Episode 3: Book of Lucifer, Part 1 (Satanic Bible)

In today’s episode, our study of Anton LaVey’s The Satanic Bible continues as we begin the Book of Lucifer. In the first three essays, not only will we hear about the importance of Satanism, but also where Lucifer came from, who are the Yezidis, and Lavey’s answer to two questions that Satanists still cannot escape. All this today on Library Luciferi. 

[INTRO THEME]

Hello, devilish readers, and welcome to Library Luciferi, your on-the-go Satanic literary review. I am Jamison Rowan, your librarian of these infernal stacks. Today we continue Anton LaVey’s The Satanic Bible by examining the first three essays of The Book of Lucifer. 

As a whole, the Book of Lucifer consists of a short intro and 12 essays, spanning pages 37 to 105. Because I realized how much I underestimated the amount of research I wanted to do for each essay, and to make sure I give you readers as much info as I can without making you wait too long or taking up too long of an episode, I’ll cover the Book of Lucifer in smaller portions. 

So let’s dive in. Opposite of last episode where I covered how LaVey copied from Might is Right, this section is LaVey’s original writing and the heart of the entire book. 

The intro is one page and begins with a brief overview of Lucifer followed by a proclamation to correct the misunderstanding of him. LaVey doesn’t cover this, but let me tell you about how Lucifer as Satan actually began with a mistranslation. 

In Isaiah 14:12, the people of Israel taunt the King of Babylon about his arrogance. The specific line as written in the King James Version is: “How you are fallen from Heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!” In the original Hebrew, the word in Lucifer’s place is Helel, meaning “Howl” but has been taken to mean, “to shine.” So during the translation to Latin, translators used lucifer-“to shine” and also the name for the planet Venus, which is seen in the mornings or evenings. After centuries of this translation being in use, the following English translation kept Lucifer and believed it was a reference to the fallen angel mentioned in Luke 10:18 when Jesus told his disciples: “I saw Satan fall like lightning from Heaven,” as well as the fallen cherub of Heaven in Ezekiel 28:12-19, initially perfect, then cast out for his pride. 

So instead of Lucifer referring to the King of Babylon in the context of Isaiah, people believed it referred to Satan and Lucifer became another name for the Devil. Not every modern translation still has Lucifer, though; versions such as the English Standard Version have instead written “O day-star” instead of Lucifer. So in summary, Lucifer went from being a planet to Satan because of translation choices.

Bringing us back to the intro of Book of Lucifer, LaVey argues that doubt, not truth alone, will set one free and that having no doubt blocks any discovery of truth. This makes perfect sense. If you accept truth at face value, what do you truly learn? You just repeat what you’re told without really understanding it. But if you have doubt, then you get curious and you begin to research. You begin to teach yourself the whys of various truths and understand why they’re either absolutely true or simply someone else’s “truth.” Doubt leads to curiosity with leads to learning, which leads to understanding, and understanding leads to knowledge. 

LaVey finishes this intro by stating that for those who already possess doubt, this book will be a revelation. After that is the first essay, “Wanted: God, Dead or Alive.” The essay begins with LaVey arguing against what he calls the misconception that Satanists don’t believe in God. Sounds weird from a guy who created an atheistic religion, but he explains that humans have always created their own gods, so for a Satanist, God is simply whatever they choose God to be, often a “balancing factor of nature…far too impersonal.” 

He next argues against the hypocrisy of blaming Satan for evil when “God’s will” has destroyed thousands. I mean, consider the Crusades, the Salem witch trials, millions of atrocities against Jewish people, and hundreds of years worth of misogyny, homophobia, transphobia, and racism. All because Christians thought only their religion was correct and God didn’t like certain types of people. Consider Satanic child abuse compared to child abuse by Catholic priests. One of these things had a panic with no evidence, the other was covered up. LaVey’s not wrong. 

But he also doesn’t go that far in explanation. His example is more tame; he says grieving people are told by priests that their loved ones are “in God’s hands now” and that the loss is “God’s will.” LaVey asks, if everything is God’s Will, then why does He allow bad things to happen?”

LaVey segues here into the topic of ownership of a Satanist’s actions. He states that humans are responsible for their own actions and the consequences that follow. If something bad happens to a Satanist, they don’t pray for something to happen but take action to make something happen. And if the Satanist makes a mistake, they will do one of two things: either genuinely make reparations and aim not to repeat that mistake, or continue their behavior because they don’t feel sorry about that mistake. This statement brings to mind the hypocrisy of the church men from LaVey’s carnival days.

LaVey then discusses the different interpretations of God and how many denominations within the religion fight over whose interpretation is right. His primary example is, of course, Catholics and Protestants since they have a notoriously long history of hating each other. However, they will all do two things, the first being hate-pray for each other (saying I’ll pray for you instead of I hate you and think you’re wrong). But then, LaVey asks in the next paragraph, with all the violence between denominations over who is correct, how many interpretations of one religion can there be and who is right?

The second thing all Christians will do is live life to please God so that they can get into Heaven. But then, say they live a life of sin and are now on their deathbed. Is it too late for them? No, because they can call in a priest to absolve them and a life of sin is magically washed away and Heaven awaits. So what’s the point of a holy life if you can just get quick forgiveness at the end?

Here, as a sort of example, LaVey mentions the Yezidis as a sect of devil-worshippers who live to please the Devil since God is all-forgiving.

This is wrong.

Yezidis have been persecuted for hundreds of years based on this misconception of their religion. Yezidis actually believe that God created 7 angels to watch over Earth. After He made Adam, He told the angels to bow down before the mortal, and 6 obeyed. The 7th, Tawuse Melek (Taw—OO—say Me-LEHK), known as the Peacock Angel, did not because God had originally told the angels not to bow down before any other, so to bow before Adam would violate the first command. Turns out the latter command was a test of which Tawuse Melek succeeded and was promoted to leader to the angels. Yezidis believe that God is so powerful, He cannot be worshipped directly and so they worship Tawuse Melek as an extension of God. 

Here is where the misconception starts: Muslims have equated Tawuse Melek to Iblis, the leader of devils in the Islamic faith. When Iblis refused to bow before Adam, this was seen as a disobedience to God and so Iblis was cast out. Because of this similarity, other religions tend to see Tawuse Melek as Shaitan, like Iblis. However, Yezidis view Tawuse Melek as an extension of God and are even forbidden from saying the name Shaitan. 

So no, the Yezidis are not devil-worshippers like LaVey says and they do concern themselves with what opinion Tawuse Melek, not God, holds of them because similar to Buddhists, Yezidis believe in reincarnation, but only within the community until you reach the perfect state of being. To be excommunicated is the worst punishment as it means you can no longer reincarnate within the community and reach enlightenment. 

In the closing paragraphs of the essay, LaVey states that current Christians cannot practice Christianity in its original form and many doubt the existence of God. Some call themselves Christian Atheists, which LaVey scorns as contradictory. LaVey is referencing some current events of his time, so let’s look at what was happening.

In October 1965, TIME magazine published an article exploring the growing “Death of God” theology (vol. 86, no. 17 if anyone wants to look it up). It examined the scholars Thomas Altizer, Paul van Buren, William Hamilton, and Gabriel Vahanian and how each advocated for the Christian church to become more secular. 

Also in 1965, Altizer published The Gospel of Christian Atheism, detailing the Death of God theology. The overall belief in Christian Atheism is that followers believe God is nonexistent, but still follow the teachings of Jesus.

The following year, on April 8th, 1966, TIME released their “Is God Dead?” issue, exploring the rise of atheism and agnosticism in America, and mentioning the Christian Atheism movement. In 1969, the same year The Satanic Bible was published, TIME released a follow-up issue with the cover that read, “Is God Coming Back to Life?” So God and secularism was a hot topic in the late ‘60s. 

Moving on to the next essay, titled “The God You Save May be Yourself.” This one is the second shortest essay, covering only a page and a half. In here, LaVey makes three main points. The first echoes the last essay by saying humans have always created their own gods. He goes on to state that because of this, by worshipping a god, you are worshipping by proxy the person who invented that god. I can see his point, but that’s quite an oversimplification. One person didn’t invent the Christian god, Odin or Zeus, nor even Satan. The better way to phrase this, I believe, would be to say that worshipping a god is to worship the ideas and values of the group of people who created it. More simply, worshipping god is worshipping a certain part of humanity. From there, LaVey then says that since man creates gods, why not create your own?

This leads to his next point, which is that man needs ritual and dogma. Many will disagree on this. However, there has been a lot of research into why humans engage in rituals and the benefits of rituals include social connection in communities, emotional regulation, and feelings of accomplishment found in rites of passage. We may not need ritual like food, water, and shelter, but as creatures of habit and social needs, we need rituals for the psychological and sometimes physical benefits that they provide. 

Dogma, though, is a tricky word choice because it holds some negative connotations. Since LaVey began this section of his book with the argument that doubt sets the mind free, his use of dogma here means simply a set of beliefs, not the definition of beliefs held and guarded blindly without question. Look at where blind beliefs have gotten us.

Since humans need rituals and beliefs, they have two options, according to LaVey. A person realizing through ritual that they and God are the same can rejoice in that, or reject that realization and chase other fruitless paths to enlightenment. Should they accept it, however, the rituals become a resource for self-improvement.  

Now we come to the third essay, “Evidence of a New Satanic Age.” LaVey starts by almost quoting Satanic Statement 8 by saying that the 7 deadly sins all lead to self-gratification. He calls envy and greed the “motivating forces of ambition,” while lust is the second most powerful instinct of self-preservation with the first being anger in the form of self-defense. He then follows it up with a statement copied from Might is Right. What LaVey says here is: “‘If a man smite thee on one cheek, smash him on the other!’ Let no wrong go unredressed. Be as a lion in the path—be dangerous even in defeat!” This is specifically from a section in Might is Right called “Be as a Lion on the Path.” If you’re looking at the authoritative edition from Underworld Amusements, you can find it on pages 176-177. 

Following this, LaVey explains that our natural instincts lead us to sin, so we’re all sinners, and since all sinners go to Hell, then we’re all going to see our friends there. Let me read the next sentence which wonderfully demonstrates his humor: “Heaven must be populated by some pretty strange creatures if all they lived for wqas to go to a place where they can strum harps for eternity.” I love that statement, though I will say I’ve also heard that people in Heaven also water potted plants, so there’s at least SOME variety. 

LaVey then mimics a God’s advocate who says that due to changing times, churches have become more liberal and have taken a more humanist approach like Satanism. Countering that mock argument, he argues that if churches are changing their fundamental practices and beliefs to stay modern, why not stop calling it what it used to be and start calling it Satanism? 

This segues into his next point about churches becoming more humanist than religious. They remove the ornate rituals and Latin recitations to make the teachings more understandable to congregants. This removes the emotional reaction of awe from the followers and appeals more to their earthly side than spiritual. And being more liberal means they are appealing to Humanity’s carnal side. LaVey finds this hypocritical as Christianity has always tried to tamper down the carnal side and demonized any other religion that celebrated it. Now by keeping up with the times, churches have become their own enemy. 

Which means, LaVey announces, that it is time for a new religion altogether that just accepts humans as they are. And since Christians called whatever encourages base instincts as Satanic, they have practically named the new religion. After all, according to Christians, Satan is the one encouraging us to be who we are, not who the church thinks we should be. After pointing out a few more points of hypocrisy within churches, such as Sunday picnics being a holy excuse for gluttony, LaVey asks the question, “Is it still Christianity if it has changed so much?” Why follow a religion anymore if it is so different from its old form and followers only believe in what suits them in modern times? 

Here comes another mock argument, one that unfortunately still plagues Satanists to this day: “Why call it Satanism instead of Humanism or something more pagan?” LaVey answers this in five points:

1) Humanism is a philosophy, not a religion. Humans still need ritual and dogma. 

2) Satanists don’t practice altruism in their magic like other pagan religions. Instead, Satanists practice what LaVey calls “controlled selfishness.”

3) Satanists have their own Golden Rule: Do unto others as they do unto you.” They don’t believe in the 3-fold rule of Wicca, where if you hurt someone, it returns back to you threefold. 

4) Satanists don’t believe in white or black magic. Magic is magic, and only the practitioner determines the morality of their actions when using it. 

5) Because they don’t believe in white magic, never will a Satanist practice it in their rituals. Nothing is more hypocritical than to escape Christianity for Satanism, and then use Christian elements in Satanic rituals or keep yourself safe from the very dark forces you call upon for aid. 

LaVey makes another mock argument as a follow-up, and this too plagues Satanists who are getting really tired of these questions: “It’s not Humanism, but why make a religion based on carnality?” LaVey answers this in three points:

1) Again, humans need ritual and dogma, even in the modern times of science. Psychiatry can aid people in accepting something intellectually, but fantasy can help them accept it emotionally. Humans love to feel wonder, which science cannot provide.

2) Satanism combines science with dogma and accepts humans as they are. What used to be considered bad in churches, like guilt, is considered good in Satanism because it is recognized as simple human nature. My two favorite quotes from this section are, “There is nothing wrong with dogma, providing it is not based on ideas which go completely against human nature.” And, “Satanism is the only religion known to man that accepts man as he is, and promotes the rationale of turning a bad thing into a good thing rather than bending over backwards to eliminate the bad thing.” 

3) Times may change, but humans never do. And we need a religion that reflects that. Satanism has always existed for as long as humans have been themselves, but now it is organized and recognized. And LaVey ends the essay with a celebration of Satanism’s embrace of humanity’s indulgences and calls upon everyone to live for the here and now. Stop feeling guilty for your own nature and instead use it to live your life happily. 

So those are the first three essays of the Book of Lucifer. To summarize, we need Satanism because as the world becomes more scientific, we need a religion that still offers us a belief system accepting us as human. And because any other religion celebrating humanity has been condemned as satanic, Christians themselves have named the new religion. Within this new religion, Satanists let go of the guilt over being themselves and instead celebrate what makes them unique and independent. Satanists are people of action, desires, and ambition. Satanists are their own gods. Quite a strong opening for this section of the Satanic Bible. 

This concludes today’s episode of Library Luciferi. Join me next time as I review more essays from the Book of Lucifer. This is Jamison Rowan, wishing you, devilish readers, good reading. Remember: Knowledge is for everyone. Thank you for listening to Library Luciferi. Hail Satan!

Library Luciferi was written and produced by me, Jamison Rowan. Theme music is “Danse Macabre,” composed by Camille Saint-Saëns and performed by Kevin MacLeod.

[OUTRO THEME]