It's sickening how underrated Lord of Light is

december-25.jpg


Birthday of Christ or... birthday of Sol Invictus?
 
Borrowed or not. It's origins are clear. And these days it's not being used as a Christian symbol either.
Oh my god. Everything in Christianity is borrowed. It's a political religion cobbled together by a church desperate to make inroads into a few different national faith structures, doing so by absorbing portions of them.

The only unique stuff to Christianity is the various teachings of Jesus. Not the origin of Jesus (that's stolen), the death of Jesus (almost certainly a myth) or the various symbols linked to him (recycled). Everything else is stolen, cobbled together, mish-mashed and presented as fact.
 
By the way, why has Christianity been brought up anyhow? I never claimed I was Christian. You brought up the fact that there were 'more Christian symbols than satanic symbols' these days which is totally false.
 
You brought up the fact that there were 'more Christian symbols than satanic symbols' these days which is totally false.
You're the one that is cobbling together dozens of different faiths into one big "Occult/Satanic" branch, rather than respecting that every single western religion is part of an interspersed web. You'll have to forgive us...but that's a pretty stereotypically Christian thing to do.
 
You still have not explained to me what is wrong with occult and Satanist symbols, though.
 
And you still have not proven the ridiculous statement that there's more occult/Satanist symbolism in modern media than Christian symbolism. Even with it being stylistic, the biggest pop songs have Christian symbolism, the most famous movies, and the more popular TV shows.
 
You still have not explained to me what is wrong with occult and Satanist symbols, though.
So instead of accepting you failed to read twice what I meant, thus twisting my words and message, you resort to moving on to the next question? Yeah, this discussion isn't gonna go anywhere. You have made it clear what your preferred way of 'discussing' things is.
 
So instead of accepting you failed to read twice what I meant, thus twisting my words and message, you resort to moving on to the next question? Yeah, this discussion isn't gonna go anywhere. You have made it clear what your preferred way of 'discussing' things is.

What's wrong with using an eye for a symbol?

Not to mention,

Yeah, this discussion isn't gonna go anywhere. You have made it clear what your preferred way of 'discussing' things is.

I don't really see a discussion. You've been saying that "worshipping Satan" is "not innocent" and that these things are not OK, and have not provided any background for your statement. I made a long post in the opening of this discussion, which you adressed merely with the statement,

You may believe or interpret it however way you want it. I personally believe it's not so innocent.

Not explaining why. I don't see a discussion here.
 
Per and LC might have pushed the "topic" into a certain direction, but @The Nomad, they also have asked questions. Nomad, if you think you have answered these already, these answers were probably not clear (enough), for me included. Would you just answer (some of) their questions? By doing that, perhaps the stinger will be taken out of the "discussion" (as we say in Dutch).
 
Back
Top