Path: shell.portal.com!svc.portal.com!opentext.com!ia.mks.com!zephyr!info.ucla.edu!library.ucla.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!eskimo!guysmiley.blarg.com!usenet From: warrl@blarg.net (Warrl kyree Tale'sedrin) Newsgroups: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.satanism,alt.religion.wicca,alt.pagan,talk.religion.misc,alt.religion.christian,alt.vampire,alt.vampyre,alt.gothic,alt.horror.cthulhu,alt.necronomicon,alt.alien.visitors,alt.sociology,talk.politics.theory,alt.politics.white-power,sci.psychology.theory Subject: Re: Satanism and Western Religion (Was Re: why are we all ... christians?) Date: Mon, 11 Dec 1995 07:58:47 GMT Organization: None -- just look at my desk! Lines: 67 Message-ID: <4ago5r$c06@guysmiley.blarg.net> References: <49lbfo$gld@guava.epix.net> <49v4m4$h74@puzzle.palace.net> <4a1vmp$rm1@jobe.shell.portal.com> Reply-To: warrl@blarg.net NNTP-Posting-Host: dialup04.blarg.net X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82 Xref: shell.portal.com alt.magick.tyagi:5324 alt.satanism:29546 alt.religion.wicca:18349 alt.pagan:136613 talk.religion.misc:192145 alt.religion.christian:71213 alt.vampire:21 alt.gothic:142962 alt.horror.cthulhu:17298 alt.necronomicon:481 alt.alien.visitors:111747 talk.politics.theory:78829 alt.politics.white-power:32808 sci.psychology.theory:1305 tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com (ny'rl'toth'p/TOKUS) wrote: >kaliyuga [alt.magick taken out of Header as irrelevant to subject matter] >49951205 >Mr. Scratch (craigh@gladstone.uoregon.edu): >|> I know that saying Satanist=Christians is a rather convenient bugaboo for >|> those Pagans who are uncomfortable with their presence. >chaos@crystal.palace.net (Matthew R. Sheahan) writes: >|i think it's more in the line of an attempt to demonize them. this >|seems to me tremendously amusing. > This is correct. A precise exegetical study of the texts > of Satanism is in order, I gather. Failing this (I have > only begun such a review), it would seem that an overview > of the cult as it progresses through history, as a comparison > among those contributing to the forum, would be valuable. I think that a division is proper. But then, I see four separate things, two of which are marginally related and the others totally unrelated to those two or to each other, all called "Satanism". Detail: (1) Christian-parody. When the properly-ordained Christian priest puts his normal garb on inside-out, hangs the cross upside down, recites the Latin Mass backward, and spits on the host before giving communion, I cannot consider it to be anything other than Christian. On the other hand, I cannot consider it to be a truly religious ceremony. A parody, a mockery, or a protest of some kind, perhaps, but not religious per se. It has no meaning in itself -- it has meaning only as the contrary of something else. Therefore it affirms nothing spiritual, it only denies. (2) Christian-offshoot. There are actual several varieties of this. I have met some people who, having read the Bible, seriously believe that it is significantly true -- when understood in the light of "the victors write the history books". They believe that the entity usually termed Satan is actually the creator and proper lord of this world, and that the entity sometimes named Jehovah is trying to steal it. This is but one of many varieties of Bible-based, religious, Satanism. I would also consider them to be Christian. (3) Pagan. I frankly have no clue why the Temple of Set is considered Satanic, let alone why it claims to be Satanic. This makes about as much sense to me as claiming that Christianity is an offshoot of Gardnerian Wicca. But, start discussing Satanism and there's a good chance that a devotee of the Temple will pop up to make the claim and explain Temple beliefs. There are some others in the same situation. They are religions, but not Christian offshoots. Some others claim that Satan is actually a pre-Christian deity that was turned into a demon by the Christians and/or Jews. (Most named demons in the Christian mythos are actually pre- or non-Christian gods, goddesses, or prophets, so there is at least precedent for the claim.) This is probably *not* an all-encompassing description of non-Christian, religious, Satanism. (4) Tabloid. These "Satanists" are sophomoric thrill-seekers, or perhaps occasionally terrorists trying to either frighten or frame some particular target. They learn about Satanism from the front cover of the National Enquirer (actually reading the articles would be too much work). Their "Satanism" is neither Christian (although they probably think that *they* are) nor religious.