Luciferianism, Satanism and Demonolatry

Although I'm not a follower of any of those systems, I'm well versed in the workings and philosophies behind Luciferianism and Satanism.

I understand that many Asetianists have been through these systems before reaching the Asetian tradition and that it's commonly seen as a possible progression to evolve from the likes of Luciferianism and all its surrounding egoic occultism into something higher and on another level like Asetianism.

My question to you is, do you think that the mythologies of Lucifer and Satan have been influenced from much older Ancient Egyptian lore, including the tradition of Sethians and Asetians?

Personally, I am inclined to believe so, as Egypt was the place of origin for many occult traditions that followed. We all know that personifications such as Satan and Lucifer are much more modern than the Egyptian pantheon. But were they influenced by Asetianism?

If you are looking for spiritual or historical connections you can see several parallels between Seth and Satan. Also, many elements about Lucifer and the development of its archetype were taken and adapted from Osiris.
Sadly many modern followers of those archetypes don't understand its Ancient Egyptian origins and how such traditions were influenced, sometimes heavily, by the Asetian culture and past.

There are many flavors of Satanism and Luciferianism but they are for the most part a modern movement spread by different cults that disagree with each other. Not always the case but a commonplace in such community. There is also the overuse of LHP terminology when in several cases there is a complete lack of understanding of what LHP is. As you mentioned, such movements often revolve around the cult of Ego, with a magickal background developed out of chaos magick and without proper mastery of the most complex magickal practices. Darkness seems to be fashionable, but the problem is when people don't seem to understand what Darkness is. Worshipping the Ego certainly opposes Darkness.

I can see how there could be some evolutional progress from students of Luciferianism that have moved into Asetianism after developing some level of occult maturity which is a process that everyone must undergo. I believe that is what you were referring to and there are certainly many such cases. I see it as something positive.

Em Hotep.

It was a very pertinent question, Jonathan. After reading your text, I immediately reminded of Israel Regardie. He admited that their books contains many direct plagiarisms from Crowley, Eliphas Levi, Waite, etc and he incorporated numerous fragments from their works without citing any reference to the sources - (book: A Garden of Pomegranates). But, it was Aleister Crowley who was bad boy, saying that Americans are a stupid people and closed minded that copy everything without realizing its symbolism - Liber 777. Of course, this does not apply to all Americans, but a part of them. It would be wise to these authors describe their sources, so it would be easier for everyone and they also receive a greater credit for their works as Israel Regardie received.

Anyway, I agree with Victor. I think he is quite right in what he said.

Crowley seems to have borrowed heavily from Ancient Egyptian tradition to formulate his own works,including ,"The Book Of Thoth".Also,Florence Farr,another promenent member of HOTGD,wrote a book on the origins and practice of Egyptian Magic,and was a serious Egyptologist.Although it can be argued that Crowley veered towards the left as a Magickian,I'm not so sure about Farr.However,in my mind,both the above and their Egyptian based works have had a significant part in influencing modern Satanism/Luciferianism.

Crowley himself once identified his spirit guide Aiwass with Lucifer. I'm also not sure if he distinguishes between Lucifer and Satan as two separate entities.

Crowley's Aiwass was actually an Egyptian priest. Michael Aquino from the Temple of Set has written about this and in his opinion Aiwass is not real but a byproduct of Crowley's own personality. This is however Aquino's opinion which doesn't infer truth by any means. He also develops that Aiwass as the minister of Hoor-pa-kraat could be considered a corruption or adaptation of an earlier Osiris and not really Horus.

I'm not sure if we currently have any experts on the ToS around the most active members, since the last around here to worship Aquino and kiss their ass was banned a long time ago, this Ankhhape / Etu Malku individual, meanwhile also banned from the ToS. lol
If this was related with the ToV we have Maxx around but the ToS is quite a different thing.

By the way in my studies I have noticed that many people confuse Lucifer with Satan when they are in fact very different archetypes. They embody different principles and have different history. This new age ideas of uniting both as representing the same thing is very inaccurate.

The tendency to draw parallels between Lucifer and Seth from Egypt is also highly incorrect. If there is a connection with Seth that would be found in Satan, not Lucifer. As Victor mentioned if people want to draw parallels they would be more easily found in Osiris, as a Light bearer of knowledge who then fell to the Underworld. I have also seen less common cases of people drawing parallels between Thoth and Lucifer but they are also very different. Again, the new age brings a tendency to draw parallels between any deity or archetype with Thoth as he represents wisdom and magick (although Aset is more representative of magick than Thoth in my opinion), but this ruler of the energies of the Moon is a very specific and unique deity not easily connected with other forces. The most obvious archetype in history that was drawn and inspired from Thoth was Hermes of the Greeks, although many details of western Hermetic traditions are lost and no longer maintain their Ancient Egyptian purity and gnosis.

Finally, in terms of adversarial currents, if Luciferians study a much older true Adversary, they will find Aset who opposed Ra and his dominion when she conquered his secret name. That is a much older concept of adversary magick albeit told in disguise. Just because of her feminine side and beauty some people seem to think she is not "dark" enough and this couldn't be more false! Feminine duality represents much better the power of Adversary and opposing stagnation and herd mentality than any Lucifer or Satan. She is just much more difficult to understand and her darker side a fascinating initiatory secret.

If this was related with the ToV we have Maxx around but the ToS is quite a different thing.

There is no way to be an authority on the TOV, as Nemo keeps changing his statements on various teachings to make them fit into a subject on any given day. Just that aspect alone should be justification for one to see how phony that group's teachings are. Example, his teaching on reincarnation has certainly changed over the years and has evolved to fit present day questions to his gang of ten. So, authority on the cartoon channel is certainly hard to be an expert on......

Jonathan wrote:Finally, in terms of adversarial currents, if Luciferians study a much older true Adversary, they will find Aset who opposed Ra and his dominion when she conquered his secret name. That is a much older concept of adversary magick albeit told in disguise. Just because of her feminine side and beauty some people seem to think she is not "dark" enough and this couldn't be more false! Feminine duality represents much better the power of Adversary and opposing stagnation and herd mentality than any Lucifer or Satan. She is just much more difficult to understand and her darker side a fascinating initiatory secret.

Aset is more than just a Bringer of Light as she is the Light of all Lights. One that can only be seen in Darkness.

Victor wrote:

Jonathan wrote:Finally, in terms of adversarial currents, if Luciferians study a much older true Adversary, they will find Aset who opposed Ra and his dominion when she conquered his secret name. That is a much older concept of adversary magick albeit told in disguise. Just because of her feminine side and beauty some people seem to think she is not "dark" enough and this couldn't be more false! Feminine duality represents much better the power of Adversary and opposing stagnation and herd mentality than any Lucifer or Satan. She is just much more difficult to understand and her darker side a fascinating initiatory secret.

Aset is more than just a Bringer of Light as she is the Light of all Lights. One that can only be seen in Darkness.

That was deep...

I am a theistic satanist and going from my time at the joy of satan ( DO NOT GO THERE), yes there is influence of egyptian mythology on satanism, as there is druid influence and Greek/Roman influence. Satan is a king of darkness and champion of freedom and truth, there is bound to be a god in every tradition that identifies to that description.

This thread was an interesting read. Some of you seem to have a better understanding of Luciferianism and Satanism that others claiming to be on the path. You raised some provoking thoughts and ideas, as well as provided the readers with a few intelligent answers. It's nice to see the different perspectives.

Even though it has nothing to do with Seth or related egyptian pantheon, an interesting satanic figure in religion was Prometheus, who rebelled against the head god to suffer immortal torment.

Like Satan they both stand for freedom as well

You may care to investigate the first known mention of "Satan" in BCE history.   It is interesting to learn more about how this being first appeared on the scene.....

sikvdili wrote:Even though it has nothing to do with Seth or related egyptian pantheon, an interesting satanic figure in religion was Prometheus, who rebelled against the head god to suffer immortal torment.

Like Satan they both stand for freedom as well

Very interesting. I never thought of Prometheus as a satanic figure. I like the connective thread there.

the rebellious figure ain't restricted to abrahamic religions, nor is it restricted to evil is all I'm saying lol

evil and good is apparently a mater of opinion ....

I'd say morality is a matter of opinion. And I know good and evil are technically morals but I'd point out that they also expand to actions and intent behind actions. So yes it's opinion but has an influence and rather notable intergration in action.

What I see when people forget this vital fact and just deem it matters of opinion and perspective ( which are very dismissable functions) it looks like a form of psychopathy

Saylamine wrote:

sikvdili wrote:Even though it has nothing to do with Seth or related egyptian pantheon, an interesting satanic figure in religion was Prometheus, who rebelled against the head god to suffer immortal torment.

Like Satan they both stand for freedom as well

Very interesting.  I never thought of Prometheus as a satanic figure.  I like the connective thread there.

If it is said that Prometheus revealed fire to mankind thus giving light,
and Lucifer is referred to as "light bearer"
and Horus is said to be connected to the morning star....

Do you find any connection between the three?

change that from Horus to Osiris.....

Maxx wrote:
If it is said that Prometheus revealed fire to mankind thus giving light,
and Lucifer is referred to as "light bearer"
and Horus is said to be connected to the morning star....

Do you find any connection between the three?

Tha a brief connection supposed says that two seperate deities are the same entity?

unable to completely receive the thought you are trying to convey....please re type so I can understand your thought.

You attribute aspects from different pantheons and a specific god of deity therein. I was asking whether or not you were implying they were in fact the same entity.

There are also parallels between the Abrahamic Lucifer and Thoth. Lucifer was the first to fall because he believed man was equal to the divine and gave man 'fire' in a sense.

Thoth was also said to have been the being who gave the ancient Egyptians ways to farm barley or some other plant (forgot the exact one), and gave man the knowledge to, in a sense form a society of his own.

Thoth and Lucifer also share in the trickster aspect of their natures.

Lucifer is not of the abrahamic theology. It was a word coined by the Roman translator Jerome to symbolise a temptor. Satan ( not lucifer) was not a trickster, he was an adversary

the devil, adversary of God, and tempter of mankind: sometimes identified with Lucifer (Luke 4:5--

[Old English, from Late Latin, from Greek, from Hebrew: plotter, from sātan to plot against]

source : satan. (n.d.). Collins English Dictionary - Complete & Unabridged 10th Edition. Retrieved October 14, 2013,