Re: End Of The Illuminati
- From: Steve Hayes <hayesmstw@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 02:19:31 GMT
On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 04:41:45 GMT, "B.G. Kent" <ravynw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Nov 2007, Steve Hayes wrote:
On Mon, 26 Nov 2007 00:29:58 GMT, Matthew Johnson <matthew_member@xxxxxxxxxxx>B - are we talking the original scripts or the King James?
In article <Ezr0j.8245$Nz1.3317@trnddc06>, B.G. Kent says...
* Lucifer was not used in the Bible..and was the name given to light or
As usual, you are wrong here. 'Lucifer' is used in a very negative sense in one
passage (Isa 14:12) and a very positive sense in another (2 Pet 1;19).
And then, of course, there is Revelation 22:16.
What difference does it make?
And no, I don't want to get into a discussion of the merits of different Bible
translations. I'm interested in discussion of the imagery of the "morning
star" (Eosphoros, Lucifer) in the Bible and in Christian theology.
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
- Prev by Date: Re: Panentheism
- Next by Date: Re: Homosexuality: an Imaginary Interview with Jesus
- Previous by thread: Re: End Of The Illuminati
- Next by thread: Re: End Of The Illuminati