Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Thus Spake....Satan

Expand Messages
  • louise
    I find your approach over-intellectual, but you and I are on the same side. If you could find it in you to read Blake and Milton rather than to ignore or
    Message 1 of 5 , May 1, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      I find your approach over-intellectual, but you and I are on the
      same side. If you could find it in you to read Blake and Milton
      rather than to ignore or manipulate them you would come to see that.

      --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, Sexystud69_17@h... wrote:
      > <<I am allowed to have feelings.>>
      >
      > Of course you are, and no one is contesting that.
      >
      > <<you came back to post after an absence,>>
      >
      > I tend to do that. I post when the muse strikes me.
      >
      > <<accused me out of several possible candidates of rambling away
      from
      > the topic of academic existentialism>>
      >
      > This came after you made a vague critique of my response to Bill.
      I
      > didn't ask for unnecessary critique, and I don't want it. When I
      > post, I want a response that deals specifically with the topic,
      and
      > not your view of my posting style. If you need to ask questions,
      feel
      > free to do so. But, vague statements about being "explicit" are
      not
      > needed.
      >
      > <<I believe sentimentality is always a bad and brutal thing,
      whenever
      > it is 'used', rather than given way to.>>
      >
      > I, however, disagree. If one gives way to sentimentality, then
      they
      > obviously have little or no control over their sensibilities, or
      at
      > least it would seem that way. But, someone who uses sentimentality
      > would seem to have complete control, as well as, awareness of any
      > necessary limitations.
      >
      > <<"Badness" is the love of deceit for its own sake.>>
      >
      > I believe that deciet is a necessary tool of survival. However,
      like
      > sentimentality, it should be used in moderation and in the proper
      > context.
      >
      > <<'my' 'religious' 'Satan' is a mythic figure based on the poetry
      of
      > Milton and Blake, with especial reference to the first two books
      > of 'Paradise Lost', 'The Songs of Innocence and Experience'
      and 'The
      > Marriage of Heaven and Hell'. Then there is the 'Divine Comedy'
      of
      > Dante, and the drawings of Gustave Dore and the etchings of Blake
      > himself.>>
      >
      > So, your idea is based on works of fiction. Fine.
      >
      > <<You're hijacking a powerful mythos>>
      >
      > I'm not hijacking anything. Satanism simply gives the Satan of all
      > lores a voice to speak, and properly represent him-/herself.
      Except
      > Satan is merely a manifestation of natural human needs and
      desires.
      > Needs and desires that are erroneously labled as "sinful" by the
      > white-light religions.
      >
      > <<in order to fulfil your own neo-liberal cult of narcissistic
      > fulfilment.>>
      >
      > Wrong. Narcissism is extreme love for oneself. Satanism is neither
      a
      > cult nor neo-liberalism. It is a religion focused on many egoistic
      > philosophies.
      >
      > <<So why not ditch the 'Satanist' claim, or label, or whatever it
      > is.>>
      >
      > Because it compliments the ideas of Satanism. We are "adversaries"
      to
      > all ideologies, philosophies and religions that look to condemn
      > and/or lable humankind as wrong, sinful or evil because they
      choose
      > to live by the laws of nature, as opposed to the assanine laws
      > of "God", which are really the laws of man attributed to a god for
      > validity purposes.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.