Do Christians and muslims worship the same God?

[Thunderfoot]

It seems I remember reading somewhere that Lucifer was a son of Venus and, well somebody else, I dont remember, but it appears you are right, that it was a title given to the Greek god Phosphorus, and apparently to the moon as well. But regardless, no where in the Bible is Lucifer named as an angel.

Isaiah 14:12King James Version (KJV)

12 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!

here is the reference

 

[Tonguez]

It seems I remember reading somewhere that Lucifer was a son of Venus and, well somebody else, I dont remember, but it appears you are right, that it was a title given to the Greek god Phosphorus, and apparently to the moon as well. But regardless, no where in the Bible is Lucifer named as an angel.

the Hebrew term used is Heylel הֵילֵל which means "to shine" and was specifically a name of the morning star (the planet Venus) St jerome translated this as Lucifer when he wrote the Latin Vulgate which translates Isaiah 14:12 as "How has Lucifer, that rose in the morning, fallen from heaven!"

In Hebrew and Christian lore Lucifer is a Cherub (one of the scary four-faced 'living creatures' kind, not a winged baby) but as has been stated the title lucifer (Shining One) was relatively common in ancient Canaanite and Classical mythology. One story has the title lucifer given to the son of Aurora (dawn) who rose as the morning star.

Lucifer has only become exclusively applied to the Devil by English translations that adhere to King James Versionism, many modern non KJV versions stick to 'morning star' rather than Lucifer

 

[The_Silversword]

Isaiah 14:12King James Version (KJV)

12 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!

here is the reference

So is the writer refering to an angel, a star, or a moon, possibly even a planet, wasnt the planet Venus also called Lucifer?

 

[Umbran]

So is the writer refering to an angel, a star, or a moon, possibly even a planet, wasn't the planet Venus also called Lucifer?

Well, therein lies a problem. You *can't tell* from the text itself - it doesn't explicate everything. It isn't an encyclopedia. The authors and translators generally expected individuals to either have the context for the references, or to have a priest or religious leader to give you that context. When those books were collected int the Bible, nobody expected you to be able to pick up the book (presuming you could read it) and know everything you needed to know.

The Bible (both Old and New Testament)... are kind of like comic books. There's a core story, but it often makes references to things more fully described in other works (for the Christians, the extras are often collectively called Apocrypha - the books that didn't make the cut when the current books of the Bible were chosen - in the 1500s and 1600s, depending on the denomination) that aren't part of the main collection. Reading the Bible is kind of like reading the Marvel Comics "Secret Wars" miniseries, but not reading all the crossover issues in the other titles. Or, like current Star Wars, with the Expanded Universe stories that aren't considered canon.

That's where we get the word canon, from, by the way. The books the church says are the accepted ones are the church canon.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

One of the reasons we got my Mom an iPad was so that she could read books with expanded typeface, without paying extra or lugging around huge hardcovers. One of the first books on it was a Catholic bible.

She was so overjoyed that one of her first self-appointed tasks was to read the Bible cover to cover- unusual for most Catholics. It took a while, but she enjoyed it. Then she read it with all of the footnotes enabled, so she could get that "full context" that escapes most modern readers who aren't actual theology students. That took MONTHS.

She felt much enlightened, but says she'll never do that again.

 

[The_Silversword]

Well, therein lies a problem. You *can't tell* from the text itself - it doesn't explicate everything. It isn't an encyclopedia. The authors and translators generally expected individuals to either have the context for the references, or to have a priest or religious leader to give you that context. When those books were collected int the Bible, nobody expected you to be able to pick up the book (presuming you could read it) and know everything you needed to know.

The Bible (both Old and New Testament)... are kind of like comic books. There's a core story, but it often makes references to things more fully described in other works (for the Christians, the extras are often collectively called Apocrypha - the books that didn't make the cut when the current books of the Bible were chosen - in the 1500s and 1600s, depending on the denomination) that aren't part of the main collection. Reading the Bible is kind of like reading the Marvel Comics "Secret Wars" miniseries, but not reading all the crossover issues in the other titles. Or, like current Star Wars, with the Expanded Universe stories that aren't considered canon.

That's where we get the word canon, from, by the way. The books the church says are the accepted ones are the church canon.

Well if we read the proceeding text from Isaiah 14, it becomes clear that it is about the fall of a king of Babylon, possibly Nebuchadnezzar, not an angel, so from this I believe Lucifer, in this case, to be referencing Nebuchadnezzar, or perhaps equating the setting of the Moon or possibly Venus to the fall of said ruler, but as you said its difficult to know for sure since it was written so long ago and been translated how ever many times so much of its original meaning may be lost.

Nice comic book analogy by the way, although some might disagree, I could imagine a priest red in the face screamin, "its not a comic book!!!" lol

 

[The_Silversword]

One of the reasons we got my Mom an iPad was so that she could read books with expanded typeface, without paying extra or lugging around huge hardcovers. One of the first books on it was a Catholic bible.

She was so overjoyed that one of her first self-appointed tasks was to read the Bible cover to cover- unusual for most Catholics. It took a while, but she enjoyed it. Then she read it with all of the footnotes enabled, so she could get that "full context" that escapes most modern readers who aren't actual theology students. That took MONTHS.

She felt much enlightened, but says she'll never do that again.

My wife, who was raised Catholic, and I sometimes get into religious debates and she usually ends up saying something along the lines of "well youre talking about the King James version, Im talking about the REAL Bible!" Is there really that much difference between the two?

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

My wife, who was raised Catholic, and I sometimes get into religious debates and she usually ends up saying something along the lines of "well youre talking about the King James version, Im talking about the REAL Bible!" Is there really that much difference between the two?

Yep:

...the KJV follows the Protestant pattern of not including the Deuterocanonical books of the Old Testament that are recognized by Catholics: Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch, 1 & 2 Maccabees (as well as portions of the Books of Esther and Daniel). As such, readings from these books appear in the Catholic Lectionary at various times of the liturgical year. Likewise, these books contain references to concepts that are familiar to Catholics but rejected by Protestants such as prayer for the dead and intercessions of saints and angels.

 

[The_Silversword]

Yep:

Interesting, I may have to check that out, but I dunno, nothing against Catholicism, but the speaking in unison thing kinda wigs me out, we never did that in our Protestant churches, I dont ever recall ever refering to our selves as protestant, I always thought that was a Church of England thing, but apparently Catholics apply the term to any non-Catholic Christian.

Anyways, im veering way off topic here, so I just wanna say yeah, Jews, Christians, and Muslims all worship the same God, or to put it in D&D terms, they worship aspects of the same god.

 

[Riley]

BTW, I personally am an atheist(non-militant (ie the rare type))

Um, no, that would be the common type. You just don't hear from us as often as you do from the evangelists. Because, you know, they are evangelists, and we are not.