he word "Lucifer" in Isaiah 14:12 presents a
minor problem to mainstream Christianity. It becomes a much
larger problem to Bible literalists, and becomes a huge obstacle
for the claims of Mormonism.
John J. Robinson
A Pilgrim's Path, pp. 47-48 explains:
"Lucifer makes his appearance in the
fourteenth chapter of the Old Testament book of Isaiah, at
the twelfth verse, and nowhere else: "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!"
Isaiah - Chapter 14 (King James Version) from
The first problem is that Lucifer is a Latin
name. So how did it find its way into a Hebrew manuscript,
written before there was a Roman language? To find the answer, I
consulted a scholar at the library of the Hebrew Union College
in Cincinnati. What Hebrew name, I asked, was Satan given in
this chapter of Isaiah, which describes the angel who fell to
become the ruler of hell?
The answer was a surprise. In the original
Hebrew text, the fourteenth chapter of Isaiah is not about a
fallen angel, but about a fallen Babylonian king, who during his
lifetime had persecuted the children of Israel. It contains no
mention of Satan, either by name or reference. The Hebrew
scholar could only speculate that some early Christian scribes,
writing in the Latin tongue used by the Church, had decided for
themselves that they wanted the story to be about a fallen
angel, a creature not even mentioned in the original Hebrew
text, and to whom they gave the name "Lucifer."
Why Lucifer? In Roman astronomy, Lucifer was
the name given to the morning star (the star we now know by
another Roman name, Venus). The morning star appears in the
heavens just before dawn, heralding the rising sun. The name
derives from the Latin term lucem ferre, bringer, or bearer, of
light." In the Hebrew text the expression used to describe the
Babylonian king before his death is Helal, son of Shahar, which
can best be translated as "Day star, son of the Dawn." The name
evokes the golden glitter of a proud king's dress and court
(much as his personal splendor earned for King Louis XIV of
France the appellation, "The Sun King").
The scholars authorized by ... King James I
to translate the Bible into current English did not use the
original Hebrew texts, but used versions translated ... largely
by St. Jerome in the fourth century. Jerome had mistranslated
the Hebraic metaphor, "Day star, son of the Dawn," as "Lucifer,"
and over the centuries a metamorphosis took place. Lucifer the
morning star became a disobedient angel, cast out of heaven to
rule eternally in hell. Theologians, writers, and poets
interwove the myth with the doctrine of the Fall, and in
Christian tradition Lucifer is now the same as Satan, the Devil,
and --- ironically --- the Prince of Darkness.
So "Lucifer" is nothing more than an ancient
Latin name for the morning star, the bringer of light. That can
be confusing for Christians who identify Christ himself as the
morning star, a term used as a central theme in many Christian
sermons. Jesus refers to himself as the morning star in
Revelation 22:16: "I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto
you these things in the churches. I am the root and the
offspring of David, and the bright and morning star."
And so there are those who do not read beyond
the King James version of the Bible, who say 'Lucifer is Satan:
so says the Word of God'...."
Henry Neufeld (a Christian who comments on
Biblical sticky issues) went on to say,
"this passage is often related to Satan,
and a similar thought is expressed in Luke 10:18 by Jesus,
that was not its first meaning. It's primary meaning is
given in Isaiah 14:4 which says that when Israel is restored
they will "take up this taunt against the king of Babylon .
. ." Verse 12 is a part of this taunt song. This passage
refers first to the fall of that earthly king...
How does the confusion in translating
this verse arise? The Hebrew of this passage reads: "heleyl,
ben shachar" which can be literally translated "shining one,
son of dawn." This phrase means, again literally, the planet
Venus when it appears as a morning star. In the Septuagint,
a 3rd century BC translation of the Hebrew scriptures into
Greek, it is translated as "heosphoros" which also means
Venus as a morning star.
How did the translation "lucifer" arise?
This word comes from Jerome's Latin Vulgate. Was Jerome in
error? Not at all. In Latin at the time, "lucifer" actually
meant Venus as a morning star. Isaiah is using this metaphor
for a bright light, though not the greatest light to
illustrate the apparent power of the Babylonian king which
Therefore, Lucifer wasn't equated with Satan
until after Jerome. Jerome wasn't in error. Later Christians
(and Mormons) were in equating "Lucifer" with "Satan".
So why is this a problem to Christians?
Christians now generally believe that Satan (or the Devil or
Lucifer who they equate with Satan) is a being who has always
existed (or who was created at or near the "beginning").
Therefore, they also think that the 'prophets' of the Old
Testament believed in this creature. The Isaiah scripture is
used as proof (and has been used as such for hundreds of years
now). As Elaine
Pagels explains though, the concept of Satan has evolved
over the years and the early Bible writers didn't believe in or
teach such a doctrine.
The irony for those who believe that
"Lucifer" refers to Satan is that the same title ('morning star'
or 'light-bearer') is used to refer to Jesus, in 2 Peter 1:19,
where the Greek text has exactly the same term: 'phos-phoros'
'light-bearer.' This is also the term used for Jesus in
So why is Lucifer a far bigger problem to
Mormons? Mormons claim that an ancient record (the
Book of Mormon)
was written beginning in about 600 BC, and the author in 600 BC
supposedly copied Isaiah in Isaiah's original words. When Joseph
Smith pretended to translate the supposed 'ancient record', he
included the Lucifer verse in the Book of Mormon. Obviously he
wasn't copying what Isaiah actually wrote.
He was copying the King James Version of the Bible. Another
book of LDS scripture, the Doctrine & Covenants, furthers this
when it affirms the false Christian doctrine that "Lucifer"
means Satan. This incorrect doctrine also spread into a third
set of Mormon scriptures, the Pearl of Great Price, which
describes a war in heaven based, in part, on Joseph Smith's
incorrect interpretation of the word "Lucifer" which only
appears in Isaiah.
A Mormon apologist responds.
The author of
The Polytheism Of The Bible And The Mystery Of Lucifer,
F.T. DeAngelis, comments on this page as follows
"It seems minor, but - the actual term
used in the Greek Septuagint version of Isaiah 14:12 (given
that there is no ONE way of accurately transliterating) is
Eo(u)s phoros, morning star/DAWN god of light.
Eos or Eous phoros [not Heos (as your
website claims) or phos phorus (as a Christian website I
visited shows)] - although there is a Greek term and
English... phosphoro(u)s. Your [site] is pretty accurate.
The actual name, "Lucifer," goes back to
the Greeks, before the Romans. Socrates and Plato talk about
this "god of light"; surprisingly, not in the context of Eos
(god of Dawn), but -- as a morning star -- juxtaposed with
the sun (Helios) and Hermes. This information can be found
Timaeus (38e) and in Edith Hamilton's
On a lighter note, Arthur Clarke, in his
2061 correctly uses the word "Lucifer". He uses
it as a name for a new sun in the solar system which is correct
since the new sun is a second 'morning star' of 'original'
'light-bearing' substance--not some evil being
of religious mythology.
David Grinspoon comments on the historical
aspects of the word as follows: "The origin of the
Judeo-Christian Devil as an angel fallen from heaven into the
depths of hell is mirrored in the descent of Venus from shining
morning star to the darkness below. This underworld demon, still
feared today by people in many parts of the world, is also
called Lucifer, which was originally a Latin name for Venus as a
morning star." (Venus
Revealed p. 17) Actually, Grinspoon should just refer to
the "Christian Devil" since the Jews never believed in such a
creature and still don't to this day.
Lucifer Rising -
Arthur C. Clark; 2010 - Counterfeit Light of the World
"A generation would soon be born that had never known a
world without Lucifer." Best selling author and world renowned
scientist, Arthur C. Clarke, penned these words in his science
fiction masterpiece, 2010: Odyssey Two–a book/movie sequel to
his ground breaking 1968 work, 2001: A Space Odyssey. Unknown to
those who only watched 2010, there was a major difference
between the motion picture and the novel. Eerily, the book
contained a section titled "Lucifer Rising."
In Clarke’s Lucifer Rising story line, the hydrogen atmosphere
on the planet Jupiter is ignited. The ensuing new "little" sun
is dubbed "Lucifer" and illuminates the earth with its light.
The result: darkness no longer existed. Fear, suspicion, and
crimes of the night disappear. Mankind has become illuminated
through the light of Lucifer.
To occultists and New Agers, the symbology of Arthur C. Clarke’s
writing was unmistakable. Lucifer, the "light bearer" shines his
knowledge (occult "truth") upon all humanity, chasing away fear
and ignorance, and providing mankind with the opportunity to
discover his own intellect.
Comment: Is Lucifer/the Light
of the Morning/Venus/Lord
of Phosphorus/the "intelligent liberator"/the "Ultimate
Rebel" - a lá Promethean style the same one?
I think we might be talking about a
event? (Just as
Immanuel Velikovsky describes).
"Venus birth" was really an object that was ejected from
Jupiter - And in mythology this is seen as a "rebel and an
The Phosphorus Connection
In 1669 the Hamburg merchant and alchemist Hennig Brandt
heated the residue from evaporating urine with powdered
charcoal, and condensed the vapor that was evolved into a waxy
solid. This solid glowed in the dark, without heat, an
astonishing phenomenon. He called the mysterious substance
phosphorus, taken directly from the Greek phosphoros,
"light-bringer." This was also the name of the planet Venus as
morning star, "Lucifer" in Latin. The discovery created quite a
stir, and soon nobody was throwing away urine. Travelling
alchemists amazed royal audiences, and it was the talk of the
time. A normal person excretes about a gram of phosphorus daily.
It gave the name to phosphorescence, which is the nonthermal
emission of light after the stimulus has been removed, in
distinction to fluorescence. The light Brandt observed was
chemiluminescence, consequent to the combination of the
phosphorus with atmospheric oxygen to form the trioxide. This
was burning, but the light is not due to thermal excitation.
When the pentoxide is formed, there is no chemiluminescence.
Phosphorus is an important agricultural fertilizer, an essential
element in metabolism and the transfer of biological energy, a
component of matches, an ingredient in pyrotechnic applications,
and besides of considerable scientific interest. Some of the
properties, applications and lore of phosphorus are reviewed in
this article. Phosphorus presents many puzzles that are unsolved
or only partially solved, which will make this discussion more
"Lucifer, the Light-bearer! Strange
and mysterious name to give to the Spirit of Darkness!
Lucifer, the son of the morning! Is it he who bears the
Light, and with it's splendors intolerable blinds feeble,
sensual or selfish Souls? Doubt it not!"
Pike (Morals & Dogma)
"What is more absurd and more impious
than to attribute the name of Lucifer to the devil, that is,
to personified evil. The intellectual Lucifer is the spirit
of intelligence and love; it is the paraclete, it is the
Holy Spirit, while the physical Lucifer is the great agent
of universal magnetism."
Eliphas Levi (The Mysteries Of Magic)
"Lucifer represents.. Life.. Thought..
Progress.. Civilization.. Liberty.. Independence.. Lucifer
is the Logos.. the Serpent, the Savior."
Helena Petrovna Blavatsky (The Secret Doctrine)
The Birth of Venus
The Comet Venus
"God" the divine Liar
Masons praising Lucifer
Quotations written by high level Masons praising Lucifer
Albert Pike &