Is there a difference between Satan and Lucifer?

For discussing the Church, Gospel of Jesus Christ, Mormonism, etc.
User avatar
Rachael
Captain of whatever
Posts: 2410

Re: Is there a difference between Satan and Lucifer?

Post by Rachael »

I have a lot of guilt and regrets about many things. But the 'good news' is I believe in the Gospel.

And sorry for taking your comments personally. I guess I did the high jumping

User avatar
Alaris
Captain of 144,000
Posts: 7354
Location: Present before the general assembly
Contact:

Re: Is there a difference between Satan and Lucifer?

Post by Alaris »

I will attempt to delineate evidence that Lucifer and Satan may be different individuals with as few scripture references as possible. You have to make some assumptions for this logic train--OK many assumptions. However, I do believe there is a good chance they are separate individuals.

First of all, Michael fights the Dragon, not Jesus / Jehova:

Revelation 12:7

And there was war in heaven, Michael and his angels waging war with the dragon. The dragon and his angels waged war,


D&C 88

111 And then he shall be loosed for a little season, that he may gather together his armies.
112 And Michael, the seventh angel, even the archangel, shall gather together his armies, even the hosts of heaven.
113 And the devil shall gather together his armies; even the hosts of hell, and shall come up to battle against Michael and his armies.
114 And then cometh the battle of the great God; and the devil and his armies shall be cast away into their own place, that they shall not have power over the saints any more at all.
115 For Michael shall fight their battles, and shall overcome him who seeketh the throne of him who sitteth upon the throne, even the Lamb.


So we learn from these scriptures that Michael is the one fighting the dragon in the pre-mortal realm (revelation) and the devil at the end of the millenium (D&C.) It's parallel and makes sense, so let's assume that the dragon and the devil are the same person.

Abraham 3

22 Now the Lord had shown unto me, Abraham, the intelligences that were organized before the world was; and among all these there were many of the noble and great ones;
23 And God saw these souls that they were good, and he stood in the midst of them, and he said: These I will make my rulers; for he stood among those that were spirits, and he saw that they were good; and he said unto me: Abraham, thou art one of them; thou wast chosen before thou wast born.
24 And there stood one among them that was like unto God, and he said unto those who were with him: We will go down, for there is space there, and we will take of these materials, and we will make an earth whereon these may dwell;
25 And we will prove them herewith, to see if they will do all things whatsoever the Lord their God shall command them;
26 And they who keep their first estate shall be added upon; and they who keep not their first estate shall not have glory in the same kingdom with those who keep their first estate; and they who keep their second estate shall have glory added upon their heads for ever and ever.
27 And the Lord said: Whom shall I send? And one answered like unto the Son of Man: Here am I, send me. And another answered and said: Here am I, send me. And the Lord said: I will send the first.
28 And the second was angry, and kept not his first estate; and, at that day, many followed after him.


I personal believe that this is the most misunderstood scripture in all mormondom. Michael literally means "Like God" or "Like Unto God." So, verse 24 could read, "And there stood one among them that was Michael." Also, in verse 27 notice how one answered "like unto the Son of Man." If the Son of Man was answering then it wouldn't say "Like unto the son of man." Now this make sense given the fact that it is Michael who is listed as the principal general who fights the devil both in the premortal realm and at the end of the millenium (see first two scriptures.) Also, the scope of Abraham 3 isn't the whole creation but our earth only. Do we not believe that the 1/3 part are bound to this earth as we are? So then doesn't it make sense that the devil is also bound to just this world as Michael is the principal priesthood authority on earth? Abraham 3 is about who JESUS is going to send as the principal (sorry to keep using that word) on Earth. This also fits with what we learn in the temple about the creation.

I have to run, but let me just say first that I believe that to become a son of the morning, you have to do way more than just be noble during a first estate. The individual who rebelled in Abraham 3 lost only his first estate. Would not the heavens lament a loss of a son of the morning far more than a first estate spirit?

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!


Perhaps Lucifer is to Jesus as Michael is to the Devil--Lucifer being higher on the rebellion's hierarchy against Jehovah's creation. I didn't delineate the assumptions that have to be made, but I will return!

Older/wiser?
captain of 100
Posts: 538

Re: Is there a difference between Satan and Lucifer?

Post by Older/wiser? »

There is no difference , except time and place. There are passages of scripture that with a small knowledge of symbolism are perfectly clear and very plain. We walk this earth under names different than our Heavenly names, yet we are the same .we have lost the knowledge of who we are, if we desire to return Rev.2:17 To him that overcome will I give of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth, saving he that received it. Lucifer also lost his name of who he once was, retaining his knowledge of who he was and what he did , his name then became Satan.

User avatar
Alaris
Captain of 144,000
Posts: 7354
Location: Present before the general assembly
Contact:

Re: Is there a difference between Satan and Lucifer?

Post by Alaris »

Older/wiser? wrote:There is no difference , except time and place. There are passages of scripture that with a small knowledge of symbolism are perfectly clear and very plain. We walk this earth under names different than our Heavenly names, yet we are the same .we have lost the knowledge of who we are, if we desire to return Rev.2:17 To him that overcome will I give of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth, saving he that received it. Lucifer also lost his name of who he once was, retaining his knowledge of who he was and what he did , his name then became Satan.
Fantastic points. However, further in that same chapter...

Revelation 2

26: And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations:
27 And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father.
28 And I will give him the morning star.


I believe Lucifer already overcame and received the morning star. I believe he kept his first and second estates at the least which is why he was an angel in authority in the presence of God and the Son and the Lucifer lament would otherwise be callous unless this fallen individual was beyond the first estate (why not lament all the souls unless it was two different levels and two different events.)

The being referenced in Abraham 3 kept not his first estate. I believe Adam and the noble and great ones were quite possible beings beyond the first and second estates as well though I'm opening up another can with that comment.

User avatar
passionflower
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1026

Re: Is there a difference between Satan and Lucifer?

Post by passionflower »

Fiannan wrote:This is not only meant to deal with LDS theology either. I have heard that many of the elite of America and Europe admire Luciferianism but that they believe there is a difference between Lucifer (the bearer of light) and Satan. There is some evidence that ancient Hebrews recognized a pantheon of gods and goddesses and not just the main players we think of, the Father, Son, Holy Ghost and bad-boy Satan/Lucifer. In ancient days was Satan like Loki in Norse mythology, more a trouble-maker as opposed to Lucifer who is more like the leader of the opposition party in Heaven? Again, I am pretty sure that Lucifer and Satan are the same, but do those in power believe they are different?

Having the unfortunate circumstance of a past personal aquaintance with Satan, I can personally testify he and Lucifer are one and the same.

Mythology, or the pantheon of gods and goddesses, has more to do with alchemy, astronomical observations, and other sciences than actual people or Gods to be worshipped ( originally ). Speaking generally, one has to get into Egypt or ancient civilizations that don't exist anymore to find a story of creation and premortal existence that would include Adam, Eve, Satan, Abel, etc.,

I have no doubt Satan has a lot of fun with the ideas Luciferians have concerning him, but not nearly as much fun as he is with all the theological philosophising and speculation done previously in this thread. If truth be told, he is actually just a basic run of the mill spirit person who is animated, makes decisions, has goals, and can make conversation, etc, and it wouldn't be incorrect to think of him as a general in command of an army completely united in a war of rebellion against Jesus Christ, Heavenly Father, and the church here on earth, with the ultimate outcome highly desirable to himself and his followers.

The little that is revealed about him is important to know only because it leads us to understand our need for a Saviour. Without the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, we would all become angels to a devil, who was formerly Lucifer but now is known as Satan. As I have said somewhere else, and after my own lengthy and prolonged experience, anyone who is not hysterically grateful for what JC did for us in the atonement, does not understand it or what would have become of all of us if he hadn't done this. Alma understood it, as well as a few others, and could not rest from preaching the gospel in order to save some from what he saw. It is no wonder to me that Nephi is kissing his feet, along with the woman with the alabaster box. I wish some of you could hear the cries of the damned, which are so HORRIFIC they cannot be imitated by any human being, no matter how good of an actor. And what it will feel like to weep, wail and gnash your teeth for what one might have had should not be underestimated.

I used to tell my kids that God has a plan for their life.
Then I would add that Satan has a plan for their life, too, and the devil is in the details when it comes to this, and he is a most formidable foe.

User avatar
Alaris
Captain of 144,000
Posts: 7354
Location: Present before the general assembly
Contact:

Re: Is there a difference between Satan and Lucifer?

Post by Alaris »

Older/wiser? wrote:There is no difference , except time and place. There are passages of scripture that with a small knowledge of symbolism are perfectly clear and very plain. We walk this earth under names different than our Heavenly names, yet we are the same .we have lost the knowledge of who we are, if we desire to return Rev.2:17 To him that overcome will I give of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth, saving he that received it. Lucifer also lost his name of who he once was, retaining his knowledge of who he was and what he did , his name then became Satan.
I replied to this yesterday but apparently I did something wrong. Ironically the counterpoint to your scripture, Older/Wiser, is in the same chapter, Revelation 2:

26 And he that overcometh, and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations:
27 And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father.
28 And I will give him the morning star.


I believe that the morning star is a status received sometime after keeping the second estate and is the same status of son of the morning. This status may be indicative of those who become the noble and great ones mentioned in Abraham 3. Notice how that scripture (see my first reply) says that among those intelligences that were organized were many of the noble and great ones. I've always assumed this scripture meant that these were the noble and great ones OF the spirits who were organized into their first estate. However the language allows for another interpretation and I believe there is evidence to support this other interpretation. The other possible interpretation is that these noble and great ones were beings beyond their second estate among those who were first estate spirits. The evidence to support this is the word "many:"

Abraham 3:22 Now the Lord had shown unto me, Abraham, the intelligences that were organized before the world was; and among all these there were many of the noble and great ones;

Why just "many?" Where were the rest of the noble and great ones? This verse and the verses that follow indicate that Abraham was shown and is talking about all the spirits bound to earth including the third part--yet only "many" of the noble and great ones were among them. This makes more sense if "the" noble and great ones were assigned to many earths after having passed through one mortal probation, for example.

Also, isn't Lucifer referred to as such in the temple? He had been cast out already according to Abraham 3 if it's the same person. Surely he would have lost his name by then if that's what happened. And he would be unable to carry fruit around if he was a first estate spirit as the unammed individual who kept not his first estate was in Abraham 3.

Again I'm not saying they're separate beings but the lament in Isaiah makes so much more sense if Heaven was lamenting a soul who rebelled so much further in the process than the first estate. A son of the morning!

User avatar
Alaris
Captain of 144,000
Posts: 7354
Location: Present before the general assembly
Contact:

Re: Is there a difference between Satan and Lucifer?

Post by Alaris »


D&C 129:8-9
8 If it be the devil as an angel of light, when you ask him to shake hands he will offer you his hand, and you will not feel anything; you may therefore detect him.

9 These are three grand keys whereby you may know whether any administration is from God.


According to Abraham 3 the unnamed angry first estate being who was rejected kept not his first estate and did not receive a body. I am guessing he would be unable to do things such as pick fruit from a tree and carry it to someone to suggest they eat. Otherwise such laws of physics and beings would probably not be called "grand" keys.

User avatar
Joel
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7043

Re: Is there a difference between Satan and Lucifer?

Post by Joel »

Differences between Satan and Lucifer are explained some:
Jim Whitefield wrote:The Invention of Satan, Lucifer or the Devil.

The KJV contains no statement in any of the writings attributed to Moses about how the devil (Satan) came into being. The Old Testament (OT) contains no mention of him. That is because the Hebrews did not, and Jews still don’t, believe in such a creature. Until the New Testament (NT) was constructed, which occurred several decades, to even centuries, after Christ purportedly lived, such a character is not mentioned anywhere at all. As with the Holy Ghost being a NT creation, with some fifty references, and none in the OT, so is the devil or Satan, with an equal count of about fifty NT areas of reference; the name itself being used in one way or another, many more times than that. Neither one is referenced anywhere in the OT at all. (In Judaism, the Holy Spirit is simply the mind or will of God).

The only references to ‘devils’ in the OT do not refer to the concept of Satan, but rather to pagan worship. There are only four that I could locate.

Leviticus 17:7. And they shall no more offer their sacrifices unto devils, after whom they have gone a whoring. This shall be a statute for ever unto them throughout their generations. (Bold added to all four of these quotes).

Deuteronomy 32:17. They sacrificed unto devils, not to God; to gods whom they knew not, to new gods that came newly up, whom your fathers feared not.

2 Chronicles 11:15. And he ordained him priests for the high places, and for the devils, and for the calves which he had made.

Psalm 106:37. Yea, they sacrificed their sons and their daughters unto devils.

‘Satan’ and also the ‘Holy Ghost’ are Christian inventions; Satan serving to create fear, for the purposes of early Christian scribes as they created their new religion: Christianity. The Jewish ‘HaSatan’ (the Satan), God’s adversary, sits on God’s council in the OT, but is erroneously equated in several instances to the idea of the Christian devil who first appears in the New Testament.

HaSatan’s true role is adversarial; he is not autonomous, but rather works for God, needing his permission before embarking on any venture. In Judaism, HaSatan is not evil.

The best known references to HaSatan are in the book of Job. Consider a little of the conversation between HaSatan and God. Job 1:6-12 and 2:1-6 are almost identical. (The Bible is often very badly edited).

Job 2:3. And the Lord said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man.

HaSatan taunts God in v.5 and says “put forth thine hand now, and touch his bone and his flesh, and he will curse thee to thy face.” God takes up HaSatan’s challenge and grants him permission to test Job:

Job 2:6. And the Lord said unto Satan, Behold, he is in thine hand; but save his life.

Without God’s permission, HaSatan can do nothing. The only other OT references to the character are these, where he is always under God’s control:

Zechariah 3:1-2. And he shewed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the Lord, and Satan standing at his right hand to resist him. And the Lord said unto Satan, The Lord rebuke thee, O Satan; even the Lord that hath chosen Jerusalem rebuke thee: is not this a brand plucked out of the fire?

1 Chronicles 21:1. And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel.

Psalm 109:6. Set thou a wicked man over him: and let Satan stand at his right hand.

In reality, many references to the devil or devils in the NT simply refer to the condition of a person who was probably either mentally ill or prone to fits, which in the modern world would be considered totally differently to the way such things were viewed two thousand years ago. For example, in Luke 8:2 Mary Magdalene is “healed” of evil spirits and infirmities, “out of whom went seven devils.” How did anyone ever know there were seven? Most theologians agree Luke was written by the same anonymous author as Acts, many years after the time of Christ. None of the NT writers ever knew or even met Jesus, and Luke was just ‘ascribed’ somewhere around the second century CE, to the Luke named in Colossians (a doctor and disciple of Paul). That is, it was simply ‘assigned’ to someone; in this case, the Luke that Paul speaks about. Perhaps there was no one else who they could think of to choose as an ascribed author.

However, no one really knows who wrote Luke, and scholars are equally divided as to whether it is even historical. So, notwithstanding that problem, who was there to actually see and count each of the seven devils that left the infirm Mary Magdalene? Why does that not happen any more? It is perfectly clear that the ‘devils’ were not actually real in this or any other New Testament instance.

A further huge error made by many is to consider that Lucifer is Satan. The idea stems from a single reference to the word – in Isaiah.

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!

Lucifer is a Latin word. In the original Hebrew text, the fourteenth chapter of Isaiah is not about a fallen angel; rather it is about a fallen Babylonian king, who, during his lifetime, persecuted the children of Israel. There is no mention of Satan, by name or even by inference. Many years after Christ supposedly lived, the proper name, Jesus Christ, evolved and it was early Christian scribes writing in Latin (which was used by the Church), who appear to have decided that they wanted the story in Isaiah to be about a fallen angel, a creature not mentioned in the original Hebrew text (or even believed in by the Jews) and to whom they gave the name ‘Lucifer’ for their own reasons.

In Roman astronomy, Lucifer was the name for the planet we now know as Venus, which is another Roman name. In Hebrew it reads ‘heleyl ben shachar’, which literally means ‘shining one, son of the dawn’, according to Young’s Literal Translation. This phrase refers to the planet Venus when it appears as a morning star. It is translated in the Septuagint (third century translation from Hebrew into Greek) as ‘Eo(u)s phoros’ which also means morning star or dawn god of light, i.e., our ‘Venus’ as a morning star.

The name ‘Lucifer’ appears nowhere prior to the idea being introduced into scripture in Jerome’s Latin Vulgate. It wasn’t actually an error in Latin, as ‘lucifer’ also actually means the same thing – Venus as a morning star. Isaiah was using the metaphor of a bright light in the heavens to represent the power of the Babylonian king who then became faded or fallen. It was as simple as that. What it has subsequently been constructed to represent, thousands of years later by Christians, I find incredulous. It is as theologically far from actual truth as you can possibly get.

God never introduced the Christian idea of Satan. Isaiah lived during the late eighth and early seventh centuries BCE. The Vulgate was written in the early fifth century CE. Well over a thousand years had passed before ‘Lucifer’ appeared as a word in Isaiah. Only after that interpolation did Christians equate it to the devil. It would have been impossible for the Hebrew prophet, Isaiah, to have used the term to mean the devil, for the simple reason that they did not and do not believe in the devil. It would completely contradict their devout idea of monotheism, as giving power to another creates dual gods.

To recap: Jews do believe in ‘THE Satan’, but the concept is radically different from the Christian idea of the devil. Jews believe in neither the devil nor hell. ‘The Satan’ has no power and is an angel who works FOR God, not against him. He must obtain permission from God for everything he does. He is described more as a prosecuting attorney (the Hebrew word for ‘The Satan’ literally means ‘adversary’), who must accuse and show evidence against a defendant. He is the accuser and is actually a member of the divine council; he is not an evil being at all.

The Satan must obtain permission from God to begin any work. There are but few references to ‘HaSatan’ in the scriptures (translated as ‘The Satan’) and in each appearance he is controlled and his work is ‘permitted’ by God for His own purpose. This character is completely different from the Christian idea of the devil.

Consider how the Jews (who originally wrote this stuff) view Job 2:3-6.

“And the Eternal said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil? And still he holdeth fast his integrity, although thou Satan movedst me against him, to destroy him without cause. And Satan answered, the Eternal, and said, Skin for skin, yea, all that a man hath will he give for his life. But put forth thy hand <God’s hand> now, and touch his bone and his flesh, and he will curse thee to thy face. And the Eternal said unto Satan, Behold, he is in thine hand; but save his life.”

Satan has no power and no authority and must get God’s permission to tempt Job or to do any other work FOR God. It is impossible that Isaiah 14:12 refers to Satan falling from heaven as that is theologically incompatible with Judaism and these scriptures are Jewish, NOT Christian. Whilst Christians have two entities, God and the devil, so did the Romans, in Jupiter and Plato, and the Greeks, in Zeus and Hades. However, Judaism is truly monotheistic in that they perceive the very idea of an independent devil creates polytheism within a religion, as each one has power and authority NOT controlled by God. To the Jews this is anathema and ‘the Satan’ is in the employ, under the direction, and control, of God – in a role that Christians would not readily understand.

“For God, the Bible, and for Judaism, to have an entity that competes with God, that has power and authority of his own in opposition to God, is to violate the basic idea of monotheism.” (Rabbi Stuart Federow).

The Jewish idea that God creates good and also evil is clearly stated in the Bible. Take a look at Amos 3:6, Jeremiah 18:10-11, and especially Isaiah 45:7, for example.

Whilst to Christians, the idea of Satan being synonymous with ‘Lucifer’ sounds rational and is quite acceptable, unfortunately it stems from Christian NT propaganda rather than the Old Testament. To the Jews, who (and I hate to keep labouring the point), actually wrote the Tanakh or Old Testament, God is truly monotheistic, there is NO competition. He creates everything, good and evil. However, evil is usually manifested in man rather than in what God does. If God ‘allows’ bad to happen it does not make him evil. Man is quite capable of that on his own.

To quote Steven Weinberg, “With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil – that takes religion.”

The reality is that Hebrew scribes who eventually wrote and constructed all the material in the Old Testament relating to the four thousand years before Christ came along (even that idea is in serious doubt by many), were Jews; they did not believe in or practice any of those things at all. That this is the case is abundantly clear from the Tanakh and Jewish theology.

However, Christians are wrong in their interpretation of it. The concept of Satan, like so many other myths, evolved over many hundreds of years, but is assumed, by modern Christians, to have always existed because the Church infers it. However, in reality, he was never a creature believed in by any of the OT prophets, other than in the form of ‘the Satan’ as described above. Early Bible writers did not believe in or teach any such doctrine as the Christian idea of ‘Lucifer’ being Satan.

It is an irony that the same title ‘(bright and) morning star’ or ‘light bearer’ (Greek ‘phos-phoros’ or ‘light bearer’) appears in 2 Peter 1:19 and Revelation 22:16, as in these instances it refers specifically to Jesus. In fact, in Revelation, Jesus is calling himself ‘the bright and morning star’. You could here equally translate the Latin word ‘lucifer’; thus, in these instances, Lucifer would be Jesus Christ and in Revelation you would have Jesus actually calling himself Lucifer, which would be perfectly correct in its proper context.

A harmless word was knowingly misused in order to create false doctrine, designed to frighten and control early Christians. The harmful, and sometimes devastating, effects of that fear and control are still felt throughout Christianity today, and all from the deliberate misuse of a single word. The myth of Lucifer, coupled with the doctrine of the fall, created an evil theology which only came into play in Christianity in the fifth century CE. Some claim that Isaiah wrote ‘dualistically’, but that is highly improbable and he certainly did not relate the idea of the bright and morning star to Satan, as the Jews did not and still do not believe in him (as already reinforced several times).

The actual invention of Lucifer as the devil was just Christian propaganda designed to brainwash Romans and Greeks into rejecting their pagan gods and accepting the new Christian God. Millions of books were burned, eliminating records which would have revealed the truth behind the fallacious teaching.

An amateur historian could readily be forgiven for not noticing the mistake concerning Lucifer, as in the case of one Dr. Peter Forshaw, an Historian in Renaissance Magic. Within a TV documentary on the philosopher’s stone, he was talking about crystal gazing and actually said (in passing) “If scrying is about invoking and communicating with angels, the problem is, how do you know if it is a good or a bad angel? Lucifer was after all the most beautiful angel; he fell. How do you know the angel you are talking to isn’t a bad angel, manifesting as a good one, leading you astray, leading you to damnation?”

He was using something familiar, but not researched, in order to illustrate a different point entirely. He cannot be blamed for not knowing the truth behind the scripture he referred to; he probably wouldn’t even know where to find it. He is an historian, not a theologian; he just used it because he assumed it would be familiar to most people, so his audience could appreciate his point. The very fact that he confidently referred to Lucifer falling, expecting all and sundry to readily know the story, just shows how most people, including Dr. Forshaw, seem to accept as factual, many things they are told, without proper questioning prior to accepting them.

Had he added, ‘the fictitious (or mythical) story of…’ that would have been more accurate, but that might have raised other questions, detracting from the actual point he was making, which concerned scrying or crystal gazing, a method where people pretend they can magically commune with angels.

The king of Babylon was referenced in Isaiah 14. ‘Lucifer’ was inserted as an interpretation of the king’s name in the fifth century CE. It was falsely associated with the new Christian idea of Satan or the devil, thus altering the previously intended meaning entirely, showing that God did not use the name of Lucifer to depict the Christian idea of the devil. It was absolutely not God’s name for the devil and it appears absolutely nowhere in any biblical scripture as such. Fifth century Christian scribes conveniently created the whole concept of a devil for their own purpose.

User avatar
Robin Hood
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 13111
Location: England

Re: Is there a difference between Satan and Lucifer?

Post by Robin Hood »

Older/wiser? wrote:All I can say is that consistent temple attendance over time does and will reveal this question and more , after all it is the Lord's university. The rest is just man's speculation.
I have always had an interest concerning this question, especially as it features in the presentation of the temple endowment.
The character who tempts Eve and argues with God in the Garden is always referred to as Lucifer. However, once they are out of the garden all the characters (Elohim, Jehovah, and the messengers) refer to the character who claims ownership of the earth and who deceives us, as satan.
I have often wondered about this change. It has to mean something.

I have also noticed that the Lucifer character seems interested in getting our first parents to disobey God and do things his way, whereas the satan character appears to be less concerned with direct opposition to God and more interested in perversion of God's teachings (philosophies of men mingled with scripture).

Are we missing something?

Older/wiser?
captain of 100
Posts: 538

Re: Is there a difference between Satan and Lucifer?

Post by Older/wiser? »

Robin Hood wrote:
Older/wiser? wrote:All I can say is that consistent temple attendance over time does and will reveal this question and more , after all it is the Lord's university. The rest is just man's speculation.
I have always had an interest concerning this question, especially as it features in the presentation of the temple endowment.
The character who tempts Eve and argues with God in the Garden is always referred to as Lucifer. However, once they are out of the garden all the characters (Elohim, Jehovah, and the messengers) refer to the character who claims ownership of the earth and who deceives us, as satan.
I have often wondered about this change. It has to mean something.

I have also noticed that the Lucifer character seems interested in getting our first parents to disobey God and do things his way, whereas the satan character appears to be less concerned with direct opposition to God and more interested in perversion of God's teachings (philosophies of men mingled with scripture).

Are we missing something?
I think we would all be surprised at how very much we are missing, maybe we are not missing one thing as much as more of the entire picture. Asking questions about what happened in the Garden of G_d is a good start,. It is not by accident that Lucifer (light bringer) is called that before they were cast out, and purposely called Satan after.

User avatar
Alaris
Captain of 144,000
Posts: 7354
Location: Present before the general assembly
Contact:

Re: Is there a difference between Satan and Lucifer?

Post by Alaris »

I have been praying about the Lucifer/Satan question and have felt as though Lucifer was gone at some point. I have no idea as of yet where he went or what happened to him, but what has been said by Robin Hood fits.

Older/wiser?
captain of 100
Posts: 538

Re: Is there a difference between Satan and Lucifer?

Post by Older/wiser? »

From Moses 4:1 And I the Lord G_d, spake: saying That Satan , whom thou hast commanded in the name of mine Only Begotten, is the same which was from the beginning, . There are many names and titles for the one "Lord" as also for the one who stood next to Him from the beginning, and he came before me, saying-Behold, here am I, send me, I will be they son, and I will redeem all mankind, that one soul shall not be lost, and surely I will do it; wherefore give me thine honor. V4 And he became Satan

Older/wiser?
captain of 100
Posts: 538

Re: Is there a difference between Satan and Lucifer?

Post by Older/wiser? »

I had forgotten this one reference , someone might find it interesting. I picked up my copy of Enoch the Prophet by Hugh Nibley and on page 186 is a comparison of Moses 4:1 with the Slavonic Enoch version Ms. R. Ch. 11: The Devil knew that I wanted to make the world...Adam ruling as Lord of it.. he became Satan when he fled heaven, before which time he was Satan-el. He changed his nature and was no longer an angel; he preserved his identity, but his state of mind was altered, as when any righteous person becomes wicked... and he conceived the impossible idea of setting up his throne... to be equal to my power. ( G-d has given him great power over such as listen to him). Apocalypse of Abraham 14:1-2; see also Dead Sea Thanksgiving Scroll Vl

User avatar
Durzan
The Lord's Trusty Maverick
Posts: 3728
Location: Standing between the Light and the Darkness.

Re: Is there a difference between Satan and Lucifer?

Post by Durzan »

Joel wrote:Differences between Satan and Lucifer are explained some:
Jim Whitefield wrote:The Invention of Satan, Lucifer or the Devil.

The KJV contains no statement in any of the writings attributed to Moses about how the devil (Satan) came into being. The Old Testament (OT) contains no mention of him. That is because the Hebrews did not, and Jews still don’t, believe in such a creature. Until the New Testament (NT) was constructed, which occurred several decades, to even centuries, after Christ purportedly lived, such a character is not mentioned anywhere at all. As with the Holy Ghost being a NT creation, with some fifty references, and none in the OT, so is the devil or Satan, with an equal count of about fifty NT areas of reference; the name itself being used in one way or another, many more times than that. Neither one is referenced anywhere in the OT at all. (In Judaism, the Holy Spirit is simply the mind or will of God).

The only references to ‘devils’ in the OT do not refer to the concept of Satan, but rather to pagan worship. There are only four that I could locate.

Leviticus 17:7. And they shall no more offer their sacrifices unto devils, after whom they have gone a whoring. This shall be a statute for ever unto them throughout their generations. (Bold added to all four of these quotes).

Deuteronomy 32:17. They sacrificed unto devils, not to God; to gods whom they knew not, to new gods that came newly up, whom your fathers feared not.

2 Chronicles 11:15. And he ordained him priests for the high places, and for the devils, and for the calves which he had made.

Psalm 106:37. Yea, they sacrificed their sons and their daughters unto devils.

‘Satan’ and also the ‘Holy Ghost’ are Christian inventions; Satan serving to create fear, for the purposes of early Christian scribes as they created their new religion: Christianity. The Jewish ‘HaSatan’ (the Satan), God’s adversary, sits on God’s council in the OT, but is erroneously equated in several instances to the idea of the Christian devil who first appears in the New Testament.

HaSatan’s true role is adversarial; he is not autonomous, but rather works for God, needing his permission before embarking on any venture. In Judaism, HaSatan is not evil.

The best known references to HaSatan are in the book of Job. Consider a little of the conversation between HaSatan and God. Job 1:6-12 and 2:1-6 are almost identical. (The Bible is often very badly edited).

Job 2:3. And the Lord said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man.

HaSatan taunts God in v.5 and says “put forth thine hand now, and touch his bone and his flesh, and he will curse thee to thy face.” God takes up HaSatan’s challenge and grants him permission to test Job:

Job 2:6. And the Lord said unto Satan, Behold, he is in thine hand; but save his life.

Without God’s permission, HaSatan can do nothing. The only other OT references to the character are these, where he is always under God’s control:

Zechariah 3:1-2. And he shewed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the Lord, and Satan standing at his right hand to resist him. And the Lord said unto Satan, The Lord rebuke thee, O Satan; even the Lord that hath chosen Jerusalem rebuke thee: is not this a brand plucked out of the fire?

1 Chronicles 21:1. And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel.

Psalm 109:6. Set thou a wicked man over him: and let Satan stand at his right hand.

In reality, many references to the devil or devils in the NT simply refer to the condition of a person who was probably either mentally ill or prone to fits, which in the modern world would be considered totally differently to the way such things were viewed two thousand years ago. For example, in Luke 8:2 Mary Magdalene is “healed” of evil spirits and infirmities, “out of whom went seven devils.” How did anyone ever know there were seven? Most theologians agree Luke was written by the same anonymous author as Acts, many years after the time of Christ. None of the NT writers ever knew or even met Jesus, and Luke was just ‘ascribed’ somewhere around the second century CE, to the Luke named in Colossians (a doctor and disciple of Paul). That is, it was simply ‘assigned’ to someone; in this case, the Luke that Paul speaks about. Perhaps there was no one else who they could think of to choose as an ascribed author.

However, no one really knows who wrote Luke, and scholars are equally divided as to whether it is even historical. So, notwithstanding that problem, who was there to actually see and count each of the seven devils that left the infirm Mary Magdalene? Why does that not happen any more? It is perfectly clear that the ‘devils’ were not actually real in this or any other New Testament instance.

A further huge error made by many is to consider that Lucifer is Satan. The idea stems from a single reference to the word – in Isaiah.

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!

Lucifer is a Latin word. In the original Hebrew text, the fourteenth chapter of Isaiah is not about a fallen angel; rather it is about a fallen Babylonian king, who, during his lifetime, persecuted the children of Israel. There is no mention of Satan, by name or even by inference. Many years after Christ supposedly lived, the proper name, Jesus Christ, evolved and it was early Christian scribes writing in Latin (which was used by the Church), who appear to have decided that they wanted the story in Isaiah to be about a fallen angel, a creature not mentioned in the original Hebrew text (or even believed in by the Jews) and to whom they gave the name ‘Lucifer’ for their own reasons.

In Roman astronomy, Lucifer was the name for the planet we now know as Venus, which is another Roman name. In Hebrew it reads ‘heleyl ben shachar’, which literally means ‘shining one, son of the dawn’, according to Young’s Literal Translation. This phrase refers to the planet Venus when it appears as a morning star. It is translated in the Septuagint (third century translation from Hebrew into Greek) as ‘Eo(u)s phoros’ which also means morning star or dawn god of light, i.e., our ‘Venus’ as a morning star.

The name ‘Lucifer’ appears nowhere prior to the idea being introduced into scripture in Jerome’s Latin Vulgate. It wasn’t actually an error in Latin, as ‘lucifer’ also actually means the same thing – Venus as a morning star. Isaiah was using the metaphor of a bright light in the heavens to represent the power of the Babylonian king who then became faded or fallen. It was as simple as that. What it has subsequently been constructed to represent, thousands of years later by Christians, I find incredulous. It is as theologically far from actual truth as you can possibly get.

God never introduced the Christian idea of Satan. Isaiah lived during the late eighth and early seventh centuries BCE. The Vulgate was written in the early fifth century CE. Well over a thousand years had passed before ‘Lucifer’ appeared as a word in Isaiah. Only after that interpolation did Christians equate it to the devil. It would have been impossible for the Hebrew prophet, Isaiah, to have used the term to mean the devil, for the simple reason that they did not and do not believe in the devil. It would completely contradict their devout idea of monotheism, as giving power to another creates dual gods.

To recap: Jews do believe in ‘THE Satan’, but the concept is radically different from the Christian idea of the devil. Jews believe in neither the devil nor hell. ‘The Satan’ has no power and is an angel who works FOR God, not against him. He must obtain permission from God for everything he does. He is described more as a prosecuting attorney (the Hebrew word for ‘The Satan’ literally means ‘adversary’), who must accuse and show evidence against a defendant. He is the accuser and is actually a member of the divine council; he is not an evil being at all.

The Satan must obtain permission from God to begin any work. There are but few references to ‘HaSatan’ in the scriptures (translated as ‘The Satan’) and in each appearance he is controlled and his work is ‘permitted’ by God for His own purpose. This character is completely different from the Christian idea of the devil.

Consider how the Jews (who originally wrote this stuff) view Job 2:3-6.

“And the Eternal said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil? And still he holdeth fast his integrity, although thou Satan movedst me against him, to destroy him without cause. And Satan answered, the Eternal, and said, Skin for skin, yea, all that a man hath will he give for his life. But put forth thy hand <God’s hand> now, and touch his bone and his flesh, and he will curse thee to thy face. And the Eternal said unto Satan, Behold, he is in thine hand; but save his life.”

Satan has no power and no authority and must get God’s permission to tempt Job or to do any other work FOR God. It is impossible that Isaiah 14:12 refers to Satan falling from heaven as that is theologically incompatible with Judaism and these scriptures are Jewish, NOT Christian. Whilst Christians have two entities, God and the devil, so did the Romans, in Jupiter and Plato, and the Greeks, in Zeus and Hades. However, Judaism is truly monotheistic in that they perceive the very idea of an independent devil creates polytheism within a religion, as each one has power and authority NOT controlled by God. To the Jews this is anathema and ‘the Satan’ is in the employ, under the direction, and control, of God – in a role that Christians would not readily understand.

“For God, the Bible, and for Judaism, to have an entity that competes with God, that has power and authority of his own in opposition to God, is to violate the basic idea of monotheism.” (Rabbi Stuart Federow).

The Jewish idea that God creates good and also evil is clearly stated in the Bible. Take a look at Amos 3:6, Jeremiah 18:10-11, and especially Isaiah 45:7, for example.

Whilst to Christians, the idea of Satan being synonymous with ‘Lucifer’ sounds rational and is quite acceptable, unfortunately it stems from Christian NT propaganda rather than the Old Testament. To the Jews, who (and I hate to keep labouring the point), actually wrote the Tanakh or Old Testament, God is truly monotheistic, there is NO competition. He creates everything, good and evil. However, evil is usually manifested in man rather than in what God does. If God ‘allows’ bad to happen it does not make him evil. Man is quite capable of that on his own.

To quote Steven Weinberg, “With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil – that takes religion.”

The reality is that Hebrew scribes who eventually wrote and constructed all the material in the Old Testament relating to the four thousand years before Christ came along (even that idea is in serious doubt by many), were Jews; they did not believe in or practice any of those things at all. That this is the case is abundantly clear from the Tanakh and Jewish theology.

However, Christians are wrong in their interpretation of it. The concept of Satan, like so many other myths, evolved over many hundreds of years, but is assumed, by modern Christians, to have always existed because the Church infers it. However, in reality, he was never a creature believed in by any of the OT prophets, other than in the form of ‘the Satan’ as described above. Early Bible writers did not believe in or teach any such doctrine as the Christian idea of ‘Lucifer’ being Satan.

It is an irony that the same title ‘(bright and) morning star’ or ‘light bearer’ (Greek ‘phos-phoros’ or ‘light bearer’) appears in 2 Peter 1:19 and Revelation 22:16, as in these instances it refers specifically to Jesus. In fact, in Revelation, Jesus is calling himself ‘the bright and morning star’. You could here equally translate the Latin word ‘lucifer’; thus, in these instances, Lucifer would be Jesus Christ and in Revelation you would have Jesus actually calling himself Lucifer, which would be perfectly correct in its proper context.

A harmless word was knowingly misused in order to create false doctrine, designed to frighten and control early Christians. The harmful, and sometimes devastating, effects of that fear and control are still felt throughout Christianity today, and all from the deliberate misuse of a single word. The myth of Lucifer, coupled with the doctrine of the fall, created an evil theology which only came into play in Christianity in the fifth century CE. Some claim that Isaiah wrote ‘dualistically’, but that is highly improbable and he certainly did not relate the idea of the bright and morning star to Satan, as the Jews did not and still do not believe in him (as already reinforced several times).

The actual invention of Lucifer as the devil was just Christian propaganda designed to brainwash Romans and Greeks into rejecting their pagan gods and accepting the new Christian God. Millions of books were burned, eliminating records which would have revealed the truth behind the fallacious teaching.

An amateur historian could readily be forgiven for not noticing the mistake concerning Lucifer, as in the case of one Dr. Peter Forshaw, an Historian in Renaissance Magic. Within a TV documentary on the philosopher’s stone, he was talking about crystal gazing and actually said (in passing) “If scrying is about invoking and communicating with angels, the problem is, how do you know if it is a good or a bad angel? Lucifer was after all the most beautiful angel; he fell. How do you know the angel you are talking to isn’t a bad angel, manifesting as a good one, leading you astray, leading you to damnation?”

He was using something familiar, but not researched, in order to illustrate a different point entirely. He cannot be blamed for not knowing the truth behind the scripture he referred to; he probably wouldn’t even know where to find it. He is an historian, not a theologian; he just used it because he assumed it would be familiar to most people, so his audience could appreciate his point. The very fact that he confidently referred to Lucifer falling, expecting all and sundry to readily know the story, just shows how most people, including Dr. Forshaw, seem to accept as factual, many things they are told, without proper questioning prior to accepting them.

Had he added, ‘the fictitious (or mythical) story of…’ that would have been more accurate, but that might have raised other questions, detracting from the actual point he was making, which concerned scrying or crystal gazing, a method where people pretend they can magically commune with angels.

The king of Babylon was referenced in Isaiah 14. ‘Lucifer’ was inserted as an interpretation of the king’s name in the fifth century CE. It was falsely associated with the new Christian idea of Satan or the devil, thus altering the previously intended meaning entirely, showing that God did not use the name of Lucifer to depict the Christian idea of the devil. It was absolutely not God’s name for the devil and it appears absolutely nowhere in any biblical scripture as such. Fifth century Christian scribes conveniently created the whole concept of a devil for their own purpose.
An interesting view that I've known about for quite some time... how come I see no one else addressing this elephant in the room? (Could easily be explained away with he "Philosophies of Men" line of thought, I think.)

JohnnyL
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 9830

Re: Is there a difference between Satan and Lucifer?

Post by JohnnyL »

Same.

DC 76:25 And this we saw also, and bear record, that an angel of God who was in authority in the presence of God, who rebelled against the Only Begotten Son whom the Father loved and who was in the bosom of the Father, was thrust down from the presence of God and the Son,
26 And was called Perdition, for the heavens wept over him—he was Lucifer, a son of the morning.
27 And we beheld, and lo, he is fallen! is fallen, even a son of the morning!
28 And while we were yet in the Spirit, the Lord commanded us that we should write the vision; for we beheld Satan, that old serpent, even the devil, who rebelled against God, and sought to take the kingdom of our God and his Christ—
29 Wherefore, he maketh war with the saints of God, and encompasseth them round about.
30 And we saw a vision of the sufferings of those with whom he made war and overcame, for thus came the voice of the Lord unto us:
31 Thus saith the Lord concerning all those who know my power, and have been made partakers thereof, and suffered themselves through the power of the devil to be overcome, and to deny the truth and defy my power—
32 They are they who are the sons of perdition, of whom I say that it had been better for them never to have been born;
33 For they are vessels of wrath, doomed to suffer the wrath of God, with the devil and his angels in eternity;
34 Concerning whom I have said there is no forgiveness in this world nor in the world to come—
35 Having denied the Holy Spirit after having received it, and having denied the Only Begotten Son of the Father, having crucified him unto themselves and put him to an open shame.
36 These are they who shall go away into the lake of fire and brimstone, with the devil and his angels—

User avatar
Alaris
Captain of 144,000
Posts: 7354
Location: Present before the general assembly
Contact:

Re: Is there a difference between Satan and Lucifer?

Post by Alaris »

Verse 28 reads to me like a segue from talking about one person to another.

JohnnyL
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 9830

Re: Is there a difference between Satan and Lucifer?

Post by JohnnyL »

alaris wrote:Verse 28 reads to me like a segue from talking about one person to another.
It does, but it reconnects it.

User avatar
Alaris
Captain of 144,000
Posts: 7354
Location: Present before the general assembly
Contact:

Re: Is there a difference between Satan and Lucifer?

Post by Alaris »

JohnnyL wrote: DC 76:
31 Thus saith the Lord concerning all those who know my power, and have been made partakers thereof, and suffered themselves through the power of the devil to be overcome, and to deny the truth and defy my power—
32 They are they who are the sons of perdition, of whom I say that it had been better for them never to have been born;
33 For they are vessels of wrath, doomed to suffer the wrath of God, with the devil and his angels in eternity;
34 Concerning whom I have said there is no forgiveness in this world nor in the world to come—
35 Having denied the Holy Spirit after having received it, and having denied the Only Begotten Son of the Father, having crucified him unto themselves and put him to an open shame.
36 These are they who shall go away into the lake of fire and brimstone, with the devil and his angels—
Amazing.

JohnnyL
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 9830

Re: Is there a difference between Satan and Lucifer?

Post by JohnnyL »

DC 76:25 And this we saw also, and bear record, that an angel of God who was in authority in the presence of God, who rebelled against the Only Begotten Son whom the Father loved and who was in the bosom of the Father, was thrust down from the presence of God and the Son,
26 And was called Perdition, for the heavens wept over him—he was Lucifer, a son of the morning
.
27 And we beheld, and lo, he is fallen! is fallen, even a son of the morning!
28 And while we were yet in the Spirit, the Lord commanded us that we should write the vision; for we beheld Satan, that old serpent, even the devil, who rebelled against God, and sought to take the kingdom of our God and his Christ
29 Wherefore, he maketh war with the saints of God, and encompasseth them round about.
30 And we saw a vision of the sufferings of those with whom he made war and overcame, for thus came the voice of the Lord unto us:
31 Thus saith the Lord concerning all those who know my power, and have been made partakers thereof, and suffered themselves through the power of the devil to be overcome
, and to deny the truth and defy my power—
32 They are they who are the sons of perdition, of whom I say that it had been better for them never to have been born;
33 For they are vessels of wrath, doomed to suffer the wrath of God, with the devil and his angels in eternity;
34 Concerning whom I have said there is no forgiveness in this world nor in the world to come—
35 Having denied the Holy Spirit after having received it, and having denied the Only Begotten Son of the Father, having crucified him unto themselves and put him to an open shame.
36 These are they who shall go away into the lake of fire and brimstone, with the devil and his angels—

Connecting angel who rebelled against JC and God=Perdition=Lucifer=a son of the morning;

Satan=old serpent=devil=rebelled against God and JC and sought their kingdom=overcomer of men's souls, who become sons of perdition.

pdale33
Hi, I'm new.
Posts: 1

Re: Is there a difference between Satan and Lucifer?

Post by pdale33 »

My understanding is pre-exile Judaism refers to anyone against god as Satan or adversary. It seems to have changed to an actual being after the return from Babylon.

User avatar
Joel
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7043

Satan in Different Churches

Post by Joel »


User avatar
Joel
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7043

History of the Devil

Post by Joel »


JohnnyL
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 9830

Re: Is there a difference between Satan and Lucifer?

Post by JohnnyL »

pdale33 wrote: January 30th, 2017, 1:09 am My understanding is pre-exile Judaism refers to anyone against god as Satan or adversary. It seems to have changed to an actual being after the return from Babylon.
Jesus called Peter "Satan" when he tried to convince Him to not do the will of His Father.

User avatar
Joel
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7043

Re: Is there a difference between Satan and Lucifer?

Post by Joel »


User avatar
righteousrepublic
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5580
Location: Telestial Earth

Re: Is there a difference between Satan and Lucifer?

Post by righteousrepublic »

Satan, Lucifer and the Devil are all one and the same entity.

Book of Moses 4

How Satan became the devil—He tempts Eve—Adam and Eve fall, and death enters the world.

1 And I, the Lord God, spake unto Moses, saying: That Satan, whom thou hast commanded in the name of mine Only Begotten, is the same which was from the beginning, and he came before me, saying—Behold, here am I, send me, I will be thy son, and I will redeem all mankind, that one soul shall not be lost, and surely I will do it; wherefore give me thine honor.

2 But, behold, my Beloved Son, which was my Beloved and Chosen from the beginning, said unto me—Father, thy will be done, and the glory be thine forever.

3 Wherefore, because that Satan rebelled against me, and sought to destroy the agency of man, which I, the Lord God, had given him, and also, that I should give unto him mine own power; by the power of mine Only Begotten, I caused that he should be cast down;

4 And he became Satan, yea, even the devil, the father of all lies, to deceive and to blind men, and to lead them captive at his will, even as many as would not hearken unto my voice.


D&C 29:36
36 And it came to pass that Adam, being tempted of the devil—for, behold, the devil was before Adam, for he rebelled against me, saying, Give me thine honor, which is my power; and also a third part of the hosts of heaven turned he away from me because of their agency;


D&C 76:25 (25–26)
25 And this we saw also, and bear record, that an angel of God who was in authority in the presence of God, who rebelled against the Only Begotten Son whom the Father loved and who was in the bosom of the Father, was thrust down from the presence of God and the Son,
26 And was called Perdition, for the heavens wept over him—he was Lucifer, a son of the morning.

Post Reply