Is "Devil Worship" another Abrahamic faith?

[Trey of Diamonds]

Can you show where they've seriously addressed the copious relevant Judeo-Christian and Gnostic material?

Nope, I only know of their existance second hand so I can't even say that said groups exist now or have ever.

On the other hand, you were of course correct. Any sweeping statement like the one made in my earlier post is necessarily flawed, and I stand corrected. Thank you.

Thanks, I have a thing about sweeping statements as you probably noticed. Generalizations bring out the worst in us.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

A stylized rejection of "Abrahamic" principles and teachings would seem to clearly indicate that "devil" worship is not a member of that category of religions.

 

[Draka]

A stylized rejection of "Abrahamic" principles and teachings would seem to clearly indicate that "devil" worship is not a member of that category of religions.

Rejection of the source of certain principles and teachings and acceptance of the opposition to that source, within the same pantheon, places "Devil worship" firmly within the same base religion. Also, I'd have to wonder which principles and teachings you'd qualify as Abrahamic since each of the Abrahamic religions have different principles and teachings among them...else there wouldn't be more than one Abrahamic religion in the first place.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Rejection of the source of certain principles and teachings and acceptance of the opposition to that source, within the same pantheon, places "Devil worship" firmly within the same base religion.

So opposing a religious text makes one a member of that religion? Got it.

 

[fallingblood]

Christian have been doing just that for centuries. Accusing the pagans of consorting with the devil, it's nothing new. And by pinning Satanism on pagans what you're doing is making them guilty by association

How does that have anything to do with me? I certainly have never made such a claim, and I'm not even trying to demonize anyone. I don't even believe Satan exists (at least not the Christian idea of Satan). I'm not even saying Satan is bad. Hell, I like the idea of Satan that I see in many Satanic ideas. I myself was a practicing Satanism for awhile, because I like the Satan of Satanism (or some forms of Satanism).

I'm not even using Pagan as a derogatory term or anything like that. I'm simply using it in the way scholars have used it, in a neutral way. Me saying that Satanism is not an Abrahamic faith (I don't think I ever called it a Pagan faith) is not trying to demonize or make anyone guilty. It is simply me using the definitions of words to make a point.

Satanism does not fit under the definition of Abrahamic faiths. Devil worship does not fit under the definition of Abrahamic faiths. It does not worship God, and it does not see Abraham as it's spiritual father. Thus, it is not an Abrahamic faith.

Again though, are you not trying to demonize Abrahamic faiths by associating Devil worship with them? I mean, if you accuse me of something similar, should it not also apply to you? Or is it just mudslinging?

 

[fallingblood]

Of course it does. And there is a difference in being opposed to a religion and opposed to a God. One sets you outside that religion and the other within.

So if I am opposed to all the Hindu deities, I'm still a Hindu? If I'm opposed to God, I'm still in the Abrahamic faiths? If I'm opposed to the Greek or Roman gods, I'm part of those religions? It simply makes no sense.

 

[Draka]

So opposing a religious text makes one a member of that religion? Got it.

No, following an entity within a religious pantheon makes one a member of said base religion regardless of where said entity is on the spectrum.

This is actually fairly simple.

In the Abrahamic pantheon, Yahweh is the "lead" deity which oversees the rules and so on, while the Devil is the entity/deity which is in direct opposition to Yahweh. They are both within the same pantheon, the Abrahamic one, so worship of either is an Abrahamic faith.

Just like:

In the Greek Hellenistic pantheon, Zeus is the "lead" deity which oversees the rules and so on, while Hades is the deity in direct opposition to Zeus. They are both within the same pantheon, the Greek Hellenistic one, so worship of either is a Greek Hellenistic faith.

Same exact thing. One doesn't say that worshiping Hades is something other than within the Hellenistic faith. So why would worshiping the Devil be anything other than within the Abrahamic faith?

 

[Draka]

So if I am opposed to all the Hindu deities, I'm still a Hindu? If I'm opposed to God, I'm still in the Abrahamic faiths? If I'm opposed to the Greek or Roman gods, I'm part of those religions? It simply makes no sense.

Are you part of a pantheon? I thought not. :sarcastic

 

[Levite]

There are people who actually worship the Abrahamic biblical entity known as "Satan" or "The Devil". Now, would not those people fall under the heading of Abrahamic and their faith/religion also be considered an Abrahamic religion just like Christianity and Islam and Judaism?

Mind you, I'm not talking about what is known today as Neo-Satanism or the like. I'm talking strictly about actual worship and following of the theistic entity "Satan" or "The Devil".

I've seen people try to say that worshiping Satan is Paganism, but Paganism includes religions and pantheons not of the Abrahamic pantheon. Since Satan belong to the Abrahamic pantheon and mythology...then shouldn't worship of said entity be claimed as Abrahamic, and NOT Pagan?

As far as I can tell, "Satanism" or "Devil Worship" appears to be a synthetic and quasi-paganistic response to Christianity.

So I suppose it could in some way be deemed an offshoot of Christianity.

But it can't be defined, I think, as "Abrahamic," since it is deeply unlikely that Abraham had any concept of "Satan" or "The Devil." Judaism is the root-religion of the Abrahamic faiths, and such theology is absent from it: Jews do not believe in "the Devil," and our concept of "the satan" is radically different from that of Christianity, since we do not believe in fallen angels, or Hell, or the existence of any power "rebellious" to God that is in control of, or which is the personification of, evil.

 

[fallingblood]

You really are trying to be in denial here aren't you? A biblical entity purported to be in direct opposition to another biblical entity and the worship of only one of them is claimed? Why? Because one is considered to be so bad you don't want anything to do with them and so try to pass them off as something else entirely?

Denial about what? Since I don't agree with you, I must be in denial? How does that make sense?

I don't consider Satan bad. I don't even think he exists. On the other hand, I like how Satanists have described Satan. I don't think it is bad.

I'm not trying to pass Devil worship off on anyone. I'm simply trying to use the definitions of Abrahamic faith in order to make a point. Devil worship does not fit under that definition, thus it is not an Abrahamic faith. It is as simple as that.

Again, I have no beef with Satan. I think if he would exist, he is simply an angel that got a bad rap. That's all.

How so? You have a mythology, a pantheon if you will, that covers all kinds of entities and characters and you pick out ONE and say that following that one doesn't qualify to be in your faith bubble?

In Abrahamic faiths, you don't have a pantheon. You have a monotheistic idea. You have one god. Not many. That is where the difference is. You're trying to compare a polytheistic religion with a monotheistic religion, which simply is not possible in this circumstance. They are truly apples and oranges.

And individuals in the Abrahamic faith really aren't picking just one god out of a lineup or the such. They only believe there is one god, God. If you worship something else, another entity, then you are outside the Abrahamic faith.

It is NOT apples and oranges. It is the same darn thing. Two entities within the SAME pantheon and at different ends of the spectrum. Worship of either one is considered to be within the same base religion.

Nope, apples and oranges. You are comparing a monotheistic religion, with a polytheistic religion, and then trying to say that the same circumstances are valid. That simply doesn't work. In Greek religion, you can worship many different gods, and that's fine. Those are all gods of that religion. That religion has many gods.

In an Abrahamic faith, you have one god, and that is God. You worship another god, and you are moving from that faith. You worship Satan, and not God, then you are out of that faith. Abrahamic faiths are defined by them worshipping the god of Abraham, and that is God. You take that away, and it isn't an Abrahamic faith. It is a faith that may borrow from an Abrahamic faith, but that does not mean it is an Abrahamic faith.

We can use another example. Judaism borrowed from Zoroastrianism. That does not make Judaism a Zoroastrianism faith though. It simply means they borrowed an idea. The same with Christianity. Christianity borrowed ideas from various Pagan religions. That doesn't make Christianity a Pagan religion. It makes Christianity a religion that borrowed from Pagan religions. There is a difference.

We are not talking about incorporating something from one pantheon into another though are we? We are talking about two entities in the SAME pantheon.

Abrahamic faiths do not have a pantheon though. They have one god. Only one god. They are monotheistic, thus no pantheon.

What we are talking about is someone rejecting God, and worshipping the Devil instead. So they aren't worshipping the God of Abraham, but an entity that grew out of the Abrahamic faith. This entity is never said to be a god, but an angel. This would not form a pantheon.

So basically, one is taking the Abrahamic faith, and taking an idea out of it; borrowing that idea, and making a new form of worship. However, it is not an Abrahamic faith, as it does not see Abraham as it's spiritual father, and does not worship the god of Abraham. It simply borrows an idea.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

In a way... It sparks my interest though.

I don't think it fits up to the characteristics of what it means to be Abrahamic, but it believes in the God of Abraham (unless you believe in the devil but not God). So it's like believing Abrahamicism is true but against it.

 

[fallingblood]

No, following an entity within a religious pantheon makes one a member of said base religion regardless of where said entity is on the spectrum.

So Hindus who follow Jesus, and see him as an avatar of Vishnu, are not Hindus, but Christians? Okay.

This is actually fairly simple.

No, it is flawed.

In the Abrahamic pantheon, Yahweh is the "lead" deity which oversees the rules and so on, while the Devil is the entity/deity which is in direct opposition to Yahweh. They are both within the same pantheon, the Abrahamic one, so worship of either is an Abrahamic faith.

There is no lead deity. There is only one deity. There is no pantheon. There is a monotheistic religion with one god. They are not in the same pantheon, as no pantheon exists.

More so, that is not the definition of an Abrahamic religion. An Abrahamic religion worships God, the god of Abraham (that is quite important here), and sees Abraham as the spiritual father of the movement. Satanism does neither.

Just like:

In the Greek Hellenistic pantheon, Zeus is the "lead" deity which oversees the rules and so on, while Hades is the deity in direct opposition to Zeus. They are both within the same pantheon, the Greek Hellenistic one, so worship of either is a Greek Hellenistic faith.

Same exact thing. One doesn't say that worshiping Hades is something other than within the Hellenistic faith. So why would worshiping the Devil be anything other than within the Abrahamic faith?

No, not just like. You are comparing apples and oranges. In Greek religion was a polytheistic religion. There were many gods you could choose from. All of those gods were apart of that religion. Worshipping those gods were all a part of that religion.

In an Abrahamic religion, which are monotheistic by definition, there is only one God. Just one God. And that God is the god of Abraham. You don't have a choice to worship another god, as there are no other ones. There is no pantheon. Thus, when you start worshipping another god, and reject God, you are no longer part of an Abrahamic faith. You may be part of an offshoot, that borrowed an idea, but not part of that religion.



This shouldn't be so difficult. The definition of an Abrahamic faith clearly shows that Satanism, Devil worship, can not be an Abrahamic faith.

 

[blackout]

Satan and Yahwey are part of the same Pantheon.

Of course the actual role of Satan, and also Yahwey, differ from group to group.
The role of the Jewish Satan is quite different from the role of the Christian Satan.
Obviously this would also be true for a theistic Satanist. (who also believes in Yahwey)

I have a feeling there aren't actually too many of those though.
Just a hunch.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Would you mind providing me a link to the group or groups and, perhaps, the relevant scripture? Could you suggest where they might be discussed in university courses on comparative religion? Can you suggest where I might find peer reviewed scholarship discussing their theology? Can you show where they've seriously addressed the copious relevant Judeo-Christian and Gnostic material?

Nope, I only know of their existance second hand so I can't even say that said groups exist now or have ever.

So I think it fair to take your "Nope" as the response to all four of my questions, and I think it an appropriate response. I continue to believe that some of these "religions" are little more than caricatures and really debase the term.

Thanks, I have a thing about sweeping statements as you probably noticed. Generalizations bring out the worst in us.

As do I. Obviously I should do a better job modeling what I preach.

 

[Draka]

Okay, let me try to break this down.

The characters and entities contained within the bible, and therefore the Abrahamic system of belief, follow the exact same mythological archetypes as every other pantheon. There's just different names for them. You can claim up and down that it makes a difference that it is considered monotheistic, but it really doesn't. In polytheistic faiths you normally have one or two major/great deities, minor deities, demigods, and even deified humans. Those things are present in the Abrahamic faiths as well, just under different guises. Angels easily follow the archetypes of minor gods, as well as saints being deified humans and so on. Shoot, you even have a direct correspondence between Jesus and the many other demigods (half-god/half-human) in other religions. Again, like in the Greek pantheon in which you have Hercules.

Swearing that the Abrahamic belief system, the bible, and the characters contained within do not make for a pantheon does not change the fact that it still follows the blueprint just like every other pantheon does.

This being the case, my point stands. Apples to apples. Two entities, within the same pantheon, makes the worship of either still a faith solely contained within that particular belief system which is based upon said pantheon.

 

[linwood]

No it wasn't. You have to look at the history of Satanism. Most Satanists wouldn't (I really don't know if any would) label themselves as an Abrahamic faith. Most Satanists see it as unrelated to other religions.

The Church of Satan exists as a direct contradiction to Christianity.
It is a major point of the "belief".

LaVey used the Christian fear of Satan as a foundation for the church which is where I believe Jayhawkers comment about caricature comes from.

Granted the Church of Satan isn`t the only form of Satanism and isn`t even the subject of the OP considering the beliefs of the COS aren`t theistic.

I`m just pointing out that the existence of some forms of Satanism are definitively intertwined with the Abrahamic faiths.

 

[Twig pentagram]

There are people who actually worship the Abrahamic biblical entity known as "Satan" or "The Devil". Now, would not those people fall under the heading of Abrahamic and their faith/religion also be considered an Abrahamic religion just like Christianity and Islam and Judaism?

Mind you, I'm not talking about what is known today as Neo-Satanism or the like. I'm talking strictly about actual worship and following of the theistic entity "Satan" or "The Devil".

I've seen people try to say that worshiping Satan is Paganism, but Paganism includes religions and pantheons not of the Abrahamic pantheon. Since Satan belong to the Abrahamic pantheon and mythology...then shouldn't worship of said entity be claimed as Abrahamic, and NOT Pagan?

I think Satan/ Lucifer/ Devil worshippers are Abrahams dark children.

 

[fallingblood]

Okay, let me try to break this down.

The characters and entities contained within the bible, and therefore the Abrahamic system of belief, follow the exact same mythological archetypes as every other pantheon. There's just different names for them. You can claim up and down that it makes a difference that it is considered monotheistic, but it really doesn't. In polytheistic faiths you normally have one or two major/great deities, minor deities, demigods, and even deified humans. Those things are present in the Abrahamic faiths as well, just under different guises. Angels easily follow the archetypes of minor gods, as well as saints being deified humans and so on. Shoot, you even have a direct correspondence between Jesus and the many other demigods (half-god/half-human) in other religions. Again, like in the Greek pantheon in which you have Hercules.

Swearing that the Abrahamic belief system, the bible, and the characters contained within do not make for a pantheon does not change the fact that it still follows the blueprint just like every other pantheon does.

This being the case, my point stands. Apples to apples. Two entities, within the same pantheon, makes the worship of either still a faith solely contained within that particular belief system which is based upon said pantheon.

You're still comparing two different things.

More so, when talking about Abrahamic faith, one must worship the god of Abraham, and must see that Abraham is their spiritual father. That is where the real argument boils down. Devil worship can not be an Abrahamic faith by definition.

Also, the Abrahamic faith is not based on the worship of a member of the pantheon (as you call it). It is based on only worshipping God. You don't have a real choice. In the Abrahamic faiths, you worship God. You can't just take that out, and still claim it is an Abrahamic faith, as by definition, an Abrahamic faith must worship God.

 

[fallingblood]

The Church of Satan exists as a direct contradiction to Christianity.
It is a major point of the "belief".

LaVey used the Christian fear of Satan as a foundation for the church which is where I believe Jayhawkers comment about caricature comes from.

Granted the Church of Satan isn`t the only form of Satanism and isn`t even the subject of the OP considering the beliefs of the COS aren`t theistic.

I`m just pointing out that the existence of some forms of Satanism are definitively intertwined with the Abrahamic faiths.

I agree that they are intertwined in Abrahamic faiths. I just wouldn't call them an Abrahamic faith. I would say they borrowed from an Abrahamic faith.

 

[Draka]

You're still comparing two different things.

We'll argue this point forever. If you actually take the time to study myth and archetypes as a whole you'll see where they are the same.

More so, when talking about Abrahamic faith, one must worship the god of Abraham, and must see that Abraham is their spiritual father. That is where the real argument boils down.

Says who? When one speaks of an Abrahamic faith they are referring to a faith which recognizes the Abrahamic god and the belief system attached to it. Even Devil worshipers recognize the Abrahamic god, they just choose not to honor or worship him, but instead find the opposite side of that coin more worthy of worship. The belief system is the same, the choice of who deserves worship and and how to go about worshiping are what differs. That's all.

Devil worship can not be an Abrahamic faith by definition.

Whose definition and why that one?

Also, the Abrahamic faith is not based on the worship of a member of the pantheon (as you call it). It is based on only worshiping God. You don't have a real choice. In the Abrahamic faiths, you worship God. You can't just take that out, and still claim it is an Abrahamic faith, as by definition, an Abrahamic faith must worship God.

Why? Why do you feel that is the requirement? That may be the requirement for you in your personal belief, but why do you think that is the requirement for all people in regards to that belief system? Why MUST it be as you say? Are there written rules somewhere to define exactly what is and is not of the Abrahamic belief system and how and who people must worship or honor or revere? What of those Christians who believe that there is more than one god? That god has a wife? Or what about the Trinity? There are many ways to view and worship within a large belief system that has many intricacies. Abrahamic religions are no different in that regard.