• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Quick question

Frank Goad

Well-Known Member
When satan was made he was a good guy.And there was nobody around to make him rebel.If he didn't have anyone to tell him to go against God.Then why did he rebel in the first place?:confused: Sorry if I have asked this before.:(
 

epronovost

Well-Known Member
When satan was made he was a good guy.And there was nobody around to make him rebel.If he didn't have anyone to tell him to go against God.Then why did he rebel in the first place?:confused: Sorry if I have asked this before.:(

I believe the legend says that he rebelled against God because he thought he was God's equal and was punished for his hubris and pride.
 

QuestioningMind

Well-Known Member
When satan was made he was a good guy.And there was nobody around to make him rebel.If he didn't have anyone to tell him to go against God.Then why did he rebel in the first place?:confused: Sorry if I have asked this before.:(

The reality is that originally the Torah indicated that Lucifer was God's obedient right-hand man and there was no conflict between them. It wasn't until the Jewish people were being ruled by a nation that had a religion where the creator god and his associate were enemies that the story changed and suddenly Lucifer became God's nemesis, so that the Jewish religion was more in line with the new rulers.
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
When satan was made he was a good guy.And there was nobody around to make him rebel.If he didn't have anyone to tell him to go against God.Then why did he rebel in the first place?:confused: Sorry if I have asked this before.:(
Pride entered into his heart and then he wanted to sit in God's throne. Ask as many time as you want.
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
There is a charming story that was told during Medieval times about Satan in the Middle East, although the story did not make its way to the West. Once upon a time, Satan was the most exemplary angel. Then God created humans and asked his angels to bow down to his new creation. Satan so loved God that he refused to bow to anyone but Him. Hence, he was cast out of heaven.
 

Hockeycowboy

Witness for Jehovah
Premium Member
Because Jehovah, who is loving and not a tyrant, gives His intelligent creation dignity and freedom.....He did not create a police state, constantly monitoring His creatures’ thoughts.

That being so, Satan began to dwell on wrong ideas, and basically grew jealous of the worship given to the Almighty. He wanted to bring attention to himself. As @KenS stated, he let pride grow & control his motivations.
 
Last edited:

February-Saturday

Devil Worshiper
Since you posted this in the Religious Q&A forum without specifying it was directed to Christians, I think that means that I get to answer.

Satan never rebelled against God. He opposes Yaldabaoth, the aeons, and the archons. Yaldabaoth might be mistaken for God, because he mythologically created the aeons and cursed the material realm, locking human spirits in golems, but he's just the demiurge.

Satan was responsible for "waking up" figures like Lilith, Judas, and Qayin from a "spiritual stupor," and they deserted Yaldabaoth after receiving His gnosis. This is sometimes portrayed as them rebelling, but Satan Himself did not rebel.

None of this literally happened, though. The myths that describe this are allegorical; they're meant to be used as guidebooks for achieving a sort of Greco-Roman equivalent to enlightenment. It's pretty obvious that they aren't meant as literal history when one sect can have multiple different variations and name characters things like "wisdom" or "error" or "enlightener."

Sin, especially pride specifically, doesn't really factor into it. The only prideful one, really, is Yaldabaoth (or Saklas) who claims to be God, falls in love with his own reflection, and creates entire races in his image to worship and serve him. Even then, he's normally portrayed as just not knowing any better.

On the other hand, Satan doesn't even ask for worship, but offers knowledge. It's knowledge that's continuously shown as stoking the rebellions. There's the Knowledge of Good and Evil. The Grigori had the knowledge of all manner of things that they taught to humanity. Judas had knowledge of the true nature of Christ. And so on. He's definitely not a prideful figure, and in most of early demonology he was actually associated with the sin of Wrath rather than Pride, which makes a lot more sense to me since He's inciting all these rebellions against Yaldabaoth.
 

Samael_Khan

Goosebender
When satan was made he was a good guy.And there was nobody around to make him rebel.If he didn't have anyone to tell him to go against God.Then why did he rebel in the first place?:confused: Sorry if I have asked this before.:(

Have you read Paradise Lost written by John Milton? He explores this very topic in his book.

It seems to me that Satan's rebellion was self manifested. It was an original thought of his which nobody else thought before.

He is like a person who is indoctrinated who eventually started questioning things and his thinking led him down the path of no return.

It could be that he was sick and tired of not being autonomous, having to serve who he saw as a tyrant and he questioned why he should follow God.
 

Samael_Khan

Goosebender
There is a charming story that was told during Medieval times about Satan in the Middle East, although the story did not make its way to the West. Once upon a time, Satan was the most exemplary angel. Then God created humans and asked his angels to bow down to his new creation. Satan so loved God that he refused to bow to anyone but Him. Hence, he was cast out of heaven.

This is the Quran's take on the issue. Funny enough, in Islam Satan isn't an angel. He is a Djinn. God asked the angels to bow, but if Satan is a Djinn, then why did he get upset? An interesting Quranic contradiction or a contradiction between what the Quran says and what Muslims believe.
 

Samael_Khan

Goosebender
Since you posted this in the Religious Q&A forum without specifying it was directed to Christians, I think that means that I get to answer.

Satan never rebelled against God. He opposes Yaldabaoth, the aeons, and the archons. Yaldabaoth might be mistaken for God, because he mythologically created the aeons and cursed the material realm, locking human spirits in golems, but he's just the demiurge.

Satan was responsible for "waking up" figures like Lilith, Judas, and Qayin from a "spiritual stupor," and they deserted Yaldabaoth after receiving His gnosis. This is sometimes portrayed as them rebelling, but Satan Himself did not rebel.

None of this literally happened, though. The myths that describe this are allegorical; they're meant to be used as guidebooks for achieving a sort of Greco-Roman equivalent to enlightenment. It's pretty obvious that they aren't meant as literal history when one sect can have multiple different variations and name characters things like "wisdom" or "error" or "enlightener."

Sin, especially pride specifically, doesn't really factor into it. The only prideful one, really, is Yaldabaoth (or Saklas) who claims to be God, falls in love with his own reflection, and creates entire races in his image to worship and serve him. Even then, he's normally portrayed as just not knowing any better.

On the other hand, Satan doesn't even ask for worship, but offers knowledge. It's knowledge that's continuously shown as stoking the rebellions. There's the Knowledge of Good and Evil. The Grigori had the knowledge of all manner of things that they taught to humanity. Judas had knowledge of the true nature of Christ. And so on. He's definitely not a prideful figure, and in most of early demonology he was actually associated with the sin of Wrath rather than Pride, which makes a lot more sense to me since He's inciting all these rebellions against Yaldabaoth.

Sounds like an interesting mythos. Where does this story come from?
 

Hockeycowboy

Witness for Jehovah
Premium Member
Since you posted this in the Religious Q&A forum without specifying it was directed to Christians, I think that means that I get to answer.

Satan never rebelled against God. He opposes Yaldabaoth, the aeons, and the archons. Yaldabaoth might be mistaken for God, because he mythologically created the aeons and cursed the material realm, locking human spirits in golems, but he's just the demiurge.

Satan was responsible for "waking up" figures like Lilith, Judas, and Qayin from a "spiritual stupor," and they deserted Yaldabaoth after receiving His gnosis. This is sometimes portrayed as them rebelling, but Satan Himself did not rebel.

None of this literally happened, though. The myths that describe this are allegorical; they're meant to be used as guidebooks for achieving a sort of Greco-Roman equivalent to enlightenment. It's pretty obvious that they aren't meant as literal history when one sect can have multiple different variations and name characters things like "wisdom" or "error" or "enlightener."

Sin, especially pride specifically, doesn't really factor into it. The only prideful one, really, is Yaldabaoth (or Saklas) who claims to be God, falls in love with his own reflection, and creates entire races in his image to worship and serve him. Even then, he's normally portrayed as just not knowing any better.

On the other hand, Satan doesn't even ask for worship, but offers knowledge. It's knowledge that's continuously shown as stoking the rebellions. There's the Knowledge of Good and Evil. The Grigori had the knowledge of all manner of things that they taught to humanity. Judas had knowledge of the true nature of Christ. And so on. He's definitely not a prideful figure, and in most of early demonology he was actually associated with the sin of Wrath rather than Pride, which makes a lot more sense to me since He's inciting all these rebellions against Yaldabaoth.
Hey, @February-Saturday. Hope you’re well. Based on your religious affiliation, I have a question if you don’t mind:

Do you celebrate any “Day of the Dead” cultural festivals?
 

February-Saturday

Devil Worshiper
Sounds like an interesting mythos. Where does this story come from?

The bulk of it comes from Ophite Gnosticism, specifically the Cainite sect. There's no supporting evidence that any off-shoot Cainite sect actually equated God with Satan like I'm doing here, but it was an accusation that was raised by the Catholic Church who attacked a group of "Luciferians" that might not have existed or might have referred to multiple different Gnostic groups. We do know that the Cainites likely preferred Judas to Christ, however, so it doesn't seem like too much of a stretch to say some of them might have gone on to venerate his antagonist

I share the opinion of Jeffrey Burton Russell that there is some evidence to suggest that these Gnostic Satanists did exist in some capacity, at least as individual heretics. However, it's not a theory that has gained wide-stream appeal and research into this topic is a little stigmatized after Margaret Murray. It's possible this interpretation was an invention of the Church.

Whether it was adopted in history or merely suspected by heresiologists, this interpretation was at the very least adopted by the modern Qayinites and Chaos-Gnostics, and almost certainly by the older Ophite Cultus Sathanas. These are the groups that included Lilith, and they're why I spelt it Qayin instead of Cain.

TL;DR: It's a speculative reconstruction of the beliefs of medieval Satanists (if they existed) based on Gnosticism and demonology that has gained underground appeal in theistic Satanic occultism.

Hey, @February-Saturday. Hope you’re well. Based on your religious affiliation, I have a question if you don’t mind:

Do you celebrate any “Day of the Dead” cultural festivals?

I celebrate a "rending of the veil" on the day that's exactly between the Autumn equinox and the Winter solstice. Oddly enough, this would have lined up astrologically with Samhain awhile ago, but now it tends to be almost a week later.

Sometimes I'll go to Day of the Dead festivals around that time and do my private celebrations on the holiday itself. I've only done this in open-minded Neopagan groups who have invited me, and who are willing to celebrate with me even though I'm not a Neopagan. Nonetheless, I'm pretty gung-ho about celebrating the Horned God and deities of death or the Underworld, so the difference in belief isn't normally a huge barrier. I do get questions about why my pentagram is the wrong way, though!
 
Last edited:

Harel13

Am Yisrael Chai
Staff member
Premium Member
The reality is that originally the Torah indicated that Lucifer was God's obedient right-hand man and there was no conflict between them. It wasn't until the Jewish people were being ruled by a nation that had a religion where the creator god and his associate were enemies that the story changed and suddenly Lucifer became God's nemesis, so that the Jewish religion was more in line with the new rulers.
a. "Lucifer" isn't mentioned in the Tanach.
b. This situation of "the story changed...so that the Jewish religion was more in line etc" is called Christianity. The Jewish view of Satan has never changed.
 

Samael_Khan

Goosebender
The bulk of it comes from Ophite Gnosticism, specifically the Cainite sect. There's no supporting evidence that any off-shoot Cainite sect actually equated God with Satan like I'm doing here, but it was an accusation that was raised by the Catholic Church who attacked a group of "Luciferians" that might not have existed or might have referred to multiple different Gnostic groups. We do know that the Cainites likely preferred Judas to Christ, however, so it doesn't seem like too much of a stretch to say some of them might have gone on to venerate his antagonist

I share the opinion of Jeffrey Burton Russell that there is some evidence to suggest that these Gnostic Satanists did exist in some capacity, at least as individual heretics. However, it's not a theory that has gained wide-stream appeal and research into this topic is a little stigmatized after Margaret Murray. It's possible this interpretation was an invention of the Church.

Whether it was adopted in history or merely suspected by heresiologists, this interpretation was at the very least adopted by the modern Qayinites and Chaos-Gnostics, and almost certainly by the older Ophite Cultus Sathanas. These are the groups that included Lilith, and they're why I spelt it Qayin instead of Cain.

TL;DR: It's a speculative reconstruction of the beliefs of medieval Satanists (if they existed) based on Gnosticism and demonology that has gained underground appeal in theistic Satanic occultism.



I celebrate a "rending of the veil" on the day that's exactly between the Autumn equinox and the Winter solstice. Oddly enough, this would have lined up astrologically with Samhain awhile ago, but now it tends to be almost a week later.

Sometimes I'll go to Day of the Dead festivals around that time and do my private celebrations on the holiday itself. I've only done this in open-minded Neopagan groups who have invited me, and who are willing to celebrate with me even though I'm not a Neopagan. Nonetheless, I'm pretty gung-ho about celebrating the Horned God and deities of death or the Underworld, so the difference in belief isn't normally a huge barrier. I do get questions about why my pentagram is the wrong way, though!

Thanks for the info.

I am aware of the Gnostics but not the subdivisions that you are referring to.

I do know that the Gnostics believed that God is evil though. So it makes sense that a religion based off Gnosticism would believe the inverse of what Christianity does.

I must look into the rest.

What are the sources of your ideas regarding demonology?
 

February-Saturday

Devil Worshiper
Thanks for the info.

I am aware of the Gnostics but not the subdivisions that you are referring to.

I do know that the Gnostics believed that God is evil though. So it makes sense that a religion based off Gnosticism would believe the inverse of what Christianity does.

I must look into the rest.

What are the sources of your ideas regarding demonology?

I'm not quite sure what you're asking, so I'm going to answer this question in every way I can think to interpret it. The general idea behind my use of demonology is from Albert Magnus, who succinctly put it "It's taught by demons. It teaches about demons. It leads to demons."

In this specific context, Eliphas Levi's Dogma et Rituel, the Alphabet of Sirach, and the Book of the Watchers (from 1 Enoch, which was floating around in Early Christianity with Gnosticism). This is sort of the fringe of what can be considered demonology, but it's where Lilith and the Grigori come from.

The underlying concept of Satan being a corrupting force behind these ordeals can be found in Daemonologie by King James and the Malleus Maleficarum. They also have the accusations of the heresies witches commit and their supposed beliefs about Satan and demons.

Later demonological works like De praestigiis daemonum would list both Cain and Satan with a relationship very similar to what I've described here, which would go on into Psuedomonarchia Daemonum and Ars Goetia where the Devil continues to be portrayed as a semi-godlike background figure behind the demons.

The concept of working with Satan for divination or to gain forbidden knowledge was so widespread that the only work above that doesn't somehow associate Satan with knowledge is the Alphabet of Sirach, and that's because He's not technically in that one. Emphasis on "technically" here, since Levi makes a direct connection between Samael-Lilith and Satan and he wasn't the first to do so, just the first that I can remember right now.

Outside of this, I mean, I also just ask the demons what their ideas on demonology are. While that works in covens and orders who know me and trust the work I'm putting in, I would absolutely not expect that to be treated as anything more than my personal opinion outside of these tightly-knit organizations.

I hope this answers your question!
 

Samael_Khan

Goosebender
I'm not quite sure what you're asking, so I'm going to answer this question in every way I can think to interpret it. The general idea behind my use of demonology is from Albert Magnus, who succinctly put it "It's taught by demons. It teaches about demons. It leads to demons."

In this specific context, Eliphas Levi's Dogma et Rituel, the Alphabet of Sirach, and the Book of the Watchers (from 1 Enoch, which was floating around in Early Christianity with Gnosticism). This is sort of the fringe of what can be considered demonology, but it's where Lilith and the Grigori come from.

The underlying concept of Satan being a corrupting force behind these ordeals can be found in Daemonologie by King James and the Malleus Maleficarum. They also have the accusations of the heresies witches commit and their supposed beliefs about Satan and demons.

Later demonological works like De praestigiis daemonum would list both Cain and Satan with a relationship very similar to what I've described here, which would go on into Psuedomonarchia Daemonum and Ars Goetia where the Devil continues to be portrayed as a semi-godlike background figure behind the demons.

The concept of working with Satan for divination or to gain forbidden knowledge was so widespread that the only work above that doesn't somehow associate Satan with knowledge is the Alphabet of Sirach, and that's because He's not technically in that one. Emphasis on "technically" here, since Levi makes a direct connection between Samael-Lilith and Satan and he wasn't the first to do so, just the first that I can remember right now.

Outside of this, I mean, I also just ask the demons what their ideas on demonology are. While that works in covens and orders who know me and trust the work I'm putting in, I would absolutely not expect that to be treated as anything more than my personal opinion outside of these tightly-knit organizations.

I hope this answers your question!

Thanks. That is informative. I actually vaguely recall some of the writings that you mentioned.

So do you actually speak to demons? If so do they literally speak to you or is the speech a feeling you have to perceive or something like that?
 

February-Saturday

Devil Worshiper
Thanks. That is informative. I actually vaguely recall some of the writings that you mentioned.

So do you actually speak to demons? If so do they literally speak to you or is the speech a feeling you have to perceive or something like that?

It depends on what I'm doing. If I'm just praying, sometimes I gain "sudden insight" and understand something I didn't before.

In full evocation rituals, with the circles and the incenses and the robes and everything, it's an actual conversation that I write transcripts of. Sometimes you do get lucky and they speak physically (what's referred to as theophanic speech), and when then normally anyone else in the room (or the next room over) will be able to hear them, too, although if their responses show up at all in recordings it's usually just brief snippets of EVP.

Demonic voices don't record nearly as loudly as they sound when you're in the room with them. I know some people who are trying to develop better methods of recording theophanic speech as a way of creating a body of evidence to "prove" the existence of demons, but getting theophanic speech consistently is an artform that isn't really worth the time for most practitioners. It's also pretty taboo to share that sort of thing with non-initiates. I've shared recordings and even pictures of demons I've evoked with non-initiates, and it's normally just dismissed as me trying to hoax them. For that reason, every experienced summoner I've spoken to just doesn't want to deal with the hassle. Demons get pretty irate about it, too, sometimes because they prefer to have control over who they reveal themselves to.

More often, you don't literally "hear" the entity. Either you get possessed and they answer through your own mouth, or you "hear" them in your mind. It can be pretty jarring, because they don't use the same voice your mind does, and we don't often realize that everything in our mind is done in the same voice until we hear a completely different one.

These voices can actually take a lot of effort to hear so most people use spirit boards or pendulums, when they first start, and while these are training wheels many practitioners move passed some people continue to prefer this method of communication. I still pull out my spirit board when I want completely unambiguous communication sometimes, or just when I don't want to put in the effort to hear the demon.

Despite this, it's pretty neat when you're working in a group and you all hear the demon's words verbatim. The first time you experience that, it completely shatters your questions of whether you're just talking to an imaginary friend or something. It tends to be a rather frightening experience for some people, though, so I don't think everyone is ready to face this sort of thing.
 

Samael_Khan

Goosebender
It depends on what I'm doing. If I'm just praying, sometimes I gain "sudden insight" and understand something I didn't before.

In full evocation rituals, with the circles and the incenses and the robes and everything, it's an actual conversation that I write transcripts of. Sometimes you do get lucky and they speak physically (what's referred to as theophanic speech), and when then normally anyone else in the room (or the next room over) will be able to hear them, too, although if their responses show up at all in recordings it's usually just brief snippets of EVP.

Demonic voices don't record nearly as loudly as they sound when you're in the room with them. I know some people who are trying to develop better methods of recording theophanic speech as a way of creating a body of evidence to "prove" the existence of demons, but getting theophanic speech consistently is an artform that isn't really worth the time for most practitioners. It's also pretty taboo to share that sort of thing with non-initiates. I've shared recordings and even pictures of demons I've evoked with non-initiates, and it's normally just dismissed as me trying to hoax them. For that reason, every experienced summoner I've spoken to just doesn't want to deal with the hassle. Demons get pretty irate about it, too, sometimes because they prefer to have control over who they reveal themselves to.

More often, you don't literally "hear" the entity. Either you get possessed and they answer through your own mouth, or you "hear" them in your mind. It can be pretty jarring, because they don't use the same voice your mind does, and we don't often realize that everything in our mind is done in the same voice until we hear a completely different one.

These voices can actually take a lot of effort to hear so most people use spirit boards or pendulums, when they first start, and while these are training wheels many practitioners move passed some people continue to prefer this method of communication. I still pull out my spirit board when I want completely unambiguous communication sometimes, or just when I don't want to put in the effort to hear the demon.

Despite this, it's pretty neat when you're working in a group and you all hear the demon's words verbatim. The first time you experience that, it completely shatters your questions of whether you're just talking to an imaginary friend or something. It tends to be a rather frightening experience for some people, though, so I don't think everyone is ready to face this sort of thing.

That is interesting. I know someone who speaks to certain Pagan gods, knows someone who does hear them, but the person I know just gets inspiration from them if I remember correctly.

What you have experienced sounds a lot like what people certain Christians experience to a lesser or greater extent.

Photo's, video and audio do not work well as evidence for things that many people think are supernatural because in the modern age, and as a designer myself, I am aware that these things can be manipulated. The first hand experience is what would really be convincing.

Has a demon ever manifested before your eyes? And are they demons in the Christians sense? Or djinn maybe?
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
When satan was made he was a good guy.And there was nobody around to make him rebel.If he didn't have anyone to tell him to go against God.Then why did he rebel in the first place?:confused: Sorry if I have asked this before.:(
As Ecclesiastes 1:9 said, "there is nothing new under the Sun."

Whatever evil motivated Satan to rebel was ultimately a creation of God.
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
When
Satan was made he was a good guy. And there was nobody around to make him rebel.If he didn't have anyone to tell him to go against God.Then why did he rebel in the first place?:confused: Sorry if I have asked this before.:(
First you create a hypothetical question, then you give a hypothetical answer.
 
Top