[Winman]

Winman, you said:

I actually agree with you, there is no way to know for certain if Lucifer in Isaiah 14 is speaking of Satan. But the name of Lucifer has been associated with Satan by the church for centuries.

Ok, you said you agree with me but then you insisted that the name of Lucifer has been associated by the church for centuries. My point is that you have shifted your authority from God's Holy Word to the church. Strange teaching, somehow you have borrowed that to the Roman Catholicism where the church and not God's Word is their final authority. I'm sorry to say but that's what you believed.

Thirdly Fred you brought up a good point Winman, you accused me of trusting in the Doctrines of men yet you trust in the doctrines of the church concerning Lucifer. With that the Pot calls the kettle black.

I disagree with you both. I have never argued that either Eze 28 or Isa 14 are definitely speaking of Satan. Now, having said that, I do strongly lean in that direction. But Satan is not mentioned by name in either account, so I cannot say with absolute certainty. I believe these are both examples of a double prophesy, where they are speaking to a man living at the time, and also speaking of Satan in the future.

It is actually those who believe in the Gap theory that use both of these passages to argue for the Gap. It speaks of Lucifer at David Reagan's site, I copied and pasted in answer to Fredoheaven's post from his site. He speaks of Lucifer as being Satan.

What I am saying is that IF indeed Eze 28 and Isa 14 are speaking of Satan, then they both contradict your belief that Satan fell between Gen 1:1 and 1:2 In both passages if you read carefully, the predictions of their fall and being cast down is future. And in both cases the men (King of Tyrus, King of Babylon) were not cast down either at the time these scriptures were written. So neither passage can be speaking of Satan falling between Gen 1:1 and 1:2.