Satanic Bible

lol its funny how after i actually decide to drop that argument entirely (which i normally never do) you just press on and ignore the actual topic, still.

Here it is, your moment of zen.

KristallNacht wrote:lol its funny how after i actually decide to drop that argument entirely (which i normally never do) you just press on and ignore the actual topic, still.

KristallNacht wrote:this still isn't about christianity. its about atheist satanism.

so discuss atheistic satanism.



which will probably be hard for you guys having not read it.

I'm an atheist, I'm not christian or Satanist. When you think about it, God doesn't really seem even logical.
I mean, really, what the heck is it doing up there? And why can it kill people without consequence when we can't?
It makes no sense at all. Why aren't we already up there? (heaven, etc. etc.) Did it have a motive for creating the universe? How did it get there? If it was created, something else must have made it first.

Therefore, God has no reason to exist, and no way to exist. Also note, I still believe in an afterlife, just not god or satan.

Rotaretilbo wrote:

Oh, I can do this too.

Organizations based around atheism and humanism are full of fucking RETARDS.

See how easy that was? You know why it isn't a valid argument? I'll give you a hint. It has something to do with a ceiling that has no support columns or other weight-baring structures holding it up. ;)

Good thing i'm not an atheist or humanist, or if I was, not apart of one of those organizations.

There are many points that can be brought up on why the Catholic Church is wrong, however, most of those points I could give a shit less about.

KristallNacht wrote:lol its funny how after i actually decide to drop that argument entirely (which i normally never do) you just press on and ignore the actual topic, still.

Dropping an argument and trying to discredit the counter arguments by refusing to continue the argument are different things. Dropping an argument would actually mean admission of being wrong.

Further, you may have missed it, but I clearly outlined why the topic I am talking about it completely relevant to this thread. Simply put, a major premise of Satanism is that Christianity is inherently wrong. This is a point you've been pushing since the beginning. Thus, if Christianity were to not be inherently wrong as you espouse, then Satanism would run into some problems.

Gauz wrote:Good thing i'm not an atheist or humanist, or if I was, not apart of one of those organizations.

Then what are you? Agnostics are belligerent against any particular side.

Gauz wrote:There are many points that can be brought up on why the Catholic Church is wrong, however, most of those points I could give a shit less about.

And I'd be one of the first to bring them up. But the Catholic Church is not the best representation of Christianity, or have you not been paying attention during every religious debate that's happened on this site in the past year?

I'm technically a Catholic, I just disagree with much of what the church says and believes in. My parents are my connection to it.

I stopped paying attention when the argument went from God to Time (wtf) or something along thoose lines.

Gauz wrote:I'm technically a Catholic, I just disagree with much of what the church says and believes in. My parents are my connection to it.

I stopped paying attention when the argument went from God to Time (wtf) or something along thoose lines.

Technically? What do you believe, Gauz? That's what determines what you are. Not what your parents believe. You clearly don't believe in the Bible, believe it's filled with trash, and hate Catholicism, so you are definitely not a Catholic.

My beliefs are in question, and I guess you can call me agnostic, orj ust unsure. I believe in morals and certain ideas and qualities from different religions, or whatever I just think is right. Honestly, I just dont like the catholic church because they almost try to force god and their beliefs on us and I just dont like that.

I dont know what i'd call myself, but if I did, I still wouldn't care.

I pull that statement, I now am apart of the church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

There's a difference between disliking certain practices by the Catholic Church and calling the entire Bible trash.

I dont think the entire bible is trash, I just think parts of it are hypocritical, redundant, and hateful.

Gauz wrote:I dont think the entire bible is trash, I just think parts of it are hypocritical, redundant, and hateful.

Hateful? What do you want? A book filled with love and compassion?

And it is hypocrital because more than one person created it. Thus they did not all share the same opinons.

And it is redundant for that same reason.

But it is still a book with good morals with or without the shiny gift wrap.

Zaki90 wrote:

Gauz wrote:I dont think the entire bible is trash, I just think parts of it are hypocritical, redundant, and hateful.

Hateful? What do you want? A book filled with love and compassion?

And it is hypocrital because more than one person created it. Thus they did not all share the same opinons.

And it is redundant for that same reason.

But it is still a book with good morals with or without the shiny gift wrap.

Well, for a religion that says show love and compassion, I would love for the book to be filled with love and compassion. Although, it's ok you flood the entire planet. Cause God can do that shit.

can we actually talk about the premises of Atheistic Satanism?


and Rot, if you had read the Satanic Bible, you'd notice the book gives no more time to the beliefs of Christianity than most ther religions. the only thing that gives it more focus is the fact Christians attack Satanism and Satanism addresses the claims.

KristallNacht wrote:can we actually talk about the premises of Atheistic Satanism?


and Rot, if you had read the Satanic Bible, you'd notice the book gives no more time to the beliefs of Christianity than most ther religions. the only thing that gives it more focus is the fact Christians attack Satanism and Satanism addresses the claims.

Of the quotes you provided, which were supposed to represent the essence of Satanism, the two largest directly address Christian beliefs. Further, many other beliefs are simply the opposite of Christian beliefs. Rather than avoid the topic, address the topic, either with an argument or admission of defeat. You had no trouble arguing religion with death and Zaki, so you should have no reason to suddenly want to shift the topic when I show up.

Wait a second... Because a couple quotes out of the entire book are the opposite of chrisitanity and christianity isn't even mentioned, the entire book is about christianity now? That's really flawed.

Angatar wrote:Wait a second... Because a couple quotes out of the entire book are the opposite of chrisitanity and christianity isn't even mentioned, the entire book is about christianity now? That's really flawed.

Try reading what he said again.

Your argument his horribly flawed.

Angatar wrote:Wait a second... Because a couple quotes out of the entire book are the opposite of chrisitanity and christianity isn't even mentioned, the entire book is about christianity now? That's really flawed.

Actually, it was because the few quotes that NT chose to represent the book in the first post either directly mention and try to discredit Christianity or try to discredit general Christian values, and because, from what NT's said, the book's core value is do whatever the Bible says not to, and don't do whatever the Bible says to. If you'd actually read my entire post, or even the entire paragraph you were responding to, you might have already known that, since I already said it.

Rotaretilbo wrote:the book's core value is do whatever the Bible says not to, and don't do whatever the Bible says to.

yeah right dude.

The book's core value is indulging your urges as long as it hurts nobody.

KristallNacht wrote:yeah right dude.

The book's core value is indulging your urges as long as it hurts nobody.

Then why are there passages that you yourself chose to represent the book about how loving everyone is not only impossible, but stupid to even try?

And which urges truly hurts nobody? The only one I can think of off hand is masturbation.

Rotaretilbo wrote:
Then why are there passages that you yourself chose to represent the book about how loving everyone is not only impossible, but stupid to even try?

And which urges truly hurts nobody? The only one I can think of off hand is masturbation.

eating. sexual fetishes. the list goes on.

and only one passage addresses the idea of loving everyone.

KristallNacht wrote:eating.

Gluttony can lead to some very serious health issues, which will in turn affect others around you.

KristallNacht wrote:sexual fetishes.

Suppose it depends on what the sexual fetish is. Bondage certainly hurts other people. :p

But even then, sexual fetishes are only truly harmless if you are only sleeping with people who have the same sexual fetish. Otherwise, you'll likely end up causing some kind of emotional damage. More importantly, if you're sleeping around, you're almost guaranteed to be causing emotional damage to at least some of the people you choose to sleep with, because not everyone is perfectly hunky dory with having sex with whoever you want whenever you want and it meaning nothing after that.

KristallNacht wrote:the list goes on.

Then why not expand it for us.

KristallNacht wrote:and only one passage addresses the idea of loving everyone.

You considered it important enough to put in the main post. Seems to be a handful of passages, but beyond the point. And while only one passage addresses loving everyone, how many address never turning the other cheek or only loving those who "deserve" your love?

And even now, you're avoiding my arguments from before. I've established that Christianity is relevant. You haven't even bothered to try and counter the points denoting Christianity is relevant. As can be seen in this thread, you had no qualms about arguing about Christianity before, and made several very radical claims about it without a second thought. Why is arguing about Christianity in this thread suddenly taboo?

NT, the idea of indulgence without hurting yourself/others has already been accomplished. It's called the US Constitution.

However, it's extremely easy to hurt yourself/others, so there are many things that are outlawed.

Rotaretilbo wrote:
Gluttony can lead to some very serious health issues, which will in turn affect others around you.

and then indulging in your PRIDE will cause you to return your body to a better condition, so indulging in both your gluttony and pride will balance out.

rot wrote:More importantly, if you're sleeping around, you're almost guaranteed to be causing emotional damage to at least some of the people you choose to sleep with, because not everyone is perfectly hunky dory with having sex with whoever you want whenever you want and it meaning nothing after that.

well, 1. lots of people do, and rarely is it emotionally damaging except where cheating is involved. and 2. its still a choice someone else is making. that person is still choosing to sleep with you, so emotional damage done to them is of their making, just as emotional damage done to you is of your making.

rot wrote:expand it for it

try all 7 deadly sins.

rot wrote:

You considered it important enough to put in the main post. Seems to be a handful of passages, but beyond the point. And while only one passage addresses loving everyone, how many address never turning the other cheek or only loving those who "deserve" your love?

1 chapter of the Book of Lucifer. most of the chapters focus on single ideas.

maybe you should try reading it, rot. since all your questions are answered right in the book.

KristallNacht wrote:

Rotaretilbo wrote:
Gluttony can lead to some very serious health issues, which will in turn affect others around you.

and then indulging in your PRIDE will cause you to return your body to a better condition, so indulging in both your gluttony and pride will balance out.

Yah... because people are fat because they refuse to indulge their pride.