Problems with Lucifer

[TonkRogerio]

marts1, an answer like what?

[Moksha]

If I remember right, the apologists at the MAD board recently discussed this and the predominating opinion was that Joseph Smith made use of the KJV of the Bible in his translations - either that, or the Seer Stone had the informational retrieval and correlating capabilities to blend the Bible in with the Lamanite writings. I think this last idea was from some guy named Rameumpton.

As you know, there were a number of such mistranslations in the KJV, that later translations caught and fixed.

[marts1]

marts1, an answer like what?

and please people, don't keep telling others to pray about everything to get answers praying is just a partial answer, seeking is the other part and this was me seeking

thanks for the help anyway guys

Do you not see how you made it sound as if prayer was not all that important?

[Finrock]

Good evening marts1. I hope you have had a wonderful day! :)

You know, one thing I've noticed from your posts marts1 is how much significance you put in to personal scripture study and prayer. I think your faith in these principles is wonderful and I appreciate your example in this. Thank you!

Little wonder your having trouble with an answer like that concerning prayer. Won't get far at all without it.

I don't think that TonkRogerio was suggesting that prayer isn't useful. I think he is making the point that generally speaking God is not going to give us all answers simply by praying. Seeking answers to concerns involves more than just praying. Oliver Cowdery at one point made the assumption that all he needed to do was to pray. But God told Him otherwise. Speaking to Oliver, God said:

"7 Behold, you have not understood; you have supposed that I would give it unto you, when you took no thought save it was to ask me.

8 But, behold, I say unto you, that you must study it out in your mind; then you must ask me if it be right, and if it is right I will cause that your bosom shall burn within you; therefore, you shall feel that it is right" (D&C 9).

Regards,

Finrock

[pam]

@Pam- your missing the point mate :S i know all that, my question was why was Lucifer used in the BoM and still being used today if its a miss translation

I don't think I was missing some of your point based on a statement made in your OP:

and how come the LDS church is making Lucifer an official name for Satan?

That is why I gave you the answer I did. We do believe that Lucifer is the name for Satan during the premortal life.

and please people, don't keep telling others to pray about everything to get answers praying is just a partial answer, seeking is the other part and this was me seeking :)

I apologize if there was a misunderstanding..but by prefacing a sentence by telling people to quit doing something and then explaining..perhaps it could have been worded differently for better understanding. Perhaps stating that people should seek answers and then pray to find out if your answers are correct.

I am not debating you. This is a public forum where we all can give our thoughts and views on a subject. Not just those that don't disagree with your own thoughts.

[TonkRogerio]

OK i probably did word it wrong :S

i thought the word "partial" in "praying is just a partial answer" and the word "other" in "seeking is the other part" gave you an incline as to how i thought of prayer but :S considering your telling me that i should have worded it better and the fact that i know I'm terrible at expressing myself with writing, must mean that the lack of though on your part for not thinking that maybe your not reading it right, is a good strategy.

And Pam, your still missing the point with the Lucifer thing

Saying stuff like "That is why I gave you the answer I did. We do believe that Lucifer is the name for Satan during the premortal life." isn't an answer to "and how come the LDS church is making Lucifer an official name for Satan?" its just another way of putting what i already stated :S

I don't know how else to put it but i always knew that Satan and Lucifer was the same person in the Mormon church and numerous other christian churches if not all...actually even Muslims believe it to be so, however, that was never my concern, my concern was that the word Lucifer is a mistranslation from the TRUE words morning star written in the original Hebrew doctrines. but its all good now, super Finrock has answered it better than i would have though and now I'm super happy see, smiling :D:D

Edited April 1, 2010 by TonkRogerio

[pam]

Perhaps we are both missing the point that the other is making.

[Maureen]

It appears that the Latin Vulgate and latin in particular has been very influential over these many centuries. Tonk, do you ever watch the TV series Supernatural?

M.

[marts1]

Good evening marts1. I hope you have had a wonderful day! :)

You know, one thing I've noticed from your posts marts1 is how much significance you put in to personal scripture study and prayer. I think your faith in these principles is wonderful and I appreciate your example in this. Thank you!

I don't think that TonkRogerio was suggesting that prayer isn't useful. I think he is making the point that generally speaking God is not going to give us all answers simply by praying. Seeking answers to concerns involves more than just praying. Oliver Cowdery at one point made the assumption that all he needed to do was to pray. But God told Him otherwise. Speaking to Oliver, God said:

"7 Behold, you have not understood; you have supposed that I would give it unto you, when you took no thought save it was to ask me.

8 But, behold, I say unto you, that you must study it out in your mind; then you must ask me if it be right, and if it is right I will cause that your bosom shall burn within you; therefore, you shall feel that it is right" (D&C 9).

Regards,

Finrock

Are you attemping to teach me something here Finrock that I do not already know? :)

[Finrock]

Are you attemping to teach me something here Finrock that I do not already know? :)

Only you know the answer to that. I'm just taking part in a discussion.

Kind Regards,

Finrock

[TonkRogerio]

maureen I'm guessing by the that supernatural had something on Mormonism or some sort? i don't watch it no but supernatural or no, it doesn't change the fact that the discrepancy exists

[Maureen]

maureen I'm guessing by the that supernatural had something on Mormonism or some sort? i don't watch it no but supernatural or no, it doesn't change the fact that the discrepancy exists

Supernatural is about two brothers who are hunters and they fight demons. Latin comes in very handy when fighting demons and in Season 5 (here in Canada and the US) Lucifer has been set free and we, the viewing audience and the two brothers have met him. I'm a fan, what can I say.

I would suspect that the Latin Vulgate has influenced many bible versions. And interpretations of scripture throughout these many centuries has evolved into Satan becoming Lucifer. Isaiah 14 is not really about Satan/Lucifer, but over the years that scripture has been interpreted as the fall of Satan rather than a lecture against a tyrannical king. We know a 19th century religious audience would see Lucifer and Satan as synonymous and they still are as we can see from viewing 21st century TV shows.

More modern English bible translations no longer use a Latin word to translate "morning star". But the word Lucifer has evolved into how we define it now, another name for Satan.

M.

[TonkRogerio]

wow...

you learnt all that from a TV show called super natural?!

supernatural sounds like wiki dude :S

but yeah that's is my main problem with Mormonism and most other Christian faiths (not saying that i don't believe, just saying its a weird inconstancy).

[Elgama]

surely its simple by 1800s when the translation was made Lucifer ment Morning Star therefore it was an acceptable word to use to convey the meaning

[Blackmarch]

hey guys, i was wondering if you could all answer a question I have about the word Lucifer please.

first off let me explain i am not a troll and I'm not looking for trouble or anything, i just generally want to know and understand the problematic questions i have been having.

the word Lucifer is a mistranslation in the bible, yet the book of Mormon has the same passage that the Bible has containing the word Lucifer. The real words used in the bible were morning star, later translated to Lucifer which is a Latin name for the morning star.

does this mean that Joseph smith copied straight out of the King James version of the bible? because if he didn't then in the book of Mormon it would be morning start rather than Lucifer, and how come the LDS church is making Lucifer an official name for Satan?

i really hope there is an answer to this puzzle and if there is, please don't leave me in the dark

thanks for your time.

No it's not a copy. THe name Lucifer is very appropriate for the name Satan had before he fell- Just like it isn't inappropriate to call Jesus by the greek version of his name (which is Jesus), rather than call him by a direct latin translation of his name which would likely have been Jeshua or Joshua. Names from bible times are important and tend to convey the wishes, covenants, or traits given or wished for the individual. Lucifer (light bearing or bearer of light) as a translation name for what the adversary was before he fell is very appropriate.

Edited April 1, 2010 by Blackmarch

[rameumptom]

Many LDS scholars believe that Joseph Smith used the KJV translation for those sections it references, because that was the main Bible used in early America, and it would help them recognize and tie quotes from the Book of Mormon back to the Bible for them. There would be less of a learning curve for KJV Bible students. "Lucifer" was used because that is what is in the KJV, and it is the concept Nephi wanted to move forward. Nephi translated the OT portions according to his view of things, not as the Jews did. For Nephi, Lucifer or Morningstar represented a person, not just a concept.

In the OT Isaiah 14, Lucifer references Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon. It foresees him trying to rise up above all nations, and even God himself. Yet he is then cast down and sneered at by the other nations who once feared him.

Isaiah wrote everything on many symbolic levels, and so the later conception that this also pertained to Satan works. Why? Because Nebuchadnezzar did just what Satan attempted to do: overthrow the nations, the spirits, and God himself. Instead, he would be cast down and sneered at by those who once feared him.

Don't let little distractions like this rob you of your testimony. This is really a non-issue. If we are too technical, we could rob ourselves of a testimony of God and Jesus, as well! But there is more spiritual evidence that is of greater importance for us to consider. The Bible and Book of Mormon are not perfect books. They are inspired books. Joseph Smith never claimed to be a perfect person, and history shows he wasn't. But I believe history also shows he was inspired and called of God.

He has witnesses to the Book of Mormon, saw Christ with others, had hundreds experience angels and miracles during the Kirtland temple dedication. Those are very hard to pull off as sleight of hand tricks.

[Maureen]

wow...

you learnt all that from a TV show called super natural?!...

I'm going to assume you're kidding. :)

M.

[Traveler]

hey guys, i was wondering if you could all answer a question I have about the word Lucifer please.

first off let me explain i am not a troll and I'm not looking for trouble or anything, i just generally want to know and understand the problematic questions i have been having.

the word Lucifer is a mistranslation in the bible, yet the book of Mormon has the same passage that the Bible has containing the word Lucifer. The real words used in the bible were morning star, later translated to Lucifer which is a Latin name for the morning star.

does this mean that Joseph smith copied straight out of the King James version of the bible? because if he didn't then in the book of Mormon it would be morning start rather than Lucifer, and how come the LDS church is making Lucifer an official name for Satan?

i really hope there is an answer to this puzzle and if there is, please don't leave me in the dark

thanks for your time.

Lucifer is not a mistranslation. There are misunderstandings that are perpetrated because from time to time someone learns a little about ancient language and spins off on some tangent. There are many textual criticisms that arise from ancient scripture text and resulting modern interpretations. One aspect often lost is the ancient concepts of suzerains, kingdoms and what we now call “common law” or from the ancients – suzerain law. Anciently names and titles were interchangeable. The status one had within a kingdom was represented both with their name or title and the name or title others used to address them. This makes translating names or titles confusing. For example was the name and title made important by the individual or was the individual made important by their name or title.

The title “Lucifer” is associated with light and there are many efforts to translate it as “The Light Bringer”, or “Possessor of Light”. The title that is translated as “Son of Morning” can also mean “oldest” or highest in station. These titles indicated an individual of importance and high station. However, as is often the case anciently, titles change with a change in status. Thus the new title is Satan. But this is incomplete. Satan for the most part is used to designate “The Devil” or someone very evil. The ancient titles under ancient suzerain law indicate “accuser”, “rebel”, “liar” and “deceiver”.

So here is the point. The scholars translating the ancient scripture text would come across one of many titles given to “Lucifer” and rather than designate a direct translation they used a common title which was Lucifer. This avoided all the confusion in the possibility that someone might think the common individual was instead a committee of individuals. Thus there were two titles – Lucifer which was a high designation and then Satan indicating the individual stripped of all high titles. This also indicates that all reading the “modern version” of scripture is of the same status before G-d according to suzerain or divine law.

My final point is that the critic concerning Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon that you are using makes a very common mistake and you have fallen for it – hook, line and sinker. That is that the Book of Mormon is flawed for some reason that they give. But the reason and proof also disproves the Bible. The truth is that in the economy of witness the Bible and the Book of Mormon together create a witness according to suzerain law to which we can “solve” disputations and thus know that the two are given as one (Genesis 42:25 & 32) establish by G-d.

The Traveler

[Wisc]

I always like reading the Traveler. He writes what I want to say.

Edited April 1, 2010 by Wisc

[TonkRogerio]

rameumptom- very inspirational speech there dude : you are totally right, and i would like to thank everyone of you guys for the thoughts you have put down on the subject, unfortunately i can't stop using my mind to confuse myself :S its just part of me i guess..

saying this, i think God gave me some pretty convincing evidence of his existence through other means other than the spirit, if this was because he knows I'm stubborn or because of pure coincidence I'm not sure :s

[TonkRogerio]

i guess reading all of this has reminded me of how much i have lost touch with Socrates famous old saying -i know i am intelligent because i know that i know nothing-.

[rameumptom]

Or as I paraphrase Socrates: I know nothing, but at least I know more than you do....

[Guest]

rameumptom- very inspirational speech there dude : you are totally right, and i would like to thank everyone of you guys for the thoughts you have put down on the subject, unfortunately i can't stop using my mind to confuse myself :S its just part of me i guess..

saying this, i think God gave me some pretty convincing evidence of his existence through other means other than the spirit, if this was because he knows I'm stubborn or because of pure coincidence I'm not sure :s

yeaaaaaah buddy! Keep digging man, you'll find it =]