I loathe self-imposed labels as much as I loathe religion as tool of self-development. Religion as a theosophy is religion as a control mechanism. That's an opinion, not a semantic argument. I'm not trying to bash theosophy.
I also hate semantic arguments when it comes to interpreting religion. It's like dissecting a puzzle piece before placing it in the full picture. It ruins the interpretation after it's been dissected, and the piece (interpretation) no longer fits the bigger picture (worldview). Think of circular logic as being a carousel, it goes around and around with the facts, and waves to you at every turn with the same answer.
Language and communication is enriched by the study of allegory and metaphor. In religion, it helps to ascribe the traditional and mythological interpretations of divinity, the nature of man and woman, the meaning of life, and so on and so forth. Hardcore philosophy, especially when critically debating religion, depends on the potency of wisdom and tangible, measurable experiences to ascribe powerful metaphors and potent allegory to language.
I have a long standing debate about the archetypes of Lucifer and Satan. It's not a semantic debate, it's an allegorical one. Essentially, I take the stance that Satan is symbolic of human nature and knowledge. You can understand the allegory of Satan if you understand the principle of separation between what is interpreted as good and evil. The concept of Lucifer is a religious archetype, so it depends on the subjugation of myth in order to understand the symbolism. Here's a metaphor for what I'm trying to convey:
Lucifer is like a gun in a display case, full of pomp and circumstance, never fired, locked up and unloaded only to be admired and worshiped by the fetishist. (those who can't, teach)
Satan is like a gun with multiple bodies on it (kills), proven to fire, always used as a tool, always loaded, and never used to place the self secondary. (those who can, DO)
What do you make of that metaphor? Do you have any interpretations of the dynamic between Lucifer and Satan?
Discussion welcomed.
Sign In
Potency In Allegory and Metaphor | Forum
Member
Kenneth
Aug 8 '14
Being more specific, I would classify Lucifer as a sniper rifle and Satan as an 18th century musket. The sniper rifle is considered powerful, but in most situations, its power is excessive, and its use is impractical. By comparison, the 18th century musket is more versatile. While not as powerful or accurate as the sniper rifle, in the right hands, it is just as lethal. If it is handled incorrectly, it can blow up in your face.
Member sonofject
Aug 8 '14
I see your metaphor in relation to mine, Jedi_Jane. Lucifer is the bearer of knowledge but not action (teacher). The biker is the bearer of human will to power (doer). But there's no principle of separation there when you conclude they are the same person. Nothing wrong with that though, it was an interesting analogy.
Member sonofject
Aug 8 '14
"They are the 'same thing' expressed differently." Yeah I get that.
Or in other words, Satan and Lucifer aren't mutually exclusive, rather part of the same spectrum just different interpretations of similar dichotomy.
Or in other words, Satan and Lucifer aren't mutually exclusive, rather part of the same spectrum just different interpretations of similar dichotomy.
Shawn
Aug 9 '14
@sonofject
About your
"Those who can't, teach.
Those who can, do."
In a community of practice, everyone is involved in the same 'doing', which is usually some kind of skill. There are, however, 'teachers' who make it a point to answer questions, write tutorials and generally help out the noob. This in itself is a skill that has to be learned and developed.
But I'm not sure that's what you mean. Personally I loathe both elitists who think they're the shit (only there for ego reasons) and academics think they're so smart because they prescribe to some 'authoritative' way of doing things (again, only there for ego reasons based on the 'right way')
Is that what you're getting at?
I'm curious to know what you think about my personal approach. Continuing from your gun metaphor..
I'm a guy who fires guns. A lot of guns. Sometimes I rarely go beyond that, my interest is usually to see if the gun fires and if it does learn what the way that specific gun fires can tell me about ballistics in general.
I could rob a bank, but I'm more interested in ballistics therefore creating better guns and bullets. (Well, OK, I admit I used to rob banks, but only until I got the hang of it and so I'd know who to design better guns. It was for science!) ;)
The Forum post is edited by Shawn Aug 9 '14
Member sonofject
Aug 9 '14
@ Shawn
Is that what you're getting at?
--Yes, in a way. Like you I hate elitist crap in the realm of learning. A bad teacher can discover a 'right way', then that way becomes doctrine, then the doctrine becomes infallible, then becomes 'law' (authoritative). Left unchallenged, there's no way to step out of the box and be a proactive learner.
Your personal approach is another interesting analogy. I used firearms as an example of something like untapped potential. Calibers and ballistics are functions of guns, common features, etc. Robbing a bank with a gun is like tapping into the potential the gun has to DO the robbery, rather than just field testing it in a firing range or what-have-you.
I used the metaphor to make a distinction about the 'qualities' or 'attributes' of the gun vis a vis the interpretations of Satan vs Lucifer. I'm quite sure we're on the same wavelength, though. :)
Is that what you're getting at?
--Yes, in a way. Like you I hate elitist crap in the realm of learning. A bad teacher can discover a 'right way', then that way becomes doctrine, then the doctrine becomes infallible, then becomes 'law' (authoritative). Left unchallenged, there's no way to step out of the box and be a proactive learner.
Your personal approach is another interesting analogy. I used firearms as an example of something like untapped potential. Calibers and ballistics are functions of guns, common features, etc. Robbing a bank with a gun is like tapping into the potential the gun has to DO the robbery, rather than just field testing it in a firing range or what-have-you.
I used the metaphor to make a distinction about the 'qualities' or 'attributes' of the gun vis a vis the interpretations of Satan vs Lucifer. I'm quite sure we're on the same wavelength, though. :)
Member Berardo Rodriguez
Nov 27 '14
"Satan and Lucifer, the same monkey with a different tail ,
Lucifer and Satan, the same actor with a different mask" this was a song the witches of my town used to sing to me when I was a little boy. After the years have passed by, I realized that Satan and Lucifer is the same figure or symbol or banner, it depends on what we want to achieve with it. It is the same water in the form of liquid, gas or solid, it's the same apple tree in winter, spring, summer and fall. It's the same symbol with any archetype. It's the same butterfly in different stages. I always saw Lucifer as the weaker manifestations of the human being , I see it as a coward, the slave and fallen angel, but it has knowledge to deceive itself by thinking that it's the most intelligent of all that exist. On the other hand, I see the same human being as Satan building its own kingdom, it's not a coward any longer, but it breaks the chains and fight for its freedom, it's not a weakling anymore, but a strong , it's not a fallen angel , but a God with myriads of demons under its command. To me ,Satan and Lucifer is the same , all depends on what I want to do with it or what type of situation I'm in. I prefer being in the stage or situation of a "Satan" rather than in the stage of "Lucifer ". EXPLOSIVE AND NOT PASSIVE.
