Re: Reclaiming Lucifer Good message! Every known religion supplanted an earlier religion,

---
Master Index Current Directory Index Go to SkepticTank Go to Human Rights activist Keith Henson Go to Scientology cult

Skeptic Tank!

From: Tim Maroney Re: Reclaiming Lucifer Good message! Every known religion supplanted an earlier religion, and usually some derogatory mythological niche was created for the deities and spirits of the older religion when this happened. In the case of Satan, he is a fusion of our old friend the Horned God (especially in the Pan-form to which he was best known by the Greek-speaking world) and the Judaic mythic figure of Satan from the book of Job. But far from the loyal prosecuting attorney of Job, Satan as formulated to insult pagans was made into an evil nemesis of God, and the exemplar of what to the pain-worshipping Christians was "sin", that is, anything ecstatic and joyful. Satan is constantly telling us to get drunk, pig out on good food, and have sex in the Christians' accounts, to which my reaction is "Amen". I think you have put it very well when you say that "Even though [new pagans] have thrown off the chains of Jehovah they still fear Lucifer. They cringe at the sound of his name." Over and over we hear this shallow refrain, that witches are NOT NOT NOT Satanists, and I think: Why the Hell not? There's more wisdom in any one page of William Blake's overtly Satanic "Marriage of Heaven and Hell" than in the whole corpus of Starhawk's work, after all. (But then, Blake wrote sophisticated and literate poetry, not folk tales, so few neo-pagans have read him.) What are these people so afraid of? Not only are neo-pagans NOT NOT NOT Satanists, they are quite nasty toward anyone who recognizes the deep truth of Satanism. One widely liked member of this board called me a "neurotic Christian-lover" for espousing the reading of Blake and Shaw's Satanic works. Needless to say, no neo-pagan objected. Within the last month a person interested in invoking Lucifer had his account removed by one of the sysops, who said the reason was that "he was extremely abusive"; of course, he didn't mention that the guy started out polite and only became abusive after the aforesaid sysop himself sent some *very* nasty and prejudiced messages to him. Again, zero objection from the neo-pagans. Similar examples abound; but I think things are beginning to loosen up on this front, thanks to people like yourself, and (I like to think) because of my continued pounding on the counter-consensual drum. Tim PS. You called for resources; aside from the Blake, there is Shaw's "The Devil's Disciple", and you might want to check out Campbell's "Masks of God" for more information on the mythic disparagement of older deities such as happened to the Titans in Greek myth and various matriarchal deities. Campbell's sympathies are clearly with the underdog.

---

E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank