Thanks for sharing this video with me. In some Eastern languages, they do not refer to “God” as such, but rather to “the God.” Could this be something similar in the Hebrew, “the Satan”? And if so, can we rightly translate “the Satan” as “Satan” in English?
Great video teaching here; challenging me. I realize you cannot possible address everything but I kept noticing that Psalm 109:6 did not have the "ha." So as reading the text satan is simply "an advisory" as oppose to being "the" adversary? Are there more than one adversary?
The context of the scripture is one good key as in the story of Balaam like he mentioned. Man’s nature plays into his bias. That leads to adding or taking away from the original intention of thought. The Latin Vulgate was around for 1,000 years with no one to challenge it. The name Lucifer was added to Isaiah 14:11. By reading both Isa 13 and 14 the context easily lets us know that it is a prophecy in the future about the king of Babylon, Nebuchadnezzar.
@@pegofleesheart The appearance of the word “Lucifer“ in Isaiah 14:12 is St. Jerome’s translation (in the Latin Vulgate) of the Hebrew word hêlêl (הֵילֵ֣ל), which means “morning star,” as most modern translations render it. So, why did St. Jerome choose to translate the Hebrew as “lucifer”? “Lucifer” is a Latin word, not a Hebrew. In Latin, it was the name of the planet Venus when it appeared as the “morning star.” Context suggests that Isaiah was, indeed, referring to a star that appeared in the morning, since he writes, “How you have fallen from heaven, O star of the morning, _son of the dawn!”_ (That is, Hêlêl ben-Šāḥar (הֵילֵ֣ל בֶּן־שָׁ֑חַר).) The point being that Isaiah was using some celestial imagery to refer to the King of Babylon. Interestingly, this is the _ONLY_ verse in the OT where the Hebrew word hêlêl (הֵילֵ֣ל) appears. Thus, not even with a word study can one connect this to any NT passage where the proper name “Satan” appears, or even any NT passage where the word “devil” appears. Dr. Heiser did write a paper on hêlêl (הֵילֵ֣ל), and I have a PDF copy of it that I downloaded way back in 2012. A copy of it can be found and downloaded here - digitalcommons.liberty.edu/lts_fac_pubs/280/ But, yes, you are right - the full context shows that Isaiah 14:12 is part of a taunt (Isaiah 14:3) that God says Israel will take up against the King of Babylon (Isaiah 14:1-22), King Nebuchadnezzar. The context also shows that the taunt is against a _MAN_ (Isaiah 14:16).
I was wondering if you have already done a teaching or lecture on the Temptation of Jesus. I would love it . I cannot wait to hear you elaborate on when *Satan offers Jesus the Kingdoms of the World back.
@@ttzz175 spot on.. ..Yahweh is NOT the Father that sent Jesus ..yahweh rules the world.. jesus came to legally buy us back to the Father who created the earth and us and then gave it to mankind... Mankind lost it to yahweh( satan)...
@@petetong9725 " Jesus came to legally buy us back " ? Who's us ? Jesus himself said, according to Matthew 15:24, he was ONLY sent to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
@@truthhitman7473keep the verse inside its context. After telling the gentile woman that He was only sent to the lost sheep of Israel she *insisted* that Jesus help her and in verse 28 “Woman,” Jesus told her, “your faith is large, and your request is granted.” And her daughter was healed right then. He is the one true God of all creation, ancient Israelites and everyone else.
Dr Heiser I know this is off topic but I just want to ask because I have listened to your lectures on the web. You mentioned that ubaid figurines have no documented evidence on Sumerian texts, but you also mentioned serpentine beings on your Genesis lecture. I was just wondering if there is a possible connection? Thanks.
heylel ben shachar, son of morning star, in Is 14"12 He is known as the serpent. Enoch calls Azezel Satan, but that is someone else who is now in tarterous. In the New Testament he is known as and called satan or the devil by Jesus, so is baal. We don't know if baal is the true devil or not, it is very confusing. The serpent was kicked out of Gods Presence in Genesis 3, so how can he be a god of the Canaanites nation? He may have just slipped into the idol for some worship. I don't know, but he couldn't have had a territory that God gave him in Deuteronomy 32:8-9. Its not clear and confusing...
Even if it wasn't taken as a personal name in Job but later came to be understood as one in second temple literature and the new testament why can't we read that back into Job? Is all anachronism unwarranted?
hi Michael, I had a question if you had time. I'm a Christian and my question is is why didn't God skip Lucifer all together to eliminate sin initially?
Hey Micheal I've been learning from you for years. But I've been wondering lately and can't seem to find you mention it in any videos. But Which is actually considered the bright morning star Lucifer,satan, or Yehshuah?
The planet venus is also called Lucifer - hence the bright morning star.Lucifer was the king of babylon a human king who loved power.He went to his grave and was covered in worms.....not some evil dark angel as man has purposely created but a human king.
@@feeltheforce10 Nimrod wasn't human, he was a nephaleim, he started as one but was not through his spells and such which corrupted him. Go read it. Preferably in ancient hebrew or hebrew.
@@KingKatura There were quite a few Kings Of Babylon......Nimrod is not mentioned in Isaiah.There are far too many deceptions in the Bible......like the prophecy the " Virgin " will conceive......its false.ALMAH is the Hebrew word in the texts and it does not mean virgin but young woman. Germany in 2017 removed this false word from their Bibles and added the correct word young woman.So the virgin birth has gone.Try explaining that to Catholics who worship the " Virgin " mother.
Mike I would like to see how you explain Adam being the name of the first man. If Hasatan can't be the name for Satan does that mean when we see HaAdam "the Man" in hebrew that Adam isn't really his name?
"Rem. I. In a few instances original appelatives have completely assumed the character of real proper names, and are therefore used without the article." (Gesenius, sec.125-f)
Adam is a name and a term and it means human. A majority of Hebraic scholars accept that humans are spoken of in very general terms in verse 1:27 about using the term "Adam" in Hebrew as a proper name. It’s not the same the Adam in Genesis 2.
That's a perfect example of PERSONIFICATION of a situation, condition or a setback. I don't know why Heiser do not step up and accept that this figure is just a personal representation and NOT a real being. Ok, I know that in this phase he is just seeing the ocurrences of the name of this misteryous character in the OT. But, wether in OT or NT this "being" is always kind like a personification of a bad person or attitude (Judas, Peter, etc). All the time it appears what everybody see is the results... Job recognizes Iahweh against him...Even in the NT when Jesus refears to it, even though it figure had developed to almost a being, all we can see are MEN doing this bad or against the "God's will", just like Peter when he is trying avoid that Jesus go up to Jerusalem to die...
Why Evil and why God has chosen us? You had said in Cosmic Geography that in spite of knowing our potential to fail He would still rather have and be with us etc.. Us is NOT necessarily the #1 reason. The #1 reason is Him - because there are attributes, qualities of His Being that only may have been found out, expressed through evil's existence and later our fall. It is all about His magnificence and glory unable to reveal It's Self and Nature any other way. And the Lord Jesus Himself understood while in the garden there was no other way. The angels look into and wonder and carefully examine this our exsistance and fate. God's Glory, His Grace, His Mercy, Lovingkindness, Longsuffering, Faithfulness and get yet more... God Incarnate. Angels bow and worship, all things in Heaven, on Earth, and under the Earth bend the knee and proclaim... Jesus is Lord to the Praise and ☞ GLORY of God. And at last the Son presents it all to the Father to the Glory of HIS Magnificence that God may be all in all.
Still couldn't it refer to a specific person? You mentioned "the King" while the king is not a proper noun it certainly refers to a specific person. When David was king someone could have said "I'm going to see the King" and everyone would have known. Now assume that lucifer lives a lot longer than we do. In fact he is still alive and was long before the work. So in a certain scenario he could have been the head "bad guy" or "the Satan" and still it could refer to lucifer? I can say I worship "the king" of heaven and you know I am talking about a specific being. Is that way off?
Thank you, Dr. Heiser. I learnt about you and your work today for first time and I am already liking it. God bless you, sir!
Thanks a Mike, I always appreciate your hard work.
Thanks for sharing this video with me. In some Eastern languages, they do not refer to “God” as such, but rather to “the God.” Could this be something similar in the Hebrew, “the Satan”? And if so, can we rightly translate “the Satan” as “Satan” in English?
keep these videos coming please. thank you.
Great video teaching here; challenging me. I realize you cannot possible address everything but I kept noticing that Psalm 109:6 did not have the "ha." So as reading the text satan is simply "an advisory" as oppose to being "the" adversary? Are there more than one adversary?
Ricci T. Allen Sr.
According to his book The Unseen Realm, there are more than one accusers.
This is a great book for serious Bible study.
The context of the scripture is one good key as in the story of Balaam like he mentioned. Man’s nature plays into his bias. That leads to adding or taking away from the original intention of thought. The Latin Vulgate was around for 1,000 years with no one to challenge it. The name Lucifer was added to Isaiah 14:11. By reading both Isa 13 and 14 the context easily lets us know that it is a prophecy in the future about the king of Babylon, Nebuchadnezzar.
@@pegofleesheart The appearance of the word “Lucifer“ in Isaiah 14:12 is St. Jerome’s translation (in the Latin Vulgate) of the Hebrew word hêlêl (הֵילֵ֣ל), which means “morning star,” as most modern translations render it. So, why did St. Jerome choose to translate the Hebrew as “lucifer”?
“Lucifer” is a Latin word, not a Hebrew. In Latin, it was the name of the planet Venus when it appeared as the “morning star.”
Context suggests that Isaiah was, indeed, referring to a star that appeared in the morning, since he writes, “How you have fallen from heaven, O star of the morning, _son of the dawn!”_ (That is, Hêlêl ben-Šāḥar (הֵילֵ֣ל בֶּן־שָׁ֑חַר).) The point being that Isaiah was using some celestial imagery to refer to the King of Babylon.
Interestingly, this is the _ONLY_ verse in the OT where the Hebrew word hêlêl (הֵילֵ֣ל) appears. Thus, not even with a word study can one connect this to any NT passage where the proper name “Satan” appears, or even any NT passage where the word “devil” appears.
Dr. Heiser did write a paper on hêlêl (הֵילֵ֣ל), and I have a PDF copy of it that I downloaded way back in 2012. A copy of it can be found and downloaded here - digitalcommons.liberty.edu/lts_fac_pubs/280/
But, yes, you are right - the full context shows that Isaiah 14:12 is part of a taunt (Isaiah 14:3) that God says Israel will take up against the King of Babylon (Isaiah 14:1-22), King Nebuchadnezzar. The context also shows that the taunt is against a _MAN_ (Isaiah 14:16).
I so appreciate your work thank you. (From a biblical dummy.)
I was wondering if you have already done a teaching or lecture on the Temptation of Jesus. I would love it . I cannot wait to hear you elaborate on when *Satan offers Jesus the Kingdoms of the World back.
What is really mind blowing is that yahweh controls the nations ,,, ruler of the world. And describes himself as an adversary
@@ttzz175 spot on.. ..Yahweh is NOT the Father that sent Jesus ..yahweh rules the world.. jesus came to legally buy us back to the Father who created the earth and us and then gave it to mankind...
Mankind lost it to yahweh( satan)...
@@petetong9725
" Jesus came to legally buy us back " ? Who's us ? Jesus himself said, according to Matthew 15:24, he was ONLY sent to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
@@truthhitman7473keep the verse inside its context. After telling the gentile woman that He was only sent to the lost sheep of Israel she *insisted* that Jesus help her and in verse 28 “Woman,” Jesus told her, “your faith is large, and your request is granted.” And her daughter was healed right then. He is the one true God of all creation, ancient Israelites and everyone else.
Dr Heiser I know this is off topic but I just want to ask because I have listened to your lectures on the web. You mentioned that ubaid figurines have no documented evidence on Sumerian texts, but you also mentioned serpentine beings on your Genesis lecture. I was just wondering if there is a possible connection? Thanks.
Yes. Got that from reading scripture & extra biblically endorsed texts- his proper name is Azezel. Right ?
heylel ben shachar, son of morning star, in Is 14"12 He is known as the serpent. Enoch calls Azezel Satan, but that is someone else who is now in tarterous. In the New Testament he is known as and called satan or the devil by Jesus, so is baal. We don't know if baal is the true devil or not, it is very confusing. The serpent was kicked out of Gods Presence in Genesis 3, so how can he be a god of the Canaanites nation? He may have just slipped into the idol for some worship. I don't know, but he couldn't have had a territory that God gave him in Deuteronomy 32:8-9. Its not clear and confusing...
Even if it wasn't taken as a personal name in Job but later came to be understood as one in second temple literature and the new testament why can't we read that back into Job? Is all anachronism unwarranted?
hi Michael, I had a question if you had time. I'm a Christian and my question is is why didn't God skip Lucifer all together to eliminate sin initially?
Love is not authentic if left with no other options
Hey Micheal I've been learning from you for years. But I've been wondering lately and can't seem to find you mention it in any videos. But Which is actually considered the bright morning star Lucifer,satan, or Yehshuah?
The planet venus is also called Lucifer - hence the bright morning star.Lucifer was the king of babylon a human king who loved power.He went to his grave and was covered in worms.....not some evil dark angel as man has purposely created but a human king.
@@feeltheforce10 Nimrod wasn't human, he was a nephaleim, he started as one but was not through his spells and such which corrupted him. Go read it. Preferably in ancient hebrew or hebrew.
@@KingKatura There were quite a few Kings Of Babylon......Nimrod is not mentioned in Isaiah.There are far too many deceptions in the Bible......like the prophecy the " Virgin " will conceive......its false.ALMAH is the Hebrew word in the texts and it does not mean virgin but young woman.
Germany in 2017 removed this false word from their Bibles and added the correct word young woman.So the virgin birth has gone.Try explaining that to Catholics who worship the " Virgin " mother.
@@feeltheforce10 They worship Lucifer and any other spirit they can bud... lol
Very intressting, Do you somewhere have a place where you post videos on a frequent basis?
Ye Bonce There are many videos from him at drmsh.com
Thank you!
נהדר תודה
thanks for posting
So are they the same being or not?
Mike I would like to see how you explain Adam being the name of the first man. If Hasatan can't be the name for Satan does that mean when we see HaAdam "the Man" in hebrew that Adam isn't really his name?
"Rem. I. In a few instances original appelatives have completely assumed the character of real proper names, and are therefore used without the article." (Gesenius, sec.125-f)
Adam is a name and a term and it means human.
A majority of Hebraic scholars accept that humans are spoken of in very general terms in verse 1:27 about using the term "Adam" in Hebrew as a proper name.
It’s not the same the Adam in Genesis 2.
Genesis 5:2
Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.
So are u saying that Satan and The adversary is not the same person?
That's a perfect example of PERSONIFICATION of a situation, condition or a setback. I don't know why Heiser do not step up and accept that this figure is just a personal representation and NOT a real being. Ok, I know that in this phase he is just seeing the ocurrences of the name of this misteryous character in the OT. But, wether in OT or NT this "being" is always kind like a personification of a bad person or attitude (Judas, Peter, etc). All the time it appears what everybody see is the results... Job recognizes Iahweh against him...Even in the NT when Jesus refears to it, even though it figure had developed to almost a being, all we can see are MEN doing this bad or against the "God's will", just like Peter when he is trying avoid that Jesus go up to Jerusalem to die...
👊✌
Why Evil and why God has chosen us? You had said in Cosmic Geography that in spite of knowing our potential to fail He would still rather have and be with us etc.. Us is NOT necessarily the #1 reason. The #1 reason is Him - because there are attributes, qualities of His Being that only may have been found out, expressed through evil's existence and later our fall. It is all about His magnificence and glory unable to reveal It's Self and Nature any other way. And the Lord Jesus Himself understood while in the garden there was no other way. The angels look into and wonder and carefully examine this our exsistance and fate. God's Glory, His Grace, His Mercy, Lovingkindness, Longsuffering, Faithfulness and get yet more... God Incarnate. Angels bow and worship, all things in Heaven, on Earth, and under the Earth bend the knee and proclaim... Jesus is Lord to the Praise and ☞ GLORY of God. And at last the Son presents it all to the Father to the Glory of HIS Magnificence that God may be all in all.
Still couldn't it refer to a specific person? You mentioned "the King" while the king is not a proper noun it certainly refers to a specific person. When David was king someone could have said "I'm going to see the King" and everyone would have known. Now assume that lucifer lives a lot longer than we do. In fact he is still alive and was long before the work. So in a certain scenario he could have been the head "bad guy" or "the Satan" and still it could refer to lucifer? I can say I worship "the king" of heaven and you know I am talking about a specific being. Is that way off?
Dr. Heiser --
Saturn