A message from Anonymous


As an agnostic luciferian, how do you deal with disbelief and deity silence? I find myself being jealous of other luciferians who claim to have personal experiences with lucifer, and I can't seem to move forward because of this.

I’m going to be completely honest here: the issue of deity silence was only a significant problem for me when I still considered myself pagan.

I found that there was an overwhelming pressure within the community to seek those experiences of gods tapping you on the shoulder or whispering in your ear, and that mindset really caused me to focus on the ‘divine’ aspects of luciferianism while ignoring the more human aspects. And I think this was what I needed at the time—after all, I came to luciferianism so cynical about divine, as someone that wanted nothing to do with it. The immersion in a community that actively welcomed and sought out divine experiences helped spur the first of many paradigm shifts that would occur in my faith, and did inspire me to grow spiritually.

But after a while, I felt stuck. Like you, I couldn’t seem to move forward. I felt like I was hearing the same conversations over and over again, most of which were not challenging my faith or the way I thought—I felt comfortable, maybe even overconfident, in my theism and in my god. Looking back, I think I hit a point where I felt as though my faith was only ever validated and motivated forward by the next ‘experience’ I had with the divine, the next ‘sign’ from my god that this was real. I’d come to rely on the divine more than myself, something I had told myself I’d never do, and had grown lazy waiting for divine inspiration while not taking the initiative to find it myself.

So when I broke away from the pagan community, it was kind of like starting over, since I was approaching luciferianism through a completely different mindset. The divine was no longer my only priority in my faith, Lucifer as an entity suddenly didn’t matter so much—instead, humanity bloomed into focus. ‘Divine experiences’ weren’t a necessity anymore, and deity silence didn’t scare me as much. Before, deity silence meant that perhaps Lucifer wasn’t a real entity, and that perhaps I was wasting my time for nothing. It increased my disbelief not only in my god, but in the values I thought I was fighting for. Afterwards, deity silence meant nothing—it could make me disbelieve in Lucifer as an entity, yes, but not in Lucifer as a force and ideology embedded within humanity itself.

I can’t disbelieve when I see people flourish despite adversity, inspire hope when all seems lost, and stare injustice in the eye with the promise that they will go down fighting if they must. So maybe I don’t always believe in my god as an actual god—it now seems rather insignificant that I cling to a literal divine form for him when he can be seen in so many other manifestations which, rather than being distinct and separate from humanity, are embodied in mankind’s very essence. 

So while I still honor him as a god, and while divine experiences and signs are not unwelcome, I don’t feel as though I need them to validate my practice or my faith anymore, and I don’t need to look towards the divine when I can also look to humanity for inspiration.

"You called me, you cried out, you shattered my deafness: you flashed, you shone, you scattered my blindness: you breathed perfume, and I drew in my breath and I pant for you: I tasted, and I am hungry and thirsty: you touched me and I burned for your peace."

St Augustine  (via awgusteen)

A message from xing-to-me


Hello! Is good to see someone who also worships Lucifer. I been worshipping him for about a year now and I come to realize he really likes Butterflies. I don't know if it was just my experience with him or if you can relate?

Hi there, I’m afraid I don’t really have any personal experiences that would support the butterfly thing.

But I just want to clear one thing up, because I’ve gotten quite a few new followers referring to my practice as ‘worship’ and it is making me rather uncomfortable.

I do not worship Lucifer. I respect, love, and honor him, and it is because of that deep-rooted respect for what he represents that I cannot claim to worship him, no matter how much I may long to. It is my personal belief that the complete submissive fealty towards him and the exalted glorification of his name suggested by the term ‘worship’ is not something he would want from me, and would in fact negate my work towards emulating his ideals. For more info on this, please see my post Of Worship and Submission, or Lack Thereof

So i’d highly appreciate it if my followers could not refer to my practice and devotion as ‘worship’—thank you in advance!

A message from Anonymous


Would you be prepared to make your devotional prayer beads for others?

Sorry, I’m afraid not. I’d be more than happy to help anyone interested in making their own, however.

A message from Anonymous


Hey, I was just wondering about a certain few Luciferian principles. There're things about how the Luciferian is "elite" to "inferior" people of Abrahamic faith & other more, er, arrogant things (I'm truly very sorry if that's insulting), & besides those few I agree with all the principles of Luciferianism. I'd be willing to follow the path, but I've never been one for exerting my status above others or seeing people immediately as "subhuman" because of one trait. Is this a bad thing for me?

I’m not sure where you heard of these as being luciferian principles, but speaking as a luciferian I can assure you this isn’t something I ascribe to or promote in any way. In fact, that particular mindset goes counter to what Lucifer stands for in certain mythos interpretations, where his rebellion was an active struggle against the injustice of a divine hierarchy. 

Choice and free will are not only applicable when they suit you—if someone is going to uphold these values as a defense to their right to reject YHWH, they must be equally willing to respect another’s choice to love and worship YHWH. Thinking they are somehow superior because of their faith is not respect.

So no, it is in no way ‘bad’ that you would refuse to put yourself on a pedestal and look down on people who have as much devotion to their faith as you, and have every right to follow their chosen god without being treated as inferior. Keep on keeping on, anon.

"If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also"

Matt 5:39

This specifically refers to a hand striking the side of a person’s face, tells quite a different story when placed in it’s proper historical context. In Jesus’s time, striking someone of a lower class ( a servant) with the back of the hand was used to assert authority and dominance. If the persecuted person “turned the other cheek,” the discipliner was faced with a dilemma. The left hand was used for unclean purposes, so a back-hand strike on the opposite cheek would not be performed. Another alternative would be a slap with the open hand as a challenge or to punch the person, but this was seen as a statement of equality. Thus, by turning the other cheek the persecuted was in effect putting an end to the behavior or if the slapping continued the person would lawfully be deemed equal and have to be released as a servant/slave.   

(via thefullnessofthefaith)

THAT makes a lot more sense, now, thank you. 

(via guardianrock)

I can attest to the original poster’s comments. A few years back I took an intensive seminar on faith-based progressive activism, and we spent an entire unit discussing how many of Jesus’ instructions and stories were performative protests designed to shed light on and ridicule the oppressions of that time period as a way to emphasize the absurdity of the social hierarchy and give people the will and motivation to make changes for a more free and equal society.

For example, the next verse (Matthew 5:40) states “And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well.” In that time period, men traditionally wore a shirt and a coat-like garment as their daily wear. To sue someone for their shirt was to put them in their place - suing was generally only performed to take care of outstanding debts, and to be sued for one’s shirt meant that the person was so destitute the only valuable thing they could repay with was their own clothing. However, many cultures at that time (including Hebrew peoples) had prohibitions bordering on taboo against public nudity, so for a sued man to surrender both his shirt and his coat was to turn the system on its head and symbolically state, in a very public forum, that “I have no money with which to repay this person, but they are so insistent on taking advantage of my poverty that I am leaving this hearing buck-ass naked. His greed is the cause of a shameful public spectacle.”

All of a sudden an action of power (suing someone for their shirt) becomes a powerful symbol of subversion and mockery, as the suing patron either accepts the coat (and therefore full responsibility as the cause of the other man’s shameful display) or desperately chases the protester around trying to return his clothes to him, making a fool of himself in front of his peers and the entire gathered community.

Additionally, the next verse (Matthew 5:41; “If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles.”) was a big middle finger to the Romans who had taken over Judea and were not seen as legitimate authority by the majority of the population there. Roman law stated that a centurion on the march could require a Jew (and possibly other civilians as well, although I don’t remember explicitly) to carry his pack at any time and for any reason for one mile along the road (and because of the importance of the Roman highway system in maintaining rule over the expansive empire, the roads tended to be very well ordered and marked), however hecould not require any service beyond the next mile marker. For a Jewish civilian to carry a centurion’s pack for an entire second mile was a way to subvert the authority of the occupying forces. If the civilian wouldn’t give the pack back at the end of the first mile, the centurion would either have to forcibly take it back or report the civilian to his commanding officer (both of which would result in discipline being taken against the soldier for breaking Roman law) or wait until the civilian volunteered to return the pack, giving the Judean native implicit power over the occupying Roman and completely subverting the power structure of the Empire. Can you imagine how demoralizing that must have been for the highly ordered Roman armies that patrolled the region?

Jesus was a pacifist, but his teachings were in no way passive. There’s a reason he was practically considered a terrorist by the reigning powers, and it wasn’t because he healed the sick and fed the hungry.

(via central-avenue)

luxettenebris I thought I might leave this here for you. 

(via sonsofthemorning)

A message from Anonymous


Can I ask about your Life Giver tag?

Do you mean why I tag my Eve posts ‘Life Giver’? 

To my understanding, in Hebrew, Eve’s name resembles the words ‘Living’ and ‘Life-giver’. While this is most likely due to the thought that she was the first female created, and thus responsible for birthing the next generation of humanity and giving rise to mankind as we know it, I see Life Giver as more of a reference to her choice in eating of the Tree of Knowledge.

Through this act, she subsequently brought death into the world, but in the introduction of death she also brought life—for our ‘existence’ is transformed into life, is valued and cherished, because it is brief and fleeting. We live our lives knowing that eventually death will come for all of us, which differentiates what we are doing and experiencing different from merely ‘existing’ without the fear that one day we too will fade, and thus not fully embracing what this existence has to offer.

"If the first woman God ever made was strong enough to turn the world upside down all alone, these together ought to be able to turn it back and get it right side up again."

Sojourner Truth (via blkcowrie)
art-is-art-is-art:

She Shall Be Called Woman, George Frederick Watts

art-is-art-is-art:

She Shall Be Called Woman, George Frederick Watts