LEVIATHAN CROSS – SIGIL OF LUCIFER

LEVIATHAN CROSS

 In Alchemy, the Leviathan’s cross is a symbol for sulfur, which is one the three essential elements of nature.

In Asia, its name is the Brimstone Symbol.The association with the Leviathan makes it a symbol of depth and surfacing. The multiple crossroads of two crosses can be interpreted as a sign of free choice, it can also be seen as a stroke-through “equal-to” (=) to show that every person has their own life.

Sulfur (“Leviathan Cross”) A symbol for the alchemical element Sulfur, (Brimstone) which is spiritually analogous to the human soul. Alchemically, sulfur has the qualities of masculine, hot and dry. Combined with Mercury (feminine, cool and moist), the pair were considered the parents of all metals.

Alchemical drawings often portray Sulfur as the sun. (In some views, sulfur and salt are the parents of Mercury) The symbol of sulfur is often used as an identifying symbol by Satanists, due to sulfur’s historical association with the devil.

Origins

The Leviathan Cross was created by The Knights Templar. The symbol was then adopted by Anton LaVey in the 1960s, founder of the Church of Satan. Previous associations with the cross and Satanic foundations are unable to be identified.

SIGIL OF LUCIFER

The Sigil of Lucifer is a lesser known historical magical sigil used occasionally as an emblem by modern Satanists. The image originates in the sixteenth century Italian Grimoirium Verum, or “Grimoire of Truth.” Used in conjunction with other symbols, its original purpose of the sigil was to aid in a visual invocation of the angel Lucifer.

The figure is probably derived from an earlier work, most likely drawn from a magic square whose origins are now lost. The emblem is sometimes referred to as the “Seal of satan,” although this is not a historical usage.

A sigil is a magical symbol which represents a fallen angel or demon. They are used to conjure demons and create a bond between the demon and the magician, who then uses them to carry out their will and desire. In reality any “magick” or focused concentration to manifest ones own will is carried out by demons, not the universe responding, this is why new age teachings of “the secret” and manifestation are so spiritually dangerous. The sigil of lucifer is the symbol that represents and embodies lucifer, the prince of  the fallen angels.

It is first recorded hundreds of years ago in the middle ages in “grimoires”, which are instructions books on black magick. Yet it is thought to originate in far older writings from the middle east and extend back to king solomon, who is said to have employed black magic and demonic powers to build the temple. King solomon in turn may have acquired the occult teachings from the pagan women he become involved with, who lead him astray. “Magick” itself is really supernatural manipulation of reality to suit your own will, which uses the unseen demonic realm to carry it out. It is warned about in the book of revelation, and possibly the oldest recorded incidents of magic are when the daughters of men became impregnated by the fallen angels in Genesis, producing the giant nephilim. This type of “Magick” is recognised and still practiced today, the two types of demons who engage in spiritual sex with humans are called “Incubus” and Succubus”. The Incubus is the male demon who impregnates the female human and the Succubus is the female demon who attempts to obtain the male life force.

☽ Lielo

14 thoughts on “LEVIATHAN CROSS – SIGIL OF LUCIFER

  1. BenGLee

    The sigil symbol of the pact between Lucifer and God or the pact of Satan is known as a God sent sign to reveal the Savage people and the judgment that God has sent to them for doing any harm to a child or woman or mother nature.. the sigil of Lucifer stands for a pact made between God and Satan
    More than less not the magician and the Lucifer it stands for. Or you speak on. You have Lucifer-the watcher over the morning. Lilith- the watcher over all mother nature and Earth and Satan-the watcher over all night. This makes up the Devil. This pact you speak on is not nothing more or less then the meaning of a Pact between God and Satan not the Magician and Satan you have but so many things wrong

    Upside down cross is not a mockery against God it is a Cross of Saint Peter that was also crucified. He begged them not to hang the cross like Jesus Christ died on he begged it to be upside down so that he know with all his heart that Jesus Christ know he felt he was not worthy of being crucified on the cross the same way. That’s why the upside down cross is always interpret to be bad. It’s not the double upside down cross is the one you need to study out and on .

    Reply
    1. Bryan

      so how does that work like the meaning of the sign and why it became as that of the 2 signs

      Reply
  2. Julien

    Hi ! I would be interested in knowing where you found the info on the fact it was used by the Knights Templar. Thanks !!

    Reply
    1. Lucifer

      Ill show you all true Satan. Allow my transformation to complete.3.6.9. I love all my children you’ll see.

      Reply
    2. Aiwass

      It wasnt he freestyled that, knights templar knew if baphomet which is really a moorish symbol but that sign never became associated with baphomet until 1960’s and from my practice. The “seal of leviathan is not called that. Facing up it represents lucifer and facing down it represents shiatan. Leviathan is the primal abyss this is why he is to the west in the circle. Lucifer has more than 1 sigil and so does shaitan leviathan is the letters encircling the samael lylyt pentagram and it represents the subconscious i.e. synonymous with primal abyss. Lylyt and leviathan are actually closely related and lylyt has more than one celestial body associated with her the algol star being one of them.

      Reply
  3. LC

    This “ author” should read the Bible thumping crap it posts by proofreading before posting

    Reply
  4. RCChristian

    One small problem here. Lucifer is known by translators of the bible to be a mis-translation. It’ s now corrected in most newer bibles.

    Lucifer was a mis-translation in the bible. For anyone who studies the creation of the bible or looks at older manuscripts and is studying mis-translations in the bible, they come to realize there are thousands of mis-translations and deliberate changes all over the bible.

    Some of the error in it was quite deliberate, including the biblical designation of Lucifer as Satan, along with the story of a fallen angel. It’s all a mis-translation that is known and has been corrected by modern biblical scholars. But none of them tell you this.

    *Lucifer makes his appearance in the fourteenth chapter of the Old Testament book of Isaiah, at the twelfth verse, and nowhere else*

    _”How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! How art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!”_

    The first problem is that Lucifer is a Latin name.

    So how did it find its way into a Hebrew manuscript, written before there was a Roman language???

    To find the answer, I consulted a scholar at the library of the Hebrew Union College in Cincinnati. What Hebrew name, I asked, was Satan given in this chapter of Isaiah, which describes the angel who fell to become the ruler of hell?

    The answer was a surprise

    In the original Hebrew text, the fourteenth chapter of Isaiah is not about a fallen angel, but about a fallen Babylonian king, who during his lifetime had persecuted the children of Israel. It contains no mention of Satan, either by name or reference. The Hebrew scholar could only speculate that some early Christian scribes, writing in the Latin tongue used by the Church, had decided for themselves that they wanted the story to be about a fallen angel, a creature not even mentioned in the original Hebrew text, and to whom they gave the name “Lucifer”

    Why Lucifer?

    In Roman astronomy, Lucifer was the name given to the morning star (the star we now know by another Roman name, Venus). The morning star appears in the heavens just before dawn, heralding the rising sun. The name derives from the Latin term lucem ferre, “bringer, or bearer, of light.”

    *The scholars authorized by King James I to translate the Bible into current English did not use the original Hebrew texts, but used versions translated from the Catholic Vulgate Bible produced largely by St. Jerome in the fourth century*

    Jerome had mistranslated the Hebraic metaphor, “Day star, son of the Dawn,” as “Lucifer,” and over the centuries a metamorphosis took place. Lucifer the morning star became a disobedient angel, cast out of heaven to rule eternally in hell. Theologians, writers, and poets interwove the myth with the doctrine of the Fall, and in Christian tradition Lucifer is now the same as Satan, the Devil, and – ironically- the Prince of Darkness.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devil_in_Christianity#Isaiah's_Lucifer_(Isaiah_14)

    So “Lucifer” is nothing more than an ancient Latin name for the morning star, the bringer of light

    That can be confusing for Christians who identify Christ himself as the morning star, a term used as a central theme in many Christian sermons. Jesus refers to himself as the morning star in Revelation 22:16:

    _”I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.”_

    And so there are those who do not read beyond the King James version of the Bible, who say…

    _”Lucifer is Satan: so says the Word of God”_

    While others with knowledge of the Latin and Hebrew texts say:

    _”No, Lucifer is the classical Roman name for the morning star, and now Jesus is the morning star.”_

    This discussion can only anger certain fundamentalists.

    Fortunately, this issue of errors in biblical translations is not one that we have to struggle with ourselves.

    *Generations of biblical scholars of all faiths have been aware of the mis-translations and of the misunderstandings that arise from the use of archaic terms whose meanings have been lost, or have evolved into different usages.*

    To address these problems a conference was held in October 1946, attended by delegates of the Church of England, the Church of Scotland, and the Baptists, Methodists, and Congregationalist churches.

    At another meeting four months later, delegates from the Presbyterians and Quakers joined the original group, along with representatives of various Bible societies. Still later, observers were sent as representatives of the Roman Catholic Church.

    The work on a new translation of the Bible, direct from the sources, stretched out over several years. The most distinguished biblical scholars and specialists in the world were invited to contribute, and every delegate was given the opportunity to review and express his own views on every verse, every word, as presented by the translators.

    The result of this prodigious joint effort was *The New English Bible*, of which the New Testament was published in 1969 and the Old Testament one year later.

    To the point, the verse in the King James version (Isaiah 14:12) that begins

    _”How art thou fallen from heaven, 0 Lucifer…”_

    Has now been translated directly from the Hebrew in the New English Bible as:

    _”How you have fallen from heaven, bright morning star…”_

    There is no mention of Lucifer, no reference to any disobedient angel plunging to hell, nor should there be

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucifer#Literal_meaning

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devil_in_Christianity#Isaiah's_Lucifer_(Isaiah_14)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucifer#Christianity

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallen_angel#Fall_of_Lucifer

    Reply
    1. Rose

      Great research. You’re the most accurate. They should replace the authors erroneous and biased article with your post. Nice work.

      Reply
  5. Marcalo De Unnero

    Satanists are morons that have been duped into feeling they have some hidden knowledge. It’s a cult of losers and narcissists.

    Reply
  6. NoWikipedia

    Anyone who links to wikipedia to make an argument immediately loses it. DON’T LINK TO WIKIPEDIA. Good grief!

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.