Lucifer and His Fall

Lucifer comes from a Latin word that meant “morning star” or “light bringing.” It is also used to denote the planet Venus when it appears as the morning star. Most of us are more familiar with its use as a name for Satan. English dictionaries define it as “a proud religious archangel, identified with Satan, who fell from heaven.”

The “name” has been associated with Satan for two reasons: One, “lucifer” is the translation of the Hebrew word heylel or helel in Jerome’s Latin translation of Isaiah 14:12 early in the fifth century A. D. The “old” King James Version transliterated the word into a proper name in this verse. Two, this translation in Isaiah 14:12 describes one who “has fallen from heaven” and been “cut down to the earth.” Because Jesus refers to Satan falling from heaven (see Luke 10:18), it has been assumed by many commentators that Isaiah is referring to the origin of the devil: a good angel who sinned and was cast out of heaven.

While this may be true about the origin of Satan, it is not what Jesus is discussing and has nothing at all to do with what Isaiah foresees. Isaiah says plainly that his prophecy denotes the downfall of the “king of Babylon” (Isaiah 14:4). The prophet begins this oracle against Babylon in chapter 13 and continues his description of the fall of the nation and its king in chapter 14.

Isaiah employs a number of “stellar” and “heavenly” images in chapter 13 to portray the fall of the nation: “for the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give light; the sun shall be darkened in its going forth, and the moon shall not cause its light to shine.” This, he says, refers to the “day of Jehovah” that comes “cruel, with wrath, and fierce anger” to make the land of Babylon a desolation (Isa 13:9-10).

These portraits foresee the end of the exaltation of this nation used by God as a rod of His indignation against Assyria and His own people––Judah (see Isaiah 10:5 for God’s use of nations). God later explains to Habakkuk that Babylon was guilty of blood-thirsty cruelty in conquering these nations and deserves to fall from its exalted place (Hab 2). God describes this fall in Isaiah 14:12: “How art thou fallen from heaven, O day star [Lucifer, KJV], son of morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, that didst lay low the nations.”

Isaiah follows this verse by highlighting the arrogance of the king of Babylon as a “man” that boasted, “I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God; and I will sit upon the mount of congregation, in the uttermost parts of the north; I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will make myself like the Most High” (Isa 14:13-14). All this, as seen in Daniel 4, depicts accurately the pride of Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon.

The prophet sees the Babylonian king as one who exalted himself as the “morning star” but is humbled and brought low by the wrath and judgment of God. “Lucifer” is an unfortunate translation of the Hebrew word for “day star” as a personal name. But more than that, Satan is nowhere discussed in this prophecy. “Lucifer,” in the original King James Version of the Bible, is the king of Babylon—not Satan.

Has Science Disproved the Bible?

Bertrand Russell, British philosopher, logician, and activist of the twentieth century, said, “Religion is something left over from the infancy of our intelligence. It will fade away as we adopt reason and science as our guidelines.” Humanistic views such as this have gained momentum in recent decades. There are many, especially in the liberal, secular education system, who believe, as Russell, that religions, including Bible-based faith, will simply vanish away as naturalistic knowledge increases. A frequent charge made by atheists and agnostics is that science has disproved the Bible (and even the existence of God). This declaration can and should provoke serious investigation on the part of believers.

Science and Faith

To answer this indictment, it is necessary for the terms “science” and “faith” to be effectively defined. Yet in examining these two words, one must sift through prejudiced assumptions and statements (For example, Robert Ingersoll, an agnostic orator of the nineteenth century, insisted, “Our ignorance is God. What we know is science.” ). “Science” must be defined and understood by three limiting principles:

Principle #1: Science is limited to observable data. The simple definition of “science” is “systemized knowledge derived from observation, study, etc.” (Webster’s New World Dictionary). Geneticist John Klotz explained science as “man’s groping for truth.” He went on to say that “science deals only with the natural, with things that can be apprehended with the sense organs. Science deals with those things that can be measured.” Scientific information is thus confined to what can be observed and studied with the senses.

Principle #2: Science is limited to reproducible data. This means that tests and experiments must produce results that can be duplicated under different conditions, viz. different operators, apparatus, laboratories, and/or after different intervals of time (IUPAC Compendium of Chemical Terminology). The scientific method is not applicable to single, unique events.

Principle #3: Science is limited to naturalistic explanations. Since scientific research is restricted to that which is observed and measured with the senses, it cannot explain anything outside of natural law.

Just as the definition of “science” must be cleared of conjecture and presumption so must “faith” (Friedrich Nietzsche unfairly alleged that “faith” is “not wanting to know what is true,” and even the American Heritage Dictionary defines the word as “belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence.”).

The Bible, which claims to be the word of God and the source of faith (cf. 1 Cor. 2:10-13; 2 Tim. 3:16; Rom. 10:17), testifies to a very different meaning of “faith”: Faith is the foundation of hope and the proof of the invisible (cf. Heb. 11:1). It can be these, because it is grounded in truth and confirmed by evidence (cf. Jn. 17:17; 1 Jn. 1:1-3). Jesus Himself did not expect anyone to believe without proof (cf. Jn. 10:37-38), yet John added that faith is possible even for those who have not viewed the evidence first-hand (cf. Jn. 20:30-31; 20:25-29; 1 Pet. 1:7-8). Faith is not “blind,” as Nietzsche and the American Heritage Dictionary malign it. It is based on the valid, historical evidence of eye-witness testimony and confirmed by substantial evidence (cf. Jn. 21:24; 2 Pet. 1:16; 1 Jn. 1:1-3).

Science Cannot Disprove the Bible

Due to the limitations of science, it will never be capable of refuting the inspiration and validity of the Bible:

The events recorded in the Bible cannot be observed or reproduced (Principle #1 and #2). They are historical events and are, therefore, non-scientific. This fact is even recognized by scientists: “Scientific study is limited to organisms and processes that we are able to observe and measure. Supernatural and religious phenomena are beyond the realm of scientific analysis because they cannot be scientifically studied, analyzed, or explained. Supernatural explanations can be used to explain any result, and cannot be disproven by experiment or observation” (The Living World, George B. Johnson). This does not mean that historical facts are any less true. For instance, the existence of Abraham Lincoln and his presidency cannot be proven through science, but the historical evidence–eyewitness testimony, written documents, structures, and archeological findings–confirms that he lived and served as president. Thus, science itself will never disprove the Bible, because the Scriptures’ account is non-observable, non-measurable, and non-reproducible.

The Bible testifies to supernaturalism (that which is above and beyond the natural realm). Unique, supernatural activities and persons (creation, miracles, God, Jesus, etc.) cannot be disproved by science, because they are outside of natural law (Principle #3). Any evidence against such must come from non-scientific sources.

Science Supports the Biblical Account

While scientific data can neither prove nor disprove the Bible, it can provide evidence for or against it. Many atheists and agnostics claim science overwhelmingly invalidates the Bible, but open-minded investigation shows the Scriptures to be completely accurate when it comes to matters both non-scientific and scientific. In fact, the Scriptures even mention things that have only recently been discovered by modern scientists. This is often called the “scientific foreknowledge” of the Bible. Consider the following examples:

- Five components of the universe: time, force, energy, space, and matter. Bible: Gen. 1:1. Science: Nineteenth century.

- Creation finished. Bible: Gen. 2:1. Science: Nineteenth century (First Law of Thermodynamics).

- Mankind of one blood. Bible: Acts 17:26. Science: Twentieth century.

- Earth wearing down. Bible: Isa. 51:6; Ps. 102:26; Heb. 1:11. Science: Nineteenth century (Second Law of Thermodynamics).

- Ocean springs. Bible: Gen. 7:11; Prov. 8:28; Job 38:16. Science: First century.

- Ocean currents. Bible: Ps. 8:8. Science: Nineteenth century.

- Ocean trenches or canyons. Bible: Job 38:16; 2 Sam. 22:16. Science: Nineteenth century.

- Water cycle. Bible: Ecc. 1:7; Amos 9:6. Science: Sixteenth century.

- Circumcision on the eighth day–the highest levels of Vitamin K in the body are present (without modern medicine) on the eighth day following birth. This vitamin produces prothombin which prevents hemorrhaging, making day eight the best day for surgical procedures. Bible: Lev. 12:3. Science: Twentieth century.

Not only do the accusations of critics that the Bible is proven false by science not hold up, they are demolished by the scientific foreknowledge of the Scriptures. The only explanation for this is inspiration. God alone knew and revealed thousands of years beforehand what man has only recently discovered.

“Has science disproved the Bible?” By no means. The Scriptures have not only held their ground, they have been reinforced by modern scientific findings. The word of God is living, active, and sharper than ever (cf. Heb. 4:12; 2 Cor. 10:3-6), and as Christians, we must be prepared to contend for and defend the faith and our hope (cf. Jude 3; 1 Pet. 3:15)