Satanist murders

[Heathen Hammer]

Satanists =/= Satan worshippers

Satanists are non-theistic. Satan worshippers are emo Christians.

 

[Orias]

Satan worshippers murder, devour four teens

Devil worshippers face life for ritual Satanic killing | World news | The Guardian

I`ll be direct, some of this was discussed on the DIR, and I had an opinon I prefer not to post there as I am willing to debate and I don`t consider myself a Satanist.

Sure, I am not saying all or even most(I just don`t know the statistics) Satanists would do that, but if the killers said they were Satanists, then they pretty much were.

They may have nothing to do with the kind of satanists in this forum, but they worship a deity they believe is Satan and do things they believe the deity wants them to do. Sure, they have a comp.letely different perspective on what this deity wants than other Satanists that think Satan wants the best for us and doesn`t like stabbing and killing and eating victims and all... but just because they are different kind of Satanists doesn`t magically mean that other satanists get to say "Oh yeah, they are not REAL satanists"

Sorry, but not only christians get to be called on the true scottman.

I agree with a majority of this.

The only reason I discredit these people as being "Satanic" is basically because they were caught, and they were foolish enough to fall prey to their own liable actions.

The only reason I'd agree with these people as being Satanists and the only way I could possibly empathize with them is that they were simply curious, seeking knowledge like many Satanists do, they just encountered a barrier between understanding and commitment. Its no different than suicide bombers and Christian crusaders in my opinion, every religion and philosophical way of thought has an extreme or "deep" end for a lack of better words.

Sure they may have been mentally ill but that doesn't stop them from understanding the concept of Satan or Satanism, it just means the way us "non" mentally ill people see it will lack and valuable insight pertaining to the reasons why they did. Basically, they wouldn't see any benefit in the actions committed, and even if they were capable of understanding that there was a perceived benefit, to the so called Satanists, it would not completely justify the actions, and nor should it.

 

[Cassiopia]

Have to go to work and don't have time to respond to this now, but I do feel strongly on this topic so...
I'll be back.

 

[Quintessence]

A few things I'd like to mention.

Me Myself, while dictionary definitions are helpful, they are limited. In particular, we must recognize that words have specialized or technical meanings within certain groups that are often not found in a generic dictionary. This is definitely the case here with the term "satanism."

I'd also like to pose an open question. Earlier jasonwill2 said blaming satanism for the cause of someone's nefarious actions isn't correct and that the true cause is mental illness. Is it? Why is it that whenever someone commits a taboo act we say "oh, they must have been crazy!" Are they? Are they really? Why can't someone commit a "horrifying" act with deliberate and lucid precision? Isn't slapping the label of "insanity" on them just another way of demonizing and scapegoating, in at least some cases?

 

[The Sum of Awe]

I'd also like to pose an open question. Earlier jasonwill2 said blaming satanism for the cause of someone's nefarious actions isn't correct and that the true cause is mental illness. Is it? Why is it that whenever someone commits a taboo act we say "oh, they must have been crazy!" Are they? Are they really? Why can't someone commit a "horrifying" act with deliberate and lucid precision? Isn't slapping the label of "insanity" on them just another way of demonizing and scapegoating, in at least some cases?

This is what I've always been wondering

 

[Cassiopia]

Satan worshippers murder, devour four teens

Devil worshippers face life for ritual Satanic killing | World news | The Guardian

I`ll be direct, some of this was discussed on the DIR, and I had an opinon I prefer not to post there as I am willing to debate and I don`t consider myself a Satanist.

Sure, I am not saying all or even most(I just don`t know the statistics) Satanists would do that, but if the killers said they were Satanists, then they pretty much were.

They may have nothing to do with the kind of satanists in this forum, but they worship a deity they believe is Satan and do things they believe the deity wants them to do. Sure, they have a comp.letely different perspective on what this deity wants than other Satanists that think Satan wants the best for us and doesn`t like stabbing and killing and eating victims and all... but just because they are different kind of Satanists doesn`t magically mean that other satanists get to say "Oh yeah, they are not REAL satanists"

Sorry, but not only christians get to be called on the true scottman.

A lot to comment on here, but firstly I think the following post by Quintessence makes some excellent points.

Yeah, the "no true scotsman" fallacy was basically what I was trying to point out in the DIR. This issue transcends any one religious demographic, though it's probably fair to say with a name like "satanism" they definitely get the short end of the stick when dealing with it. Neopaganism gets quite a bit of it too.

On the one hand, it is definitely legitimate to be concerned about the representation of minority religions in the media. There was a great article dealing with that recently on the Wild Hunt right here (link). Anti-satanic propaganda is real, and it harms both religious Satanists and Neopagans (who often get conflated with Satanism).

But let's set that side for a moment. Let's assume that someone who is a religious Satanist or Neopagan legitimately killed someone. Roughly a year ago I was listening to a podcast that featured a news story about an alleged Wiccan who committed a murder. The podcaster was livid and kept insisting the murderer couldn't possibly be a REAL Wiccan. The Wiccan Rede states, after all, to "harm none" and killing someone is obviously a violation of that. Therefore, a murderer can't possibly be Wiccan, the podcaster insisted.

I'm sorry, but no. Wiccans can commit murder. So can Christians, Jews, Hindus, Native Americans... whatever. Accept that. While I find it understandable that a group wants to distance itself from its unsavory members, it is incorrect to say that they are not what they are. What is correct is to say that their behavior is not representational of the larger movement and the religion does not necessarily endorse their behavior, not that the murderer isn’t part of that movement. If they're part of it, they're part of it. We shouldn’t lie to ourselves by claiming they're not.

People who murder are just like you and they’re just like me. They’re ordinary, everyday people. They’re white, asian, african. They’re male, female, straight, gay. They’re of any sort of religion and ideology you can think of. Their demographics may have nothing to do with why they committed a crime, but sometimes they do. Own up to it. Quit denying it. Quit telling the lie that “oh, if someone does something bad, they can’t possibly be one of us!” Guess what. They are. They’re one of you. They’re humans, just like you. They make mistakes, just like you.

I have to agree with all of the above.

Actually, here is some Oxford dictionary:

satanism Pronunciation: /ˈsātnˌizəm/

Syllabification:OnOff
(also Satanism)
Definition of satanism
noun
the worship of Satan, typically involving a travesty of Christian symbols and practices, such as placing a cross upside down.

Dictionary definitions are problematic because they are loaded with meaning ascribed by the prevailing views in society. I have seen some dictionary definitions which also say in black and white terms that Satanists are evil. In which case you have to ask by what standards they are measuring evil? And the answer would be by the standard of the Judao-Christian norms in the mind of the writer.
Most Satanists who identify as such these days are members or are affiliated to the Church Of Satan and are in fact atheists, who don't worship at all in the commonly understood interpretation of the word. So dictionary definitions are not always accurate in a religious context.

I'd also like to pose an open question. Earlier jasonwill2 said blaming satanism for the cause of someone's nefarious actions isn't correct and that the true cause is mental illness. Is it? Why is it that whenever someone commits a taboo act we say "oh, they must have been crazy!" Are they? Are they really? Why can't someone commit a "horrifying" act with deliberate and lucid precision? Isn't slapping the label of "insanity" on them just another way of demonizing and scapegoating, in at least some cases?

To answer the above it is my opinion that while some offenders might actually have a mental illness of some type, I would agree with your implication that that is not always the case. Indeed sometimes it is used as an excuse purely to avoid a longer jail sentence. Take for example the guy who killed all those people in Norway last year... Fortunately the authorities in that case judged that he was sane, he was just a very bad and nasty person.

We have to accept that there are bad and dangerous people in all walks of life and in all religions.
The important point is not to blame all members of any social group or religion for the actions of an extremely small minority within that group or religion.

In western society it is probably statistically provable that most murders are committed by Christians simply because more people in our society are Christian than anything else. Should all Christians be thought of as potential murderers?

On 9/11 2001, one of the worst acts of mass murder was committed by Muslims. Does that mean we should consider all Muslims as potential or probable murderers? I think not.

Now those of us who identify as Satanists have a particular problem, and we can't really duck the issue. We identify with an entity who is considered to be evil by the majority in our society. Very few of us consider ourselves to be evil, but we can't pretend that the norms of society's perception will not be applied to us. Moreover, we have to accept the logic that people who do consider themselves to be evil or who's views and actions would be deemed evil by most of society are likely to be attracted to our religion whether we want them or not.

If we want a future in which our religion is reappraised, and the enlightenment we have found on the satanic path becomes more widely available and better understood in society; we need to put our own house in order. (I have said the same to some of my Muslim friends for similar reasons).

There are idiots within our ranks who use Satanism as an excuse for all sorts of bad behavior. We need to call them out on it. When Satanists do very bad things, we need to condemn them more loudly and more strongly than anyone else.

There are also some of us who revel in the idea of being dark and dangerous (in the worst sense in which those adjectives can be used) and who basically act like spoiled teenagers and use Satan as an excuse for their anti-social ways. They really need to be told to shut up or grow up.

I believe that Satanism has a lot to offer the world in the state it is in. We need to be positive ambassadors for our religion and philosophy. I think perhaps some of us have got too comfortable in our dark little corner.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

To answer the above it is my opinion that while some offenders might actually have a mental illness of some type, I would agree with your implication that that is not always the case. Indeed sometimes it is used as an excuse purely to avoid a longer jail sentence. Take for example the guy who killed all those people in Norway last year... Fortunately the authorities in that case judged that he was sane, he was just a very bad and nasty person.

We have to accept that there are bad and dangerous people in all walks of life and in all religions.
The important point is not to blame all members of any social group or religion for the actions of an extremely small minority within that group or religion.

In western society it is probably statistically provable that most murders are committed by Christians simply because more people in our society are Christian than anything else. Should all Christians be thought of as potential murderers?

On 9/11 2001, one of the worst acts of mass murder was committed by Muslims. Does that mean we should consider all Muslims as potential or probable murderers? I think not.

Now those of us who identify as Satanists have a particular problem, and we can't really duck the issue. We identify with an entity who is considered to be evil by the majority in our society. Very few of us consider ourselves to be evil, but we can't pretend that the norms of society's perception will not be applied to us. Moreover, we have to accept the logic that people who do consider themselves to be evil or who's views and actions would be deemed evil by most of society are likely to be attracted to our religion whether we want them or not.

If we want a future in which our religion is reappraised, and the enlightenment we have found on the satanic path becomes more widely available and better understood in society; we need to put our own house in order. (I have said the same to some of my Muslim friends for similar reasons).

There are idiots within our ranks who use Satanism as an excuse for all sorts of bad behavior. We need to call them out on it. When Satanists do very bad things, we need to condemn them more loudly and more strongly than anyone else.

There are also some of us who revel in the idea of being dark and dangerous (in the worst sense in which those adjectives can be used) and who basically act like spoiled teenagers and use Satan as an excuse for their anti-social ways. They really need to be told to shut up or grow up.

I believe that Satanism has a lot to offer the world in the state it is in. We need to be positive ambassadors for our religion and philosophy. I think perhaps some of us have got too comfortable in our dark little corner.

The problem with that is, Satan is the opposition, in which he who is a Satanist should oppose all rules. Some Satanists may be in disagreement with this, but I ask if Satanists believe it's good to do the things considered bad in the Bible, where and how do you draw the line?

 

[Cassiopia]

The problem with that is, Satan is the opposition, in which he who is a Satanist should oppose all rules. Some Satanists may be in disagreement with this, but I ask if Satanists believe it's good to do the things considered bad in the Bible, where and how do you draw the line?

You use your own intelligence and your own judgement.

I don't do all the things that the bible considers bad. I don't believe in the bible, so why would I use it in the same way a fundamentalist Christian does?

Something I should have added to my previous post is that as Satanists we need to move well beyond defining ourselves (or allowing ourselves to be defined) in relation to Christianity. We may reject some Christian values, just as we may reject some Hindu or Buddhist values.

We are not in opposition to Christianity, we are simply Not Christian.

Perhaps we need to modify our language.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

You use your own intelligence and your own judgement.

I don't do all the things that the bible considers bad. I don't believe in the bible, so why would I use it in the same way a fundamentalist Christian does?

But your own judgement may not be conclusive to another Satanist who disagrees with you.

Something I should have added to my previous post is that as Satanists we need to move well beyond defining ourselves (or allowing ourselves to be defined) in relation to Christianity. We may reject some Christian values, just as we may reject some Hindu or Buddhist values.

We are not in opposition to Christianity, we are simply Not Christian.

Perhaps we need to modify our language.

I understand this. I was saying, most people source their moral codes from religions, and Christianity being mainstream I asked why you accept some and deny others.

 

[jasonwill2]

The argument is wheter or not they are satanists

I say if they pray to a deity they call Satan, and they define themselves as Satanists, then they are satanists. I wouldn`t deem them the same kind of satanists that ar ein this forum, I would deem them to have complewtely different beliefs, but I know their beliefs arte centered on the figure of Satan.

If someone calls them-self a Christian, but believes nothing that a Christian would, are they really a Christian other than in name?

Actually, here is some Oxford dictionary:

satanism Pronunciation: /ˈsātnˌizəm/

Syllabification:OnOff
(also Satanism)
Definition of satanism
noun
the worship of Satan, typically involving a travesty of Christian symbols and practices, such as placing a cross upside down.

Christian practices? That can't be right, or else they would be Christians.

This has more to do with hollywood and less to do with satanism, I suspect.

Exactly my point, it doesn't reflect Satanism but their misconceptions of it.

Satanists =/= Satan worshippers

Satanists are non-theistic. Satan worshippers are emo Christians.

Not all Satanists are non-theistic, myself, Orais, and Mindmaster as three examples just here on the forums.

A few things I'd like to mention.

Me Myself, while dictionary definitions are helpful, they are limited. In particular, we must recognize that words have specialized or technical meanings within certain groups that are often not found in a generic dictionary. This is definitely the case here with the term "satanism."

I'd also like to pose an open question. Earlier jasonwill2 said blaming satanism for the cause of someone's nefarious actions isn't correct and that the true cause is mental illness. Is it? Why is it that whenever someone commits a taboo act we say "oh, they must have been crazy!" Are they? Are they really? Why can't someone commit a "horrifying" act with deliberate and lucid precision? Isn't slapping the label of "insanity" on them just another way of demonizing and scapegoating, in at least some cases?

IN THESE SPECIFIC CASES IF YOU READ THE ARTICLES, yes, it is overly apparent that mental illness is the issue. However, when anyone kills in the name of religion, it is extremely likely that religion is not the cause and that the reasons are deeper then what they believe. Sane people can kill, but most sane people are not going to kill and do what these people did.

If you read the article it is apparent why I say that those specific people were mentally ill, and that this had more to do with their personal and or mental problems more than it did with some philosophy influencing them.

 

[Cassiopia]

But your own judgement may not be conclusive to another Satanist who disagrees with you.

So?
You have been interacting with Satanists on this board longer than me... Surely the idea that Satanists don't always agree with each other is nothing new to you?

I am kind of arguing that we need to establish a few fundamentals that we can agree on so that we can criticize those who do outragous things in the name of Satanism more uniformly.

I asked why you accept some and deny others.

I use my own judgement. That's kind of fundamental to Satanism.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

It seems that the folks in the articles are trying to emulate what could be called Traditional or Classic Satanism which is a Christian denomination. While it is debatable that such a denomination actually existed, the idea of the worship of the Christian Satan is most definitely a part of the Christian Mythos. I still consider them Christians, just because they are worshiping Satan as opposed to Yahweh doesn't change the fact that they are still acknowledging the Abrahamic God.

Today, Satanism is very different. Followers of the Left Hand Path have many views on who and what Satan is and what being a follower means. Few of them acknowledge him as solely the representation of the Abrahamic evil that balances Yahweh's good. This is why they take offense when people use Satanism as an excuse for the evils that they choose to do. Still, if these yahoos actually believe that they are following Satan then they are legitimately Satanists. Saying they are not real Satanists is no different than the Baptists saying Catholics aren't real Christians. You can't take away a persons beliefs, they are whatever they believe themselves to be.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

I am kind of arguing that we need to establish a few fundamentals that we can agree on so that we can criticize those who do outragous things in the name of Satanism more uniformly.

But wouldn't that be limitation?

What if there isn't any moral code agreed on among Satanists?

 

[jasonwill2]

Traditional or Classic Satanism

I should note that some say "Traditional Satanism" to mean Theistic Satanism, not that there is any Satanic traditions. Also "Classic Satanism" makes me think of the early 1800's romanticizations of Satan, and is a form of Symbolic Satanism in that sense.

But wouldn't that be limitation?

What if there isn't any moral code agreed on among Satanists?

I think she meant basic attributes of Satan, as for Theistic Satanists.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

I think she meant basic attributes of Satan, as for Theistic Satanists.

If she did I don't see how it's relevant to our discussion.

 

[Cassiopia]

I think she meant basic attributes of Satan, as for Theistic Satanists.

Yes, but I think we could go further. I think there are some things we agree with traditional Satanists as well.
For a start we could agree on a few things (such as mass murder, pedophilia and cruelty to animals) that Satanists definitely shouldn't do.

If she did I don't see how it's relevant to our discussion.

Then you need to re-read the first two posts in the thread and the longish post I made in reply to that.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Then you need to re-read the first two posts in the thread and the longish post I made in reply to that.

I was quoting in reference to the moral proposition, and I replied arguing we have disagreements on the morals. I believe you are the one who needs re-reading to do.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

I should note that some say "Traditional Satanism" to mean Theistic Satanism, not that there is any Satanic traditions. Also "Classic Satanism" makes me think of the early 1800's romanticizations of Satan, and is a form of Symbolic Satanism in that sense.

I was speaking of the 1800s romanticism of Satanism but I see your point. I suppose the real problem with using the term Traditional in this context is that Christian Devil worshipers existed more in rumor than reality. Go any further back and the Satanists were mostly pagans that were identified as Satanists by their persecutors rather than self identifying as such. For Christians, Satanists existed all over the place, they were anyone not following Christ.

 

[Orias]

I was speaking of the 1800s romanticism of Satanism but I see your point. I suppose the real problem with using the term Traditional in this context is that Christian Devil worshipers existed more in rumor than reality. Go any further back and the Satanists were mostly pagans that were identified as Satanists by their persecutors rather than self identifying as such. For Christians, Satanists existed all over the place, they were anyone not following Christ.

I agree with this as well.

 

[jasonwill2]

Yes, but I think we could go further. I think there are some things we agree with traditional Satanists as well.
For a start we could agree on a few things (such as mass murder, pedophilia and cruelty to animals) that Satanists definitely shouldn't do.


Then you need to re-read the first two posts in the thread and the longish post I made in reply to that.

Do you want to destroy Satanism as it is now, like how the Catholics effectively destroyed all the gnostic sects? That just makes us another dogma.

And "no animal cruelty" is too easy to spread to no animal sacrifices. However anyone who thinks that pedophilia and genocide is ok is probably something that most people will at least supposedly agree is not good, so I really don't see the point.

I was speaking of the 1800s romanticism of Satanism but I see your point. I suppose the real problem with using the term Traditional in this context is that Christian Devil worshipers existed more in rumor than reality. Go any further back and the Satanists were mostly pagans that were identified as Satanists by their persecutors rather than self identifying as such. For Christians, Satanists existed all over the place, they were anyone not following Christ.

True, Satanism as it is understood by some Christians is more urban legends, which is why I don't think it should be considered real Satanism when kids who believe these urban legends go out and try to fulfill what they see as actually being Satanism. As I said in the LHP DIR, these are cases of self-fulfilling prophecies; a product of SRA-type propaganda. I unashamedly blame certain unbiblical ideas of Satan floating around in Christian circles.

This is why Satan encouraging such killings is unBiblical and against even a Biblical Satan's goals:

Why "Satanic ritual crime" doesn't make sense even from a Christian point of view

As well for Satan being "evil" and why from a human benefit view, why even a Biblical Satan is good:

Satan and "Evil" in Christianity

From the first link in this post:

Among Satanists, it is often said that tales of "Satanic ritual crime" reflect a "Christian" view of Satan. In fact, the idea that Satan would want His human devotees to commit violent crimes in His name doesn't make a whole lot of sense even in terms of the traditional Christian view of Satan's goals and strategies.

According to traditional Christian doctrine, Satan's goal is to lead people away from Christ, NOT to maximize human nastiness. Satan is, traditionally, NOT believed to care how nice or how nasty people are, because even the nicest people aren't good enough for God and will go to hell (or at best to limbo) if they haven't accepted Christ.


So then, from a Christian point of view, what would Satan want His human followers to do? The main thing would be to lead other people away from Christ. He would also want us to get ourselves into positions of power and influence and/or to develop our creative talents, the better to lead still more people away from Christ. Beyond that, Satan would only want us to do as we please, looking out for our own interests.


A bunch of Satanists going around torturing and murdering people would not be a particularly effective way of leading other people away from Christ. On the contrary, rumors of Satanist atrocities are more likely to frighten people into clinging all the more tightly to Christianity. And that, of course, is probably one of the reasons why some Christian evangelists love to spread tales of "Satanic crime" - even though such tales do not make much sense even in terms of the traditional Christian view of Satan's goals and strategies.

Bold added for emphasis.