h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Hi there,

Look, it is not my intention to flame you; however, I feel compelled to be critical of some of the things you have written (or most). I will go step by step quoting you, so that my critique is more comprehensive and clear.

You:
"To the average person the term 'Satanist' conjures up images of men in black robes drinking goblets of blood, ripping up bibles and sacrificing new-born babies to the Devil on alters of stone. In reality this is just a fabrication propagated by sick, twisted individuals who use an unpopular title as an excuse to do horrible things. The devil-worshipers you see on day-time TV are not true Satanists, and have done nothing but give a Satanism an even worse reputation."

The term "Satanist" does not conjure up images of all of that because it is a fabrication "propagated by sick, twisted individuals!" Actually, a very good and objective reason exist for such a prevailing perception. One of the most relevant reasons is that Satanism (before LaVey established his Church, as well as after) was indeed involved in the worship of Satan (as he is depicted in the Bible, and perpetuated in the Catholic dogma), ritual sacrifice of animals (and sometimes human beings, children, or babies)! Satanism first appeared in the Middle Ages (the Dark Ages), but most of it was perpetrated under the name of Occult. For example, an occultist Gill d'Laval was sentenced in France in the fifteenth century because he sacrificed two hundred boys to the Devil, which would in turn divulge the secret of gold-making (i.e. Alchemy) to d'Laval.

In the twentieth century, however, the most conspicuous (and powerful) Satanist belong to the OTO (the Order of the Eastern--Oriental--Temple) furtive organization. The most renowned Satanist of the twentieth century was Aliester Crowley. He postulated the so called Law of Telem, which basically says that one should live the way s/he wants to, and perpetrate the things s/he wishes. This is NOT in the human nature (which is by and of itself very debatable), since human beings have an innate sense of morality. Crowley actively evoked Satan (or the demon he called "Horinzon"). In 1909, he and his associate Viktor Noeburg (not sure about the spelling though!) succeeded in evoking their demon in the Sahara desert. However, both of them barely managed to escape alive, nevertheless, they were both significantly phychologically injured... From these kinds of "experiments" one can never fully recover!

Therefore, the most common satanists are not those of LaVey; he is but a fool trying to, as you yourself said, fit into the modern context. In this respect, his Satanism is not satanism of which people generally conceive. What people (including me) generally conceive of is a different kind of Satanism which was not replaced by LaVey, and which does exist even today, as I am writing this.

You:
"LaVey deemed the Christian church and many other old religions out of date and, in most cases, hypocritical. He stressed the fact that most religions are centred on denying basic human nature, and that most sins in religion are actually needs that all people have and that need to be addressed in order to live a happy life."

Hmm. This is a very narrow vision of Christianity. I am a Catholic, for example, and I can give you my most honest word that there is much more to Christianity than "restrictions." Those rectrictions that do exist, I agree, have their rightful place within a broader Christian philosophy. As with everything else, Christianity has its philosophy which is called--guess--Theology. Yes, that is right. It is a bit more complex than "do as you wish," so it take more mental effort at understanding the real Christian values and motivations.

I will briefly touch upon some of them. The first and the foremost Christian principle is--Faith. Faith is much more than belief, you see, as in when you believe something is going to happen just because you do not know the exact cause of that something, and in consequence, just because you cannot predict the outcome. This is belief; Christian Faith phenomenologically appears very similar, whereas it really is not... Faith is a beautiful feeling (and understanding) of one's life's purpose! This purpose is ALREADY GIVEN TO (all of) US by our Heavenly Father; and the realization is MADE POSSIBLE BY HIS EARTLY SON--JESUS CHRIST. For someone like me, who is firmly within his Faith, there really is no place for Satan. Why? Well because I have already dedicated my life to following the candle that all can see in the darkness called--the Christ!

Another focal point of Christianity is the Community of Believers. This community is the Christ's body... The point being: that if the entire community follows Christ, the entire community will end up at the same place. Therefore, let there be no concern for the split in the Church, for the genuine Churches will eventually meet at the point which defines us. Nevertheless, we must not be lazy, for there is a long way of wrestling with the world, and each will carry his/her own Cross! As should...

You:
"He stressed the fact that most religions are centred on denying basic human nature, and that most sins in religion are actually needs that all people have and that need to be addressed in order to live a happy life. As an example, LaVey sited the seven deadly sins: greed, pride, envy, anger, sloth gluttony, and lust."

This is also a superficial reasoning, which may be directed at scooping up that portion of people who have (justifiably) many doubts with respect to Christianity, but who have not been properly (or at all) initiated into it. World religions (at least Christianity I know for sure) do not "deny the basic human nature." If that were the case; all of those religions would perish, ESPECIALLY, in the so called New Age, which seems to offer easier (more accessible) answers. This only goes to prove that Man needs a sense in his/her life; which CANNOT be one's own Self! You know how when someone does a good deed (such as rescues someone; or risks one's own life for someone else; or gives money to charity when s/he is poor, etc.), people experience a spontaneous spiritual reaction... When you indulge in one's own Self, nobody but you yourself will feel gratification. Now, you may say that this is because of the general propensity to favor good deeds in our civilization. But, why did these values emerge as they did; could be bit trickier question.

You: "The Satanist considers himself his own god"

As you go through life, you will find that the genuine gratification CANNOT (in any possible extension of human nature) fall only within the sphere of ourselves! It cannot! One may try; as a matter of fact that is the one of the very points--one should try; but one will end up realizing that such life is not very fullfilling. You know, the thruth of Christ is very profound, far-reaching, and hence RADICAL! Christ said something like: the one who safeguards his own life will loose it; the one who gives it up (just like he did) will have a life endlessly more gratifying that any worldly indulgence may provide. Heh, this is a Christian conceit, but not an unfounded one! Of course, nowadays, we have witnessed many fundamentalist movements (such as the Wahabbi, or Taleban) which interpret this in a violent manner. But since Christ also said: "Love your enemies just the way you live your brethren," for a Christian, there is NO room for fundamentalism or violence. These are all complex issues, and I do not want to bother you (or myself, to be honest) with them here.

Essentially, all I wanted to point out here is that Christian philosophy is not ONLY concentrated on denying people things; Christianity does not consist only of those seven misdeeds. Therefore saying that they are misplaced WITHOUT previously taking into consideration the ENTIRE Christian philosophy, IS INADEQUATE... Instead of reading what LeVay does not like about Christianity (definetely a partial view), you maybe ought to visit a clergyman (or a devout Christian) and ask him/her: What and why does Christianity make you happy? And then you will see that they will not say: "Well, because I do not eat as much as I want to; or because I do not sleep as much as I sometimes feel like sleeping!" No, one cannot find fulfilment in that; the fulfilment is on a spiritual level, which is why everyone should evaluate (and critique) Christianity and how much it appreciates the human nature, on a spiritual level.

That is all for Christianity from me... for now.

However, I feel that the most important thing to stress in my critique of your interpretation of Satanism is that Satanism IS NOT what you think it is... Before the San Francisco Chrurch, there were Satanists; they did not correspond to your description, in fact, they constrasted sharply. After the establishment of the Church, Satanists still play a role, much more furtive now, as the organizational capabilities have risen to an unprecedented degree. Finally, I feel that The Church of Satan (whatever its ulterior motive may be) CANNOT (AND SHOULD NOT TRY TO) change the prevailing perception; the use of the word Satan is the misplaced by LaVey, not the mundane people.

Take Care,
GoRan

From the top...

devil worship, as you have described, is believed by most historians to be a myth created by christian missionaries, popularised by the Inquisition, and propogated by religious fundamentalism. There are certainly some sick people out there, but they do sick things because they are sick, not because they're worshipping Satan.

I'll try and find some references for you - gimme a few days.

> "... most religions are centred on denying basic human nature ..."

I think that's a pretty safe assertion. Christianity is not all of religion - and many other religions are much more certain about their emphasis on denying *basic* human nature - such as Buddhism or Islam. Even many christians would agree that their religion is about denying primitive human instincts like lust, in favour of 'higher' ideals, such as faith.

And really, is that such a bad thing? Are we humans, or animals? Satanists would like us to be more like animals - I'm not so sure that is a good thing.

Okay,

I love a good, prolific discussion.

Hmmm. Who are those historians; and can you verify that "most" of them consider "devil worship as I have descibed it" to be a fabrication of inquisition?

Basically, I believe it is good that you point that out, because the Inquisition did create some myths. Dogma is rigid, and does need explanation for unknown phenomena; therefore, but being rigid, many cases were probably ascribed to devil-worship when they really were not. HOWEVER, Inquisition DID not create the notion of Satanism. Do you know anything of present-day Satanist sects (organizations), some furtive, some not? Do you know anything about OTO? I should stress that many Satanists DO NOT openly admit that they worship Satan, precisely because of the abovementioned widely-held and popular conceit regarding them. But, the final effect IS absolutely horrific. Calls for collective murders, human sacrifice, that sort of thing. This goes on IN MANY SECTS! Sects are sprawling throughout the globe, and many of them are predicated on what you call "sick" beliefs. I would call them doctrines; and I would not certainly dismiss them as easily as you are. They do outrageous things, not of the sort this alleged Satanist introduction describes: "Do what you wish as long as it does not interfere with others." That is crap... Real (or most of) Satanists do things that fade in comparison with Inquisition, for example. Sick, demented, there is no adequate description for that utterly criminal conduct.

Lucinda: "Even many christians would agree that their religion is about denying primitive human instincts like lust, in favour of 'higher' ideals, such as faith."

Those Christians are missing the point! Many Christians are missing the point, in fact. Christianity is not ONLY didactic; it is much more than that. Christian Theology does not say: DO NOT EAT TOO MUCH AND YOU WILL GO TO HEAVEN... or something similar. No No... That is a middle-age notion, which the Church has denounced repeatedly by now. There is a "why" for everything Christians are ideally supposed to do. Many Christians do the RIGHT thing for the WRONG reason... Which does not mean that there is no RIGHT reason as well. These commands are taken far too literally; they ought to be considered within a far broader (and historical) context. That is, the context in which they were written, you know. I am sure you know, but the signifier and the signified with differ radically as the context (i.e. in our case--time) changes. Also, the commands were originally given to Jews; and even though Christianity is an outgrowth of Judaism, the focal point of Christianity, then, cannot be the Judeist part, but the growth, the EVANGELIUM, the New Testament, the Happy News...

Lucinda: "And really, is that such a bad thing? Are we humans, or animals? Satanists would like us to be more like animals - I'm not so sure that is a good thing."

I am sure it is not a good thing. However, that is the raison d'etre of religion. YOU, personally, have a CHOICE! Why, well because God gave you a choice! Our Heavenly Father has made it possible for us to be more than animals; and has given his Son (i.e. himself) to show us how to...

Lucinda, take care; I enjoy chatting with you...
GoRan

Apologies for barging into this very passionate discussion, but I feel compelled to submit what I feel are valid and constructive points.

How do we define such motivations as anger, lust, greed, envy, etc. Do we define them as 'deadly sins' or as 'living motivations' or can we describe them as bindings? I have lived these things and I must say it lead me down a road of dissatisfaction. I embarked upon this journey because I felt that the 'Christian Church' was restrictive and small minded in it's beliefs. I found that in just giving in to these things led to emptiness and more want to fill the space. Luckily I realised that Christianity is something else altogether, and pure religious adhereance to laws and rules does not have a home therein.

I cannot find any example in history of someone who has given themselves over to any of the seven deadlies -or combination thereof- having a life or legacy to which I could happily aspire.

Look at Hitler, Howard Hughes, Marilyn Monroe, Amin, any number of African famines. Where there exists gross human rights violations, genocide, Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, you can bet that there are influential people who are giving themselves over to our old seven deadly sins.

What we often miss about Christianity are some of the main points.
Listen to this. WHEN CHRIST CAME HE SAID "A NEW COMMANDMENT I GIVE UNTO YOU - LOVE ONE ANOTHER AS I LOVED YOU" (I'm not capital shouting there, I just can't use italic or bold type). 'As I have loved you' means a selfless love that is willing to regard others first. Not just to give up things to look good. In fact Christ also says 'forget vain traditions' and 'when you fast, or give to the poor, do so in secret, don't do it so everyone sees...'

In this he was saying forget all the other commandments and everything else. He also cleverly gave us no excuse. Think honestly about it. Have you ever had a lot of experience with someone who lived by greed, lust, anger, gluttony etc, and thought, 'good for them - they're doing their own thing and it makes me feel good...'. Generally you feel hurt and unvalued. Alternatively have you met someone who genuinely thought of you and your feelings first and did something for you from a truly giving heart and you honestly thought 'stupid zealot, I hate the way that makes me feel...'.

I think not, people who live in the former way invariably leave an increasing trail of destruction in their wake with a decreasing sense of right and wrong. I believe in Christ, and I believe the bible, and I live my life by Christ's new commandment, and I regret living my life for myself because it was such a mindless waste. I have genuinely experienced both sides fully, and even in the off chance that I'm wrong, who cares, I've lived well and enjoyed the difference I can make for the lives of others.

If I'm right though......

NFAF

A673454 - Modern Satanic Cults

- That should start to answer GoRan's claim that "Satanism ... was indeed involved in ... ritual sacrifice of animals (and sometimes human beings, children, or babies!)". You can take that part of the debate over there, I think, rather than getting into it here.



NFAF - you enjoy living a christian lifestyle, so you do so. LaVey would be proud of you, if it's the honest truth. You're putting your own happiness first. You're denying the deadly sins, not because they're wrong in themselves, but because they 'lead you down a road of dissatisfaction'.

> "even in the off chance that I'm wrong, who cares, I've lived well and enjoyed the difference I can make for the lives of others. If I'm right though......"

A517646 - Pascal's Wager
That particular argument is only about 350 years old...

Well, if I may, I'd like to say a few things that I have noticed myself about similar debates that I have been involved in. I think I should start by saying where I stand - I consider myself closer to the Satanism described in this guide entry than to Christianity. However, I am not ready to buy into anything as of yet. In any event, I also want to thank the two Christians who have submitted their opinions here for not being the raging zealot I have seen so many times in similar debates. In any event, here's my two cents. The first point that I wish to bring up is that quoting Christ, the Bible and such seem to me empty arguements. May I remind you that not everyone regards the Bible as truth, therefore the quotes that you take from such a source are worthless. While I respect that you are entitled to your own beliefs which I am entirely unprepared to pass judgement on as to the correctness of such beliefs, you must also understand that to some, quoting the Bible is as you would regard a quotation from the Necronomicon, Satanic Bible, or other such piece of writing. However, the Necronomicon may be a poor example, at least that which is said by some to be scribed by Al Azif or Abdul Alhazred, a crazy Arab, on scrolls of flesh. Such a tale is entirely false. Lovecraft, a writer who himself frequently referenced this piece of fiction as a true tale recording the walkings of the Great Old Ones upon the Earth, wrote many letters to people saying that the Necronomicon did not predate him; he wrote it. In any event, to some, quoting the Bible is as quoting the Necronomicon would be to you - they believe that it is a blatant untruth, and that it should not be regarded as any evidence. As you can provide no evidence of the existence of God, you cannot prove that the Bible is true. You can merely provide faith, which is not enough for some of their own faith in direct opposition to yours. In summary, I am in no way anti-Christian, I would simply remind you that there are those out there who do not share the beliefs that you provide as positive proof.

However, I am not ready to state that Satanism is just another religion with perfectly innocent beliefs. Yes, there are instances of those who believe in what are undeniably the darker and more unsavory aspects of Satanic Cults. However, there is more to Satanism than that. If that i all that you see Santanism to be, then you are blind in your reasoning and beliefs. The Church of Satanism does exist; therefore I would caution you against using Biblical proofs against such an organization and classifying all Satanism as the darker aspects that some cults employ. Although I would say that I am closer to the Church of Satanism than that of Christianity, I would also state that I am far from embracing many of the darker beliefs of some that I have come in contact with; such a lifestyle does not seem attractive to me. Lucinda, while I agree with you for the most part, I would also say that GoRan is correct in asserting that "Satanism ... was indeed involved in ... ritual sacrifice of animals (and sometimes human beings, children, or babies!)" Not all Satanism is such, but some is.

Furthermore, I would note that the earlier comments about an exemplary follower of the Church of Satanism and an exemplary Christian were not entirely correct. When I see someone following the Church of Satanism I think "Good for him, he's doing his own thing." When I see someone following Christianity, I think the same. It's what you believe. Nothing can take that away. Don't make the mistake of classifying one belief as right and another as wrong. An opinion cannot be wrong, only disagreed with.

On another note, I would say that you classifcation of Buddhism as a restricting religion is compleatly wrong, at least in the sense that you mean. It is not as you imply a religion that sets beliefs and says that it is perfectly open and will let you live a free lifestyle. Becoming a Buddhist is a lyfestyle decision in which you give up a lot. It takes dicipline and sacrifice, and acknowledges that. Is there really any way that Buddhists can deny that such a lifestyle is not restrictive? However, it is for the sake of enlightenment - understanding. Understanding and knowledge are possible the greatest of freedoms that are achived only by dicipline and sacrifice. Personally, although I am not a Buddhist, I admire such a religion above many others. Those who can go through such restrictive conditions on simply the promise of understanding are incredible, and better men than I. I couldn't do it, and I would caution you that before sterotyping Buddhism as just a religion that restricts freedoms you consider the ultimate goals of it. Buddhists are ultimatly knowledge lovers; they are not closed minded as some (no offence) Christians who are convinced that all beliefs but theirs are wrong. They seek knowledge, and will listen to any opinions, even those contrary to theirs, and consider them for the sake of greater knowledge. In such a way, it is just about as free as you can get. Islam, another religion that you cited as restrictive, I cannot speak on - I don't know enough about it.

Finally, I would sum up what I have said. First, citing your own religion or belief does nothing to sway those who would not believe it in the first place. It's circular logic: The proof you offer requires that you believe what you are trying to prove in the first place. Second, beware of broad classifications: Satanism is a very general term, and regarding all those who call themselves Satanists as identical would be as grossly incorrect as regarding all those who believe in Christ as the same. Thrid, religion is essentially a belief, not a fact: because you need proof to have fact, and a God of any sort defies classification as truth or fiction, we are essentially debating opinions, which cannot be right or wrong, but simply believed. Fourth, religions that seem restrictive may in fact achieve nothing but freedom: exercise caution when saying that all a religion does is restrict freedom.

What I am tring to do here is not further a specific cause, but urge you to keep you minds open. Also, remember that all that this guide entry has stated is fact. That the Church of Satanism asserts that all other religions are restrictive is a fact, and entirely true. The assertion that all other religions are restrictive is a belief, and cannot be right or wrong. Anyway, I hope that I have not offended anyone, and that I have brought some new perspective to this debate and your views. If you want to talk to me about this, I'm on AOL Instant Messenger as ThePixelGuru, or just post here or to my personal space. See you around h2g2, all.
Jamie

I think my point about Buddhism was that it restricts you in some ways, but (claims to) do so in order to unrestrict you in other ways. In the same way that a rigorous training regime restricts your free time, but unrestricts your top speed...

True. In retrospect, I would say that what I wrote about your statements on Buddhism was perhaps over-interpreting what you had said. In its basic form, I would agree that you would be right in saying that Buddhism is one of the more restrictive. However, I wouldn't say 'Don't consider it, it's too restrictive.' I realize that's not quite what you said, but that is the more extreme form of the arguement. And one thing that I forgot - thanks for being one of those who is able to write on such a (guide) entry without so much supporting the Church of Satanism as simply putting the facts out there and then responding with opinions; it's a good way of doing things, rather than acting as a raging Satanist throughout. Keep it up.
Jamie

Guys,

Firstly, let me say that I love the way that debates get conducted here. This is possibly the first time I have encountered such a good hearted exchange of ideas on a really touchy subject.

It's really difficult sometimes to put the genuine Christian perspective forward, because I feel that I do so from a somewhat embattled position. The Christian religion in some of its various forms or denominations has been responsible for or at least closely linked with a dreadful list of autrocities, such as the inquisition, the crusades and the witch hunts to name but a few. If anything I would like to draw a distinction in your minds between 'religion' and 'Christianity'. These are 2 very different things. Religion says 'thou shalt not do this or else...' and Christianity says 'I do this because I love'.

It is hard to argue something that relies so heavily on faith and personal experience. One could argue that 'not only the bible, but history reflects some of these things such as the influence of the apostle Paul' and so on, but the immediate argument is 'well how much of history is prescribed to us by the ancient church?'. Probably a lot.

If you choose to acknowledge the bible, then we find a huge net imbalance between a lot of what we have seen historically in the church and what Christ actually did and said. He actually contended quite severely with religion, and stressed the importance of putting others before yourself. Now the killer here, is that Christ (whether you believe in his existance or not, the philiosophy works) left us no room to put others first just so we can achieve our own ultimate goal. He gets us on intent every time and challenges our honesty to ourself first. These are among the reasons that I find this whole realm so compelling and I cannot not believe it. BUT, I cannot really argue it effectively - and don't even try - because once again if I can MAKE someone believe because I force them to submit to my logic then I miss the point.

My other thought(not a hugely intellectual point I know) is that if I believe that an infinitely wise powerful and loving God created us differently then he would not make it so only an intellectually gifted few could understand the path thereto. I have successfully studied science, physics, business, law, and even the stockmarket, (I am a financial adviser and corporate adviser by trade so I get to see a lot of grubby goings on from day to day) and consider myself someone of moderate intelligence, but still I cannot argue creation vs evolution or Christianity vs Satanism because a. The arguments are just as good on both sides, and b. Christ doesn't care if I can out argue someone. What He cares about is do I care for my brother or sister, do I honour those around me (whether Christians or not) rather than tearing them down, do I forgive others like I ask of Him. It gets to the heart of the matter of how I live with my fellow manand how I make my life genuinely useful. Any comparison here to Pascal's wager is pointless, because it comes from a selfish base.

I'm thinking of changing my H2G2 name to 'Rambler'. I've rabitted on a bit here. This is a subject that I am very passionate about because I see it work week in and week out. I see restored relationships, rebuilt lives, genuine joy (as distinct from transient happiiness), people being honest and just with each other, and I know the difference it has made in myself. But please in your minds make the distinction between religion and Christianity.

Nice comments pixelguru. I hope to see you in this or other threads again. When you hang around a lot of Christians, it can be difficult and confronting to have your core beliefs challenged. Growing up as a Christian you can believe things 'because you always have'. I walked away for a time, and 2 years ago decided to work out what I believe and why. It's good to be challenged because it makes me question my own side constantly. I really appreciated your comments.

Freek

Oh WOW.
I've been gone for a real long time, and I'm just walking into this.

Okay, the only thing I want to interject is something pertaining to the first post. All that stuff you were saying about most Satanists not realizing what Satanism is really about...or not ADMITTING it...
I am sorry, but you are so full of (expletive deleted.)

I can SAY THIS because I AM a Satanist, and I know many others. And all I can say is that you have had a very thourough brain-washing from your religion. You will never see my side of life, and I will never accept your inevitable "sources" for this information...old texts, myths, ancient historical manuscripts...

Does it ever occur to you to NOT believe something your priest tells you? I don't think so, because in your mind, a priest wouldn't lie.
I say they whole-heartedly WOULD to make someone more of a believer.
Ever think those old accounts of guys sacrificing 200 children...
AND COME ON...HOW CAN YOU BELIEVE something like that...were just propaganda to justify killing a percieved enemy? Ever hear of Salem?
I guess you think those witches really were having black masses where they kissed the Devil's backside for power, huh?

Listen, I was raised Baptist most of my life, okay? I have SEEN the propaganda films they show young people in church to make them afraid of "the Devil's influences." I have seen the videos with Gene Simmons from KISS spitting up FAKE blood on stage...though they said it was REAL in the video. I have heard the theory that the SMURFS were Satanic because they were magical creatures and the wizard's cat was names Azrael. It's all B.S.

Do you know how many fake affidavits(sp?) were filled out against Marilyn Manson? How good Christian people told the police flat out LIES about human sacrifice and group rapes at his concerts? I have been to FOUR of his concerts and seen nothing of the sort.

Put it this way, yes...AS I SAID...there are those who use the name Satanist as an excuse to do horrible things. But they are not who I or any other true Satanist recognise as equals. They are fools who don't want to take the blame for their sicknesses. And people should stop believing idiotic propaganda just because someone who "wouldn't lie" said it was so.

Now we were having a perfectly good debate and some moron comes along and starts getting abusive.

Mr or Ms Gott, both sides here were sharing contrary ideas in a good spirit, and probably getting somewhere with regard to understanding the other. I don't think that anywhere here anyone has postulated that whatever any priest has said is the purest truth. I am a strong Christian and I have never made a blanket acceptance of anything I hear from the pulpit, in the same way that I don't with polititians or what I hear on the news.

In my own entry I cautioned religious zealousness as being the cause for autrocities in the past. Maybe you have been miffed by something that happened in your Christian experience and now you're all bitter and twisted and have to rebel against it and ridicule Christians generally. You get all huffy about Christians making generalisations about Satanists and then what do you go and do? HMMMMMMM.

So what, only Christians tell lies? Where does any Christian text ever say that Christians don't ever tell lies or do anything wrong?

You are furthering the mainstream Christian view of Satanists Gott, by living in deception and getting all bitter and twisted about Christianity. I thought Satanists were all supposed to be cool and laid back and just looking after number 1. Go and do so, and if you think Satan is going to do you any favours, you're a fool.

TF

TF - Couldn't agree more. That's exactly what I was trying to say, and from another point of view. You don't say, "Look, on this page it says X, Y, and Z," but rather "This is what I believe, therefore it is a truth to me." Thanks, hope to see you around.
Genetisch Gott - Couldn't disagree with you (much) more. Look, it's not all propiganda that you have to see through in order to see what is 'right,' i.e. Satanism. Don't assume because some of it is blatant lies all of it is. I'm not sure how widespread it is, but here in the States (Massachusetts, specifically), there's a big something going on about Catholic priests sexually abusing small children. This is (obviously) horrible, but does not mean that all Catholics are child molesters. Don't assume because some of the stuff that you hear or see is Christian propiganda that it is all malicious lies. They are very against things such as Manson or any gaming or real life use (whether you believe it is possible or not, I'm not ready to pass judgement on that), casual reference to or other mentions/uses of magic. They have a right to be against it. First of all, it's free speech. Second, it is directly in opposition to what they believe. I have seen statements by Christians that Dungeons and Dragons praises Hitler; simply untrue. The rulebook says something to the extent of, 'Hitler is an example of someone with great charisma - he seems likable, carries himself well and can convince people to do things, whether they are good ideas or not.' That isn't praising Hitler, and a quote of the book was not fairly presented for reference. This could be mere oversight and misinterpretation, or a desire to show the evils of Dungeons and Dragons through any means nessecary, including blatant lies. You say that rituals including the sacrifice of humans do not occur - this may be true, but they did occur. You cannot deny the darker origins of Satanism and its use hundreds of years ago. This is a problem for some people, as they cannot see past the dark spots on the past and present (there are still some rather unsavory parts of Satanism existant) record of Satanism. Some people cannot see past this to view some Satanists as seperate people from those who attempt to summon daemons and devils or call upon supernatural forces for less than good purposes. This is unfortunate; in fact, this is just as unfortunate as you judging all Christians as propaganda spreading liars who have yet to see through the lies all around them and embrace Satanism. Would it really be fair to judge Satanism by those who practiced it hundreds of years ago for clearly evil purposes? Then would it be fair to judge Christianity by the Inquisition? Try to keep an open mind, as some have regrettibly not. Things that seem as rediculous as the Smurfs or Harry Potter being evil are not at all silly from a certain point of view. Well, until later, all.

Tidy work again pixelguru. I have seen the 'Satan in Pop Music' videos, talked about the smurfs (I never really took the smurfs that seriously, I feel I may have missed something here), listened to 'Another One Bites The Dust' backwards (I love Queen) and heard all the D & D arguments, Harry Potter Arguments, Life of Brian (a classic) arguments, and I really can't be bothered. We have a similar problem here (Australia) with sexual assaults by Catholic Priests. In fact at the moment we have a raging controversy with our Governor General (the Queen's representative in our country) - who used to be our Anglical Archbishop - having covered up sexual offences within his church. Simply said, morally the world seems to be in a shambles whichever way you look at it.

I don't think that I achieve anything by proving to someone that by playing D & D they are evil. Jesus once said to a group of people who were about to stone a woman for adultery 'He who is without sin should cast the first stone'. The bible also says that I should pick the plank out of my own eye before I pick the speck out of my brother's eye. Unfortunately a lot of Christians major on the minors, and look to find the bad rather than striving to attain the good. Maybe we look for the bad because it makes us feel better about our own disfunctional lives. I have been guilty of this in times gone past. If more of us (Christian or otherwise) looked for the good in the world around us rather than the bad, we would be surprised at the result (news programs would be shorter). If I prove someone WRONG by some aspect of their life, how have I appreciated that person's value. Now there are some things that some people (Christians included) do that I cannot accept, but Christ tells me to love and value, not attack and tear down.

Have a great day. Look forward to talking with you again.

TF

I am looking out for number 1. I WROTE this entry, and I am responding to the first person that started this thread. I was not refering to any of you who responded, and I thought I made that clear when I posted.

I was not inferring that all Christians are like that, I was refering to HIM/HER. I was only responding to HIS/HER posts.

I also do not take everything Anton LaVey said as truth. I look into EVERYTHING if it is something that interests me, and I most DEFINATELY look into things people tell me are bad before I make a judgment. I simply get infuriated when people like the first poster (sorry, but I don't remember the nick, and I don't want to go back and look it up) make all these statements about what we all "KNOW" is going on, but don't give any proof to back up their assertions. People like that make judgments based on what they have HEARD and not what they have experienced, and I don't think those judgments have any place in a debate.

And by the way, TF...I don't consider myself a "moron" just because I state my opinion. It differs from yours, fine. I don't state it in a polite and PC way, fine. But that does not make me a moron.

I don't mince words, that is all, and what I percieved as that person's attitude got to me. I have no problem with any of the others that posted to this thread...they have not posted accusations that they have no proof or experience of, and they seem very willing to HEAR other points of view. Christian or no, if you treat me with respect, I treat you the same. But if I percieve a slap in the face, I slap back.

> "You say that rituals including the sacrifice of humans do not occur - this may be true, but they did occur. You cannot deny the darker origins of Satanism and its use hundreds of years ago."

Well, uh, yes you can. There's no hard evidence for any 'darker origins' of Satanism, and if it really happened, then there should be. On the other hand, there's *lots* of evidence for the Church making stuff up to demonize its opposition.

A673454 - Modern Satanic Cults
A531794 - Wicca - a Legacy of Persecution

Ok, right on both counts. "Darker origins" was perhaps poor diction, and there is plenty of evidence of Christian Churches making stuff up. But there are some pretty decent arguments for Satansim being a mite more (insert word here, maybe 'ungood,' for those of you who have read 1984) than the "innocent, picked-on religion that has always been this way." So there's not absolute, hard evidence - but there are some good indications. I'm not attacking Satanism; I'm just saying that it's not all good stuff. Also, I'm not speaking from a point where I haven't seen any of this. Modern Satanists don't sacrifce small children, but there's a definite line. I see some people and have no problem with the way they choose to follow Satanism, and some others who, while I don't have a problem with them (it's their own thing after all, let 'em do it), but am quite certain I don't want to get involved. Well, see you, all (y'all?)!

Yes GG, it's annoying when people fire all guns up isn't it. If you're tired of people shoving opinions down the throats of others and being forceful about it and saying that someone is full of BS for doing so then aren't you guilty of the very same thing yourself. You only vindicate your opposition and strengthen their view whether right or wrong. Additionally how does that sort of thing fit in here? I'm glad my reply got a reaction. Argument good; Spirited debate good; Abuse bad...

All of the arguments I've heard against the Church here are all of the things that Christ argued for aswell. Food for thought...

TF

> "Argument good; Spirited debate good; Abuse bad..."

Ahh, so 'some moron' was just spirited debate, right?

mote-eye-log.
-Xanthia

Then I just got two reactions, and we all got the point right. I used the word fool aswell. I'm sure that you didn't miss that one; maybe you were just being kind.

Lucinda did you hear me using anything but respectful conversation before I was told that Christians were full of BS. I think not. I purely added these strong comments to illustrate the point that even when we are happy to go voicing off things with disrespect and disregard to things that others hold dear, it affects them. GG was a bit miffed and so are you. When we just go mouthing off (because we are looking after number one and living our own life and 7 sins, etc etc), we can affect, hurt, annoy, devalue others. That's why Christ said forget the commandments and just do this one - Love one another as I have loved you. A lot of Christians are hypocrites, but we're not the only hypocrites. You can't have a one dimensional view of us, if you don't want us to have a one dimensional view of anyone else. If you go to a restaurant and you hate the way they prepare the food, do you then reject food? Probably not, maybe you just find somewhere that make food the way it was meant to be made.

Sincere Regards,

TF