Where in the Bible does it say that Lucifer was one of the angels or an archangel?
2Where in the Bible does it say his name was Lucifer?– DanSep 8, 2013 at 5:33
1@Dan: Isaiah 14:12 KJV.– Reinstate Monica - Goodbye SESep 8, 2013 at 5:43
3@Wikis The Hebrew text has הֵילֵל בֶּן־שָׁחַר (helel ben-shakhar, “Helel son of Shachar”), which is probably a name for the morning star (Venus) or the crescent moon. "Lucifer" actually comes from the Latin Vulgate text. My point was merely to highlight assumptions inherent in the question.– DanSep 8, 2013 at 5:49
1@brilliant the question itself uses the term (whether as a title or a name) - anyways it's not important. It's a good question - I was just trying to stimulate thought on the translation choice. I didn't realize it would turn into this. My apologies. I probably should have put a wink ;) after the question.– DanSep 8, 2013 at 19:55
1Satan would have been an angel. Archangel is not used in plural in Greek so there is only 1. This is an excellent question btw– JeremyNov 18, 2013 at 1:20
Interesting question. In the Bible, this is strongly hinted at rather than directly stated. Here is the evidence:
In Job 1:6 we learn that Satan was in heaven with other angels.
One day the angels came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came with them.
That Satan is (was) in heaven is also seen in Zechariah 3:1-2, Luke 10:18 and Revelation 12:9. Revelation 12:9 gives a further clue to Satan's identity:
The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him.
This thought is also stated by Jesus in Matthew 25:41:
“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.
That he has his own angels, is a further clue to him being a (former) angel. (And incidentally, Isaiah 14:12-15 is often used to show why Satan fell, because he wanted to ascend to God's throne).
Note also 2 Corinthians 11:14, which says that Satan can "masquerade as an angel of light."
Conclusion: we know that Satan lives / has lived in heaven, with other angels (some of which are his own), that he was (or will be) cast out of heaven. From this we infer that he is a "fallen angel".
Update: In my answer above I assembled evidence for Satan being an angel. But it's not proof (see comments below). Which leads me to consider proof by exhaustion: if Satan was not an angel, what could he be? I know of only three types of sentient beings in the Bible: God, man and angels. He's clearly not God, nor man. That only leaves one other option.
Update on Lucifer: @Dan asks where Lucifer is named as such. The answer is in Isaiah 14:12 KJV:
How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!
This verse and the wider passage are historically interpreted as referring to Satan, though it is not directly stated.
Footnote: there are only two named angels in the Bible. Michael (Daniel 10:13, Daniel 10:21, Daniel 12:1, Jude 1:9 & Revelation 12:7) & Gabriel (Daniel 8:16, Daniel 9:21, Luke 1:19 & Luke 1:26).
Wikipedia has an interesting article, Christian teaching about the Devil which contains more information (I did not use this for my answer). Sep 11, 2011 at 12:31
5The Catholics and Orthodox also have Tobit as a canonical book, which features the angel Raphael.– James TSep 11, 2011 at 12:57
5Thank you again for all these verses, but again I feel we have a missing link here. I mean logically we can't yet jump from "Jack with his soldiers" or "Jack among his soldiers" to the conclusion that Jack is also a soldier. Do you understand what I mean? Otherwise, we could also conclude that Jesus is an angel from "...when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels" (2 Th 1:7) or a saint from "...the Lord comes with ten thousands of His saints" (Jude 1:14). Yes, you are right: it is hinted, but not directly stated, so I think we need to find some logical basis for Sep 11, 2011 at 21:21
that (I mean some logical sequence proving that Satan is merely an angel (or the highest of all angels), yet not like the Son of God). At the moment I am reading the material from Wikipedia that you have referred me to. Sep 11, 2011 at 21:29
1@TheFreemason: thank you for explaining your downvote. Indeed, I did make that mistake in the original draft of my question (assuming Lucifer = Satan) but then I added an update to explain it. That wasn't the core of this question, though, but of this question. Aug 4, 2014 at 15:41
"Where in the Bible does it say that Lucifer was one of the angels or an archangel?"
“Lucifer” is actually a Hebrew word when translated means “shining one.” The Septuagint uses the Greek word that means “bringer of dawn.” That is why some translations render the original Hebrew “morning star” or “Daystar.” But Jerome’s Latin Vulgate uses “Lucifer” (light bearer), and this accounts for the appearance of that term in various versions of the Bible.
The 'name' Lucifer occurs once in the Scriptures (Isa. 14:12) and only in some versions of the Bible. Traditionally, Lucifer is a name that in English generally refers to the Devil before being cast from heaven. But this description is given to a man and not to a spirit creature as is further seen by the statement: “Down to Sheol you will be brought.” Sheol is the common grave of mankind—not a place occupied by Satan the Devil. Additionally, those seeing Lucifer brought into this condition ask: “Is this the MAN that was agitating the earth?” Clearly, “Lucifer” refers to a human, not to a spirit creature. - Isaiah 14:4, 15, 16.
Careful Exegesis has actually conclude that Isaiah did not have Satan in mind when he says "Lucifer," but actually the king of Babylon.
CONCERNING THE TRADITION OF LUCIFER BEING A NAME FOR THE DEVIL
I have read that before the rise of Christianity, it was the pseudepigrapha of Enochic Judaism who interpreted Isaiah 14:12-15 as applicable to Satan, and presented him as a fallen angel cast out of Heaven. Christian tradition, influenced by this presentation, came to use the Latin word for "morning star", lucifer, as a proper name ("Lucifer") for Satan as he was before his fall. As a result, "Lucifer has become a by-word for Satan in the Church and in popular literature", as in Dante Alighieri's Inferno and John Milton's Paradise Lost.
You may appreciate the following link to further information: SHINING ONE (Isaiah 14:12).
1The word lucifer is Latin. No doubt about it.– user900Aug 17, 2013 at 5:59
Lucifer isn't a Hebrew word, it's Latin. Although you are correct it means light-bearer. The Greek word for light-bearer is used in 2 Pe 1:19 in reference to Jesus. I provide a more complete response on the question of lucifer in my answer christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/19233/…, including the fact that the Early Christians didn't consider lucifer to be the name of the angel before his disobedience. Jan 14, 2014 at 5:54
Many commentators use the scripture in Ezekiel 28:11-17 to represent, symbolically, the angel called Lucifer or Satan who was involved with worship and was in the garden and was also among the fiery stones. (See Moses on the mountain for this reference.) All of the allusions in Ezekiel seem to say that the person/angel referred to was the devil/Satan/Lucifer. The most obvious interpretation of the scripture is that it is really about the King of Tyre but as in any scripture there is sometimes an immediate interpretation and a future completion.
If you look at the example in Isaiah 9:6 about Jesus and the reference to a "virgin birth," God speaks prophetically, "Behold a virgin shall bring forth a child." Most historians have said this refers to another event that happened within the life of the prophet; having said this, many of the gospel writers and early church writers have understood this as a direct prophetic word for the virgin birth of Jesus Christ. So the answer to the Question in "Where in the Bible does it refer to Lucifer?" could refer to the story of the King Tyre and the allusions to an angel in the garden of Eden and a perfectly created being that fell because of sin and worship of his own beauty in Ezekiel. There many allusions to Lucifer in Ezekiel in chapters 25, 28, 29, 35 and 39 as well.
3Welcome to Christianity, Paul. That's a fine answer. Can you point to an example commentator or two who suggest this view? That would take this answer to another level. ;-) (But +1 in any case.) Dec 6, 2012 at 17:27
You view is absolutely incorrect. There are more than 3 typs of beings. Look up the Cherubim. The bible talks about different beings.
The Hebrew term cherubim is cognate with the Assyrian term karabu, Akkadian term kuribu, and Babylonian term karabu; the Assyrian term means 'great, mighty', but the Akkadian and Babylonian cognates mean 'propitious, blessed'. In some regions the Assyro-Babylonian term came to refer in particular to spirits which served the gods, in particular to the shedu (human-headed winged bulls); the Assyrians sometimes referred to these as kirubu, a term grammatically related to karabu. They were originally a version of the shedu, protective deities sometimes found as pairs of colossal statues either side of objects to be protected, such as doorways. However, although the shedu were popular in Mesopotamia, archaeological remains from the Levant suggest that they were quite rare in the immediate vicinity of the Israelites. The related Lammasu (human-headed winged lions — to which the sphinx is similar in appearance), on the other hand, were the most popular winged-creature in Phoenician art, and so scholars suspect that Cherubim were originally a form of Lammasu. In particular, in a scene reminiscent of Ezekiel's dream, the Megiddo Ivories — ivory carvings found at Megiddo (which became a major Israelite city) — depict an unknown king being carried on his throne by hybrid winged-creatures.
The bible NEVER gives the impression of angelic beings being the ONLY ones in existence besides man, god and angels. And in this instance Cherubims are not baby like beings, they are to be so big that a human can walk under them or even ride them as they fly.
3where is the quote from? What are all the footnotes? Ah wikipedia corrected. Please don't quote without citing your source. Aug 14, 2013 at 18:20
4Hello, Nelson, and welcome to the site. It seems that you are actually responding to an answer rather than answering the question. Also, I see you put the large middle section in quotes; if that is from another source please give us a link or the title of the book. You can edit this or delete it with the links below it. FYI: There are also Seraphim in Isiah and the 24 Elders in Revelation, etc. There are quite a few examples of non-angel, non-human sentient creatures. Also, angel may not be a species at all, but an office of position. Aug 14, 2013 at 18:23
If a cheribum is a kind of angel, then the three kinds of beings framework works. Mar 20, 2016 at 17:59
Freds Bend put it the best way I have ever heard.
Also, angel may not be a species at all, but an office of position.
It is true it never talks about Satan BEING an angel.... BUT! The bible also states the "powers and the principalities"
For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.
Evil can still be in the heavenly realms and FORCES is indeed plural...So I would take that and automatically think that angels are not the only things that turned evil. Correct?