Nope. I was offering an alternative to your assumption that theism and practices by theists must include veneration. You admitted you didn't know. The wiki article at least cites some references.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The Luciferianism DIR Overview
- Thread starter Quagmire
- Start date
Wouldn't point #3 "The harmony between Light and Darkness and between the Objective and the Subjective are of great importance to the Luciferian." mean that objective evidence shouldn't be discarded or ignored simply because you don't like it? How about applying this principle to this:
EtuMalku
Abn Iblis ابن إبليس
No, it posits the illusion of objective realty, that that the Luciferian explores and understands the Universe and hir position in it free from duality.
Are you OK lately?
Why has it become so important to you that I am being hypocritical?
Hmm. Your mileage may vary. I'm not into metaphysical idealism.
It's not. I'm being my normal skeptical self, doing what skeptics do--looking for truth.
EtuMalku
Abn Iblis ابن إبليس
I don't recall you carrying on like this with anyone else on this forum . . . are you planning a Mercurial Mutiny?
Let me question and probe this a bit further:
If objective reality is supposedly illusion, then the illusion of duality would originate within the subjective reality and be projected onto objective reality, no?
I've already stated repeatedly that my logical deduction regarding the "illusion of duality" originates in the subjective mind--the duality being that of like/dislike, which then causes bias, which then spreads to perception bias where you tend to see what you like and tend to ignore what you dislike--thereby creating a distortion--an illusion--of reality within one's subjective mind that is disharmonious with objective reality.
Like I said earlier, your mileage may vary.
ThorirTheHound
Member
I always thought of luciferianism as a branch of gnostisicm, essentially they do believe in a diety however Satan is the liberater from the mad God (Jesus Trinity) whom broke apart from an even higher realm and created us, an even lower life force.
EtuMalku
Abn Iblis ابن إبليس
I guess you need to ask the admins that . . .
EtuMalku
Abn Iblis ابن إبليس
So you ARE planning an Aquino on us!!
It is not 'supposedly' it IS an illusion so far as our senses are capable of perceiving. Objective reality (OU) exists outside of our subjective universes, the illusion exists for those who don't see it. If you truly embraced and understood the Primacy of Darkness then you would never be asking these questions / making these statements.
Oh, I agree that our subjectively processed sensory perceptions of OU are not the actual OU (including the mind as a sensory base for sensing ideas in the environment. We humans often misunderstand each other.)So you ARE planning an Aquino on us!!
It is not 'supposedly' it IS an illusion so far as our senses are capable of perceiving. Objective reality (OU) exists outside of our subjective universes, the illusion exists for those who don't see it. If you truly embraced and understood the Primacy of Darkness then you would never be asking these questions / making these statements.
Last edited:
They told you one is required? The only reason we have one now is things were crazy when the overview was made, we had some serious issues managing even a discussion, so strict lines were drawn. Those problems have since been banned.
EtuMalku
Abn Iblis ابن إبليس
You are able to remove the current Overview without and admin?
No but that doesn't make it required. I don't think you can delete any OP once is made, especially if it's locked.
EtuMalku
Abn Iblis ابن إبليس
Then I'm losing sight of and interest in rewriting the Overview . . . I hate pointless endeavors
I would say that we don't really need an overview. Anyone can google Luciferianism pretty quickly and read up on it to get a rough idea.
As far as the last few pages it kind of shows why I wanted to add that fourth point as a kind of catch-all for all the variation IMO.
If you want to use this illustration it fails because in the context of yoga the Bhakti and Jnana practices are NOT opposed. It's actually been said that you should practice either one or all of them. It's actually stated in the Bhagwad Gita that all are different paths to the same thing, in that case Krishna.
Most Luciferians and Satanists don't think in terms of Vaishnavism or yoga, seeing as the cultural origins are totally different.
Pardon me if I am wrong, but it almost comes off as a way of trying to exclude Satanists/Luciferians who don't see as much of a distinction between the two paths as some others do.
That's kind of part of what is supposed to be great about Luciferianism and Satanism though, the diversity and individualism inherent in it that creates all these different viewpoints.
***Which again, is why I wanted to include the 4th point onto Etu's proposed 3 points. I think it would fit nicely since we all will come to our own conclusions about what Luciferianism means to us.***
I was/am lost too. I personally don't think that yoga (in that vein) is in opposition to Luciferianism like you concluded, but I also don't really see the relevance of bringing it up in this context.
I know I've mentioned stuff like that occasionally, but only ever in the context of my own practices and beliefs because I lacked an English word for it. So I almost feel as if I'm somehow involved in that statement but I'm not a theist so heck if I know what it's referring to
Just because a word is associated with another doesn't mean that it means the same thing. A connotation does not equate to an denotation.I wouldn't call wikipedia or it's sources 'evidence' in the sense that most skeptics would think of it. Maybe an indication. But at any rate, I've personally known Luciferians who venerate Lucifer and it's a good chance that if someone believes in real deities they probably venerate some of them in some way or another, even if they don't worship them.
I would be in favor of just not having an overview. It in itself seems redundant.
There are only two kinds of people who would ever post in here anyway: Luciferians, and non-Luciferians coming to ask questions.
Why would we need to define it for those who already are Luciferian? And any overview won't answer most questions anyone would have coming here anyway.
Yeah, people will have read tons of other stuff before even finding this DIR. Look how truly small our LHP group is and it's the best one I have ever found, hands down. The overview, as I said, was explicitly to limit the posting in the dir during what was basically a crisis. It sounds harsh now, but it was an absolute disaster then, and I believe the mods openly admitted they did not know how to define a DIR member at the time. That's the only reason it's there, and I forgot about it until it came up to be honest.
Plus those of us still around from then have all matured.
Plus those of us still around from then have all matured.
Even if this doesn't lead to the drafting of a new DIR overview, I wouldn't say this endeavor has been pointless--it has gotten the DIR participants to examine and look at their beliefs--which is always a good practice, imo.