I would like to have a Christian on this website present me proof that Lucifer became Satan rather than Lucifer becoming Jesus.
Thanks in advance.
I would like to have a Christian on this website present me proof that Lucifer became Satan...
Posts
Total:
40
Religion fries my brain honestly.
Proof?
This event is purely belief but if there is evidence in the Christian God so the timeline of events that are connected to him should also be true
-->
@Vader
That website has many holes in its theory, shall I explain them to you?
-->
@RationalMadman
I don't see any holes, but explain away
-->
@TheHammer
What do you think it is saying?
-->
@RationalMadman
Not sure what you're asking. It explains how Lucifer fell and became Satan, unless I'm missing something
-->
@RationalMadman
Ezekiel 28:11-19 seems to be where the idea originated. Christianity has often embraced esoteric readings of otherwise straightforward OT passages.
At the end of Book 12 of the "Left Behind" novel series the above is cited during the climatic scene in which Satan is judged, so I'm guessing probably most Christians who've extensively combed through the Bible are of this view as well.
-->
@TheHammer
It doesn't explain the Biblical proof that it even probably happened, it tries to prove that it's remotely possible.
-->
@Swagnarok
Do you know that Jesus was described as the following
2 Thessalonians 1:7
and give relief to you who are troubled, and to us as well. This will happen when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven in blazing fire with his powerful angels.
this blazing Jesus metaphor comes in more in the Bible especially when he contrasts himself to darkness constantly as well as explicitly refering to his aura as blazing and his energy as fiery.
Lucifer was smited down and reborn as Jesus. This is an absolute fact that I believe strongly in. I am certain that Jesus was Samael AKA Lucifer, if the Bible is true.
-->
@RationalMadman
The name Satan literally translates "accuser". This is important because the role of the Devil is to accuse us before the Throne of God on account of the sins we've committed, so that we should face punishment for such and be denied eternal life. Jesus, on the other hand, is our advocate before God the Father.
It's silly to think that Jesus would be both our accuser and our advocate, and that he tempted Himself in the wilderness (Luke 4:1-13). In addition, since Jesus is God the Son, it probably would not have been a sin for mortal Jesus to bow down and worship immortal Jesus, so the second temptation in the aforementioned passage would not have made sense if the one doing the tempting was God. This would also imply that God tempts humans into sin, which is expressly rejected elsewhere in the New Testament, and implied in the Book of Job (in which God merely gave the devil permission to tempt Job, without Himself so acting to tempt).
(In theory you could get around this by drawing a distinction between Biblical references to "devils" and "Satan", which would be to imply that one is not the other. Please note that I know nothing about how all this was originally translated in Hebrew/Aramaic; the only thing I have to go by is our less accurate English versions of the Bible.)
In addition, Revelation (20:10) describes Satan (or the devil) as being thrown into the Lake of Fire, which is Hell, where he will spend an eternity. It's silly to think that Jesus would condemn himself to hell for all eternity.
In short, all Biblical references to the devil and Satan are negative, painting him as the enemy of the believer and of God. I suppose it might not be impossible to think up or even defend some kind of alternate reading in which the devil is Jesus, but what would be the point of this?
You could claim that the Biblical passages are corrupted from how They "originally" read, but then again what alternate reading is there? For whatever alternate reading you propose, what evidence is there for it? We have an abundance of preserved OT manuscripts dating back to before Christ, and NT manuscripts dating back to the second century AD (that is, within 100-170 years of the life of Christ). They all seem to read more or less the same as the texts that we have now, bearing a remarkable degree of consistency over time; in fact, many 20th and 21st century editions are themselves directly translated from some of the oldest known Biblical manuscripts that we've recovered through archaeology. But so far as I can tell there's not a single preserved text that equates the devil with Jesus.
-->
@RationalMadman
Also, such references to "blazing fire" would be a manner by which ancient Semitic peoples described heavenly glory. If the Ezekiel passage that I cited above is to be taken as a reference to Satan, we have reason to believe that he himself enjoyed heavenly glory (as an angel) before his fall from grace. Angels, by dwelling in the presence of God, partake in His glory without themselves being God.
Exodus 34:29-35 describes the face of Moses as being imbued with divine glory because he had been in the presence of God. But this fact did not make Moses the same as God.
-->
@Swagnarok
The devil is Satan, God of the OT.
Jesus is Lucifer, the angel Samael, son of Aurora and Satan/God.
-->
@RationalMadman
Do you know that Jesus was described as the following2 Thessalonians 1:7and give relief to you who are troubled, and to us as well. This will happen when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven in blazing fire with his powerful angels.this blazing Jesus metaphor comes in more in the Bible especially when he contrasts himself to darkness constantly as well as explicitly refering to his aura as blazing and his energy as fiery.Lucifer was smited down and reborn as Jesus. This is an absolute fact that I believe strongly in. I am certain that Jesus was Samael AKA Lucifer, if the Bible is true.
My opinion is that you read far too much into this. Did you know that fire in metaphoric language often represents judgment in the Bible, as well as glory, as previously stated by Swagnarok?
Please present your evidence that Jesus is Lucifer.
-->
@RationalMadman
I'm curious as to how you reached these conclusions. The Old Testament was quoted extensively by the New Testament, and by Jesus. The New Testament also quoted the Psalms, which were songs of praise to the God of the Old Testament. There is nothing to suggest that the God of the Old Testament is distinct from, much less opposed to, the God of the New Testament, with the exception of the fact that trinitarian doctrine was not directly present in the Old Testament.
It seems that you are not reaching your conclusions through careful reading of Scripture but rather from your own imagination. Am I wrong?
-->
@Swagnarok
You are the one failing to carefully read. If OT God was real, then the omniacient, onnipresent and onnipotent being skmehow created a false religion of Judaosm for so many generations just to have to create a being later on to 'correct it all'.
-->
@Swagnarok
When discussing the devil's ate and power, it is always equated to God's read the references. The devil is said to be an adversary of Jesus, not of God.
-->
@PGA2.0
Both are loghtbearers. Both have a face that is part feminine in elegance, part masculine in chiseled features. Both are persuasive, rebellious and stand for justice as an end in itself.
-->
@RationalMadman
Jesus is Lucifer.
Makes it pretty clear
Revelation 22:16
Lucifer is not really a name for the devil, it is a word that exists only in translation. Understandably, this can be confusing.
In Isaiah what sometimes gets translated into "lucifer" is a reference to the king of Babylon who fancied himself a god above the earth. Lucifer being the morning star, venus, which happens to show up in the night sky right before dawn. That is why Venus historically has been called the morning star, because its appearance in the sky preceeds the rising of the sun.
So in a sense, you are right. Jesus Christ is the morning star. His appearance even, precedes the rising up of all with Him in the glorious ressurection, Christ Himself being the resurrection. The resurrection being The Light of Truth.
But it isn't the case that Lucifer fell from heaven and became Jesus. Jesus Christ is not an angel or anything like that. Jesus Christ is The Incarnate Word of God.
Essential to recognizing the identity of Jesus Christ is The Trinity.
The scriptures do say that Satan disguises himself as an angel of light though, "Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works."
That word that gets translated into "transformed" in the King James(which I quote from because it has no copywrites) is μετασχηματίζεται, which in the context of this verse means that the devil masquerades as an angel of light, not that he actually becomes one.
-->
@RationalMadman
Again, I think you are reading way too much into this. What biblical verses support your claims that Jesus is Lucifer? Since you made the claims I am interested in finding out how you justify them.Both are loghtbearers. Both have a face that is part feminine in elegance, part masculine in chiseled features. Both are persuasive, rebellious and stand for justice as an end in itself.
123 days later
-->
@RationalMadman
Still waiting for a reply to Post 21.
13 days later
-->
@Swagnarok
@PGA2.0
My Swag, that was a good post!
And you'll keep waiting PGA. I think some claims are made simply for their "outrage" value. Nothing else.
-->
@PGA2.0
There's many, I'll get to it later.
-->
@ethang5
@RationalMadman
There's many, I'll get to it later.
Okay, Ethang5 and I will keep waiting.
-->
@PGA2.0
Pack a toothbrush.
-->
@ethang5
@RationalMadman
Pack a toothbrush.
How long do you think I will be waiting for? (^8
Hopefully, RationalMadMan will address this matter quickly. It will be interesting to see what he is reading into Scripture and how valid his inferences are.
-->
@ethang5
Pack a toothbrush.
Still waiting. Maybe I had better pack a few! (^8
Why is it so difficult to answer these questions if those who deny Him believe they have more reasonable answers?
Both are l[i]ghtbearers. Both have a face that is part feminine in elegance, part masculine in chiseled features. Both are persuasive, rebellious and stand for justice as an end in itself.
Because two people bear light does that make them the same person? And how is Jesus' face feminine? How does he know what Jesus' face looks like, or for that matter Lucifiers? And how is Jesus rebellious to God? Where did that materialize from? What verses is he appealing to? He never lists them and open them up for discussion.
-->
@PGA2.0
Why is it so difficult to answer these questions if those who deny Him believe they have more reasonable answers?
Their definition of "reasonable". To them "reasonable" is what ever agrees with their emotional, no evidence personal opinion. Ask them for a logical reason for their belief, and you automatically become "unreasonable". Because, if "reasonable" is what ever agrees with their emotional, no evidence personal opinion, then "unreasonable" is what ever disagrees with their emotional, no evidence personal opinion.
It's a great circular bit of tautology that keeps them safely locked in their delusion.
-->
@ethang5
Why is it so difficult to answer these questions if those who deny Him believe they have more reasonable answers?Their definition of "reasonable". To them "reasonable" is what ever agrees with their emotional, no evidence personal opinion. Ask them for a logical reason for their belief, and you automatically become "unreasonable". Because, if "reasonable" is what ever agrees with their emotional, no evidence personal opinion, then "unreasonable" is what ever disagrees with their emotional, no evidence personal opinion.It's a great circular bit of tautology that keeps them safely locked in their delusion.
I would have liked RationalMadman to provide numerous verses of Scripture to see where he got the idea the two could be the same.