
Ovidiu Furdui
Har și pace frate Brinzei puteți sa va dați opinia la slujba oficiată de Easter la Vatican.
GBY
http://neclintit.com/2014/04/25/de-pasti-biserica-catolica-a-incantat-si-invocat-aparitia-anticristului/
Să încercăm împreună:
Problema:
1. Prima parte a problemei este că avem de-a face cu simbolisme, iar simbolismele pot avea sau caracter unic sau caracter multiplu (lucru valabil și în Biblie dar și în societățile secrete).
,,Lucifer“ se traduce prin Luceafăr și apare în Biblie și pentru identificarea unui heruvim căzut, dar și pentru divinitate. În afară de binecunoscutul text despre căderea lui Lucifer (Isaia 14:12 – rămâne să citești în adăugirea în limba engleză de la sfârșit cât de corectă este această interpretare), iată alte texte în care simbolismul este cu sens total opus:
19Şi avem cuvîntul proorociei făcut şi mai tare; la care bine faceţi că luaţi aminte, ca la o lumină care străluceşte într’un loc întunecos, pînă se va crăpa de ziuă şi va răsări luceafărul de dimineaţă în inimile voastre. – 2 Petru 1:19
28Şi -i voi da luceafărul de dimineaţă. – Apocalipsa 2:28
16Eu, Isus, am trimes pe îngerul Meu să vă adeverească aceste lucruri pentru Biserici. Eu sînt Rădăcina şi Sămînţa lui David, Luceafărul strălucitor de dimineaţă. – Apocalipsa 22:16
În America există multe biserici cu numele: ,,The Morning Star“ (Luceafărul, steaua dimineții)
2. Cea de a doua parte a problemei este că avem de-a face cu o liturghie catolică foarte veche, rostită în limba latină. Majoritatea oamenilor nu mai înțeleg și nu mai folosesc latina. Îmi vei spune: ,,Bine, bine, dar Dumnezeu o cunoaște!“
Îți voi răspunde că ai dreptate, de aceea numai Dumnezeu știe precis în ce sens a fost folosit cuvântul ,,Lucifer“ în liturghia de la Vatican.
Adendum: În mai toate societățile secrete bazate pe grade de inițiere, simbolismele au un caracter multiplu, la un grad înseamnă ceva, iar la unul superior poate însemna exact invers. De aceea, ,,mulți ascultă, puțini înțeleg“.
Probabilitatea: Poate avea liturghia un sens pentru mulțime și altul pentru cei puțini care știu mai mult? Bineînțeles, dar eu nu m-aș aventura așa de departe.
Un exemplu: Richard Wurmbrand îmi spunea că ebraica are un vocabular redus de cuvinte și unii termeni au sensuri multiple, chiar contradictorii. De exemplu: ,,codoș“ poate desemna sfințenia divină, dar și … ceea ce știm noi în limba română …
Pentru cititorii de limbă engleză:
As an adjective, the Latin word lucifer meant “light-bringing” and was applied to the moon.[6] As a noun, it meant “morning star”, or, in Roman mythology, its divine personification as “the fabled son of Aurora[46] and Cephalus, and father of Ceyx“, or (in poetry) “day”.[6] The second of the meanings attached to the word when used as a noun corresponds to the image in Greek mythology of Eos, the goddess of dawn, giving birth to the morning star Phosphorus.[46]
Isaiah 14:12 is not the only place where the Vulgate uses the word lucifer. The Vulgate uses the same word in contexts where it clearly has no reference to a fallen angel: 2 Peter 1:19 (meaning “morning star”), Job 11:17 (“the light of the morning”), Job 38:32 (“the signs of the zodiac”) and Psalms 110:3 (“the dawn”).[47] To speak of the morning star, lucifer is not the only expression that the Vulgate uses: three times it uses stella matutina: Sirach 50:6 (referring to the actual morning star), and Revelation 2:28 (of uncertain reference) and 22:16 (referring to Jesus).
Other indications that in Christian tradition the Latin word lucifer did not carry connotations of a fallen angel are the names of Bishops Lucifer of Cagliari and Lucifer of Siena, and its use in the Easter Proclamation prayer to God regarding the paschal candle: Flammas eius lucifer matutinus inveniat: ille, inquam, lucifer, qui nescit occasum. Christus Filius tuus, qui, regressus ab inferis, humano generi serenus illuxit, et vivit et regnat in saecula saeculorum (May this flame be found still burning by the Morning Star: the one Morning Star who never sets, Christ your Son, who, coming back from death’s domain, has shed his peaceful light on humanity, and lives and reigns for ever and ever). In the works of Latin grammarians, Lucifer, like Daniel, was discussed as an example of a personal name.[48]
Judaism[edit]
The Hebrew term הֵילֵל (heylel)[2] in Isaiah 14:12, became a dominant conception of a fallen angel motif[49] in Enochic Judaism, when Jewish pseudepigrapha flourished during the Second Temple period,[17] particularly with the apocalypses.[18] Later Rabbis, in Medieval Judaism, rejected these Enochic literary works from the Biblical canon, making every attempt to root them out.[17] Traditionalist Rabbis often rejected any belief in rebel or fallen angels, having a view that evil is abstract.[50] However, in the 11th century, the Pirqe de-Rabbi Eliezer, drawing on ancient legends of the fallen angel or angels, brought back to the mainstream of rabbinic thought the personification of evil and the corresponding myth.[51] Jewish exegesis of Isaiah 14:12–15 took a more humanistic approach by identifying the king of Babylon as Nebuchadnezzar II.[52]
Christianity[edit]
Early Christians were influenced by the association of Isaiah 14:12-18 with the Devil, which had developed in the period between the writing of the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament,[53] also called the Intertestamental Period when the deuterocanonical books were written. Even in the New Testament itself, Sigve K Tonstad argues, the War in Heaven theme of Revelation 12:7-9, in which the dragon “who is called the devil and Satan … was thrown down to the earth”, derives from the passage in Isaiah 14.[54] Origen (184/185 – 253/254) interpreted such Old Testament passages as being about manifestations of the Devil; but of course, writing in Greek, not Latin, he did not identify the Devil with the name “Lucifer”.[55][56][57][58] Tertullian (c. 160 – c. 225), who wrote in Latin, also understood Isaiah 14:14 (“I will ascend above the tops of the clouds; I will make myself like the Most High”) as spoken by the Devil,[59] but “Lucifer” is not among the numerous names and phrases he used to describe the Devil.[60] Even at the time of the Latin writer Augustine of Hippo (354 – 430), “Lucifer” had not yet become a common name for the Devil.[55]
Some time later, the metaphor of the morning star that Isaiah 14:12 applied to a king of Babylon gave rise to the general use of the Latin word for “morning star”, capitalized, as the original name of the Devil before his fall from grace, linking Isaiah 14:12 with Luke 10:18 (“I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven”) and interpreting the passage in Isaiah as an allegory of Satan’s fall from heaven.[61][62]
However, the understanding of the morning star in Isaiah 14:12 as a metaphor referring to a king of Babylon continued also to exist among Christians. Theodoret of Cyrus (c. 393 – c. 457) wrote that Isaiah calls the king “morning star”, not as being the star, but as having had the illusion of being it.[63] The same understanding is shown in Christian translations of the passage, which in English generally use “morning star” rather than treating the word as a proper name, “Lucifer”. So too in other languages, such as French,[64] German,[65]Portuguese,[66] and Spanish.[67] Even the Vulgate text in Latin is printed with lower-case lucifer (morning star), not upper-case Lucifer (proper name).[5]
Calvin said: “The exposition of this passage, which some have given, as if it referred to Satan, has arisen from ignorance: for the context plainly shows these statements must be understood in reference to the king of the Babylonians.”[68] Luther also considered it a gross error to refer this verse to the devil.[69]
(Wikipedia)
Categories: Articole de interes general
Pai da, dar in acest video, lucifer apare ca fiind Tatal lui Hristos, si nu Hristos insusi cum apare in 2 Petru si Apocalipsa. In acest caz, luciferul din material nu poate fi decat satana.
Felicitări! Un articol foarte, foarte bun!