Maui is Lucifer: Esoteric Philosophy Found in the Film Moana

As we observe and analyze the children’s film, Moana, we will find that there are parallels of the inverted Genesis account which reveal that Maui, the secondary main character, represents Satan painted as the hero.

Many of us are familiar with the narrative of Adam and Eve in the book of Genesis. In the second and third chapters of Genesis, God tells Adam that he must not eat from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, or he will die as a consequence (King James Version, Genesis 2.17). The serpent figure, known as Satan in the New Testament, then persuades Eve to eat from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil against God’s command (Revelation 12.9). The serpent tempted Eve by informing her that God withheld the full story, that if she and Adam would eat from the tree, they would not die, but would instead become as gods knowing good and evil (Genesis 3.1-7).

3

There is another interpretation of the story that many have not heard. In contrast with the Biblical account which paints the serpent as an adversary and a trickster, the alternative view sees him as a symbol who was also good, because he gifted humanity with the knowledge of self and associates with the attainment of immortality (Hall 88). It fundamentally inverts the perspective of the Genesis story, rendering Satan as the good guy. As we observe and analyze the children’s film, Moana, we will find that there are parallels of the inverted Genesis account which reveal that Maui, the secondary main character, represents Satan painted as the hero.

5a

We will begin with an overview of the opening prologue which establishes the background of the movie. Notably, the first three words uttered by the narrator happen to be the same first three words of the Bible, “In the beginning” (House, Moana, 00:00:54 – 00:00:57; Genesis 1.1). The narrator establishes that the beginning was a peaceful period when Te Fiti, the mother goddess, used her creative power to bless the whole world. Then came Maui, the most daring of all the demigods, who sought to steal the very source of the goddess’s creative power: the heart of Te Fiti. He stole it in the attempt to gift humanity with “the power to create life itself” (Johnson, Moana, 00:37:46 – 00:38:20). As a consequence, the goddess Te Fiti turned into Te Ka, a “demon of earth and fire,” and caused a sweeping fog of darkness to bring death to the whole world (Moana, 00:02:50 – 00:02:55). The goddess, now in her evil form, struck Maui from the sky and imprisoned him on an island for a thousand years.

10

Maui Compared to Prometheus

So, we see from the background of the plot that Maui stole the creative power from the goddess so he could selflessly gift it to humanity. We may recall a similar story in the Greek myth of Prometheus when he stole fire from the gods to do the very same thing. According to esoteric author Helena P. Blavatsky, the allegory of the fire of Prometheus was just another version of the serpent Lucifer’s rebellion against God because, like Prometheus, Lucifer (meaning “light-bearer” in Latin) brought the light, or fire (meaning wisdom), to man in the form of the forbidden fruit (237; Hall 68). Mind you, this is the inverted view of the Genesis story, not the Biblical one.

11

Man took the Forbidden Fruit, then Came Death into the World

The next aspect of Moana’s back-story is what makes it such an unmistakable parallel with the Book of Genesis. Maui’s act of gifting the heart of Te Fiti resulted in the goddess giving birth to a terrible darkness that brought “inescapable death” (Johnson, Moana, 00:03:44 – 00:03:47). In Genesis, it was not until after Adam and Eve received the knowledge of good and evil that the curse of death came upon them (Genesis 3.17-22). What’s more, Adam and Eve were not the only ones to receive a curse. God confined the serpent to the dust of the earth just as Zeus had Prometheus chained to a rock; and in the film, Maui was imprisoned on a remote island (Genesis 3:14-15; Blavatsky 283; Johnson, Moana, 00:38:05 – 00:38:20).

14a

Maui Compared to Satan

So far, we have looked at the story of Moana and how it parallels with the esoteric interpretation of Genesis and the myth of Prometheus. Aside from noted elements of the back-story, there are numerous characteristics of Moana’s secondary hero, Maui, that correspond with the attributes of Lucifer, or Satan.

  • First of all, Maui is a demigod who prides himself on his good looks. The song that introduces his character contains the lyric, “I know it’s a lot: the hair, the bod! When you’re staring at a demigod” (Johnson, Moana, 00:38:50 – 00:38:58). In the Bible, the fallen angel Lucifer had a heart that grew proud because of his beauty (Ezekiel 28.17).
  • Secondly, Maui was said to have been “struck from the sky” at the hand of the goddess (House, Moana, 00:03:02 – 00:03:06). Various passages in the Bible describe Lucifer as “fallen from heaven” and “cast out into the earth” (Isaiah 14:12; Revelation 12:9).
  • Thirdly, the narrator of the film dubbed Maui a “trickster” (meaning ‘deceiver’), and Satan is known as the father of lies (House, Moana, 00:01:50 – 00:01:54; Harper; John 8.44).
  • Lastly, Maui found himself stuck on a remote island for a thousand years until princess Moana set him loose after which remained a short time for him to defeat Te Ka; otherwise, Moana’s home island would die (Moana). Here, Maui resembles Satan in two ways: (1) Like Maui, Satan was bound for a “thousand years,” and (2) was “loosed [for] a little season” before he went out to deceive the nations, and to gather Gog and Magog to battle. (Revelation 20.3-10).

Untitled

The Heart of Te Fiti is a Serpentine Stone

If the back-story and character qualities are not convincing enough to indicate that the film reflects the serpent allegory in Genesis, then it is necessary to note one final piece of evidence. To recap, we previously illustrated how Maui’s character corresponds with the fallen angel Lucifer – the serpent. It complements the fact that Maui’s desire to gift the creative god-like power to humans relates to the knowledge of good and evil given to mankind in Genesis. Maui is therefore analogous with the serpent. To further strengthen the claim that Maui represents the Serpent, we need only to examine the sacred stone: the Heart of Te Fiti. The heart of Te Fiti happens to take the form of a small pounamu stone, also known as a greenstone (Roach). A pounamu is a type of ‘serpentine’ rock named for its greenish pattern that resembles the skin of a snake (Keane; Schoennher 35). In the film, when princess Moana retrieved the lost Heart of Te Fiti from the sea, she held in her hands a symbolic serpent stone, containing within it the potential power of creation. It was as God had described Adam after eating from the tree of knowledge, “And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever” (Genesis 3.22). Salvation from death would come to Adam if he ate from the tree of life to undo the curse brought by the serpent. Salvation would come to princess Moana and her people if she would restore the serpentine stone to the Goddess (House, Moana, 00:03:51 – 00:04:08).

Conclusion

Moana is a film that undoubtedly borrows elements from the Book of Genesis and the Greek myth of Prometheus. The evidence presented here, however, suggests it is more than mere cherry picking of random components from the Bible. The evidence of similarities between Genesis and the film illustrates that multiple elements match in sequence, such as the sweeping fog of death following humanity’s introduction to a god-like knowledge, and how that corresponds with the third chapter of Genesis. Furthermore, the background of Moana is not merely a repackaged version of an old Bible story, but rather a reversed creation narrative that flips the antagonist-protagonist relationship between God and Satan. The character traits of the deuteragonist demigod, Maui, relate closely to that of the Bible’s illustration of Satan. And the protagonist nature in which Maui is painted agrees with the esoteric interpretation of the Genesis story in which the serpent is regarded as the hero of humanity.

Works Cited

Blavatsky, Helena P. The Secret Doctrine: The Synthesis of Science, Religion, and Philosophy. Pasadena, CA: Theosophical University Press, 1888. PDF.

Hall, Manly P. The Secret Teachings of All Ages. San Francisco, CA: H.S. Crocker Company, Inc., 1928. PDF.

Harper, Douglas. trickster (n.). 2018. Web. 15 September 2018. <https://www.etymonline.com/word/trick?ref=etymonline_crossreference#etymonline_v_17813&gt;.

Keane, Basil. Pounamu – several names. 12 June 2006. Web. 8 September 2018. <https://teara.govt.nz/en/pounamu-jade-or-greenstone/page-1&gt;.

Moana. Dirs. Ron Clements, et al. Perf. Auli’i Cravalho, Dwayne Johnson, and Rachel House. Walt Disney Animation Studios. 2016. DVD.

Roach, Vicky. Strong, resourceful, physically confident — is Moana the most evolved Disney princess yet? 10 December 2016. Web. 8 September 2018. <https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/movies/new-movies/strong-resourceful-physically-confident-is-moana-the-most-evolved-disney-princess-yet/news-story/626f5c9226fd6d2bce95846220eaabb5&gt;.

Schoenherr, Allan A. A Natural History of California. 2nd ed. Oakland, CA: University of California Press, 2017. PDF.

The Holy Bible: King James Version. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 2017.

Advertisements

The Antichrist Unveiled

Scripture provides evidence that the man of sin and the son of perdition are synonymous with the antichrist. These are all three titles signifying a man who denies that Christ came in the flesh (2 John 1:7, KJV), thereby denying the Father and the Son (1 John 2:22, KJV). The beast (equated with a horn or a king/kingdom) found in the prophetic writings of the Bible may correctly be labeled antichrist because it is characterized spiritually by its denial of God’s divinity (Daniel 11:36, KJV; Revelation 13:4-6, KJV) – this being no different from the character of the antichrist spirit (1 John 4:3, KJV).

In this article, we will embark on a quest to remove the veil of confusion surrounding the antichrist. The aim is not to project a prophetic insight into the future or a personal interpretation of symbols in the apocalyptic language. You will not find that here. The purpose of this article is to make light of how the prophecies relate the antichrist to the man of sin, the son of perdition, and the various beasts. My wish is to allow the Bible to interpret itself, but I have also injected some of my own reasoning. I encourage you to search the scriptures and verify whether or not my logic is correct.

The Antichrist by Definition

There are only four verses in the Bible that mention the term, antichrist. These are contained in the two books of 1 John and 2 John (1 John 2:18,22, KJV; 1 John 4:3, KJV; 2 John 1:7, KJV). Given that the Bible is the inspired word of God, these four verses state four indisputable facts about the antichrist:

1. There are many antichrists.

“Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.” (1 John 2:18)

2. An antichrist is defined as anyone who “denieth the Father and the Son” or all “who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh.”

“Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.” (1 John 2:22)

“For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.” (2 John 1:7)

3. There were already many antichrists in the world, even as early as the first century when the epistles of John were written.

For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.” (2 John 1:7)

4. There is a “spirit of antichrist” which was also in the world already. This spirit is defined as “every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh”.

And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.” (1 John 4:3)

So, how can the antichrist be one man, but also many? What are the implications of the plurality of this antichrist? The fact that there are many antichrists in the world already poses a contradiction to the conventional idea of it representing only one world leader in the future – if we are true to the text. The truth is, the antichrist (strictly speaking of the term used in 1 John and 2 John) is not only one man. The antichrist is a spirit that indwells any person or group/system of people that rejects the core doctrine of the Christian faith – that Jesus is the Son of God who “is come in the flesh”(1 John 4:3, KJV). This is why the Bible says there are “many antichrists” (1 John 2:18, KJV; 2 John 1:7, KJV).

As I explained in a previous article, The Antichrist Temple Revealed, the human body is the temple of the antichrist spirit (2 Thessalonians 2:4, KJV). A man possesses that spirit when he denies Christ, thereby dethroning God in his own mind. From a biblical standpoint, this man leaves room in his heart for no other god but himself, because there is only one true God.

The Antichrist and the Beast

And this leads us to how the antichrist relates to the beast in scripture. The king demonstrates the same denial of God’s divinity in Daniel 11 and the beast in Revelation 13. (I will explain more later how a “king,” a “beast,” and a “horn” can all represent a government or a kingdom.)

“And the king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself, and magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished: for that that is determined shall be done.” (Daniel 11:36)

“And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him? And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months. And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.” (Revelation 13:4-6)

The common characteristic that unifies the beast and the antichrist is found in the behavior of the beast. The blasphemy committed by the beast – when he speaks great things and exalts himself above God – is a manifestation of the antichrist spirit in him. His relationship to the antichrist is spiritual.

And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist…” (1 John 4:3)

We have already gone over the definition of antichrist, and the spiritual relationship it has with the beast. But, what is the beast? Concerning the apocalyptic language used in the prophetic books of the Bible, the beast is a symbol for a king or a kingdom – specifically a kingdom that opposes God and Jesus Christ – an antichrist kingdom. There is evidence of this found in Daniel 7:16-17. Here, Daniel starts out by saying the four beasts in a dream “are four kings,” but further clarifies in verse 23 that the four beasts also represent four “kingdoms.”

“I came near unto one of them that stood by, and asked him the truth of all this. So he told me, and made me know the interpretation of the things. These great beasts, which are four, are four kings, which shall arise out of the earth.” (Daniel 7:16-17)

“Thus he said, the fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth, which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces.” (Daniel 7:23)

The Four Beasts and Four Horns of Daniel and Zechariah

The four symbolic beasts written about in the book of Daniel are well known to be the historic empires of Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome (not to be confused with the four beasts in the midst of God’s throne). These same four beasts are also in the first chapter of Zechariah. History has long confirmed that these four gentile empires were the four horns that scattered the Jews. It is known to historians as the Jewish Diaspora (“diaspora” = “dispersion, scattering”).

“Then lifted I up mine eyes, and saw, and behold four horns. And I said unto the angel that talked with me, What be these? And he answered me, These are the horns which have scattered Judah, Israel, and Jerusalem.” (Zechariah 1:18-19)

The “four horns” prophesied in Zechariah 1 could literally be interchangeable with “four kings” or “four beasts,” (not that we would want to interchange words) because the Bible consistently uses symbolic imagery of horns to prophesy of kings. And as I mentioned earlier, a beast can signify either a king or a kingdom (Daniel 7:17, 23, KJV). Quoted below are two of the most explicit examples where horns represent kings.

“And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.” (Daniel 7:24)

“And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast.” (Revelation 17:12)

So the four beast kingdoms that scattered the Jews all rose and fell long ago. Rome became the fourth to scatter them when it crushed the Jerusalem Temple to pieces in 70 AD. However, the Roman Empire did not altogether fall in 476 AD like much of mainline history gives account. As the pseudonymous author John Daniel wrote in his book, Scarlet and the Beast, the Roman Empire continued to reign as the Holy Roman Empire long after its fall.

“We could possibly understand the fourth horn mentioned by Zechariah as indeed the horn of the Roman Empire. But of Rome, as it extended to medieval Europe where the old Roman Empire became known as the ‘Holy Roman Empire’, Europe’s Babylonian system of united church and state continued to be governed [spiritually, at least] by Rome.” (Scarlet and the Beast by John Daniel)

This beast, identified as Rome, is further described in Daniel 7:7 as having ten horns of its own. Revelation 13 describes two more beasts: one “having seven heads and ten horns” which did “rise up out of the sea,” and another after it that “had two horns like a lamb” which was “coming up out of the earth.” The first of these two beasts – the one which rose up out of the sea – had one of his heads “wounded to death” and “his deadly wound was healed.” Some researchers believe the deadly head wound (Revelation 13:3,12, KJV) represents the fall of Rome, and his healed wound was the continuation of the Holy Roman Empire. It’s an interesting interpretation, but I cannot say for sure if it’s correct.

The Man of Sin and the Son of Perdition

As for the ‘man of sin’ and ‘son of perdition,’ there is no denying that these two names are both synonymous with each other. The proof text for this is found in 2 Thessalonians 2:3. You can see the two names are stated back to back, as in listing two titles for the same person.

“Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;” (2 Thessalonians 2:3)

So they are no doubt the same, but are the man of sin and the son of perdition the same as the antichrist? We’ve already established that there are many antichrists, meaning there is a spirit of antichrist that dwells in many people. There is no indication that the Bible uses the word, antichrist, to refer to only one person. So how can the son of perdition be the same as the many antichrists? There is only one son of perdition. Right?

Wrong.

In the 17th chapter of John, Jesus is praying to the Father. This entire chapter is known as the High Priestly Prayer. Starting from John 17:2, you may notice a common thread throughout the chapter. He repeatedly mentions how believers in Christ are given to Him by the Father. When we reach John 17:12, Christ is still praying about believers, referring to them as “those that thou gavest me.” In this verse, Christ also states in prayer that “none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.”

“While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.” (John 17:12)

Keep in mind that the context of this entire chapter is Jesus praying about all of his believers. We can be sure that He is not only talking about the twelve disciples – even though the previous chapter is a conversation between Him and his disciples, and that John 17:9 may sound like his prayer is exclusively for them. We can be confident that He prayed for all believers because of what He said in verse 20.

Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;” (John 17:20)

It appears as if Jesus was so thoughtful as to include this identifying statement for anyone who might ask the question, ‘who was he praying for?’ He was not only praying “for these alone” (the disciples who were near him at that moment), but “for them also which shall believe on me through their word.” This is important because it further identifies who He was talking about earlier in John 17:12 when he said, “…and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition…” He was not only talking about his disciples, and the son of perdition was not only Judas Iscariot, the lost one of the twelve. The son of perdition is not only one man, and there is not only one man in the world who is lost. All who are not in Christ are lost. The same is true about all who possess the spirit of antichrist. Every man who denies the Father and the Son, or confesses not that Jesus came in the flesh, is an antichrist. He is the man of sin and the son of perdition.

Some may still argue that Jesus was only talking about Judas Iscariot when he mentioned the son of perdition. This could be said because it is true that he was the only lost one of the disciples, and his betrayal of Jesus took place so “that the scripture might be fulfilled.” My final argument against this is simple: the apostle Paul talks about the revealing of the son of perdition in as a future occurrence (2 Thessalonians 2:3). And Paul wrote his epistle to the Thessalonians long after Judas Iscariot’s death. Therefore, the son of perdition cannot be only a title for Judas. Jesus may have been calling Judas an antichrist when he mentioned the son of perdition in John 17:12, but Paul was certainly not speaking of Judas in 2 Thessalonians 2:3.

Scripture provides evidence that the man of sin and the son of perdition are synonymous with the antichrist. These are all three titles of a man who denies that Christ came in the flesh (2 John 1:7, KJV), thereby denying the Father and the Son (1 John 2:22, KJV). The beast (equated with a horn or a king/kingdom) found in the prophetic writings of the Bible may correctly be labeled antichrist because it is characterized spiritually by its denial of God’s divinity (Daniel 11:36, KJV; Revelation 13:4-6, KJV) – this being no different from the character of the antichrist spirit (1 John 4:3, KJV).