Latest / Martyr's Row / Ep. 38 - Did St Jerome Accidentally Name Satan?

Transcript

Ep. 38 - Did St Jerome Accidentally Name Satan? · Martyr's Row

0:00
This week on Martyrs Row! Is Jesus Lucifer? Is
0:03
Augustine the only one who struggles with lust
0:05
in heaven? Does Twilight have the best CGI? Did
0:09
Yahweh write the Ten Commandments in King James
0:12
English? And did he have Darby proofread it?
0:16
Volgate? More like Schmolgate? Wait, wait, wait,
0:19
wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait,
0:19
wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait,
0:20
wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait,
0:20
wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait,
0:20
wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait,
0:20
wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait,
0:20
wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait,
0:20
wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait,
0:20
wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait,
0:20
wait, wait, wait, wait, Saint Felix in Adactus
0:46
suffered at Rome in the persecution of Diocletian.
0:51
Felix, an elder of the church, had long concealed
0:55
himself to comfort the faithful in secret. But
0:59
being discovered, he was brought before the judge
1:01
and commanded to sacrifice to the idols. When
1:05
he refused, he was scourged and led forth to
1:08
die. As he was being taken to the place of execution,
1:12
a certain man from the multitude, moved by the
1:16
Spirit of God, cried out that he too was a Christian
1:20
and would die with him. His name was Adductus,
1:25
which means added. He was joined unto Felix as
1:30
a fellow in martyrdom. Together they confessed
1:33
Christ. and together were beheaded, sealing their
1:37
faith with one witness. Thus these two, strangers
1:41
in the flesh, were made brethren in death, and
1:46
their bond endureth where the saints are numbered
1:49
in glory. Anno Domini, 303. Hey, Paul. What's
1:56
up, Stephen? Hey, I'm feeling festive. I like
2:01
it. Do you have any interesting festivities either
2:05
in your family or like in like life or let's
2:09
say it this way, do you have anything like in
2:12
history that you're like I really love this tradition
2:16
or festival? Is that a weird question? Has anyone
2:18
ever asked you that, Paul? You know, in other
2:21
ways, yes. Did I ask a very confusing question?
2:26
I like it. Like is there any, I guess the...
2:30
the way that makes the most sense is, do you
2:32
have a favorite holiday? You know what's funny
2:37
is, but really I'm asking, do you have any weird
2:39
traditions? That's fair. And yes, I actually
2:43
do. You do? I've actually created them myself
2:45
though. Okay. Better than I could have imagined.
2:50
And if you're gonna ask me why I did these, I
2:52
can't tell you why because I don't know. Okay.
2:54
But they started as a joke and I've just kept
2:56
doing them every year. Okay. So for Thanksgiving,
2:59
which is. Coming up. Well, depending on when
3:02
you listen to this. Yeah, it may have just passed.
3:05
But if you listen to it when you're supposed
3:06
to. Or maybe coming up again. Yeah, true. This
3:09
is your Thanksgiving episode. Weird pick. True.
3:14
But still good. Love it. Yeah, I love it. Well,
3:16
you won't know that. That's true. But I love
3:20
it. So for Thanksgiving, I buy a baguette. OK.
3:24
And then I try to gather as many people as are
3:27
willing to. Humor me. Okay. I would like us all
3:31
place a hand on the knife. We've cut the Thanksgiving
3:33
baguette together Well, okay, so you all collectively
3:36
hold the knife. Yeah, and we cut the baguette
3:38
So at some point the handle feels heavier than
3:40
the blade. Oh, yeah And one person's doing all
3:44
the work What's what's your highest count for
3:51
That's not enough. No, not many people want to
3:54
do it with me. I'm like, come on, guys. This
3:56
is a Thanksgiving baguette. Is this always at,
3:58
like, a friend's giving? Unless I'm with my family
4:01
in Ohio, yes. Have you ever done it with your
4:03
family in Ohio? Mm -hmm. OK. And they're like,
4:05
Paul's Thanksgiving baguette. How many years
4:07
have you done this? This would be... Paul's Thanksgiving
4:10
baguette. That feels like the title of an episode.
4:14
That's a shirt. That'd be a glorious sweater.
4:19
That would be. Like hand -stitched and it looks
4:21
a little Jewish. I love it. It looks a little
4:25
Jewish. It just has a star of David on the back
4:29
for no reason. Just because. Well, I mean, they
4:31
do have many festive rolls. Yeah. Oh. Festivals?
4:35
Festive rolls. That could be underneath the Jewish
4:40
star, the star of David. Festive roles. Festive
4:44
roles. I mean, brilliant ideas. That'd be a great
4:47
shirt, actually, as well. I love the idea. I
4:49
really like that. Yeah. So it's been, I think,
4:53
four years now I've done it. Yeah. OK. It might
4:56
be five years. Four or five years. Were you inspired
4:58
by Seinfeld? I must have been. Yeah. Or I think,
5:03
maybe I was watching like the... It's the great
5:05
pumpkin Charlie Brown. I love that movie. And
5:07
I might have just saw something and be like,
5:09
hmm, baguette. Although is that a TV special
5:11
or is it a movie? I think it's a TV special.
5:13
I think so too. Yeah. They probably all were.
5:15
You know what actually might be even weirder?
5:16
I might have been watching that and eating a
5:18
baguette. And you thought? And thinking Thanksgiving
5:21
baguette. You know that there is a Thanksgiving
5:25
Charlie Brown. Oh, there is. And they have to
5:30
make their own. the kids all end up having to
5:32
make their own Thanksgiving. Oh, yes. And then
5:35
they eventually go over to... And they put it
5:36
all together, don't they? Yeah. Yeah. So it is
5:40
more likely that you'd be watching that and eating
5:42
it back up. That might have been what I was watching.
5:43
Okay. I mix those two up often, as I just did.
5:46
It makes sense. But no one even really thinks
5:48
about the Thanksgiving one. That's true. But
5:51
again... I think it's a pretty great one. They're
5:54
all great. Yeah. There's actually new ones. Like
5:56
there's a new one around Franklin. There's a
5:58
new one around Marcy. Oh, that's cool. They're
6:02
awesome. I didn't know they were still making
6:03
them. Yeah. That's amazing. It is awesome. Well,
6:07
and there's a Peanuts movie that came out like
6:09
five or six years ago. Really? Mm -hmm. They're
6:11
great. I need to watch this. Charlie Brown's
6:13
the best. He's pretty low. Like, he's a very
6:17
Eeyore character. Yeah. Which is interesting
6:20
to put the main character as like a depressed
6:22
person. Well, not in like the, what, the 50s?
6:25
No, the 30s? Yeah. Was it the 30s? I mean a thirties
6:30
would make the most sense. I think it was the
6:31
50s. Everyone was depressed then. Charles Schultz.
6:34
Charles. Good old Charles Brown. His name would
6:36
be Charles. Yeah. He looks like a Charles. And
6:39
he would be Jewish. He's depressed at every holiday.
6:50
I also have one around Christmas time. Okay.
6:54
Another tradition that I created. Okay. So I
6:57
have, I bought it at, my brother and I bought
6:59
it at Target back in 2016, I think it was. This
7:01
is something you still possess. I do. Okay. Yeah.
7:05
2016 is almost 10 years ago. It's crazy, right?
7:07
Yeah. We've been doing this for almost 10 years.
7:08
Wow. We call it the Christmas Pig. Okay. It's
7:11
like one of those like - Wait. It's one of those
7:13
just like pigs with lights in it that you buy
7:16
from Target. I don't know these. Oh, it's a pig
7:19
with lights in it. Is it clear? It's like wrapped
7:22
in tinsel. What yeah, it's it's pretty cool.
7:26
It's got a little scarf on it with a hat. Okay,
7:28
and so I call him the Christmas pig But do they
7:30
still sell new versions of this? I don't know
7:33
I don't think this is something that Target just
7:35
has they call they had it I think this was a
7:38
2016 Target calendar item that sounds about right
7:42
And I possess it. Yeah. Yeah, so I call him the
7:46
Christmas pig. Okay, and New Year's Eve. Yeah,
7:49
there I have a lighting of the Christmas pig.
7:52
Got it. Yeah okay so it's like hey christmas
7:54
is coming let's light the christmas pig i love
7:57
that so at thanksgiving you cut the baguette
8:01
yep and at christmas you light the pig those
8:07
are my traditions i mean neither of these things
8:11
are very jewish no i mean kind of the baguette
8:14
a little bit depending on which feast you're
8:17
that's true you're working on i don't know Working
8:21
on? Working on. Working on that feast. I mean,
8:25
when you say it like that, that's the most normal
8:28
thing to say. It is. Just over here, working
8:31
on a feast. Working on my feast. Said every 1950s
8:34
mother. It's all jello, though. That's true.
8:40
What about you? Well, I don't really have anything
8:43
like that. I'm a pretty normal guy. Yeah, that's
8:48
fair. I've been allowed to be an adult by myself
8:52
for too long. Oh, but that's I mean, that's beautiful
8:55
though Oh, yeah, but to be fair you came up with
8:58
this stuff a long time ago. Yes, and you're the
9:02
type of person that even if you had like a Wife
9:05
and ten kids you would still be coming up with
9:08
it. Probably it more actually I would cuz I have
9:10
followers You would have affirmation Come on
9:17
kids like oh boy They're like yeah baguette,
9:21
and then they go over to other people's house,
9:22
and they're like what what are why don't you
9:25
guys have a baguette? Where's your baguette?
9:27
It's where's your baby? Who's gonna light the
9:29
pig they're like your dad's weird? I can't go
9:37
to sleep. It's Christmas time the pigs not a
9:39
pig almost said the pigs not on fire Oh, I love
9:46
that. No, I actually don't have anything like
9:48
that, which is now I feel depressed. We'll create
9:53
you some traditions. Traditions are fun, though.
9:57
Kids, traditions are fun. They're very fun. I
10:00
think you should continue to come up with things
10:02
like that. I think I wanted like a whole calendar.
10:04
Now I want it. Yeah, I want to do. Well, you
10:07
have like a calendar of reading and stuff like
10:09
that. Yeah. And music. Things that you cycle
10:11
back. Yeah, maybe we need to do that on MartyrsRow
10:15
.com. We need to have Paul's calendar included
10:20
in our feasts. It's basically like a Jewish calendar
10:25
with all these festivals, but it's just the things
10:27
that I do. That we made up. Do we add Festivus?
10:31
We have to. To get your poll. Festivus for the
10:37
rest of us. It's beautiful. Well, regardless
10:40
of what season you're listening to this in, I
10:42
hope you enjoy it. Cut a baguette for Paul. And
10:46
grab as many people around you as you can. Three,
10:48
two, one. They wrote the law for a pagan king
11:09
In a language not their own And 70 hearts beat
11:15
one refrain The word is flesh and bone Light
11:21
bearer, light bearer Fallen or divine The stars
11:29
to whisper stories in A scholar's weary mind
11:35
From scroll to script, from dawn to dusk The
11:40
meaning shifts in time A light bearer, light
11:46
bearer Fallen or divine Now we sit in dim lit
11:54
rooms With stories for the brave Searching myths
12:00
through candle smoke The names that time won't
12:05
save We walk the roads of martyrs past Where
12:10
faith and fire remain And listen for the echoes
12:17
still Beneath an empty grave Light bearer, light
12:24
bearer, fall in love Stars to whisper stories
12:32
in A scholar's weary mind From scroll to script
12:38
from dawn to dusk The meaning shifts in time
12:44
Light -bearer, light -bearer Fallen or divine
12:50
Maybe every word's a word we meant The light
12:57
we keep alive again We're keepers of their echoes
13:03
Every time we tell the story We carry the light,
13:10
carry the light a little further We carry the
13:16
light, carry the light a little further down
13:20
the road Light bearer, light bearer Fallen or
13:27
divine The stars to whisper stories in A scholar's
13:35
weary mind From scroll to script, from dawn to
13:41
dusk The meaning shifts in time Light bearer,
13:47
light bearer Fallen or divine Light bearer Light,
13:56
power, fallen, or divine The thing is, is AI
14:27
will never be as messy as us. That's true. Which
14:30
is part of the charm, I think. I know, that's
14:32
the whole thing. I think there are, well, I guess
14:36
it could take our podcast and go recreate this
14:42
and keep it as messy as it is. It'd be like,
14:45
whew. Would you like me to organize that? No.
14:49
The opposite, unorganize it? Yeah. Keep it as
14:53
cluttered as our brains. To be human is to be
14:56
messy. To be garbage can. Yeah. Which is funny
15:01
because it's like, that is, I feel like that
15:03
is the characteristic where you kind of go like,
15:05
well, not everything can be taken over by AI.
15:08
You know what I mean? Yeah. It's like, well,
15:10
what is it? It's it's that messiness of like
15:14
yeah, we're always trying to hit the mark But
15:16
we're never quite hitting it and that's kind
15:18
of what makes it nice and we're not ever doing
15:20
it in the same way Yeah Well, I mean, that's
15:24
because that's kind of that weird journey where
15:26
going from analog to digital, we're like, how
15:28
do we make it as crisp and polished as possible?
15:30
Yeah. And then we got really close. We're like,
15:32
we don't like it. Yeah, I mean, and now we're
15:35
like, OK, how do we take all of our digital recording
15:37
and then add noise to it? Yeah, like so we're
15:40
in we're in a studio and in in one of the control
15:44
rooms, they actually have everything rigged up
15:46
to where there's a old VHS tape. I love it like.
15:51
VHS player, and they have blank tapes in it,
15:54
and so he can output the audio from the DAW,
16:01
from where it's been recorded, run it out into
16:04
the VHS player. burn it to the VHS and then play
16:10
and sample the VHS back to the - So good. Which
16:13
is like, some of it's the type of math is like,
16:16
what? Yeah. And that's the piece of it. It's
16:18
like, oh, there's something about that. Like
16:20
I don't know about you, but every time I get,
16:23
which is like just recently, someone gave us
16:27
a TV they didn't need. So it's like, yeah. And
16:30
the one we have, we've had for like 10 years.
16:33
Okay, dang. So we get this other one and it's
16:36
like, all right, and the first thing I do is
16:38
I go in into the video settings and turn the
16:42
judder off. Yeah. And the judder, if you don't
16:45
know what that is, like if you ever buy a new
16:47
TV now, every, every movie, everything you watch
16:51
looks like a soap opera. Yes. And that's the
16:55
only way I can describe it because it's like
16:56
the four, like everything is too focused. Because
16:58
it like blends all the frames together as well.
17:01
Well that's a different, actually that's a different
17:03
thing. Yeah, it creates a stark background to
17:07
where it looks like everything is too, there's
17:11
too much depth. Oh, I see. I see a different
17:14
thing. Oh yeah, so it looks like you're in the
17:16
room. That's interesting. Versus classic cinema
17:19
is like, it's kind of 2D, it's kind of flat.
17:22
And so if you turn all the judder and the note,
17:25
like you turn all that stuff off, which it's
17:27
trying to smooth out. then it makes it look more
17:30
like what you're used to seeing. And you're like,
17:31
oh, that's it. Yeah. Which is more like old school
17:34
TV. Yeah. So I always like, new technology, I
17:38
always immediately, because in my brain is like,
17:41
my brain is like, this is not finished. Yeah.
17:45
I don't know. That's so interesting. Yeah. Well,
17:47
yeah, it's kind of funny, because I've got a
17:48
joke, and people joke about me, because I just
17:50
like buying old stuff. OK. So like, I recently
17:53
just bought like a cassette tape player. Yeah.
17:55
And it's like, oh yeah, this one's from like
17:57
the 80s. And I was like, yeah, that's awesome.
17:59
I've got like an old reel -to -reel in my house
18:01
as well. And it's like, yeah, I just like old
18:04
stuff. It's cool. Yeah, it is cool. I mean, I
18:07
think that is one of those pieces where it's
18:08
like, I don't, I'm not sure exactly like how
18:12
things translate from generation to generation.
18:15
Like what are the things within us that like
18:17
we see it or we understand it and we go, this
18:21
is like. Oh, what's it called? When there's a
18:28
theory or this idea that, oh, the uncanny valley.
18:34
So the idea of the uncanny valley where it's
18:37
like something is not right and it's just enough
18:42
wrong that it makes me think it's fake. So it's
18:46
like our ability to recognize things we should
18:50
be aware of. or beware of, right? Which is kind
18:55
of an interesting thing. So as things pass from
18:59
generation to generation, it's like, how did
19:01
we get here and how did we make the new things
19:09
old and the old things new again? And why don't
19:13
we just leave everything like it is? Can't watch
19:22
the Lord of the Rings movie it is but there's
19:24
there's one of them where? Legolas like jumps
19:28
off of the back of some creature okay, and I
19:31
remember like watching me like oh cool And then
19:33
something like do you know that's like VFX? I'm
19:36
in like what like that's I couldn't even tell
19:39
it's crazy doesn't it look like a spider when
19:41
he does it though Yeah, and then now now when
19:43
you watch it. You're like what? Have you seen
19:46
that have you seen the like the the memes in
19:49
this the stuff of people watching the first Twilight
19:52
movie for the first time. Oh, no. OK. It's the
19:58
same kind of thing. So it's like there's a scene
20:00
in the first Twilight movie, which I'm not. I
20:02
mean, I think at this point, if you watch the
20:05
first Twilight movie, ironically, it's actually
20:07
really funny. OK. Like watch it in the daytime
20:11
and not like seriously. in the daytime, not at
20:16
Twilight. It's like when you go into a church
20:19
that's designed where every wall is black, there's
20:23
no windows, everything's blacked out, but then
20:25
you walk in in the daytime, just the regular
20:27
Walmart lights are on, and it's like, oh, this
20:30
room looks really weird. It's that type of thing.
20:34
If you watch Twilight in the middle of the day,
20:36
it kind of already makes it gimmicky yeah so
20:40
it's like there's something funny about that
20:42
where it's like if you uh okay so there's a scene
20:45
where um the main character Is a vampire and
20:50
he can run really fast. Okay, and so the girl
20:52
is like sick for some reason I don't know all
20:55
the details But she's like sick for some reason
20:57
and then he goes and gets her and he needs to
20:59
take her somewhere And so he like super speed
21:02
runs, but when he's super speed runs, it's like
21:05
he's like And it just looks like a blurred person
21:09
and he's just like Like he he like looks like
21:13
he's like a robot running that's so fun It's
21:16
the funniest thing because you watch other people
21:19
watching it for the first time. They just bust
21:21
out laughing It's just this funny like uncanny
21:24
value where it's like. Yeah, so like That's funny.
21:28
I don't know. I think that there are there are
21:31
things like that that it's it's interesting when
21:34
again from generation to generation it's funny
21:36
how we're always trying to make things better
21:39
but it seems like we're making them worse yeah
21:42
and i'm not sure what that is like there's something
21:46
about that yeah like why are we trying this yeah
21:49
so it's interesting um with this whole with these
21:53
ideas because i've been i've been thinking about
21:54
something for a little while okay especially
21:56
like the idea of because there's a weird mix
21:59
between like there's a part of us that's like,
22:03
okay, we want something new and better. And another
22:05
part of us is like, no, old is better. And so
22:08
it caused us to get stuck to certain ideas. A
22:12
little bit too much sometimes. And it's like,
22:14
okay, where's the wiggle room in there? And so
22:17
I'm a Latin guy. Not as far as like, I am not
22:22
Hispanic. In high school, I learned Latin. That
22:28
was the thing that we did. Which I still feel
22:30
like is valuable. Oh, absolutely. But only for
22:33
people who study the Bible. Or you feel like
22:37
like words a lot. But if you hear me say that
22:40
even, you're like, wait, why study the Bible?
22:42
Why is Latin good for studying the Bible? Because
22:45
it's not written. Well, it's actually very big.
22:48
Well, it is now. It wasn't then. that's fair
22:51
back then latin didn't exist it's just like okay
22:55
it's like the in -between language yeah because
22:57
it was um it's like us trying to make it better
23:01
and then now on the other side of it we're like
23:04
why learn latin why do this like no no it's good
23:08
trust me yeah it's like thousands of years of
23:11
uh catholic church yeah making everybody listen
23:14
to everything in latin like It's like, we're
23:17
just going back to, we're skipping over you guys,
23:19
going back to the original Greek and Hebrew.
23:22
Which, I mean, that's kind of the funny thing
23:23
because we do have the Vulgate, which is a Latin
23:26
translation, but most people haven't even heard
23:28
of it. No, but doesn't it sound cool? It sounds
23:31
cool. It's like a superhero. Yeah, it's a pretty
23:33
cool, pretty cool title. Yeah. It's funny enough
23:36
about it, and it's cool just because of the...
23:39
consistency with the idea is because I'm pretty
23:42
sure Vulgate just means common language. OK.
23:45
Or like the common tongue, which is what the
23:49
New Testament is written in Koine Greek. Yes.
23:51
Oh, yeah. It's just for everybody. Common Greek.
23:53
Yeah. Yeah. It's like that's actually pretty
23:55
cool. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Because Hebrew
23:58
was not and it was very difficult to read and
24:02
still is. Yes. Yes. Well, so it's interesting
24:07
because I've been. Being being a Latin Latin
24:11
enjoyer connoisseur connoisseur In high school
24:17
which in high school which is funny cuz like
24:18
I haven't actually like studied it since high
24:21
school That's like tell me that you were homeschool
24:23
without telling me Nailed it All right kids today,
24:30
we're gonna learn Latin well unless you only
24:32
wear denim Well, I guess of course it's my daily
24:38
Latin lesson Right after I milked the cows Paul
24:44
are you okay? Tell me in Latin. Do you need to
24:47
be escaped? So there's this interesting Latin
24:55
word, okay that That we have yeah that we attached
25:01
to somebody. I really want to say Latino. I know
25:04
you do There's this really big dead language
25:09
word Those two things are not the same Latin
25:22
and Latino no, they're different wildly different
25:25
like they couldn't be more opposite I Was trying
25:32
to think of a way to differentiate it but I don't
25:33
think there is okay just Latin Yeah, a Latin
25:37
word. A Latin word. There's one Latin word that
25:39
sticks out to you, Paul. It sticks out to me.
25:40
Okay. And has recently. Okay. Especially when
25:43
we talk about like the Vulgate. Yeah, sure. And
25:47
so... Which at this point we don't even, like
25:50
what even is that? What even is that? What even
25:52
is the Vulgate? Let's just throw it away. Yeah.
25:55
Is that the question we should ask? What is the
25:57
Vulgate? What is the Vulgate? But so the question
26:01
I do have for you though. Okay. Yeah, let's do
26:04
it. I love it. Um, so, uh, Saint Jerome. Yes.
26:09
Translated the Vulgate. Okay. Um, and he used,
26:14
he used a word in one, in a couple of his verses.
26:16
Okay. And the word is Lucifer. Ooh. Creepy. Creepy.
26:23
What movie is that? They mentioned a name and
26:24
they're, ooh, oh, it's Lion King. Oh, it is.
26:27
Of course. Mufasa! You'll always find a way.
26:32
Disney's gotta be in there somewhere. Of course.
26:35
Mufasa! I shudder at his name. I need to watch
26:41
this again just to keep up with you. Lucifer!
26:44
No, don't. Well, so I guess my question for you
26:48
is did St. Jerome accidentally name the devil?
26:56
Is what dogs say. Said the liar. Lucifer. So,
27:04
Lucifer we find in the Vulgate. Yes. And Jerome
27:09
is the one who translates the Vulgate. Yeah.
27:12
And now, I mean even, like even up to a month
27:17
ago, somebody was asking me a question about
27:21
Lucifer. Satan. Yes. And said, oh well you know
27:24
how Lucifer And I went, I can't really address
27:30
the question you're asking because I'm distracted
27:34
by the use of Lucifer. Yeah, because we don't
27:37
actually see that idea coming up until later.
27:42
Yeah. Well, we've talked about a couple of things
27:44
like this that we think that there are, we assume
27:49
that, or let's say it this way. you have like
27:52
an elevation worship who comes out with a song
27:54
called Elohim. And you're like, okay, but Elohim
27:57
doesn't necessarily mean Jesus. Right. Like,
28:01
in fact... That line actually does bother me
28:03
a lot in that song. Of course it does. It should.
28:05
Because like, it doesn't actually make sense.
28:08
It's a generic name. Yeah. So, it's not... It
28:12
has to have an identifier. Right. So, you can't
28:15
just say Elohim. Because it's not even a name.
28:18
It's not a name. It's like calling you human.
28:21
Yes. It's the same categorization. Yeah, but
28:25
it's not even, it's not even uppercased. Like
28:29
you wouldn't see it uppercase, like in the Old
28:31
Testament you would see uppercase Lord, L -O
28:34
-R -D, and that would signify Yahweh, right?
28:38
But Elohim is not, you wouldn't see that written.
28:43
And if it's referring to Jesus, it would have
28:47
a qualifier. Because even when it refers to Yahweh,
28:50
It says Yahweh Elohim. Right. Which is Lord God.
28:54
Yes. Yeah, so that's the yeah I mean that's that
28:57
that's the whole thing is like both of those
28:59
things have to be together. Yeah, which I was
29:01
looking at this the other day too and the the
29:04
mighty like Mighty men, right? What's the what's
29:09
the word gibberish? Yeah, so gibberish like mighty
29:13
men the gibberish the So like, I wanna say it's
29:23
like, oh, it's El -gibor, El -gibor. So El -gibor
29:29
in Hebrew is mighty God. Oh, interesting. Yeah.
29:34
Yeah. So, gibor or giborim. Yeah. Like, the first
29:39
time we see it is obviously Genesis 6 -4. They
29:43
were the mighty men of old. And then we see it
29:45
again with Nimrod. He became a gibor. Yes. But
29:50
then El Gabor is mighty God. So again, there's
29:56
a lot of these Hebrew signifiers that we've turned
30:01
into proper nouns. And it's not like, it's us
30:08
going, oh, I learned a Hebrew word, I'm gonna
30:11
use this. Do you know what I mean? Especially
30:14
in a modern era. And so your question is really,
30:17
did Jerome do the same thing? Did he do that?
30:20
Did he do that in Latin, thus giving us a popular
30:24
TV show called Lucifer? Right. Yeah, and now
30:27
they're synonymous. Oh wait, is that what you
30:29
were asking? Did Jerome, was he the writer and
30:32
director of the show Lucifer? Yes. That is my
30:35
question. The hit, was it ABC or something like
30:41
that? The hit ABC show. Hashtag definitely not
30:45
sponsored. But do call us. Yeah, we'll talk.
30:50
Yeah, I would love that conversation. But that
30:53
is an interesting thought. Yeah, so then maybe
30:56
what we should talk about really quick is like
30:58
what is the Vulgate? Why do we even have the
31:01
Vulgate? When was it written? Well, I think it's
31:04
hard to talk about that even without understanding
31:06
who Jerome is as well. Yeah, good point. Yeah.
31:09
Who Jerome? Who Jerome is? Paul who is Jerome?
31:15
I'm so glad you asked actually have this legal
31:17
pad He brought his notes my infamous legal pad
31:21
who was st. Jerome. That's my question was st.
31:24
Jerome number one nice Nailed it yes This is
31:30
really looking up to be fair. I literally have
31:32
not seen his legal pad I Mean I saw that I saw
31:37
that was there I just yeah what and to be fair
31:40
even if you could see it you wouldn't be able
31:42
to Tell what it says. It's true, because my handwriting
31:45
is... No, you can hold it up. They still can't
31:47
read it. My handwriting is wild. Because I try
31:51
to write it as fast as possible. Yeah, and you
31:53
stay really close to the line. And I also, I
31:55
blur my words together. I love that. My letters,
31:57
yeah. It's funny, because the way that I write,
32:00
everything goes diagonal. Oh, really? So like,
32:03
when you look at the page... No, I mean, everything
32:05
is vertical when I write it, but then if you
32:07
push the page back, like you're trying to distinguish
32:10
a... All of my, anything I write with a sideways
32:15
line, it all goes the same direction, it's really
32:17
aggressive. So you look at the paper and it's
32:20
actually a diagonal, you turn it on its side.
32:24
That's not necessary to explain. No, but that's
32:27
interesting. Yeah, I do, my handwriting actually
32:29
has, it's gone through quite a big journey. Well,
32:32
we don't really need it anymore. Yeah. Which
32:35
is unfortunate. Well, I do because I don't have
32:37
a printer. Fair enough. Fair enough. Anyways,
32:41
St. Jerome. So who's Jerome? St. Jerome. Why
32:44
are we talking about Jerome? What a good old
32:47
boy. So he was born around 347 A .D. Yes. I like
32:53
how you said around and then a very specific
32:55
date. I love that's how they do it too. They're
32:58
like, it was somewhere around this 347 A .D.
33:00
Like you can't say like 350. Well, it depends
33:02
on what your calendar is. That's true. We'll
33:04
talk about that. Different episode. So he was
33:08
born in Striden, which is modern day Croatia
33:12
or Slovenia. Oh, cool. Which is the only reason
33:14
I wrote that down. So we do have a Twilight tie
33:17
in. And so he was classically trained in Rome
33:23
and he loved Cicero and Virgil. As anyone does.
33:27
Those were his boys. I mean. you know and so
33:31
it's interesting with him is so he's he loved
33:33
you know ancient philosophy and greek philosophy
33:35
yeah um and reason and so in a vision he had
33:39
god told him you are a caesaronian not a christian
33:43
whoa and i was like whoa and then so because
33:46
of that he's like I need to start reading scripture
33:48
more. Oh, interesting. So he had this vision
33:50
where it's like, you love them more than you
33:52
love me. Oh, I see what you're saying. I thought
33:53
you were saying it was a directive. Like God
33:55
was saying, you are not a Christian, you are
33:58
Ciceroanian. Yeah, a follower of Cicero. Yeah.
34:02
And so he's basically saying like, you love them
34:04
more than you love me. Wow. And so Jerome's like,
34:06
I gotta tidy up. That's very Pauline of God.
34:09
It is, right? A statement no one's ever said
34:15
before. Wow, how Pauline of you, God. How very
34:21
Pauline. And then so, because then he lived as
34:27
an ascetic monk, where he learned Hebrew from
34:30
Jewish teachers, which was kind of rare for a
34:35
non -Jew to learn, especially from those teachers.
34:38
And when you say ascetic monk, so ascetic, person
34:42
or that type of, it's a descriptor of the lifestyle.
34:46
Yes. And asceticism is the idea of completely
34:50
separating yourself from civilization. So not
34:54
just a monk, but an ascetic monk, which is complete
34:57
isolation. He just lived out in the desert, punished
34:59
by himself and the other monks. Yeah, asceticism
35:02
also has an element of hard work along with it,
35:05
which is interesting. Yeah. because it's like
35:07
devotion to prayer and to study, but it's also
35:10
an intention of working hard to subdue the flesh.
35:14
Yes. So, yeah, which is pretty hardcore. Yeah.
35:18
So, yeah, he was, again, very Pauline. Yeah.
35:21
It's kind of a hard core guy. I wonder if he
35:24
built tents. Well, so it's interesting. So because
35:28
there's actually a quote, maybe God sent Paul
35:30
to Jerome to tell us, hey, Paul, you got to get
35:33
through this guy. Go tell him. Write him a letter.
35:36
So the vision he gets is like, wow, why is this
35:38
so Pauline? Because Paul is actually the one
35:41
who went and told him. He's actually the one
35:42
who did. God said Paul. In three, I don't know,
35:48
30 AD. Paul would love that. Yeah. He would love
35:51
that. Hey, can you go yell at that guy? Yes.
35:54
You know what? Yes, I can. You know what? Shout
35:57
out, Paul. Hey. Cheers to you, Paul. And so,
36:04
Jerome, I added this quote in here because I
36:07
think it speaks to kind of him and his lifestyle
36:09
and his view. So he said, ignorance of scripture
36:13
is ignorance of Christ. So he was a big studier.
36:17
You don't hear many people saying that these
36:19
days. No, for sure. It was unique that he specifically
36:23
studied Hebrew and Greek because those were not
36:28
his language. Right. Those are things that he...
36:31
Yeah, he had to actually learn. Yeah, he would
36:33
have learned it the same way we would have to
36:34
learn it except Yeah, he was a little closer
36:37
to it. Mm -hmm I mean because those guys are
36:40
still there to teach it. Yeah, well kind of yeah
36:43
Yeah, um, but yeah, so his hit their language
36:46
would have been Latin for the most part right
36:47
because of Rome Yeah, true. Yeah, which is kind
36:51
of cool. It's cool And so that's kind of a little
36:53
bit of who Jerome was. And so the Vulgate, so
36:57
to unify kind of messy Latin translations into
37:02
one accurate text, they called Jerome and they're
37:07
like, hey, can you translate? And originally
37:09
it was just the four gospels, but he's kind of
37:11
a zealot, so he just kept going. Yeah, and the
37:14
wasn't the idea that like at the time they had
37:19
the Hebrew and the Greek, but they were also
37:23
mainly using the Greek as far as like they were
37:26
using the Old Testament and New Testament. And
37:28
the Old Testament had been translated into Greek,
37:31
the Septuagint. And then they were using both
37:35
of those, and then it was like spotty translated
37:39
into Latin. There wasn't a Latin translation.
37:45
There were a bunch of scrap translations. Yeah,
37:49
they weren't congruent with each other. Yeah
37:52
well and so actually a big point with this and
37:54
this because this is really important to kind
37:56
of what Jerome did yeah was um it wasn't just
38:00
like oh we use Hebrew and we use Greek like they
38:02
only use Greek yeah because so they actually
38:04
ignored the Hebrew you're right right so like
38:08
every Latin translation up to the Vulgate if
38:12
it was translating the Old Testament, it was
38:14
only translating the Septuagint. It was only
38:17
translating from Greek, which had been translated
38:19
from Hebrew. So it wasn't a true translation.
38:25
Yeah, as far as it was just utilizing the Greek
38:28
translation. And so Jerome, instead of relying
38:32
solely on the Greek, he was like, hey, I wanna
38:35
also use Hebrew. And they didn't ask him to,
38:38
right? No, they just said, hey, can you just
38:41
do a good translation for this? Yeah, bring it
38:43
all together. He's like, cool. I'm going to use
38:45
Hebrew as well. And everyone went to an uproar.
38:47
They're like, are you crazy? Yeah. And so, yeah,
38:50
most Christians viewed the Septuagint as inspired
38:52
and definite. Wasn't it a Pope Gregory? I think
38:55
it was. Wasn't it a Gregory? Old Greg? Old Greg?
38:59
It might have been. I didn't write that down.
39:01
I think it was. You're probably right. Oh wait,
39:04
Pope Damasus the first. Okay, so not Gregory.
39:08
No. Yeah, yeah. But Gregory's got to be in there
39:10
somewhere. He's got to be there somewhere. He
39:12
is in the mix. At some point. There's a Greg,
39:14
there's always a Greg around. There's always
39:17
a Greg. Amen. And so yeah, so like, why was Hebrew
39:24
so controversial? Because we think by that today
39:26
are like... That's not kind of, that's just normal.
39:29
And actually a lot of that is because of Jerome,
39:31
that we think about Hebrew the way we think about
39:33
it now. Oh, that's interesting. And so... Well,
39:36
I mean, in Israel right now, that's the language,
39:40
is Hebrew. Yeah, it's not ancient Hebrew, it's
39:42
a modern, yeah. Yeah, and really the main difference
39:45
is that in the writing, obviously there's like
39:49
evolution of slang and different things like
39:51
that, but in the writing, they add dots and things
39:55
like, and... characters to help delineate and
40:00
add in vowels. Whereas the old writing is only
40:05
consonants. Right, which makes it confusing.
40:09
That's part of what makes it so hard. Yeah, so
40:13
the Hebrew is controversial because the apostles
40:17
and New Testament writers quoted from it, because
40:19
that's what they knew, that's what they had.
40:22
So it carried apostolic authority. Got it. Yeah
40:26
true the Greek translation that is. Yeah. Okay.
40:29
I yeah because yeah that and that would Sorry,
40:32
I feel like you know, you're good filling in.
40:34
No, it's important. Yeah, cuz the cuz Like if
40:37
you've ever read the New Testament and you go
40:40
Oh, this has a footnote and it's and you go down
40:44
and it's like this is referencing Isaiah or it's
40:46
referencing song Yeah, and then you go to and
40:49
you're like, well, that's not what it The quote's
40:51
different. And it's because they're not quoting
40:54
it in Hebrew. They're quoting the Septuagint.
40:56
They're quoting the Septuagint. So what was written
40:59
down was actually written down originally in
41:02
Greek, not translating what they said, because
41:05
they didn't say it in Hebrew. They said it in
41:08
Greek. Or they said it in Aramaic, and it was
41:11
written down in Greek. True. Yeah, because we
41:13
recently had that on one of our Abraham episodes
41:16
with Stephen. He's quoting in Acts and it's like,
41:20
he's not even using the same word. And it's like,
41:23
oh, that's because that's the translation that
41:26
he would have, but it's not the original Hebrew.
41:29
I do wonder if there's ever been a translation
41:31
where whenever something is referenced like that,
41:33
if the translators have ever gone back and just
41:36
put in the Hebrew. Oh, that'd be interesting.
41:39
Yeah. It would be incorrect because it's not
41:41
what it says. That's not what they said. Yeah,
41:43
that's true. Yeah. So even in the New Testament,
41:47
those apostles, they're quoting the Septuagint.
41:50
Right. Which is... I mean, that was the language
41:52
they spoke. Yeah, I don't know that any of us
41:56
really think about that. It's funny, because
41:59
we just assume that, oh, it's all the same. Yeah.
42:03
No, they have a translation the same way we do.
42:05
Right. And depending on who it was, that doesn't
42:07
mean that they didn't... In their synagogues
42:09
here the old testament in hebrew because right
42:12
because they still would have those right? Yeah,
42:14
but it was in the same way. It's like you go
42:15
into a catholic church and they They do a lot
42:18
of their stuff in latin, right? It's like well
42:20
We're just there like I don't know what they're
42:22
saying Yeah, and really the reason why they have
42:25
done it like that for so long is because gerome
42:28
Put all of this together. Yes. I mean they were
42:30
doing it back then in latin But the one is like
42:34
unified. Yeah him unifying it and making this
42:37
translation actually pushed it into the next,
42:41
I don't know, 1200 years? Easily. Yeah. Yeah,
42:44
absolutely. Which is pretty wild. It's crazy
42:46
to think about that. Yeah. So yeah, so translating
42:50
from the Hebrew, it implied that the apostolic
42:54
Bible, the Greek, the Septuagint was flawed.
42:57
So that was the implication people were taking
42:58
when he's like, I want to also use Hebrew. They're
43:01
like. you think the apostles are wrong? Yeah.
43:03
He's like, no, that's not what I'm saying. So
43:07
the other thing about it was big was the Hebrew
43:10
canon lacked what we now call the apocrypha.
43:14
Right. And so the church feared that Jerome was
43:17
also cutting scripture. That's interesting. So
43:20
by not having those books in Hebrew to translate
43:22
from as well, they're like, oh, you're getting
43:24
rid of scripture, which would be like the Maccabees
43:27
and those Jubilees and those books. Well, not
43:30
Jubilees. No, no, no, not that one. What's the
43:32
other one? Wait, no, there's another one I was
43:34
thinking. It's like Tobit. Yeah, Tobit. That's
43:37
what I was thinking of. And then you have Maccabees
43:39
and then you have like Esther too. Yeah. There's
43:44
like a couple that are like, oh, I didn't realize
43:46
there was like a second and maybe Ecclesiastes
43:48
too. It's something like that where there's a
43:50
couple of books that there's like a second part
43:53
to it. Yeah. But yeah. Which come later. Because
43:57
they're second temple literature. Yes. Right?
43:59
Yeah. So they're written, they're actually written
44:00
in Greek or in Aramaic depending on, I don't
44:04
know, I'd have to go back and look at that. Depending
44:05
who did it, yeah. Yeah. Yeah, so the culture
44:09
cultural tension the other big part about that
44:11
too is with language so we think of Greece or
44:15
Greek and the Romans like well, they're the they're
44:18
the Philosophers and yeah, the the reasoners.
44:21
Yeah And so Greek the language was the language
44:24
of philosophy and theology in Hebrew was considered
44:27
obscure and provincial Hmm, so they're like that's
44:31
for them, but we're the ones who are like reasonable
44:34
Yeah, cuz you're talking about a shift in worldview.
44:36
Yeah Which that we have talked about a lot. We've
44:40
talked a lot about that. Because when you get
44:43
to the Greek language and you get to the Roman
44:46
Empire, you start to get into the five senses.
44:52
Everything starts to flatten out. And the spiritual
44:55
worldview that's very evident in the Hebrew text
44:59
kind of collapses. In some ways. Yeah. Yeah.
45:04
Yeah in some ways. I guess in other ways it's
45:06
in other ways it shows other pieces Yeah, yeah,
45:09
that's true. But and I think a lot of that's
45:11
just because of language differences. Mm -hmm
45:14
Yeah, it's not because people are trying to hide
45:16
stuff or change stuff. It's like it's just they're
45:18
doing the best they can Yeah, and it's a different
45:20
language, right and we talked about this on like
45:23
the conversations around Israel as a nation in
45:26
the idea of like I think sometimes we think of
45:29
like as a modern Christian that's specifically
45:33
American and Protestant, like my mind goes to
45:38
like, well, I have, I like use the ESV a lot.
45:43
I grew up mostly reading the NIV, but then most
45:47
of the preaching I heard was in King James or
45:49
New King James. And then before that there was
45:53
Greek and Hebrew. And I'm like, well, actually,
45:57
no, that's not, that's a jump. it is so like
46:01
you kind of like that's the whole that's the
46:03
whole thing of like well there's a there's 1500
46:06
years and up to 2000 years of um and maybe even
46:11
to 2500 years because you're talking about the
46:13
when the septuagent was written or translated
46:16
yeah and you you get into this element where
46:18
it's like actually there's a lot of handoffs
46:22
Yes, and a lot of pieces and adjustments and
46:25
translations and changes that get us all the
46:27
way to here So then you look back and you go
46:30
wait in 1947 when they found the Dead Sea Scrolls
46:34
They found a complete version of the book of
46:36
Isaiah. Yes, that was word for word But the translation
46:39
that they found was a thousand years older than
46:41
the one we had crazy So then you go. Well, the
46:44
reason why that's so crazy is because we don't
46:46
go King James Hebrew Yes. You know what I mean?
46:50
Yeah, that's true. Like we go Torah, Moses, to
46:55
Septuagint Greek, to a bunch of random pieces
47:01
of Latin, to the Vulgate, and then that evolves
47:05
into like old English, and then into English,
47:11
into the like royal English of King James. Yeah.
47:17
So you have like all of these changes. There's
47:19
a lot in there. It's a lot to track. And the
47:22
other thing that's interesting, because I actually
47:25
heard someone say this recently, when it comes
47:27
to English translations of the Bible, there are
47:31
people that think, and I'm not picking on anybody
47:33
by saying this specifically, just saying like,
47:35
I've just heard people say this, that they're
47:37
like, oh, I wish people would translate English
47:40
translations off of the original text and not
47:43
other English translations. And it's like, they
47:45
don't. Right. and it's like some people think
47:47
that and it's like okay no part of why and that's
47:51
the big thing with English like well why was
47:53
the ESV such a big push yeah over King James
47:56
or NIV it's like well because of the Dead Sea
47:57
Scrolls yes it's like that's why it was so big
48:00
so it's like oh we actually have more than we
48:02
did when they translated those so we can do a
48:04
better a better job at translating yeah and there
48:07
were a lot of translations I mean you look at
48:09
like the I think the NASB has like a 1996 version
48:13
And then there's an updated version recently.
48:17
And some of those, like some of those translations,
48:19
not saying specifically the 96 NASB, but some
48:23
of those translations don't, it took a long time
48:26
for people to bring in the Dead Sea Scrolls to
48:29
translations and identify, yeah. So there's a
48:33
lot that goes into translating. And one of the
48:37
benefits that we have versus like the early church
48:39
is we have a lot more. For sure. than they did
48:42
when they were translating. So hopefully we can
48:44
do a better job. Doesn't mean we will, but hopefully
48:47
we have more to work with. So Paul, what we need
48:50
to do is we need to do an episode on what the
48:52
Septuagint is. That'd be awesome. LXX? Yeah.
48:57
Which means 70. Yes. Which, that's the whole
49:00
story. So like, we need to get into the Septuagint
49:03
at some point. We'll definitely tell that story.
49:04
And then we need to talk about like the Aramaic
49:08
as well as the... look into what they were actually
49:14
teaching, what language they were using, how
49:16
that manipulated, or not manipulated, but how
49:20
that... Shaped the way that they were speaking
49:23
and preaching what language they were using how
49:26
that was written down So that's a different episode.
49:29
It is and I don't want to spend too much more
49:31
time on it No, cuz I want to know about Lucifer.
49:33
Yeah, we're getting there But I do want to say
49:35
this cuz it isn't and I have never gonna miss
49:37
an opportunity to make fun of Augustin Oh Augustin
49:41
Augustin so Jerome that's his big controversy.
49:44
He's like I'm not only gonna use the Greek. I'm
49:46
also gonna use the Hebrew. Yeah And critics like
49:48
Augustine, and other contemporaries at the time,
49:51
they accused Jerome of arrogance and heresy.
49:55
Love it. Which is like, today it's wild, at least
49:58
for me it'd be like, because you wanted to use
50:00
more? Yeah, true. Or yeah, which honestly goes
50:06
back to like, maybe we should question more the
50:11
choices of Augustine. not of Jerome. Right? I
50:15
think we should. Which we've talked about a lot.
50:18
Yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah. We love Augustine. We
50:20
love. Shout out Augustine. Love to pick on him.
50:23
Honestly, Augustine's almost definitely hanging
50:25
out with Paul. Paul's like, this guy. Somehow
50:32
Augustine, in his glorified body, is still dealing
50:35
with lust. He's like, that pear looks nice. Like,
50:44
no. Too far, Paul. Oh, too far? Too far. He was
50:48
a pear stealer. Paul slaps him in the hand. No!
50:52
Come on, man. No! Just one bite. Easy. It's like,
50:59
Jesus, didn't we get rid of the thorns in the
51:00
side? Come on, can't we help this guy out? This
51:05
is just like a deep -cut Christian theology SNL
51:09
sketch. Very nerdy. We've lost half the people.
51:15
I mean, if they were with us to this point, they'd
51:18
appreciate it. Hopefully. Comment below if you
51:21
appreciate it. And if you don't, then we do.
51:25
Yeah, then comment that you don't appreciate
51:27
it, and we'll ignore it. Yeah, just say hi. Yeah,
51:30
please. So yeah, it was a big deal what he did.
51:35
Sure. But he was also one of the pioneers of
51:37
biblical scholarship because of his approach
51:40
to this. Yeah. And he was in a unique position
51:43
because he learned Hebrew, where a lot of people,
51:46
they knew Greek and Latin. And so, he was in
51:49
a unique spot where he could actually do this
51:51
as well. Yeah, so Augustin is just jealous again.
51:54
I think so. He's like, oh, darn it. Something
51:58
else I don't know. Did I tell you about something
51:59
else I did bad? Another thing I regret. Jerome's
52:04
like, oh, Augustin again? Hey, can I get somebody
52:08
to keep this guy out of here? So then, this is
52:13
where I want to... turn it back to you on this
52:15
part. So jumping into, so that's kind of the
52:17
setup as far as like, Jerome did a pretty big,
52:22
bold thing. And because his translation was really
52:27
good, because he was very critical and he used
52:29
everything he had available to him, it solidified
52:34
itself, the Volgate did, in a pretty pronounced
52:36
way, as we've talked about in the Catholic Church.
52:41
And so, there's a key verse where we see the
52:43
word Lucifer. And that's Isaiah 14, 12. Do you
52:51
want me to read it? Yeah, actually, please. Isaiah
52:54
14, 12. And let's say the ESV. Love it. How you
53:01
have, it's funny because we've actually read
53:03
this passage multiple times. At this point. We're
53:05
always coming back here. There's like a few spots
53:08
where we always go. It's Amos, Isaiah, and Ezekiel.
53:12
And then Genesis 1 through 12. Of course. Yeah,
53:16
and we spent a decent time in Revelation. That's
53:19
true. Not as much as these guys. That's true.
53:21
Isaiah 14, 12. How you are fallen from heaven,
53:27
O day star, son of dawn. how you are cut down
53:31
to the ground, you who laid the nations low.
53:36
Now let me jump over here. Yeah, please. How
53:39
about the King James version? Isaiah 14, 12.
53:44
Oh, how art thou fallen from heaven, oh, Lucifer,
53:48
son of the morning? How art thou cut down to
53:51
the ground, which didst weaken the nations? Is
53:57
there another translation that's interesting?
53:58
I think they all kind of say the same two things.
54:01
How about the Darby? What's Darby got to say?
54:06
How about the Darby translation, which is the
54:08
guy who invented dispensationalism? Oh, enough.
54:12
Isaiah 14 12. How art thou fallen from heaven,
54:16
Lucifer, son of the morning? Also, did I mention
54:19
that he just slipped that in? Yeah, but then
54:23
you go to like New Living Translation. How you
54:28
are fallen from heaven Oh shining star son of
54:31
the morning, okay You know what I mean? Like
54:34
we're worst. We're jumping between it's it's
54:37
interesting to me that the King James Yes, and
54:42
the John Darby Translation who was who created
54:48
dispensationalism. Yeah It's interesting that
54:52
those hold to this yeah mainly because like Let
54:57
me say it this way, dispensationalist evangelicals
55:02
of the 70s, 80s, 90s who grew up reading the
55:08
New King James or reading the King James version
55:11
and preaching out of the King James version are
55:14
also using the Darby King James and they're using
55:20
those pieces. So when he does his own translation,
55:24
he's of course gonna use that there because the
55:27
king james uses it yeah so it yeah and so it's
55:31
interesting because in like esv in nlt yeah those
55:35
are there too you quoted um they say um morning
55:40
star or shining star yeah oh day star day star
55:44
son of dawn that's right yeah um so it's kind
55:48
of fascinating it's like wait why are they all
55:50
different yeah um and so do you have an answer
55:55
paul Well, so it's interesting kind of As much
56:00
as I can yeah, and which one is correct. Well,
56:03
so the answer is yes And so in that verse But
56:11
Hebrew, okay. Yeah. So we're gonna say well,
56:14
I was just gonna say this is something that classically
56:17
happens Where it's it's the issue that I have
56:20
and yes, I have led so I've I've as someone who
56:25
has led worship for many years in a church setting.
56:29
Yes, I have led songs that have used the name
56:31
Yahweh. Yeah. But the thing is, is Yahweh is
56:34
Hebrew. Yes. That doesn't mean God wants to be
56:39
referred to as Yahweh. Yeah. Because even Yahweh
56:43
is not correct. The way I'm saying that. Right.
56:47
Honestly, it's a it's it's not how he would have
56:50
actually said it. Well, not only that, but ancient
56:52
Hebrews To them, it would be equivalent, me saying
56:56
Yahweh this many times, to them would be like
56:59
me saying Bloody Mary three times in the mirror.
57:01
Yeah, that's true. It's not that we don't speak
57:05
His name, it's that we are not holy enough to
57:09
say the name of the Creator God. Therefore, we
57:14
should not say it. Those with unclean lips. That's
57:17
the idea is like we can't even lift to the level
57:22
of being able to say the name Yahweh Yeah, so
57:25
already you kind of go like well. Yeah, he said
57:28
My name is Yahweh. No. He said I am that I am
57:32
Mm -hmm, and that would be the more correct translation.
57:35
Yeah, not it's me Yahweh Yeah, yeah, and that
57:40
happens a lot. We're like All of a sudden, we're
57:43
singing a Phil Wickham song. And then we all
57:45
of a sudden call God Yahweh. And it's like, well,
57:48
all we're doing is we're not finishing the translation
57:51
of all the lyrics. It's like, in that way, when
57:57
we go, is Lucifer or O'Day Star Son of Dawn,
58:02
which one is correct? And you go, yes. Well,
58:06
it just means one of them didn't finish translating.
58:10
You know what I mean? Yeah. Well, so that's the
58:13
interesting thing is, because actually all of
58:16
them are very correct. Yes. They're just not
58:19
finished translating. Well, as far as like, what
58:23
do you mean? Maybe I'm missing. Lucifer is Latin.
58:26
Yes. And it's not a - Oh, I know what you mean.
58:29
Now I see it. Yes. Okay. Took me a second to
58:32
get there. I'm following now. Yes. You're right.
58:35
And it's also not a proper noun. Right. But it's
58:40
interesting even with this because I believe
58:42
Daystar is capitalized It is yeah, which is also
58:47
that's interesting for a reason we'll get into
58:49
in a minute but the reason why it's capitalized
58:51
is because the context of Isaiah 14 is a It's
58:56
a correction. What's the word I'm looking for?
58:58
Well, it's kind of like a taunt. Yeah towards
59:01
the King of Babel towards the King of Babylon.
59:04
Yeah, right. Yeah, that's like the immediate
59:07
Which brings up an interesting idea, by the way,
59:10
which I'll mention later. Okay, I love it. Nice
59:13
little tease. Well, so yeah, so looking at those,
59:17
because that's part of it, it's like, okay, why
59:18
are we, why are these all different? And I mean,
59:20
you kind of already answered this, like, well,
59:21
we didn't actually translate it all the way.
59:23
Yeah, we didn't finish translating it. We just
59:25
stopped at proper noun and just decided that
59:27
was the name. That'll do it. And so in Hebrew,
59:32
and I'm a non -Ancient, non -Jew. As we all are.
59:36
As we've established. So in Hebrew, it's halil
59:40
ben shakar, which means shining one sun of dawn.
59:43
Yeah. And then in Greek, it's hios foros, which
59:45
is bringer of dawn. Yes. And then in the Vulgate,
59:49
it's lucifer, which means light bearer. Right.
59:52
And so they're all correct. But the thing is,
59:56
instead of translating lucifer, like in the King
59:59
James, they were just like, let's just keep that
1:00:02
instead of light bearer. Right, but the reason
1:00:07
why Jerome uses Lucifer. Is because it's the
1:00:10
correct translation. Well, so here's the interesting
1:00:13
thing. So the thing that's interesting in this
1:00:17
piece is the esphorus or phosphorus, which is
1:00:21
like kind of what it looks like. The word hesphorus,
1:00:29
dawn or bearer, it was the ordinary Greek word
1:00:32
for Venus. Yes. The Morning Star. Yes. So, Hesperus,
1:00:38
in the Greek, that was their ordinary word for
1:00:44
Venus. Correct. Which we've talked about on previous
1:00:47
episodes about, isn't Venus, wasn't that the
1:00:51
gateway to heaven? That's Saturn. Venus is actually...
1:00:54
Oh, that's right. So, Venus, and it's interesting
1:00:57
even with what it leads into, are you talking
1:00:59
about the myth? No. Okay, we can go into that
1:01:02
too, which is fun. well the Venus it's quick
1:01:04
okay it's not long um you and your myths i love
1:01:08
i'm always gonna find a way to make fun of Augustine
1:01:10
and talk about a myth but so yeah yeah so like
1:01:14
so when we look at Lucifer and like the use of
1:01:17
Jerome kind of stopping and using the word Lucifer
1:01:20
is because where the Greek where the Septuagint
1:01:24
had used that in Isaiah instead of him using
1:01:27
the Hebrew Morning Star, instead of him using
1:01:30
what would be in Hebrew, the halil bin sahar.
1:01:36
In translating that into Latin, he just used
1:01:40
the Greek. Oh, interesting. So he translated
1:01:45
Daystar, or that, the, so the Septuagint had,
1:01:53
Hesphorus, something like that, the way you would
1:01:56
say it. That which is don or bearer, right? That
1:02:02
word or that phrase, that he does take from the
1:02:08
Greek. Everything else around it he takes from
1:02:11
the Hebrew. Yeah, so it's blended there. Because
1:02:14
Lucifer doesn't come from the... Lucifer actually
1:02:19
comes from, that is the Latin name for Venus.
1:02:23
So it's that, all of this stuff is tied in, in
1:02:28
the Greek. So he's using a common, because you
1:02:32
just said the Volga is the common language. So
1:02:36
he's using a common language reference because
1:02:39
in the Septuagint, they're referencing Venus.
1:02:42
And he sees that and he goes, well, our reference
1:02:45
to Venus is Lucifer. So he uses Lucifer which
1:02:50
it's cool because actually I mean even in the
1:02:53
Hebrew it's kind of pointing to that Yes, which
1:02:56
is which is interesting, right? It actually goes
1:02:58
back to this ugaritic myth Okay, which is cool.
1:03:02
Yeah, and we see Isaiah when I think that's why
1:03:04
he does it I think this it's this evolution where
1:03:06
it's all saying the same thing all the way back
1:03:08
Yeah, but he ends up using the common the common
1:03:12
use. Yeah of Venus That makes sense. In Greek,
1:03:18
translated to Latin, which would be Lucifer.
1:03:20
That makes a lot of sense. Yeah. Yeah. And it
1:03:22
all kind of lines up. Yeah. So what's the myth?
1:03:25
Yeah. So this is so exciting. It gets so exciting.
1:03:30
So the interesting thing about Venus to ancient
1:03:33
observers, they noticed that Venus appeared twice
1:03:36
in the sky, once before dawn and after sunset.
1:03:40
So it was the morning star and the evening star.
1:03:42
Yeah. So interestingly, it vanishes at sunrise,
1:03:46
and it comes back up toward the evening, but
1:03:50
it disappears around midnight. And so it's always
1:03:53
being overtaken by these other lights. And so
1:03:57
in the Ugaritic myth, Ahthtar, which means the
1:04:01
morning star, tries to ascend to the throne of
1:04:04
the storm god Baal, or Baal, because I have to
1:04:08
do that, after his death. But he cannot reach
1:04:13
it because he is too weak and he instead descends
1:04:16
back to earth, which is a symbolic fall from
1:04:18
heaven And so in Isaiah, it seems like he's actually
1:04:22
playing off of this which would have been a very
1:04:24
popular myth at the time Sure, but he's saying
1:04:27
oh and we see in his language. He's like, yeah,
1:04:29
you fell from heaven. Yeah, just like Venus,
1:04:32
right? Yeah, that makes sense and it makes sense
1:04:36
and then for Jerome to be like, oh, yeah, that's
1:04:38
what he's talking about Yeah, so let me just
1:04:40
use that Yeah, in a metaphoric sense. Yeah. Which
1:04:44
is interesting. So guys like Plato and Hesiod
1:04:49
who were ancient Greek poets, they also used
1:04:53
that phosphorus in the same astronomical sense
1:04:56
for Venus. That makes sense, yeah. So it's like
1:05:00
adding all of those pieces together, how we get
1:05:03
Lucifer. The problem is exactly like what you're
1:05:06
saying, it's like there's this proper noun element,
1:05:09
even of Oday Star. Yes. And I think what's happening
1:05:13
is it's referencing an individual, but it's not
1:05:19
calling them like that would be like us saying
1:05:23
Satan's name is also Oday Star. Right. But we're
1:05:28
for some reason we're okay with saying Lucifer
1:05:30
because it sounds like a proper name. Yeah, it
1:05:32
sounds different Yeah, but there is an evolution
1:05:35
of that of like the solidification of Lucifer
1:05:39
Lucifer Lucifer as the Lucifer Lucifer Yeah as
1:05:43
the proper noun something that I thought was
1:05:45
interesting though And this was like this is
1:05:48
like a side note thing. But here's the thing.
1:05:50
So I think that the so In the use of Lucifer
1:05:56
or Venus or day star in Isaiah, we know that
1:06:02
the Hebrews had an understanding of astronomy
1:06:06
and of the stars as a sign from God that creation
1:06:11
itself was witnessing the glory of God and what
1:06:15
God was doing. So it was simple and common for
1:06:21
Hebrews to use language of creation and go like,
1:06:26
oh yeah, it's like Venus, like how Venus falls.
1:06:30
That's what happened to, I almost said Lucifer.
1:06:34
That's what happened to Satan. So like, it's
1:06:37
like this. Oh, also, King of Babylon, you fell
1:06:41
too. Or you're going to fall. And you're gonna
1:06:46
fall in the same way that Satan did. You're gonna
1:06:49
fall in the same way that lucifer did because
1:06:52
it seems like because I mean like in the immediate
1:06:54
contact by lucifer I mean the day the day star
1:06:56
venus. Um And I think that's where it's like
1:07:00
even in isaac because we've talked about this
1:07:02
on a previous episode as well Is like well the
1:07:04
immediate context when you read it. He's talking
1:07:06
about the king of babalon Yes, but then there's
1:07:08
that layered context and this is part of why
1:07:10
lucifer became such a proper noun For satan.
1:07:15
Um is because there is that layered texture that
1:07:18
we see because of how the in the ancient hebrews
1:07:22
how they Viewed kings and rulers and principalities.
1:07:25
Yeah, it's like oh and we see that in ezekiel
1:07:27
again go back to the equal 28 You have the king
1:07:31
of tire and the prince of tire and they both
1:07:33
rule But one of them is a divine being the other
1:07:35
one is not right? Yeah, and I think we see a
1:07:38
very similar thing in isaiah 14 where he's like
1:07:41
he's actually talking to both of them Yeah, because
1:07:43
there's other parts where we see later in it's
1:07:45
like Doesn't sound like he's talking about a
1:07:47
person. Well, that's what I was gonna say like
1:07:48
in looking into this and like thinking about
1:07:51
Thinking about everything that we've talked about
1:07:53
and we've talked about the idea that it seems
1:07:55
to be that the the Hebrew worldview was Spiritual
1:08:00
in nature that they believe that there was a
1:08:02
spiritual being behind every Earthly king. Yes,
1:08:06
so for for the early church and for early church
1:08:11
fathers and also philosophers and theologians
1:08:14
in the early for them to start to make Lucifer
1:08:22
or Daystar or that name, to start to make it
1:08:27
a proper noun and referencing it as Satan is
1:08:31
equating to a Hebrew worldview that there was
1:08:33
a divine being behind the earthly king. Or equating
1:08:38
to the element that the king of Babylon himself
1:08:41
had reached the point of deity. or was at least
1:08:46
a false god on the earth. And actually a fake
1:08:52
god, not just false. He actually would be fake.
1:08:56
He would be fake. He would be saying that he
1:08:59
was god, but not actually a spirit being. To
1:09:02
use the word, he's saying he's Elohim when he's
1:09:04
not. Correct. So he's not ascending to that place.
1:09:09
He's a representation of what's behind him, which
1:09:12
would be the Hebrew worldview. And so in some
1:09:16
ways, the early theologians and church leaders
1:09:24
were contemplating that same worldview, even
1:09:28
in 300 and 400 AD. I mean, that was a big part
1:09:32
of a lot of the debates at that time as well.
1:09:36
And that's where we go back to Augustine. True.
1:09:39
But yeah, so like you have So in Judaism, Isaiah
1:09:43
14 -12 was never read as a story of Satan's fall.
1:09:47
It was understood as a taunt song against the
1:09:50
king of Babylon. Yes, yeah. And it was a human
1:09:53
ruler who exalted himself and was brought low.
1:09:56
That's what we talked about. Early Christians
1:09:59
inherited Septuagint and Vulgate language and
1:10:02
they began to connect Isaiah 14 with Luke 10
1:10:05
-18. Luke 10 -18, I saw Satan fall like lightning
1:10:09
from heaven. This pairing, Lucifer falling from
1:10:13
heaven and Satan falling like lightning, planted
1:10:16
the interpretive seed. And then in 160 to 225,
1:10:22
Tertullian, in some of his writings, cites Isaiah
1:10:25
14 and applies it directly to the devil's pride
1:10:28
and fall. He who once was Lucifer and who fell
1:10:32
is now the devil. That's what Tertullian says.
1:10:37
So Tertullian's Latin is the first known instance
1:10:40
where Lucifer is treated as a personal name for
1:10:43
the fallen angel. Which is interesting because
1:10:47
this is pre -Jerome. So Tertullian before Jerome
1:10:53
calls him Lucifer as proper noun. That's interesting.
1:10:58
It is interesting because Tertullian is early
1:11:03
enough that like, I mean he's I believe yeah
1:11:07
160 to 225 is when he lived. So you're talking
1:11:11
about like if that's interesting if John dies
1:11:15
in the 90s. Yeah, you know what I mean, then
1:11:18
Tertullian shows up 70 years later. So the next
1:11:23
generation after the apostles. Yeah, and he's
1:11:26
expressing this idea that Lucifer check this
1:11:29
out Yeah, but he's not saying Lucifer proper
1:11:32
now and he's saying oh day star Yes. Even then,
1:11:36
he's not saying Lucifer is the name of Satan.
1:11:39
Yeah. It's actually more true that what he's
1:11:42
saying is the King of Babylon was Satan. Yeah.
1:11:46
As far as what he, like he who once was Lucifer
1:11:50
and who fell is now the devil. Which is - And
1:11:53
I feel like it'd be even, in some ways it might
1:11:55
be even more accurate to say the one who attempted
1:11:59
to ascend to heaven to overtake the throne is
1:12:01
now Satan. Yeah. Yeah, it was both historical
1:12:05
and allegorical for him. But that is the actual
1:12:09
origin point. That's really fascinating. In Christian
1:12:12
thought, yeah. Yeah, and then it's interesting
1:12:14
because then, and this is another thing I think
1:12:17
we've brought up several times, we should just
1:12:18
do an episode on this too, which is Paradise
1:12:20
Lost. Oh yeah. I don't know, I'm jumping ahead
1:12:23
a little bit. No, no, no, that's a big part of
1:12:25
it. Yeah, I'll let you walk through here. No,
1:12:27
no, no, go ahead. Cause I just don't want to
1:12:29
jump too far ahead. Cause that's a big thing
1:12:31
where in Paradise Lost, Milton names his antagonist
1:12:35
Lucifer and pulls this huge narrative of like,
1:12:40
oh yeah, so he's the serpent and this is his
1:12:42
fall from heaven. He was the worship leader and
1:12:44
then he falls and then he tempts humanity and
1:12:47
then this is his story, essentially. And that
1:12:50
kind of helps solidify that idea that this is
1:12:53
the same thing. Right. Well, the other thing
1:12:56
to be said is like, Like I just talked about
1:12:58
Tertullian. Yeah, and then I'm gonna mention
1:13:01
something that origin says as well and origin
1:13:03
is a generation after Tertullian so still before
1:13:06
Jerome, but Church early church history Calls
1:13:12
origin a heretic. Yeah, and some parts of Tertullian
1:13:16
as well Which makes sense because you look at
1:13:19
some of the ideas they had like oh, right So
1:13:23
you get this piece, but Origen said, he lived
1:13:25
184 to 253 AD, Origen speaks of an angel who
1:13:31
became the devil through pride. And he connects
1:13:34
that fall with Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28, which
1:13:37
we talked about. So he connects it with the Prince
1:13:40
of Tyre. So he connects this passage in Isaiah
1:13:45
14, where it speaks of the King of Babylon with...
1:13:49
The king of Tyre in Ezekiel 28 And he ties them
1:13:54
all into the one like spiritual narrative of
1:13:57
Satan Which kind of does still shape the way
1:14:01
we talk about Satan now That's true. I mean and
1:14:04
that's kind of even jumping off of our previous
1:14:07
episode of like when did Satan fall? Yeah, it's
1:14:10
interesting because we through it mean even from
1:14:12
then to now it's like we've Tried to cleanly
1:14:15
tie all this together when the Bible doesn't
1:14:17
tie it together that cleanly. No, it doesn't
1:14:19
But here's the other thing that's interesting.
1:14:22
To me, this is interesting, and this might be
1:14:24
jumping ahead because I feel like this is a good
1:14:26
way to bring the pieces together. Is that Lucifer,
1:14:34
the name Lucifer is only used once in the Vulgate?
1:14:38
Twice. Are you sure? Where's the other one? Do
1:14:43
you know this? No. Oh, so the other one is 2nd
1:14:47
Peter 1 .19. I'm gonna have to correct you on
1:14:49
that. Oh? I looked it up in the Vulgate. It's
1:14:52
not Lucifer though. It is. There's something
1:14:54
before it. I say I just looked it up. No, yeah.
1:15:01
Okay, go with what you're gonna say. Oh, so I
1:15:03
mean what I was gonna say with that is I swear
1:15:06
I just looked it up yesterday. Tell me. Tell
1:15:13
me, Paul. Okay. And I'll look for the note that
1:15:15
I have. Okay. So yeah, in the Vulgate, 2 Peter
1:15:19
1 .19 calls Christ Lucifer. And so actually,
1:15:24
there was a time where Lucifer meant, because
1:15:27
of that, it's assigning him as he is the day
1:15:29
star, Christ is. And he uses that word to delineate
1:15:35
that. And so it gathers this meaning of Christ
1:15:38
-like light. And actually, I think there's even
1:15:41
a pope whose name was Lucifer. Oh, really? Or
1:15:44
it was part of his name, I believe. Or one of
1:15:47
the saints. And so, yeah, it carried this idea
1:15:53
of Christlikeness. So it's, I mean, I might be
1:15:58
wrong. Maybe I misread. I don't know. Now I can't
1:16:01
find where that note is. Okay. But we've talked
1:16:04
about this before and the idea that there's multiple
1:16:06
- Left to also look that up and put it in the
1:16:08
notes or something. Yeah, well there's also like,
1:16:11
we've talked about the idea that there are multiple
1:16:13
morning stars. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, no, I'm
1:16:22
like 95 % confident on this. That it's in there
1:16:27
twice. Yeah. Yeah. but So, I mean it's interesting
1:16:35
because if I'm correct and what I what I read
1:16:38
is How that word is is used because I think it's
1:16:45
I think in English it's translated different
1:16:47
In second Peter. Oh, I think it's just the setup
1:16:50
So it's like it's until the until the day dawns
1:16:53
and the Lucifer rises in your hearts Okay, second
1:16:57
Peter 119 that makes sense. So I think I was
1:17:00
reading it as at At Lucifer. Yes. Which would
1:17:04
be the Lucifer. That is correct. Yeah. So it
1:17:08
doesn't make it a personal like, day star. Right,
1:17:11
but also - It makes it like, oh, he is the. Yes.
1:17:14
Which, I mean, even in context, that still makes
1:17:17
a lot of sense. Right. He's not saying Christ
1:17:19
is Venus. Well, and then in the Latin liturgy,
1:17:23
Revelation 22 -16 translates as the bright morning
1:17:27
Lucifer. Which is interesting. That's interesting.
1:17:31
Because that's what it is. Yeah. It's the bright
1:17:34
morning star. Yes. But Venus. So it's a specific
1:17:39
star. Yes. So Lucifer is the specific star. Yes.
1:17:44
Which makes sense why you eventually evolve into,
1:17:48
well this is a specific spiritual being that
1:17:52
fell, right? Yeah. But again, it's the same as
1:17:59
Elohim. Right. it's not referring, like it's
1:18:03
used as light bearer, right? And we understand
1:18:08
that, and I wish I could pull this passage right
1:18:11
now, but that Satan masquerades as an angel of
1:18:16
light. So you get this imitation of Lucifer,
1:18:20
the light bearer, and if his name were Lucifer,
1:18:24
then it's only as imitation to the true Lucifer.
1:18:28
which is wild, because that means that technically
1:18:31
in context, the one true Lucifer, if used as
1:18:36
a proper noun, would be Jesus. And that he would
1:18:41
be a lesser Lucifer. No, that's true. You know
1:18:44
what I'm saying? That's very true. You would
1:18:46
have to interpret it that way. We even see that
1:18:48
in Revelation, in the letters where Christ is
1:18:52
describing himself. And every descriptor goes
1:18:56
back to one of the gods. And so I can't remember
1:19:00
which one it is, but he's putting these descriptors
1:19:02
and it's like, oh, he's talking about Apollo.
1:19:05
And it's like, he's not saying I'm Apollo. What
1:19:08
he's saying is like, no, I'm better than him.
1:19:11
He said he did all this. No, no, no, no. I did
1:19:13
those things. And it would make sense even in
1:19:15
this context, if they're referring to Venus,
1:19:20
he's saying like, you think Venus is so great.
1:19:23
That's me. Yeah, I'm better. Yeah, I'm actually
1:19:26
the one. Yeah. Yeah, but in a lot of ways this
1:19:29
is not This is not something that This is not
1:19:35
something that's necessarily critical no, but
1:19:38
it is it is a smoking gun Yeah, you have a second
1:19:42
Peter passage in the Vulgate that calls Jesus
1:19:45
Lucifer, which sounds heretical to say like oh
1:19:48
Jesus is Lucifer. Yeah Well, if you're going
1:19:52
to say that Lucifer is the proper noun name of
1:19:55
a specific being Yeah, the same if you do say
1:19:59
that you're probably also you probably also believe
1:20:02
that Elohim is Yahweh. And that's the whole point
1:20:08
of our podcast is to distinguish the fact that
1:20:11
there's more going on here. Some of it is descriptive
1:20:15
metaphorical language. And what we see a lot
1:20:18
in Hebrew literature is the idea that there is
1:20:22
this, as Paul talks about in Romans, man is without
1:20:26
excuse for creation, sings, breathes, it witnesses
1:20:31
the glory of God. So all should be able to look
1:20:36
outside and see the glory of God. And in that,
1:20:41
he's expressing something that is deeply Hebrew,
1:20:44
which is they were looking and witnessing that
1:20:49
the stars and the constellations and creation
1:20:52
around them was singing the praises of God. And
1:20:57
not only that, but it was speaking to a coming
1:21:00
Messiah. So the stars themselves were, as Genesis
1:21:03
1 says, signs and seasons is what they bring
1:21:09
us. Yeah. And then we often fall for the Deuteronomy
1:21:13
4 19, where we start to worship the signs. And
1:21:17
that's that point of like, oh, instead of looking
1:21:20
at Venus and seeing Christ, which is what Second
1:21:23
Peter's talking about, we stop at Isaiah and
1:21:26
be like, oh, that's Venus, I'm gonna worship
1:21:28
her. Yeah, so does Jerome accidentally set off
1:21:34
a domino effect where Lucifer becomes a proper
1:21:38
noun and misunderstood? Yeah. Kind of. But also
1:21:43
if you believe that Lucifer is a name of Satan,
1:21:47
it would necessarily fall under the category
1:21:49
of a lesser Lucifer and the true Lucifer would
1:21:54
have to be Jesus. So is Jesus Lucifer? So in
1:21:58
the Vulgate, Jesus is Lucifer. What a way to
1:22:03
end. Three, two, one.