Go Back   Old Project Avalon Forum (ARCHIVE) > Project Avalon Forum > Project Avalon > Spirituality

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-16-2008, 03:01 PM   #1
Zelphael
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: London, UK
Posts: 91
Default Why I am gladly a Luciferian.

The following article I wrote in response to why I am a Luciferian and why I believe what I do.

I am not entirely sure as to the beliefs of the NWO. I am not certain theirs match mine, or true Luciferianism.

Read with an open mind.

---

Lucifer, The Only God Worth Knowing.

Lucifer – latin for “Light-Bringer” from lux or lucis meaning “light” and ferre, “to bear or bring”. Therefore, from etymology, Lucifer is one who brings light. With no other information, cultural connotations or otherwise, alone by itself this name would seem to indicate a positive idea or being much more than a negative one. Yet, second only to Satan, is it feared and detested.

If someone brings light to you in a dark place, you would thank and welcome him for his help in allowing you to see your surroundings. But that example is talking about optical light, photons.
If we take light in the metaphorical sense to mean illumination (the degree of visibility of your environment, clarification that removes obstacles to understanding, awareness of the place that one occupies in this world) then we can see that light, enlightenment, illumination, luminescence, etc all share a clear and healthy relationship with the mind, intellect, mental faculties which supply us with the ability to do this.

So Lucifer is one who brings light – illumination of the mind. Yet the Latin ferre also means “to bear”, meaning that Lucifer bears (contains, has within himself) that light. It could be derived from this that Lucifer is the personification of the mind, the intellect, the mental faculties, aptitude of interaction with and awareness of one's surroundings and, ultimately, reality. This is no bad thing. In fact, these things are the primary force which interfaces between our selves and the exterior world. This is a good thing. This is what we need. When this is not used properly, often enough or well enough, the self fails to interact with the world in any worthwhile, profitable or advantageous manner.

How does this tie in to “spirituality”? What is spirit? It is the mind. The mind is explicitly dependant on the body to live in it's current state, so the body provides the house for the spirit which is the mind, but there is not some “other” floating soul, astral energy or separate self governing the body and the mind. Spirit is the mind, soul is the body. If Lucifer is, loosely, an emanation or expression of the mind at it's best, most desirable and creatively productive state, Lucifer is the sole source of all spirituality.

Luciferianism is the most enlightened, practical and elaborate form of nousolatry: the interaction with, worship and appreciation of the mind. Greek nous (νοῦς) for “mind, intellect” and latreia (λατρεία), meaning “worship”.
While we all share the basic mental faculties which bear the Luciferian spirit, it is clear some possess it with greater, more productive, useful, worthwhile, skilful aptitude than others. Therefore, Luciferianism is not a universal or egalitarian ideal. It is elitist, esoteric and proactive in it's selective discrimination. These things are often looked upon with contempt by the masses, because (and for good reason) it often neglects to include them. But this is no fault other than their own.

Lucifer demands personal responsibility, development and actualisation of the higher self with relentless personal effort. Not only is elitism sensible, it's needed for progress to actually occur. Being highly skilled and selective, instead of generous with to whom are given opportunities and responsibilities when they completely lack the aptitude to carry them out properly, is ultimately better for all.
There is no greater challenge or pleasurable reward than relentlessly pursuing an active relationship with Lucifer. It is the ultimate of ultimates, to perfect one's own Luciferian spirit to the greatest it can be, taking into consideration the differing limits of capacity between individuals (as very few share the exact same potential, were it possible to quantify).

I unapologetically speak of Lucifer with anthropomorphic language. I feel this serves many beneficial purposes.
Firstly, man needs and has always craved one or more gods to call his own. Man has not yet had the chance to live without gods, and even those who claim to have none clearly do, just not in name, as they find other sources to which the same energy and thought is directed. Even affirmed atheism is never without the individual's own gods, explicitly acknowledged or not. God is the most ancient preoccupation for man's mind throughout our entire human history of civilisation. Think on that sentence alone, taking into consideration what I have said about the mind so far.
Secondly, there is a reason religions have more followers than “life philosophies”. People crave the satisfaction that comes with the process of externalisation of one's energy. In this, Lucifer is a useful anthropomorphic entity because he is 'the internal that is externalised'. He is a friend, a teacher, a helper, a lover, a guide. Humans crave the “other” and not all are ready to accept a completely self-reliant state of belief (and I would argue that, all other reasons considering, it is not a lesser or more perfect expression of Luciferianism to use or not use Lucifer in an anthropomorphic manner. This is completely up to the individual and he whom does not shouldn't look down upon he who does – the benefits of both are different and personal in their value.)
Furthermore, aesthetics and spiritual expression have always gone hand in hand. Religion is appealing because of the myths, ritual, psychodrama, mystery and theatrics. The diversity of religious belief around the world is obvious. One is free to pick and choose what is the name, character, appearance and nature of his god. And yet still, all gods are man-made inventions originating in the mind of man – any other assertion is a boldfaced lie. Therefore, the mind is the womb, playhouse and tomb of the gods.

Philosophy has often sought God and not found him, yet come up with elaborate, descriptive and wonderfully sublime systems of belief to explain the nature of the universe and metaphysical reality. While these systems may or may not suffice for their intended purpose, to many, they are impersonal and lack that utter “something” to be desirable. This is why time and time again, religion has prospered over philosophy. The stories and mythical characters living out highly fantastical lives are enjoyable and aesthetically rewarding.
Lastly, speaking of Lucifer as a living entity and a being in his own right makes for an interesting thought experiment. The faculty is certainly living, as long as we are, and we use it rightfully. So could it be Lucifer is “real” enough to be in his own right? That is up to the individual to decide. At this point in my journey, I would personally say 'no' to that question, but each to his own.


Lucifer is not Satan. Neither Jews nor early Christians ever knew the name Lucifer. It was not until the Roman Church latinised the texts and the name Lucifer was used to describe Nebuchadnezzar. A later misinterpretation of the original scripture caused tradition to accept this as the story of Satan's fall, and as such the name Lucifer became synonymous and interchangeable with that of Satan.

As a pagan god in his own right, Lucifer was the Roman name for the Greek god Phospheros, the Morning Star (and the Evening Star was his brother Hesperos, spoken of separately by Homer, but he did not realise these were both the same “star” they the Greeks were seeing; they did not know they were both the same planet Venus until Pythagoras discovered this in 550 B.C.E.
If Lucifer is both the Morning and the Evening Star, he is both the conscious mind of the day and the subconscious mind of the night. Both conscious thought and unconscious expression through dreams are rewarding.
Some god names which are either completely, partially or somewhat loosely associated with the Lucifer archetype (as I describe it) are Ahura Mazda, Thoth, Hermes / Mercury, Prometheus, Satan, (etc.) Lucifer is the Serpent, The Dragon and The Sun, in their positive (and sometimes negative) expressions. The most ancient expressions of wisdom, light, knowledge and action.

I choose to use the name Lucifer, because it is not a Christian term and theologically has nothing to do with Christianity, unlike Satan (which is a different idea from what I'm describing, even in a LaVayan sense) and etymologically makes the most sense. There is also a historical tradition of Luciferianism in that express name, in opposition to the movement of Christianity which is the pinnacle of everything that goes against the far superior Luciferian ideals. Christianity is subservient to an external god, makes the worshipper dependant and not self reliant, but a slave. The list goes on, and modern Satanists have documented the points far better. I concern myself not with Christianity here as I see Luciferianism to be entirely unrelated and far more ancient, historically speaking.

Lucifer is the oldest god on the planet, and the only one who has ever propelled mankind forward into higher states of development and evolution. He may be the oldest and greatest, but he is certainly not jealous or possessive, as he needs us not, yet without him we are worthless. Lucifer is the only saviour that mankind will ever have over his own destiny, and that is because he is us (yet we are not always in rightful communion with him).
Lucifer gives to those who earn it. He discriminatingly chooses his human partners and his rewards are hard earned, and can be taken away swiftly. The relationship must be constant, it must be enveloping in its love and always yearning for a greater depth. His modus operandi, while not always understood or accepted by the lower masses, is a far more personally empowering one, because doing things his way is the highest that man can attain, if he is properly evoked from within and worked with attentively.
He is never evil, cruel or malicious (highly subjective terms to begin with; what is “evil” is not always agreed upon). Evil is not a part of the fabric of our universe, as many schools of thought have attempted to justify. If anything, it is all a result of chosen actions by individuals expressing the faculty of free will. There is no evil force in nature.
However, a general understanding and acceptance of human morality in its most widely accepted and understood form would clearly indicate that perceive certain actions and events to be “evil”. It is a human construct, but a useful and arguably necessary one. Lucifer can never be truly evil, but he can and is always the highest expression of all that is good for the self, and what is good for each self, if properly actualised by each self, is eventually good for all even if all do not initially see and realise the logic, or detest the intensive requirements to get there or the methods used by others in their self-realisation. Misuse of a tool does not make the tool itself evil.

How Lucifer differs from LaVey's Satan, to those familiar with it – indulging in pleasures does not always lead to actualisation of Lucifer. Laziness is often pleasurable and desirable but ultimately damaging. Sex is enjoyable but short lived and not very progressive to the development of the self. Satan is instant gratification and appeals on the soul (body) level, Lucifer is deferred gratification and appeals on the spirit (mind) level. Satanism is materalistic, Luciferianism is essentially spiritual. Lucifer enjoys Satanic expression, but when and where appropriate and not to the detriment of the self's journey. Satan is raw, unrefined energy, whereas Lucifer is focused, refined and highly attuned and directed. Morality does not largely differ between the two schools of thought.



The Luciferian Pentacle: Man, upright within a pentagram, with the spirit (mind) point at the top, as opposed to the satanic inversion with the four elements (the body) above spirit to symbolise materialism over spirituality.
The equal-armed cross within the circle is the glyph of Earth and represents Man at the centre of his universe as his own god. The moon and five planets are not essential (this is from Cornelius Agrippa's occult writings). The pentagram has also been strongly associated with Venus, and this is another connection to Lucifer the Morning and Evening Star.

HE ALONE IS WORTH KNOWING! HAIL LUCIFER!
Zelphael is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2008, 03:36 PM   #2
THE eXchanger
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Spiritual eXplorer-Canada
Posts: 4,915
Default Re: Why I am gladly a Luciferian.

Madam Helena Petrovna (Von Hahn) Blavatsky

1887 Sept The first issue of HPB's magazine Lucifer appears. The aim of this journal she declares is to "Bring to Light the Hidden Things of Darkness." Its emphasis was to be ethics and philosophy rather than psychic phenomena and spiritualism. Mabel Collins offered to be Co-Editor and was accepted. She worked at this for a short while. Later, Annie Besant became Co-Editor, after she read and reviewed The Secret Doctrine .

In addition she explains that "LUCIFER ... the Light-Bearer is the Morning Star ... and 'LUCIFER' is no profane or satanic title. It is the Latin Luciferus. The Light-bringer, the Morning Star, equivalent to the Greek Phosphorus ... The name of the pure Herald of the Daylight." -- Yonge.

HPB was thus able to gather around her Theosophists who were serious students and who were anxious to receive her oral instructions, receiving directly from her answers to their questions. She was also freed to do her writing and to complete it as a full and complete message.


8888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888888



WHAT'S IN A NAME?



WHY THE MAGAZINE IS CALLED "LUCIFER"

WHAT'S in a name? Very often there is more in it than the profane is prepared to understand, or the learned mystic to explain. It is an invisible, secret, but very potential influence that every name carries about with it and "leaveth wherever it goeth." Carlyle thought that "there is much, nay, almost all, in names." "Could I unfold the influence of names, which are the most important of all clothings, I were a second great Trismegistus," he writes.

The name or title of a magazine started with a definite object, is, therefore, all important; for it is, indeed, the invisible seed-grain, which will either grow "to be an all-over-shadowing tree" on the fruits of which must depend the nature of the results brought about by the said object, or the tree will wither and die. These considerations show that the name of the present magazine--rather equivocal to orthodox Christian ears--is due to no careless selection, but arose in consequence of much thinking over its fitness, and was adopted as the best symbol to express that object and the results in view.

Now, the first and most important, if not the sole object of the magazine, is expressed in the line from the 1st Epistle to the Corinthians, on its title page. It is to bring light to "the hidden things of darkness," (iv. 5); to show in their true aspect and their original real meaning things and names, men and their doings and customs; it is finally to fight prejudice, hypocrisy and shams in every nation, in every class of Society, as in every department of life. The task is a laborious one but it is neither impracticable nor useless, if even as an experiment.

Thus, for an attempt of such nature, no better title could ever be found than the one chosen. "Lucifer," is the pale morning-star, the precursor of the full blaze of the noon-day sun--the "Eosphoros" of the Greeks. It shines timidly at dawn to gather forces and dazzle the eye after sunset as its own brother "Hesperos"--the radiant evening star, or the planet Venus. No fitter symbol exists for the proposed work--that of throwing a ray of truth on everything hidden by the darkness of prejudice, by social or religious misconceptions; especially by that idiotic routine in life, which, once that a certain action, a thing, a name, has been branded by slanderous inventions, however unjust, makes respectable people, so called, turn away shiveringly, refusing to even look at it from any other aspect than the one sanctioned by public opinion. Such an endeavour then, to force the weak-hearted to look truth straight in the face, is helped most efficaciously by a title belonging to the category of branded names.

Piously inclined readers may argue that "Lucifer" is accepted by all the churches as one of the many names of the Devil. According to Milton's superb fiction, Lucifer is Satan, the "rebellious" angel, the enemy of God and man. If one analyzes his rebellion, however, it will be found of no worse nature than an assertion of free-will and independent thought, as if Lucifer had been born in the XIXth century. This epithet of "rebellious" is a theological calumny, on a par with that other slander of God by the Predestinarians, one that makes of deity an "Almighty" fiend worse than the "rebellious" Spirit himself; "an omnipotent Devil desiring to be 'complimented' as all merciful when he is exerting the most fiendish cruelty," as put by J. Cotter Morison. Both the foreordaining and predestining fiend-God, and his subordinate agent are of human invention; they are two of the most morally repulsive and horrible theological dogmas that the nightmares of light-hating monks have ever evolved out of their unclean fancies.

They date from the Mediæval age, the period of mental obscuration, during which most of the present prejudices and superstitions have been forcibly inoculated on the human mind, so as to have become nearly ineradicable in some cases, one of which is the present prejudice now under discussion.

So deeply rooted, indeed, is this preconception and aversion to the name of Lucifer--meaning no worse than "light-bringer" (from lux, lucis, "light," and ferre "to bring")1--even among the educated classes, that by adopting it for the title of their magazine the editors have the prospect of a long strife with public prejudice before them. So absurd and ridiculous is that prejudice, indeed, that no one has seemed to ever ask himself the question, how came Satan to be called a light-bringer, unless the silvery rays of the morning-star can in any way be made suggestive of the glare of the infernal flames. It is simply, as Henderson showed, "one of those gross perversions of sacred writ which so extensively obtain, and which are to be traced to a proneness to seek for more in a given passage than it really contains--a disposition to be influenced by sound rather than sense, and an implicit faith in received interpretation"--which is not quite one of the weaknesses of our present age. Nevertheless, the prejudice is to the shame of our century.

This cannot be helped. The two editors would hold selves as recreants in their own sight, as traitors to the very spirit of the proposed work, were they to yield and cry craven before the danger. If one would fight prejudice, and brush off the ugly cobwebs of superstition and materialism alike from the noblest ideals of our forefathers, one has to prepare for opposition. "The crown of the reformer and the innovator is a crown of thorns" indeed. If one would rescue Truth in all her chaste nudity from the almost bottomless well, into which she has been hurled by cant and hypocritical propriety, one should not hesitate to descend into the dark, gaping pit of that well. No matter how badly the blind bats--the dwellers in darkness, and the haters of light--may treat in their gloomy abode the intruder, unless one is the first to show the spirit and courage he preaches to others, he must be justly held as a hypocrite and a seceder from his own principles.

Hardly had the title been agreed upon, when the first premonitions of what was in store for us, in the matter of the opposition to be encountered owing to the title chosen, appeared on our horizon. One of the editors received and recorded some spicy objections. The scenes that follow are sketches from nature.


I

A Well-known Novelist. Tell me about your new magazine. What class do you propose to appeal to?

Editor. No class in particular: we intend to appeal to the public.

Novelist. I am very glad of that. For once I shall be one of the public, for I don't understand your subject in the least, and I want to. But you must remember that if your public is to understand you, it must necessarily be a very small one. People talk about occultism nowadays as they talk about many other things, without the least idea of what it means. We are so ignorant and--so prejudiced.

Editor. Exactly. That is what calls the new magazine into existence. We propose to educate you, and to tear the mask from every prejudice.

Novelist. That really is good news to me, for I want to be educated. What is your magazine to be called?

Editor. Lucifer.

Novelist. What! Are you going to educate us in vice'? We know enough about that. Fallen angels are plentiful. You may find popularity, for soiled doves are in fashion just now, while the white-winged angels are voted a bore, because they are not so amusing. But I doubt your being able to teach us much.


II

A Man of the World (in a careful undertone, for the scene is a dinner-party). I hear you are going to start a magazine, all about occultism. Do you know, I'm very glad. I don't say anything about such matters as a rule, but some queer things have happened in my life which can't be explained in any ordinary manner. I hope you will go in for explanations.

Editor. We shall try, certainly. My impression is, that when occultism is in any measure apprehended, its laws are accepted by everyone as the only intelligible explanation of life.

A M. W. Just so, I want to know all about it, for 'pon my honour, life's a mystery. There are plenty of other people as curious as myself. This is an age which is afflicted with the Yankee disease of "wanting to know." I'll get you lots of subscribers. What's the magazine called?

Editor. Lucifer--and (warned by former experience) don't misunderstand the name. It is typical of the divine spirit which sacrificed itself for humanity--it was Milton's doing that it ever became associated with the devil. We are sworn enemies to popular prejudices, and it is quite appropriate that we should attack such a prejudice as this--Lucifer, you know, is the Morning Star--the Lightbearer, . . . . . .

A M. W. (interrupting). Oh, I know all that--at least don't know, but I take it for granted you've got some good reason for taking such a title. But your first object is to have readers; you want the public to buy your magazine, I suppose. That's in the programme, isn't it?

Editor. Most decidedly.

A M. W. Well, listen to the advice of a man who knows his way about town. Don't mark your magazine with the wrong colour at starting. It's quite evident, when one stays an instant to think of its derivation and meaning, that Lucifer is an excellent word. But the public don't stay to think of derivations and meanings; and the first impression is the most important. Nobody will buy the magazine if you call it Lucifer.


III

A Fashionable Lady Interested in Occultism. I want to hear some more about the new magazine, for I have interested a great many people in it, even with the little you have told me. But I find it difficult to express its actual purpose. What is it?

Editor. To try and give a little light to those that want it.

A F. L. Well, that's a simple way of putting it, and will be very useful to me. What is the magazine to be called?

Editor. Lucifer.

A F. L. (After a pause) You can't mean it.

Editor. Why not?

A F. L. The associations are so dreadful! What can be the object of calling it that? It sounds like some unfortunate sort of joke, made against it by its enemies.

Editor. Oh, but Lucifer, you know, means Light-bearer; it is typical of the Divine Spirit--

A F. L. Never mind all that--I want to do your magazine good and make it known, and you can't expect me to enter into explanations of that sort every time I mention the title? Impossible! Life is too short and too busy. Besides, it would produce such a bad effect; people would think me priggish, and then I couldn't talk at all, for I couldn't bear them to think that. Don't call it Lucifer please don't. Nobody knows what the word is typical of; what it means now is the devil, nothing more or less.

Editor. But then that is quite a mistake, and one of the first prejudices we propose to do battle with. Lucifer is the pale, pure herald of dawn--

Lady (interrupting). I thought you were going to do something more interesting and more important than to whitewash mythological characters. We shall all have to go to school again, or read up Dr. Smith's Classical Dictionary. And what is the use of it when it is done? I thought you were going to tell us things about our own lives and how to make them better. I suppose Milton wrote about Lucifer, didn't he?--but nobody reads Milton now. Do let us have a modern title with some human meaning in it.


IV

A Journalist (thoughtfully, while rolling his cigarette). Yes, it is a good idea, this magazine of yours. We shall all laugh at it, as a matter of course: and we shall cut it up in the papers. But we shall all read it, because secretly everybody hungers after the mysterious. What are you going to call it?

Editor. Lucifer.

Journalist (striking a light). Why not The Fusee? Quite as good a title and not so pretentious.

The "Novelist," the "Man of the World," the "Fashionable Lady," and the "Journalist," should be the first to receive a little instruction. A glimpse into the real and primitive character of Lucifer can do them no harm and may, perchance, cure them of a bit of ridiculous prejudice. They ought to study their Homer and Hesiod's Theogony if they would do justice to Lucifer, "Eosphoros and Hesperos," the Morning and the Evening beautiful star. If there are more useful things to do in this life than "to whitewash mythological characters," to slander and blacken them is, at least, as useless, and shows, moreover, a narrow-mindedness which can do honour to no one.

To object to the title of LUCIFER, only because its "associations are so dreadful," is pardonable--if it can be pardonable in any case--only in an ignorant American missionary of some dissenting sect, in one whose natural laziness and lack of education led him to prefer ploughing the minds of heathens, as ignorant as he is himself, to the more profitable, but rather more arduous, process of ploughing the fields of his own father's farm. In the English clergy, however, who receive all a more or less classical education, and are, therefore, supposed to be acquainted with the ins and outs of theological sophistry and casuistry, this kind of opposition is absolutely unpardonable. It not only smacks of hypocrisy and deceit, but places them directly on a lower moral level than him they call the apostate angel. By endeavouring to show the theological Lucifer, fallen through the idea that

To reign is worth
ambition, though in Hell;
Better to reign in
Hell than serve in Heaven,
they are virtually putting into practice the supposed crime they would fain accuse him of. They prefer reigning over the spirit of the masses by means of a pernicious dark LIE, productive of many an evil, than serve heaven by serving TRUTH. Such practices are worthy only of the Jesuits.

But their sacred writ is the first to contradict their interpretations and the association of Lucifer, the Morning Star, with Satan. Chapter XXII of Revelation, verse 16th, says: "I, Jesus . . . am the root. . . and the bright and Morning Star" "early rising"): hence Eosphoros, or the Latin Lucifer. The or probrium attached to this name is of such a very late date, the Roman Church found itself forced to screen the theological slander behind a two-sided interpretation--as usual. Christ, we are told, is the "Morning Star," the divine Lucifer; and Satan the usurpator of the Verbum, the "infernal Lucifer."2 "The great Archangel Michael, the conqueror of Satan, is identical in paganism3 with Mercury-Mithra, to whom, after defending the Sun (symbolical of God) from the attacks of Venus-Lucifer, was given the possession of this planet, et datus est ei locus Luciferi And since the Archangel Michael is the 'Angel of the Face,' and 'the Vicar of the Verbum' he is now considered in the Roman Church as the regent of that planet Venus which 'the vanquished fiend had usurped'." Angelus faciei Dei sedem superbi humilis Obtinuit, says Cornelius à Lapide (in Vol. VI, p. 229).

This gives the reason why one of the early Popes was called Lucifer, as Yonge and ecclesiastical records prove. It thus follows that the title chosen for our magazine is as much associated with divine and pious ideas as with the supposed rebellion of the hero of Milton's "Paradise Lost." By choosing it, we throw the first ray of light and truth on a ridiculous prejudice which ought to have no room made for it in this our "age of facts and discovery." We work for true Religion and Science, in the interest of fact as against fiction and prejudice. It is our duty, as it is that of physical Science--professedly its mission--to throw light or facts in Nature hitherto surrounded by the darkness of ignorance And since ignorance is justly regarded as the chief promoter of superstition, that work is, therefore, a noble and beneficent work But natural Sciences are only one aspect of SCIENCE and TRUTH. Psychological and moral Sciences, or theosophy, the knowledge of divine truth, wheresoever found, are, still more important in human affairs, and real Science should not be limited simply to the physical aspect of life and nature. Science is an abstract of every fact, a comprehension of every truth within the scope of human research and intelligence. "Shakespeare's deep and accurate science in mental philosophy" (Coleridge), has proved more beneficent to the true philosopher in the study of the human heart--therefore, in the promotion of truth--than the more accurate, but certainly less deep, science of any Fellow of the Royal Institution.

Those readers, however, who do not find themselves convinced that the Church had no right to throw a slur upon a beautiful star, and that it did so through a mere necessity of accounting for one of its numerous loans from Paganism with all its poetical conceptions of the truths in Nature, are asked to read our article "The History of a Planet." Perhaps, after its perusal, they will see how far Dupuis was justified in asserting that "all the theologies have their origin in astronomy." With the modern Orientalists every myth is solar. This is one more prejudice, and a preconception in favour of materialism and physical science. It will be one of our duties to combat it with much of the rest.

Lucifer, September, 1887



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 "It was Gregory the Great who was the first to apply this passage of Isaiah, 'How art thou fallen from Heaven. Lucifer. son of the morning,' etc., to Satan, and ever since the bold metaphor of the prophet, which referred, after all, but to an Assyrian king inimical to the Israelites, has been applied to the Devil."
back to text


2 Mirville's Memoirs to the Academy of France, Vol. IV, quoting Cardinal Ventura.
back to text

3 Which paganism has passed long millenniums, it would seem, in copying beforehand Christian dogmas to come.
back to text

Last edited by THE eXchanger; 11-16-2008 at 03:50 PM.
THE eXchanger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2008, 03:44 PM   #3
macrostheblack
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 386
Default Re: Why I am gladly a Luciferian.

To speak that word gives power and energy to it.

We must all learn to respect each others beliefs and work towards the same goal.

Macros
macrostheblack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2008, 03:46 PM   #4
THE eXchanger
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Spiritual eXplorer-Canada
Posts: 4,915
Default Re: Why I am gladly a Luciferian.

Madam Helena Petrovna (Von Hahn) Blavatsky

photo of: (see attachment)
Attached Images
File Type: jpg hpb.jpg (6.4 KB, 17 views)

Last edited by THE eXchanger; 11-16-2008 at 03:49 PM.
THE eXchanger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2008, 03:49 PM   #5
Zelphael
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: London, UK
Posts: 91
Default Re: Why I am gladly a Luciferian.

Thank you, eXchanger, that was fantastic.
Zelphael is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2008, 03:52 PM   #6
Rareheart
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: SE Coast, US
Posts: 195
Default Re: Why I am gladly a Luciferian.

If it's true that we all need something to worship, and recognition of a higher power is a beneficial thing. You choose what you will...and I'll choose this:

God is hidden in the mirror.

http://deoxy.org/video/yQ3Hk7AZFT0


The OP is very well written btw...thanks Zelphael

Rareheart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2008, 04:09 PM   #7
Zelphael
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: London, UK
Posts: 91
Default Re: Why I am gladly a Luciferian.

Thanks, Rareheart. Good video and I totally agree... God is in the mirror.
Zelphael is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2008, 04:16 PM   #8
Steve_G
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Why I am gladly a Luciferian.

A very good thread guys, learning a lot. Keep it up
  Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2008, 04:49 PM   #9
capreycorn
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: switzerland
Posts: 455
Default Re: Why I am gladly a Luciferian.

A WONDERFUL AND ENLIGHTENING THREAD

a lot of things i always wanted to know about lucifer ! great post!

also great post on the "lucifer problematic" (baphomet has similar image problems)


....but it was so much to read...now I`m tired...
capreycorn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2008, 06:37 PM   #10
Antaletriangle
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: U.K.
Posts: 3,380
Default Re: Why I am gladly a Luciferian.

Hidden hand who posted on ATS spoke of what you speak.excerpts were posted on here a month ago i think somewhere!!lol.
Antaletriangle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2008, 07:14 PM   #11
Trutht5
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3
Arrow Re: Why I am gladly a Luciferian.

I have a good image now to keep me out of churches forever more!
I agree with your views 1000%
Thanks for the wonderful letter..........
Trutht5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2008, 07:48 PM   #12
martina
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 91
Default Re: Why I am gladly a Luciferian.

The mind is not the spirit/soul. The mind is the intellect and emotions like fear, distress, hate, anger and egoism, it thinks it is the ruler.
The reason that we think we need the mind, is because we lost our abilities to think with our heart and to communicate with it.
Lucifer is the ego, who tells you, that it is your mind that is the most important, he gives you the illusion of being a master and creator, but it is not.
Lucifer can't create, he can only manipulate, that is something different.
In fact it is not the light he brings, but he disconnect you from your spirit/soul, in fact he brings darkness to you.
martina is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2008, 08:10 PM   #13
THE eXchanger
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Spiritual eXplorer-Canada
Posts: 4,915
Default Re: Why I am gladly a Luciferian.

Source: http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread402958/pg1
THE eXchanger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2008, 08:23 PM   #14
burgundia
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Poland
Posts: 3,442
Default Re: Why I am gladly a Luciferian.

Quote:
Originally Posted by martina View Post
The mind is not the spirit/soul. The mind is the intellect and emotions like fear, distress, hate, anger and egoism, it thinks it is the ruler.
The reason that we think we need the mind, is because we lost our abilities to think with our heart and to communicate with it.
Lucifer is the ego, who tells you, that it is your mind that is the most important, he gives you the illusion of being a master and creator, but it is not.
Lucifer can't create, he can only manipulate, that is something different.
In fact it is not the light he brings, but he disconnect you from your spirit/soul, in fact he brings darkness to you.
And this is what i think as well. The mind creates the illusion. You can see the truth with your heart only.The mind creates the matrix. To see you have to feel.
burgundia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2008, 08:55 PM   #15
capreycorn
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: switzerland
Posts: 455
Default Re: Why I am gladly a Luciferian.

let`s face it. the ego / mind alone isn`t capable of letting us experience what enlightenment "Lucifer" & co. can flood our whole being with.
as long as we are trying to "feel" it with the "heart"..whatsoever..indicates, that we`re still tethered to very faint and limited ways of perception.
i believe, that awakening our kundalini or cultivating our chi pales in comparison to the true enlightenment of the light bearer..it`s like the light of a bonfire which looks pretty dim compared to the power of the sun.

it`s all a little off, but I`m just trying to give an idea what kind of heavenly force the "light" of the bearer could have...

....the world couldn`t imagine what force the atomic bomb would have until...
(this is not saying that the light bearer is a destructive force...absolutely not)

Last edited by capreycorn; 11-16-2008 at 08:57 PM.
capreycorn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2008, 09:34 PM   #16
Circlewerk
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: So.Cal
Posts: 156
Default Re: Why I am gladly a Luciferian.

There is vibration that IS.
I am no longer influenced by the idea that it has to be labeled in order to be experienced.
These words, and their limited definitions can only keep us in a place of seeking, as if we are without, or in need, or are aspiring at best, as if there is some place, some way of thinking, either psychologically, spiritually, whatever, that we need to acquire in order to be at the top of our game as humans. This enables the belief in psychological time/ past/ future.

A label, even that part of my mind that is focused on considering whether a name is necessary, narrows my awareness of the vibration.
Dark, light, matters not. They act as a diversion on the human psyche, keeping him stuck in desire or fear.
It is the desire of the mind to label, to attach words, to attach at all, that must stop in order for the vibration to be tapped.
It is desire, seeking, believing, attachment, conscious & unconscious fear, that takes man on a parallel journey along side the IS, thwarting his individual unconditional awareness and ease in the unknown, due to being stuck in psychological time/desire.

Infinite, universal, unconditional vibration, needs not "become." It IS.
Naming it, at this point in our awareness, means it is still untapped by the person naming it.
The desire to name and/or define it, is a conditioned response.
The same response that has lead man away from himself for too long.

Breathing~
CW
Circlewerk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-2008, 09:38 PM   #17
BeaTnik-BandiT
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Laurentides, (Québec)
Posts: 198
Default Re: Why I am gladly a Luciferian.

Quote:
Originally Posted by burgundia View Post
And this is what i think as well. The mind creates the illusion. You can see the truth with your heart only.The mind creates the matrix. To see you have to feel.
Exactly. Satan and Lucifer are no more than manifestations (see Egregores)
of our own ineptitude to be conscious of our connection to the creation, the creator, God-mind, all that is, ...or whatever fits anyone's beliefs)

- Lucifer, being a manifestation of our rational ego, is 'incomplete' and bound to be trapped in it's own 'artificial' realms.
- Satan, is tied by it's propensity for 'materialistic pleasures', so case closed.

Up in the scale, we have the HEART. We 'feel' from it; - That is our connection - this is the KEY to Completeness.

Quote:
HE ALONE IS WORTH KNOWING! HAIL LUCIFER!
Zelphael, if you make the choice of living your life with an exclusively 'rational' mindset and Glorify your knowledge, good for you,
and then you can be glad to call yourself 'a Luciferian'.

But don't be surprised to find yourself sooner or later in the same gang as the 'Dark Cabal' and it's bunch of A** H***S.

Anyways, i question your intentions for setting up this thread.


salute.
BeaTnik-BandiT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2008, 12:30 AM   #18
Accipiter_Phi
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: over there, to the left... no, not that left, this left!
Posts: 86
Default Re: Why I am gladly a Luciferian.

advocatus phosophoros,

Leaving a wee bit out, aren't we?

Id est:

muneris ut ego versus muneris ut alius , nullus?

An nescis, mi fili, quantilla sapientia mundus regatur?

Veni Creator Spiritus: Orbis Judicans conscientiae.
Accipiter_Phi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2008, 01:08 AM   #19
TruthWillSetUFree
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Illinois
Posts: 673
Default Re: Why I am gladly a Luciferian.

Quote:
Originally Posted by martina View Post
The mind is not the spirit/soul. The mind is the intellect and emotions like fear, distress, hate, anger and egoism, it thinks it is the ruler.
The reason that we think we need the mind, is because we lost our abilities to think with our heart and to communicate with it.
Lucifer is the ego, who tells you, that it is your mind that is the most important, he gives you the illusion of being a master and creator, but it is not.
Lucifer can't create, he can only manipulate, that is something different.
In fact it is not the light he brings, but he disconnect you from your spirit/soul, in fact he brings darkness to you.
I also believe it was Lucifer/serpent who tempted Eve with the fruit on the tree of knowledge (mind). This has taken us out of "The Garden of Eden" of our spiritual selves into the world of suffering that the ego/Lucifer creates with illusion.

Just like he tricked Eve, he is a master of trickery and manipulation making you think it is for your own good and benefit. He has been at it for centuries.
(so has the Illuminati)

Jesus said we are not of this world. I believe this world is the home of the devil, as he was given dominion over it for a time, it is his playground to manipulate and control the masses until true Christ Consciousness wins this battle. (this is very true of the Illuminati/Bilderberg/NWO crew who are power hungry and control oriented)

Yes, it is all of God, the darkness/illusion/lucifer is catalyst that can propel change.

Underneath it all his power is only illusion used to control people much like the Wizard of Oz behind the curtain.

It is also the light that dispels the darkness and illusion. This is why transcending the ego/lucifer is a worthwhile endevour, as it takes one out of suffering into a non dualistic state where one has transcended mind and it's trappings.

It is up to us to see the illusions he creates, feeding our ego's with promises of love(that is only conditional if you do his bidding), power(over others) and material wealth(at the expense of others)

This is what we came to transcend for our salvation.
TruthWillSetUFree is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2008, 01:16 AM   #20
isotelesis
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 112
Cool Re: Why I am gladly a Luciferian.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zelphael View Post
HE ALONE IS WORTH KNOWING! HAIL LUCIFER!
Some folks need idols, haven't quite extricated themselves from monolithic symbols, the Prometheans are laughing, apparently some have never left their caves.

Last edited by isotelesis; 11-17-2008 at 01:20 AM.
isotelesis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2008, 03:56 AM   #21
capreycorn
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: switzerland
Posts: 455
Default Re: Why I am gladly a Luciferian.

it`s a curse, that we have to define and name something and thereby limit it. but how else would one bring up such a topic in this forum?

capreycorn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2008, 04:02 AM   #22
conjuredUp
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: beyond the sun...
Posts: 253
Default Re: Why I am gladly a Luciferian.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Circlewerk View Post
There is vibration that IS.
I am no longer influenced by the idea that it has to be labeled in order to be experienced.
These words, and their limited definitions can only keep us in a place of seeking, as if we are without, or in need, or are aspiring at best, as if there is some place, some way of thinking, either psychologically, spiritually, whatever, that we need to acquire in order to be at the top of our game as humans. This enables the belief in psychological time/ past/ future.

A label, even that part of my mind that is focused on considering whether a name is necessary, narrows my awareness of the vibration.
Dark, light, matters not. They act as a diversion on the human psyche, keeping him stuck in desire or fear.
It is the desire of the mind to label, to attach words, to attach at all, that must stop in order for the vibration to be tapped.
It is desire, seeking, believing, attachment, conscious & unconscious fear, that takes man on a parallel journey along side the IS, thwarting his individual unconditional awareness and ease in the unknown, due to being stuck in psychological time/desire.

Infinite, universal, unconditional vibration, needs not "become." It IS.
Naming it, at this point in our awareness, means it is still untapped by the person naming it.
The desire to name and/or define it, is a conditioned response.
The same response that has lead man away from himself for too long.

Breathing~
CW

Loving.
KNOWING.

IS'ing.
Yeah.

Informative article and thread, indeed... but labels, none-the-less.

LOVELOVELOVE,
C
conjuredUp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2008, 05:26 AM   #23
Circlewerk
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: So.Cal
Posts: 156
Default Re: Why I am gladly a Luciferian.

[QUOTE=capreycorn;81394]it`s a curse, that we have to define and name something and thereby limit it. but how else would one bring up such a topic in this forum?



Curse?


Perhaps if people spoke of it from the perspective of it being the unknown that it is, if they looked at their desire to name it, and analyzed that desire prior to considering labels, maybe then, they would detach from the desire and the influenced labels & beliefs that shrink them from it.

Maybe then, they could see that their desire to "know" something and label it, actually keeps them from experiencing the enormity of it.

If an individual speaks on their personal experience of it, without saying that their experience is the best, the only or most honest way to tap vibration, then they would be simply sharing their own experience without trying to influence others.
Words can quickly make a person appear self-righteous. Words carry their own vibration. In using them, it is productive when the individual own their experience as their own, asking themselves if it recycled, and what their motive is in speaking on it.
Delivery is often louder than the words chosen.

Speaking objectively, without an emotional commitment or attachment/belief to what is being said, or the way the audience receives the explanation, is less controlling, possibly inviting the reader/listener to explore what is offered unconditionally, if at all.

Looking to define something as radical as this is what keeps man from it.
Seeking, suggests not having, that it is out of reach..as if a definition will bring it into reach, or more of a reality..

With the limitations of words and definitions in this area, humility is seemingly a prerequisite to a real experience of IS.
It may even be, that once experienced consistently, a desire to define it will be realized as the limit of it, or at least the thing that cuts off that individuals experience of it.

" The mark of your ignorance is the depth of your belief in injustice and tragedy. What the caterpillar calls the end of the world, the master calls a butterfly."
Richard Bach-Illusions.
Circlewerk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2008, 06:02 AM   #24
capreycorn
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: switzerland
Posts: 455
Default Re: Why I am gladly a Luciferian.

[QUOTE=Circlewerk;81425]
Quote:
Originally Posted by capreycorn View Post
it`s a curse, that we have to define and name something and thereby limit it. but how else would one bring up such a topic in this forum?


Maybe then, they could see that their desire to "know" something and label it, actually keeps them from experiencing the enormity of it.

Delivery is often louder than the words chosen.

Looking to define something as radical as this is what keeps man from it.
Seeking, suggests not having, that it is out of reach..as if a definition will bring it into reach, or more of a reality..

With the limitations of words and definitions in this area, humility is seemingly a prerequisite to a real experience of IS.

" The mark of your ignorance is the depth of your belief in injustice and tragedy. What the caterpillar calls the end of the world, the master calls a butterfly."
Richard Bach-Illusions.


someone more eloquent than me might be able to "paint" a mental picture for the ones "listening" and thereby show the way to some extent..but that is just about as good as it gets..

the more we`re told, the less we know.
so is defining something a curse? maybe not that bad really. but a devil`s loop for many seekers in the ocean of semantics.

delivery is often louder than the words chosen. so true. and the less words chosen the better. knowing which "buttons to push" in the seeker`s mind to get him there without using a name or defining - is the key.

for some, enlightenment comes through poetry.
for others by "letting go" and for some through "desire".
..here we go again..I make no sense..

Last edited by capreycorn; 11-17-2008 at 06:09 AM.
capreycorn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2008, 09:27 AM   #25
martina
Avalon Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 91
Default Re: Why I am gladly a Luciferian.

Quote:
Originally Posted by capreycorn View Post
let`s face it. the ego / mind alone isn`t capable of letting us experience what enlightenment "Lucifer" & co. can flood our whole being with.
as long as we are trying to "feel" it with the "heart"..whatsoever..indicates, that we`re still tethered to very faint and limited ways of perception.
i believe, that awakening our kundalini or cultivating our chi pales in comparison to the true enlightenment of the light bearer..it`s like the light of a bonfire which looks pretty dim compared to the power of the sun.

it`s all a little off, but I`m just trying to give an idea what kind of heavenly force the "light" of the bearer could have...

....the world couldn`t imagine what force the atomic bomb would have until...
(this is not saying that the light bearer is a destructive force...absolutely not)
It is not trying to feel it with the heart, I am talking about. There is a place in the heart from where you can go everywere in the universe you want, its a place from where you can get all the answers from and where you can communicate with the higher realms. Its a place where you can be. Besides this, the heart has brain-cells and can think, the mind is not made to think with, as you can probably see.
martina is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:44 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Project Avalon