Author Topic: Satanism = Bad?  (Read 8690 times)

x_XTacTX_x

  • CC:DBT Dream Team
  • Radical Dreamer (+2000)
  • *
  • Posts: 2079
  • I got myself a Paper Clip.
    • View Profile
Satanism = Bad?
« on: June 21, 2008, 02:12:33 pm »
Okay, I left Catholicism a long time ago. I drifted through a few religions, and about two years ago I settled in Universalism, more or less a third party viewer version of Buddhism. Lately though, I've been wanting to research other religions. I wanted to go into something not many people would dare to do. I googled "Pagan", and found out, to my surprise, it actually has nothing to do with the worship of the CHristian manifestation of Satan. Then something clicked, and I had a newfound urge,

Long story short, I found myself at a Satanism forum last night.

Now I'm not saying that I want to become Satanist, not in the least bit. After looking through some of the articles and threads on that site it's starting to creep me out more than ever. But what's been itching in the back of my mind now is that why Satanism is viewed as the asshole of religions. Sure, it's a little... Different, but what right does any other religion have to insult it?


Maybe this is a wierd topic, but this is pretty much the only place I can discuss something like this.

FaustWolf

  • Guru of Time Emeritus
  • Arbiter (+8000)
  • *
  • Posts: 8972
  • Fan Power Advocate
    • View Profile
Re: Satanism = Bad?
« Reply #1 on: June 21, 2008, 02:30:40 pm »
Hahaha, this is one I haven't seen before. I can understand the friction with Catholicism, I've done some heavy re-interpretation of the religion, to the point that many mainstream Catholics might not consider me a Catholic. I self-style myself a Liberal Catholic Relativist, whatever the heck that means.

I may have a serious misunderstanding of Satanism, but from the documentaries I've watched it seems to have a focus on the godhood of the individual. While I am attracted to the idea of the Divine in the Human, I have serious misgivings with Satanism due to the arrogance it seems to espouse. The weird ceremonies and Marylin-Manson-goth-makeup stuff don't bother me, but that does. After all, in Catholicism, we're supposed to eat God every Sunday.

EDIT: I should say, though, that arrogance plays into many other religions as well. Most mainstream Christians believe that an acknowledgment of Jesus' divinity is the only path to salvation, and that everyone who doesn't subscribe to this belief is destined for Hell. Thus, the belief that Christians are "better" than people of other faiths lies not far behind. This situation may not bother atheists and non-Christians, but it does bother me as a Christian, perhaps paradoxically so. Thus my reinterpretation of my own religion and where it stands in respect to other worldviews.
« Last Edit: June 21, 2008, 02:59:11 pm by FaustWolf »

MsBlack

  • Squaretable Knight (+400)
  • *
  • Posts: 458
    • View Profile
Re: Satanism = Bad?
« Reply #2 on: June 21, 2008, 05:18:19 pm »
Okay, I left Catholicism a long time ago. I drifted through a few religions, and about two years ago I settled in Universalism, more or less a third party viewer version of Buddhism. Lately though, I've been wanting to research other religions. I wanted to go into something not many people would dare to do.

Wow. Just wow. Anybody have the time to count how many things are wrong with this?

FaustWolf

  • Guru of Time Emeritus
  • Arbiter (+8000)
  • *
  • Posts: 8972
  • Fan Power Advocate
    • View Profile
Re: Satanism = Bad?
« Reply #3 on: June 21, 2008, 05:30:29 pm »
I guess I wasn't surprised by that part of Tact's post in the least; it's something so many people go through. Not sure if it's a "nowadays" thing or if people have been doing the "try everything" approach for eons. My guess would be that they've yearned to do so for eons, but that the Internet promotes this trend by making it much easier to explore other religions. Finding meaning in the spiritual realm of one's life is no easy thing.

x_XTacTX_x

  • CC:DBT Dream Team
  • Radical Dreamer (+2000)
  • *
  • Posts: 2079
  • I got myself a Paper Clip.
    • View Profile
Re: Satanism = Bad?
« Reply #4 on: June 21, 2008, 05:53:40 pm »
MsBlack, if you're talking about the facts of Universalism, you're probably right. I never really went in depth with studying it. And I didn't say that I wanted to go jump around from religion to religion, I just said I wanted to study them. And really, The religious journey in my life isn't a big one:

Catholic, then Buddhist, then Universalist. And I'm only a kid. I don't see anything wrong with that.

MsBlack

  • Squaretable Knight (+400)
  • *
  • Posts: 458
    • View Profile
Re: Satanism = Bad?
« Reply #5 on: June 21, 2008, 06:00:23 pm »
(I began writing this before Reply #4)

Aye, wishful thinking has been around for aeons, as have arbitrary paradigm shifts and trying to be different by...being different...like many others. Really, I don't know the specifics, but Tact's post seemed to very strongly suggest a dilettantish attitude to religions. Less strongly suggested is veneration of Buddhism and obscure religion. And of course, he wants to 'go into to something' merely because it's 'something not many people would dare to do', which suggests not so much a concern for tenable ideologies so much as seeming apart from the crowd for its own sake.

...why Satanism is viewed as the asshole of religions.

I think the answer is, rather simply, the suggestion of its name and thus its reputation. To many religious folks, Satan -- or their equivalent thereof -- is viewed as an ultimate, irredeemable evil; 'the opposite of God'. Thus, 'Satanism' suggests an ideology that worships or venerates or honours or idolises (etc.) this great evil. Plus, as FaustWolf touched upon, some 'Satanists' are just trying to be 'different' or are 'shock jockeys' or seem sinister, intimidating, threatening and so on, giving the mere term a bad reputation.

(Having read Reply #4)

...I didn't say that I wanted to go jump around from religion to religion...

Using the verb 'to go into' (it is a verb, right?) was ambiguous and your post suggested (to me) that you did want to do that. However, I'll 'let you off' on a technicality.

And really, The religious journey in my life isn't a big one:

Catholic, then Buddhist, then Universalist.

When does a 'religious journey' become 'big'? Furthermore, what is a religious journey? Consider also that many (perhaps even a vast majority of) people follow only one religion for their whole lives. Even more follow only one position on religion (e.g. deism, theism, atheism, agnosticism and the others there probably are) throughout their whole lives.

And I'm only a kid. I don't see anything wrong with that.

The age card? Hoo hah! 'Don't make me laugh!'

The whole 'religion' part seems 'wrong', but that's a train for another journey...

If you're capable of distinguishing between the ideologies of religions and choosing them freely, you have no excuse for idly and superficially adopting them. Right?
« Last Edit: June 21, 2008, 06:22:13 pm by MsBlack »

Lakonthegreat

  • Chronopolitan (+300)
  • *
  • Posts: 328
  • Love this community, and care for it as your own.
    • View Profile
    • My Myspace
Re: Satanism = Bad?
« Reply #6 on: June 21, 2008, 06:12:29 pm »
I will say this. I'm an Assembly of God, tongue-speakin' Christian. One of my best friends is a Satanist. I don't see anything wrong with the ideals and values of the religion. It's basic principle is "Do whatever makes you feel good, just don't hurt anyone else in the process." However, the rites and practices of the religion are what creates such a negative view of it. Some of the various rituals and chants turn people off. This is where I feel my opinion comes into play, because people are freaked out by my Christian denomination as well, almost for the same reason. I may be a Christian, but I'll never judge anyone for anything they do. If you want to worship a goat, I don't care. Just don't start telling me that my religion isn't worth anything because we don't worship a goat.

So in conclusion, it's not a bad religion in itself, but some of the rites and practices (Just as in my church) are viewed as kind of weird by everyone who doesn't understand it. I'm telling you, I'm 20, and therefore have had a long time to think about my lifelong religious affiliation. This is what works for me, I know it to be right, but it might not be right for everyone. So therefore, experiment around while you're a kid. Experiment for as long as you can.

FaustWolf

  • Guru of Time Emeritus
  • Arbiter (+8000)
  • *
  • Posts: 8972
  • Fan Power Advocate
    • View Profile
Re: Satanism = Bad?
« Reply #7 on: June 21, 2008, 09:56:06 pm »
It's truly strange, but I find the situation of a friendship between an Assembly of God Christian and a Satanist truly heartwarming. There may be hope for the human race after all. Thanks for sharing that Lakon.

Lakonthegreat

  • Chronopolitan (+300)
  • *
  • Posts: 328
  • Love this community, and care for it as your own.
    • View Profile
    • My Myspace
Re: Satanism = Bad?
« Reply #8 on: June 21, 2008, 10:15:00 pm »
It's truly strange, but I find the situation of a friendship between an Assembly of God Christian and a Satanist truly heartwarming. There may be hope for the human race after all. Thanks for sharing that Lakon.

Well like I said, I can't judge someone on their belief system. i judge by the person.

I have hope for the human race too, and that's why I'm like that lol.

x_XTacTX_x

  • CC:DBT Dream Team
  • Radical Dreamer (+2000)
  • *
  • Posts: 2079
  • I got myself a Paper Clip.
    • View Profile
Re: Satanism = Bad?
« Reply #9 on: June 21, 2008, 10:20:01 pm »
If you're capable of distinguishing between the ideologies of religions and choosing them freely, you have no excuse for idly and superficially adopting them. Right?

Don't make me laugh. You think I just ran around, picking a bunch of religions randomly like paper slips from a hat? For your information, choosing a religion after leaving the Catholic church, which was an exteremely difficult decision in itself, was one of the hardest fucking things in my life. There's a reason I said 'drifted'. I didn't mean to say something along the lines of "Jewish one day, Hindu the next", I meant I spent months looking for a religion that I felt I belonged in. Don't you dare think I'm some attention-seeking brat who thinks he's so deep and brooding just because he thinks he acts out of the norm.

Lord J Esq

  • Moon Stone J
  • Hero of Time (+5000)
  • *
  • Posts: 5463
  • ^_^ "Ayla teach at college level!!"
    • View Profile
Re: Satanism = Bad?
« Reply #10 on: June 21, 2008, 11:51:25 pm »
The believer who drifts from their own religion and experiments with others is halfway to an eiphany: They've figured that their old religion doesn't have the answers that it claimed. What they have yet to realize is that none of the other religions have those answers, either—because those answers don't even exist, since the questions are phony. Unfortunately, those are the questions the believer is raised to ask from birth, and, until the believer realizes this, he or she is cursed to remain drifting, until either they settle into a new package of bogus answers, or until the numbness of seeking to touch mirages finally dispirits them.

Religions are built up out of wishful thinking, social control, and community. That's all. They aren't as special as they claim, nor as mystical, wise, or hallowed. They haven't got answers that would hold up to real scrutiny. They don't enjoy any particular connection to the profound truths of philosophy, above and beyond the kinds of truths you might find at the grocery store, or listening to Ray Charles, or standing in line at the bank. Religions are posers and pretenders for weak-minded dead-enders who haven't got the brains or the drive to stand on their own legs and thrive philosophically.

I know it makes me sound intolerant to talk like this. That's because it is intolerance. Today in Seattle was the Fremont Solstice Parade, an event which features, among other things, public nudity and body art. It's the one day of the year when my fellow Seattleites, living in our puritanical, sex-obsessed culture, can put aside all of the norms and rules of society—which tell us to pretend that the naked human form doesn't exist, and that our real skin is the clothes we wear—and celebrate the vitality, diversity, agility, beauty, and vulnerability of the human body. It's a beautiful sight, and yet, on every other day of the year, you'd get arrested for painting yourself green and riding nude on a bicycle down a public street.

It seems we have a contradiction, so somebody has to be wrong: Is the parade wrong, or is the puritanism wrong? Is society wrong that public nudity is a threat to order and morality? Or is public nudity indeed such a threat?

That's the interesting thing here: There is at least a chance that society is wrong, and that those of us who buy into the religious premise of “hiding our shame” are living a lie 364 days a year...or 365 days a year on leap years such as this. And don't get me started on the many thousands of Seattlelites who, even today, still think that public nudity is wrong, and would never have gone to the parade. I think this is one of those strange occasions when a vast majority of the people may indeed be wrong 100 percent of the time. We have this moral ban on nudity, and it never gets questioned...but that doesn't make it right.

So here I am now: I'm not just dismissing one religion. I'm dismissing every religion, and I'm suggesting that your drifting is only the beginning of a much more difficult process of illumination. I've made up my mind about the merits and nature of religion, by careful scrutiny and hard thought, and that's why I am intolerant toward it. To me, it's bunk. And, although my opinion stands in opposition to the everyday lives and unquestioned values of billions...there is at least the chance that I have a point.

That's what you'll have to figure out for yourself, by looking at religions for what they really are—not what they tell you they are—and deciding what it is that is most important to you. But for what my opinion may be worth, if you're flirting with Satanism, why even bother? Why submit yourself like that? If you want to be controlled by something in your life, look elsewhere! There are better ways to serve. And if you want to be your own person, the Satanists aren't any closer to it than the Catholics are. Satanists are just living in the oppressed minority rather than the entrenched majority, and so are that much more edgy and alternative about their religious precepts. Don't make the mistake of thinking that something novel or uncommon is any more credible than something universally common, simply because it is novel or uncommon. That's not how it works. If you were to think of nudity as a good thing simply because most people hide from it, then you shall have taken the wrong lesson. So too with Satanism...and with any religion, large or small, popular or unpopular.

Strive to judge by a higher standard than popularity. Strive to judge by a higher standard than the cheap religious morals by which so many other people justify their evil. Know yourself, and religion won't be necessary.
« Last Edit: June 21, 2008, 11:53:33 pm by Lord J esq »

x_XTacTX_x

  • CC:DBT Dream Team
  • Radical Dreamer (+2000)
  • *
  • Posts: 2079
  • I got myself a Paper Clip.
    • View Profile
Re: Satanism = Bad?
« Reply #11 on: June 21, 2008, 11:55:41 pm »
That might have been the most eye opening thing i've read.... ever.


woah.

Lakonthegreat

  • Chronopolitan (+300)
  • *
  • Posts: 328
  • Love this community, and care for it as your own.
    • View Profile
    • My Myspace
Re: Satanism = Bad?
« Reply #12 on: June 22, 2008, 12:13:51 am »
Strive to judge by a higher standard than the cheap religious morals by which so many other people justify their evil. Know yourself, and religion won't be necessary.

Now, to understand where I stand with my religion.

Christianity is a religion, yes. But I despise religion for the same reasons that you posted.

I've chosen not to follow a religion, but a close personal relationship directly with the deity I worship. I receive my spiritual gratification from worshiping and spending time with this deity.

Burning Zeppelin

  • God of War (+3000)
  • *
  • Posts: 3137
    • View Profile
    • Delicate Cutters
Re: Satanism = Bad?
« Reply #13 on: June 22, 2008, 01:08:07 am »
A naked, green Lord J riding a bicycle? Pictures please.

Also, and sorry if this has been asked, but are you into Laveyan Satanism or theistic Satanism?
I've chosen not to follow a religion, but a close personal relationship directly with the deity I worship.
Some would call that "deluding yourself"

Daniel Krispin

  • Guest
Re: Satanism = Bad?
« Reply #14 on: June 22, 2008, 02:57:32 am »
That might have been the most eye opening thing i've read.... ever.


woah.

Hm... and yet keep in mind what was posted was, by and large, Nietzschien philosophy, which is just another system, as it were (though, even as you said of the post, he can be rather eye opening in his own way.) Keep in mind that if there is absolute truth (speaking hypothetically), and it exists apart from one's self, then looking only inside oneself will avail nothing. It's obviously a tough call to make, but such claims as these may be no less constrictive in their own fashion. The problems I have with such arguments are the selfsame ones I might have with Nietzsche.

I suppose the question that must be asked is... if we are to break our moral chains, as it were... what happens if there are, indeed, unescapable chains? There is a strong desire in Nietzsche to break out of the herd, as it were. To some extent I find that commendable, but it must be wondered... are we just deceiving ourselves into a delusional freedom thereby? Basically I'm asking, what if freedom is, in fact, not only freedom of will, but free knowledge (knowledge free of ignorance), and as such one becomes less free, though they think themselves more free.

It's popularly considered in some circles that religion, and in particular Christianity, is a system for the weak. That may well be... strike that, it definitely is. But the question we must ask is... what if we are all, inherently, weak? What if, as much as we will ourselves otherwise, we cannot be strong, and in doing so do not end up truly free, but only put ourselves under another form of control that we perceive even less... that is, merely exchange the names in things. A cow that leaves the constraints of its pasture may soon be subjected to the necessity of finding food on its own... self determination, perhaps, but it is still bondage, after a fashion. But we call one 'free' and the other not... why? Or for another example, take Democracy... it is freedom's cry, but how many of us are truly free under it? And how many of us live under the illusion of freedom whilst still enthralled to the demagogues? So I wonder if this idea that's put forward of individual strength is not a similar delusion which promises freedom, but instead will only give us bondage to masters we cannot perceive so well as the old tyrants which governed us. So you must consider if someone can ever even be strong or free, or if those are merely titles we give to things in order to shift around our chains so as to make them easier to bear. Now such a thought is reprehensible to some. But just because it is reprehensible in opinion, doesn't make it not so. A prisoner might hate the chains, but that doesn't mean the chains aren't there.

Just some further things to consider. It is very easy to question the standing morality and the social norms these days... in fact, it has come into vogue and fashion in many places. But how about we question the question? Not in that one should not consider why one hold the beliefs they have... but you must also ask yourself... why do so many consider their base beliefs wrong by default? That is, why do we so unquestioningly question, as if the doubt is more important that the pursuit of finding what is real and not. Doubt is an important part of a fulfilled mind, it's true, but if you doubt only to doubt, only because you think 'well, I obviously am not going to go just with what I was taught', be careful. What you were taught at first may not be right... but it may also be. Why, after all, are we believing that because the majority believes it, because it's the ruling theocracy, as it were, that it must be wrong? Is this not the indocrination of a type of philosophy that disdains any sort of rule whatsoever? And if so, aren't we then just buying into another belief system in order to judge that whatever is believed by the majority is an oppression by matter of necessity? What validates that?

For example, we have had it questioned why this all is good for one day, but not for many. It seems hypocrisy. And yet, by what laws shall we be governed? By anarchy? Perhaps, and yet even there we will have discontent. The thing is, custom is not something that we should just flout because we think it is a blind indoctrination: many things are, indeed, most of what makes us human is. Look at our forms of speech... it's not by accident that the ancient Greek Hesiod said of speech to be 'dividing thought.' We organize thought into certain forms in order to bring across ideas. How are we capable of this? Because those organizational categories are constructed into us as we grow. We are, in a sense, civilized as we mature, and in fact that process is indoctrination: we become a slave to the organization of thoughts in the human fashion. We take what is abstraction in the mind and we formalize it. What was once instinct becomes conscious. It becomes chained and ruled by the reason of our minds. And what's to be said for this? We have become indoctrinated into civilization.

Language is but one aspect. Others are the social customs we have. Now the point is... it might seem very attractive to cast out certain aspects of our constriction, but don't assume we're suddenly making ourselves free or, indeed, that much seperates the use of language from the regular use of clothing. The use of writing. The 'use' of anything. Morality, social morality, is a system which, over the length of time, has been shown to work and to keep us continuing. Call it an evolutionary byproduct of culture. Now, feel free to cast out what you will, but you'll be making a grave mistake to do so so blithely... because we, in our limited scope of vision, cannot always perceive what use things have. There was a time when doctors did not know the use of many parts of the body, but that did not make them useless or redundant. What if they'd tried to remove them? So there's your answer for the question of the public nudity. Social norms exist for a reason. The reason might be outmoded, or it might not. But for individuals to suddenly choose to remove them is an unwarranted and unlearned leap. As, I would add, is the stance that religion is uneccessary. What if it performs a useful social function that we are unaware of consciously?

Right, right, we can all be strong on our own... we think. But what if we can't. Well, I guess we need some to dare it. But I don't think the person has yet existed who has not had faith or reliance in something. And as long as there is faith, we'll have religion, or at least the spark which is at the core of the religious temper. At any rate, I think we're always willfully deluding ourselves. Unless we return to the base instinct of animals, we will always live under some delusion... but beneficial delusions! Maybe not to the individual... but even that which is harmful can have lasting benefits. A clever man once said that there can be no such thing as an evil person for that even those named evil have only spurred us to be better than before. Perhaps our delusions work in similar fashion. Perhaps our only hope is not escape from the delusions, as some would have, but merely understanding which ones govern us. Hm?

Of course, we need our plowmen of evil, too. So I'll not grudge those trying to turn over the soil. We will be better for it, I admit. I'm one of those old farmers still trying to coax what he can out of the old field. That's my part in all this.
« Last Edit: June 22, 2008, 03:17:20 am by Daniel Krispin »