Isaiah 14:12: “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!”

Most of us grow up being taught either through Sunday School or secular literature and entertainment that Lucifer is the name of the enemy. It was my first year at Moody Bible Institute that I was enlightened to the fact that to apply this passage in Isaiah14:12 to the enemy of God was to take it out of context as the context is clearly  speaking of a human king of Babylon, although this king is not really identified. In fact in the Hebrew the word for Lucifer is not even a proper name.  It is the word helel llyh  which comes from the root word halal llh.  You may notice I am braking from my tradition of not showing a Hebrew word in the Hebrew script.  The reason I never show a Hebrew word in the Hebrew script is because most people who happen to read my little studies would not pay attention to the script anyway and it is usually a waste of time to show it. However, in this case I think anyone with no background in Hebrew will see the close association of the word helel to halal and notice the missing Yod ( י), that second letter that tends to float in the air. Halal in its root form means to shine. The is followed by  ben shachar  which means son of dawn or morning.  It comes from a Semitic root word SK which means to fall down and came into Hebrew with the idea of the dawn where light falls down upon the earth.  Thus there is a play on the idea of this person falling down or a person of light or light bearer falling down.

The King James Version is really the only version to render this word helel as Lucifer, and making it a proper name.  In fact every modern translation will render it as either the morning star, day star, shining one, or shining star. Since the JPS Tanakh (Jewish Publication Society) uses the rendering of shining one I will go that rending as I would like to look at this from a Jewish standpoint.  The King James Version really referenced the Latin Vulgate which simply transliterated the Latin word that it used which is lucifer. In Latin the word means the morning star or is a reference to the planet Venus or as an adjective it is the light bringer. This closely parallels the Semitic root as it was brought into the Hebrew. It also matches the Greek word used in the Septuagint heosphoros which means bringer of the dawn.  This is used in Greek literature for the son of the goddess of the dawn, Eros, whose was named,  Phosphorous. Of course that word came into the English language to represent an element that glows in the dark. So the KJV is really not wrong to use the Latin word here.  In fact the Latin word is probably the closest to the idea of helel, all which in some way reference a bearer of light.

The question arises as to just how a passage where the context is obviously speaking of a human king of Babylon managed to finagle its way to become a reference to the spiritual enemy of God with a name, Lucifer, that has attached itself so deeply into our thinking as the proper name for this enemy?  We do have our own literature to blame for much of this association.  Also, even though the context speaks of a Babylonian king, it is a perfect portrayal of the enemy himself and his fall from heaven.  Yet, oddly enough the basis for saying that there is a secondary reference to the fallen angel from heaven comes from Judaism which today denies the existence of a devil and speaks of a Yetzer Hara or evil inclination, that tempts us to do evil.  The concept of the devil or a personification of the evil was very strong among  Jews during the second temple period after the return to Israel after captivity.  This was due to the strong acceptance of the first and second Book of Enoch as being inspired and gave the enemy of God a very expanded and prominent role. It was the early Jews who could easily see secondary and esoteric meanings in Scripture who applied Isaiah 14:12 to be a picture of a fallen angel as well as its contextual application.  This carried on into the middle ages until the Jews rejected the Books of Enoch as canonical and thus moved evil from a personification to an abstract Yetzer Hara.  However, in the eleventh century Rabbi Eliezer brought the ancient teachings of fallen angels back into mainstream Rabbinical teaching so that today there is a belief of a devil among some very orthodox rabbis, however, the general belief among Jews today is the abstract Yetzer Hara and Jewish commentators identify this helel as Nebuchadnezzar II mentioned in the Book of Daniel.

I personally do not believe the Books of Enoch are inspired, however, the reference to the Books of Enoch in the canonical book of Jude suggest that they hold historical value. So I would go with the ancient Jewish thought of a secondary meaning behind Isaiah 14:12 as a reference to the fallen angel. In fact I believe there is a third reference here. Helel has the idea of dawn, dawning being a reference to the bearer of light. As I indicated there is a close association of Helel (הילל) to Halal  (הלל) its root.  Sure Halal means to shine, but it also means to praise. It is where we get the word Hallelujah, praise the lord.  The word Jah (God) is left off of Helel.  The enemy was the bearer of light, the light of God but he left the Jah off  and began to receive the praise to himself.  When that happened he fell.  When King Nebuchadnezzar looked over his kingdom and declared, “Look at what I have done,” he lost his mind and wandered among animals.

A third reference is when a pastor, teacher, or Christian leader looks out over his congregation, his beautiful church building, or his many teachings, his books, his TV and radio ministry, his worldwide influence and his following and says to himself, “Look at what I have done. Lo, but I am really a fancy pants.”  How art thou fallen from heaven, O Helel bearer of the light of God, [how] art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!