Funny how you mention LATIN to justify Pike to make the comparison of Jesus and Lucifer.
Lucifer was written in Hebrew (Isaiah) in the bible, and Jesus was written in Greek.
The rest of your point was based on that.
Fair enough, but when calling the Devil "Lucifer" we do not use the Hebrew word. Similarly, when the Vulgate (or any Latin translation) refers to Jesus as "lucifer", it does not use the Greek word. Any understanding and debate we have over what the word "lucifer" means (whether the literal meaning of the morning or day star or as a reference to, depending on the context, Jesus or the Devil--the latter always a capital "L") is derived from the Latin text, which is why it is so important to the debate. What the original languages have to say is in this case, irrelevant. Pike calls Lucifer the "son of the morning", which meshes perfectly with the Biblical references to the Devil as Lucifer. He never calls the Devil lower case lucifer or the day star, as far as I can tell, and I have searched M&D for any and all references to the Devil as Lucifer.
And in any case, Pike makes it absolutely clear who he considers the Lucifer he speaks of to be on page 324: the Devil.
I've had enough of this Dorals and Mogma
crap. I don't even know if you read the book, and if you did so, it appears you didn't do so with a critical eye or any sense of context. I think I'm done for good now. You have not addressed my points, you have merely regurgitated your own already debunked--and debunked long before I came here or this forum even existed--talking points, rejecting any "knowledge" outside of your conspiracy websites. As I said before, I do not believe it within my human powers to persuade you if these appeals to facts I have made do not make any difference.