Thank you for your thoughtful replies.
Originally posted by RavenStar:
About love, the way that you described love Satanism doen't teach it. I personally don't understand how someone could help others out of this love you talk about. When I help others, it makes me feel good, that is why I do it. Of course, at first I'll help out a friend for their benefit, but in the end it makes me feel good. If helping someone didn't make me feel good then why do it? The only people I could see myself not enjoying helping are my enemies. They are my enemies for a reason. I donate money to charities all the time. Why? Because I like doing things like that. I do what I like to do. So the answer to your question is no, Satanism doesn't teach love, Satanism teaches you to spend time with your friends, family, and ppl you like. Doing things for enemies wouldnt make sense. In this case, it shouldn't teach love.
It seems to me, actually, that you may help out from a genuine concern for the other person, and the resulting good feelings are unexpected (albeit positive) side-effects. If not, there
are, I think, other reasons.
Certainly, there are other selfish motivations, beyond the obvious (some hidden gains by being nice) and the good feelings that generally result from doing good. There's the belief that God will reward you for your good works; while it's true He may bless you, it seems like that's a lesser reason to do good. At the same time, there's the fear that you will be punished for not doing good (karma, what goes around comes around). And there's the guilt that results from not helping people, guilt that stems from the fact that you believe you have a duty to do good.
But all of those are, in my mind, lesser motivations than genuine, selfless, disinterested concern for your neighbor. I'm not saying that doing good for the reasons above is bad, per se; but doing good for TRULY selfless reasons strikes me as the better way.
What are some things that can lead one to believe that one SHOULD help everyone, including one's enemies?
-
We're all human. We're all dignified creatures, part of a species capable of reason and beauty. At the very least, we're all living things, all creations - equal in the eyes of a disinterested universe, or equally God's creations.
-
We're all good to some degree. Certainly, there are those that are guilty of some of the most heinous acts imaginable, but certain philosophies and religions hold that all of us contain at least SOME goodness, some worthiness of love.
-
We're not responsible for the circumstances of our birth. There's an old saying, "There, but by the grace of God, go I." It means that, had things been different, you could very easily be that homeless man on the street, the child with a serious learning disability, or the man convicted of murder. It's not to excuse the behavior of others, but to recognize that we COULD HAVE chosen the same path given the same circumstances.
-
We ourselves are not worthy of love. A Christian idea, it suggests that if one REALLY examines one's own life, you'll see it poisoned with acts of sheer selfishness, anger, hatred, and cowardice. And yet we would like to be loved, despite our shortcomings.
-
While we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. This is at least a belief specific to Christianity, but the crux of it is universal (though certainly not universally accepted). The idea is that GOD LOVES US, not because of what few good acts we're truly responsible for, but DESPITE the terrible acts that can be laid at our feet. God loves us, and He loved us when we were truly unlovable; so too we should love our neighbors, even when they have done nothing to earn that love.
(If Christ's parable is to be believed, we are overwhelmed in our shortcomings, villagers who owe the Heavenly King millions of dollars. Despite that, the King forgave our tremendous debts, so we simply should not begrudge our fellow villagers who owe us, by comparison, five or ten dollars.)
If you search those reasons for personal benefits, an answer to the question, "what's in it for me?" you won't find it. That's the point: love is ultimately not about what good it does to the one who loves, it's about the good it does to the one BEING LOVED. It's a DUTY that I honestly believe we must commit ourselves too.
At the same time, if you accept that we are unlovely - that we have all willingly and deliberately strayed from God and the path He set out for us, that we are truly responsible for our own sins - then you will find no reason God should love us, either.
But if you then ponder the
possibility that He loves us despite ourselves, and loves us completely, you'll find yourself standing at the threshold of the most amazing thing man will have EVER encountered: divine grace. And if you walk through the door and accept His grace and forgiveness, you will find yourself transformed.
To be honest, there's another reason why loving only your friends strikes a false note with me. Satanism speaks of "kindness to those who deserve it," and it begs the question, how do you determine worthiness?
One could keep a tally of "good deeds" and "bad deeds." Certainly, that sounds silly, but I've seen people act like they're keeping just such a list. There are husbands, wives, parents, and children who keep mental lists against people they should love the most. And I've even seen list-takers among immature Christians (again, meant literally as those who have accepted Christ but have not grown in Christ, through either being new to Christianity or not honestly committed to it 100%); certainly, I'm guilty of the same crime. So, silly as it is, it seems instructive.
So, what kind of tally should we keep? Should all good and bad acts be treated equally, or should especially evil deeds cost more? How much more?
Should deeds in the far past be worth less as their effects are felt less strongly? Or should they be MORE important as the person is unrepentant about the transgressions of the distant past?
Should bad deeds be erased if the person sincerely apologizes? And should they be redrawn (with extra marks) if the person slides back into the same routine?
And should a person's past and motives be taken into account, even if you have to guess at it?
And at the end of the day, how much is enough to call someone good? 50-50, good acts to bad acts? 60-40? 85-15?
My point is this: if you DON'T keep such a list, aren't you running the risk of loving someone who is unworthy of your love? But if you DO keep a tally, how can you actually love the person involved? How can you honestly love someone if you're so thoroughly scrutinizing their every move?
Universal, selfless love may lead to misery, but only on the part of the one who loves. Taken to its natural conclusion, the road of universal love sometimes leads to the angry prisoner or the contagious leper, and it may even lead to the cross.
But taken to its natural conclusion, love based on worthiness leads to misery for everyone else - because they are either all unworthy or are coldly evaluated on a daily basis.