Prior Book | Prior Chapter | Prior Verse | Next Verse | Next Chapter | Next Book | Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015 | |
NASB | Isaiah 14:12 "How you have fallen from heaven, O star of the morning, son of the dawn! You have been cut down to the earth, You who have weakened the nations! |
AMPLIFIED 2015 | Isaiah 14:12 "How you have fallen from heaven, O star of the morning [light-bringer], son of the dawn! You have been cut down to the ground, You who have weakened the nations [king of Babylon]! |
Subject: Using the word Lucifer |
Bible Note: Greetings Searcher! I've noticed that that NKJV and KJV both translate 'heylel' as Lucifer in Isaiah 14:12 instead of 'morning star' or shining one/Daystar. The NET Bible notes do support the possibility of mistranslation: "What is the background for the imagery in vv. 12-15? This whole section (vv. 4b-21) is directed to the king of Babylon, who is clearly depicted as a human ruler. Other kings of the earth address him in vv. 9ff., he is called “the man” in v. 16, and, according to vv. 19-20, he possesses a physical body. Nevertheless the language of vv. 12-15 has led some to see a dual referent in the taunt song. These verses, which appear to be spoken by other pagan kings to a pagan king (cf. vv. 9-11), contain several titles and motifs that resemble those of Canaanite mythology, including references to Helel son of Shachar, the stars of El, the mountain of assembly, the recesses of Zaphon, and the divine title Most High. Apparently these verses allude to a mythological story about a minor god (Helel son of Shachar) who tried to take over Zaphon, the mountain of the gods. His attempted coup failed and he was hurled down to the underworld. The king of Babylon is taunted for having similar unrealized delusions of grandeur. Some Christians have seen an allusion to the fall of Satan here, but this seems contextually unwarranted (see J. Martin, “Isaiah,” BKCOT, 1061)." [Quoted from www.bible.org - Isaiah 14:12] Therefore, would the question be that this is a Textus Receptus (NKJV/KJV) vs. NU manuscript translation (just about everything else) difference since those translations that claim reliance on the Textus Receptus generally have "lucifer" in Isaiah 14:12? If that is true - that the NKJV and KJV are translating "Lucifer" based on the tradition of translation from the Textus Receptus or from the Textus Receptus itself, then it could all just boil down to manuscript family preference. Blessings to you, Makarios |