Satanism

Status
Not open for further replies.
Level 35
Joined
May 22, 2007
Messages
5,366
- when I refer to God, in this thread about Satanism, I take it for granted people understand that it is indeed the deity that deist Satanists believe to exist, and per Satanic definition, that deity is themselves. If there is a deity, it is the Satanist him/herself.

Then it would do Satanists well to say: "I am myself, and I worship myself" not "I am God, and I worship God".

From a deist Satanist standpoint, God and Satan are equal.

Alas.

God is just the common term used to describe the singular deity of a religion.

I remember when alot of words were once known for what they truly were...and now they are diluted things.

Joy for example, they now equate with 'happiness', when the truth of its definition is more akin to perseverance-in-peace, and contentment in the face of purposefully being so, even in dark times.

It is not unique to Christianity. When a Satanist claims to be God, he does not claim to be the father of Jesus Christ. He is merely defining himself.

They should be clear to identify themselves for what they are then...Themselves, not by the name of something they are not.

If you can't accept that, then you will never understand deistic Satanism. You can't compare it, in any way at all, to Christianity (nor any other religion), because it is a different religion.

But you maintain that you do not want to understand God, but you'll use his name everywhere to define yourself, an individual with the self-centered notion of egoistic vanity.

Neither can you compare the Islamic God

Allah = Allah

to the Christian God,

God = God

you can't claim that when a Muslim prays to his God he is not praying to God, because the Muslim himself is the one who choose who God is to him.

Allah = Allah

PS: a minor pet peeve of mine: God = God, and when people say 'prays to his God' they are making an error in grammar...it is properly: "he prays to his god", because the capitalised form of God is God the individual being of the judeo-christian persuasion, not a deity of other faiths...Zeus is a Greek god, he is not a Greek God.
 

Deleted member 157129

D

Deleted member 157129

Then it would do Satanists well to say: "I am myself, and I worship myself" not "I am God, and I worship God".
The word 'myself' does not refer to a deity. A deist Satanist worship the deity him/herself, God.

Alas.

I remember when alot of words were once known for what they truly were...and now they are diluted things.

Joy for example, they now equate with 'happiness', when the truth of its definition is more akin to perseverance-in-peace, and contentment in the face of purposefully being so, even in dark times.

They should be clear to identify themselves for what they are then...Themselves, not by the name of something they are not.

But you maintain that you do not want to understand God, but you'll use his name everywhere to define yourself, an individual with the self-centered notion of egoistic vanity.

Allah = Allah

God = God

Allah = Allah

PS: a minor pet peeve of mine: God = God, and when people say 'prays to his God' they are making an error in grammar...it is properly: "he prays to his god", because the capitalised form of God is God the individual being of the judeo-christian persuasion, not a deity of other faiths...Zeus is a Greek god, he is not a Greek God.
God is a singular supreme being, a god is one out of many supreme beings. God is not a name, it is a term or word. Allah is God, Satan is God, God is God. Shiva is a god, Zeus is a god.

Besides, I want to add that I do indeed understand the Christian God.
 

Deleted member 157129

D

Deleted member 157129

My head hurts talkin about all this. We should all just go out for some bread and drink off the grail.


.. the grail's right here, says Heineken on the label.


Seriously, if you got nothing to debate, nothing you want me to elaborate on concerning Satanism or nothing else related to this thread, then please stop making posts here.
 
Level 35
Joined
May 22, 2007
Messages
5,366
Words do not have intrinsic meaning. They have whatever meaning we give to them.

Full persnickety eat mud see do I chimpanzee unto pickle's underwearing You bung yams simple gregarious.

The word 'myself' does not refer to a deity. A deist Satanist worship the deity him/herself, God.

The word 'myself' does not refer to a deity.
A deist Satanist worship the deity him/herself,

The word 'myself' does not refer to a deity. A deist Satanist worship the deity him/herself, God.

Call yourself what you are, not what you are not. You are not another individual, you are yourself. You might worship yourself as 'a god', you do not worship yourself as God, you are not God, you cannot worship yourself therefore as "God".

This is the point I am trying to make. You by saying:

A deist Satanist worship the deity him/herself, God.

You are stating:

"the deity him/herself = God"

This is impossible, inaccurate for many reasons...and you need to alter your position on it, and not claim to be who you are not.

If you want to worship yourself...be sure to know that it is you whom you are worshiping, and not God. And that You are You, and God is God.

God is a singular supreme being,

God is The Supreme Being. There can be only one supreme being.

a god is one out of many supreme beings.

Fallacy, if there are many supreme beings, then they are not supreme, but have equals.

God is not a name, it is a term or word.

No...It is a name...God = God.

Allah is God,

Allah is Allah.

Satan is God,

Satan is Satan...a fallen created being of the Angelic persuasion, a cherub in his original form.

God is God.

Yes he is.

Shiva is a god,

Shiva is a part of the Hindu Pantheon consisting of multiple gods, he is NOT God, neither is Brahma, or Vishnu, or Lakshmi, or Krishna.

Shiva is Shiva, Brahma is Brahma, Vishnu is Vishnu, Lakshmi is Lakshmi, and Krishna, is Krishna.

None of them are God.

Besides, I want to add that I do indeed understand the Christian God.

Apparently not, if you did, you certainly wouldn't be claiming his identity, place, role, titles, and proper status as Lord over your life.

You know of God, but you don't understand God.
 

Deleted member 157129

D

Deleted member 157129

Full persnickety eat mud see do I chimpanzee unto pickle's underwearing You bung yams simple gregarious.

Call yourself what you are, not what you are not. You are not another individual, you are yourself. You might worship yourself as 'a god', you do not worship yourself as God, you are not God, you cannot worship yourself therefore as "God".

This is the point I am trying to make. You by saying:

You are stating:

"the deity him/herself = God"

This is impossible, inaccurate for many reasons...and you need to alter your position on it, and not claim to be who you are not.

If you want to worship yourself...be sure to know that it is you whom you are worshiping, and not God. And that You are You, and God is God.

God is The Supreme Being. There can be only one supreme being.

Fallacy, if there are many supreme beings, then they are not supreme, but have equals.

No...It is a name...God = God.

Allah is Allah.

Satan is Satan...a fallen created being of the Angelic persuasion, a cherub in his original form.

Yes he is.

Shiva is a part of the Hindu Pantheon consisting of multiple gods, he is NOT God, neither is Brahma, or Vishnu, or Lakshmi, or Krishna.

Shiva is Shiva, Brahma is Brahma, Vishnu is Vishnu, Lakshmi is Lakshmi, and Krishna, is Krishna.

None of them are God.

SUPREME adjective

1. Having preeminent significance: ascendant, dominant, predominant, prepotent, prevailing, regnant, ruling. See important/unimportant.
2. Of the greatest possible degree, quality, or intensity: extreme, transcendent, ultimate, unsurpassable, utmost, uttermost. See better/worse, big/small/amount.
3. Conforming to an ultimate form of perfection or excellence: exemplary, ideal, model, perfect. See good/bad.

If it makes you feel better; God is a singular deity, a god is one out of many deities.

I did not claim Shiva to be God, he is one out of an amount of gods in Hinduism, though they are all essentially the same. In fact, I think a Hindu would define Shiva as God, just as much as Vishnu. A Christian defines Jesus as God, as well as the son of God and a form of God, does he not?


Apparently not, if you did, you certainly wouldn't be claiming his identity, place, role, titles, and proper status as Lord over your life.

You know of God, but you don't understand God.

I am not claiming his identity, place, role nor titles. I decide my own faith, I act by free will and I control my own life. There is nothing beyond me.

I do understand God, but not the way you understand God, and I disagree with your interpretation of God, but I will allow you to have your own interpretation, just as I. I do that courtesy to all, out of free will, you should try the same.
 
Level 13
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
1,481
Christianity shouldn't have been brought into this topic either way, it's like sulfuric acid on something with carbon.

Let's drop christianity in further discussion.
 
Level 35
Joined
May 22, 2007
Messages
5,366
If it makes you feel better; God is a singular deity, a god is one out of many deities.

Getting closer, and yes, I do indeed feel better. :)

I did not claim Shiva to be God,

Alrighty.

he is one out of an amount of gods in Hinduism, though they are all essentially the same. In fact, I think a Hindu would define Shiva as God, just as much as Vishnu. A Christian defines Jesus as God, as well as the son of God and a form of God, does he not?

The Godhead is rather quite different from the three prime gods of Hinduism. But that is a different debate all together. ;)

I am not claiming his identity, place, role nor titles.

If you say at any point: "I am God" then you are indeed claiming those things.

I decide my own faith, I act by free will and I control my own life. There is nothing beyond me.

And I wish you the best with that notion.

I do understand God,

no....not really...You are most welcome to prove me wrong of course! :D

Prove your understanding. :)

but not the way you understand God,

Then...I believe I will go so far as to say...you don't understand God. Because my understanding of God comes from God himself. Just like it does to every Christian, who is actually born again and saved.

and I disagree with your interpretation of God,

Because I don't interpret him as You, Me, or any other mortal fallible, death riddled, sickness riddled, sin riddled, conflict riddled, mistake riddled, selfishness riddled, loveless, faithless, kindness less, dis-compassionate, poor in morals, man?

I'm perfectly okay with that. :)

but I will allow you to have your own interpretation, just as I. I do that courtesy to all, out of free will, you should try the same.

I'm not usurping your free will. Not in the least little bit. :)
 
Level 12
Joined
Aug 31, 2008
Messages
1,121
Yours guys God's have different meaning according to your belief's!
Shiik, he's not going to give in until you say:
I am god.
Instead of:
I am God.

It would almost make more sense for you to say you are the center of the universe, because form my understanding a god is one who has godly powers. Unless like El said,can chuck yourself offf a cliff, you are a human, just one who believes that he is important.

Even more curious, if every satanist thinks of himself as a god, what does he think of other satanists? Are they all gods? Explain.
 

Deleted member 157129

D

Deleted member 157129

The Godhead is rather quite different from the three prime gods of Hinduism. But that is a different debate all together. ;)
I agree, considering it is three forms of God in Christianity, while I believe it is a lot more in Hinduism (actually, I think Hinduism offers an unlimited amount). Been a few years since I looked into it, but there are three prime gods, representing creation, maintenance and destruction (could I be bold enough to claim that it relates very well to Christianity, if you grant Satan the role of destruction - of course, he'd have to be considered a deity), plus Krishna whom walked the Earth (like Jesus Christ). After that the list goes on with more gods that represent each their values. Anyway, let's not stray off-topic.

If you say at any point: "I am God" then you are indeed claiming those things.
If I had said at any point that I am your God, I would be claiming your God's (or god's) identity, etc. However, all I've said is that a deist Satanist would claim to be his own God (or his own god, depending on his views). I do not consider myself to be God, a god nor Satan. I am a mortal being of free will, with full responsibility of my actions.

no....not really...You are most welcome to prove me wrong of course! :D

Prove your understanding. :)

Then...I believe I will go so far as to say...you don't understand God. Because my understanding of God comes from God himself. Just like it does to every Christian, who is actually born again and saved.
Your understanding, is that you were enlightened by God himself, which is common among most Christians. However, there are a lot more varieties between you than you could possibly fathom without discussing it with all Christians. God might have told you a different story than what he told John Smith. I know a lot of Christians, and none of them are the same. There is only one thing they agree completely on; that God represents love.

Because I don't interpret him as You, Me, or any other mortal fallible, death riddled, sickness riddled, sin riddled, conflict riddled, mistake riddled, selfishness riddled, loveless, faithless, kindness less, dis-compassionate, poor in morals, man?

I'm perfectly okay with that. :)
No, I do not interpret the Christian God as me, or any of what you have described above. He is kind, he loves, he forgives, and he is everyone. He denies pleasure, freedom and responsibility, he represents a life-style where everything is going to be fine in the end, no matter what you do, as long as you feel remorse (and pay a priest so you can tell him about it).



Vosty, yes I am a human indeed. Never tried to impose anything else. I am mortal. Neither do I believe I am important.

A Satanist that views himself as God, views only himself as God, though he would not expect anyone else to agree that he is their God, only his God.

Satanists take care of their own life, value their own benefits. We have a responsive code of conduct where we shall do unto others as they do unto you.


Also, more clarification on the God discussion from our leader (and the story around the quote), taken from Wikipedia:
In The Satanic Bible, Anton LaVey describes Satan as a motivating and balancing dark force in nature. Satan is also described as being the "Black Flame", representing a person's own inner personality and desires. Satan is seen as synonymous with the nature and even, metaphorically, with certain conceptions of a supreme deity or God.

In his most important essay, "Satanism: The Feared Religion", the Church of Satan's current leader Peter H. Gilmore states:

Satanists do not believe in the supernatural, in neither God nor the Devil. To the Satanist, he is his own God. Satan is a symbol of Man living as his prideful, carnal nature dictates. The reality behind Satan is simply the dark evolutionary force of entropy that permeates all of nature and provides the drive for survival and propagation inherent in all living things. Satan is not a conscious entity to be worshipped, rather a reservoir of power inside each human to be tapped at will. Thus any concept of sacrifice is rejected as a Christian aberration—in Satanism there’s no deity to which one can sacrifice.[11]

Satan is said to appear in mythology and literature around the world as a trickster, rebel, and Figure seeking the destruction or slavery of man. Figures such as the Greek Prometheus are said to perfectly exemplify the qualities of Satan, the prideful rebel.[12] Satan is seen as the powerful individual who acts regardless of what others might say.[13] Also, the word satan is derived from the Hebrew for "adversary" or "accuser" (ha-satan). Thus, combining the traditional rebellious imagery associated with Satan and other relative deities, together with the etymological aspect of the word itself, Satanists claim to be adversaries of mainstream behavior which they define as "herd conformity", seeing it as stifling to individuality, creativity, and progress.[14]

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.

LaVey proposes, instead, that if all gods are creations of humans, worship of an external deity is worship of its creator by proxy. He suggests, then, that the rational Satanists should instead internalize their gods and therefore worship themselves; hence the Satanic maxim, "I am my own god."[15]

It follows that Satanism shuns the idea of belief in all other deities as well. Belief in any such externalized deities is generally considered grounds for excluding someone as a Satanist, and devil worship in particular is considered nothing more than a misguided inversion of Christianity, the practitioners of which being regarded as devil-worshipers, instead of Satanists
 
Level 15
Joined
Sep 3, 2009
Messages
1,521
ok so i wasnt wrong ok. but ya i agree with some aspects of satanism but im mostly atheist. and i think its just funny how i know ppl who claim they are christian and whatever other branch but they do not follow any of the commandments and rules of it. yet i know satanists and atheists who are nicer and more well mannered.
 
Level 13
Joined
Jan 19, 2008
Messages
793
Then they should accurately portray this without taking on the guise of being an individual that they are not.

They never claimed to be anyone else but themselves. A Satanist defines himself as God. Despite your blind faith towards your God, there is a difference, a capitol letter or not. They are their own being, and they worship themselves as their own. They are their own God. How hard can that be to understand?

I would like to think that the person of whose identity they are attempting to steal would care.

Again, no one's identity was stolen. I can name several things Christianity stole, though I'm not here blindly preaching like you are, whether or not someone is entitled to their own religious views.

A Satanist sees himself as his own God, therefore that is his religious view.
Which means you're sitting here saying that shiik can't have his own religious view, nor can any other Satanist. Hm...

But you maintain that you do not want to understand God, but you'll use his name everywhere to define yourself, an individual with the self-centered notion of egoistic vanity.

Not your God, his God, himself.
The religious views are expressed in a way that they are in charge of their own life, and that they are the one's in the driver's seat and are in charge of what choices they make. So you call it self-centered, anyone else could easily say that they are self-driven.

You are stating:

"the deity him/herself = God"

This is impossible, inaccurate for many reasons...and you need to alter your position on

it, and not claim to be who you are not.

This is what I got from this...

You have different views then me. *Clubs you to death with a Bible.*

God is The Supreme Being. There can be only one supreme being.

In your religion, not his. Again, conflict of religious views which you repeatedly seem to cross that line, almost as a way of self pleasure by the count of how often you do it.

Apparently not, if you did, you certainly wouldn't be claiming his identity, place, role, titles, and proper status as Lord over your life.

You know of God, but you don't understand God.

He has claimed no one's identity but his own. Get over it.
 
Level 27
Joined
May 30, 2007
Messages
2,872
Now, I've been instructed to come to this thread and tell Elenai that X("God") != Y("God").

Elenai, naughty naughty.
God is not a name, it is a term or word.
I'd like to point out, strictly for the sake of clarity, that English("God"), in the middle of a sentence, being capitalized, is a proper noun. Yes, that means Elenai has been playing Grammar Nazi. If I were to moderate this it would consist of deleting it for being off-topic. Which, I guess I can do for future posts.
Our most sacred holiday, our birthday, is quite common to celebrate as well, albeit not on such a global scale.
SIX BILLION divided by three hundred sixty five. I'd say it is pretty global. :p
I'm making a point and waiting for you to get it. I won't spoon feed you this point, you are certainly smart enough to get it I'm sure.
Don't hold your breath, because people are actively trying to not understand anything you say as logical.
Your point?
His point is that your point has no application.

In other words:
Get snag bat cod jerf mark tat fog tuf.

No, you can't just come into a debate and say, "You can make up your own definitions whenever you want!"

You can make up words whenever you want. No reasonable person will stop you. They can and often will stop you, however, if you happen to try to interrupt their conversation with words that you have made up without conveying their definitions.

I am personally against redefinitions because they make communication that much more difficult.
 

Deleted member 157129

D

Deleted member 157129

Let's just put it straight once and for all; no one here is redefining God. Whether it is the Christian or Muslim God you refer to, does not change the definition of God. God and a god are unequal terms, saying all deist Satanists worship themselves as a god, rather than God, would be incorrect, because some deist believe in only one, supreme deity, while others believe in several deities. There are Satanists that will define themselves as a god, and those who will define themselves as the God.

As for the birthdays, aye, it is globally celebrated, or accepted as a celebration, but the celebration of your, specific birthday is not global (usually). Few people invite a billion people to celebrate their birthday, and even if they did, I doubt they'd all attend.
 
Level 35
Joined
May 22, 2007
Messages
5,366
I agree, considering it is three forms of God in Christianity, while I believe it is a lot more in Hinduism (actually, I think Hinduism offers an unlimited amount). Been a few years since I looked into it, but there are three prime gods, representing creation, maintenance and destruction (could I be bold enough to claim that it relates very well to Christianity, if you grant Satan the role of destruction - of course, he'd have to be considered a deity), plus Krishna whom walked the Earth (like Jesus Christ). After that the list goes on with more gods that represent each their values. Anyway, let's not stray off-topic.

Alas, that they are all separate beings (this is where the similarities abruptly end), and Satan is not granted the 'role' of destroyer, but is instead a rogue agent.

He denies pleasure,

Is that why God invented flavour? Is that why God invented colour vision for man to enjoy? Is that why God states "Be fruitful and multiply? (IE: have alot of sex) Just because he wants it to be confined to the proper place of marraige, doesn't mean he is denying you pleasure.

I have yet to see God come out of Heaven and smite someone for enjoying a bubble bath.

freedom and responsibility,

Is this why God gave you free will to choose, and to be stuck with the consequences of your choices? Just because he has grace, and forgives his children, does not mean that he didn't give them the choice to choose to ask for forgiveness and REPENT, and be pardoned. Just because he is willing to turn our evil into good, does not mean he has no regard for freedom, or responsibility.

he represents a life-style where everything is going to be fine in the end, no matter what you do, as long as you feel remorse

Wrong: He shows Grace if you will repent, and then he works with you freely to make you into a person who lives a Godly lifestyle by your own free will, and want to live it.

(and pay a priest so you can tell him about it).

...Seriously...no.

That is VERY OLD Medieval Roman Catholic Man-made tradition! And shows me that you don't particularly understand Christianity, and therefore, you can't understand God either...

I do not, never, ever, ever, pay a priest to hear my sins. I talk directly to God about them.

A Satanist sees himself as his own God, therefore that is his religious view.

I shall now fix that sentence:

A Satanist sees himself as his own god, therefore that is his religious view.

Not your God, his God, himself.

*god

The religious views are expressed in a way that they are in charge of their own life, and that they are the one's in the driver's seat and are in charge of what choices they make. So you call it self-centered, anyone else could easily say that they are self-driven.

It is self-centered. Infact, saying that you are your own god, or God, is entirely self-centered to a degree higher than just about anything I've seen on this earth...

Don't hold your breath, because people are actively trying to not understand anything you say as logical.

Unfortunately.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Deleted member 157129

D

Deleted member 157129

Alas, that they are all separate beings (this is where the similarities abruptly end), and Satan is not granted the 'role' of destroyer, but is instead a rogue agent.
My understanding is that all gods in Hinduism are in fact part of a greater, supreme deity, thus they worship different values of the same God.

Is that why God invented flavour? Is that why God invented colour vision for man to enjoy? Is that why God states "Be fruitful and multiply? (IE: have alot of sex) Just because he wants it to be confined to the proper place of marraige, doesn't mean he is denying you pleasure.

I have yet to see God come out of Heaven and smite someone for enjoying a bubble bath.
If there were no flavour, it would not be less pleasure in life. Pleasure comes from the freedom to do anything you want, at any time, under any condition. The seven deadly sins are a perfect example of how the Christian God limits your freedom.

Is this why God gave you free will to choose, and to be stuck with the consequences of your choices? Just because he has grace, and forgives his children, does not mean that he didn't give them the choice to choose to ask for forgiveness and REPENT, and be pardoned. Just because he is willing to turn our evil into good, does not mean he has no regard for freedom, or responsibility.
If you had free will in Christianity, your fate could not have been determined. You can't blame fate, if you possess free will. Seeking pardon from an external entity that not all humans believe to exist, is not just. If I do something wrong, I must ask forgiveness from the victim, if he does not grant me pardon, it because I do not deserve it. A typical Christian would consider himself forgiven for his deeds even without letting the victim know of his regrets.

Wrong: He shows Grace if you will repent, and then he works with you freely to make you into a person who lives a Godly lifestyle by your own free will, and want to live it.

So only monks can be forgiven.

...Seriously...no.

That is VERY OLD Medieval Roman Catholic Man-made tradition! And shows me that you don't particularly understand Christianity, and therefore, you can't understand God either...

I do not, never, ever, ever, pay a priest to hear my sins. I talk directly to God about them.
That is Christianity, Christianity is nothing but man-made. God is not. You need not understand Christianity to understand God. I shot that statement in just to see your reply, and I hoped it would be like this.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Level 24
Joined
May 9, 2007
Messages
3,563
His point is that your point has no application.

In other words:
Get snag bat cod jerf mark tat fog tuf.

No, you can't just come into a debate and say, "You can make up your own definitions whenever you want!"

No, You also can't come into a debate and say, "Oh look, my definition is correct, and yours is wrong!", </endargument>. Yes, it defies the point of having a shared language if you spew random words, but it doesn't mean that the given definition is intrinsically right.

It's omnipotence all over again. I'm just saying arguing over the 'real' meaning of words is pointless, and in-fact impossible. Especially in over a case as strife with problems as the word god, as opposed to God.

Different people give different words different meanings, just learn to interpret them.
 
Level 35
Joined
May 22, 2007
Messages
5,366
My understanding is that all gods in Hinduism are in fact part of a greater, supreme deity, thus they worship different values of the same God.

My understanding, is that it is polytheistic, perhaps I shall research it and see, I am curious now that this other thought is presented.

If there were no flavour, it would not be less pleasure in life. Pleasure comes from the freedom to do anything you want, at any time, under any condition. The seven deadly sins are a perfect example of how the Christian God limits your freedom.

Freedom = Self-harm, and being imprisoned in your own guilt, and evil consequences? Okay! You may have your freedom.

I personally, will choose the freedom of grace.

If you had free will in Christianity, your fate could not have been determined. You can't blame fate, if you possess free will.

Do I blame fate? No. Do Christians believe in fate? No.

If I do something wrong, I must ask forgiveness from the victim,

To sin against a person, is to sin against his maker, ultimately it lies with asking for forgiveness from the artist for marring his painting, not the painting.

So only monks can be forgiven.

No. You don't have to be a Monk for God to work in your daily life. Your understanding is...indeed flawed...

It doesn't take isolation in a monastery for God to work in your daily life.

Christianity is nothing but man-made.

Prove it.

It could not be clearer than how it is already defined. They worship their God, you worship your God. Their God is internal, your God is external.

It could not be clearer than how it is already defined. They worship their god (their individual selves), you worship God. Their god is internal, God is external - and dwells within the Christian believer.

No, You also can't come into a debate and say, "Oh look, my definition is correct, and yours is wrong!", </endargument>. Yes, it defies the point of having a shared language if you spew random words, but it doesn't mean that the given definition is intrinsically right.

You can when your definition IS right.

Blue = Blue, doesn't matter if you think it is Green or not.

God = The Judeo-Christian God. And his most commonly attributed name.

Allah = The Muslim name as presented in the Quaran.

It's omnipotence all over again. I'm just saying arguing over the 'real' meaning of words is pointless, and in-fact impossible. Especially in over a case as strife with problems as the word god, as opposed to God.

Alas, for correctness which...in other debates, you are so clearly adamant on have fullness of. Curious.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Level 27
Joined
May 30, 2007
Messages
2,872
I told you guys this discussion was off topic. -.-

I have left a little of it, under the reasoning that Satanism does say that other religions restrict freedom or something.

Also I couldn't resists this:
I tried that a few times. It didn't work.
Well then I will tell you what you would tell Elenai if he told you this when he tried to do the experimentation you did:

You did the experiment wrong.

You guys do realize you are debating against tautology don't you? Elenai has said more correct things here than anyone else simply because he was repeating tautology over and over and over.

Elenai uses tautology and you can't perceive him as correct.
And people call me biased for defending him? (Alright, only really one person that I know of, but still.)

I'll be closely monitoring this thread. I might just close this thread when I log off tonight and open it when I come back on.
 
Level 34
Joined
Jul 4, 2007
Messages
5,552
I told you guys this discussion was off topic. -.-

I have left a little of it, under the reasoning that Satanism does say that other religions restrict freedom or something.

Also I couldn't resists this:

Well then I will tell you what you would tell Elenai if he told you this when he tried to do the experimentation you did:

You did the experiment wrong.

You guys do realize you are debating against tautology don't you? Elenai has said more correct things here than anyone else simply because he was repeating tautology over and over and over.

Elenai uses tautology and you can't perceive him as correct.
And people call me biased for defending him? (Alright, only really one person that I know of, but still.)

I'll be closely monitoring this thread. I might just close this thread when I log off tonight and open it when I come back on.

The most interesting thing of this thread was that Mulgrim started with a completely nonsense starting post which evolved into an BANmbush for Elenai.

To be honest, I can't frankly find the topic at all. I like to see this thread in hell to be closed since it began with a Something Else-ish post.



The topic questions were:
1 - Do you think if I put a bible on his forehead it will burn? :)

2 - p.s. satanic or Satanist?

1 - He's human, unless proven nót to be human, so it's extremely unlikely that he has got the magical ability to burn an object.

2 - A Satanist can be more seen like a hobby or a profession, but the word 'Satanic' can be considered more like "being Satanic" as in demonic empowered. Hmm, "I am a Satanist" and "I am Satanic".

Meh, sometimes stuff looks harder than it is. If you just let me in this thread sooner, I would have saved you the time and posts.
 

Deleted member 157129

D

Deleted member 157129

Some random seeming parts from the post I made to respond before the thread was closed that I find should be part of the thread.
--
If a Satanist would claim to be themselves, it would prove nothing at all. All humans are themselves, thus a Satanist is a human, and all humans are Satanists, because a Satanist is themselves? There is no better choice to describe a specific, singular deity in English than to use the term God. It is described as such for people to understand what the Satanist is implying.

--
If I were to define Satanism myself, it would be as short as this; Satanism is, it has always been and it will henceforth be. Satanism was never made, it never became.

Today's description of Satanism, however, would not exist if it wasn't for Christianity. What Anton LaVey does is not to create a religion, he compares it to other, already described religions to provide an insight for others to understand what it really is about, and how it is different from other religions.
Satanism existed before humans did. Satanism doesn't apply only to humans. A tiger is a Satanist.
--

EDIT:

The most interesting thing of this thread was that Mulgrim started with a completely nonsense starting post which evolved into an BANmbush for Elenai.

To be honest, I can't frankly find the topic at all. I like to see this thread in hell to be closed since it began with a Something Else-ish post.



The topic questions were:


1 - He's human, unless proven nót to be human, so it's extremely unlikely that he has got the magical ability to burn an object.

2 - A Satanist can be more seen like a hobby or a profession, but the word 'Satanic' can be considered more like "being Satanic" as in demonic empowered. Hmm, "I am a Satanist" and "I am Satanic".

Meh, sometimes stuff looks harder than it is. If you just let me in this thread sooner, I would have saved you the time and posts.

It started off in a different thread, which is why the posts on the first page or so are off-topic by nature, yet they are necessary to understand the thread at least for a couple pages.
Being a Satanist is not comparable with a hobby. Unless you can also define Buddhism a hobby. If you had bothered to read up, you'd realize there's more to this thread than a mere question, or two.
 
Level 27
Joined
May 30, 2007
Messages
2,872
Some random seeming parts from the post I made to respond before the thread was closed that I find should be part of the thread.
I like debate as much as the next guy, but I had to draw the line of what was on topic somewhere, and very little qualified. Very little qualified as being discussion supposing it were on topic.
 
Level 34
Joined
Jul 4, 2007
Messages
5,552
It started off in a different thread, which is why the posts on the first page or so are off-topic by nature, yet they are necessary to understand the thread at least for a couple pages.
Being a Satanist is not comparable with a hobby. Unless you can also define Buddhism a hobby. If you had bothered to read up, you'd realize there's more to this thread than a mere question, or two.

Used the wrong words (teehee), but no, I can't be bothered to read Elenai's pagan tautologous (thanks Hakeem) posts that covers at least 66 per cent of the thread.
 

Deleted member 157129

D

Deleted member 157129

I like debate as much as the next guy, but I had to draw the line of what was on topic somewhere, and very little qualified. Very little qualified as being discussion supposing it were on topic.
Yeah, I haven't looked through what you did closely, but I guess you've done a good job. We strayed far off topic discussing whether or not a G justifiably can be capitalized or not.

Used the wrong words (teehee), but no, I can't be bothered to read Elenai's pagan tautologous (thanks Hakeem) posts that covers at least 66 per cent of the thread.

Oh, you'll come to realize Elenai's posts are only rather recent, and most of this discussion is between me and Hakeem. At least, most of the significant posts are.
 
Level 22
Joined
Dec 31, 2006
Messages
2,216
Here's my opinion:
There's no god and satanism is wrong.
Bitch about me :D
It's Satanism not satanism!!!

on-topic:
Seems to me that the Satanism shiiK is talking about is basically the survival instinct every living creature is born with and therefore everyone are Satanists when they are born. This is indeed funny.
 

Deleted member 157129

D

Deleted member 157129

Here's my opinion:
There's no god and satanism is wrong.
Bitch about me :D
The existence of God, or god, is unrelated to Satanism. I don't believe there is a God, nor god, yet I am a Satanist. Another Satanist could believe there is a God, or god. Deists, Atheists and Agnostics can all be Satanists.
 

Deleted member 157129

D

Deleted member 157129

It's Satanism not satanism!!!

on-topic:
Seems to me that the Satanism shiiK is talking about is basically the survival instinct every living creature is born with and therefore everyone are Satanists when they are born. This is indeed funny.

Not entirely, all living creatures have different views on how to survive. Though Satanism applies, basically, to the hunter. A chicken, for instance, would not be a Satanist. Not even all humans are born Satanists, and not all creatures within a race either. Though if you are born a Satanist, all other religions are unfit and you will behave wrongly, become a sinner. Technically, if you sin, according to your religion, when you do something you want to do, you have chosen a religion that is unfit to you. That's my stance on things.
 
Level 10
Joined
Sep 21, 2007
Messages
517
To Saken:

Well man, its not like you can know everyone who helps you and everyone who doesn't, so you might as well help society to make it a better place and help out those that are helping you. It would also make you feel proud of yourself and glad tho ^^ maybe thats subjective, but w/e ;P

Its a pretty neat idea i got from you there though, made me realize how i generalized how all people helped (even tho i didn't really intend it that way) but yea man thanks ^^
 

Deleted member 157129

D

Deleted member 157129

Instinct doesn't have anything to do with Satanism?


I'm fine with that as long as you don't equalize Agnostics with Satanists
Oh, I'm not equalizing anything at all, I am differencing. Although, I'm pointing out that Satanism is very broad, and can accept a lot of variation within the belief. As far as I know, you can be Agnostic and Christian at the same time as well. The three; Atheist, Agnostic and Deist; are views on deities, and are thereby not a religion by themselves, but supplementary.
 
Level 28
Joined
Jun 4, 2007
Messages
1,480
I'm fine with that as long as you don't equalize Agnostics with Satanists

Satanism is a way of life.
If you do everything for your own partitial benefit and see the devil as a symbol of what it really means in the hebrew and the bibel, your way of life can be described as "satanic" even if you do or do not belive.

I'm doing a school task about satanism and by gathering information I can't say that I see much negative with that way of life. I myself can't count as a satanist since I often offer to help to people and don't make any fuzz about not getting repayed. The only personal benefit for me is that the person may like me more but that doesn't make much of a difference at all.
 
Level 13
Joined
Jan 19, 2008
Messages
793
To Saken:

Well man, its not like you can know everyone who helps you and everyone who doesn't, so you might as well help society to make it a better place and help out those that are helping you. It would also make you feel proud of yourself and glad tho ^^ maybe thats subjective, but w/e ;P

Its a pretty neat idea i got from you there though, made me realize how i generalized how all people helped (even tho i didn't really intend it that way) but yea man thanks ^^

I volunteer almost reguarly at the Texas School for the Blind and Visually Impaired during family nights, registrations, and I also help out as an Aid all day for Art class some days from 6:00 in the morning to 4:30 in the afternoon. I don't need to be told to, I just do it.

Also, shiik, a chicken can be a hunter, given that it's a wild chicken, and that it hunts for a worm maybe. Though I get the point you were making.
 
Level 9
Joined
Aug 18, 2008
Messages
346
Elenai belives that bullies should be beaten so that they learn a lesson for the rest of their lives.
Satan belives that evildoers should be tortured for all eternity.
God belives that evildoers should die (the flood of Noah ect.) and be sent to Satan.
Myself (atheist) belive in neither of such things.

But if I had to choose between visiting imaginary Satan, imaginary God or Elenai. I would definatly pick imaginary Satan.
Imagine all the cool people you would meet if you went to see Satan.
Ghandi,
Marie Curie,
Richard Dawkins,
Thomas Edison,
Marlon Brando,
Jodie Foster,
Seth Green,
Angelina Jolie,
Bruce Lee,
Ian McKellen,
Jack Nicholson,
Penn and Teller,
Gene Roddenberrry (creator of Star Trek),
Bill Gates,
Ernest Hemingway,
Mark Twain and all the lovely looking porn stars aswell as all the bright people that has ever existed.
53922634.jpg



I mean, if I actually spent my entire life following some boring rules and try and become as immune as possible to all common knowledge.
Who would I meet?
Yeah the God Warrior ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q3mDLsyn6ns )
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top