Morning Stars

[robycop3]

Some people holler about the use of 'morning star' in Isaiah 14:12 because Jesus calls Himself the morning star in Rev. 22:16.(Remember the AV 1611's marginal note, "or, O day starre" for Isaiah 14:12.) But clearly there are many morning stars in Scripture. Before He calls Himself the morning star, He says, in Rev. 2:28 "And I will give him the morning star." Clearly this isn't Himself. And before all these things we see in Job 38:7 "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy".

A little help from the Hebrew readers, please? I have been told by more than one Jew that 'morning star' is a valid English rendering in Isaiah 14:12 because we have 'helel', I.E. "light bringer or bearer" coupled with "son of the morning". How correct is this?

I believe Jesus clearly indicated His uniqueness among all other 'morning stars' by calling Himself the BRIGHT AND morning star.

Who were those morning stars in Job? And what morning star is Jesus gonna give to the believers?

 

[BruceB]

robycop3,
I have nothing in the way of an answer for you, but I am glad you have asked this question; this is an area of confusion for me and I eagerly await an explanation.
Bruce

 

[franklinmonroe]

robycop3,

I'm quite sure that you will receive some very thorough answers from the board. Therefore, I will keep my answer rather short.

Most objections I've read are about the translation here as "morning star" (or similar) because it eliminates the KJVs "Lucifer", which many believe to be the proper personal name of our spiritual enemy (Satan, the devil, the dragon, etc. a fallen archangel).

Lucifer is simply the Latin word standing in for the Hebrew here (and need not be capitalized). In English "morning star" is a proper rendering. As you stated, the original 1611 translators knew it was accurate translation. The "morning star" is often a reference to the planet Venus (even contemporarily).

Jesus is symbolized as a lion (of Judah), as is Satan (as a roaring lion), so be careful of making too much of literary anthropomorphism.

 

[Logos1560]

Under the heading "Lucifer, Son of the Morning," Clarence Larkin wrote: "The 'Morning Stars,' (probably other glorious created ruling beings like himself), sang together" (Job 38:7) (Rightly Dividing the Word, p. 97).

 

[Askjo]

Lucifer is not the morning star!

You look at Hebrew word if you can find right word for Isaiah 14:12.

The Hebrew word for morning is boqer. The Hebrew word for star is kokav. You look for “morning” in Hebrew word on Genesis 1:13. You also look for Hebrew word for “star” on Genesis 1:16.

The Hebrew word, “Helel” does NOT mean morning star, but it means to SHINE. Lucifer is a right word for translation. Two words for one word: lucis and fer = Lucifer.

Lucifer in the KJV comes from the Hebrew word, “helel – it means ‘light bearer” or “shining one” – Not morning star!

Nowhere for “star” is found in Hebrew word on Isaiah 14:12.

You must remember the Satan is transformed into an angel of light – See 2 Cor. 11:14. You see, he is Lucifer, an angel of light, not morning star.

Jesus Christ is the morning star.

 

[tinytim]

Is there a place in the Bible that shows Lucifer = satan = devil?

 

[Ed Edwards]

Lucifer is not the morning star!

You look at Hebrew word if you can find right word for Isaiah 14:12.

The Hebrew word for morning is boqer. The Hebrew word for star is kokav. You look for “morning” in Hebrew word on Genesis 1:13. You also look for Hebrew word for “star” on Genesis 1:16.

The Hebrew word, “Helel” does NOT mean morning star, but it means to SHINE. Lucifer is a right word for translation. Two words for one word: lucis and fer = Lucifer.

Lucifer in the KJV comes from the Hebrew word, “helel – it means ‘light bearer” or “shining one” – Not morning star!

Nowhere for “star” is found in Hebrew word on Isaiah 14:12.

You must remember the Satan is transformed into an angel of light – See 2 Cor. 11:14. You see, he is Lucifer, an angel of light, not morning star.

Jesus Christ is the morning star.

Sigh :tear:

This is idioticy bordering on blasphemy.

//Nowhere for “star” is found in Hebrew word on Isaiah 14:12.//


This is true, but meaningless. The Hebrew word is shown in
Strongs as:

H1966
הילל
hêylêl
hay-lale'
From H1984 (in the sense of brightness);
the morning star: - lucifer.



//Lucifer is not the morning star!//

Correct. Lucifer is AS the morning star.
The morning star brings an unfulfilled HOPE OF DAWN
(compare to the true dawn of the SON).

//Jesus Christ is the morning star.//

Wrong, totaly wrong. Jesus Christ is AS the morning star:
Jesus is the man leading the true dawn of God: the Messiah
(AKA: Christ).

These are COMPARISONS, not equaltions.

Jesus Christ is NOT the morning star, evening star, day star,
allof which refer to the planet Venus, the second planet from
the Sun in the Solar System. Jesus Christ is much more than
a hot ball of metal & gas. - always was, always will be.

Even the KJV1611 Edition tells the truth:

Isa 14:12 (KJV1611 Edition);

How art thou fallen from heauen, ||O Lucifer,
sonne of the morning? how art thou cut downe to the ground,
which didst weaken the nations?

Translator's Footnote: Or, O daystarre

This footnote means that the translators note a
nearly as good way to translate the passage
is:

Isa 14:12 How art thou fallen from heauen, O daystarre,
sonne of the morning? how art thou cut downe to the ground,
which didst weaken the nations?

Unfortunately, this does not support the blasphemy
that 'Lucifer' is the name of 'Satan' (a title: the acuser)
AKA: The Head Devil (another title). His name is not known,
just his titles:

Old mealy mouth
The Deceiver
That Old Dragon
etc.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Is there a place in the Bible that shows Lucifer = satan = devil?

No, it is a ignorant* assigment made by people who
'don't know' about metaphors & similies (communication devices).

caveat "ignorant" = 'not knowing', it is NOT a judgement
as some think, but an fruit inspection

 

[FERRON BRIMSTONE]

If you read Isaiah 14 carefully you see that the chapter has a dual focus on the king of Babylon and the Anti-Christ. Beginning in verse 12 the writer compares them to Satan and his fall. This is fitting since Satan is influencing them both.

Whether you translate it as Lucifer, morning star, day star, light bearer or shining one, I believe the translation would be correct. However the title is used here as a derogatory term because of their desire for greatness. Satan, the king of Babylon, and the anti-Christ all see themselves as deserving such a title, but will be brought down to the lowest pits of hell. So the term is used primarily for the king of Babylon and the anti-Christ, but also for Satan, who was at one time an Angel or light-bearer.


Isa 14:12 "How you are fallen from heaven, O Day Star, son of Dawn! How you are cut down to the ground, you who laid the nations low!
Isa 14:13 You said in your heart, 'I will ascend to heaven; above the stars of God I will set my throne on high; I will sit on the mount of assembly in the far reaches of the north;
Isa 14:14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will make myself like the Most High.'
Isa 14:15 But you are brought down to Sheol, to the far reaches of the pit.
ESV

 

[Marcia]

This has come up before here, and I recall someone posting info on that. There is an association with Venus, which was called the morning star.

http://www.crivoice.org/lucifer.html
The term Lucifer in fourth century Latin was a name for Venus, especially as the morning star. The Latin word Lucifer is composed of two words: lux, or in the genitive form used lucis, (meaning "light") and ferre, which means "to bear" or "to bring." So, the word Lucifer means bearer of light. The same word is used in other places in the Latin Vulgate to translate Hebrew terms that mean "bright," especially associated with the sky:
Job 11:17: And your life will be brighter than the noonday; its darkness will be like the morning.
2 Peter 1:19: You will do well to pay attention to this as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts.


This reflects how the Latin word Lucifer was used in classic Roman poetry, such as this passage from Virgil (Georgics, III, 324-325):

Luciferi primo cum sidere frigida rura
carpamus, dum mane novum, dum gramina canent"
Let us hasten, when first the Morning Star appears,
To the cool pastures, while the day is new, while the grass is dewy.


​

The term also occurs in the plural (luciferum) in Job 38:32 to refer to an astral constellation. Other forms of the word are used in similar ways to refer to light or the stars. And this reflects the Greek (Septuagint) translation’s use of heosphoros, "morning star" to translate the Hebrew of Isaiah 14:12.

There is some debate about the exact origin of the original Hebrew word in Isaiah 14:12 (helel). The strongest possibility is that it comes from a verbal root that means "to shine brightly," as well as "to offer praise" (where we get the phrase hallelu yah). In any case, the noun form is the Hebrew term for the morning star, in most cases the planet Venus. Both the second century BC Greek translation in the Septuagint, and the fourth century AD Latin translation in the Latin Vulgate understand this to be the meaning of the Hebrew word helel.

 

[Mexdeaf]

Thanks Bro. Ed, for clearing that up. In Spanish, 'lucir' is to shine. 'Lucifero' is resplendant, OR morning star, referring to Venus. So it all mathes up with what you said.

 

[Logos1560]

The Hebrew word, “Helel” does NOT mean morning star

Lucifer and morning star were used as synonyms in the 1500's and 1600's.


The old 1300’s Wycliffe's Bible made from the Latin Vulgate may have been the first English Bible to introduce the Latin word "lucifer" into English at Isaiah 14:12. The 1395 edition of the Wycliffe Bible had “Lucifer” more than once since it was also used at Job 38:32: “Whether thou bringest forth Lucifer, that is, day star, in his time, and makest evening star to rise on the sons of earth.“ The Oxford English Dictionary pointed out at its entry word Lucifer the following: "The Latin word was adopted in all the English versions down to 1611" (IX, p. 81). This source noted that this word was “used as a proper name of the morning star” (Ibid.).


The 1534 Luther’s German Bible, which is on the KJV-only line of good Bibles, has “morgen stern” [morning star] at Isaiah 14:12. In his lectures on Isaiah concerning this verse, Martin Luther indicated that the Hebrew word “denotes the morning star, called Lucifer and the son of Dawn” (Luther’s Works, Vol. 16, p. 140). According to this translation of his own comments, Luther’s rendering was likely the result of the influence of the Latin Vulgate or at the very least his rendering “morning star“ was intended to mean the same as “Lucifer.” Of the earlier English Bibles of which the KJV was a revision, the 1535 Coverdale’s Bible first used “Lucifer” at Isaiah 14:12. Coverdale is said to have translated primarily from the German with guidance from the Latin, and he is not known to have had a manuscript copy of the old Wycliffe‘s Bible. Is it possible that Coverdale’s rendering “Lucifer” was his translation for Luther’s German Bible’s “morgen stern?” Does this evidence suggest that the rendering “Lucifer” was first introduced into the English Bible from the direct or indirect influence of the Latin Vulgate?


Since the Hebrew word in this verse occurs only once in the whole Old Testament, it was perhaps easy for English translators to follow this interpretation of the Latin translators. Lucifer was the Latin name for the planet Venus when it appears as the morning star. The Liberty Annotated Study Bible confirmed that "the name Lucifer is actually the Latin designation for the morning star" (p. 1038). The 1968 Cassell's New Latin Dictionary indicated that the Latin word "lucifer" comes from two root words meaning "light-bearing, light-bringing" and that it would be translated into English as "Lucifer, the morning star, the planet Venus." According to the English-Latin section of this dictionary, the translation of "morning-star" in English is given as "lucifer" in Latin.


At the end of Isaiah 14, the 1549 edition of Matthew’s Bible has some notes that include these words: “Lucifer, the morning star, which he calleth the child of the morning, because it appeared only in the morning.” The marginal note in the 1560 and 1599 editions of the Geneva Bible for this word included the following: "for the morning star that goeth before the sun is called Lucifer." These two notes from two pre-1611 English Bibles that are on the KJV-only view’s line of good Bibles provide clear credible evidence concerning the meaning of the word "Lucifer" in English in the 1500's. The 1657 English translation of the 1637 Dutch States-General Version and Dutch Annotations also indicated this meaning with its rendering "O morning-star" at Isaiah 14:12.


What did the KJV translators themselves mean by the choice of the word "Lucifer" in Isaiah 14:12? The 1611 KJV gives in its margin the literal meaning or acceptable alternative translation for "Lucifer" as "daystar." The KJV translators were aware of the marginal note in the Geneva Bible, and they would have recognized that their marginal note at this verse would have associated this meaning “daystar” or “morning star” with this rendering “Lucifer.“ D. A. Waite seemed to suggest that alternative translations in the marginal notes of the 1611 N. T. were “merely synonyms of words that could have been used rather than the ones chosen to put into the text itself” so would he say the same about the marginal notes of the 1611 O. T.?” (Fundamentalist Distortions, p. 18). In a sermon, KJV translator Lancelot Andrewes referred to "St Peter's Lucifer in cordibus [daystar in your hearts]" (Hewison, Selected Writings, p. 112). Clearly, Andrewes used the word Lucifer in his sermon with this understood meaning “daystar.“ Daystar is Old English for morning star. A 1672 edition of the KJV has the following note at Isaiah 14:12: “for the morning-star that goeth before the sun is called Lucifer.“ Thus, several credible sources from the 1500’s and 1600’s clearly establish how this word “Lucifer” was commonly used and understood in that time period.

To claim that the Hebrew word does not mean "morning star" is also claiming that it does not mean "Lucifer."

 

[Askjo]

Sigh :tear:

Lucifer is AS the morning star.
Jesus Christ is AS the morning star

Jesus Christ is NOT the morning star

You contradict yourself what you are saying.

This quotation shows very obvious: Lucifer is AS Jesus. Jesus is AS Lucifer. Lucifer is AS morning star as Jesus. Jesus is AS morning star as Lucifer.

Look at Rev. 22:16 (KJV) “I AM … morning star." This verse does not say Jesus is “AS” morning star. But this verse is very clear that Jesus IS the morning star.

Translator's Footnote: Or, O daystarre

This footnote means that the translators note a
nearly as good way to translate the passage
is:

The KJV translators were very wise to select a right word in the KJV. Lucifer is a right word instead of a day star. They put “Lucifer” on Isa. 14:12 instead of morning star or day star.

 

[Helen]

Some people holler about the use of 'morning star' in Isaiah 14:12 because Jesus calls Himself the morning star in Rev. 22:16.(Remember the AV 1611's marginal note, "or, O day starre" for Isaiah 14:12.) But clearly there are many morning stars in Scripture. Before He calls Himself the morning star, He says, in Rev. 2:28 "And I will give him the morning star." Clearly this isn't Himself. And before all these things we see in Job 38:7 "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy".

A little help from the Hebrew readers, please? I have been told by more than one Jew that 'morning star' is a valid English rendering in Isaiah 14:12 because we have 'helel', I.E. "light bringer or bearer" coupled with "son of the morning". How correct is this?

I believe Jesus clearly indicated His uniqueness among all other 'morning stars' by calling Himself the BRIGHT AND morning star.

Who were those morning stars in Job? And what morning star is Jesus gonna give to the believers?

The morning stars of Job were the stars in the cores of the galaxies which lit up about 3.5 to 4 days before the stars in the spiral arms (of which our sun is one). The stars of Job are literal stars. Due to the high speed of light at the creation of the cosmos, the morning, or central stars, literally blew up like giant balloons with light (all stars are, as the Bible correctly indicates "light holders") which is why we have the red giants in the cores of our galaxies. They are also called the Population II stars. The Population I stars, like our sun, are younger and bluer for the most part, which is why we see the blue color along the spiral arms of the galaxies.

The 'morning star' of Christ is the idiom for the idea that the New Day is coming and we can look for it.

Essentially, there is probably nothing in creation which is not some kind of picture of a spiritual truth.

 

[Ed Edwards]

No, it is a ignorant* assigment made by people who
'don't know' about metaphors & similies (communication devices).

caveat "ignorant" = 'not knowing', it is NOT a judgement
as some think, but an fruit inspection

Amen, Brother Ed -- Preach it! :thumbs:

Those who don't know methods of communication are
limited in their ability to communicate.

A 'metaphor' is a figure of speach in which a similarity
with something else is implied

A 'simile' is a figure of speach in which a similarity
with something else directly by the use of 'like' or 'as'.

Askjo: //Look at Rev. 22:16 (KJV) “I AM … morning star." This verse does not say Jesus is “AS” morning star.//

Your statement shows that in this case Jesus is
compared to the 'morning star' by a metaphor (the 'like' or 'as' is
missing).

The meaning of nouns is that they refer to something.
'Jesus' refers to a person who walked and talked on earth
about 2,000 years ago. 'Messiah' ('chosen one of God') is
His Job title and referes to His earthly and heavenly person.
'Morning Star' refers to the planet Venus in it's rising-before-the-sun
position. 'Evening Star' refers to the planet Venus in
it's setting-after-the-sun position. Venus is also known as
'day star' for it is the only planet or star that can be seen during
the daytime.

Sorry, 'Jesus' does not denote the same set of attributes as
does the term 'Morning Star'. To claim so shows the claimer
to be a member of one of those groups
that claim that God can honor 'not knowning' more than he can honor
'study to shew thy self approved unto God'.

Other debaters: fortunately "Those who don't know methods
of communication are limited in their ability to communicate."
So they pose no threat to the rest of us (save
in our guilt-by-association).

 

[robycop3]

Any comments on the morning star Jesus said He's gonna give the believers?

 

[Ed Edwards]

It is a metaphor of Jesus giving Himself for we Believers.

 

[franklinmonroe]

I believe the original questions have fully answered. All the historical and linguistic evidence shows that "moring star" or "day starre" are proper renderings.

"Lucifer" is not Hebrew, and it is not English. It is unfortunate that the KJV translators choose to retain this Catholic Latinism in the text rather than plainly and properly putting it into English vernacular. There is no contridiction that brightness or star-likeness be attributed to both Christ and Satan (they are also both powerful, intelligent, etc.)

From the Encyclopedia Britannica:
In classical mythology, the morning star (the planet Venus at dawn), personified as a male figure. Lucifer (Latin: “Light-Bearer”) carried a torch and served as herald of the dawn. In Christian times, Lucifer came to be regarded as the name of Satan before his fall; it was thus used by John Milton in Paradise Lost.

From American Heritage Dictionary:
1. The archangel cast from heaven for leading the revolt of the angels; Satan.
2. The planet Venus in its appearance as the morning star.
3. lucifer A friction match.
[Middle English, from Old English, morning star, Lucifer, from Latin Lūcifer, from lūcifer, light-bringer : lūx, lūc-, light + -fer, -fer.]


From Wikipedia:
In the Vulgate, an early-5th-century translation of the Bible into Latin by Jerome, Lucifer occurs in Isaiah 14:12-14 as a translation of the Greek word heosphorus ("dawn-bearer"), an epithet of Venus. The original Hebrew text of this verse was הילל בן שחר (heilel ben-schahar), meaning "Venus, son of the morning" or "Venus, the brilliant one", a poetic epithet of the king of Babylon, comparable to many other titles used by kings throughout history, such as Louis XIV of France being called Le Roi Soleil ("The Sun King"). In Isaiah, this title is specifically used, in a prophetic vision, to reference the king of Babylon's pride and to illustrate his eventual fate by referencing mythological accounts of the planet Venus

 

[Ed Edwards]

Strangly, most of what we know about Satan is a
Catholic version from John Milton in Paradise Lost.

1. Satan is NOT the warden of eternal Hell, he is the
chief & intended prisioner.

2. Satan is NOT ugly & mishapen, he frequently
appears as an angel of light

3. etc.