It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Jolting tales surface of satanic rituals

page: 5
11
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 2 2008 @ 12:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Pellevoisin
 


Yeah, early Christians didn't base their faith on Christian Scripture because the bulk of it hadn't been written yet. Most of this "living tradition" does not stem from Jesus but from his successors such as Peter and Paul and the successive popes right up to today.

In fact I would wager a bet that Jesus's own religion would be unrecognizable to him today and he would be angered by how petty and bigoted it has become.

Oh well, if you believe your God wants to you alienate and deride everyone who isn't exactly like you than I suppose you can enjoy a very lonely heaven.




posted on Jul, 2 2008 @ 12:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Shadowflux
reply to post by Pellevoisin
 


I gotta say man, you paint a really ugly picture of Christians. Your concept of Christianity seems very rigid and unchanging and not at all the doctrine of Love preached by Jesus. I guess if you're gonna follow something you might as well go all the way and demonize everyone else who thinks, acts, speaks, or looks different than you.


Such wide brushstrokes are very misguided. You want Christianity to be about a fluffy Easter Bunny when it is mostly about a dead human carcass once nailed to a cross that came to life again and walked out of its tomb because a deity wanted it so -- which in point of fact is what the doctrine of love preached by Jesus the Nazarene who taught that there was no greater love than to lay down one's life in order to save one's friends is all about.

This is of course the image opposite of what is alleged in the OP to have been inflicted upon victims in the name of satan.

[edit on 2/7/08 by Pellevoisin]



posted on Jul, 2 2008 @ 12:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Shadowflux
reply to post by Pellevoisin
 


Yeah, early Christians didn't base their faith on Christian Scripture because the bulk of it hadn't been written yet. Most of this "living tradition" does not stem from Jesus but from his successors such as Peter and Paul and the successive popes right up to today.


That is an assertion that cannot be proven. But it is an assertion that is very much in fashion.



posted on Jul, 2 2008 @ 12:35 AM
link   
reply to post by ALightinDarkness
 


I guess you are not familiar with Biblical types, or are ignoring the reference. Joseph was an OT type of Christ. So was Joshua. Lucifer and satan are OT types of the devil. Malignant spirit, whatever you want to call it, attempting to exalt itself above the throne of heaven.

The only reason you object to the use of Lucifer is because of your masonic heresies. Solomon was led astray, and you have followed.



Amos 5

26 But ye have borne the tabernacle of your Moloch and Chiun your images, the star of your god, which ye made to yourselves.

Acts 7

43 Yea, ye took up the tabernacle of Moloch, and the star of your god Remphan, figures which ye made to worship them: and I will carry you away beyond Babylon.



posted on Jul, 2 2008 @ 12:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Pellevoisin
 


I don't want Christianity to be about anything, all I wanted was for a few choice Christians to offer another religion the same respect other religions give to Christians.

All I got from you was vague, obtuse and completely irrelevant answers which always seem to say I'm wrong in some way.

Sorry if I expected Jesus's follows to actually follow his teachings



posted on Jul, 2 2008 @ 12:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pellevoisin

Originally posted by Shadowflux
reply to post by Pellevoisin
 


Yeah, early Christians didn't base their faith on Christian Scripture because the bulk of it hadn't been written yet. Most of this "living tradition" does not stem from Jesus but from his successors such as Peter and Paul and the successive popes right up to today.


That is an assertion that cannot be proven. But it is an assertion that is very much in fashion.


Whoa whoa whoa, wait a minute buddy. So you're now telling me that the New Testament, all of which was written after Jesus's death, was actually around while Jesus was around? You're saying the Acts and all the Letters and even Revelation are not later products of an organized religion?

Now who is crazy?



posted on Jul, 2 2008 @ 12:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Shadowflux
reply to post by Pellevoisin
 


I don't want Christianity to be about anything, all I wanted was for a few choice Christians to offer another religion the same respect other religions give to Christians.

All I got from you was vague, obtuse and completely irrelevant answers which always seem to say I'm wrong in some way.

Sorry if I expected Jesus's follows to actually follow his teachings


It is impenetrably ridiculous to assert that you as a satanist are able to judge what Jesus' teachings were much less what his followers ought to believe.

Clearly you do want Christianity to be about respecting your religion under the guise of respecting other religions. You want that very badly for some reason. Well, it is not likely to happen because the path you have taken and the religion you embrace is entirely rejected by most Christians as the path to death, destruction, and hell.

And the idea that people who have chosen your path have engaged in what is alleged in the OP strikes christians as even more heinous in itself -- whether or not it is proven to be false or true. It is the idea of it that is beyond noxious and odious. So go be whatever you want to be, but don't expect others to respect it, bless it, endorse it, or tolerate it. If you need their validation, you are in trouble.



posted on Jul, 2 2008 @ 12:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Shadowflux

Whoa whoa whoa, wait a minute buddy. So you're now telling me that the New Testament, all of which was written after Jesus's death, was actually around while Jesus was around? You're saying the Acts and all the Letters and even Revelation are not later products of an organized religion?

Now who is crazy?


No, I refer to your assertion that the Christian religion is mostly manufactured from the teachings of others whether Paul, Peter, or popes. It is not possible to prove a distinction between the so-called "original teachings of Jesus" and the development of Christian doctrine. Your assertion is not provable but is based on a series of prejudices about what you think the teaching of Jesus was and Christianity as it now exists. Unprovable, but an idea that is very much in fashion.



posted on Jul, 2 2008 @ 12:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pellevoisin


And the idea that people who have chosen your path have engaged in what is alleged in the OP strikes christians as even more heinous in itself -- whether or not it is proven to be false or true. It is the idea of it that is beyond noxious and odious. So go be whatever you want to be, but don't expect others to respect it, bless it, endorse it, or tolerate it. If you need their validation, you are in trouble.


aHa! See, that is exactly what I was saying in my first post in here. That Satanists did not commit the acts recounted in the OP and that acts like that are not related to Satanism. Satanism does not teach nor endorse the harming of others and especially the harming of animals. Sexual aspects may be present in many of the ceremonies but all participants are of legal age and are more than willing.

Christianity has been quite accepting of various forms of sexual abuse throughout history right up to the present. Catamites have always been a part of the Christian faith but woe be unto the person who brings up priest's predisposition to young boys.

You talk a lot but you never really say anything, however you are good at projecting whatever you wish on others.



posted on Jul, 2 2008 @ 12:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pellevoisin


No, I refer to your assertion that the Christian religion is mostly manufactured from the teachings of others whether Paul, Peter, or popes. It is not possible to prove a distinction between the so-called "original teachings of Jesus" and the development of Christian doctrine. Your assertion is not provable but is based on a series of prejudices about what you think the teaching of Jesus was and Christianity as it now exists. Unprovable, but an idea that is very much in fashion.


Except for the fact that it is no mystery who wrote the various parts of the New Testament and when they were written. They were written after 33 AD and not by Jesus. There has been no denial of the constant editing of the Bible through history nor has there been any denial as to to omission of various other books. I don't think you're as educated as you like to sound.

Edit: By your logic you can't prove that what you follow is the true teaching of Jesus

[edit on 2-7-2008 by Shadowflux]



posted on Jul, 2 2008 @ 01:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Shadowflux
I don't want Christianity to be about anything, all I wanted was for a few choice Christians to offer another religion the same respect other religions give to Christians.


That's a massive load of crap, my friend. NOBODY gets more garbage lumped upon them with virtually no defense from the media or public than Christianity. We've seen numerous times where someone who cracked a joke about any other religion caused "outrage" and was expected to issue a heartfelt apology, yet how many pedophile priest, Jimmy Swaggert, or just general poor taste Christian jokes have we heard made on late night TV shows and radio broadcasts after which anyone who professes outrage is immediately painted as some "Christian kook?"

For the record, I could care less whether these people were into S&M, bondage, or whatever other sexual frivolities they enjoyed behind closed doors. I'm a preacher's kid, a believing Christian, and a former Catholic and I've enjoyed kinky fun many times. Personally I think God gave mankind sex for pleasure and as a way to relieve stresses and the crap the world leaves at your doorstep every day as much as He did for procreation.

However, the issue here isn't one of mere kink... it's an issue of allegations a man chained up a woman and raped her with a cane during some sort of ritual. "No" freaking means "no" whether you're in the High Chiefs of Lucifer, the churches of the Vatican, or sitting at home reading a book that says we all came from feces tossing apes. No means no. If the alleged victim said "no" then it has become a crime. That includes rape, that includes bondage, and that includes any other depravity that went on in these people's home.

On a side note, I never fail to be amused at the comment "Satanists don't follow the devil..." Then why in the blue hell do you call yourselves Satanists. I'm a Christian, I follow Christ. Buddhists follow Buddha, Zoroastrianists follow Zoroaster, and the list could go on... I also love the idea that Satanists who perform acts like this aren't really Satanists. Excuse me? I've actually read most of the writings of Anton LaVey and the man wholeheartedly endorsed acts such as this. His position of "Do as thou wilt" extended outward to even those who didn't wish to have such things done to them. He essentially endorsed rape by saying that, after a so-called "mating signal" had been recieved, there was no such thing as saying "no." He also instructed his followers to be as merciless and cruel as they wished to visitors inside their homes as they were masters of their own house and could do whatever they wished to their "guests." Sounds pretty damn close to what is alleged to have happened here, doesn't it? All perfectly fit within LaVey's laws of Satanism and his guidance of Satanists.



posted on Jul, 2 2008 @ 01:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Shadowflux

aHa! See, that is exactly what I was saying in my first post in here. That Satanists did not commit the acts recounted in the OP and that acts like that are not related to Satanism. Satanism does not teach nor endorse the harming of others and especially the harming of animals. Sexual aspects may be present in many of the ceremonies but all participants are of legal age and are more than willing.


Unprovable. You are merely relating something you believe not something that can be proven. You also have no way of knowing whether or not satanic ritual was part of the offense alleged in the OP. You simply want satanism to be as you have described it.


Christianity has been quite accepting of various forms of sexual abuse throughout history right up to the present.


A broadbrush assertion that is patently false.


Catamites have always been a part of the Christian faith but woe be unto the person who brings up priest's predisposition to young boys.


Always? You were there? Sexual crimes are sexual crimes no matter who commits them, and they should be punished under applicable laws.


You talk a lot but you never really say anything, however you are good at projecting whatever you wish on others.


Not true.



posted on Jul, 2 2008 @ 01:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Shadowflux

Except for the fact that it is no mystery who wrote the various parts of the New Testament and when they were written. They were written after 33 AD and not by Jesus. There has been no denial of the constant editing of the Bible through history nor has there been any denial as to to omission of various other books. I don't think you're as educated as you like to sound.


I'm really not worried what you think about me. I do wonder how you came about your miseducation in christianity, but it is only a passing thought.


Edit: By your logic you can't prove that what you follow is the true teaching of Jesus


I am not interested in proving anything about what I follow. What I believe is what I believe. I am interested in burning straw men.

[edit on 2/7/08 by Pellevoisin]



posted on Jul, 2 2008 @ 01:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by burdman30ott6

Originally posted by Shadowflux
I don't want Christianity to be about anything, all I wanted was for a few choice Christians to offer another religion the same respect other religions give to Christians.


That's a massive load of crap, my friend. NOBODY gets more garbage lumped upon them with virtually no defense from the media or public than Christianity. We've seen numerous times where someone who cracked a joke about any other religion caused "outrage" and was expected to issue a heartfelt apology, yet how many pedophile priest, Jimmy Swaggert, or just general poor taste Christian jokes have we heard made on late night TV shows and radio broadcasts after which anyone who professes outrage is immediately painted as some "Christian kook?"


On a side note, I never fail to be amused at the comment "Satanists don't follow the devil..." Then why in the blue hell do you call yourselves Satanists. I'm a Christian, I follow Christ. Buddhists follow Buddha, Zoroastrianists follow Zoroaster, and the list could go on... I also love the idea that Satanists who perform acts like this aren't really Satanists. Excuse me? I've actually read most of the writings of Anton LaVey and the man wholeheartedly endorsed acts such as this. His position of "Do as thou wilt" extended outward to even those who didn't wish to have such things done to them. He essentially endorsed rape by saying that, after a so-called "mating signal" had been recieved, there was no such thing as saying "no." He also instructed his followers to be as merciless and cruel as they wished to visitors inside their homes as they were masters of their own house and could do whatever they wished to their "guests." Sounds pretty damn close to what is alleged to have happened here, doesn't it? All perfectly fit within LaVey's laws of Satanism and his guidance of Satanists.


Honestly, can you really blame people for ragging on Christians given the way the so called Christians have presented themselves on this thread? Christians come off as self righteous and bigoted because they apparently are.

Also, I never said I didn't follow the devil, I don't believe in the devil, that's a Christian concept. "OOooooo that narsty ole debil!!!" *shakes fist*
Secondly, a follower of the Devil would be called a Devilist according to your logic. Satanists follow Satan, a concept that is not very christian and in some respects is much older than Christianity.

So to be clear, the Debil is something Christians made up to scare people into joining the faith. Satan is the philosophy of the advocacy of the opposite.

Now, thirdly, you are quite mistaken about LaVey's teachings. First "Do as thou wilt" was Crowley's teaching, LaVey taught "responsible indulgence". The partial quote you provided about the "Mating signal" is meant to say that you shouldn't be a lecherous douchebag constantly hitting on whatever woman is around. You should wait until you see that she is interested in you before you proceed. That is exactly the opposite of what you stated it to be in reference to and completely validates my original point that the recounted acts are not Satanic.

And this just brings me back to my original point. I understand and respect your religion. I have a very good knowledge of it and have researched it very thoroughly for many years. Yet you seem loath to afford me the same courtesy. You've skimmed one book by LaVey and have assumed you know the whole philosophy. All you have done with your post is display your ignorance and validate my original argument.

You guys are making it too easy, I say one thing about you and you proceed to adamantly display it



posted on Jul, 2 2008 @ 01:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Pellevoisin
 


I find it hard to argue with someone who's only retort to a valid statement is "You can't prove it!!! You don't know anything!"

I don't even think you know what we're arguing about, you do realize that if you made some of the statements you have in a workplace environment I could have you brought up on charges of religious discrimination right?

No matter what you or your little book says Satanism is an officially accepted religion, the main difference is that The Church of Satan pays taxes as it feels all churches should be taxed.

That was my point, sheesh, it's a fact guys, accept it. Satanism is a legitimate and recognized religion, there are procedures in the Army for a chaplain to administer a Satanic funeral, it's accepted by the Center for Religious Tolerance.

You have no right to deride another's belief system simply because yours says you are always right. You can argue and quote scripture till you turn blue but you still don't have a right to go around calling everyone a sinner just because they're different than you. You don't have a right to go blaming sexual abuse on another's religion. You have no right to say I will burn in hell simply because I don't believe in your book.

I have always been cordial and respectful to Christians and have never received the same in turn, perhaps I should follow the Satanic teachings more closely and start treating others the way they treat me.



posted on Jul, 2 2008 @ 01:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Shadowflux
reply to post by Pellevoisin
 


I don't even think you know what we're arguing about, you do realize that if you made some of the statements you have in a workplace environment I could have you brought up on charges of religious discrimination right?


I could care less. The irony is that you don't know anything at all about my religion or religious practises. I find that very amusing.



posted on Jul, 2 2008 @ 01:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pellevoisin


I could care less. The irony is that you don't know anything at all about my religion or religious practises. I find that very amusing.



The real irony is that you know nothing about me or what I know yet you assume I'm an idiot and pass judgment on me right away. Who was it that said "Judge not lest ye be judged"? I don't know, I'm an idiot and know nothing about Christianity.

You know nothing about my religion or religious practices yet you defy your own religious teaching in judging me the way you have. I find that rather amusing. (I just realized, by getting you to defy Jesus's teachings I have in essence become your Satan! Hows that for transcendence?)

During this entire discussion I never insulted (unless you find equality insulting) or derided Christianity, it's belief system or it's followers. Sad that you couldn't do the same.

Well, I'm done, I feel confident that I have made my point quite clear and there is no use yelling at the deaf. You guys will just have to keep being self righteous a-holes until someone not nearly as nice as I takes offense to it.

I think that any rational free thinking individual reading this thread understands my point and I feel it's quite logical and sound. Hell, its a simple concept to begin with.

Don't judge what you don't know, don't speak of things you don't know about and stop deriding another person's belief system just because it fits your agenda.

Thanks for the entertainment guys, it's always a challenge trying to reach people. I'll check back tomorrow but I doubt anything will be different.

[edit on 2-7-2008 by Shadowflux]

[edit on 2-7-2008 by Shadowflux]

[edit on 2-7-2008 by Shadowflux]



posted on Jul, 2 2008 @ 01:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Shadowflux
 


I haven't "skimmed one book by LaVey." Try again. I've read the Satanic Bible, the Devil's Notebook (Hmmm... the founder of your church used the word "Devil" in descriptions related to the church... interesting.), Satanic Rituals, and Satan Speaks. I also have a collection of MP3s entitled "The Satanic mass" which is LaVey walking through a service. I think I know a little bit about what I'm typing here, friend. Are you seriously going to try and tell me that Anton Szandor LaVey didn't heavily borrow from Aleistar Crowley & the Thelema movement?

I'll give LaVay credit for one thing, just like the authors of the Quran and, in some ways my own Christian Bible, the manner in which it was written was ambiguous enough to allow a follower to either take a fundamentalist path, taking everything literally and following the path of the zealot, or taking a more inert translation of the text to use as a defense against those zealots when they are caught and the religion as a whole is blamed for their deeds. As for the worshipping the devil thing, we'd be here all night going back and forth with me saying "Yes, they do" and you saying "No, they don't." and the truth is we'd both be right and we'd both be wrong. You know as well as I do that liberalism has seeped into EVERY religion over the past 30+ years, allowing and even embracing those into the flocks of every church who do not fully understand or even adhere to the principles of the religion. It's what opened the door for pedophile priests in the Catholic Church, it's what birthed the abortion clinic bombers from the Southern Baptists, and maybe it's what let the dark, brooding, actual devil worshippers into the Church of Satan. This especially holds water when you consider that the CoS prides itself on allowing believers of all manner of pagan religions into their fold, even to the extent of embracing the fact that they have many members who continue to practice numerous pagan religions, identifying themselves as being intertwined with everything from Satanism to wicca to worship of the ancient deities (of which the Devil would certainly qualify). My point is they are in the church now and whether misguided or not, if you're going to take the position that Satanism isn't about the devil then maybe you should start by telling the members of the actual congregation that and weeding out the ones who act and believe otherwise.

Now, have we sidetracked this thread enough?



posted on Jul, 2 2008 @ 02:08 AM
link   
reply to post by burdman30ott6
 


I suppose you make some valid points except I'd point out that LaVey himself never raped or murdered anyone and had always spoken against such activities. In fact you will never find anything that states the Church of Satan endorses illegal activities at all.

Yes, LaVey based a lot of of Crowley but LaVey abhorred drugs where as Crowley descended into a dark abyss of substance abuse and very unhygienic practices which resulted in the death of a few of his followers.

I'd also say that even if mentally unstable people have entered the CoS it does not mean they are "real debil worshippers" and it does not mean that the CoS endorses, agrees with or supports their views or actions anymore than the Christian church endorses pedophile priests.

I think what it comes down to is that you put too much emphasis in an anthropomorphized concept of evil where as I don't really believe in evil.

Hey, maybe you should watch Speak of the Devil, it's a docu about LaVey, really neat stuff, you see the whole house, he plays a few songs for you and discusses his life, careers and philosophy. I think LaVey is a man who needs to be hear and not just read to fully understand him.

There, I hope you're happy, you made me keep typing after I said I was done

Edit: I'll post the video link tomorrow if people are still interested, i'm too tired to deal with it now and it's sometimes tricky to find on Google Video

[edit on 2-7-2008 by Shadowflux]



posted on Jul, 2 2008 @ 02:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Shadowflux
 


Please do. The only video I've seen of him was of online clips from the usual nonsense he got involved in on shows like Giraldo and Phil Donahue in the 80's. To be honest, I wasn't impressed with him from those appearances. He struck me as purely a powerfull voiced man with impressive eyebrows and a lot of PT Barnum showmanship mixed in.

BTW, if you've never read L. Ron Hubbard's Penthouse interview where he discusses his father and Crowley, it's a fascinating read. I'm not sure what the protocol would be as to linking an interview from Penthouse on this site, but do a search for it and I'm sure you can find the text. I'll just say this, if even a portion of what Hubbard (and others I've read) said about Crowley is correct, then any Satanist who gets pissed about the whole worship the devil/evil incarnate thing truly should lay much of the blame on his doorstep. He's the one who ran around talking about being the beast and Hubbard Sr was talked about as being the Anti-Christ. He's also the one who largely started many of the images we hold today of Satanic ritual abuses, sacrifices, the whole Rosemary's Baby stuff. In my opinion, the mere fact that LaVey took anything at all from Crowley to build his religion on speaks volumes about LaVey's own depravity. It would be akin to someone building a government on the base principles of Adolph Hitler and defending it by saying "but we're not Nazis."




top topics



 
11
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join