Who is Satan

[Fixed Cross]

Is Satan truly the evil adrenalchrome harvesting tyrant? Or is he La Vey's rebel?
Or the Hebrew "adversary" or yet something else?

I know a few Satanists - and they are mostly a danger to themselves. Is it that they havent ascended high enough on the satanic ladder? Or is Satan being used as a patsy?

Honestly, Im in the dark here.

untab

Hoo-hooooooo what a spooky pun.

[Dan~]

I believe that satan is many types of beings related to the word itself.
There is no one true satan.

[Mr Reasonable]

I think it's just a word people use to describe a guy who embodies things that they see as contrary to their morals.

[iambiguous]

Well, that settles that.

[Meno_]

Not necessarily....



The Faustian bargain was just a too hasty forgone ( fargone) conclusion.

[felix dakat]

A man of wealth and taste?

[Bob]

Hebrew Bible

The original Hebrew term śāṭān (Hebrew: שָּׂטָן‎) is a generic noun meaning "accuser" or "adversary",[7][8] which is used throughout the Hebrew Bible to refer to ordinary human adversaries,[9][8] as well as a specific supernatural entity.[9][8] The word is derived from a verb meaning primarily "to obstruct, oppose".[10] When it is used without the definite article (simply satan), the word can refer to any accuser,[9] but when it is used with the definite article (ha-satan), it usually refers specifically to the heavenly accuser: the satan.[9]

The word with the definite article Ha-Satan occurs 17 times in the Masoretic Text, in two books of the Hebrew Bible: Job ch. 1–2 (14×) and Zechariah 3:1–2 (3×).[11] [12] It is translated in English bibles mostly as 'Satan' (18x in Book of Job, I Books of Chronicles and Book of Zechariah).

The word without the definite article is used in 10 instances, of which two are translated diabolos in the Septuagint. It is translated in English Bibles as 'an accuser' (1x) but mostly as 'an adversary' (9x as in Book of Numbers, 1 & 2 Samuel and 1 Kings).

1 Chronicles 21:1, "Satan stood up against Israel" (KJV) or "And there standeth up an adversary against Israel" (Young's Literal Translation)[13]
Psalm 109:6b "and let Satan stand at his right hand" (KJV)[14] or "let an accuser stand at his right hand." (ESV, etc.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satan

[felix dakat]

Hebrew Bible

The original Hebrew term śāṭān (Hebrew: שָּׂטָן‎) is a generic noun meaning "accuser" or "adversary",[7][8] which is used throughout the Hebrew Bible to refer to ordinary human adversaries,[9][8] as well as a specific supernatural entity.[9][8] The word is derived from a verb meaning primarily "to obstruct, oppose".[10] When it is used without the definite article (simply satan), the word can refer to any accuser,[9] but when it is used with the definite article (ha-satan), it usually refers specifically to the heavenly accuser: the satan.[9]

The word with the definite article Ha-Satan occurs 17 times in the Masoretic Text, in two books of the Hebrew Bible: Job ch. 1–2 (14×) and Zechariah 3:1–2 (3×).[11] [12] It is translated in English bibles mostly as 'Satan' (18x in Book of Job, I Books of Chronicles and Book of Zechariah).

The word without the definite article is used in 10 instances, of which two are translated diabolos in the Septuagint. It is translated in English Bibles as 'an accuser' (1x) but mostly as 'an adversary' (9x as in Book of Numbers, 1 & 2 Samuel and 1 Kings).

1 Chronicles 21:1, "Satan stood up against Israel" (KJV) or "And there standeth up an adversary against Israel" (Young's Literal Translation)[13]
Psalm 109:6b "and let Satan stand at his right hand" (KJV)[14] or "let an accuser stand at his right hand." (ESV, etc.)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satan

Ah yes. But Satan is depicted as far more powerful in the New Testament than in the Old. In the New Testament he is viewed as "the god of this world". He temps Jesus by offering all the Earth's kingdoms to him indicating his power over them.

[perpetualburn]

Is Satan truly the evil adrenalchrome harvesting tyrant? Or is he La Vey's rebel?
Or the Hebrew "adversary" or yet something else?

I know a few Satanists - and they are mostly a danger to themselves. Is it that they havent ascended high enough on the satanic ladder? Or is Satan being used as a patsy?

Honestly, Im in the dark here.

untab

Hoo-hooooooo what a spooky pun.

If he's a tyrant then he's less of a tyrant than God. Some Christians believe even Satan can be saved (although this might be considered blasphemy).

The real sin, the sin of sins, is attributing the power of the holy spirit to the devil or some other divine source (I'm not even sure Satan himself commits this sin... his sin seems to simply be pride and a desire to rule in heaven... But does this mean he thinks he could perform the same life-saving function of God, or does he just want to displace him? ). What is the relationship of the Devil with the fire of Love? Is the Devil simply Love in its melancholy form, wandering the in-between realm of dreams as God's most beautiful dejected angel? Or is he a fiery tempter, and as such, how does this fire compare with the flame of God?

https://poets.org/poem/two-loves
https://poets.org/poem/praise-shame

And
" so fair was he, So melancholy, yet withal so proud" from his poem "The Legend of Spinello of Arezzo"


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_sin

Nietzsche seems to be the greatest sinner in this regard. His Dionysus/Eros (Both liberators/hunters)/Superman/Eternal Return completely replaces the critical life-saving function of God. What's interesting to me about Nietzsche, is that he must of experienced some pretty rapturous visions of the Christ-god-archetype at some point, but yet remained devoted to Dionysus to the very end. Nietzsche's Dionysus then seems to be an even greater "enemy" to Christ than the Devil... I put enemy in quotations because I think Dionysus simply sublimates the Christ-god-Archetype whereas in Christianity the opposition between Christ and the Devil lasts forever.

To add further confusion, the very best Christians (who are really just great poets) seem to do the opposite! (they treat the pagan gods kindly but ultimately believe it is Christ that does the sublimating)

[Gloominary]

I think of Lucifer, Satan and the Devil as 3 archetypes, energies or entities in 1, sort of like the unholy trinity.

God: Lawful Good

A lawful good character typically acts with compassion and always with honor and a sense of duty. However, lawful good characters will often regret taking any action they fear would violate their code, even if they recognize such action as being good.

Lucifer: Chaotic Good

A chaotic good character does what is necessary to bring about change for the better, disdains bureaucratic organizations that get in the way of social improvement, and places a high value on personal freedom, not only for oneself, but for others as well. Chaotic good characters usually intend to do the right thing, but their methods are generally disorganized and often out of sync with the rest of society.

Satan: Lawful Evil

A lawful evil character sees a well-ordered system as being easier to exploit than to necessarily follow.

The Devil: Chaotic Evil

A chaotic evil character tends to have no respect for rules, other people's lives, or anything but their own desires, which are typically selfish and cruel. They set a high value on personal freedom, but do not have much regard for the lives or freedom of other people. Chaotic evil characters do not work well in groups because they resent being given orders and usually do not behave themselves unless there is no alternative.

What constitutes all 4 is somewhat (sub)culturally and/or individually relative.

[perpetualburn]

the very best Christians (who are really just great poets) seem to do the opposite! (they treat the pagan gods kindly but ultimately believe it is Christ that does the sublimating)

I just saw this on Gab (posted by the CEO Andrew Torba):

"Christianity did not come to travel and journey along with the other religions or to coexist peacefully with them, and to learn to get along. It came to dissolve the false faiths once and for all."
- Elder Athanasios Mitilinaios

[zinnat]

Well, both of Bob and Felix are very close to reality.

Satan is the adminstrator ( not ruler) of this world put purposely there by the God himself to teach and test humans. That is why he tempts every one in order not to cross him spiritually.

He is not a some kind of evil entity as most think about him.
He is just fulfilling a duty assigned to him but he does that very strictly. Whoever comes to this human's realm are his subjects and have to go by his rules and regulations, without any exceptions including avatars and prophets.

With love,
Sanjay

[Fixed Cross]

A man of wealth and taste?

Best comment. But wrong, because that's Lucifer.
This is a real tricky situation because it is scary.

Gloominary has something I think. But maybe the arrangement of the last two should be reversed - Satan doesnt seem so orderly to me - nor does it seem to me that lawful / orderly evil is less evil than chaotic evil.
Think of the Soviet Union.

Satan is the adminstrator ( not ruler) of this world put purposely there by the God himself to teach and test humans. That is why he tempts every one in order not to cross him spiritually.

He is not a some kind of evil entity as most think about him.
He is just fulfilling a duty assigned to him but he does that very strictly. Whoever comes to this human's realm are his subjects and have to go by his rules and regulations, without any exceptions including avatars and prophets.

He isnt the ruler but its his rules and regulations?
The way you put it, it would seem that Satan is simply the strong arm of God, which is incorrect, at least from the Biblical perspective; other Angels and Aspects of God serve that purpose. For example, Michael, who governs the Police. And Michael. whose names means Alike to God, doesnt obey to anyone except his creator.
Satan is more complex.
Satan in the Biblical tradition seems an entity in particular concerned with advanced and exalted humans, a trickster element, a seducer. He is not the force of commandment that compels rules like the Ten Commandments.

Is Satan truly the evil adrenalchrome harvesting tyrant? Or is he La Vey's rebel?
Or the Hebrew "adversary" or yet something else?

I know a few Satanists - and they are mostly a danger to themselves. Is it that they havent ascended high enough on the satanic ladder? Or is Satan being used as a patsy?

Honestly, Im in the dark here.

untab

Hoo-hooooooo what a spooky pun.

If he's a tyrant then he's less of a tyrant than God. Some Christians believe even Satan can be saved (although this might be considered blasphemy).

The real sin, the sin of sins, is attributing the power of the holy spirit to the devil or some other divine source (I'm not even sure Satan himself commits this sin... his sin seems to simply be pride and a desire to rule in heaven... But does this mean he thinks he could perform the same life-saving function of God, or does he just want to displace him? ). What is the relationship of the Devil with the fire of Love? Is the Devil simply Love in its melancholy form, wandering the in-between realm of dreams as God's most beautiful dejected angel? Or is he a fiery tempter, and as such, how does this fire compare with the flame of God?

It would quite simply be a waste of Creation not to have entities vying for it in their autonomous will.
I agree with Gloominary on the nature of the Light Bearer, he is that rogue element of wealth and taste which isnt in the game to sustain and nurture but to make use of it so as to make sure that it is something real.
He is there to make sure the sheep arent the final meaning of the Earth.

Satan is rather the one who manufactured the deal between wolf, shepherd and dog that keeps the sheep in check.

Nietzsche seems to be the greatest sinner in this regard. His Dionysus/Eros (Both liberators/hunters)/Superman/Eternal Return completely replaces the critical life-saving function of God.

It is older in origin and more comprehensive even in its origin than the Christ - the Dionysian finds its meaning in the state religion of the Tragic, which was a forced initiation of the whole polis, woman, children and slaves included, into pretty serious mysteries of the psyche; mysteries which in our time are unincorporated.
Satan in such a culture was not possible, as the whole People was a spectrum, which N referred to as Dionysos himself.

What's interesting to me about Nietzsche, is that he must of experienced some pretty rapturous visions of the Christ-god-archetype at some point, but yet remained devoted to Dionysus to the very end.

I dont think so at all actually... I am fairly certain that he was a true pagan, and that his visions were Wotanic, shamanic, which allowed him to adopt the Presocratic instincts (Socrates as blueprint for the Christ) and which naturally abhors the christian flame.
I dont see that there was a christian pathos strong enough to produce visions.

Nietzsche's Dionysus then seems to be an even greater "enemy" to Christ than the Devil... I put enemy in quotations because I think Dionysus simply sublimates the Christ-god-Archetype whereas in Christianity the opposition between Christ and the Devil lasts forever.

Its not that I am ignorant of the concept of sublimation, but could you explain what it truly means in this context?
is not the Christgod an attempt to sublimize this duality, with confession and communion as its alchemical method? Is it not essentially a failure, "a colossal waste" as reportedly Odin told a modern shaman?
Is not Dionysos simply an alchemy for a stronger kind of human, who is compelled to take more Earthly truth into his heart?

I dont think there is an underlying nature to all gods; I think wars in heaven are frequent and intense.

It seems to me that a whole lot of gods would be pissed off at the Christ for usurping mankind in a habit of lacking discipline. I do think Nietzsche is best taken literally, with Christianity as first a symptom and then an exacerbation of decadence. And from this flurid rot, a couple of special flowers were born which served to intoxicate in ways that bent the spirit back to health. I personally take this to apply only the the religion of the Western Roman Empire. I have much to respect in the East - there is a greater continuity of culture and an absence of radical artifices inflicted on human nature. It is less of an experiment.
Who Jesus was to me is a student of Babaji, the teacher of Lahiri Mahasaya, in whose temple Ive accessed his grace, the sheer awesomeness the might of Light, the instance of dust that the whole of time in under his finger.
A contemporary saying attributed to the man who is said to live this whole Aeon on sun-breath, is that it is within the power of the yogi to resist the nuclear bomb.
In as far as legends go, of great men of god, this is both ore close to home and more convincing of true divinity. For me anyway. Im not that impressed with the Jesus. He was a yogi with an ego. Whereas the yogi ego is only a fluttering bird who laughs at itself in beautiful song, Jesus said: none shall enter heaven except through me. Wow. Just, wow.

Apollon is one God who really does not resonate well with Christianity. Both are Sun Gods, but Apollon is actually the Sun. The Christ is a dark swamp wherein the human spirit triumphs only despite its own faith, in error, which life is happy to provide anyone who doesnt engage daily in a real spiritual discipline, which involves physical dexterity in coordination with worship in the form of giving shape to nature - it is the true form of being human.
Odin did in the end find ways of working with Christ, because there is plenty of trickery to be done, but Apollon is really pissed.

To add further confusion, the very best Christians (who are really just great poets) seem to do the opposite! (they treat the pagan gods kindly but ultimately believe it is Christ that does the sublimating)

But humans do not all respond to the same Gods in the same ways.
Christ is incapable of sublimating anything in me so as for me to want to "be" it'; I wont speak of his mother, she holds a different magic, more ancient.
But the transformative power - I dont know that I need to be sublimated - in my soul became known to me only through the pagan gods and goddesses.

Odin does seem to me to prefer Lucifer, and not to like Satan very much. Perhaps then it is true what Gloominary says.

In as far as the laws of evil go, apparently it simply has to do with sacrificing to a goal.
The concept of a boss, at a job, that you dont believe in but you have to do it.
This is lawful evil, the nature of drafted armies.

[phenomenal_graffiti]

Satan is whatever one imagines and believes him to be without regard for (if he exists) what or who he is outside anyone's belief and definition.

That being said, there may be someone's imagination of what or who Satan is that coincides with external reality.

It is unknown who "guessed the right answer".

[obsrvr524]

I was taught that Satan is a method of manipulation (an Archangel) used by man in the attempt to maintain power over all people forever. It is depicted as the goat's head because the method is that of the escape goat - falsely accused of stealing by the actual thief (much like in the US's elections).


The USD probably should read - "In Satan we Trust".

Jesus was reportedly tempted by its use to gain control over the entire Earth but chose otherwise.

Satanism is used throughout MSM, Wikipedia, and even in the maths thread when conflating 1.0 with 0.999... currently being discussed. And I am about to prove that such satanism is NOT all powerful.

[Dan~]

Just a little while ago I was attending a zoom JW meeting online.
I like to learn more about bible topics and the ideas surrounding them.
But some guy started to talk shit about satan like there was no tomorrow.
I got so upset and disturbed that i closed the window.

The teacher / preacher seemed to be so arrogant that it was almost inhuman.

As if free will is the ultimate source of all sin and evil.
Blame freedom and satan for all your problems and it wont make them go away,
it just makes things worse.

[obsrvr524]

Just a little while ago I was attending a zoom JW meeting online.
I like to learn more about bible topics and the ideas surrounding them.
But some guy started to talk shit about satan like there was no tomorrow.
I got so upset and disturbed that i closed the window.

The teacher / preacher seemed to be so arrogant that it was almost inhuman.

As if free will is the ultimate source of all sin and evil.
Blame freedom and satan for all your problems and it wont make them go away,
it just makes things worse.

I don't think that preachers are usually saying "don't blame me - it's his fault".

I think they are saying "because 'he' (or really 'it') can seriously mess with your life - beware."

I don't see it as any different than someone saying that there is a possibly really really really bad storm coming that could completely trash your roof - so make sure to reinforce the uprights.

Or maybe a politician claiming that a certain policy proposal will bring horrible devastation to your country (such as electing O'Biden) so strongly defend against it.

[Dan~]

I don't think that preachers are usually saying "don't blame me - it's his fault".
I think they are saying "because 'he' (or really 'it') can seriously mess with your life - beware."

In this case, it was the JW teaching that evil is caused by the miss-use of free will.

What good does it do to preach "Beware" ?

A God that created all is off the hook now because somehow free will makes bad things happen.

So far Bob made the best post.

[Fixed Cross]

Yes, Bobs post was very good.

He went into the actual meaning of the world. I mentioned it in the OP too.

Still and all, are we much clearer now than we were before, on the nature of this being?
Or are we even less clear?



Observer - you, not unreasonably, connect satan, as the goat, with the accused --- the bock of shame, bock of sin. Scapegoat.

Whereas the Hebrew term satan appears to mean accuser.



See what I mean? This creature does a hell of a job confounding us.
"The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didnt exist" - but even when his existence is recognized no one seems to be able to pin him down.

The being's got some skills. And Im perfectly serious - it isnt often at all that a being or concept is so utterly elusive.

[obsrvr524]

Yes, Bobs post was very good.

He went into the actual meaning of the world. I mentioned it in the OP too.

Still and all, are we much clearer now than we were before, on the nature of this being?
Or are we even less clear?



Observer - you, not unreasonably, connect satan, as the goat, with the accused --- the bock of shame, bock of sin. Scapegoat.

Whereas the Hebrew term Satan appears to mean accuser.

I completely agree with Bob's post. I wasn't saying that Satan is the goat. Satan's HEAD is represented as a goat - meaning that what comprises his intelligence is the intelligence about the escape goat story ("It isn't me - it's this goat"). If the story had been about the intelligent use of a football, his head would be that of a football. The football would be the cleverly accused (they certainly couldn't use the face of the one doing the accusing - that would defeat the intelligence being displayed).

And Satanism isn't only about accusing. Someone who is merely accusing someone isn't a satanist. The satanist accuses someone (or something I guess) for his own guilt. You see that on this board all the time - "hypocrisy" - "I'm not guilty - they are" - even though he really is and they are probably innocent.

It is a technique Karl Marx proposed to help accomplish communism (he didn't invent it).

And like I called out long ago, what they have been calling the Marxist movement in the US was actually the contest between The Devil vs Donald Trump and affecting the entire world. He exposed the shills and scammers that comprise the Ugly Swamp in DC and that the US Congress has now entirely become ruled by. He "tore the curtain". So of course they accused him of being divisive when he actually just exposed the division that they had already produced. Satanism creates divisiveness because it offends the innocent into getting angry at the judgers who didn't realize (often) that they had been scammed.

[Fixed Cross]

I can fully understand that definition.

Very good. Satan isnt the goat, he is the goat-exploiter.

So that is the meaning of inverting the pentagram. Creating a goat.

This means that the enemies of Trump arent merely, satanists - they are satans.

[obsrvr524]

This means that the enemies of Trump arent merely, satanists - they are satans.

And by analogy the Trumpers are the early Christians - being gunned down after the trial and crucifixion by the satanists who's curtain he tore and tables he over turned.

And look what came of that.

But this time I imagine it is different. Now there is a super surveillance state covering the whole world - no where for the Christians (Trumpsters) to run or hide.

Now Satan reigns supreme (for a while at least).

[Meno_]

Until Daniel Webster gets a hold of him

[Fixed Cross]

I think you get that part of the story in a different light than I do - (though I do not disagree)
The concept of satan isnt originated in the new testament, but in the old.
So I see not one satan confronting christ but something altogether more complex, a game of satans and tzaddiks.
Men of God, obedient to their family laws as well as privately engaged in work for the dharma.
tzaddiks are tied to what is in astrology the fourth house, the nadir, the home of the moon, in which Jupiter is exalted.

Beyond the tzaddik, there is the personality Zeroeth Nature appears to present.
The one so highhe had to fall to know anything at all.
Beyond this, in the rare case someone comes out of that sane, lie the mysteries of Lucifer, if I may so freely speak -
who is equated in certain lore with Athena - whose animal is the owl.

As we have been told,

untab

This only means, that the battle is moved to a higher arc. We arent fighting from the cross but from the throne; so we arent fighting satans but the abyss of Being, the abysmalness of which statans happily use where they can, but which they havent created.

[Fanman]

I think that “Satan” represents people who can only tolerate things done in the way they want, and will go to any length to achieve their goals. The kind of people who have a sense of entitlement and lust for power. According to the Bible, he wanted to place his throne above the stars of God. For me, that says everything about “him” I need to know. Because if God has a good nature, unless Satan had contrary views to him, why would he go to the extent of wanting to place his throne above “God’s stars”? Satan seems like a narcissist to me.