Saint_Frankenstein said
First off, I do not think that reducing satanism to simple adversity makes it into nonsense. To be certain, there is more to Satanism lest everyone be Satanic in some way. Today, Satanism is considered a Left Hand Path occult tradition with many, many branching ideologies. "Satanism" is almost an umbrella term that absolutely must be explained by each individual member. It has become this way because of add-ons to the original concept of Satan - most likely due to Christianity, their Devil, and misunderstanding and perversions of Jewish text.
Let's strip away all the extras and get down to the core. Satan is a title for angels that test the faith of man on God's behalf, such as in the story of Job. To start, the title was assigned to multiple entities and was never the name of a specific angel or God. Thus, worshiping an actual entity as Satan has no meaning historically. Symbolically sure, you can do anything you want symbolically - but Satan was never one specific individual.
To say that Satanism is merely about being adversarial makes it into a nonsense, as if it's not any deeper than that. As a person who views Satan as an actual Being, I just view it as a title that was given to Him. He has many titles, such as Lucifer, Azazel, Belial, Samael, Iblis, Shaitan, Samyaza, etc. Some people choose to approach Him using the names of other slandered cultural Adversaries such as Prometheus, Tiamat, Apep, Set, Loki, Enki, Typhon, Exu or any other cultural Devil figure that serves similar functions in world mythologies.
Also, there is no set definitions of Satanism or Luciferianism that we all must abide by. None of us agree on exactly what they are so all we can all do is speak for ourselves.
First off, I do not think that reducing satanism to simple adversity makes it into nonsense. To be certain, there is more to Satanism lest everyone be Satanic in some way. Today, Satanism is considered a Left Hand Path occult tradition with many, many branching ideologies. "Satanism" is almost an umbrella term that absolutely must be explained by each individual member. It has become this way because of add-ons to the original concept of Satan - most likely due to Christianity, their Devil, and misunderstanding and perversions of Jewish text.
Let's strip away all the extras and get down to the core. Satan is a title for angels that test the faith of man on God's behalf, such as in the story of Job. To start, the title was assigned to multiple entities and was never the name of a specific angel or God. Thus, worshiping an actual entity as Satan has no meaning historically. Symbolically sure, you can do anything you want symbolically - but Satan was never one specific individual.
The word "Satan" itself means adversary, and so a Satanist embodies adversarial energy / archetypes. This is the same as Luciferians embodying light-bearing archetypes, not worshiping a specific entity. So at its core, Satanism really is about adversity. That's all it comes down to.
To say that we are talking about one being being who has been given numerous titles also is only purely symbolic. Outside of Christianity, none of the numerous names given to the devil are connected in any way - and even within Christianity they are based off of misinterpretations of perversions of other religions. So, to see Satanism as anything other than being about adversarial energy is to work within a Christian paradigm - which is fine, but that essentially makes it Christianity. To call this entity all these different names can only be insulting. You can take the exact same religion and beliefs, remove the word "Satanism", and it would all be completely valid.
The claims of slandered gods use a modern, Satanic understanding rather than one that is historically accurate. Again, if it is symbolic then no qualms - this is what Setianism has done. Set was a god of storms and - again - to see him as demonized is to fit into a Christian paradigm. He even helped protect Ra in the underworld. Apep was never demonized, he was a concept created as a "demon" already. To worship Apep would be to desire the death of the Sun god and the end of all life - which is closer to the rapture than anything Satanic IMO.
I agree that there are no real set definitions for Satanism and Luciferianism, but there is logic. Without that then anyone could be a Satanist.
In summation:
1. Satan is the adversary - it was a title given to those who tested mankind. This means that relative to any man (or woman), one who tests and is adversarial is Satan relative to whom they are testing. This is the full extent of Satan's job. Further, these angels were just pawns to god, something the LHP tends to be very against.
2. To view this entity as a deity of some sort and then assign it negative Hebrew and Christian names raises numerous problems. For one, it seems disrespectful and insulting. Further, it requires you to work from a Christian paradigm since it relies on false connections and mythologies to apply the names. All these issues could be eliminated simply by dropping the Satanic label and practicing a wholly separate religion.
So, either Satanism is all about adversity or it is a Christian denomination.
3. Looking at old archetypes and myths from a Christianized perception does not help anything at all.
To say that we are talking about one being being who has been given numerous titles also is only purely symbolic. Outside of Christianity, none of the numerous names given to the devil are connected in any way - and even within Christianity they are based off of misinterpretations of perversions of other religions. So, to see Satanism as anything other than being about adversarial energy is to work within a Christian paradigm - which is fine, but that essentially makes it Christianity. To call this entity all these different names can only be insulting. You can take the exact same religion and beliefs, remove the word "Satanism", and it would all be completely valid.
The claims of slandered gods use a modern, Satanic understanding rather than one that is historically accurate. Again, if it is symbolic then no qualms - this is what Setianism has done. Set was a god of storms and - again - to see him as demonized is to fit into a Christian paradigm. He even helped protect Ra in the underworld. Apep was never demonized, he was a concept created as a "demon" already. To worship Apep would be to desire the death of the Sun god and the end of all life - which is closer to the rapture than anything Satanic IMO.
I agree that there are no real set definitions for Satanism and Luciferianism, but there is logic. Without that then anyone could be a Satanist.
In summation:
1. Satan is the adversary - it was a title given to those who tested mankind. This means that relative to any man (or woman), one who tests and is adversarial is Satan relative to whom they are testing. This is the full extent of Satan's job. Further, these angels were just pawns to god, something the LHP tends to be very against.
2. To view this entity as a deity of some sort and then assign it negative Hebrew and Christian names raises numerous problems. For one, it seems disrespectful and insulting. Further, it requires you to work from a Christian paradigm since it relies on false connections and mythologies to apply the names. All these issues could be eliminated simply by dropping the Satanic label and practicing a wholly separate religion.
So, either Satanism is all about adversity or it is a Christian denomination.
3. Looking at old archetypes and myths from a Christianized perception does not help anything at all.