And he said, So is the kingdom of God, as if a man should cast seed into the ground; And should sleep, and rise night and day, and the seed should spring and grow up, he knoweth not how. For the earth bringeth forth fruit of herself; first the blade, then the ear, after that the full corn in the ear. But when the fruit is brought forth, immediately he putteth in the sickle, because the harvest is come. (Mar 4:26-29)

Much of the teaching of Jesus was done through parables, a short story or analogy that describes a spiritual principle. Teaching this way has many advantages, one of which is that we learn best by relating what we don’t know to the things we do know. To a people involved in farming, parables of planting, growing and harvesting use ideas familiar to the listeners. If you have ever planted a garden you know that just looking at the seed and soil doesn’t tell you how much you will be able to harvest. Certainly, a good gardener gets a feel for the soil, knows how to test it and improve it. But, when you look at the seed and the soil it is not possible to tell right away if the seed will germinate and grow and how much fruit it will produce. You have to plant the seed and wait.

Teaching spiritual things is like this, Jesus says. You plant the seed (the knowledge of the Gospel) and then wait. If the soil is good the seed will eventually grow and bear fruit. The gardener mostly just waits for that to happen. True, he must insure the seed gets the water it needs and he must remove any weeds that spring up to compete with his seeds. Yet, the gardener doesn’t really make the seeds grow. It is the nature of the seed and the soil to produce growth.

The meaning in this parable of Jesus is fairly obvious. Planting the seed refers to preaching the Gospel and teaching the knowledge of God’s ways to people. The soil refers to the person who receives that teaching. In order for the knowledge to develop into a spiritual life, the seed must be good and the soil must be good.

First, we must make sure we preach and teach the true message that God has revealed to man. This involves our own level of understanding and our ability to express that understanding. We must study and learn so that we understand the message and know that we have the right message. It isn’t enough to just read the Bible to gain that knowledge. What is really required is that we live it. If we see our knowledge bear fruit in our own life, then we know for certain that we have the right message. It’s all well and good to make a detailed exegesis of the Bible, but it is so much better to be able to say, “And it really is that way because that is what happened to me.” We want to be able to say honestly, “Try it - it works.” Thus when we preach and teach on the words of Jesus, we don’t have to sound like some seminary trained expert. We simply have to relate how the knowledge of God changed our lives. Like this:

And he said unto them, Take heed what ye hear: with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you: and unto you that hear shall more be given. For he that hath, to him shall be given: and he that hath not, from him shall be taken even that which he hath.
(Mar 4:24-25)

These verses came immediately before the parable about planting the seed. The promise that Jesus gave to his disciples was that if they pay attention to his teaching, put it into practice, live by it, then they would receive even greater understanding. If the words of Jesus are not practiced every day, the knowledge slips away. If we don’t apply the knowledge to our lives, nothing will come of it and even that knowledge we do have will be lost. Even more so, if we take that knowledge and spread it to others, even more will be given to us.

The second part of this parable has to do with the soil. There is always the temptation to try and figure out where the good soil is. In other words, we want to prejudge the listener to determine if they are “one of us.” That is not the way we are to do it. Remember that until the seed is planted and nurtured we won’t know if the soil is good. In the same way that we know we have the right message by living it, we find the lost by giving them that message and watching to see what happens. Just as the gardener must wait for the seed to grow, we must wait and watch to see how the message changes the listener’s life. This may take time and we must be patient. And, we always remember that it is the mysterious working of the unseen force of the Holy Spirit that causes the seed of knowledge to germinate, grow and bear fruit in that person’s life. Our obligation is to plant the seed and water the soil. We preach the message and give encouragement and support to those that receive it.

What goes along with this is that we don’t reject people out of hand just because they are not what we expect a good Christian to be. Jesus said that the physician comes to heal the sick, not the healthy. Likewise, if we are engaged in teaching, there isn’t much point it teaching to those who already know. That type of self-serving activity may make us feel good about ourselves but doesn’t do the work of the Kingdom of God. The work of the gardener is to create new life where there is none, or to nurture growth where the seed has been planted. The soil is empty to begin with and only later does it create a harvest.

The word “Lucifer” is only used once, and only in some, English Bibles at Isaiah 14:12. In the KJV it is, “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!” Backing up to Isaiah 14:4, you’ll find this is a prophecy against the King of Babylon: “That thou shalt take up this proverb against the king of Babylon, and say, How hath the oppressor ceased! the golden city ceased!” From the context then, “Lucifer” is a symbol for the King of Babylon. Most of the commentaries I have read agree on this. For example, John Gill says:

“Isa 14:12 - How art thou fallen from heaven,…. This is not to be understood of the fall of Satan, and the apostate angels, from their first estate, when they were cast down from heaven to hell, though there may be an allusion to it; …

“O Lucifer, son of the morning! alluding to the star Venus, which is the phosphorus or morning star, which ushers in the light of the morning, and shows that day is at hand; by which is meant, not Satan, who is never in Scripture called Lucifer, … but the king of Babylon is intended, whose royal glory and majesty, as outshining all the rest of the kings of the earth, is expressed by those names;”

That’s fairly typical of the commentaries since the protestant reformation. None of these scholars think this is anything other than a statement about the King of Babylon except maybe by an allusion.

The Hebrew word translated “Lucifer” is Helel and is “hapax legomenon’ (i.e., only used once in the entire scripture.) When a word only appears once in the whole Bible there will be difficulty in translation since there isn’t sufficient usage to get a good idea of what the word should mean. The lexicons state that “helel” is derived from a root “halal” meaning “shining”. When combined with the following Hebrew it is literally, “shining dawn-son” and appears to be a reference to the planet Venus. There are some scholars who think there was an ancient Sumerian or Canaanite myth about Venus and that Isaiah is parodying that myth. Whether that is true or not, the reference to Venus is a poetic symbol of the King of Babylon. Venus appears as a star but is not an actual star. This wanna-be star can never ascend to the heavens and appear permanently among the other stars, but must instead sink back towards the earth. As such, Venus becomes a symbol of the pride and arrogance that leads to the King’s downfall.

Whatever “helel” meant to Isaiah, the Jewish translators of the Septuagint used the Greek word for Venus, “heosphorus” when translating the Hebrew to Greek. When Jerome translated the Hebrew into Latin, he used the Latin term for Venus, “Lucifer.” Isaiah 14:12 in the Vulgate is, “Lucifer, qui mane oriebaris.” That Jerome meant “Lucifer” to refer to the “day star” is obvious when you look at the other two usages of Lucifer in the Bible. One is at Job 11:17, “cum te consumptum putaveris, orieris ut lucifer” which in the KJV is, “thou shalt shine forth, thou shalt be as the morning.” The other place is 2 Peter 1:19. The Latin is, “et lucifer oriatur in cordibus vestris” which the KJV translates, “and the day star arise in your hearts.” Now, if we say that “Lucifer” is a name for Satan then Jerome has 2 Peter 1:19 saying “until Satan arise in your heart.” Obviously that won’t do, so the KJV translators switch and use the “day star” in 2 Peter instead of the transliterated Latin of Isaiah 14 thus hiding this embarrassing little fact.

That leaves us with the question of why KJV uses “Lucifer” instead of “day-star” in Isaiah 14. The reason is – Church tradition. We get the idea that Lucifer is a name for Satan from early Christian commentators. There is a reference in Tertullian from the 2nd century (but I can’t find it right now) and also in Origen (3rd century). Both writers treat Isaiah 14 as a reference to Satan. Here is one example from Origen:

“Again, we are taught as follows by the prophet Isaiah regarding another opposing power. The prophet says, ‘How is Lucifer, who used to arise in the morning, fallen from heaven!’ … Most evidently by these words is he shown to have fallen from heaven, who formerly was Lucifer, and who used to arise in the morning.” (Ezekiel Opera, iii. 356)

In Luke 10:18 Jesus says, “I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven.” The commentators take that little phrase, combine it with images from Revelation, and then interpret the prophecy against the King of Babylon as an allegorical reference to the fall of Satan. Since the Latin is “Lucifer” in Isaiah 14, that word becomes used as a name for Satan. This idea that Satan was a “bright one” who fell due to pride carries forward throughout the middle ages and forms the basis for works such as Milton’s “Paradise Lost.” The usage sticks and ends up in the KJV in the 17th Century. Modern translators who try to reverse the tradition get accused of trying to hide the name of Satan as dupes of the Anti-Christ. It seems tradition is too powerful a force to overcome by honest scholarship alone.

Unfortunately, the Theosophists, Masons such as Albert Pike, New Agers, and others have picked up on this confusion and make a big deal out of it. They try to turn it around by using “Lucifer” in a literal sense of “light bringer” and thus deny they are “Satan worshipers.” That’s as non-Biblical as treating “Lucifer” as a name for Satan. When Lucifer is used in the Vulgate of Isaiah 14 it is definitely a reference to a king who fell because of his pride. In that sense, it’s a pretty good description of Satan and also anyone who is filled with pride.

What we are left with is a mess. Strictly speaking the Bible never says Lucifer is a name for Satan. On the other hand, common usage in English, built upon tradition, does use Lucifer as a name of Satan. Using Lucifer (“light bringer”) to refer to Satan can only be considered valid when used in a sarcastic sense. However, we have to use the language as it is understood or we won’t communicate very well to others. To me, those who treat the names Satan and Lucifer differently are just playing games with words to try and justify their self-serving beliefs. Unfortunately, others are doing the same thing when they yell and scream about people corrupting the Bible by removing the name “Lucifer.”

Personally, I don’t make an issue out of this. I do try and understand what is truly Biblical as opposed to what is merely tradition. As Jesus warned the Pharisees, “You make void the word of God by your traditions.”

Thank you Father for This Day,
     For my food to eat,
    A warm place to stay,
    And friends that I meet,
    Along my path on this day.

Guide me Father through This Day,
    May the things I do,
    And the words I say,
    Be pleasing to you,
    And benefit all this day.