In Nephi’s quotation of Isaiah’s writings, we come across a passage that is often understood in terms of the pre-existence and the war in heaven:

“How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! Art thou cut down to the ground, which did weaken the nations!” (2 Nephi 24:12)

This does indeed bear striking resemblance to the apocalyptic account of the fall and exile of the dragon:

“And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven. And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.” (Revelation 12:7-9)

But is the connection between these two passages as clear cut as we might like to think? Let’s examine the context that Isaiah gives to his passage as we search for increased understanding.

Isaiah had previously been speaking about Babylon—particularly in reference to its opposition to Zion and Israel. All of 2 Nephi 23 (Isaiah 13) is dedicated to prophesying of the fall of Babylon, and the prevailing of God’s people. In 2 Nephi 24 (Isaiah 14), we see this prophesy comes to pass, and Israel rejoices over “how hath the oppressor ceased.” Back in chapter 23, Isaiah used astronomical imagery (stars, constellations, sun, moon) to describe the realized power of God against those who oppose him (ie Babylon). Turning back to chapter 24 we see what turns out to be a parallel fulfillment of this prophesy, which is the scripture we are examining:

“How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!”

Given the context of Isaiah’s words, it seems very unlikely that he is interjecting an aside about the primeval war in heaven. Rather, it makes much more sense that he is continuing his train of thought regarding the fall of Babylon using an astronomical metaphor. But what does astronomy have to do with this passage? First, it should come as no surprise that the word “heaven” is not only a designation for the dwelling of God, but is also a generic term meaning “sky.” And “Lucifer,” as it turns out, is defined by the dictionary as the planet Venus, the morning and the evening star.

Lucifer is a Latin word meaning “light bearer” (from lux, lucis, “light”, and ferre, “to bear, bring”), and a Roman astrological term for the “Morning Star” the planet Venus. Venus is one of the first and brightest stars to appear in thy sky (due to its proximity to the setting sun,) but it also falls below the horizon very early on in the night. Perhaps for this reason it was used as a symbol to describe something of greatness that fell into essentially oblivion (In Isaiah’s case, Babylon). Lucifer came to be identified with Satan by Christendom largely due to John Milton’s religious epic entitled Paradise Lost, where that identification is taken as a given, lack of scriptural support notwithstanding. But the word “Lucifer”only appears in the standard works three times, two of which are the Isaiah and 2 Nephi renderings of this scripture, and the other is in D&C 76: 26, in a vision of the pre-mortal world and war in heaven.

The traditional understanding of Lucifer is that it was the Devil’s name before he was expelled from heaven, when he became known as Satan. But if “Lucifer” is simply referring to Venus, how do we understand it in the D&C context, which is clearly about the fall of Satan? Let’s have a good look:

“And this we saw also, and bear record, that an angel of God who was in authority in the presence of God, who rebelled against the Only Begotten Son whom the Father loved and who was in the bosom of the Father, was thrust down from the presence of God and the Son, And was called Perdition, for the heavens wept over him—he was Lucifer, a son of the morning. And we beheld, and lo, he is fallen! is fallen, even a son of the morning!” (D&C 76-24-26)

If we look at this carefully, we see the Devil is referred to in three ways:

1. An angel of God
2. Perdition
3. Lucifer

It says that “Perdition” is what he was called, and “Lucifer” is what he was. It should be noted that both references are in past tense, so it does us no good to try to determine which is which in terms of pre or post fall. If we understand both the literary concept of a metaphor, as well as the symbolic significance of the Morning Star (ie Venus/Lucifer,) the allusion to the fall of Venus seems entirely appropriate to describe the fall Satan.

However, back to the Isaiah reference to Lucifer, it appears that it is not a reference to Satan at all, but is a description of the fall of Babylon. In all fairness, Babylon could in turn be understood as a symbol for Satan, but even so, the Isaiah connection between Lucifer and Satan is at best indirect. While I am sure there are some who would continue to quibble over satanic nomenclature, I believe that the case is clear that the word “Lucifer” is not an original designation of the Devil.