DesalationReborn wrote:Operation Ravage wrote:DesalationReborn wrote:Operation Ravage wrote:DesalationReborn wrote: Many, like you, OR, seem to let your own opinions rule take precident over projected beliefs, a usually healthier standpoint, where as many others let their Christian beliefs rule over themselves, constantly judging
I'm judgmental?
Perhaps. Regardless, I don't have a signature condemning the religious preference of 1.3 billion people. Nor have condemned people here for being non-believers, or sinners; I have, however, played hardball with people who haven't gotten their facts straight, or made excuses, or failed to do any research into the religion they're condemning.
I might occasionally jump to conclusions, but this street goes both ways.
I was boxing in 2 schools of thought-- you were in the 1st, and the "judgers" were in the latter.
For clarity...
Camp #1 (Pretty Healthily-minded):"own opinions take precident over projected beliefs"
You define your own morals. You're the master of your thoughts.
Camp #2 (Problematic): "let their Christian beliefs rule over themselves, constantly judging themselves as worthless sinners, constantly repremanding while trying to fit into a role they were not meant to instead of seeking fufillment on their own terms"
Projected morals define them. They're "slaves."
That's essentially Neizstche's master-slave morality, abiet severly watered down.
EDIT: And sorry, I did have a confusing grammar error in that last post.
Then going by your own words, our young self-proclaimed Satanist is a slave to religion. After all, his signature and avatar suggest that his current religious beliefs are a reaction to a mainstream religion; thus, he's still defined by that mainstream religion, and thus, a slave.
Pretty much depends on his motivations-- whether it is for the justification of himself or in reaction to an outside will. Satanism in itself strives for self-fufillment as it's utmost goal, so it's likely the former, but maybe the later. I have similar thoughts and would actually join the Church of Satan if I wasn't opposed to a binding affiliation to a certain group. I like to course to my own beat.
I'd note as well that technically Satanism, the Church of Satan, is not a religion. Although they revere Satan as a literary figure and the embodiment of the mainstream Western religion's demonization of individualistic drive, they acknowledge no god other than the "god" of the self and the strive for one's own fulfillment. In that way, it is more a philosophy, like the Eastern conceptions of Buddhism, Taoism, and Confusism.
And I will disagree with you on that conjecture.
The very precept of Satanism--indeed, the name itself--identifies itself as an antithesis to Christianity. Hence, it is a reactionary movement, rather that a progressive identity. By Nietzsche's standards, it is still bound in slavery.
Despite what Satanists claim, the ideals of Satanism emerged directly out of Christianity (living for the self, rather than the whole, etc); and such, their movement will always be deemed as purely reactionary.
Let me get back to you on the second part of your post after I've done a little reading; however, I will go so far as to disagree with you on the philosophy of Satanism; whereas Satanisim celebrates the self, most other world religions advocate the collective.
