So /his/, what are the characteristics and personality of Satan.

>>1450430
Go ask a Luciferian on /x/

>>1450432
I'm asking from an entirely historical perspective pertaining to documents and lore from old. I don't give a shit about the paranormal.

>>1450430
Since there is no original doctrine on "Satan" fully, you could see is as a seperation from God, ignorance to God, self indulgence, and eventually actions that lead to negative results.

In Sanskrit it would be "Adharma" and "Maya" or "Mara", and demonic forces that drive a person to meet their material ends without considering truth or enlightenment but rather gain over the expense of others.

>>1450430
The bible mentions virtually nothing about Satan. What you find about him pre-schism is mainly concentrated in the works of the early monastics. He is widely called in the east (in english) 'the Evil one'.

As per the church fathers and the early monastics, there are two ways one can go. The way of life, and the way of death. The devil consistently tries to bring the faithful over to his ill-fated camp (which has no chance in hell of winning). In essence? The devil is pretty much a deranged angel who fell from Heaven on account of pride.

He's a representation of our desire for independence and freedom in spite of it sometimes being against our best interest. I don't think that's what the original authors or holy men or whatever you want to call him intended him to be, probably more a literal character that rebelled against god which is baaaaad. But thanks to Paradise Lost among other works of fiction he's come to symbolize indignation in general.

Not much of his personality is revealed from the "canon" I guess you could call it, scripture. But we can assume he had an independent spirit and was more than a little proud, refusing to bend the knee.

>>1450448
Do you have some sources I could browse about the Indian version of Lucifer (Satan; I use the names interchangeably)? Great post btw, thanks.

>>1450453
The Bible (at least the new testament) refers to Satan directly when Jesus was in the wilderness. I'm aware that the old testament mainly talked about an 'adversary' to Yahweh, but the OT is shit besides psalms, proverbs, and maybe isaiah. I'm here for lore about him after Christianity arose, not so much for the Judaism's approach to evil. In the NT Satan was a real 'character', and I'm interested if there are works later on in the roman, medieval, or even more recent interpretations about the character.

>>1450430
research Samael
He is an angel of God
He is the angel of Death
He is the tempter and the accuser
and he is part of God's will

>>1450461
>refusing to bend the knee.
Would this be because The Church was a tool to unite peoples and needed to relate people who wanted independence from power to something that goes against God?

>>1450507
Those are some examples of things that are like "satan" but if you notice both Buddha and Yeshua are tempted, Gautama by Mara and Yeshua by Satan both promising them the world over enlightenment.

>>1450585
I can smell your fedora

>>1450599
An excellent rebuttal

>>1450599
Milton used the idea for the reason I suggested.

>>1450445
Luciferianism is an actual religion. Also stop using Satan and Lucifer interchangeably

>>1450593
You'd right in regards but the specifics are quite the opposite. Where as Adam/Eve are tempted by knowledge, buddha was tempted by ignorance. Adam/Eve were supposed to stay ignorant, Satan in this case wanted to liberate them. Mara in buddhas case wanted buddha to stay ignorant, but buddha was vying for wisdom.

So in some sense, if you switched Satan and Mara, buddha would consider Satan as a good person. Mara in similar fashion would be considered an angel by God.

File: blakecr.jpg (20KB, 316x457px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 316x457px

A fantasy peddled by an evil demiurge

>>1450642
It's a modern "religion" that is basically an edgy atheist's club. They specifically don't believe in a real devil, Anton LeVay was just fucking around.

Not really relevant to what OP is asking about.

>>1450430
read Paradise Lost

>>1450782
This basically comprises the main classical resource on Satan's character.

Where in the bible is it made clear that Satan is Lucifer?

Doesn't the Hebrew of Satan just mean adversary? Do we know that Satan is Lucifer?

>>1450769
If anything it is modern Gnosticism or at the very least trying to be. Calling it an edgy atheist's club is deceptive and even if true insulting

>>1450883
Lucifer comes from the Morning-Star, a designation given to a king in the OT. However, the king is described as a cherub and existed near the beginning of creation, so it's often taken to refer to a supernatural being /angel. Satan was the heavenly prosecutor, whose job it was to test the faith of humans. Contact with Zoroastrianism changed him to a more actively antagonistic force than a faithful servant with a bad job. In the NT, Satan is identified with the snake in Eden and generally the devil. This combined with the passage about the fall of Lucifer created the modern concept.

>>1450646
Actually, "The Serpent" in the Adam and EVE story did not tempta them with knowledge but the illusion of knowledge, because the Serpent rushed them into something God did not want to happen yet.

Adam and Eves fall from grace is the essence of original sin.

>>1450646
Buddha wouldn't consider Satan as a "good person" but would (most likely) also put it in the same category of Mara.

Adam and Eve were not enlightened with truth, but we're enlightened by their disobedience to truth.

>>1450981
What God says was metaphorically true, what Satan said was literally true.

>>1450993
That is Adharma

You have any quotes from scripture that back up what your point is? I respect your right to opinion but it seems you have the message very misunderstood

>>1450999
The serpent said that they would be as gods, knowing good from evil. They did in fact become like God, in that before eating the fruit they did not know good from evil, and afterwards they did gain said knowledge. God said they would surely die if they ate the fruit, but he referred to the spiritual death of the soul.

>>1451005
Even before they ate the fruit they were as gods, but they were rushed into something that was not yet ready.

We don't die spiritually, even before eating the "apple" but there is countless natures of reincarnation which is the death. They chose to live in samsara over enlightenment.

>>1451012
>were as gods
But not as gods in the sense of knowing good from evil, which is specifically what Satan promised, and specifically was delivered.

>We don't die spiritually
Spiritual death leading to a need for salvation is a pretty core item of faith.

>>1451021
https://www.ananda.org/clarity-magazine/2010/09/genesis-god-darwin-yogananda/

Satan / The Snake is the Kundalini energy that tempted Eve and Adam into procreation of animal instinct life over the Divine Mind of heaven and communion with God. The apple is red like the Muladhara chakra.

Because of procreation, there is reincarnation and samsara.

We were as "gods" before the apple.

No Spirit dies.

>>1451021
The "spirit" death you describe is "ego" death, and the "death" is only loss of attachment

>>1451005
>spiritual death of the soul after knowledge
>anatman
The similarities are the there.