Re: Lucifer & the Anointed Cherub
Posted: Thu May 04, 2017 3:28 am
Apart from the discussion about 'double fulfillment' it seems this explanation above stands on it's own-buckeyematt2 wrote:I don't think "Lucifer" in Is. 14:12 was actually intended as a "name" for the devil. "Lucifer" is actually just a transliteration of the Latin word for "morning star" - the KJV translators just duplicated the term used in the Latin Vulgate because the Hebrew word is used only once in the Old Testament and they didn't know what to make of it. Jerome, the translator of the Vulgate, knew Hebrew better than the KJV translators, but even he was uncertain about the meaning of the Hebrew word. But at least he made an attempt at a translation.
George are you suggesting that the name of the Babylonian King was Lucifer? I suppose one could imagine that the early church writers & fathers were not 'inspired' if they did not have the Holy Spirit. If we conclude only the original foundational Apostles alone possessed the Holy Spirit, then we might as well conclude none of us can be guided by the Holy Spirit into truth.
I suspect, that Jesus, spending 3 solid years with the disciples explained so much more to them than they wrote down- especially of the Old Testament meanings- since this is all they really had to expound on- I'm sure Jesus explained so much to them that was passed down- but whether they ended up making as big of deals out of some of these passages, as we do in our 'discussions' may explain the lack of a lot of writings about it.