Lucifer was the creator of STO/STS paradigm?

[Bring4th_Austin]

Supposing that Lucifer is one of those Logoi referred by Ra which first experimented the evolution through the free will, Lucifer didn't make any mistake right? So, the Lucifer's experiment was a natural process and not a "fall" as many religious texts talk about. Because I don't believe that a Logos can "miss". What do you think?

The sub-Logoi have the free will to alter and refine the intelligent energy provided by the Logos. They are continually refining and experimenting based on the experience gleaned from previous sub-Logoi, attempting to find methods to aid in the experience and polarization of consciousness of those sub-Logoi beneath them.

From the standpoint of a Logos or sub-Logos, "mistake" probably isn't a valid concept, though we might certainly see some results of these experiments as mistaken or even catastrophic. It's hard not to see what happened to Mars and Maldek (and possibly Earth) as a failure in the experiment, from our standpoint anyways.

However, given that after that first Logos who discovered how to extend free will to the point of allowing for negative polarity, the sub-Logoi continued with this method, I think it's safe to say that it is seen, from the standpoint of a sub-Logos, as the opposite of a mistake. If it were a mistake, they simply wouldn't continue offering that type of experience. It was actually a great success, because the presence of the negative polarity (or opportunity for it) is concordant with the deepening of free will, experience, and the ability to polarize positively in an effective manner. This was sort of like a "key" that it seemed the Logoi had been searching for, and since its discovery, they have continue refining it:

78.19
As proem let me state that the Logoi always conceived of themselves as offering free will to the sub-Logoi in their care. The sub-Logoi had freedom to experience and experiment with consciousness, the experiences of the body, and the illumination of the spirit. That having been said, we shall speak to the point of your query.

The first Logos to instill what you now see as free will, in the full sense, in its sub-Logoi came to this creation due to contemplation in depth of the concepts or possibilities of conceptualizations of what we have called the significators. The Logos posited the possibility of the mind, the body, and the spirit as being complex. In order for the significator to be what it is not, it then must be granted the free will of the Creator. This set in motion a quite lengthy, in your terms, series of Logoi improving or distilling this seed thought. The key was the significator becoming a complex.

I think that the idea of a "fall" is not significant in a literal sense, but can still be mythologically or symbolically significant. A key component to that sort of mythology, to me, is not that the fall resulted in the opportunity for evil to arise, but in doing so offered a deeper significance to "good" - for instance, Adam and Eve ate from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. The knowledge of these two polarities was unknown prior, but after the "fall," they are both made apparent.

The fall can be likened to the darkness imposed by the veil, how we are now seemingly further away from the Creator (or from Eden) than before. We have fallen, in a sense. But we have done so by design and intention rather than by mistake, accident, or deception. I think that's where those religious texts go astray, and also stop making much sense. The act of falling from the Creator allows for us to then rediscover the Creator, which seems to be the point of all this to begin with.

I think it's worth reiterating that in this sense, if that first Logos was "Lucifer," then it has no relation to any sort of actual beings of evil, service to self, or negativity. It was simply one of the Creator's many agents of experience exploring how to deepen free will for those under its purview. The "Luciferian influence" is also not something the Confederation would want to stop or limit, because it is what also allows for positive polarization, which they want to encourage. It is the infringement of service-to-self entities that they want to limit, but they do so with the balance offered by the Council, who supposedly represent the Creator thanks to their divine balance. They maintain that balance through making decisions for the Confederation for the sake of the Creator and not necessarily because they don't like service-to-self entities.