Loading...

What's in a Name? | Forum

PlasmoticJezebel NUTZ
I'm sure in a lot of ways I agree with you, but not on this particular article. 

I don't think the name matters. The essence does.


Don't let the name fool you. WBC is as Satanic as they come.

Discordia Member
Discordia Sep 9
I don't know, "A Satanism that concerns itself inordinately with who is or is not a "true Satanist" is just not something I find very interesting" sounds an awful lot like a less verbose version of: 


"Nothing puts me to sleep faster than hearing occultists defend the “purity” of their tradition and tear down the practices of others. How incredibly un-Satanic to feel the need to find some authority who “has all the answers” and follow them. Perhaps doubly so when their credentials are derived more from the age of their ideas than the quality. How cliché to rely on fossilized tomes to tell you how things supposedly were in some golden past where people knew the correct names and the proper rights, and decide that any developments in the interim must clearly be a devolution of the “true” religion. What could be more boring? Is anyone actually enjoying the endless mudslinging over the proper interpretations of dead traditions?"


Also "don’t waste your time trying to define anyone else."

As for WBC, I know nothing about their intentions, but I can't argue with you about their practice.


The Forum post is edited by Discordia Sep 9
PlasmoticJezebel NUTZ
Well then yes, we do agree. And all is right with world... til next time.
Dark Enlightenment

Quote from PlasmoticJezebel I'm sure in a lot of ways I agree with you, but not on this particular article. 

I don't think the name matters. The essence does.


Don't let the name fool you. WBC is as Satanic as they come.

Let's take this and plaster it all over the place until every prospective satanist first tries to get the magic eye to show a schooner before attempting anything else.

The essence is always there when the argument, "______ are just trying to piss off people that do things they dont like" can be had.  The center piece of satanism lay therein, but...

What I have problems with is applying that essence to a group. Because after the WBC, you have Ruby Ridge, Waco, FLDS, Eco warriors, jihadists, skinheads and every other 12 Monkeys like attempted societal subversion.

The actions of smashing social taboo is there but most of the doers are as wired to following, acceptance as reward, and as plastic as anyone else.

The line I like here, and use often is:

"A person is smart, people are dumb panicky dangerous animals and you know it."

In analogy it works.

A person's societal transgression in their establishment of autonomy is satanic, but a  groups societal transgression, an effort of like minds, fails to meet criteria of fierce individualism even if its source is.

Take "annoying liberal faggots". On a personal level it is perfectly satanic to be triggered by said annoying liberal faggots, but ones person ironic support of Trump can quickly lead to a false party line of "You must be annoyed by liberal faggots too" rather fucking quickly.

And the once hilarious decision to hock Trump merchandise leads to something approaching a conservative party line that borders on bizarre.  I bet if you did a visual mapping of "Things online satanists think" in a spectrum of extremes  it would look still like a school of fish.  They are like fashion trends and it is fucking hilarious.  All of a sudden mustard yellow is in.

Everything gets diluted and deluded after a the initial browncoat reflex. 
The Forum post is edited by Dark Enlightenment Sep 9
T.Volt
T.Volt Sep 9
"Why does The Devil do anything, he's the freakin' devil he's a dick!"
-Al Gore


Don't mind Anna, she just hates all men who don't like her Polish cat dandruff.

The Forum post is edited by T.Volt Sep 10
Jedi_Jane
Jedi_Jane Sep 9
Just an FYI: The term "annoying liberal faggot" is redundant. 
Anna
Anna Sep 9

@PJ

The only person here who initiates all those semantic debates is you. You are the only one who claims the word gets redefined. In reality it isn't redefined. Satan-ism means connection to, expression of the archetype of Satan. Whether it is the literal worship of the devil or just the lifestyle contrary to the Christian one doesn't really matter. It all amounts to embracing the sin, acting as an adversary to God and all that revered and worshipped by the society. The archetype of Satan allows for the variety of interpretations and expressions. That doesn't mean it means anything. What it means is specified by culture, constantly evolving.


Your insistence that abstract nouns have one specific meaning only shows your ignorance. Is throwing acid in a woman's face justice? For many Muslim guys yes. Is capital punishment justice? Debatable. Is killing infidels justice? So what that you have a definition in a dictionary if people all round the world envision justice differently, if it is expressed differently from culture to culture?


 And WBC Satanic? You're funny. They are good Christians. I mean true Christians. Would burn heretics at the stake if they only had a chance.

PlasmoticJezebel NUTZ

Quote from Anna

@PJ

Whether it is the literal worship of the devil or just the lifestyle contrary to the Christian one doesn't really matter. It all amounts to embracing the sin, acting as an adversary to God and all that revered and worshipped by the society. [...]


Your insistence that abstract nouns have one specific meaning only shows your ignorance. [...]


 And WBC Satanic? You're funny. They are good Christians. I mean true Christians. Would burn heretics at the stake if they only had a chance.

Do you think before you write? 


And which god specifically is worshiped exclusively in western society? You know we're not a theocracy, right? Do you think anyone runs around saying they're a Satanist to mean they're Hindu?


I do not once insist that nouns have just one meaning. I do point-out that they are providing an alternate non-standard one. Which is exactly what they are doing. When you do that - as you are free to do - you will run into these types of problems: both of being misunderstood, of others playing the same game. One need not complain about that which they need not subject themselves to. 


The thing the general population conceptualizes when the word Satanism is uttered - which is closer to what is in the dictionary - is not the thing that is meant when these people utter it. The source of the disconnect is either with the listener or the communicator, and this is one of those instances where the blame lay squarely with the latter. 


*by the by, I really didn't think I needed to spell this out for you, but as your pedantry knows no bounds: I cite the dictionary not as one would a rule-book that decides language for us, but as a the single most reliable gauge for how the word is most commonly understood - because that's how dictionaries work. If you have a better gauge, I'm all ears.


As for the WBC: you either see it or you don't. I'm not surprised you don't.

The Forum post is edited by PlasmoticJezebel Sep 10
Anna
Anna Sep 10

Yes, I'm sure I do think. Satanism is and has always been the reaction to Christianity. Satan is a character from which book? Christianity is not only a religion but a specific ethos, including a specific morality system. You don't see how the Western world is influenced by Christian system of values? Perhaps less than in the past but still that morality is prevailing.


Words have not only more than one meaning but their meaning depends on the cultural context. Ours allows for at least several interpretations of such words like Satan, Satan-ism, Satan-ic etc because the core Satan archetype has quite a rich history. If one is not aware of it, then that person is ignorant, stupid even. Now, whether it makes sense to educate the stupid about their own cultural heritage and explain shit to them and what potential risks it entails is a totally different cup of coffee, deserving a separate thread because the OP didn't complain (or did I miss something?) about being misunderstood by uneducated, semi-literate idiots.

PlasmoticJezebel NUTZ
The western world - certainly the united states - is no more influenced by Christian values than it is Hellenic ones. 


But that's neither here nor there.


I will simplify this, because obviously it's causing a commotion in your mind. This all has explicitly to do with the article, mind you.


In the beginning there was LaVey: Satanism is not devil worship. 

He's at liberty to do that, but there's the obvious problem of Satanism, by definition, being synonymous with devil-worship he had to contend with.


Sure, words evolve over time. Keep saying that to yourselves. This one seems to have plateaued. It's already been 50 years, kiddo, and nothing whatsoever has changed with the standard definition. It still means what it meant before LaVey came around. It hasn't moved a tick. And it won't. 


To think that it will (any day now, just you wait!) indicates an highly distorted sense of proportion with regards to this matter; one for which there is no remedy except maybe spend more time off the internet interacting with a few normal people for a while. 


So, since the definition hasn't changed, they've had to be content spending far, far too much time re-asserting this non-standard definition to a mostly bored or incredulous audience (interspersed with the occasional sympathetic ear and the far rarer convert). Because that's just the hill they decided to die on, apparently. 


"We mean something else! ours is a philosophy of Anton Lavey blah blah Milton blah blah blah Paradise Lost blah blah Symbol blah blah blah Shadow self blah blah blah Ayn Rand blah blah Christian Hypocrisy blah blah  Crowley blah blah blah Ghost blah blah blah light bearer"


"fine, whatever you bookish kook. It still means devil worship"


And the logic by which that ^ series of name-drops, books they haven't even read, and pedantry is supposed to usurp the commonly understood definition can be applied and used-up by anyone whosoever, thus opening door to meaning whatever the hell any tom, dick, or harry wants it to, and thus absolutely nothing at all! So no one should be surprised when that's exactly what happens. I say let it. 'Can't turn a hoe into a housewife.

The Forum post is edited by PlasmoticJezebel Sep 10
Anna
Anna Sep 10

If the Western society wasn't largely influenced by Christianity, then the term Satanism would be quite meaningless - the very thing you're arguing against. And nobody in their right mind would assume that some worship the devil, I mean what for?


The definition is nothing more and nothing less than the anti-Christian ethos, embracing sin, doing the devil's work. All the rest is an interpretation; devil worship, LaVey's philosophy, embracing the shadow, rebelling against the status quo are all part of and fit the definition.


Besides, if you want to believe Satanism means devil worship, go on. I guess we are going to argue about this shit till the day of fucking Rapture.

The Forum post is edited by Anna Sep 10
MichaelWoond
MichaelWoond Sep 10
Quote from Anna

Satanism is and has always been the reaction to Christianity.


No, Satanism did not existed before 20 century. It was a myth in the middle ages describing an evil conspiracy who worshipped the devil and no such cult ever existed. 

The definition of Satanism is the modern religion that began with Anton LaVey's creation of The Church of Satan and has developed into many different branches because Satan opens up to different interprations and expressions. 

Anna
Anna Sep 10

@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?

MichaelWoond
MichaelWoond Sep 10
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
PlasmoticJezebel NUTZ

Anna. People do worship the devil. There are legitimate bon-a-fide devil worshipers out there. I happen to know a few of them. And yes, they do play in death metal bands. And yes, Virginia, they do call it Satanism (surprising, I know! next they'll be telling us water is wet!) What do they worship the devil for? Look, I dunno, man, ask them. Why does anyone worship anything? And they do by and large what you think they might - only with animals rather than people - at least as far as I know for sure.


We'll call him "J" I noticed he had the Satanic Bible on his book shelf. I mentioned "oh you've read that too". His response: "yeah, but meh, that book was such a fucking rip-off".



*not really much to say to that, now is there?


There's really nothing to argue. 


All there ever is going to be are:


1) Satanists who worship the devil. 


and


2) Bookish kooks and assorted weirdOs who call whatever amalgamated mass of pedantry of a belief system they have going for them "Satanism", who spend most of their time arguing about what a Satanist is and fighting among themselves like Star Wars fans at a Star Trek convention over who gets to call themselves one.


(See also the sixth Satanic sin: Lack of Perspective.)

The Forum post is edited by PlasmoticJezebel Sep 10
Discordia Member
Discordia Sep 10
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
PlasmoticJezebel NUTZ
Promise?
Anna
Anna Sep 10
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.
PlasmoticJezebel NUTZ
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. Thus, your sample concerning what "most" devil worshipers - or even "most" Satanists think can best be characterized as somewhere between grossly-inadequate to worthless.

The Forum post is edited by PlasmoticJezebel Sep 11
Zach Black Owner
Zach Black Sep 11

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 :)
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 »
Certain features and pages can only be viewed by registered users.

Join Now

Like and 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 and is currently the most widely used social networking site for Satanists of its kind.
Zach Black-Social Media YouTube - satanicinternational & thesatanicnetwork FaceBook - SatanicInternational ( Zach Black) Instagram - satanicinternational