SHOW LINKS

• • • • From A Dictionary of Angels: Including the Fallen Angels Davidson, Gustav Davidson, 1967: Abezi-Thibod, meaning “father devoid of counsel.” In early Jewish lore, Abezi-Thibod is another name for Samael, Mastema, and other chief devils. He is a powerful spirit who fought Moses in Egypt, hardened Pharaoh’s heart, and assisted Pharaoh’s magicians. He was drowned in the Red Sea. With Rahab, he shares the princedom over Egypt. In The Testament of Solomon, he is the son of Beelzeboul and the demon of the Red Sea: “descendant of the archangel,” he declares.
        • From Testament of Solomon, Anonymous, 1000 CE(??): And I outwitted these spirits and then I sealed them in with my ring.. And I, Solomon, questioned the spirit which came up from the depth of the Red Sea: “Who art thou, and what calls thee? And what is thy business? For I hear many things about thee.” And the demon answered: “I, O King Solomon, am called Abezithibod. I am a descendant of the archangel. Once as I sat in the first heaven, a fierce spirit and winged, plotting against every spirit under heaven. I was present when Moses went in before Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and I hardened his heart.. I am he who fought against Moses with wonders with signs.” I said therefore to him: “How wast thou found in the Red Sea?” And he answered: “In the exodus of the sons of Israel I hardened the heart of Pharaoh. And I excited his heart and that of his ministers. And I caused them to pursue after the children of Israel. And Pharaoh followed with (me) and all the Egyptians. Then I was present there, and we followed together. And we all came up upon the Red Sea. And it came to pass when the children of Israel had crossed over, the water returned and hid all the host of the Egyptians and all their might. And I remained in the sea, being kept under this pillar.” I, therefore, Solomon, having heard this, adjured the demons not to disobey me, but to remain supporting the pillar. And they both swore, saying: “We will not let go this pillar until the world’s end. But on whatever day this stone fall, then shall be the end of the world.”

• Ahriman: 

• From Encyclopedia Iranica: God’s adversary in the Zoroastrian religion seems to have been an original conception of Zoroaster. But the notion of Ahriman did not remain unchanged through the centuries: In the Gathas, Angra Mainyu, [the angry or destructive spirit] is the direct opposite of [the bounteous spirit] Spənta Mainyu; both spirits are essentially actors in the primeval choice, a great drama dominating the life of man and the destiny of the world. Later, Ahriman serves as the negative counterpart not of the other spirit but of [the creator] god Ormazd. The name Angra Mainyu appears only once in the Gathas, when the “most bounteous of the spirits” declares his absolute antithesis to the “evil one” in all things. These are the twin spirits who made the great choice [between good and evil at the beginning of the universe]. It can be deduced that there must have existed in Iranian belief, before Zoroaster, gods and demons, notably demons of death; there existed also tales, if not myths, of the birth of wonderful twins. Zoroaster propounded belief in one supreme god, yet wanted to explain the existence of evil (a fact of life) as a consequence of free choice. The myth of the Twin Spirits is a model he set for the choice every person is called upon to make.

• It cannot be doubted that both are sons of the creator god, since they are explicitly said to be twins. In the beginning, neither of them was wicked, so there is therefore nothing shocking in Angra Mainyu’s being a son of the true god, and there is no need to resort to the improbable solution that Zoroaster was speaking figuratively. (That Ormazd and Ahriman’s brotherhood was later considered a heresy is a different matter.) Although demons are said to to be the offspring not of Angra Mainyu but of another evil spirit, Akəm Manah (whose names means “evil thinking”). The abode of the wicked in the hereafter is said to be the abode of this same “worst thinking,” not of Angra Mainyu; one would have expected the latter to reign in hell, since he had created death. Ahriman is evil by choice: “It is not,” he says, “that I can not create anything good, but that I will not.” That there existed Ahriman worshippers is attested by Plutarch and in Dēnkard. The former says that Zoroaster taught the Persians to sacrifice“offerings for averting ill, they invoke Hades and darkness; then having mingled it with the blood of a slaughtered wolf, they bear it forth into a sunless place and cast it away.” Iranian influence, especially during and after the exile of the Jews in Babylonia, may very well have helped in bringing about the conception of Satan.  https://iranicaonline.org/articles/ahriman 

• Uzza:

• • • • • From A Dictionary of Angels: Including the Fallen Angels Davidson, Gustav Davidson, 1967: In their hurried exodus from Egypt, and in their encounter with Pharaoh’s horsemen at the Red Sea, the Hebrews were helped by “the angel of God, which went before … and behind them . . . ina pillar of fire and cloud”. Here the identity of the angel of God poses no problem: he was Michael or Metatron, guardian of Israel. However, Michael or Metatron did not fight alone: he had the aid of a swarm of “ministering angels who began hurling arrows, great hailstones, fire, and brimstone. On the enemy side, harrying the Hebrews, was the guardian angel of Egypt, once holy but now corrupt. It appears though that Egypt had more than one guardian angel—four in fact, and that they all showed up, armed to the teeth. Various sources identify them as Uzza, Rahab, Mastema, and Duma. The fate of Rahab we know: he was drowned, along with the Egyptian horsemen. Mastema and Duma went back to Hell, where they had unfinished business to attend to. As for Uzza, some authorities say he was actually Semyaza, grandfather of Og, a leader of the fallen angels, [the Watchers]; Semyaza may be summoned ttby the pronouncement of any of a string of variations on his name—Samiaza, Shemhazai, Amezyarak, Azael, Azaziel, or Uzza. In the Book of Jubilees and the Dead Sea Scrolls, where Mastema is the angel of adversity, it was Mastema who tried to kill Moses and who hardened Pharaoh’s heart, but according to the Midrash, Uzza did this. Also in the Midrash, God is reminded that “the angels Uzza and Azael came down from Heaven and were corrupted through cohabiting with the daughters of men. In legend, Uzza is tempted by the maiden Ishtahar to reveal to her the Explicit Name of God. It is said that he now hangs between heaven and earth, head down, and is the constellation Orion.

• Odin: 

• • • • • From The Witch, Ronald Hutton, 2016: There is, however, one very striking form in which a definite element of Norse paganism survived into the early modern period, and that was in ceremonial magic. Just as magic preserved the names of Egyptian deities as powerful spirits, so Scandinavian gods continued to be associated with magical workings, although as devils. It seemed that in the north the Christian tactic of demonizing the divinities of older religions had worked with particular effect: Those divinities certainly remained known throughout the Christian period; as demons, however, they, and especially their leader, Odin, retained a supposedly ‘real’ presence. A late fourteenth-century Norse rune stick invokes Odin as ‘greatest among devils.’ In 1484 a man tried for theft in Stockholm confessed to having “served Odin” for seven years. Nine years later another thief was executed for having dedicated himself in a cemetery to ‘the devil Odin” to get rich, and a text from the late 1530s stated that people who suddenly became mysteriously wealthy were suspected of having made a pact with Odin. Another Swedish case, from 1632, involved advice to find wealth by going to a crossroads at night to make exactly such a pact with Odin. A trial in 1693 said that he came to those who invited him with black servants, dogs and coach horses, the latter having flaming eyes.” From Iceland comes a seventeenth-century book of magic which contains a curse in the names of Lord God the Creator, Christ, Odinn, Thor, Frey, Freya, Satan, Beelzebub and spirits with unknown names: the powers of heaven and hell are thus indiscriminately enlisted. All this provides a spectacular example of how ancient gods could be fully assimilated into Christian mythology, though they do not seem to feature in the witch trials themselves.

• Lucifer: 

• • • • From KJV, Isaiah 14: “How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: 14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High. 15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit. 16 They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, and consider thee, saying, Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms; 17 That made the world as a wilderness, and destroyed the cities thereof; that opened not the house of his prisoners? 18 All the kings of the nations, even all of them, lie in glory, every one in his own house. 19 But thou art cast out of thy grave like an abominable branch, and as the raiment of those that are slain, thrust through with a sword, that go down to the stones of the pit; as a carcase trodden under feet.”

• From Against Marcion, Tertullian, 208 BCE: At any rate, if there is a God of this world, He blinds the heart of the unbelievers of this world, because they have not of their own accord recognised His Christ, who ought to be understood from His Scriptures. Content with my advantage, I can willingly refrain from noticing to any greater length this point of ambiguous punctuation, so as not to give my adversary any advantage, indeed, I might have wholly omitted the discussion. A simpler answer I shall find ready to hand in interpreting the god of this world of the devil, who once said, as the prophet describes him: I will be like the Most High; I will exalt my throne in the clouds. The whole superstition, indeed, of this world has got into his hands, so that he blinds effectually the hearts of unbelievers, and of none more than the apostate Marcion’s. Undoubtedly he who has raised up children of disobedience against the Creator Himself ever since he took possession of that  air of His; even as the prophet makes him say: I will set my throne above the stars;… I will go up above the clouds; I will be like the Most High. This must mean the devil, whom in another passage (since such will they there have the apostle’s meaning to be) we shall recognize in the appellation the god of this world. For he has filled the whole world with the lying pretence of his own divinity.

• From Commentary On Ezekiel, Origen, 238 CE…ish: Adam, you see, was in Paradise, but the serpent saw to it that he was cast out. The serpent is the Enemy who is opposed to the truth. He was not created that way from the beginning; just as Adam and Eve did not sin immediately after they were made, so also the serpent at one time was not a serpent—when he was abiding in the Paradise of delights. For the prophet says, “Lucifer, who used to rise early, has fallen from heaven; he has been dashed to pieces upon the ground.” Jesus says, “I saw Satan falling from heaven like lightning.” In what respect does it differ to speak of lightning and Lucifer “careening from heaven?” What is relevant in this context is the full agreement regarding the falling. Through the freedom of the will some have ascended to the heights of goodness, while others have plunged into the depths of wickedness. But you, O mortal, why do you not wish to be abandoned to your free will? Why can you scarcely bear to strive, to labor, to exert yourself, and by means of good works to become yourself the cause of your own salvation? Do you not wish righteousness, wisdom, and chastity to become your work? Do you not wish fortitude and the other virtues to be your work?

• Beelzebub: 

• From the KJV, 2 Kings 1: Ahaziah [King of Irsael] was sick, and he sent messengers, and said unto them, Go, inquire of Baalzebub the god of Ekron [city of the Philistines] whether I shall recover. But the angel of the lord said to Elijah [the prophet], Arise, go up to meet the messengers and say unto them, Is it not because there is not a god in Israel, that you go to enquire of Baalzebub?

•  From Matthew 12: Then was brought unto [Jesus] one possessed with a devil, blind, and dumb: and he healed him, and all the people were amazed. But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, This fellow casts out devils by Beelzebub the prince of the devils.” And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, “Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand:  And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand? And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your children cast them out?” 

• From the Jewish Encyclopedia, 1901: The name “Beelzebub,” written also “Beelzebul,” which occurs nowhere else in Jewish literature, is a variant form of “Baal Zebub,” the god of Eḳron, whose oracle King Ahaziah consulted during his illness, provoking thereby the wrath of God. Plagues being often ascribed to the influence of flies, the god who dispelled flies  probably retained his popularity long after he had ceased to be an object of worship. In fact, the fly was regarded by the Jews in particular as more or less impure and demonic. with reference to “the flies of death” in Ecclesiastes. The devil in German folk-lore also appears in the shape of a fly Geiger hinks that Baal Zebub, in his capacity as god of the hated Philistines, became the representative of the heathen power and consequently the arch-enemy Satan, the foe par excellence, and therefore the name “Baal Debaba” (“debaba” being the Aramaic form corresponding to Hebrew “Zebub”) acquired the meaning of “hostility,” the verb  with the sense of “hostile action” being derived from it. But neither this opinion nor a similar one expressed by Storr, and revived in Riehm  seems acceptable, as “Beel Debaba” is the ordinary Aramean word for “calumniator.”

• Mastema:

• From Jubilees: And they made for themselves molten images, and they worshipped each the idol, the molten image which they had made for themselves, and they began to make graven images and unclean simulacra, and malignant spirits assisted and seduced (them) into committing transgression and uncleanness, and the prince Mastéma exerted himself to do all this, and he sent forth other spirits, those which were put under his hand, to do all manner of wrong and sin, and all manner of trans- gression, to corrupt and destroy, and to shed blood upon the earth. And the prince of Mastéma sent ravens and birds to devour the seed which was sown in the land, in order to destroy the land, and rob the children of men of their labours. Before they could plough in the seed, the ravens picked (it) from the surface of the ground. And on the fourteenth day and on the fifteenth and on the sixteenth and on the seven- teenth and on the eighteenth the prince of the Mastéma was bound and imprisoned behind the children of Israel, that he might not accuse them.

• From Notes on Jubilees, RH Charles, 1902: Over against the angelic kingdom stands a demonic or satanic kingdom governed by “ the prince of the Mastéma,” where Mastema is in derivation and meaning the equivalent of Satan. His demons are the spirits which went forth from the bodies of the [giants], slain children of the Watchers and the daughters of  men. By means of these demons the prince of the satans is able to compass his evils, the seduction and destruction of men. Satan and Mastema represent all manner of disease. In Ethiopic texts the name is wrongly given as “Prince Mastema,” but “Prince of Mastema” is correct. Like the Chronicler, the author of Jubilees takes offence at the frequent mention of men being tempted or slain by god in Genesis and Exodus, so he represents the temptation of Abraham to offer Isaac as due to Mastéma ,and the attempt on Moses’s life as made by the same evil agent, instead of by god; likewise the hardening of the hearts of the Egyptians and the slaying of the first born he ascribes to Mastéma and his angels. 

• From Angels and Demons in the Book of Jubilees, Jacques Van Ruiten, University of Groningen, 2007: Mastema is possibly not a demon himself. He seems to be a bad angel. It is impossible, however, that he be one of the Watchers, since they are tied up in the depths of the earth by the good angels, awaiting their judgment. The context o implies that Mastema is identified with Satan. The demons do everything Mastema tells them, so that he is able to exercise the authority of his will among mankind; in Jubilees 49, for example, demons seem to assist Mastema in killing the firstborn of Egypt. When Noah’s sons complain about the attacks of the demons on their children, God grants Noah’s intercession by commanding the good angels to bind all demons. Mastema protests against this plan: “Lord, creator, leave some of them for me, because if none of them is left I shall not be able to exercise the authority of my will among mankind. For they are meant for the purpose of destruction and misleading, because the evil of mankind is great.” God grants Mastema’s protest, and leaves ten percent of the evil spirits; this implies that Mastema has a function in the divine order, and God seems to approve. 

• In the Bible, there is no demonology: In Genesis, one cannot read anything about evil spirits. Demons sees to be part of the wider influence of material originating from Enoch. Why did the author of Jubilees think it appropriate to incorporate the myth of the demons in his rewriting of Genesis? The evil spirits play a part in the rewritten narrative of the period between the flood and the story of Abraham. The shedding and consumption of blood is an important characteristic of the demons in Jubilees, just as the shedding and eating of blood is an important theme in Genesis. Moreover, in this period, the earth is repopulated after the flood and divided among the three sons of Noah. Different family lines emerge in different nations, and tensions between the different nations announce themselves, for example, the curse of Canaan. Jubilees seems to take up several elements of Genesis and relate them to the demons, and the development of the nations is under the demons’ control. The incorporation of the demons shows that the author of Jubilees brought the passages on the division of the earth and the separation of the nations from the chosen people into association with other biblical passages,

• Asmodeus

• • • • From the Book of Tobit: It came to pass the same day that Sara was also reproached by her father’s maids, because that she had been married to seven husbands, whom Asmodeus the evil spirit had killed before they had lain with her. Dost thou not know, said they, that thou hast strangled thine husbands? thou hast had already seven husbands, neither wast thou named after any of them. Let us never see of thee either son or daughter. When she heard these things she was very sorrowful, so that she thought to have strangled herself; and she said, I am the only daughter of my father, and if I do this, it shall be a reproach unto him, and I shall bring his old age with sorrow unto the grave. Then she prayed toward the window, and the prayers were heard before the majesty of the great god, and the angel Raphael was sent to give Sara to Tobias the son of Tobit and to bind Asmodeus, because she belonged to Tobias.

• From THE FIGURE OF THE DEMON IN THE BOOK OF TOBIT, Ida Fröhlich Pázmány Péter Catholic University, 2016: Tobiah is familiar with Sarah’s story, “that she has already been given in marriage seven times, and each man has died in the bridal chamber” being killed by a demon. Also he knows the demon does not harm Sarah “because he loves her.”. Raphael repeats emphatically that Tobiah should not be afraid, “for Sarah was destined for him before the world existed, and it is Tobiah who will rescue her, and Asmodeus fled to Egypt, a land distant from Media. Nothing is told here about the demon’s nature, his origin, and habitat, and there is no information about his relation to Sarah. Some sources report that the demon gets divorced from his victim by the angel Raphael. In virtue of the remark “because he loves her,” Ego thinks that both concepts are linked to the idea that Asmodeus is in love with Sarah; she labels the demon Asmodeus as an incubus, a demon who desires sexual relationship with his victim, while Sarah represents the type of the killer-wife who means a danger for her husband. Any sexual contact with such a wife can prove deadly. Worse still: a killer wife is viewed as being directly responsible for the death of her husbands . The killer wife is an international folk motif, known also as the narrative motif in catalogues of international folklore as “The Monster in the Bridal Chamber”. However, the enigmatic comment “because he loves her: does not necessarily refer to sexual desire between the demon and the girl: The Greek verb means “to like, be fond of, cherish” and  has a multiple meaning, including (1) human love for human object (including sexual relation), (2) appetite for food, drink for object, food, etc., and (3) love for God. Group two includes a very special meaning “to be mindful of, to attend to, to care about”.

• Belial:

• • • From Jewish Encyclopedia, 1906: Belial is a term occurring often in the Old Testament and applied, as would seem from the context to anyone opposing the established authority. The Talmud regards it as a compound word, made up of “beli” and “‘ol” (without a yoke). Gesenius finds the derivation in “beli” and “yo’il” (without advantage; i.e., worthless). Ibn Ezra contents himself with the remark that “Belial” is a noun, and quotes the opinion of someone else that it is a verb with a precative force, “May he have no rising.” Cheyne (“Expository Times,” 1897, pp. 423 et seq.) seeks to identify Belial with the Babylonian goddess Belili; Hebrew writers, according to this view, took up “Belili” and scornfully converted it into “Belial” in order to suggest “worthlessness.” Hommel agrees with the equation Belial = Belili, but argues that the Babylonians borrowed from the western Semites and not vice versa. In the apocalyptic literature where all angelologic and demonologic lore was faithfully preserved, Belial held a very prominent position, being identified altogether with Satan. The uncircumcised heathen are “the sons of Belial,” and in the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, Belial is the archfiend from whom emanate the seven spirits of seduction that enter man at his birth . He will, like Azazel in Enoch, be opposed and bound by the Messiah. In the Ascension, Belial is identified with Samael and called “the angel of lawlessness”—”the ruler of this world, whose name is Matanbuchus.” In Sibyllines, which partly is of Christian origin, Belial descends from heaven as Antichrist and appears as Nero, and Belial is the seducer who, as the pseudo Messiah, will appear among the Samaritans, leading many into error by his miraculous powers, .
    • From SOME PHILOLOGICAL NOTES ON THE SONS OF BELIAL, ANDRÉS PIQUER OTERO, University of Madrid, 2011: Though the meaning of the word seems more or less clear as an attribute which reflects impiety or some other sort of generic negative quality, an exact explanation and etymology have baffled experts and given rise to a considerable speculation. “Belial” appears 27 times in the Hebrew Bible. All in all, the word, either singly or in the nominal construction detailed above, defines a negative concept or quality, though its interpretation —and hence its translation, both in ancient versions and in modern works— may differ. A small but remarkable number of cases  chooses to render the word as oppression or oppressor, but the general definition “badness” is often given. “Death” would be, at first sight, closer to the Hebrew term. The tendency to personification is well attested in the Dead Sea Scrolls, where Belial is clearly presented as a personal negative entity in a large number of instances, leader of the forces of darkness agains the Sons of Light. There are also references to the evil spirits of Belial, which are the source of humans’ sinful actions. These ideas are remarkable given the continuity they establish with the Greek Pseudoepigrapha, especially the relationship between Belial and his spirits and the evil or sinful disposition among humans. There is a continuity between some of the Dead Sea Scrolls referencing “the traps of Belial.” It is then between two main lines of interpretation, either a common noun which creates a negative attribution or a supernatural being associated with evil and hence negative behavior, that one has to attempt the placement of a translation. 

• • • Sammael: 
      • From THE DEVIL IN LEGEND AND LITERATURE ALLEN H. GODBEY, 1931: In the case of Sammael, Rudwin contents himself with a bare reference to a very late Jewish tangling of Sammael with Lilith, and his being chief of the fallen angels, and never replaced by Satan. An Assyriologist must come to the rescue, incidentally asking why he writes Samael instead of Sammael. Sammael is well known in cuneiform lore, thousands of years before late Judaism has made of the facts. Sammael is Sammu-ilu, “divine plant”: wormwood. Exhilarating in small quantities, its deadly absynthian powers made it an ordeal-plant where evidence was insufficient. Old Babylonian reliefs show an accused person led before a god or chief priest who holds out the deadly cup—Here the Samniu-ilu is resorted to by the accuser or prosecutor: “the satan.” The rabbinical lore that makes Sammael an angel of Death, an angel of the Lord, killing with a drop of wormwood when the man’s time is come, is fundamentally correct. 
      • From Lilith and Eve, Wives of Adam, Marlene E Mondriaan, Old Testament Essays, 2005: Rabbinic legend refers to the longhaired, winged Lilith as queen of the demons. She was one of Sammael’s 18 wives, and from this communion the demons came. These were responsible for illnesses and any ailment that caused suffering. With her wild and passionate nature, Lilith decided to abandon Sammael and join Adam, who insisted that she obey him. Lilith refused. Certain aspects of this legend correspond with that recorded in the Alphabet of Ben Sira. Lilith was generally regarded as grandmother of the devil or the devil herself, as well as progenitor of witches and witchcraft. Talmudic tradition denotes Lilith as daughter of Ahriman. Sammael or Satan was a created being, the personification of evil, created to test man’s moral strength. He was the supreme ruler of demons, evil spirits and fallen angels. Lilith, Sammael and Satan are the most important demons. Ashmodai, also associated with Sammael, and at times with the serpent of the Garden of Eden, commanded Lilith. As consort of Satan and mother of the demons, Lilith was regarded as a symbol of sensuality and sexual seduction.

• Mephistopheles

• From Faust: A Commentary, Denton Snider, 1886: Much discussion has been spent itself over the derivation of the word Mephistopheles, which seems a corrupted Greek compound. The Greek particle of negation (Me) and the Greek word for love (Philos) seem to be suggested by the first and last terms, but the middle term is more doubtful. Three meanings may here be noticed: 1) Not loving light? 2) Not loving Faust, or Phosto, the old form of the name being “Me-Phosto-Pheles”, and 3) Allied to “Mephitic” the term which designates poisonouv vapors arising from the earth in certain places–pools, caverns, springs–destructive of human life.

GET IN TOUCH WITH BLACK MASS APPEAL

• Facebook
• Twitter
• Instagram
• Patreon
• Tabitha Slander’s Instagram
• Discord server

SATANIC BAY AREA

• • Website
  • Facebook
  • Twitter (as @SatanicSF)
  • Instagram
  • Sign up for Satanic Bay Area’s newsletter
  • On TikTok as DailyBaphirmations

The post Episode 189 – Names of the Devil III appeared first on Black Mass Appeal.

SHOW LINKS

• From Genesis 2-3, King James Version: And out of the ground made the Lord God to grow every tree; the tree of life and the tree of knowledge of good and evil. And the Lord God commanded, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. tNow the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? And the woman said, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband, and he did eat. And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons. And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid. And the LORD God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou? And he said, The woman whom thou gavest me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat. And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat. And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life. Unto the woman he said, in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children, and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee. Unto Adam he said, In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return. And the Lord God said, man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life and live forever. So he drove out the man, and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.

• The Bible and the ancient Near East, Gordon & rendsburg, revised 1998 Ed: Man is intelligent because he ate magic fruit from the Tree of Knowledge, gaining knowledge that up to that time had been a monopoly of divinity. It is interesting to note that the knowledge imparted by the fruit of this tree is the “knowledge of good and evil,” a much misunderstood phrase. The antonyms “good and evil” represent “everything.” The same expression in inverted order occurs in Egyptian, where “evil-good” means everything, and from Greek literature we may cite the words of Telemachus, “I know all things, the good and the evil”. The only reason that readers of the Bible have failed to grasp the proper understanding of “the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil” is that the traditional interpretation is so deeply entrenched. Thus man obtained universal knowledge and to that extent shares with god a divine prerogative. Mankind was driven out of paradise because God saw that man could not be trusted to obey His will and to refrain from eating the fruit of another tree in the Garden of Eden that would give man immortality. God decided that man should not obtain immortality lest he become like the gods. Accordingly, if we examine the story in Genesis objectively, we see that, while many elements go into making up the whole picture, it is not so much an account of the “Fall of Man” but rather of the rise of man halfway to divinity. He obtained one of the two prerogatives or characteristics of the gods: intelligence; but he was checked by God from obtaining immortality, which would have made him quite divine. 

• From The Knowledge of Good and Evil as the Knowledge, Nathan French: A range of commentators suggest that the primary interpretation should be toward a contextualized meaning of “beneficial” and the “harmful.” I will demonstrate that the principle of divine retribution, in relation to ‘some’ experiences of ‘good and bad/evil,’ assumes the divine agency of reward and punishment through blessing and cursing. Additionally, it will be shown that these texts reveal an interplay between human and divine retribution as indication of divinely sanctioned retribution through ‘blessing and cursing.’ Thus, the words that generally mean “knowledge of good and evil” in their target languages often appear within these literary contexts signifying the whole of the retributive process, from discrimination to response, the fruit of the knowledge of reward & punishment. It is the knowledge for administering reward and punishment that empowers humans to become judges with ultimate power, like Yahweh himself. The divine knowledge is forbidden since it is ultimate power for retribution. In this way, Yahweh’s reward and punishment serve as his tools for establishing a particular political and social order, a body politic. Knowledge of good and evil represents the advancement from childlike innocence to moral decision.

• From Loss of Immortality, Konrad Schmid, University of Teubingen, 2008: Especially within the Christian tradition, there is a widespread notion that the first human beings were created to be immortal, making physical death the bitter consequence of human sin. However, there are also some newer approaches that see death as a natural part of creation, while death only becomes a frightening and threatening element under the influence of sin. At first glance, the traditional notion of an original immortality which was lost after the fall would fit perfectly into the Paradise story: This would be just another element contrasting the situations before the fall and after. In addition, God’s threat “you shall surely die” would be narratively fulfilled. Humankind, after its fall, has to die. But upon further review, there are far too many problems for such a thesis. First, Gen 2:7 states: “YHWH God formed man from the dust of the ground.” “Dust” in the Hebrew Bible functions clearly as a metaphor for transience, for being mortal. Secondly, in the punishment sentences in Gen 3:14-19, there is only one instance where the topic of death is brought up. This verse does not claim that humankind from now on has to die in contrast to the situation before. Death is not mentioned among the elements of punishment themselves. In Gen 3:22 God says, “See, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might reach out his hand and take also from the tree of lif, and eat, and live forever. “‘ This sentence apparently does not reckon with the possibility that the human beings could again become immortal after having lost their original immortality a short while earlier. Rather, the prohibition of the tree of life is now mandatory, because after the humans have gained knowledge, immortality is the main element which still very clearly distinguishes God and humans.

• The prevalent Christian interpretation which sees the primitive status of humankind as immortals is the result of an apocalyptic perspective on the paradise story which was historically alien to it. Genesis 3 is probably one of the most non-eschatological texts of the Bible, as is evident especially from its final verse: “[The Lord God] drove out the man; and at the east of the garden of Eden he placed the cherubim, and a sword flaming and turning to guard the way to the tree of life.” The angels with their sword stand for the conviction that paradise is lost forever. The Paradise story tries to explain how the present conditions of human life outside the paradise came about. lt is not interested in painting out  a model for eschatological expectations. The common Christian interpretation has thoroughly transformed this, as can be seen for example from a famous German hymn by Nicolaus Hermann which ends with the words: “Today, Christ unlocks the door to the beautiful paradise, the cherub no longer stands in front of it.” But in Genesis, there is no way back, never ever. The Bible obviously sees no problems in determining human life – as it was designed by the creator – as substantially limited. Genesis 2-3 seems to present the wish to become immortal as a real wish only for fallen humanity. Immortality as such does not seem to be theologically important.

• From Adam & Eve & The Serpent, Elaine Pagels: In their arguments from Scripture, Jewish teachers often avoided speaking directly about sexual practices but engaged in heated discussions about Adam, Eve, and the serpent, and in this metaphorical way revealed what they thought about sexuality and about human nature in general. The Book of Jubilees, for example, written about 150 years before Jesus’ birth by a Palestinian Jew, retells the story of Adam and Eve to prove, among other things, that Jewish customs concerning childbirth and nakedness were not arbitrary or trivial but actually built into human nature from the beginning. As this author tells it, Adam entered Eden during the first week of creation, but Eve entered the garden only during the second week; this explains why a woman who gives birth to a male child remains ritually impure for one week, while she who bears a female remains impure for two weeks. The author goes on to recall that God made garments for Adam and Eve, and clothed them before expelling them from Paradise; this shows that Jews must “cover their shame, and not go naked, as the Gentiles do,” in public places like the baths and the gymnasia. Throughout subsequent generations, what Jews and Christians read into the creation accounts of Genesis came, for better and worse, to shape what later came to be called tradition. Meanwhile certain radical gnostics, railed against marriage and procreation and against the God who had created such impurities. This radical teacher dared to tell the story of Paradise from the serpent’s point of view, and depicted the serpent as a teacher of divine wisdom: ‘For the serpent was wiser than any of the animals that were in Paradise. . . . But the creator cursed the serpent, and called him devil. And he said, “Behold, Adam has become like one of us, knowing evil and good.’ What kind of God is this? First, he envied Adam that he should eat from the tree of knowledge. . . . And secondly he said, ‘Adam, where are you?’ So God does not have foreknowledge, since he did not know this from the beginning. And afterwards, he said, ‘Let us cast him [out] of this place lest he eat of the tree of life and live forever.’ Surely he has shown himself to be a malicious envier. And what kind of God is this? Great is the blindness of those who read, and they did not know it.’” What church leader would not bridle at a critic who turned the Genesis account upside down?

• From Justin Martyr, Dialogues, Second Century: Then what is next said in the Psalm —’For trouble is near, for there is none to help me. Many calves have compassed me; fat bulls have beset me round. All my bones are poured out and dispersed like water,’— was likewise a prediction of the events which happened to Christ. For on that night when some of your [Roman] nation, who had been sent by the Pharisees and Scribes, and teachers, came upon Him from the Mount of Olives, surrounded Him. And the expression, ‘Fat bulls have beset me round,’ He spoke beforehand of those who acted similarly to the calves, when He was led before your teachers. And the expression, ‘For there is none to help,’ is also indicative of what took place. For there was not even a single man to assist Him as an innocent person. ‘They opened their mouth upon me like a roaring lion,’ designates him who was then king of the Jews, and was called Herod, a successor of the Herod who, when Christ was born, slew all the infants in Bethlehem born about the same time, because he imagined that among them He would assuredly be of whom the Magi from Arabia had spoken; Or He meant the devil by the lion roaring against Hi,: whom Moses calls the serpent, but in Job and Zechariah he is called Satan, and by Jesus is addressed as devil, showing that a compounded name was acquired by him from the deeds which he performed. For ‘Sata’ in the Jewish and Syrian tongue means apostate; and ‘Nas’ is the word from which he is called by interpretation the serpent. We may perceive that the Father wished His Son really to undergo such sufferings for our sakes, and may not say that He, being the Son of God, did not feel what was happening to Him and inflicted on Him. 

• From How the Serpent Became Satan, Shawna Dolansky, Biblical Archaeology Society, 2016: Introduced as “the most clever of all of the beasts of the field that YHWH God had made,” the serpent in the Garden of Eden is portrayed as just that: a serpent. Satan does not make an appearance in Genesis for the simple reason that when the story was written, the concept of the devil had not yet been invented. Explaining the serpent in the Garden of Eden as Satan would have been as foreign a concept to the ancient authors of the text as referring to Ezekiel’s vision as a UFO. In fact, while the word satan appears elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament, it is never a proper name; since there is no devil in ancient Israel’s worldview, there can’t yet have been a proper name for such a creature. After the canon of the Hebrew Bible closed beliefs in angels, demons and a final apocalyptic battle arose in a divided and turbulent Jewish community. In light of this impending end, many turned to a renewed understanding of the beginning, and the Garden of Eden was re-read—and re-written—to reflect the changing ideas of a changed world. Satan became the proper name of the devil, a supernatural power now seen to oppose God as the leader of demons and the forces of evil; and the serpent in the Garden of Eden came to be identified with him. In 1 Enoch, the “angel” who “led Eve astray” and “showed the weapons of death to the children of men” was called Gadriel, not Satan. Around the same time, the Wisdom of Solomon taught that “through the devil’s envy death entered the world, and those who are on his side suffer it.” Though this may very well be the earliest reference to Eden’s serpent as the devil, in neither text, nor in any document we have until after the New Testament, is satan clearly understood as the serpent.

• Although the author of Revelation describes Satan as “the ancient serpent”, there is no clear link anywhere in the Bible between Satan and the serpent in the garden. The ancient Near Eastern combat myth motif, exemplified in the battle between Marduk and Tiamat, typically depicted the bad guy as a serpent. The characterization of Leviathan in Isaiah reflects such myths nicely: “On that day YHWH will punish With his hard and big and strong sword Leviathan the fleeing serpent, Leviathan the twisted serpent, And he will kill the dragon that is in the sea.: So the reference in Revelation to Satan as “the ancient serpent” probably reflects mythical monsters like Leviathan rather than the creature in Eden. In the New Testament, Satan and his demons have the power to enter and possess people; this is what is said to have happened to Judas. When Paul re-tells the story of Adam and Eve, he places the blame on the humans and not on fallen angels or on the serpent or Satan; still, the conflation begged to be made, and it will seem natural for later Christian authors—Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Irenaeus and Augustine, for example—to assume Satan’s association with Eden’s snake. Most famously, in the 17th century, John Milton elaborates Satan’s role in the Garden poetically, in great detail in Paradise Lost. But this connection is still not forged anywhere in the Bible.

• • From Commentary on the Bible, Matthew Henry, 1706: It is certain it was the devil that beguiled Eve. The devil and Satan is the old serpent, a malignant spirit, by creation an angel of light and an immediate attendant upon God’s throne, but by sin become an apostate from his first state and a rebel against God’s crown and dignity. Observe here: He does not discover his design at first, but puts a question which seemed innocent: “I hear a piece of news, pray is it true? has God forbidden you to eat of this tree?” Thus he would begin a discourse, and draw Eve into a parley. Those that would be safe have need to be suspicious, and shy of talking with the tempter. He quotes the command fallaciously, as if it were a prohibition, not only of that tree, but of all. God had said, Of every tree you may eat, except one. He, by aggravating the exception, endeavours to invalidate the concession: Hath God said, You shall not eat of every tree? The divine law cannot be reproached unless it be first misrepresented. He seems to speak it tauntingly, upbraiding the woman with her shyness of meddling with that tree; as if he had said, “You are so nice and cautious, and so very precise, because God has said, ‘You shall not eat.’ The devil, as he is a liar, so he is a scoffer, from the beginning: and the scoffers of the last days are his children. That which he aimed at in the first onset was to take off her sense of the obligation of the command. “Surely you are mistaken, it cannot be that God should tie you out from this tree; he would not do so unreasonable a thing.” See here, That it is the subtlety of Satan to blemish the reputation of the divine law as uncertain or unreasonable, and so to draw people to sin; and that it is therefore our wisdom to keep up a firm belief of, and a high respect for, the command of God. In answer to this question the woman gives him a plain and full account of the law they were under. It was her weakness to enter into discourse with the serpent. She might have perceived by his question that he had no good design.. But her curiosity, and perhaps her surprise, to hear a serpent speak, led her into further talk with him. Note, It is a dangerous thing to treat with a temptation, which ought at first to be rejected with disdain and abhorrence. The garrison that sounds a parley is not far from being surrendered. “You shall not die,” he says, so the word is, in direct contradiction to what God had said. Thus Satan endeavours to shake that which he cannot overthrow.
  • From the Book of Adam & Eve, Anonymous, Sixth Century: Then Adam said unto God, “Lord, Thou didst create us, and make us [fit] to be in the garden; and before I transgressed, Thou madest all beasts come to me, that I should name them. Thy grace was then on me; and I named every one according to Thy mind; and Thou madest them all subject unto me. But now, Lord God, that I have transgressed Thy commandment, all beasts will rise against me and will devour me, and Eve Thy handmaid; and will cut off our life from the face of the earth. I therefore beseech Thee, God, that, since Thou hast made us come out of the garden, and hast made us be in a strange land, Thou wilt not let the beasts hurt us.” When the Lord heard these words from Adam, He had pity on him, and felt that he had truly said that the beasts [of the field] would rise and devour him and Eve, because He, the Lord, was angry with them [two] on account of their transgression. Then God commanded the beasts, and the birds, and all that moves upon the earth, to come to Adam and to be familiar with him,† and not to trouble him and Eve; nor yet any of the good and righteous among their posterity. Then the beasts did obeisance to Adam, according to the commandment of God; except the serpent, against which God was wroth. It did not come to Adam. Then Adam and Eve came out at the mouth of the cave, and went towards the garden. But as they drew near to it, before the western gate, from which Satan came when he deceived Adam and Eve, they found the serpent that became Satan coming at the gate. And whereas aforetime [the serpent] was the most exalted of all beasts, now it was changed and become slippery, and the meanest of them all, and it crept on its breast and went on its belly. 

• When the accursed serpent saw Adam and Eve, it swelled its head, stood on its tail, and with eyes blood-red, did as if it would kill them. It made straight for Eve, and ran after her; while Adam standing by, wept because he had no stick in his hand wherewith to smite the serpent, and knew not how to put to death. But with a heart burning for Eve, Adam approached the serpent, and held it by the tail; when it turned towards him and said unto him:– “Adam, because of thee and of Eve, I am slippery, and go upon my belly.” Then by reason of its great strength, it threw down Adam and Eve and pressed upon them, as if it would kill them. But God sent an angel who threw the serpent away from them, and raised them up. Then the Word of God came to the serpent, and said unto it, “In the first instance I made thee glib, and made thee to go upon thy belly; but I did not deprive thee of speech. “Now, however, be thou dumb ; and speak no more, thou and thy race31 because in the first place, has the ruin My creatures happened through thee, and now thou wishest to kill them.”* Then the serpent was struck dumb, and spake no more. And a wind came to blow from heaven by command of God, that carried away the serpent from Adam and Eve, threw it on the sea shore, and it landed in India.

GET IN TOUCH WITH BLACK MASS APPEAL

• Facebook
• Twitter
• Instagram
• Patreon
• Tabitha Slander’s Instagram
• Discord server

SATANIC BAY AREA

• • Website
  • Facebook
  • Twitter (as @SatanicSF)
  • Instagram
  • Sign up for Satanic Bay Area’s newsletter
  • On TikTok as DailyBaphirmations

The post Episode 188 – Satanists Read the Bible III (Year of the Serpent) appeared first on Black Mass Appeal.