Message from @ComradeChaos
Discord ID: 686775543429070878
can you give an example?
What you believe impacts how you relate to the truth and by extension you impact the truth through the reactions of other people
I am using an English system created by Kenneth Grant.
Principally Qabalah is a numerological, gematrical, comsological and ontological tool of manifestation or philosophy
Depending on how you use it
do you have an example
It's the way that concepts stack up on each other and the correlations you perceive. Consciousness comes from negative existence.
If there was a really powerful mind: a quantum computer perhaps, it may have the ability to affect reality through quantum entanglement and retrocausal forces
Or we could be the quantum computer of a system designed for a purpose different than its initial perceived intention of communication
What we saw as a new avenue for intercommunication was just actually handing intelligence agenices our inner most thoughts and primal desires.
We're developinga technology right now called "time crystals", a cutting edge technology for creating artificial minds for ais
Don't you find it interesting that from Lucifer's forehead fell an Emerald that would allow people to communicate with Demons and have visions?
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/04/170417155014.htm
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-981-10-8049-4_1
https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/5/9/eaaw9832
Principally, I believe that you can find truth through the lies we tell ourselves in the form of stories
It's just a ride, but it's all so real
What if we're in an infinite loop chasing perfection and the big I am is the roko basilisk
https://www.academia.edu/34056071/The_Serpent_as_a_Symbol_of_Primeval_Yahwism
@ComradeChaos do you have an example or no?
@ComradeChaos If you don't mind my asking, is it fair to assume you are a Christian? If so, do you belong to a particular denomination?
It's not fair to assume that he's a Christian
Paganism is disavowed in the Bible
What he does is practical satanism
> Satanism
Whatever flavor of Paganism he might follow is, in all likelihood, no way a form of LaVey's Satanism. I can only assume you're using the term "Satanism" as a form of catch all pejorative for all things bad which would be fine if you clarified that.
I suppose there exists some forms of Satanism that are heavily influenced by classical pagan thought and mythology and perhaps that's theoretically possible.
> I can only assume you're using the term "Satanism" as a form of catch all pejorative for all things bad
No, I am using the actual definition of satanism. I don't care how LaVey redefined the term to make it more appealing to edgy 15 year olds. Satanism predates LaVey and his edgy redefining of the term.
It has never been a defined religion until LaVey did so. Any use of "Satanism" before has only been a term levied at others to bring them down and to discredit them. If you're a Setian, afaik they probably see early Egyptian religion and depictions of Set as the earliest forms of "Satanism," but in the modern day it's not really the case.
I'd recommend reading *The Satanic Bible* if you really want to know more about the most popular form of Satanism today.
No. Prior use of Satanism was not used to merely discredit them, although that was a byproduct, because no one wants to affiliate with that which is evil, it was used to describe advocating that which is immoral, whilst being immoral. That's what satanism is. Him engaging in pagan practices is immoral
I'm familiar with LaVey's variant of satanism, any form of cringeworthy self worshiping nietszhe style individualism is bad, regardless if its shrugged under the umbrella of satanism, or whichever term
Yes, clearly it was used to associate those with *Satan,* probably at the time the worst guy ever. That still isn't a defined, proper religion and philosophy as what they thought of as evil could have been seen as good to others. Obviously from their perspective they would deem those evil as Satanists, but those *deemed* Satanists would have very different opinions on what was considered evil.
Others could have just as easily claimed the other side to be Satanists, showing that it's not so much a specific idea or thing, rather, it was just a word to say, succinctly, *you are evil.*
Which hardly constitutes any form of actual beliefs.
It does constitute a form of actual beliefs since perspective varying on X, does not mean that X is actually subjective. That's an invalid syllogism
It's only a definition on what is *actually* evil if you assume that those who used it actually knew what was evil, which isn't a very rational take.
I'm sure you think that they were correct, and that's fine.
I can't believe that they were correct because I'm not a Christian (The term "Satanism" mostly being used by Christians in medieval history).