Do you consider Satanism a valid Pagan tradition?

[Cassandra]

Not really. Being a Heathen, I found Druidic ceremonies to be... to much pomp. (Just the one I went to, not speaking for them all.) The way in which we address Theology is also significantly different from the Celtic traditions, and even more different from the Greek. Wiccan rituals were completely foreign to my tastes, way too much ceremony and script reading, and even when they used Norse deities it felt off.

So no, I wouldn't say that Pagan traditions are coherent even with one another. That's somewhat why we have cultural division even amongst ourselves.

Reading is an art. Try again:

Pagan traditions have similarities.
Pagan traditions are in themselves coherent.

What part do you object to?
1 - You want to deny that Pagan traditions (which is vastly more then rituals) have similarities?
Or
2 - do you want to deny a particular tradition is something coherent?

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

Reading is an art.

A bad start.

What part do you object to.
1 - You want to deny that Pagan traditions (which is vastly more then rituals) have similarities?
Or
2 - do you want to deny a tradition is something coherent?

Both, really.

1. What are our similarities? We worship multiple gods, some of which relate to nature. Full stop, I'd say. Our magics are different, our theologies are different, even our cultural arts and representations are different. While I am more than willing to utilize the term Paganism as an umbrella term for pre-Christian beliefs of Europe being recreated in the modern age, it's not something that we all see eye-to-eye about.

For example, even our god "archetypes" differ significantly. Zeus has more in common functionally with Odin or Tyr, though he is a god of thunder as Thor is. Zeus and Odin - as Chieftains of their respective pantheons - share that function with Сварог, though he is the God of forging and the sun, which he would then share with Haephestus, Apollo, Sunna (a Goddess, at that,) and if memory serves Lugh.

So what real similarities do we have?

2. Even within given traditions, we are not coherent. Just look at the division between the Asatru Folk Assembly and the rest of American Heathenry. Look at the division between Asatruar and Lokeans. Arguments against Rokkatru, or worship of Loki even if one isn't a flat-out Lokean. Look at the varying sects of Wicca - some which reject other paths of Wicca, certain genders, or certain pantheons even within the Eurocentric constraints. Must I go on?

While by and large we leave each other to our own devices, we are far from a similar family, or coherent among ourselves.

 

[David T]

That is the question I want to ask.

I am not asking if it is "pagan". Putting up a Christmas tree can be called "pagan". Using three as your lucky number is pagan. All kind of things can be called "pagan". Many Jewish customs and symbols go back to paganism as well. That means very little. Then every human being on Earth can be called "pagan" in one way or another.

The question is: Do you believe Satanism was once a Pagan tradition of a people in his own right? I do not mean a minor cult or sect either. Every society harbors groups on the fringe of society who go against the grain and can even do the weirdest things. But that does not make them representatives of their traditions even if they are born in them and use similar symbols and customs. We do not say criminals represent Christianity, because criminals are Christian, engage in Christian celebrations, have Christian names, etc. When you go against broadly accepted ideas or conduct you are no longer representing the tradition. You rather are a "Satan", an opposer. There are always people seeking opposition.It is pagan to allow such opposition if they respects ancestral traditions, but that is not the same as identifying with them. The overwhelming majority of people in Pagan traditions do not.

So what is your take?

Obviously yes but he wasn't known as the devil and he is in the old testament and new testament as well. Chesterton nailed it already and you need to look more closely at the devil as depicted and get back to me on what you have discovered. He hides in the open an a bit of a trickster at that. Apparently metaphysics can't turn backwards literally without the devil standing there. Curious how that works!!!!

 

[1137]

That is typical Abrahamic view on reality with a little role reversal.

You think Christianity believes gods are platonic forms and there are many of them? Wut?

 

[1137]

My view

Pagan traditions have similarities and Pagan traditions are in themselves coherent. Tradition means that people share values, ideas about right conduct, customs, etc.

As does Satanism, as pointed out in academic books such as "The Invention of Satanism."

What do Satanists share? Little except their opposition to traditional society.They revolt in various ways. That is why it is a very lose bunch that ranges from immature revolting youngsters and hipsters to freaks to sexual perverts and maniacs with all kinds of serious mental disorders. I do not call that a tradition. It is telling that one Satanist refers to the book of death, another to ancient Hinduism and Buddhism. They seem to live in their personal fantasy religion seeking passages in old scripture to underpin it. (A typically Abrahamic custom)

I'd say revolt in this sense is one tiny part, even if the most recognized by biased, ignorant individuals with no knowledge on the topic. Things like individualism, pride, positive societal change, etc. They take from different places because they see the underlying truth to these ideologies, that they are the same tales told through cultural and geographical biases.

There is one group that considers Satanist Pagans and that is Abrahamists. Especially for fundamentalist Abrahamists all Pagans are Satanists. For them Pagan worship is Demon worship. I think some of the descriptions of the Abrahamist God rather make it easy for Satanists to do a role reversal and feel good about it.

Yes, the church pretty much made paganism into Satanism. They changed names and interpretations, but it was indeed pagan. So based on this, were you able to reason, you'd realize even just in that sense it is indeed a continuation.

If Satanists really want to point to ancient Satanist traditions of people, they should point to the warring headhunters and cannibalistic tribes. But they should also realize that makes them the enemy of dharmic Pagan traditions. Just read the Ramayana, it is all about exterminating these demon tribes because they constantly disturbed peaceful nations. However, It would explain why some Satanists engage in similar practices today and also their references to snake worshipers.

Why, when it doesn't really embody the ideology of Satanism? If there's a religion embodying violence and cannibalism, it's probably that one where they eat the flesh and blood of their human sacrifice savior, while crusading through the world trying to convert through violence.

Personally I would think twice to associate myself with such a controversial bunch of people. But when people do not mind the association that is a message in itself. Something like, I do not give a *** what main stream society thinks of that. That again proves they are not a tradition but rather people revolting traditions. Yes such people are in all societies.

Good, Satanism doesn't want people who can't see passed Society's biases.

By the way, I have not seen any concrete evidence of Satanism being a tradition. Just vague references, like read the Egyptian book of dead. I think there is good reason why Satanist have their own DIR apart from Paganism. We really do not want to feed into age old bias about Pagans.

Well, you don't seem to be willing to take the time and look into things. The Egyptian book of the dead is pretty Osirian, making it a Christian precursor, not a satanic one. The pyramid texts, however, still show the old Setian/satanic views of man rising above god. There's the myth of Prometheus in Greek, Ishtar in Babylon, Tiamat in Sumer, plenty of myths that directly tie into and inspire the rise of modern Satanism. Sadly the lazy will never find such information.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

Yes, the church pretty much made paganism into Satanism.

I wouldn't say so much that the church made paganism into "Satanism", so much as they demonized various elements into "Satanic" stigmas. Honoring the Old Gods remained a pagan custom and remained the same, it was just ignorantly labelled as "devil worship" and the Old Gods denounced as "false". With true Satanism, they at least recognize that you're worshiping Satan. (When that's the case)

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

I don't believe Satanism is a Pagan tradition. For one thing it doesn't hold nature in reverence which is a feature common to many (I'll even venture most) Pagan traditions. It's not doctrine; just a common theme. Further, Satanism is a descendant of Abrahamic traditions - indeed, it relies primarily on Satan who is an Abrahamic concept and thus I feel it falls under the Abrahamic umbrella as much as that might disgust some Abrahamics here.

Edit: I made my post before reading anything other than the thread title so if I'm repeating arguments already made and/or debunked then I apologise.

 

[Toten]

Satan is a name from the current, ruling paradigm of western culture.

Western Culture? The concept of "Satan" was invented in the middle east, and had nothing to do with the Western world. You could say that the fictional character of satan has something in common with Western Culture now since there is a lot of drunkenness, adultery, greed, dishonesty, disloyalty, and gluttony in the west, since those were concepts that were attributed to "Satan" by the original sources who invented him, but that's irrelevant, let alone having anything to do with Paganism.

You can name "The paradigm of western culture" "Sauron" or "Darth Vader" and it would mean just as much. There is no "Satan", "Lucifer", "Samael", or "Set" in European Paganism, and trying to connect them with "Odin" or "Zeus" is just dishonest and frankly, disrespectful.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

You could say that the fictional character of satan has something in common with Western Culture now since there is a lot of drunkenness, adultery, greed, dishonesty, disloyalty, and gluttony in the west, since those were concepts that were attributed to "Satan" by the original sources who invented him,

Actually, no. Originally Satan was charged with testing the devoutness of people, offering temptations but only to see if they truly were holy people, not as an effort to corrupt them.

There is no "Satan", "Lucifer", "Samael", or "Set" in European Paganism,

3/4; Lucifer is the Roman personification of the dawn and dusk, the "Morning Star".

 

[Toten]

Actually, no. Originally Satan was charged with testing the devoutness of people, offering temptations but only to see if they truly were holy people, not as an effort to corrupt them.


3/4; Lucifer is the Roman personification of the dawn and dusk, the "Morning Star".

I didn't mean the people who created him wanted to corrupt people. But in the works of fiction in which he is a character, that is his will and his goal, and those concepts are things that he uses to do so. The people writing about him didn't want to corrupt others, but the actual character in the story did. Hence why he is the antagonist, and being associated with him would lead to prosecution and execution (ie, witches, adulterers).

 

[Cassandra]

Obviously yes but he wasn't known as the devil and he is in the old testament and new testament as well. Chesterton nailed it already and you need to look more closely at the devil as depicted and get back to me on what you have discovered. He hides in the open an a bit of a trickster at that. Apparently metaphysics can't turn backwards literally without the devil standing there. Curious how that works!!!!

The Devil is a logical product of Abrahamism. Your desire to push the concept on us is also typical for the Abrahamic mindset.

 

[1137]

I don't believe Satanism is a Pagan tradition. For one thing it doesn't hold nature in reverence which is a feature common to many (I'll even venture most) Pagan traditions. It's not doctrine; just a common theme. Further, Satanism is a descendant of Abrahamic traditions - indeed, it relies primarily on Satan who is an Abrahamic concept and thus I feel it falls under the Abrahamic umbrella as much as that might disgust some Abrahamics here.

Edit: I made my post before reading anything other than the thread title so if I'm repeating arguments already made and/or debunked then I apologise.

How can it be said that Satanism doesn't respect nature? Even the most base, simple, non spiritual satanic groups like the CoS and TST are all about nature, our place in the world, and especially rejecting the status of sin assigned by religion to natural things like lust, pride, self worth, and accomplishment. People are getting caught up on the fact that the specific word Satan is Abrahamic, and ignore that that's simply the cultural climate we live in.

Western Culture? The concept of "Satan" was invented in the middle east, and had nothing to do with the Western world. You could say that the fictional character of satan has something in common with Western Culture now since there is a lot of drunkenness, adultery, greed, dishonesty, disloyalty, and gluttony in the west, since those were concepts that were attributed to "Satan" by the original sources who invented him, but that's irrelevant, let alone having anything to do with Paganism.

We someone's never read a book on satanic philosophy or an academic study in their life? Maybe we should leave Tue question to be answered by those who have actually studied the topic.

You can name "The paradigm of western culture" "Sauron" or "Darth Vader" and it would mean just as much. There is no "Satan", "Lucifer", "Samael", or "Set" in European Paganism, and trying to connect them with "Odin" or "Zeus" is just dishonest and frankly, disrespectful.

Lol yes, people believe in Darth Vader as real but not Christianity, cultural similarity is disrespectful, and Greece and Egypt can't be classified as western. Watch out folks, this guy has no idea what he's talking about.

 

[1137]

The Devil is a logical product of Abrahamism. Your desire to push the concept on us is also typical for the Abrahamic mindset.

Kind of funny that such an archetypal entity far predates Abrahamic religion, huh! Seriously, do you people read more than Christian blog posts on the topic?

 

[David T]

The Devil is a logical product of Abrahamism. Your desire to push the concept on us is also typical for the Abrahamic mindset.

You have zero clue to pan

 

[Toten]

We someone's never read a book on satanic philosophy or an academic study in their life? Maybe we should leave Tue question to be answered by those who have actually studied the topic.

Then you follow a philosophy then, not a religion, let alone a Pagan one. If you're a "Satanist", you either believe in "Satan" or you don't. Atheistic Philosophical "LaVeyan" Satanism is no more a Pagan tradition than Theistic Satanism.
Maybe YOU should leave the question to people who actually have an argument or point to offer, and not go about using ad hominems. If I wanted to I could just say "Go and actually read a book on actual Paganism because clearly you've never done so in your life, and let people who actually know something about Paganism discuss it and quit insulting our culture". But instead I had an actual point to offer.

Lol yes, people believe in Darth Vader as real but not Christianity, cultural similarity is disrespectful, and Greece and Egypt can't be classified as western. Watch out folks, this guy has no idea what he's talking about.

You might have a point... except "Satan" didn't come from Greece or Egypt. He came from Israel.
He didn't come from Western Civilization, he came from ancient Middle-Eastern civilization.
Satan's Creators:

The reason I brought the latter part up is because in Paganism, Darth Vader and Christianity are both fiction. And so is Satan. If you say otherwise, it would be nice for you to name some authentic sources or evidence.

 

[1137]

Then you follow a philosophy then, not a religion, let alone a Pagan one. If you're a "Satanist", you either believe in "Satan" or you don't. Atheistic Philosophical "LaVeyan" Satanism is no more a Pagan tradition than Theistic Satanism.
Maybe YOU should leave the question to people who actually have an argument or point to offer, and not go about using ad hominems. If I wanted to I could just say "Go and actually read a book on actual Paganism because clearly you've never done so in your life, and let people who actually know something about Paganism discuss it and quit insulting our culture". But instead I had an actual point to offer.



You might have a point... except "Satan" didn't come from Greece or Egypt. He came from Israel.
He didn't come from Western Civilization, he came from ancient Middle-Eastern civilization.
Satan's Creators:

The reason I brought the latter part up is because in Paganism, Darth Vader and Christianity are both fiction. And so is Satan. If you say otherwise, it would be nice for you to name some authentic sources or evidence.

You're not even apparently aware of cross-culture similarity. You have nothing to contribute here.

 

[Toten]

You're not even apparently aware of cross-culture similarity. You have nothing to contribute here.

More ad-hominems. Still waiting for some points here.

Why don't I add one since you failed to on your turn?

There is no "Satanist" culture. A fictional character originally part of a religious tome in the role of an antagonist. He is not mentioned as a figure in any ancient Pagan sources outside of the Abrahamic world. With different Pagan religions, people can study 2 different cultures and their language and compare them to help determine "It's likely these cultures/religions came from X or Y". Such as the Gauls, whose god of thunder was depicted with a large hammer, and whose name has a similar origin to its norse counterpart, Thor. That is "cross-culture similarity".

So again, let's see some substance. Keep trying, you'll get it eventually.

 

[1137]

More ad-hominems. Still waiting for some points here.

Why don't I add one since you failed to on your turn?

There is no "Satanist" culture. A fictional character originally part of a religious tome in the role of an antagonist. He is not mentioned as a figure in any ancient Pagan sources outside of the Abrahamic world. With different Pagan religions, people can study 2 different cultures and their language and compare them to help determine "It's likely these cultures/religions came from X or Y". Such as the Gauls, whose god of thunder was depicted with a large hammer, and whose name has a similar origin to its norse counterpart, Thor. That is "cross-culture similarity".

So again, let's see some substance. Keep trying, you'll get it eventually.

Seems like you simply reject cross cultural similarities that you don't like.

 

[1137]

Actually for the few actually interested, I stumbled upon "The History of the Devil and the Idea of Evil" by Paul Carus on Kindle for $1. Of course some of the info is outdated, especially farther back like seeing Apep and Set as identical, but it's an awesome study on the evolution of this force and its roles in different cultures.

 

[David T]

The Devil is a logical product of Abrahamism. Your desire to push the concept on us is also typical for the Abrahamic mindset.

How Baptist of you!!! . Let me guess you grew up Catholic, got all dysfunctional and decided to go the anti thingie. Isn't that like dressing like a vampire pretending to be a vampire? I am about as far from abrahamic (in theological terms) as one gets. Actually just hang out in nature play music and laugh. Oh and breath, I breath a lot, seems to help.