They also include quite a few non-Satanists, many of whom will insist that Satanists are "Christian" in order to exclude Satanists from even the broadest sense of the word "pagan," i,e.
I personally have no great attachment to the label "pagan. As it was explained to me by one Western post-Christian "pagan" who, in his case, has no religious identity other than "pagan" in a purely negative sense , excluding Satanists from the category "pagan" helps him convince liberal and middle-of-the-road Christians that "pagans" really worship the Christian God under a different guise.
In other words, the point of claiming that Satanists are "Christian" and that "pagans" are totally non-Christian is actually to kiss up to Christians and to convince them that "pagans" are more Christianlike than we Satanists are. That's one reason why the "more non-Christian than thou" game is so annoying. It is fundamentally two-faced.
If they really want to be purist about their non-JCI-ness, then they should stop defining themselves in relation to JCI, even in a negative sense. When asked what your religion is, answering "I am pagan" -- and defining "pagan" as "not JCI" -- doesn't just mean you belong to a religion which happens to be non-JCI. No wonder such pagans get asked, "Do you worship Satan? While "unlabeled spirituality" is a negative term too, it is at least a much more neutral negative term than "pagan" lowercase p , and it refers to a much more specific group of people.
Better yet, if you tell people, "I have an unlabeled form of spirituality," I can guarantee you that the next question out of most people's mouths won't be, "Do you worship Satan? Nor is an "unlabeled spirituality" movement likely to attract the attention of very many Satanists, if any.
For those who still want to put together a larger "community" consisting of a motley collection of minority religions that have almost nothing in common except that they aren't Satanism , I would suggest calling it "Right Hand Path" or something. I personally am not fond of the whole idea of "Right Hand Path" vs. However, "RHP" is a category from which nearly all of today's Satanists do exclude themselves; so, if you're desperate for a good excuse to exclude Satanists from some group of yours, you are unlikely to get much if any argument about it from Satanists if you call your group "RHP.
As I said, I personally have no great attachment to the label "pagan. In fact, I personally think that the English language would be better off without it. What's the point of having a special word to mean "non-JCI"? The English language doesn't have a special word for "non-Hindu", for example.
Nor does it have a special word for "non-Protestant" or even "non-Christian" -- both of which might be worthwhile categories if the point were simply to bring together a bunch of American religious minorities.
The word "pagan" lowercase p contributes nothing to an appreciation of the diversity of world religion. On the contrary, it only encourages Christians and other Westerners including Pagans, capital P to stereotype non-JCI people as being more "all alike" than they really are.
I think that the word "pagan" should be allowed to become the exclusive property of "Pagans" capital P , who have a decades-old attachment to the word and thus are unlikely to give it up no matter what. At least Pagans can define the word "Pagan" in a positive sense and thus can if they so choose find ways to distinguish themselves from Satanists without having to annoy us by calling us "Christian" or "Abrahamic. Pagans capital P can legitimately say that Pagan religions and Satanism are distinct.
However, they should not say so on the grounds that Satanism is "Christian" or "Abrahamic. Instead, they should simply say that Satan is not part of their pantheon as either a literal deity or a symbol. Making such a statement on behalf of the entire Pagan community is problematic, since there isn't just one Pagan pantheon. Now what? Do Pagans really follow Satan? The short answer to that question is No.
It's also important to keep in mind that most people who self-identify as Satanists do not, in fact, worship Satan as a deity, but instead embrace a concept of individualism and ego.
Many Satanists are in fact atheists, particularly among those who follow LaVeyan Satanism. Others consider themselves hedonists. Regardless of your feelings about Old Scratch, the Devil, Beelzebub, or whatever you want to call him, Satan generally doesn't appear in most modern Pagan spiritual systems.
Many evangelical branches of Christianity warn members to avoid any sort of Pagan belief path. For example, pretty much any pagans were designated as "Satanist" by Christianity, despite the fact that they didn't fit the above definition by any stretch of the imagination.
It was basically an alternate definition made up by the Church of "if you worship any deity aside from the God of the Christian Bible, you are automatically considered to be worshiping Satan". Same goes for witches - while they were universally accused by the Church of things like worshipping Satan and Black Masses, it's very doubtful that most were. Early Gnostic sects could also be called Satanist without actually worshiping Satan - many of them would probably fit the paganism catch-all listed above.
A good example would be Borborites. The best I could find was the Palladist incident. The Palladists were a satanic cult that was reported to exist by Leo Taxil in He later called a press conference where he asserted he made the whole thing up, and perhaps importantly for your question thanked the Catholic clergy "for their assistance in giving publicity to his wild claims".
It is very frequent for Satanism to be confused with the Occultists. Satanists are most often what could be described as "hedonists," while the Occultists, among other parts of their religion, worship Lucifer, or the Christian devil figure.
Occultism was founded by Aliester Crowley , which has no connection to the Catholic Church. According to the Church of Satan, he is not a Satanist, but:. The Occultists borrowed heavily from Catholic theology, but backwards. Satan or Lucifer is the creator or positive role model.
Lucifer means "light" and the egoism and challenge of God by Lucifer is not viewed as negative, but is something to aspire to. If we add nine months to this date, the normal time for the gestation of a human baby in the womb, John the Baptist would have been born about the middle of March, in the spring, shortly before the Passover.
Yeshua was conceived about six months after John Luke , esp. This would suggest that Yeshua the Messiah was conceived about the middle of December. This would place his birth nine months, or days, later — or the month of September! If Yeshua the Messiah was not born on December 25, who was? Let us take out our magnifying glass, and like Sherlock Holmes, do some careful detective work, and see if we can solve the mystery — the puzzle of why the whole world observes the birthday of Yeshua the Messiah on a day on which he was not even remotely born!
In the book History of Rome , by Michael Grant, we read this startling revelation:. This was the cult of the Sun, which was revered by millions of the inhabitants of the Roman Empire, and its religion for a time even became the state worship…. Before long, the emperor Aurelian established a massive temple of the Unconquerable Sun as the central and focal point of the entire religious system of the state It was in reality the birth day of the pagan sun god, worshipped by millions throughout the Roman Empire!
Finegan writes:. In the time of Constantine the cult of Deus Sol Invictus was still at its height, and the portrait of the sun-god was on the coins of Constantine…. This date appears in a list of dates probably compiled in A. Are we beginning to get the picture? The Influence of Constantine. He became emperor in A. From this time, for the next two hundred years, all persecutions of Christians of the Roman church, and its adherents, ceased. From that time, he points out, the church became totally subverted by politics and self-seeking opportunists.
Both good and bad, sincere seekers after God and hypocritical seekers after gain, rushed into the communion. Ambitious, worldly, unscrupulous men sought office in the church for social and political influence…. How did it happen? Obviously, something strange and weird was going on! The Greek mind, dying, came to a transmigrated life in the theology and liturgy of the Church…the Greek mysteries passed down into the impressive mystery of the Mass.
The Mithraic ritual so closely resembled the eucharistic sacrifice of the Mass that Christian fathers charged the Devil with inventing these similarities to mislead frail minds. These historical observations ought to make us sit up and take notice! It invaded the church, infiltrated it, and seduced it from within! Much that is most characteristically Christian [so-called] in worship and usage, he ignored. How did this happen? Should all true Christians be concerned about this historic truth — this reality?
The Seduction of the Church. For many years, several dates were used. Most of the customs originated in cultures that existed before Christianity…. Its adherents say that their tradition has pre-Christian roots, and refer to it as La Vecchia Religione , the Old Religion. There are a number of different traditions of Stregheria, each with its own history and set of guidelines. Much of it is based upon the writings of Charles Leland, who published Aradia: Gospel of the Witches.
Although there's some question about the validity of Leland's scholarship, the work purports to be a scripture of an ancient pre-Christian witch cult. Share Flipboard Email. Patti Wigington. Paganism Expert.May 20, · The last of the four pagan elements, Fire is the opposite of Water, an upward-facing triangle reminiscent of the phallus and, thus, the masculine. It is linked to the South, and is an agent of change through strong will. Pentagram. The pentagram is probably one of the most easily-identified pagan symbols today.