Who or What Is The Enemy Of Our God, Anyway?

Okay, I think the file I am looking for is on my "big" computer, and I'm on the laptop. I will give the best explanation I can here.

The original use of the word satan came in later transcriptions of ancient texts. The word itself means "adversary". The OLDEST name found for satan (this is why you will never find me capitalizing satan - the better interpretation would have been "the satan) is a name that is rarely heard and I would rather not give it out. However, in discussing this with a friend of mine who has been studying ancient Hebrew and the older scrolls, I will share what he told me regarding the name (except for the name).

//The Adversary has a name. It is only found once in the Tanakh. We learned it from the great YashaYahu (Isaiah) Scroll that was recovered in the Qumran excavation site, back in the late 40's.
I've been studying the Dead Sea Scrolls for a while now. I hate to even type his name, but since nobody here knows it, I suppose I could do it for educational purposes. His name is (omission deliberate). It means arrogant son of the morning star. (the sun)
That's straight from the "original Hebrew texts". :-)
The DSS predate the oldest copies of the Masoretic texts by centuries and centuries.//

Okay, so we know the following:

~The Hebrew noun satan, (sah-TAHN), transliterated (not translated) “satan,” means “adversary.” It occurs nine times in the Old Testament and generally has the meaning “adversary” or ”an adversary.”
~Without the definite article, and meaning “Satan,” the word occurs only in I Chronicles 21:1. Some prefer to see it even here as “an adversary,” not necessarily an actual being as being Satan.
~With the definite article, “the satan” (hassatan) means “the adversary.” It occurs seven times in Job 1:6-9, 12, seven times in Job 2:1-7, three times in Zechariah 3:1-2, and nowhere else in the Old Testament. Most Christian and Jewish interpreters have understood this title as “The Adversary,” i.e., Satan.

Also, satan was a cherub, the highest rank of angels. We find this in Ezekiel. Many say that Ezekiel 11 is speaking only of the King of Tyre. No - it is, as other chapters in other areas of the Bible do, speaking of both man and satan at the same time (it usually starts as one and transfers over to the other). If this was talking about the King of Tyre, when was HE in God's garden of Eden? He wasn't.

Ezekiel 28
13Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering, the sardius, topaz, and the diamond, the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper, the sapphire, the emerald, and the carbuncle, and gold: the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created.

14Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire.

WHEN was the King of Tyre on the "mountain of God" and "walking in the middle of the stones of fire"? WHEN was the king of Tyre ever considered a CHERUB? The bible often speaks with a duality when prophesying. The typology here refers to both in various ways, King of Tyre (probably possessed by Satan as in the end time Beast) and Lucifer apart from the King of Tyre.

We know that the garden of Eden was a pattern of the heavenly temple; just as the tabernacle of Moses was. Satan was in the garden of God in Heaven (as well as in the earth), just as Adam was in the earthly type of the heavenly garden. Just as Adam and Eve were cast out of the earthly Eden when iniquity was found in them so was Lucifer cast out of the Eden of Heaven when iniquity was discovered in him.

Was satan a literal snake and not a cherub? Well, was Judah a lion? Was Herod a fox? No. The bible uses much symbolism.

Now, back to the name. So WHERE did "Lucifer" come from? Well, it came from changes in interpretation over time. Jerome (or St. Jerome for those of you who are Catholic), was the the one who was chosen to translate the Bible from Original Hebrew/Aramaic and Greek texts to Latin. Once the first church/religion split in Constantinople, and you had Eastern (Orthodox) and Western (Catholic), Rome wanted a Latin translation. This takes us to Isaiah 14 and the King of Babylon (another duality story like the King of Tyre, where both man and satan are being talked about).

You see, instead of "the morning star", the ancient texts (upon studying the dead sea scrolls") tells us that the actual name should have been "arrogant son of the morning star". Therein lies the first problem and point of confusion. When Jerome translated "morning star", he translated "lucern ferre" -- the Latin words meaning "light bearer". This of course makes no sense when talking about the adversary, and it shouldn't - as he was the "arrogant son of the morning star". But that is what we had at that time, the Dead Sea Scrolls had not been discovered (and still no changes have been made based on their discovery). So, lucern ferre, or "light bearer" it was. Over time and more translations, "lucern ferre" became "lucernferre", became "lucerfer", became "Lucifer". THAT is where the name came from.

Being Greek Orthodox, and knowing that even the Greek Orthodox Church cannot agree on an accurate interpretation from ancient Greek to modern Greek, I know how sensitive God's word is to misinterpretation due to translational error. Even our KJV holds changes, and that is why I encourage people to get a "Key Word" Bible, which will enable you to choose just about any word as you read (KJV) and look in the back for the original word in Hebrew or Greek and what its original meaning is. It can be very enlightening.

I hope this helped clarify what was also for me a point of great question (obviously!). Any disagreements with what I've found in my studies, please let me know. I am by no means perfect -- I'm just like the rest of you - seeking the core truth of God's Holy Word. :)