Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Does it actually make sense for an atheistic religious group to use what they consider an ''archetype'' /fictional character, as part of their atheistic religious ideas? Why?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Does it make sense to use ''Satan'' for an atheistic religious group?
- Thread starter Desert Snake
- Start date
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
That is an argument, imo, considering that the 'being', or character being referenced, is not a 'fictional' character, textually or traditionally. Hence, does the character maintain the meaning/s/ being ascribed to it, if the inference, is that it is fictional.
Jedster
Flying through space
Satan can mean adversary/prosecutor(in Hebrew)... so why not?
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
That could be part of the reasoning. I'm not familiar with the 'usual' inference to the Satan figure, that you are referring to, however, so my opinion may be slightly skewed regarding this, /religiously/.
To me I don't understand atheism outside of atheistic-materialism. An atheist believer in Satan has some explaining to do before I would say it makes sense.
Rick O'Shez
Irishman bouncing off walls
It does look somewhat confused.
Well...it doesnt make a lot of sense to me personally, but then again communion falls into that bucket too.
From the church of Satan website...
Sort of. "Satan" is the personification of the natural desires of man that has been crushed under religious-authoritarian morality and inhibitions. Le Vey believed in the need for ritual and mysticism so projecting the "true" nature of man onto a Satan figure makes a certain amount of sense.
Atheism/Materialism can "blur" with religion. it's highly debatable but if you think that religion is a reflection of an aspect of universal human psychology, some aspects of "religious" ideas would continue even without a belief in god. This is unique t "strong-atheists" because the conscious rejection of belief in god leaves a "void" which needs to be filled with new ideas. Atheists may therefore create rituals by which to organise social life and as a celebration of man. In Marxist ideology this is known as "God-Building" and was officially considered a "deviation" from Marxist orthodoxy. In 1920's Russia there were attempts "Red Baptisms" where babies were "Octobered" as well as "Red Marriages" to replace Religious Rituals. There wasn't however much attempt at Funeral rituals though beyond Public processions for important figures. The current Ideology of North Korea known as "Juche" may debatably have revived some of these ideas in near deifying Kim il Sung, whilst still being a nominally atheist-materialist worldview, but it's a tricky one to classify. Cult like behaviour was still common amongst the communist-atheist types, particularly leader worship (e.g. Mao's "little red book"), so they behaved like religious fanatics even though they weren't discernibly "religious" in any recognisable sense.
Atheism/Materialism can "blur" with religion. it's highly debatable but if you think that religion is a reflection of an aspect of universal human psychology, some aspects of "religious" ideas would continue even without a belief in god. This is unique t "strong-atheists" because the conscious rejection of belief in god leaves a "void" which needs to be filled with new ideas. Atheists may therefore create rituals by which to organise social life and as a celebration of man. In Marxist ideology this is known as "God-Building" and was officially considered a "deviation" from Marxist orthodoxy. In 1920's Russia there were attempts "Red Baptisms" where babies were "Octobered" as well as "Red Marriages" to replace Religious Rituals. There wasn't however much attempt at Funeral rituals though beyond Public processions for important figures. The current Ideology of North Korea known as "Juche" may debatably have revived some of these ideas in near deifying Kim il Sung, whilst still being a nominally atheist-materialist worldview, but it's a tricky one to classify. Cult like behaviour was still common amongst the communist-atheist types, particularly leader worship (e.g. Mao's "little red book"), so they behaved like religious fanatics even though they weren't discernibly "religious" in any recognisable sense.
Speaking as a theistic Satanist... No it has never personally made any sense to me past my teenage angst atheism phase.
Generally, it's just confusing as hell to everyone who is not them... lol
Christians = Follow Christ
Buddhists = Follow Buddha
Satanists = Atheists that use Satan like a puppet? Ok, confusing -- but they could have just as well picked the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
etc...
Since Satanists are generally not religious I prefer to call them LaVeyists which more accurately describes what they are. To me Satanists have something to do with Satan either in a religious sense or at least as some sort of "big spirit" that they admire and seek to be involved with. Of course, 99% of the cool kids will disagree with my opinion.
Generally, it's just confusing as hell to everyone who is not them... lol
Christians = Follow Christ
Buddhists = Follow Buddha
Satanists = Atheists that use Satan like a puppet? Ok, confusing -- but they could have just as well picked the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
etc...
Since Satanists are generally not religious I prefer to call them LaVeyists which more accurately describes what they are. To me Satanists have something to do with Satan either in a religious sense or at least as some sort of "big spirit" that they admire and seek to be involved with. Of course, 99% of the cool kids will disagree with my opinion.
Rick O'Shez
Irishman bouncing off walls
I sort of get that, but it seems odd to use a figure with such strong theistic associations. Oh well, stranger things have happened I suppose.
Satan isn't deified in Christian theology, so why wouldn't it make sense for atheists to utilize the concept? They can do the same things the Christians do - acknowledge it as a thing, without deifying it.
Granted, when it gets down to practice, how both groups regard Satan ends up being analogous to how someone who deifies it would look, but that just speaks to the uselessness of the labels "theist" and "atheist" along with the nebulous nature of the term "god."
Granted, when it gets down to practice, how both groups regard Satan ends up being analogous to how someone who deifies it would look, but that just speaks to the uselessness of the labels "theist" and "atheist" along with the nebulous nature of the term "god."
Altfish
Veteran Member
Risking the wrath of all Satanists and Pastafarians, as I understand it these are similar non-belief systems. People who support The Flying Spaghetti Monster and The Satanic Temple are just using them as a way of showing how crazy some (all?) religions are.
By declaring themselves as a religion they can also demand equal rights as that given to the 'approved' religions.
By declaring themselves as a religion they can also demand equal rights as that given to the 'approved' religions.
McBell
Unbound
Yes.
Especially when said group do not believe that a being named Satan actually exists but rather adopt a philosophy based upon said fictional character.
EtuMalku
Abn Iblis ابن إبليس
You're asking two different questions here . . . Post Title:
Does it make sense to use ''Satan'' for an atheistic religious group?
What exactly is the question?
As an ordained Pastafarian of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster (Pasta be Upon Him,) I would have to say that it makes perfect sense! (Your mileage may vary.)
I understand. This form of 'Satan' belief from my way of looking at things still falls under the over-arching materialist umbrella.