How do Luciferians view Cain?

[Gjallarhorn]

Are we taking your word for this or would you like to extrapolate on your statement?

What parts of my commentary do you not see as Luciferian?
http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...erians-view-cain-post3052178.html#post3052178

How about the fact that it's entirely fiction?

I understand your interpretation of the "forbidden fruit" being an affair, but I don't see the historicity of this.

 

[Eni Alihm]

How about the fact that it's entirely fiction?

I understand your interpretation of the "forbidden fruit" being an affair, but I don't see the historicity of this.

Well first off this is a Luciferianism DIR so just like the other religious DIR's we are accepting the story as truth for now, its authenticity is not for debate.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

Well first off this is a Luciferianism DIR so just like the other religious DIR's we are accepting the story as truth for now, its authenticity is not for debate.

Since when is Luciferianism about accepting claims based on poor evidence?

How enlightened does that sound?

 

[Iti oj]

Since when is Luciferianism about accepting claims based on poor evidence?

How enlightened does that sound?

were not that just happens to be the stipulation of the thread. why you harassing the new guy? *goes to read the page before*
edit yeah i still don't see whats going on here.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

were not that just happens to be the stipulation of the thread. why you harassing the new guy? *goes to read the page before*
edit yeah i still don't see whats going on here.

How is it a stipulation? Where in the (recently created) Luciferian tenets was "Oh, by the way, Cain is the Serpent's kid" added?

The OP did not address it, which means it is certainly not just to be taken as a stipulation. If it is not a stipulation, it is up for disagreement. I disagree, in the very essence of Luciferianism.

 

[Iti oj]

How is it a stipulation? Where in the (recently created) Luciferian tenets was "Oh, by the way, Cain is the Serpent's kid" added?

The OP did not address it, which means it is certainly not just to be taken as a stipulation. If it is not a stipulation, it is up for disagreement. I disagree, in the very essence of Luciferianism.

no one here thinks any of this is literal (well maybe besides the op) were talking about mythos and whether or not mythological figure fits in an archtype.
so your arguing for no reason.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

no one here thinks any of this is literal (well maybe besides the op) were talking about mythos and whether or not mythological figure fits in an archtype.
so your arguing for no reason.

Once again, I disagree with the interpretation of the mythology.

I am arguing to show that I have a right to disagree, and that my disagreement is valid.

I see no evidence to show that Cain has Luciferian traits, and that is with or without him being the son of the Serpent. He did not seek knowledge. He sought revenge.

 

[Iti oj]

Once again, I disagree with the interpretation of the mythology.

I am arguing to show that I have a right to disagree, and that my disagreement is valid.

I see no evidence to show that Cain has Luciferian traits, and that is with or without him being the son of the Serpent. He did not seek knowledge. He sought revenge.

thats fine. then make your argument. i think i would agree with you(though i know little of Cains story) ultimatly all these stories are false so........
also can you see his apprehension of debating you? you dont list lucifer you have not posted in the sub dir nor shown interest in it then start arguing with him
(this is to be a peaceful dir)

 

[Gjallarhorn]

thats fine. then make your argument. i think i would agree with you(though i know little of Cains story) ultimatly all these stories are false so........
also can you see his apprehension of debating you? you dont list lucifer you have not posted in the sub dir nor shown interest in it then start arguing with him
(this is to be a peaceful dir)

I didn't post or show interest because for the last month or so there has been nothing but bickering and internal confusion about what the term even meant. As far as the current revision of the overview goes, I am also Lucifer/ian.

As far as the story goes, we are given very little as to the nature of Cain's intentions. We are not told whether God explains to Adam and Eve or their children that He prefers meat. Cain's offering is rejected. The goal of a Luciferian is knowledge. Cain did not ask why his offering was rejected. He did not try to analyze or understand it at all. Instead jealousy took him over and he killed Abel. Cain did not kill to see the consequences. He did not offer differing sacrifices to see the outcome.

There is no Lucifer in Cain.

 

[Iti oj]

I didn't post or show interest because for the last month or so there has been nothing but bickering and internal confusion about what the term even meant. As far as the current revision of the overview goes, I am also Lucifer/ian.

As far as the story goes, we are given very little as to the nature of Cain's intentions. We are not told whether God explains to Adam and Eve or their children that He prefers meat. Cain's offering is rejected. The goal of a Luciferian is knowledge. Cain did not ask why his offering was rejected. He did not try to analyze or understand it at all. Instead jealousy took him over and he killed Abel. Cain did not kill to see the consequences. He did not offer differing sacrifices to see the outcome.

There is no Lucifer in Cain.

I agree with both of these points. at least as long as the bible is all their is to cains story .
actually very compelling post g =D frubals

edit: and if cain had direct evidence of gods existance and power and reject him then that also seems un lucifer like

 

[Eni Alihm]

I didn't post or show interest because for the last month or so there has been nothing but bickering and internal confusion about what the term even meant. As far as the current revision of the overview goes, I am also Lucifer/ian.

As far as the story goes, we are given very little as to the nature of Cain's intentions. We are not told whether God explains to Adam and Eve or their children that He prefers meat. Cain's offering is rejected. The goal of a Luciferian is knowledge. Cain did not ask why his offering was rejected. He did not try to analyze or understand it at all. Instead jealousy took him over and he killed Abel. Cain did not kill to see the consequences. He did not offer differing sacrifices to see the outcome.

There is no Lucifer in Cain.

You are most welcome to your opinion on the myth. The goal of a Luciferian is not Knowledge, a Luciferian imparts knowledge, the goal is apotheosis.

 

[Gjallarhorn]

You are most welcome to your opinion on the myth. The goal of a Luciferian is not Knowledge, a Luciferian imparts knowledge, the goal is apotheosis.

The tenets say otherwise. Should we revise them again?

And in any case, what knowledge did Cain impart? That death exists? Surely not.

 

[Eni Alihm]

Since when is Luciferianism about accepting claims based on poor evidence?

How enlightened does that sound?

How can myths and metaphors be evidenced?
The best we can do is discuss philosophical sides of which you haven't posted any, you're just stamping your feet and saying "no you're wrong and I'm right".

 

[Eni Alihm]

The tenets say otherwise. Should we revise them again?

And in any case, what knowledge did Cain impart? That death exists? Surely not.

What tenet? Do you not understand the post I made about Cain and Abel? Besides, like I just said, Luciferianism is not about knowledge, it's about apotheosis.

 

[Iti oj]

How can myths and metaphors be evidenced?
The best we can do is discuss philosophical sides of which you haven't posted any, you're just stamping your feet and saying "no you're wrong and I'm right".

weve already taken care of this he said she said crap look at his last post to see his why

 

[Gjallarhorn]

What tenet? Do you not understand the post I made about Cain and Abel? Besides, like I just said, Luciferianism is not about knowledge, it's about apotheosis.

Apologies, I edited some things slightly just so it is better. Here is what I submitted to the staff

- Lucifer, light-bearer, is a title that can be earned by any person, deity, spiritual being, etc, and in some cases it can be the name of a specific entity. This path is individualistic and not dogmatic. However, even if Lucifer is seen as a specific being, worshiping or dedicating yourself to this God is logically not Luciferian in nature, as the path is one of individuality and personal freedom. Honoring, communicating with, invoking this being, whether Lucifer be a title or a name, is up to the individual practitioner.

- The quest for knowledge is essential to the path. All knowledge that can be gained is good, but the rejection of false knowledge and acceptance of factual knowledge also is important. To believe that the earth is flat despite the objective fact it is not is logically not to commit to knowledge / light-bearing. It should be noted that knowledge includes knowledge of self.

- Luciferian is more basic than atheistic, theistic, gnostic, deistic, polytheistic, etc etc etc. Anyone can be a Luciferian if they wish to be, and the existence of God is neither an objectively true or false fact, so there is no logical contradiction in believing either way.

- Truth over comfort is obviously important, as the concept of lucifer is light-bearer. If a fact contradicts your beliefs, to amend your beliefs is logically the Luciferian thing to do whereas accepting a false believe is not to commit to truth.

- The Luciferian path is primarily Left-Hand Path, and is open to all magic(k), occultism, etc etc etc. It is an individualistic path, and there is nothing a Luciferian must do or is not allowed to do. The "criteria" for the title is simply logical.

- Nobody has more of a "right" to the title than any others, it is simply based on reason.

- The ability to use mythology and symbolism effectively and learn from it while still being able to recognize it is not actually true is an important aspect of the Luciferian path.

- The Luciferian does not need to wear their label on their sleeve, nor seek approval. It is a personal commitment and nobody needs to know. (This is more in life than the forum. )

- While a Luciferian does not necessarily need to be a teacher and share their knowledge, part the the logical criteria is they must be a student and take in knowledge.

- For a Luciferian, the quest for knowledge has to come before the ego's desire to be right. In order to learn, one must be willing to be wrong and lose arguments.

- The burden of Knowledge of Self is on the Luciferian, as nobody else can every truly understand who you are. Personal experiences, such as mystical experiences, may validate belief for any individual person, but a Luciferian realizes that personal experience is not objectively valid and is not a usable premise in the argument for any objective truth.

- Everyone wishes to think they are on the quest for factual knowledge, even if they knowingly reject accepted fact to do so. This perception is irrelevant. Factual knowledge is not dependent on how one feels, only what is actually true.

- Fideism is a direct contradiction of the Luciferian path.

- The Luciferian accepts that objective truths exist and that there is reality external of the mind, even though we perceive that reality and those truths subjectively.

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/3039622-post113.html

No apotheosis here. Back to the drawing board?

 

[Eni Alihm]

LOL, come by the Ordo Luciferi and we will set you straight as to what Luciferianism is and is not.
Why didn't you use the Luciferian Manifest to define Luciferianism like everyone else?

 

[Gjallarhorn]

LOL, come by the Ordo Luciferi and we will set you straight as to what Luciferianism is and is not.
Why didn't you use the Luciferian Manifest to define Luciferianism like everyone else?

Because that's not what the resident Luciferians have been arguing in the last month.

Would you like to debate this further? I'm sure they'd all love to.

 

[Iti oj]

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/3039622-post113.html

No apotheosis here. Back to the drawing board?

thats a tenit of being lhp since luciferian is such then it should be included by defult? i can we please stop this bull ****. just respond to the good post he made.
edit: idk but knowledge comes first and formost

 

[Eni Alihm]

Because that's not what the resident Luciferians have been arguing in the last month.

Would you like to debate this further? I'm sure they'd all love to.

Well, I guess I got here a little too late, you all have defined your Lucifer the way you see Him.

I see this going on with the Setians as well, one camp doesn't agree with the ToS camp and visa versa.