Jump to content


* * * * * 2 votes

Horned God Was Originally Lucifer?


27 replies to this topic

#21 Lydia

    Member

  • Old Timers
  • Pip
  • 17 posts
  • LocationU.S.

Posted 20 April 2017 - 05:34 AM

View PostSuccubusSherry, on 21 February 2016 - 09:21 PM, said:

I came across an amazing comment this week in a group that I occasionally look into:
"Gerald Gardner’s original notes used Lucifer as the name of the horned god before Doreen Valiente changed it during her grand re-write."

That statement is false. The person who wrote it was either lying, or was unknowingly passing on someone else's lie.

Doreen Valiente didn't join Gardner's Bricket Wood Coven until the summer of 1953, whereas Gerald Gardner had chosen the two god names, including 'Cernunnos', several years before that, when he was writing the draft material for his coven, some time in 1945-47. Gardner's pre-Valiente book of shadows, which copied much of that material, and was written some time in or before 1949, likewise uses the name 'Cernunnos'. Before Gardner had decided on the god names, he did not write 'Lucifer' as a stand-in name in his writings, but rather he simply wrote 'the gods'.


View Postsen, on 21 February 2016 - 10:40 PM, said:

The Bible describes Satan, in later works, as something of a dragon. Prior to that, however, he's never really described physically.

By "later works", you are referring to the Book of Revelation in particular, which is the only book in the bible that gives Satan a physical description. In particular, it is verses 12:3-4 that provide that description. That excerpt uses the koine greek word 'drakon', which is often translated as 'dragon', but it actually means 'large snake'. Although the english word 'dragon' is derived from that greek word, it has come to refer to a very different type of creature.

Edited by Lydia, 20 April 2017 - 01:01 PM.


#22 violetstar

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 381 posts
  • LocationUK

Posted 20 April 2017 - 10:41 AM

Lydia,your statement is also incorrect.'Dragon' is no more a description than what is given in Ezekiel:

Ezekiel 28:12-18 God describing him: “Thus says the Lord GOD, You had the seal of perfection, Full of wisdom and perfect in beauty. You were in Eden, the garden of God; Every precious stone was your covering: The ruby, the topaz, and the diamond; The beryl, the onyx, and the jasper; The lapis lazuli, the turquoise, and the emerald; And the gold, the workmanship of your settings and sockets, was in you. On the day that you were created they were prepared. You were the anointed cherub who covers, and I placed you there. You were on the holy mountain of God; You walked in the midst of the stones of fire. You were blameless in your ways from the day you were created. Until unrighteousness was found in you.”


It’s complicated to compare the Hebrew tanin, the Greek drakon, and the KJV “dragon” and other translations (including “whale”) because there is some disagreement about the original text.

Furthermore, sometimes the Greek drakon and KJV “dragon” are translations of a different Hebrew word altogether: livyathan, commonly “leviathan” in English.
“The use of ‘dragon’ by the KJV [for tanin, rendered in the LXX as drakon] is not correct. There were no dragons in ancient Israel.” - Dr.Claude Mariottini

We are looking at Leviathan rather than Satan.You should also be aware that by applying literalism you undermine the mystic interpretation gained through knowledge of the meaning of projective language in both the Greek and Hebrew letters used to construct words.Without this much of the Bible will be incomprehensible nonsense taken literally but by understanding the words used to produce a passage,the nonsense soon becomes a truth.

That being applied,you will find there are in fact two 'Satans' in the New Testament each holding a specific role in the stories there,

As for Gardner one might substitute 'writing draft' for 'nicking from Crowley'.But its old hat and all he had claimed has been demolished by Ronald Hutton and more so Ethan Doyle-White.

Might I suggest you research more thoroughly and get your own facts right before hurling claims of misinformation at others.
Your friend is close by your side and speaks in far ancient tongues - Jon Vangelis

#23 Lydia

    Member

  • Old Timers
  • Pip
  • 17 posts
  • LocationU.S.

Posted 21 April 2017 - 02:18 AM

View Postvioletstar, on 20 April 2017 - 10:41 AM, said:

Might I suggest you research more thoroughly and get your own facts right before hurling claims of misinformation at others.

Wow, Violetstar, that is quite some aggressive false-portrayal that you direct against me, and completely unprovoked- falsely portraying my benign and constructive correction of another poster's inaccuracy as an act of personal aggression.

Furthermore, I clearly demonstrate below that I have more correct knowledge on these subjects than you do, and that various statements of yours are not factual, so it's amusing to see you say that I need to research more thoroughly and get my facts right.


View Postvioletstar, on 20 April 2017 - 10:41 AM, said:

Lydia,your statement is also incorrect.'Dragon' is no more a description than what is given in Ezekiel: Ezekiel 28:12-18 God describing him:

That quote from Ezekiel is irrelevant, being as it describes a king of Tyre rather than Satan.
But I suppose that some christian biblical exegetes, seeking to find more references to Satan than there actually are, misinterpreted it as Satan.

And by the way, Revelation 12:3-4 describes Satan with much more detail than just 'drakon' (large snake).
It describes Satan as being a huge red snake with seven heads, a diadem crown on each head, ten horns (it is not stated how the ten horns are distributed among the seven heads), and an apparently long and powerful tail.


View Postvioletstar, on 20 April 2017 - 10:41 AM, said:

Furthermore, sometimes the Greek drakon and KJV “dragon” are translations of a different Hebrew word altogether: livyathan, commonly “leviathan” in English.

The word 'Leviathan' is usually left untranslated in the various versions of the bible.
But that is irrelevant in this case anyway, because the Book of Revelation was not translated into koine greek from hebrew, but was originally written in koine greek by John of Patmos, so he knew exactly what greek words to use.


View Postvioletstar, on 20 April 2017 - 10:41 AM, said:

“The use of ‘dragon’ by the KJV [for tanin ... ] is not correct. There were no dragons in ancient Israel.” - Dr.Claude Mariottini

That is similar to what I was saying, though I had criticized the translation of drakon into 'dragon',
because 'dragons' as we think of them today did not exist in the mythology of the classical greeks either.


View Postvioletstar, on 20 April 2017 - 10:41 AM, said:

We are looking at Leviathan rather than Satan.

Wrong again. Revelation 12:9 clearly states that the giant snake in the sky is Satan, called 'Diabolos' and 'Satanas' in koine greek. But that does not rule out the possibility that the giant Satan-snake is also equated with Leviathan. The conceptions of Leviathan in the old testament vary, but there is one old testament conception of Leviathan, in Isaiah 27:1, which describes Leviathan as a snake ('nahas' in hebrew), and may therefore be alluded to by the drakon (large snake) of Revelation 12, whereas there is no connection to the other mentions and conceptions of Leviathan in the old testament.


View Postvioletstar, on 20 April 2017 - 10:41 AM, said:

You should also be aware that by applying literalism you undermine the mystic interpretation gained through knowledge of the meaning of projective language in both the Greek and Hebrew letters used to construct words.Without this[,] much of the Bible will be incomprehensible nonsense taken literally but by understanding the words used to produce a passage,the nonsense soon becomes a truth.
That being applied,you will find there are in fact two 'Satans' in the New Testament each holding a specific role in the stories there[.]

You are referring to the beliefs put forth in the 1970 book called "The Cipher of Genesis" by Carlo Suares.
Those beliefs are not based in historical facts about biblical doctrines, but are a baseless and anachronistic application of Kabbalistic ideas about letters to biblical texts, to try to read-in new meanings that are not actually there.


View Postvioletstar, on 20 April 2017 - 10:41 AM, said:

As for Gardner one might substitute 'writing draft' for 'nicking from Crowley'.

Wrong. Gerald Gardner certainly took many quotes and other elements from Crowley, but he also took much from other sources as well, such as the Key of Solomon, the Golden Dawn, and the book Aradia; plus he also contributed his own original content.

Edited by Lydia, 22 April 2017 - 08:29 AM.
Took out the insults


#24 Lillith_Star

    Member

  • Old Timers
  • Pip
  • 22 posts
  • LocationIn your dreams.. stealing your life force

Posted 21 April 2017 - 02:34 AM

View PostLydia, on 20 April 2017 - 05:34 AM, said:

That statement is false. The person who wrote it was either lying, or was unknowingly passing on someone else's lie.

Doreen Valiente didn't join Gardner's Bricket Wood Coven until the summer of 1953, whereas Gerald Gardner had chosen the two god names, including 'Cernunnos', several years before that, when he was writing the draft material for his coven, some time in 1945-47. Gardner's pre-Valiente book of shadows, which copied much of that material, and was written some time in or before 1949, likewise uses the name 'Cernunnos'. Before Gardner had decided on the god names, he did not write 'Lucifer' as a stand-in name in his writings, but rather he simply wrote 'the gods'.



However, Gardner was copying Aradia a lot from Leland's material where Lucifer is the god of witchcraft in the Wica's religious framework. ("Aradia" being the "Goddess".) While his (Lucifer) more pagan origins are showing in this document, there is still some Catholic assimilation in such. Valiente was probably right about his omission of Lucifer as "too strong meat" for his Wicca, as she said in another interview. Gardner was more careful about anything with Satan or any association, probably due to fear of religious persecution of his day. Valiente and others were not, originally, so keen to it.

#25 R. Eugene Laughlin

    Board Member

  • Moderators
  • 3,516 posts
  • LocationOregon

Posted 21 April 2017 - 05:02 AM

I've locked this thread pending a Moderation Team review.
Effectiveness is the Measure of Truth
http://neuromagick.com/
https://www.etsy.com...CraftsEngraving

#26 Curious Cat

    Nanwu

  • Owner
  • 1,132 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 03:17 PM

I am unlocking this thread. Please refrain from making insults or threats.

#27 violetstar

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 381 posts
  • LocationUK

Posted 22 April 2017 - 04:33 PM

Lydia.Carlo Suares was a late comer to Hebrew letter mysticism-by many centuries.

I should have made clear in my reply to you that the information on Satan was not my opinion but that of recognised experts in the field.However,the whole theology of the early writers such as Josephus who equated Satan with a King of Tyre in the example you gave,is in constant dispute among Theologians.Thus what is taken as accepted fact may be subject to change as new evidence comes to light.

You are of course entitled to your own personal beliefs.
Your friend is close by your side and speaks in far ancient tongues - Jon Vangelis

#28 R. Eugene Laughlin

    Board Member

  • Moderators
  • 3,516 posts
  • LocationOregon

Posted 22 April 2017 - 05:15 PM

We're locking the thread again and will consider reopening it at a later date.
Effectiveness is the Measure of Truth
http://neuromagick.com/
https://www.etsy.com...CraftsEngraving





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users