Sorry for the unannounced hiatus. I’ve been asked to teach a sequence of ancient history courses at a local university, so I’ve been prepping. Classes start today, so I should be “in the flow” now and more able to budget my time. Hopefully I’ll put out my first section of the Bellingham Statement tonight.
Back to blogging…
Hi Mike, I was wondering if you could comment on this piece of writing. If Lucifer is a latin name, how did it find its way into a Hebrew manuscript?
Sorry I forgot to include the link…
http://www.lds-mormon.com/lucifer.shtml
@DJR: Lucifer isn’t in a Hebrew manuscript since it’s Latin. “Lucifer” is a word found in the Latin translation of the Bible (the Vulgate). It occurs in three places in the Clementine edition of the Vulgate: Isa 14:12 (as a proper name, or as a translation in the phrase “shining one, son of the dawn”); Job 11:17 (for “morning”); and 2 Peter 1:19 (for “morning star”). Since many argue that Isa 14:12 refers to the fall of God’s arch enemy, “Lucifer” came to be a proper name for the devil because of the Vulgate. The Hebrew at Isa 14:12 reads “Helel ben Shachar” [“Shining One, son of the Dawn”).
Thanks Mike!
I ran across this on the net while searching on the derivation of Cherubim, Seraphim and just the origins of angelic beings in general. I thought this man had an interesting perspective, and it was the first time I’ve ever seen Cherubim described as ‘machines.’
http://www.thetruthishere.com/cherub_lucifer.html
@DJR: cherubim aren’t machines