Bridging the divide

[ArmyMatt]

Bad example. The ONLY thing evil about the inverted cross is for those who know, to let the satanists own it. There is NO excuse to give up on truth just because it's not popularly understood.

Every time I see some hipster wearing it ("oooh, I'm soooo evil" lol), I congratulate them for their Christian piety by wearing Saint Peter's cross, indication their humble unworthiness before Christ.

the truth has nothing to do with it. no one is denying how St Peter was crucified. but I highly doubt anyone on here would walk into an Orthodox St Peter and Paul's Church with an inverted Cross, and approach the chalice, and then rebuke folks for weird looks and give a lecture on the history of St Peter's martyrdom

 

[Protoevangel]

the truth has nothing to do with it. no one is denying how St Peter was crucified. but I highly doubt anyone on here would walk into an Orthodox St Peter and Paul's Church with an inverted Cross, and approach the chalice, and then rebuke folks for weird looks and give a lecture on the history of St Peter's martyrdom

The truth has everything to do with it. The symbol has only been hijacked by the ignorant, and allowed by those who say the symbol has been hijacked... Giving it up without bothering to wiggle their little finger.

Of course I would walk into an Orthodox Church with an inverted cross, it's is a Christian symbol, after all. During evening services, I often wear a jacket with a demon skull patch with a bullet hole it it's forehead. I never get any odd looks. If I did, I doubt I'd bother rebuking them, but I might talk with them afterwords and explain it's significance. It's those who "know" and still roll over, pretending the symbol has been "hijacked" who I rebuke... Even when they are too stubborn, or simply interested in arguing for arguments sake, to realize their error.

Sorry Matt, but I won't give up or hand the symbol over. Not even for a moment. It's ours, not theirs.

 

[Protoevangel]

t but I highly doubt anyone on here would walk into an Orthodox St Peter and Paul's Church with an inverted Cross, and approach the chalice,

Any day of the week. Well, probably not Diving Liturgy, I usually try to dress up a bit for that.

 

[ArmyMatt]

Any day of the week. Well, probably not Diving Liturgy, I usually try to dress up a bit for that.

that's pretty sweet, but I mean only an upside down Cross, with nothing to explain.

 

[Protoevangel]

that's pretty sweet, but I mean only an upside down Cross, with nothing to explain.

It doesn't matter if the explanation is on the shirt or on your lips. Yes, of course we will have to educate the ignorant... Instead of propagating the ignorance, as you were doing.

And no, the inverted cross is not a symbol of the church of Satan*. They use the Sigil of Baphomet, and the alchemical symbol for sulphur.

* They do allow any satanist to use any symbol that they find personally meaningful, so yes, some ignorant satanists do use the upside-down crosss. But your nonsense is straight out of the tabloids and fundamentalist chick tracts. It has no basis in truth.

 

[ArmyMatt]

It doesn't matter if the explanation is on the shirt or on your lips. Yes, of course we will have to educate the ignorant... Instead of propagating the ignorance, as you were doing.

And no, the inverted cross is not a symbol of the church of Satan*. They use the Sigil of Baphomet, and the alchemical symbol for sulphur.

* They do allow any satanist to use any symbol that they find personally meaningful, so yes, some ignorant satanists do use the upside-down crosss. But your nonsense is straight out of the tabloids and fundamentalist chick tracts. It has no basis in truth.

Anton Lavey, who started the Church of Satan, said that was why he used the inverted Cross. so it is not ignorant Satanists that use it, unless you want to say the founder of Laveyan Satanism was ignorant of his own religion.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

London seems to be doing just fine...

God Bless London...

 

[MKJ]

well, the ones you picked out were good examples (Christmas trees, etc), because they are obviously Christianized.

and I know they are not like the Neopagan druids, but they are too close for comfort, and all the articles I have seen have identified them as such, even if their official name is something different.

Christmas trees and such were not always Christianized. At some point, they had been only used in non-Christian settings. When Christians began to use them, they had to say to themselves - the symbolism here is not pagan, in and of itself, it is a symbol that worked for pagans but it can also work well for us - without somehow associating paganism with Christianity in a bad way or producing a sort of inappropriate syncretism.

In this case there isn't even a danger of some kind of syncretism, because the group has no religious philosophy, so that is not really a worry.


The reason those articles identified them as a religious group of Druids is because they want to make shocking headlines. How easy is it for a reporter to go to google and read the Wikepidia entry on the group, or ask the ABC for comment? Those are the most basic of things journalists are supposed to do before they print a story.

If they are not doing them, it is not because they don't know they should. It is because they are looking to print something sensational, to titillate people, to make people feel shocked, to make them feel superior, all with the goal to make money selling papers.

By allowing that to influence how we view the real situation, all it is doing is making that sort of journalism possible - we are allowing ourselves to participate in their lies and deception. It is not that they have innocently got the wrong idea. They have willfully remained ignorant.

 

[ArmyMatt]

Christmas trees and such were not always Christianized. At some point, they had been only used in non-Christian settings. When Christians began to use them, they had to say to themselves - the symbolism here is not pagan, in and of itself, it is a symbol that worked for pagans but it can also work well for us - without somehow associating paganism with Christianity in a bad way or producing a sort of inappropriate syncretism.

In this case there isn't even a danger of some kind of syncretism, because the group has no religious philosophy, so that is not really a worry.


The reason those articles identified them as a religious group of Druids is because they want to make shocking headlines. How easy is it for a reporter to go to google and read the Wikepidia entry on the group, or ask the ABC for comment? Those are the most basic of things journalists are supposed to do before they print a story.

If they are not doing them, it is not because they don't know they should. It is because they are looking to print something sensational, to titillate people, to make people feel shocked, to make them feel superior, all with the goal to make money selling papers.

By allowing that to influence how we view the real situation, all it is doing is making that sort of journalism possible - we are allowing ourselves to participate in their lies and deception. It is not that they have innocently got the wrong idea. They have willfully remained ignorant.

I know, that was why I brought up Christmas trees because that was a valid point you made. but I have not seen any article to correct the use of the term druid. I have seen in those articles the Archbishop saying that they are not pagan, but no correction to the term druid.

 

[Protoevangel]

Anton Lavey, who started the Church of Satan, said that was why he used the inverted Cross. so it is not ignorant Satanists that use it, unless you want to say the founder of Laveyan Satanism was ignorant of his own religion.

Howard (Anton's real name) said a lot of things. He even said of himself,

"I'm one helluva liar. Most of my adult life, I've been accused of being a charlatan, a phony, an impostor. I guess that makes me about as close to what the Devil's supposed to be, as anyone. It's true. I lie constantly, incessantly. Because I lie so often, I'd really be full of [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] if I didn't keep my mouth shut and my bowels open."​

Anton ACTUALLY used an inverted pentacle with a lightning bold, not an inverted cross. He did sell an inverted cross to church of satan members for a short while in 1970, but quickly ceased, for reasons I've already stated here...

Let's see:

From the church of satan's official website (I won't provide a link to such a vile site, you can verify on your own if you feel the need):

"The reversed cross is often seen by Christians as symbolic of St. Peter since legend states that he was crucified upside down (at his own request) by the Romans and thus it also can serve as symbolic of the office of the pope of the Roman Catholic Church. Literature has long depicted anyone who has embraced Satan and thus rejected Jesus as having embraced the reversed cross as symbolic of that act. Satanists are free to employ any symbols which they feel have resonance, so if such an upside-down cross has personal meaning they could use it."​

Hmm, kind of what I've already told you, which you just ignore.​

From the The Description, Philosophies and Justification of Satanism (I won't provide a link to such a vile site, you can verify on your own if you feel the need):

3.8. The Inverted Cross

The inverted cross was the cross that St. Peter was crucified on because he didn't feel worthy to be crucified on the same form of cross as Jesus Christ. It was a symbol for unworthiness and deep respect of one's superiors: representing folly, hardship, failure and reverence for Christ. That's what it used to mean - a very Christian symbol indeed. Since the advent of the B-Movie and limited public intelligence the inverted cross became a reversed Christian symbol - a symbol of Anti-Christian sentiment. Because in modern times it has come to represent anti-Christianity, some Satanists display this symbol.​

"Since the advent of the B-Movie and limited public intelligence..."​

From the Symbol Dictionary (Reversed Cross (Upside down cross, Cross of St Peter)

"The reversed cross, also known as the cross of St. Peter, has also been viewed as an emblem of Satanism, although more often by non-satanists than believers. Historically, it has been a symbol of humility, a symbol of Martyred St. Peter’s refusal to be crucified in the manner of Christ, and his preference to be hung upside down. Today,the symbol of an upturned cross may symbolize an opposition to Christian dogma, a concept borrowed from Christian writers who mistook the emblem of Peter for an anti-Christian symbol- a bit of a self fulfilling prophecy!"​

"...also been viewed as an emblem of Satanism, although more often by non-satanists than believers."​

Hmm, imagine that.

Look, you aren't taking to some newbie who you can fool by pretending you know what you are talking about. I've been involved with satanism and the various movements and philosophies since 1983, only forsaking it completely in 2000, when I became a Christian. I can tell you, as someone who knows... the inverted cross is used outside of Christianity in two related capacities: 1) the socially arrested, monochromatic narcissist who really has no clue about true satanism (self ignorance), and 2) attention wh0res looking to be noticed and idolized by those I mentioned in #1 and if lucky, to be protested by ignorant fundamentalists, to increase their exposure and "rebel status" that much more (preying on your ignorance).

Shrinking away from the true meaning of the upside-down cross is promoting ignorance, plain and simple. It is a form of ignorance that even honest satanists find to be beneath them. It is dime-store tabloid psychology.

"When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I put away childish things."
- 1 Corinthians 13:11​

You are capable of so much more than hunkering down and repeating the same nonsense over and over. It's time to embrace the truth, and leave these childish herd-mentality fallacies behind.

Thank God for this symbol of pious humility and obedience! Holy Saint Peter, pray for us!

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

If I might intervene here (not like anyone asked me!), I have to say just as an observer that this discussion is turning nasty. Matt and Dan are two great guys who are wonderful Orthodox Christians, yet both of you guys are getting out of hand and getting borderline insulting and testy with each other. I can understand both points of view. On one hand, the upside down Cross used to be the symbol of Peter's martyrdom, something Godly and good, noble, and important. Then it was usurped by Satanists and has come to be seen as something vile and blasphemous. Not sure if anyone remembers, but there was an X-Files episode with an upside down cross and during the show they kept thinking it was a Satanic group committing these murders, but after a while they found out the upside down Cross symbol was from a Catholic priest devoted to St. Peter and he was fighting the evil characters involved. Totally opposite.

I can understand the frustration that something good has been usurped and twisted, yet I can also understand the other opinion that perhaps we should just accept that the symbol has been usurped and avoid using it and using more recognizable forms of Christian symbology.

If you think about it, the swastika was a GOOD symbol in Buddhist and Hindu religious representation. It was a symbol of good. But I think WAYYYY more people would see the swastika as a symbol of racism and intolerance thanks to Adolf and the boys. So should I go wearing a swastika to work stopping to explain over and over and over "no, it's actually Buddhist and a symbol of good dharma, etc."

This isn't an argument worth hurting feelings over and creating tension between two good men.

 

[Protoevangel]

If I might intervene here (not like anyone asked me!), I have to say just as an observer that this discussion is turning nasty. Matt and Dan are two great guys who are wonderful Orthodox Christians, yet both of you guys are getting out of hand and getting borderline insulting and testy with each other. I can understand both points of view. On one hand, the upside down Cross used to be the symbol of Peter's martyrdom, something Godly and good, noble, and important. Then it was usurped by Satanists and has come to be seen as something vile and blasphemous. Not sure if anyone remembers, but there was an X-Files episode with an upside down cross and during the show they kept thinking it was a Satanic group committing these murders, but after a while they found out the upside down Cross symbol was from a Catholic priest devoted to St. Peter and he was fighting the evil characters involved. Totally opposite.

I can understand the frustration that something good has been usurped and twisted, yet I can also understand the other opinion that perhaps we should just accept that the symbol has been usurped and avoid using it and using more recognizable forms of Christian symbology.

If you think about it, the swastika was a GOOD symbol in Buddhist and Hindu religious representation. It was a symbol of good. But I think WAYYYY more people would see the swastika as a symbol of racism and intolerance thanks to Adolf and the boys. So should I go wearing a swastika to work stopping to explain over and over and over "no, it's actually Buddhist and a symbol of good dharma, etc."

This isn't an argument worth hurting feelings over and creating tension between two good men.

Actually, the swastika is still very widely used in Buddhism, Jainism, and Hinduism, and especially in the counties where these religions are substantial. The symbol is all over houses, shops, buses, taxis, rickshaws, etc. In fact, you'll be hard pressed to find any symbol that is used more widely than the swastika in India... As well it should be. Yes these religions should continue to use the symbol that means so much to them, and has for thousands of years.

Even so, it's not a direct comparison because the upside-down cross was never really a symbol of satan, except in the mind of certain fundamentalists, tabloid-reading non-satanists and ill-informed satanists. So no, there is no reason to "just accept that the symbol has been usurped".

Finally, it isn't you or Matt that I'm insulting, it's this pitiful, disgusting, disgraceful argument suggesting that we roll over like a beaten dog before the fight has even begun to let 'them' have a symbol they honestly don't even claim as their own.

 

[ArmyMatt]

um, Proto, I was just disagreeing with what you said. I don't think you are ignorant or know less than me, and I certainly was not trying to come across like I know more about things than you do. I only know what I have heard and seen from Satanists that I know. the Church of Satan website says that while the Sigil of Baphomet in the maing symbol, the inverted Cross is also a symbol of theirs. it's also used in their worship services. I know because I know Satanists to this day from college and high school.

forgive me if I caused any offense, it was not my intention

 

[Protoevangel]

um, Proto, I was just disagreeing with what you said. I don't think you are ignorant or know less than me, and I certainly was not trying to come across like I know more about things than you do. I only know what I have heard and seen from Satanists that I know. the Church of Satan website says that while the Sigil of Baphomet in the maing symbol, the inverted Cross is also a symbol of theirs. it's also used in their worship services. I know because I know Satanists to this day from college and high school.

forgive me if I caused any offense, it was not my intention

WTHeck? I don't want or need an apology, bro. Come here, It's okay. Have a beer or a tea, come back, and don't read anger at you into my post. I mean, people arguing the same false points over and over, when they refuse to even try to address the actual information provided is somewhat offensive, but I just want some intellectual honesty in the discussion.

For instance:

the Church of Satan website says that while the Sigil of Baphomet in the maing symbol, the inverted Cross is also a symbol of theirs.

This is untrue, and that fact has already been demonstrated. I've already provided a quote from their site where they explain that it is not one of their official symbols... Now you claim, based only on your own assertion, that they say it is... Now that's annoying. I mean, sure, you could be right, but you've given zero evidence to demonstrate why I should believe you. Don't just contradict me, show me I'm wrong. Show my evidence is flawed or contradicted by more "official" sources. Show me where they claim the symbol as their own. Any of that I would respect. This... ignoring the actual material that I've provided which could serve to educate you, while regurgitating nonsense that I've already covered... not so much.

But remember, you aren't your argument. I may have no respect for the argument (or lack of the same) you are using, but that does not reflect on you personally. So come on ya big lug.

 

[ArmyMatt]

well, I did not supply the website because it was the Church of Satan site and I did not wanna tag that on a Christian forum page. and I was not making an argument per say, I was saying what I have seen based on Satanists that I know. they affirm that the inverted Cross is one of their own symbols.

personally, I agree with you that it is St Peter's Cross, but as stated earlier with St Paul, if something offends my brother, prolly best not to do it. I imagine anyone walking into an Orthodox Church would with an inverted Cross would probably have some explaining to do, because in the modern sense, that is associated with Satanism.

and I rechecked their site. and forgive me but I did read it wrong. the site's FAQ part says that it was initially assumed to be theirs when it wasn't, and the Sigil of Baphomet is their sign. so I misread that. and since it is the Church of Satan site, I am not gonna tag it here.

however, the site also says that they can use whatever symbol they feel close to, and since so many wear an inverted Cross, they have, even if not on paper, adopted that as a symbol of their faith. so I was wrong in that it is not an official symbol of their faith, and I should not have said that.

 

[Protoevangel]

well, I did not supply the website because it was the Church of Satan site and I did not wanna tag that on a Christian forum page.

Understood, that's why I quoted the page without providing a link to it. It was enough for someone who wanted to verify the quote, but not an "invitation" to browse the site.

and I was not making an argument per say, I was saying what I have seen based on Satanists that I know. they affirm that the inverted Cross is one of their own symbols.

Well, it was your specific statement, "because the Church of Satan uses that as one of their symbols", which I was originally responding to. But I do understand the misunderstanding based on the individual members you have known. I know a number of satanists as well, and they don't all know their faith/philosophy too well.

personally, I agree with you that it is St Peter's Cross, but as stated earlier with St Paul, if something offends my brother, prolly best not to do it. I imagine anyone walking into an Orthodox Church would with an inverted Cross would probably have some explaining to do, because in the modern sense, that is associated with Satanism.

Yes, education is important. I'd at least ensure the clergy were prepared before I wore the cross, so even if people don't give me the chance to explain the cross, they could tell the priest about their misgivings... And/or I might start with the t-shirt I posted pictures of earlier.

and I rechecked their site. and forgive me but I did read it wrong. the site's FAQ part says that it was initially assumed to be theirs when it wasn't, and the Sigil of Baphomet is their sign. so I misread that. and since it is the Church of Satan site, I am not gonna tag it here.

No problem bro.

however, the site also says that they can use whatever symbol they feel close to,

Indeed, I mentioned this in Post #85.

and since so many wear an inverted Cross, they have, even if not on paper, adopted that as a symbol of their faith.

As I've mentioned though, and the quotes I've provided back it up, it's not typically true (especially not well educated) satanists who use the symbol. It's kind of like calling the nazar evil eye charm, an Orthodox symbol just because some (usually cultural only or uneducated/supersticious) Orthodox may wear it.

so I was wrong in that it is not an official symbol of their faith, and I should not have said that.

No problem dude. I still say it's time for us to reclaim it, unapologetically. Most especially since, as you've noticed, they don't claim it. The more we embrace it, the more they (the ones who just want to be "edgy"/"hardcore") will find it distasteful.

 

[ArmyMatt]

no issues with what you said. I think I was coming at it from the POV that perception is reality, which in a sense is true.

 

[Protoevangel]

no issues with what you said. I think I was coming at it from the POV that perception is reality, which in a sense is true.

Yea, I can see that, somewhat. If you change your perception, you can change your life (your reality). That's pretty potent.

So I guess I'm talking about changing reality for some people.



I have a story I'd like to share, that may offer some insight as to how I personally approach the perception/reality understanding:

I grew up very isolated. My nearest friend lived five miles away. I spent my time exploring the outdoors and in lots and lots of reading. Luckily, I had teachers who pushed me to read more and more advanced books. When I was still quite young, I read something (I don't remember what it was) that had a quote from Alfred Korzybski, "The map is not the territory". This quote profoundly affected me. When I shared this with my schoolteacher, she brought me her book, "Steps to an Ecology of Mind" by Gregory Bateson. She had highlighted a paragraph, which still resonates with me:

"We say the map is different from the territory. But what is the territory? Operationally, somebody went out with a retina or a measuring stick and made representations which were then put on paper. What is on the paper map is a representation of what was in the retinal representation of the man who made the map; and as you push the question back, what you find is an infinite regress, an infinite series of maps. The territory never gets in at all."

She explained to me that the territory is reality, and the map is our perception of that reality. This blew my mind as a fifth grader, but it has always stuck with me.

 

[ArmyMatt]

Yea, I can see that, somewhat. If you change your perception, you can change your life (your reality). That's pretty potent.

So I guess I'm talking about changing reality for some people.



I have a story I'd like to share, that may offer some insight as to how I personally approach the perception/reality understanding:

I grew up very isolated. My nearest friend lived five miles away. I spent my time exploring the outdoors and in lots and lots of reading. Luckily, I had teachers who pushed me to read more and more advanced books. When I was still quite young, I read something (I don't remember what it was) that had a quote from Alfred Korzybski, "The map is not the territory". This quote profoundly affected me. When I shared this with my schoolteacher, she brought me her book, "Steps to an Ecology of Mind" by Gregory Bateson. She had highlighted a paragraph, which still resonates with me:


She explained to me that the territory is reality, and the map is our perception of that reality. This blew my mind as a fifth grader, but it has always stuck with me.

makes a lot of sense I must say.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Hi Dan,

I'm well aware that it is still used...but where is it primarily used? India, all over Asia! You won't see a lot of white, Anglo dudes like me walking into a library, Costco, or the mall wearing a big swastika on my jacket, right? I kind of doubt you would either, if you weren't Orthodox and you liked the symbol. That was what I was getting at.....

I'm merely saying that this argument isn't getting anywhere. It's beaten to death and you it has gotten testy. Just my observation. It's not a subject I passionately care about. I'm probably angrier at the term "gay" and the beautiful God-given beauty of a rainbow both being turned into sodomy symbols than anything! LOL....if we're going to talk about usurping beauty...

Actually, the swastika is still very widely used in Buddhism, Jainism, and Hinduism, and especially in the counties where these religions are substantial. The symbol is all over houses, shops, buses, taxis, rickshaws, etc. In fact, you'll be hard pressed to find any symbol that is used more widely than the swastika in India... As well it should be. Yes these religions should continue to use the symbol that means so much to them, and has for thousands of years.

Even so, it's not a direct comparison because the upside-down cross was never really a symbol of satan, except in the mind of certain fundamentalists, tabloid-reading non-satanists and ill-informed satanists. So no, there is no reason to "just accept that the symbol has been usurped".

Finally, it isn't you or Matt that I'm insulting, it's this pitiful, disgusting, disgraceful argument suggesting that we roll over like a beaten dog before the fight has even begun to let 'them' have a symbol they honestly don't even claim as their own.