/fringe/ - Fringe

>>137215

Anytime I see confusing verses, I like to read the entire chapter, and often the one before and after, to get the full context.

If you read the KJV Bible, they specifically name Lucifer in this text, as the former Morning Star and Fallen Angel. It's intended to be a rebuke or taunt against Lucifer and the King of Babylon, a prophecy of their impending destruction. You said in your heart, "I will this and that…" This was Lucifer's betrayal of Yahweh which got him and his Fallen Angels kicked out of Heaven to begin with. Afterwards, Lucifer worked with Satan to deceive humanity and lead them astray from God. When the Bible talks about the nation of Babylon, I believe God is not angry at the country of Iraq, God is talking about the Babylonian people, which still exist to this day.

In Revelation, this verse comes after the events of the last battle, Archangel Michael defeating the Beast, Dragon, and Anti-Christ, locking them away. After the 1000 year reign. After Judgement Day. Satan and his Angels (assuming Lucifer is in this group of Angels) are cast into the Lake of Fire for eternity. This occurs after God creates a new heaven and earth. They're talking about New Jerusalem City, and Jesus has, by my estimate, assumed the role of Morning Star or Commander of the Angels. With some mental gymnastics, the best answer I can give is that Lucifer was once the Morning Star and Commander of God's Angels. After Lucifer sided with Satan, he and his loyalists were all cast out of Heaven and Archangel Michael then took on the role of Commander. (The question has been asked if Jesus and Archangel Michael are the same person.) After the recreation, new heavens and earth, Jesus assumes the role of Commander of the Heavenly Angels. Why? The rider of the white horse isn't Michael. Michael locked them up before the 1000 year reign. The rider of the white horse who leads the Angels in the final battle is thought by many, myself included, to be a form of Jesus himself. (His Super Saiyan Final Form!)

Something else I'll leave is an explanation from another regarding Satan and Lucifer.

Many believe that they are one and the same. The idea is that 'Lucifer' which translates as 'light bearer' or 'morning star' was the name of the Angelic being who became Satan, before he fell from grace. ('Satan' itself means 'the deceiver').

There is a tradition that he was originally an archangel who fell due to pride. Many in the church beleive this.

Curiously there is nowhere in the Bible that definitely states that Lucifer and Satan are the same entity, or that he was an archangel. The only archangel named in the Bible is Michael. (There are others mentioned in the apocryphal books.)

Since God is not evil and cannot create anything evil, it follows that the devil probably did start out as an angelic being. As to what kind, we can't know for sure, but he was likely high ranking. Quite possibly he was an archangel or a cherub, but the Bible does not state for sure. It is clear however that he rebelled and took a large portion of the Angelic host along with him. The book of Revelation is quite clear on this:

And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven. And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

Revelation 12:7-‬9 KJV

As for 'Lucifer’ we see that word used in the following passage:

That thou shalt take up this proverb against the king of Babylon, and say, How hath the oppressor ceased! the golden city ceased!

Isaiah 14:4. KJV (I include this for context as it is the start of the proverb)

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. Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.

Isaiah ‬12-‬15 KJV

It's clear from verses 12–15 as to why many believe this 'Lucifer' is in fact Satan since the tale of Lucifer's pride and attempt to ascend to the throne of God certainly coresponds with what we read concerning Satan in Revelation.

That being said, while I think this may be a valid interpretation it is not definitive. Nowhere does it state that these two entities are the same. In fact verse 4 clearly indicates that this proverb is aimed at the King of Babylon, who had the people of Israel in captivity at this time. The verse that succeeds this passage also indicates a human being:

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

Isaiah 14:16 KJV

Some would argue verses 12–15 is aimed at the spiritual principality behind the king of Babylon, which again may be a valid interpretation. Or the entire proverb could be a disclaimer against a human king using metaphorical language. Or it could be aimed at both the man and the spiritual entity behind him.

That all being said, there is nothing in these verses that unequivocally states that this 'Lucifer’ is the devil spoken of in Revelation, although I think it is very possible.

So, Satan (meaning accuser) may also be a mantle that Lucifer was given after his fall from Heaven. If we look at it this way, after the final battle, Lucifer is Satan and cast into the Lake of Fire for eternity, then Jesus takes on the role of Morning Star in the New Heaven. So, NO, Jesus is not the Fallen Angel Lucifer.

>>137215

Morning Star is Venus, which is a star of Osiris, the dying and reborn God of Egypt.

When it comes to actual "satan" of christians that would mean Set of Egyptians, and that is mercury, not Venus.

Therefore Old Testament Isaiah just projects Jewish-Sethian hate to Osiris, and implication of hate towards pantheon. Its actually one of phrases that is incompatible with cult of christianity and many reasons why old testament and new testament messages are different, because christianity is an evolution of orphic cult, siphoning egyptian, pythagorean and platonic though, where Venus is seen as positive.

There's also whole big deal of Osiris constantly trying to get jews back to worship Him, but jews instead always go back to the Set who rules material world order, son of Geb, god representing Earth. Because Dionysus-Bacchus by greek-roman speculation of jewish holidays was patron of jews as Yahweh, little did the know.

Meanwhile Venus is actually protector of Roman race.

>>137303

>sky-kingdom

That Golden Kingdom is the same between Hindu and Christian tradition. Golden City of Brahman of the Vedas.

Meanwhile Tree of Life and waters under it (Revelation#21:6 and Revelation#22:1-2) are part of Egyptian Sycamore tree tradition, even with similar iconography.

Its not jewish at all.

>>137308

This is what has lead me to take interest in Hindu and the Vedas. I know that the Bible and Christianity have been jewed and subverted. I want to know God from a non-jewish perspective. Some suspect that Jesus himself, during the almost 20 years he went missing in the Bible, traveled India with his (((merchant))) uncle and most of his teachings come from a Hindu mindset. Reminder that most of Jesus learning came from non-jews and that the jews had Jesus crucified for not going along with their schemes. "Woe unto you, (((scribes))) and (((Pharisees)))! You claim to be jews, but you're not. You're liars!" OY VEY! Pontius Pilate, shut Jesus down or we're going to riot! (sound familiar?) There are many similarities between Christianity and Hinduism, except Hindu hasn't been jewed and subverted. That's why I am learning.

>>137309

>Some suspect that Jesus himself, during the almost 20 years he went missing in the Bible, traveled India with his (((merchant))) uncle and most of his teachings come from a Hindu mindset.

It may also be Egypt, anon. Having God as your Daemon, with the whole thing bestowed by a sign of bird. Christianity is a mesh of things. There's also a lot of general similarity between Dionysus and Shiva, and Christians were trying to portray Jesus as new Dionysus, less Hindu connection more facts that Orphic tradition already contained Hindu elements (golden embro/cosmic egg, isles of the blessed/worlds of brahman, belief in reincarnation and coded phrases post death). Then there's also Babylonian Inanna connection through her descent into underworld for three days and three nights and then punishing traitorous Dumuzid for not mourning Her. And then Rome itself contained sacred space cult similar to Vedic one, so Alexander's imports weren't even necessary to make this religion. Neither jews were though, we could had easily had Christianity without jews. We actually kinda almost had it with Mithra, Orpheic cult and Serapis. But Christians became a raging mob, destroying everyone else.

>>137317

This whole universe belongs to Intelligences that left similar messages everywhere. Myth is Logos, it metaphorically retells older tale. No matter what religion, they eventually to attune to one system.