[Opinion] Was John Milton a Satanist?

[Xenophon]

He conflates Lucifer with Satan, I know. Anyhow though, that character gets all the really good lines in Paradise Lost. God, Adam, Eve? Mostly cameo appearances. In the later Paradise Regained, Jesus comes off a little better but it's still not Oscar-quality. Blake and Shelly both surmised Milton was "Satanism-signalling" as it were. In the scales against this, Milton had a reputation as exceedingly fair-minded in the cut-throat world of 17th Century pamphleteering where he shone. It is characteristic of him to give the opposing side its strongest case before bringing up his (intended) artillery.

Your thoughts? Personally I think the second possibility more likely, but I am open to the suggestion that Milton had a repressed "thing" for his Prince of Darkness and that this drove his writing in making the villain the more compelling character.

Post automatically merged: Jul 17, 2024

I know: this could have gone into books, lounge, general occult, or controversy. Since its about Satanism, LHP seemed like as good a fit as any.

 

[Aeternus]

My take on it is that John Milton wasn't really a Satanist, not even LHP.

He was more of a libertarian. Basically, all he does in the Paradise Lost is to show how Lucifer, the Demon of Rebellion struggles with the chains of his mistakes, only to find in this eternal irregular lifestyle of his a liberation.

And I must say, that the conflation he makes in terms of Satan as Lucifer is founded as it is both lack of certain knowledge in Milton's terminology (most of it is not even original, rather, copied from various Jewish and non-Jewish texts and esacthology), and also, due to certain censorship of the church at the time he was alive.

One thing which also seemed absurb to me was his take on the Gods that supposedly turned Demons. For an uneducated mind it is more than dangerous to believe such a thing, and we can see that to hard-core/ fanatic Christians who still believe Gods are Demons.

John Milton is not so reliable or having to do anything with the LHP. But, one may find his works reliable for the impact of lolbertarianism

 

[Xenophon]

My take on it is that John Milton wasn't really a Satanist, not even LHP.

He was more of a libertarian. Basically, all he does in the Paradise Lost is to show how Lucifer, the Demon of Rebellion struggles with the chains of his mistakes, only to find in this eternal irregular lifestyle of his a liberation.

And I must say, that the conflation he makes in terms of Satan as Lucifer is founded as it is both lack of certain knowledge in Milton's terminology (most of it is not even original, rather, copied from various Jewish and non-Jewish texts and esacthology), and also, due to certain censorship of the church at the time he was alive.

One thing which also seemed absurb to me was his take on the Gods that supposedly turned Demons. For an uneducated mind it is more than dangerous to believe such a thing, and we can see that to hard-core/ fanatic Christians who still believe Gods are Demons.

John Milton is not so reliable or having to do anything with the LHP. But, one may find his works reliable for the impact of lolbertarianism

Well said, though when writing about matters theological, one is constrained to employ received vocabulary in most discourses just so readers have some point of traction.

I love your term "lolbertarianism" and have plans to plagiarize it.

There is no question Milton was not a practicing Satanist. About as far as Blake et.al. would go is that they seem to think him a latent Satanist. At most, one conflicted and still in the closet.

 

[Konsciencia]

I agree with Aetarnus. Even though, John Milton wrote Paradise Lost. I know for sure He was not a Satanist. Perhaps, he had an opened mind, or perhaps, he was a neutral Spiritual person without judgement.

 

[Xingtian]

He conflates Lucifer with Satan, I know. Anyhow though, that character gets all the really good lines in Paradise Lost. God, Adam, Eve? Mostly cameo appearances. In the later Paradise Regained, Jesus comes off a little better but it's still not Oscar-quality. Blake and Shelly both surmised Milton was "Satanism-signalling" as it were. In the scales against this, Milton had a reputation as exceedingly fair-minded in the cut-throat world of 17th Century pamphleteering where he shone. It is characteristic of him to give the opposing side its strongest case before bringing up his (intended) artillery.

I agree with the argument (I think CS Lewis advanced this) that Milton deliberately gave Satan the most overwhelmingly attractive rhetoric and heroic posturing precisely to show how seductive sin is. As a classicist he was thoroughly imbued with the Greco-Roman epic tradition with its exaltation of martial valor; as a Christian he sought to subtly subvert this. And I think sometimes people overlook the many parts where Satan does not come off looking well at all, as when he meditates on how he knowingly deceives his fallen comrades, or his "Ah, gentle pair..." speech in book IV, which makes him look quite petty:

And, should I at your harmless innocence
Melt, as I do, yet public reason just—
Honour and empire with revenge enlarged
By conquering this new World—compels me now
To do what else, though damned, I should abhor.

I agree though that Milton didn't really give a compelling presentation to the other side, though Raphael gets some beautiful lines.

Milton was at the end of the day a Christian but of such an idiosyncratic attitude, and unparalleled learning, that he found it hard to get on with other nonconformists even if he was broadly politically aligned the the Puritans.