Hacker News Reader

Comment by forward1 | Hacker News Reader

[flagged]

The only version we have is from God following Satan's planned coup who just says a bunch of mean things about Satan's character. We know that Satan led around 1/3 of the angels in his coup.

Whatever Satan was fighting for, it was something that he managed to persuade a large amount of God's supporters to join him in fighting for.

That lack of clarity creates a blank canvas to suggest your own reasoning. Certainly, in the majority of cases where a significant number of people fight back against an uncompromising and absolute authority, they are fighting against the coercive control involved.

But that doesn't really matter because Satanism isn't really about Satan in the same way that Christianity isn't really about God.

If you consider the serpent from the garden to be Satan, then the Bible. It gave humans knowledge after all while God forbade it.

This story has always reminded me of the story of Prometheus. Both were punished by gods for their gifts to humanity.

Rabelais toys with this idea.

In some sense it is necessary theologically that Satan (and his followers) exist if a dialectical approach is taken. That view goes back thousands of years, to before Christianity, with the eternal struggle of Ahura Mazda and Angra Mainyu.

If I'm not mistaken, Paradise Lost is the original source for much of it, and more recent popular culture embellishment is much of the reset. Essentially the line "Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven" is split in half, and the focus is put on "than to serve in Heaven" as a rallying cry for independence, and the "better to reign in hell" part is ignored. The Satanic Temple doesn't worship (or believe in) Satan, so leaving off the other half is inconsequential as he's just a symbol anyway.

I think that primarily comes from Milton's Paradise Lost.

Biblical content about Satan is extremely sparse so about 99% of what people think they know about Satan comes from fiction.

In addition to Biblical content, we should also refer to the biblical apocrypha – those ancient writings that are not included in the traditional Old and New Testaments. There are some fun stories to read in the apocrypha, building on the traditional stories we know.

To your point, I wonder how much Satan plays a part in each of these classes of writings.

Is there a good collection and retelling of these stories somewhere? I'm aware some versions of the Bible have some apocrypha, but after reading the old+new testaments, I'm just not up for more of that kind of writing.

The book I have on my bookshelf is called "The Forgotten Books of Eden", subtitled "Lost Books of the Old Testament". This one is a 1980 re-printing of the 1927 book edited by Rutherford Platt. This free PDF looks like a replica: http://www.evreninsirlari.net/dosyalar/155-156_s04_04.pdf

The first two chapters "The First Book of Adam and Eve" and the second, directly deal with their conflict with Satan.

100%, even if it’s from the Bible.

It’s a fairly common interpretation of Paradise Lost, though probably not the interpretation Milton intended.

Rejected God? Embraces those who live their best life? Hail Satan.

I can only speak as a Christian, but a lot of the Bible and Christian teachings are kind of fascist. A lot of worshipping God, treating God and Jesus like King, God killing people, etc. Also, a lot of rules (many quite arbitrary and nonsensical). I could 100% see Satan considered some kind of champion of liberal and libertarian values.

What's a "recognized text"?

Christianity’s Satan is not important in this context since this religion doesn’t pretend he exists.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com