Satanism

[Deleted member 157129]

Whoa!

Don't flow to another subject people,let's stick to a point of view about satanism!

What's your stance on fanaticism?

Let's just say I'm not fanatic about Satanism, although I believe it is correct I am open for the possibility it is not the only right choice. You must know that I do not behave like I do because I am a Satanist, I've always behaved like I do, and a few years ago I discovered that way of living was considered Satanism. I acknowledge that, and it suits me perfectly. I am not a to-the-book, fanatic Satanist - I do as I please, and my choices just happen to float well with Satanism.

 

[Hakeem]

I just don't see what the hell that singular cell has to do with anything,

A human can be accurately considered as a single cell, and the organism can be thought of as humanity, or further, the entire ecosystem. A single cell from a multicellular organism cannot live by itself apart from the body easily. Bacteria can live by themselves, but as can be seen by the diversity of multicellular organisms we have today, cells evolving to work together was a damn good adaptation. Humans evolving to work together is an equally awesome trait.

The rest of your 'quests' are pretty simple, [...] as long as there were others like me.

No. That is the point of the experiment. You live without the rest of the body; you live without any help from other humans. (Of course if you consider the body to be the whole ecosystem, then living without it is impossible.)

We do to others as they do unto us.

Yeah, and that's all fine and well and fair and whatnot, but to go rhetoric vs. rhetoric: Even if they were to make you watch them kill their friends?

It is a child's game.
"Quit copying me."
"Quit copying me."
"Stop it!"
"Stop it!"
"You are an idiot."
"You are an idiot."
"I am an idiot."
"Yes, you are."

You put yourself behind the community.

Yeah, though it's not so much putting myself there as it is that I already am there. Even under Satanist interpretation, you are behind the community, because everyone else is putting themself before you. A part is less than the whole.

You care about everyone else before yourself.

Not necessarily. I cannot help others if I am dead, so I must take care of myself first. Each cell must do its own work.

If there's nothing in it for me, then it is a sin to do it.

This seems like it could apply to all versions of sin in the various religions. All things you do to help others will help you. The only thing you can do that does not have anything in it for you, come to think of it, are things that are negative. This may be the first contradiction:

What is in it for you to "attack your enemies"? All I see is the likely opportunity to get people mad at you.

I have no faith in it lasting - some day the community will take from you something you care about.

Only if I do something bad for them to have a reason to do that to me. If I have done no such thing to deserve it,

You'll lock the community out.

Then it wont be the community that I lock out. The blame does never lie on the community, outside of negligence.

Though I am the one of us, who makes the biggest difference, because you simply meld yourself with everyone.

I would say the opposite. By melding myself with everyone I open up the door to a power you do not possess as an individual. I can use the power of humanity as a whole. Not within my single cell, but within the body. Of course, to move the body, you must be part of the brain. The brain is also nothing without the muscle cells to move the parts.

Maybe working on space travel has implications for you in your life time, but what about the people who made the first space shuttle? There was no benefit for them personally, not even recognition. Of all the people that have worked on it, only a handful have even been to the moon. Without people doing things for humanity as apart from themselves, I don't know if we would have the technology and knowledge we have today.

It is as if you see yourself as everyone, and that your neighbour is you.

Yes.

Of course, speaking from human to human it is often confusing to say, "I am humanity." You could say, "We are humanity," but that also has room for confusion and it doesn't clarify that I am referring to myself.

 

[Saken]

Even if they were to make you watch them kill their friends?

That was totally blown out of proportion, don't you think? He means like if someone is an asshole to you, you're obligated to show now kindness to that asshole. You're welcome to be an asshole right back because the first person chose to act that way, thus they chose to be treated the same way in return.

What is in it for you to "attack your enemies"? All I see is the likely opportunity to get people mad at you.

He said if there is nothing in it, there is nothing worth doing. So then the obvious course of action would to not attack said enemies. The Satanist wouldn't lash out at his enemies without knowledge of victory, or some form of reward. Where did you get the idea that he or a Satanist would just attack people from that quote of his?

Only if I do something bad for them to have a reason to do that to me. If I have done no such thing to deserve it.

Shit happens. Not everyone has the same mind set as you, even if you share the same religion in your own community or nor do others around you. Example; would you think a rape victim did something to his or her rapist for the said rapist to commit that vile act?

Then it wont be the community that I lock out. The blame does never lie on the community, outside of negligence.

So when a whole community stands behind something, be it good or bad, the blame of the future consequences is never to fall back upon said community?

 

[Hakeem]

You're welcome to be an asshole right back because the first person chose to act that way, thus they chose to be treated the same way in return.

Yeah, sure, you're welcome to be an asshole right back. You're also welcome to forgive them.

Which "gives your something back" better?

The obvious course of action would to not attack said enemies.

Isn't it Satanist principle to "attack your enemies"?

Where did you get the idea that he or a Satanist would just attack people from that quote of his?

Not from that quote.

Would you think a rape victim did something to his or her rapist for the said rapist to commit that vile act?

No. Would you blame the community for something the rapist did?

So when a whole community stands behind something, be it good or bad, the blame of the future consequences is never to fall back upon said community?

Humanity never agrees on something in that manner. Blame only those who agreed. If it is the majority of the community, fine, blame the majority. I'd just assume blame them for being stupid/ignorant/negligent. (And if you're going to blame human nature, you might as well blame gravity.) In any case, the community/majority only stands behind taking something from you if you have done something wrong. If they condemn you for something you didn't do, blame the person who framed you. If there wasn't someone who framed you, blame your lack of legal knowledge or something. I like to blame the flawed system.

It is very easy to misplace blame, I'll give you that.

 

[Dreadnought[dA]]

Do you think the world would be a better place if everyone was Satanist?

 

[Mulgrim]

imo, the world wouldn't even be a good place if everyone was atheist... the majority of them are cold assholes

 

[raid1000]

imo, the world wouldn't even be a good place if everyone was atheist... the majority of them are cold assholes

and call ourselfs the united atheist alliance or the united atheist league or the allied atheist allegiance

 

[Deleted member 157129]

A human can be accurately considered as a single cell, and the organism can be thought of as humanity, or further, the entire ecosystem. A single cell from a multicellular organism cannot live by itself apart from the body easily. Bacteria can live by themselves, but as can be seen by the diversity of multicellular organisms we have today, cells evolving to work together was a damn good adaptation. Humans evolving to work together is an equally awesome trait.

Fine, as long as that single cell consists of many more cells. Discussing in metaphors is plain damn useless, and you probably know as much as me that it is just something you do to 'cause confusion and anger. If you want a civilized argue, you don't try to confuse your opponent. So please, keep the metaphors out of this.

No. That is the point of the experiment. You live without the rest of the body; you live without any help from other humans. (Of course if you consider the body to be the whole ecosystem, then living without it is impossible.)

You live without the rest of your body? Then, by my definition, you would be dead, and the experiment is impossible. Furthermore, others like me does not imply me (even if it does from your point of view, I do not consider my friends to be me).

Yeah, and that's all fine and well and fair and whatnot, but to go rhetoric vs. rhetoric: Even if they were to make you watch them kill their friends?

It is a child's game.
"Quit copying me."
"Quit copying me."
"Stop it!"
"Stop it!"
"You are an idiot."
"You are an idiot."
"I am an idiot."
"Yes, you are."

I'm not sure where you pulled that from, but stupidity is still a sin, as well as the rule of benefit. There's nothing in it for me to kill my friends, so why would I be that stupid?

Yeah, though it's not so much putting myself there as it is that I already am there. Even under Satanist interpretation, you are behind the community, because everyone else is putting themself before you. A part is less than the whole.

The lesser is not necessarily behind.

Not necessarily. I cannot help others if I am dead, so I must take care of myself first. Each cell must do its own work.

It just seemed so, the way you defined yourself. Then again, you define yourself as the community as a whole, you are the universe, and then you can only care for yourself, and the reason people die is because you don't want that cell to be part of you. No one has their own opinion, because you are everyone, so how can I discuss with you if I am you? That's one serious example of schizophrenia, but whatever I tell you, I am still you, so it doesn't matter then.

This seems like it could apply to all versions of sin in the various religions. All things you do to help others will help you. The only thing you can do that does not have anything in it for you, come to think of it, are things that are negative. This may be the first contradiction:

You obviously live in some sort of paradise, where everyone's desire is to help each other and no one would accept help if they were unable to help back. The world is not like that. If you help someone it is not given that you will receive help back - however, if you help a Satanist, then it is probably that you will be helped, unless what needs to be done contradicts with his/her view of life.

What is in it for you to "attack your enemies"? All I see is the likely opportunity to get people mad at you.

If there's nothing in it for me to attack an enemy, I won't attack him - take the pub example. There are situations where it does benefit me to attack an enemy. What's the benefit for America when they attack Afghanistan?

Only if I do something bad for them to have a reason to do that to me. If I have done no such thing to deserve it, then it wont be the community that I lock out. The blame does never lie on the community, outside of negligence.

Once again, this paradise of yours is not reality. I can't possibly tell you why, because your experience in life makes it impossible to fathom reality. Not all people are Satanists, therefore you won't always have the same response.

I would say the opposite. By melding myself with everyone I open up the door to a power you do not possess as an individual. I can use the power of humanity as a whole. Not within my single cell, but within the body. Of course, to move the body, you must be part of the brain. The brain is also nothing without the muscle cells to move the parts.

That's not what I meant by melding. You disappear in the community, because you're only one out of many, and you work so hard to be the same as everyone. I work in the opposite direction, my goal is to be different from everyone, I urge to be unique, your desire is absolute equality.

Maybe working on space travel has implications for you in your life time, but what about the people who made the first space shuttle? There was no benefit for them personally, not even recognition. Of all the people that have worked on it, only a handful have even been to the moon. Without people doing things for humanity as apart from themselves, I don't know if we would have the technology and knowledge we have today.

Maybe they wanted to know more about the universe, that is a personal benefit. If you do nothing for your own benefit, you are a slave - as far as I know, space shuttles were not built by slaves, but by people who chose to become scientists and chose to work on a space shuttle programme. A personal benefit doesn't mean it has to be ONLY your benefit.

Yeah, sure, you're welcome to be an asshole right back. You're also welcome to forgive them.

Which "gives your something back" better?

If there is something in it for me, then I'd probably forgive them. Aye, the option that benefits me the most is the right choice. It is seldom forgiveness.

Isn't it Satanist principle to "attack your enemies"?

I define my own enemies, as do everyone.

No. Would you blame the community for something the rapist did?

Yes. He was raised by the community, the community made him who he is.

Humanity never agrees on something in that manner. Blame only those who agreed. If it is the majority of the community, fine, blame the majority. I'd just assume blame them for being stupid/ignorant/negligent. (And if you're going to blame human nature, you might as well blame gravity.) In any case, the community/majority only stands behind taking something from you if you have done something wrong. If they condemn you for something you didn't do, blame the person who framed you. If there wasn't someone who framed you, blame your lack of legal knowledge or something. I like to blame the flawed system.

True, there will always be objections, but when the majority agrees on an action whose consequence is the death of someone close to you, then you will have to blame a lot of people, and per interpretation, you'd blame the community, the world, for being thoughtless, careless and evil. Otherwise you'd have to find out, somehow, the name of each and everyone one who accepted the idea, or did not disagree, and blame all those. Would you? Would you blame your leg when you trip, or yourself, or perhaps God? Maybe everyone? I blame no one.

Do you think the world would be a better place if everyone was Satanist?

Not necessarily, diversion is good. Without that balance, it would crumble. The simple answer is no.

 

[Saken]

Yeah, sure, you're welcome to be an asshole right back. You're also welcome to forgive them.

Which "gives your something back" better?

Self satisfaction, knowling I didn't pander to an ass hole, appease them by letting them step all over me. I'd rather stand up for myself and not be subserviant to the unruly behavior of an ass hole. That's what gives me more in return.

Isn't it Satanist principle to "attack your enemies"?

False assumption. One wouldn't just go out and attack every single one of your enemies just because you can. I'd rather trick my enemey and prolong any confrontation, especially one that'd end up in me taking any heavy losses. Sure a Satanist may be more willing to just attack an enemy, but it's not the way you see it. One wouldn't just be like America and invade other countries private matters in the name of democracy, hm?

the majority of them are cold assholes

Ooo! Don't tease me! You're turning the necrophilia side of me on!

 

[TwistedImage]

imo, the world wouldn't even be a good place if everyone was atheist... the majority of them are cold assholes

That being said, people who practice religion are soooo much better.

And, uh, what kind of satanism is being discussed? There are so many I lost track and I don't feel like reading multiple walls of text. <.<

 

[Hakeem]

Which brand of Satanism was early on in the thread, before the text walls. It has not changed.

You live without the rest of your body?

No, I'm community oriented. The point is that if you tried to do everything without any other humans, you are more than likely to die. The things we do are only possible because there are so many of us.

"No man is an island."

There's nothing in it for me to kill my friends.

It's not the benefit rule that I am questioning. I am questioning the "attack your enemies" concept.

Why would I be that stupid?

Because you are a Satanist.

It is an extreme example, but doing unto others what they do unto you is not a positive thing when what they do is negative. Working together is just damn good evolution, and working apart or in opposition is proportionally bad.

How can I discuss with you if I am you?

But you are not me. You are an individual. I am everyone else.

This would actually be an instance of what I said before. Parts of a whole talking to each other normally reference their self as distinct from the whole. They also do this when talking to things outside the whole. <_< My question was originally formed from something you said about being selfish or something. I am a selfish person, but that "self" that I am being selfish for is actually the whole of humanity. I probably should have clarified that I only think of myself as the whole of humanity in the context of being selfish.

Everyone's desire is to help each other.

Yes. I consider it an evolutionary imperative. Our care about each other gave us an incredible survival advantage. Our intelligence gave us an advantage too, but suffice to say it opened Pandora's box and wrought havoc on the rest of out traits.

What's the benefit for America when they attack Afghanistan?

It isn't America that feels the benefit of war. War has benefits, yes, but not to the participating parties.

You disappear in the community, because you're only one out of many, and you work so hard to be the same as everyone.

Not at all. What would a body be without many types of tissue? It is infeasible to have every cell be capable of every task. We need sustenance, shelter, and social activity. These each require a diversity of different tasks. We need farmers as well as carpenters as well as artists. If everyone were equal then the body of humanity would be an amorphous blob. Uniqueness is desirable, though with 6 BILLION of us, unachievable. Diversity is one of the most effective survival mechanisms, possibly being the most effective.

Maybe they wanted to know more about the universe, that is a personal benefit.

I suppose satisfaction of curiosity qualifies as beneficial to yourself.

The option that benefits me the most is the right choice. It is seldom forgiveness.

How not? The only benefit in any fight is to remove a threat. Forgiveness is very effective at removing human threats.

I define my own enemies, as do everyone.

I define my enemies as those that are more destructive to humanity than constructive to it. Rolling over and taking it is not a very effective survival mechanism. It is like cancer. Destroying mutated and destructive cells benefits the body.

Does Satanism have anything to say about what an enemy is? I am considering the possibility that Satanism is a religion without any pigment, substituting the reader's whim for an objective reality.

He was raised by the community, the community made him who he is.

No, he was raised, or not raised, as the case may be, by a subset of the people and ideas he came into contact with. That is a far cry from the 6 BILLION people that compose the complete human community. How can you even blame something like "everyone"? Do you blame every individual on the street passing by? Aren't you succumbing to stupidity by that point of misplaced blame?

When the majority agrees on an action whose consequence is the death of someone close to you.

Then I blame that person close to me for doing something to deserve it. Otherwise I blame the court system for being careless with the death sentence. Actually, if this happens, you'll likely blame the state and move somewhere where there is no death penalty.

Would you blame your leg when you trip, or yourself, or perhaps God?

I'd blame my lack of concentration while walking. People often take the ground for granted.

 

[Deleted member 157129]

That being said, people who practice religion are soooo much better.

And, uh, what kind of satanism is being discussed? There are so many I lost track and I don't feel like reading multiple walls of text. <.<

LaVeyan Satanism..

LaVeyan Satanism is a religion founded in 1966 by Anton Szandor LaVey. Its teachings are based on individualism, self-indulgence, and "eye for an eye" morality. Unlike Theistic Satanists, LaVeyan Satanists are atheists, agnostics, and Deists who regard Satan as a symbol of man's inherent nature.[2] According to religioustolerance.org, LaVeyan Satanism is a "small religious group that is unrelated to any other faith, and whose members feel free to satisfy their urges responsibly, exhibit kindness to their friends, and attack their enemies".[3] Its beliefs were first detailed in The Satanic Bible and it is overseen by the Church of Satan.

------

No, I'm community oriented. The point is that if you tried to do everything without any other humans, you are more than likely to die. The things we do are only possible because there are so many of us.

I wasn't referring to you, but rather the quest 'to live as a singular cell' .. from my point of view, that would indicate being dead, and the aforementioned quests would be impossible to perform.

There's nothing in Satanism that encourages a Satanist to live completely alone.

"No man is an island."

.. and no man is the world?

It's not the benefit rule that I am questioning. I am questioning the "attack your enemies" concept.

My friends are not my enemies. My enemies would be the ones who killed their own friends, in order for me to do the same to my friends, because of my responsive 'do unto others as you would have them do unto you' ..

Because you are a Satanist.

That would be contradictory, I am not allowed to be stupid as a Satanist.

It is an extreme example, but doing unto others what they do unto you is not a positive thing when what they do is negative. Working together is just damn good evolution, and working apart or in opposition is proportionally bad.

Satanists are not mindless beasts, we evaluate the situation. A rule must be interpreted, otherwise, you'd be stupid.

This would actually be an instance of what I said before. Parts of a whole talking to each other normally reference their self as distinct from the whole. They also do this when talking to things outside the whole. <_< My question was originally formed from something you said about being selfish or something. I am a selfish person, but that "self" that I am being selfish for is actually the whole of humanity. I probably should have clarified that I only think of myself as the whole of humanity in the context of being selfish.

I can't be bothered looking back.. it's about time Hive starts including the quotes from the posts you quote.. makes this much easier.. the whole conversation is lost this way.

Yes. I consider it an evolutionary imperative. Our care about each other gave us an incredible survival advantage. Our intelligence gave us an advantage too, but suffice to say it opened Pandora's box and wrought havoc on the rest of out traits.

Okay, you pulled that quote out of its context and gave it the opposite meaning. I'll just repeat that the world is not like that at all. Perhaps you live in a city of Satanists, because that would have been a world a lot like that. Though we have a bunch of Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhist, Hindus and a load of other religions, as well as a lot of undefined philosophies, and of course Atheists and Agnostics. It creates conflict and disagreement. Satanism, as the indirect opposite of most religions, creates balance. Of course, with only Satanism, there would be no balance either.

It isn't America that feels the benefit of war. War has benefits, yes, but not to the participating parties.

Okay, you misinterpreted my original intention.. because, obviously, America wouldn't attack Afghanistan for no reason whatsoever? There is a benefit. There is no benefit for me that America bombs the life out of Muslims.

Not at all. What would a body be without many types of tissue? It is infeasible to have every cell be capable of every task. We need sustenance, shelter, and social activity. These each require a diversity of different tasks. We need farmers as well as carpenters as well as artists. If everyone were equal then the body of humanity would be an amorphous blob. Uniqueness is desirable, though with 6 BILLION of us, unachievable. Diversity is one of the most effective survival mechanisms, possibly being the most effective.

Aye, that's is my point of view. To me it seemed you had the opposite opinion.

I suppose satisfaction of curiosity qualifies as beneficial to yourself.

Of course it does.

How not? The only benefit in any fight is to remove a threat. Forgiveness is very effective at removing human threats.

There are more benefits from a fight, but that's not the point here - the benefits of forgiveness is most often none. The correct statement would be:
Forgiveness is very ineffective at removing human threats, and very effective at telling someone it's perfectly fine to do you harm.

I define my enemies as those that are more destructive to humanity than constructive to it. Rolling over and taking it is not a very effective survival mechanism. It is like cancer. Destroying mutated and destructive cells benefits the body.

Rolling over and taking it - to forgive.
Destroying mutated and destructive cells - attack your enemy.

Does Satanism have anything to say about what an enemy is? I am considering the possibility that Satanism is a religion without any pigment, substituting the reader's whim for an objective reality.

I think these excerpts from the Eleven Satanic Rules should clarify that:

03. When in another’s lair, show them respect or else do not go there.
04. If a guest in your lair annoys you, treat them cruelly and without mercy.
09. Do not harm young children.
10. Do not kill non-human animals unless you are attacked or for your food.
11. When walking in open territory, bother no one. If someone bothers you, ask them to stop. If they do not stop, destroy them.

No, we do not have a sworn enemy, we are not urged to kill all Jews, like Nazis, or to hate Satan, like Christians, nor God, like Diabolists. Everyone are neutral until proven different, friend or foe.

No, he was raised, or not raised, as the case may be, by a subset of the people and ideas he came into contact with. That is a far cry from the 6 BILLION people that compose the complete human community. How can you even blame something like "everyone"? Do you blame every individual on the street passing by? Aren't you succumbing to stupidity by that point of misplaced blame?

It is also an action not to do anything. Anyhow, the community has evolved as it has, and this is the cause of how humans behave. Either you're not part of the community, or you act like the community would want you to act, ie you are normal. It is the normal people who define whether you are normal or not. The majority decides. Therefore, it is the community that makes villains. When I blame the community, I am not blaming everyone. I do not blame you, Hakeem, if a murderer kills my father. I do not blame my neighbour. I blame the community and, if identified, the murderer.

Then I blame that person close to me for doing something to deserve it. Otherwise I blame the court system for being careless with the death sentence. Actually, if this happens, you'll likely blame the state and move somewhere where there is no death penalty.

You really need to throw away your 'deserve' .. is there no such thing as an accident in your world? I am not talking about a death penalty, there is no death penalty where I live, and it's absurd that there still is death penalties in other countries, or states, even if it is the just sentence for some criminals, it is too easy to misjudge. Justified murder is too much power in the hands of a judge, or even a state. No one should have the power to choose who dies and who doesn't.

I'd blame my lack of concentration while walking. People often take the ground for granted.

.. and that is you? I have to ask, because you could be referring to a cell that might not be you.

 

[klishky]

Destroying mutated and destructive cells - attack your enemy.

Isn't that Justice if the mutants were causing problems.

 

[Deleted member 157129]

Isn't that Justice if the mutants were causing problems.

Indeed. Though, it would not be allowed under, for example, Christianity - because then you'd be advised to turn the other cheek, and let the destructive cell destroy some more.

 

[Mulgrim]

Indeed. Though, it would not be allowed under, for example, Christianity - because then you'd be advised to turn the other cheek, and let the destructive cell destroy some more.

i'm christian, but i believe in justice, i will never follow this, it depends on the situation. and yes i know i should follow it, but i won't.

 

[Squiggy]

Oh yeah, here's what you get from writing such crap

//Cleaned Harshly

 

[Hakeem]

Dang. I couldn't justify moving any part of the discussion into other threads. <_<

Cruft

.. and no man is the world?

But aren't we? Collectively?

A rule must be interpreted, otherwise, you'd be stupid.

There are stupid rules, as well.

I can't be bothered looking back.. it's about time Hive starts including the quotes from the posts you quote.. makes this much easier.. the whole conversation is lost this way.

If it were important I'd have just clicked the arrows in the quotes.

Okay, you pulled that quote out of its context and gave it the opposite meaning.

I made your quote look like that, yes. But my point still stands. (See below.)

Blame.

Therefore, it is the community that makes villains.

Yes and no. The majority defines what a villain is, but it does not cause the villain to act they way it does.

When I blame the community, I am not blaming everyone. I do not blame you, Hakeem, if a murderer kills my father.

What does it mean to blame the community then? My impression of it is nothing more than mere words, like benefit to America. I may be part of the community and speak like it is a tangible thing, with tangible benefits, but I don't pretend to know what it really is beyond a collection of people mutually helping each other out. To, "blame the community," to me, would either be to blame the collection of people, or the aspect of them helping each other out.

It is too easy to misjudge.

And that is what I blame. Some people should be killed, but if we are going to put someone to death, we better be damn sure of ourselves.

.. and that is you? I have to ask, because you could be referring to a cell that might not be you.

I don't know. It is unclear. Usually I am attentive to where I put my feet. If I am not, it is because I am confident I know the intricacies of the surface. For the most part I am right in this confidence; the geography of my room in the morning is usually the same. I might logically blame whatever put something in my path. It is usually the case that many different factors are at play, so the blame is distributed. This contributes to the difficulty in placing blame.

There's nothing in Satanism that encourages a Satanist to live completely alone.

Of course not. That is just an example to demonstrate the extreme importance other people play in life. To help anyone helps you. It may not be directly visible all the time, but helping people really does help you. Satanism may not preach solitude, but attacking your enemies as opposed to forgiving them certainly does not breed the ever-important community.

That would be contradictory, I am not allowed to be stupid as a Satanist.

Yes, it would be. Is not Satanism contradictory? Suppose I were to tell you to never be stupid. Would you listen to everything I had to say as if it were as important as that? Probably not. Suppose I write it in a book. Do you take everything in the book as it is important as that? You might be tempted to say, "No," at this point, but in reality, that is exactly how people think. If stupidity is a sin in Satanism, then it condemns itself, because it is a method to bring stupidity to people. I would argue that the founder himself was largely deluded and stupid, however apparently logical he may be.

Though we have a bunch of Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhist, Hindus and a load of other religions, as well as a lot of undefined philosophies, and of course Atheists and Agnostics. It creates conflict and disagreement.

Yes, that would the effects of opening Pandora's box. Through "knowledge" we justify doing negative things to other humans, when our core instinct is to help others. Our "intelligence" is just far more potent than our instincts.

There is a benefit.

To what? You cannot simply say, "This benefits America." America isn't a tangible thing that can have benefits. The people of America, they can get benefits. The land can get benefits too, but it isn't that land that gets benefits, it is the ecosystem of the land. Your question was of the nature of, "What benefits the community?" while mine was of the nature, "What benefit is it to you personally?" The questions are similar, but the analogy does not carry every aspect; there are gains in war that do not exist in a fight between two people.

Saken answered this, and I was considering how he was wrong. He was wrong in his answer because the correct choice is to do what benefits you most, while he was choosing short term—and it stopped there. He is correct. He is just thinking short-term. I think almost purely in the long-term.

Forgiveness is very ineffective at removing human threats, and very effective at telling someone it's perfectly fine to do you harm.

Ah. I see what you mean. That applies—for the most part—to children. Yes, forgiveness can definitely have that effect, but it can also have the effect I describe. It is not black and white, and my personal experience tends me to think forgiveness is an effective way to remove and an enemy. A lot of people can really only learn by a good beating. <_<

Rolling over and taking it - to forgive.
Destroying mutated and destructive cells - attack your enemy.

It's all in how I defined my enemy. I define my enemies as the people that set themselves as enemies to everybody else. Hmm. What does Satanism say about forgiving your friends?

Satanism, as the indirect opposite of most religions, creates balance.

So do Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhist, Hindus and a load of other religions, as well as a lot of undefined philosophies, and of course Atheists and Agnostics. All of these systems preach balance and peace and whatnot. Even those Godless atheists often have the attitude of getting along. You'll often hear it as, "I wont bother you about it if you don't bother me about it."

You may want to make the argument that a lot of these don't preach balance or preach more conflict than balance, or some other negative principle, but then Satanism has the same flaws. If all those lead to disagreement and conflict, then so does Satanism, for being different. Or, hell, so does Satanism for being the same. People can find ways to get mad about similarity. <_<

Aside from Buddhism, I mean. As far as I know, Buddhists practice and preach terminal pacifism. If you want to talk about the idea that brings the most balance, it's either Buddhism, or, if you consider that picking a side and creating conflict, then agnosticism is the most balanced, simply because it picks no side.

That is actually my philosophy. Yes, I subscribe to a philosophy that is not agnosticism, but I'm sure not going to tell anyone what it is. Instead I will tell them that I am functionally agnostic. I'll tell people what I am when they can handle it without it creating some sort of stupid bias in their mind. Basically this means I wont ever tell.

 

[Vosty]

Hehehehehe...
You unlocked it just so you could fire back, didn't you Hakeem?

Well anyway, I interpret 100% of what Hakeem says true, because he states facts how they are to make sense in my mind, and many other's. He speaks for those to understand, not for selfish defense.

 

[Dreadnought[dA]]

By following the rule of, "you attacked me, now I attack you", they will then attack back, and then you'll attack, so on and so forth. Changing Lanes

 

[Mulgrim]

Hehehehehe...
You unlocked it just so you could fire back, didn't you Hakeem?

Well anyway, I interpret 100% of what Hakeem says true, because he states facts how they are to make sense in my mind, and many other's. He speaks for those to understand, not for selfish defense.

he can post in locked threads too.

 

[Deleted member 157129]

Hehe, I'll just skip the unrelated stuff - though I agree to a certain extent about most of what you said there. Just wanted to point out, about the rules, even though a rule can be, theoretically, stupid - it still depends a lot on how it is interpreted.

Of course not. That is just an example to demonstrate the extreme importance other people play in life. To help anyone helps you. It may not be directly visible all the time, but helping people really does help you. Satanism may not preach solitude, but attacking your enemies as opposed to forgiving them certainly does not breed the ever-important community.

Depends on what kind of help it is you provide. I mean, you could be aiding a criminal. Yeah, I know, that's on the edge. I'm just pointing out that even if it might help you in the long run, the cost might not be repaid, for various reasons. That can, of course, also turn the other way and you get more back than what you give. Additionally, there's a cost in attacking too, of course, but it's possible to do a more accurate guess (at least in my experience). The idea though, in Satanism, is that we do not take the risk in helping others if we're not sure of getting anything back. There is no such thing as karma, like in Buddhism, that supposedly increase with every little good deed. Neither for evil deeds. Forgiving someone for breaking your leg is hardly going to benefit you in any way.. if anything, it benefits the other part, because you won't sue them - if you do, then you attacked back.

Yes, it would be. Is not Satanism contradictory? Suppose I were to tell you to never be stupid. Would you listen to everything I had to say as if it were as important as that? Probably not. Suppose I write it in a book. Do you take everything in the book as it is important as that? You might be tempted to say, "No," at this point, but in reality, that is exactly how people think. If stupidity is a sin in Satanism, then it condemns itself, because it is a method to bring stupidity to people. I would argue that the founder himself was largely deluded and stupid, however apparently logical he may be.

Not entirely right, because there's not much of a controlling hand. You are in absolute control, and disagreeing with yourself is beyond anyone's comprehension - of course you can weigh opinions you have up against each other, but you do not disagree like a child would disagree against 1+1=3. It provides a guideline, but it's just words. Yes, all religions are essentially just words, but they are already interpreted (they're done), if you interpret the Holy Bible differently than the already established interpretations (Protestantism, Catholicism .. etc), then you are not Christian, in essence you could actually interpret the bible in such a way it would be similar to how Muslims view their Koran. Satanism involves all interpretations, which is also why Atheists, Agnostics and Deists alike can be Satanists.

Yes, that would the effects of opening Pandora's box. Through "knowledge" we justify doing negative things to other humans, when our core instinct is to help others. Our "intelligence" is just far more potent than our instincts.

Aye, it is as if we evolve to discard our instincts. Though I'm not sure our instinct is to help everyone, I agree it is instinctive to help in certain scenarios. If you see an accident happen, you try to help out, just 'cause it appears to be the obvious action (so would I, as a Satanist).. but it's not always as obvious.

To what? You cannot simply say, "This benefits America." America isn't a tangible thing that can have benefits. The people of America, they can get benefits. The land can get benefits too, but it isn't that land that gets benefits, it is the ecosystem of the land. Your question was of the nature of, "What benefits the community?" while mine was of the nature, "What benefit is it to you personally?" The questions are similar, but the analogy does not carry every aspect; there are gains in war that do not exist in a fight between two people.

When I refer to America, I usually refer to the ones in charge. It benefits the president in one way or another to do what he does, or (s)he simply would not do it - whether it be to gain trust among the people, to solve trouble with economy in an easier way than another.. and a bunch of other reasons. I doubt it benefits (directly) the people of America to attack anything at all.

Ah. I see what you mean. That applies—for the most part—to children. Yes, forgiveness can definitely have that effect, but it can also have the effect I describe. It is not black and white, and my personal experience tends me to think forgiveness is an effective way to remove and an enemy. A lot of people can really only learn by a good beating. <_<

In my experience, the latter works best, but I agree that it is not as simple as black and white.

It's all in how I defined my enemy. I define my enemies as the people that set themselves as enemies to everybody else. Hmm. What does Satanism say about forgiving your friends?

# Satan represents kindness to those who deserve it, instead of love wasted on ingrates!
# Satan represents responsibility to the responsible instead of concern for psychic vampires!

Basically, you need to evaluate the situation, is this friend worth keeping (in most cases they are, because you've already considered this before you befriended them)? If the answer is yes, the rest comes quite easy.

So do Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhist, Hindus and a load of other religions, as well as a lot of undefined philosophies, and of course Atheists and Agnostics. All of these systems preach balance and peace and whatnot. Even those Godless atheists often have the attitude of getting along. You'll often hear it as, "I wont bother you about it if you don't bother me about it."

Aye, which I think I mentioned in the end (though perhaps not perfectly clear - with merely Satanism there would be no balance either).


Satanism does not pick a side either, I think I've mentioned that we consider everyone to be neutral before something proves them friend or foe. Some religions make everyone friends, some all foes, but few are neutral.

He speaks for those to understand, not for selfish defense.

I'm guessing you're just taking this generally, because here in this thread no one is fighting to be better than the other. I'm just trying to let people know what Satanism really is about.

 

[Vosty]

I guess noone has really any right to argue against one's beliefs anyway. I say this, because sometimes there are some pretty ridiculus religions (Not your Shiik, it actually sounds interesting) but people apparantly still follow them. Scientology, for instance. Load of crap, even the makers of it say it is a hoax, but people still believe it.

 

[Saken]

By following the rule of, "you attacked me, now I attack you", they will then attack back, and then you'll attack, so on and so forth. Changing Lanes

Not if you follow the rule of destroying your enemies.

 

[Deleted member 157129]

By following the rule of, "you attacked me, now I attack you", they will then attack back, and then you'll attack, so on and so forth. Changing Lanes

If they attack a second time, you didn't strike hard enough to teach the lesson (of benefit).

 

[Hakeem]

There is no such thing as karma, like in Buddhism, that supposedly increase with every little good deed.

But there is. If not by forces we don't understand, then by the way people behave. (Which is something we also don't really understand, I suppose. <.<) "Human induced karma," as it were.

Satanism involves all interpretations, which is also why Atheists, Agnostics and Deists alike can be Satanists.

So is it just another synonym of everyone?

When I refer to America, I usually refer to the ones in charge.

I might argue that the purpose of a leader is to make decisions that people don't like, loosely implying they can never do anything of benefit for themselves as a leader.

Satanism does not pick a side either, I think I've mentioned that we consider everyone to be neutral before something proves them friend or foe. Some religions make everyone friends, some all foes, but few are neutral.

I was meaning neutral in terms of ideology. (For people to disagree over.) Agnosticism is completely neutral because the only doctrine is, "I don't know." Buddhism has doctrines, but they are about peace, peace, and more peace. There is no room for any violence in Buddhist interpretation, as far as I know.

He speaks for those to understand, not for selfish defense.

You might say that I argue for selfish defense, just with a greater sense of "self." ;D

 

[Squiggy]

My beautiful closure :/

 

[Deleted member 157129]

But there is. If not by forces we don't understand, then by the way people behave. (Which is something we also don't really understand, I suppose. <.<) "Human induced karma," as it were.

Perhaps, but it is not preached as part of Satanism, like in Buddhism. There is karma in various other religions as well, though less prominent. Christianity, for instance, talks about going to heaven. Unfortunately, you're not left responsible for your own actions, so even if you have bad karma (in essence), you can just ask a priest for forgiveness, and he will hear you, and forgive you. Resentment purifies the karma. If karma was a part of Satanism, the only way to make up for bad would be to act good. I don't consider it good (karma-wise) to ask for forgiveness, it's cheap and doesn't make a difference. The effect is damaged effectively by our lack of afterlife though.

So is it just another synonym of everyone?

I almost did describe it as such, but it's difficult to explain. All interpretations is an exaggeration. Though you are given a lot of freedom to understand the religion, it is restrained by the rules. There is an outer bound, which makes a Christian and a Deist Satanist different - for instance, all interpretations of Satanism still evolves around the self, there is no supreme being beyond you - if there is a God, you are that God. This limit fend off nearly all well-known religions, except for Buddhism - where there is no God. I might have pointed it out earlier, but there are a lot of similarities with Buddhism in Satanism. Though we are not preached peace, we are peaceful, we mind our own business. Although a Buddhist would probably not approve of it, I am sure the conversion from Satanism to Buddhism could be easy.

I might argue that the purpose of a leader is to make decisions that people don't like, loosely implying they can never do anything of benefit for themselves as a leader.

They may not benefit their personal self, but they can benefit, in their position, from their actions. For instance, if they effectively make decisions that help the majority of their people, the chances of being re-elected increase.

I was meaning neutral in terms of ideology. (For people to disagree over.) Agnosticism is completely neutral because the only doctrine is, "I don't know." Buddhism has doctrines, but they are about peace, peace, and more peace. There is no room for any violence in Buddhist interpretation, as far as I know.

Similarly (to Agnosticism), Satanism can be interpreted as "I don't care about you, as long as you don't care about me" ..

 

[Hakeem]

For instance, if they effectively make decisions that help the majority of their people, the chances of being re-elected increase.

Being reelected is not necessarily a good thing.

 

[klishky]

Indeed. Though, it would not be allowed under, for example, Christianity - because then you'd be advised to turn the other cheek, and let the destructive cell destroy some more.

Yeah I suppose but that's not the subject is it? Christianity?
I disagree with some principals of Christianity.
For example if someone starts a fight I don't just stand there like a gormless mong.

 

[Deleted member 157129]

Yeah I suppose but that's not the subject is it? Christianity?
I disagree with some principals of Christianity.
For example if someone starts a fight I don't just stand there like a gormless mong.

I was merely referring to your comment about justice. I found it appropriate to state an example of the opposite, to weigh it up against. It is not considered justice in all views of ethic - to remain on topic, it is considered justice in Satanism, heck it would, arguably, be considered a sin to act differently.

 

[NearbyHermit]

How about this one?

 

[kids711]

Then suddenly you see Satanists walk around your house wearing DEVIl HORNS and Tails and a Fork to poke you in the eyes.

 

[legospencer]

I guess I always interpreted Satanism simply as the worship of one's own evil: the sin that naturally resides in all of us. I suppose it's up for debate whether Satan is an actually manifestation of sin (or vice versa, for all I know).

 

[Deleted member 157129]

How about this one?

First of all, not all of this is Satanism (most of it, or even all of it, is different from LaVeyan Satanism. One statement in there "[..] I'm the devil [..]" can be justified as LaVeyan Satanism). Though, there are many interpretations of what a Satanist is, and unfortunately, it puts different groups in wrong views. Speaking of Satanism in general like this created a wrong stereotype, where Satanists are described as devil worshippers (Diabolism) and wicked evil people that sacrifice animals and even humans to the devil (in LaVeyan Satanism you are not allowed to kill an animal unless it is in self-defence or for food - besides it is completely meaningless to sacrifice anything considering there is no one to sacrifice to). LaVeyan Satanists are the only true Satanists, other groups have been entitled the same because of their relation to Satan (which is pretty natural, I suppose). Second point is that Death Metal does not really resemble a religious belief, and judging Death Metal (heck, they even blame Heavy Metal - which by the way is a different sub-genre and hardly related to Death Metal at all) by a number of fans that commit Diabolical acts is stupid. Lastly, if you were referring to my statements about Satanism and Black Metal, know that Black Metal is not Death Metal, although similar. If there is no relation to Satanism in the music, it is not Black Metal (at least that's how I've understood the definition - and in my experience it applies to all Black Metal).

Then suddenly you see Satanists walk around your house wearing DEVIl HORNS and Tails and a Fork to poke you in the eyes.

That'd be Halloween costumes, and they're not serious about it. However, I shan't speak for Diabolical "acolytes" ..

I guess I always interpreted Satanism simply as the worship of one's own evil: the sin that naturally resides in all of us. I suppose it's up for debate whether Satan is an actually manifestation of sin (or vice versa, for all I know).

That is a very simple view on it, but at least there's not much to disagree with. In an abstract sense you could view Satan as a symbol of freedom and pleasure, whilst God would resemble restriction and control.

 

[Mulgrim]

My beautiful closure :/

eeeevil

 

[legospencer]

That is a very simple view on it, but at least there's not much to disagree with. In an abstract sense you could view Satan as a symbol of freedom and pleasure, whilst God would resemble restriction and control.

Precisely my good sir. And agreeable is credible.

 

[NearbyHermit]

Satan is not a deity!
It's the worship of ones self!

Not following religion,makes you an atheist!

Worshiping the so-called satan is just a breaking of the religious laws,if they're trully laws.
They're more like guidelines.


One last thing,during history classes,my teacher explained to us students the meaning of religion:

The term of explaining something man cannot understand!

 

[legospencer]

It seems to me that the creation of religion was a complex blend of the need for necessary morale for those low on the hierarchical structure in times of hardship and, for the more philosophical and educated, a way to (as stated above) explain the quandaries of life that could not be explained, in context of the times then, and as of right now.

 

[NearbyHermit]

It seems to me that the creation of religion was a complex blend of the need for necessary morale for those low on the hierarchical structure in times of hardship and, for the more philosophical and educated, a way to (as stated above) explain the quandaries of life that could not be explained, in context of the times then, and as of right now.

Exactly!

It was necesarry those days,now it's more of a burden!

 

[Vosty]

Exactly!

It was necesarry those days,now it's more of a burden!

Yeah, back wehn everyone needed reasons for how things were created and how things are.
I think Greek myths have the most fun answers for most things anway.
So yeah, science tossed many religous facts out the window, but we still cling on because of traditon.

There is still only one question I ask:
Who placed out universe in the first place?
Because we know how it was created, but now who put the first part of it in.

 

[TwistedImage]

Nowadays religion exists either as an excuse to blow yourself up or a wall to lean against in thinking that there is a life after death.

Or both. <.<

EDIT: Yes, I worded that in a horrible, horrible way.

 

[Deleted member 157129]

Satan is not a deity!
It's the worship of ones self!

Not following religion,makes you an atheist!

Worshiping the so-called satan is just a breaking of the religious laws,if they're trully laws.
They're more like guidelines.


One last thing,during history classes,my teacher explained to us students the meaning of religion:

The term of explaining something man cannot understand!

No, Satan is no deity, that is correct - however, that does not mean a deists can't be a Satanist - you are your own God, and there you have it. If you believe there is a God, you are a deist. An atheist Satanist views Satan purely symbolical, whilst an agnostic Satanist is caught between the two.

It's as if you're yelling at someone trying to tell them wrong, but I can't make out who you're talking to. Satanism is a religion, just as much as any other religion (except you could perhaps consider it younger when you look at when it was finally accepted as a religion - basically, Satanism was born the day human learned to ponder, just like all other beliefs).

Religious laws, what are you referring to exactly? If you're referring to the rules of Satanism; there is indeed no worship of Satan within Satanism, nor any other deity, because there is none. However, if you use the definitions, it is possible to worship Satan and still retain the role of a Satanist. Have a look at this quote:

Satanists do not believe that Satan is a god; rather, the function of God is performed and satisfied by the Satanist him/herself. That is, the needs of worship, ritual, and religious/spiritual focus are directed, effectively, inwards towards the Satanist, as opposed to outwards towards a God.

Aye, that definition of religion is quite accurate, but then it is in vain to encourage followers to seek enlightenment, if you already know that no man can fathom the whole. Reaching nirvana (for example in Buddhism) would be a futile quest. However, the definition applies perfectly to Christianity, which is why I'm left to assume your teacher is Christian. Then again, was it not Christianity that invented the term 'religion'?

Nowadays religion exists either as an excuse to blow yourself up or a wall to lean against in thinking that there is a life after death.

Or both. <.<

There is no personal benefit in committing suicide, a Satanist would never do such a thing. Neither does a Satanist believe in the afterlife. None of your examples apply to my religion.

 

[NearbyHermit]

Aye, that definition of religion is quite accurate, but then it is in vain to encourage followers to seek enlightenment, if you already know that no man can fathom the whole. Reaching nirvana (for example in Buddhism) would be a futile quest. However, the definition applies perfectly to Christianity, which is why I'm left to assume your teacher is Christian. Then again, was it not Christianity that invented the term 'religion'?
.

I couldn't have said it better!

Simply religion is 100% bound to belief,otherwise,it has no meaning,no purpose. It's not the fact that you believe in something,the fact that you even believe counts the most.

That's my view of things,I do believe in God,but nowadays religion got twisted with all these branches and conceptions. Man doesen't make religion,he just passes it on.

Even if it was the product of a human mind,but it had a lot of human deaths to back it up. So in my opinnion,it's real,but you need a lot of faith to see it and not be blinded by it.

 

[TwistedImage]

How does it have "human deaths to back it up?" You mean the Christian crusades?

<.<

 

[Kwah]

Just dropping in to announce this thread is being watched. Do try to keep from devolving into a religious flame-war.

This being said, by no means be worried about making non-flaming posts, and the discussion itself is fine. It's just a touchy topic, and care needs to be taken to maintain it as an intellectual discussion.

I'll contribute my view later.

 

[Vosty]

Btw, to be curious, do Satanists have a December holiday?

 

[TwistedImage]

From what shiiK is saying I'm guessing satanists don't have holidays.

However, in Norway it's stereotypical to celebrate Christmas even if you're not christian, so meh.

If shiiK isn't a hermit he's most probably celebrating Christmas with his loved ones :O

 

[Vosty]

From what shiiK is saying I'm guessing satanists don't have holidays.

However, in Norway it's stereotypical to celebrate Christmas even if you're not christian, so meh.

If shiiK isn't a hermit he's most probably celebrating Christmas with his loved ones :O

Same here. Morely though because of what America did to it. It created it as time to go to stores and buy more useless shit your relatives will use once and then throw away. They had commericials for christmas sales a month ago already.

 

[Deleted member 157129]

Btw, to be curious, do Satanists have a December holiday?

We "celebrate" Solstice, and we justify the Christmas holiday with Winter Solstice .. we do not celebrate the birth of Jesus, if that's what you're fishing for. Easter means nothing to me.

From what shiiK is saying I'm guessing satanists don't have holidays.

However, in Norway it's stereotypical to celebrate Christmas even if you're not christian, so meh.

If shiiK isn't a hermit he's most probably celebrating Christmas with his loved ones :O

We have only one real holiday, and that is our own birthday. Though we also mark the date when the Church of Satan was founded, which so happens to be on Walpurgis Night, in 1966.

Yes, I "celebrate" Christmas with my family and friends, for traditional reasons.

 

[legospencer]

I seem to remember Satanists generally celebrating Halloween as a holiday of significance as well. Am I wrong?