Satan A Pagan Symbol

Satan Origins Symbols
This essay will explore the pagan symbolism of Satan. It directly addresses the controversy of why some
Satanists identify themselves as pagan. It will trace the origins of Satan back, to the beginning, it may at
times address biblical context, but my focus is dedicated to pagan origins and attributes of Satan. There are
many reference books which address the birth of Satan. Many of those references will be found throughout
this paper.

This essay will also explore the differences between Satan, devil and demon. These labels are often
interchangeable when discussion the topic of Satanism. There are many books and articles which address
the differences between all the types of Satanism, and what is considered the True and Authentic Satanism.
This paper will not fall into endless abyss of that pretentious debate. There are many resource books which
address the How To or education For Dummies (series reference), this paper is not an instruction manual
for would-be Satanists.

Satanism, is vast. It is no longer the Satanism from the late 1960's, and has evolved into a variety of
philosophical paradigms, and religions. Satanism is, but is not limited to: Humanism, Atheism, Hedonism,
Libertine Philosophy, Objectivism, Human Psychology, Sociology, Luciferianism, Setianism, Asetianism,
Theism, Religious, Spiritual, Non-Spiritual, Humanistic, Materialistic, Carnal, Left-handed, Right-handed,
and Middle-pillar. In order to truly understand what each Satanists believes and practices, you should
engage them in dialogue. It can not be assumed that because a person self-labels as a Satanist, they are
either an Atheist or a Devil-worshiper. Things are not so black and white, but often many shades of gray
but most often neutral. It would take a small volume library to cover the topic of Satanism properly. I will
provide some references at the conclusion of this essay for further research. They are not the be-all, end-all
resources for all things Satanism. Nor, will any one resource define Satanism. I suggest that material from
any/all Satanic writers be examined before drawing your conclusions about what is and isn't Satanic. It
would also serve you to understand that organizations which are dedicated to Satanic philosophy are not
Satanisms unto themselves. They are simply organizations in place to serve the agenda as put forth by that
organization, often published in a mission statement.

Satan serves as an allegory, metaphor, and a literal being to Satanists. To determine which Satanists
believes what, you have to ask them. I am one Satanist, I do not speak for the whole of Satanism but have
studied nearly all the Satanic philosophies out there (new ones pop up all the time) to get a full grasp of
what it means to be Satanic outside of my own perspective. I find the topic of Satanism invigorating, and
have my own opinions about what it means to be Satanic. This however does not cloud my judgement
when tracing Satan back in time, to the beginning.

Satanism does not always require worship, but some Satanic philosophies/religions have a strong focus on
the worship of external beings. Whether those beings are deity or something else is completely reliant
upon the Satanist's personal beliefs or adherence to an established religion/philosophy. Satanism has a
strong focus on study and intellectualism, as many Satanic schools of thought believe in becoming the
Super-man, and achieving hyper-intelligence. As such, Elitism is often part of their Satanic paradigm.
This does not mean that all Satanists study, nor are Elitists.

Satanists, are human beings - subject to all the same fallacies as other human beings. They are also
emotional and spiritual beings. How the emotional/spiritual is conceptualized is as individual as the
person.

Satanism often contains dogma, for those that need it but it often rejects it. There is no universal set of
laws, rules, or ethics to follow but if a Satanist feels the need for some structure, many Satanic philosophies
offer it for consumption and adherence if desired.

Satanism is often associated with darkness, all things carnal and sometimes 'evil'. While Satanists enjoy a
dark aesthetic, not all Satanists seek this environment. There is no cookie-cutter for a Satanist, though
many fit established molds based on cultural influences and sometimes the longing for a sense of
'belonging'. This does not mean that all Satanists are social, or can be easily categorized based on
established paradigms. Many are complete enigmas. Satanists will often be found in the Art, Goth,
Vampire, Diabolist, Black Metal, Death Metal, or Heavy Metal communities. This does not mean that all
Satanists are Artists, Goth, Vampires, Diabolists or Metal heads. Satanists are every day people. You may
not be able to identify them by their mode of dress nor do they wear black all the time, rock fedoras, or
listen to specific music. The desired aesthetic is as individual as the Satanists.

Satanism, is represented by many symbols which will be discussed here. It is often considered
synonymous or kin to the Egyptian god Set, Egyptian Aset, Lucifer, Devil, Daemon, Daimon, Demon and
historically pagan gods. As part of a Satanist's desired aesthetic, a specific cultural reference may appeal to
each of them. This will lead the researcher around the world, culture to culture chasing down the devil.

Satanism, can be studied by using a variety of sources. There is not a single book that can do it justice.
Since Satanism is not a unified or universal philosophy/religion, many sources can be resources for Satanic
thought. Satanism, is not limited to Satanic writing. It draws from many subjects such as Anthropology,
Archaeology, History, Language/Music, Science, Sociology, Psychology, Literature, and Occultism. This
is just a handful; you could literally study this subject for the whole of your life if you are passionate
enough about it.

If you have questions regarding this essay, feel free to contact me. I am not infallible, and my ideas are
ever-evolving especially with the introduction of new information, and examination of outside
perspectives. I enjoy discussing the topic with knowledgeable individuals. Which leads me to modes of
communication. Satanists often adhere to Lex Talionis, otherwise known as the Silver Rule, and do not
appreciate pointed statements which aim to insult or degrade their person. If you do this, be prepared for
back-lash. Satanists are often aggressive in personality vs. passive. Satanism has a strong focus on the
beast within, and if you tease the dog you are libel to be bitten. For everything else, there's duct-tape.

From this point on, I will convey my personal opinions and address generalized viewpoints. I will also
share historical references for your examination. My position on this topic is by no means an absolute. It
is intended to present information in an organized fashion for further research. It is my hope that it will
foster critical thinking, self-examination and pave the way for the development of additional papers which
cover the topic of Satanism in the 21st century, from both a pagan and secular perspective.

What the hell is a pagan?

Before I can address Satan as a pagan symbol, I must address the term pagan. I have written in the past
about the use and mis-use of this term, in the form of diatribes. This is a more serious approach to the term
and its meaning.

Latin is an Italic dialect, which was spoken in the Italic peninsula, along with Greek, Celtic and Etruscan
language. Eventually all of these languages were taken over by imperial Rome, but not before they left
their mark on the Latin language. Before the collapse of the Roman Empire, Latin became standard in
places like Spain, France, Romania, and other surrounding areas. Latin had become absorbed into what we
now refer to as Italian, Spanish, French, Romanian and other romance languages.

Language study has relied heavily on existing antiquarian manuscripts and artifacts. There are surviving
pre-Abrahamic (religions of Abraham) religious texts referred to as pagan rites. During your own quest for
truth, you will find the following references referred to (and often):

History of Livy
Virgil's Aeneid
Ovid's Metamorphosis (Classical era)

There is also a heavy reliance upon Greek myths. The problem is,
that when examining Greek mythology, outside of the Roman names
for gods, there is very little historical reference to Roman culture. It
is heavily Greek. This often confuses scholars into believing that
the two are identical.

An additional source is the Golden Bough. However, it is riddled
with inaccurate theories and focuses too much on irrelevant detail -
if one were looking for something truly Roman. Context is
everything. Especially when examining language. To further complicate matters, there is a heavy Etruscan
influence which by the study of Etruscan culture, you can see as far back as 8th century BCE. The
Etruscans influenced the early Greeks and vice versa, plus the Etruscan language is not considered Indo-
European. So now you have Italic languages (which are pretty muddy as it is) being brought into the fold
of what is considered Latin today. If you want to truly understand the evolution of the term pagan, I
strongly recommend that you delve into language study.

For the sake of keeping this paper as condensed as I possibly can, I am only going to focus on paganus to
deliver my point of view. There are many forms and the etymology study could be an entire chapter in
itself. In antiquity, the term was used to address people living in rural areas, outside of cities. In the
Roman Empire, any person not living in the more civilized cities (vs. rural villages) were referred to as
paganus (post-Classical Latin). This context can be compared to calling a person living in the country in
the 21st century, a hick. It had negative connotations. Consider the terms 'hick' or 'hillbilly', these terms
are meant to communicate that the person is uncivilized, un-socialized, rustic, uneducated, and a lower-
class citizen. The same applies to the term pagan. This term was used in such a fashion, that the country
folk became accustomed to being called pagans. Just like the country folk in the 21st century are
accustomed to the social stereotyping used in the same manner. People have a resiliency and can be thick-
skinned about language usage, especially in lieu of larger issues to consider. People pick their battles, if
they are even free to do so. The country folk of antiquity did not have all the freedoms of citizens today.

Just as language develops today, it developed in antiquity. As time went on, pagan was used in such a way
to address civilians of a society. In the Roman Empire, the military had prestige; if you were not a noble,
politician or in the military you were a civilian. The term was extended to apply to civilians of the empire
with the advent of Christianity. Once the Roman Empire became Christianized, the context changes
slightly to encapsulate any person not adhering to the new government religion. The term becomes even
more derogatory than it ever had been before. The term becomes the equivalent of scum on the bottom of
my shoe!, and passes beyond the realm of a lower-classed citizen or a civilian. In this paper I will cover the
Christian-Rome, as well as the anti-Barbarian ideologies it contained.

On through the ages the term is used in various forms. There are surviving historical references which can
give us insight into the context of usage and per time period. There can be no absolutes when traveling
back in human history. The conclusions drawn about any given culture and era, is based on a mixture of
resources. Written accounts, which are often second-hand and outdated, archaeological evidence,
anthropological study, and language development. Then there's the issue of contemporary understanding of
antiquarian ideas. Scholarship does its very best to paint an accurate picture of history, but many
scholastic references in use fall subject to conjecture and estimation which is often referred to as
empiricism. There is a distinct difference between empirical facts and an educated guess.

This leads me to modern usage. The term pagan, has become an umbrella term for most religions (or anti-
religions) which are not Judaic, Christian or Islamic. The term is slightly less derogatory, but its all about
context. There are existing reconstructionist religions which do not apply the term attributed to its
historical usage in the Roman Empire as well as modern. The terms pagan and heathen, have been used
historically and currently to by adherents of monotheistic religions as a pejorative. While pagans of the
modern era embrace the term, they seek to remove the negative connotations that have been thousands of
years in the making. To this day, the term pagan is considered an Epicurean term. In spite of the efforts of
modern pagans, it remains derogatory when in use by monotheistic religions as well as a misunderstanding
of references to the term outside of the Christian or modern pagan context.

This leads me to the Neo-pagan movement of the 1960's. This differs greatly from the historical paganism
(Bronze-age - Iron-age). This term was widely applied to many new religious movements which attempted
to resurrect historical pagan practice. Typically, Neopagans are categorized into two groups: nature-
oriented and magical. As in scholarship, I am using pagan and Neo-pagan to differentiate between the two.
If you are not familiar with the differences, I encourage you to include an intensive study on historical and
Neopaganism.

I do not consider myself to be Neopagan, and do not self-apply the term, but acknowledge that this term
may be applied to me attributed to outside perspective of my personal beliefs and practices. I will instead
use the phrase Modern Pagan to umbrella my views. Obviously I can not be a historical pagan, I do not
feel as though Neopagan fits me, so the alternative is to use Modern Pagan with an emphasis on the
perceived differences.

Why I consider myself a Modern Pagan

I consider the historical usage of what it meant to be pagan, and thumb my nose at it. I am not content with
societal structure, adhere to social mores or feel socially obligated. In certain social circles, this would
place my persona in the unsocialized and/or uncivilized categories. I am very frank with my speech and
when it serves me say what is exactly on my mind. This often shocks people, and I'm often told I should
learn tact. I don't subscribe to Shoulds. I have no need to curb my speech so that others can feel
comfortable with my point of view. People often require a lot of sugar with that jagged little pill, I prefer
they choke on it. I am not a hand-holder, nor paid to be their therapist. In a social society people will often
regurgitate the latest and greatest catch phrase. " Do unto others, as you would have done unto you" , they
say. I prefer the Silver Rule. You will be treated, as I have been treated by you. You have to earn my
respect, it is not given to you just because you exist, and certainly not because society dictates that its due
to you for simply surviving past the age of 50 years of age. For these reasons, I am considered rustic,
rough, and often Barbarian in nature. I use the term pagan, very tongue-in-cheek. It's just another label,
among labels to befuddle people. I understand it will attempt to pigeon-hole my identity, but I'm well
aware of this fact and use it skillfully. Why any person would embrace this term as if it compliments their
person, especially with an educated understanding, is beyond me. It has always been an insulting term, and
still is in spite of the romanticisms of other modern pagans. Neopagan, is a new term, from its very start is
has meant to communicate specific ideologies in a positive way, painting itself into a positive image and
fitting itself into a modern society. I do not agree with many of the ideologies considered Neopagan,
therefore I do not self-label or identify as a Neopagan.

Why some Satanists consider Satan a pagan symbol

As stated, there are many forms of Satanism. I have studied nearly all of them, and Satanists you have been
heard. While I do not agree with many of the ideologies of other Satanists, I support their position to
believe and practice what they so choose under the Satanic label. All forms are true for the individual but
will not be accepted by others. If an individual can`t handle that, I suggest selecting a new identity pin.

I don't live for creating an image for others so why would I expect that another should do that for me? I
create complete environments for my personal enjoyment. It is my life, and I live for me; even if my loved
ones often share my life with me. I do not live for them, and I only get one shot at this so I'm going to live
it to the fullest. If my personal views hurt your precious little feelings, either grow a thicker skin (like the
historical pagans) or stay out of my environment. Equally, I accept that I will not fit another`s paradigm or
world view.

I have concluded that Satan represents a great many things to Satanists, and is often considered pagan in
nature. As such, many Satanists consider themselves pagan but this does not mean that all Satanists do. In
fact, many spend a great deal of time and effort to distance themselves as far from pagans as humanly
possible. I do not. I also do not spend time forging personal wars with pagans, Christians, Jews, Muslims,
or any other religion in this world. I study them intensely to better relate to the human condition

Satan as a pagan symbol:

Satan, often represents the dark force in nature - the hidden.
Satan, draws from pre-Abrahamic mythology and symbolism.
Satan, represents man's carnal nature, and his ability to shape his own world.
Satan, represents wisdom, and the empowerment to better the self.
Satan, is often used as an infernal name to invoke for power and protection.
Satan, is often an allegorical image of the self.
Satan, is a warrior archetype, active vs. passive.
Satan, is a thought-form, an egregore.
Satan, is the symbolic super-man
Satan, is a metaphor, an allegory, and complex ideology.
Satan, is the universal symbol of biblical ideas which are wholly pagan

And many, many more.

Back to the beginning

The most common origins story starts in the Hebrew language: Ha'Satan as a Biblical reference, Ha'Satan
in Ancient Hebrew language, and Ha'Satan in Modern Hebrew language but there is so much more to
consider, when considering the origins of Satan.


While Satan is a derivative of the Hebrew Ha'Satan, the character was built upon pagan foundations, as
were many of the ideas that make it into what is known today as The Holy Bible.

Hebrew is considered to be a Semitic language. A language family of Middle Eastern origins. This
includes, but is not limited to: Akkadian, Amharic, Arabic, Aramaic, Ge'ez, Hebrew, Maltese, Phoenician,
Tigre and Tigrinya. Language is inter-woven with culture, so you can not study a language without first
understanding the culture it belongs to. How would the culture have used a specific word such as Ha'Satan,
and are there varying contexts?

One can be a Semite, without being a Hebrew. A Hebrew is not reduced to being a Jew. A Semite, is any
person having been a descendant from the original settlers of the Arabian peninsula. When addressing the
usage of Ha'Satan in Old Testament, the language and the people using that language is central to
understanding both context and translating that into a language can understand - especially if they do not
speak Ancient Hebrew. I provide you with this guide of key-words for your own research:

Semitic Language

Hebrews

Hebrew Language

Biblical Hebrew

Classical Hebrew

Medieval Hebrew

Do not take my word for it, find your own truth. You may discover that there is a crypto-history based in
biblical mythology, and there is an actual history based on individuals who may or may not have
contributed to the writing which made it into Old Testament and on in to New Testament.

Tanakh is the Hebrew cannon, Torah is Five Books of Moses, and Talmud is the central text of mainstream
Judaism. The Christian Bible is created in two-parts from Hebrew texts (Old Testament and New
Testament). The Bible, is available in many versions and its contents vary from denomination to
denomination. The Christians can not seem to agree on an absolute text or interpretation, therefore
Christianity is divided on many issues of faith.

Torah, is written in Classical Hebrew is archaic and no longer spoken in pure form but studied intensely.
Jewish people have been studying and praying in Classical Hebrew for roughly 2000 years. The oldest
form of Hebrew writing, is dated 3000 years old and discovered as recently as 2008. When discussing
Classical Hebrew, we are addressing a language spoken from 10th century BCE to 4th century CE.

Torah, in present form is written in Biblical Hebrew which is divided into Golden, and Silver Ages.
Biblical Hebrew replaced Classical Hebrew in 4th century CE.

Culturally, Hebrew is considered the language of the Jews. The Jews teach that this language united all of
mankind, and every single letter has esoteric value.

It is a common misunderstanding that all Hebrews are Jews, and have always been Jews. The term
Hebrew, has been applied to many nomadic peoples of the Middle East. It is most commonly applied to
Israelites. During the Egyptian Empire, Hebrew was applied to Semitic nomadic Egyptians, until the close
of the Bronze Age. By the time of the Roman Empire the Jews were referred to as Hebraios, in Christian
context (Jewish-Christians). In Latin Hebraeus, plural Ivrim (Hebrew) derived Irom Tpuo (Ancient
Greek), which translates to pass over, or traverse (lies across).

The Hebrews are mentioned in various chapters in the Bible, which is not my focus. I am addressing the
cultural references and language development to understand the usage of specific terms within context.

The Satan

Ha'Satan, in the Hebrew language

r : v, He'I vrit

Standardized English Pronunciation: Ha-Sah-tahn.

The Hebrews would have spoken it: He-vrit (t is sort of silent)

; u n, in this form meant The Accuser.

In Arabic, '.=' ash-Shaytn. The Adversary.

This is where Satan gets an English name. Ha'Satan, in early Hebrew simply meant adversary. This does
not mean enemy, the evolution of adversary changes with the paradigm shift, within Mediterranean and
Middle Eastern cultures, as does the meaning of the term Ha'Satan.

I refer you to the following resource:

Everett Ferguson. Backgrounds of Early Christianity. 2nd Edition, William B. Eerdmans Publishing
company, Grand Rapids, Michigan, [1987], 1993, ISBN 0-8028-0669-4 pbk)

This book discusses the origins of early Judeo-Christianity, and the development of mythos based on Greek
Daemonology. The Daemons/Daimons were considered 'watchers of mankind', and by the time the Book of
Enoch was written, these 'watchers' were created from the early Daemons/Daimons. Hellenistic era Greeks,
had 'watcher Daemons' that were overseers of human affairs. The early Hebrew intellectuals, not only had
access to the mythologies, but studied them intensely.

Any 'watcher' who was seemingly not performing his task, was considered to have 'fallen from grace'; thus
Ha'Satan began to take on the designation of an 'opposing watcher'. The Illiad, was drawn from.
Hesiod tells how the men of the golden race became after death demons, (guardians or watchers over
mortals).

This is also a contributing factor to the idea of a 'fallen watcher'. The fallen Angel, referred to in the
biblical tale.

The early Hebrews were not using the Mythology like the Greeks would have. I encourage you to study
Greek culture, in addition to the cultures of early polytheistic nomadic Hebrews. The Greeks used
mythology as metaphoric teaching mechanisms. While I'm sure some Greeks fell subject to literalisms,
mythology was used very differently from culture to culture, even if you can detect similarities.

The idea that a 'watcher' may have 'fallen from grace' was metaphoric in nature.

Ha'Satan, as a designation was changed in both meaning and application attributed to a misunderstanding
of early texts, as well as a paradigm shift which occurred in Hebrew thinking, and religious theology. This
is precisely why, the later Hebrews did not catch the transliteration error when the Hebrew Bible was
translated in Latin (and other languages). Ha' (the) Hastan (Satan), was used in a variety of forms, but no
longer as an adjective. It became a noun (proper and improper): Satan, a being and fallen watcher, vs. The
Satan a title, a job description, a role in use by different characters.

All of this, can be researched and followed through the ages. There were many contributing factors to
cultural changes and evolutions.

In early Hebrew, 'Ha'Satan' was not a very important word. It could be equated to 'The Lawyer', or 'The
Prosecuting Attorney'.

Pausanias, 2nd century AD, discusses the existence of 'watchers' aka Daemons, in an underworld
environment. One of the major players, ate the flesh of sinners.

Now, up to this point Ha'Satan, is still in use in its proper form. The more the theologians were exposed to
existing mythologies (from various cultures), and stories made their way to their sitting rooms, the more
these mythologies made it into their writing. All cultures experience a form of cross-culturism. As groups
travel for survival and exploration they bring with them their cultural values.

This is a decent book, which discusses the development of 'Hell' in Judeo-Christian mythos:

Classical Hades, " Alice K. Turner, The History of Hell. Harvest Books, Harcourt Brace & Co., San
Diego, New Yor k, London, 1993, ISBN 0-15-600137-3


So you are beginning to catch a glimpse, of Satan taking form.

Satan, represents a literal being to many but more a metaphor and allegory by most Satanists.

Based on this information I have presented, it begins to paint a picture in your mind.

So far, we can summate that this allegory would involve:

1. A watcher
2. A protector of mankind
3. A Daemon of the underworld
4. A Daemon who ate the flesh of the disobedient
5. A watcher, falls from grace (off duty)
6. A Daemon, taking the physical attributes as described in Greek mythology

By the time of Plutarch (50-120 AD), he's talking about hurling the disobedient into lakes of fire.

You have to admire the imagination of man kind, and his thirst for burning flesh, blood, and
dismemberment.

Also, a contributing factor the development of Satan is Hermetic and Platonic philosophy. The usage of the
Baphomet Goat, to represent Satan is the occultism of Hermeticism embedded within Satan's core.

The Elephas Levi, is the most popular rendition used. It
embraces the Hermetic principles, coupled with seemingly
'dualistic' imagery, which would be Platonic in nature. Plato
had a strong stance on the division of 'good' and 'evil'. Plato
believed that God was good, and incapable of evil. If he is
incapable, then someone or something must be responsible for
the evils in the world.

" ...for the good we must assume no other cause than God, but
the cause of evil we must look for in other things and not in
God...we must not accept from Homer or any other poet the
folly of such error as this about the gods...Zeus is dispensor
alike of good and evil to mortals. "
-Plato

I recommend this resource for Hermeticism:

The Way of Hermes [The Corpus Hermeticum & the
Definitions of Hermes Tri megistus to Asclepius], Rochester,
Vermont, Inner Traditions Publishers, 1999/2000, ISBN 0-
89281-817-4 and Plato: The Collected Dialogues of Plato
Including the Letters. Bollingen Series L XXI. Princeton University Press. [1961] 1996, ISBN 0-691-
09718-6

Examining religions around the world, you will see the good vs. evil paradigm present in several cultures.

Greek Hermeticism, influenced Plato and his ideas that God was supreme goodness, goodness itself.

" No other beings spoken of as gods, men or divine powers can be even in the slightest degree good, but
God alone. God is this alone and nothing else. All other things are contained within the nature of the
Supreme Good, for they are body and soul, but themselves have no place to contain the Supreme Good. The
greatness of this good is such that it is the reality of all beings; of the bodily and of the bodiless, of the
sensory and of the subtle. This is the Supreme Good, this is God. Therefore, do not call anything else good
since then you blaspheme, and do not ever call God anything but good since again you blaspheme... For the
nature of God is One: Supreme goodness; God and goodness are one generative power, from which come
all generations. He who gives all and takes nothing is good. God gives all and takes nothing. So God is the
Supreme Good and the Supreme Good is God. The other name is that of the Father, by virtue of him being
the author of all things; for the Father's nature is to create. "
-Plato

If God is supreme goodness, than anyone or anything that opposes goodness must be evil.

At this point, Daemons, as watchers, were placed there by God in Plato's mind.

We see evidence of this here:

" Well, the god, in his kindness to man, did the same; he set over us this superior race of spirits who took
charge of us with no less ease to themselves than convenience to us, providing us with peace and mercy,
sound law and unscanted justice, and endowing the families of mankind with internal concord and
happiness. "
-Plato

Now you are seeing the development of 'Angels' (aka watchers) created by God, to watch over mankind.
By the time the early Hebrews were studying Greek texts, they are being influenced by early Greek
ideologies without a full grasp of their culture at the start, the paradigm shifts occurring within it, and
communicated by their mythology.

A watcher, off duty, falling from grace - no longer protects man kind but seeks to destroy it. In the case of
the development of Satan as a being, this watcher not only discards human affairs but punishes the
disobedient by eating their flesh, and hurling them into a lake of fire.

Celsus, 2nd century AD, writes intensely regarding the nature of Daemons (watchers and protectors) vs.
the Christian view, and you begin to see evidence of the poor attitude towards Christians.

Celsus, wrote specifically about Christians not fulfilling their civic duty by not taking up arms to fight in
wars. Celsus, put his faith in the watchers to guard over his army, heal their wounds, and lead them to
victory.

Taken from this resource:
Celsus On the True Doct rine. New Yor k & Oxford. Oxford University Press. 1987

" Men are born in bodily form; they are bound to it; they are weighted down by the passions and needs of
the world and are paying the penalty for their sins, until such time as the soul has been purified through its
successive stages.

As Empedocles teaches, " It [the soul] must wander about, away from the blessed, for thirty thousand years,
becoming in its time every possible shape of mortal being. " The soul is guarded in the here and now by the
wardens of our earthly prison. This is the nature of our mortal existence: we are given to gatekeepers for
purposes ordained by God; the gatekeepers do their duty at God's pleasure. It makes little sense, therefore,
for the Christians to heap abuse on the officers, the demons, in charge of our prison. They offer their
bodies to be tortured and killed to no purpose when they think that in so doing they are defying the demons
and going to their eternal reward. They have carried to an extreme a principle that we revered first:
namely, that it does no one any good, in the end, to love life inordinately. But to hate life is just as wicked.

The Christians do not suffer for a principle but because they break the law; they are not martyrs but
robbers...That life is under the control of gods one can see from the writings of the Egyptians. They say that
a man's body is under the power of thirty-six demons (or gods of some sort) who divide it among
themselves, one for each part of the body. The demons are known under various names...By invoking these
names, they heal the appropriate part of the body. In any case, what is to prevent someone from paying
homage to these and other gods, if he so chooses- so that at least one can be healthy and not ill, have good
luck rather than bad, and be delivered from misfortunes of all sorts. Instead the Christians make ridiculous
claims for themselves" " At the name of Jesus every knee in heaven and earth, and those under the earth,
and every tongue confesses Jesus is Lord. " I am not making the case for invoking demons, however; I am
merely trying to show that the Christians do the same things that the Egyptians do in memorizing the names
of thirty-six demons, only they choose to invoke but one. One must be careful about believing such things
lest one become so engrossed in healing, and lapse into the superstitions associated with the magical arts,
that one is turned aside from the higher things, the appropriate objects of reflection. Some skeptics say -
and perhaps we should believe them- that the demon is part and parcel of the things created by God, and is
riveted to blood and burnt offerings and magical enchantments and the like. Healing and predicting the
future are their sphere, but their knowledge and activity concern only mortal activities. This being so, it is
well to acknowledge the demons formally only when reason dictates, and reason may not dictate our doing
so in every case. It is perhaps better to think that the demons require nothing, long for nothing, demand
nothing. They may be pleased with our little tokens of recognition, but what ought really to occupy our
minds, day and night, is the Good: publicly and privately, in every word and deed and in the silence of
reflection, we should direct ourselves toward the contemplation of the Good. So long as God is the subject
of our thoughts, the little devotions we perform on behalf of the powers of this world -not the demons only
but the rulers and princes who hold power at the gods' design- are surely nothing horrible. Indeed, it is
only insanity for the Christians to refuse their religious duties, rushing headlong to offend the emperor and
governors and to invite their wrath. To love the emperor and to serve God are complementary duties... "

Now, keep in mind the tone of Christianity at this point in time. The Greeks and Romans were looking
around at the Christians scratching their heads. Not only were they not fulfilling their civic duties as
citizens, but they were martyring themselves, for no apparent purpose. Pay special attention to how he
refers to the Daemons in this passage.

Elaine Pagels, Professor of Religion at Princeton University, The Origin of Satan.

Is a fairly decent book, she tracks the 'Ha'Satan' from early Hebrew on through the development in the
Hebrew Bible from 6th century BC to the 1st -3rd century B.C., and covers the early Christian development
1-3 BC. She also covers the Daimons, in Classical Greek, Roman and Christian usage. I like this book, in
that it's a very scholarly written text, which demonstrates true research findings without a bunch of rhetoric.

Excerpt, that I believe is relevant, Pagels writes:

" In the Hebrew Bible, as in mainstream Judaism to this day, Satan never appears as Western Christendom
has come to know him, as the leader of an " evil empire, " an army of hostile spirits who make war on God
and humankind alike. As he first appears in the Hebrew Bible, Satan is not necessarily evil, much less
opposed to God. On the contrary, he appears in the book of Numbers and in Job as one of God's obedient
servants -a messenger, or angel...In Hebrew, the angels were often called " sons of God" (bene
`elohim)...the Hebrew term the satan describes an adversarial role. It is not the name of a particular
character. Although Hebrew storytellers as early as the sixth century BCE occasionally introduced a
supernatural character whom they called the satan, what they meant was any one of the angels sent by God
for the specific purpose of blocking or obstructing human activity. The root stn means " one who opposes,
obstructs, or acts as adversary. " (The Greek term diabolos, later translated " devil, " literally means " one
who throws something across one's path. " )...The story of Balaam in the biblical book of Numbers, for
example, tells of a man who decided to go where God had ordered him not to go. Balaam saddled his ass
and set off, " but God's anger was kindled because he went; and the angel of the Lord took his stand in the
road as his satan" [le-satan-lo] -that is, as his adversary, or his obstructor. This supernatural messenger
remained invisible to Balaam, but the ass saw him an and stopped in her tracks: "

This gives credence to Hebrew usage of Ha'Satan, as simply a title.

Another great resource is:
The Bi rth of Satan: Tracing the Devil's Bi blical Roots by T.J. Wray, Greg Mobley. ISBN 1403969337

You'll have to use your imagination, to enter a time before these stories were collected and written down. It
is a well known fact, that the Bible was not written in a day, nor was is codified as one book, for quite some
time. It is a collection of works (some of which have been omitted).

Prior this Judaism, and later Christianity and even later Islam, there were folk lore, legends, and
mythologies in use by peoples around the globe. Many of which made contact with each other on trade and
exploration routes. In nearly every culture you can find some form of a watcher, good, evil, heaven and
hell. Judeo-Christianity did not invent these ideas, they merely adopted them.

This is why you see African influences in Europe, and Asian in Europe, and European in America, and
South America, etc.

Before there were these 'religions' (and I use that loosely), people call this 'paganism', but this was not
paganism to the people who practiced it. In ancient Rome, the term pagan was used as an insult. In modern
language it might sounds something like: " Look at you country hicks and your rural folk practice! Ha ha
ha, you are uncivilized!"

Many Neopagans, believe the term in history was used as it is today from the beginning. It was not. Those
religions called pagan were not pagan to the people that practiced them until much later in language
development. Most often, they didn't even have names, or were they organized in such a way that modern
paganism is today.

Where do Neopagans get their ideas from? Typically poorly researched Neopagan writers. If you would
like to know the true history of pagan as a term, I suggest visiting your local library and looking at the
history of language development through the ages, as well as Roman history, and the history of England -
just for starters.

By today's standards, the term pagan not only applies to Satan (both tongue-in-cheek, and according to the
standards of text book definitions), Satan embodies purely pagan symbolism.

The Book of Maccabees, demonstrates that early Jews were willing to accept the Classical Greek usage of
Daemons, it took nearly 800 years for daemons to be changed into the responsible parties for evil doing
(Demons).

1 Maccabees

2 Maccabees

3 Maccabees

4 Maccabees

5-8, are also available.

It is important to understand the flux and shift.

In Old Testament, demons are not in control of earth, kingdoms or the dominion of men. Ha'Satan, was
merely a designation. The adversary.

The Advesary, can not defy God - therefore is not his enemy. This change did not occur until early Judaism
(1st-3rd century) incorporated the Hellenistic daemons, but regarded them as ruling the world and doing
evil (Maccabean). By 1st century BC, both Jews and Christians transformed the designation and made him
one being, who lead demons (vs. Daemons). In the Greek context, there is no evidence that there was ever
one ruling Daemon in Greek mythology. This is something new, but born from something older.

What's more, there were demons and demon possession for centuries before the Greeks. However in none
of the existing mythologies, do these demons rule the earth, or control mankind. This comes from Platonic
thought, hence my focus. I also suggest an intense study on demon possession by culture around the world.

The basis for the big bad guy, is drawn specifically from the Greeks.

I will discuss the Eastern demons, separately.

I also suggest reading:

The Fi rst Book of Enoch

This gives you an idea why ENOCHIAN, is also part of the Satanic aesthetic. You will discover this
commonality when you delve into Satanic writing. It will not be addressed in depth in this paper.

In Greek culture Daimones were in the air, space, high heaven and where the gods lived. They were also in
the earth, water, and the underworld.

Take a look at the Greek Papari Magica.

This is especially relevant, when addressing how the Daimones were viewed by the Greeks, and by other
cultures reading the works of the Greeks. You will detect paradigm shifts in culture within this text.

Helios-Horus is called to as " ruler of the world" or " lord of the world, " and " daimon of sleepless fire" ...

Early Hebrews would have interpreted this to mean 'god', or at the very least in control of the dominion of
men.

Hellenized Jews and Christians, changed the idea of The Satan, so when sitting back and trying to
determine the distinct differences between the Jewish and Christian faiths, this plays an important role.

The Ha'satan in Old Testament, vs. New Testament are different. In OT, The Satan, as a role, seems to be
taking its instruction from God itself. By NT it is one singular entity who is in control of legions of
Demons, and holding dominion over the earth and of men.

I would like to add to this, that this helps others to understand the kinship of Satanists and Daemonolators.

Daemonolatry, draws heavily from the early Greek usage and understanding of Daemons. Daemonolatry is
a historical pagan religion, which includes Satan in its pantheon of forces.

While modern Daemonolators pull from the mythologies of the Near East, most address daemons as
benevolent forces, vs. gods to be worshiped.

Eden's Serptent: Its Mesopotamian Origins by Walter R.
Mattfield, M. A. Ed

Another fairly explored book, that discusses the Mesopotamian
origins of the protagonist, pre-biblical - biblical.

The Hesperides in Greek Mythology

In Greek mythology, the Hesperides were nymphs who guarded the legendary Golden Apple tree. There are
several different accounts of their ancestry in myth. The ancient poet Hesiod claims that these nymphs
were the daughters of Nyx, the goddess of Night:

" After them dark Night, having lain with no one,
gave birth...to the Hesperides, who live beyond Okeanos
and keep the golden apples and the fruit-bearing trees. "
(Hesiod, Theogony, 213-216)

However, other ancient sources state that the Hesperides were the offspring of quite different parents. Atlas
and Hesperis, Atlas and Pleione, or even Ceto and Phorcys were all offered as possible parents to the
Hesperides.

Despite the differing opinions about the ancestry of these nymphs, ancient authors agree that the
Hesperides were important in Greek myth as the guardians of the tree from which the Golden Apples grew.
And these were not just any apples, either - they were the fruit that the goddess Hera received as wedding a
gift from Gaia (the Earth). Indeed, the golden apples appear in several myths, including the story of
Atalanta and Hippomenes, and the legendary tale of the labors of Herakles.

Ever wonder why the fruit in the Garden of Eden is assumed to be an apple?

There are many theories.

This is the 9th Gate to the Kingdom of Shadows, from
the book The Club Dumas by
Arturo Perez-Reverte. You
may be familiar with this work
used in the film The Ninth Gate,
2000. I painted this a while
back but changed the engraving
slightly. It uses elements from
both the book and the film. I
was tempted to paint an apple in
her hand but decided against it
at the last moment. While the
symbolism is seemingly biblical at first glance, I am
using it to communicate other ideas as well.

The Hesperides lived together in a garden, along with
the dragon Ladon. There are names associated with
the individual nymphs, and they are often called
Aigle, Arethusa, Erytheia, Hespera, and
Hesperethusa. Together, the nymphs sang enchanting
and beautiful songs.

Hesperides

Sound familiar?

The following images and descriptions have been collected and supplied by Walter R. Mattfield:

Agathos Daimon in the form a great serpent with a cock's comb
(?) atop its head and a beard or goatee below its mouth. The
bearded clothed bust in the niche above the serpent with a grain
modius (a measuring bucket for wheat) on its head may be the
alternate human representation of the Agathos Daimon? Does the
cock's comb allude to cocks who crow at sunrise and the goatee to
the setting sun as an aged man? The Agathos Daimone was
assimilated to the sun-god.

Antinous, a handsome youth who was the Roman Emperor
Hadrian's (ruled ca. 117 AD) companion and lover who died
under mysterious circumstances in Egypt. He is portrayed here as
the Graeco-Egyptian Agathos Daimon, The Agathos Daimon
Serpent is on his
left forearm.

Mosaic from the House of the Evil Eye, Antioch, 2nd century A. D. showing the

Kako Daimon (Caco Demon) or " Evil Spirit " naked, with enlarged penis between his legs. His brow is
described as either possessing horns or wings. Near him is the " Evil Eye" being pecked at by a raven and
stabbed by a trident and a sword, and attacked by a scorpion, snake, millipede, spotted leopard (or cat?)
and dog.

I would like to point out, that the enlarged Penis, was used by Greco-Romans as a protective agent. I have
discussed this in depth-in some of the Roman topics on the main board of paganspace.net, a social
networking forum I belong to. What is now being called the evil spirit would not have been evil to the
Ancient Greeks. Clearly the allegory is to demonstrate a protection and ward against the Evil Eye
(Malocchio, in Italian).


Bronze sculpture of Sarapis-Amun-Agathodaemon, a
combining of several Egyptian gods (Athens, Greece
Museum exhibit of Egyptian Art, Greco-Roman Era).

Agathodaemon enthroned as ruler of the world (the orb
held in its hand symbolizing the world) adored by
Thoth, an Egyptian baboon-god who greets at sun-rise
the sun with barking. The Agathodaemon is here being
assimilated to the sun as ruler of the world (drawing
after a gemstone).

Agathodaimon figurine in bronze of a beardless young man with a grain modius (?)
atop his head and a sheaf of wheat (?) or a victory palm branch in his left hand (?)
Alexandria, Egypt.
(Roman Period, 100-200 AD)

Agathodaimon figurine in silver, 1st-2nd century AD a mature
bearded (?) man holding a cornucopia or horn of plenty in left
hand and a patera in his right hand. (Boston Museum of Fine
Art)

Agathos Daimon
as a large snake,
with goatee
under its chin;
Greek: drakon
(English:
" dragon" ) meaning " large snake. "
The Agathos Daimon was assimilated to the Egyptian Ra or
Re the sun-god (Greek Helios, Roman: Sol) and called " The
Eternal Eye. " Perhaps the " Eye of Ra" above the serpent's
head alludes to its epithet " The Eternal Eye" ? The eye
represented the sun-god. In Egyptian myth the sun rises as a
young man and sets as an aged man, perhaps this accounts for the Agathos Daimon's appearance in art
forms as both a beardless young man and a mature bearded man? Agathos Daimon shown with a sun disc
atop its head. In texts it is associated or assimilated to the Graeco-Egyptian sun-god Helios-Horus and
called " the Lord of the World. "

Photo and description credits:
Walter R. Mattfield, M.A. Ed.

Coin of the Roman Emperor Trajan, circa 1st century A. D., issued for
Egypt, showing on its reverse side the Agathodaemon as a large
serpent.

Wall fresco or painting showing an offering to the Agatho Daemon
serpent, coiling itself about the altar in a garden setting (from a house
in Pompeii, Italy, 1st century A. D.).

Fresco or wall painting showing an offering to the Agatho Daemon by
the Genius of the house in toga, accompanied by two gods associated
with good luck and good fortune holding a drinking rhython and bucket
(Roman Empire, 1st century A. D. Pompeii, Italy).

Fresco showing two agatho daemons accompanied by other Egyptian gods including Isis in a boat (Roman
Empire period)

Photo and description credits:
Walter R. Mattfield, M.A. Ed.

The Book of Zohar

Book of Zohar on Sacred Texts:
http://www.sacred-texts.com/j ud/zdm/index.ht m

Synopsis:

The Zohar (Hebrew. : t , lit Splendor or Radiance) is the foundational work in the literature of Jewish
mystical thought known as Kabbalah.[1] It is a group of books including commentary on the mystical
aspects of the Torah (the five books of Moses) and scriptural interpretations as well as material on
theosophic theology, mythical cosmogony, and mystical psychology. The Zohar contains a discussion of the
nature of God, the origin and structure of the universe, the nature of souls, redempt ion, the relationship of
Ego to Darkness and " true self " to " The Light of God, " and the relationship between the " universal energy"
and man. Its scriptural exegesis can be considered an esoteric form of the Rabbinic literature known as
Midrash, which elaborates on the Torah.

The Zohar is mostly written in what has been described as an exalted, eccentric style of Aramaic, a
language spoken in the Land of Israel during the Roman Period in the first centuries of the Common Era.

The Zohar first appeared in Spain in the 13th century, and was published by a Jewish writer named Moses
de Leon. De Leon ascribed the work to Shimon bar Yochai, a rabbi of the 2nd century during the Roman
persecution[2] who, according to Jewish legend,[2][3] hid in a cave for thirteen years studying the Torah
and was inspired by the Prophet Elijah to write the Zohar. This accords with the traditional claim by
adherents that Kabbalah is the concealed part of the Oral Torah.

While the traditional majority view in religious Judaism has been that the teachings of Kabbalah were
revealed by God to Biblical figures such as Abraham and Moses and were then transmitted orally from the
Biblical era until its redaction by Shimon ben Yochai, modern academic analysis of the Zohar, such as that
by the 20th century religious historian Gershom Scholem, has theorized that De Leon was the actual
author. The view of non-Orthodox Jewish denominations generally conforms to this latter view, and as
such, most non-Orthodox Jews have long viewed the Zohar as pseudepigraphy and apocrypha while
sometimes accepting that its contents may have meaning for modern Judaism. Jewish prayerbooks edited
by non-Orthodox Jews may therefore contain excerpts from the Zohar and other kabbalistic works,[4] even
if the editors don't literally believe that they are oral traditions from the time of Moses.

Sources: [1] Scholem, Gershom and Melila Hellner-Eshed. " Zohar. " Encyclopaedia Judaica. Ed. Michael Berenbaum and F red
Skolnik. Vol. 21. 2nd ed. Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA, 2007. 647-664. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Gale. [2]
Scharfstein, Sol (2004). Jewish History and You I I. Jewish History and You. Jersey City, NJ, USA: KTAV Publishing House. pp.
24. [3] Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai - Lag BaOmer at OU. ORG [4] Siddur Sim Shalom edited by Jules Harlow

Zoroastrianism is a religion and philosophy based on the teachings of prophet Zoroaster (also known as
Zarathustra, in Avestan) and was formerly among the world's largest religions. It was probably founded
some time before the 6th century BCE in Persia (Iran). The term Zoroastrianism is, in general usage,
essentially synonymous with Mazdaism (the worship of Ahura Mazda, exalted by Zoroaster as the supreme
divine authority).

Pri mer research:
http://www.dmoz.org/Society/Religion_and_Spi rituality/ Zoroast rianism/

Introduction to Zoroast rianism:
http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~i ranian/ Zoroast rianism/index.html

Article Excerpt:

Zoroastrianism

"4) Good and Evil

The solution of the problem of Evil has been attempted by every Great Prophet, and though the ways of
looking at it have been different in different lands and at different epochs, still there is a fundamental
similarity of treatment. Zarathushtra has tackled the problem in His characteristic manner. He had made
Asha the very key-stone of His Teaching, and we have seen that to Him Asha meant the Eternal law which
impels all creation to progress Godwards. To Him life upon this Earth meant a constant endeavour to tread
this Path. Life therefore was unceasing endeavour, a continuous activity-what the Hindus have named
Karma Yoga, or the Religion through Action. The Prophet expected all his followers to be active partisans
on the side of Asha; consequently all that helps the forward progress of humanity is Good, all that tends to
hinder it is Evil.

Zoroaster preached about the two Spirits, but His Philosophy is by no means dualistic. This idea of dualism
did, indeed, creep into the religion during the later stages of its development; but in the Teacher's own days
and in His own words, the idea developed is most emphatically not dualistic. It is not dualistic in the sense
usually understood, namely of conceiving two co-eternal, co-equal powers, one good and one evil, who are
for ever at war with each other. The concept of Zarathushtra is something essentially different. He tells us
that there are the Two Spirits-The Good and the Evil-at war with each other. They form the antithesis of
each other in every respect. But in two must important respects His Teaching differs from the popularly
conceived idea of 'Dualism'. In the first place the conflict is bound to have an end. The books, even the later
books which were responsible for all this later confusion of thought, speak of the ultimate triumph of the
Good Spirit (Spento-Mainyu) and the hiding of the Evil One (Angro-Mainyu) 'underground'. And the
Prophet Himself categorically declares in the Gatha (Y., xxx, 10), 'Then indeed shall the support of
Falsehood come down, and broken shall be its power', that Evil shall ultimately perish. If, therefore, one of
the two powers in the so-called 'Dualistic' system is ultimately to perish, we cannot in reason say that the
system teaches that these two powers are either co-equal or co-eternal.

And yet in another aspect and perhaps in a more fundamental respect is the system of Zoroaster not
dualistic. The Two Spirits are not 'self-created' as may be expected in a truly 'Dualistic' system. For both
these emanate from and are the creation of Ahuramazda. These Twin Spirits first emanate from Him, the
Eternal Lord of all Life and these Twain working together create and maintain the whole of this Universe.
As Prof. Jackson has very well expressed it, these Twin Spirits do not exist independently but each in
relation to the other; they meet in the higher unity of Ahuramazda. They exist before the beginning of the
world, but their opposition only comes to its expression in the world that we see.

Though it has not been very clearly stated that these Two Spirits are 'created by Mazda', still, at least in one
place in The Gathas (Y., xxx, 1), I believe that such a statement is made. It is a disputed passage and the
Pahlavi tradition seems to support this translation. This is not the place to enter into a grammatical
discussion as to the meaning of this passage, but I would render the opening lines of that verse as,

Now I will speak to those who desire (to hear), about these Two who are created by Mazda, which
(teaching) is indeed for the wise.

Then again in Yasna, xix, 9, Ahura Mazda speaks of the Two Spirits as His own, implying that they both
emanated from Him. Thus though not explicitly, still by implication, we may conclude that the Two Spirits
represent the double emanation from the Eternal, when the Eternal 'breathes out into manifestation'. They
may be compared to the twofold Powers, Purusha and Prakriti (or Spirit and Matter), which have been
postulated in the Yoga Philosophy of India as emanating from the Supreme Lord, Ishvara. Of course, I do
not here wish to imply that all the subtleties of the Yoga system are to be found in the teaching of
Zarathushtra, but I wish merely to draw a rough sort of analogy. Just as Ishvara in the very act of
manifestation gives forth these Twain-Spirit and Matter-so also for the purpose of manifestation, according
to Zoroaster, are needed the Twain Spirits, the Good and the Evil, 'created by Mazda'. They represent the
two poles upon which the whole of manifestation and evolution revolves. Apparently opposed to each other
in every respect, they are both necessary to create and to sustain the manifested universe. Their opposition
is clearly and forcibly declared in the Gathas (Y., xxx, 4):

And now when these Two Spirits together came, they in the beginning created Life and Not-Life.

And in another place Zarathushtra declares (Y., xlv, 2):

I will speak of the Spirits Twain at the first beginning of Life, of whom the holier spake thus to the wicked
one:

Never shall our minds harmonise, nor our doctrines; neither our aspirations, nor yet our beliefs; neither our
words nor yet our actions; neither our hearts nor yet our souls.

The first quotation given above is very significant-'they created Life and Not-Life'. This constitutes the
fundamental opposition of this pair, and it virtually amounts to saying that they correspond in the essence
to the idea underlying Purusha and Prakriti or Spirit and Matter. This quotation is in fact the clearest
expression of the fundamental difference between the Two Spirits that is to be found in the Zoroastrian
Scriptures. If we look upon them as in a sense representing the two phases of the eternal activity of God,
namely creation and dissolution, we may better understand their true importance. It was probably in this
sense that, in later times, the Zoroastrian Divines attributed to the Evil Spirit such 'evils' as the creation of
extreme heat and extreme cold, of plagues of vermin and noxious creatures.

As time went on and as the true Teaching of the Prophet receded further and further into oblivion, a new
and curious idea began to overlay this original idea of the Two Spirits. The later Zoroastrian theologians
seem to have forgotten that destruction is also part of God's work; that one side of His activity, as shown in
the progress of the universe, consists in renovation and renewal, which is impossible without the
destruction of what has ceased to help in the forward march of Creation and has thus become 'evil'. This
forgetting of the fundamental conception of the Evil One as an Aspect of God Himself led, in later times, to
a marked divorce between the functions of Angro-Mainyu (the Matter or Not-Life Aspect of God). And in
exact proportion as the Evil and the Good Spirits became estranged from one another did the former also
get estranged from his Creator. And just at the same rate did the Good Spirit become more and more
indentified with Ahuramazda. And at last in Sasanian times (as represented by the Theologians of the
Vendidad) we find, instead of the Good and Evil Spirits, Ahura and Ahriman (Angro-Mainyu) forming the
fundamental Pair. How far this view had been influenced by the doctrines of Judaism, Christianity and
Buddhist (in its more popular forms with its hosts of demons and evil spirits) would form a very interesting
piece of work in Comparative religions. Here it may be sufficient to state that Angro-Mainyu in the
Vendidad, far from being 'a Creation of God', has become the Arch-Opponent of the Almighty, very much
as Satan did after 'he fell from Heaven'. Thus we read in the very first chapter of that book that when Ahura
Mazda created various fine lands for the people to dwell in, this Arch-Fiend, Ahriman, 'counter-created'
various plagues therein in order to drive away God's own people from their homes! This later idea of
Ahriman is decidedly unphilosophical and inconsistent with the other dogma, simultaneously put forward,
of the omnipotence of God. And it is certainly opposed to the original teaching of Zarathushtra, which, as
we have already seen, admitted no other at God's level. This later conception was, due to a
misunderstanding of the Prophet's teaching, very possibly under the influence of Semitic theology. And
assuredly this later conception of Ahriman is responsible both for the philosophic confusions and the
superstition that crept into Sasanian Zoroastrianism, and also for the belief among foreigners that
Zarathushtra's religion was 'dualistic'.

Whatever the subsequent history of the Evil Spirit may have been in Iranian Theology, there cannot be any
reasonable doubt that the original concept as it emanated from the mind of the Master Himself and
embodied in the Gathas is the purest and the most philosophical explanation of the existence and the origin
of Evil. 'Life and Not-Life', this phrase conveys the very essence of the whole teaching. It must, however,
be borne in mind that in the Gathas we find only the main points of the teaching jotted down rather than a
'connected' system of philosophy. Each verse contains one or two ideas expressed in terse and often highly
phonetic language. Each verse represents some idea but the connection between the verses themselves is
often not expressed at all. Only long and patient thought and meditation, coupled with a life lived according
to the teaching, would slowly bring out clearly the connecting links. All one can do at present is to take up
the scattered hints from various verses of the Gathas and other Hymns and carry them forward to their
logical conclusions.

The first such conclusion we can draw from the very definition of the Two Spirits-as Creators of 'Life' and
'Not-Life'-is that both are as the two poles of the same Eternal Source of all Life; that both are (to vary our
metaphor) the First Creators and the First Ministers of His Will. The Absolute willed to manifest, and from
unity He became Duality. Angro-Mainyu is as essential for Creation and Manifestation as Spento-Mainyu.
This point is very finely brought out in the Sraosha Yasht (Y., lvii).

In that Hymn, in the very first verse, Sraosha is described as paying His homage to all the Beings who have
helped to create the universe:

Among the creatures of the Great Ahura,
He was the first to worship the Eternal;
He first did worship the immortals Holy,
The Six that stand around the Throne of Mazda;
He also worshipped first the Twin Maintainers,-
The Twin Creators,-who create together
The manifold creation all around us.

Sraosha (Obedience to the Divine Will) is here shown as recognising the Two as among the Supreme
Manifestations of the Will of the Eternal. Evil is necessary in the world in order that Good may ultimately
triumph. Spirit must unite itself with Matter in order to realise completely the fullness of its stature. That
Good shall come out triumphant in the end has been maintained by Zoroastrian theology throughout its
long history. And when we characters Evil as 'Not-Life', we only imply that until Spirit returns to the
Eternal Source from which it emanated, Matter serves as the shadow, that it only appears as Evil. In other
words, Evil, in itself does not exist; or to put it paradoxically, Evil has but a negative existence.

A second implication is with regard to human conduct. Evil is found in the world in order that we may
strengthen ourselves by learning to overcome it. For life to a true follower of Zarathushtra is a constant and
sternuous effort not merely in being good but also in fighting and overpowering evil. Evil has to be
regarded, so to say, as a whetstone for a Zoroastrian to sharpen his determination upon. Evil is like
Mephistopheles in Goethe's Faust,
Part of that power which still
Produceth good whilst ever scheming ill.

Another, and perhaps a more remote, implication from these ideas is that complete freedom is left to the
individual to choose his own side in the eternal battle. The sternuous Zoroastrian must stand upon his own
legs. No Prophet, no Saviour intercedes for him or bears his burden. The Lord Zarathushtra points out the
Path and stands as a glorious example to all mankind, and is very ready to guide and help and inspire. But
each individual has got complete freedom to choose his own path in life; and once the choice is made every
step upon the path chosen must be trodden by his own feet. According to Zoroastrian theology each human
being has a principle within himself called urvan which is often translated as 'soul'. The literal meaning of
urvan is 'the chooser'; for it is that within the human being which enables him to choose between the right
and the wrong, between the temporary and the eternal. Zarathushtra, even while he first proclaimed His
Message, said:

Hear with your ears the Great Truths, consider them with clear thought, deciding between the two and
choosing, -man by man, each one for himself.

Once the choice is made, the Eternal Law, which declares that a man shall reap exactly as he has sown,
steps in and determines the future progress of the individual.

Thus we see that the Lord Zarathushtra has worked out a very satisfactory solution of the problem of the
existence and the origin of Evil. He has taught that Evil is but a negative aspect of the Divine Life, only 'the
Shadow of the Eternal', for it has created 'Not-Life'. Evil by itself does not, cannot exist; but it is relative,
depending upon the distance from God at which the individual stands upon the Path of Asha. Angro-
Mainyu is terrible indeed as long as He has power to tempt people with material and temporary happiness,
or to confound their intellects and souls. He has tempted Sages always, and often quite successfully. He
tempted Yima and led him to his fall. He tried to tempt the Master Himself (as Buddha and Christ were also
tempted later) but failed. When this last temptation was overcome, the Master stood up in His full glory as
Teacher of the World, as Zarathushtra (He of the Golden Light). Then He explained to mankind what Evil
was in reality-the Shadow of the Light Eternal, of God Himself. For He had conquered Angro-Mainyu and
assuredly He had the best right to explain to humanity the true nature of Evil."

-END EXCERPT-

Excerpt from:
The religion of Zarathushtra, I.J.S. Taraporewala, Madras, 1926

" The writings of the Greek and Roman historians are full of speeches. They could not possibly have been
delivered in the forms in which they were reported. For one thing, nobody had taken down full notes of
them at the time, and there were no handouts describing their contents. Second, the language in which the
historians reported them is very often their own, and not that of the speakers...what the historians put
down, as an alleged record of such speeches, was a vital part of ancient historiography, because it
reflected the backgrounds and explanations of events and the characters, motives, intentions, aims,
expectations and reactions of the principal participants. The speeches, therefore, with which the works of
the ancient historians are filled form a vital part of their historical picture...they are not history in the
modern sense of the word, because they are unauthentic; if they ever took place at all, they were not
delivered in those terms, or even with those contents. Thus, speeches form an enormous barrier between
ancient ideas of historiography and our own conceptions of the same activity. "

Source: " Speeches, Digressions and Cycles, " Michael Grant. Greek and Roman Historians,
Information and Misinformation. Routledge. London & New Yor k. 1995. ISBN 0-415-11770-4

" No one familiar with the mythologies of the primitive, ancient, and Oriental worlds can turn to the Bible
without recognizing COUNTERPARTS on every page, TRANSF ORMED, however, TO RENDER AN
ARGUMENT CONTRARY TO THE OLDER FAITHS. "

Source: " The Serpent's Bride. " Joseph Campbell. The Masks of God: Occidental Mythology.
Ar kana. New Yor k. Vi king Penguin Books. 1964, 1991

" Campbell noted that the Hebrews, apparently _employing inversions_, are reversing or inverting motifs
by _180 degrees_ borrowed from the earlier Mesopotamian culture. He notes that Abraham through Jacob
are portrayed as wandering shepherds, _not_ settled urbanites, planting orchards and harvesting the fruit.
He suggests the Hebrew shepherds wanting to magnify themselves, took earlier Mesopotamian themes
praising city life and applied these motifs to themselves, portraying the urban life as depraved and not in
God's favor (After the expulsion from the Garden of Eden Cain the agriculturalist and murderer appears
and builds the world's first city). Campbell may be right. This would explain how a Mesopotamian city
garden which man is created to toil in, relieving the Igigi gods, becomes a lush garden planted by a God
before man's creation (Adam) in the midst of a wilderness called Eden. The uncultivated desert or steppe
land in which wandered wild animals and shepherds was called in Sumerian edin. That is to say, the
Hebrews may have reversed or inverted the Mesopotamian " creation of man" myths. Instead of man being
created to work in a city garden, he is placed in God's garden in the midst of a wilderness called Eden
(edin?). Campbell also notes the motif of man TILLING the city gardens of Sumer and Adam's TILLING the
Garden in Eden (emphasis mine)"

Source: Walter Reinhold Warttig Mattfeld y de la Tor re, Master of Arts in Education (Social
Sciences)

Arabic lexicons provide the rendered meaning of (d)jinn not only for spirits, but also for anything
concealed through time.

Arabs exposed to Latin-speaking cultures, re-tooled the Greek Daemons/Daimons just as they had been
before by Hellenized Jews, and Christians.

The Djinn, become the very thing they were intended to be.

The whisperers in the dark, seeping into the hearts of man and making them commit great evil.

Ptolemy II, conquered Jerusalem and enslaved thousands of Jews. Those Jews, were settled throughout
Egypt, many of which were in the capital of Alexandria. If you know your history, you'd know that
Alexandria was founded in the name of Alexander the Great. Refer back to the resource I provided
Maccabee (books 1-4), and clearly you will see that Jews in Jerusalem, as well as the capital city
Alexandria, not only accepted Greek religion, they introduced that religion into the Temple where most of
the Jews were saturated.

People often forget that some Jews not only prospered there but gained their freedom and returned to
Jerusalem.

By the time of NT, you have about 400 years of Greek influence, with the Platonic explanation for good
and evil (Remember, God is good and incapable of evil, and there must be an embodiment of Evil.).

After all that saturation, Daimon/Daemon according to the Greeks is entered as an English translation as the
Christian Demon. That's roughly 800 years of evolution. The Greek ideology changed dramatically, in that
you have 'watchers' over mankind, an evolution into good vs. evil, and the Ancient Hebrews ideology of
OT, is now lost in NT.

3rd Century BC, Jewish intellectuals were relegating the gods to the rank of Daimones, and denying they
were gods possessing power equal to their God Yahweh.

In the Hellenistic era, Magicians were claiming they could control the Daimones. How? By uttering God's
secret name.

Refer back to the Greek Magica Papyri, and it's very clear what the roles of Daimones were. Often
intermediates between men and gods. They have no human limitations, but are below the gods. The
Daimones of the underworld, were the dead (Daemons) which became Daimones fulfilling roles. If it were
the case that every person that died, became a Daimon, the only purpose the underworld would serve,
would be a Daimon making factory. This is not the case. It's one type of 'living spirit' which is transposed
into a new kind of spirit, a Daimon. Spirit, being used to describe these 'beings' which are often described
as supernatural beings.

The same applies to Satan, living as a Daemon, transposed into a Daimon (Demon) in the underworld. The
Ha'Satan of the OT, becomes something new entirely in the NT.

From the Greek Magical Papyri:

" Rejoice with me, You who are set over...the world, for whom all the gods serve as body-guards...You who
are the Agathos Daimon of the world, you who arise from the abyss, you who each day rise a young man
and set an old man. I beg you lord, do not allow me to be overthrown, to be plotted against, rather, I ask to
obtain...victory over all men and women" .

Chapter 36, page 211-30.

" Lady Isis, whom Agathos Daimon permitted to rule in the entire Black land (Egypt)...Protect me, for I am
the one established in Pelusium"

Chapter 7, page 490-505

The 'dragon' attributed to Satan, comes from the Greek 'drakon', so when we refer to the Book of
Revelation, this is heavily Greek influenced.

The Agathos Daimon, in Egypt, was represented as a snake or some kind of serpent (refer back to the
images of the artifacts I have included).

Egyptian Bes, as a Daemon, is attached to Satan as well. Bes, is associated with Lightening.

Magica Papyri spell:

" I call upon you the headless god who has sight in this feet. You who are lightening and thunder... "

In NT, Satan is described as a fall like lightening from the heavens.

Just some examples of how the Hellenist Greek Daimones, were re-tooled and applied to Satan by
Hellenized Jews and Christians.

It is well known, that many Jews do not understand that Jesus Christ is the Messiah. He simply does not
meet the criteria outlined by Moses in OT, and does not fulfill the prophesies. Moses warns of a false
Prophet.

By the time of Books 2-4 of the Maccabees, you begin to see Jews martyring themselves because they no
longer wanted Greek gods and rituals in their Temple. This is around 160 BC, 160 years before the birth of
Jesus. There was a lot going on at that time. Many groups were claiming not only to know the intentions of
God, but the goings on in the kingdom of heaven. Moses provided prophecy of a coming messiah.
Hellenized Jews were writing Apocalyptic texts, and Noble death was popular.

Another great book I can recommend:
Martydom and Noble Death: Selected texts f rom Graeco-Roman, Jewish, and Christian Antiquity by
Jan Willem van Henten and F reidrich Avemarie. 2002

It addresses the cultural phenomena of Noble death, the death of philosophers and cultural baggage.

The suffering of Jesus Christ, is central to Christian theology. It is among the attributes of evil assigned to
the devil. Which leads me again to the evils of Satan.

Noble Death is popular
See:
http://en.wi kipedia.org/wi ki/ Hellenistic_civilization

Why Satan embodies E VI L

1. He tells the truth, this can be witnessed in Genesis. Though Eve claims the serpent beguiled her, the
serpent told Eve the truth, that if she ate from the tree she would be just like God, having knowledge of
good and evil (Platonic philosophy). The Serpent, is likened to Satan even though it is never referred to as
such. It is often assumed. God, punishes the Serpent, by making him the creature he is today, on his belly,
with no limbs, a creature of cunning, cursed to slither across the earth. Serpent usage can be found in
historical paganism.

2. The Satan, tests Job on God's behalf. The Book of Job, clearly outlines that The Satan can not disobey
God, this is not the being Satan, but it is assumed attributed to the change in NT.

3. Satan, tempts Christ. Remember, the suffering of Christ is central to Christianity.

4. If God is the embodiment of goodness itself, then anything that opposes God surely must be evil, Satan
becomes the embodiment of evil, in NT.

5. Satan, tempts man to disobey God (but remember Man must first disobey to fall subject to Satan's
temptations).

6. Satan, is the deceiver, the shape-shifter, controls the earth with legions of demons. He has control over
the dominion of men.

7. Sons of light, are associated with angels. Sons of darkness, are associated with demons and Satan is the
Prince and leader of the demons.

Surely you recognize a Hellenized theme here? I encourage you to look at Hellenistic Culture, along your
course of study.

Satan is comfortable in the cradle of civilization - Ancient Mesopotamia

Look to the Epic of Gilgamesh, more specifically at the mythology of the South Wind.

Akkadian Eridu, the god Ea. Adapa is warned not to eat the food of death, just like God warns Adam not to
eat the forbidden fruit.

Like God, Ea allows the knowledge to be obtained by eating the forbidden food and denies Adapa
immortality, much like Adam and Eve were denied the Tree of Life (and immortality).

The Book of Genesis, the Garden of Eden - are similar to the Mesopotamian Edin.

Edin, is short hand for Seri or Seru (depending).

In Hebrew "Eden" means 'delight' but also 'well watered' - fertile ground.

Seri/Seru, is basically a watering hole in the desert where the people would meet to cultivate the land. The
'garden in the desert' which is a collection of gardens in the city and outside of it. The Mesopotamians
believed the were cultivating the land for the gods, so that the gods would not have to toil on earth. The
people were working, so the gods would not have to and would supply them with all their needs for
eternity.

Garden of Eden Edin

Pay special attention to the wild man of the steppe. He has animal
companions, and the animals do not mistrust until he is exposed to the
Harlot. After satisfying his sexual lusts (having the knowledge from eating
the forbidden food), the animals now see him as human, vs. the hairy man-
animal he once was. He begins to wear clothes and live in cities. The
harlot, represents civilization. Civilized man, is a flesh eater, when animals
were once his companions, they are now slaughtered for their flesh.

This is a bit different than the Garden of Eden of Genesis, but you see
similarities.

The changes that occur, once Adam 'knows' Eve (sex), and the events that
follow.

Adam and Eve, are cast out of the garden, God gives them clothing and
they reside elsewhere in 'civilization' vs. the garden.

Edin, is now a place to fear for man whereas in the garden of Eden, Adam
and Eve had no need to fear - especially the beasts of the wild.

Outside of the Eden, however was another matter.

There are other comparisons to be made within the creation myths of Ancient Mesopotamians.

Scholars have noted an animosity existed to some degree between the tent-dwelling nomadic herdsmen and
the settled peoples of the land, the dwellers of villages and cities. This theme seems to be apparent, as it
relates to the use of pagan in antiquity in Rome.

Walters writes:

" " Adapa's fall from innocence" was in his naive, innocent trust in his god. He apparently thought that if he
was blameless before his god and scrupulous in doing all his assigned tasks, as this god's servant, his god
would not betray this trust. He believed his god would not deal falsely with his servant, his god would
reciprocate by doing only good for his loyal servant, always ready to care for and look out after his
servant's well-being. Adapa's innocence, his trust in his god, was betrayed.

Ea of Eridu in Sumer (modern Iraq) did not want Adapa to possess immortality. He foresaw that Anu the
supreme god who dwelt in heaven would offer Adapa food of life and water of life conferring immortality
on him and consequently all of mankind. To prevent this from happening Ea tricked Adapa into believing
the bread of life and water of life were in fact the bread of death and the water of death and if he consumed
either he would surely die. So, when Adapa was offered these items by Anu's servants Gishzida and
Dumuzi, he refused to consume them .

Apparently Anu was upset to learn that Adapa had cursed the southwind deity, breaking its wing and
causing breezes to stop blowing over Lower Mesopotamia. This was forbidden knowledge, man was not
supposed to know how to overpower a god. So an upset Anu summoned Adapa from Eridu in Sumer to
appear at his heavenly abode to give account of himself. Upon realizing Adapa had been given these
powers by Ea, Anu apparently concluded if this man has a god's forbidden knowledge (able to control the
forces of nature via curses and incantations) he might as well be made a full -fledged god by having
immortal life, thus the bread of life and water were presented for him to consume.

Why did Ea not want man (Adapa) to possess immortality? Ea is portrayed as a wily trickster god, he is a
god of great wisdom, and in some myths responsible for man's creation. Apparently Ea realized the
" danger" in making man into an immortal god and acted to prevent this from happening by tricking Adapa
into thinking the bread and water of life would kill him. In other words, Ea's wisdom, his ability to foree the
consequences of present actions surpasses Anu's.

Anu apparently failed to realize that if man was given immortality and made into a god the gods would lose
their Sabbath Rest from earthly toil!

The Mesopotamians understood the gods had made man to relieve themselves of the grievous toil upon the
earth endured in providing life's necessities for themselves: food, shelter and clothing. In creating man to
be their slave, man's purpose in life was to provide the gods with all this, freeing them from toil on the
earth for ever. In other words, in Mesopotamian thinking gods do not toil their for food, shelter and
clothing, man does.

If man is given the boon of becoming a god, then who will provide the gods with life's basic needs: food
shelter and clothing? The gods will have to return to the earth and provide these needs for themselves as
there will no longer be mortal men to do this grievous labor on their behalf.

So, Ea wisely sabotoged Anu's plan to make man immortal with the bread and water of life. This myth also
explains why man does not have immortality. He does not have it because a god, Ea, willed it so that the
gods would not lose their Sabbath Rest from earthly toil.

The important concept here is that for the Mesopotamians, their gods did _not_ have to act in a fair, ethical
manner towards each other or towards man. Man's good behavior, his scrupulously carrying out his duties
for his god and behaving himself, were no guarantee that the gods would reciprocate in a like manner
(good behavior does not bind a god's hands forcing him to reciprocate by giving " good in return for
good" ).

No fault was found by Ea with his servant Adapa, yet, in the end, acting out of self -interest (not wanting to
lose his servant and his Sabbath Rest from earthly toil) Ea bushwacked Anu (and Adapa) foiling this god's
ill-thought-out rash attempt to bestow immortality on mankind, not foreseeing the grave consequences of
such an action: that the gods would have to return to the earth and bear again the grievous toil in
providing for themselves life's necessities of food, shelter and clothing if man was made into a god and
freed of servitude to the gods.

So, Adapa's " innocence" was his naively assuming he could trust his god, that his god would never betray
him or act against Adapa's best interests. In other words the Mesopotamians did not have a very high
opinion of their gods in regards to their ethical treatment of man their slave. "

Source:
Walter Reinhold Warttig Mattfeld y de la Tor re, M. A. Ed.

Trickster god in the garden of Edin?

Sound familiar?

Resource:
Mesopotamia and the Bible by Mar k W. Chavalas

The majority of this book is well-researched and written, though there's a few essays that made me sit with
my mouth open, epic fails for focus. None the less, it's a decent read, but I only add it as a primer - not a be-
all, end-all, resource for examining the Mesopotamian and other cultural links in the Bible


What about Ba'al?

This small head is of the Canaanite agricultural god, Baal.
Every year in the fall, Baal died and with him died the crops.
But in the spring, he came back to life and it was the planting
season. Stories like this of a dying/rising god were used to
explain the change of season, and are "take-offs" of the
ancient Egyptian myth of the Dying/Rising god, Osiris. Clay
"Baal-heads" like this were often sown in the fields at
planting time, the fertility god put there to encourage the
crops to grow. For a time, Baal was a competitor of the
Jewish battle god, YHWH. Eventually, when the early Jews
discovered that YHWH could "grow crops" as well as win
battles, YHWH triumphed over Baal in Jewish affection.

Religious tablets excavated at Ras Shamra, at one
time Baal had no sanctuary amongst his Canaanite
worshipers. The construction of a temple began, but
the shit hit the fan.

'Provoked bv Baals adversaries, disputes and
bloody encounters arose. After these had been
settled, the gods, assisted by various divinities,
began to build the sanctuary. It appears that Latpon
was appointed overseer, but he, lazy as he was wise
and immortal, refused to take part in the work, while
the goddess Asherats own handmaid busied herself
in making bricks for the walls. Baal himself helped
in the building of his sanctuary, by felling cedars on
the mountain sides for the structure of the temple,
hurling his lightning, which the poet ingeniously
compares with a saw.`

A large part of Baal's temple was uncovered in the excavations at Ras Shamra.

The tablet also describes the death of Baal. Yahweh gained favor with the people.

The priests who wrote Exodus (15:11) explain his
prominence in Jewish worship then and today by
acclaiming:

" Who is like unto thee, O Lord, among the gods. "

" O Lord" is an English title that Bible translators
repeatedly and quite deceptively give for the Hebrew word
" YHW" in which the ancient Jews failed to add the written
vowels.

Josh. 24.2, 14. and Ezek. 20.7., 24 we are told that both in
Mesopotamia and Egypt the Israelites worshipped other
gods.

YWH is only one of the gods of the Bible, who appears
nearly 7,000 times in the Old Testament.

Here's an excerpt I find relevant:

'Larrv, two of the most respected Jewish archaeologists and professors in Tel Aviv, Israel are telling the
truth about the multiple gods of the OT [Old Testament] and prove, just as the bible itself does, that
Yahweh was also Baal/Moloch and was married to his own mother. This, of course, follows the Sumerian
Genesis to a 'T.` The link tells the entire sordid tale.

What other kind of tale would educated people expect to find in that vulgar hateful book? If any of your
friends want the bare facts this is the article for them. There have been many handcrafted idols of
Yahweh/Moloch unearthed that are unspeakably pornographic which should be no surprise since those
people practiced not only human sacrifi ce, murder, rape, theft and every possible sexual perversion known
to mankind. As Thomas Paine so rightlv wrote, 'It seems the bible is more the word of a devil than a god.`
It is the book of demons and people have no clue what thev are worshipping.`

As well as:

'These are the reported idols depicting Yahweh of the OT'''' There are also altars dedicated to him with
the same drawings. No wonder the chief editor of the Dead Sea Scrolls, John Strugnell, after having one
drink too many went on a live interview and blurted out what a horrible religion the Hebrews had and that
it should have never been allowed to exist!!! John Allegro, who was among the original DSS [Dead Sea
Scrolls] translators, also warned people about the sex and drugs involved in the bible religions and who
Yahweh really was but he just got his career and life destroyed by the Vatican for his efforts. Several of the
RC [Roman Catholic] priests/translators became alcoholics, left the church and married due to what they
discovered in the DSS. Those results are finally being published for the world to read for themselves, but
the ignorant Christians will just blame it all on the Devillike thev do evervthing else thev dont like.
Professor Finkelstein is one of the top archeologist in Israel and wrote the book The Bible Unearthed, and
there is also a wonderful video of the same title on Google. He is an honest Jewish man, and he will not lie
for religion. It is a great and enlightening video for those who truly want the honest truth. "

Source: Einhorn Press

Baal religion revolved around the cycles oI nature necessary Ior survival and prosperity in the ancient
world, primarily growing crops or raising livestock, as well as the growth of human populations.

" This cosmic battle was not understood as a historical event of the past, but occurred anew each year and
was reenacted in cultic ritual. Marduk represents the forces of order, the coming of spring with its renewal
of life and the end of the reign of the chaos and death of winter. Marduk is the spring sun that gives life and
renewed energy to the earth. Tiamat represents those forces that threaten human existence, the threat of a
disordered world in which springtime never comes. The ancient theme of an original primeval ocean that
threatens to break out and engulf the world in killing salt water is also seen in Tiamat. Creation, in
Babylonian thinking, was an ongoing struggle between order and chaos, a way of thinking no doubt related
to the uncertainties of life in the ancient world. "

Source: Dennis Bratcher, CRI, Theological Resources

Suffice to say, the OT is vividly different than the tone of the NT. Since the ancient Israelites were
influenced by the people around them, namely, the Babylonians who were the descendents of the earlier
Sumerian culture found in Mesopotamia. They were influenced by the Egyptian culture and religion due to
their enslavement in that country as well. The ancient Israelites were knowledgeable about Baal and other
pagan deities.

Many of these stories, are just edited and retooled for a new world religion, which matched the cultural
changes of the era. Remember, this Bible was written over a long period of time and encapsulated paradigm
shifts expressed through mythologies.

Take a look at Sargon the Great. Sargon, is given credit for founding Babylon, and its first king. This was
recorded in cuneiform, before the Moses story. The stories are similar. Was Moses a REAL person? A
historical person?

Let's take a look.

Moses' mother feared for the life of her infant son so she hid him in a basket and put the basket along to
riverbank to sail down the Nile River. At the other end, the Pharaoh's daughter found the infant when she
went to bathe. She immediately recognized the child was Hebrew and decided to raise him as her own. She
looked for a Hebrew woman to be the infant's wet nurse and hired Moses' own mother to care for the child.
The name Moses is a combination of Egyptian words that mean child of the water.

Sargon's mother was a high priestess. She hid the birth of her child too. She also put him in a basket and
sent him down the river. The river she sent him down was the Euphrates in Mesopotamia. Directly from the
poetic text of the Epic of Gilgamesh, we have from Sargon tale... " She abandoned me to the river from
which I could not escape. The river carried me along: to Aqqi, the water drawer, it brought me. Aqqi, the
water drawer, when immersing his bucket lifted me up. Aqqi, the water drawer, raised me as his adopted
son. Aqqi, the water drawer, set me to his garden work. During my garden work, Istar loved me (so that) 55
years I ruled king... "

How was it re-tooled for the new mythos?

Sargon's story is that of a mighty warrior. He rules over a people. Moses' story is a faithful servant of God
who leads his people out of bondage.

Another story that is similar is the story of Hammurabi (6th King of Babylon) who is given the law by his
god Shamash (Code of Hammurabi), Moses gets the 10 Commandments from God in the mountain.

Hmmmmm?

By the definitions of what it means to be pagan today, clearly the entire foundation of this religion is based
on pagan stories, symbols and characters - to include the devil. The common view is that a person is pagan
if they are not Judaic, Christian or Muslim. If the Devil is an adversary to the God of the Abrahamics, this
is a pagan Devil.

Good vs. Evil, can be found around the world and the religion of the Abrahamics is no different, it follows
suit.

The very idea that there is so much focus on calling these religions NOT pagan, is absurd when clearly the
entire religion is wholly pagan by today's definition. It is based on historical pagan religions, ideas,
symbols, practices, and characters.

The era of the inquisitions and witch trials did a number on the psyches of modern pagans. People cling to
these stories like babes in the night suckling their new mother's breast, all the while crying:

" Let my people go!"


In terms of some pagans romantic desire to unite the human race:

1. By clinging to labels of pagan vs. Abrahamics is segregation and alienation
2. By claiming that these are OUR religions, and those belong to THEM is segregation and alienation.
3. By ignoring the similarities and embracing the differences this is segregation and alienation.
4. By propagating anti-Abrahamic rhetoric, this segregates and alienates

So what is it that today's modern pagans really want? Clearly, they don't really seek to be unified with
brethren in the community in which they live, or with their neighbors across the sea. Many wish to be
accepted in their local communities but they sure are working pretty hard to alienate themselves.

Ghandi, is a modern day hero to many modern pagans, he is quoted often and by many.
He says: Be the change that you envision.

Reader ask yourself this:

What do I envision as a unified species, and what am I working towards to unify them?

Do I even care?

Why do I care?

Do I prefer discourse or harmony? Why do I prefer either?

How does any of this affect my life?

Among the philosophies some Satanists adhere to, is Hermeticism, because at the end of the day Humanist
ideals ring true. It's all the same, we are embracing many of the same principles of belief we just label them
differently.

One ocean.Many boats.

As Sargon and Moses traveled down the river in their baskets it lead them to the same place.

The occultism of the Bible is rich in occult symbolism for us all. It is a book, among many books, which
address the internal Jihad, the Mein Kampf...of mankind.

It is when that internal struggle, is brought to the physical battlefield that we endanger each other with our
ideas. Hence, judge men by what they do not what they believe in. Even if those beliefs compel them to
act.

I couldn't care less if my Abrahamic neighbors find my beliefs evil, it does not stop them from being
neighborly. Our disagreement does not stop me from being neighborly.

My neighbors from Mexico call me Diabla, they fear what they don't know about me. What they do know
is I drive a car with an inverted pentagram on the side. This symbol means devil to them. I do not live
with my head firmly planted up my own ass. I know that the symbolism that I choose for myself presents
ideas and impressions.

I have always been kind to them, we communicate with physical gestures due to the language barrier
between us. They wave to me when they are walking to the mail box, or going to and from work and I
wave back. When I was stuck in the ice last winter, 6 young men came to me without hesitation and rocked
my car out of the ice. In spite of my devilry, they`ve been courteous to me on many occasions. And I in
turn am courteous to them.

What we don't know about each other, gives us the sense of uneasiness. We are connected to our sense of
self and the perceived self of others. This attachment can be best addressed through the examination of
Buddhist principles (as one modality for seeking answers) the Dukkha.

In the case of Satanists, Satan, and more specifically how Satan can, and will be pagan to some - what we
believe harms no one, or does it? What we do certainly carries the potential for harm and what we do is
certainly driven by belief. Since this harm is highly subjective, who should decide? Can this decision be
universal? Good, evil.. for whom or what? And should that whom or what, act as the checks and
balances? What is the probability? How do you gauge that? By utilizing social trappings? Satanic
philosophy is a modality for seeking answers, it does not provide them. No philosophy should speak in
absolutes. Philosophy is a thought technology at your disposal. Some people thrive in the ocean of
philosophy and others drown in its infinite possibilities. They look for structure and guidance while others
prosper in chaos.

I could easily say, that pagan ignorance damages my Satanic image, by the amount of willful ignorance,
delusion, and stupidity displayed by most self-identified pagans. I make a conscious choice to identify as
pagan, in spite of those representations. I have very specific reasons for why I do, and I have no need to
justify that to anyone. My humanist nature compels me to offer insight into my way of thinking. This
fosters understanding both in and out of pagan communities. It also gives my Satanic brethren insight into
why a Satanist may wish to self-identify as pagan. There is a plethora of sources to gain Satanic insight but
you may not always like what you find. Many Satanists (especially those who write) are rather harsh with
their explanations for why they do what they do. What drives them, and what they think about outside
perspectives. I'm constantly sticking up my proverbial finger to people who believe they can sway my
views without presenting me anything of substance to consider.

I thrive in an environment of mental stimulation. You disagree with my point of view? Bada-bing! Let's
talk about it! Tell me why, stimulate my inner beast it likes to be taken for a thrill ride now and again. We
are human animals, and will behave that way. So, if you approach me with insulting and pointed questions,
resort to name calling, or what ever gets you off, be prepared for the response. I shoot from the hip, and
I'm pretty fantastic at psychological terrorism. However, I would like to state for the record I'm not a
game-show. Just because I enjoy stimulating conversation doesn't mean that I desire every conversation to
turn into a debate. I find it completely amusing when people present other people to me on a silver platter
solely based on their debate skills [finger-twirl]. What's even more amusing, is that these presentations are
due to past failures in engaging me. Nothing like bringing a champion to fight your battles for ya! See you
in the arena my mighty gladiators [eye roll]. I spend a great deal of time self-examining, sociology and
human psychology are hobbies of mine. As I have mentioned earlier in this paper, I judge men by what
they do and not what they believe in, even if those beliefs compel their actions. By examining my fellow
humans I gain insight into myself.

You may not enjoy my game show

The field of knowledge is the devil's playground. Let's play!

Back to the pagan origins of Satan

Source:
Bible Gateway

Psalm 60

For the director of music. To the tune of 'The Lilv of the Covenant.` A miktam[b] of David. For teaching.
When he fought Aram Naharaim[c] and Aram Zobah,[d] and when Joab returned and struck down twelve
thousand Edomites in the Valley of Salt.

60:1 God, you have rejected us.
You have broken us down.
You have been angry.
Restore us, again.

60:2 You have made the land tremble.
You have torn it.
Mend its fractures,
for it quakes.

60:3 You have shown your people hard things.
You have made us drink the wine that makes us stagger.

60:4 You have given a banner to those who fear you,
that it may be displayed because of the truth.

Selah.

60:5 So that your beloved may be delivered,
save with your right hand, and answer us.

60:6 God has spoken from his sanctuary:
'I will triumph.
I will divide Shechem,
and measure out the valley of Succoth.

60:7 Gilead is mine, and Manasseh is mine.
Ephraim also is the defense of my head.
Judah is my scepter.

60:8 Moab is my wash basin.
I will throw my shoe on Edom.
I shout in triumph over Philistia.`

60:9 Who will bring me into the strong city?
Who has led me to Edom?

60:10 Havent vou, God, refected us?
You dont go out with our armies, God.

60:11 Give us help against the adversary,
for the help of man is vain. ...

60:12 With God we will gain the victory,
and he will trample down our enemies.

Syria of the two rivers (Mesopotamia) and Aram-Zobah, Syria of the watchmen,
(Coelosyria), when Joab returned, and smote twelve thousand Edomites in the
Valley of Salt.

See Chronicles

The number killed, is often considered a copy error.

There is a possibility it has deeper meaning.

In other interpretations, 'Adversary' is replaced with 'Enemy'.

Music of the Bible

" TITLE. Here is a lengthy title, but it helps us much to expound the Psalm. To the Chief Musician upon
Shushaneduth, or the Lily of Testimony. The forty-fifth was on the lilies, and represented the kingly warrior
in his beauty going forth to war; here we see him dividing the spoil and bearing testimony to the glory of
God. Tunes have strange names apparently, but this results from the fact that we do not know what was in
the composer's mind, else they might seem to be touchingly appropriate; perhaps the music or the musical
instruments have more to do with this title than the Psalm itself. Yet in war songs, roses and lilies are often
mentioned, and one remembers Macaulay's Song of the Hugenots, though perhaps we err in mentioning so
carnal a verse-- " Now by the lips of those ye love, fair gentlemen of France, Charge for the golden lilies
now, upon them with the lance. "

Sounds a lot like the Magica Papyri, at least to me.

Authorship of Psalms

The religion of the Papyri Graecae Magicae, is an elaborate syncretism of Greek, Egyptian, Jewish, and
even Babylonian and Christian religious influences engendered by the unique milieu of Greco-Roman
Egypt. This syncretism is evident in the Papyri in a variety
of ways.

The papyri date mostly from the second century BCE to the
fifth century or so CE. Clearly, there is an influence by the
cultural religions of the era. Many people refer to this text
for 'historical magic', but neglect the cultural influences of
religion. In this case, Abrahamic becomes pagan, and pagans
interpret it to be void of Abrahamic influence. While the
original context is based on 'pagan' ideals, the application is
established Abrahamic religion. If pagans seek a clear
division of what is THEIRS and what is OURS, they should
do their homework. Nothing is pure.

The word psalms is derived Irom the Greek 1uoi
(Psalmoi), perhaps originally meaning "songs sung to a
harp", from psallein "play on a stringed instrument".

Thirteen Psalms have headings that refer to some event in the life of David. These Psalms are 3, 7, 18, 34,
51, 52, 54, 56, 57, 59, 60, 63 and 142.

Other scholars think the Psalms is a post-Exilic collection of poems, the work of several authors from
differing dates.

Sources:
Psalms, Book of." Cross, F. L., ed. The Oxford dictionary of the Christian church. New York: Oxford
University Press. 2005

The reason you see 'Biblical Hebrew' terms:
Tanakh was composed mostly in Biblical Hebrew and
Biblical Aramaic (the Book of Daniel, some parts of
the Book of Ezra and a few other passages).

According to the Talmud, much of the contents of the
Tanakh were compiled by the "Men of the Great
Assembly" by 450 BCE, and have since remained
unchanged. Modern scholars believe that the process
of canonization of the Tanakh became finalized
between 200 BCE and 200 CE.

When I attended Catholic High School, my Ancient
History classes were my favorite. I also loved how
they were objectively taught. The teachers of both
History and Science, were not nuns. Nor were they
theologians. They were secular teachers. Saint Clare High School, thank you for that education and further
driving my passions. Even when the more religiously slanted students questioned the material being taught
(as it related to Theology), the teachers handled those questions objectively.

As you see the stories traced through history, it becomes apparent that these stories were in existence long
before the Hebrews codified their own religious beliefs, and wrote them down.

The Near East


Ancient Near East

Religion:

I refer you to these books:
Ancient Civilizations of the Near East & Mesoamerica

The Ancient Near Easat Volue I, Edited by James B. Pritchard

The Ancient Near East Volume I I, Edited by James B. Pritchard

What MakesCivilization?, David Wengrow


Consider the demons of Ancient Egypt. At close
examination, the Egyptians didn't seem to have a
clear distinction between what they considered gods
and demons.

Based on the writing we have discovered, coupled
with artifacts we can assess that the Egyptians
believed in super-natural forces. Some of which, I
might add, they have believed were 'real' creatures
living in the wild among the animal kingdom.

Vivid imaginations, or did they experience their own
apparitions and manifestations? It would serve you
well to examine trance culture, and religious ritual, ceremony and ecstatic euphoria. As well as self-
hypnosis.

There was a big focus on the 'hunt' in Egyptian civilization, not just for survival but it was considered
subduing the wild and controlling these 'forces'.

Many of the artifacts show these creatures holding magic wands, some of hippos teeth. Egyptian and
Nubian artifacts show that these ideas were not only wide-spread, but in use by a huge region.

The Egyptians had protective demons, as well as demons which could cause strife for man. These hippo
wands were given mostly to women and children, to protect them against these
harmful demons which would bring illness. The men would take the warrior
position and seek to battle these forces directly using their magic and magical
weaponry.

By the time of the Roman invasion, we begin to see a shift in the hieroglyphs,
symbols of protection, and symbols of malice. Romanization begins...

The Temple of Esna (2nd century AD), should be of special interest. It's a decent example of the changes in
thought throughout the Egyptian kingdom.

Rather than using the hybrid animal/man symbolism they had in the past for protection. The sigil of Osiris
became the popular protective agent.

Serpopards, is an example of a creature used by the Egyptians.

They protected the Egyptians from wild animals, which may seek to harm them.

This website has a fairly decent collection of images:
http://www. reshafim.org.il/ad/egypt/bestiary/serpopards.htm

I chose the Serpopards specifically, because they appear in both Mesopotamian and Egyptian artifacts.

Example of Mesopotamian Serpopards.

I recommend these books:

Not a bad book to have on your shelf as a quick reference:

Post-Romanization, based on surviving spells,
prescriptions, and apotropaic devices suggests the theory
that these hostile entities were divided into sub-types in
the Egyptian worldview. Much like in Christian
demonology.

Pay special attention to anything with wings

The King and Queen of Demons

" In some rabbinic sources, the demons were believed to be under the dominion of a king or chief, either
Asmodai (Targ. to Eccl. i. 13; Pes. 110a; Yer. Shek. 49b) or, i n the older Haggadah , Samael (" the angel of
death" ), who kills by his deadly poison, and is called " chief of the devils" . Occasionally a demon is called "
Satan " : " Stand not in the way of an ox when coming from the pasture, for Satan dances between his horns"
(Pes. 112b; compare B. K. 21a).

According to Zoroastrianism , the queen of demons is Lilith , pictured with wings and long flowing hair,
and called the "mother of Ahriman " (B. B. 73b; 'Er. 100b; Nid. 24b). "When Adam, doing penance for his
sin, separated from Eve for 130 years, he, by impure desire, caused the earth to be filled with demons, or
shedim, lilin, and evil spirits" (Gen. R. xx.; 'Er. 18b.)

Though the belief in demons was greatly encouraged
and enlarged in Babylonia under the influence of the
Zoroastrianism that was the religion of the Persian
Empire ( Parsee ) notions, demonology never became
an essential feature of Jewish theology. The reality of
demons was never questioned by the Talmudist s and
late rabbis; most accepted their existence as a fact.
Nor did most of the medieval thinkers question their
reality. Only rationalists like Maimonides and
Abraham Ibn Ezra , clearly denied their existence.
Their point of view eventually became the mainstream
Jewish understanding. "

Source: Encyclopedia Britannica

Augustus Caesar

During his lifetime, Augustus did not wish to be depicted
as a god (unlike the later emperors who embraced
divinity), but this statue has many thinly-veiled
references to the emperor's "divine nature", his genius.
Augustus is shown barefoot, which indicates that he is a
hero and perhaps even a god, and also adds a civilian
aspect to an otherwise military portrait. Being barefoot
was only previously allowed on images of the gods, but it
may also imply that the statue is a posthumous copy set
up by Livia of a statue from the city of Rome in which
Augustus was not barefoot.

The small Cupid (son of Venus) at his feet (riding on a
dolphin, Venus's patron animal) is a reference to the
claim that the Julian family were descended from the
goddess Venus, made by both Augustus and by his
adoptive father Caesar - a way of claiming divine lineage
without claiming the full divine status, which was
acceptable in the Greek East but not yet in Rome itself.

Augustus is shown in this role of "Imperator", the
commander of the army, as thoracatus or commander-in-chief of the Roman army (literally, thorax-
wearer) meaning the statue should form part of a commemorative monument to his latest victories; he is
in military clothing, carrying a consular baton and raising his right hand in a rhetorical "adlocutio" pose,
addressing the troops. The bas-reliefs on his armored "cuirass" have a complex allegorical and political
agenda, alluding to diverse Roman deities, including Mars, god of war, as well as the personifications of
the latest territories conquered by him: Hispania, Gaul, Germania, Parthia (that had humiliated Crassus, and
here appears in the act of returning the standards captured from his legions); at the top, the chariot of the
Sun illuminates Augustus's deeds.

Adlocutio: the adlocutio is one of the most widely represented formulas of Roman art. The convention is
regularly shown in individual figures like the famous Augustus of Primaporta or can be put into a narrative
context as seen in the Aurelian panel. Characteristic of the formula is the outstretched hand of speech as
well as the contrapposto pose with the weight clearly shifted to one leg.

Here Marcus Aurelius is shown addressing his army. This context articulates
Marcus Aurelius's role as imperator or leader of the army. The figure behind
him has been identified as Pompeianus who was Marcus Aurelius's son-in-law
and closest advisor.

Decent link:
http://employees.oneonta.edu/farberas/arth/arth200/politics/aurelia...

(breaks down all the imperial posturing.)

My ode to Pax Romana, photo credit SIN
JONES, December 2010 AS.

Gaius Julius Caesar Augustus (23 September
63 BC 19 August AD 14) is considered the
first emperor of the Roman Empire, which he
ruled alone from 27 BC until his death in AD
14. Born Gaius Octavius Thurinus, he was
adopted posthumously by his great-uncle
Gaius Julius Caesar in 44 BC via his last will
and testament, and between then and 27 BC
was officially named Gaius Julius Caesar. In
27 BC the Senate awarded him the honorific
Augustus ("the revered one"), and thus
consequently he was Gaius Julius Caesar
Augustus. Because of the various names he
bore, it is common to call him Octavius when referring to events between 63 and 44 BC, Octavian (or
Octavianus) when referring to events between 44 and 27 BC, and Augustus when referring to events after
27 BC. In Greek sources, Augustus is known as Oktuio (Octavius), Kuoup (Caesar), Aouoto
(Augustus), or Lcuoto (Sebastos), depending on context.

The Emperor credited to the Pax Romana, the Roman Peace.

In January of 27 BC, the Senate gave Octavian the new titles of Augustus and Princeps. Augustus, from the
Latin word Augere (meaning to increase), can be translated as " the illustrious one" . It was a title of
religious rather than political authority. According to Roman religious beliefs, the title symbolized a stamp
of authority over humanityand in fact naturethat went beyond any constitutional definition of his
status.

Augustus was granted the right to hang the corona civica, the " civic crown" made from oak, above his door
and have laurels drape his doorposts. This crown was usually held above the head of a Roman general
during a triumph, with the individual holding the crown charged to continually repeat " memento mori " , or,
" Remember, you are mortal " , to the triumphant general. Additionally, laurel wreaths were important in
several state ceremonies, and crowns of laurel were rewarded to champions of athletic, racing, and
dramatic contests. Thus, both the laurel and the oak were integral symbols of Roman religion and
statecraft; placing them on Augustus' doorposts was tantamount to declaring his home the capital.
However, Augustus renounced flaunting insignia of power such as holding a scepter, wearing a diadem, or
wearing the golden crown and purple toga of his predecessor Julius Caesar. If he refused to symbolize his
power by donning and bearing these items on his person, the Senate nonetheless awarded him with a
golden shield displayed in the meeting hall of the Curia, bearing the inscription virtus, pietas, clementia,
iustitia" valor, piety, clemency, and justice. "

The cult of Divus Augustus continued until the state religion of the Empire was changed to Christianity in
391 by Theodosius I.

Theodosius was the last emperor to rule over both the eastern and the western halves of the Roman Empire.
During his reign, the Goths secured control of Illyricum after the Gothic War - establishing their homeland
south of the Danube within the empire's borders. He also issued decrees that effectively made the Catholic
Church and Nicean Christianity the official state religion of the Roman Empire.

For the first part of his rule, Theodosius seems to have ignored the semi-official standing of the Christian
bishops; in fact he had voiced his support for the preservation of temples or pagan statues as useful public
buildings. In his early reign, Theodosius was fairly tolerant of the pagans, for he needed the support of the
influential pagan ruling class. However he would in time stamp out the last vestiges of paganism with great
severity. When he no longer needed their support, those pagans were discarded and their power removed.

His first attempt to inhibit paganism was in 381 when he reiterated Constantine's ban on sacrifice. In 384 he
prohibited haruspicy on pain of death, and unlike earlier anti-pagan prohibitions, he made non-enforcement
of the law, by Magistrates, into a crime itself.

In 388 he sent a prefect to Syria, Egypt, and Asia Minor with the aim of breaking up pagan associations and
the destruction of their temples. The Serapeum at Alexandria was destroyed during this campaign.

Theodosius died on Jan. 17, 395, leaving the East to Arcadius and the West to a younger son, Honorius,
who had been proclaimed Augustus in 393. This division of the empire became permanent.

A serious illness soon after his accession prompted Theodosius's early baptism, which Christian Roman
emperors usually postponed till their deathbeds. This made him very susceptible to the pressures of the
Church, and he came particularly under the influence of Ambrose, the strong-willed bishop of Milan, who
repeatedly placed him under heavy penance when his justice was hotheaded or severe. Theodosius was a
devoted persecutor of Christian heresies, and in 391 he officially closed all the empire's temples and
forbade the practice of all pagan cults.

Recommended books:

The Emperor Theodosius and the Establishing of Christianity by Noel Q. King
The Later Roman Empi re by A. H. M. Jones
Theodosius: the empi re at bay by Stephen Williams


Arcadius, was considered a weak ruler of the Eastern Empire. He
was dominated by both his wife, and court politics.

Aegyptus sive de providentia, Synesius of Cyrene is a
mythology/allegory which describes the events of the attitude
towards the Goths at this time, as well as the anti-barbarian
movement of the Empire.

By 399, Arcadius order the demolition of all pagan temples. As Emperor, he was charged with bringing the
empire to peace by uniting the people with one singular religion The Laws of Arcadius were set forth.

An overview of Christian Law 4th Century

Honorius, Theodosius younger son was put in charge of the
Western Empire.

We are talking of a boy of 10. The Popes of Rome, as well as
the Military (General Stilicho), were his primary advisors.

He reigned in the midst of the anti-Barbarian movement and
was often influenced to make strategic moves to wipe them
out. This would cause retaliations and several battles which
would lead to the sacking of Rome in 410.

Honorius moved the capital to Ravenna in 402 because it was
easier to defend against the constant attacks by the Barbarian
tribes. After an invasion by the Visigoths in 402 he fled to
Asti, Stichilio led the Roman army to victory but a huge
Barbarian army (500,000+) lead another attack in 406, when they are defeated again.

Honorius was at Bononia in 408, when he heard of his brother's death. Stilicho went off to the
Constantinople to maintain order but while he was gone Olympius (a minister) had Honorius' ear.
Convincing him of conspiracy and Stilicho was aligning with the Barbarians to over-throw Honorius. He
was arrested, and executed. Honorius had any associates of Stilicho killed, to include his son. His wife (the
second daugther of Stilicho) was removed from the throne and Honorius' mother put in her place.

Honorius was being used by any influential politician or clergyman of the time. Which eventually lead to
the sacking of Rome in 410. Churches and temples remained unharmed but the affect on the Roman people
was far more damaging. Honorius did little to defeat his enemies which controlled Rome, called The City
of God, by the Roman people.

He's often called the Chicken Shit Emperor, attributed to a story that upon hearing of the sacking of
Rome he was in shock and didn't believe it. He thought that the news was about a chicken he named Roma.


" I thought that my fowl Rome had perished.' So great, they say, was the folly with which this emperor
was possessed. " Source: Procopius, The Vandalic War

He died in 423 of Edema, having no heir Joannes was appointed for about a year until Theodosius II
appointed Valentinian III.

This was roughly 425.

Theodosius II became Emperor of the Eastern Empire (son of
Theodosius I). He reigned 408 - 450, and was responsible for Law Code
and a University in Constantiople. All the laws since Constantine I
were collected, and formalized into a system of law.

It was published Codex
Theodosianus in 438.

Basically, all of the
laws of the now
Christian Empire since
the year 312, which
were also brought to the Western Empire. It contained 65
decrees aimed at Christian Heretics. The "Law" was
enforcing Christianity across the divide Empire of Rome.


In 399, it began, that all pagan religions would be wiped out by the destruction of temples, on through 438
with laying down the law.

The Druids were a special focus, attributed to the alleged practice of human sacrifice. Claudius had
forbidden their rituals in 54 AD, and was enforced by future emperors.

The Jews were expelled from the city of Rome with Tiberius. They were causing too much discourse
within the city, but with the arrival of the first Christians, they too were claiming to have the word of Christ
so he decided to push them out as well. At this time, was the 'Jewish Tax, which allowed Jews to practice
their religion within Rome. In spite of having paid the tax, both groups were forced out - only to return
later, when the religion of Rome became Christianity.

Although Constantine is being attributed of being the first Christian Roman Emperor, he was Baptized
on his death bed and there is no written record of him ever having been Christian during his lifetime. He
persecuted a specific group of Christians (Donatists) but mostly out of fear, same as the laws he enacted
against divination, and other magic in fear it would be used to rise up against him as Emperor.

There was a very small population of Christians by the end of his reign, and if he intended to
Christianize the Empire he would have done so during his reign. He did however write against pagan
religions, giving credence to the idea that he was becoming progressively more Christian towards the end
of his life.

Any law he was putting forth were attributed to his fear over those he thought might rise against him.
Not that it was wholly Christian minded, and this can be examined further by looking at some of the things
he did during his 'Christian' era, to include the murder of his son, wife, and enuch priests of Egypt.

In spite of his view against pagans, he allowed public divination, and pagan rites, he was more concerned
with what was going on in private. In 323, he even wrote a law for the banishment of Christians during
public sacrifices.

Constantine I, also sought the advice of augers (divination through the flight patterns of birds), Sol Invictus
(Sunday) was the holiday observed for the sun god, he legislated that it be a day of rest for the Roman
people.

While his attitude towards some pagan rites and observances seemed to be hyper-critical at times, he did
still support pagan practice and observances.

This gives us evidence that at least Constantine I, did not intend for the Roman Empire to be wholly
Christian. When drawing from his 'laws' it was more so about which groups might rise up against him vs.
legislating a singular religion for Eastern/Western Empire.

Now, back to the Theodosian Code.

16.10. 24 reads:

Manichaeans, Pepyzites, and those who do disagree as to the day of Easter may have their property taken
and be sent into exile. But Christians may not attack or plunder Jews or pagans. They must pay back three
times as much as what they took from an innocent pagan or Jew. .

This law, protected pagans and Jews, if they were abiding by all other laws, and not harming anyone.
AND, if they resided outside the city and in the country areas. The rural pagan.

16.10.23, however dealt with pagans who were exiled from the city of Rome.

Pagans are to be exiled and have their possessions confiscated.

You can peruse the laws here:
http://www.fourthcentury.com/old/ Theodosian/ C Th16.htm

This dealt directly with the use of the term pagan as the country dweller, vs. those that resided in cities.

The general Roman attitude towards pagans was based upon location, and whether or not they were abiding
by Roman law.

Since many lived outside the city, and in country areas - they were not considered educated to be able to
make an educated decision to go against Roman law; therefore they were a lower-class citizen to begin
with. Many of the city dwelling pagans, were aligned with for political reasons in the past. They were
considered an upper-class citizen for this reason.

16.7.7

There is no statue of limitations for investigating apostates in the matter of their wills. They may not give
a testament, and their goods must be given to kinsmen, preferably Christians. Also, gifts and testaments
will be rescinded for those who made sacrifices after becoming Christians.


This addresses the watchful eye over the city dwelling pagans, who would be required to become Christian
to stay in the city. If they were performing public rites, and sacrifice this law directly address the
consequences for doing so.

16.10.25

Pagan sacrifices are forbidden. Pagan temples and shrines are to be torn down and replaced with the
symbol of Christianity: the cross. Anyone who mocks this law faces execution.

Many of these laws were written only months apart, based on the goings-on within the Roman capital.

16.10.7

Those who make pagan sacrifices or prayers will be penalized with the loss of property.

Suffice to say, as time goes on the attitude towards pagan religion gets more harsh as time goes on.

By 450 and with the death of Theodosius II, Marcian becomes emperor who would enforce the law by
penalizing officials for not enforcing it on the citizens. The penalties got more strict, by 457 (Leo I) who
would not only hit the officials but any person having knowledge of pagan rites or practice (472). Money,
a seizure of property - hit them in the wallet, and the tattle on their neighbors. So now you have the people
persecuting the people to not only keep their own money but gain favor with officials.

Zeno, is Eastern Emperor 474-475, there was a campaign against Zeno attributed to the religiosity of the
Empire. Leontius, was the candidate supported by pagans, in hopes of reviving the old religions. Zeno
regained his position in 476, and went after Leontius who hid out and managed to escape Zeno for about 4
years but was captured in 488 along with Illus, and was executed.

As a result of the revolt, harsher anti-pagan laws were put in place but now aimed at pagan intellectuals
attempting to revive ancient practices.

When Anastasius took the throne in 491, Christianization of the empire was considered i r reversible.

Any pagan hoping for a return of polytheism, as well an abolition of anti-pagan laws had to put on a good
face or else succumb to them.

THIS, is precisely how paganisms make it in to Biblical doctrine. Pagan ideologies are given a new
aesthetic. The early intellectuals which were converted to the new religion could easily take pagan stories
and give them the fancy window dressing of the new saga. This was commonplace, and detecting pagan
symbolism was not persecuted as vehemently as people are led to believe.

Many of these stories were written hundreds of years after Jesus was to believed to have lived. NT, took
the OT stories to a new level. Hellenized Jews and Christians were writing the stories of OT, and into the
next era. As Hellenized paganism is being suppressed, the stories would remember them but with a new
face.

Timeline

313 By Edict of Milan Constantine and Licinius establish toleration of Christianity.
329-335 Constantine orders destruction of Hellenic temples at Didyma, Mt. Athos, Aigeai, Baalbek
etc. According to pagan rhetor Libanius (Address to Theodosius, Pro Templis, 6 and 37), Constantine I
"did not bring any change to the traditional [=pagan] worship... one could notice that [during the reign
of Constantine] all rituals were performed properly" and "he [Constantine] did not prohibit [pagan]
sacrifices". According to Zosimus (book 2 of his "History"), Constantine erected two pagan temples in
his capital, Constantinople.
361-363 Emperor Julian, the last pagan Emperor, proclaims restoration of Hellenic worship.
389-391Theodosian decrees, Christianity becomes official state religion of the Roman Empire.
415 Mob-killing of Hypatia.
440 to 450 All Hellenic monuments, altars and Temples of Athens, Olympia, and other Greek cities are
destroyed. As German historian Gregorovius, in his "History of Athens" says, the pagan monuments of
Athens and Greece were the best preserved among other monuments in the late Roman Empire.
529Emperor Justinian closes the Academy of Athens. Some of the remaining Academy members--
"whose occupation was gone" according to J.B. Bury[105]--flee to Ctesiphon, the capital of the
Sassanid emperor Khosrau I. Modern historians such as Blumental and A. Cameron claim that the
Academy continued to exist for almost 5060 years after 529.
651Harran conquered by the Arabs. Sabians, to some degree descendants of Hellenic tradition, are
considered monotheists and as such are permitted to survive. The Nabatean Agriculture was said by
Maimonides to have been an accurate record of the beliefs of the Sabians in the Harranian area.
804Hellenes of Laconia, Greece, resist the attempt of Tarasius, Patriarch of Constantinople, to convert
them to Christianity.

SEE: The Decline of Hellenized paganism on Wi kipedia for closer examination of this time-line

" The early rise of Germanic Christianity was, thus, mainly due to voluntary conversion on a small scale.

In the 4th century some Eastern Germanic tribes, notably the Goths, an East Germanic tribe, adopted
Arianism. From the 6th century, Germanic tribes were converted (and re-converted) by missionaries of the
Roman Catholic Church, firstly among the Franks, after Clovis I's conversion to Catholicism in 496. The
Lombards adopted Catholicism as they entered Italy, also during the 6th century.

Unlike the history of Christianity in the Roman Empire, conversion of the West and East Germanic tribes
took place " top to bottom" , in the sense that missionaries aimed at converting Germanic nobility first,
which would then impose their new faith on the general population.

The Franks were converted in the 5th century, after Clovis I's conversion to Catholicism. In 498 (497 or
499 are also possible) he let himself be baptised in Reims. With this act, the Frankish Kingdom became
Christian, although it would take until the 7th century for the population to abandon some of their pagan
customs.[5] This was typical of the Christianization of Europe. Christian and pagan practices would
effectively exist in parallel " .

It would be difficult to showcase purely 'Christian', 'Jewish', or 'Islamic' ideologies for this reason.

On through the ages, as the Bible was codified, edited and released in various versions. You can see the
presence of pagan stories, characters, and practices through out.

When addressing the pagan symbolism expressed through the character, later known as simply 'The Devil' -
what part of this character is wholly Abrahamic?


At this point, I have expressed the attributes of this devil which can be traced back to Platonic, Hellenist,
and Neo-platonic ideologies:

Good vs. Evil

Ancient stories, with re-tooled paradigms

Consequences for disobedience and not appeasing God(s)

So where does that leave Satan in the 21st century?

Loved, hated, respected and feared

Invoked and evoked through the creators: mankind

In terms of the 'earth-based', or 'nature-based' ideologies espoused through neo-paganism; one could argue
that the cosmology of Satan is wholly natural.

The invention of Satan was an inevitability attributed to man's nature. For rejecting Satan's existence in
the human psyche would be unnatural.

Satan was birthed from old stories, mythologies, culture to culture around the world. Satan did not fall
from the heavens unto the earth, it has been ever present in the earth-dwellers.

But wait...there's more!

While Australia is a highly secular country, with the national census recording the number of Christians
going from 96.1% in 1901 to 63.9% in 2006

Source: Year Book Australia, 2004. Australian Bureau of Statistics.
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/dc057c1016e548b4ca256c47002.... Ret rieved 2005-03-27.

The wide-spread of Christianity in Australia dates back to the Colonial era.

Because Christianity offered Australians much in terms of charity and welfare, it was able to gain a firm
footing down-under.

It was a give and take with regard to Aborigines. On one hand, it had such an impact on their culture that it
began to change, shape and mold to the Christian view. On the other, many activists worked towards
preservation of the Aborigine culture and history.


News reports show Church powers trying to get a tighter grip on the people:

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/09/14/1094927585127.html

Seems that there are dividing faiths Catholic, Pentecostal, Lutheran, and Pentecostal animosity.

Based on the surveys I've seen, the Catholicism maintain 50% of adherents.

It seems to be suffering a decline:

http://www.eurekast reet.com.au/article.aspx?aeid=13462

http://au.christiantoday.com/article/christianity-is-dwindling-in-a...

Celtic Christianity in Australia:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/local/cornwall/hi/people_and_places/religion_...

From the religion point of view the population of Australia can be rated as: Christians-- 70.9%,
Buddhists1.9%, Muslim1.5%, Hindus0.5%, Jewish0.4%, Sikh0.1%, No religion15.5%,
others0.4%.

Not even down-under
is immune!

Catholicism is heavily pagan
with a devil at its core!

The Devil-worshipping Yezidis

Al-Jilwah

The texts of the Yezidi people have been examined and classified as Devil Worship. The central
character in their own Cosmology is Malek Teus, often equated with the devil. This is a misunderstanding,
and mistranslation. Malek Teus, is similar to an angel, with peacock symbolism. Malek Teus, within the
stories gained favor with God, so the Yezidi people try to emulate Malek in order to gain favor with God
themselves.

They aspire towards God, therefore they are not devil worshipers but rather devotees of God.

It's a common misconception, therefore this is why many Satanists correlate the Yezidis with Satanism.

Quoting myself from other writing:

"The Hebrew word for Angel is Mal'ak (Mal'ek)which means: messenger, dispatch as a deputy, or
ambassador (it has also been interpreted to mean 'Master', in this case 'Master Angel'). The Angel of the
Yedzidi's is 'Mal'ak Taus' symbolized by the peacock. It is often referred to as the 'Peacock Angel'. I often
wondered if the symbolism of angels is what inspired the creation of faery characters in mythology. If we
take a look at the peacock angel, and the beautiful colors of the peacock feathers, it could be the inspiration
for fairy wings (then of course the inspiration from the insect kingdom i.e. butterflies, dragonflies, cicada
flies), then there's the issue of determining which stories pre-date Abrahamic religion.

The Yedzidi people aspire to be like Mal'ak to gain favor with God. The Muslims demonize Mal'ak
Taus, and he is often considered the devil himself which is why the Yedzidi people are often called 'devil
worshippers'. This is a common misconception. The main characters in the Yedzidi belief system are 7
main Angels. Mal'ek Taus is often referred to as a 'she' character but I have also seen it referred to as a 'he'
character.

Mal'ek Taus was born in a summerland where the mountains are violet and the skies clear. Her father
was a king of the people, her mother a sad, foreign face. They wed for political reasons; the breeding was
mixed. Their seal color was blue, the crest held a star. And the Shining Star, poor Taus, was heir to that
house.

Malek Taus comes from a class of angels, or the Elohim. Most angels (servants and creations of God, the
reputed creator of the Heavens and Earth) are nonphysical beings made of light and sound, but there was
one separate order of creatures known as the Watchers, or the Grigori, who were physical in every sense of
the word. They are said to have had white, wooly hair and eyes that glowed like fire. Their visages bore
resemblance to the snake, and they could speak without making a sound.

Some hold the belief that the Watchers were shamanistic humans. Still others bear witness that they had
wings and traveled astrally quite frequently to the Heavenly realm. Indeed, so it is believed, this is how
some of the angels came to earth.

The Grigori, it is believed, were physical in every way, and this put them in a unique position in Heaven.
They understood humans better than all of God's hosts, and Earth had become their home. God ordered
them to watch, nothing more, and help guide humanity as it grew and developed into the perfect being God
had planned them to be.

The heavenly being swallowed me and, as its pearl, I came out a new being. I came out again as Blue, his
angel, eager to serve him in all ways. My song was pure and sweet, and singing I went from hand to hand
as His vassal. My lands and title fell under His domain. But civil war brought me to ruin. I was wounded,
and with my wound I fled punishment and came to Earth.

There is a legend, recorded in the Book of Enoch (and in other texts), about how the angels came to earth
and clothed themselves in human flesh.

"To the earth, these beings came... to Earth where the beauty of human women caught them in a spell.
They took wives, these angels. "And they (the mortal women) became pregnant, and they bare great giants,
whose height was three thousand ells: who consumed all the acquisitions of men. And when men could no
longer sustain them, the giants turned against them and devoured mankind." (from The Book of Enoch)

These giants are called the Nephilim. Indeed, throughout oral history there are accounts of giants, mostly
sons of the gods (and indeed, Bene ha-elohim means "Sons of the goddesses"), who either commit
outrageous sins or miraculous deeds. Hercules was such a man. Also, Goliath - the nemesis of David from
the Bible - was such a giant.

Those were dark times, when the Nephilim roamed the earth and the Watcher-angels ruled. The people
of Earth cried out, and their cries were heard. It was against God's will that the Watchers breed with the
humans, and so they and their children were cast down. The Watcher leader was "bound hand and foot, and
cast for eternity into the darkness of a desert referred to as Dudael." (From the Ashes of Angels)

The wars had begun.

And Taus came to the unborn body of a familial cousin; the mother was fair and winged, and the father
was dark, rugged - a human. She took the girl child's form for her own, and she was small. With her stature,
she walked into the gates of the Winged Folk and sold herself for the sake of her people, that they would be
persecuted no more.

Revolts among the Watcher and angelic ranks is a common theme throughout the oral and written history
of the world. One of the most famous rebellions is that of Lucifer, who through pride and conceit tried to
overthrow God and lost the battle to be cast from heaven. In another version, he refused to bow down
before newly-created Adam, first human man, and so was joined by other Elohim to rebel against their lord
and master.

There is another tale; the tale of Satan, who also rebelled against God, and upon being cast from his
station over the Earth was transformed into a wicked and hideous creature, and his people besides. It is told
that he roams the Earth, he and his bedfellows, as a wicked and angry spirit that tries to trick the righteous
into committing acts that would doom them to Satan's kingdom for all eternity.

She was trusted, was the head of all angels, this Lucifer, this Malek Taus. She was trusted and stood by
God's throne to be commanded only by the most high being of all. God had created her the most beautiful
of all; vibration and sound in perfection. Lucifer was the Most Beloved by God.

And so I destroyed as commanded and fought for my masters, and worked my way into a most trusted
position. But they betrayed me, and my people were transformed into twisted mockeries of life, and so I
rebelled. With my blue banner behind me, I fought for the people I helped to harm. Freedom was a
tantalizing taste on my tongue. Oh, how I craved it!

But, then I was captured and taken to my former lords, alive. They slipped a metal pole beneath my
bonds so that I could not sing, and they carried me like a hunting trophy. For a week, I wept as I was
carried thus with no food nor water. And in the dark halls of my former lords, the one who had betrayed me
bore witness to my treason, and so I was cast into the pits to be tortured until the end of my days. It was in
those pits... that I became lost.

Reports of Malek Taus's demise are exaggerated: some believe the adversary is still bound in the pits,
suffering torment and waiting for the day when God will bring him forward to face his crimes. Some
believe the Peacock Angel - as Lucifer - has escaped and roams the earth. Others feel Lucifer roams the
earth as his punishment.

The Yezidi believe he was pardoned. Their precious Peacock Angel was pardoned, so they say, and
reinstated in the ranks of the being he tried to displace. When they worship their age-old symbol, they do so
with snake and bird. Upon entering the tomb of Sheikh Adi, worshipers are known to stop and kiss the
image of a blackened snake. They revere it; they revere in the symbol of their fallen lord. Loyally, they
acknowledge Mal'ek Taus and the position God had given him.


Malek Teus, is the peacock angel. The leader of all archangels, not a fallen angel - as others perceive it.
As an angel, Teus is illumination. They believe that the evil and wickedness in the world comes from the
hearts of men, not angels.

The Satan interpretation comes into play, because Teus refused to submit to Adam. Other religions
decided that this is in direct opposition with God. They don't believe the sons of Adam, men - should
question God. By deciding that Teus is 'wicked' because he opposes Adam and the sons of Adam presumes
to know God's intentionality. If Teus was so evil, so wicked - how did he gain favor? The Yazidis do not
question, they emulate Teus because by doing so they believe they too will gain favor with God.

So, their beliefs center on God, not the devil. They seek illumination, so they can be with God.

The Book of Revelation & The Black Book are their doctrines. Read them, then you decide.

The Black Book is not 'devil worship' it addresses the direct ancestry of the Yazidi people. They reject
being descendants of Adam & Eve. Rather, Adam's son Jar and a Houri. Eve was plucked out of the picture
rather early, as her seed was foul. So here's a mythology for you. Children were conceived by placing one's
'seed' in jars. Adam & Eve fought over who was going to produce a child. So they sealed their 'seed' in jars.
When Eve opened hers, it was worms, bugs, and a foul smell. Adams, a perfect male child (Jar) who
married 'a Houri' and they birthed the Yazidi people. Houri are like magical beings, they just are. No
birthing is required, that is for the sons of Adam, men. A man + a Houri = illuminated people to be. They
are ecstatic people, who have heightened awareness of God."

-END QUOTES-

There is outside perspective and then there is truth. If you have not studied the culture and read the texts,
how can you determine if the Yezidis are Devil Worshipers?

Many of the Yezidi texts can be found on Sacred Texts

The Yezidis are private people, and their ambiguity leads to much speculation. There is a special hatred
of them by radical orthodox Muslims. They are often targeted for violence.

Yazidi and Yezidi spellings are acceptable.

See you in HE L L!
Wait...which one?

Many cultures have concepts of hell. Hell, is not limited to the Abrahamics. It is conceived as the home of
Satan.

Ancient Egyptian Texts: The Book of Two Ways (Book of the Ways of Rosetau), The Book of
Amduat (Book of the Hidden Room, Book of That Which Is in the Underworld), The Book of Gates,
The Book of the Dead (Book of Going Forth by Day), The Book of the Earth and The Book of
Caverns.

By examining their works, you can see the Egyptian concept of hell. A place of judgment. Rather than
'heaven' and 'hell', the Egyptians had 2 Fields. Each person was judged and placed in either of the fields. 42
judges of the divine, would decide whether or not a person was flung into the place, where you are
devoured by a great beast or the other, which is akin to heaven. It is postulated that the concepts of heaven
and hell, were borrowed from the Ancient Egyptians. Much of this comes with the rise of the cult dedicated
to Osiris, in the Middle Kingdom (2055 BC and 1650 BC).

I recommend this book:
The Essential Guide to Egyptian Mythology: The Oxford Guide, ~Hell, 1acobus Van Dijk,
Ber kley Reference, 2003, ISBN 0-425-19096. It covers the adaptation of Hell in early Christianity and
Coptic texts.

I have already commented on the Gilgamesh Epic as evidence of the earliest concept of an underworld.

This link has a fairly decent overview of 'Hell':

http://www.hell-on-line.org/ TextsANE.html

The Greeks had Tartarus, a proverbial torture chamber beneath the underworld. Plato wrote that souls were
judged in the underworld (see a familiar theme here?) and those deserving to be punished were sent to
Tartarus.

See the Gorgias Dialogue here, 400 BC.

I've already covered the Platonic viewpoint of Good vs. Evil, so naturally there would be a 'good place' and
a 'bad place' inserted, to address what to do with the good and evil.

In Asia (Philippines), Gimokodan, the underworld of the Mindanao people. Remember when we were
discussing gender of Satan?

By a dark river resides a woman, covered in nipples. She suckles spirits before they pass on. The location
Gimokodan, is divided into two places. Red, for those killed in battle and White, for everyone else. The
spirits move by night, but in the day they are reduced to the morning dew.

This is the gimokod, the 'souls' which can be taken in to
either man or animal and is the reason that they believe
that all living creatures have more than one soul.

If I drank the morning dew, I would be taking in the
many souls of the departed into myself.

'Red' vs. 'White'. Another reason the Devil is red-skinned
and God wears flowing white.

This mythology arose within their culture attributed to the major river there used to irrigate the land, and
fertile crescent. Called Mindanao River. It doesn't take a rocket scientist, to determine why the concept of a
new existence is divided.


In Africa, the Swahili speaking tribes have Hetgwauge, a place for wicked souls. It is a dark, dusty and
desolate place where Hetgwaulana, lord of the dead, resides. It is a place where the wicked are tortured for
their wrong-doings. Book:
" The Encyclopedia of Hell. " Mi riam Van Scott. St. Martin's Press,1998

Excerpt from the book:

" SWAHILI HELL: According to African Swahili belief, hell is a deep abyss below the surface of the earth
into which the damned are cast. It is the seventh thing God created and accordingly has seven descending
levels. The worst sinners, those believed beyond hope of salvation, occupy the lowest realm, which is an icy
place of unendurable cold. (Departed souls of moderately evil people could be sent to the sixth circle below
the earth for punishment. These spirits had some hope of eventual salvation).

The influence of eighth-century Arab traders is evident in the depiction of Swahili hell. As in the Islam
faith, the deepest pit of the underworld is ruled by IBLIS (a harsh DEMON), who metes out punishment to
his accursed subjects. Traveling merchants from Muslim countries also brought notions of JAHANNAM,
the hell of Muslim belief. Their images of a horrible underworld of torment became mingled with
indigenous concepts of afterlife justice. The result is a dark realm that features components of both faiths.
(o)

Hell (North Africa). The original African religions did not know of a place where the souls of the
departed would be punished for their sins. The Islamicized peoples, however, have many tales about the
horrors of hell more than about the blessings of heaven.

In Swahili literature, hell is located beneath this earth and is constructed in the form of a building with
seven floors, but much bigger. At the very bottom there are the worst sinners, those who during their lives
have consistently denied the existence of God. They shiver eternally in the perennial ice which is crushing
them for ever. On the first floor, that is, the upper floor of hell, there are the sinners of moderate
wickedness, the drinkers of wine who were otherwise good Muslims. They will be forgiven after a spell in
hell, and then go on to purgatory, Matahara or Jahannamu, where they will only suffer thirst and drink
discharge. Ladhaa, the second floor as one goes down, contains the misers who are dragged by their hair
into a river of blood, the blood which they squeezed out of their victims, and which they must now drink or
else drown in. Hutama, the third floor, is for the hypocrites and liars. Sairi, the fourth floor, is for
embezzlers and deceivers. Sakari, the fifth floor, is full of fire and smoke, for the adulterous women who
will have fire in their bellies for ever. Here also are the sahiri, the sorcerers who put spells on their victims,
or those who dig up bodies and eat human flesh. Jahimu, the sixth floor down, is or the idolators who
worship sanamu, false gods, in defiance of the One God. Hawiya, the seventh and bottom layer, is for the
atheists, who live in a never-ending polar night " . (z)

(Z) reference book:
" An Encyclopedia of Myth and Legend: Af rican Mythology. " Jan Knappert. Diamond Books.
Hammersmith, London,1990

Here is a reference for Swahili language and culture:
http://www.glcom.com/hassan/swahili_history.html

Obviously, the concept of hell is a blending of pre-Biblical and Biblical ideologies.

O le nu'u-o-nonoa

Samoan Underworld

" O LE NU'U-O-NONA: O le nu'u-u-o-nonoa is the underworld of Samoan belief. It is a region of Sa-le-fe'e
(Land of the Dead) reserved for the souls of the wicked. The name O le nu'u-o-nonoa means " land of the
bound, " since damned spirits are imprisoned in this subterranean hell. The vengeful god Ita-nga-ta takes
great delight in torturing these souls in the dour abyss" .

Source: " The Encyclopedia of Hell. " Mi riam Van Scott. St. Martin's Press,1998

Etymology
" The modern English word Hell is derived from Old English hel, helle (about 725 AD) and ultimately from
Proto-Germanic halja, meaning " one who covers up or hides something" . Germanic cognates exist in Old
Frisian helle, hille, Old Saxon hellja, Middle Dutch helle (modern Dutch hel), Old High German helle
(Modern German Hlle) and Gothic halja. The English term is also possibly derived from Old Norse Hel.
Surviving 13th century Icelandic representations of Germanic paganism in the form of Norse mythology
feature a female being named Hel, who is described as ruling over Hel, a location in Niflheim.

The word " Hell " used away from its religious context was long considered to be profanity, particularly in
North America. Although its use was commonplace in everyday speech and on television by the 1970s,
many people in the US still consider it somewhat rude or inappropriate language, particularly involving
children. Many, particularly among religious circles and in certain sensitive environments, still avoid
casual usage of the word. In British English and some parts of North America, the word has fallen into
common use and is not considered profane; often considered to be a safer and less offensive alternative to
swearing, as in the phrase, " Go to Hell. " "

Source: Thesaurus


Hells... A research map

General Descriptions:

Hell

Christian Hell

Buddhist Hell

Gnostic Hell

Hindu Hell

Jain Hell

Swahili Hell

Western Europe:

Anaon (Brittany)

Anwnn (Celtic)

Hittola (Finnish)

Niflheim (Norse)*

Tartarus (Greece)

Eastern Europe:

Middle East:

Drugaskan (Zoroastrian)

Aralu (Sumerian)

Land of No Return (Babylonian)

Gehenna (Hebrew)

Jahannam (Islamic)

Asia:

Avici (Buddhist)

Jigoku (Japanese Buddhist)

Kalichi (Ancient India)

Patala (Hindu)

Ti Yu (Chinese)

Yellow Springs (Chinese)

Yomotsu-kuni (Shinto)

Africa:

Hetgwauge (Haida tribe)

Americas:

Adlivun (Innuit)

Hunhau (Mayan)

Shobari Waka (Yanomamo)

Oceania:

O le nu'u-o-nonoa (Samoan)

http://whiterosesgarden.com/Nature_of_Evil/Underworld/UNDR_content_pages/UNDR_content_hell
s.htm

Religious literature and beliefs

Hell appears in several mythologies and religions. It is commonly inhabited by demons and the souls of
dead people. Hell is often depicted in art and literature, perhaps most famously in Dante's Divine Comedy.

Bah' Faith
The Bah' Faith regards the conventional description of Hell (and heaven) as a specific place as symbolic.
Instead the Bah' writings describe Hell as a " spiritual condition" where remoteness from God is defined
as Hell ; conversely heaven is seen as a state of closeness to God. The analogy to the womb in many ways
summarizes the Bah' view of earthly existence: just as the womb constitutes an important place for a
person's initial physical development, the physical world provides for the development of the individual
soul. Accordingly, Bah's view life as a preparatory stage, where one can develop and perfect those
qualities which will be needed in the next life.

The Bah' teachings state that there exists a hierarchy of souls in the afterlife, where the merits of each
soul determines their place in the hierarchy, and that souls lower in the hierarchy cannot completely
understand the station of those above. , where they will be punished for sin after the general resurrection
and last judgment. However, in modern times some Christian theologians have 'adopted' alternative beliefs
such as conditional immortality and universalism. It is said that St. Peter is the keeper of hell in some forms
of Christianity. He is supposedly the mediator between who gets to go to hell or heaven.

Greek mythology
main Tartarus In classic Greek mythology, below Heaven, Earth, and Pontus is Tartarus, or Tartaros
(Greek Too:ooo, deep place). It is either a deep, gloomv place, a pit or abvss used as a dungeon of
torment and suffering that resides within Hades (the ent ire underworld) with Tartarus being the hellish
component. In the Gorgias, Plato (c. 400 BC) wrote that souls were judged after death and those who
received punishment were sent to Tartarus. As a place of punishment, it can be considered a hell. The
classic Hades, on the other hand, is more similar to Old Testament Sheol.

Hinduism
Naraka In Hinduism, there are contradictions as to whether or not there is a Hell (referred to as 'Narak' in
Hindi). For some it is a metaphor for a conscience. But in Mahabharat a there is a mention of the Pandavas
going to Heaven and the Kauravas going to Hell. Hells are also described in various Puranas and other
scriptures. Garuda Purana gives a detailed account on Hell, its features and enlists amount of punishment
for most of the crimes like modern day penal code.

It is believed that people who commit 'paap' (sin) go to Hell and have to go through the punishments in
accordance to the sins they committed. The god Yamaraj, who is also the god of death, is the king of Hell.
The detailed accounts of all the sins committed by an individual are supposed to be kept by Chitragupta
who is the record keeper in Yama's court. Chitragupta reads out the sins committed and Yama orders the
appropriate punishments to be given to the individuals. These punishments include dipping in boiling oil,
burning in fire, torture using various weapons etc. in various Hells. Individuals who finish their quota of
the punishments are reborn according to their karma. All of the created are imperfect and thus have at
least one sin to their record, but if one has led a generally pious life, one ascends to Heaven, or Swarga
after a brief period of expiation in Hell.

Islam
main Jahannam Muslims believe in fahannam (in Arabic. ) (which is related to the Hebrewword
gehennim and resembles the versions of Hell in Christianity). In the Qur'an, the holy book of Islam, there
are literal descriptions of the condemned in a fiery Hell, as contrasted to the garden-like Paradise (jannah)
enjoyed by righteous believers.

In addition, Heaven and Hell are split into many different levels depending on the actions perpetrated in
life, where punishment is given depending on the level of evil done in life, and good is separated into other
levels depending on how well one followed God while alive.

There is an equal number of mentions of both Hell and paradise in the Qur'an, which is considered by
believers to be among the numeric miracles in the Qur'an.
The Islamic concept of Hell is similar to the medieval Christian view of Dant e. However, Satan is not
viewed as Hell's ruler, merely one of its sufferers. The gate of Hell is guarded by Maalik also known as
Zabaaniyah. The Quran states that the fuel of Hellfire is rocks/stones (idols) and human beings.
Names of Hell according to Islamic Tradition based on the Quranic ayah and Hadith:

* Jahim
* Hutamah
* Jahannam
* Ladza
* Hawiah
* Saqor
* Sae'er
* Sijjin
* Zamhareer

Although generally Hell is often portrayed as a hot steaming and tormenting place for sinners there is one
Hell pit which is characterized differently from the other Hell in Islamic tradition. Zamhareer is seen as the
coldest and the most freezing Hell of all, yet its coldness is not seen as a pleasure or a relief to the sinners
who committed crimes against God. The state of the Hell of Zamhareer is a suffering of extreme coldness of
blizzards ice and snow which no one on this earth can bear. The lowest pit of all existing Hells is the
Hawiyah which is meant for the Hypocrites and two-faced people who claimed to believe in Allah and His
messenger by the tongue but denounced both in their hearts. Hypocrisy is considered to be the most
dangerous sin of all (despite the fact that Shirk is the greatest sin viewed by Allah). According to the
Qur'an, all non-believers who have received and rejected Islamic teachings for reasons unknown will go to
Hell.

The Qur'an asserts that Hell is a place of everlasting of torture just as Heaven is asserted as a place of
everlasting enjoyment. However, while some Muslims are said to be tortured finitely for their unforgiven
sins, there are verses in the Qur'an explicitly mentioning an everlasting and infinite torture in Hell.
Morever, even though in Islam, the devil, or shaitan, is created from fire, he suffers in Hell because Hellfire
is 70 times hotter than the fire of this world. It was also said that Shaytan is derived from shata, (literally
`burned'), because it was created from a smokeless fire.

Judaism
Daniel 12:2 proclaims " And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, Some to
everlasting life, Some to shame and everlasting contempt. " Judaism does not have a specific doctrine about
the afterlife, but it does have a mystical/Orthodox tradition of describing Gehenna. Gehenna is not Hell,
but rather a sort of Purgatory where one is judged based on his or her life's deeds, or rather, where one
becomes fully aware of one's own shortcomings and negative actions during one's life. The Kabbalah
describes it as a " waiting room" (commonly translated as an " entry way" ) for all souls (not just the
wicked). The overwhelming majority of rabbinic thought maintains that people are not in Gehenna forever;
the longest that one can be there is said to be 11 months, however there has been the occasional noted
exception. Some consider it a spiritual forge where the soul is purified for its eventual ascent to Olam
Habah (heb. :::o :x, lit. "The world to come", often viewed as analogous to Heaven). This is also
mentioned in the Kabbalah, where the soul is described as breaking, like the flame of a candle lighting
another: the part of the soul that ascends being pure and the " unfinished" piece being reborn.
According to Jewish teachings, hell is entirely physical ; rather, it can be compared to a very intense feeling
of shame. People are ashamed of their misdeeds and this constitutes suffering which makes up for the bad
deeds. When one has so deviated from the will of God, one is said to be in gehinom. This is not meant to
refer to some point in the future, but to the very present moment. The gates of teshuva (return) are said to
be always open, and so one can align his will with that of God at any moment. Being out of alignment with
God's will is itself a punishment according to the Torah. In addition, Subbotniks and Messianic Judaism
believe in Gehenna, but Samaritans probably believe in a separation of the wicked in a shadowy existence,
Sheol, and the righteous in heaven.

Maya faith
In Maya mythology ,Xibalb is the dangerous underworld of nine levels ruled by the demons Vucub Caquix
and Hun Came. The road into and out of it is said to be steep, thorny and very forbidding. Metnal is the
lowest and most horrible of the nine Hells of the underworld,it is ruled by Ah Puch. Ritual healers would
intone healing prayers banishing diseases to Metnal. Much of the Popol Vuh describes the adventures of
the Maya Hero Twins in their cunning struggle with the evil lords of Xibalb.

Norse mythology

Taoism
Ancient Taoism had no concept of Hell, as morality was seen to be a man-made distinction and there was
no concept of an immaterial soul. In its home country China, where Taoism adopted tenets of other
religions, popular belief endows Taoist Hell with many deities and spirits who punish sin in a variety of
horrible ways. This is also considered Karma for Taoism.

Other Hells
The hells of Europe include Briton Mvthologvs 'Anaon`, Celtic Mvthologvs 'Uffern`, the hell of Lapps
Mvthologv and Ugarian Mvthologvs 'Manala` leads to annihilation. The hells in the Middle East include
Sumerian Mvthologvs 'Aralu`, the hells of Canaanite Mythology, Hittite Mythology and Mithraism; the
weighing of the heart in Egyptian Mythology can lead to annihilation. The hells of Asia include Bagobo
Mvthologvs 'Gimokodan` and Ancient Indian Mvthologvs 'Kalichi". African hells include Haida
Mvthologvs 'Hetgwauge` and the hell of Swahili Mvthologv. The hells of the Americas include A:tec
Mvthologvs 'Mictlan`, Inuit Mvthologvs 'Adlivun` and Yanomamo Mvthologvs 'Shobari Waka`. The
Oceanic hells include Samoan Mvthologvs 'O le nuu-o-nonoa` and the hells of Bangka Mvthologv and
Caroline Islands Mythology.

The Gathas mention a " House of the Lie" where those who had more bad thoughts, words, and deeds go.
Over the history of Zoroastrianism they have believed in annihilation of the wi cked, purgation of the
wicked in molten metal and in eternal punishment. It is difficult to find which one is correct because they
all have standing in Zoroastor's writings.

HE L L resources:
References

1. ^ a b c d Barnhart, Robert K. (1995) The Barnhart Concise Dictionary of Etymology, page 348. Harper
Collins ISBN 0062700847
2. ^ http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=hell&searchmode=none
3. ^ Numerous verses in the Qu'ran and New Testament.
4. ^ Alighieri, Dante (June 2001 (orig. trans. 1977)) [c. 1315]. "Cantos XXXI-XXXIV". Inferno. trans.
John Ciardi (2 ed.). New York: Penguin.
5. ^ Eileen Gardiner, Visions of Heaven and Hell Before Dante (New York, Italica Press, 1989), p. 43.
6. ^ Gardiner, Visions, pp. 58 and 61.
7. ^ Gardiner, Visions, pp. 141, 160 and 174, and 2067.
8. ^ Gardiner, Visions, pp. 222 and 232.
9. ` Religion and Magic in Ancient Egypt, Rosalie David, p158-159, Penguin, 2002, ISBN 0-14-
0262252-0
10. ` The Essential Guide to Egyptian Mythology: The OxIord Guide, 'Hell, p161-162, Jacobus Van
Dijk, Berkley Reference, 2003, ISBN 0-425-19096-X
11. ` The Divine Verdict, John Gwyn GriIIiths, p233, BRILL, 1991, ISBN 9004092315
12. ` see also letter by ProI. GriIIith to 'The Independent, 32 December 1993 [1]
13. ^ "Egyptian Religion", Jan Assman, The Encyclopedia of Christianity, p77, vol2, Wm. B Eerdmans
Publishing, 1999, ISBN 90041 16958
14. ^ http://www.hell-on-line.org/TextsEGY.html
15. ^ http://www.hell-on-line.org/TextsANE.html
16. ^ Sheol: 1Mos 37:35, 42:38, 44:29, 44:31,
17. ^ Hades: Mat.11:23 16:18 Luk.10:15. Ap.2:27,31. 1Kor 15:55.Upp.1:18 6:8 20:13,14
18. ^ Lewis & Short Inferus
19. ` c: n; : x:_: Hinnom: Jer.19:6
20. ` LXX aouuvopiov uio Evvo
21. ^ Gehenna: Mat.5:22,29,30, 10:28, 18:09, 23:15,33. Mar. 9:43,45,47, Luk.12:05, Jak.3:6.
22. ^ tartaro - verb: throw down to Tartarus, used of the fall of the Titans
23. ^ Unger, Merrill F. (1981). Unger's Bible Dictionary. Chicago: Moody Bible Institute, The. pp. 467.
24. ^ The New Schaf-Herzog Encyclopedia of religious Knowledge pg. 415
25. ^ The New Schaf-Herzog Encyclopedia of religious Knowledge pgs. 414-415
26. ` See Kallistos Ware, 'Dare we hope Ior the salvation oI all?" in The Inner Kingdom: Volume 1 oI the
Collected Works
27. ^ Revelation 20:11
28. ^ Romans 6:23
29. ^ a b c "What Does the Bible Really Teach?", 2005, Published by Jehovah's Witnesses
30. ^ "Insight on the scriptures, Volume 2", 1988, Published by Jehovah's Witnesses.
31. ^ New Bible Dictionary, "Hell", InterVarsity Press, 1996.
32. ^ New Dictionary of Biblical Theology, "Hell", InterVarsity Press, 2000.
33. ^ Evangelical Alliance Commission on Truth and Unity Among Evangelicals, The Nature of Hell,
Paternoster, 2000.
34. ^ a b Masumian, Farnaz (1995). Life After Death: A study of the afterlife in world religions. Oxford:
Oneworld Publications. ISBN 1-85168-074-8.
35. ^ Sanghvi, Sukhlal (1974) (in English trans. by K. K. Dixit). Commentary on Tattvrthastra oI
Vcaka Umsvti. Ahmedabad: L. D. Institute oI Indology. pp. 107
36. ^ Sanghvi, Sukhlal (1974) pp.250-52
37. ^ refer Mahavrata for the vows and restraints in Jainism
38. ^ Meredith Sprunger. "An Introduction to Zoroastrianism".
http://www.ubfellowship.org/archive/readers/601_zoroastrianism.htm. Retrieved 2008-10-10.
39. ^ Yasna 49:11, "Avesta: Yasna". http://www.avesta.org/yasna/y47to50b.htm. Retrieved 2008-10-11.
40. ^ Eileen Gardiner (2006-02-10). "About Zoroastrian Hell". http://www.hell-on-
line.org/AboutZOR.html#The%20Fate%20of%20the%20Soul. Retrieved 2008-10-10.
41. ^ Chapter 75, "The Book of Arda Viraf". http://www.avesta.org/pahlavi/viraf.html. Retrieved 2008-
10-10.
42. ^ Eileen Gardiner (2009-01-18). "Zoroastrian Hell Texts". http://www.hell-on-
line.org/TextsZOR.html#The%20Fate%20of%20the%20Soul. Retrieved 2010-8-24.
43. ^ Sample Hatlo Inferno comic:
44. ^ Deut. 32:22, Deut. 32:36a & 39, II Sam. 22:6, Job 11:8, Job 26:6, Psalm 9:17, Psalm 16:10, Psalm
18:5, Psalm 55:15, Psalm 86:13, Ps. 116:3, Psalm 139:8, Prov. 5:5, Prov. 7:27, Prov. 9:18, Prov. 15:11,
Prov. 15:24, Prov. 23:14, Prov. 27:20, Isa. 5:14, Isa. 14:9, Isa. 14:15, Isa. 28:15, Isa. 28:18, Isa. 57:9, Ezek.
31:16, Ezek. 31:17, Ezek. 32:21, Ezk. 32:27, Amos 9:2, Jonah 2:2, Hab. 2:5
45. ^ Gen. 37:35, Gen. 42:38, Gen. 44:29, Gen. 44:31, I Sam. 2:6, I Kings 2:6, I Kings 2:9, Job 7:9, Job
14:13, Job 17:13, Job 21:13, Job 24:19, Psalm 6:5, Psalm 30:3, Psalm 31:17, Psalm 49:14, Psalm 49:14,
Psalm 49:15, Psalm 88:3, Psalm 89:48, Prov. 1:12, Prov. 30:16, Ecc. 9:10, Song 8:6, Isa. 14:11, Isa. 38:10,
Isa. 38:18, Ezek. 31:15, Hosea 13:14, Hosea 13:14, Psalm 141:7
46. ^ Num. 16:30, Num. 16:33, Job 17:16
47. ^ Mat. 5:29, Mat. 5:30, Matt. 10:28, Matt. 23:15, Matt. 23:33, Mark 9:43, Mark 9:45, Mark 9:47, Luke
12:5, Matt. 5:22, Matt. 18:9, Jas. 3:6
48. ^ [Acts 2:27, New American Standard Bible]
49. ^ [Acts 2:27, New International Version]
50. ^ [Acts 2:27, New Living Translation]
51. ^ [Luke 16:23, New Living Translation]
52. ^ [Catholic for a Reason, edited by Scott Hahn & Leon Suprenant, copyright 1998 by Emmaus Road
Publishing, Inc., chapter by Curtis Martin, pg 294-295]
53. ^ Roget's Thesaurus, VI.V.2, "Hell"

Further reading

Everett Ferguson. Backgrounds of Early Christianity. 2nd Edition, William B. Eerdmans Publishing
company, Grand Rapids, Michigan, [1987], 1993, ISBN 0-8028-0669-4 pbk)

Hey Satan, what's your sign?

I could write another essay on the symbolism of Satan, but my focus is to address pagan origins and why
Satanists consider themselves pagan.

Here I will address a couple of pagan symbols in hopes of at the very least opening the window to the vast
occultisms which can be drawn from Satan.

The Roman God Bacchus, the Wine God, who was equivalent to Dionysus of the Greeks, was depicted on a
cross, in the same pose as Christ would be later on (when the Church would adopt the Cross). It is known
that such depictions of pagan Gods in the early Greco-Roman world completely determined how Christ was
presented.

The Chi-Rho emblem, considered the first Christian Cross, was also a pre-Christian symbol: the original
Chi-ro signified good fortune.

The Chi Rho Cross is a warrior's cross and also a 'Chrismon' (a monogram of Christ).

The Chi Rho Cross (or Constantine's Cross) - a sigla, forming a warrior's cross
A sign appeared to the Roman Emperor Constantine as a light in the noon-day sky. At the same time, he
heard the words, In Hoc Signo Vinces (In this sign you shall conquer). He took this as a sign from God and
decided the shape drawn by the light should be an emblem for his military. This emblem became known as
Labarum (etymology unclear - possibly a Gaulish/Celtic word. See Lauburu Cross).

The shape he saw was of a flaming cross - " a long spear, overlaid with gold" . It had a cross bar and " on
the top of the whole was fixed a wreath of gold and precious stones, and within this the symbol of the
Saviour's name, two letters indicating the name of Christ by means of the initial letters, the letter 'X'
intersection 'P' at the centre. " (recorded in the 3rd century by Eusebius Pamphili, Bishop of Cesarea in
Palestine)

The Greek word for Christ is Christos and the Greek lettering is Xoio:o. The first letter X (chi, shaped
like the St. Andrews Cross) and the second letter o (rho), form the monogram of Christ (Chrismon). It
also became the monogram of Constantine. Coincidentally, the labarum was similar to an existing pagan
emblem used as a standard by the Roman cavalry. Constantine was the Pontifex Maximus, chief priest of
the classical Roman Pagan religion. So it's easy to see why he warmed to the symbol.

However, the timing of witnessing the sign was significant; it was 27th October 312, the day before an
important battle on Milvian Bridge in Rome, which he won. Since chi and rho form the monogram of
Christ, he understood it was a sign from the Christian God and thenceforth Constantine became more
tolerant of Christianity. (Some books indicate that Constantine made Christianity the state religion, but
that didn't happen until a century later during the reign of Theodosius.)

Let's take a look.

What does this have to do with Satan?

Many religious groups accuse the 'Catholic Church' and more specifically the 'Pope' of being Satan. All of
the pagan symbolism fused into Catholicism is apparent even to Christians. They are fearful of it, they warn
their fellow Christians to abandon Catholicism all together or else have their souls damned for all of
eternity. I recognized this in early childhood. People call me a closet Catholic all the time, just another
label I can add to my costume closet. Catholicism is rich in pagan symbolism, stories, characters and even
have their own Hell on earth! The Vatican.

E WTN broadcast the Papal Mass at Vista Pastoral A Cagliari, Santa Misa.
This quote f rom Pergamos - Men Conquer and Rule chapter:

Crosses attached to or superimposed on circles were the most common Satanic symbols in pagan religions.
The Egyptian Ankh, the Hindu Swastika, the Druid " Peace Sign, " and the Roman Chi Rho are all examples.
The scientific symbol for " woman, " a circular sun with an external cross, was first used in Babylon to
designate the " Mother of God. " The biological male designation, a circle with an arrow emanating from it,
is also of Babylonian origin. It signified the sun, represented by the circle, sending a ray, represented by
the arrow, out to Mother Earth, impregnating her at the Festival of Ishtar, cel ebrated on the Sunday
nearest the Vernal Equinox. True to the faith of Constantine, Catholics celebrate the Sun's achievement
each year on Easter Sunday, nine months before the Sun God's nativity on December 25th.

There are several explanations for the origin of the cross in Satanic sun god lore. It represented the first
letter of Tammuz's name. And the sun " crosses" the equator at the Vernal Equinox, the day the Babylonians
believe the sun impregnated mother earth giving birth to Tammuz nine months later at the Winter Solstice.
Pagans celebrated Easter Sunday by baking sun-shaped rolls with crosses cut into them. The custom
continues with the baking of Hot Cross Buns today. Constantine, and his " Sign of the Cross, " ritualistically
imitated by all Catholics today, elevated the Satanic symbol to universal acclaim.

Vestments for His Holiness Benedict XVI

In March, the Saint Bede Studio was contacted by the Archdiocese of Sydney with a request to submit
designs for sets of vestments for the Papal Mass in Saint Marvs Cathedral, Svdnev, Saturdav, 19th Julv.
Designs were prepared for vestments decorated in three different styles: the Gothic Revival ; Carolingian;
and according to the traditions of Rome. These designs were then submitted by the Archdiocese of Sydney
to the Prefect of Pontifical Ceremonies, Monsignor Guido Marini, who selected the design for vestments
ornamented in the Roman style.

A chasuble and stole, Pontifical dalmatic and mitre were to be prepared for the Popes use, in addition to
the three dalmatics for the deacons assisting the Pope at the Mass.

In preparing the design, certain considerations were paramount. Firstly, that the vestments be beautiful
and dignified, as is fitting for vestments used by His Holiness. Secondly, that the vestments be convenient
for the use of His Holiness. Lastly, that the vestments be visually related to Roman traditions for
ornamenting sacred vestments.

The design for the chasuble is inspired by a 16th century Saragossan painting of Saint Martin of Tours. But
the semi-conical shape of that chasuble was changed to accord more with the shape and dimensions set
down in the same century by Saint Charles Borromeo.

The fabric for these vestments is the magnificent silver and gold " Edwardine" silk damask which is figur ed
in the Italianate stvle of 18th centurv. The front of the chasuble is decorated with the 'tau`. an ornament
in continual use in Rome for almost 1000 years...

When applicable to the Messiah, " Anointed" was rendered XS (Chi -Sigma), XU (Chi-Upsilon), XW (Chi-
Omega), or XN (Chi-Nu). Interestingly, Rho or " r, " the second letter in " christos, " was never used, nor was
the Tau or " t. " I believe the Rho was deleted because it became synonymous with drugs. I believe the Tau
was deleted because the " t " symbolized the first sun god, Tammuz, and his cross.

While the placeholder CRU, has been embellished with the addition of a " t, " the sign of the Satan's " cross, "
and has in time become " Jesus' " last name, the shocking truth is neither chrio, nor christos, were ever
actually written out on any page of any first, second, or third century manuscript of any Renewed Covenant
book or letter. Interestingly, of the many ways the placeholder CRU is rendered in the 70 extant pre-
Constantine manuscripts, none of them contain the Greek tau, or " t. " Not one. And of the 24 letters in the
Greek alphabet, the " T" or Tau, was the only one associated with Tammuz, the son of the sun in the
Babylonian religion that has come to pollute Christendom.

While I'm not an expert on such things, the Hebrew letter Beth is said to mean " house. " The letter Resh
means " head. " The consonant-vowel Yod is " hand, " representing " power and authority. " And the Tau
means " mark. " Thus the BRYT/Covenant is the house of Yahweh. He is the head of the family. Those who
bear His mark, His name, are invited to live there. And we arrive by way of His outstretched hand, His
power and authority. We cannot get there on our own volition.

" Tau" cross vestments at yesterday Papal Mass in Cagliari, Italy. Apparently, this " T" shape/cross goes all
the way back to ancient Egypt, and has was even a prominent feature in Mayan architecture.

From the same broadcast:
" The Tammuz robes are particularly revolting worn with the Dagon fish hats and set before statues of the
Babylonian mother of god and queen of heaven. These boys did a fine job of resurrecting the Babylonian
religion.

I don't know what percentage of the Roman Catholic leadership is deceived as opposed to being deceptive,
but it doesn't matter. They claim to act and speak for God so they have condemned their souls and all those
they have influenced. The lack of knowledge isn't an excuse--it's deadly. "

Ichthys was the offspring son of the ancient
Sea goddess Atargatis, and was known in
various mythic systems as Tirgata, Aphrodite,
Pelagia or Delphine. The word also meant
"womb" and "dolphin" in some
tongues..."Ichthus," an acronym from the
Greek, "Iesous Christos Theou Uios Soter," or
"Jesus Christ the Son of God, Saviour."


The Abrahamics did not invent the fish symbolism. I often discuss the symbolism of Venus, the clam and
the fish.

The fish = fertility

The Clam = vagina

Venus = Romanized concepts

The fish symbol, has been used to represent fertility for thousands of years and pre-dates the Abrahamic
religions.

The Romans perceived her as Venus, and the term 'Venus' is the origins of such terms such as venereal
disease, tied to the 'sex'. dies Veneris, her sacred day was Friday. She is often depicted with her fish.

How the symbol became to be known as:

Goes back to the Christian persecutions. Christians often had to meet in secret to
avoid capture and torture by the Romans, during the era in which Christianity was
not favorable. The usage of this symbol, was an 'insiders' form.

In order to meet with fellow Christians without putting yourself out there (which could result in your
death!); the top arch was drawn, if the person you were talking with drew the bottom arch to complete the
form - this was confirmation that it was safe to speak freely. This symbol later became to be known as a
protective sigil on doors, later was the Khristos term. The origins of Ichthys was the offspring of the
ancient Sea goddess Atargatis, and was known in various mythic systems as Tirgata, Aphrodite, Pelagia, or
Delphine. The word also meant "womb" and "dolphin" in some tongues, and representations of this
appeared in the depiction of mermaids. The fish is also a central element in other stories, including the
Goddess of Ephesus, as well as the tale of the fish of the Nile that swallowed part of Osiris' body (the
penis), and was also considered a symbol of the sexuality of Isis for she had sexual intercourse with Osiris
after his death which resulted in the conception and birth of his posthumous son, Harpocrates, Horus-the-
child. So, in pagan beliefs, the fish is a symbol of birth and fertility.

When Christ alleged to feed the wedding party from one fish, this was the Goddess of fertility and
plentifying the food for consumption. The early Jews were polytheistic (with a divine feminine aspect), and
were also reading Greek documents, hence this story is adapted into the new mythos.

Don't take my word for it, the Truth is out There.

The cults of Dagon, are also mentioned in the Bible. ( See I Samuel 5:4)

Bible, New International Version (1984)
" But the following morning when they rose, there was Dagon, fallen on his face on the ground before the
ark of the LORD! His head and hands had been broken off and were lying on the threshold; only hi s body
remained. "

Christians are well-aware of the pagan roots of these symbols, but teach that they have long been forgotten
and replaced with new meaning. The new religion, and the 'origins' with Christ.

Many Christians do not feel comfortable with the symbols once they learn the origins. Thus, abandoning
certain symbols, in fear of the wrath of God.

Many do not even wear a cross, because they come to realize it was 'added' later, and the language was
changed to justify the addition. Therefore they feel 'fooled' and often lost as to determining the true will of
God.

How can a follower be faithful, if they can not sort out the fact from fiction? Even if the entire religion is
based on fiction, there are certain 'facts' that believers will adhere to.


I recommend watching the film Dagon, based on stories written by weird tales writer HP Lovecraft. It
covers the paradigm shift in a very creative way. In the film, the Christian faith is replaced with a pagan
one, and the bias over the repercussions for doing so are in line with the societal view that pagans worship
dark gods which require blood sacrifice. Hence, the fear and loathing of pagan religion.

The most meaningful orientation is
probably to have the fish swimming
to the left, as is shown above. The
symbol then resembles the first letter
of the Greek alphabet, alpha. That
recalls Revelation 1:8:


" I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which
is to come, the Almighty. " (King James Version).

Style Decisions of the Pope While adopting the lavish lifestyle advocated by God, the Holy Father makes
his fashion choices from other deities. The Pope Chooses Accessories: The Hat this is inspired by both
the Godess Cvbele (whose Cult of Harlotrv and Holv Taverns site lies beneath St Peters) and bv Dagon
the Fish-God. The Pallium its origin is the cloth worn by a shepherd when carrying a lamb on his
shoulders. It is ornamented with the Cross Formee, the symbol for pagan sun worship. The Lappets
these are the strips of cloth on the back of his hat, as worn by pagan kings. The Stole his crimson and
gold stole bears the symbol of Baal within the eight pointed star of Ishtar. The Gloves these bear a
sunburst design, another Sun God symbol for Baal. Accessories from the True Faith: The Ruby Slippers
these are hand-made in red satin, red silk, and gold threads; each bears a floppy bow and a cross of red
rubies. They may be worn with the ceremonial silk stockings, which are interwoven with gold threads and
heavily embroidered. Pilgrims are permitted to kiss one slipper. "

Bible Stories, By Barbara Griffiths. A teaching aid for young adults.

F rom Religious Tolerance:
The pre-Christian history of the fish symbol :

The fish symbol has been used for millennia worldwide as a religious symbol associated with the Pagan
Great Mother Goddess. It is the outline of her vulva. The fish symbol was often drawn by overlapping two
very thin crescent moons. One represented the crescent shortly before the new moon; the other shortly
after, when the moon is just visible. The Moon is the heavenly body that has long been associated with the
Goddess, just as the sun is a symbol of the God.

The link between the Goddess and fish was found in various areas of the ancient world:
In China, Great Mother Kwan-yin often portrayed in the shape of a fish.

In India, the Goddess Kali was called the " fish-eyed one"

In Egypt, Isis was called the Great Fish of the Abyss

In Greece the Greek word " delphos" meant both fish and womb. The word is derived from the
location of the ancient Oracle at Delphi who worshipped the original fish goddess, Themis. The later fish
Goddess, Aphrodite Salacia, was worshipped by her followers on her sacred day, Friday. They ate fish and
engaging in orgies. From her name comes the English word " salacious" which means lustful or obscene.
Also from her name comes the name of our fourth month, April. In later centuries, the Christian church
adsorbed this tradition by requiring the faithful to eat fish on Friday - a tradition that was only recently
abandoned.

In ancient Rome Friday is called " dies veneris" or Day of Venus, the Pagan Goddess of Love.

Throughout the Mediterranean, mystery religions used fish, wine and bread for their sacramental
meal.

bullet In Scandinavia, the Great Goddess was named Freya; fish were eaten in her honor. The 6th day of
the week was named " Friday" after her.

In the Middle East, the Great Goddess of Ephesus was portrayed as a woman with a fish amulet
over her genitals.

The fish symbol :

" ... was so revered throughout the Roman empire that Christian authorities insisted on taking it over,
with extensive revision of myths to deny its earlier female-genital meanings...Sometimes the Christ child
was portrayed inside the vesica, which was superimposed on Mary's belly and obviously represented her
womb, just as in the ancient symbolism of the Goddess. " 4 Another author writes: " The fish headdress of
the priests of Ea [a Sumero-Semitic God] later became the miter of the Christian bishops. " 5

The symbol itself, the eating of fish on Friday and the association of the symbol with deity were all taken
over by the early Church from Pagan sources. Only the sexual component was del eted.

References

1. D. T. Kauffman, Ed., " Baker's Concise Dictionary of Religion " , Baker Book House, Grand Rapids MI,
(1985), Page 13.
2. J. C. Cooper, " An I llustrated Encyclopaedi a of Traditional Symbols " , Thames & Hudson, London, UK,
(1979), Page 68-69.
3. I nformation about the fish wars can be seen at:
1. The Fish Warshttp://www.expocity.com/.
2. See also http://www.meangene.com/
3. Evolution Observed at: http://www. rof.com/
4. Ring of Fi re catalog at: http://www. rof.com/
4. B. G. Wal ker, " The Woman's Encyclopaedia of Myths and Secrets " , Harper & Row, San F rancisco CA
(1983), Page 313-314
5. J. C. Cooper, op cit, Page 15.
6. B. G. Wal ker, " The Woman's dictionary of Symbols and Sacred Obj ects " , Harper Collins, San F rancisco
(1988)
7. B. G. Wal ker, " The Woman's Encyclopaedi a " op cit, Page 188-190
8. " Jehovah's Witnesses: What do We Believe: Did Jesus Die on a Cross? " is at:
http://www.happinessi nthepar k.com/
9. The Encyclopaeia Britannica, 11th Edition, Vol. VI I, Page. 506
10. J. C. Cooper, op cit, Page 45-47.
11. B. M. Metzger, M. D. Coogan, " The Oxford Companion to the Bible, " Oxford Uni versity Press, (1993), Page
57
12. Tertullian, " De Corona, (or The Chaplet), " at: http://www.csn.net/advent/fathers/0304.htm
13. " Experts Concerned About Backward Jesus Fishes, "
I nternet T rash.com at: http://internettrash.com/
14. Graydon F. Snyder, " Ante Pacem: Archaeological Evi dence of
Church Life Before Constanti ne, " Mercer University Press, (2003),
Page 27. Read reviews or order this book safely from Amazon.com
onli ne book ...
15. F rom the web site of the Evangelical Luterhan Conference &
Ministerium at: http://www.elcm.org/
16. Gregory B. Dill, " The History of the Ichthus, " at: Plymouth
Church of Christ, at: http://www.plymouth-church.com/
17. JCSM's Top 1000 Christian Sites - F ree Traffic Sharing
Service! We have been invited to exchange links with Jesus Christ
Saves Ministries (JCSM).
18. " Origin of the ' Christi an' Fish Symbol, " at:
http://www.albatrus.org/

Articles:
Pagan Origins of
Catholicism - The
Fish Hat (Mit re)
August 5, 2008 by A
Watchman
http://www.onlinechu
rch.com.au/pagan-
origins-of-
catholicism-the-fish-
hat-mit re-2

The Pope is Satan!

There are so many stories, symbols and symbolic meanings which can be utilized by a Satanist, but more
specifically by a Modern Pagan. Consider what the pope represents to non-Catholics, the devil himself!

www.catholicsupplyonline/pope.com


www.catholicsupplyonline/pope.com

Stick a statuette of a pope on your altar! Try that on for size! You create your own world, and complete
environment. The fear of blasphemy, resides in the hearts of the believers. Are you a believer? Do you
believe yourself that this would be seen as a disrespect to others? Why would you think this? Why are you
so concerned with respecting the godforms of other believers? Are you a slave to social morality?

So what the hell kind of Satanist are you again?

I am a Modern Philosophical Satanist. I use this label to differentiate between my own Satanism and what
has been coined as: Symbolic Satanism, Atheistic Satanism, LaVeyan Satanism, or Spiritual Satanism.

While my beliefs rely heavily on symbolism, the pre-conceived notions of Symbolic Satanism do not
appeal to me, nor do the monikers Atheistic Satanist, LaVeyan Satanist or Spiritual Satanist. While I have
read the works of Anton Szandor LaVey, as well as other Satanic philosophies, I do not consider this my
Satanism. I admire LaVey for his candor, and theatrics. I believe many completely miss the point of his
Modern Satanism. I often find myself wondering if others are reading the same texts I am. I have read
every book, published article, rant, rave, and joke published by the author. The Modern Satanism of LaVey
is a philosophy, that philosophy is based on his personal observations of the human condition. It relies on
the symbolism of what Satan represents to the masses, and by proxy the Satanist using that symbolism. It
is full of satire, parody, theatrics, and praxis of philosophies from various sources. LaVey writes in volume
to convey his thoughts regarding the behaviors he finds at times detestable but more comedic than
anything. He states clearly: Do not follow me, find your own way! And yet? Hundreds, if not thousands
quote his word as gospel. The focal text The Satanic Bible, was titled in such a way to parody the idea of
the gospel of men. When I obtained my own Red Card from The Church of Satan, it was my metaphoric
toast to his truthful observation, and finding my own way. Modern Satanists are often the worst offenders.
The Church of Satan, is nothing more than a symbolic admiration group. I have a simple registered
membership, and no desire to be active within a silly house of cards. The house itself is built on hearty
laughter and tears of disappointment but used today as a foundation for climbing corporate ladders in the
name of successful living and affiliation. For as much as Mr. LaVey wrote and spoke on the subject, I see
fields of black sheep, and a sheep is still a sheep.

I am a Strong-Agnostic, which is just a form of Soft-Atheism. I will often use Atheist to quickly answer
questions, but I understand that Atheism implies a lot about the way I think. I'm often told: You believe in
nothing! Which always makes me laugh, for it is far from the truth. I believe in a lot of things. I may
conceptualize them differently than most, is all. It would serve you well to include a study of Atheism and
Agnosticism (Implicit and Explicit), in your own quest for knowledge and truth.

I do not believe in the super-natural or para-normal, I find these terms to be oxy-morons. The term super-
natural implies that something exceeds nature. If I experience something I can not explain it does not mean
it exceeds nature. If I can experience it and I am part of nature, then it too must be part of nature. Para-
normal implies that something exceeds the 'norm' or perhaps exists in the field of para-psychology.
Science is making break-throughs all the time, and in the absence of empiricism I draw conclusions about
things based on my own observations. When I can not conclude, I am perfectly content with I don't know.
Perhaps some day I will know, but today there may not be enough data or evidence to draw a conclusion
about something I've experienced. I challenge my own experiences, because the human brain is a
fascinating working conundrum. It can produce hallucinations and can not always be relied upon. I
acknowledge that in the sea of what can be known, I know very little. I have my passions, and consider
myself knowledgeable in many topics but I aspire towards the knowledge of so much more by the time my
life comes to a close. I also do not rely or defer to experts often, referenced yes but relied upon? No, even
expert knowledge will be brought to my examination table to be dissected. To include, my own earlier
conclusions.

I am a natural skeptic, this does not mean I'm a cynic. I prefer skeptical inquiry for obtaining knowledge.
By trying to disprove a thing you may actually prove a thing. I've never been the type to take things at face
value, or a person's word. I'm also an Occultist, therefore I rely much on my own personal gnosis. I am
aesthetically driven, and create total environments through my occult devices. I strongly believe that
philosophy is crucial to scientific hypothesis and theory. Satan, is very much a part of my aesthetic, and
total environment.

Satan, is an idea...an ideal. I have no desire to change its image. Satan, needs no advocate. It will mean
what it will mean to the individual. Satan was built on ancient symbolism and has evolved into a modern
device for the human race. Satan is a technology. Even those who have no belief in Satan, are at the very
least, familiar with this symbol and what connotations it carries which rest heavy on the minds of man kind.
I use Satan, it does not use me. I have no desire to change the image of Satan because that symbolism is
the foundation for how it will be used. Satan has journeyed through time and space and has evolved along
with mankind which created it. All of the character archetypes serve me. I can channel its attributes, and
the god-form takes shape. We build the gods, they do not build us. I live as that god, reigning over my
own existence. It is my life, and I wish to be sovereign from the imposed social morality of others.

I understand my role in this society, I envision changes for it and wish to remain active in seeing those
changes manifest. The changes others would like to see, are not the same changes I desire. We can never
truly have what we want and live in the utopias built in our own minds because we all want very different
things. Your desires invade my paradise, and mine bring hell to the gates of yours. We are not a peaceful
species, but we can find creative ways to live in peace in spite of our warring nature. Religiosity is a very
human trait, and it is created in many mediums and expressed through many outlets.

The face of the Atheist (especially the hard Atheist) is seen as un-religious. This is the furthest thing from
the truth. There are Religious Atheists, and Atheists are religious about many things. The term religion, is
often only understood to mean adhering to an organized religion. Some will use the term spiritual to
substitute for religious. Being religious can be simplified to mean faithful devotion, to an idea or an ideal.
This leads me to faith, when people think of faith they often place it in the context of blind following.
Many faithful devotees do follow a pre-existing idea blindly, in that that idea is never challenged. This is
often attributed to ideas developed in early childhood. Not all forms of faith are blind following. Faith,
can mean unwavering loyalty and often times trust. As children our gods are our parents. We believe
them, and believe in them with unwavering loyalty. Why would they lie to us? Why shouldn't we trust
them? Children have faith that their parents are all-knowing and all-powerful. As you grow and mature,
you realize that your parents are fallible human beings, which are often not reliable. You discover they
have lied to you, and you begin to lose faith. Your devotion waivers, and these symbols of godhood are
reduced to at the very least Daemons (representatives), and sometimes even represent the embodiment of
evil in your life. Your parents have fallen from grace, and become devils for you to use as scapegoats.
Satan, is a viable scapegoat to be used by all.

What it means to be spiritual means very different things to people, to me it represents the emotional state
resulting from stimuli. The sense of awe and wonderment we can experience in the right environment. I
am inspired by many things, and many of those things others may not understand. In fact, my inspirations
often horrify others. I don't require that others understand why that is, but I will offer explanations if
requested by the genuinely interested - the seekers of their own truth. I do not long for, or require
acceptance. I exist in spite of your personal views of my life, for if you accepted me fully I would question
your motivations and your mentality would be critically examined.

All things exist within the mind as concepts. I strive towards the abolition of duality, us vs. them in my
own mind. I can see the commonalties present in the human condition, but expressed through different
ideologies. This is among the reasons I study all world religion (and beliefs) to include the newly invented
(and new ones are invented all the time, even as I write). I think, that others - like myself, also identify this
and can see the trend of my ideas. Others more stunted, see this as those people agreeing with me are being
converted to Satanism, or that they are jumping in a SIN band-wagon. I see this at times, yes, but I also see
that my ideas resonate with those who also seek to destroy the trading off, of one ideology for another, but
expressing the SAME thing.

I learned the errs of my earlier thinking in my youth, through self focus. I can learn about myself, and the
way I think, through the thoughts and beliefs of others. If I'm over critical at times, it is because I feel it's
necessary to shock the system out of a stunted mind-set. If ideas challenge others too much, you can see
this displayed in an emotional reaction. The walls are breaking down, but people are desperate to fill the
cracks with mortar so that they can go on living as they always have, all the while wondering why 'others'
are creating discourse among our species. My focus is myself, but I am not naive to think that while I'm
self-examining that my thoughts are not a beacon. Good or evil? Highly subjective for what is good for
one is an evil to another - hence there is no good and evil but what invades our personal utopia. I am my
own serpent in my Garden of Eden, and often the serpent in yours.

We live in modern societies where a small group of individuals represent larger groups. The axiom the
majority rules rings true, in that how we are able to live, is regulated by the majority in control. With all its
sociopolitical agendas which carry baggage in tow. Satan often represents that force which opposes the
attempts to shape my way of living to meet the expectations of the moral majority. I find the attempt
immoral.

My Satanism contains many levels of philosophy and ideologies. You can not obtain it from a singular
source. I pirate from everything I can get my hands on to act as a catalyst for shaping my own ideas. I
wish to be inspired, challenged and stimulated. I can not simply parrot ideas of others, as my own.
However I will utilize common ideas to communicate and express my own. My Satanism is best
expressed through living it.

In conclusion, these are my thoughts on the subject of Satan as a pagan symbol and why I consider myself
to be both a Satanist and a pagan. It is extremely difficult for me to summate my life study into a short
essay, and here I am at nearly 90 pages! I'm sure this paper only leads you to more questions. Good! No
one ever received answers, without asking questions. Seek them out. Do not follow me, do not quote my
word as gospel. If I have inspired you, provoked you, or given you affirmation let that seed be planted but
you should feed it to grow.

SIN JONES
www.the-poison-apple.com
December 2010

Additional Relevant Resources:
Genius, is never revealing all of your sources.

The Fourth Way, Ouspensky
Works of Frederick Nietzsche
Works of Anton Szandor LaVey
The Lucifer Principle by Howard Bloom
Coyote Satan Amerika, Steven Johnson Leyba
The Book of the Law, Aleister Crowley
Nemo on Satanism, A Piece of the Action
Complete works of Plato
Works of Mark Twain
Androphilia by Jack Malebranche
The Birth of Satan: Tracing the Devil's biblical roots by TJ Wray, Greg Mobley
Left and Right of Center by John and Lillee Allee

Satan A Pagan Symbol

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Satan A Pagan Symbol

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Satan Origins Symbols

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi