Is Satanism Pagan? [Archive] - MysticWicks Online Pagan Community and Spiritual Sanctuary

Kaylara

June 18th, 2001, 12:50 PM

Well, here's my take on it...
Satanism and Wicca have a whole lot in common, as do Wicca and Hermetic magick... There is a good reason for this...

When Gerald Gardner was getting together his coven, he was friends with Aliester Crowley... I think that he took a lot of the ways that Crowley had, and changed the so that there was a difference... The person who really filled out the gaps in Wicca was Doreen Valiente, by really giving the women in the craft power...

Anton Levay, if you look at many of the laws in Satanism, took a lot from Gardenarian Wicca as a basis for his religion. He like Gardner before him changed a bit of it to fit his personal way of thinking, and modern Satanism was born... (hatched?)

Personally, I think that yes, Satanism is pagan... Do I agree with it? No. Many of the Satanists I have known over the years are painfully ignorant, and do very little research... (I'm not saying all of them, but most of the ones that I've known are like this...) I saw a special on Dateline I think it was, a few months back about Satanism, and dear Goddess, they made the entire Satanic community look like complete morons... :( The had the person who took over for Anton LeVay after his death, and the man just came off looking like a brainwashed idiot... I was shaking my head the whole time... It's just really sad how little research most people do before they decide that they are this religion or that religion...

I think that if more people took the time to really try to understand their own spiritual yearnings, that we would have a much more peaceful, and learned world...

Just my thoughts on it...

Kaylara

Armitage

June 18th, 2001, 02:06 PM

I voted that I don't really care. It's not that i don't respect theirs or anyone elses' beliefs but what does it matter? I'm kinda sick of people needing to categorize, pigeonhole and identify. Especially with something so nebulous as a belief system.
And yes, I know this is so it's not equated with other, more benign belief systems, and it's futile. That kind of thing will continue until Paganism is widely accepted and even afterwards, because of how it is viewed and who the viewers are.

Cailleach Dubh

June 18th, 2001, 02:23 PM

Armitage: yes good point, at the end of the day, pagan or not, so what?

Kaylara,
Be very careful of generalisations. You now know of at least one other Satanist who is not an idiot, (BSc, MSc, PhD...nearly). True enough, many teenage so called "Satanists" are idiots (I suspect these are the people you have encountered "over the years"), they are attracted to it because of its "hard" image, and have no idea of what the religion is to adult practitioners.

If there is similarity between Wiccan practices and Satanism it is due to the fact that VERY little of Gardners work was original. Aleister Crowley was certainly an influence on both men, that doesnt mean that LaVey "ripped off" Wicca (Satan forbid :)). And I don't know what "laws" you mean, the nine Satanic Statements? The rules of the earth? Believe me, they are a far cry from anything in Wicca.

I have no idea what this Dateline program was, bear in mind though, that the producers doubtless had a agenda to make them look as stupid as possible and I'm sure they went out of their way to find the biggest bunch of kooks they could find. In addition, there is no way the man interviewed was the successor to LaVey, because his successor is a *woman*.

Greenthumb

June 18th, 2001, 03:07 PM

So possibly, if Satanists stepped forward, and explained the true aspects of the faith(?), do you think that alot of the "stigma" one automatically associates with Satanism could be curtailed? Because I beleive that it is that which makes sects of people want to differentiate themselves and their doctrines from even looking satanistic.

greenthumb

Rick

June 18th, 2001, 05:46 PM

Originally posted by Cailleach Dubh
Be very careful of generalisations. You now know of at least one other Satanist who is not an idiot, (BSc, MSc, PhD...nearly).

Personally. I know a lot of well-educated, multi-lettered idiots. None of them, however, have Celtic (Gaelic? Welsh? Sorry, I keep gettin' 'em mixed up) names. :)

In addition, there is no way the man interviewed was the successor to LaVey, because his successor is a *woman*.

What happened to Michael... Uh, What's-his-name? Aquino? You know, Edred Thorsson's buddy...

Wyrdsister

June 18th, 2001, 05:57 PM

Originally posted by Lilu
I would recommend checking out the Church of Satan's website, they have a lot of interesting information there.
Would that be www.satan.com?

Wyrdsister

Lilu

June 18th, 2001, 07:55 PM

It's www.churchofsatan.com :)

Lilu

Lilu

June 18th, 2001, 07:57 PM

Hmmmmm, there's also www.churchofsatan.org

I'm not sure if they are for the same thing or not.

Cailleach Dubh

June 18th, 2001, 08:14 PM

Originally posted by Rick

Personally. I know a lot of well-educated, multi-lettered idiots. None of them, however, have Celtic (Gaelic? Welsh? Sorry, I keep gettin' 'em mixed up) names. :)

Hehe! I was waiting to get slagged over that, its quite true, I know plenty of multi-lettered idiots as well!
Its Irish btw :)

What happened to Michael... Uh, What's-his-name? Aquino? You know, Edred Thorsson's buddy...

Aquino is LaVey's successor only in his fantasies, he's head of the the Temple of Set , a group that split from the COS in the 70's.

And that second internet address is NOT for the COS, thats another group who think they were quite clever in having an addy that could be confused for that of the COS.

Lilu

June 18th, 2001, 08:22 PM

Thanks for the clarification on the URL Cailleach, I was pretty certain it was the first one, but you can't always tell with these things. The first one was the one I am familiar with anyway. :D

Spirahl

June 19th, 2001, 12:28 AM

Why name your religion after a being that you don't even believe to exist? This is the one thing that I do not understand about Satanism- it seems like the very name of the religion was only meant to rub people the wrong way. I've wondered if Satanism was really more of a protest against religion in general. I could be way off the mark here, but Cailleach, religious wars have run rampant across the face of the earth since...forever...but I think this could be very much an in your face fact in Ireland? Do you think your views are somewhat reactionary? In your face right back at 'em?:smash:

Daniel

June 19th, 2001, 04:42 AM

I myself used to think that Satanism was about an in-your-face rejection of religion in general (or at least Christianity); hence the Satanic Bible, the inverted crucifix, and so on. I have come to believe, however, that it's more about the rejection of certain principles. Some regard them as the result of higher wisdom, while Satanists seem to regard them as highly ammusing.

For example, the belief that to think it is to do it (thinking about having sex with a stranger being the same as actually fornicating), or the belief that one should respond passively to an assailant (physical or otherwise). Right along with these go the significance of sin, self-denial, and faith in anything other than the individual. Additionally, Satanists seem to go in for indulgance, responsibility for one's own actions, and ultimate control of one's own destiny. God is not an all-knowing, all-loving creature but merely the heartless equalizer of Nature that keeps the Wheel turning.

I don't think it's so much about "do whatever the hell you want," as it is that such principles keep people from realizing their full potential. It is my contention that if it were truely about such reckless behavior, neither Satanists nor Satanism would have lasted very long. As for the reason for calling it Satanism to begin with, I would but suggest that Satan, as Christ's nemesis, is an excellent namesake for a path that strikes the bulk Christ's teachings as irrelevent and counterproductive.

In any event, while this may strike one as the antithesis of Christianity for mocking's sake, the existance of Satanism strikes me as a perfectly logical one. Coins do not have a single side, nor can one percieve light without the existance of shadow.

bansidhe

June 20th, 2001, 01:51 AM

i honestly think that it depends on how you classify religions. Most texts i've read classify any religion that isn't Abrahamic (Christianity, Judaism and Islam) as Pagan. So this includes, Druidry, Hinduism, Buddhism, Wicca, Satanism, Asatru..... the list goes on. I don't agree with the beliefs of satanism (the few that i know) if i did, i suppose i'd probly be a satanist, wouldnt i (duh bans), but i do tolerate them, because i consider every belief to be valid to the believer, and personally im sick of people telling me that Druidry isnt a valid religion / way of life / path / whatever. well, there you go, ive but in my share! :p
blessings, bans.

mythril

June 21st, 2001, 01:49 AM

I said no, because paganism embraces the beliefs of divinity, even though different pagan faiths believe in different names for divinity, and earth mother, and that we must be humble because we were created by a higher force.

And satanists think themselves as their own god as has been said already and so they do whatever they like. Of course it depends on the person practicing this faith. in all faiths there are some ignorant people.

but i guess it doesn't really matter in the end, we are all family.

anyway , thats my opinion :)
any criticism? ;)

moonmorgan

June 24th, 2001, 08:06 PM

As far as I know, Paganism means any earth religion. Since satanists do no worship the earth, it makes sense that they aren't pagans. Right??

mythril

June 25th, 2001, 02:09 AM

i agree

Fawn

June 25th, 2001, 04:31 PM

I have to say that Satanism is a a pagan religon. They do work with deities just as wiccans do---they do work with not agaqinst nature. They do not sacrifice animals nor eat babies-they are not cold cruel people in fact the people that I have encountered are very intelligent and great fun. And here's you a kicker---damn good friends to have!!!!

mythril

June 26th, 2001, 01:27 AM

Thanks for your view fawn.
although, paganism is pre christian and satanism was created when christianity came and only because of christianity.
So satanism is not pre christian, therefore i don't think it is a pagan belief system.

:)

what do u think?

Cailleach Dubh

June 26th, 2001, 07:30 AM

All the old chestnuts in this thread I see:

Spirahl: I'm trying hard not to feel patronised by that post. Unlike, doubtless a great number of people on this board, I was never, as an adult (>13 yrs), a Xian. Neither of my parents are practicing Xians, and except for some failed attempts at brainwashing in school, I cannot honestly say Xianity was ever forced upon me. It is a common misconception that Satanism is merely "Inverse Xianity" or a religious protest, it *isn't*, if it was I would have no interest in it. While Satanism may have reactionary elements, they are no more reactionary than, say, the feminism of Wicca. Reaction has its place. However, in both religions the reactionary elements are only part of a whole. And no, living in Ireland has nothing to do with it.

The question of why Satanism is named such, is a complex one, which can be answered on many levels, however, I haven't the time (nor the inclination, as I have just answered this question for someone else) to go into that right now. Ask me some other time! On the other board maybe ;)

Re: Whether or not Satanism is pagan or not (again). There can always be a definition that excludes Satanism (if that is your agenda). It is a matter of indifference to me, this morning at least :) Although that is liable to change without notice. As for not "worshipping" nature; the concept of "worship" is anathema to Satanism. However, as I have pointed out previously, there is a huge reverence for the power of nature, in fact I could easily argue for Satanism as, if not more, nature focussed than many other? pagan religions. Man is considered an animal like any other; non-human animals (and children) are held sacred as they are the uncorrupted manifestation of the "dark force" of nature. There is no higher being, there is only man and nature, and through Satanism, man seeks to reconcile that artificially created dicotomy.

If you want to define pagan as "nature worshipping" and seek to exclude Satanism on that basis, then Xian sects like the Amish, who strongly venerate the earth/nature, would probably qualify as pagan; and a group like the Temple of Set who worship the Egyptian god Set, but not "nature", wouldn't. However, as far as I'm aware the Egyptian pantheon is considered very much "pagan"!

Mythril: Sure, paganism was pre-Xian, but neo-paganism is *not*. Are you trying to suggest Wicca is pre-Xian? Does anyone who has been a Wiccan for more than a week believe that? There is probably more real pre-Xian paganism in Catholicism (certainly true of the Irish variety), than Wicca. I'm not going to get into the origins of Wicca- I reckon most people know it , or the distinctly post-Xian nature of what is termed "Witchcraft", but I humbly suggest some swotting up of objective sources may be in order.

As an aside, one of the most influential books on the whole neo-pagan revival, directly influencing Margret Murray and Charles Leland, was the famous work on witchcraft by Jules Michelet: La Sorciere (1862), and this is a work of literary Satanism!

It is detrimental, I believe, to argue about semantics on order to exclude one particular group or another, eventually, if a Satanist is discriminated against, then there is every reason to expect the same may befall a Wiccan. You are either fighting for religious tolerance or you're not, you can't point a finger saying "but its OK to discriminate against them, they're not like us" as this will ultimately undermine your own position.

Kaylara

June 26th, 2001, 07:59 AM

*clapping*

Spirahl

June 26th, 2001, 08:29 AM

SORRY CAILLEACH:
that's why I said "I may be way off the mark here". Playing Devil's Advocate. I was just thinking/reacting aloud, and as it turns out, very off the mark. But I know you can take it!;) I know you to be an intelligent and mature woman, not a kid searching and rebelling- that's why I knew you could answer my ? without slamming me TOO badly or getting OVERLY upset. I'm ducking and running here...
I know youv'e mentioned Marilyn Manson before and I know you don't have the fondest feelings where he is concerned. And I suppose my above off-the-cuff remarks are the result of his ummm...flamboyance. Now there is a great Irishwoman (at least I think so) Sinead O'Conner, who when I was in highschool, tore up a pic of the Pope on "Saturday Night Live". Of course, being a teenybopper at the time, I thought this was hilarious! I saw her being interveiwed on TV a couple of years ago, and she said that although her views are still much the same, that age has mellowed her.
That she now knows a whisper is sometimes heard more clearly than a shout.
I thought that very wise and something that Mr. Manson should think about (ya, me too8O ). For a lot of people, Manson's antics are the only view they have of Satanism. (I'm totally discounting those "they eat babies..." types here).
And before any young people take offense...no I am not slagging you, or saying that you are rebellious or that your opinions don't matter. These things are associated with youth, but not neccessarily contained in every young person. Quite often adults feel rebellious too, and this serves a very important function: free-thinking.
Now I will go back to my lurking...but I was directly addressed here and wanted to clear things up with Cailleach. I sincerely hope that I have.

mythril

June 26th, 2001, 09:00 AM

Cailleach Dubh:
You obviously have researched alot on this subject,
Lets look at it point by point.

I noticed that u said that quote "There is no higher being, there is only man and nature, and through Satanism, man seeks to reconcile that artificially created dicotomy. "

This point alone sais that satanism is not pagan as all pagans believe in a higher power no matter what their faith, and satanism does not i gather.

Mairwen

June 26th, 2001, 09:13 AM

Originally posted by moonmorgan
As far as I know, Paganism means any earth religion. Since satanists do no worship the earth, it makes sense that they aren't pagans. Right??

Well, I was going to stay out of this discussion until I read this, but now I'm stepping in. Why is it assumed that you have to be Earth-centered to be Pagan? My tradition certainly isn't Earth-centered, but it is Pagan Traditionalist Craft.

Kaylara

June 26th, 2001, 09:28 AM

Same thing with Golden Dawners, Ceremonial Magicians, etc. They are still pagan.

Kaylara

Mairwen

June 26th, 2001, 09:45 AM

Thank you, Kaylara.

Cailleach Dubh

June 26th, 2001, 10:41 AM

OK, Spirahl, that's cool! *scrubs Spirahl off blacklist* ;)
I'm rather ambivalent about Manson, his Satanism *isn't* manifested in his stage antics, his music, or his persona, but rather in his calculated manipulation of the media (and his fanbase) to his own ends, his ambition, and his exploitation of the misconceptions of Satanism to further his notoriety. It not what he appears to be that is "Satanic" but the motivation and shrewdness that lies beneath. Unfortunately many people confuse his carefully contrived image with Satanism, and so think its all about drugs, shagging groupies and acting like a freak.

There is *no* satisfactory definition of paganism that can be arrived at today or ever perhaps.
Mythril, I understand what you are saying, however, this definition won't work either. That is merely your personal definition, and obviously I can't change your mind but consider the following..
All Xians/Jews/Muslims also believe in a higher being, and that doesn't make them pagan. Now, if you are trying to define what constitutes "religion" again you end up on shaky ground. I can offer up Buddism as an example, Buddists don't believe in "god" either, yet most would agree it is a religion. You could even make a case for Buddism being "pagan".

"Paganism" is a nebulous term, there is no point in trying to define a group out of it, unless there is an ulterior motive. How about a pagan is "anyone who thinks they are one" as a definition?

Mairwen/Kaylara: Regarding the nature worship issue, I think you are both right.
In relation to the Golden Dawn etc, many agree that this is "pagan" and yet GD magical practices are full of Jewish and Xian symbolism. However, I would not exclude them on this basis, as, like I said its damn near impossible to define the term.

Kaylara

June 26th, 2001, 09:51 PM

But many of the things that are common pagan practices are taken from similar sources. Crowley and Gardner was friends. Wicca has many of the same elements in it as Ceremonial Magick. When you come right down to it, we have more in common with other magickal paths and systems than many of us like to admit. The Golden Dawn and Satanism both have a bit of tarnish on their names, (most paths do, but these are seen as being the taboo paths) but if you look at many of the practices of different magickal systems, you find many many similarities.

Blessings,
Kaylara

mythril

June 27th, 2001, 01:46 AM

Cailleach :
your right, Ive decided to stop giving my opinions.
I guess it was from my point of view,
I am just going to hear you all out from now on. :)

I used to be christian when i was young, so i guess the views of christianity about satanism are still in the back of my conciousness,
But it doesn't matter what any individual follows as long as it is in 'love and light' (oooops, thats an overused saying, but i still like it.)

Mairwen

June 27th, 2001, 09:18 AM

Originally posted by mythril
But it doesn't matter what any individual follows as long as it is in 'love and light' (oooops, thats an overused saying, but i still like it.)

I think the whole "love and light" thing is a Wicca thing.

eaglewolf

June 27th, 2001, 12:54 PM

Originally posted by Mairwen

I think the whole "love and light" thing is a Wicca thing.

Yeah, you and all of the other misinformed fluffy followers...

~ew

Skye

June 27th, 2001, 01:50 PM

Originally posted by mythril
Cailleach :

But it doesn't matter what any individual follows as long as it is in 'love and light' (oooops, thats an overused saying, but i still like it.)

I am not going to classify this view with any particular path, but not all who are pagan believe soley in following 'love and light'.

I for one do not purposely go around hurting people, but if needed, I do not have a problem with the saying 'an eye of an eye', or using magik for the protection of myself and my family. I try 'love and light' first, if that doesn't work, things will get nasty.

mythril

June 28th, 2001, 02:25 AM

why do u say that eagle wolf?

Skye:
I agree that whatever a person does comes back to them,
but when we say love and light, we mean not causing a harmful situation in the first place.
But of course it is only natural to protect ones family but i don't think magick is the answer to that, watever energies you send out will come back to u so if u direct negative energy at another , be sure that u will only hurt yourself in the end.

otherwise, you are totaly correct.

Rick

June 28th, 2001, 09:36 AM

Originally posted by mythril
why do u say that eagle wolf?

Skye:
I agree that whatever a person does comes back to them,
but when we say love and light, we mean not causing a harmful situation in the first place.
But of course it is only natural to protect ones family but i don't think magick is the answer to that, watever energies you send out will come back to u so if u direct negative energy at another , be sure that u will only hurt yourself in the end.

otherwise, you are totaly correct.

Hmm... well, if you sow wheat, you're gonna reap wheat, not oats. If you send out negative, same analogy can apply. So, by this same reasoning, you CAN return negative energy sent toward you, 'cuz they have it coming.

Right?

I'm gonna just leave this at that, 'cuz my head is already spinning like that kid in the 'Exorcist'.

PS I'm glad that I'm an Odinsman, so's I don't have to much worry about moral & ethical things, can eat babies if I want, & just have to die bravely to get into Valhalla.

Yeah, right...

Skye

June 28th, 2001, 10:19 AM

Originally posted by Rick

Hmm... well, if you sow wheat, you're gonna reap wheat, not oats. If you send out negative, same analogy can apply. So, by this same reasoning, you CAN return negative energy sent toward you, 'cuz they have it coming.

Well said, good analogy, thanx Rick:)

Mythril,
I understand that alot of people today follow some kind of credes and rules, that give them a basis for their ethical practices My particular path, which has been around far longer then any modern crede, does not aknowledge these, therefore I feel no reason to follow them. These credes and rules, cover only a portion of the pagan community, there are many who do not follow these principals.

I would never tell someone not to follow what they believe. But be aware that not everyone believes the same things. This is what makes us unique. Unlike christians, who all have the bible for their guidance(even though they all interpret it differently), we pagans do not have a centralized dogma. Thank the Goddess, I don't think I would like being so limited in my practices and beliefs:D

Astraea

June 28th, 2001, 08:22 PM

Okay, I noticed people veered off the original subject, but I just wanted to post my view of Satanism.
I've researched Satanism, but that really makes no difference as far as my views of this are concerned. I consider a Pagan to be at least one of three things- someone who walks his or her own completely personalized spiritual path, someone who accepts the spiritual belief systems of old which which pre-dated Christianity, or someone who does not follow the major religions of the world- Christianity, Islam, or Judaism. These three religions are much more closely related to each other than they are to any other religion or belief system and I consider any spiritual path not associated with them to be Pagan.

With that in mind, Satanism is Pagan to me. Satanism is related to Christianity only in that it is intended to be an opposite of Christianity (constituently opposite).
You all might not agree with that, but this is my own definition of Pagan.

quixote

June 28th, 2001, 09:20 PM

Im not sure if it is pagan, but I've always thought satanism was just a backlash to the church's fearmongering. They have always put such emphasis on satan, almost deifying him-no wonder the teenagers go for it. Then there is the use of corrupted images of others deities as the various guises of satan. the church is learning now that fear is not always a good way to maintain control over the population. just my two cents worth.
Blessed Be
Quixote

mythril

June 29th, 2001, 01:49 AM

well said Rick.
I agree that if one is pestered by anothers negative energy, one should send it back.

Astraea
:if you put it in that way, then i guess satanism would be considered a pagan faith.

I really don't know if everyone will ever agree on this particular question because there are so many ways to look at it.

Don't know about you all but i am actually enjoying finding out others view points, very interesting.

Ravenhart

July 1st, 2001, 05:20 PM

Ok. I do NOT think that Satanism is a Pagan faith. Why do I think that? Well, let's look at the definition of Pagan. Pagan is a Latin term for farmer. Therefore, it is an Earth based faith. Since when was Satan derived from an Earth faith?
Now, let's look at Satan. Satan is a creation of the Christian faith. Basically, it is the Christian God's alter ego. He is a very very bad man. Satan is not a diety as the Bible tells us. He is a fallen angel.
So, Satanism is a Christian offbranch (making it a Christian faith) since Satan is a Christian character. We are made to think that Satanism is Pagan because the physical aspects of our Wiccan Horned God were put onto Satan.
Also, as I'm sure everyone reading this knows, the pentagram is not a symbol of Satan. It is the symbol of Wicca.
Ok. That's all I have to say. Satan no Pagan. Satan belong to Christianity.

Blessed Be!

Mairwen

July 1st, 2001, 06:54 PM

Originally posted by Ravenhart
Ok. I do NOT think that Satanism is a Pagan faith. Why do I think that? Well, let's look at the definition of Pagan. Pagan is a Latin term for farmer. Therefore, it is an Earth based faith. Since when was Satan derived from an Earth faith?

Well, it's already been said, but I'm going to say it again. Not all Pagans follow an earth-based/earth-centered Path.

Cailleach Dubh

July 1st, 2001, 09:10 PM

Ravenheart: ...well shucks that's cute, but you really should have read the rest of the thread before posting.
BTW: the pentagram is thousands of years old, it just happens to be used by *both* Wiccans and Satanists, albeit in different orientations, neither has exclusive right to it.

Astraea

July 1st, 2001, 09:23 PM

Mairwen, I completely agree with that.

Ravenhart, I'm not going to waste everyone's time repeating myself over my own views on this, I posted enough about it above. But I had to say a couple things in response to your post. I'm not made to think Satanism is Pagan because of the fact Christians "supposedly" used the Horned God image as an image of Satan. That has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not Satanism is Pagan.
Also, the pentagram is not a Wiccan symbol. The pentacle was adopted by Wiccans. The pentagram was around as long ago as 3500 B.C. It was used by the Mesopotamians, was a symbol of the goddess Ceres, was a symbol of the 5 books of the Pentatuech to the Hebrews, etc., etc. It was even used as a symbol of Baphomet (inverted) before the Satanists came around and claimed the inverted pentagram. It has been used by different cultures and people for different reasons over time. Saying it's a Wiccan symbol is a rather narrow minded statement- especially since most Wiccans use the pentacle and not the pentagram. And Wicca is not the only Pagan religion- many, many non-Wiccan Pagans use the pentagram or pentacle.

Yes Satanism was intended to be an opposite of Christianity. But it is not a Christian faith!
Also, the word "pagan" is not Latin for "farmer." It is derived from the word "pagus" which originally meant "something stuck in the ground as a landmark" and was also used to describe a rural district. It then became "paganus" which meant villager or country dweller. A farmer was a country dweller, but pagan never meant "farmer." With this in mind, your definition of Pagan makes no sense to me.

I noticed many non-pagans have misconceptions regarding many aspects of Paganism. It seems like a lot of Pagans have some misconceptions also.

mol

July 2nd, 2001, 11:14 AM

Originally posted by Lilu
Thanks for the info Cailleach, I have to say that just being called "Church of Satan" kind of gives the impression of being a religion doesn't it? My impressions came from a different site, which belonged to a Satanist I used to correspond with years ago, but I've since lost the link and his email address since we stopped writing, so I can't recommend it.

I think like most spiritual ideals, whether it becomes a religion or a philosophy to you, depends entirely on you.

I enjoyed the info and thoughts on the ritual practices etc. I have to agree with you on the paganism theme. My personal *understanding* of what paganism is and isn't would place Satanism in with paganism, but like someone else said, we would all have to come to a general consensus on the actual definition of Paganism before we could judge whether Satanism is in with it or not.

BB
Lilu

Some have said that the use of 'Church' in their name is really for mocking purposes....

mol

July 2nd, 2001, 11:16 AM

Why is this being discussed in Political Pagan?

;)

Mairwen

July 2nd, 2001, 11:17 AM

Well, here's something else. Even though we're a Pagan Tradition, we don't use the Pentacle/Pentagram in our practices. :D Most do. Some don't. :D

Epona44

July 2nd, 2001, 02:40 PM

I think if you buy into Satanism, you have to buy into Christian mythology.
Like it or not, Satanism is an offshoot of Christianity. One is tied
to the other.

Kaylara

July 2nd, 2001, 03:03 PM

Originally posted by mol
Why is this being discussed in Political Pagan?

;)

I don't know... Because I am a masochist?

Kaylara

Cailleach Dubh

July 2nd, 2001, 04:19 PM

Originally posted by Epona44
I think if you buy into Satanism, you have to buy into Christian mythology.
Like it or not, Satanism is an offshoot of Christianity. One is tied
to the other.

Satan almighty!
As I hate repeating myself.......all I have to say is NO!
And try reading the thread.
Any other theological genius gonna crawl out of the woodwork I wonder?

Revelation

July 2nd, 2001, 04:49 PM

To support CD here....

I know lots of Wiccans who follow Innana, Lilith, Isis....

and yet no one walks around saying, "Nope, you can't follow Innana, she belongs to the Babylonians" or "Nope, can't follow Lilith, she belongs to the JEws" or "Nope, can't follow Isis, she bleongs to the Kemetics..."

why does Satan have to belong to CHristianity? Wiccan usurp Deities out of other penthons all the time. WHy not the Satanists?

MistOfTheSea86

July 2nd, 2001, 05:39 PM

This is a very great forum! I have learned more about this subject in 10 minutes then I have in a year. I am just going to post what I feel. First I must state that Whomever I agree and disagree with, your points are still valid I am just basing mine off of them.

Satanism a pagan faith, I used to think no but I think that was because lack of research on my part. Thanks much to Callieo I have a much broader view. As from what I have read it is said that satanism was created long before Wicca and neo-paganism, but does not pre-date regular paganism. SO what is wrong with saying that it could be a pagan faith? How could we know, we have to read and read what others have researched they could have gotton something wrong somewhere. Could they have not? We are led to believe that it can not be Pagan because it uses Satan as it's prime name. I thought that there was something called Demonaltry that just used Demons as their guides or dietys and some of them use Satan. So could they be considered Satanists? Is not Demonolatry related to Satanism? Does this make them any less Valid? No it doesn't. They are all valid religions, it just comes to personal question. If you agree with what they do and can tolerate it.

I think that alot of people on hear are mixing up Wicca with Pagan. Therefore you are getting your opinions based off of Wicca practices not all Pagan practices. Not all Pagans are Wiccan. Wicca had been around for 50 some odd years and Pagan for nearly well a long time. SO along that period of many years Satanism could have been branched off many Pagan beliefs using Satan as their prime ruler to defie those who only think that their religion is right. Which could be the case with some in here also. Could Satanism be Pagan? Absouletely it had been around long enough, it uses many of their practices, some not. But that does not mean they can not be. It all falls on the individual and what he/she thinks to be right. And if they wish to carry on their narrow-mindness or actually research and figure out what the religion is and base their opinion off that.

Now I have another question. It has been told that many religions. Earth-based or no are based on ideas. And I have heard that Satanism is based on the idea of Defiance. Could this be true? If so does this make the religion not a religion, but an act of deifance against the Christian god? If so, are they saying that they believe in the Christian god? SO that it must be somewhat Christian based?. I am confused, can someone help
me.

Thanx again to all those who have responded to this post. You have broadened my view. And since being a teenager, this will really help, and pherhaps it will help me be less rebellious :) To those who said that. JK Keep on postin and educatin

Daniel

July 3rd, 2001, 03:54 AM

Originally posted by MistOfTheSea86
Now I have another question. It has been told that many religions. Earth-based or no are based on ideas. And I have heard that Satanism is based on the idea of Defiance. Could this be true? If so does this make the religion not a religion, but an act of deifance against the Christian god? If so, are they saying that they believe in the Christian god? SO that it must be somewhat Christian based?. I am confused, can someone help
me.That's a very interesting question. As far as I know, the Bible seems to describe the worship of anything other than the god of Israel as rebellion against the one true god. "Sorcery," in particular, is cited as a particularly heinous form of rebellion.

Satanism, when it comes to rebellion against the god of Israel, is something of a special case. The Satanic Bible actually cites Satan as the best friend the Church has ever had (for an assortment of reasons). This, to some, might tend to lend credence to the idea that Satanism is primarily about defying "God," and derives its principles from Christian mythos.

On the other hand, I've always found it interesting to investigate how much Roman Catholisism has in common with Wicca. Perhaps it's Wicca-based.

MistOfTheSea86

July 3rd, 2001, 03:56 AM

Ya never know:D

MistOfTheSea86

July 3rd, 2001, 04:00 AM

I just noticed something...If you look on one of the other posts it says is Stanism Pagan? I just thought that was funny cause I have a friend named Stan who is totally against every religion and when people ask him about it, he just says I am part of teh Stanism religion. LOL just thought I would share

Kaylara

July 3rd, 2001, 09:07 AM

That's ok, I've been told a zillion times online that I worship Satin. LMAO!

Kaylara

Rævyn Cigány

July 3rd, 2001, 09:49 AM

Originally posted by Kaylara
That's ok, I've been told a zillion times online that I worship Satin. LMAO!

Kaylara

Hey! I worship Satin too! It feels SO nice on the skin and....:eek: AHEM...sorry....WAYYYYYYYYYYYYY off topic! ;)

BB

Rae )0(

Rævyn Cigány

July 3rd, 2001, 09:51 AM

Originally posted by MistOfTheSea86
I just noticed something...If you look on one of the other posts it says is Stanism Pagan? I just thought that was funny cause I have a friend named Stan who is totally against every religion and when people ask him about it, he just says I am part of teh Stanism religion. LOL just thought I would share

LOL!!! My hubby has a friend where anything witty that he says (which these days are few and far between :p) is called a Chadism!!!

BB

Rae )0(

Phrater

July 4th, 2001, 08:05 PM

Satan itself is a Judeo Christian Concept.
The christians created it and they can keep it.

:confused: There are few things that bother me more than
the ignorance that would group us with their sillyness.

Although there is a funny link. Ever think that it is funny,
how the later christian artists made Satan look a lot like
Pan? The Horns, The goat legs. The Tail, the goatee.

But then again... look at how much eggs have to
do with easter and evergreen trees and wreaths
have to do with Christmas... lol :D

Rævyn Cigány

July 5th, 2001, 01:31 AM

Originally posted by Phrater

Although there is a funny link. Ever think that it is funny,
how the later christian artists made Satan look a lot like
Pan? The Horns, The goat legs. The Tail, the goatee.

But then again... look at how much eggs have to
do with easter and evergreen trees and wreaths
have to do with Christmas... lol :D

Yeah, eh? Toooooooooo funny!

BB
Rae )0(

EasternPriest

July 5th, 2001, 02:09 AM

Originally posted by Phrater
Satan itself is a Judeo Christian Concept.
The christians created it and they can keep it.

Actually, the concept of the "evil one" "devil" "satan" is not Judeo/Christian in origin. Although the concept exists within Judaism and Christianity, it exists in other belief systems as well.

EasternPriest

July 5th, 2001, 02:12 AM

Originally posted by Phrater

:confused: There are few things that bother me more than
the ignorance that would group us with their sillyness.

But then again... look at how much eggs have to
do with easter and evergreen trees and wreaths
have to do with Christmas... lol :D

It would seem that the two statements above are contradictory. The concepts in the second sentence are far more related than you would probably like them to be.

ELM

July 5th, 2001, 08:05 AM

The concepts or symbols in the second sentence are only related because the Church tried very hard to incorporate pagan traditions into the new religious practice of christianity, in order to convert pagans. What has the evergreen to do with the birth of Christ? Not a lot, but it was a symbol of eternity and sacred to the Goddess, especially during winter. So the Church integrated it. The Church in fact tried to ban Christmas celebrations in the 17 and 1800's. Why did they want o do this? Because it was too pagan. Further the concept of the devil may be found in other non-christian religions, but it is not present in Western paganism. There are no such black and white, wrong and right concepts, there is only cause and effect because this is how the God and Goddess work. There are ethics based on cause and effect, but there is also recognition that even the most seemingly horrid event will have both good and bad outcomes.

Myst

July 5th, 2001, 01:19 PM

Depends on your definition of Paganism - some consider Pagans to be anyone who doesn't worship the Christian God.
In that sense, Satanism is Paganism.

However, some suggest that Pagans honour the balance in life between negative and positive (and even Dianic Wiccans do, IMHO, they just prefer to focus on the Goddess to undo all of the focus that's been on the God for years). In that case Satanists are not Pagan, I don't think they care for balance at all.

Another point is that Satanists often don't worship Satan. Some do, most don't. Most prefer to live a life of committing every sin and being righteous because they feel they have every right to do what they want, and because they think indulging is a good thing. Then you have the recite the Lord's prayer backwards type, who I might consider the equivalent of fluffybunny goth Witches (no offence to anyone, but I think you know what I mean). In the case where they don't work with a God, they might not be considered Pagan - isn't Paganism a group of religions that believe there is a God in some form (even if it is one that exists in every living creature)?

The one thing that does tire me though is people who preach over and over that there are no Satanic Witches - "if they tell you they work with Satan they can't be a Witch, period!!".

That ticks me off. You can be a Jewish Witch, a Catholic Witch, and any other religiou mixed with Witch but apparently for some reason not a Satanic Witch? Many people believe Witchcraft is the craft, not the religion, so you can combine it with anything. Who is anyone to say "yeah you shouldn't persecute me coz I'm a Witch, but those Satanists are EVIL man!".

:)
always IMHO
Willow

EasternPriest

July 5th, 2001, 06:19 PM

Originally posted by ELM
The concepts or symbols in the second sentence are only related because the Church tried very hard to incorporate pagan traditions into the new religious practice of christianity, in order to convert pagans. What has the evergreen to do with the birth of Christ? Not a lot, but it was a symbol of eternity and sacred to the Goddess, especially during winter. So the Church integrated it. The Church in fact tried to ban Christmas celebrations in the 17 and 1800's. Why did they want o do this? Because it was too pagan. Further the concept of the devil may be found in other non-christian religions, but it is not present in Western paganism. There are no such black and white, wrong and right concepts, there is only cause and effect because this is how the God and Goddess work. There are ethics based on cause and effect, but there is also recognition that even the most seemingly horrid event will have both good and bad outcomes.

Actually..the symbols have more to do with the celebrations than you would probably like them to...I would urge you to do some study, rather than just repeat the "common wisdom"

Just because a concept is not found in "Western paganism", or whatever you choose to call your path, does not automatically
make the concept judeo/christian. That is the point that was being made in my post.

Blessings....

Cailleach Dubh

July 5th, 2001, 06:36 PM

Im not even going to address some of the sillier posts, as doubtless, I will be berated by the "fluffy police".

Now for anyone else who is actually interested; I will try to adress some of the main questions that have cropped up.

Firstly, while some Satanists believe in Satan as an entity, I know of no Satanist or Satanic sect who believes in a Xian god, or a Xian version of Satan. In this, Satanism differs from say, Wicca, as I've noticed that many Wiccans do not reject JC and Xian mythology. And there can be no such thing as a Christo-Satanist, unless you are a crackpot psycho. So to say Satanists must believe in Xianity is *utterly* false. In fact, the case is quite the contrary.

While Satan originated as the Jewish "adversary", gods prosecuting attorney. He became demonised through contact with dualist religious systems such as Zoroastrianism. Of course, the Xian image of Satan was largely due to pagan horned gods of various origin. So even this version of Satan is highly syncretic and not the product of Jewish/Xian/Islamic mythology alone.

Yes, Satanism has been around since long before neo-paganism, I would also like to point out that one branch of what could be classified as Satanism; "Yezidism" the religion practiced by the Kurds is one of the worlds oldest religions. Their conception of Satan (Melek Taus) is somewhat different (i.e. non dualist) to that of other religions and I'm not going to claim any direct connection other than there is a modern Satanic ritual based around their holy text, the al jilwah.

As someone already mentioned, the *conception* of Satan is quite a cosmopolitan one, not confined to J/X/I mythology. Satanism uses demons/gods from many cultures during rituals, the name Satan is chosen as the principal archetype because we live in a predominantly Jewish/Xian/Islamic influenced culture. If for instance, Satanists lived in ancient Egypt, the god Set would probably get the glory. The Temple of Set, as Satanists trying to divorce themselves from Xianity entirely, have already thought of that. However, this is rather disingenuous, as I don't live in ancient Egypt, don't know anything firsthand about that culture or how that god was conceived.

"Satan" is just a word, using the name no more makes me a Xian than calling a domestic canine by the english name "dog" makes me a loyal subject of the British monarchy. Nor does it make the dog a subject of the Queen! Satan is a name for something that exists regardless of Xianity.

So why is Satanism called Satanism? This is a question I'm always asked.

Firstly: In modern Satanism, Satan is conceived of in two main ways
1) Satan as force of nature (yes Willowraven, wouldn't this then qualify as pagan?)
2) Satan as symbol; of pride, lust, individualism, wisdom, non-conformity, progress etc.
The two definitions are not mutually exclusive, for to embrace your own nature is to possess the qualities of the second definition.

So we use the term Satan because nature runs contrary to "god", and what is contrary to god is of Satan (in our own culture anyway). Think of all our natural urges, lust, pride, anger, etc. these are all of the devil and self denial, abstention, to live out of balance with nature, to subscribe to ideas of the soul and mind as divorced from the flesh is "godly" and "good". To have blind faith and humility is godly, to have pride and seek knowledge is of the devil. Stasis is godly, progress is evil. See the pattern.

If some of those things seem like exaggerations now, thats only because our society has become increasingly secular, but think of any number of religious regimes around the world and you will see what I mean. So Satanism doesn't have tenets that oppose just those of Xianity, but oppose nearly every religion on earth, since the vast majority of religions are anti-nature. (The solution to that is not to go and hug a tree, but to seek reconciliation with your *own* nature, for this reason I see the rede as anti-nature and an attempt to sneak Xian guilt into a belief system that purports to be beyond Xianity). This goes to the heart of Mistofthesea's question. Satan is only in opposition to god because god opposes nature.

Satanism is the ultimate nature religion, and like nature, its not always "nice". We did not name our religion Satanism, Satan is the name that has given to this force of nature. And why should we not use it, are we cowards? We will reclaim Satan as the demonised adversary and champion those "adversaries" in times past who died in His name. Has it occurred to anyone on this board that historical witches were all by default, branded as Satanists, and a few of them certainly were. There wasn't a *pagan* amongst them. Modern witchcraft is based, in part, on accounts of medieval witch trials, and the witches were supposedly worshipping the devil. Hence, Wicca is partly based on largely fictitious accounts of devil worship.

I also want to bring up this idea of the horned god in Witchcraft, I don't know if any of you have read "A razor for a goat" by Elliot Rose. This is the standard refutation of the Murrayite hypothesis. Neo-pagans like to think the horned god in question during the Witch trials was Cernunnos, however, paganism had been dead for several hundred years at that point, not only that but the areas which endured the most persecution were hotbeds of religious fundamentalism. The images of Satan as a horned goat like animal had been around for a long time, these were simple peasant folk, *if* (and its a big if) any horned god was worshipped, who do you think it was? More importantly who did *they* think it was? You guys can do the maths.

Then their is the case of the Scottish witch and self-confessed (and probably barking mad) devil worshipper Isabel Gowdie (1662), there is a song attributed to her, it is an ode to shapeshifting and the devil:
"We sing this song in the devil's name,
With joy and feasting to his fame...."

Hilariously, I've seen the word "devil" replaced by the words "horned one" on pagan web-sites (and it doesn't even fit), a historical distortion designed to white-wash the so-called "pagan" past.

Witchcraft is rooted in historical Satanism, real or imagined, and that fact makes a mockery of the "Satanists aren't real witches" claim. I feel it is the ultimate irony that modern witches run like scared kids from this association. Hardly a tribute to those who died at the stake, is it? As a certain infamous Satanist once said of modern witches:

"In the name of all those who suffered and died as agents of the devil in ages past, the present band of heretics-those who would deny the devil, yet play His game-must be called to task. More cowardly are they than the whining informer who plucked at the sleeve of the inquisitor. They have the opportunity to take up the very creed of defamation which killed their brothers and sisters of the past and cast that creed before the world in triumphal mockery of its age of unreason. But no- they do not thrust the bifid barb of Satan aloft and shout : "He has triumphed! Rege Satanas!" His art and works which brought men to the rack and thumbscrew, can now be learned in safety. But no...He is denied. Denied by those who cry up His art and ply His work."

Just food for thought... :D

MistOfTheSea86

July 6th, 2001, 05:27 AM

Hold up a second here. Are you saying that Pagans are now satanists? I am confused. And also, to tell you the truth(Hope I do not lose any respect for this) I did not even acknowledge the horned god. I thought that was just what some people worshipped. It kinda seems unfair to those who don't know about the horned god to be said to ineverteably worship him, and in what you said worship satan. This is all terribly confusing to me. ANd also WHat is a Xian? I here this all the time and I do not know what it is. Please be patient with me Call. I will eventuallly get there.:D

Phrater

July 6th, 2001, 07:23 AM

Originally posted by EasternPriest

Actually, the concept of the "evil one" "devil" "satan" is not Judeo/Christian in origin. Although the concept exists within Judaism and Christianity, it exists in other belief systems as well.

I'll agree with you partially, "evil one" is not christian in origin.
But I don't recall ever saying it was. I simply said satan is. Hence
our topic. Satan (in my opinion) is simply yet another device used by the catholic church to keep the flock in line.

The concept of an evil deity goes as far back as the first person in the world trying to blame something really bad on something out of his control.

And since then, some people have found the need to follow the
prospective evil one because they think good is weakened by
morals.

Without rambling too much more I'd like to say that I do not
think less of somebody that practices satanism, in fact I'm happy they at least had the nerve to think outside the box.

But I hold true to my earlier statement, Satanism is, by clear definition, absolutely not a Pagan Religion. :sunny:

Cailleach Dubh

July 6th, 2001, 09:01 PM

Mistofthesea: Since you are very polite, interested, and take time to at least read my posts, I will try to clear up any confusion....

I'm not saying you personally worship the devil! I'm not even saying those who worship a horned god are worshipping Satan, because they imagine him to be Cernunnos or a similar deity. However, Cernunnos was *not* the horned god of the historical witches (the assumption that he was, is the reason why the horned god is so popular in modern witchcraft). No, I'm merely pointing out the historical connection of modern Witchcraft with historical Satanism, a connection modern witches would prefer buried. The basis for the whole idea of witchcraft being pagan was Margret Murrays insistence on deleting the words Satan and devil from accounts of witch trials, and substituting the "horned one" instead. Gerald Gardner was a huge fan of Murray's, in fact without Murray (and Leland and Michelet, none of whom were historically accurate), the whole neo-pagan movement may not have happened, witchcraft wasn't pagan, but Wiccans have since done their best to try and make it pagan, by adopting pagan pantheons, and avoiding like the plague anything associated with the mythology of the "big three". History, however, is against them. This is why you will see silly blinkered reactions like "Satan = Xian" (BTW: Xian is short for Christian, like Xmas etc.), some people get totally caught up in semantics and *refuse* to see past the obvious. They seem to think that by using a few pagan deities names here and there, you suddenly get "paganism".

Satanists haven't gone out of their way to avoid Xian terminology (and why should we, did not most of us grow up in a J/X/I culture? And while I live in the one of the few remaining places on earth that is truly close to celtic paganism; an Irish speaking community in rural Ireland, I feel no inclination to suddenly become a Druid because that culture does not exist anymore and I could not accurately recreate it, or relate to it) and have used it to make a point, but the religion is totally different from Xianity. On the other hand, Wicca, in particular is a very Xian influenced religion.

The constant neo-pagan references to "the burning times" are particularly ironic, given the fact that these Witches were either Xians or Satanists, and modern Witchcraft knocks itself out disclaiming any relationship with either creed.

mol

July 6th, 2001, 09:26 PM

Some coals for the fire:

Here is websters definition of Pagan.

pa·gan (pgn)
n.

One who is not a Christian, Muslim, or Jew, especially a worshiper of a polytheistic religion.
One who has no religion.
A non-Christian.
A hedonist.
A Neo-Pagan.

So...there you go...

mol

July 6th, 2001, 09:29 PM

Originally posted by Cailleach Dubh

Satanists haven't gone out of their way to avoid Xian terminology (and why should we, did not most of us grow up in a J/X/I culture? And while I live in the one of the few remaining places on earth that is truly close to celtic paganism; an Irish speaking community in rural Ireland, I feel no inclination to suddenly become a Druid because that culture does not exist anymore and I could not accurately recreate it, or relate to it) and have used it to make a point, but the religion is totally different from Xianity. On the other hand, Wicca, in particular is a very Xian influenced religion.

The constant neo-pagan references to "the burning times" are particularly ironic, given the fact that these Witches were either Xians or Satanists, and modern Witchcraft knocks itself out disclaiming any relationship with either creed.

I didnt ever get to say welcome to you...so welcome!

Now, just to get into this...the persecutors of Witches in the days of old labeled them Satanists or devil worshippers or demon possesed...NOT the Witches themselves. Correct?

MistOfTheSea86

July 6th, 2001, 11:20 PM

For being pateint with me call. I think tha I am finally getting a grip on some things. SO Xian means Christian eh? YOu are christian? And here all this time I thought you were a satanist 8O. I had a strange dream last night. I was talking to this man and he was talking to me of satanism, and I told him my little thing about how It was once told that Satanism was created because they wanted to defie and rebel. Defiance was the religion nothing else. BUt then I realized that the idea is but one of many in the religion that makes it whole. Religion is an idea. BUt it puts more emphasis on certain things that makes it more than just an idea. DOes that make any sense? My dream helped alot to understand that religion. Okay this is a very hectic paragraph and I am going to stop it before I lose everything I am trying to say.8O

THe answer to mol, I have read somewhere that they burned them not because they were witches but because they thought they were possessed. They had no problem with the witches, they just thought that they were in afilliation with Satan. Or something along those lines, hope this helps.

Daniel

July 7th, 2001, 04:34 AM

Could you rephrase the question you used to close your comment? It made no sense to me.

mol

July 7th, 2001, 07:08 AM

Originally posted by Daniel
Could you rephrase the question you used to close your comment? It made no sense to me.

Oh...it seemed that the thought was that the Witches that were persecuted in the days gone by were either Christians or Satanists.

While I dont doubt that there were quite a few. The people that were labelling them Satanists, etc...were the accusers. Not the Witches.

Or maybe I need sleep.

Draedon

July 7th, 2001, 08:56 AM

Satanism is pagan, in that it is a non-Christian religion. However, it is equally arguable that Satanism is a philosophy and not a religion, as the writings of Anton LaVey deny the existence of any 'paranormal' or 'supernatural', to include notions of 'God' and, interestingly, 'Satan'. Having denied these concepts, it is hard to define Satanism as a religion, and as a non-religious philosophy it would not be pagan. However, Buddhism is also an apparently non-religious philosophy when the issue of 'God' is broached, and yet we welcome Buddhism as a pagan faith. A Satanist, in all objectivity, would tell us that either both are pagan, or neither are pagan, and since we openly accept Buddhism amidst our folds, we must accept Satanism equally, although we may agree with Satanism less if that is our personal sentiment.

Mairwen

July 7th, 2001, 12:41 PM

However, Buddhism is also an apparently non-religious philosophy when the issue of 'God' is broached, and yet we welcome Buddhism as a pagan faith.

I know a LOT of Buddhists who would disagree with that.

Draedon

July 7th, 2001, 12:51 PM

Buddhists do not believe in a deity, therefore, they do not fit under some definitions of religion. Buddhism is often seen as a philosophy rather than a religion. As well as having no God, Buddhism does not restrict memebership in other religions, so you could be a Buddhist Muslim or a Buddhist Satanist if you wanted. Buddhism only says that you should consider a religion carefully before joining it.

Mairwen

July 7th, 2001, 01:18 PM

Draedon, I think you need to do your Buddhism homework. There's way more to it than what you think/say/have posted.

Draedon

July 7th, 2001, 01:34 PM

I don't think I could put everything that can be said about Buddhism into a single post. Sorry.

Cailleach Dubh

July 7th, 2001, 02:48 PM

To address Mol's question:

At the time, the term Witch and devil-worshipper were synonymous. To be accused of one was to be the other. Most of the accused were unfortunate Xians, a tiny minority might have been actual religious witches i.e. devil-worshippers like Isabel Gowdie, the latter were the only people who would have used the term for themselves. Modern theories suggest that the word "witch" is derived from the verb "to bend" (and so it is related to sorcery) and not "wise". It never had positive connotations until recently. If you are talking about folk-healers, herbalists and so on, its unlikely they would have called themselves witches, though their neighbours might have, thinking their power came from the devil. [In addition, this kind of "witchcraft" would not have had a religious aspect the Murrayites assume, they would normally have been Xians] Of course, its possible that the herbalists/healers also thought their power came from the devil, or that they allowed that misconception due to the mystique and power they gained from the association.

Draedon: I've already touched upon Buddhism in this thread, I too know Buddhists that would argue vehemently that their beliefs constitute a religion. Religion is what you make it.

Mistofthesea: Oh, dear I seem to have confused you terribly! Me a Xian!? Go lie down, take a pill and re-read the stuff I've written! :)

mol

July 7th, 2001, 02:54 PM

Comments:

Originally posted by Cailleach Dubh
To address Mol's question:

At the time, the term Witch and devil-worshipper were synonymous. To be accused of one was to be the other. Most of the accused were unfortunate Xians, a tiny minority might have been actual religious witches i.e. devil-worshippers like Isabel Gowdie, the latter were the only people who would have used the term for themselves. Modern theories suggest that the word "witch" is derived from the verb "to bend" (and so it is related to sorcery) and not "wise". It never had positive connotations until recently. If you are talking about folk-healers, herbalists and so on, its unlikely they would have called themselves witches, though their neighbours might have, thinking their power came from the devil. [In addition, this kind of "witchcraft" would not have had a religious aspect the Murrayites assume, they would normally have been Xians] Of course, its possible that the herbalists/healers also thought their power came from the devil, or that they allowed that misconception due to the mystique and power they gained from the association.

Thanks for clearing that up. This is what I was speaking of...although I and many others think that the healers, etc of old were Witches...they never really claimed to be. They were Pagan, though. (Most of them.) Some of these healers were also persecuted.

Mistofthesea: Oh, dear I seem to have confused you terribly! Me a Xian!? Go lie down, take a pill and re-read the stuff I've written! :)

LOL. Yes...definitely re-read.... ;)

Thanks for your input Cailleach.

Betty Ann Bongo

July 7th, 2001, 03:01 PM

Draedan,

I would agree with you that there are certain types of Buddhism that do not honor God in any particular form. (I beleive these are the Theravada Buddhists) but Mahayana Buddhists do honor a Divine.

I would also agree with you that a philosophy that does not honor any Divine is not a religion. Many disagree. However, I define religion as a philosophy coupled with an honor for the Divine. THats just me. And as such, I don't definie THeravada Buddhism as a religion either, and certain Satanist sects I would call philosophies, and not religion.

These are not value judgments, they just don't fall into my definition of what religion is. But feel free to disagree.

Mairwen

July 7th, 2001, 03:22 PM

Originally posted by mol
although I and many others think that the healers, etc of old were Witches...they never really claimed to be. They were Pagan, though.

People gotta realize that the word "witch" was created by the Inquisition. It wasn't something in common parlance until that time. So, no. Our forebears would NOT have called themselves witches. How can you name yourself something that doesn't exist?

Betty Ann Bongo

July 7th, 2001, 03:27 PM

Some of them weren't even pagan. Many of them were devouted to the Christian church, they just didn't see anything wrong with pairing magic and healing with CHristian doctrine.

In fact, I would argue that most of these "cunning folk" were probably not pagan at all. I"m more inclined to believe that we have termed them pagan to romanticise the history of paganism, and to cast a rosy glow on the cunning folk of the past, but I"m not so sure I buy into the belief that these cunning folk worshipped the "old gods". Perhaps they did. But, its just as likely they didn't.

Yvonne Belisle

July 7th, 2001, 03:30 PM

Many of them probably didn't they were simply different and it was at a time when different was deadly.

Cailleach Dubh

July 7th, 2001, 03:54 PM

Yeah, Betty is on the right track here, nearly all recent scholarship has discounted the possibility of an uncorrupted line of pagan practice extending back to pre-Xian times. Pagan practices can still be found in the folk and religious traditions of various countries (especially catholic ones) but paganism as a *religion* was largely dead in Europe by about 1000CE. Long before the witchtrials. This is the crux of what I was saying about witches being either Xians or devil worshippers.

Read: Elliot Rose's very scholarly work "A Razor for a Goat"
or J. Russells "History of Witchcraft"
Both written by historians who did not have an agenda to "prove" the existence of paganism in medieval Europe, unlike many books written by neo-pagans for neo-pagans, the standard of research in most of these is abysmal.

Mairwen: The word "witch" was around before the witch trials alright, but it was never "a big deal" until then.

Mairwen

July 7th, 2001, 08:00 PM

Mairwen: The word "witch" was around before the witch trials alright, but it was never "a big deal" until then.

Not that I've been able to find.

MistOfTheSea86

July 7th, 2001, 09:23 PM

So you are a Satanist? You are right I am confused, It said that I wouldn't be a good Xian if I did do that,or something. I re-read and still are in kind of the dark, but I think that you are a satanist correct?:) I am confused can you just answer my question please????:D

Myst

July 8th, 2001, 02:43 PM

This is precisely why I never liked history class - you end up spending your lifetime arguing over something that happened decades or centuries ago or over terminology and when a word was used and by whom, and after all the arguing nobody agrees and nobody knows for certain what really happened anyway.

8O :p 8O :p 8O :p 8O

Danustouch

July 10th, 2001, 01:10 AM

Here we get into some murky territory..that of semantics.

1st question. Is Satanism, Pagan? Hmmm..ok...well..someone made the assertion that if by pagan, we mean, not judeo christian...etc, etc, etc. Well...Bhuddists are not Judeo Christian...and...they are not Pagan. There are many paths who are not Judeo-Christian, and whom are not, necessarily, pagan either. Pagan does not mean "Not Judeo Christian"....it means...Worshiping the Old Gods, Country Dweller, worshiping Many gods..and other things.

Then..someone brought up another point..that Satan is a Judeo Christian ideal..Someone ELSE pointed out that the idea of Satan is NOT just a Judeo Christian ideal. Both are right. The term Devil means "adversary"...many old religions had an "adversary" to their deity...or a "trouble maker" etc, etc, etc. It is part of the Morality Mythos type thing. There often HAS to be an "adversary" behind a moral lesson, to show "what will happen if you are not a good little boy/girl.".

Satan..as we hear of him through Christian lips, is indeed a Judeo Christian ideal..in my belief...BUT..and here's the murkiness of it. SATANISTS DO NOT WORSHIP HIM EITHER (at least not many of them that I know of.). Most Satanists that I have spoken to believe in Inverted morality. That even to them, Satan is just a myth, an ideal. Their purpose and goal in life, is to invert morality, so...as someone else pointed out....they can choose for themselves what is good for them.

So..in as much as neither of us (pagans or satanists) believe in a horned fellow colored red, poking people with a pitchfork..well..yeah..i guess there are similarities. And our ritual formats are basically...similar, as well.

However...our belief systems are SOOOOOOOO differen't. Our core values, the things we put our emphasis on are SOOOOOOOO differen't than those that Satanists do, Really..the only links between us and Satanism, is certain Ritualistic practices (ok IF we agree that Ritual is not the MOST important part of Wicca..but that the religious guidance, the spiritual shaping is the most important thing?) and the fact that we do not worship Jehovah and Jesus Christ.

Other than that...we are as differen't as night and day. One strives to better our environment...the other says..."why bother"? that sort of thing. Most of the Satanists that I have known have no great concern for the world around them. They are mainly concerened with advancing themselves in the world. Getting ahead, manifesting their will, etc, etc, etc.

Most Pagans I know on the other hand, are very concerned about topics such as religious freedom, civil rights, the environment, feminism, gay rights, on and on and on and on.

And this is because of the core belief of Satanism being that they are supposed to be their own God. So why would they need to improve anything around them? or themselves? they are god hood, as it is.?

That's my take. If I'm wrong, if I offended anyone..sorry..it's late..and hubby is missing me in bed, I think.

Goodnight all.

Draedon

July 10th, 2001, 06:06 AM

Wicca, and many of the various associated paths, are largely Christian in their moral values, and this is largely due to the influence of Gardner and others.

Satanism, on the other hand, is diametrically opposed to Wicca morally. It is 'an it harm none, do as ye will' vs 'an it better ye, do as ye will'.

Whether paganism (or though we should be saying 'neo-paganism') can be extended to include Satanism is the decision of the pagan community. Satanists don't care (officially), as they're primary concern is a revision of the morality that has been diseminated throughout this society by Christianity. To simplify, Satanists just want to **** the Christian church. Now that's a bit crude, but not actually inaccurate ( http://www.churchofsatan.com/ and http://www.satanism101.com/ ), although they obviously have further objectives beyond their attack on the church.

So, it is for pagans to decide whether or not they include Satanists among their fold. Remember, at this point, that although LaVey was attacking Christianty, he did not specify that only Christianity was an enemy, his writings can easily be applied to almost any religion. Afterall, one of his key objectives was that all religions should be taxed, and this leads on....

mol

July 10th, 2001, 09:33 AM

Originally posted by Draedon

To simplify, Satanists just want to **** the Christian church. Now that's a bit crude, but not actually inaccurate ( http://www.churchofsatan.com/ and http://www.satanism101.com/ ), although they obviously have further objectives beyond their attack on the church.

Moderator/Site God Mode

We dont have many rules here. One of them is to respect moderators decisions. The other: DO NOT EVER MAKE BLANKET STATEMENTS THAT RIDICULE ANOTHERS PATH. Period.

And, this is the second time I have warned you about the use of profanities here. I dont censor. I expect members to do it themselves.

Yvonne Belisle

July 10th, 2001, 09:58 AM

People please remember too that there are 2 types os satanists. There are those that worship no god or goddess before themselves and there are those that worship the Christian concept of Satan the fallen angel. They are two different groups with very different views but the same lable.

mol

July 10th, 2001, 10:28 AM

Originally posted by Yvonne Thomas
People please remember too that there are 2 types os satanists. There are those that worship no god or goddess before themselves and there are those that worship the Christian concept of Satan the fallen angel. They are two different groups with very different views but the same lable.

Actually, there are more than two types as well. There are quite a number of different 'kinds' of Satanists. Of course, there are more people qualified to verify this but it is true.

And actually, just to post my opinion. I think this thread is actually moot. Satanism is a valid Path just like any other. It makes no difference if someone lumps Satanism in with Paganism or not. Labels are nothing unless we make them something.

I know this thread is about if Satanism Is considered a Pagan Path, but I thought I would just throw in my .2

Danustouch

July 10th, 2001, 10:29 AM

Though Draedons use of language was certainly crude, and innappropriate for this forum, I do agree, somewhat with an idea he expressed...

Satanists DO place a heavy emphasis on inverting morality, as defined mainly by the Christian Church, and Judeo Christian ideals. I don't think their main goal is to cause problems for the Christian Church. I think their main goal is to get rid of preconceived "rights" and "wrongs" in their own lives, that were force fed them by Christian, or other "Mainstream" religions, in order to decide for themselves what is or what is not, right for their lives, beneficial to them.

I do not mean this as any sort of blanket statement....this is just coming from some conversations that I have had with some people who were current, and former members of the Church of Satan, and the Temple of Set.

They follow Crowleys' ideal of finding "True Will". Which is basically, finding out what the best thing for their lives would be, and pursuing it without qualm, in any way that it can be done. Of course, most Satanists that I spoke to learned that their "basic will" differs a great deal from their "true will". An example? They desire a woman who is married to a jerk. Are they likely to Kill the husband to get the woman? NOOOOOOOO...because that is not their "TRUE" will....Their TRUE will doesn't want them to be imprisoned for murder. That would be their basic will..and therefore, not to be indulged. This does not mean that they wouldn't use magick, or any other means to "get the girl"...but...they would consider what the ramifications of their actions were, and decide whether or not it was their "True Will". They wouldn't just accept society or main stream religions ideal that to "break up a home is wrong". Again..this is just from some of the Satanists whom I have spoken to.

I am aware that Laveyan Satanism is quite a differen't deal. But...Lavey had his own reasons for doing some of the things which he did. Lavey himself said something about his church practices being "somewhat of a side show"...(if I can find the reference, i will post it here.".

But the central idea of this message is, whether or not they believe in an ACTUAL devil, (which most do not) it differs greatly with the ideas of paganism.

As far as I know, most pagan paths still agree that we do not judge others' paths. We do not try to interfere with anyone elses path. We concern ourselves only with our own religious paths.
While Satanism seems to have a central theme of recognizing Christian beliefs (or Judeo Christian beliefs)..and trying turn them on their head.

And...Draeden DID leave some good links on the subject.

Draedon

July 10th, 2001, 11:33 AM

Originally posted by mol

Moderator/Site God Mode

We dont have many rules here. One of them is to respect moderators decisions. The other: DO NOT EVER MAKE BLANKET STATEMENTS THAT RIDICULE ANOTHERS PATH. Period.

And, this is the second time I have warned you about the use of profanities here. I dont censor. I expect members to do it themselves.

I'm sure this is the only occassion on which I have used a profanity. Also, what I said was not a blanket statement. It was almost a direct quote from the Satanist 5-Point Revisionist Program, relevant to the distinction between Satanism and Paganism.

Draedon

July 10th, 2001, 11:38 AM

Please read the following from http://www.churchofsatan.com/home.html and consider how these objectives would effect YOU. How would your personal religious opinions, beliefs and practises be treated by a society that adopted these objectives. This is the criteria on which a decision like 'Is Satanism Pagan?' should be answered. I would be amazed if anyone could say that Satanism is a welcome addition to the pagan community considering this information. Before I get accused of anti-satanist opinions - I'm all for it, I just don't think you are. My personal views quite agree with Satanism on a number of issues, but on those issues, I disagree with other pagans. There is no compromise on these points.

PENTAGONAL REVISIONISM:

A FIVE-POINT PROGRAM

by Anton Szandor LaVey ©1988

In recent years, we’ve wasted far too much time explaining that Satanism has nothing to do with kidnapping, drug abuse, child molestation, animal or child sacrifice, or any number of other acts that idiots, hysterics or opportunists would like to credit us with. Satanism is a life-loving, rational philosophy that millions of people adhere to. Now we’re ready for something that goes quite a few steps beyond just explaining our principles. Every revisionist movement needs a set of goals/guidelines that are clear, concrete, and that will effect significant changes.

The following Five-Point Program reflects attitudes which allow others to decide whether they wish to align themselves with Satanism or not. Each is necessary for Satanic change to take place. When asked what we’re “doing,” here’s the answer:

1. Stratification—The point on which all the others ultimately rest. There can be no more myth of “equality” for all—it only translates to “mediocrity” and supports the weak at the expense of the strong. Water must be allowed to seek its own level without interference from apologists for incompetence. No one should be protected from the effects of his own stupidity.

2. Strict taxation of all churches—If churches were taxed for all their income and property, they’d crumble overnight of their own obsolescence, and the National Debt would be wiped out as quickly. The productive, the creative, the resourceful should be subsidized. So long as the useless and incompetent are getting paid, they should be heavily taxed.

3. No tolerance for religious beliefs secularized and incorporated into law and order issues—to re-establish “Lex Talionis” would require a complete overturning of the present in-justice system based on Judeo-Christian ideals, where the victim/defender has been made the criminal. Amnesty should be considered for anyone in prison because of his alleged “influence” upon the actual perpetrator of the crime. Everyone is influenced in what he or she does. Scapegoating has become a way of life, a means of survival for the unfit. As an extension of the Judeo-Christian cop-out of blaming the Devil for everything, criminals can gain leniency, even praise, by placing the blame on a convenient villain. Following the Satanic creed of “Responsibility to the responsible,” in a Satanic society, everyone must experience the consequences of his own actions—for good or ill.

4. Development and production of artificial human companions—The forbidden industry. An economic “godsend” which will allow everyone “power” over someone else. Polite, sophisticated, technologically feasible slavery. And the most profitable industry since T.V. and the computer.

5. The opportunity for anyone to live within a total environment of his or her choice, with mandatory adherence to the aesthetic and behavioral standards of same—Privately owned, operated and controlled environments as an alternative to homogenized and polyglot ones. The freedom to insularize oneself within a social milieu of personal well-being. An opportunity to feel, see, and hear that which is most aesthetically pleasing, without interference from those who would pollute or detract from that option.

This is the encapsulated version of the current thrust of Satanic advocacy. So when someone asks you, “Well, what do Satanists do?”, you will be qualified to tell him.

Yvonne Belisle

July 10th, 2001, 11:40 AM

The following was found under gun laws and is placed here only to refresh your memory. I for one allow my child in the Mystic Wicks site. I agree whole heartedly with Mol in that yes they will learn these words but it would be best if they didn't learn them here. This is a wonderful teaching tool and I would hate to feel that I couldn't share it with my children. The word that you chose could have been easily done with F*** everyone would have understood and nothing would have been lost.

Draedon
Theoricus

Registered: Jul 2001
Location: England, UK
Posts: 84

I hate sexism almost as much as I hate feminism. For **** sake, you are who you are, and no one is 100% male or female. Its pathetic enough limiting yourself to dichotic thinking, but making judgements (positive or negative) based on those stereotypes is truly pathetic.

Feminists are women who can't handle men - they are too weak.
Sexists are men who can't handle women - they are too weak.

We base gender on physical appearance, ie male body = man, female body = woman. However a person has more than one gender:

Body: Can be anything from 100% male (through 50/50) to 100% female in terms of build and muscle definition, etc. Which are you? One or the other or a combination?

Gender: Can be anything from 100% male (through 50/50) to 100% female in terms of having penis or vagina, etc - at birth, surgery is performed on 1 in 10 babies to make clear distinctions. Which were you? One or the other or a combination?

Sexuality: Can be anything from 100% male (through 50/50) to 100% female in terms of preferring men or women in bed, etc. Which are you? One or the other or a combination?

Brain: Can be anything from 100% male (through 50/50) to 100% female in terms of cognitive functions, etc. - eg male brains navigate using a visualised map, female brains navigate using landmarks and directions (ie a route). Which are you? One or the other or a combination?

Need I go on?

__________________
Copyright © 2001 Michael Lewis. Fair quotation and teaching usage is allowed, as long as full credit is given to the author and to this source, and its home address (http://draedon.cc) is given in full.

Draedon

July 10th, 2001, 11:48 AM

Originally posted by mol

Actually, there are more than two types as well. There are quite a number of different 'kinds' of Satanists. Of course, there are more people qualified to verify this but it is true.

And actually, just to post my opinion. I think this thread is actually moot. Satanism is a valid Path just like any other. It makes no difference if someone lumps Satanism in with Paganism or not. Labels are nothing unless we make them something.

I know this thread is about if Satanism Is considered a Pagan Path, but I thought I would just throw in my .2

Satanism is a valid path, but it is still an issue of debate whether or not it is to be considered a pagan path. I am a member of a group of people among whom almost all the other members are Satanists, and some are officially registered memebers who pay their annual subscription fees to the Church of Satan. I think I'm qualified to speak about Satanism, and I can assure you that whilst they have many things to offer, beyond their ideas of personal responsibility and independant thinking, they are quite simply intollerable under the moral concepts of any pagan path.

Furthermore, there is no such thing as a Satanist who worships the devil. There are those who claim to, and there are those who pretend to, but the world does need its wannabes, so they say. These are individuals who have heard about Satanism, and believeing that it may add something to their meaningless lives, have begun to practise 'devil worship' as defined by the Christian Church (usually in the form of their parents). In other words, these people are Christians who want to play naughty. Most Satanists would execute these people given the chance, as they are surely the most pathetic specimens on the planet.

Yvonne Belisle

July 10th, 2001, 12:03 PM

I am not NOT acting as a moderator here I just want to point out that a blanket statement is very highly frowned upon here. I have known Satanists of both types. They each felt very strongly that they were following a valid path. I do not agree with their choices but I do agree with their right to chose their path. It is not for us to define anothers religion here but this is a place to exchange ideas. There are billions of people worldwide who honestly believe in the christian devil and amid those are people who chose to worship it as their diety. For them it IS a valid path if we like it or aprove has nothing to do with it's validity. The arguement that it doesn't exsist because another group says so has been used to deny the existance of many religions in the past including Wicca, Paganism in general and I for one truely do not want to see that here. When we use such a blanket type arguement it is far too simple to fall into the trap of applying it to other things.

Kaylara

July 10th, 2001, 12:06 PM

First a few questions...

Because I don't pay any group for the right to be pagan, does that mean that I am unqualified to speak about it?

Who are you to say that people who actually worship Satan as a Deity are wrong?

Who are you to say that people who actually worship Satan as a Deity are wannabe's?

My point here is that while many of the Satanists I know get on my nerve, that doesn't mean that I have the right to tell them that their path is a wannabe path. It's their choice, not mine, and none of my business unless they make it my business.

I think that Mol is correct, and this topic is just as moot as the topic on whether or not there can be Christian Wiccans... Some people say yes, and some people say no. It's that simple. We all have our particular opinions about the subject, but you can't argue opinions.

Kaylara

Draedon

July 10th, 2001, 12:09 PM

I thought this might be relevant, from http://www.churchofsatan.org/faq.html#gnostic - Gnostic Satanism. Bear in mind, these guys are dionysian (they think everybody should do what they want and be free to do so utterly without interference from anyone else), whereas mainstream Satanism, from which these guys have severed, thinks that Wiccans and other Neo-pagans are just as pathetic as Christians, and all ought to be shot.

Can you define "Right Hand Path/Left Hand Path?"

RHP = Right Hand Path (spiritual)
When the tip of the star points up, that is considered a symbol of the spirit, the force of change. The word which fits perfectly here is becoming!

LHP = Left Hand Path (carnal)
The Baphomet with it's goat has been considered a symbol of the flesh, but that does not fully describe it. The word which fits perfectly is being!

And so we have being and becoming - both are essential to life - one cannot exist without the other! Both Wiccans and Satanists have been fooled into believing that a war exists between the flesh and the spirit - the source of this confusion happens to be the Christian/Islamic influence which pervades our culture!

When you perceive the universe as a place where spirit and matter divide, a similar "split" occurs in your inner universe, the one between your ears! This is bad, because it leaves you wide open to manipulation from those who play on your feelings of inner conflict, guilt. They appoint themselves supreme arbiter, divine interpreter of what's right and wrong, good and evil for you! Don't you see what's happening here? No one benefits from this form of thought control - it does more harm than good.

The flesh and the spirit emanates from the One and ultimately returns to it. The All Is One philosophy is potent because it has the power to overthrow dictators, politbureaus and pontiffs.

Danustouch

July 10th, 2001, 12:21 PM

Ok....

Who was making blanket statements??? When I said..."SATANISTS THEMSELVES DO NOT BELIEVE IN SATAN" I actually should have rephrased that...Satanists as defined in the Church of Satan, and Temple of Set....DO NOT BELIEVE IN SATAN, for the most part.

I am aware that there are some people who claim to be satanists who do believe in an actual satan. I have known SOME of them to be angst ridden teenagers, but...I'm sure some of them are very sincere in their belief that he does exist, and in their worship of them. I may not agree with it, and in essence, do NOT, but..i will admit that there are some who do. However much of a minority they may be, I do not know. All that I can do is to reiterate what I said before....that most of the Satanists I have met, some of whom were elders in COS and TOS , have said that Satanists do not believe in Satan as an existing being. Perhaps he was speaking only of the members in his church, or whatever.

Is Satanism a valid path? Is any path NOT valid??? of course! Satanism is Valid. Is it Pagan? I don't believe so. That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it.

Kaylara

July 10th, 2001, 12:23 PM

Originally posted by Draedon
I thought this might be relevant, from http://www.churchofsatan.org/faq.html#gnostic - Gnostic Satanism. Bear in mind, these guys are dionysian (they think everybody should do what they want and be free to do so utterly without interference from anyone else), whereas mainstream Satanism, from which these guys have severed, thinks that Wiccans and other Neo-pagans are just as pathetic as Christians, and all ought to be shot.

Can you define "Right Hand Path/Left Hand Path?"

RHP = Right Hand Path (spiritual)
When the tip of the star points up, that is considered a symbol of the spirit, the force of change. The word which fits perfectly here is becoming!

LHP = Left Hand Path (carnal)
The Baphomet with it's goat has been considered a symbol of the flesh, but that does not fully describe it. The word which fits perfectly is being!

And so we have being and becoming - both are essential to life - one cannot exist without the other! Both Wiccans and Satanists have been fooled into believing that a war exists between the flesh and the spirit - the source of this confusion happens to be the Christian/Islamic influence which pervades our culture!

When you perceive the universe as a place where spirit and matter divide, a similar "split" occurs in your inner universe, the one between your ears! This is bad, because it leaves you wide open to manipulation from those who play on your feelings of inner conflict, guilt. They appoint themselves supreme arbiter, divine interpreter of what's right and wrong, good and evil for you! Don't you see what's happening here? No one benefits from this form of thought control - it does more harm than good.

The flesh and the spirit emanates from the One and ultimately returns to it. The All Is One philosophy is potent because it has the power to overthrow dictators, politbureaus and pontiffs.

Ok first... I don't believe that the spirit and flesh are at war.

Second, if any Satanist who I talk to thinks I am pathetic and weak, they are too worried about what I would do to them to act upon their urges to kill me. (seeing as how I am still alive and all that)

;)

Kaylara

mol

July 10th, 2001, 12:39 PM

Originally posted by Draedon

I'm sure this is the only occassion on which I have used a profanity. Also, what I said was not a blanket statement. It was almost a direct quote from the Satanist 5-Point Revisionist Program, relevant to the distinction between Satanism and Paganism.

While this issue IS under debate, my moderation is NOT. If you were using a quote then proper credit and reference should have been given in the first place. And this was the second time I have warned you on the use of profanity here. 2. Second. Twice. Not once.

Back on topic...

Cailleach Dubh

July 10th, 2001, 01:33 PM

I just *lurve* all this: Satanists think...Satanists do....Satanists don't; blahblah.... With so many self-appointed Satanic experts in this thread, I hardly think my opinion (as a COSser, incidentally) is necessary.

Draedon: what was that last post all about? Are you trying to suggest most Satanists subscribe to mind/body dualism, because hello, they don't! That is one of the key tenets of Satanism! And don't quote rubbish from that twit Egan in the FCOS at me either. Otherwise I'd agree with what you said on the dangers of dualist mentality. However, I don't believe you DO know anything about the TOS, if you did, you would know that the TOS believe in a literal Satan, who they "respect" (they claim it is not worship) in His incarnation as Set.

And I see we have a new working definition of pagan too. Apparently if you are not a "fluffy bunny" then you can't be a pagan. Hmm, so that means all these human/animal sacrifing (who lets, face it, weren't joining in gay pride parades either) religions in the past can't be pagan right?

Not that I give a damn, but its amusing to watch neo-pagans try to define themselves around the exclusion of Satanism. Another thing, not all Satanists get all hot and bothered about whether other Satanists worship an entity, maybe the teenagers worry about pseudo-Satanists, "wannabes" etc. Personally, being a long way from being a teenager, I couldn't care less.
Now, carry on arguing about what I and other Satanists are *supposed* to believe seeing as you've such an inside track on it, its funny really.

I think Mol's comment about the point being moot is the most sensible thing that has been said in this thread.

Myst

July 10th, 2001, 11:11 PM

MistOfTheSea86

July 10th, 2001, 11:22 PM

Draedon- Since everyone is yelling at you I will try not to contribute to the aggresion anymore. I will just say this, research is the key. If you want to argue something research it first, then argue. I learned that the hard way. Thinking I knew everything then got into a fight with a christian over the bible, Phew! I felt like an idiot. I now completely brush up on the subject before I rebel or conflict ideas with someone. I also would ask you to please refrain from using profanity in this forum. Mol works his as...(JK 8O ) Butt off trying to keep this place up and running, and the last thing he needs is for people to take advantage of it and screaming ugly words. Besides, isn't that a rule in the rules of the site? I am not sure but I think it was. If not well it should be! Well anywayz please do not do it again. I am sure there is a civilized way of speaking what you want to say. There always is, people just over look it because of their anger.

Everyone else- Now I know I am not an expert of this topic, which is why I ask so many questions, and I get decent replies. That makes me more educated in the matter, and hence doing so I will try to now argue what I think. I feel that Satanism is not what I thought it to be. At first I thought it was nothing more than a idea based upon people feeling aggresion towards christians and their religion. But now I know it is more than that, It is a religion that bases it's values off of many if not hundreds of ideas. As with most religion. So in that fact it is valid in my book. Now what I don't like about the religion. If what I have read is right and Satanists believe that they are their own god and they can do as they wish. I feel that is wrong if not completely egotistical. People who think like that usually end up being snobby with a superiority complex and as most know those two things are not good together. I think that a religion that preaches to something that, if I am right, they Don't believe in are only letting people bad-mouth them. If they do not believe in Satan then why worship in the name of him? And if they do not believe in the christian god or the bible, then why call them self satanists and just be ridiculed even more? I know that there are those who acknowledge Satan as an entity, but from what I have read from Dubh's posts and a few others that is not the case. Why not choose a different name for your religion? So that people CAN'T have a reason to discriminate and ridicule you. I am just highly confused at the fact that Satanists seem to condradict themselves. It is like one big oxymoron that has gone on forever and won't stop because of the pride of some. I tried to look at this from all views, if I offended anyone I am sorry. It is just so hard to see things from different sides of a computer screen.:) I feel that some of the motions mentioned above can be wrong or all for that matter. I just tried to fit it all in. Well I am open to all people who would like to critique what I have said. Put me in LINE!:bad: Or so to speak:D Well anyways I guess I will let all this info. Seep in:) Thanx like always for listening and reading.

Cail. Dubh- You still haven't answered my question!:D Are you a satanist or not? Come on tell me, please?

Myst

July 10th, 2001, 11:36 PM

On the sacrifice subject; when I first started learning about Paganism I understood that there was never human or animal sacrifice as those who hate us would suggest. Then I stopped getting all my information from fluffy bunny books and sites.
Same goes for "all Wiccans follow the Rede". Yes sacrifice was part of life, usually by choice (as in the king dying for the harvest at each year) or with good solid reason.

MistOfTheSea86

July 11th, 2001, 12:33 AM

for clearing that up for me. So... Yes...:)

mol

July 11th, 2001, 12:34 AM

Originally posted by MistOfTheSea86

Cail. Dubh- You still haven't answered my question!:D Are you a satanist or not? Come on tell me, please?

Thanks for taking up on me.

Heed this everyone! If anyone gives me any flack...I will sick Mist on you.

Now, as an aside. I can take care of the moderation. You just concentrate on participation.

And also...I think you know that Caill is Satanist. No need to press the issue. And it was also said:

"With so many self-appointed Satanic experts in this thread, I hardly think my opinion (as a COSser, incidentally) is necessary. "

COS = Church of Satan.

MistOfTheSea86

July 11th, 2001, 12:37 AM

That was weird. Mol I just saw that exact same post but by someone named Dravin in the wxact same thread. How could you, and then it appear. Strange..:confused:

mol

July 11th, 2001, 12:38 AM

Originally posted by Cailleach Dubh
I just *lurve* all this: Satanists think...Satanists do....Satanists don't; blahblah.... With so many self-appointed Satanic experts in this thread, I hardly think my opinion (as a COSser, incidentally) is necessary.

Very necessary and WANTED in my opinion.

And I see we have a new working definition of pagan too. Apparently if you are not a "fluffy bunny" then you can't be a pagan. Hmm, so that means all these human/animal sacrifing (who lets, face it, weren't joining in gay pride parades either) religions in the past can't be pagan right?

Perhaps some see it this way, but not all....not even a majority (also in my opinion.)

I think Mol's comment about the point being moot is the most sensible thing that has been said in this thread.

And it still stands. Honestly. I dont see where the labels matter. It has been the labels that have caused so much pain and suffering in this world...right from the start! And no...I am not saying "Cant we all just get along."

NO WAY!

I am saying...lets leave the labels to the politicians. Lets move on with our Paths.

mol

July 11th, 2001, 12:39 AM

Originally posted by MistOfTheSea86
That was weird. Mol I just saw that exact same post but by someone named Dravin in the wxact same thread. How could you, and then it appear. Strange..:confused:

It was me. I am on my brother's computer and the thing was logged in as him. 3 people in a house...all members of the same community. I am glad we all have different machines...

:p

MistOfTheSea86

July 11th, 2001, 12:44 AM

I thought I had a psychic vision:D YEs leave it to the polititions for labels. Let us just move on with our paths. No need to be labled something.

Draedon

July 11th, 2001, 07:00 AM

After listing the URLs of relevant sites, quoting relevant extracts from those sites, I'm accused of not doing my research. Hmmm.

Ask a decent psychologist about Satan worship. They will tell you that it is almost impossible to worship Satan as the concept is generally understood. If you think about it you will see why. Satan worship is an immature act of rebellion and peer pressure amongst small groups of with strict Christian parents in every single case that I have had the misfortune to encounter. These people call themselves Satanists and cause trouble for my friends and I by giving us a bad reputation with the public, the police, and the local government. I only know one Satanist on a personal level who does not want these individuals dead, and that's because he has mastered a true (if somewhat ott) dionysian attitude "We hold that all individuals have the right to exercise sole dominion over their own lives,
and have the right to live in whatever manner they choose, so long as they do not forcibly
interfere with the equal right of others to live in whatever manner they choose." ( http://www.churchofsatan.org/ )

As for the Temple of Set literally worshipping Satan. Good for them. Don't have a go at me about it. It's not my fault. ( http://www.xeper.org/ )

Now, there has been mention that the Lord Egan phenomena is a load of **** (I refrained). Fine, if thats your opinion, but there is growing support for the less elitist and more gnostic approaches to satanic philosophy, and the FCoS is the main organisation behind this move. The CoS is becoming too tight and narrow in its philosophy, and it is failing to appeal to a wider audience except by reputation (hey, its still 'cool' to CoS, right!). There is a gradual and continual move away from this mainstream satanic philosophy and towards the gnostic approaches, especially as more people add the Nag Hamaddi Library to their Biblical and Anti-biblical studies. ( http://www.webcom.com/~gnosis/naghamm/nhl.html )

Draedon

July 11th, 2001, 08:48 AM

Originally posted by Cailleach Dubh
I just *lurve* all this: Satanists think...Satanists do....Satanists don't; blahblah.... With so many self-appointed Satanic experts in this thread, I hardly think my opinion (as a COSser, incidentally) is necessary.

Draedon: what was that last post all about? Are you trying to suggest most Satanists subscribe to mind/body dualism, because hello, they don't! That is one of the key tenets of Satanism! And don't quote rubbish from that twit Egan in the FCOS at me either. Otherwise I'd agree with what you said on the dangers of dualist mentality. However, I don't believe you DO know anything about the TOS, if you did, you would know that the TOS believe in a literal Satan, who they "respect" (they claim it is not worship) in His incarnation as Set.

Interesting, for a Satanist you fall short on the nines:

You ask if I'm "trying to suggest most Satanists subscribe to mind/body dualism", but I introduced the quote saying that "mainstream Satanism, from which these guys have severed" have different views. I clearly, therefore, did not try to suggest that anyone outside of the FCoS, and not even all of those inclusive, subscribed to this theory.

Also, this was not the point of relevance. The post was about relations between Satanism and Paganism, and whether or not the Neo-Pagan community would be wise to associate with Satanism. My point is that Satanism often expresses negative intentions towards pagans and their faith. My point is not that 'most Satanists subscribe to mind/body dualism', which we both know, and have done, I assume, for sometime, is a false statement. I won't even ask where you got it from.

Then, "I don't believe you DO know anything about the TOS". Well, I never even mentioned, let alone claimed to know anything about the Temple of Set, but I do actually know a fair bit. The point is, I disagreed with the most basic premise of their faith and saw no need to research the path any further. It would be just as pointless to me as researching the Muslim faith. I'm more interested in other paths. Like I said, I never even mentioned the TOS, so where you got that from, I can only imagine.

Where are you getting these ideas from? I find it hard to believe that you are a Satanist.

Draedon

July 11th, 2001, 09:07 AM

Originally posted by Yvonne Thomas
I am not NOT acting as a moderator here I just want to point out that a blanket statement is very highly frowned upon here.

Christians belief in the cricifixion and resurection of Jesus Christ. Oh no! I just made a blanket statement! Hang on? It's true! Hang on, again! Isn't "a blanket statement is very highly frowned upon here" a blanket statement? You are saying that everyone in here (without having consulted them on this) has a negative reaction (apparently hardwired) to this specific mode of communication. This is, yes, a blanket statement that you are making, and yet it did not incurr the anticipated wrath. Automatically disproving itself. In short, what you said was right until it was said, then it became wrong. This is what happens when logic overcedes common sense. Common sense would rather say that you were wrong to begin with.

I have known Satanists of both types. There are billions of people worldwide who honestly believe in the christian devil and amid those are people who chose to worship it as their diety. For them it IS a valid path if we like it or aprove has nothing to do with it's validity.

Satanists of the CoS and FCoS are following a valid path. I'm not going to comment on the TOS as they are a fence element in this. As for the devil-worshippers, well, no one is denying their right to be a valid path, its just that they are a Christian rebellion rather than a seperate religion. They are kids whose authoritarian Christian parents successfully forced Christianity on them. They believe, but they still want to rebel against it, so when they hear about 'Satanism', they think 'Ahh!', and slit their neighbours' cats' throats. (This is called dry humour - I shouldn't have to point that out to intelligent people such as yourselves, but I know that at least one person would otherwise indignently 'inform' me that not all satanists slit cats' throats, and I shouldn't make blanket statements.)

The arguement that it doesn't exsist because another group says so has been used to deny the existance of many religions in the past including Wicca, Paganism in general and I for one truely do not want to see that here. When we use such a blanket type arguement it is far too simple to fall into the trap of applying it to other things.

Not a problem. If we say that any 'religion' which is actually a rebellion-reponse to another religion is not a religion, then guess what, only these so-called satanists will be included in that! No pagans or neo-pagans of any path can be considered a counter-movement against any other faith, seeing as they are all independant faiths based on their own unique philosophies. I'm not stupid enough to make blanket statements, or any statement of any kind, that could be used logically against me. I take no responsibility for the people who twist what I say and try to use it against me. These people who are not capable of rational and logical argument are everywhere, and they compose about 90% of our global society - I can't make them my personal responsibility, however much I'd like the pleasure of dealing with them personally. ;)

Kaylara

July 11th, 2001, 09:23 AM

This thread is becoming redundant. I will be closing it on Friday July, 13th.

*End Moderator Mode*

Blessings,
Kaylara

Draedon

July 11th, 2001, 09:26 AM

I should apologise at this point to anyone who is finding my arguments aggressive. I am adopting a defensive position now. My logic is never criticised by those who interpret it logically, and I do not suffer fools lightly. This should be all I have to say, but for those who read to quickly and think to slowly (ie, those who do not sufficiently study the meaning of what they a reading) I shall add that I am slightly annoyed by the irrational reactions to many of my posts as yet. Logic is being allowed to suffer in this debate at the hands of emotional and irrational thinking ('woolly', for those who still need clarification). If anyone still requires firther clarification, then I am afraid I cannot help you. No one can.

Kaylara

July 11th, 2001, 09:37 AM

Sweetie,
Just because we pick apart what you are saying doesn't mean that we are thinking irrationally. Because you are not used to being questioned doesn't mean that it's a bad thing. You are becoming defensive because this thread has gotten quite volitile, which is another reason why I am closing it.

But please, do not say that we are stupid or using fuzzy logic just because we don't agree with you. Not only is that extremely arrogant, it personally doesn't make me want to listen to what you are saying. Because by saying that I am not thinking correctly, and all of the other things that you said, you are in essence showing me that you don't respect my views at all.

I think that you are a very well spoken and intellegent person, and I am glad to have finally found someone my age who is articulate, and knowledgeable. But I really, really, really hate being treated like I am inferior just because I hold different views than you.

I think that your responses were well thought out, well researched, but I don't agree with them. This is my white flag. I don't want to discuss this subject anymore, so If you will agree to disagree, we can close this thread on an upbeat.

Blessings
Kaylara

Yvonne Belisle

July 11th, 2001, 10:04 AM

Mol is the untimite authority on this board and he has repeatedly said that we are not to be using blanket statements that put down others paths, religions, ect.... I am not refering to any members other than the rules that have been stated repeatedly by Mol when I say that they are frowned upon. I di not say that the people of this site.....

Cailleach Dubh

July 11th, 2001, 10:11 AM

Originally posted by Draedon

Interesting, for a Satanist you fall short on the nines:

Actually, honey, my grasp of Satanism extends far beyond the the nines or indeed the eleven.

You ask if I'm "trying to suggest most Satanists subscribe to mind/body dualism", but I introduced the quote saying that "mainstream Satanism, from which these guys have severed" have different views. I clearly, therefore, did not try to suggest that anyone outside of the FCoS, and not even all of those inclusive, subscribed to this theory.

Fine, but your your wording was vague. I don't know why we are discussing the FCoS at all, or mind/spirit dualism for that matter.

Also, this was not the point of relevance.

True.

My point is not that 'most Satanists subscribe to mind/body dualism', which we both know, and have done, I assume, for sometime, is a false statement. I won't even ask where you got it from.

As I said, your post was vague: "Both Wiccans and Satanists (you didn't say "these" Satanists or FCoS Satanists) have been fooled into believing that a war exists between the flesh and the spirit". Yes you prefaced the post by saying you were talking about the FCoS, but that was not so clear later in your post. So that's where I got it from, not that difficult to figure out now is it? You need to take responsibility for your own woolly wording, honey, and not get all defensive and hostile when someone takes you up wrong on the basis of what you write.

Then, "I don't believe you DO know anything about the TOS". Well, I never even mentioned, let alone claimed to know anything about the Temple of Set, but I do actually know a fair bit. The point is, I disagreed with the most basic premise of their faith and saw no need to research the path any further. It would be just as pointless to me as researching the Muslim faith. I'm more interested in other paths. Like I said, I never even mentioned the TOS, so where you got that from, I can only imagine.

Oh excuse me, I did confuse a post by Danustouch for one of yours. However, the fact remains that some adult Satanists worship Satan as an entity, albeit not a Xian conception. I make a distinction between these and the teenage dabblers/ vandals, who, true enough, I would like to see rounded up and gassed.

Where are you getting these ideas from? I find it hard to believe that you are a Satanist.

*chortle* .......you're a funny kid really. If only you had something of substance to fill that puffed up shell of an ego....

Oh, and btw, no one pays an annual subscription to the COS unless someone is having them on. But then, you wouldn't know that would you?

Kaylara: I think closing this thread is a good idea, I don't think anything constructive can come of this discussion any longer.