Satanism or Satanisms

Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File	Select/drop/paste files here
* = required field	[▶ Show post options & limits] Confused? See the FAQ.

File: 1427079258545.jpg (33.74 KB, 462x350, 33:25, 236423452345.jpg)

Satanism or Satanisms Anonymous 03/23/15 (Mon) 02:54:18 No.64

Since my youth, I have been a Satanist. For over 17 years, I have walked the path of Satanism. I recognize, and fully realize, that there exists a vast multitude of ideas upon purity.

Countless cultures have believed that a particular aspect of their society was the most truthful and pure of ideas. Wars have engulfed nations, tribes have slain each other, cities have fractured apart in civil engagements over "right" and "wrong". Entire sections of human history are dedicated to crusades of some sort, especially in the arena of 'truth'.

When speaking about Satanism, it is most appropriate to talk about Satanisms, as opposed to a specific form of Satanism. There are many variations of Satanism, which are defined in vastly differing conceptions of adherence. Some forms anthropomorphize Satan, some forms are strictly symbolic and psychosocial in extension, and still, some others experience Satan in the spiritual sphere. That Satan, a diabolical being of ingenuity and cleverness, would be specifically molded after a historical approach seems a contrary idea to the very history of Satan as a social and religious force of change. Satanism is reflected in the plurality and expression of individual praxis, evident within the many developments thereof.

All religions and pursuits grew from historical conflicts and social tendencies that defined the sharing of knowledge and perspectives accordingly. Throughout the entire existence of mankind, humanity has continually interacted with multitudes of ideas and perspectives. Many ideas held underwent radicalization and marginalization, while still others were publicly adored and heralded as supreme. That a religion, unique in experience, would be exactly adjusted towards a specific esoteric and eccentric paradigm, seems counter-intuitive to the very notion of individual praxis.

The individual is not an exactitude of history.

Anonymous 03/23/15 (Mon) 17:37:02 No.65

I never understood how anyone could claim their religion was the one truth.

Anonymous 04/08/15 (Wed) 04:43:06 No.94

Interesting.

So is Satanism all about the individual or are there customs and traditions and shit?

Anonymous 04/11/15 (Sat) 03:31:35 No.107

>>94

It really depends upon your angle, but such is the most important aspect of Satanism. Satanism is an extremely relative religious perspective, contingent upon resistance and empowerment, encircling a union of sorts between a dynamic force, energies, and/or eternal ones.

One can subscribe to certain traditions- that choice is yours, and yours alone. The very stratum of Satanism has the idea of opposition, of inherent celebration and examination of difference, within its composure. As such, Satanism proposes that the individual is free, that the individual alone decides upon the importance of tradition.

Magic, a tool emphasized by focus and power, requires modules for its exercise. By relying upon over-sophisticated methods of rituals or traditions, one entraps themselves within the ideology of the mechanic. They are no longer experiencing actualized liberation but a simulated falsity, a forceful gnosis reliant upon methods convoluted by interested parties of power.

Instead, Satanism advocates taking that which is beneficial and discarding with that which is not. It is a deeply pragmatic spiritual approach, an eclectic religious platform which praises the creative expression of personal interest.