Who is Satan? Or what does Satan represent to you?

[URAVIP2ME]

Then the world is not a world of badness (alone).

Besides the bad in the world there is the good.
The dominant mental attitude today in these last days of badness on Earth is described at 2 Timothy 3:1-5; 2 Timothy 3:13
The figurative ' humble sheep ' of Matthew 25:31-33 are considered as being righteous ones - Matthew 25:37

 

[EtuMalku]

Example please of guilt tripping.
What false rewards and punishments do you have in mind ?

Please remember there is a BIG difference between the teachings of Christendom (so-called Christian but mostly in name only) and the first-century teachings of Christ as found in Scripture. Christendom mostly uses or goes by church customs or traditions - Matthew 15:9

Abrahamic faiths work on a 'reward' (heaven) 'punishment' (hell) system, indoctrinating their adherents early on (childhood rituals) which sets up a psychological guilt if the system is not followed as prescribed.

I am not aware of the differences in 'Christendom' and the 'first-century teachings of Christ' . . . please elaborate.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Because that is what I believe. I believe that the christians gave Lucifer the name Satan. I have gotten into arguments with christians before that they have gotten pissed when I call him by his real name "Lucifer". Christians hate it.

No, Christians did Not name Satan as Lucifer. Lucifer is Not part of the ancient manuscripts which make up Bible canon.
The Hebrew has shining one or morning star not Lucifer.
When KJV translated Isaiah 14:12 into KJV English the King James version chose Lucifer.

 

[EtuMalku]

No, Christians did Not name Satan as Lucifer. Lucifer is Not part of the ancient manuscripts which make up Bible canon.
The Hebrew has shining one or morning star not Lucifer.
When KJV translated Isaiah 14:12 into KJV English the King James version chose Lucifer.

Gotta agree here, a deity Lucifer is never mentioned in scripture.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Abrahamic faiths work on a 'reward' (heaven) 'punishment' (hell) system, indoctrinating their adherents early on (childhood rituals) which sets up a psychological guilt if the system is not followed as prescribed.
I am not aware of the differences in 'Christendom' and the 'first-century teachings of Christ' . . . please elaborate.

Yes, there is a false teaching of reward heaven and punishment hell.
According to Scripture, No one who died before Jesus had a heavenly hope of going to heaven - John 3:13
That includes people like King David - Acts of the Apostles 2:34, and John the baptizer - Matthew 11:11.
Most people going to heaven is a made-up teaching of Christendom, which developed 'after' 1st-century Christianity ended
- Acts of the Apostles 20:29-30
God's promise to father Abraham was and earthly promise - please notice Genesis 12:3; Genesis 22:18
All the faithful of Hebrews chapter 11 have Not seen that earthly promise yet - Hebrews 11:13; Hebrews 11:39
Under Christ's coming 1,000-year governmental rulership over Earth is when they will have a healthy physical resurrection on Earth.
That is why the ' future tense ' is used at Acts of the apostles 24:15 that there ' is going to be ' a resurrection....

Jesus did open the way for some to be resurrected to heaven - Revelation 20:6; Revelation 5:9-10; Luke 22:28-30
The majority can have the same opportunity that was given to Adam before his downfall to live forever on a paradisical Earth.
Mankind will see the return of the Genesis ' tree of life ' for the healing of earth's nations - Revelation 22:2
That means enemy death will No longer exist on Earth - 1 Corinthians 15:26; Isaiah 25:8; 1 Corinthians 15:55

As far as biblical hell goes. The Bible's hell is: mankind's temporary grave for the sleeping dead.
The old Hebrew Scriptures teach sleep in death -> Psalms 115:17; Psalms 146:4; Daniel 12:2; Daniel 12:13; Ecclesiastes 9:5
That is why Jesus also likened death to sleep at John 11:12-14.
If biblical hell was a permanent place then No one could be resurrected out of hell.
Can you think of anyone righteous who went to biblical hell ? ______
According to Acts of the Apostles 2:27 righteous Jesus went to hell the day he died, but Jesus did Not remain in hell.
Jesus has keys to unlock biblical hell according to Revelation 1:18
Please also notice that according to Revelation 20:13-14 that the Bible's hell comes to a final end.
After everyone is ' delivered up ' out of biblical hell, then emptied-out hell is cast vacant into a symbolic ' second death' for vacated hell.
So, except for those of Matthew 12:32; Hebrews 6:4-6, death frees or acquits a person from sin according to Romans 6:7.
There is No post-mortem penalty, or double jeopardy, for the dead - Romans 6:23.

 

[Luciferi Baphomet]

No, Christians did Not name Satan as Lucifer. Lucifer is Not part of the ancient manuscripts which make up Bible canon.
The Hebrew has shining one or morning star not Lucifer.
When KJV translated Isaiah 14:12 into KJV English the King James version chose Lucifer.

I believe that they did and Lucifer is the Morning Star. Jesus isn't the Morning Star. Christians have called jesus the Morning star before.

 

[The_Fisher_King]

But if that's the case then God is neither morally perfect

Define 'morally perfect'.

nor omnibenevolent

Agreed.

and he can in fact do wrong

Wrong by whom?

Also, he would have no moral justification for sending people to Hell as punishment for disobeying him

I don't believe in this notion of punishment.

because he would be the one leading people astray

That part of God that is Satan leads people astray.

 

[The_Fisher_King]

She? Don't you mean he?

Lucifer is she and he. Sometimes Lucifer appears as a she, sometimes as a he, sometimes as genderqueer. Lucifer has (had) many names around the world throughout history. Among the ancient Sumerians, for example, Lucifer was known as Inanna. Amongst the Norse, as Loki.

Why would Lucifer want to be a slave to god when we wants people to be free from gods slavery?

God is the One Who loves freedom, it is Satan who does not. That is how Lucifer - the bringer of light and the liberator - is God's servant and not the same as Satan.

He is the light and the truth and the liberator.

Oh, I agree. But in my opinion (s)he is not Satan. Where Lucifer is the bringer of light, Satan is the bringer of darkness.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I believe that they did and Lucifer is the Morning Star. Jesus isn't the Morning Star. Christians have called jesus the Morning star before.

Lucifer doesn't have anything to do with Satan. That comes from how St. Jerome translated Isiah 14 in the Latin Vulgate, but that passage is actually referring to King Nebuchadnezzar, who was holding the Jews in bondage during that time. It's a poem mocking him. Lucifer was originally a minor figure in Greco-Roman mythology, the personification of the planet Venus at dawn. He was Phosphorus, son of the dawn goddess, Eos.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shahar_(god)

As for Jesus being the Morning Star, He referred to Himself as such: "16 “I, Jesus, sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the root and offspring of David,[a] the bright morning star.”" - Revelation 22:16

Personally I consider Christ to be the ultimate Lucifer, and His symbolism fits that role better than Satan's, who is associated with darkness. The Buddha is another one who fits that archetype better, imo. Christianity even has an ancient belief in the concept of humans becoming Divine: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divinization_(Christian)

"If the Word became a man, It was so men may become gods." - Irenaeus. Hmm, doesn't that sound curiously familiar? Doesn't sound like God wants to be helpless slaves, to me.

If you ask me, I think it's better to go with Prometheus if you want a knowledge-bringing deity who is punished for revealing secrets to humanity. Most of what Luciferians and Satanists say about Lucifer/Satan is a rehashing of the Prometheus story as it is.

 

[The_Fisher_King]

Because that is what I believe.

Fair enough. But I guess what I am asking is, how have you come to this belief? Lucifer and Satan have different origins.

I believe that the christians gave Lucifer the name Satan.

I believe so too. But in my belief, led astray by Satan, most of the Christians confuse(d) two distinct and separate beings. This serves Satan very well. Because most think Lucifer and Satan are the same, they cannot see the light that Lucifer brings. They either fight against Lucifer (thinking he is Satan) or serve Satan (thinking he is Lucifer).

I have gotten into arguments with christians before that they have gotten pissed when I call him by his real name "Lucifer". Christians hate it.

There are a few Christians who distinguish between Lucifer and Satan, though fewer still know Lucifer for who (s)he really is, one of God's Messengers and guides.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

What about according to your version of Christianity?

I agree with what it says about Satan being a fallen Angel. I'm typically in sync with traditional theology in terms of my personal beliefs.

 

[Tumah]

Lucifer is she and he. Sometimes Lucifer appears as a she, sometimes as a he, sometimes as genderqueer. Lucifer has (had) many names around the world throughout history. Among the ancient Sumerians, for example, Lucifer was known as Inanna. Amongst the Norse, as Loki.

Historically speaking the word lucifer as used in the KJV was meant to mean the actual "morning star" known as Venus. In its original context of Isaiah 14, its a used as a metaphor for Babylon where Israel is exiled to.

Its only later (ie. post KJV) that lucifer became Lucifer as an alternate name to Satan in Christianity.

From the looks of it, you've taken that new alternate name for satan and separated it from the new tradition it was associated with to create an even newer character based off characters from other traditions.

 

[The_Fisher_King]

I agree with what it says about Satan being a fallen Angel. I'm typically in sync with traditional theology in terms of my personal beliefs.

Okay, thanks for the clarification.

 

[The_Fisher_King]

Historically speaking the word lucifer as used in the KJV was meant to mean the actual "morning star" known as Venus.

Agreed. I believe Lucifer is the planet Venus.

Its only later (ie. post KJV) that lucifer became Lucifer as an alternate name to Satan in Christianity.

Indeed. As I have said above, I believe this was a mistake on the part of most Christians.

From the looks of it, you've taken that new alternate name for satan

Nope. I stick with the earlier tradition. Satan is and always has been a completely distinct entity.

and separated it from the new tradition it was associated with to create an even newer character based off characters from other traditions.

I haven't created any characters. Lucifer, Inanna and Loki are all names (from different traditions) for the planet Venus.

 

[EtuMalku]

Lucifer is a pre-JudeoChristian Roman deity personifying the Morningstar of Phoenician/Canaan cosmology.
It was St. Jerome who placed the word Lucifer into the Bible . . .
Isaiah 14:12 according to the Vulgate translation:
"Et habemus firmiorem propheticum sermonem : cui benefacitis attendentes quasi lucernæ lucenti in caliginoso donec dies elucescat, et lucifer oriatur in cordibus vestries"

The Hebrew translation had the word helel in the place of Lucifer, or rather St. Jerome replaced the word helel with Lucifer. Helel means ‘shining one’.

In 382 AD, Pope Damasus I commissioned St. Jerome to write a revision of the old Latin translation of the Bible. This task was completed sometime during the 5th century AD, and eventually it was considered the official and definite Latin version of the Bible according to the Roman Catholic church. By the 13th century it was considered the versio vulgate – the common translation.

In Greek mythology, Hesperus, the Evening Star is the son of the dawn goddess Eos (Roman equivalent: Aurora) and the brother of Eosphorus the Morning Star (Eosphoros "dawn‑bearer").

 

[Tumah]

Agreed. I believe Lucifer is the planet Venus.

I think we are only in agreement if you are saying that lucifer is another name for Venus and not something along the lines of Venus representing Lucifer.

Indeed. As I have said above, I believe this was a mistake on the part of most Christians.

I suspect though, that we might differ as to what that mistake is.

Nope. I stick with the earlier tradition. Satan is and always has been a completely distinct entity.

The earlier tradition also lacks a luciferian figure though.

I haven't created any characters. Lucifer, Inanna and Loki are all names (from different traditions) for the planet Venus.

Yes, but you are superimposing one onto the other. Lucifer is simply a name for Venus in the original Christian tradition, not having any other characteristics other than being a bright star that's seen in the morning.
Loki and friends are personalities in their respective traditions, that are represented by the planet Venus having the traits you mention.

 

[The_Fisher_King]

I think we are only in agreement if you are saying that lucifer is another name for Venus and not something along the lines of Venus representing Lucifer.

I am saying that Lucifer is another name for the planet Venus.

I suspect though, that we might differ as to what that mistake is.

What do you believe the mistake was?

The earlier tradition also lacks a luciferian figure though.

I should have been clearer, sorry. Which earlier tradition are you referring to?

Yes, but you are superimposing one onto the other. Lucifer is simply a name for Venus in the original Christian tradition, not having any other characteristics other than being a bright star that's seen in the morning.
Loki and friends are personalities in their respective traditions, that are represented by the planet Venus having the traits you mention.

I don't think I am. I believe Lucifer is the planet Venus. I believe Inanna is the planet Venus. I believe Loki is the planet Venus. Traditions disagree on the planet Venus' nature and role in the great scheme of things, whether that be the 'non-religious' 'Western' scientific view, the ancient Roman view, the 'original Christian' view, the ancient Sumerian view or the old Norse view. I reject the 'non-religious' Western' scientific view, that the planet Venus is 'just' a planet (with no 'special' spiritual/religious role).

 

[Tumah]

What do you believe the mistake was?

Equating a reference to Venus as referring to satan.

I should have been clearer, sorry. Which earlier tradition are you referring to?

Christianity's.

I don't think I am. I believe Lucifer is the planet Venus. I believe Inanna is the planet Venus. I believe Loki is the planet Venus. Traditions disagree on the planet Venus' nature and role in the great scheme of things, whether that be the 'non-religious' 'Western' scientific view, the ancient Roman view, the 'original Christian' view, the ancient Sumerian view or the old Norse view. I reject the 'non-religious' Western' scientific view, that the planet Venus is 'just' a planet (with no 'special' spiritual/religious role).

Ok, but Christianity lacks a Luciferian figure (in the way of the Romans and in the way of planets with spiritual roles, to my knowledge). I think you could have made it more clear that you're referring to the Latin name for a Greek deity.

 

[The_Fisher_King]

Equating a reference to Venus as referring to satan.

Oh, we can agree here. I have said several times now, I believe these are distinct entities.

Christianity's

The tradition I am referring to goes back much further than that.

Ok, but Christianity lacks a Luciferian figure (in the way of the Romans and in the way of planets with spiritual roles, to my knowledge). I think you could have made it more clear that you're referring to the Latin name for a Greek deity.

I am not a Christian, so why the assumption that the Lucifer I am referring to is the Christian usage of the term (whether the early Christian usage or later ones)?

 

[The_Fisher_King]

. . . satan nor lucifer is not the evil one
remember always
before god created light
there was darkness

And that darkness is Satan.