Ask a satanist

[kuroshashu]

Your sorrow is appreciated, but not necessary. I’m the happiest and most fulfilled I’ve ever been.

You cite the French, Russian and Chinese revolutions as evidence that satanism cannot work. However, these were authoritarian regimes, satanism is individualist. More like modern western capitalistic democracy. Which isn’t without its problems, but it may be that they’re innate in us as the beasts we are. Or maybe not.

My counter-point would be to say that all of the aforementioned revolutions were to escape theocracy of one form or another, save for the Chinese which was only partially under the influence of the theocratic Empire of Japan. None of these revolutions represented an outbreak of reasonableness at any rate.

In regards to Moses’ “I am who I am”, that’s a tautology and by definition true. But you’re not who you were.

And finally, I see that in the last century humanity’s power to better itself has only grown. I don’t think it’s a stretch to assign some of the credit to the muzzling of religious dogma. None can predict how high we’ll climb, but we’re making a fantastic start and I have faith in us.

 

[PA650]

Do you subscribe to utilitarianism? In addition, from what I have gathered from your posts, I doubt you care about your actions in regard to society, thus,
“also, yes hedonism, individualism and vengeance are encouraged” these ideas you hold sound marvelous with your viewpoint, but detrimental to others in many ways from my perspective. Frankly, I understand the atheist viewpoint, but yours is quite peculiar to say the least. Although in your opinion, I have already been programed to think in such a way, especially since I adhere to Christian morality. Lastly, do your viewpoints share any similarities to the postulations of Friedrich Nietzsche?

 

[kuroshashu]

I do have some problems with utilitarianism, mainly where the idea tramples on individual property rights and liberties.

From where I sit, it doesn’t look to me like altruism truly exists. I help you because I like helping you. We can go deeper than that, but for our purposes this is deep enough. Now, since the main goal of my life is to serve my master (myself), helping others is just another tool at my disposal. Likewise, harming others displeases me, so I’ll avoid it.

We advocate being true to your animal nature. We’re social animals programmed to get along, to feel each other’s pain and joy. This is true of more or less everyone, so satanism doesn’t pose that kind of problem.

Oddly, I’ve never read any Nietzsche. I think I’m the only person who’s failed to do so; definitely the only pseudo-intellectual poser not to. So I can’t really answer unless you pose a specific Nietzchesque question.

Cheers
KS

 

[maize]

atheistic satanism = better shock value for your atheism

 

[kuroshashu]

atheistic satanism = better shock value for your atheism

Haha, fair call. That’s more or less is the reason for the term. I could just call myself an atheist, but I’m an argumentative sod…

 

[kalt]

Well, it’s partially in recognition that there are certain benefits to religion such as community. So in part it’s an attempt to set-up a structure in which that positive can be harnessed without dogma etc.

Secondarily, it’s a protest in the form of a parody. That’s the reason behind all the satanic symbolism even though we don’t believe satan exists.

And thirdly, the main reason that I use the designation is that it accurately describes my position: that since in your life there is no higher power than yourself, you are your own lord and saviour. You ought to worship in the manner that pleases your master (you) best.

The only dogma of satanism is that there is no dogma and since you’re your own god you change the rules as you go, so there’s variety within this church, but then what church isn’t varied?

Couldn’t you just get tickets to a Trekkie convention?

Seriously, each person in your religion is his own God with his own religion and rules. There is no dogma, no chuch, no ritual.

So what is it you think you belong to? You seem to say that you “belong” to belong to a cohesive group, but there is no cohesion except in lack of cohesion.

It seems to me that you enjoy being uniformly different from the majority. (A lot like teens who think they are individuals but are really the most conformist of all people.)

All of you are the same for the sole purpose of being different.

Can’t you think of a higher, more fulfilling, worthwhile goal?

If you want to be different, why not go all the way? Be truly unique. Don’t follow the satanist mantra. Form your own army of one!

 

[Liberty_Belle]

How would you broadly define your political views?

Also, given you state you believe in individual property rights and liberties, how can you say humanity has rapidly progressed given the growth of big government in the last century or so?

 

[PA650]

I do have some problems with utilitarianism, mainly where the idea tramples on individual property rights and liberties.

From where I sit, it doesn’t look to me like altruism truly exists. I help you because I like helping you. We can go deeper than that, but for our purposes this is deep enough. Now, since the main goal of my life is to serve my master (myself), helping others is just another tool at my disposal. Likewise, harming others displeases me, so I’ll avoid it.

We advocate being true to your animal nature. We’re social animals programmed to get along, to feel each other’s pain and joy. This is true of more or less everyone, so satanism doesn’t pose that kind of problem.

Oddly, I’ve never read any Nietzsche. I think I’m the only person who’s failed to do so; definitely the only pseudo-intellectual poser not to. So I can’t really answer unless you pose a specific Nietzchesque question.

Cheers
KS

Well, with regard to Nietzsche, I say give it a try. Nos vemos.

 

[josie_L]

Hello all,
Thread title says it all really. I’m an atheistic satanist, as opposed to a theistic satanist and I don’t really go in for the rituals since it’s clear in the satanic bible that they’re only for those who miss the ritual of their old faith and I haven’t got one. Erm, otherwise, ask away. I’m not really sure what you might want to know, so I’ll just leave it at that.

Cheers all
KS

You realize you are not the first to declare you’re a Satanist on this forum. There have been quite a few that have done so, it is I guess light attracting dark that propels them to post on a CHRISTian forum.

 

[kuroshashu]

Kalt: Rituals do exist for those who choose to participate and while there is no dogma, people calling themselves satanist will tend to be pretty similar, certainly within the scope of diversity of other religions.

As for writing it off as a pubescent protest, there is some truth to that in a lot of cases. I could let that worry me, but sod it. I think it’s worthwhile having this label around in opposition to religion and while it’s easy to dismiss us all as angry teenagers, people would do that whichever opposing side I joined.

Also, I must protest at the claim of conformism. We all are a varied mix of traits; many of which have labels. Of my mix, one label reads ‘satan’, that’s all. Being non-dogmatic, there’s no compunction to remain under the label, nor to mould yourself to fit.

Liberty Belle: Broadly speaking, I’m a social liberal and economic semi-authoritarian with mildly interventionist views in matters international.

While I obviously disagree with government regulation of human lives, government regulation of corporations is welcome, so big government doesn’t exactly worry me. I figure that if the corporate world is going to be made to serve humanity, it will need guidance, since their sole purpose is profit at all expense.

This will probably look to be a contradiction of individual property rights, but I dodge this by pointing out that a corporation isn’t human; it’s a machine made partially out of humans.

As for human advancement, liberty can be imposed upon in many ways; big government is one, but the struggle for survival is another and it’s mainly on this front that I claim victory.

PA650: Thanks, I will do so.

Josie L: Haha, yeah, I’d guessed. I came here to ask a question about abortion and one of the respondents asked me to start this thread. It’s been fun though.

 

[kalt]

Kalt: Rituals do exist for those who choose to participate and while there is no dogma, people calling themselves satanist will tend to be pretty similar, certainly within the scope of diversity of other religions.

As for writing it off as a pubescent protest, there is some truth to that in a lot of cases. I could let that worry me, but sod it. I think it’s worthwhile having this label around in opposition to religion and while it’s easy to dismiss us all as angry teenagers, people would do that whichever opposing side I joined.

Also, I must protest at the claim of conformism. We all are a varied mix of traits; many of which have labels. Of my mix, one label reads ‘satan’, that’s all. Being non-dogmatic, there’s no compunction to remain under the label, nor to mould yourself to fit.

Well, are you similar or a varied mix. And which is it that makes you want to join to give you the sense of belonging, that part of religion which you said holds value for you. Certainly the similarities. If it were the differences, you wouldn’t need to join anything.

Why do you feel the need to join a group to protest another group. Can’t you prostest religion without saying that you’re a satanist?

This seems to be just a lot of attention getting. It’s “Look at me, I’m creepy to you!”

And you say this is teenage-like behavior?

Liberty Belle: Broadly speaking, I’m a social liberal and economic semi-authoritarian with mildly interventionist views in matters international.

While I obviously disagree with government regulation of human lives, government regulation of corporations is welcome, so big government doesn’t exactly worry me. I figure that if the corporate world is going to be made to serve humanity, it will need guidance, since their sole purpose is profit at all expense.

This will probably look to be a contradiction of individual property rights, but I dodge this by pointing out that a corporation isn’t human; it’s a machine made partially out of humans.

As for human advancement, liberty can be imposed upon in many ways; big government is one, but the struggle for survival is another and it’s mainly on this front that I claim victory.

PA650: Thanks, I will do so.

Josie L: Haha, yeah, I’d guessed. I came here to ask a question about abortion and one of the respondents asked me to start this thread. It’s been fun though.

 

[Benjamin8o8]

did you answer my question? I don`t know if you did:shrug:

 

[John7]

Erm, otherwise, ask away. KS

what do you think of this verse (read slowly)
Matthew 16:23 “…Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.”

 

[Ed_Rand]

And finally, I see that in the last century humanity’s power to better itself has only grown. I don’t think it’s a stretch to assign some of the credit to the muzzling of religious dogma. None can predict how high we’ll climb, but we’re making a fantastic start and I have faith in us.

Reminds me of Pope Leo XIII’s dream. Similar to the story of Job, Pope Leo had a dream in which Satan asked God to give him some time to destroy His Church.

The Vision Of Pope Leo XIII

October 13, 1884

Exactly 33 years to the day prior to the great Miracle of the Sun in Fatima, that is, on October 13, 1884, Pope Leo the 13th had a remarkable vision. When the aged Pontiff had finished celebrating Mass in his private Vatican Chapel, attended by a few Cardinals and members of the Vatican staff, he suddenly stopped at the foot of the altar. He stood there for about 10 minutes, as if in a trance, his face ashen white. Then, going immediately from the Chapel to his office, he composed the prayer to St. Michael, with instructions it be said after all Low Masses everywhere. When asked what had happened, he explained that, as he was about to leave the foot of the altar, he suddenly heard voices - two voices, one kind and gentle, the other guttural and harsh. They seemed to come from near the tabernacle. As he listened, he heard the following conversation:

The guttural voice, the voice of Satan in his pride, boasted to Our Lord:
“I can destroy your Church.”

The gentle voice of Our Lord:
“You can? Then go ahead and do so.”

Satan:
“To do so, I need more time and more power.”

Our Lord:
"How much time? How much power?

Satan:
“75 to 100 years, and a greater power over those
who will give themselves over to my service.”

Our Lord:
“You have the time, you will have the power.
Do with them what you will.”

God gave him the 20th Century.

 

[tomarin]

Hello all,
Thread title says it all really. I’m an atheistic satanist, as opposed to a theistic satanist and I don’t really go in for the rituals since it’s clear in the satanic bible that they’re only for those who miss the ritual of their old faith and I haven’t got one. Erm, otherwise, ask away. I’m not really sure what you might want to know, so I’ll just leave it at that.

Cheers all
KS

What do you think of Phillip Pullman’s children’s books, The Golden Compass et. al? He seems to have a similar outlook to yours.

 

[mchale]

From where I sit, it doesn’t look to me like altruism truly exists. I help you because I like helping you. We can go deeper than that, but for our purposes this is deep enough. Now, since the main goal of my life is to serve my master (myself), helping others is just another tool at my disposal. Likewise, harming others displeases me, so I’ll avoid it.

You know, I have heard many times about altruism not really existing… and usually with an argument similar to yours. No one with this argument, however, has ever adequately explained to me why some people have and continue to willingly sacrifice their lives for the benefit of total strangers? Under no reasonable definition, can sacrificing ones life for a stranger be considered serving oneself.

–
Bill

 

[kuroshashu]

Benjamin8o8: Yeah, I did. It’s on the first page.

John7: Reading it as one who believes that yahweh is just another empty promise, I think it’s interesting. Indeed, had I been present, I’d’ve said something to the effect that until things that be of god are shown to exist, I’ll continue savouring those that be of men.

It does nicely sum me up actually, if seen in that light. Thank you for making me read it again.

Ed Rand: It’s an interesting tale. The 20th century is in my opinion the most fascinating: unprecedented bloodshed and misery as well as peace and prosperity.

However, satan’s century ran out twenty-five years ago and the church is still in decline…

Tomarin: I regret to say that I’ve never read anything by Phillip Pullman. Or if I did I don’t recall. I’ve nearly zero recollection of my childhood, so I could be wrong.

Mchale: Yeah, it does seem an interesting difficulty. My response is two pronged:

One, from an evolutionary stand-point, your genes don’t give a **** about you except as a means to their ends. It’s not hard to imagine scenarios in which it may serve a gene’s long term interest to compel a certain carrier to preform heroics. If a bee stings, it dies. But the gene pool of the hive is made more secure, so the individual sacrifices itself. Not a directly applicable analogy to humans, but the same mechanic could be at work.

Two, in what is probably an unintended side-effect of evolution, we humans are exceptionally imaginative. We value abstract concepts, often more than our own lives. People used to dual to the death to defend their honour, whatever that might be. Like I say, I think this is probably an unexpected side-effect of the advent of abstract though, but one which hasn’t been worrisome enough for natural selection to act upon.

These two probably work in tandem and mutually reinforce.

Cheers
KS

 

[mchale]

Mchale: Yeah, it does seem an interesting difficulty. My response is two pronged:

One, from an evolutionary stand-point, your genes don’t give a **** about you except as a means to their ends. It’s not hard to imagine scenarios in which it may serve a gene’s long term interest to compel a certain carrier to preform heroics. If a bee stings, it dies. But the gene pool of the hive is made more secure, so the individual sacrifices itself. Not a directly applicable analogy to humans, but the same mechanic could be at work.

Ah, but see, from a mental level, isn’t this true altruism? After all, to the individual, no advantage is gained from such heroics. Even if such self sacrificing behavior does somehow gain an advantage for the genes, then certainly such calculations do not go through the mind of someone who has to instantly decide to take action that might cost them their lives to save another life.

In any case, the analogy with bees are flawed. Most stinging insects don’t die when they sting; you have to show that a real advantage occurs to the bees because members of the hive die when they sting.

The analogy is further flawed because a hive is essentially a huge but immediate family; with the exception of the Queen and the Drones, all members of the hive are sisters. The same can’t be said in many cases of self sacrifice amongst humans.

Two, in what is probably an unintended side-effect of evolution, we humans are exceptionally imaginative. We value abstract concepts, often more than our own lives. People used to dual to the death to defend their honour, whatever that might be. Like I say, I think this is probably an unexpected side-effect of the advent of abstract though, but one which hasn’t been worrisome enough for natural selection to act upon.

These two probably work in tandem and mutually reinforce.

Cheers
KS

Again though, doesn’t this mean that true altruism exists?

–
Bill

 

[kuroshashu]

Mchale: My point about the bees is this: your genes built your brain to serve them. So whatever just feels right to you, probably does so because your genes pre-determined it. So the bee doesn’t consider its fate (incidentally, the removal of the venom sac that usually happens when a bee stings is fatal) because it’s genes programmed it to defend the gene-pool at all costs.

Now, for the bulk of specifically hominid evolution, we lived in small family groups. So it was true that we were related to everyone we knew. Our genes program in certain rules and one reading “Defend, to the death if necessary, other humans” may’ve worked to protect only close kin and so was evolutionarily stable.

These days we live in sprawling metropolises, but the rule may still be in operation to some degree. We don’t have to think about it, it just comes naturally. Brains are fallible beasts and I think this is a case in which that shines through. We also have unusually unempathetic people after all…

About abstraction, we sacrifice ourselves for our values. That it benefits others is incidental. Again, we have plenty of examples of people sacrificing themselves to the detriment of others for their values.

It’s akin to charity; people give because they feel good about giving.

 

[mawst]

Well, it’s partially in recognition that there are certain benefits to religion such as community. So in part it’s an attempt to set-up a structure in which that positive can be harnessed without dogma etc.

Secondarily, it’s a protest in the form of a parody. That’s the reason behind all the satanic symbolism even though we don’t believe satan exists.

And thirdly, the main reason that I use the designation is that it accurately describes my position: that since in your life there is no higher power than yourself, you are your own lord and saviour. You ought to worship in the manner that pleases your master (you) best.

The only dogma of satanism is that there is no dogma and since you’re your own god you change the rules as you go, so there’s variety within this church, but then what church isn’t varied?

It’s ok you believe that Satan doesn’t exist. He believes in you, and he enjoys the parody.