Satanology 101
Satanology 101
XOFC
expresses its concern about the rise of the
growing references and use of Satan/Lucifer as a Role Model and as a positive
Moral Force, a trend which we believe is rapidly increasing. XOFC expresses its
regret towards the Christian Church, which has not only failed to take a strong
stand in this area & topic, but is hardly aware of any debate or discussion
on this subject (which is taking place) , This despite the enormous success
& growth of occult publishing within the past 7 to 10 years.
XOFC
calls on Pastors, Youth Pastors, and Christian Leaders to acquaint themselves
with what is actually going on – in the country (& World) at large, and to
continue to act as the Salt of the Earth and a true and strong model of what the
Church and a well-grounded Spiritually Strong Christian should be.
Further,
XOFC takes note of the fact that most Pastors have absolutely No Clue about how
the debate on Satan and Lucifer (as 2 distinct beings) is affecting the New
Bible Versions and the translation/rendering of standard proof-texts on the
identity of Satan, Lucifer and Jesus Christ.
From “Satan the Evil One” to “Lucifer the Light-Bearer”
We
assert in this article - that the issue of what the English rendering of
Satan & Lucifer is: in 1) the New Testament and
2) in the Old Testament, as
well as 3) in the Footnotes of any Bible and
4)
References - needs to be first understood from a historical point of view
- in terms of Divorcing the English Meaning of the words which discuss/refer to
Satan/Lucifer from the Hebrew words.
The
Assumption by Pastors and Bible Students is that the English Rendering of Satan
in the Bible is dependent
first on the Hebrew and then on the Greek. This view
is mistaken. There is less and less correlation between the English
Rendering of Satan/Lucifer and the Hebrew or the Greek...because the
Personal
Point-of-view of the Translators and Translation Committees has overshadowed the
meaning of the terms.
Pastors
have insufficient understanding of the effects of “deconstructionist
grammar” and keep thinking that the debate is about one thing when really it
is about something else entirely...The concepts, terminology and implications of
this debate on so many levels is not even perceived by 95% of most pastors/youth
pastors.
Once
we understand the facts about the actual debates in society about the identities
of Lucifer/Satan, then we have a base from which we are able to accurately
address the specifics of the terms and definitions.
----------------
Hard
as it is to understand to those unfamiliar with the politics of Terminology and
the Behind-the-scenes Politics of Bible Translations, The English rendering of
words is less and less dependent on what the Greek or Hebrew actually states and
more and more on what the Translators THINK the Greek or Hebrew Text should say.
That
is why the Revised English Bible (1989-UK) has gone so far as to de-genderize
terms that in the Hebrew and the Greek retain Gender Particularity and
Distinction. That is why Bibles are now showing up which talk about
God-the-Mother (instead of God the Father) or God the Father/Mother.
Part
of the problem in discussing Satan the being, is that it is hard for
evangelicals to think of Satan without thinking of Satanists, and this conjures
up images of human sacrifice, etc, and many other things which - certainly
evangelicals - would find rather hideous.
But
Satan has much more sophistication than mere sacrifice (and the point
theologically about Human Sacrifice, is that it remains the Anti-Sacrifice of
Jesus, where a human literally sheds blood in an attempt to satisfy his god).
Evangelicals
know little about Satan-ists, but even less about Occultists. The notion that
people can be entirely personally committed to Satan, while perceiving Satan as
a true Angel of Light, is something that most evangelicals have trouble
believing CAN happen. But the point is that there are far more Occultists and
Luciferians than there are Satanists.
There
are overlap between the groups as the more “initiated” of them will confess
- off the record. And of Occultists within Academia and Seminaries, there is no
end. Now contrary to the expectations of standard evangelicals, these Occultists
do not hide, or at least not much. They write books, they speak, they lecture,
they go to debates...but most of this takes place obviously outside of
evangelical circles. Yet they interact with the rest of their academic or
seminary colleagues, so why can’t we all just get along ? (Just read the
bestseller The Aquarian Conspiracy by Ferguson...then come back and see if you
agree or not)
Yet
despite the mention of some of these factors influencing the debate about
Lucifer-Satan, It will be very difficult for standard evangelicals to understand
what is really going on with Satan Lucifer terminologies, because they mis-understand
the debate. More importantly, they misunderstand the Contextualization of the
debate.
How
could this be ? After all, the debate about Lucifer & Satan uses the Bible
as a text to adjudicate and decide in what context Satan and Lucifer should be
presented to the Public. Evangelicals of course, still say that they will let
their Bibles decide (though that little point is being rapidly addressed by
Bible publishers).
[Did
you notice the small shift in that last paragraph ? It was “uses the Bible as
a text to adjudicate” instead of “uses the Bible as THE text to
adjudicate”]
As
we often hear in seminary, theology is too important to be left to the
theologians. And nowhere is this more true than in the area of Satan &
Lucifer. Most of the premises that
we are about to share usually are taken as offensive by pastors. And the reason
is that in many cases, pastors have almost no clue about the discussion in
society about a subject (Satan/Lucifer) which had historically belonged within
the ecclesiastical realm of Pastors but has long since left them high and dry.
Society
at large has stopped consulting Pastors on most issues long ago (and since most
pastors shunned “social impact”, why should that surprise anyone ?).
However, just because Pastors are deemed irrelevant by society does not mean
that society has not moved on and addressed the issues (in anycase) that used to
be the exclusive purview of Pastors.
Most
pastors of course, claim Not to be moral cowards, but they will continually
refuse to address or answer the kinds of questions that are asked sometimes at
places such as this site. And that is why many people have to have
bulletin-board discussions about the KJV/NIV/Versions, not only because most
Pastors are highly ignorant in an area where they are supposed to be informed,
but because they realize their ignorance, and are determined to avoid the
discussion of anything which could result in the termination of their paycheck,
(i.e. job termination) not on grounds of ignorance, but on grounds of moral
cowardice.
(And how many of you here have NOT had highly detailed hours-long discussions with your pastors about the various versions - precisely because the pastor knows he is out of his depth, he knows he is out of his “competence” ???
...much
of his audience knows it also though, which is why so many evangelicals are
switching to the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox faith -)
The
Pastors should be encouraged to become competent in these areas, but wait...stop
and imagine the actual work that pastors would have to do, and actual
study...and actual learning, and real reading, somehow the Roman Catholic
Bishops seem to find the time to learn the ancient languages and ancient
texts...if only to misquote them...
Modern
Society takes a very keen interest in who Satan is and Should be, and he (Satan)
is the topic of dissertations in colleges, Conferences, Lecture series, etc -
all accomplished without the slightest assistance from Pastors, Evangelicals,
the Church or anything else Christian in any sense.
Religion
at the College Level (in other words - those who are framing the debate about
God for the next 50 to 75 years) usually takes place with manuals on Voodoo,
anthropological studies of Shamanism, and discussion of the “persecution of
witches” presented by modern Witches, who are brought onto campus to lecture
[somehow, the millions of christians martyred for their faith is never quite
brought up].
But
Education is too important to be left to the educators. So who cares about
College ? Just go to your local Barnes & Noble or to Borders, Books &
Music, and to the metaphysical or occult section, and you will see the rows
after rows of books not only about the occult, but about Satan, Mephistopheles,
Beelzebub, the Evil Presence, the Devil, Abraxas, the Evil One, etc.
So
we don’t really have any obligation to talk to our pastors (if we don’t care
what the Bible says about holding our Christian Brothers accountable) and
demonstrate to them, that they are largely irrelevant to society, to the youth,
or to any society-wide debate {and that they could change this, if they really
wanted to}. We can simply notice their irrelevance by noticing the absence of
their point of view - on the shelves of modern bookstores.
Even
if they perceive themselves to be relevant, their point of view will only reach
a few, and the Kids (teens) already have a very strong grasp on both the occult
and Satan (though not from the Christian Perspective) thanks to the local
bookstores who sell “All of
that innocuous stuff”.
The Reason why Satan is so important is because he is the cleavage point, the point of departure for either faith: Either the true Christian Faith or the True New Age Faith: Lucifer is the link to both. The problem is that the same person who is defined as a bad guy (Satan) for one group (the true Christian Church), is the same person who is defined as a good guy (Lucifer - the “real” light bearer) for the other group (those in the new age/occult)...and the New Age/Occult presently controls 90% of almost all social institutions and 95% of all political institutions. But that is just on the level of societal influence. Converting average members of society still remains the central task and goal. Remember the goal of Lucifer: not to accept conversion, but to WILL yourself to him [do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law - Aleister Crowley]
The Issue of Versions will be crucial to the issue of who Satan or Lucifer turns out to be, though not for the obvious reasons.
Having
covered the issue of who knows very little about the subject of the Sociology of
Satan/Lucifer (Pastors/the church), we will now turn for a moment to those who
do. But actually the issue of who Satan turns out to be (whether Lucifer or not,
whether an evil being or merely a misunderstood one) has much less to do with
Who knows these answers, than it has to do with “WHEN”.
The
answers about Lucifer & Satan must accurately be understood in the context
of WHEN the origins of the debate took place (yes, besides the Fall of Man and
the Tower of Babel).
Most
people (evangelicals especially) think that this debate about the identity of
Lucifer/Satan started in the 1960s. Why ? They point to the starting of the
Aquarian Popular Movements in the 1960s, and to the proliferation of Satanism
& Witchcraft which gained wide exposure in the 1960s.
Well
those things are true. But what is missed is that the re-flowering of the occult
in the 1960s really is only the explanation of what happens when the Occult
meets the Medium of the Mass Media.
By
now you may have guessed that the reason why the topic of the debate about
Lucifer-Satan is so important is because there is a great, wide and vast attempt
presently to re-cast Lucifer as the true being of light, and to separate this
true being-of-light from Satan [who would be merely the invention of the
“church”].
So
while the Church weakly claims to understand who Satan is, most pastors are
having a harder and harder time explaining who he is to the younger generation
who have already had Satan and Lucifer defined to them. He is present in Black
Sabath, Led Zep, Pink Floyd etc. (Music as a tool for trances or theological
subversion is old news). But what is much more interesting, down-to-earth and
locally available - is the amazing proliferation of books on the Occult and
Demonism, Wicca, Satanic Rituals, and possession (Yes, how to covet and
cultivate demonic possession ...your own), are the Texts and Textbooks which
specifically mention Satan as the lead or key topic of the Book.
If
you want the specifics maybe you should ask for anonymously
for your youth group
to educate you about the better points of Satanism and all of the fun you might
be missing...You probably think that Sabrina the Teenage witch or Buffy the
Vampire Slayer are the title of gothic novels for simpletons ? (or you could
just go to your local bookstore and ask them to show you the right section)...
Back
to the Issue of Lucifer-Satan and who gets to define Him (He/She/It).
The
issues of occultism and the identity of Lucifer/Satan are important, and the
terms are important. But the Most important factors are Audience, Market Share,
Leverage and Contextualization. The issue is not really about the Terms of the
debate, but in the wider frame of “who gets to decide” what the terms of the
debate should be.
And
in order to understand this, we have to really go back to the mid 1800s. Now
this is not a shock to the occultists, but it IS a shock (often) to the
Evangelicals. After all, We are
talking about Satan,...and Is there now an implication
that people in the 1800s were messing with the definitions of Satan and Lucifer,
and that today this is having an impact on us, our debate, bible versions, the
debates on religion in Colleges, etc ???
The
answer is Yes, those are some of the implications.
Let’s very briefly look at how those occult manuals and textbooks were
released in the 1960s, and see if this has anything to do with the debate on who
gets to convince society at large of who Satan is...
We
all know that the Catholic Church confiscated many manuals of strong occultism,
demonic rituals, records of seances, etc over the years of its existence. These
books were the basis for its own justification of the Inquisition (well,
occultism and the Protestant’s use of the Bible, and copying accurate Bible
Versions without official church sanction, etc...).
Well,
Napoleon was busy conquering Europe and he stopped off at the Vatican. More
precisely, he overan it. All of the manuscripts which had been seized by the
Vatican containing occult material and how to conjure demons, all of these
manuscripts were about to see the light of day.
The
Catholic Church had one of the best occult & demonic libraries of the world.
The Vatican Library was carted off to France. There it was placed under the
custody of two men. These two men would later become famous in the occult
underground. And why shouldn’t they ? After all, they now had access to the
best demonic sources in the world, the library which the Inquisition had seized.
These
were the 2 men: The first was a French man well known in literature circles,
named Charles Nodier. He had many students that he schooled in the Occult
and Demonism, one of which was a young poet and author named Victor Hugo.
The
Second man in charge of the Vatican Library was an ex-catholic Priest. Legally,
his name was Alphonse Louis Constant. But
to the rest of the world, he is better known today as the Satanist Eliphas Levi.
He
also had many disciples (among which are Bulwer Lytton). Napoleon’s Career
came to its final defeat around 1815. But the custodians of the Vatican library
carried on their work. French Freemasons sent the work of Eliphas Levi straight
from Paris over to the head of American Freemasonry, Albert Pike. He simply
plagiarized the work of Eliphas Levi and then stuck that in
his
own “Morals and Dogma”. But the Occult influence of Eliphas Levi was most
felt in England, where occultist from all over the British Empire had found a
safe haven. (Notice that although it was
occultists who found the safe haven in England, “Witchcraft” remained a
crime in England until the 1950s).
Most
of the people who are today educating the younger generation into occultism are
in fact simply the books from the 1800s. The manuals of H.P. Blavatsky were
written and released in the 1870s (her teachings were around long before then).
Bulwer-Lutton released his occult books in England through the 1800s (and
several of those are manuals for occultism). Eliphas Levi published his first
works on the Devil & Satanism in the 1840s, though his formal Rituals of
High Magick came out in 1860. There are other works of course, but neither time
nor space permits. And these are still only the official ones...there were many
manuals that still appear today, but are actually from the era of the mid 1850s.
Interesting
that Cambridge and Oxford were not removed from this debate on the Occult in the
1850s. In fact they were very much a part of it. Interesting that
Westcott and
Hort both Graduated from Cambridge in the 1850s. They State (so, not their
oponents, but THEY state ) - that they began working on their
changed version [ their original collation] of the New
Testament in 1852 !!!
That
was long before the official date of begining of the Revised Version Translation
Committees in the 1870s. In view of the facts about WHEN Westcott & Hort
began their textual “translation/creation”, it becomes important to remember
that the Translations Committees of the Revised Version only translated into
English from the Greek Texts that Westcott provided to them. The Translation
committees did not collate nor decide which ancient manuscripts should be part
of the version they were translating. Only Westcott & Hort could decide
that.
The
Translation Committees did vote on the texts whether to accept or reject them, but
they consistently voted to accept the Texts of Westcott & Hort. That is a
surprise to no-one, and also one of the Reasons that FHA Scrivener complained
that he was voted down consistently at the expense of truth (See the book
Revision Revised - Free PDF for more info) . Several of the
members of the Translation Cttee were also part of the
Secret Societies of
Cambridge. But the important point is that the occultic materials from France
had filtered their way to Cambridge right at the time when Westcott & Hort
were there. And it is a matter of public record that among there were circles of
occultists at Cambridge, not only around Ruskin & Tennyson, but that there
was an entire group of occult professors known as the
NeoPlatonists, (Definition) and two
of
their students at the time were Westcott & Hort.
Look
up this definition in the works of H.P. Blavatsky (The Secret Doctrine) and what
is a Neo-Platonist ? Someone who acknowledges the supremacy of Lucifer as the
light bearer of the Universe. (We actually recommend that you stay away from
Blavatsky until you have read “The Adversary” by Martin Bubek, “Overcoming
the Adversary” (also by Bubek), and Hidden Dangers of the Rainbow [which
directly concerns Blavatsky] ).
By the way, we forgot to mention that the original magazine put out by the New Agers starting in 1875 was simply called “Lucifer”.
Aleister Crowley [Satanist yes, but also a graduate of Cambridge] claimed to be the reincarnation of Eliphas Levi, and Alice Bailey claimed to continue the work of H.P. Blavatsky. But frankly, what is causing us to focus on the relevance of so called occultic or demonic authors is their claim that they are preparing the way for THEIR messiah.
Crowley called it the age of the Coming Eon in his inspiration by his spirit guide Aiwass. Alice Bailey wrote many books about the occult messiah, (one of which is called “the Re-appearance of the Christ”), and you can get these books in almost any bookstore and certainly in any city town with a population larger than 20,000.
So
the Occultists have their messiah...Well the Buddhists have their messiah, the
13th reincarnation of the Buddha who will appear - only this buddha
is called Matreya...and the Moslems are awaiting the return of one of their
Prophets, According to Judaism, they await their “True messiah” and of
course the Christians claim that
their Messiah is going
to return
also.
Therefore
all of the major world religions/major worldview are ALL awaiting the return of
their long sought for messiah. This is not what we are alleging. It is what they
are stating. Now we turn our attention back to the issue of Lucifer.
“Now
if Lucifer and the Christ are the same, and if Christ and Jesus are the same,
then probably Lucifer and Jesus may be the same”. In the Bible context, things
may seem clear, but only at first. In the first part of this, we wrote:
“After all, the debate about Lucifer & Satan uses the Bible as a text to adjudicate and decide in what context Satan and Lucifer should be presented to the Public.”
Yes,
OK even the public uses the Bible. But which Bible ? No, we do NOT mean which
Version ! We mean: Which
Bible ? Is it the Bible of the 66 Books ? Or is it the Bible of the
Apocryphal Books ?
Is it the Lost Books of the Bible ? Is it the Lost Books of Eden ? Is it the Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ ? Is it a Course in Miracles ? Is it the Poisonwood Bible ? Or the Celestine Prophecy ? Is it the Islamic teachings of Jesus the Prophet ? Or is it the Teachings of Jesus according to Elizabeth Claire Prophet ? Or is it the Jesus of Father Matthew Fox ? Or the Jesus of the Jesus Seminar (Funk, et al) ? Or the Jesus of the Q Gospel (Bloom) ? Or the Jesus of the Dead Sea Scrolls ? Or the Nag Hammadi Library ? Or the Gnostic Gospels ?
Those
of you who believe in the 66 books (a dwindling proportion every day we may add)
are part of a small group. The rest of the world bypassed this issue long ago,
and has moved on to accept many other books as part of the Bible. The issue of
not only of “Who Jesus is” but of “Where to find Him” is mired in the
sea of books, and textbooks, and “discoveries” all claiming to be something
new, different, good, better, secret, hidden or revealed ...about Jesus.
What
all of these texts have in common however, is that almost all of the new Texts
point to a rising Messiah who claims to be the one called Jesus, and this new
Jesus has teachings which contradict the historical teachings of the
historic
Christian Church and the true and historic Jesus Christ.
So,
when it comes to Modern Versions, the question of HOW the Passages about Satan
are defined are in fact central to the issue not only of who Satan is supposed
to be, but also of who Jesus Christ is supposed to be.
There is a growing number of people who are using standard texts about the Coming Messiah in the Book of Revelation in the New Testament, and then going back to the Old Testament sections on Satan, in order to argue and assert that the Coming Messiah and the Old Testament Lucifer are one and the same.
Many of the people who are advancing their argument actually believe that when they are discussing their coming messiah as being also Lucifer, that they still also think that this is Jesus Christ. How can this be ? They are asserting a metaphorical interpretation [or allegorical interp] of the Old Testament passages.
Now in view of this kind of theology, advanced on this kind of level, if you cannot argue the facts about who Satan and Jesus are from the Greek Text of the New Testament [called the Textus Receptus], (choose Latin ?) then from where will you assert your defense ? Usually the Hebrew is more complicated, not less !
But
the first point here would be to stop and assess the impact of the New Modern
Versions in the Bluring of the Line between Christ, Satan, God, Jesus and
Lucifer. The Second point is to realize that almost all modern versions are - by
their own definitions these days - Transitional.
The
NIV was presented as a finalized version. But if you look at the words of the
TNIV Cttee, they state that where the TNIV is today, that is the place where
they (the NIV/TNIV Cttee) wanted to take their readership...from the beginning
of their project... [and the TNIV is due for a revision in 2005]. Of course,
aging boomers continue to stand by their NIV, but their children and the rest of
the evangelical crowd has already moved on to the TNIV.
But
both the TNIV and the NIV are really a drop in the bucket compared to all of the
other kinds of Bibles out there, which are NOT comprised of the 66 books of the
Old Testament.
Many
people’s view of Satan will be influenced by their view of Hell. If Hell were
a bad place, then Satan would be a bad guy. But if Hades were a cool place to
hang out with all your budies, then Satan may only be a “hardcore party
animal”. Therefore maybe the
views of Hell of some of the translators of the Modern Versions may be relevant.
Many of them do have anti-traditional views of Hell and Eternity (that might
mean that they are not saved, though some might be, are we really going to start
judging ?....oh - yeah...the spiritual man judgeth all things...)
Of
Course, Wesctott & Hort did not Believe in Hell. Westcott did not believe in
the Fall of Man nor original sin, so by definition he did not believe that Satan
had tempted mankind into a fall. John Stott, so-called Evangelical used
to - (in the past) - believe in Hell, but now no longer believes in this, and simply calls his
doctrine the doctrine of annihilation (which sounds really bad, but actually
simply means that when you die, you either Go to Heaven or you Cease to Exist,
but you do not Go to Hell). Eastern Religions simply call this “Soul Sleep”.
But
of course, the views of John Stott did not disqualify him from sitting on the
Board of Directors of the UBS, the
United Bible Societies that produces the Red
Cover Greek Nestle-Aland Text [or forgery depending on your point of view]. A
member of the translation Committee of the Nestle Aland Text believes that only
by membership through Baptism and the Eucharist (Miracle or Blasphemy) can one
go to heaven, and he does not believe that Christians end up in Hell only
Purgatory [This is Roman Catholic Archbishop Carlo Martini, who also
believes that Evangelicals are mentally insane]. Another Member (Alan
Wikgren) of the Translation Committee of the UBS Nestle Aland Text
may be able to trump all of the other members, because he has spent much of his
time in the Apocryphal book of Enoch. This is the Book which tells the Story of
how Demonic Beings possessed and molested human women.
Prophecy
studies are conducted by the Catholic Church, in the groups that follow the
Lady
of Fatima and the Blue Army. Fatima happens also to be one of the daughters of
Mohamed, and there are branches of Islam that heavily lean towards prophecy, and
the Mulahs are studying this. The
Buddhists know their prophecy but only care about ensuring their next personal
incarnation (Western converts believe in Evolution, Eastern Buddhists believe in
Devolution). OF course, Judaism is looking to the Prophetic, many leaders of the Charismatic
Movement today - are just plain making up prophecies through their “New Apostolic
Reformation” (Led by Peter Wagner, Ted Haggard, the Kansas City Prophets and
other assorted Heretics) (more
on this in our Report on Wagner in PDF Format), the Black Moslems in the US believe in the
Reincarnation of Farakhan, and the New Agers and occultists in addition to their
Coming Christ also believe in Prophecies (Prophecies of Seth/ Nostradamus/
Ramtha/etc)
in great abundance. Therefore, the whole world watches, learns and waits.
But
the issue of deciding about which texts are at the heart of the Book of Isaiah
and Ezekiel and the reconciliation of those texts to the Books of the New
Testament are crucial to understanding how to respond to the debates that have
and are crystalizing around:
1.
Who Jesus Is
2.
Who he is not
3.
Is he the coming one ?
4.
Is he also Lucifer
5.
Is Lucifer Bad or Evil
6.
Is Lucifer Satan ?
7.
If the forces which oppose this “coming Christ” are therefore Anti-Christ,
then
what should be done with them ?
Now
the Dead Sea Scrolls (Translation by Gastner) and the Nag Hammadi texts of the
coming war between the Sons of Light and the Sons of Darkness, take on new
meaning...with greater implications.
As
Usual, we invite your comments or questions. All questions are kept private
and confidential.
Witchcraft 101 - The More the Merrier
FREEMASONRY - Hidden Facts