Is satanism just materialism with a 'character', to represent it ''satan''?

[Desert Snake]

Satanism generally seems to be presented as an atheistic religion, however, it has a 'entity', ''satan'' , as a mascot, of sorts. The precepts generally just seem like materialism/philosophy, even to where it has hardly anything in common with other anti-theistic groups/concepts.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

There's far more than one belief system that uses the term 'satanism,' some which are theistic, some which are atheistic. Some which are physicalist, some which aren't. So my answer would be 'some Satanists and not others.'

 

[Desert Snake]

There's far more than one belief system that uses the term 'satanism,' some which are theistic, some which are atheistic. Some which are physicalist, some which aren't. So my answer would be 'some Satanists and not others.'

Yes, but should they have the same name/label? Would you consider an atheistic 'Christian' group, to be 'Christianity?

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Yes, but should they have the same name/label? Would you consider an atheistic 'Christian' group, to be 'Christianity?

Yes, they are under the rather broad umbrella of Christianity (as are some messianic Jews and Christian Hindu). The same is no less true of Hinduism, which has everything from physicalism to monotheism to polytheism to pantheism and are all under the broad terms of Hindu.

 

[Laika]

Satanism generally seems to be presented as an atheistic religion, however, it has a 'entity', ''satan'' , as a mascot, of sorts. The precepts generally just seem like materialism/philosophy, even to where it has hardly anything in common with other anti-theistic groups/concepts.

No. As far as I know Some atheistic LHPs may identify as materialists but that is not representative of all satanists-especially theistic ones. It is also not representative of all materialists.

In so far as Satan is treated as a creation of and projection of man, that is materialistic and similar to views that man created God, etc. I think a belief in social Darwinism is also common amongst satanists- which is also partly materialist. But there is no specific philosophical requirement for even atheistic LHPs to be materialists.

You could ask them in their DIR?

 

[Desert Snake]

Yes, they are under the rather broad umbrella of Christianity (as are some messianic Jews and Christian Hindu). The same is no less true of Hinduism, which has everything from physicalism to monotheism to polytheism to pantheism and are all under the broad terms of Hindu.

I don't consider hinduism to be applicable in this context. /far too broad, may not even be a religious label/ Messianic Jews and Christian Hindus would both be of a similar religion precepts, regardless of some differences, to some other Christian groups. Satanism that is theistic is necessarily quite different from atheistic satanism, and moreso, the way that atheistic satanism is presented is quite different from the theistic presentations.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

I don't consider hinduism to be applicable in this context. /far too broad, may not even be a religious label/ Messianic Jews and Christian Hindus would both be of a similar religion precepts, regardless of some differences, to some other Christian groups. Satanism that is theistic is necessarily quite different from atheistic satanism, and moreso, the way that atheistic satanism is presented is quite different from the theistic presentations.

Plenty of Christians don't consider Christianity to be a religion either (it's a relationship! <droll>) and plenty of people consider Buddhism a philosophy rather than a religion, too. But i think its fair, academically, to call it a religion for organizational purposes. Buddhism also spans both theistic, atheistic and various monism or dualism positions. I really don't think a division between theism and atheism is too broad for those or Satanism.

 

[Zigzangle]

Plenty of Christians don't consider Christianity to be a religion either (it's a relationship! <droll>) and plenty of people consider Buddhism a philosophy rather than a religion, too. But i think its fair, academically, to call it a religion for organizational purposes. Buddhism also spans both theistic, atheistic and various monism or dualism positions. I really don't think a division between theism and atheism is too broad for those or Satanism.

Of course Christianity is a religion just like any other and has no more credibility.

 

[Aštra’el]

Anyone who worships the malevolent sides of their own human Nature, or collective human Nature (and perhaps even the gods that embody those particular sides of human Nature), is in my opinion a "Satanist".

There are those who use the term "Satanist" to describe themselves, but do not meet the above criteria. Although they may not meet my subjective standards of Satanism, if they wish to use the term to describe themselves than so be it. May they embrace or evolve that word to mean whatever they want it to mean.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

You could ask them in their DIR?

Usually the best approach if one is really interested in understanding a particular tradition, and how people in the real world actually practice it.

 

[Araceli Cianna]

No, Satan is a real being. Some people attribute far too much to him but he's definitely real.

 

[Desert Snake]

No, Satan is a real being. Some people attribute far too much to him but he's definitely real.

The question topic isn't if satan is real. Much of ''Satanism'', is actually an atheistic philosophy, not a theistic religion. /Or atheistic religion, whatever./

 

[Quintessence]

From what I understand of Satanism, a better description would be philosophical hedonism, not materialism. Whether or not Satan is seen as the embodiment or deity of hedonism would depend on the flavor of Satanism, most likely.

 

[GoodbyeDave]

If you want to learn about theistic Satanism, start here:
http://theisticsatanism.com/index.html

 

[EtuMalku]

No, Satan is a real being. Some people attribute far too much to him but he's definitely real.

And I'm sure you have evidence of this?

 

[crossfire]

From what I understand of Satanism, a better description would be philosophical hedonism, not materialism. Whether or not Satan is seen as the embodiment or deity of hedonism would depend on the flavor of Satanism, most likely.

So wouldn't that make Satan the embodiment of Freud's Id?

 

[Araceli Cianna]

And I'm sure you have evidence of this?

Yes

 

[Zigzangle]

No, Satan is a real being. Some people attribute far too much to him but he's definitely real.

You have absolutely no evidence to support that statement.

 

[VioletVortex]

Absolutely not. In general, Satanism values both material and abstract concepts. Also, Theistic Satanists obviously believe in the spiritual.

I believe that there should be a balance between the spiritual and the material.

 

[Desert Snake]

Plenty of Christians don't consider Christianity to be a religion either (it's a relationship! <droll>) and plenty of people consider Buddhism a philosophy rather than a religion, too. But i think its fair, academically, to call it a religion for organizational purposes. Buddhism also spans both theistic, atheistic and various monism or dualism positions. I really don't think a division between theism and atheism is too broad for those or Satanism.

You have mistaken the intent/inference of the original premise/question. I'm not saying that Satanism isn't or can't be, a religion; i most assuredly believe that it can/in more than one form. The question pertains to the nature of the religious paradigm/philosophy, etc