To rule in hell, or serve in heaven?

[InfinityTruth]

Fast forward to 4:58-end. I just thought that last bit had a lot of wisdom. That and I agree with the part where he says that the word 'love' is so abused that it has no meaning anymore.

 

I know the majority(This being an eastern philosophy forum... ) here probably have no concept of an afterlife 'hell' (Me either), but something that he said struck a chord with me. I could easily be a satanist if the last bit of this video is satanic philosophy.

 

[Sloppy Zhang]

"Better to reign in hell than to serve in heaven" was uttered by Satan in John Milton's "Paradise Lost".

 

Julius Caesar is attributed with a similar phrase (well Caesar came first), that being "I'd rather be the first man in a barbarian village than be the second man in Rome".

 

So, yeah, common strain.

 

 

 

No, I never watched the video

 

[edit] Okay, watched the bit you were referring to-

 

but something that he said struck a chord with me. I could easily be a satanist if the last bit of this video is satanic philosophy.

 

Yeah, I was brought up Catholic, and I always wondered at the Satanists, because they were worshiping an entity who fundamentally hated them.

 

Anyway, reading through some Satanist stuff later on, it seemed that there are quite a few groups who aren't so much about "worshiping satan", but more about the "question God, question authority, think for yourself, rugged individualism" type thing, which I do think is admirable.

 

I've got my own issues with some Christian concepts. For instance, God gave humans free will, because if they didn't CHOOSE to worship God, then the worship would be meaningless. After all, he made the angels so that they HAD to obey him, and he figured it'd be better to design something that could decide... oh, but wait, lucifer and a bunch of other angels sure did go against the programming, huh? But I digress.....

 

So God makes humans so they have free will, but then punishes them for exercising aforementioned free will if they choose the wrong way to live life? Huh. Doesn't seem like much of a choice. "Hey, worship me or don't. Your choice. I don't care. Buuuuuuut if you don't..... you're going to go to a pit of fire and torment for all eternity. But yeah, no, go ahead, live life how you want, it'd mean nothing if I made you worship me."

 

Not cool, IMHO. So, yeah, I guess I'm right up there with lucifer (down there with satan?) when it comes to saying "hey, God, what's the deal?"

 

Though I don't think lucifer/satan appreciates me associating myself with him. But what do I care? He hates me anyway......

 

On that note, I read somewhere that Voltaire, while on his deathbed, was visited by a priest there to conduct last rites.

 

When the priest asked if Voltaire would renounce satan and all of his evils, Voltaire reportedly replied-

 

"Now now, this is hardly the time to be making enemies".

 

+1 for covering all the bases

Edited August 5, 2011 by Sloppy Zhang

[tulku]

Tis best to serve in heaven but also to rule in heaven as well.

 

As the only being in the Universe whom you need to rule over is yourself.

 

Ruling over others? That is too much of a headache, too much trouble and little to no benefits in return.

 

Once you become part of Heaven's retinue, you will have plenty of access to the powers of the Universe and why would you need rule over other beings when you already have the powers to create and destroy beings of your own making?

 

I would rather be the Second Soul in Heaven than to be the Emperor of Rome/Hell anytime.

[InfinityTruth]

 

Yeah, I was brought up Catholic, and I always wondered at the Satanists, because they were worshiping an entity who fundamentally hated them.

 

 

"Now now, this is hardly the time to be making enemies".

 

 

Yeah, christians from my perspective, the ones I've always seemed to get direct contact (irl...the ones I've met online can be cool though) with have been INCREDIBLY ignorant. They know nothing about other belief systems and yet they talk about them and condemn them without any knowledge of the beliefs.

 

When I was forced to go to church they were having missions at colleges trying to convert wiccans and labelled them as satanists. The fucken nerve of these guys.

 

When I got older I briefly (2 months?) experimented with that belief system(Mostly out of rebellion...that's when I started refusing to put up with church anymore). I learned the majority of what the churches were saying about wicca was completely untrue.

 

Wicca is a religion of peace. They would never worship satan because they don't even believe in satan. Plus the 3 fold rule anything they do would comeback to them 3 fold. They wouldn't want that kind of negative energy around them.

 

I still like the nature aspect of wicca to this day.

[Harmonious Emptiness]

I saw an interesting documentary that showed how Anton LaVey and his partner who started the Temple of Set were both high level CIA specialist in mind control sciences (you probably know about the whole CIA adopting the Nazi mind control scientists "so the Russians didn't get them" and all the weird shit the CIA did in experimenting with mind control. Tons of videos. I exhausted my interest in that stuff a long time ago...) Basically the CIA wanted to know if they could reproduce the mind control of a cult, and then these two former CIA specialists become leaders of this cult which afforded them lots of sex, drugs, and other benefits.

 

What you want to study is not Satanism, but Anarchism. Anarchism is not at all about creating chaos. It is the same as Lao Tzu and Mencius' beliefs that people are naturally good and that forced authority is basically immoral, and that harmony will pervade a society who recognizes this 1 law: I don't force my authority on you, and you don't force authority on me. When someone steals from you, beats you up, they are robbing you of your right to choose what happens to you, so they forfeit their rights to live in this society and thus go to jail.

 

The economic sides of it are tricky since they lean to different degrees of Socialism, Federalism, or Communism. My preference for the economic side is in Paul Goodman's "Communitas" where he talks about everyone working for about 2 or 3 years on the farms, gaining a sense of community in the process, and then they become capitalists or do whatever they want to do, while having basic food provided for everyone their entire lives. So if people want to compete in the rat race they can, or otherwise they can live in simple housing and be provided free food.

 

Basically though, the philosophy of total individual freedom is not likely to be found in a Satanic cult. However, Bakunin, Kropotkin, Proudoun, they're not using the label of freedom to lure people into a mind control cult. The Church of Satan is probably best known for it's child sex rings with shady political coverups. Didn't one of Aleister Crowley's wives die because he made her have sex with a goat too? This stuff ain't cool at all.. Just a bunch of idiots trying to find boundaries by debasing themselves and others rather than seeing the fallacy of authority and rejecting constraints while enhancing their dignity and integrity in the process.

 

-edit: The former leader of the Temple of Set is now a host on a Fox Network show, or at least recently, like as a newscaster. Connections, connections.

Edited August 5, 2011 by Harmonious Emptiness

[Pu-erh]

As I remember it from the biography, Crowley and his group *tried* to get a goat to have sex with Crowley's mistress of the time, but the goat wasn't really into it. No one died as a result. People repeat too much stuff about Aleister Crowley without citing sources and it all gets blown out of proportion. Don't lump him in with those Church of Satan and Temple of Set guys. His philosophy is much more interesting.

[Cat Pillar]

As I remember it from the biography, Crowley and his group *tried* to get a goat to have sex with Crowley's mistress of the time, but the goat wasn't really into it. No one died as a result. People repeat too much stuff about Aleister Crowley without citing sources and it all gets blown out of proportion. Don't lump him in with those Church of Satan and Temple of Set guys. His philosophy is much more interesting.

 

Yeah, Aleister Crowley was a much different animal than the Church of Satan group.

 

Also, I've never heard anyone say before that LaVey was involved with the CIA. I do know that he played calliope in carnivals, though.

[Birch]

I wonder what cults are for?

In my more insecure moments I see them as the permitted shadow of monotheistic religions.

In other words if your views run too far from the established doctrine then there's a place for you still:-) There was a start of a discussion about why mystics hung around the coattails of established religious doctrines. Are they a bit like those CIA guys? Are they guiding doctrine itself? I got spooked by that reported KW remark on mediocrity. It seems people are always trying to make the world a better place by training people rather than, well, anything.

But what if the world in it's current state is as good as it's going to get due to the structures we've got in place and no amount of training (or mind-control for that matter) is going to help?

I realise all that sounds negative but gotta take the rough with the smooth:-)

[3L3VAT3]

There's also some interesting connections between the mythical Prometheus and Lucifer. Prometheus was the champion of humans and brought us knowledge of fire, and was punished as a result. Lucifer means "bringer of light", which is different than the Christian notion of him as just the ultimate evil.

 

Also, a lot of the notions we have of 'the devil' are Christian twistings of earlier pagan teachings that were a lot less nefarious than we come to believe. I believe the image of the horned goat is a twisting of early fertility gods, like Pan. Thus the root of the word "horny". Basically a demonization of our sexual impulse... and we can see how that's working out for the Catholic church (ie; sex scandals).

 

Even the word HELL didn't mean what we believe it to be today, I think it was just a place in the earth... I remember hearing that the native americans where really put off with the christian idea that the center of earth was supposedly a place of great evil. Maybe that explains why Western culture is so destructive of our earth. Un-grounded. Interesting that the base chakra (muladhara) is associated with RED (the color of the devil).

 

This isn't to say there isn't actual evil in the world, or to say that evil is a good thing. of course not. Just that many of the things that masquerade as good are in fact evil and likewise... it gets complicated

[Harmonious Emptiness]

Yeah, Aleister Crowley was a much different animal than the Church of Satan group.

 

Also, I've never heard anyone say before that LaVey was involved with the CIA. I do know that he played calliope in carnivals, though.

 

Actually you're right. Lavey was fairly high level law enforcement but not CIA. His "second hand man" who later started the Temple of Set was Lt. Colonel Michael Aquino who apparently specialized in mind control operations.

 

there was an Alex Jones movie that showed some type of documentation but I can't find it now.

Edited August 5, 2011 by Harmonious Emptiness

[mewtwo]

I knew a levayan satanist. he believed that all relgions are a deviation of the original sun worship.

[lino]

"Better to reign in hell than to serve in heaven" was uttered by Satan in John Milton's "Paradise Lost".

 

Julius Caesar is attributed with a similar phrase (well Caesar came first), that being "I'd rather be the first man in a barbarian village than be the second man in Rome".

 

So, yeah, common strain.

 

 

 

No, I never watched the video

 

[edit] Okay, watched the bit you were referring to-

 

 

 

Yeah, I was brought up Catholic, and I always wondered at the Satanists, because they were worshiping an entity who fundamentally hated them.

 

Anyway, reading through some Satanist stuff later on, it seemed that there are quite a few groups who aren't so much about "worshiping satan", but more about the "question God, question authority, think for yourself, rugged individualism" type thing, which I do think is admirable.

 

I've got my own issues with some Christian concepts. For instance, God gave humans free will, because if they didn't CHOOSE to worship God, then the worship would be meaningless. After all, he made the angels so that they HAD to obey him, and he figured it'd be better to design something that could decide... oh, but wait, lucifer and a bunch of other angels sure did go against the programming, huh? But I digress.....

 

So God makes humans so they have free will, but then punishes them for exercising aforementioned free will if they choose the wrong way to live life? Huh. Doesn't seem like much of a choice. "Hey, worship me or don't. Your choice. I don't care. Buuuuuuut if you don't..... you're going to go to a pit of fire and torment for all eternity. But yeah, no, go ahead, live life how you want, it'd mean nothing if I made you worship me."

 

Not cool, IMHO. So, yeah, I guess I'm right up there with lucifer (down there with satan?) when it comes to saying "hey, God, what's the deal?"

 

Though I don't think lucifer/satan appreciates me associating myself with him. But what do I care? He hates me anyway......

 

On that note, I read somewhere that Voltaire, while on his deathbed, was visited by a priest there to conduct last rites.

 

When the priest asked if Voltaire would renounce satan and all of his evils, Voltaire reportedly replied-

 

"Now now, this is hardly the time to be making enemies".

 

+1 for covering all the bases

 

Keep in mind that the word "Satan" sprouts from "Shaitan" which means "adversary"

in Arabic.

 

I'm not altogether sure that Lucifer was adversary. Keep in mind the facial similarities

in between him, Mercury, Ares, and Genius (who is or was an Angel).

[Sloppy Zhang]

I wonder what cults are for?

 

In other words if your views run too far from the established doctrine then there's a place for you still:-) There was a start of a discussion about why mystics hung around the coattails of established religious doctrines.

 

There's something to be said for community and group. I have more than a few friends who are part of Christian groups/social circles, Buddhist groups, or Hindu groups. I personally consider cultivation to be more of an individual pursuit, so I never really seek out those groups. Sometimes it does get lonely. You think about having a group, a default social circle with a group of friends that you already know have something in common with you.

 

I just shrugged those thoughts off, and don't really feel lonely anymore. But I could see how someone might be spurred to start a group. And to help draw people, make it similar to what they already know. That way they can still be "rebellious", but not do something so radical that it might make them uncomfortable. At least, that's the impression I get from a few groups.

 

There's also some interesting connections between the mythical Prometheus and Lucifer. Prometheus was the champion of humans and brought us knowledge of fire, and was punished as a result. Lucifer means "bringer of light", which is different than the Christian notion of him as just the ultimate evil.

 

Also, a lot of the notions we have of 'the devil' are Christian twistings of earlier pagan teachings that were a lot less nefarious than we come to believe. I believe the image of the horned goat is a twisting of early fertility gods, like Pan. Thus the root of the word "horny". Basically a demonization of our sexual impulse... and we can see how that's working out for the Catholic church (ie; sex scandals).

 

Even the word HELL didn't mean what we believe it to be today, I think it was just a place in the earth... I remember hearing that the native americans where really put off with the christian idea that the center of earth was supposedly a place of great evil. Maybe that explains why Western culture is so destructive of our earth. Un-grounded. Interesting that the base chakra (muladhara) is associated with RED (the color of the devil).

 

This isn't to say there isn't actual evil in the world, or to say that evil is a good thing. of course not. Just that many of the things that masquerade as good are in fact evil and likewise... it gets complicated

 

Yes, it's interesting, sad, funny, and maybe a bit depressing when you start researching so many things that were co-opted, or re-imaged by the Church (either adopted into its own ceremonies and "mythos", or demonized). And the depressing thing is that people take those stories wholesale, as part of the unquestioned tenets of the faith, and when you look around at the "pagan" groups of the past.... well, they are disturbingly similar. But ultra orthodox people rarely ever even take that look.

 

But I think sometimes it might have to do with being part of the group. People like to be told what to do. It makes it easier for them. Do what you're told, pay your dues, and you have friends and a support network for life. So I don't really blame people for going into it.

 

Keep in mind that the word "Satan" sprouts from "Shaitan" which means "adversary"

in Arabic.

 

I'm not altogether sure that Lucifer was adversary. Keep in mind the facial similarities

in between him, Mercury, Ares, and Genius (who is or was an Angel).

 

Yeah, stuff like that is definitely worth considering.

 

I heard one interpretation that was something along the lines of anything that could push you off the path towards God was "the adversary" or "the enemy". Excessive alcohol consumption, which could lead you to do bad things, would be one such "adversary" of your faith. But then somewhere along the lines it got personified, picks up baggage, "the devil made me do it", blah blah blah.

 

Definitely much to think about. I've always been a fan of English/Literature classes, where critical looks are taken at texts, the linguistic evolution of words, their original meanings, contemporary understanding of words or texts, and things like that. Religious studies scholars also do that, but I also think there are a lot of scholars coming into it with their own agenda- so a Christian scholar will magnify or diminish certain facts which would help them spin it one way. Not saying it's all bad, I'm just saying that everyone should be careful and critical.

 

Unfortunately, criticism is all too often seen as heresy.

[lino]

There's also some interesting connections between the mythical Prometheus and Lucifer. Prometheus was the champion of humans and brought us knowledge of fire, and was punished as a result. Lucifer means "bringer of light", which is different than the Christian notion of him as just the ultimate evil.

 

Also, a lot of the notions we have of 'the devil' are Christian twistings of earlier pagan teachings that were a lot less nefarious than we come to believe. I believe the image of the horned goat is a twisting of early fertility gods, like Pan. Thus the root of the word "horny". Basically a demonization of our sexual impulse... and we can see how that's working out for the Catholic church (ie; sex scandals).

 

Even the word HELL didn't mean what we believe it to be today, I think it was just a place in the earth... I remember hearing that the native americans where really put off with the christian idea that the center of earth was supposedly a place of great evil. Maybe that explains why Western culture is so destructive of our earth. Un-grounded. Interesting that the base chakra (muladhara) is associated with RED (the color of the devil).

 

This isn't to say there isn't actual evil in the world, or to say that evil is a good thing. of course not. Just that many of the things that masquerade as good are in fact evil and likewise... it gets complicated

 

The statue of Prometheus at the Rockefeller Center in New York City does resemble Lucifer.

 

Also, take a look at this picture: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Lucifer_Liege_Luc_Viatour.jpg

 

Look at the crown near his lap. It shows two spokes broken off. Lucifer

could have been the victim of a ritual since in the Bible it does outline

that a crown of thorns was put on Jesus Christ before his death, along with the Earthquake. Also, some hanky panky happened to Virocana, the giant king. He, along with Amitabha Buddha and the directional Buddhas, were passed off a 7-ray crown I think.

 

The seven ray crown, I suspect, is earned by an Angel when they perform the

seven punishments (I'd rather call them abuses). I suspect that the seven punishments are the casting of the seven poisons in Revelations.

 

One more note, I have a picture of Helios (Colossus of Rhodes). His picture shows a torch, a bow and arrows (pay particular attention to the word "Sinner" in the Bible), and a nine ray crown. Part of the picture is my avatar.

Edited August 5, 2011 by lino

[3bob]

The statue of Prometheus at the Rockefeller Center in New York City does resemble Lucifer.

[3bob]

the only ruler in hell is a lie, (that takes all it can steal in the process)

[goldisheavy]

If Lucifer wants to rule in hell, the first thing Lucifer needs to do is to teach people to obey authority and pose himself as the authority. If people don't have a concept of authority, then Lucifer cannot rule anyone. The possibility of ruling arises only after the idea of authority is firmly established in people's minds. So Lucifer would need to brainwash everyone to believe in authority first. Second, Lucifer would pose itself as an authority, preferably as a religious prophet and get people to worship either him directly, or to worship God through the perverted lens of his rebellious and false teachings.

 

So if Lucifer is real, then the chances of some no-name critic being Lucifer are practically zero. If Lucifer is real he is going to be Mohammed, Jesus and other authorities.

 

If Lucifer taught people to question authority, then no one would follow Lucifer since no one would view Lucifer as an authority.

Edited August 5, 2011 by goldisheavy

[Sloppy Zhang]

So if Lucifer is real, then the chances of some no-name critic being Lucifer are practically zero. If Lucifer is real he is going to be Mohammed, Jesus and other authorities.

 

I've heard thoughts like this before. You just can't trust anybody!

 

If Lucifer taught people to question authority, then no one would follow Lucifer since no one would view Lucifer as an authority.

 

Hmm, I dunno. Human nature is pretty insidious like that.

 

"Oh, yes, thank you for telling me to rebel, you showed me not to just follow people blindly. Now please, oh rebellious leader, tell me what I should rebel against next!"

 

It's hard to be truly rebellious and free thinking. I think a significant portion of those who say they are, aren't. They've just supplanted one overt authority for a subversive authority. They tell themselves they are making their own decisions, but they are not.

 

And that is far, FAR more dangerous, IMHO.

[Aetherous]

[Everything]

To quote Jacques Fresco: "When a land falls into chaos, the only law that can and shall not be broken is the law of nature."

 

In hell, men rule over men, men serve men.

In heaven, nature rules over men, men serves nature.

 

Religion was born on the day that we made nature serve us. The day that we left mother, headed into the unknown, in seek of fire, knowledge. But in order to succeed we have to stand up to the challenges of satans. In the end we will return to mother nature with our treasures or die playing with fire.

[goldisheavy]

I've heard thoughts like this before. You just can't trust anybody!

 

 

 

Hmm, I dunno. Human nature is pretty insidious like that.

 

"Oh, yes, thank you for telling me to rebel, you showed me not to just follow people blindly. Now please, oh rebellious leader, tell me what I should rebel against next!"

 

It's hard to be truly rebellious and free thinking. I think a significant portion of those who say they are, aren't. They've just supplanted one overt authority for a subversive authority. They tell themselves they are making their own decisions, but they are not.

 

And that is far, FAR more dangerous, IMHO.

 

Rebelling makes no sense without the idea of authority. A person rebels when one wants to replace one authority with another.

 

If you just ignore authority and live your life as you see fit, what is there to rebel against?

[Birch]

Rebelling makes no sense without the idea of authority. A person rebels when one wants to replace one authority with another.

 

If you just ignore authority and live your life as you see fit, what is there to rebel against?

 

Your own sense of it? The internalized authority. I've had experiences of feeling physically scared/sick when I've done something that goes against the grain, even if that grain is ludicrous.

 

Reminds me of Alex in Clockwork Orange.

[Cat Pillar]

Your own sense of it? The internalized authority. I've had experiences of feeling physically scared/sick when I've done something that goes against the grain, even if that grain is ludicrous.

 

Reminds me of Alex in Clockwork Orange.

 

I've had that feeling before. Very unpleasant, nasty feeling.

[Sloppy Zhang]

Your own sense of it? The internalized authority. I've had experiences of feeling physically scared/sick when I've done something that goes against the grain, even if that grain is ludicrous.

 

Reminds me of Alex in Clockwork Orange.

 

I've had that feeling before. Very unpleasant, nasty feeling.

 

Same here.

 

I'm really starting to wonder if it is a "true" authority, or just one that's been so deeply embedded for so long that I feel incredibly uncomfortable without it.

[goldisheavy]

Exactly. I think many people are getting it. When I relax, sometimes I notice my subconscious mind will produce a thought that's completely in line with convention and that I personally completely disagree with. The convention that I don't like is my own inner reality. The good news is: I know where the target is and I can reprogram it at will. And do.