My Freemasonry | Freemason Information and Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Lucifer and Satan

Status
Not open for further replies.

Blake Bowden

Administrator
Staff Member
Neither the attributes nor personification of Lucifer or Satan play any role in the beliefs or rituals of Freemasonry. The topic is only of interest insofar as anti-masonic attacks have accused Freemasonry of worshiping Lucifer. The confusion stems from such 19th century masonic authors as Albert Pike and Albert G. Mackey who have used the term "luciferian" in its classical or literary sense to refer to a search for knowledge. John Robinson notes "The emphasis here should be on intent. When Albert Pike and other Masonic scholars spoke over a century ago about the "Luciferian path," or the "energies of Lucifer," they were referring to the morning star, the light bearer, the search for light; the very antithesis of dark, satanic evil."

"Lucifer" is the Latin term originally used by the Romans to refer to the planet Venus when that planet was west of the sun and hence rose before the sun in the morning, thereby being the morning star.

The same planet was called Hesperus, Cesperugo, Vesper, Noctifer, or Nocturnus, when it appeared in the heavens after sunset. Although 19th and 20th century occultists would equate other goddesses such as Astarte, Ashtoreth, Lilith, Isis, Cemeramis, Mari, and Ishtar with Venus, links between the cultures and attributes represented are not historically clear. Lucifer as a personification is called a son of Astraeus and Aurora or Eos, of Cephalus and Aurora, or of Atlas. He is called the father of Ceyx, Daedalion, and of the Hesperides. Lucifer is also a surname of several goddesses of light, such as Artemis, Aurora, and Hecate. 1.

The word appears to have entered the religious lexicon when the Hebrew expression in Isaiah 14:12, "HeYLeL BeN-ShaCHaR." (meaning "bright son of the morning/dawn," "bright [and] morning star," "glowing morning star," or "shining one, son of the dawn.")2. was translated to "Phosphorus" (the Greek word for Venus as the morning star) in the Septuagint, and then translated into "Lucifer" in the Vulgate (from the Greek Septuagint). Isaiah 14, taken as a whole, is a parable, or prophecy of denunciation against the Kings of Babylon, specifically Tiglath-pileser III 3 In verse 12, the prophet characterizes the arrogance of Tiglath-pileser III as if the king had thought himself fit to appear in the sky as the morning star, but has fallen to earth, being brought low by the vengeance of the Lord against those who would exalt themselves and persecute the Lord’s people (i.e., the Israelites).

Origenes Adamantius (185 CE - 254 CE), an important Christian scholar of the early Greek Church, and Augustine of Canterbury (d. May 26 604/605 CE), founder of the Christian Church in southern England, both interpreted the use of the term Lucifer as a reference to the Devil.

Author: Unknown
The name Lucifer was applied to Satan by St. Jerome and later to the demon of sinful pride by Milton in Paradise Lost. Lucifer is the title and principal character of the epic poem by the Dutch playwright, Vondel (who uses Lucifer in lieu of Satan), and a principal character in the mystery play by Imre Madach, "The Tragedy of Man". Blake pictured Lucifer in his illustrations to Dante. George Meredith’s sonnet Lucifer in Starlight addresses the "fiend" as Prince Lucifer. To Spenser in An Hymne of Heavenly Love, Lucifer is "the brightest angel, even the Child of Light." In Ovid’s Metamorphosis, Lucifer is the morning star and father of Ceyx. He is described as riding a white horse (clarus equo, book XV.189) and his face is characterized by a bright gladness (see XI.270 ff. Lucifero genitore satus patriumque nitorem ore ferens Ceyx). Also see Books II.115 and 723, IV.629,665.

The word "satan" is from a Hebrew word, "sathane", meaning adversary or calumniator; in original Jewish usage (see the book of Job), the satan is the adversary, not of God, but of mankind; i.e., the angel charged by God with the task of proving that mankind is an unworthy creation. Note though, that Balaam’s satan (Numbers 22:23-33) protects him from harm.

Later, as Judaism absorbed such ideas as Zoroastrian dualism and concepts about angels during the Exile, and then as Christianity echoed various concepts from earlier religions, the concept of an evil power ruling an underground domain of punishment for the wicked became fixed in Christian doctrine. In such a doctrine, elements of the Graeco-Roman god Pluto/ Vulcan/ Hephaestus, the Underworld, and various aspects of Nordic/Teutonic mythology may be traced.

The Latin name of Phosphorus, Venus as the morning star, is the light bringer which heralds the dawn. The name is sometimes applied to the planet as the evening star as well, although Hesperus is properly its name then. By a curious chain of reference, the passage in Luke 10:18 was thought to refer to Isaiah 14:12, in which the star is used metaphorically for the monarch of Babylon. Thus Lucifer became the chief of the fallen angels, the name borned by Satan before his rebellion.

"From a supposed reference to this passage in our Lord’s words. 'I beheld Satan fallen as lightning from heaven' (Lk 10:18), in connexion with Rev 9:1-11 (the language of 9:1 being in part probably derived from this passage), Lucifer came in the Middle Ages to be a common appellation of Satan. The star of Rev 9:1-11 is a fallen angel who has given to him the key of the abyss, from which he sets loose upon the earth horribly formed locusts with scorpions' tails, who have, however, power to hurt only such men as have not the seal of God on their foreheads. But this angel is not actually identified with Satan by the writer of the Apocalypse. The imagery in Is was no doubt suggested by a meteor, and possibly it was so in Rev also."

While some authors referred to Lucifer as Satan’s name before his expulsion from Heaven, others referred to Lucifer and Satan as two distinct entities. 10. Both as a literary convention and as Christian teachings or belief, historically there would appear to be little consensus. Regardless, it should be clear that an author may use the terms Lucifer or luciferian and not be referring to Satan.
 

drapetomaniac

Premium Member
Premium Member
Later, as Judaism absorbed such ideas as Zoroastrian dualism and concepts about angels during the Exile, and then as Christianity echoed various concepts from earlier religions, the concept of an evil power ruling an underground domain of punishment for the wicked became fixed in Christian doctrine.

And while many cultures have been accused of devil worship, the idea of the devil was actually introduced by exposure to Christianity.

Having an adversary to God is a foreign idea in most systems.
 

MasonicTexan

Registered User
You know I was watching "Decoded" on the History Channel, and the Statue of Liberty is also referred to as Lucifer.
Lucifer being the "bearer of light" aka Venus.
Thus I can understand and have always figured that when people associate Lucifer with Freemasonry, they are confused to the actual meaning of the name and not what it truly is.
 

rhitland

Founding Member
Premium Member
There is a statue in the Old Hall of the House at the US Capitol, it is Liberty next to a snake. I noticed it when I was there a few months back. Lucifer/Light-Bearer/Serpent/Wisdom symbolism is something that is deeply ingrained in the American subconscious.

http://www.aoc.gov/cc/art/liberty_and_eagle.cfm

I like how they just brush over the broken column with the snake. I wonder if the broken column alludes to anything?!
 

BEDickey

Premium Member
I can add something to this but not much, most of this has been pretty well covered. The name of the statue of liberty is "Diana Lucifera" or Diana the light bringer. As far as Satan even that word merely means opponent, such as when Jesus tells Peter, "get thee behind me Satan" what he is saying is " hey you, opponent, get behind me. I'm the man in charge here." As was said the meanings have been corrupted threw the years.
 

Benton

Premium Member
I read this post a long time ago, but I wanted to comment regarding how much I appreciate it. It's helped dispel some fears from some of my conservative Christian loved ones who can't help but misquote Pike.
 

Frater Cliff Porter

Premium Member
Having an adversary to God is a foreign idea in most systems.

The devil in many ways has been devastating to our culture, not in that we are plagued by a little red dude. But, in that, with him to blame we have an excuse not to take personal responsibility.

On another note, not sure the above is accurate Brother Rich. I think that from Sumer, Cush, etc. we can make an argument an entity(ies) of Good and one (or more) of evil in a culture is common.
 

CTx Mason

Registered User
So much has been lost in translation over the millennia, who can say they have THE TRUTH? Good exists just as evil exists. Evil buy nature is destructive, good is constructive. Each of us have the capacity for both, but only mankind has the choice and ability to not be enslaved by his nature or passions and make a choice of action for good or evil.
Regardless of what name we label something, it is defined by its actions, the fruit that it bears, and each individual ultimately bears the responsibility and rewards/consequences for them.
Am I my brother's keeper? I believe that we are, especially as Masons.
 

jwhoff

Premium Member
I guess we came up with the devil to flame our fears. The opposite of light is darkness. Human nature tends to slide back and forth.
 

Griffin

Brother of the R+C
Premium Member
Good work, Bro. Blake! Wikipedia actually has a very good article on "Lucifer," including several citations showing how the term has been used for Christ both Biblically (2 Peter 1:19) and in Catholic chant.
 

BryanMaloney

Premium Member
Having an adversary to God is a foreign idea in most systems.

On the contrary, opposition of the benevolent divine by powerful spiritual evil is found in many systems. Hindu religion(s) has a long tradition of opposing the evil Asuras against the benevolent Devas, and this can be dated long before Christianity. The ancient Iranian religion (pre-Christian and pre-Zoroaster) opposed the benevolent Asuras against the evil Devas. Mahayana Buddhism has demons which are no less real than the gods it recognizes. Admittedly, one can make a case that Mahayana is not "pure" buddhism, but it is one of the most popular forms. The Aesir were opposed by the Jotunn. The idea that the world was a loverly, happy place until nasty old Christianity leaped in to make everybody unhappy is another 19th century fantasy.

If anything, sober anthropological study of our many religious traditions reveals that a concept of some overwhelming spiritual evil being or beings acting in direct opposition to the benevolent Divine is remarkably common.
 

BryanMaloney

Premium Member
The opposite of light is darkness.

Perhaps, but Dionysius the Areopagite (forgive my spelling), in his Epistle to Dorotheum, made mention of "the Divine darkness" (gnophos). That is, while we say that God is light, we must also say that He is not light, for while he brings us out of ignorance, which we call darkness, He is also ultimately unseeable, unknowable, and inconceivable. Thus, while God is light, He is also the most impenetrable darkness.
 

jwhoff

Premium Member
Strong responses brother. Thoughtful. I see you spent a little time in the studies of humanities.

Kinda dark and alone out here in the materialistic world isn't it?

To bad you are to far from Houston for our 3rd Monday night of the month SCCR jam sessions. To far indeed.
 

BryanMaloney

Premium Member
Thank you for the compliment. I am the product of a liberal arts education. I have a Bachelor of Arts in biology, which makes very many people confused. How can one have a Bachelor of ARTS in biology? Obviously, it must be an inferior education in the sciences!* I have great concern for our nation, which so readily embraces narrow technocratic training but denigrates the old Artes Liberales approach that sculpted the Founders. That being said, the most important thing I learned was how limited my knowledge was vs. how much there is to know. Thus, education is the highest attainment, but education is not mere erudition. Education that does not transform for the better is not education at all.

*My own wife and her daughters concluded the negative about my schooling, even though my alma mater--a small liberal arts college--ranked 35th in the production of people who went on to achieve their PhD's in the sciences in 2011 and her eldest daughter's alma mater--an extremely large and well-beloved state university known for extreme fanaticism among its maroon and white clad alumni--didn't even make it on to the top 50 list.
 

jwhoff

Premium Member
I remember a graduate of Tractor Tech in the Carolinas, who told me she knew little about the Viet Nam war. This was in the late 80s. Her defense was that she was a small child during the war years. Forget the fact that we were still discussing the fallout of those years during her college days.

Were that the technocratic world should be armed with a few tenants of the humanities, we might not be so easily led astray. Not to mention constantly distracted from conversation by text messaging daily.

One more tip to the wise. The Scottish Rite will feel like an old shoe when the time comes. I choose to see you at Grand Lodge once you've started your trip to Light.
 

Tubal Cain

Registered User
Satan is tied to freemasonry as the idles of the brotherhood are the descendants of him. Hiram Abiff. Tubalcain. Noah. They all are of the bloodline of Cain. The son of Satan and eve.


Freemason Connect Mobile
 

travelinman76

Registered User
Great conversation. I had a guy approach me when he heralded I was going to become a mason and he could not help but get on the Internet and find a bunch of Pike quotes and print them off for me. I did not care why he thought then and don't plan on trying to prove "I'm right" with this info but it makes me smile to think about him thinking I'm the crazy one.


Freemason Connect Mobile
 

dfreybur

Premium Member
I am the product of a liberal arts education. I have a Bachelor of Arts in biology, which makes very many people confused. How can one have a Bachelor of ARTS in biology? Obviously, it must be an inferior education in the sciences!* I have great concern for our nation, which so readily embraces narrow technocratic training but denigrates the old Artes Liberales approach that sculpted the Founders. That being said, the most important thing I learned was how limited my knowledge was vs. how much there is to know. Thus, education is the highest attainment, but education is not mere erudition. Education that does not transform for the better is not education at all.

My degree is a Bachelors of Science in Liberal studies so we're opposites of some sort here. I had switched back and forth between math and computer science majors and ended up finding a degree program that allowed 2 minors instead of 1 major. So I have minors in both math and computer science instead of a major in either. Very inefficient path to a degree by the way. I ended up qualifying for a third minor in English if my degree had the option to list more than 2 minors.

Anyways, early in the career the science part was more valuable because entry level jobs tend to be technical. The science studies gave me depth at a time when I needed that depth.

But as I've progressed in my career the liberal studies parts of my studies have become more valuable. The studies in many topics gave me breadth at a time when I need depth. When I was taking those GE courses I resisted putting time into them because I knew they would be ignored early in my career. Decades later I'm now glad I was required to take them and glad I actually worked the material and learned from it instead of just jamming to pass the finals.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top