Was Satan in charge of music in heaven
- Thread starter TransJenner
- Start date
lucifer is latin for morning star
nowhere in the bible does it state lucifer is satan or the devil
it's misconception based on a verse that if read out of context, you would think was talking about satan
put if you people keep saying something long enough, everyone believes it, and this is proof of it
nowhere in the bible does it state lucifer is satan or the devil
it's misconception based on a verse that if read out of context, you would think was talking about satan
put if you people keep saying something long enough, everyone believes it, and this is proof of it
TransJenner
Banned
TransJenner
Banned
Slippery slope or a narrow roadSo the Daystar Network is actually the Lucifer Network
I'm just giving you a hard time, but you're travelling down a slippery slope.
@MufasaChoppa are you going to explain why we can no longer obtain tape recorders? 
Also how is sound captured onto albums? How was that discovered
I see that they play from the vibration of the needle
Also how is sound captured onto albums? How was that discovered
I see that they play from the vibration of the needle
Makes sense why they teach that music is haraam.
Where does it say this in the bible.
Lurking Class Hero
Medicine for loneliness
I just re-read these and I disagree with your reading of these passages, breh.
You have to read the preceding passages and read the scriptures in their context.
The Ezekiel passages are about the King of Tyre, not Satan.
The Isaiah passages you referenced seem to be about the fall of Babylon and it's king. They don't say anything about 'Lucifer'
being a chief angel. In fact the proper name Lucifer isn't even used here.
As you said, context is key. Context does not only come from surrounding passages. It also comes from other passages in the Bible.
In Ezekiel, he was comparing the king of Tyre to Lucifer. The way Ezekial described the subject can't be of no mere man or king. If you know the story of Lucifer then you can easily see that the Bible is using comparison and symbolism as it always does.
Verse 13 Thou hast been in the garden of Eden....
No king of Tyre or mere man has ever seen Eden besides Adam and Eve. Lucifer has been there though.
V14 thou art the anointed cherub
V 15 Thou was perfect in thy ways
These cannot describe a man. No man can be a cherub neither can a man be perfect.
But Lucifer was the anointed cherub and he was also perfect before he fell from heaven.
Also in Isaiah, the first verse says O Lucifer son of the morning. So it clearly does mention who it is referencing.
Just in case I gave you the wrong scripture it's Isaiah 14 chapter starting at verse 12
Crayola Coyote
Superstar
Lurking Class Hero
Medicine for loneliness
This is basically the core issue. It's either describing Satan or using hyperbolic and poetic language to describe a lofty/arrogant/glorious king/city. I'm by no means certain, but I lean towards the later, and don't find your arguments entirely convincing. I'll show you why:
This is certainly true, but there's no good reason to believe that this is about the literal garden of Eden. Similar language is used in Ezekiel 31:18 about Assyria. Assyria certainly wasn't in Eden.
I think the word perfect here applies to the city of Tyre. In Ezekiel 27:3 it says, "O Tyre, you have said 'I am perfect in beauty'". This seems to be a mere the cognition of Tyre's previous state. BTW, the word perfect is used of men in the bible. Job is referred to as perfect (Job 2:3). David is said to have a "perfect heart" (1 Kings 11:4) even though he was a murderer and adulterer. It's hyperbole.
Regarding the cherub. I don't see how this proves your point at all. I thought you were arguing that Satan was an archangel? A cherub is not an angel. Besides, Satan is associated with the serpent in the garden, not the cherub.