findingtruth wrote:Mourn wrote:Well, the "Truest" form of Satanism can only be the one that can explain why it is called "Satanism" and not some way else, whether that is "atheism", "individualism" or "paganism". And most of the groups cannot do that, of course. Thus, I would prefer an underground gang of teens slaughtering cats and dogs, vandalizing, and stabbing and beating up their classmates. They are more true than the crippled bitches of J.o.S. or C.o.S. that's for sure.
Additionally, even some (heretic) Christians are more Satanists than the members of most of the "Satanic" groups I've encountered. In fact, even the Book of Revelation from the Bible is also highly heretical and Satanic.
You caught my interest in a few ways. Can you explain a bit more how Revelation is Satanic? Also, why do you feel that COS are "crippled bitches"? I know damn well why JOS is haha
For many reasons, but the most important ones are that it describes a pretty dark God who can only be described by words as "elitist", "hateful", "sadistic", "zoomorphic" and "strong" requiring the blood of His saints as a sacrifice and the blood of His enemies for vengeance, in a way that the God of the Old Testament compared to Him seems simply a primitive mythologic little bitch. These things would not be serious, and perhaps also doubtful, if the book was indeed not heretic and written by John the Evangelist and not a mysterious John exiled to Patmos (and probably guilty for causing several problems since it's obvious he is not willing to compromise with any power except of that of his God), whilst the Book of Revelation contains the words "light", "love" and "forgiveness" and "truth" only a couple of times each (some of them not at all, as he is willfully avoiding to use them) and instead he uses words such as, "torment", "whore", "whoredom", "abominations", "anger" and "power" all the time.
Now, I told you these things would not be that strange if the man was indeed the Evangelist, or, anyway, a Christian who was respected by the famous ones like Paul, John, Peter etcetera. Instead, he is a person who, not only does he disagree with both Paul's and Jesus' teachings, but also claims that a dark and sadistic deity depicted more accurately as a half-human half-sheep with seven horns and seven eyes actually told him He is Jesus and narrated to him a book which says the exact opposite things of what Jesus and his apostles were saying. In fact, if John of Patmos knew Jesus while the latter was alive, he'd probably accuse him of compromising with the Roman Empire and forgiving sinners and gentiles. The same as he would with Paul, Peter and the rest of the apostles and especially John the evangelist.
Now, I can't say for sure if the Gospel of John was written by one author or many (although I believe that at least its biggest part was written by John), but I can say for sure that the writing style of the main author contains some special characteristics which are apparent way too many times throughout the gospel, and these characteristics are also apparent in the first epistle of John. Perhaps one of his most obvious ones is his tendecy to repeat a sentence while trying to clear up some things instead of explaining which exactly is the truth. I haven't encountered any other author of the Hellenistic era doing this. "At the beginning there was the Word, and the Word was towards God, HE WAS AT THE BEGINNING TOWARDS GOD, and God was the Word." Of course, John of Patmos doesn't do that at all. Now, I explained all this because in English someone can't probably compare the dictionary of the two authors which is pretty different, the one writing "the lamb of God" and the other "the slaughtered lamb" whilst each of them is using a different word meaning "lamb".
So, here's the point: In the Book of Revelation, we have a mysterious author describing a dark God who has nothing to do with the one the other Christian authors are promoting, and actually disagrees with him when it comes to subjects such as "forgiveness", "sin" etcetera. Well, the God of the Book of Revelation doesn't consider forgiving because He demands worshipping instead of trying to convince He should receive it, even though He doesn't need it and He is going to fuck up the world royally even if He only has one follower upon the earth. That's what I'm talking about when I'm thinking about God (= Satan). Not crucified saviours.
As for CoS, they are merely systemic atheist individualists. A gay narcissist would be much more appropriate as their supposed "symbol" than Satan is. This whole thing is feeding on outdated prejudices like "atheism = Satanism", which probably existed during LaVey's time and he thought it would be fancy to draw some attention by using it, but it's still a stupid thing based on trolling.
People who grew up in Catholic countries, when thinking about Christians, are probably thinking of crazy mobs, Inquisitions (well, these things are good of course) in the past, and, in the present, Jesus freaks humiliating themselves by screaming like whores getting fucked in the ears all the time "Jesus saves" and accusing every new president / prime minister as the Antichrist, but I was grown up in a Protestant family and I've only known Protestant and Orthodox Christians who are not stupid enough to get everybody mad by claiming they are trying to judge the world using words and interpretations of words written and told two and three thousand years ago.
