Do you consider Satanism a valid Pagan tradition?

[Onyx]

"Satanism" has become an umbrella word for varied disciplines. It is therefore somewhat of an ill-defined term that requires further clarification.

My personal view is that all "gods" are simply reflections of the Prince of Darkness, which I define as the origin of the consciousness or isolate will.

 

[Cassandra]

I'm pretty sure that I have no idea what is going on in this post at all, because the points aren't well made. I've posted twice, and I still don't like my responses.

I've pretty much come down to the fact that the entire OP is a false cause fallacy, and really doesn't mean anything.

It's also in the wrong forum. Should be in LHP DIR.

This thread was obviously created in the Pagan forum to harvest the opinion of Pagans towards Satanism as a Pagan tradition. Not to judge or define Satanism. I am however interested the ideas of Satanists as well.

 

[1137]

Again that means nothing. There is great similarity between all kinds of worship and a loose reference to some old text does not prove a remarkable relationship between you and the people that wrote that text. Basically all religions have huge similarities. Chimpanzees have 99% similarities with humans, but humans distinguish themselves on the basis of that 1%. That why it really is a fallacy to say, this old text has much in common with Satanism.

Besides I abundantly made clear Pagan traditions are mainstream traditions of peoples living together sharing land, customs, language, traditions and societal social norms. Not just ideas. That is modern take on religion. Someone writes a book and than his followers become a cult/sect. But that is not Pagan traditions. Pagan traditions are not made by leaders, but grow naturally throughout history of a people.

You mean.... like serpent worship? Yeah, I'm aware.

 

[Cassandra]

Most Satanists just see Satan as a symbol, and are actually centered around themselves.

That is interesting observation. As I see it:

1. Abrahamism is about serving a higher Lord
2. Satanism centers around serving oneself
3. Paganism the path of serving each other

1 = Submission, bending to autority
2 = centrism, rejection of autority
3 = universal Respect

Satanists have absolutely no concern of what Christians think on anything, just like they have barely any concern of what we think of them.

The problem here is that by taking on this name Satanists deliberately play into bias created for thousands of years. Christians consider Pagans Satanists, and Satanist in turn comply with many of the things Christians consider evil. So for Christians Satanists become the living proof of the Pagan evil. And this is not done coincidentally. Satanists like to provoke. But then again Satanist serve themselves.

For me as a Pagan Abrahamism is as dark as Satanism, more like two sides of the same coin. One invokes they other. But I dislike being associated with any of them. Pagan traditions are about seeking harmony not about seeking controversy, division, conflict, opposition, etc.

Neopaganism is a corruption of old beliefs on a technical basis, and really is an injected with nebulous concepts from Eastern traditions rather than having any lineage to any sort of religions in the past. Some pagans (reconstructive) do actually only practice what they've been able to dig up, but those guys are pretty rare.

Neopagan groups are diverse, but their ideas are not a "corruption". This word alone betrays a puritan mindset alien to most Pagans. Paganism never was an ideology in the first place. Neopagans simply want to revive some of that feeling of coherence as people of the same roots. It is a mindset, not ideas. There are many ways to do that. As Nature based religions have a lot in common it is only logical to learn from traditions that are unbroken. The danger is more to attach too much to ideas based on reconstructions. For instance for years scientists were wondering what the meaning was of Stone Henge, creating all kind of theories about Sun worship, Then they found Wood Henge and became even more puzzled. But a tribal person from Africa immediately understood the meaning of the both. You have to live in Nature to understand Nature religion, not theorize about it with a 21th century mind. Yes we can revive Pagan traditions by changing our life styles. No it will not be a copy. Pagan traditions were naturally evolving, that is how it should be. It should fit the natural connection in the here and now, but with all the knowledge we have acquired through science as well. Natural science is a logical part of Natural religion. Otherwise we become museum pieces in a costume drama, reenacting a period in time.

Satanists don't merely "reject" Christian dogma, an anti-dogma would create a new dogma based on another one. More, they make their own way and have full reign to explore and test these ideas themselves. At its core, it is pure spiritual/intellectual freedom -- there is no tradition that is worth keeping to a Satanist unless they just purely enjoy it.

I think Satanism is really a logical outcome of modern individualism.

 

[1137]

That is interesting observation. As I see it:

1. Abrahamism is about serving a higher Lord
2. Satanism centers around serving oneself
3. Paganism the path of serving each other

I wouldn't say Abrahamic religions are about service, but submission. Satanism is often misunderstood as selfish in nature, but in actuality it respects the Self, as in the form of self hood, as in individual existence itself. It's why you cannot impose on anothers will, because they are also a free individual. I actually went into social work because of satanic philosophy, because I realized the individual abilities of others including the ability to willfully better themselves and the world around them.

The problem here is that by taking on this name Satanists deliberately play into bias created for thousands of years. Christians consider Pagans Satanists, and Satanist in turn comply with many of the things Christians consider evil. So for Christians Satanists become the living proof of the Pagan evil. And this is not done coincidentally. Satanists like to provoke. But then again Satanist serve themselves.

Satanic philosophy goes far beyond Christianity, and in fact it's academically considered a "milieu" rather than any specific path. Further, provoking is not necessarily self serving. If you remove a child from a neglectful or abusive caregiver, you provoke them in numerous different way, hopefully in a way that leads to change. Provocation is the antidote to stagnation, which Satanism absolutely does shun.

For me as a Pagan Abrahamism is as dark as Satanism, more like two sides of the same coin. One invokes they other. But I dislike being associated with any of them. Pagan traditions are about seeking harmony not about seeking controversy, division, conflict, opposition, etc.

How do you expect to achieve harmony, or even recognize a lack of it, without Amy condition of conflict? If there is no division then what's the need for harmony in the first place? Without opposition how can there be growth?

Neopagan groups are diverse, but their ideas are not a "corruption". This word alone betrays a puritan mindset alien to most Pagans. Paganism never was an ideology in the first place. Neopagans simply want to revive some of that feeling of coherence as people of the same roots. It is a mindset, not ideas. There are many ways to do that. As Nature based religions have a lot in common it is only logical to learn from traditions that are unbroken. The danger is more to attach too much to ideas based on reconstructions. For instance for years scientists were wondering what the meaning was of Stone Henge, creating all kind of theories about Sun worship, Then they found Wood Henge and became even more puzzled. But a tribal person from Africa immediately understood the meaning of the both. You have to live in Nature to understand Nature religion, not theorize about it with a 21th century mind. Yes we can revive Pagan traditions by changing our life styles. No it will not be a copy. Pagan traditions were naturally evolving, that is how it should be. It should fit the natural connection in the here and now, but with all the knowledge we have acquired through science as well. Natural science is a logical part of Natural religion. Otherwise we become museum pieces in a costume drama, reenacting a period in time.

All of this can be applied to Satanism.

I think Satanism is really a logical outcome of modern individualism.

Individualism yes, but there's nothing modern about it. Like I said, you should read the pyramid texts.

 

[Serpent Child]

It depends what sect of Satanism you're speaking about, since Satanism is extremely diverse. True Ancient Satanism is based upon ancient religions such as Ancient Hinduism and Ancient Buddhism, there are also Ancient Satanic Scriptures along with the religion so yes I would say its a valid Pagan tradition.

 

[Toten]

As far as I can tell, Satanism is no more a "Pagan" religion/tradition than it is a Christian one.

Satanism/Satan in the bible was supposed to be anti-everything christian. Drunkenness, Adultery, Thievery, Temptation, Corruption, etc. all of which were attributed to the Devil by Abrahamic peoples, who were his creators in the first place. Lucifer may represent rebellion or liberation to some people, but in the world of Paganism he is but a fictional character, except for people who practice/believe in aspects of all different kinds of religions and cultures and use that as a way to identify themselves as "pagan".

From a European perspective, what Satan represents in Abrahamic religion is as anti-European as it is anti-Christian. Greed, Corruption, Dishonesty, Deceit, etc. were all considered immoral and degenerate in most European cultures and many of its deities long before Christianity existed in Europe. That plus the fact that he is a foreign concept to European Pagan religions is why I see no reason for actual Pagans to attribute "Satan" to anything, except to try to appear as unique. "Paganism is anti-christian, but I'm a Pagan Satanist, so I'm really REALLY anti-christian". It's pointless.

 

[Quintessence]

*** thread moved to Religious Debates ***​

 

[1137]

As far as I can tell, Satanism is no more a "Pagan" religion/tradition than it is a Christian one.

Satanism/Satan in the bible was supposed to be anti-everything christian. Drunkenness, Adultery, Thievery, Temptation, Corruption, etc. all of which were attributed to the Devil by Abrahamic peoples, who were his creators in the first place. Lucifer may represent rebellion or liberation to some people, but in the world of Paganism he is but a fictional character, except for people who practice/believe in aspects of all different kinds of religions and cultures and use that as a way to identify themselves as "pagan".

From a European perspective, what Satan represents in Abrahamic religion is as anti-European as it is anti-Christian. Greed, Corruption, Dishonesty, Deceit, etc. were all considered immoral and degenerate in most European cultures and many of its deities long before Christianity existed in Europe. That plus the fact that he is a foreign concept to European Pagan religions is why I see no reason for actual Pagans to attribute "Satan" to anything, except to try to appear as unique. "Paganism is anti-christian, but I'm a Pagan Satanist, so I'm really REALLY anti-christian". It's pointless.

Sure this all makes sense, if we pretend Christian created Satan out of absolutely nothing but their own mythology.

 

[Politesse]

Sure. There's certainly a lot of shared history and shared practices between them, and by my lights anyone interested in bringing magic back into Western culture is a friend of mine. I realize there is also a lot of "bad blood" there, but that's public religion for you, always fighting the exterior instead of honoring the interior!

I do get the argument made by some above about antiquity, but I don't think most practiced elements of Paganism are really all that old either. Themes and traditions, sure. But they too have had to adapt to the modern world, and make "reconstructions" of practices for which all possible sources have been lost or changed through oral tradition. In any case, is not the counter-religious movement to Christianity by now an old theme in its own right, even if (implausibly if you ask me) it were no older than 32 BC?

 

[Toten]

Sure this all makes sense, if we pretend Christian created Satan out of absolutely nothing but their own mythology.

They didn't - ancient Jews and other early abrahamics did. Christianity didn't exist then.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

No, I do not classify Satanism as a Pagan religion, and this is my biggest issue with how some use (Contemporary) Paganism; when it can be applied to every non-Judeo-Christian religion, it becomes synonymous with non-Christian/Jew/Muslim, and becomes useless.

Satan is a figure from Hebrew culture, and in turn a figure in Jewish, Christian, and Muslim religions. It would be more accurate to say that Satanism is an Abrahamic tradition, even though they oppose the god of Abraham.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

No, I do not classify Satanism as a Pagan religion, and this is my biggest issue with how some use (Contemporary) Paganism; when it can be applied to every non-Judeo-Christian religion, it becomes synonymous with non-Christian/Jew/Muslim, and becomes useless.

Satan is a figure from Hebrew culture, and in turn a figure in Jewish, Christian, and Muslim religions. It would be more accurate to say that Satanism is an Abrahamic tradition, even though they oppose the god of Abraham.

That really depends on the Satanist. Some do not believe the being they're talking about is limited to the Abrahamic convention and includes titles of both pre and post Abrahamic deities. But they take the Hebrew term for it. A Satanist who believes Satan is also Set or Marduk or Enki might very well have many pagan rituals and beliefs but still identify under Satanism should nevertheless by common usage and theological usage be considered a pagan.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

Well, my issue remains; I've never met many Kemeticists, or polytheists who worship deities of the Fertile Crescent, who self-identify as Pagan, or belonging to a Pagan (Contemporary) religion. Having known a Satanist who believed Odin to also be Satan, I do not find their worship to be compatible with Heathenry (Paganism relative to Northern Europe), but rather just an application of all "knowledge-giving" deities as Satan.

Which, this isn't to demean or criticize Satanism, they are their own culture and tradition.

 

[1137]

No, I do not classify Satanism as a Pagan religion, and this is my biggest issue with how some use (Contemporary) Paganism; when it can be applied to every non-Judeo-Christian religion, it becomes synonymous with non-Christian/Jew/Muslim, and becomes useless.

Satan is a figure from Hebrew culture, and in turn a figure in Jewish, Christian, and Muslim religions. It would be more accurate to say that Satanism is an Abrahamic tradition, even though they oppose the god of Abraham.

Satan is a name from the current, ruling paradigm of western culture. Most satanists, if not all, realize that Satan is a perversion of many ancient gods and beings, even one's who were in no way "satanic". The church demonized a lot, including the very meaning of the word Satan itself! This makes the word Satan more effective than names like Set, Prometheus, even Lucifer.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

How is it's the ruling paradigm?

And while I can agree that the church demonized and altered a lot, I still don't view Satanism as Paganism, I view it as Satanism.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

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?

Frankly, I think that the modern-day Pagan religions that are continuations of actual Pagan traditions of actual peoples are few and far between. Yeah, Satanism isn't a continuation of some ages-old religious tradition, but the same could be said for most Pagan religions that try to pass themselves off as continuations of ages-old religious traditions.

 

[Cassandra]

"Satanism" has become an umbrella word for varied disciplines. It is therefore somewhat of an ill-defined term that requires further clarification.

My personal view is that all "gods" are simply reflections of the Prince of Darkness, which I define as the origin of the consciousness or isolate will.

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

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

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

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.

 

[Cassandra]

It depends what sect of Satanism you're speaking about, since Satanism is extremely diverse. True Ancient Satanism is based upon ancient religions such as Ancient Hinduism and Ancient Buddhism, there are also Ancient Satanic Scriptures along with the religion so yes I would say its a valid Pagan tradition.

With prominent leaders like Aleister Crowley and Anton Lavey, "true ancient Satanism" does not really impress me.

Again these faint claims. What in ancient Buddhism and Hinduism makes Satanism based on ancient religions? Show some real facts for a change. Especially Abrahamic religion thrives on personal interpretation of selective shopping in old texts. It is the most practiced form of self-deceit.