Is the last antichrist beast a dead man made alive again?

[robert derrick]

Try again, because the coming Antichrist person DOES NOT HAVE "SEVEN HEADS", etc. Or maybe you actually believe God creates monsters with seven heads in His creation?

God didn't create him that way, but he was created good by God like every angel and man in His image, until like Lucifer, he made himself a devil.

Since we know the first beast is a man, having the number of a man, and is cast into the LOF with the false prophet, then we know the revelation of Scripture is spiritual and ministerial, not physical, nor of nations and kingdoms of men.

Prophecy of Scripture reveals the devil and the beast as they are spiritually and ministerially, which is why they are now similar in image and shape, with heads, horns, crows, etc...but not the exact same. One is the devil, and the other is a false minister and spiritual child of the devil.

Their form and shape as created by God are the same, but nothing like the image of beasts and dragon they have become. When seen with eyes of angels and men, the dragon still has the jewels and pipes of Lucifer Ezek 28, and the beast still has the arms and leg of a man in Gen 2.

Real Wisdom in God's Word means understanding HOW God uses symbols and allegories from real nature that He created.

Real wisdom of God's word is always taking God at His word, who can speak just as plainly as any man:

Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.

Until someone can show that having the number of a man, does not mean he is a man, then he is simply a man.

For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.

The same applies to interpretation of prophecy of God. The simple answer given by God, is that the beast is a man. But that is foolishness to lovers of deciphering symbols and allegories. "It's just too simple and easy."

But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.

Those who love study, just for studies sake, don't want thinks to be simple and easy but hard and confusing. So they dismiss a simple beginning in order to start with something more confusing, and then by must sweat delcare how they have unravelled the Gordian Knot.

Like Alexander, the sword of the word just cuts straight thru all the confusing nonsense, and just says, "There, he's just a man. And the devil is just an andel."

They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, and consider thee, saying, Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms.

.We MUST also interpret those symbols per OTHER SCRIPTURE WITNESSES He gave to come to the proper understanding of HOW He is using them there in Revelation 13. For example,

For example:

Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.

For another example: NT doctrine of Christ speaks plainly of all such beasts, as being men of false teaching and prophecy.

And Scripture says, once again in plain English, that all antichrists are false apostles. They are brute beasts turning from the doctrine of Christ to their own prophecies, teachings, and gospels for profit, even as Balaam, the son of Bosor. (2 Peter 2)(Jude)

there's at least TWO OTHER SCRIPTURE WITNESSES where He showed the "ten horns" represent TEN KINGS.

And since he is a man, then we begin to interpret all such things spiritual and ministerial about that man: He is a man with 10 crowns, even as a man can wear many hats. He has 10 heads, as a man has many offices to: he is a great multitasker for the evil, not the good.

All empires are begun and built by one man, though unlike Alexander the Great, they are rarely built to their greatest height by the same man. But there are whole denominations and organizations of churches founded by and ruled by one man, and he is the same many heads many churches, rather than the One Head Jesus Christ.

Such a false apostle of his own organization of churches is the head of every one of his churches, though there be local pastors only representing him. Are we not kings and priests to God? Then the beasts are false kings and priests instead of Christ.

And since Rev.17 also reveals that the "seven heads" represent SEVEN MOUNTAINS, that means seven geographical areas on earth.

Which simply means an imperial organization of regions of throughout the world.

The "seven mountains" of Rev.17 is an EXPLANATION of the meaning of the "seven heads" symbol, NOT just another symbol.

Exactly, and so proves that beast of a man will be head and king over them all.

Instead of dismissing NT doctrine of Christ, that plainly says what beasts and antichrists are: brute ministers transforming themselves into false apostles and antichrists, after the manner of false prophets of old. Put your symbolic and allegorical mind to the task of how men can be so grotesquely spiritually and ministerially described by God, just like Lucifer.

Though they come as angels and ministers of light, God shows their true spiritual and ministerial nature of the beast:

But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.

The scholarship and wisdom of man's long studied endless debates of confusion, is to leap from OT prophecies to Jesus' Revelation of all prophecy, and treating them as though the NT doctrine of Christ in between doesn't even exist.

Three simple things show all such beasts are men, described spiritually and ministerially by Christ:
1. The first beast is a man by interpretation of Christ in Rev 13. And all such succeeding beasts are men according to Christ's doctrine from Paul, Peter, and Jude.
2. NT teaching says all antichrists are false apostles. (1 John 4)
3. Lucifer is described completely differently in Rev 13 as Satan the dragon, than how he was created perfect by God in Ezek 28.

Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee.

And so is any man created good by God in the beginning, but if he receive in his heart the spiritual power and ministerial authority of the the dragon, then he is also made to be in the image of the dragon, and no more of God.

 

[robert derrick]

You just revealed YOUR LACK OF BIBLE STUDY IN THE OLD TESTAMENT PROPHETS...

Isa 14:12-17
12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!
13 For thou hast said in thine heart, "I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:
14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High."
15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.
16 They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, and consider thee, saying, "Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms;
17 That made the world as a wilderness, and destroyed the cities thereof; that opened not the house of his prisoners?"
KJ

And now you finally use Scripture plainly as written to teach plainly from it. Good job. I've been waiting for you to do so.

Do you see there in verse 16 that GOD is calling Lucifer a "man"? You should, as that is direct Biblical proof that Lucifer ALSO has the image of a man!!

However, I have learned not to be so boastful of proving someone else wrong, until I have seen their answer.

But, first of all, you now must agree that the first beast is a man, by having the number of man as a 'direct quote', even as you believe Lucifer will be a man, by being 'quoted' as one.

However, the difference here is between God by Scripture speaking of the first beast as a man, and God by Scripture quoting what others say of Lucifer cast into the pit with them.

God by prophecy of Scripture in Rev 13 is speaking of man and his number, but God by prophecy of Scripture in Isaiah 14, is only recording accurately what they will say at that time.

The same thing happens in Acts 22, when Luke accurately quotes what Paul says of his companions on the road to Damascus, that they did not hear a voice, verses what Luke earlier quotes what God says really happened: they did hear Jesus' voice, as well as see that light.

Lucifer will enter into that man, as he did Judas, and then Lucifer will be cast into the pit of hell, when that man is cast into the LOF alive.

Those already in the pit, will then see and speak of him as a man like themselves, temporarily being tormented in hell for his sins: Prophecy records what they will say, not what God is saying of Lucifer as being a man of flesh and blood on earth, and then cast into the pit of hell.

Lucifer will enter into his last great son of perdition, but will not be that man, no more than he was the man Judas Iscariot.

And once again, Satan cannot be that man cast alive into the LOF, and then be cast again into the LOF, where the beast and false prophet already are.

And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

 

[robert derrick]

So apparently, YOU HAVE NOT EVEN READ GENESIS 1:26-27 WHERE GOD DECLARES HE MADE FLESH MAN IN HIS IMAGE LIKENESS

This is false natural theology. JW's go so far as to say souls of men are their mortal bodies, and cease to exist with the corpse, so that Jesus ceased to exist for 3 days after dying on the cross.

Our souls are created in the image of God, Who is a Spirit. Our souls like that of angels are spiritual beings created in the image of God.

Our natural bodies, like all living creatures on earth, are made from earth and shaped differently from all others by Christ.

But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:

It's not man's body that is made in the image of God, but God who was made in the image and likeness of man, when the Word was made flesh.

The only reason the Son of God now has the body of a man, is because He has come in the flesh of man. Neither God nor the Word had a body in the beginning, in order to shape Adam's flesh in His image.

AND OF THE ANGELS, which is that of the image of man!

Nowhere does any Scripture say angels are are made in the image of man. Scripture says we are made a little lower than the angels, because we are made with flesh and blood on earth, while they are made with spiritual bodies in heaven.

And neither Lucifer nor any angel looks anything remotely like a man in heaven:

Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering, the sardius, topaz, and the diamond, the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper, the sapphire, the emerald, and the carbuncle, and gold: the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created.

The only one in heaven that looks like a man on earth, is the man Christ Jesus in heaven, that was made flesh on earth in the likeness of men, rather than the likeness of whales or ostriches.

Man is not made in the Son's likeness on the throne, but the Son was made in the likeness of men on earth.

If all men are created bodily in the image of God, then all men would already be conformed to the image of His Son at birth and remain that way.

For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

If you want to go the route of Calvin's predestination, and say men were already created in the Son's image before entering the world, then all men are saved at birth and being conformed to His image on earth.

YEAH! GOD and the angels LOOK LIKE US, with the image of man!!! That image of man originates from God's OWN Image Likeness!t

Yippee. Not. But if it makes you feel good to think so and jump around all happy about it, then far be it, that I should disallusion you of it. Oops, already did. Sorry. I didn't know you get such a high out of it.

Have you not read...

Heb 13:2
2 Be not forgetful to entertain strangers: for thereby some have entertained angels unawares.

Sure. Awares and unawares, God sends them to look like men temporarily on earth.

Other than Lucifer in Ezek 28, we don't know what angels look like with spiritual bodies in heaven.

KJV

I don't know what FALSE JEW keeps pushing the completely stupid and idiotic idea that the image of man only began with the flesh creation of man,

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

The difference between angels and men, is that the souls of men are breathed into natural bodies being formed in the mother's womb.

I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well. My substance was not hid from thee, when I was made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth.

We see here it is the soul that is the context of being wonderfully made. Not the shape of a natural body, that the soul is then breathed into and wrapped by.

And you also see how your natural theology leads to you talk like the image of God is the image of man.

 

[ewq1938]

But, first of all, you now must agree that the first beast is a man, by having the number of man as a 'direct quote'

But, first of all, you now must agree that the second beast is a man, by having the number of man as a 'direct quote'


Rev 13:11 And I beheld another beast (second beast) coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon.

Rev 13:17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the (second) beast, or the number of his name.
Rev 13:18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the (second) beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.

 

[Davy]

God didn't create him that way, but he was created good by God like every angel and man in His image, until like Lucifer, he made himself a devil.

That's irrelevant to what I said. God does not do monsters. So a ten horned, seven headed, ten crowned beast is NOT a reality, as no such thing exists in God's creation. What that Rev.13:1 description with those symbols is, REPRESENTS something that is... REAL, and that is a BEAST KINGDOM.

Until you realize that, using your common sense, then you will never... understand Christ's Book of Revelation.

 

[n2thelight]

Which power is given by the Dragon. Satan has no power to make himself a man,

All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

Satan is not the maker of anything, not his sinful children from the womb, nor himself to be made a man, Which I wouldn't think he wants to be in the first place, since he still wants to be God on the throne.

The god of this world does not become a man, as the God of Israel does, but he will have the perfect tool of a man to enter into, so as to make him his best false christ ever seen on earth.

Stephen King made him the devil, in The Stand. Not God.

He's not going to make himself a man , he is called a man many times in scripture . He's coming here as who he is , a fallen angel

Ezekiel 28:14 "Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire."

Ezekiel 28:15 "Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee."


Isaiah 14:15 "Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit." After Satan has served his five months as the deceiver of the people, it is God that shall throw him into the pit."

Isaiah 14:16 "They that see thee shall shall narrowly look upon the, and consider thee, saying. "Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms;"

Is there any doubt that the man is satan? Try again

 

[robert derrick]

But, first of all, you now must agree that the second beast is a man, by having the number of man as a 'direct quote'

True. He's a man just like the first beast. But it's the first beast's number and name. The next beast and false prophet enforces the rule.

Rev 13:17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the (second) beast, or the number of his name.
Rev 13:18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the (second) beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.

And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon.

And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed.

And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.

And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:

And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.

Unfortunately you're getting too transparent in your changing Scripture, by taking it out of context. Vs 11 and on is all about what the next beast does for the first one.

 

[robert derrick]

That's irrelevant to what I said. God does not do monsters.

No. He just knows how to accurately desire them spiritually and ministerially.

So a ten horned, seven headed, ten crowned beast is NOT a reality, as no such thing exists in God's creation.

No, there is no man that is actually a beast on earth. But there are men described as beasts. ALexander the Great was described as one. Paul talked about fighting them in Ephesus. Peter and Jude speak of them as brute beasts.

The beasts in prophecy of God are all men, and many of them are false prophets, teachers, apostles and christs.

What that Rev.13:1 description with those symbols is, REPRESENTS something that is... REAL, and that is a BEAST KINGDOM.

A beast kingdom is not cast into the LOF. The beast is, but not his kingdom, whose armies are then destroyed around Armageddon.

Until you realize that, using your common sense, then you will never... understand Christ's Book of Revelation.

I'll stick with the number of a man is of a man, that will be a man cast alive into the LOF.

No kingdom of men are cast alive into the LOF, and especially not a kingdom, which is nothing without a man to rule it.

 

[robert derrick]

He's not going to make himself a man , he is called a man many times in scripture . He's coming here as who he is , a fallen angel

Ezekiel 28:14 "Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire."

Ezekiel 28:15 "Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee."

Isaiah 14:15 "Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit." After Satan has served his five months as the deceiver of the people, it is God that shall throw him into the pit."

The problem here is, that this is prophecy of Satan being cast into the pit of hell and shut up for a thousand years.

And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years, And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.

Until that time, he is still the god of this world, prince and power of the air, and walking about as a roaring lion.

And he is not cast into the pit, until after that man of sin is cast alive into the LOF, and then a thousand years later, the devil is cast into the LOF. He's not cast into the LOF twice, nor is he in the pit of hell and in the LOF at the same time.

Isaiah 14:16 "They that see thee shall shall narrowly look upon the, and consider thee, saying. "Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms;"

The next problem here is rightly dividing the word of truth. Scripture records prophecy and history of what men say, as well as prophecy and doctrine of what God says.

The Scripture is not God saying he is a man, but is only prophetically recording what they will ask about him in hell, when the devil is cast down among them. They aren't even saying he's a man, but only asking a question about him. They are only speaking of him in context of men, because like themselves he is cast into hell like a man tormented with them.

A similar case is Luke recording what Paul says about his companions to Damascus, vs what God says by Luke what really happened. They did hear the voice, but obviously lied to Paul about it, who took them at their word and so said they only saw the light.

Paul simply repeated a lie, that he could not prove false. God does not say they did not hear the voice, nor does he say Lucifer is a man.

Is there any doubt that the man is satan? Try again

See above. If you think it is an incorrect argument, then show me how. I'd be glad to see it, and agree those in hell were right, when they ask, is this the man?

At this point, the answer is no. He's the devil that inspired all that destruction,but he's not the man that did so for him on earth.

So long as we start with certain truth, then God can lead us into all truth, so that He never contradicts Himself.

Only the Word was ever made flesh from heaven, not any angel, and certainly not the devil. The Stand is a good enough book of fiction, but not true.

 

[ewq1938]

True. He's a man just like the first beast.

Did Daniel describe there being two men ruling in the end times? Did Paul write of the "men of sin" or "man of sin"?

 

[robert derrick]

Did Daniel describe there being two men ruling in the end times? Did Paul write of the "men of sin" or "man of sin"?

No. John did in rev 13. Prophecy of Scripture comes from all Scripture, which pieces it altogether.

Line by line, etc...

 

[ewq1938]

No. John did in rev 13. Prophecy of Scripture comes from all Scripture, which pieces it altogether.

Line by line, etc...

Or John was shown the same as Daniel and Paul, and it is a misinterpretation to turn a ten kingdomed empire into a single person. The ten horned beast is always a large empire, in Daniel 7 and Rev 13.

 

[The Light]

You just revealed YOUR LACK OF BIBLE STUDY IN THE OLD TESTAMENT PROPHETS...

No. I don't believe he did. I believe the error is yours. Much as I like the King James Version, there is a translation error here. The proper translation should be "Day Star" or "Morning Star" not Lucifer. KJV pulled the translation from the Latin Vulgate instead of properly translating the word.

Isa 14:12-17
12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!
13 For thou hast said in thine heart, "I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:
14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High."
15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.
16 They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, and consider thee, saying, "Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms;
17 That made the world as a wilderness, and destroyed the cities thereof; that opened not the house of his prisoners?"
KJV

Do you see there in verse 16 that GOD is calling Lucifer a "man"? You should, as that is direct Biblical proof that Lucifer ALSO has the image of a man!!


I don't know what FALSE JEW keeps pushing the completely stupid and idiotic idea that the image of man only began with the flesh creation of man, but they simply show their complete lack understanding the Scriptures of God's Word, even in the VERY FIRST CHAPTER OF THE BIBLE!

The verses are talking about Nimrod, the king of Babylon, not Lucifer. The proper translation is day star or morning star. You need to understand the false Babylonian religion to understand this. Nimrod at his death was claimed to be the sun. It is claimed that a ray of the sun impregnated Semiramis, his wife and mother and then Tammuz, the supposed reincarnation of Nimrod was born. Tammuz is the false savior. Tammuz is Horus. The eye of Horus is on the back of the United States 1 dollar bill. The world awaits their soon coming savior. But first Jesus will come for the first bride, the Church.

That said, Nimrod is the day star, not Lucifer. We can further prove that Nimrod is a last days Antichrist by these verses.

Isaiah 14
6 He who smote the people in wrath with a continual stroke, he that ruled the nations in anger, is persecuted, and none hindereth.

7 The whole earth is at rest, and is quiet: they break forth into singing.

8 Yea, the fir trees rejoice at thee, and the cedars of Lebanon, saying, Since thou art laid down, no feller is come up against us.

Since the death of Tammuz, the supposed reincarnation of Nimrod, the fir tree, has been cut down, decorated, and fastened with nails so it will stand upright. The fir tree, an evergreen, represents Nimrod. Nimrod is the beast of the sea. He will return. When Nimrod is laid down the second time, the fir trees will be at rest as they will no longer be cut down every December.

Revelation 17
8 The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.

9 And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth.

10 And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space.

11 And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.

Nimrod is the eighth king who is of the seven. The thing that hath been, is that which shall be, and that which is done is that which shall be done. There is no new thing under the sun.

Bottom line, Nimrod is the day star being talked about in Isaiah 14, not Lucifer.

 

[ewq1938]

The verses are talking about Nimrod, the king of Babylon, not Lucifer.

Lucifer is a correct translation.

It comes from the Hebrew word heylel which means "morning star" and when translated to Latin the Latin word for morning star is luxferre, lux "light" and ferre "carry" which became Lucifer.


Nimrod did not fall from heaven. This is about the one we call satan.

Isaiah 14:12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!

Who else but Satan will literally fall from heaven?

Isaiah 14:13 For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:

Who else but Satan could ascend into heaven like he did in Job?


Isaiah 14:14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.

Paul wrote that the Antichrist will also seek to do this and whether the AC is Satan or a Satan possessed man it still is a reference to Satan.


Isaiah 14:15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.


Exactly what Rev 20 depicts happening to Satan!

Isaiah 14:16 They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, and consider thee, saying, Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms;
Isaiah 14:17 That made the world as a wilderness, and destroyed the cities thereof; that opened not the house of his prisoners?

Satan bound for a thousand years and I can easily imagine people saying this about him!

That's far too many coincidences to just be about some old king of Babylon as all of it exactly pertains to Satan and what is going to happen to him and what he tries to accomplish.

The serpent was in the garden of Eden.
Lucifer was in the garden of Eden.
Satan was the serpent in the garden of Eden.

Satan fell from heaven.
Lucifer fell from heaven.

Satan will be cast into a pit.
Lucifer will be cast into a pit.

So how exactly is Lucifer not Satan?

 

[The Light]

Lucifer is a correct translation.

It comes from the Hebrew word heylel which means "morning star" and when translated to Latin the Latin word for morning star is luxferre, lux "light" and ferre "carry" which became Lucifer.

As I said, the translation is incorrect as it should be translated "day star" or "morning star" When you go to the Latin Vulgate you will see that the word "lucifer" is not capitalized and is not a proper name. When translated to the King James it was capitalized. It is not Lucifer that is being talked about, it is Nimrod the day star, the sun.

Nimrod did not fall from heaven. This is about the one we call satan.

Isaiah 14:12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!

Who else but Satan will literally fall from heaven?

Nimrod is claimed to be the sun. Check the Babylonian religion that is all over the world. He is the sun god. Semiramis is the moon god Isis. Tammuz is the star, Horus.

Isaiah 14:13 For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:

Who else but Satan could ascend into heaven like he did in Job?


Isaiah 14:14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.

Paul wrote that the Antichrist will also seek to do this and whether the AC is Satan or a Satan possessed man it still is a reference to Satan.

The beast of the sea is Nimrod, an Antichrist, so Paul just agrees with Isaiah 14.

Isaiah 14:15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.


Exactly what Rev 20 depicts happening to Satan!

Revelation 20
10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

Don't you notice that is where the beast is? So, your argument is invalid.

Isaiah 14:16 They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, and consider thee, saying, Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms;
Isaiah 14:17 That made the world as a wilderness, and destroyed the cities thereof; that opened not the house of his prisoners?

Satan bound for a thousand years and I can easily imagine people saying this about him!

Is Satan a man? This alone proves what you are saying is incorrect.

That's far too many coincidences to just be about some old king of Babylon as all of it exactly pertains to Satan and what is going to happen to him and what he tries to accomplish.

Sorry, but the king of Babylon is Nimrod.

Here is more proof, though I have found that scriptural proof holds little weight with many that post here.

Isaiah 14
24 The Lord of hosts hath sworn, saying, Surely as I have thought, so shall it come to pass; and as I have purposed, so shall it stand:

25 That I will break the Assyrian in my land, and upon my mountains tread him under foot: then shall his yoke depart from off them, and his burden depart from off their shoulders.

The Word is talking about the Assyrian. The Assyrian is Nimrod and not Lucifer. Nimrod is both the Assyrian and the King of Babylon.

The fact that the fir trees rejoice when the king of Babylon is laid down should be all the proof that is necessary, but again proof seems to matter little.

The serpent was in the garden of Eden.
Lucifer was in the garden of Eden.
Satan was the serpent in the garden of Eden.

Satan fell from heaven.
Lucifer fell from heaven.

Satan will be cast into a pit.
Lucifer will be cast into a pit.

So how exactly is Lucifer not Satan?

I don't recall saying that Satan is not Lucifer. This is a straw man argument. I'm saying that the day star is Nimrod who is claimed to be the sun.

 

[David in NJ]

As I said, the translation is incorrect as it should be translated "day star" or "morning star" When you go to the Latin Vulgate you will see that the word "lucifer" is not capitalized and is not a proper name. When translated to the King James it was capitalized. It is not Lucifer that is being talked about, it is Nimrod the day star, the sun.


Nimrod is claimed to be the sun. Check the Babylonian religion that is all over the world. He is the sun god. Semiramis is the moon god Isis. Tammuz is the star, Horus.

The beast of the sea is Nimrod, an Antichrist, so Paul just agrees with Isaiah 14.

Revelation 20
10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.

Don't you notice that is where the beast is? So, your argument is invalid.

Is Satan a man? This alone proves what you are saying is incorrect.


Sorry, but the king of Babylon is Nimrod.

Here is more proof, though I have found that scriptural proof holds little weight with many that post here.

Isaiah 14
24 The Lord of hosts hath sworn, saying, Surely as I have thought, so shall it come to pass; and as I have purposed, so shall it stand:

25 That I will break the Assyrian in my land, and upon my mountains tread him under foot: then shall his yoke depart from off them, and his burden depart from off their shoulders.

The Word is talking about the Assyrian. The Assyrian is Nimrod and not Lucifer. Nimrod is both the Assyrian and the King of Babylon.

The fact that the fir trees rejoice when the king of Babylon is laid down should be all the proof that is necessary, but again proof seems to matter little.


I don't recall saying that Satan is not Lucifer. This is a straw man argument. I'm saying that the day star is Nimrod who is claimed to be the sun.

Lucifer is satan.
The Assyrian whom God will "break in my land" is the Antichrist = a man.

Without satan in the man of sin, you have no Antichrist.

Luke 22:1-6
Now the Feast of Unleavened Bread drew near, which is called Passover. And the chief priests and the scribes sought how they might kill Him, for they feared the people.
Then Satan entered Judas, surnamed Iscariot, who was numbered among the twelve.
So he went his way and conferred with the chief priests and captains, how he might betray Him to them. And they were glad, and agreed to give him money. So he promised and sought opportunity to betray Him to them in the absence of the multitude.

John 17:12
While I was with them in the world, I kept them in Your name.
Those whom You gave Me I have kept; and none of them is lost except the son of perdition, that the Scripture might be fulfilled.

 

[No Pre-TB]

Why I believe lucifer is Not Satan.

1. lucifer is not a personal name. It is a description. Example: Using lucifer in its proper English reading would look like:
"Day star, son of the morning"aka Morning star. Neither of which is a personal name.
2. The word heylel describes bringing in light. The same we are to let our lights shine.
3. Christ is the bright morning star. Revelation 22:16
4. We are promised to have the Morning star ourselves. Revelation 2:28
5. The context of Isaiah 14:3-22 is, " take up this proverb against the king of Babylon"
6. Satan is not described anywhere in Isaiah CH's 12, 13, 14, 15, 16...in context, by name or otherwise.
7. If you do not understand poetic language, who are: the fir trees rejoice at thee, and the cedars of Lebanon. The story is poetic
8. When is Satan ever described to be persecuted in verse 6? Only men are persecuted.
9. He is called a man in verse 16, "Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms"
10. He said, For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven. So did Capernaum in Matthew 11:23, So does the man of sin in 2 Thessalonians 2:4, and in Job 20:6, or Ezekiel 28:2 against the prince of Tyre.

"Lucifer” etymologically gives the same meaning, and is used by Latin poets (Tibull. i., 10, 62) for Venus, as an equivalent for the phôsphoros of the Greeks. Few English readers realise the fact that it is the king of Babylon, and not the devil, who is addressed as Lucifer. While this has been the history of the Latin word, its Greek and English equivalents have risen to a higher place, and the “morning star” has become a name of the Christ (Revelation 22:16)."

"The word in Hebrew occurs as a noun nowhere else. In two other places Ezekiel 21:12; Zechariah 11:2, it is used as a verb in the imperative mood of Hiphil, and is translated 'howl' from the verb ילל yālal, "to howl" or "cry." Gesenius and Rosenmuller suppose that it should be so rendered here. So Noyes renders it, 'Howl, son of the morning!' But the common translation seems to be preferable. The Septuagint renders it, Ἑωσφόρος Heōsphoros, and the Vulgate, 'Lucifer, the morning star.' The Chaldee, 'How art thou fallen from high, who wert splendid among the sons of men.' There can be no doubt that the object in the eve of the prophet was the bright morning star; and his design was to compare this magnificent oriental monarch with that. The comparison of a monarch with the sun, or the other heavenly bodies, is common in the Scriptures."

"It is singular, however, that among the Semitic nations the morning star is not personified as a male (Heōsphoros or Phōsphoros), but as a female (Astarte, see at Isaiah 17:8), and that it is called Nâghâh, Ashtoreth, Zuhara, but never by a name derived from hâlal; whilst the moon is regarded as a male deity (Sin), and in Arabic hilâl signifies the new moon, which might be called ben- shacar (son of the dawn), from the fact that, from the time when it passes out of the invisibility of its first phase, it is seen at sunrise, and is as it were born out of the dawn.)"

EDIT: Also,
In the Latin vulgate, it is not capitalized.

"quomodo cecidisti de caelo lucifer qui mane oriebaris corruisti in terram qui vulnerabas gentes"

 

[David in NJ]

Why I believe lucifer is Not Satan.

1. lucifer is not a personal name. It is a description. Example: Using lucifer in its proper English reading would look like:
"Day star, son of the morning"aka Morning star. Neither of which is a personal name.
2. The word heylel describes bringing in light. The same we are to let our lights shine.
3. Christ is the bright morning star. Revelation 22:16
4. We are promised to have the Morning star ourselves. Revelation 2:28
5. The context of Isaiah 14:3-22 is, " take up this proverb against the king of Babylon"
6. Satan is not described anywhere in Isaiah CH's 12, 13, 14, 15, 16...in context, by name or otherwise.
7. If you do not understand poetic language, who are: the fir trees rejoice at thee, and the cedars of Lebanon. The story is poetic
8. When is Satan ever described to be persecuted in verse 6? Only men are persecuted.
9. He is called a man in verse 16, "Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms"
10. He said, For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven. So did Capernaum in Matthew 11:23, So does the man of sin in 2 Thessalonians 2:4, and in Job 20:6, or Ezekiel 28:2 against the prince of Tyre.

"Lucifer” etymologically gives the same meaning, and is used by Latin poets (Tibull. i., 10, 62) for Venus, as an equivalent for the phôsphoros of the Greeks. Few English readers realise the fact that it is the king of Babylon, and not the devil, who is addressed as Lucifer. While this has been the history of the Latin word, its Greek and English equivalents have risen to a higher place, and the “morning star” has become a name of the Christ (Revelation 22:16)."

"The word in Hebrew occurs as a noun nowhere else. In two other places Ezekiel 21:12; Zechariah 11:2, it is used as a verb in the imperative mood of Hiphil, and is translated 'howl' from the verb ילל yālal, "to howl" or "cry." Gesenius and Rosenmuller suppose that it should be so rendered here. So Noyes renders it, 'Howl, son of the morning!' But the common translation seems to be preferable. The Septuagint renders it, Ἑωσφόρος Heōsphoros, and the Vulgate, 'Lucifer, the morning star.' The Chaldee, 'How art thou fallen from high, who wert splendid among the sons of men.' There can be no doubt that the object in the eve of the prophet was the bright morning star; and his design was to compare this magnificent oriental monarch with that. The comparison of a monarch with the sun, or the other heavenly bodies, is common in the Scriptures."

"It is singular, however, that among the Semitic nations the morning star is not personified as a male (Heōsphoros or Phōsphoros), but as a female (Astarte, see at Isaiah 17:8), and that it is called Nâghâh, Ashtoreth, Zuhara, but never by a name derived from hâlal; whilst the moon is regarded as a male deity (Sin), and in Arabic hilâl signifies the new moon, which might be called ben- shacar (son of the dawn), from the fact that, from the time when it passes out of the invisibility of its first phase, it is seen at sunrise, and is as it were born out of the dawn.)"

You said: "Why I believe lucifer is Not Satan - 1. lucifer is not a personal name."

This is a failed argument right from the start.

"Prince of Peace" - ditto , not a personal name

"Wonderful Counselor" - not a personal name

"My Servant" - not a personal name

"Lamb of God" - not a personal name

"only begotten Son" - not a personal name

"Redeemer" - not a personal name

"son of man" - not a personal name



Lucifer is satan = clear as day and dark as night

Ezekiel ch28
Thus says the Lord God:

“You were the seal of perfection,
Full of wisdom and perfect in beauty.
You were in Eden, the garden of God;
Every precious stone was your covering:
The sardius, topaz, and diamond,
Beryl, onyx, and jasper,
Sapphire, turquoise, and emerald with gold.
The workmanship of your timbrels and pipes
Was prepared for you on the day you were created.

“You were the anointed cherub who covers;
I established you;
You were on the holy mountain of God;
You walked back and forth in the midst of fiery stones.
You were perfect in your ways from the day you were created,
Till iniquity was found in you.

 

[David in NJ]

Why I believe lucifer is Not Satan.

1. lucifer is not a personal name. It is a description. Example: Using lucifer in its proper English reading would look like:
"Day star, son of the morning"aka Morning star. Neither of which is a personal name.
2. The word heylel describes bringing in light. The same we are to let our lights shine.
3. Christ is the bright morning star. Revelation 22:16
4. We are promised to have the Morning star ourselves. Revelation 2:28
5. The context of Isaiah 14:3-22 is, " take up this proverb against the king of Babylon"
6. Satan is not described anywhere in Isaiah CH's 12, 13, 14, 15, 16...in context, by name or otherwise.
7. If you do not understand poetic language, who are: the fir trees rejoice at thee, and the cedars of Lebanon. The story is poetic
8. When is Satan ever described to be persecuted in verse 6? Only men are persecuted.
9. He is called a man in verse 16, "Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms"
10. He said, For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven. So did Capernaum in Matthew 11:23, So does the man of sin in 2 Thessalonians 2:4, and in Job 20:6, or Ezekiel 28:2 against the prince of Tyre.

"Lucifer” etymologically gives the same meaning, and is used by Latin poets (Tibull. i., 10, 62) for Venus, as an equivalent for the phôsphoros of the Greeks. Few English readers realise the fact that it is the king of Babylon, and not the devil, who is addressed as Lucifer. While this has been the history of the Latin word, its Greek and English equivalents have risen to a higher place, and the “morning star” has become a name of the Christ (Revelation 22:16)."

"The word in Hebrew occurs as a noun nowhere else. In two other places Ezekiel 21:12; Zechariah 11:2, it is used as a verb in the imperative mood of Hiphil, and is translated 'howl' from the verb ילל yālal, "to howl" or "cry." Gesenius and Rosenmuller suppose that it should be so rendered here. So Noyes renders it, 'Howl, son of the morning!' But the common translation seems to be preferable. The Septuagint renders it, Ἑωσφόρος Heōsphoros, and the Vulgate, 'Lucifer, the morning star.' The Chaldee, 'How art thou fallen from high, who wert splendid among the sons of men.' There can be no doubt that the object in the eve of the prophet was the bright morning star; and his design was to compare this magnificent oriental monarch with that. The comparison of a monarch with the sun, or the other heavenly bodies, is common in the Scriptures."

"It is singular, however, that among the Semitic nations the morning star is not personified as a male (Heōsphoros or Phōsphoros), but as a female (Astarte, see at Isaiah 17:8), and that it is called Nâghâh, Ashtoreth, Zuhara, but never by a name derived from hâlal; whilst the moon is regarded as a male deity (Sin), and in Arabic hilâl signifies the new moon, which might be called ben- shacar (son of the dawn), from the fact that, from the time when it passes out of the invisibility of its first phase, it is seen at sunrise, and is as it were born out of the dawn.)"

EDIT: Also,
In the Latin vulgate, it is not capitalized.

"quomodo cecidisti de caelo lucifer qui mane oriebaris corruisti in terram qui vulnerabas gentes"

Scripture give us complete confidence to know that 'Lucifer' was the name given by God BEFORE he sinned and became known as Satan.

“You were the anointed cherub who covers;
I established you;
You were on the holy mountain of God;
You walked back and forth in the midst of fiery stones.
You were perfect in your ways from the day you were created,
Till iniquity was found in you.

 

[No Pre-TB]

You said: "Why I believe lucifer is Not Satan - 1. lucifer is not a personal name."

This is a failed argument right from the start.

"Prince of Peace" - ditto , not a personal name

"Wonderful Counselor" - not a personal name

"My Servant" - not a personal name

"Lamb of God" - not a personal name

"only begotten Son" - not a personal name

"Redeemer" - not a personal name

"son of man" - not a personal name



Lucifer is satan = clear as day and dark as night

Ezekiel ch28
Thus says the Lord God:

“You were the seal of perfection,
Full of wisdom and perfect in beauty.
You were in Eden, the garden of God;
Every precious stone was your covering:
The sardius, topaz, and diamond,
Beryl, onyx, and jasper,
Sapphire, turquoise, and emerald with gold.
The workmanship of your timbrels and pipes
Was prepared for you on the day you were created.

“You were the anointed cherub who covers;
I established you;
You were on the holy mountain of God;
You walked back and forth in the midst of fiery stones.
You were perfect in your ways from the day you were created,
Till iniquity was found in you.

8The cedars in the garden of God could not rival it; the cypresses could not compare with its branches, nor the plane trees match its boughs. No tree in the garden of God could compare with its beauty. 9I made it beautiful with its many branches, the envy of all the trees of Eden, which were in the garden of God.’ ----so that all the trees of Eden, that were in the garden of God, envied him

How do trees in Eden envy a King? or Ezekiel 31:16...who are the trees in Eden?

I made the nations to shake at the sound of his fall, when I cast him down to hell with them that descend into the pit: and all the trees of Eden, the choice and best of Lebanon, all that drink water, shall be comforted in the nether parts of the earth.

Again, its poetic language. Otherwise, explain the 2 passages in Ezekiel.