Hate isn't the way of the Satanist

[oldbadger]

Since you mentioned you might wanna look more into the LHP, it might help you to know, there are basically two (if not more) quite different currents that have "chaos" in their name. In one context (namely in the aforementioned chaos magicians) it can mean a chaotic approach in so far as they use elements from any mythology or fictional universe they can think of. In other contexts (mainly when refering to gnostic LHPers), "chaos" rather refers to the opposite to or origin of the existing cosmos.

OK......... everything about my perception of Deism is both tangible and intangible chaos in action. I'm no scientist but understand that quantum theory is quite chaotic! So is the chance of the next meteor or asteroid strike here, in fact the very chance that I would meet with my wife and that I would suit her is all down to fate = chaos.

I wouldn't have that much of an issue with it being called a philosophy instead; depends on the definition of religion whether it fits or not.

There might be several better words which could fit perfectly...........

But there are also quite established religions without deities, and even if atheistic Satanists don't believe in any deities, they might nevertheless be engaged in their "religion" to such an amount that simply calling it a philosophy doesn't really cut it. I mean, I'm agnostic regarding the existence of personal deities, but in actual practice I still treat Satan as if it exists not just as an impersonal something but a being because that makes it much easier to relate to, and I enjoy engaging in devotional activities like e.g. praying. And in that I don't necessarily differ from purely atheist Satanists. Not calling that religious therefore seems a bit strange to me.

Yes! Only recently I have learned that some Hindu followings are atheist, even though they recognise Brahman etc........ One of the Hindus on the Great Beings thread is just such a Hindu.

Maybe we can settle on calling it a form of spirituality? Or does that open up another can of worms?

That's fine, imo........ if you believe in Spirits (good or bad ones), Mediums, Clarevoyants, Healing then the word makes perfect sense, but imo folks who deny such beings whilst banging on about their spirituality and such are deluded. If ask them to define 'spirit' they have trouble, I find.

Well, I'd call it pantheism, but seems like we share some beliefs then.

For me Theistic Gods are aware of and/or care about humans, which (in this huge Universe) I find difficult to believe.
For me a Deist God is everything and every force and no-thing and no- force but who is as indifferent to humans as you might be to a single hair on your right forefinger.

Sure, at that time those laws certainly made sense one way or another. Doesn't make them that useful nowadays, though.

Many are outdated and not needed, but many are still brilliant. I absolutely love the poor laws.... about 24 of them, and some are still used today in different countries. Example: You cannot seize a person's trade tools in lieu of a debt, etc etc.....

 

[Liu]

That's fine, imo........ if you believe in Spirits (good or bad ones), Mediums, Clarevoyants, Healing then the word makes perfect sense, but imo folks who deny such beings whilst banging on about their spirituality and such are deluded. If ask them to define 'spirit' they have trouble, I find.

I don't actively believe in any such. I consider it possible, and I have heard/read quite some convincing experiences of other people, but having had no really convincing experiences with any such I consider myself an agnostic.
And that's why I guessed that bringing in the term spirituality might not make it easier... I'm spiritual in so far as that I experiment with approaching reality as if deities etc. exist, but I have a hard time simply believing. Having been raised by areligious humanists doesn't make it easier, I already went a long way by just being an agnostic instead of an outright dogmatic disbeliever in these matters.

For me Theistic Gods are aware of and/or care about humans, which (in this huge Universe) I find difficult to believe.
For me a Deist God is everything and every force and no-thing and no- force but who is as indifferent to humans as you might be to a single hair on your right forefinger.

That's a valid argument.
The issue I have with the term deism however is that it has two different meanings - one is basically the same as pantheism, but the other is the belief in a personal, self-aware deity that created the universe and afterwards just let it alone.

Many are outdated and not needed, but many are still brilliant. I absolutely love the poor laws.... about 24 of them, and some are still used today in different countries. Example: You cannot seize a person's trade tools in lieu of a debt, etc etc.....

It's rare to find someone into the LHP actively defending biblical laws

 

[oldbadger]

I don't actively believe in any such. I consider it possible, and I have heard/read quite some convincing experiences of other people, but having had no really convincing experiences with any such I consider myself an agnostic.
And that's why I guessed that bringing in the term spirituality might not make it easier... I'm spiritual in so far as that I experiment with approaching reality as if deities etc. exist, but I have a hard time simply believing. Having been raised by areligious humanists doesn't make it easier, I already went a long way by just being an agnostic instead of an outright dogmatic disbeliever in these matters.

I'm open minded about spiritualism, and a couple of amazing experiences hold my interest..... deeply.

That's a valid argument.
The issue I have with the term deism however is that it has two different meanings - one is basically the same as pantheism, but the other is the belief in a personal, self-aware deity that created the universe and afterwards just let it alone.

I don't think any Deism is the same as PanTheism. There is, of course, PanDeism.
Deism = All is God but detached from interest in us.
Theism = All is God which is interested in us.

It's rare to find someone into the LHP actively defending biblical laws

I'm into learning about LHP, but would withold any opinion about LHP until I've discovered more....

 

[Liu]

I don't think any Deism is the same as PanTheism. There is, of course, PanDeism.
Deism = All is God but detached from interest in us.
Theism = All is God which is interested in us.

I don't consider this "interested in us or not"-dichotomy to be of much value to my beliefs. I can't tell for sure anyway. The term deism rather gives me the impression of a god that is completely detached from existence, and therefore quite the opposite of what I believe in.
Wikipedia states "pandeism" "holds that the creator deity became the universe (pantheism) and ceased to exist as a separate and conscious entity". Not that Wikipedia would be completely reliable, but that is even further from my (and, as I would assume, also your) beliefs.
But I agree that the term theism doesn't really hit the mark either.
I guess I did the right thing when I recently edited the field "Religion" in my profile here, as the term "pandiabolism" seems like a more accurate description to me, although it must be even quite more confusing.

I'm into learning about LHP, but would withold any opinion about LHP until I've discovered more....

That's fine by me - yeah, should have written "interested in" instead of "into", I guess. But in the case of something like the LHP one can't really be interested in learning more about it without not being into it a little bit at least.

 

[oldbadger]

I don't consider this "interested in us or not"-dichotomy to be of much value to my beliefs. I can't tell for sure anyway. The term deism rather gives me the impression of a god that is completely detached from existence, and therefore quite the opposite of what I believe in.
Wikipedia states "pandeism" "holds that the creator deity became the universe (pantheism) and ceased to exist as a separate and conscious entity". Not that Wikipedia would be completely reliable, but that is even further from my (and, as I would assume, also your) beliefs.
But I agree that the term theism doesn't really hit the mark either.
I guess I did the right thing when I recently edited the field "Religion" in my profile here, as the term "pandiabolism" seems like a more accurate description to me, although it must be even quite more confusing.

Pandiabolism is understandable (to me) and in Yin-Yan philosophy the title could possibly connect your belief with mine.
No Probs.

That's fine by me - yeah, should have written "interested in" instead of "into", I guess. But in the case of something like the LHP one can't really be interested in learning more about it without not being into it a little bit at least.

I can feel connected to much that I have read on this thread, yes, because everything and action has yin&yan within it.
A huge Star much bigger than ours can produce the heavier atoms like carbon, and that Star with all it's planets must be horrifically blown asunder for its carbon to be released to be gathered to a system like ours..... for you and I to exist. Ask a creature on one of the planets about to be obliterated whether this ioncident is good or bad, then ask us the same question = Yin & Yan.
No incident is all good or all bad (to me) and personally I turn away from any concept of a God committed to mankind......... or for that matter a Lucifer separated from God. Both seem to be the same to me........ this perception is horrible to me, but must be faced. A bacteria killing thousands is not evil, it's just a lifeform that wants to do what it does, survive and make 'babies'. I just hope I can remember this if I come unstuck with sepsis!