MILTON'S PARADISE LOST & SATAN Audiobook By Guillermo Santamaria cover art

MILTON'S PARADISE LOST & SATAN

Virtual Voice Sample

$0.00 for first 30 days

Try for $0.00
Access a growing selection of included Audible Originals, audiobooks, and podcasts.
You will get an email reminder before your trial ends.
Audible Plus auto-renews for $7.95/mo after 30 days. Upgrade or cancel anytime.

MILTON'S PARADISE LOST & SATAN

By: Guillermo Santamaria
Narrated by: Virtual Voice
Try for $0.00

$7.95 a month after 30 days. Cancel anytime.

Buy for $3.99

Buy for $3.99

LIMITED TIME OFFER | Get 3 months for $0.99 a month

$14.95/mo thereafter-terms apply.
Background images

This title uses virtual voice narration

Virtual voice is computer-generated narration for audiobooks.

Isaiah 14:12, with its phrase hêlēl ben-šāḥar (“shining one, son of dawn”), originally referred to the King of Babylon in the form of a prophetic taunt-song (Isa. 14:4). The image of the morning star (Venus) mocked the arrogant ruler who exalted himself as divine but was cast down to Sheol. In Jewish interpretation, the passage was seen as satire of a human king, not a story about Satan. Early Christian writers, however, such as Tertullian, Origen, and Cyprian (2nd–3rd centuries), were the first to apply the verse allegorically to Satan’s fall. Jerome’s Latin Vulgate (4th century) translated hêlēl as Lucifer (“light-bearer”), and Augustine made this identification doctrinal by teaching that Satan was the original “Lucifer” who fell through pride, establishing pride as the essence of sin. Medieval theologians such as Gregory the Great and Thomas Aquinas reinforced this reading, and the Reformers generally inherited it: Martin Luther allowed the dual meaning (Babylon’s king literally, Satan spiritually), while John Calvin insisted that the immediate sense applied only to Babylon’s king, though he admitted the king’s pride mirrored Satan’s rebellion. Particular Baptists such as John Gill and Benjamin Keach also followed the dual interpretation, reading the text as both a taunt of Babylon’s monarch and an allegory of Satan’s fall, while later preachers like Spurgeon quoted Milton and the tradition cautiously, always subordinating it to Scripture. In contrast, modern historical-critical scholarship, beginning in the Enlightenment and cemented in the 19th century, denied the dual sense entirely, arguing that Isaiah 14:12 is about the King of Babylon alone, and that the Lucifer = Satan connection was a later Christian invention. Old School Baptists like Gilbert Beebe and Samuel Trott exemplified this sober approach, avoiding the Lucifer tradition altogether and instead grounding their teaching about Satan in clearer texts such as Job 1–2, Matthew 4, and Revelation 12.

Angeology & Demonology Christianity Salvation Theory Theology Royalty Tradition
No reviews yet