From: rtsumn01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu
Subject: Re: Christians to the Lions!
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1992 02:51:41 GMT
Organization: University of Louisville

In article <65911@cup.portal.com>, Tagi@cup.portal.com (Tagi Mordred Nagashiva) writes:
> I think of equal importance is the note that many regular members of
> alt.satanism see fit to respond to it, which I'd think would eventually
> get tiring, but I'm beginning to suspect that alt.satanism has
> elements of alt.atheism.2.

Well, I'd certainly agree with that. I read alt.atheism myself. A lot of
Satanists are atheists. That doesn't mean they're identical, just that they
have something in common (rejection of the xian "God").
 
> Scott:
> 
> While these theories have some merit, considering the teachings of 
> their (allegedly) chosen religion, an attempt should be made to be open minded
> enough to see their side of things.
> 
> 
> Response:
> 
> Many Christians did not choose their paths and are actually Satanists, in
> that they are adversaries in the 'War of the Faiths'.  The mature Christian
> path involves choosing no side and attempting to resolve this war peaceably.

I think you are drifting far from the general definitions with this stuff about
"War of the Faiths." I see what you are saying, but II'm not gonna buy the
definiton of "Satanist" involving xians.

No true xian can be a mature xian.
 
> I agree that 'attempting to see their side of things' is a very worthy
> approach.  I'd consider it more Christian than Satanic, however. ;>

Really? I don't see much leeway in xianity for the other guy's viewpoint.
 
> Scott:
> 
> Many Christians, when asked why they do this, respond something to the effect
> that it is charity, something they do out of the goodness of their hearts,
> out of concern for people etc. etc... Well, if the christian is really 
> concerned with people, why not preach to those who have not heard the message?
> 
> 
> Response:
> 
> I think that many of them actually feel this way, especially those who go
> out on the streets or door-to-door personally.  The response to this question
> would most likely be along the lines that the preaching IS to those who have
> not heard the message.  'Hearing' in such communities equates to 'conforming
> to'.  Thus the Satanists are the ones who have not heard it and by their
> very names and natures display it for all the world to see.  There is no
> more potent a target.  By claiming to be a 'Satanist' one sets oneself
> up for it.  This burden used to be borne by 'Witches'.  Previous to that
> it was the 'Christians', who replaced the 'Jews'.  This is the reason I 
> identify the lot of them as manifestations of the Great Martyrdom Cult. 

Really, Scott was not exaggerating. Most xians I run into who are interested in
conversing with/converting me are astounded to learn that I have actually read
_The Bible_. The idea that some poor person could genuinely have read the Word
of G*d and not been convinced had never occured to them.
 
> Scott:
> 
> Most "Satanists" are well aquainted with the messages of christianity. They
> have been preached to ad-infinitum, and are fed up with it. That is part of the
> reason they are Satanists instead of plain- old agnostics. Many Satanists are
> deeply offended by these posts, with good reason. 
> 
> 
> Response:
> 
> There is no 'reason' for offense.  Offense comes from emotional wounds
> (insecurity, poor self-image, etc.).  If one is strong and emotionally
> healthy, offense is rarely, if ever, taken.  The Satanists who get so
> offended are hurt Christians, remorseful over the loss of their faith
> or resentful of those who attempt to tell them what to do and how to feel.

Becoming resentful of someone telling you what to do and how to feel is well
justified in this day and age. The fundie branch of xianity has increasing 
influence in politics today. Look at the popularity of George Bush. It's gotten
to the point that my own mother is voting Democrat to preserve her rights, and
that would scare you silly if you knew my mother.

As for the "hurt xians" I doubt that there are any of those in this newsgroup
at amy rate. I'm certainly not remorseful.
 
> Note that I do not say that they are 'undeservingly' resentful.  I think
> that what passes for 'religion' in the world today is no less than politics
> and coercive politics at that.  It makes sense that people are turning toward
> agnosticism, atheism and satanism, given the extreme oppression extant.
> 
> 
> Scott:
> 
> [most of the Satanist/Christian reversal exploration omitted - good idea]
> 
> While christians have no problem explaining their beliefs, having
> the Satanic doctrines shoved in their faces is just too much...
> 
> 
> Response:
> 
> I don't think I'd go this far.  Most Satanists haven't thought very much
> about their 'beliefs', I find.  Yes, they are more adept, intellectually,
> than the preaching Christians, but this ain't saying much.  I don't think
> that it is the fact of having these doctrines forced in their faces that
> upsets Satanists so, but the fact that they are the CHRISTIAN doctrines.
> 
> Imagine that a Nichiren Shoshu Buddhist comes in here and attempts to
> coerce us (through the usual guilt-ploys, enticement, etc.) to read
> _The Diamond Sutra_.  I don't think that the average Satanist would
> get near as upset about it.  We'd probably ask what the sutra was about.

In that case I would get eqally offended and flame him/her to the best of my
abilities. Allow me to get up on my pedastel and preach about history
for a moment...

Xianity is a *missionary* religion. The reason it prospered and spread so
quickly is that it encourages its members to spread "the good word." This is
why it is the established religion most familiar to most of you reading this
newsgroup. It's a meme, an idea designed to spread itself from person to person
and culture to culture like a god-blessed virus. Buddhism, and most other
religions, believe in waiting for the nonbelievers to come tto them, rather
than forcing down their throats.

...back off the pedastel. What little I know of Buddhism, it pisses me off too,
but I have to deal with fewer of them because Buddha didn't teach door-to-door
proselytizing, and death for those who wouldn't convert.
 
> Most Satanists are former Christians.  I am not, thus I think I have
> a clearer perspective on it than many of either group.  It is similar
> to having an interested but removed friend observe a fight between myself
> and my lover.  She might make some very perceptive observations about
> BOTH our attitudes/actions.

It depends on how you define "xian." I haven't been to a church since I was
five. By the time I ws able to think rationally I didn't give the idea of
yahweh any credence. Am I a former xian? Or do you have to come from a non-xian
culture and family before you qualify?
 
> Scott:
> 
> Now consider this: you will never convert a satanist over USENET. You either
> 
> 1) are too infuriating
> 
> 2) look like a fool
> 
> 
> Response:
> 
> This is simply untrue.  Along with the following criticism, this is 
> short-sighted.  I think that you are correct about the hard-core
> Satanist (or any hard-core religious individual), but the disoriented
> teen types are waiting bait for the preacher who knows the trips and
> traps to set out for the Christian-conditioned, unsure mentality.

The teen types really don't appear on the news here; if they did I doubt they
would pay the preacher any attention except to laugh at him. He might have a
chance in face-to-face conversation, but not here.
 
> Scott:
> 
> There is NO logical reason to convert to christianity. The only appeals are to
> the emotions, and as stated before they either look foolish or infuriating.
> Things like, "But Jesus LOVES you; he died for your sins!" or
> "Your soul is in danger!!" are appeals to guilt and fear respectively; not
> reason. 
> 
> 
> Response:
> 
> Christianity is largely an emotional path.  Appeals to reason regarding ANY
> of its doctrines is ludicrous.  You are correct that there is no logical
> reason to convert to Christianity, but most conversions are EMOTIONAL in
> nature.  People choose the path/group they want to join based on how they
> FEEL about them: whether they are accepted, whether they agree with the
> behaviors/words, etc.  Logic has little to do with it.

Scott raises a good point; many xians do try to appeal to "reason" in their
arguements. At least they see it as such, and will tell you so. He is informing
them that what they label "reason" is not truly so.
  
> Guilt and fear are the biggest traps of the Christian path.  They are
> effectively used as reigns by a large portion of our culture.  This is a
> much larger problem than can be attributed to 'Christianity', however.  
> Western culture is permeated with it.

Western culture is also permeated with xianity. I suspect a connection.
 
> Scott:
> 
> As most Satanists have chosen this path out of reason, these appeals
> will never work. As for those Satanists who are so for emotional reasons, their
> minds are as closed as that of the Born-again christian.
> 
> 
> Response:
> 
> I'd like to see this substantiated.  My experience is, as I've said above,
> that most people involved with religion are in it for EMOTIONAL reasons.
> Even atheists (whom I do NOT regard as a religion yet) are there arguing
> AGAINST the mainstream culture for emotional reasons (generally because
> their experience with it was unsatisfying, emotionally, behaviorally,
> and intellectually).

Reason and emotion may go hand-in-hand. I have rational motives to oppose
xianity (its repression, destruciveness, mysogyny, irrationality among others);
thinking of these makes me very angry when I am confronted with xianity in real
life--especially when its "virtues" are being touted for my approval. This
doesn't discredit my reasons.

I know what good xianity has done; this doesn't make up for the wrongs.
 
> Scott:
> 
> Perhaps, if indeed preaching is done for humanitarian, and not egotistical
> or masochistic reasons, your energies are better spent educating those who
> know little of your faith; those born atheistic, communists, buddists etc.
> 
> 
> Response:
> 
> The humanitarian preaching is through activity, silently.  Only the rude,
> egotistical, S/M types go all out 'for your soul'.  Oh I suppose there is
> the occasional, wayward adolescent who doesn't understand a whit,
> but they usually stop preaching early on or it becomes an egotistical
> prop.

Sure, there are those who preach silently, as you put it. But the ones who
trumpet their faith at us are the ones we're addressing currently, as they are
the ones who are *here*. Incidentally, I believe there are some strains of
xianity that require their members to go out and preach.
 
> Scott:
> 
> otherwise;
> GROWL! BOOGA BOOGA! 
> HASTUR ASTAROTH LEVAITHAN ISHTAR!!!!!!!!!
> XILKA XILKA!
> BESA BESA!
>   
> go away already...
> 
> 
> Response:
> 
> As I said, I think that this ought be a newsgroup for remedial thinking.
> Let the preaching Christians in, don't respond to their prods regarding
> the 'evils of Satanism', show them a FAQ which addresses these concerns,
> and then get into some serious discussions about the nature of Satanism
> today, how Satanism affects your lives, what different flavors of it
> there are, how the SATANIST distinguishes hirself (if she does) from
> other religions, etc.  etc.  I thought the thread on 'coming out of
> the closet' was a good idea, but I haven't read it yet.

Sure, like there is anyone here interested in discussing the nature of
Satanism, would like to get a FAQ going (obviously!) but I still anticipate
that their will be a certain amount of xian-bashing required. After all, for
some of us, it's our *jobs*   :-)
 
> Scott:
> 
> well, comments?
> definately got to have something like this in a FAQ
> (alt.pagan & alt.magick have one I believe)
> 
> 
> Response:
> 
> Alt.pagan tends to be one step above alt.atheism.3.  Most 'pagans'
> are too reactionary or step all over one another attempting to separate
> themselves from the NEW manifestation of the Martyrdom Cult - Satanists.

I hear about this a lot, but I don't catch it much from alt.pagan.
 
> Alt.magick is MUCH more together, since it separates itself from religion
> completely and tends toward an art and/or science discussion.  In other
> words, it is largely technical with theoretical spicing.  If it gets too
> theoretical people get bored or upset rather quickly.

Alt.magick can distance itself from religion because it is not inherently a
religious topic. Satanism is. If we started talking about it alt.magick style,
discussing the virtues of Satan as one aspect of Geburah or Tiphareth, and
considdering following Satan as an expression of godhead simply because it
would overturn all our preconceived notions of divinity and this would be
magickal, I would get bored quickly. Bye-bye Semhaza. I want this newsgroup to
*stay* alt.satanism, not become alt.magick.satan. Over-technical discussions
don't belong here.
 
--Semhaza (The Antichrist)
Newsgroups: alt.satanism