Callisto
Hellenismos, BTW
Reconstructionists most often do not refer to themselves as "pagan" and prefer the term "polytheist". Some are quite staunch on the matter others will tolerate it informally such as in a general/multi-path forum like this.
-
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!
Do you consider Satanism a valid Pagan tradition?
- Thread starter Cassandra
- Start date
Reconstructionists most often do not refer to themselves as "pagan" and prefer the term "polytheist". Some are quite staunch on the matter others will tolerate it informally such as in a general/multi-path forum like this.
Heck, no. But I could say the same for the vast majority of modern Paganism.
The Kilted Heathen
Crow FreyjasmaðR
Most Pagan traditions today recognize that we are not direct, unbroken extensions of the past, but modern revivals and reconstructions.
No. It's a reaction against Christianity or even a subset of it in some cases.
Liu
Well-Known Member
What about those Satanists whose worldview is unrelated to Christianity, or at least not influenced by it more than by other religions? That seems to be not too untypical for us. I for one don't see my religion as a reaction against Christianity, and certainly not as a subset of it.
You are right that there are Satanists for which that would be true, but it's not the core and purpose of the religion but mostly a side-effect of the surrounding culture.
Like many other modern "Pagan" religions, IMO.
The Kilted Heathen
Crow FreyjasmaðR
While I can see how the other Pagan religions are a reaction to - and sometimes against - Christianity, I think it's a very different sort than those type of Satanists. Whereas we Pagans have chosen to walk paths other than Christianity and often thus set ourselves at opposition to Christians, Satanists (of that pedigree) have chosen the anti-deitiy of Christianity and Abrahamism, and upheld him as their god, with the typical deity of Abrahamism - Yahweh - as the divine villain. The conflict remains "in-house", as it were, rather than simply "switching camps".
I'd argue that "the Goddess" is also a form of anti-deity. Both it and the Satan of Satanism are used to stand in opposition to the image of a monotheistic male god. The Satanists are just more explicit about their opposition.
The Kilted Heathen
Crow FreyjasmaðR
Not a very good one, as she's still a deity. Who also has a consort on equal ground in "the God". The Goddess opposes monotheism, not so much that of male gods.
What I meant by "anti-deity" is that Satanism has chosen the direct nemesis of Yahweh - as represented by Christian myth - and swapped the roles. They didn't chose to follow another deity seen as benign by another people, or no deity at all, but chose the enemy of the church, the rebel who challenged heaven, and like the tendency to use St. Peter's cross in Hollywood, turned the mythology on it's head.
Liu
Well-Known Member
I'm not saying that your words don't apply to some or even many Satanists, but most of us don't even believe Yahweh to exist, or at least not to be the creator. Gnostic Satanists often equate him with the demiurge, but they tend to equate him with a bunch of other deities along the way (e.g. Marduk) so it's questionable if there it's really that much of a focus on being against Abrahamic religions. It just looks like it as those are the religions we are most likely to encounter.
Nor do most of us believe in any other part of Christian theology. We believe in a being or concept that has appeared in many cultures/religions, but with the current main religion around us being Christianity we use the concept from that religion which fits best to have a name for our patron deity.
No other deity? Naturally you are not as well-read in texts by Satanists as I am, but we tend to incorporate pretty much any deity we like into our panthon, or equate it with our main deity. Discordia, Set, Tiamat, Kali, Exu, Loki, Prometheus, just to name some examples.
The Kilted Heathen
Crow FreyjasmaðR
Yes, I know. I made that distinction, and am just referring to the Satanists who do believe in Yahweh, just in the negative, such as those who don't see him as the creator. Which, essentially, turns Christianity on it's head.
I must ask; why not call it Mardukism, then? By using the name of Satan - however presented - it calls to mind the Abrahamic pantheon
Yes, I am aware of this. Yet as you say, it's equated with the "main deity". In many conversations that I've seen and had with Satanists - here and elsewhere - it's said that those gods that you named are names of Satan; that they're the same figure. It still comes back to Satan.
Liu
Well-Known Member
Such invers-Christians are not typically considered Satanists by us other Satanists, though, and seem to be if not a minority then at least not a religion the adherents tend to hold for as long as we other Satanists do with our.
No, they equate Yahweh with Marduk, not Satan. Those who do this equation tend to see Satan as either Enki or Tiamat. And I think I have seen the term Enkians, and the term Sumerian Chaos-Gnosticism for gnostic Tiamatians.
Also with other deities I have seen religion names like Setianism (which has a specific metaphysical belief, though), Discordianism (which imo is basically the sister-religion to Satanism), Ahrimanism, Thursatrú (as you certainly remember), Promethianism, ...
Personally, I use the term Satanism as I don't work with only one pantheon and Satanism seems the most unspecific of the names. I could just call myself a LHPer and my deity "dark one", as I tend to do. But having a proper name (or several) has its advantages to make clear what you're taking about, and the name of Satanism has a certain history now, so the philosophy of it, as little as it might actually have to do with any inverted Christianity, is kinda bound to it.
That's a matter of individiual interpretation and I can't speak for all. But strange as it is, it mostly seems have to do with familiarity and traditions. I would say if you see a Satanist saying something like "those are names of Satan" it most typically means "those are names for that concept/deity that is best-known here under the name of Satan".
Also, it can be expected that many Satanists know most about the mythology of Abrahamic religions and less about other religions and therefore draw most deeply from that source.
Last edited:
The Kilted Heathen
Crow FreyjasmaðR
From what I read of Thursatru, it's not Satanism. It was compared to Satanism. Ahrimanism, I would wager to say, is the same; comparable to Satanism, but the "anti-Zoroastrianism" as Thursatru is "anti-Ásatrú".
I would think "Left Hand Path" would be the most unspecific. As mentioned, "Satanism" invokes Satan, and thus binds to Abrahamism.
Though in my experience it always results in an uneven comparison; a changing of the deity named to fit with the "dark deity" archetype. If one is just using a name - say, Loki, for instance - but what they're claiming to be Loki is nothing like the Norse God, can it really be claimed to be Loki? Can it really be claimed to even be Satan?
The Kilted Heathen
Crow FreyjasmaðR
The parallel Prometheus defying Olympus to Satan defying Heaven, I would imagine.
I understand that, but the stories are very different. Zeus is the Keeper of Order and Prometheus introduced uncertainty and possible chaos by stealing fire from Olympus and giving it to humanity, a primitive species. As the Keeper of Order, Zeus was not happy about this and so punished Prometheus for it. But Prometheus was later freed by Heracles, who, of course, is Zeus' son. That does not mean that Zeus doesn't want humans to have certain abilities, though, as Zeus is said to love humanity. Perhaps he just didn't think we were ready for it or wished for such things to progress naturally.
That's my take on it, but that's basically what happened in the myths. That's quite different from the Genesis story where Yahweh seeks to deny humans autonomy out of hand (which is common in Semitic pre-Abrahamic myths where humans are basically slaves of the Gods made to till their divine garden). In Hellenic religion, it's a common belief that humans can and should seek Godhood by practicing Virtue and becoming a Hero. Either way, it's not about "choosing sides" in Hellenic religion. The Gods have their disagreements and squabbles with each other, of course, as they have competing areas of domain. That doesn't make any of them less worthy of honor.
The Kilted Heathen
Crow FreyjasmaðR
Oh believe me, I know there are significant differences. I definitely disagree with many parallels that are made.
Liu
Well-Known Member
I see your point. And I also call my religion LHP - as I said I mostly use the name Satanism because the majority of texts about the LHP use Satanic terminology and because it's what the religion is best known as. It has become common use, I can't change it.
And most of the members of other "satanic" religions I listed would call themselves Satanists, or at least don't deny that they are. I know some that don't like the name, e.g. some Ahrimanists who don't like being called Satanists lest they get confused for atheists/LaVeyans. They incorporate a lot of Tantrism, though, as they consider Ahriman and the Druj a demonized form of Hindu deities. Another Ahrimani I know however calls herself a Satanist, some kind of henotheist and calls her deity Satan-Ahriman as she sees Ahriman as the historical predecessor to Satan.
Regarding Thursatrú, I have only read texts by one Thursian so far, namely by the author of Gullveigarbók (including that book). And while his main focus is on Norse mythology, he also worships Pan and considers both Pan and the Thursian deities manifestations of that same extra-worldly chaos he venerates of which also Satan is, according to him, a manifestation. Also, Tursatrú in the form I know it has developed from the writings of the Misanthropic Luciferian Order, a group of Chaos-Gnostic Satanists in Sweden who base their spiritualities on a variety of different myths (mostly Jewish, Sumerian and Norse, as far as I'm aware).
So you see, Satanism is a very diverse religion, and therefore, just because two forms of it look nothing like each other to you that doesn't mean that I wouldn't consider them both to be forms of Satanism.
Good question. My own opinion: Myths are myths. They may contain truth, but they are not literally true, and not all are even metaphorically true. They can be used as a rather helpful tool to better relate to spiritual aspects of reality, and the forces/deities they describe might exist in one form or another. But we can hardly know for sure. So instead of searching which myths to believe I rather start with what model of reality to believe, and from that point I then look which myths, and which interpretations of them, help me best with that. Or I look which myths other people work with and see if I can relate to them as well and in which form they are compatible with my worldview and may give me more insights on it or inspiration to modify it. It's spirituality, not reconstructionalism after all.
Okay, with Promethianism I leaned a bit too much out the window. I don't know much about it actually, it seems to be a different name some Luciferians use for their religion (and don't ask me whether that is the same as Satanism or not xD).
Last edited: