July 11, 2008

Atheists Are Satanists?

Or is it, satanists are atheists? In a recent article I just read, there is a custody battle going on between a satanist named Jamie Meyer, and his wife that wants her children to be dropped off at a Christian Church on Sunday so they can attend Church with her.

Meyer is a real winner, with his tattoo showing the "t" in satan's name on his left leg, drawn to look like an upside-down cross. Also, this is Jamie Meyer's second failed marriage. Misty Hoff, his first ex-wife, said he already has alienated his oldest daughter by calling her a hypocrite for her Christian beliefs. What a real man this guy is, Pffft.

But the part that threw me back is what Peter Gilmore, high priest of the Manhattan-based satanism organization said: "Satanism is the world's first carnal religion, Satanists are thus atheists—not devil worshipers—and we see Satan as being a symbol of pride, liberty and individualism, not a deity." (emphasis added)

Wow that sure does sound like the definition of modern secular humanism which is cloaked with the buzz word of atheism. My heart and prayers goes out to those poor children that have to put up with this while just trying to grow up. This is why God gave us the wisdom in 2 Corinthians 6:14 "Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?"

The real twist is that the burden is on the ex-wife to show that the religion of satanism was harmful to the children. Really? Satanism isn't harmful? Ah, American freedom, our forefathers would be proud. Atheism isn't harmful? How about guiding people into the eternal lake of fire. Is that harmful enough for you?

Satanists and atheists, arm in arm together forever, inseparable in that unquenchable fire,(Mark 9:43) outer darkness,(Matthew 22:13) a furnace of fire and a place where people wail and gnash their teeth,(Matthew 13:42) and a lake of fire.(Revelation 20:15) where the worm does not die and the fire is not quenched,(Mark 9:48) and where people are in agony in flames.(Luke 16:24)

Perhaps the most terrifying passage in the Bible describing hell says that men will "drink the wine of the wrath of God, which is mixed in full strength in the cup of His anger; and he will be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever; and they have no rest day and night." (Revelation 14:10-11)

Good luck with all of that atheists, satanists, secular humanists, or whatever you're calling yourselves this week. Please repent before it's too late.

15 comments:

  1. Satanists don't believe in God or Satan. This is old news, very old news.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi Mike,

    Atheists or satanists don't believe in God or satan, correct? Let me ask you something then, as an atheist does it bother you the label for yourself is interchangeable with satanists? Does it disturb you in the slightest that the description for atheists is one in the same as satanists? What does your conscience tell you? Have you ever cringed when you realized the correlation?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Dan, this is a ridiculous bit of logic. You are saying all satanists are atheists therefor atheists are all satanists. I don't care that we differ in our opinions of God but at least try to use logic properly.

    By your use of logic I could say "All women are humans therefor humans are all women." Obviously, that is incorrect.

    I know you want to try to plug all nonbelievers as evil but it simply isn't true.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hi Dan,

    Good question.

    That doesn't bother me in the least. Why would it? They decide to drape their beliefs in some sort of symbolism. It's not a symbolism I would use, but it doesn't make them bad people, except from the Christian perspective of them being depraved non-Christians.

    ReplyDelete
  5. doubting foo,

    That would be a great analogy if it weren't for one thing. There is a distinction between woman and men, as humans. There is no said distinction between satanists and atheists. There is nothing obvious that distinguishes the difference between the two. The beliefs are one in the same. I can see why you would pigeonhole it into some fallacy but that just isn't the case here. They are one in the same, interchangeable.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Frankly, I'm surprised anyone decided to comment on this one, but since they have...

    There is nothing obvious that distinguishes the difference between the two. The beliefs are one in the same. I can see why you would pigeonhole it into some fallacy but that just isn't the case here. They are one in the same, interchangeable.

    Excellent. Then you will quickly admit that there is nothing obvious that distinguishes between Jehovah's Witnesses and True Christians™. The beliefs are one and the same. I can see why you would pigeonhole it into some fallacy, but that just isn't the case here. They are one and the same, interchangeable.

    Wait a minute...

    --
    Stan

    ReplyDelete
  7. How am I confused? Please educate my feeble mind as to the difference, please.

    Jehovah's Witness denies the deity of Christ, His physical resurrection, and salvation by grace. This alone makes it non-Christian. The differences are very apparent and transparent. The atheist and satanist comparison isn't.

    Again apples and oranges

    ReplyDelete
  8. Apples and oranges is right! You should be open a fruit stand.

    You found one article where some kook satanist says they are atheists then use poor logic skills to make the assertion that the opposite is true.

    While SOME atheists may also have effed up ideas about how the world works you cannot say ALL do.

    They way you are twisting this logic you might as well call Hindus atheist.

    ReplyDelete
  9. And of course, Hindus would be the least Atheistic of us all. :-)

    ReplyDelete
  10. How am I confused? Please educate my feeble mind as to the difference, please.

    I have neither the time nor the patience to properly educate your feeble mind, but I will briefly detail how it is that your equivocation of Satanists and atheists is directly analogous to my equivocation of True Christians™ and Jehovah's Witnesses.

    First, you mentioned the "distinction between woman and men, as humans", by which you pretty clearly mean the physical distinction. You cited this to show that the difference between men and women is "obvious", whereas, according to you, "[t]here is no said distinction between satanists and atheists. There is nothing obvious that distinguishes the difference between the two."

    To wit, then, the "obvious" difference between men and women (and you haven't seen many transvestites, or extremely effeminate men, or extremely "butch" women, I gather) is incomparable to the differences between Satanists and atheists. Likewise, the differences between True Christians™ and Jehovah's Witnesses are just as incomparable (to penis vs. vagina comparisons).

    Secondly, you make the further assertion that "[t]he beliefs [of Satanists and atheists] are one [and] the same", with not even the slightest attempt at argument. My equivalent assertion, therefore, that 'the beliefs of True Christians™ and Jehovah's Witnesses are one and the same', is equally valid.

    Of course, each of us is quite aware that a Typical Christian™ does not view a Jehovah's Witness as his peer, just like a Typical Atheist™ does not view a Satanist as his peer, so why make such asinine assertions?

    Are you intentionally being misleading, are you making a weak attempt at satire, or are you just trying to spew vitriol?

    To the uninitiated layperson, there is indeed no difference between a True Christian™ and a Jehovah's Witness -- they each attend a church on Sunday, they each claim the bible as the holy word of god, etc. Indeed, because of my knowledge of their beliefs, I could take this further, but we're talking about laypersons with no specific understanding of either case.

    In a typical IQ test, a question such as the following will appear:

    If all ginns are dirps, what can be said of dirps?

    A) Some dirps are ginns
    B) All dirps are ginns
    C) No dirps are ginns
    D) Nothing specific can be said about dirps


    Here, you have so thoroughly filled the circle for (B) that no amount of erasing could deny that you had chosen it as the answer, and as a result, your determined IQ will have suffered by at least 20 points.

    Seriously -- why would you make such an egregious error?

    Let me ask you something then, as an atheist does it bother you the label for yourself is interchangeable with satanists? Does it disturb you in the slightest that the description for atheists is one in the same as satanists? What does your conscience tell you? Have you ever cringed when you realized the correlation?

    I ignored this initially, but its relevance is growing with each post. Let's try a different tact:

    Let me ask you something then, as a True Christian™ does it bother you the label for yourself is interchangeable with Roman Catholics? Does it disturb you in the slightest that the description for True Christians™ is one in the same as Roman Catholics? What does your conscience tell you? Have you ever cringed when you realized the correlation?

    I see the foot is on the other hand, now.

    You're obviously aware that the Baskin-Robbins label "Christian" comes in many more than 31 flavors, and you have argued many times that your version of Christianity is the only True Christianity™ (nevermind the special pleading such an argument necessarily entails), and you are quite aware that Atheism has only one base tenet: the denial of any deity.

    Obviously, Satanists can be atheists if they like, just as Roman Catholics can be Christians if they like, but neither Satanists nor Roman Catholics speak for all of Atheism or all of Christendom, respectively. Certainly, not all Christians are Roman Catholics, and just as certainly, not all atheists are Satanists.

    You can stop now.

    --
    Stan

    ReplyDelete
  11. "If all ginns are dirps, what can be said of dirps?"

    Hilariously poignant!

    Comparing the RCC as true Christians is frustrating I will admit and I understand.

    I will stop, funny man Stan.

    Touché

    ReplyDelete
  12. A concession!

    Woot!

    Now I can die a happy man.

    Of course, if you're at all correct, that happiness will be short-lived, to be replaced with everlasting torment...

    But hey, one moment of happiness is worth it, right?

    --
    Stan

    ReplyDelete
  13. I think there is some much-needed clarification on the definitions of certain words in this thread.

    First of all, there are two kinds of Satanists. There are theistic Satanists, who consider Satan to be a real entity that they worship. (BTW, I think these guys are totally posing.)

    Then there are LaVeyan Satanists, who regard Satan as a philosophical symbol of indulgence and freedom. They are generally either atheists or agnostics. (BTW, I think these guys fail at PR forever.)

    Secondly, atheism is not a religion, it is a lack of belief in gods and higher powers. We atheists do not believe in God or Satan in the same way that you don't believe in Odin, Ra, or Amaterasu. One could say that Christians and atheists are very much alike - the only difference is that you believe in one more god than we do.

    There are some atheists who are also Buddhists, Jains, Secular Jews, etc., and yes, even some LaVeyan Satanists. But not all LaVeyan Satanists are atheists, and atheists are certainly not by any means always Satanists.

    Squares can be rectangles, but rectangles can't be squares. It's that kind of thing.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Mira,

    >>Secondly, atheism is not a religion, it is a lack of belief in gods and higher powers.

    First, the US has determined that Atheism is indeed a religion and you have the same rights as any not for profit, faith based organization. Secondly you do promote a philosophy of secular humanism even though your attempt in skewing the proper definition.

    Second, (a)--prefix meaning "not," "without" from L. a-, short for ab "away from" (cf. avert), or its cognate, Gk. a-, short for apo "away from, from," both cognate with Skt. apa "away from," Goth. af, O.E. of.

    theist--from Gk. theos "god"

    For grins, I also looked both atheist and atheism up.

    Atheist--1571, from Fr. athéiste (16c.), from Gk. atheos "to deny god, godless," from a- "without" + theos "a god"

    Atheism--1587, from Fr. athéisme (16c.), from Gk. atheos "without god".

    Third there is no such thing as neutrality to a worldview. You have picked a side.

    Y'all have denominations, y'all organize camps to indoctrinate your philosophy to young children, y'all publish books and promote atheism. You definitely belong to a religion!

    ReplyDelete
  15. Mira,

    Thanks for the submission to the FSTDT archives. I feel honored.

    ReplyDelete

Bring your "A" game. To link: <a href="url">text</a>