Lucifer and the Devil

1. The Villainy of Being on the Losing Side	2. Enter the Devil
3. Offices and Names	4. Endnotes

 The Villainy of Being on the Losing Side

The saying goes that Rome was not built in a day. So too is this true for the Church of Rome. During its rise to dominance the Church of Rome conquered many peoples as it grew to the source of influence it is today. It did this at first as the official religion of the Roman Empire and later, after the fall of Rome, as a world power in its own right.

As the Church of Rome acquired worldly authority it was forced to deal with the religions of the people it conquered. Diana, Venus, Holda, the Horned One, Hel, Plumed Serpent, and all the other deities of polytheism were dragged into the pantheon of the Church of Rome and found guilty of being the baleful influences of evil in the world regardless of what they represented in their original religious contexts.

The first victims of character assassination by the Church of Rome were the former religious icons of the Roman Empire, the Greco-Roman pantheon itself. Jupiter, Juno, Diana, Venus, and all the deities of the formerly dominant religion were cast down and listed among the forces of evil. The gods and goddesses of Rome were considered either demons or they were thought aspects of the Devil himself. The Catholic Encyclopedia makes it clear when it says that "the higher gods of the Greeks had come to be regarded as devils." ¹

Though they were demonized this did not have to be a slander against their character. The Catholic Encyclopedia says that "though the word demon is now practically restricted to this sinister sense, it was otherwise with the earlier usage of the Greek writers. The word ... originally meant a divine being; it was occasionally applied to the higher gods and goddesses, but was more generally used to denote spiritual beings of a lower order coming between gods and men. For the most part these were beneficent beings, and their office was somewhat analogous to that of the angels in Christian theology." ² So we can see that even according to the view of the Church of Rome it was not necessary to view the old gods as evil. The Greco-Roman gods and goddesses could have been viewed in a more positive light. Instead they were portrayed as forces of evil.

This portrayal of other people's deities as evil beings continued with the expansion of the Church of Rome. Fred Gettings put it precisely when he said, "almost all the demons (or, at least, demonic names) were the gods (or god names) of now vanished civilizations. The occult maxim Diabolus est Deus inversus ('The Devil is inverted God') connotes the notion of the demons, under the control of the Devil, being the adversaries of God and perhaps indeed of man." ³ So, by inverting the gods of Rome and later other people's divine beings, did the myth of the Christian Devil grow.

 Enter the Devil

And so we come to the Devil. The goat-legged, pitchfork wielding, priapic Devil arrives with the stench of brimstone. But the image and character of the Devil were not established in one day. The formation of the idea of the Devil was a work in progress already at the time of Jesus the Christ and the authors who wrote of Him.

Judaism had been expressing the notion of a figure (or figures) that stood for evil since their exile in Babylon. But the Jews were not the first to postulate the thought of a divine being which represents absolute evil. That historical first was established by the Persians with Zoroastrianism and that religion's figure known variously as Angra Mainyu or Ahriman.

It is considered likely that the Zoroastrian thinking on Ahriman was the catalyst for the Judaic evolution of a being (or beings) of evil. Jeffrey Burton Russell, in regard to the source of Judaic inspiration, says that, "of the influences that may have existed, the Iranian is usually considered most likely on two grounds. First, Ahriman and Satan show certain intrinsic similarities, and second, these similarities become striking in Hebrew thought following the exile, when Hebrew writers could easily have come into contact with Zoroastrian ideas in Babylonia." ⁴

While in Zoroastrianism the reign of Ahriman as the sovereign of evil is firm in Judaic and later Christian thought this is not so clear. Some, such as Russell, maintain that the myriad of names can all be applied to the Devil. Russell writes, "the names of the Devil vary, particularly in the Apocalyptic period: he is Belial, Mastema, Azazel, Satanail, Sammael, Semyaza, or Satan. These names have different origins, and the beings they denote differ in their origins and functions from one another. But gradually they coalesce. The Devil becomes a spiritual being personifying the origin and essence of evil: there can be only one Devil." ⁵ This only becomes more confusing as time goes on and more names are applied to the Devil: Beelzebub, Lucifer, Asmodeus, the Horned One, and so on and so on.

Not everyone subscribes to the notion of there being a single Devil, however. While the Church of Rome and others subscribe to there being only one Devil and then many demon followers some feel that there is more than just one devil. John Milton in Paradise Lost, for example, makes Satan, Beelzebub, and Belial all separate devils. Joost van den Vondel does the same with Lucifer, Belial, and Beelzebub in his play Lucifer. Occultists and demonologists have maintained that there is a hierarchy of demonkind that does not necessitate there being only one Devil. Francis Barrett, for example, in The Magus has Belial and Asmodeus as separate devils.

The most common names given to the Devil are Lucifer and Satan. These names are also most commonly applied to the same being as the Devil even when there is a distinction being made of devils being individual. When there is a leader of demonkind being put forth generally speaking Lucifer, Satan, and the Devil are often considered synonymous.

Some make a case for Lucifer and Satan not being names for the same being. Gustav Davidson says in his entry on Lucifer that He is "erroneously equated with the fallen angel (Satan)." ⁶ Under his entry on Satan he restates his belief saying, "through a misreading of Isaiah 14:12, he has been identified with Lucifer." ⁷

Another interesting fact that the words lucifer and satan share is that they have both been taken to be offices or states of being rather than names. The Catholic Encyclopedia in its entry on Lucifer says that the Church fathers, "maintain that Lucifer is not the proper name of the devil but denotes only the state from which he has fallen." ⁸ It was important for the Church of Rome to make such a distinction in the case of Lucifer because the word has such a positive meaning, coming from the Latin for "light-bringer" or "light-bearer." It does not really fit well with the notion of the Devil as absolute evil.

Satan also was used in reference to a role rather than as a personal name. The word was used to indicate a position as an opposer in service to Yahweh. Davidson says, "the term likewise designates an office; and the angel investing that office is not apostate or fallen." ⁹ So, strangely enough, both words originally had a positive meaning (or in the case of satan at least a faithful one) before becoming associated with the composite figure of the Devil.

 Endnotes

 1. "demons." Catholic Encyclopedia. [book on-line]; accessed 16 December 2006; available from http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04710a.htm; Internet.
 2. Ibid.
 3. Fred Gettings, Dictionary of Demons (London: Guild Publishing, 1988), 80.
 4. Jeffrey Burton Russell, The Devil (New York: Cornell University Press, 1977; reprint 1987), 218.
 5. Ibid., 188-189.
 6. Gustav Davidson, A Dictionary of Angels (New York: The Free Press, 1967; reprint 1971), 176.
 7. Ibid., 261.
 8. "Lucifer." Catholic Encyclopedia. [book on-line]; accessed 16 December 2006; available from http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09410a.htm; Internet.
 9. Davidson, A Dictionary of Angels, 261.

Back to top of page
E-mail the Gnostic Witch Bible:
Copyright © 2004-2007.  All rights reserved.
The Gnostic Witch Bible
http://www.light-bringer.com/