What's in a Name? | Forum

MichaelWoond
MichaelWoond Sep 10 '19
Quote from Anna

@Michael

 Actually, the word dates back to the 16th century. It was used for describing rival Christian groups. Those were accused of doing Satan's work, that is spreading heresy. The concept of devil worship is even older and dates back to the medieval witch hunts. The same goes for the black mass. Know something about the poisons affair in France? Do you really think LaVey pulled it out of his ass?


Yes Satanism was in the myth defined as the evil conspiracy who worshipped the devil and that myth was the cause behind the accusation of heretics and pagans. However, none of these were practicing Satanists. Have you ever read the satanic bible? 
The Forum post is edited by MichaelWoond Sep 10 '19
Discordia Member
Discordia Sep 10 '19
Don't be silly Plasmo, there are no real devil worshipers. Nobody ever actually does anything interesting. There are no men in red woolen shirts behind some narrow door getting incredible kicks from things you'll never know. Hush now and go back to sleep.
The Forum post is edited by Discordia Sep 10 '19
Anna
Anna Sep 10 '19
I'm not denying that there exist Satanists with theistic inclinations or call them devil-worshippers. However, most of them do not worship the devil. So while Satanism can mean the devil worship, in most cases it doesn't. I'm saying that there is more to that term than just devil-worship. There is also this little nuance: the myth vs the reality. Does an average dumbass Joe have to be aware of this? Sure, he doesn't have to. He might just check his dictionary like that lost foreigner abroad I mentioned earlier who asked for directions and got more than she asked for.
Zach Black Owner
Zach Black Sep 11 '19

Quote from PlasmoticJezebel The average Joe dumbass as not a dumbass for thinking some incohate vagueness concerning robes, candles, sacrifice of animals or people, and worshiping the devil when you say "Satanism" anymore so than one is a dumbass  for thininking some vagueness concerning multi-armed deities, dots on the forehead, saris  and worshipping some god with the head of an elephant when you say "Hinduism"


Aside from those who practice some form of Hinduism, only academics, kooks, and lonely isolated pedants on the internet have any idea that Hinduism is pretty varied - closer to the word "Paganism" than an actual cohesive religion. Same applies to those odd-balls who have even read the Satan Bible or give a rat's ass about Bloom, Rand, or about philosophy in general. It's boring to the over-whelming majority of people. Fortunately, they aren't required to have an in-depth knowledge of boring topics in order to understand you when and if you use the appropriate word or phrasing you're trying to communicate (if, and that's a big if - communicating with the masses is at all a concern of yours. That if is another open question) This goes for countless words and phrase: "Particle physics", for example. I can say the word or phrase and you have a pretty good idea what I'm talking about - there's no danger of miscommunication - even though you may not know even the first thing about it. That's how language is supposed to work: it's supposed to inform and convey meaning with very little by way of noise or ambiguity. Anyone's free to play games with that and push those boundaries, but that does come with some consequences.


If we had to deconstruct the semantics of each and every single word we've used in this conversation the way we expect others to do of Satanism, this thread would consist of just two posts as long as the Twin Towers were tall. Literally. Frankly, I wouldn't expect anyone to read. I don't even think I would.


This "well Satan technically means adversary, and technically anything opposed to the Church, and historically it comes from the Protestant reformation" Listen: nobody talks like this. No one holds conversations like this outside of forums or a lecture hall.


I will give you, though, that the internet is amazing at warping and distorting one's perspective - in some cases severely. Such as this one. 


Seriously, average Joe dumbass is only average Joe dumbass by the heady, cerebral, and socially awkward standards of bookish Karen pedant.


The image they have in mind for Satanism - as vague and nebulous as it is - is sufficient. In many cases it's spot-on. He doesn't check his dictionary. He doesn't have to. The dictionary is there for you to check, in case you forgot in your rabbit hole of esoterica, obscurantism and/or liberal social activism the language the rest of the world is speaking.


*Incidentally, I doubt you know a single Devil Worshiper. Your whole sample of anything relating even remotely close to a "Satanic community" exists exclusively in cyberspace. As it turns out: rational atheistic Satanists have a hard enough time taking this forum / WordPress nonsense seriously enough to bother participating - that goes doubly so for theists who frankly don't feel the need to discuss - much less defend - their beliefs to you or anyone for that matter. They're not going to win a rational debate concerning what they full well know to be faith. They don't get off on giving acerbic psuedo-intellectuals a reason to feel smug at having a lack of anything better to do.

Fuck ...way to early ( late ) for me to read all this :)
Discordia Member
Discordia Sep 11 '19
Well if you won't read that Zach then I guess there's no hope you'll ever ready our wordy crap ;)
Anna
Anna Sep 11 '19

@PJ

And your sample is what? A few acquaintances.


 I'm not even sure what the fuck it is that you're arguing. I didn't say anyone is required to know the etymology and a full meaning of the word. But being unaware of it makes someone ignorant. In this case this is the ignorance of Satanism. Using your Hinduism example, it's the lack of knowledge about Hinduism. Ignorant people use their preconceptions and stereotypes about every religion.


And if the internet has warped anyone's perspective... seriously, Mr Kettle just go back and reread your nerdy posts.

MichaelWoond
MichaelWoond Sep 12 '19
I'm a Satanist whatever I want to label myself it or not. It's not a choice. If I was not a Satanist I would not join this social network... In many ways I would wish I was not a Satanist...


Anna
Anna Sep 12 '19

@PJ

Even if most people are unaware of the etymology of the word, that doesn't change anything. If I'm imagining the covens of black-hooded figures worshipping the Devil, organizing orgies and sacrificing virgins and babies, that doesn't yet mean that my imagination reflects the reality.

Discordia Member
Discordia Sep 13 '19
I do find it interesting that any time a person attempts to actually do anything, they immediately get accused of "crying for recognition" or "attention seeking" by people who apparently think it is nobler to sling mud from the sidelines. I really only have one thing to say to that:



The Forum post is edited by Discordia Sep 13 '19
Discordia Member
Discordia Sep 13 '19
@TV the question was not "Do you call yourself a Satanist?" The question was "What names do you give yourself, and why?" Both you and JP have done a great job of explaining why you don't like the label "Satanist," but neither of you have actually said what you call yourselves. JP has made a bit of an argument for not giving oneself any labels at all. Is that your position as well?
Discordia Member
Discordia Sep 13 '19
Lol yeah, I'll claim that was an intentional joke instead of me just being sick and brain fogged ;)
Discordia Member
Discordia Sep 14 '19
You’re not going by the words in my blog. The word “outcry” never appears and the references to war are not a call to war, they are saying “we are already at war whether you know it or not.” The basic message of the whole thing is “If you want me to care about your position don’t tell me what other people are doing wrong, show me what you are doing and try to convince me it’s better.” I don’t know how you read that and assumed I was saying “everyone validate MEEE” but I think you may be projecting a bit.
Anna
Anna Sep 14 '19

@T.Volt


Hyperbole is simply that. Definitely, not my favorite literary device but people can use it for the variety of reasons. I could, for example, call my debate with AK a War of Words too but that doesn't have to mean an emotional investment, at least not to the point of losing one's sleep over it. Blogging is creative writing. No need to get bonkers over what is no more than mere rhetoric.

The Forum post is edited by Anna Sep 14 '19
Anna
Anna Sep 14 '19
By hitting each other's heads with a dictionary.
Anna
Anna Sep 14 '19
People will use labels to define you whether you want it or not. We also use labels when we think, we categorize things. That's how a human mind works. It's all a part of a cognitive process, however imperfect it is. To pretend otherwise is just that; to pretend. Or it is the idealizing of the self. Nothing makes you different from the human "herd." That is unless you're an Alien.
Anna
Anna Sep 15 '19
This is true. At least here, finally, we agree with each other. If some need to go round telling everyone how evil they are, that means they probably aren't.
Discordia Member
Discordia Sep 15 '19
That was almost touching TV. Heartfelt and shit.

Anyway trust me I do get the need to test new people and prove they can take criticism. I expected some level of initiatory hazing. Believe it or not I thrive on *constructive* criticism. That’s why I try to engage with people and get feedback. If I wanted nothing but sycophantic admiration I’d go write beautiful fluff that sounds deep to 12-year-olds and start marketing myself to Random House. I love having smart and skeptical people find the flaws in my arguments. And I also enjoy being snarky and pedantic, and I appreciate a community that can handle that

But I have to admit that it gets boring when every exchange seems to devolve into a pointless sparring match. I did my years in competitive debate. I know how to win those games but they don’t bring me joy. I’d much rather just talk to interesting people who *want* to talk to me.
Dark Enlightenment
Dark Enlightenment Sep 15 '19
What Anna said.


As simple as categorization. 


That categorization and something Anna didn't say.


Taking a satanic label (before TST and Swedish metal went and sanitized society from a 1988 rerun) was more reprehensible than walking around with a Hitler Mustache, depending on where you were for a long while. 


In my mind that's THE point of the label. Satan doesnt really scare outside the Bible Belt like it used to. 


Today it is about racism. The most transgressive thing is walking a nice liberal California boardwalk with a red temporary ink swastika and menacing face tattoos. The jollies from using a reprehensible label is the moral indignation it garners. 


And in that instance you are using the "Neo Nazi" label. A rebel with or without an apparent cause, is that so different then the kid dragged to church their whole life seeking that what chaps the ass of their religious folks?  


Why such the pejorative towards labels anyway? Labels reflect the way of society.  What  is better then to seek that which subverts or antagonizes? 


What, you can't even acknowledge a norm exists now?


STILL CASE AND POINT: 8-8-88 Rally For Satan. At the apex of The Satanic Panic, no less. 


It must do something internally to walk a path of greater resistance. Like playing life on "legendary". 


But pay no attention to me, I do it spineless and wrong. 




The Forum post is edited by Dark Enlightenment Sep 15 '19
Anna
Anna Sep 16 '19

I thought the greatest offence was fucking kids? No?

Racism seems to be a bit passe, I think.

Discordia Member
Discordia Sep 18 '19
Well first off I thought none of you actually identified as Satanists, so I’m not sure this group is the best representative sample. But yes I have interacted with many Satanists, as well as many others who use different labels but whom I would loosely consider “my sort,” and of course quite a few LARPers, edgy teens and quarrelous man-children. I am not at all surprised to run into this sort of behavior. Nor, after well over 20 years online do I find it in any way exclusive to Satanists, occultists or really any particular group. That sort of insecure posturing is rampant in most circles.

But I also know quite well that discussions don’t have to go that way. I know there are people who are capable of more because I have met them. I’m in regular contact with several now. Believe it or not I do have Satanist friends, not to mention the one I married.

You seem to be confusing my statement of preference with some kind of complaint. I know most people I run into in these circles are going to want to play pointless games. That doesn’t surprise me, it just bores me. Either I’ll find someone on here interested in a real conversation, or I’ll get bored and leave.
The Forum post is edited by Discordia Sep 18 '19
Pages: « 1 2 3
Certain features and pages can only be viewed by registered users.

Join Now

Spread the Word. Help Us Grow

Share:

Donate - PayPal

This site is largely funded by donations. You can show your support by donating. Thanks. Every dollar helps. You need not a PayPal to donate either just a debit or credit card.

Satanic International Network was created by Zach Black in 2009.