This…again? Tracer: What exactly are you arguing? It’s been made clear that there was once a great angel in heaven, who fell. This fallen angel was given the name Satan. Not only is it in the Bible, (see my references in part 1) but it’s also in apocryphal books. (see Pickman’s posts)
Maybe you’re nitpicking about the name Lucifer. ?? The angel’s name could have been Billy Bob, but the events that took place are the same, and are no less important.
Adam
“Life is hard…but God is good”
Welcome back, ARG. Just in time for Christmas.
Adam…
I don’t want to get into a nitpick with you when you’ve just returned (and welcome back, by the way!). But how has it “been made clear?”
AFAIK, Scripture only once makes reference to the alleged fall of the Devil, and that under the name Lucifer. As several people have pointed out, while “Lucifer”=Satan is a reasonable conclusion, and the historical one, “Lucifer”=something else is a quite valid reading of that passage, and nobody is sure precisely what Isaiah originally meant by it. (“Lucifer” is in quotes above to carry the significance that, while the usual meaning of the name Lucifer in modern English is as a synonym for the CEO of devils, what I mean by it in this context is “the personage whom Isaiah apostrophizes in the cited passage” whoever that may be.)
About those “fake pig porno pictures,” tracer:
The number of books between Genesis and Malachi differ between Catholic and Protestant editions of the Bible. And neither include all the religious books known to the Jews. Most Protestants use precisely the set that was set aside by the Council of Jamnia and accepted by Jerome for use in the Vulgate. The Septuagint included a bunch of others which are part of the Catholic Old Testament, and which are included in many versions of the Bible not published by/for the Catholics as “The Apocrypha.” Episcopalians and Methodists use these, though very rarely, in public worship, and the Articles of Religion of both churches state that “they are not used to establish any doctrine but may be profitably read…” There is another collection of books that has never (as far as is known) been considered canonical by anybody. Catholics, who use the term “deuterocanonical” for the books that Protestants term “apocrypha,” call this other batch “apocrypha,” while Protestants refer to them as the “pseudopigrapha.”
Examples:
Genesis, Jeremiah: P & C: canonical Old Testament
Tobit, I Maccabees: C: canonical Old Testament, referred to as “deuterocanonical” to distinguish from what is shared with Jews and Protestants
P: Apocrypha
Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs:
– not considered part of the Bible by anybody
C: Apocrypha
P: Pseudopigrapha
Polycarp: Thanks for the welcome. (and to everyone else who’s done the same)
I guess I should not have said “been made clear.” What’s clear to me, may be Greek to you, when it comes to the things of God, and vice versa.
Tracer said:
This is what I have trouble with. Way back on 8-24 I said:
Now, I find this to be compeling evidence. You may see it differently. And, as I said earlier, it’s not the name Lucifer that I find most important. Though the Scripture does not specify the name of the Satan/angel, it does make it “clear” of the events that took place.
“Life is hard…but God is good”
Adam: I have a side question for you, to wit, many have claimed I was the same person as you while you were gone, do you think there is any truth to that?
I think such statements had to do with my popularity as well! 
By the way, Welcome back!
Phaedrus
For what a man had rather were true he more readily believes.
Wow, Adam! I missed you, too!
(And I never thought you and Phaedrus were the same person.)
Incidentally, my maiden name is “Luce”, which is Latin for “light”, or “shining light”. Is Lucifer the “light bringer” because he tempted man with the knowledge of good and evil?
Holly, I always thought that he was called that because he was “The Morning Star” as in God’s most Glorious creation of a living being. Hey, Holly, your maiden name means “light”, does that mean YOU are Phaedrus?
Phaedrus
For what a man had rather were true he more readily believes.
Shhhh… don’t give it away.
ARG220 wrote:
If Jesus was around watching Satan fall from Heaven, that would mean Satan’s fall happened loooooooong after the events in Genesis.
Tracer…the Son of God, according to orthodox Christian doctrine, is coeternal with God, and darn well was around for whatever Satan may have been up to whenever you care to bring up. He merely took on human form ca. 5 BC – the Incarnation. So while Jesus was the name he used while on Earth and after the Ascension, he was the same individual before, during, and after, and it’s entirely appropriate to call him Jesus when he was the Word which God spoke in Creation.