Does it make sense to use ''Satan'' for an atheistic religious group?

[Desert Snake]

What is an atheistic religious idea? Isn't that self-contradictory?

Not necessarily. You do have atheistic Buddhists, as mentioned earlier.

 

[leibowde84]

Not necessarily. You do have atheistic Buddhists, as mentioned earlier.

So you are talking about certain atheists who use Satan as a mascot or something? I guess it's kinda funny. Don't see any harm in it.

 

[EtuMalku]

Sure, I get that much. I don't get why they want to be seen as the only legitimate form of Satanism. It just seems kind of petty. It also strikes me as fighting a losing battle. Ask a thousand people what Satanism is and I'd put money on 999 of them saying "devil worship."

It's a tactic that I don't really understand the point of at the end of the day.

I explained why in my comment . . . if they are to believe they are legitimate Satanism then they would be the only correct Satanism and therefore all others are incorrect and thus ostracized. Personally, I don't believe so but apparently they do.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

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?

Since atheism refers to a belief that there is no actual god, it is reasonable to assume that they adopt a symbol that they understand is not a god but nonetheless aspire to in terms of its qualities.

 

[Revoltingest]

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?

It doesn't make any sense.
But who says everything should?
If anyone likes doing so, then more power to'm.

 

[jonathan180iq]

If their push-back is against Western Christianity, then using the known boogey-man of that culture is a decent tactic, I suppose. But as a broader view of reality and a way of life that can be taken seriously, it's a bit dumb.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

I think it's fine for adolescents and teenagers to explore their beliefs and push back in a rebellious or confrontational manner, such as using "Satan" as a symbol of their opposition to the authority of the dominant church/religion of their culture. However, it's a little silly when people don't outgrow it by adulthood.

 

[crossfire]

Religion does not need to include theology or metaphysics in order to be a religion.

 

[crossfire]

Since atheism refers to a belief that there is no actual god, it is reasonable to assume that they adopt a symbol that they understand is not a god but nonetheless aspire to in terms of its qualities.

There are also those who would consider any form of worship to be idolatry.

 

[crossfire]

There are also those who believe that a religion only requires a collective body of beliefs in the form of an egregore to be a genuine religion. (Where two or more are gathered together in my name, I am also there.)

Atheistic Satanism, with its collective body of beliefs, fits this definition.

 

[1137]

In all fairness the CoS wasn't actually atheistic until 1975. The organization was made up of mostly believers, who ended up leaving the church that same year. It's been basically used as an edgy way to get people to buy membership ever since, especially with people like Gilmore. The TST are not actually satanists, they are strictly political activists using the most misunderstood and fear inducing title to make a point about religious equality. So for atheistic Satanism I'd say it comes down to edginess and shock value, and not much else.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

There are also those who would consider any form of worship to be idolatry.

True, but I wouldn't necessarily call something like atheistic satanism worship. Applying a symbol to adapt elements related to it doesn't require worship.

 

[Onyx]

I worship myself as my own God.

 

[MonkeyFire]

They could use him, or not.

 

[Altfish]

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?

Yes.
The idea of these protest groups is that there are no religious 'after school groups' or whatever. So they are looking for a reaction from the cossetted Christians who believe it is their right to have Christian groups but no one else can have their 'religious' group.
The Christians rarely disappoint and usually throw persecution into the mix.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The words atheistic and religious group do not belong in the same sentence. They are dichotomous terms. An atheist has NO belief in any god so religion would be a non sequitor.

Just because your religion has a god doesn't mean that every religion has to have one.

To the OP: it makes sense depending on what your goal is.

If your goal is to scare and troll Christians, being a Satanist works great.

If your goal is to be the poison pill that gets Christian-dominated governments to stop their church-state violations, it's great, too. I definitely appreciate the efficiency of using a colouring book, student club, or statue to accomplish what would've taken years, buckets of money, and lots of lawyers' time to do otherwise.

 

[LuisDantas]

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?

Any concept can be meaningful when given appropriate conception and context.

We use fictional characters all the time. There is no reason to go out of our way to make "God" or "Satan" exceptions.

 

[Luciferi Baphomet]

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?

Like "The Satanic Temple"? Some are Atheists.

 

[LuisDantas]

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.

An atheistic satanist no more has to believe in a literal Satan than, say, someone who finds inspiration and fortitude in the ideals represented in the idea of Shakti or of a Boddhisatva has to believe in their literal existence.

 

[LuisDantas]

The words atheistic and religious group do not belong in the same sentence. They are dichotomous terms. An atheist has NO belief in any god so religion would be a non sequitor.

I quite disagree.

If anything, the reverse is true. Religion does not even benefit from god-belief.