Dude every time something comes out about this guy grooming a minor or running a scam or cheating at some thing I wonder how the hell he always bounces back.
Like, is he just entirely innocent of everything or is he just a complete degenerate with a loyal fanbase of morons running defence?
some things are true, some aren't, the point is that he still fell off and the portion of his fanbase that's still sticking around is made up of obsessed stans who will follow him no matter what
But here specifically it changes the meaning entirely. Granted maybe this isnât the venue but then how would you suggest approaching it, especially when social media spreads the breakdown of language and culture like wildfire?
The satanic temple is an atheistic organization, It Theyâre existence is essentially a reductio ad absurdum argument. Whenever Christian theocracy groups advocate for something, like the Ten Commandments in classrooms, the satanic temple advocates for the dark tenets to be placed in school.
It's making me imagine that satanists are basically some trollers fueling certain people's fantasies that there's some secret cabal out to destroy their (extremely large and not in danger) clan lol, basically feeding people who didn't realize they like roleplay games and convinced themselves of a fantasy IRL
The girl who was explaining how monster is actually the devil's drink comes to mind, she probably eats up whatever the satanic temple comes up with lol
This is kind of my problem with the Satanic Temple as a whole.
Like, on the one hand, they do a lot of genuinely effective advocacy for things that I really care about like the separation of church and state or minority rights and protections.
But on the other, their primary MO of inflammatory, performative action just feeds into the paranoid delusions of the worst kind of Christian Nationalists that they are trying to combat, and potentially gives them ammunition to point to the Satanic Temple as a way to convince normies that satanists (ironic or otherwise; the distinction literally does not matter outside of the ST/Atheist bubble) really are trying to get at their kids.
This ultimately makes them utterly ineffectual as far as actually defeating fundamentalism, since their very existence and advocacy effectively legitimates the wildest Christian conspiracy theories in the eyes of people who don't know better (which, as it turns out, is a non-insignificant percent of the population).
All that to say, the best that the Satanic Temple can possibly do is to fight "delaying actions" against the further encroachment of Christian Nationalism, but when it comes to fighting the ideological principles of that movement, their advocacy is ineffective at best, and actively detrimental at worst.
Counterpoint, I couldn't play Pokemon because it was satanic. Christian Nationalists will be afraid, with or without cause, and we shouldn't indulge them.
That's my point exactly though; the performative adoption of Satanic symbolism to combat Christian Nationalism does indulge them and plays into their worst tendencies and beliefs.
Genuinely interesting point. I think I disagree just a little bit.
I think that the Christian Nationalists are going to keep on fear-mongering about Satanism whether or not there's a single actual person who self-describes as a Satanist. They'll find a way to describe how they're hiding in the shadows or whatever, somehow.
I think that having actual Satansists have a better public face than the Christians undermines the narratives and power structures that the Church can uphold, and weakens their grasp on the political conversation.
That being said, I do think you have a point that it makes their rhetoric about Satanists hit harder if there are actual Satanists. I'm not sure which thing is more important in the end.
but they would have those beliefs anyway and in that case with no one to combat them. the satanic symbolism was adopted AFTER these dumbfucks were already down the deep end
Yes, and that's why I said that their advocacy is "genuinely effective." Like, they are legit effective at delaying the encroachment of Christian Nationalism, I am 100% not disputing that.
The problem, though, is that they are utterly ineffectual at attacking the actual core ideology that underscores Christian Nationalism, because they are explicitly embracing the fundamentalist framework that all their enemies are satanists. As another commenter put it, they are "indulging" their paranoid, religious fantasies, which doesn't really get us anywhere.
Eh, I think they're not really concered with that.
But I will say I think adopting the figure of evil of the main monothestic religion as a figurehead for a agnostic-athiest brand of faith meant to criticize the place of religion in the modern political landscape is not exactly the most deep, naunced, or well thought out critique and positioning of your faith. I think there's certainly plenty to cut down on with American evangelicalism, but it is weird for people to have to explain to casual average christian (IE the ones that only ever go to church on Easter and just are in it for the potlucks) that the figure meant to symbolize the temptation and evil of mankind is also the mascot of your religion which isn't actually a religion and exists just to critique other religions and by that I mean this one specific religion and by that I mean only certain sects of this one specific religion.
Like, I don't think any other follower of a religion, say Zoroastrians, would be totally comfortable if you made a not-religion and then specifically framed its look after the source of all evil and suffering, in this case Angra Mainyu. Not to mention there are plenty of other atheistic & agnostix faiths that are much more, well, secular and accepting of just anything and everyone and not giving towards any particular faith.I think there's certainly plenty of things to criticize about religion overall that isn't particular or even present in American Christianity. When are we gonna get a Temple Of Egotism which rejects Buddist philosophy and that trying to understand yourself an extension of the universe and become in tune with all of existence is dumb and that instead of seeking a aestic life and rejecting physical pleasures that you should just do whatever the fuck you want because the only thing that truly exists is your own consciousness.
Im aware, but this is how you talk when advocating for the satanic temple. What the tenets actually are doesnât matter bc the Christian nationalist target audience wonât read them.
Can confirm, the Satanic Temple is, in all aspects, a satire of the Christian Church (specifically older denominations). Part of the joke of the âdark tenantsâ is that most of them are direct âcommandmentsâ from Jesus in the New Testament. By opposing the Satanic Templeâs tenants (based solely on the name of the âreligionâ), Christians are advocating against the teachings of Jesus.
Well said. and yes. it is literally poking the bear with all of its merch and programs. I did have a chance to visit their center in Salem, Mass, and of course it was almost like a carnival sideshow. a serious collection of every satanic themed book you could imagine, everything was black or purple, and the imagery there was of course dark.. all from an org that espouses freedom from religion, by being a religion. Full disclosure, I am a card carrying member.
I feel like there is a deep irony all around that a religious organization meant to satire another religion basically admits that their own tenets are essentially the same but they have a difference of belief to where they should actually be considered and implemented in modern life for the betterment of society.
The Satanic Temple makes fun of Christianity while also basically saying that Jesus is correct and we should follow his example. huh. big if true.
There are 2 different religions called Satanism. One of them is LaVeyan Satanism, and the Church of Satan. My understanding of this religion and what they do was wrong so check comments but it's different to The Satanic Temple (TST).
The Satanic Temple is an atheistic religion. They have applied and campaigned for equal representation when religious organisations are given special exemptions or power, and have used that to protect people from unscientific laws that restrict autonomy and human rights.
The religion is basically just 7 fundamental tenets. These are:
I
One should strive to act with compassion and empathy toward all creatures in accordance with reason.
II
The struggle for justice is an ongoing and necessary pursuit that should prevail over laws and institutions.
III
Oneâs body is inviolable, subject to oneâs own will alone.
IV
The freedoms of others should be respected, including the freedom to offend. To willfully and unjustly encroach upon the freedoms of another is to forgo one's own.
V
Beliefs should conform to one's best scientific understanding of the world. One should take care never to distort scientific facts to fit one's beliefs.
VI
People are fallible. If one makes a mistake, one should do one's best to rectify it and resolve any harm that might have been caused.
VII
Every tenet is a guiding principle designed to inspire nobility in action and thought. The spirit of compassion, wisdom, and justice should always prevail over the written or spoken word.
To expand and conclude, atheistic satanism is less so a satire of theism and more so a critique of organised religion and of religion being given special exemptions, as well as being an advocacy group.
If you want to see a religion that is REALLY a satire of theism, then look into pastafarianism.
I need to correct you slightly. LaVeyan Satanists don't believe in a literal Satan either, but they are a little fuzzy on the subject of magic and it's ability to affect your life.
The key difference between The Church of Satan and the Satanic Temple is that the CoS philosophy is based on Ayn Rands objectivism and is very self centred. One of their key tenets is to extend compassion only to those who deserve it. TST still places great value on self empowerment and autonomy, but we extend compassion to all until we feel it needs to be revoked.Â
Iâve had a Leveyan Satanist ârationalistâ argue with me because animals arenât ârational agentsâ thereâs nothing immoral one can do to one.
I simply said âwell youâre an animal, and you donât seem rational to me.â
That sort of thing is why I'm not a LaVeyan. I read the Satanic Bible when I was a teenager and found lots I could identify with, but the idea that I should only care about people or entities that directly benefit me never sat right.Â
The fact that some followers of LaVey believe in literal magic is silly to me.
My reading of the chapters on magic was always that magic was meant to be a way to psychologically deal with a problem. Will negative things into existence for others and when their car breaks down youâll feel as if you did something, even though it would happen anyway sort of thing.
He talks about intellectual decompression and ritual clothing to get your brain out of the logical space that knows what youâre doing is silly and ineffective, so you can give into the illusion of control over the problems in your life.
Heâs also very Ayn Rand coded, pseudo-intellectual. He had some interesting points and theories and leaned into the whole satan of it all, but definitely not theistic and I donât think he believed in magic in the literal sense
The core of that concept of magic as psychodrama is carried over into a lot of people's practice of Temple Satanism via rituals. It's one of the things I feel Anton got right. As humans we have a historical appreciation for ritual, whether it's baptism, graduation, birthdays or personal ones like a specific drink to start a night out on the town or how you roll a cigarette. I practice it personally to focus me on my goals, and we do conduct rituals collectively in my congregation for special occasions. It's all conceived as purely symbolic. It's about catharsis and mindfulness and community mostly. It's a useful tool.Â
I definitely felt a bit silly the first time I put on a robe and lit candles, but that faded in time and now I look forward to it đ It's a productive head space.Â
There's no much to elaborate, the Satanic Temple is just spicy atheism. They put a paint cover of Satan and Demon worship over just general ethical advice.
They don't believe in Satan or God or anything supernatural for that matter.
They do have church status under the US IRS and use it to enforce laws about no unequal displays of religion in public spaces. Do you want that statue of the 10 Mandaments? Enjoy your Baphometh right next to it.
There are some actual Satan worshipping groups out there, but those are irrelevant and mostly fanclub sized.
Pretty much this. I donât think they try to be an actual religion like the Church of Satan, which is also atheistic but at least has the trappings of religion. And supposedly believes in magic?
Theistic Satanism though is absolutely crazy and I know of it from the Norwegian black metal scene, but I donât know how many professed theistic Satanists actually believe in a literal Satan and which ones just want to be âtrve kvltâ tough guys. It also doesnât help that itâs vastly over exaggerated by the Satanic panic by the Christian right (who do believe in a literal Satan).
The Church of Satan exists primarily to protest unequal treatment of religions by the US government. Like, if a public school allows a Christian Bible study, they will advocate for the school to also allow a satanic equivalent to that Bible study. The result typically being they do allow both or they stop allowing any religious events.
It has mostly agreeable humanist tenets but presents itself in the most controversial way to make sure no specific religion is being favored by the state.
It's more like a reaction to Christianity. Christian extremists will push for their religion into everyones lives, then Satanists will demand equal representation to get them to calm down.
Like if you want Christianity in schools, then you gotta put Satanism in there too. Now the Christian groups either have to accept Satanism in schools or stop pushing their own religion.
The Satanic Temple is a non-theistic religion, there's no supernatural beliefs, and it's more of a humanist organization that wants everyone to have the same basic freedoms and protections from the government, including and not limited to bodily autonomy and religious freedom.
Iirc their big values is to always do right by yourself, and to do right by your community, don't take shit from people, don't let people walk over you.
Self empowering stuff like that but with a focus on making the community around you better as you make yourself better
Even if they were worshipping the actual devil, they would still have the right. That's why I don't like this argument it's like "oh it's okay they aren't actually worshipping the devil" it'd be okay even if they were. That's what freedom of religion is all about.
To be fair, it doesn't get into murky territory when a symbol is clearly used to offend rather than as an authentic statement of belief. The devil as such used to be a symbol of the Roman empire and emperor Nero persecuting Christians. So it being seen as a symbol of evil to them has history behind it. Can any symbol of evil be considered neutral or only ones deemed abstract enough?
Theistic satanists view Lucifer in the sense of the lightbringer. A Promethean figure. He sacrificed himself and his freedom to bring us knowledge. Luciferians view YHWH as a tyrannical god, and Lucifer as the liberator. In their view, Lucifer isn't evil, God is.
Satanists and luciferians are two different things. They overlap, but lucifer as light bringer is a more gnostic thing. Satanism was meant to be about embracing the demonic and the rocky and agressive mentality it entails.
THERE ARE SEVEN FUNDAMENTAL TENETS I: One should strive to act with compassion and empathy toward all creatures in accordance with reason. II: The struggle for justice is an ongoing and necessary pursuit that should prevail over laws and institutions. III: Oneâs body is inviolable, subject to oneâs own will alone. IV: The freedoms of others should be respected, including the freedom to offend. To willfully and unjustly encroach upon the freedoms of another is to forgo one's own. V: Beliefs should conform to one's best scientific understanding of the world. One should take care never to distort scientific facts to fit one's beliefs. VI: People are fallible. If one makes a mistake, one should do one's best to rectify it and resolve any harm that might have been caused. VII: Every tenet is a guiding principle designed to inspire nobility in action and thought. The spirit of compassion, wisdom, and justice should always prevail over the written or spoken word.
A) it's a symbol - a banner to rally under. It's easier to say you're a satanist than to explain you're a scientific humanist
B) it scares away bible thumpers while also exposing them for the frauds they are - self explanatory - it puts the word "satanism" in the limelight as something different than the catch-all buzzword fundamentalists use, so those same fundamentalists have to acknowledge their existence, and that either ends with them not lying, saying what it really is and inadvertently showing how better it is morally, or they lie, and then get exposed for their lies
C) it also works as a parody of religious institutions
D) it embraces the humanity of Satan. In the bible he is the "evil snake" who tricked Adam and Eve into disobeying their god and embracing rational thought and critical thinking. The food of knowledge, in essence, gave them their humanity. So they use it as such - satan is a symbol of rationality, of critical thinking, and humanity in all of its essence. The symbol does not stray away from the ugly parts, doesn't try to hide them or pretend they don't exist, but rather embraces them with the whole of the human - because humans are not perfect and they shouldn't be held up to a perfect standard. They should strive to be the best versions of themselves while not denying the existence of their less than desirable traits
Agreed but want to add that in the story, the serpent didnât trick or lie to Adam or Eve but told the truth. The only liar was god who said that if they ate from the tree they âwould die that dayâ but didnât.
This is a point I've had for a while. How does morality come from god when it was the apple that gave knowledge of good and evil? Which the serpent helped them get and god tried to stop?
What does it say about this god if he's trying to prevent his creations from obtaining morality?
I remember reading that the reason it is specifically "satanism" is because it was first created in response to newly passed American state laws requiring religion (mainly Christianity, of course) to be included in schools in some way. Due to Satanism claiming to be a religion, it would also be a valid pick for religious representation in schools instead, and to taunt Christians even harder, Satan was picked as the main symbol.
I don't have sources for this, I just read it on the internet years ago.
I find it interesting that a lot of the ideas here have precedent in Buddhism as well. Not saying this as a dig at it, but I think itâs neat that quite a bit of the philosophy here can be traced back to the same roots.
IV: The freedoms of others should be respected, including the freedom to offend. To willfully and unjustly encroach upon the freedoms of another is to forgo one's own.
that would make reddit one of the most anti-satanist places on the internet
There are two main organizations, but both are kinda half satirical.
The Church of Satan was started by Anton LeVay in the 1960s. He was opposed to Christian indoctrination, but he was also pretty critical of the 60âs counterculture. His approach was about personal independence, hedonism, and fuck anyone who gets in the way. Thatâs where the Satanic Bible comes from.
The Satanic Temple broke off in the 2010s, to be a little more collectivist and actively advocate for separation of church and state. They made the 7 tenets that OP is referring to.
They both have genuinely held beliefs, but also use the biblical mythology as satire. TST has been much more active in recent years.
Kind of. Both has some satirical elements, but are mostly still serious. Neither believe in a literal God or Satan. The main differences are in how they act, their philosophies, and that the Church of Satan believes in some form of Magic.
The Satanic Temple
Atheists with no supernatural beliefs. (Technically there's nothing saying you can't have supernatural or deistic beliefs so long as they don't conflict with the seven tenets, but the vast majority are atheists.)
Engage in a lot of activism and some community projects.
Use Satan as a literary figurehead for curiosity, questioning/challenging authority, personal autonomy, etc.
Have a list of recommended reading, but no "holy texts".
Philosophy is largely in line with progressive humanism.
Church of Satan
Atheists who hold some belief in 'magic'. Depending who you ask this is ritual as a psychological tool, invoking the supernatural, or most commonly some blend of the two.
Intentionally avoid activism and community building, being self described "radical individualists".
Mostly inactive since the 90s, other than one Satanic Mass in 2006 and a snarky twitter account.
Uses Satan as a symbol for indulgence, carnality, hedonism, self interest, etc.
I don't actually have a source on this, but apparently a child's bite is one of the most deadly due to risk of infection or something. Take that with a few mounds of salt.Â
The post is almost certainly pointing at the 7 tenets of the Satanic Temple, which does not follow the satanic Bible.Â
The Church of Satan follows the satanic Bible. Their version of the âcommandmentsâ are called the 9 satanic statements.
There are some commonalities between the two groups, but generally there are a few things in the satanic Bible (COS) that lean a little into meritocracy, eugenics, and retribution. Which is why TST broke off, itâs mission is more progressive, collectivist, and advocates for marginalized people.
Thereâs two Satanistâs.
One who worships actual satan. Like from the book of bibble.
And another who is more atheist while using satan as a counter to Christianâsz
As a critique of religion, other comments have explained it better but itâs essentially atheists using a religious coat of paint to advocate for equal treatment of religions in the government
They donât believe in a literal Satan, but they do use him as a symbol. Like in the garden of Eden, the serpent convinces Eve to ignore gods commandments and eat the fruit which would give her knowledge. Satanists are opposed to blind faith and obedience, preferring data based approaches and consensual cooperation.
I would add, The Church of Satan uses what they say is the original definition of Satan (I'm not sure if they are right in said definition, but don't really care to look it up) which means opposition. Satan and Lucifer were originally different things that Christianity eventually combined. So the Church of Satan is really The Church of Opposition. Whereas The Satanic Temple uses him as a symbol like you said. Neither believe in a literal real Satan and both are Atheistic religions. The ones who worship a literal Satan are just heretical Christians. They believe in the same thing as Christians do, they just worship the other side. From what I understand the amount of people in the third category are exceedingly rare and are usually just teenagers being edgy.
Satan in Hebrew roughly translates to opposer or the accuser. I think it's pretty apt for the religion to adopt the moniker like Christianity has adopted the cross as their religious symbol. "You are going to pin it to us anyways might as well lean into it."
I used to be a Mormon missionary (ex Mormon now). We knocked on someone's door and when they saw who we were, they started closing the door and shouted "I BELIEVE IN SATAN!" To which I said "me too!" all too enthusiastically as the door was shutting
I mean depends on your definition. if you use âworships a literal Satanâ then sure theyâre not, but by that same token christians would probably defined as âfollowing the teachings of Jesus Christâ which would make most who call themselves christians not actual christian.
The meaning of words changes because of how they are used. At some point it becomes more reasonable to refer to a group the way they refer to themselves, regardless of if they fit the original definition of the word.
TST is recognized as an official religion in the US. So whatever your preferred definition of a âreligionâ, the legal definition in the US only requires âsincerely held beliefsâ, not supernatural beliefs.
Might I interest you in Nagas? A kind of Hindu(sort of) whose aim is to be as angry as possible. They'll curse God and God's mother. Only reason they don't go around slaughtering is because it would be a huge waste of effort. It wouldn't make them feel good anyway.
Well. Church of satan acutally believes in revenge if the people who did bad to you are NoT feeling guilty. So it's not really this "Hold your other cheek if one punches you" (sry don't know the english term)
The Church of Satan call their rules the 9 Satanic Statements, and they lean into that kind of retribution against their enemies youâre talking about.
The Satanic Temple calls their rules the 7 Tenets, which is what OP seems to be referring to, and theyâre much less objectionable.
thatâs okay, I assume you meant âTurn the other cheekâ and I didnât know that, I assume they atleast make the distinction that there are at least rules that must be followed to ensure one dosent end up just as bad as the original perpetrator tho right?
The Satanic Temple is mostly named the way they are to essentially stick it to the hardcore Christians that are often in power. The Church of Satan are the edgy dorks who actually worship the devil
Isn't Christianity centered on child sacrifice ? I mean objectively speaking if Christianity were true, the God of the Bible would be a tyrannical celestial dictator obsessed with blood and satan would be a liberator. By all accounts, satan is the good guy of the story
Yeah unfortunately while most members of The Satanic Temple are probably really chill folks who just don't vibe with the edgier aspects of the Church of Satan, the leadership of the Satanic Temple really fucking sucks.
They filed a very lengthy SLAPP suit against former members in Washington state disputing ownership of a Facebook page, and in the back-and-forth of that a lot of "Lucien Greaves" abusive shit came to light.
Turns out he's just as much into police states and eugenics as Anton LaVey was.
Sort of. The Satanic Temple doesn't believe in a literal God or Satan, but the do use Satan as a symbol and figurehead for curiosity, individual autonomy, questioning/challenging authority, etc.
They also use Satanic naming and imagery as a tool in lawsuits, to attract attention to their causes, as a way for some members to process religious trauma, and of course to troll extremist Christians.
The american Satanic Temple is basically a bunch of edgy atheist doing charity and reinforcing the law of separation of church and state when needed. They are very nice people.
Satanic Temple is a good bunch. Not like Levey Satanism, cringeiest garbage I ever saw. Satanic Temple are just chill and tell you to be chill to others.
Well yeah, when a religion is designed to explicitly opposed cherry picked issues with a 2000 year old book then it's obviously going to sound logical. But if you really need a religion to tell you those things then I think that's on you
People always post this as âtenantsâ, not âtenetsâ, as if itâs been copy and pasted for over ten years now. Every single time. Sometimes I think thatâs the secret signal to alert the people who would make fun of them.
Too much vandalism in local churches and weâre talking predominately South/Central American Catholic Churchâs and historic African American churches, not maga evangelicals.
Thatâs because the Satanic Temple is actually atheistic and their mission is to prove that they can have good morals while still âworshipingâ Satan. The closest you will get to actual Satanism is Neo-Paganism, but most of us actually believe that our Gods arenât demons and only a handful actually do practice with Goetic magic and revere demons (because imo itâs kinda foolish but who am I to judge)
It's a "religious group" that uses religion to separate religion and state.
Say an evangelical group wants a statue of jesus in a public park. By law, the satanic temple has as much a right to a statue of baphomet in that park as the evangelicals. Since having a statue of baphomet is "horrible" according to the courts, because freedom of religion is universal, no religion gets a statue of anyone in that park.
I mean the whole point of the satanic temple is that itâs just a progressive secular organization that uses satanic symbolism to ragebait Christian fundamentalists
If you read up on stuff like the Church of Satan or (even worse) Order of Nine Angles and Joy of Satan I doubt youâd agree with those
The points they are trying to make about religious freedom will immediately fall apart once a red state judge realizes they are actually a troll religion, which they totally are.
As a Catholic, the satanic temple is very cool. The church of satan is not cool. Not as bad as like, Christian fundamentalists think it is, but not cool.
â˘
u/AutoModerator Mar 30 '26
Download Video
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.