Lucifer is the bringer of light, the illumination of knowledge and Gnosis. What can be said about Gnosis and being a Gnostic, is to be illuminated with Gnosis, the knowledge that transcends knowledge. To me, this will always remain an initiatory experience, that throughout the life of the Gnostic take shape in different levels according to each individual development.
But there seems to be many people who thinks of Gnosis as a mere cerebral knowledge. Added to that, people seem to confuse even more the difference between esoteric and exoteric Christianity (or in Satanism, or Luciferianism).
I see many Luciferians/Satanists/LHP’ers saying they are Gnostics, yet at the same time behaving very religious about certain myths/dogmas and ideological constructs regarding their particular flavour of religion.
Beware of the danger of starting to believe any of the myths. If you are a regular Christian (or Jew or Muslim or Theistic Satanist), you need just the faith and hence you are following a religion.
In Gnosticism there are so many different myths, sometimes confusing. Good thing. The Gnostic initiate should not swallow any of the myths. The key is non-acceptance, non-following, and non-believing. The myths serve a purpose, in the same way as certain Tools or magical processes do.
They give you an approximation a way to make sense of the inner processes.
Anything else is just jerking off.
My Luciferian path is heavily influenced by neoplatonsim, whose thinkers tended to clash with gnostics. It interests me to see where my ideas will differ from that of gnostics.
I find that gnostics tend to create anthromorphic representations of the archetypes such as the demiurge, and takes them out of context of how the neoplatonists would see the demiurge. I also note that stories are created around these anthromorphic representations, the added names like Lilith.
One thing I am trying to do is to keep faith to original sources rather than those that are spun by later ignorant or prejudiced thinkers.
It is not my place to impose any ideas onto others, but a clear line of authenticity to original source material would make for a stronger paradigm.