From: rhr9081@hertz.njit.edu (Ray Rich)
Newsgroups: alt.satanism
Subject: Re: xians here
Date: 29 Jul 92 17:07:40 GMT
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.

In article <1992Jul28.175124.23617@ccu.umanitoba.ca> roholdr@ccu.umanitoba.ca (R Ross Holder Jr) writes:
>In <1992Jul27.123940.26287@njitgw.njit.edu> rhr9081@hertz.njit.edu (Ray Rich) writes:
>
>>>I doubt he needs Christians to make him think he looks good...
>>>
>>	If this statement is meant to infer some kind of pomposity on my part,
>>I must say you are mistaken.I do not view myself as any "Champion of Satanism"
>>or anything.  I simply offered my counterviews and opinions against those of
>>Evan Marshall.  I have received support for this, but I never demanded it, nor
>>even asked for it.  If my posts come across to some as logical and well-
>>reasoned, but insipid and pompous to others, so be it.  They are merely my
>>opinions.  You, however, have given us no opinions of your own, with the
>>exception character judgement against me.
>
>I must apologize - I didn't mean to infer pomposity on his part.  I meant to
>make it plain that it is my opinion he was behaving pompously.  It is not that
>I am judging his character, either.  I simply expressed an opinion about his
>remarks in the previous message.
>
	OK.  I guess my post could have been taken wrong.  Much of it was meant
in good humor.  The only thing I was real serious about was that we should allowxians here.  Despite our passionate arguments, Mr. Marshall and I are on fairly
friendly terms and seem to share a mutual respect.  He has his beliefs and I
have mine.  It is extremely unlikely that we will change each other's views,
but I have learned from the exchange, as have others who have e-mailed me.  Thus I see it as fairly productive.

>>              Arguments with [christians] actually only reinforce
>>[Satanism's] points against THEIR god.
>
>I still have yet to see in what way.  Mr. Rich is right about one thing,
>though; there is very little on this newsgroup that tells readers alot about
>satanism.  So far I've been defending Christianity, but I'd love nothing
>better than to go on the offensive.  For to me satanism is the worship of Satan
>or adherance to the philosophy of Satan.  Since Satan is popularly known
>to be the advocate of all that is evil, corrupt and wrong in the world, I
>find it difficult to understand why any reasoning, consenting adult would
>suddenly find themselves wanting to become a part of this.
>
	OK.  I have a problem with this.  Satan is popularly known to be
the advocate of all that is evil, corrupt and wrong in the world, but this
is due mostly to christian media influence.  Of course they are going to make
their arch-nemesis out to be the sum of all that is undesirable.  In the Middle
East, the western nations are often referred to as "The Great Satan", simply
because it is a good propaganda tool in such a zealous area of the world.
What Satanism is to you really doesn't carry any weight.  You could interpret
it as the worship of foul-smelling cabbage for all I care.  You'll find that
just about every human being has a different view on the meanings of God and
Satan.  Even organized religion and publication have done little to change this.

>>  I have no interest in seeing my views tempered by an organized religion
>
>Does organized religion "temper" views or does it provide a larger forum for
>new ideas to be discussed?  Either way, I believe satanism to be fairly well
>organized - if you will, a well-organized cult.
>
	I prefer to formulate my opinions and beliefs from a variety of religions and literature rather than try to fit my philosophies into someone elses'.
Also Satanism is hardly organized at all.  Anton LaVey once had the most widely
known and respected Church of Satan, but that all dissolved when Michael Aquinas(sp?), his right-hand man, left over differences on the nature of Satan and
formed his own church, the Temple of Set.

>>BTW, You really didn't make it clear which religion you yourself subscribe to.
>>Which side of the Fence of Eternal Damnation do you stand on?
>
>I don't think my religious orientation is particularly relevant.  But I'll
>say this; I don't call it the Fence of Eternal Damnation.
>
	It is far easier to understand your position and motivation if your
orientation is known.  While it is fine if you keep such matters private, this
group is devoted to religious discussion, so being frank and honest goes a long
way to furthering rational talk.

> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>|R. Ross Holder, Jr.             | Home Address:                |
>|(roholdr@ccu.umanitoba.ca)	 | 410-424 River Avenue         |
>|Department of Philosophy	 | Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada   |
>|The University of Manitoba	 | R3L 0C6   PH#: (204) 478-1744|
> ---------------------------------------------------------------

	My statements are in no way meant to be representative of anyone other
than myself...  unless you count my legions of loyal followers (Just Kidding!!)

					Me Pompous?
						Raymond H. Rich
Newsgroups: alt.galactic-guide