I’ve been taught throughout my lifetime that the being we refer to as the devil was once an archangel named Lucifer and that he rebelled against God and became “satan.” Where did that teaching come from? Most of you will respond by telling me that Isaiah 14 reveals that to us. Does this chapter really teach us that? Does it support that teaching? Let us look at this chapter and see if it really reveals that.
Before we turn to the Scriptures let us look at what some of the well known Bible commentaries tell us. First from Adam Clarke’s commentary on Isaiah 14:12.
“Verse 12. O Lucifer, son of the morning] The Versions in general agree in this translation, and render heilel as signifying Lucifer, the morning star, whether Jupiter or Venus; as these are both bringers of the morning light, or morning stars, annually in their turn. And although the context speaks explicitly concerning Nebuchadnezzar, yet this has been, I know not why, applied to the chief of the fallen angels, who is most incongruously denominated Lucifer, (the bringer of light!) an epithet as common to him as those of Satan and Devil. That the Holy Spirit by his prophets should call this arch-enemy of God and man the light-bringer, would be strange indeed. But the truth is, the text speaks nothing at all concerning Satan nor his fall, nor the occasion of that fall, which many divines have with great confidence deduced from this text. O how necessary it is to understand the literal meaning of Scripture, that preposterous comments may be prevented! Besides, I doubt whether our translation be correct. heilel, which we translate Lucifer, comes from yalal, yell, howl or shriek, and should be translated, ‘Howl, son of the morning;’ and so the Syriac has understood it; and for this meaning Michaelis contends: see his reasons in Parkhurst, under halal.”
Let us look further at John Wesley’s comments in his commentary of Isaiah 14:12.
“Fallen - From the height of thy glory. Lucifer - Which properly is a bright star, that ushers in the morning; but is here metaphorically taken for the mighty king of Babylon. Son - The title of son is given in scripture not only to a person or thing begotten or produced by another, but also to any thing which is related, to it, in which sense we read of the son of a night, Jonah 4:10, a son of perdition, John 17:12, and, which is more agreeable, to the present case, the sons of Arcturus, Job 38:32.”
And, from one more commentary, Matthew Henry’s:
“How hast thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer! son of the morning! v. 11, 12. The king of Babylon shone as brightly as the morning star, and fancied that wherever he came he brought day along with him; and has such an illustrious prince as this fallen, such a star become a clod of clay? Did ever any man fall from such a height of honour and power into such an abyss of shame and misery? This has been commonly alluded to (and it is a mere allusion) to illustrate the fall of the angels....”
Just reading these commentator’s words I think we have to begin to question the teaching we have grown up with. So, let us begin our study by looking briefly at the verses in question in Isaiah 14.
“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! 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: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.” (Isa. 14:12-14)
Let us first notice who God is addressing Himself to in this passage of Scripture. Verse 4, “That thou shall take up this proverb against the king of Babylon...”
God is speaking of and to and about “the King of Babylon,” not Lucifer, not satan, not a cherub. Drop down a few verses and we will see that God tells us of the end of this man’s reign, verse 11.
“Thy (referring to the king of Babylon) pomp is brought down to the grave, (satan never died or was placed into a grave) and the noise of thy viols (harps or lutes): the worm (or maggots) is spread under thee (maggots do not eat spirit bodies), and the worms cover thee.”
Your teaching and mine have been much alike and you are probably already parroting the old line, “ but the narrative jumps in verse 12 from the king of Babylon to the spirit being named Lucifer”. Does it? Is this “Lucifer” of verse 12 satan the devil? What does the end of the king of Babylon, in verse 11, have to do with the beginning of satan?
Let us look at verse 12 again. “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!”
We need to understand. Notice again what we read in verse 4 that God says to take up this proverb against the “king of Babylon.” Picking up this “proverb” in verse 10, which is after all the “trees” (different people which feared the king), spoken of in verses 6-8, are at rest because of the king’s demise. We will see if this “Lucifer theory” fits into these verses without twisting and wresting the English language.
Verses 10-14 of Isaiah 14: “All they shall speak and say unto thee (king of Babylon), art thou (king of Babylon) also become weak as we? art thou (king of Babylon) become like unto us (mortal men and not gods from heaven)? Thy (king of Babylon) pomp is brought down to the grave, [and] the noise of thy (king of Babylon) viols; the worm is spread under thee (king of Babylon), and the worms cover thee (king of Babylon). How art thou (king of Babylon) fallen from heaven, O Lucifer...”
Okay, what is this? How can the king of Babylon, the king of Babylon, the king of Babylon, the king of Babylon, the king of Babylon, the king of Babylon, the king of Babylon, the king of Babylon(made reference to eight times in two sentences), suddenly turn into “Lucifer” in the middle of a sentence? Is “Lucifer” a proper name? Is “Lucifer” another name for the king of Babylon? Is “Lucifer” an English word? Is there a Hebrew word that can be translated “Lucifer?”
Doing a bit of research we find that this word “Lucifer” appears NO other place in all of Scripture. Furthermore, “Lucifer” is not a Hebrew word, nor is it a English translation of a Hebrew word. “Lucifer” is Latin! And, it is related to a group of Latin derived English words including lucid, luciferin, and luciferose. All of these words suggest brightness or shining. “Lucifer” is the Latin Vulgate translation of the word “xosphoruos” in the Septuagint. This Greek word “xosphoruos” is the root of the English words fluorescence and phosphorescence. They also suggest brightness and shining.
Interestingly, there are no Hebrew or Aramaic text in which there is a word in this verse that corresponds. What is found in ALL such texts is the word “hehlehl,” eill, which is a form of the Hebrew stem “yah-iahl,” ill. And what is the meaning of “ill?” It means HOWL!
So, where does this bring us? There appears to be some confusion between a word meaning “brightness” and one meaning “howl.” It has been suggested that the translators of the Septuagint may have overlooked the smallest of the Hebrew letters or perhaps were using a copy in which it had been inadvertently omitted. Thus if the form of the word eill, as it occurs in this particular verse, were shortened to ell its meaning would be derived from a different root, in fact would be itself a different root, and the sense given in the Septuagint and the Vulgate would be at least understandable. However, there is still one gigantic exception. It could possibly mean “a shining one,” but there is ABSOLUTELY NO reason or rule of grammar for turning the word into a personal name such as “Lucifer.” Doubtless the KJV translators followed the Vulgate as they did in most of their translating.
Following is a listing of all of the King James renderings of the word that is found in the “Hebrew” texts and transliterations of its various forms. Every occurrence in the entire KJV is listed. You can be the judge. In ALL Hebrew or Aramaic texts of Isaiah 14:12 the only word found is “heh-lehl,” eill, which is a form of the Hebrew stem “yah-lahl,” ill, meaning howl. Here is Kittel’s Hebrew Text for the Hebrew stem ill–“yah-lahl”–HOWL:
Isa 13:6 eiliu Howl ye
Isa 14:31 eili Howl
Isa 15:2 iilil shall howl
Isa.15:3 iilil shall howl
Isa.16:7 iilil Howl
Isa.16:7 iilil shall howl
Isa. 23:1 eililu Howl ye
Isa. 23:6 eililu Howl ye
Isa. 23:14 eilile Howl ye
Isa. 52:5 eililu make to howl
Isa. 65:14 eililu shall howl
Jer. 4:8 ueililu Howl
Jer. 25:34 eililu Howl
Jer. 47:2 ueill and shall howl
Jer. 48:20 eilili Howl
Jer. 48:31 ailil will I howl
Jer. 48:39 eililu They shall howl (Howl ye)
Jer. 49:3 eilili Howl (Howl ye)
Jer. 51:8 eililu howl
Ezek. 30:2 eililu Howl ye
Hos. 7:14 ililu They howled
Joel 1:5 ueililu And howl
Joel 1:11 eililu howl
Joel 1:13 eililu And shall be howlings
Amos 8:1 ueililu and howl
Micah 1:8 uailile howl ye
Zeph. 1:11 aililu Howl
Zech. 11:2 eill howl
Zech. 11:2 eililu howl
Isa. 14:12 eill LUCIFER (??)
One need not be a Hebrew scholar to see at once that “Lucifer” is totally out of place in this listing. The meaning of this word is exceedingly clear; eill is a verb that means “HOWL”, and not a noun that can be in any way twisted into a personal name such as “Lucifer”!
Please notice carefully that the Hebrew verb eill in Isa. 14:12 is the very same identical form of the first verb eill in Zech. 11:2. Let us try substituting the personal noun “Lucifer” in place of the verb “howl” in the two places it occurs in Zech. 11:2. (Note that here as in many Scriptures, the trees are likened to people who are crying out because of death and destruction.)
“Lucifer, fir tree; for the cedar is fallen; because the mighty are spoiled: Lucifer, O ye oaks of Bashan; for the forest of the vintage is come down.”
I think you will have to agree such a translation would be nonsense. Let us try the same substitution back in Isaiah 14 where we find the word Lucifer in verse 12. Notice how this word is translated in verse 31. Instead of “Howl, O gate; cry, O city...” We would have it read, Lucifer, O gate; cry, O city...” Again, such a translation would be pure nonsense; just as it is also nonsense translated that way in Isa. 14:12.
In a footnote Kittel tells us that it is only the Septuagint (which is the Greek Translation of the Hebrew Scriptures) that we find this word ell instead of eill. This word was translated into eospearos, which Jerome translated into Lucifer with a capital “L” and which the King James translators carried over into our English Bible without checking the HEBREW manuscripts. If they would have it would have solved this dilemma. ALL of the Hebrew manuscripts have eill in Isaiah 14:12. And, keep in mind that the Old Testament was written in Hebrew, NOT Greek or Latin.
Let us read a few translations other than the KJV and see how they have dealt with this strange word ell which comes to us by way of the Greek Septuagint and the Latin Vulgate.
“How you are fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn! You are hacked down to the earth, destroyer of nations.” (New International Version)
“How you are fallen from heaven, O Day Star, son of Dawn! (New Revised Standard Version) Note: There is absolutely no reason to capitalize “day,” “star,” or “dawn” in this version.
A few translations have chosen to follow the Hebrew manuscripts rather than the Catholic Latin Bible.
“How you have fallen from the heavens! Howl, son of the dawn! You are hacked down to the earth, defeater of all nations.” (Concordant Literal Old Testament)
“How are you fallen from heaven! howl in the morning! for you have fallen down to the ground, O reviler of the nations.” (Holy Bible from the Ancient Eastern Text George M. Lamsa’s translation)
Another question that we need to address is just who was it that fell from heaven? And does the phrase “fallen from heaven” prove that this individual had to have been at God’s throne or in heaven to “fall from heaven”therefore proving that this must have been a spirit being? The answer is NO. This is simply a figure of speech. And, to prove this let us look to the words of our Saviour in Luke 10:15. “And thou, Capernaum, which art exalted to heaven, shalt be thrust down to hell.” So here we have a whole city being thrown down from heaven to hades, their grave. And so it is with the King of Babylon whose “pomp is brought down to the grave” (Isa. 14:11) These two Scriptures have exact parallel thoughts.
From the context it is very clear that it is the king of Babylon who elevated himself to high heaven in the heavens of his own mind, and it is the same king of Babylon who has “fallen from the heavens,” and it is the same king of Babylon who is “hacked down to the earth,” and it is the same king of Babylon who was the “defeater of all nations,” and not a “perfect satan.”
Before we move on let us look at verses 13 and 14 of Isaiah 14. Do we find any sign of satan here?
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:
Isaiah 14:14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.
Many would have us believe this is speaking of a spirit being rebelling against God and attempting to displace Him. As we have seen the context has been about a man and a system. So, the language here shouldn’t be a surprise. It is a continuation of Babylon, the same system that started at Babel, where they first thought to build “a tower whose top many reach into heaven.” (Gen. 11:4)
Now verse 15:
15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell (sheol–the grave), to the sides of the pit (cistern, hole, dungeon, or possibly crypt)
This is speaking of the demise, the death, of the king of Babylon, not the death of satan.
Maybe there is some sign of satan in verse 16.
Isaiah 14:16 They that see thee (has any man seen satan?) shall narrowly look (gaze) upon thee, [and] consider thee, [saying, Is] this the man (“man?” This is no satan but a MAN!) that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms;
As one continues reading there are more references to a “man,” not a spirit being. Verse 19, “But thou art cast out of thy grave...” Verse 20, “Thou shalt not be joined with them in burial,...”
We find in these verses that just like many of the Pharaohs and rulers of other nations who taught and thought that they were “gods” and who exalted themselves and their thrones to heaven, this king of Babylon was also just a MAN. And, God Almighty tells him to “HOWL” because He is going to bring him “DOWN TO HELL,” (the grave.) And, from history and archeology we find that is exactly what happened.
After looking at the context, understanding the unfortunate translation and capitalization used here, and without making assumptions, it is quite clear that there was no archangel named Lucifer that rebelled against God and became the adversary, called “Satan,” being talked about here. Isaiah 14 is speaking only of a man, the king of Babylon, not an archangel.
Updated 12/27/10
No comments:
Post a Comment