Let's face it- it's not easy being an ideologist- especially when you don't have all your facts straight. I'm a pretty spiritual person but I don't consider myself to be particularly religious. I recognize that organized religion is flawed and I get it that it's
all written by men even if they
insist that it at least includes the word of God. Of course, Islam insists that
all of the Qur'an is
the word of God and I'm in no position to refute that assertion.
That said, much of what I've read and heard rings true and I believe it. Of course, much of what I've heard and read sounds like it was written by someone or some group of people who did it "for the good of the people" and I take that with a grain of salt. Geniuses like Bill Maher would call me a "cherry picker" for having this belief and would ridicule me for
not being a "true believer". Of course, half a breath later, he and people like him would ridicule me for
being a "true believer" and for swallowing the story hook line and sinker. It's like there's a pattern in there somewhere. I wish I could see it.
Anyway, I was reading a blog this morning and thought I'd comment on a recent post. I'd link to the blog but I don't want to be accused of stealing bandwidth as has happened in the past. I'd comment directly on the post but I've been asked to promise not to post there anymore.
Catherine Beyer writes: Luciferianism hard to Distinguish from Satanism.
I periodically have received requests to cover Luciferianism on this site, particularly to show how it is different from Satanism. The problem is that sources on Luciferianism are not terribly abundant, and often what I find, quite frankly, does describe traits that seem very much in line with Satanism.
If anyone knows of good sources for Luciferianism, particularly how it is separate from Satanism, I'd welcome the suggestions.
That's the problem. There must be 5,000 varieties of Christians. Can anyone tell me the difference between a Presbyterian and a Congregationalist? Members of both groups are absolutely convinced that their religion is the correct one. And the same is true with devil worshippers. They all think their religion is the true one.
Beyer points us to a site about Luciferianism: The Society of Lucifer.
We Luciferians know that Luciferianism is not Satanism, but because of the confusion in our path we have allowed Satanism to creep in to pollute our path. What I call Neo-Luciferianism mixes Satanism with Luciferianism, and I refer to the type promoted by Michael Ford. Many Satanists, and near all Christians, think Luciferianism is Satanism, and we have done little to counter that false idea. I have written at length on this blog about the differences between Satanism and the Luciferian paths, but we need to create a clear boundary between the two paths, or be hijacked as another obscure Satanist path.
Indeed we do.
So, here we go again, I guess. Libs and other ideologists latch onto the idea of 100% participation with zeal and vigor. They do this glibly and blindly because I suspect it's just too much effort for them to deal in the facts and the truth.
"Members of both groups are absolutely convinced that their religion is the correct one. And the same is true with devil worshippers. They all think their religion is the true one."
The
truth is that most religious people are not blind followers. Most are not convinced that their religion is the only correct religion. Furthermore, people without any belief in religion or God have little to no understanding of what people who believe in religion or God actually believe. Of course, they don't let
that stop them. Maybe I'm reading too much into this, but it sounds an awful lot like classic forms of bigotry.
Stereotypes are a big timesaver but bigotry is just blind hatred. There's a reasonable explanation for this type of behavior and I'll explain it in a future post.
Like it or not, large, expensive homes do more to preserve "the rural heritage" of an area than high-density housing does.