Is "Devil Worship" another Abrahamic faith?

[Draka]

I didn't say it wasn't connected with Abrahamic faiths, just that it doesn't have its origins with Abraham.

More so, many Satanic faiths have incorporated Pagan ideas into their faith, and really don't worship Satan, but a Pagan god Pan. It's called Satanism simply because that is what others have labeled it.

As for the Satanists who worship Satan, it really is something more modern. We can see that it doesn't go back to Abraham (who doesn't have an idea of Satan. Satan really doesn't appear, as we know him now, until sometime around the rise of Christianity (it is quite complicated actually). So it is a late idea.

Being associated with the Abrahamic faiths does not mean one is part of the Abrahamic faiths though. Also, the idea of God, and worship of God is important in Abrahamic faiths as well.

Do you remember the OP at all? I said I'm not talking about Neo-Satanism or the like. I'm talking about straight out worshiping of the "Devil". The entity considered to be in direct opposition of the Abrahamic god, and is therefore Abrahamic itself.

If one person worships Zeus and another worships Hades aren't they both following a Hellenistic faith and pantheon? You don't say one is following a Greek Pagan faith and the other is following Hinduism or the like now do you? They are just worshiping different entities of the same pantheon. Same goes for Devil worshipers and those who worship the Abrahamic god. Two sides of same coin.

 

[fallingblood]

Martin Luther nor any of the protestant reformers were descendents of Abraham. Like you said if it wasn't founded by Abraham or his descendents then it's not Abrahamic

Christianity was though. It worships the God of Abraham. It sees Abraham as it's spiritual father. And it is a direct offshoot of Judaism, which started with Abraham (or his descendant). All that protestantism is is a divergent form of Christianity. It isn't a new religion, it is the same religion. It is just a different form. Thus, it still is Christianity.

Martin Luther, nor any of the protestant reformers, did not found a new religion. They reformed an older religion, while still keeping it that same religion.

 

[fallingblood]

The OP said to disregard Neo-Paganism so don't throw that out to try and muddy the water.

Abrahamic refers to the God of Abraham, not religions created by Abraham and his decendants. Satan is a part of Abraham's God's belief system and is by default a part of the Abrahamic faith.

Yes, Satan is part of the Abrahamic faith. However, that means very little. The worship of Satan, or Satanism is not an Abrahamic faith. It simply does not fit the definition. Unless you want a very broad definition.

Abraham, as far as we can tell, had no idea about Satan. Satan was a later creation.

 

[Villager]

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?

Why not? If it is Satanic to believe that one can be justified by works, and Peter was called 'Satan' for saying something similar, why not include explicit worship of Satan?

Any more 'Abrahamic' candidates? Roll up!

 

[Flankerl]

Yes, but it still isn't created by Abraham or his descendants. That is one of the major keys here.

No its not about his descendants.
I could go into the forest for a few days and claim that [insert_name_of_angel_here] came to me and that iam the last true prophet and so on and so on.

If my new religion(Flankerlianism) gets enough followers it will over time also be an abrahamic faith. Even if i just did it for the lulz. And of course no major "abrahamic" faith would accept me. Which would be like before with Judaism - Christianity, Christianity - Islam, Islam - Bahai'i and finally my awesome religion.

Its just about claiming to be the real faith if you want to act like the boss.




So Satanism? Why not. I could probably relate more to HaSatan(big fan, keep up the good work testing us!) than Jesus or Mohammed.

 

[Draka]

Yes, Satan is part of the Abrahamic faith. However, that means very little. The worship of Satan, or Satanism is not an Abrahamic faith. It simply does not fit the definition. Unless you want a very broad definition.

Abraham, as far as we can tell, had no idea about Satan. Satan was a later creation.

If Satan/Devil is part of the Abrahamic faith then why would worshiping him NOT be Abrahamic? It's certainly wouldn't belong anywhere else. To deny that worship of an Abrahamic entity is indeed an Abrahamic faith just seems like a lame attempt to distance oneself from the "bad" in one's own religion. Read the point I made about Zeus and Hades again.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

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.

They don't worship the god of Abraham, they don't see Abraham as a spiritual father. That would disqualify them as being of the Abrahamic faith. Unless you want to consider the idea so broadly, that anyone taking ideas from the Bible are part of the Abrahamic faith, and then you run into the problem that some Hindus even have accepted Jesus into their pantheon and regard him as the same avatar as Vishnu. So would these Hindus be part of the Abrahamic faith? Of course not.

More so, most forms of Satanism don't have only their roots in the Abrahamic faiths. That is where the history comes into play. One will see that many Satanists adopt ideas from various Pagan ideas and deities as well, such as Pan.

Once again you refer to modern day Satanists even though the OP said this was not about them.

And it has nothing to do with worshipping the God of Abraham but rather acknowledging him. You say only decendants of Abraham can create an Abrahamic religion, well what about the Mormons? They were created by John Smith who I'm pretty sure did not come from one of Abraham's lines. Are you saying LDS isn't Abrahamic?

 

[fallingblood]

Do you remember the OP at all? I said I'm not talking about Neo-Satanism or the like. I'm talking about straight out worshiping of the "Devil". The entity considered to be in direct opposition of the Abrahamic god, and is therefore Abrahamic itself.

No, being in opposition to the Abrahamic god does not make it Abrahamic. If I am in direct opposition to Hinduism, that doesn't make me a Hindu. It simply doesn't work like that.

Simply, it does not fit into the definition of an Abrahamic faith. It doesn't. Unless you want to make the definition of an Abrahamic faith so broad that it will actually incorporate nearly anything.

If one person worships Zeus and another worships Hades aren't they both following a Hellenistic faith and pantheon? You don't say one is following a Greek Pagan faith and the other is following Hinduism or the like now do you? They are just worshiping different entities of the same pantheon. Same goes for Devil worshipers and those who worship the Abrahamic god. Two sides of same coin.

Apples and oranges. When someone worships the Devil, they are not practicing an Abrahamic faith. Worshipping Satan simply does not fall into any Abrahamic faith. It does not go back to Abraham, nor do they see their spiritual fathers as Abraham.

It may originate out of an Abrahamic faith, but so do many things that are not part of the Abrahamic faith. Some Hindus incorporate Jesus into their belief systems, that doesn't make them part of the Abrahamic faith. They are still Hindus.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

I think they are just trying to pin it on the pagans and therefore demonize pagans

 

[fallingblood]

Once again you refer to modern day Satanists even though the OP said this was not about them.

No, I'm referring to Satanism throughout history. I'm not really referring to modern day Satanism.

And it has nothing to do with worshipping the God of Abraham but rather acknowledging him. You say only decendants of Abraham can create an Abrahamic religion, well what about the Mormons? They were created by John Smith who I'm pretty sure did not come from one of Abraham's lines. Are you saying LDS isn't Abrahamic?

JMormons are part of the Christian tradition. Thus you loose here. They originate out of Christianity.

More so, I didn't say that only descendants of Abraham can create an Abrahamic religion. I clarified myself later on.


But really, if you want your definitions, then there are many Buddhists, Hindus, etc that are also part of the Abrahamic faith. I guess no one told them. Hell, even some atheists and agnostics are too. I mean, if it only has to do with acknowledging the God of Abraham, you've made the idea so broad anyone could really fit in if they tried.

 

[fallingblood]

I think they are just trying to pin it on the pagans and therefore demonize pagans

That is dumb.
How does pinning this on Pagans demonize pagans? It doesn't. Unless one is very narrow-minded. And really, if that is what we are trying to do, wouldn't you be guilty of the same thing? Trying to demonize Christianity are you?

 

[fallingblood]

No its not about his descendants.
I could go into the forest for a few days and claim that [insert_name_of_angel_here] came to me and that iam the last true prophet and so on and so on.

If my new religion(Flankerlianism) gets enough followers it will over time also be an abrahamic faith. Even if i just did it for the lulz. And of course no major "abrahamic" faith would accept me. Which would be like before with Judaism - Christianity, Christianity - Islam, Islam - Bahai'i and finally my awesome religion.

Its just about claiming to be the real faith if you want to act like the boss.




So Satanism? Why not. I could probably relate more to HaSatan(big fan, keep up the good work testing us!) than Jesus or Mohammed.

First, no one is speaking about HaSatan. They are talking about the Devil, Satan. The Christian idea.

Second, I clarified what I meant.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

That is dumb.
How does pinning this on Pagans demonize pagans? It doesn't. Unless one is very narrow-minded. And really, if that is what we are trying to do, wouldn't you be guilty of the same thing? Trying to demonize Christianity are you?

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

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

No, being in opposition to the Abrahamic god does not make it Abrahamic. If I am in direct opposition to Hinduism, that doesn't make me a Hindu. It simply doesn't work like that.

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.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I agree that this happens but to dismiss all as such is also shallow and disrespectful.

Perhaps. Could you give me an example where

... people who actually worship the Abrahamic biblical entity known as "Satan" or "The Devil". ​

are doing otherwise?

 

[Draka]

No, being in opposition to the Abrahamic god does not make it Abrahamic. If I am in direct opposition to Hinduism, that doesn't make me a Hindu. It simply doesn't work like that.

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?

Simply, it does not fit into the definition of an Abrahamic faith. It doesn't. Unless you want to make the definition of an Abrahamic faith so broad that it will actually incorporate nearly anything.

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?

Apples and oranges. When someone worships the Devil, they are not practicing an Abrahamic faith. Worshipping Satan simply does not fall into any Abrahamic faith. It does not go back to Abraham, nor do they see their spiritual fathers as Abraham.

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.

It may originate out of an Abrahamic faith, but so do many things that are not part of the Abrahamic faith. Some Hindus incorporate Jesus into their belief systems, that doesn't make them part of the Abrahamic faith. They are still Hindus.

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.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

Satanism uses the symbology of the Christian faith while renouncing the central tenets of the Christianity. if anything it could be described as a Christian apostasy

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

Perhaps. Could you give me an example where

... people who actually worship the Abrahamic biblical entity known as "Satan" or "The Devil".
​

are doing otherwise?

If they actually believe that Satan was wrongfully rejected by God worship him instead of God, how is that shallow and disrespectful? They merely have a different view than you. If they are pretending to worship Satan just to upset you or others like you then yes, they are shallow and disrespectful. IMHO

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

Satanism uses the symbology of the Christian faith while renouncing the central tenets of the Christianity. if anything it could be described as a Christian apostasy

No, Apostasy is pretending you believe something when you really don't. Satanists are open about their beliefs. I guess a closet Satanists who goes to church would be an apostate of that church. Maybe.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

If they actually believe that Satan was wrongfully rejected by God worship him instead of God, how is that shallow and disrespectful?

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?

I have no doubt but that they have an opinion. So do the self-styled Jedi Knights. But having an opinion does not make it any less of a toy religion.

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.