Analysis of the Devil

In these notes, I analyze the various terms and identities associated with the devil. To start, based on my research, one could potentially divide the character of the devil into several separate identities. We could draw together an image of two to four distinct identities that have been conflated with one another over the centuries, either out of misunderstanding, or a direct desire to suppress/demonize pagan beliefs.

"Venus" - rising and falling/rebirth/feminine power

   - Lucifer

   - Phosphoros

   - Ishtar

   - Inanna

   - Attar

   - Aphroditë

   - Melek Taûs

   - Shahar

   - Astarte

"Jupiter" - Evil or torment/Death/Demiurge

   - Yaldabaoth (the Demiurge)

   - Samaël (angel of death)

   - Belial

   - The Devil (prince of hell)

The Adversary - adversary, wisdom, temptation

   - Satan/Ha-Satan

   - Iblis, Shaitan (?)

   - Sophia (as opponent to the demiurge)

   - The Serpent

   - Melek Taûs

   - Prometheus

The Horned God - physical, carnal, masculine, natural

   - Pan

   - Dionysus

   - Cernunnos

   - Wiccan Masculine God *

   - Green Man

   - "The Devil" of the Tarot

   - Baphomet (pagan/satanist interpretation)

    We could perhaps imagine the Adversary identity rolled in to the Venus identity, along with other feminine, naturalistic entities of opposition, such as Lilith. The Jupiter identity could be rolled in to the Horned God identity, as they represent, perhaps, different perspectives on the same concept. The Demiurge, seen negatively as a representation of the physical world, could be cast positively, if one is to embrace physicality.

    Resolving this complex intertextual relationship that these various identities represent is in no way cut and dry. The associations are interwoven with each other. We can draw lines, showing the various deities/ideas that contributed to each concept, but as time has progressed, these identities have merged, represented now as merely different interpretations of the same entity. The modern devil is at once the primal, hedonistic, goat headed god of pagan practices, as well as the elegant, angelic figure of Lucifer, the light barer, and yet still the demonic monster, ruler over hell, representative of misanthropy.

* It is important to note, that the wiccan figure of the Horned God, the Baphomet conflated with the Devil, is a modern syncretic entity. Historical wiccan/pagan practices had nothing to do with the Christian Devil at all - indeed, of the pagan practices that survived into the era when "witchcraft" was being actively persecuted, none of the masculine Celtic/Germanic deities that the modern "Horned God" draws from would have been worshiped still. Aversion to the label of Satanism leads Wiccans today to shy away from this association, tying the Horned God closer to other pagan sources than the satanic/humanist associations suggested by Crowley. The aversion to Satanism derives largely from the historical (and sometimes modern) accusation of "Satan worship" leveled at witches, and the idea that consorting with The Devil was the only source of the magic, curses, hexes, etc. blamed on "witchcraft." This falls in line with the western/Abrahamic pattern of vilifying any and all forms of feminine power, authority, independence, etc.

Additional info: Remythologization of Shahar/Lucifer as Satan, the fallen angel.

"Isaiah 14:12–15 has been the origin of the belief that Satan was a fallen angel, who could also be referred to as Lucifer. It refers to the rise and disappearance of the morning star Venus in the phrase "O light-bringer, son of the dawn." (Helel ben Shaḥar, translated as Lucifer in the Vulgate and preserved in the early English translations of the Bible.) This understanding of Isaiah 14:12–15 seems to be the most accepted interpretation in the New Testament, as well as among early Christians such as Origen, Eusebius, Tertullian, and Gregory the Great. It may be considered a Christian "remythologization" of Isaiah 14, as the verse originally used Canaanite mythology to build its imagery of the hubris of a historical ruler, "the king of Babylon" in Isaiah 14:4. It is likely that the role of Venus as the morning star was taken by Athtar, in this instance referred to as the son of Shahar. The reference to Shahar remains enigmatic to scholars, who have a wide range of theories on the mythological framework and sources for the passage in Isaiah."