Me too. It drives my wife crazy.
But is paganism opposed to God? I think we should narrowly define satanic as “inspired by Satan”. I don’t think Christian tradition finds everything in paganism to be Satan’s handiwork.
BEATLES for sheer brilliance and versatility is tops. Plus the way Pink Floyd broke up and is still separated makes the Beatles’ breakup look like a small disagreement. IMHO, Floyd had Dark Side and Wish You Were Here and Echoes. Rest downhill. The Wall, apart from Gilmour’s 3 contributions, is simply Gilbert and Sullivan.
Do you mean Gilbert O’Sullivan ?I agree. Paganism can be a mixed bag. Some of it is opposed to God (and thus might be considered “satanic” in that sense), but not all of it is opposed to God. That’s why I would rather call a band pagan than satanic. There are a lot of pagan bands out there, but very few satanic bands (in the truest sense of the words).
O.K. Michael you have just given me the biggest laugh of all on CAF yet with the link to Dschinghis Khan Moskau. The link didn’t work but I googled and found them on Youtube. Now that is Pure GoldLIght operetta is a world away from rock
Beatles ? Nah. Dschinghis Khan - Moskau Now they could sing.
At first I was not sure of the spelling but now I get it. A German Boney-M type band with a Slavic sounding song and its lead singer doing steps from the Hopak. Triple AAA!! LOL
It’s a grape and raisin story really Joe. Same thing different form. We need to know what satanism is before we start categorizing things. Satanism is NOT the direct worship of satan as a god. That is only one form. Some satanists do not believe in literal satan, they are atheists. They believe in the ideology of satan and what he represents - rebellion against God’s laws. Some satansists classify themselves under the nine satanic statements viz a viz Anton La Vey. Before we start trying to distinguish between paganism and satanism in music let us first understand that there are many pagan movements which are at their core very much satanic.
You say satanism and paganism are the same thing. Does that make “Lord of the Rings” satanic because Tolkien was influenced heavily by Norse mythology (and other pre-Christian European religions)? If so how do you account for the strong Christian themes in the novels?
Based on the definition of satanism paganism I think most forms of paganism definitely have alot of antichistian (i.e. satanic) elements in them. That said I do think that anyone who practices magic (whether white or black flavors) is using dark forces (demons, demonic powers) to effect physical change in the physical world. It’s like holding hands with the devil.
Also Norse and other pre-christian religions do not pre-date God. They pre-date Jesus Christ’s first coming. They are all in darkness and therefore they cannot be children of light until their hearts are converted to Christ and they put aside their pagan ways. If they are not children of light they are children of darkness and the lord of darkness is satan. Hence satanic. Remember satanism is not only the direct worship of satan bu the indirect honor paid to satan by our anti-christian thoughts, words and deeds.
This is where we disagree. I think satanism is only the direct worship of Satan. If we don’t use a precise definition of satanism then there’s no way we can have a meaningful conversation about what is or isn’t satanic. Your definition (satanism = anything that is not explicitly Christian) is so broad that the term becomes meaningless. Almost anything could be considered satanic according to that definition. I think you give Satan too much credit as a creative force.
Okay, now you’ve totally lost me. So a novel has to be explicitly Christian or else it’s not really Christian? And any use of magic whatsoever as a literary device in books/movies/music is inherently antichristian and satanic?
I tend to agree a bit with both of you. As LOTR does have magic in it, and wizards, even false deities, it obviously would not be “Christian”.
The Narnia books have magic in them, and wizards and false deities (a big black bird worshipped by the vaguely Middle Eastern people next door) and true deities (Aslan) and it’s obviously Christian. So why can’t Lord of the Rings be Christian?
How is Aslan a true deity exactly? If you think that because of his role he symolizes Jesus and the fact that he is a lion emphasizes the Lion of Judah of scriptures, it can go both ways. The devil is also described in the bible as a lion. I would not call any movie a christian movie unless it is explicitly scripted as such. Movies like art are subject to interpretation and just as you can say that aslan is a true deity someone else can say that he symbolizes the devil. The use of magic by stars of the show fly in the face of any christian ideology. Christianity is based on faith in Our Lord Jesus and being obedient to His will not faith in magic or men to save us but faith in God. How is this brought across in narnia or LOTR? I would really label the above as fiction rather than speculate as to the “christianess” of them which could be leading others in the wrong direction.
No the definition of satanism from the church of satan is stated in the 9 satanic statements. One needs to do research to understand their enemy tomarin. The classical view of satanism has evolved into modern satanism (many satanists are atheists, or claim to be.)
If someone stated that Aslan symbolizes the devil, I would state that either (1) they have not read the books, nor do they have even a cursory knowledge of the books; or (2) they have taken literary deconstructionism to new lows.
It’s common knowledge that Aslan is an allegorical representation of Christ. C.S. Lewis openly acknowledged it and it’s pretty obvious from the first book in which Aslan sacrifices himself to save Eustace’s life and then is resurrected (I don’t think the devil is in the habit of doing this). Lewis wrote the books as a way of introducing children to the meaning of Christianity in a new guise and he made a deliberate choice to represent Christ as a lion because he felt Christianity had become too associated with effeminacy in the popular culture of his time.
I agree that both books are fiction. So is “Pilgrim’s Progress”. It doesn’t make them any less Christian.
I find it interesting that you are so firm in your belief that Tolkien was a devout Catholic. “Many call me Lord Lord but they do not know me” comes to mind. I’m not saying he isn’t I’m saying don’t put your head on a block for his reputation. Hitler fooled alot of people into believing he was catholic as well before his terror campaign began. What do we read now? He had jewish blood and was a pagan magician.
Kinja, have you ever actually read anything that Tolkien wrote (or anything about him, for that matter)?
Even a cursory glance through a second-rate biography of Tolkien is enough to make the case for Tolkien’s catholicity. 
I admit I have never been a fan of Tolkein though I’m sure he is a good writer. My point is not how much of a Catholic he is. Being a devout catholic as far as your religious observances is concerned doesn’t necessarily mean that one is living a life in Christ. What I mean to say is this. There are Catholics who let their kids trick or treat on halloween or who won’t stop to help an old dirty man who has fallen on the sidewalk, or who live their lives doing other things outside their religious practices which are not acceptable for any true believer to participate in.Kinja, have you ever actually read anything that Tolkien wrote (or anything about him, for that matter)?