First of all, I would like to thank the Siddha corporation that sends free lessons to those incarcerated. I was incarcerated myself, and read a few lessons. I practiced those lessons, and went further with the main idea behind those lessons, and about a year later: Badabing, my mind stopped it's stupid dialogue/monologue.
Here is something which I found later in my incarceration. I cannot get an answer, or anything, but some sort of denial\misdirection from all the Christians I have asked. I wish to understand what your opinions are of my view that Jesus is equating himself with Satan. First,
Revelation 22:16 (KJV) I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.
Now, looking back at:
Isaiah 14:12 (KJV) How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!
Which Jesus is the only one in the whole Bible to equate to Satan in:
Luke 10:18 (KJV) And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven.
Now, if you are to actually look at what Lucifer means: it is a translation of the Hebrew Heylel:
H-1966. heylel, hay-lale';
from H-1984 (in the sense of brightness); the morning-star:--lucifer.

.... H-1984. halal, haw-lal';
a prim. root; to be clear (orig. of sound, but usually of color); to shine; hence to make a show, to boast; and thus to be (clamorously) foolish; to rave; causat. to celebrate; also to stultify:--(make) boast (self), celebrate, commend, (deal, make), fool (-ish, -ly), glory, give [light], be (make, feign self) mad (against), give in marriage, [sing, be worthy of] praise, rage, renowned, shine

Now, I wish to listen to your opinion of why this is. So far I have only heard “No, it cannot be. Those are two different writers, etc. etc.” In a book inspired by God when the writer of Revelation clearly states in two different and differing terms the exact meaning of Heylel, i.e. bright and morning star.
I have really only studied the King James version of the Bible because it was the only thing around for over 200 years, neh? Nowadays, versions are springing up like morning flowers. But the question of the matter is not the Bible, it is the wording… The Hebrew word is still the same, and so is the Greek translation of it.
P(ost)S(oulsearch): I am not trying to sway anybody, or anything of the sort. I am merely trying to understand why I see what I see.
It equates the Brahman trinity with the Christian trinity perfectly, i.e. Jesus is Shiva. I cannot understand how this could have slipped by 1500+ years of intense study.