I'm curious to know if anyone has a good interpretation of the Bible that may offer up a decent explanation for how Lucifer may be another name for Satan. I was brought up in a Christian house and went to Christian schools my entire life, and everyone always seemed to believe that Lucifer was indeed another name for Satan. I had believed it myself without even questioning it.

Recently, however, I had heard someone say that this wasn't the case, and I decided to check things out. I found that the name Lucifer appears in the Bible only once, in Isaiah 14, and, as far as I can tell, is used to refer to the king of Babylon.

So if you believe that Lucifer is another name for Satan, can you explain how the Bible can be interpreted as saying that?

soxfan849 : I always heard so too, what version of the bible are you using? I'll have to check that out, I just realized that I never actually looked it up, just believed my elders. I believe it is, just need to find a bible verse to confirm that.
Edit: Just read your link, and I saw that in verse 28 it says " In the year that king Ahaz died was this burden." King Ahaz, not Lucifer. I read the verse mentioning Lucifer, and it appears to me that it does refer to lucifer as satan. "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!" I interpret this to refer to the fall of the angels ("How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer"), and the "how art thou cut down to the ground" to refer to what Jesus did on the cross. Just throwing in my interpretation, hope it helps!

mrfe :

I linked to the King James Version in the original post, but here's a link to the NIV version as well. Verse 4 seems to be the most important in understanding that verse 12 was directed at the king of Babylon, and not at Satan.

I just saw your link to the NIV, and I believe it confirms my edit in my previous post. "12 How you have fallen from heaven,morning star, son of the dawn!You have been cast down to the earth,you who once laid low the nations! 13 You said in your heart, “I will ascend to the heavens;
I will raise my throne
above the stars of God;
I will sit enthroned on the mount of assembly,
on the utmost heights of Mount Zaphon.
14 I will ascend above the tops of the clouds;
I will make myself like the Most High.”
15 But you are brought down to the realm of the dead,
to the depths of the pit." I'm pretty sure this refers to Satan's failure to overthrow God, and then the subsequent kicking out of Satan. That's my opinion.

mrfe :

Read the entire chapter, not just the part that mentions Lucifer. As I said, verse 4 is extremely important.

you will take up this taunt against the king of Babylon:

Satan isn't mentioned at all in the chapter. Why would it be talking about Satan when it's directed at the king of Babylon?

.

I don't ordinarily get readily involved with threads anymore but I see that there is a lot of confusion here so I feel I must help out. This is one of those extremely complicated issues in biblical scholarship that volumes have been written on and that I have read only so much about myself (and I'm rusty) but to summarize quickly Lucifer is the Romanized name for a pagan deity who once tried to overthrow Ba'al and take over heaven or something, so he's seen as a sort of allusion or parallel for Satan. Something like that. Think of it as being the equivalent of when Romantic poets figuratively referred to the Greco-Roman gods when describing things. There is a ton of scholarly debate over every aspect of the matter but in any event it's all a matter of semantics anyway. What's in a name?

soxfan849 : I’m not sure on this one so I can’t really give a solid answer but I am definitely certain that there is evil in the world and that there are those who profit and may even take pleasure in those who are struggling and or, suffering. It’s sad but I am certain that evil does exist.

I just hope that one day we will see evil disappear and we will see less hatred in the world, more tolerance, kindness and understanding for one another. As I’ve said many times the concept of world peace is closer than any of us or society really realize if we as a society could just stop judging each other and being kind to one another. It may seem a tad sentimental but that’s how I see it.

this link to a youtube video with explain EVERYTHING you need to know. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&ved=0CEEQuAIwAQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3Dj-gbOnWj6Mw&ei=xVDQUOGAM-7yiQLYtYD4Bw&usg=AFQjCNHOA7U8otZEasqm2L3YNFe8cd0_UQ&sig2=M91Zsj-JZrIgoa1F-Qeuew&bvm=bv.1355534169,d.cGE

Wikipedia?

'From the fourth Century Lucifer is sometimes used in Christian theology to refer to Satan, as a result of identifying the fallen "son of the dawn" of Isaiah 14:12 with the "accuser" of other passages in the Old Testament.'

Also Lucifer's Page. It seems that Lucifer is the name used to refer to Satan before he "fell".

Of course, I don't really know a whole lot about Christianity, or the Abrahamic religions in general, so I don't really know much myself.

Lucifer is indeed the name of Satan before he fell.  There are some pretty good answers up above, but you really do need to look at the surrounding scripture to understand it.  mrfe's answer in particular was pretty good.

Maybe I'm missing it because I'm tired, but I don't see where Lucifer is mentioned to be the king of Babylon?  I see where the king is talked about, and where Satan is talked about.  I don't see anything that says they are one and the same.  Which verse exactly made you think this, soxfan?

Singelli :

The reason I asked about such an interpretation is that "Satan" isn't mentioned in that chapter at all. In fact, everything would be directed at the king of Babylon, except that one verse. That's why it doesn't make sense to me. Why would God speak something that's directed to the king of Babylon, talk about Satan for a second, and then return to talking about the king again? The only way interpreting the verse as referring to Satan seems like it might make sense to me, is if the king of Babylon were somehow being compared to Satan. But even then it seems like a stretch.

soxfan, your question was so legitimate that I did some more looking into it.  When I couldn't find much, I asked my husband for some aid, and we came up with something very interesting.

I do NOT believe Lucifer is another name for Satan, and I feel like we have some pretty conclusive reasoning.

Isaiah 14:12- 13 states "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"

It does seem a little out of place to be ONE mention of Satan in a passage about a king, and it seems odd that people associate the name with Satan because of the one phrase in that verse.  Thus, we looked up a few other phrases.  Surprisingly, it was  "the sides of the north" that yielded interesting results.

Psalm 48:2 states"Beautiful for situation, the joy of the whole earth, is mount Zion, on the sides of the north, the city of the great King."  This is the only phrase in the whole bible with the exact same phrase.

First of all, Zion we know is a mountain.  It was a holy city.  Isaiah 14 references this mountain, and it makes so much more sense in all the phrases like ascending into heaven, and sitting above the stars.  I think it's certain that Lucifer was a very evil man. He wished to be like God and to sit in the place of God.  If you read the rest of Isaiah with this in mind, it fits PERFECTLY and the passage becomes cohesive.

Isaiah was prophesying the fall of this king, from his high place of power and honor.

Even 'son of the morning' is likely in reference to the position of kingship, since it refers to the 'star of day' .  In Babylon, the day star was a symbol for their god, so it could have been referencing kings which were viewed like and treated as gods.  (This part is all speculation on my part.)

Furthermore, if you keep reading Isaiah, it mentions 'all of your sons'.  Satan does not have sons.

The verse itself is referring to an earthly king. However, the Bible is known for using earthly kings as imagery for the fall of the devil. Another example for this is Ezekiel 28:13, "You were in Eden, the garden of God; Every precious stone was your covering: The ruby, the topaz and the diamond; The beryl, the onyx and the jasper; The lapis lazuli, the turquoise and the emerald; And the gold, the workmanship of your settings and sockets, Was in you. On the day that you were created They were prepared." I did find it interesting as did other commentaries I consulted that for brief moments, these verses seem to reach heavenly descriptions. Now as I said before. These verses in their beginning obviously are of earthly kings. I do think though that these could provide a picture of Satan's fall. Ultimately I am only straddling the fence as I have not done an in depth study on these passages. What I am saying is, is that I think it does; it appears that way but I'm not entirely sure.

soxfan849 : This is mostly related to how Lucifer rebelled against God and so God sent him and his followers into hell.  However, this DOES NOT mean that there is only one Satan or devil they are just names and titles of fallen angels aka demons so to say Lucifer is Satan could be true depending on what your requirements are for said "Satan".  Hope this helps

I don't see the point of this thread to be honest - Lucifer was an angel but he defied God thus he became Satan. He is now Satan and Lucifer is gone.

tRIUNE : I think the two names became intertwined at some point in history, but were not originally intended to be the same. What you described is the "going story" now but that's really a misnomer. "Lucifer" just means "morning star" in Latin, I believe. The verse in Isaiah most likely was to say that the King of Babylon had been cast down from heaven like a fallen morning star. It was basically a metaphorical description there, not a name.

"Lucifer" as a name only properly exists in Canaanite mythology (though I believe this version is more commonly referred to as "Helel" due to transliterations of Hebrew) as a god who tried to occupy the thrown of Baal but was unsuccessful and ended up ruling the underworld.

Satan, on the other hand, is the fallen angel who rebelled against God. The archangel, Michael fought against Satan and banished him from heaven. From there, Satan took his grudge out on humans, trying to tempt them to do evil.

That's the general gist of it anyway.