Veteran wrote: “God addressing Satan as "a man" (like in Isa.14) is not dependent upon the idea of flesh man, simply because the image of man originates from God's Own Image. That's why when angels appeared on earth per God's Word they had the image appearance of man. Even the meaning of the name Gabriel is 'man of God'. So I'd like to know where some get that idea that God can't be referring to Satan because of calling him a man.” The problem is that nowhere in Isa 14 is Satan addressed at all. It’s addressed to the king of Babylon. I do agree that it mirrors Satan’s fall, but it is not talking about Satan’s fall. Veteran, what you are doing is trying to take historical accounts and prophecy which Isaiah meant for the King of Babylon and making it all about Satan. Satan is indirectly who these verses are talking about, directly, it’s the king of Babylon. Angels appeared as men (and I mentioned an account listed in Genesis 18), but they were still called angels. It doesn’t matter that they appeared as men. They were still who they were, and never in Isa 14 is Satan mentioned. So I’d like to get that idea where God was referring to Satan in Isa 14 (and mind you, I agree there are similarities), when the entire prophecy is about Babylon. Let me explain it further. We can see similarities between Jonah and Christ. Why? Because Christ spoke of it. However, Christ is not mentioned in the Book of Jonah, and the prophecy isn’t an exact replica. Jonah was in the whale 3 days and 3 nights; Jesus wasn’t in a whale… He was in the heart of the earth, or you could even find scripture that says he preached in hell. But no… He wasn’t in the whale, and neither was Jonah in the grave or even hell (although he said likened it to hell). This I can believe because Jonah talked about it, and Christ said, here’s the sign. He explained it. I have read your commentary on Isa 14, and it’s quite detailed and good. I like it, but still much of it is speculation, and drawing on Eze 28 (that is, claims that Eze is also talking about a direct description of Satan, when he isn’t). Your argument is “just because it says he was a man doesn’t mean he was a man!”…. If so, (and if not, please correct me) then when do we trust the Bible is talking about a man when it says “man”? And by the way… Here’s something you should understand… God did not create man in his own image. Adam was in God’s image (though he wasn’t God, just an image). So let me say this again: Isa 14 is a prophecy about the King of Babylon. I can even show you in the Bible where it comes to pass. Nebuchadnezzar said himself in the Bible that the prophecy came to pass. I refer to Daniel Chapter 4. And yet… As wonderful as your commentary on Isa 14 was, and despite what parts I agree with and disagree with, it is purposeless except in an attempt to validate what you believe about Eze 28. It is purposeless in that it does very little to answer the question of whether God created evil or if Satan did. To your credit, you have attempted to answer that, and I will deal with that at the proper time. But all your commentary of Isa is for nothing in this thread, other than to support your beliefs of Eze 28. Veteran wrote: “Someone has obviously told you to speak against any idea that those chapters are referring to Satan himself, and I'd just like to know what reason they gave you for doing that?” That is pretty accusative, and it boarders on insulting. It is true that someone enlightened me to the fact that Lucifer is not Satan. Someone spoke the truth to me. The fact that Eze 28 is not speaking about Satan is my own research. I am getting this from the Bible! So yes someone is telling me to speak against any idea that those chapters are referring to Satan. It’s God! His reason is that it is the Truth. Veteran wrote: “Your last statement that Lucifer was a flesh man is a theory. That word is not even IN... the Hebrew manuscripts. The KJV translators added it from the Latin name for the planet Venus. The actual Hebrew word that is there means 'morning star', a Title that only... belongs to Christ Jesus Himself (Rev.22).” No, it’s fact. The KJV says that Lucifer was a man. It says God created evil. That is not a theory, its fact. If you want to say the KJV is wrong, fine. Do that, and be blunt. By the way, do you not think I haven’t researched what “Lucifer” translates to? Do you not think that I don’t understand what “bright and morning star” means to Christ? I’d like a little credit here, Veteran. That’s why I come against all those who continually call Satan by the name of “Lucifer”. They are giving him exactly what he wants.) Veteran wrote: “The reason why God used it in Isa.14 was because He was using Satan's own words to mock him with, because Satan's rebellion was about coveting God's Throne in wanting to be God. Thus Satan also tries to steal Christ's Title of The Morning Star.” I absolutely believe that Satan is trying to steal God’s thunder (so to speak). But it is nothing but theory that Satan called himself Lucifer and it is theory that God mocked him. Scripture, please. Veteran wrote: “I can understand how not all Bible believers do not yet 'see' how God uses the flesh kings of Bible history as 'types' for Satan per the Isa.14, 30, Ezek.28 & 31 chapters. But with someone who goes out of their way to try prove against that, when the pointers God left us is obvious, that suggests influence from another agenda, an agenda to hide God's Truth.” Once again, I fully support the likeness. However, you are going out of your way to prove that these verses are first talking about Satan when they clearly are not. Again you can use Jonah to prove Christ, but Jonah was not Christ. I likewise believe Jezebel was a likeness of the great whore of Revelation, but she was not it, nor does the prophecy fit 100%. If I am so bent on proving that chapters like Isa 14 and Eze 28 don’t talk about Satan, you are just as guilty of believing they aren’t talking about Nebuchanezzer and the Prince of Tyre. Veteran wrote: “The reason I say it's an agenda to hide that Truth of God's Word is because of what Satan's original rebellion was about in coveting God's Throne for himself.” With all due respect, which is diminishing rapidly, the reason I bring these things out is because GOD SAID IT. God said he created evil. I have a direct quote. You don’t. If you want to attack the KJV, fine. So I’m trying to hide God’s truth by telling what he said? I covet God’s throne for myself? Is that what you are saying? I have a verse that says God created evil and YOU are the one trying to discredit it. Veteran wrote: “THAT is the main issue God brings up in those chapters used as 'types' for Satan.” Again, it wasn’t. I could by that idea because we must understand the spiritual meaning as being more important. So Jezebel being thrown down has more significance in that it was a prophecy. But these verses are speaking of human events. It is the more important, but not the main. Veteran wrote: “And it was never a flesh man that originally did that sin against God, but Satan himself as the originator of coveting God's Throne.” Of course it wasn’t… It was Eve’s fault! It was woman’s! Veteran wrote: “And naturally, those who serve the devil today do NOT want that kind of information out, nor believed.” Please… What are you accusing me of? I have provided or can provide everything I said with the words of God himself. You saying I serve the devil? YOU are the one throwing theories around. Yes, you do use scripture when you can, but you can’t back up everything you say with scripture, can you?