An Investigation of One Theory of Interpretation
Origin of the Controversy
Many have made claims concerning the following controversy. Doctoral dissertations have been given and
books written on the subject.[1] It is important to read and understand all of
the endnotes for a full orbed grasp of the topic. This paper examines Isaiah 14:12 in order to
evaluate an hypothesis developed by two medical doctors: The Day-Dunegan hypothesis. Unfortunately, no complete bibliography for
this hypothesis is available at this time.[2] The hypothesis appears to have been derived
from the perspective of the anti-abortion birthing rights movement.
While we agree with this movement and deplore abortion in
all its forms, there is more to the story.
The Malthusian Dilemma is an ever pressing reality. Earth’s population is rapidly approaching
7.25 billion people.[3] The world population growth rate is still
above 1%, though it appears to be declining.[4] This means that the earth’s population will
double in roughly 70 years, the hoped-for life span of my newest grandson, who
is now crawling on the living-room floor.
This means that he will have, in aggregate and on average 1 to 2 acres
to eke out his life. So the moral
implications of such an hypothesis have severe and broad implications. Christianity, as never before, needs to step
up and address these complicated difficult problems for which the human race
has no solutions currently in place.
Fortunately, our God is not limited either by our stupidity
or by our powerlessness.
Working Hypothesis
The hypothesis states that: If certain key words of
Scripture can be altered slightly, “the entire meaning of Scripture” can be
changed and a whole “new religion” created.
Its first corollary is that: The general blindness and
ignorance of the people will allow such sweeping changes to take place
unnoticed.
While this hypothesis will
probably stand on the merits of linguistic nuance. That being said, the method of examination
appears to be trivial. I will provide at
least an outline of what I consider to be an adequate analysis. There is no excuse for ignorance of Greek in
this kind of study. The absence of any
reference to Greek shows a definite weakness and inadequacy of examination in
the formulation of this hypothesis. So
we will accept the points as a working null hypothesis and test it for failure
in each verse.
The first corollary exposes
some fundamental theological errors. It
is far too humanistic; God is still in control here. It fails to account for the power of the Holy
Ghost, Who enables us to tear down strongholds of error with truth. It fails to recognize the true nature of The
Church (Hebrews 12). It is simply
impossible for The Church to stumble and fail in such a manner. If society as a whole should fail in this
way, then we would be forced to conclude that Christianity has departed the
face of the earth, having retired at last to the Heavenly City of God. So the whole hypothesis fails on its presuppositions. Nevertheless, for the sake of discussion, we
will continue, and not pass the hypothesis off as being trivial.
Isaiah 14:12
“How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer[5], son of
the morning! How art thou cut down to
the ground, which didst weaken the nations!” — KJV
“How you are fallen from heaven, O Lucifer,
son of the morning! How you are
cut down to the ground, You who weakened the nations!” — NKJV
“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!” — NIV
“How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer,
who didst rise in the morning? how art
thou fallen to the earth, that didst wound the nations?” — DRA
“How you are fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, who rose up in
the morning! He who sends for all the
nations is crushed to the earth.” — Orthodox Study Bible (OSB)
“πῶς[6] ἐξέπεσεν[7] ἐκ[8] τοῦ οὐρανοῦ[9] ὁ ἑωσφόρος[10] ὁ πρωὶ ἀνατέλλων[11]; συνετρίβη[12] εἰς[13] τὴν γῆν[14] ὁ ἀποστέλλων[15] πρὸς[16] πάντα τὰ ἔθνη[17].” — Septuaginta,
Rahlfs
“How did the until-bringer, the dawn rising fall from
heaven? [How was] the apostle to
all the nations crushed into the earth?” — my translation of the Septuagint
The Context
How are you fallen from
heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning? How
are you cut down to the ground, who weakened the nations? For you said in your heart,
“I will ascend into
heaven. I will exalt my throne above the
stars of God. I will sit also upon the
mount[18] of the congregation, in the
sides of the north. I will ascend above
the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.”
Yet you shall be brought
down to hell[19], to
the sides of the pit. Those who see you
shall narrowly look upon you, and consider you, saying, “Is this the man who
made the earth tremble; who shook kingdoms; who made the world as a wilderness,
destroyed its cities; and did not open his prisons?”
All the kings of the
nations, all of them lie in glory, everyone in his own tomb. But you are cast out of your grave like an
abominable branch, and as the clothes of those who are slain, thrust through
with a sword, who go down to the stones of the pit as a carcass trodden under
feet. You shall not be joined with them
in burial, because you have destroyed your land, and slain your people: the
seed of evildoers shall never be honored.
“Prepare slaughter for his
children for the iniquity of their fathers so that they do not rise, nor
possess the land, nor fill the face of the world with cities: for I will rise
up against them,” says the Lord of
hosts, “and cut off from Babylon the name, the remnant, the son, and nephew,”
says the Lord. “I will also make it a possession for the
bittern, pools of water; and I will sweep it with the broom of destruction,” says
the Lord of hosts. The Lord
of hosts has sworn, saying, “Surely as I have thought, so shall it come to
pass; and as I have purposed, so shall it stand: I will break the Assyrian in
my land, and upon my mountains tread him under foot:” then his yoke shall
depart from them, and his burden depart from their shoulders.
This is the purpose that
is purposed upon the whole earth: and this is the hand that is stretched out
upon all the nations: for the Lord
of hosts has purposed, and who shall disannul it? His hand is stretched out, and who shall turn
it back?
Comment
Isaiah writes about the historical fall of Babylon, which he
also calls Assyrian. This passage
closely parallels Ezekiel 28 in tone and subject matter; where the prince of
Tyrus thinks of himself as God, and God’s equal; where the king of Tyrus is referred
to as a cherub. Likewise, in Daniel,
empires are seen as the consorts or wives of emperors. Empires or kingdoms are feminine, wives;
emperors and kings are masculine; the emperor acts as a high priest; behind the
false worship is a system of demons ruled by Satan. All of these seek to mimic the true kingdom
of God.
Both Lucifer and morning star are
legitimate translations of ἑωσφόρος;
yet that does not make either of them good or wise translations. Lucifer is an opinion based on the Latin
language; morning star is an opinion based on related
astronomy concerning Venus. Isaiah may
have neither or both ideas in mind. The only word that approaches ἑωσφόρος in the New Testament is φωσφόρος[20], which differs from ἑωσφόρος by a single letter.
Otherwise the two passages differ widely. The ἑωσφόρος
is declining, while φωσφόρος is ascending. Certainly, some sort of astral imaging is in
view here.[21] Venus, the day star fades toward dawn while
the Sun brightens and obliterates sight of the whole night sky. Therefore, we must conclude that it is the 2
Peter 1:19 passage which is unfortunate: for it should be clear that it is
impossible for the day star to achieve ascendancy against the overwhelming
power of φωσφόρος, which ought to be rendered Light-bringer. It is the Sun that typifies the Glory and
Power of Jesus Christ, who is exponentially that many times more Glorious and
powerful than the Sun, than the Universe full of stars. As with the German name Feuerbringer, or Fire
bringer, the two words[22] and two ideas have little
in common.
An intriguing possibility arises. The Jews are lovers of puns. So much so that they called Antiochus IV Epiphanes, “Epimanes,” behind his back. The
change of a single letter, φ,
to, μ, made the one who
claimed to be “light giver” into “madman”[23]. As with English, where wise guy does not
indicate a wise person, nor smart alec praise an intelligent person; so also ἑωσφόρος falls far short of being φωσφόρος. A ruler or even cherub who sees himself as φωσφόρος might be insulted to be thought of as ἑωσφόρος. The Feuerbringer, fire
bringer, or light bringer, is a person of importance, bringing life to the
community. The until-bringer, pro-tem-bringer,
temporal-bringer, temporary-bringer, acting-bringer, provisional-bringer,
adjunct-bringer, substitute-bringer, or simply substitute brings almost nothing
and is insignificant even in comparison to the moon. He just got too big for his britches and has made
himself a smarty pants.
However we chose to look at these words, there is much
evidence to show that the translations are unfortunate, but no evidence shows malice. I would have preferred Light-bringer or
Light-bearer in 2 Peter 1:19; and substitute-bringer or Eosphoros, the
transliteration, in Isaiah 14:12 rather than attempting any translation at
all. That idea may still be unacceptable
to those still stinging from WWII, where Führer is too close to Feuer for some peoples comfort. Lucifer is the Latin for Light-bearer, and
simply gives more credit to Satan and his minions than they are worth even in
aggregate. Still, Satan appears as the
angel of light.[24]
There is no way to be certain that these words are intended
to be names, titles, descriptions, epithets, or pejoratives; so there is no way
to know if these words are best capitalized or not. Clearly, an individual person is named or
described in both Isaiah and 2 Peter.
The verbs would have to be in the second tense to support the vocative.
Could this person be Satan?
Yes, or Nebuchadnezzar as the icon of Satan, or as the slave of some
demon in the service of Satan. It should
be clear that the Satanic kingdom counterfeits The Church, the true kingdom of
God; that its imperial master is Satan, who operates through hordes of demonic
minions, and billions of enslaved people.
Only The Church has the authority to make a final determination and
declaration in this matter. Translators
do not have that authority; neither do I.[25]
As far as technical correctness of translation and accuracy
the NIV seems to have a slight edge, because Lucifer means light bearer,
whereas the person described is no light bearer. Yet in attempting to be technically correct
they have opposed the evident decision of The Church. I would suggest, Substitute, but The Church
must have the final say: for as 2 Peter 1:20-21 says,
“Knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any
private interpretation: for prophecy was not
brought by the will of man, ever: but men of God spake as they were moved by
the Holy Ghost.”
We conclude with a summary proposal:
“How did the Substitute, the dawn rising fall from
heaven? [How was] the apostle to
all the nations crushed into the earth?” — my translation of the Septuagint
Side Issues
There is no small attempt to make Satan into the brother and
equal of Jesus, creating a pseudo-dualistic religion. This is a different problem, outside of the
scope of this discussion.
Conclusion
The hypothesis fails to be
proved in Isaiah 14:12. The
translational change is technically possible, but silly. Many readers will realize that it bucks the
authority of The Church; while others will see the meaning of the words from
the weight of the context, no matter what translation is chosen for ἑωσφόρος. As always we should never accept anything out
of context: local Bible context, whole Bible context, Bible set within The
Church context, Bible set within its historical milieu. The translation morning star does minimal
damage and avoids valuing Saran above what he is worth. This is the whole point of the passage. Whoever we believe Lucifer to be, he is being
taken down a peg or two or more, precisely because of his hubris. Even if the passage does not speak
specifically of Satan, we would still conclude that Nebuchadnezzar’s personal
hubris typifies that of Satan and is ultimately informed and prompted by Satan.
[1]
Here are a few samples, as well as opposition arguments to provide balance:
http://www.biblerays.com/uploads/8/0/4/2/8042023/which_version_is_the_bible_jones.pdf
http://www.cspmt.org/pdf/Identity%20of%20the%20New%20Testament%20Text%20III.pdf
http://www.walkinhiscommandments.com/Pickering/Miscellaneous/In%20Defense%20of%20Family%2035.pdf
http://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/37/37-2/JETS_37-2_185-215_Wallace.pdf
[2]
The following may be correct sources:
http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2012/11/the-new-order-of-barbarians-2498414.html
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=236586.0
http://www.zoominfo.com/p/Lawrence-Dunegan/29235800
[3]
http://www.census.gov/popclock/
[4]
http://www.census.gov/population/international/data/idb/worldgrgraph.php
[5]
The pseudonym, Lucifer, derives from Latin; not from either Greek or Hebrew.
[6]
πῶς, interrogative or relative adverb:
how or how?
[7]
ἐξέπεσεν, 3s, past indicative verb: he
fell off, out of, from, forfeited, failed; for example: to earth, to shore; implicitly:
to end, ruin, or death (he died).
Translators are treating this as though it read ἐξεπέσατεν, 2p: How did all of you fall?
2s: How did you fall? would be ἐξέπεσας.
[8]
ἐκ, preposition:
out of, from.
[9]
τοῦ οὐρανοῦ, articular genitive singular: of the heaven.
[10]
ὁ ἑωσφόρος,
articular nominative possibly used as a vocative, a compound of ἕως + φόρος, literally until + bearer or bringer: Morning Star, Dawn
Bringer, Venus; the language is very hyperbolic and attempts to describe a
Hebrew idea in understandable Greek terms, which appear to draw a clear
distinction between OT and NT uses of similar ideas. If this is Satan, which is a highly disputed
idea, then Satan is the false morning star, who brings deception arrogance and
lies. Jesus is the true morning star,
who brings light and life to the world.
It is no secret that, out of jealousy, Satan attempts to clone Jesus
(Numbers 21:9; Matthew 4; Luke 4; John 3:14).
[11]
ὁ πρωὶ ἀνατέλλων, participle phrase, adjectival
to ὁ ἑωσφόρος
followed by the Greek question mark (;): the dawn rising.
[12]
συνετρίβη, 3s, past indicative passive
verb: he was beaten down, broken, crushed, warn out.
[13]
εἰς, preposition: into.
[14]
τὴν γῆν, articular accusative singular: the earth.
[15]
ὁ ἀποστέλλων,
articular nominative possibly used as a vocative: the sender, the apostle,
similar to angel, the messenger.
[16]
πρὸς, preposition: from with
accusative, near with dative, to with accusative.
[17]
πάντα τὰ ἔθνη, articular neuter accusative
plural: all the nations.
[18]
Zion, Jerusalem, clearly so from Psalms.
However, Psalms frequently refers to heavenly Zion, and Jerusalem, not
to earthly Zion, or Jerusalem.
[19]
Possibly only the grave, yet this is not likely. Ancient culture saw graves as the doorways to
the abyss, to a subterranean journey devoid of light, (Styx). Styx does not call forth pictures of quietly
resting in the grave.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Styx
[20]
φωσφόρος, nominative possibly used as a
vocative, a compound of φῶς
+ φόρος, literally light + bearer or bringer: day star, morning
star. 2 Peter 1:19.
[21]
This is not uncommon in scripture. For
example in Genesis 37:9-10, where Jacob is the sun, Rachael (or Leah) is the
moon, and the eleven brothers are stars; all of whom will bow down to Joseph in
Egypt. Additionally, a thirteenth star
will be adopted in Egypt.
[22]
ἑωσφόρος and φωσφόρος
[23]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antiochus_IV_Epiphanes.
[24]
Please note that Satan is not the angel of light; but rather, Satan transforms
himself into an angel of light. Satan
and all his minions are frauds. 2
Corinthians 11:14
[25]
It would appear that The Church has given its declaration for there seems to be
a consensus: Catholic Church, DRA; Orthodox Church, OSB; Protestants, KJV. Having arrived at this consensus so long ago,
are we now to fold under the pressure of smart alec private opinions? Moreover, no one today has the command of
Greek idiom common in the first five centuries.
It is because I have no command of Greek idiom that I am compelled to
break words into components for understanding.
Neither Jerome nor his predecessors were obstructed by such a lack of
Greek or Hebrew idiom: they were on the scene, in the era, and their wisdom is
not easily refuted except by the arrogant and simple minded.
[26]
If you have been blessed or helped by any of these meditations, please repost,
share, or use any of them as you wish.
No rights are reserved. They are
designed and intended for your free participation. They were freely received, and are freely
given. No other permission is required
for their use.
