Satanism

[Yorick]

Originally posted by MagiK: Not trying to offend here Yorick because I do applaude your devotion, but it does sound to me like you are setting yourself up as a judge of how people relate to God, and that is the one and only judgement we aren't supposed to make...what is in a mans heart is up to God to judge.

How so? How am I juding another? I am not saying if anyone is or isn't a Christian stockbroker or not. I'm arguing that the definition of a Christian stockbroker, is a stockbroker that puts Christ ahead of money. This is not judgement but a statement concerning the values a christian holds.

Jesus himself said you cannot worship God and money. The two desires conflict.

Someone's 'God' is what they are placing first in their life. How am I going to know what that actually is? That's for the individual to decide. Is sport, career, a relationship, sucess, knowledge, sex, games or a divine creator first?

There are ministers of religion who's ministry itself can become their god ahead of God himself. C.S.Lewis breifly explored that concept in "The Great Divorce".

Whatever the case that's between an individual and God to work out. I would be being judgemental if I were holding a specific individual up to scrutiny and trying to proclaim what their 'god' was.

[Yorick]

Originally posted by Aviendha: It is Christian’s definition of Hell that I have often struggled to understand, and I am happier with your assessment. But if someone has not asked for forgiveness, it seems you are suggesting that they are barred from the presence of God. Where do they go then? Do they, as Yorrick has suggested, just cease to exist. But if the term Hell, can be defined as ceasing to exist and therefore being banned from the presence of God, then I must ask you where Satan is situated? God created Hell to hold Satan (from someone’s earlier definition), so this must mean that his existence was wiped out. Since Christian’s don’t believe that this is the case, can you explain where Satan fits in?

The bible speaks of eternal suffering for Satan. Revelation clearly speaks of two outcomes. One for Satan and death, the other for those that reject God. The prevailing theological thinking has merged the situations into a place of eternal suffering for humans. Roman Catholicism went further, and added purgatory - temporary suffering for everyone dependent on ones actions here.

There is no mention of purgatory in the bible. That concept was rejected outhand by protestantism.

It's interesting that many have used fear to try and bring people to Christ. Christ used love. Healing. Christ came to save not condemn. To forgive, not judge. Christ will not be sitting in judgement. He has taken all punishment on himself. The ultimate scapegoat.

It's far better to focus on Christ, on Heaven, on the Holy Spirit's gifts of inner peace, patience, joy, kindness, gentleness and love. As a christian I look at where I'm going, not where I'm not.

[Yorick]

Originally posted by Chewbacca: Its refrshing to see the truth exposed about satanism and the lies of old church propaganda revealed. Altering another religions diety like they did with the Horned One and perverting it into an evil type was a brilliant way to scare the peasants into converting and to gather more land and money. Today it is ironic, that as a "religion" Satanism doesnt seek to convert anybody, you cant really count "black mass" publicity stunts. Its a very "come if ya will" society, although it does have its spokepeople. I think its certainly not for everyone, for it takes character to acknowledge ones own darkside and the potentcy of ones own lust, just as it takes wisdom to place these aspects of oneself into a healthy perspective and with self-authority. I find it amazing that anyone who has read the original post, or some of the thoghts shared throguh the course of the thread would still hold prejudice against someone who calls themself a satanist in the decisivly "non-gothic" way. You know they used to blame minoritys for all sorts of heinous crimes based out of ignorance and fear of the unknown and the different, dont fall into that trap again. Prejudice against Satanists in light of common knowldge is just plain sad. A satanist could be your doctor, lawyer, cop, military officer, stockbroker, me ect. As a witch of sorts, I identify alot with Satanism. Some of the philosophy (personal responiblity, authority, and power); symbolism (phallace, ritual knife), and ritual practice( consecrating space and casting a circle) of satanism correlates with my practice of Witchcraft and invokations of the masculine side of creation or the God (depicted with horns in some archtypes) . My perspective differs from most Satanists because the Godess, or the femine side of creation gets equal coverage in my self-growth through rituals, prayers and practices. Some witches focus more on the goddess. Also I accept the unseen, or spiritual realm of life with the same weight as the physical or seen realm. I seek balance living as a spirit inside a body with a spiritual existance and destiny beyond my body. Satanists focus soley on the expirience of phyical existance, having no concern of an after-life or spiritual existance. It isnt practical to them to waste the little time we have as a mortal concerned about what happens if we are not. I agree with this to the extent that it balances with my spiritual belief that my consiouness and soul shall endure beyond this mortal coil. Words can be lacking when it comes to personal first hand expiriences involving communion of spiritual nature. There is an old saying: "Nothing will ever beat seeking enlightenment and truth for yourself, it may be not what you expect or exactly what you asked for."

G'kar, we've had this discussion before.

Judaism is one of the oldest continually practiced religions in the world. The concept of Satan has existed for thousands of years in this faith, not to mention Islam and Christianity.

It seems simple to me. Why call yourself a Satanist, if you don't believe in the historically accepted concept of the personality? Why not invent another name? Tasanists? Natasists? Saantism?

It's not hard. Satan is a being. If you don't follow that being, don't try confusing the issue with the "We're Satanists but we don't believe in Satan"

When I speak of Satan, I speak of the personality that has been spoken of for thousands of years. Most humans do. The vast majority in fact.

Historically when people come along with a new or revived theological worldview, they give it a clear, new identity. Scientology. Theosophy. Sunni Islam. Lutheranism.

It helps for clarity. Identity. Knowledge.

But then the Satan of the bible is all about deception. Confusion. Lies. Mistruth.

The biggest attempted con is that he doesn't exist.

He cannot create, only pervert.

Now, I'm not telling a Satanist what to believe or not to believe, I'm suggesting that if they honestly wish to have a clear identity, without the confusion, then give the concept another name. Otherwise they are fighting an uphill battle.

Language is an untamed, unchainable beast. Trying to dictate what a word is in the face of what it is used as, is like attempting to stop the tide.

[ 05-20-2002, 12:07 PM: Message edited by: Yorick ]

Originally posted by Yorick: The bible speaks of eternal suffering for Satan. Revelation clearly speaks of two outcomes. One for Satan and death, the other for those that reject God. The prevailing theological thinking has merged the situations into a place of eternal suffering for humans. Roman Catholicism went further, and added purgatory - temporary suffering for everyone dependent on ones actions here. There is no mention of purgatory in the bible. That concept was rejected outhand by protestantism. It's interesting that many have used fear to try and bring people to Christ. Christ used love. Healing. Christ came to save not condemn. To forgive, not judge. Christ will not be sitting in judgement. He has taken all punishment on himself. The ultimate scapegoat. It's far better to focus on Christ, on Heaven, on the Holy Spirit's gifts of inner peace, patience, joy, kindness, gentleness and love. As a christian I look at where I'm going, not where I'm not.

Not all sin. He compared the judgement of sinners to Gehenna ( a refuse dump effecctively). The sinners (with much waikling ang gnashing of teeth) would be hurled into the Lake of Fire and permanently destroyed. No love there

[Yorick]

Originally posted by Lord Shield: Not all sin. He compared the judgement of sinners to Gehenna ( a refuse dump effecctively). The sinners (with much waikling ang gnashing of teeth) would be hurled into the Lake of Fire and permanently destroyed. No love there

Why would he force someone into accepting his grace? We do have free will. [img]smile.gif[/img] Would not an eternity with a God you did not want to be with be an unpleasant reality?

Originally posted by Yorick: quote: Originally posted by Lord Shield: Not all sin. He compared the judgement of sinners to Gehenna ( a refuse dump effecctively). The sinners (with much waikling ang gnashing of teeth) would be hurled into the Lake of Fire and permanently destroyed. No love there

Why would he force someone into accepting his grace? We do have free will. [img]smile.gif[/img] Would not an eternity with a God you did not want to be with be an unpleasant reality?[/QUOTE]sure. free will. serve God or be burnt

what a choice

Originally posted by Yorick: quote: Originally posted by MagiK: Not trying to offend here Yorick because I do applaude your devotion, but it does sound to me like you are setting yourself up as a judge of how people relate to God, and that is the one and only judgement we aren't supposed to make...what is in a mans heart is up to God to judge.

How so? How am I juding another? I am not saying if anyone is or isn't a Christian stockbroker or not. I'm arguing that the definition of a Christian stockbroker, is a stockbroker that puts Christ ahead of money. This is not judgement but a statement concerning the values a christian holds.

Jesus himself said you cannot worship God and money. The two desires conflict.

Someone's 'God' is what they are placing first in their life. How am I going to know what that actually is? That's for the individual to decide. Is sport, career, a relationship, sucess, knowledge, sex, games or a divine creator first?

There are ministers of religion who's ministry itself can become their god ahead of God himself. C.S.Lewis breifly explored that concept in "The Great Divorce".

Whatever the case that's between an individual and God to work out. I would be being judgemental if I were holding a specific individual up to scrutiny and trying to proclaim what their 'god' was.[/QUOTE]Sounded to me a lot like you were accusing non-christian stock-brokers of being money worshipers.....Im not saying that is what you ment, just how I read what you wrote.

[Yorick]

Originally posted by Lord Shield: sure. free will. serve God or be burnt what a choice

[img]smile.gif[/img]

Exist forever with the being that made you; or cease to exist without.

Seems pretty cool. If you reject ALL that God is, you reject life.

If all is a product of his being, if he's holding everything together, and if ever he stopped enabling life to have a holiday all would stop existing, then to reject God totally is to reject existing at all.

Why would he keep pouring love and life into someone that doesn't want what he is?

In any case, Buddhists believe in obliteration of the soul. That is what Buddha desired. (He desired no desire?) Freedom from the Karmic cycle of being continually reborn into what he percieved as an existence of suffering. To Buddha, Life = Suffering.

This is attained by a Buddhist Monk upon his death, losing all desire to be reborn.

It all sounds like a valid option to me.

I know what I've picked. I choose to see life as full of positives. I choose to love and know the Creator Awareness that has made itself known to humanity through it's manefestation as Jesus Christ. I choose to accept the offer of eternal life that Jesus offered, the offer that people died to joyously proclaim, and the offer which has given me so much joy, hope, peace, creative inspiration and perception.

What happens to everyone else is between them and God.

[Yorick]

Originally posted by MagiK: Sounded to me a lot like you were accusing non-christian stock-brokers of being money worshipers.....Im not saying that is what you ment, just how I read what you wrote.

Well no you missed my point bro.

The stockbroker is the priest to the person that worships money.

It is a comment on the perception of a money worshipper, not on a stockbroker. Who may be Jewish, Hindu, sportsmad, a sexaholic, Christian, drug addicted or anything.

The stockbrokers 'god' was irrelevent to what I was saying, (unless they are a money worshipping person.)

[K T Ong]

Originally posted by Yorick: In any case, Buddhists believe in obliteration of the soul. That is what Buddha desired. (He desired no desire?) Freedom from the Karmic cycle of being continually reborn into what he percieved as an existence of suffering. To Buddha, Life = Suffering. This is attained by a Buddhist Monk upon his death, losing all desire to be reborn. It all sounds like a valid option to me.

Buddhism has often been misunderstood, no less by Schoperhauer. Do your homework, please, Yorick. Buddhists do not aim at ceasing to exist. Nor did the Buddha equate all of life simplistically with suffering -- as if one simply never wins in the Wheel of Rebirth, so the only way out is a kind of spiritual suicide. This is actually a nihilist outlook which the Buddha himself condemned.

The Buddha actually once said, "Monks, there exists an Unborn, an Unmade, an Unbecome. If, monks, there were not this Unborn, Unmade, Unbecome, there would then be no escape from that which is born, made, become." What Buddhists aim at is a realization of this Unborn, Unmade, Unbecome. A realization of the eternal.

One of the keystone teachings of Buddhism is that of interdependent origination. All things (except the Unborn, Unmade, Unbecome) arise from various contingent causes and conditions, and are ipso facto transient and liable to be a source of suffering if we attach ourselves psychologically to them, if we cling to them. A car, for example, arises only from various factors such as the desire for cars, the knowledge of how to make cars, the materials required for making cars etc. Take one of these away and cars cannot exist. But once a car has come into being by virtue of the confluence of these causes, it will likewise go some day. Whatever has a beginning must have an end. Only that which is beginningless can be endless. If, in ignorance of all this, I make a fetish out of my car (I don't own one, BTW [img]tongue.gif[/img] ) and make it the object of my psychological attachment, then one day I'm going to be in tears. Same with everything else -- except, of course, the Unborn, Unmade, Unbecome, which the Buddha exhorts us to find.

I can elaborate more if you wish, Yorick, but for now let this do. And that much said, I do agree with you on Big Mammon being the one religion with the greatest number of followers today -- much to the planetary environment's sorrow, be it said...