Watching Lucifer

Lightbringer (Lūcifer) & Punisher

➥ from lūx (“light”) + ferō (“bear, carry”)

➥ The planet Venus as the daystar

Passing through an XV suite of episodes

Punisher but not Evil

 הֵילֵל בֶּן שַׁחַר‎  (helél ben shaḥár)

Héylélbėnşǎẖar (helélbenshaḥár)

 הֵילֵל בֶּן שַׁחַר (he) hillél ben sháẖar masculine,

אַיֶּלֶת הַשַּׁחַר (he) ayélet hasháẖar feminine

from Ancient Greek Ἑωσφόρος (Heōsphóros), from Ἕως (Héōs, “dawn”) + φέρω (phérō, “to bear, to carry”).

(biblical) The King of Babylon who named himself after the planet Venus as mentioned in the King James Version of Isaiah 14:12

A name applied to Satan by mistake by misinterpreting Isaiah 14:12

The word heōsphoros does not appear in Kittel, because it does not appear in the NT. This word is the Septuagint (LXX) translation of the Hebrew הֵילֵל בֶּן־שָׁחַר (hêlēl ben šaḥar) in Isa 14:12. (Incidentally, the Qamets under the Shin in שָׁחַר is a pausal form used with a heavy accent; the contextual from is with Patach, שַׁחַר, and in both cases, the word is accented on the first syllable.) To understand how the KJV reads “Lucifer,” we need to look at the Hebrew, the language in which most of the OT was composed, then the LXX, the Greek translation of the Hebrew OT, and the Vulgate, Jerome’s Latin translation of the Hebrew OT.

First, the Hebrew. The phrase consists of three words. Hêlēlis found only here in the Hebrew OT, but is a word derived from a verb meaning “to shine.” The noun would presumably mean “shining one.” The second word, ben, means “son of.” Šaḥar is found 24 times in the Hebrew OT. It basically means “dawn” (cf. Gen 19.15). In some cultures, “Dawn” was the name of a god. Isaiah was probably using the phrase הֵילֵל בֶּן־שָׁחַר, “shining one [=star], son of the Dawn,” as a poetic reference to the planet Venus. The Hebrews used the same word כּוֹכָב (kôkab) to refer to either a star or a planet. But the literal planet Venus was probably being used to refer to an astral deity. Isaiah used this deity to represent the king of Babylon as a (self-proclaimed?) divine figure. This has the effect of making the king’s fall greater and therefore more dramatic.

Second, the Greek. The three-word Hebrew phrase is rendered by ὁ ἑωσφόρος ὁ πρωὶ ἀνατέλλων (ho heōsphoros ho prōi anatellōn), “O Heosphoros, who rises early/who raises the morning.” The keyword, heōsphoros, has two parts: heōs means “morning” and phoros means “bearer, one who brings.” Heōsphoros, “bringer of the morning/dawn,” is again a reference to the planet Venus. Thus, though heōsphoros is not a literal translation of hêlēl ben šaḥar, it is an accurate translation of a phrase referring to Venus, an exact equivalent of hêlēl ben šaḥar. The interpretation of the Bible text by the LXX translators is probably the same as those mentioned above.

Third, the Latin. The exact Latin equivalent of the Greek Heosphoros is Lucifer. Luci comes from lux meaning “light” and fer is the same as the Greek phoros, “bearer.” So, though it had other uses, Lucifer is a term for the planet Venus, just as the Greek and the Hebrew are.

The sources for the identification between “Lucifer” and Satan are difficult to date, but they all come from post-New Testament times. There are three basic groups of sources to check plus the NT.

OT Pseudepigraphic Works

First, many OT pseudepigraphic works were originally Jewish and then later reworked by Christians. We begin to see Satan equated with Venus here. For example, in The Life of Adam and Eve, thought by many to have been composed between 100 B.C. and A.D. 200, probably closer to A.D. 100, with Greek and Latin translations between then and 400, though this is all in dispute now (see J. R. Levinson, “Adam and Eve, Literature Concerning” in Dictionary of NT Background, 4–5). In 9:1 Satan is said to have transformed himself into “the brightness of the angels.” Eve, complaining to Satan about his continual onslaught of deception to lead her into sin, asks in 11:2–3, “Have we stolen your glory and made you without honour?” In 12:1, the devil responds that the reason for this pursuit is that it is on account of them that he was expelled and deprived of his glory “which I had in the heavens in the midst of angels, and … was cast out onto the earth.” The cause for this expulsion was the very creation of man. Man was created in the image of God. Therefore, Michael, the angel presented Adam before all the angels and told them to “worship the image of God.” Satan refused because he was superior to man and man should worship him. Other angels began to follow suit. Michael warned of the threat of God’s wrath. To this Satan responded, “If he be wrathful with me, I will set my throne above the stars of heaven and will be like the highest” (cf. Isa 14.13; Dan 8.10; Obad 4; Job 22.12; Jude 9). Whether the identification is Jewish or Christian, I cannot tell. It may have been a Jewish idea. The writers of these works often rewrote the Bible stories.

Later Jewish Rabbinic Works

Second, in the later Jewish works of the rabbis (Talmud and others). The earlier rabbinic works do not make the Lucifer-Satan connection. Rather they apply Isa 14:12 to God’s judgment on human rulers. For example, in the Babylonian Talmud, Shabbat 149b quotes Isa 14:12. It takes a lesson from Nebuchadnezzar and Zedekiah to teach that it is right to punish the wicked. There is no treatment of hêlēl ben šaḥar and no identification with Satan or hint of reference to any other superhuman being.

NT Sources

In the NT there are only three verses that may apply, Luke 10:18; Rev 9:1 and 12:9. In Rev 12:9 Satan is clear, but no star is mentioned. In Rev 9:1, a star is fallen from heaven to earth. But is this a reference to Isa 14:12? If it is, is it teaching that Isa 14:12 is talking about Satan? Perhaps, but I think it is better to say that Rev 9:1 is applying the same terminology that Isaiah does (namely, of a powerful one who is cast down from his high place by God) to Satan. Therefore Isa 14:12 need not be interpreted of Satan in any way. Luke 10:18 is no more conclusive than Rev 9:1.

The earliest Christians to identify the figure of Isaiah 14:12 with Satan seem to be the contemporaries Tertullian (d. c. 225) and Origen (d. about 250). Tertullian in his Against Marcion 5.17 quotes Isa 14:13-14 and applies it to “the devil” (Diabolus). Though Origen wrote in Greek, his First Principles work is preserved only in the Latin translation of Rufinius. In 1.5.5 Rufinius’ translation does contain the word Lucifer in quoting Isa 14:12. Many later church fathers continued this line of interpretation.

Conclusion: The Short Answer

Isaiah 14:12 simply does not give any factual information about the history of Satan: (1) Isaiah’s context is about the fall of the king of Babylon. Kings were often referred to as stars; Isa 14:12 would be describing the fall of the greatest (in some sense) one. (2) Lucifer was not originally a name for Satan but referred to as Venus. (3) It was only later that Christians, perhaps following some writings of OT pseudepigrapha, which were sometimes heavily steeped in speculative stories about angels, made this identification. The name Lucifer, then, meaning “light-bearer,” is quite appropriate for Christians and their task of bringing the light of the gospel to the world. Jesus himself, the ultimate Light-bearer (John 1:4, 5, 9; 8:12; 9:5), is called the “morning star” and “bright morning star” in Rev 2:28; 22:16, respectively, another term for the planet Venus. Of course, given the historic identification of Lucifer as the name for Satan, this meaning would be completely lost today.