• 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!

Luciferianism vs. Satanism

Deidre

Well-Known Member
Please refrain from turning my thread in the DIR ...into a debate. This thread reminds me of Christians who seek to define other Christians.
 

Mindmaster

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Having explored and studied Buddhism a few years ago, I would agree. If I'm honest, I'm confused by Satanism because it seems like its followers believe that a deity created an order to the world of which they are going against. Not purposefully maybe but it seems like a Satanist would have to at least believe that an Abrahamic deity exists in order to react to it. In my world, I don't think I can logically believe that the Christian god exists but I'm choosing to reject him. It is more logical to not believe that he exists at all and is just another man made invention.

Personally, I think the Abrahamic "God" is a fairy tale. Two ways to skin the cat - logic, and ones own psycho-spiritual facility. Let's start with logic - Does any of the behavior of the OT or NT God exemplify his nature as a deity or does he either act like a petulant child or an emotionally imbalanced human? I guess my first criteria for a "god" is that he must in fact demonstrate his superiority in action, and if he is the creator then he most demonstrate his love as a father for a child. According to the bible of course he is found wanting on all of these criteria, hence logically he isn't _the_ god. He may be _a god_, but that leads to the next problem for me.

Satan never has demanded exclusivity from me, so I am aware of several other gods through direct experience. They have come to me in their own ways, and I may even work with them when it is something that is not in Satan's wheelhouse, so to speak. If all of those beings are responsive but Jesus, Jehovah and the holy menagerie aren't then it leaves their existence suspect on another level - does it not? :D While Satan is mentioned in the Christian bible so is Astaroth, Baal, and Moloch and probably many others that were edited out. It is more likely to me that they are the legit gods, and the bible is pure deception written by a class of people who have a history of manipulating humanity. :D
 

Deidre

Well-Known Member
Personally, I think the Abrahamic "God" is a fairy tale. Two ways to skin the cat - logic, and ones own psycho-spiritual facility. Let's start with logic - Does any of the behavior of the OT or NT God exemplify his nature as a deity or does he either act like a petulant child or an emotionally imbalanced human? I guess my first criteria for a "god" is that he must in fact demonstrate his superiority in action, and if he is the creator then he most demonstrate his love as a father for a child. According to the bible of course he is found wanting on all of these criteria, hence logically he isn't _the_ god. He may be _a god_, but that leads to the next problem for me.

Satan never has demanded exclusivity from me, so I am aware of several other gods through direct experience. They have come to me in their own ways, and I may even work with them when it is something that is not in Satan's wheelhouse, so to speak. If all of those beings are responsive, but Jesus, Jehovah and the holy menagerie don't then it leaves their existence suspect on another level - does it not? :D While Satan is mentioned in the Christian bible, so is Astaroth, Baal, and Moloch and probably many others that were edited out. It is more likely to me that they are the legit gods, and the bible is pure deception written by a class of people who have a history of manipulating humanity. :D

I lean in agreement. Lol Although if people wish to believe it, so long as they don't infringe on others' rights to not believe it, then that's fine. :)
 

Liu

Well-Known Member
Having explored and studied Buddhism a few years ago, I would agree. If I'm honest, I'm confused by Satanism because it seems like its followers believe that a deity created an order to the world of which they are going against. Not purposefully maybe but it seems like a Satanist would have to at least believe that an Abrahamic deity exists in order to react to it. In my world, I don't think I can logically believe that the Christian god exists but I'm choosing to reject him. It is more logical to not believe that he exists at all and is just another man made invention.
Most theistic Satanists don't believe in the Abrahamic god, or if they do they believe he's just one of many many spirits in existence.
Some gnostic Satanists do seem to believe in the Abrahamic god (they give him the position of the demiurge in their mythology - but how literal that is to be taken probably depends on the gnostic in question)
Some also believe that there is kinda a duality of deities (like in Zoroastrianism) that are opposing principles.
I'm rather of the opinion that there is one divine something which already is this opposition (and every other opposition) in and of itself. Whether there are any lower deities that represent different aspects of existence, who knows.

In buddhist terms, to be a Satanist is to become Mara.
Agreed (although it's only part of it), especially since at least in certain kinds of tantra, Mara is the divine (or rather, the divine also includes Mara).
 

Deidre

Well-Known Member
It's hard to undo the Christian narrative in my mind. Not impossible but it's just difficult for me to see myself as "divine" or Satan as such. Aside from atheism, I've followed mainly a non-denominational form of Christianity, so it almost became a second skin, emotionally. The ideas that are presented in the LHP are so radically different than Christianity that I love, but also realize aren't that easy to just pick up and follow, emotionally for me. What I like about Luciferianism is it allows me the ability to illuminate my own path and Lucifer is to be seen as the pioneer of that, for want of a better word. But he's not divine and not to be exalted, IMO.
 

crossfire

LHP Mercuræn Feminist Heretic ☿
Premium Member
In buddhist terms, to be a Satanist is to become Mara.
<...>

Agreed (although it's only part of it), especially since at least in certain kinds of tantra, Mara is the divine (or rather, the divine also includes Mara).
In Buddhism, Mara is having your individual mind overcome by greed, hatred, and/or delusion, and is rather collectivist in nature. If you want to become collectivist greed, hatred, and/or delusion embodied, well, that's up to you. Luciferians would consider the goal to become Mara to be RHP, due to its collectivist nature..
 

crossfire

LHP Mercuræn Feminist Heretic ☿
Premium Member
It's hard to undo the Christian narrative in my mind. Not impossible but it's just difficult for me to see myself as "divine" or Satan as such. Aside from atheism, I've followed mainly a non-denominational form of Christianity, so it almost became a second skin, emotionally. The ideas that are presented in the LHP are so radically different than Christianity that I love, but also realize aren't that easy to just pick up and follow, emotionally for me. What I like about Luciferianism is it allows me the ability to illuminate my own path and Lucifer is to be seen as the pioneer of that, for want of a better word. But he's not divine and not to be exalted, IMO.
Perhaps this will help: you are an individual sentient being, possessing your own subjective mind (which is pretty much the definition of sentience.) This is what makes you divine. Individual subjective minds should be honored and shown compassion and respect. This is the LHP as I understand it and live it.
 
In Buddhism, Mara is having your individual mind overcome by greed, hatred, and/or delusion, and is rather collectivist in nature. If you want to become collectivist greed, hatred, and/or delusion embodied, well, that's up to you. Luciferians would consider the goal to become Mara to be RHP, due to its collectivist nature..
That is an um...interesting...take on the matter.
 

Mindmaster

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
It's hard to undo the Christian narrative in my mind. Not impossible but it's just difficult for me to see myself as "divine" or Satan as such. Aside from atheism, I've followed mainly a non-denominational form of Christianity, so it almost became a second skin, emotionally. The ideas that are presented in the LHP are so radically different than Christianity that I love, but also realize aren't that easy to just pick up and follow, emotionally for me. What I like about Luciferianism is it allows me the ability to illuminate my own path and Lucifer is to be seen as the pioneer of that, for want of a better word. But he's not divine and not to be exalted, IMO.

I guess the question is do you feel the divine is separate from nature, or not? Personally, I am aware of the connections between the things and feel that they are different aspects of a compound and complex organism - the known and unknown universe. That's to say that things may exist in a more subjective spiritual realm, or a more finite physical realm but they exist in the same reality regardless. The divine is a pretty loaded term as well, and perhaps it escaped me how many things people can infer into the meaning of that word. The Christian use of the term doesn't exist to me, aka the divine is separate reality that is presumably superior to the material world. Therefore, being is the highest order of existence whether it is on this level or the level of pure consciousness. :D

P.S. The state of being, in my view, doesn't make something superior or inferior to me, but rather it's value to me personally. I wasn't sure if this was clear, but I don't view Satan as a master and myself as a servant. Our relationship is that of mutual benefit, a partnership if you will. :D
 
Last edited:

Liu

Well-Known Member
Agreed (although it's only part of it), especially since at least in certain kinds of tantra, Mara is the divine (or rather, the divine also includes Mara).
I have to correct myself, what I had in mind is normally called Maya - but Mara is part of that so that doesn't change my point.
 
I guess the question is do you feel the divine is separate from nature, or not? Personally, I am aware of the connections between the things and feel that they are different aspects of a compound and complex organism - the known and unknown universe. That's to say that things may exist in a more subjective spiritual realm, or a more finite physical realm but they exist in the same reality regardless. The divine is a pretty loaded term as well, and perhaps it escaped me how many things people can infer into the meaning of that word. The Christian use of the term doesn't exist to me, aka the divine is separate reality that is presumably superior to the material world. Therefore, being is the highest order of existence whether it is on this level or the level of pure consciousness. :D
I find the western idea of bifurcating physical from spiritual weird to be honest. I've just never grepped reality like that. Physical laws govern physical things, for that's how we have categorized our observations of physical things. It's all based on how things behave, not what they actually ARE. It is a fact that we, as a species, have no idea what ANYTHING actually is. The idea of 'spiritual' is a blindfolded straw-grasp to explain an element of reality that may be nothing close to the reality of that reality.

You dig?

The divine is simply exerting control over the unknown beast and harnessing it's power.
 

Mindmaster

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
I find the western idea of bifurcating physical from spiritual weird to be honest. I've just never grepped reality like that. Physical laws govern physical things, for that's how we have categorized our observations of physical things. It's all based on how things behave, not what they actually ARE. It is a fact that we, as a species, have no idea what ANYTHING actually is. The idea of 'spiritual' is a blindfolded straw-grasp to explain an element of reality that may be nothing close to the reality of that reality.

You dig?

The divine is simply exerting control over the unknown beast and harnessing it's power.

I almost feel bad using the term spiritual to explain anything for much of the reasoning you have mentioned. As soon as you use these words they become loaded with the misconceptions of the reader. The obstacle, of course, is that Christianity has been shaping the vernacular on these matters for a couple of thousand years. I merely use the worlds divine, spiritual, and whatever to refer to the area of existence dominated by consciousness itself rather than the material (observable) but in no way feel these things aren't infused into one another. They don't exist to spite one another, but rather to feed and compliment each other in my view. :D

Secondly, your observation on the nature of the world is not strikingly different than my own. I do not deny that properties and behaviors are relevant to understanding how to react logically with the material world, but I do not mistake those traits as the essence of being or the reason why something exists, or whatever. Those answers are simply things we do not have, and I think it is healthy and humbling in a way to have this sort of self-realization. Verily, the more you know, the more you feel you don't know - but, such is the price of genius, in that only they are qualified to recognize the their own shortcomings. :D
 

Deidre

Well-Known Member
I find the western idea of bifurcating physical from spiritual weird to be honest. I've just never grepped reality like that. Physical laws govern physical things, for that's how we have categorized our observations of physical things. It's all based on how things behave, not what they actually ARE. It is a fact that we, as a species, have no idea what ANYTHING actually is. The idea of 'spiritual' is a blindfolded straw-grasp to explain an element of reality that may be nothing close to the reality of that reality.

You dig?

The divine is simply exerting control over the unknown beast and harnessing it's power.

What unknown beast?
 

Deidre

Well-Known Member
Your explanation makes a lot of sense to me, MindMaster. I never viewed divinity as merely beyond the physical, I like that. My ideas have been rigidly shaped from Christianity and I'm trying to get past those. So yea, in that context, humans could very well be....divine. I liken divinity to worship, and I don't expect anyone to worship me, unless they want to. :D
 

crossfire

LHP Mercuræn Feminist Heretic ☿
Premium Member
Agreed (although it's only part of it), especially since at least in certain kinds of tantra, Mara is the divine (or rather, the divine also includes Mara).
I have to correct myself, what I had in mind is normally called Maya - but Mara is part of that so that doesn't change my point.
Actually, I could go along with this in that sentience is also inherently vulnerable to delusion (mistaking the subjective for the objective.)
 
Your explanation makes a lot of sense to me, MindMaster. I never viewed divinity as merely beyond the physical, I like that. My ideas have been rigidly shaped from Christianity and I'm trying to get past those. So yea, in that context, humans could very well be....divine. I liken divinity to worship, and I don't expect anyone to worship me, unless they want to. :D
You just haven't met the right man, apparently. :)
 

Deidre

Well-Known Member
The all, the everything, the reality. That which we apprehend dimly.

I like how you explain things too as well as crossfire. You are all very good at explaining this.

So. Why do you think in your own opinion, this scares people? Satanism scares people. (Clearly not all people lol)
 

crossfire

LHP Mercuræn Feminist Heretic ☿
Premium Member
This. However, a simply dichotomy, as so often, doesn't include all cases. Most Satanists I can think of, including myself, would be somewhere between those two versions, but much closer to the theistic one in practice and goals, even if many of them are atheists or agnostics and see deities etc. as mere projections of their psyche.

What many here seem to actually distinguish between if they differentiate between Luciferianism and Satanism is Luciferianism and what you describe as atheistic Satanism.
My Luciferian order is quite friendly with an Atheistic Satanic order, and there are members of my Luciferian order who are also members of the Atheistic Satanic order. Carl Jung and Joseph Campbell are important to both orders. While our Luciferian order may seem too new-agey for some of the Satanists, and their Satanic order may seem to be a bit obsessed and limited by the horned god archetype to us, we generally find we have a lot in common.
 
Top