they will tell you we are not waiting for any one person, we have to realise that is the old energies of following which will never evolve us. We are the people we have been waiting for!!!!!!

Beware the teachers that preach fear!

Permalink Reply by Voicespirit on August 24, 2008 at 12:51pm

Thank you and many blessings to all who have posted such wonderful information here!

As for the web site in question... I personally find no truth, love or light there, only fear. But we each must use discernment and find our own truth in the matter.

Blessed Be.

Permalink Reply by Corey on August 26, 2008 at 1:31am

Yes its all very confusing, i just hate the idea of believing in something that is complete crap, and there seems to be quite a bit of it on these type of subjects.and Yea i did find the site a bit negative, but there was a loving spiritual side to it. I'm not sure if i have this all correct but sananda (jesus) (and he really does look like jesus) is going to come here and proclaim himself jesus and it is referred to as the second coming right?
and the bible does say that there will be a fake second coming of jesus before the real one, and if this is the real one, wheres the "false prophet" that it mentions?
I dont follow the bible much either but it is a crucial part of the book and the book does have a lot of truth in it.

And have they announced a final date for the landings yet?

Permalink Reply by Barron on August 26, 2008 at 6:36am

There are some interesting threads on here indeed. Thanks for the post "Saved By Grace".
As for you stating "Nesara" is a great scam, well, time will tell. It would be nice to believe in would it not?! It sure beats our present system of Illuminati control (Rothschilds, Rockefellers, Bilderbergers, Council On Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission, and some higher-up-the-chain elements of the Masonic movement and the Vatican) and the corrupt current economic system that has endured for too long. - it is however crumbling, of that, we can be certain!
As for stating Ashtar Command being a scam, that is not my reality -to me is is VERY REAL! And if you really think it is a load of garbage, then may i politely ask what you are actually doing on here in the first place then? (No, seriously, it is a serious question.)

Yes, most of us on here are aware of the Dark Cabal agenda - I have been studying "them" and their movements for about 25 years now so yes "microchips" and "concentration camps" are real and we are aware of them, however, you will not win the battle between "good and evil" or between the "dark and the light" by stooping to their levels. This site does spread a lot of very useful knowledge and by being en-light-ened we can all individually be prepared for eventualities and have choices by being aware enough not to be blindly manipulated.

I do not expect that most people on here "expect o be saved by aliens" as we are all mature grown up adults who know that we take responsibility for our own actions and therefore we control our destiny. (We will, however, be interacting with them in a far more open manner than is currently happening and will become a full member of the G.F. sooner than most people realise.)
"Saved By Grace" - rather than tell us all that the Ashtar command is a scam and that "evil runs this place", are you able to offer some positive solutions to the problems that you have outlined in your post?
Thanks.

Permalink Reply by Corey on August 27, 2008 at 4:31am

Personally i dont even know what we can do to fix this problem. The reptilians "ascended masters" have us by the balls, Buy a gun. The new world order is about religion and this is it right here, its well on its way. I was tricked into this just like you because it gave me a false sense of hope and purpose.
They are reptilians and so are the people at the top of the pyramid, they are working together. If you were the devil would you just barge in announcing how evil you wrere? or would you fly a false flag of peace, love and "light" and plant yourself a trojan horse?

Has anyone on this site even made physical contact with these "masters" or is it all just channeling? Because its not hard for a reptilian to pose as a lightmaster.

And have you seen any of Ben-Arions videos?
dont you notice his lack of enthusiasm and emotion? its kinda like the lights are on but no ones home isnt it. Classic sign of someone being controlled by an evil 4th dimensional entity like a reptilian.


look at the pupils, thats how you will know.

Permalink Reply by Barron on August 28, 2008 at 5:25am

Hey "Saved by Grace".

You wrote in your last post and i quote:
"Here's my POSITIVE SOLUTION to all of you wondering what to do - GET THE HELL OFF THIS WEBSITE, AND STOP READING THE FALSE CHANNELED MESSAGES."

May i ask you "Saved by Grace", whether or not you could do me a favour and heed your own advice?

Thank you.

And PS to "Corey" yes people have met physically some of the Ascended Masters - just do an ounce of research. You could do worse than to start with the Theosophical Society teachings.

Permalink Reply by Ben-Arion on August 28, 2008 at 3:06pm

NEVER JUDGE anyone of its behavior or appearence. I am speaking from my heart. Not to overwhelm or prove, just share my view. Im sorry you mussunderstand it so....I wish you peace and Love. Simplicity.

Thank you for sharing....

Permalink Reply by ENIGMA on August 28, 2008 at 1:16am

i believe!!!u r right!!!!plz explain to me more!!!i will appreciate it!!!!blessings!!

• 1
• 2