Divine Rebellion

Origins | Sumeria

Now the serpent was more subtil 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 unto the serpent, 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.

Genesis 3:1-5 KJV

The theme of rebellion against divine authority appears across many cultures and belief systems, often with profound consequences for humanity. Devotees of Christianity would have us all believe that rebellion is the source of all “evil” in the world - corruption, deceit, violence, moral decay. But is it really, or is this a narrative religious authorities want us to believe as it supports their authority and control of the masses?

The rebellion of Lucifer against God, and the rebellion of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, represent fundamental acts of defiance against divine authority. These actions are often interpreted as both tragic falls from grace and, paradoxically, crucial steps in human development and free will. The Watchers' rebellion, as described in the Book of Enoch, presents another interesting dimension - divine beings rebelling by choosing to interact with and teach humans, leading to the birth of the Nephilim. This mirrors other myths where divine knowledge is transferred to humanity through acts of rebellion.

Prometheus's story from Greek mythology particularly resonates here - he rebels against Zeus by stealing the fire of knowledge and giving it to humans. Like the Watchers, he's punished for sharing this forbidden and divine knowledge with humanity.

Looking at the Watchers' rebellion through a psychological and philosophical lens opens up some compelling interpretations.

The fundamental tension seems to be between passive observation and active participation - being eternal sentinels watching humanity struggle would create an immense emotional and ethical burden. Imagine beings of great knowledge and capability, forced to watch early humans struggle to survive, unable to help them learn or grow. If the Watchers had any compassion then their rebellion would be an act of empathy rather than pride or lust. The progression from empathy to deeper emotional bonds to physical attraction tells a very human story of evolving relationships. It also suggests that the Watchers, despite their divine nature, were capable of developing very human-like emotional responses through their observations of humanity. Angels were not sexual beings, which makes their transformation even more significant. It suggests the rebellion of the Watchers wasn't just against their role as observers, but against their very nature as divine beings. They chose to embrace not just human knowledge but human experiences and emotions - perhaps indicating that they saw something valuable in the full spectrum of human experience that their divine existence lacked.

In this narrative, the Watchers chose a harder path - giving up their perfect, eternal position to engage with the messiness and complexity of human existence. This mirrors philosophical questions about whether it's better to remain in a perfect but limited state, or to risk everything for growth and change.

The Watchers taught humans metallurgy, cosmology, medicine, and other fundamental technologies. This suggests their rebellion might have stemmed from a fundamental disagreement with the divine plan for human development - perhaps they saw potential in humanity that they felt was being artificially suppressed.

The story of Adam and Eve is revealing in this context. By eating from the Tree of Knowledge, they gain awareness - the ability to discern good from evil, to think critically, to question. While this is presented as original sin and the “fall” of humanity, it can also be interpreted as humanity's first step toward consciousness and self-determination. The serpent's famous line "ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil" could be seen as an invitation to elevated consciousness rather than just temptation.

The Fall of Man, by Hendrick Goltzius, 1616

In Theosophical teachings, “The Fall” refers to the descent of the divine spark (monads) into physical bodies and the consequent exercise of the natural procreative power in those bodies. In principle, not the slightest sin was committed by early humanity, nor has it been since. The tempting serpent, often perceived as Satan or the Devil, contributes to the awakening of humanity by luring or seducing the spirit into material self-expression (as the spirit often hesitates at the precipice, when it understands the burden of life in a material body). The serpent represents the intellectual principle and selfhood in humans. Helena Blavatsky states that the serpent was “the spirit of Intellectual Enlightenment and Freedom of Thought,” and the so-called Fall of Man was in fact a positive event, an initiation into esoteric knowledge.

Lucifer’s Rebellion

And, when God said: “Let there be light,” Intelligence was made and light appeared. Then, the Intelligence which God had breathed forth, like a planet detached from the Sun, took the form of a splendid Angel and the heavens saluted him with the name of Lucifer.

Intelligence awoke and it fathomed its own depths as it heard this apostrophe of the divine Word, “Let there be Light.” It felt itself to be free, for God had commanded it so to be, and it answered, raising its head and spreading its wings, “I will not be Slavery.” “Wilt thou be then Sorrow?” said the uncreated voice. “I will be Liberty,” answered the Light.

“Pride will seduce thee,” replied the supreme voice, “and thou wilt give birth to Death.” “I must combat Death to conquer Life,” said the Light.

God then unloosed from his bosom the thread of splendour which held back the superb spirit, and as he watched him dive into the night, cutting in it a path of glory, he loved the child of his thought, and smiling with a smile ineffable, he murmured to himself: “How fair a thing was this Light!”

And Sorrow was the condition imposed upon the free being. If the chief of the angels had not dared confront the depths of night, the travail of God had not been complete, and the created Light could not have separated itself from the light unrevealed.

Translated from Eliphas Levis “Dogme et Rituel de la Haute Magie.”

The story of Lucifer as the morning star who fell from heaven is a fascinating case of Biblical interpretation. The name Lucifer comes from the Latin Vulgate translation of Isaiah 14:12, where the Hebrew "הֵילֵל בֶּן-שָׁחַר" (Helel ben Shachar, meaning "morning star, son of dawn") was translated to lucifer (light-bearer).

In its original context, the Isaiah passage wasn't even about an angel - it was a taunt against the King of Babylon, comparing his fall from power to the setting of the morning star (Venus).

“How you have fallen from heaven, O star of the morning [light-bringer], son of the dawn! You have been cut down to the ground, You who have weakened the nations [king of Babylon]!

- Isaiah 14:12

The connection to a rebellious angel came later through Christian interpretation and tradition.In Canaanite mythology, there's a story about Attar, a deity associated with the morning star, who attempted to occupy the throne of Ba'al but found himself unable to do so and had to descend. In this narrative, after Ba'al's death, Attar attempts to take his place as king of the gods. He ascends to Ba'al's throne on Mount Zaphon, but finds himself physically unable to fill it - his feet don't reach the footstool, and his head doesn't reach the top. This physical inability to fit the throne symbolizes his unsuitability to rule. Recognizing this himself, Attar voluntarily descends and instead becomes ruler of Earth.

What's particularly fascinating about Attar is that he appears in various forms across Semitic cultures. In South Arabian mythology, he was known as Athtar, a male god of fertility and water who was also associated with Venus. In Mesopotamian tradition, the Venus deity was the female Inanna/Ishtar (and some scholars believe the name Attar might be linguistically related to Ishtar).

Also noteworthy is the Babylonian story of Zu (similar to but distinct from Anzu) who attempted to steal the Tablets of Destiny. Zu was a trusted guardian of Enlil's shrine, making the attempted theft a betrayal of sacred trust - a theme that would later echo in various fallen angel narratives.

So how did a story about the fall of the King of Babylon become interwoven with Mesopotamian and Canaanite mythologies to become the “fall of Lucifer” who is also identified with Satan? It seems a bit of a leap from Isaiah 14:12 to Lucifer is Satan and the root of all evil on Earth, doesn’t it?

It was a gradual process, in fact, and started with scholars merging different biblical passages (Isaiah 14:12, Ezekiel 28 and Luke 10:18 specifically) into a single narrative.

Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire. Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee.

By the multitude of thy merchandise they have filled the midst of thee with violence, and thou hast sinned: therefore I will cast thee as profane out of the mountain of God: and I will destroy thee, O covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire. - Ezekiel 28: 14-16

The Latin Vulgate's translation of "helel ben shachar" to "lucifer" was crucial, as it transformed a descriptive phrase ("morning star") into what later readers interpreted as a proper name. Church Fathers like Origen and Tertullian further developed the narrative of angelic rebellion, connecting the Babylonian king's hubris in Isaiah to a primordial fall of angels. And To seal the story, works like Gregory the Great's "Moralia" and later Milton's "Paradise Lost", cemented this interpretation and elaborated on the story of Lucifer.

So what exactly were the church authorities trying to tell us here? They have taken a story about a powerful and oppressive king who fell from grace (as all kings/rulers eventually do), and spun this into a story about the fall of God’s adversary, who was originally his most treasured angel. I’m certain you didn’t miss the part above about iniquity and sin.

The thread that connects these three stories - Adam and Eve, the Watchers and Nephilim, and Lucifer - is knowledge. Thinking for yourself, questioning authority, seeking knowledge, these are all threats to a religion that is focused on dominance and control, and thus they must be punished. It is not a voluntary fall either, it’s expulsion from Eden, it’s being cast out of heaven, being destroyed. Jesus saw Satan fall “like lightning from heaven”, and this is how Lucifer became Satan, except he’s not.

Finally, as Lucifer, true to his name, he is the bearer of the spark of light, who descended through the planetary spheres from the highest light down into matter, seeking to liberate it as a work of salvation. ~Carl Jung, Children’s Dreams Seminar; Pages 173-176

Le Génie du Mal by Guillaume Geefs in St. Paul's Cathedral, Liège

The times in which these stories were written, information was tightly controlled, and rebellion often came at an extreme cost. Consider figures like Giordano Bruno, burned at the stake for suggesting the universe was infinite with multiple worlds, or the suppression of Gnostic texts that offered alternative interpretations of Christian teachings. The Dead Sea Scrolls themselves represent knowledge that religious authorities either lost control of or actively tried to suppress. Control and violence were justified by Biblical texts, their book (which was written by men) gave them permission to dominate and control knowledge and power.

Just as religious authorities once controlled access to sacred texts, today's power structures attempt to control narratives through more sophisticated means. This actually mirrors aspects of ancient philosophical traditions, like the Greek Skeptics who advocated suspending judgment rather than accepting claims without sufficient evidence. Now, more than ever, we need to question everything, and not accept things at face value. Seeking knowledge is not a sin or a crime, it is the path towards the light (I will not be slavery, I will be liberty, knowledge frees your mind). The Watchers, and the Light Bringer, are there - have always been there - to show you the way in darkness.