Question the Practice of Halloween... Or the Christian Practice of Satanism

The Sir Francis Dashwood Journal | 10-31-02 | Sir Francis Dashwood

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

It never ceases to amaze me that most Christians would criticize me for being an atheist, yet they will "celebrate" a macabre pagan holiday. They inculcate their children into the practice of it and feed them the most unhealthful things you could give a child to eat.

Likewise, many atheists criticize me for being a "right-winger." Most atheists are so caught up in their polemics, they have become nothing more than anti-Christians - or what I call the Religious Left (a collaboration of the Marxist religion, neo-pagan animal/tree/earth worshipper eco-fascists and general technophobes).

Why do you "celebrate" on certain "holidays," what are you celebrating, do you really know? Or have you been so lost in the conformity of it all to really take a look at what you partake in?

As you ponder this, two noted Christian philosophers support my secular argument...

Søren Kierkegaard from The Sickness Unto Death:

The fantastic is, of course, most closely related to the imagination [Phantasien], but the imagination is related in it’s turn to feeling, understanding, and will, so that a person’s feelings, understanding and will may be fantastic. Fantasy is, in general the medium of infinitization… (emphasis mine)

The fantastic is generally speaking what carries a person into the infinite in such a way that it only leads him away from himself and thus prevents him from coming back to himself.

Thomas Hobbes' Leviathan:

Part IV. Of the Kingdom of Darkness

Chap. xlv. Of Demonology and other Relics of the Religion of the Gentiles.

[14] An image, in the most strict signification of the word, is the resemblance of something visible: in which sense the fantastical forms, apparitions, or seemings of visible bodies to the sight, are only images; such as are the show of a man or other thing in the water, by reflection or refraction; or of the sun or stars by direct vision in the air; which are nothing real in the things seen, nor in the place where they seem to be; nor are their magnitudes and figures the same with that of the object, but changeable, by the variation of the organs of sight, or by glasses; and are present oftentimes in our imagination, and in our dreams, when the object is absent; or changed into other colours, and shapes, as things that depend only upon the fancy. And these are the images which are originally and most properly called ideas and idols, and derived from the language of the Grecians, with whom the word eido signifieth to see. They are also called phantasms, which is in the same language, apparitions. And from these images it is that one of the faculties of man's nature is called the imagination. And from hence it is manifest that there neither is, nor can be, any image made of a thing invisible.

[15] It is also evident that there can be no image of a thing infinite: for all the images and phantasms that are made by the impression of things visible are figured. But figure is quantity every way determined, and therefore there can be no image of God, nor of the soul of man, nor of spirits; but only of bodies visible, that is, bodies that have light in themselves, or are by such enlightened.

[16] And whereas a man can fancy shapes he never saw, making up a figure out of the parts of divers creatures, as the poets make their centaurs, chimeras and other monsters never seen, so can he also give matter to those shapes, and make them in wood, clay or metal. And these are also called images, not for the resemblance of any corporeal thing, but for the resemblance of some phantastical inhabitants of the brain of the maker. But in these idols, as they are originally in the brain, and as they are painted, carved moulded or molten in matter, there is a similitude of one to the other, for which the material body made by art may be said to be the image of the fantastical idol made by nature.

As you think further, exactly what is Halloween?

Originally, All Hallows' Eve was one of the great fire festivals of Britain at the time of the Druids. In Scotland it was associated with the time when the spirits of the dead, the demons, witches, and sorcerers were usually active and propitious.

Paradoxically, All Hallows' Eve was also a night when young people performed magical rituals to determine their future marriage partners. The youth of the villages carried on with much merry-making and sensual revelry, but the older people took great care to safeguard their homes from the evil spirits, witches, and demons who had exceptional power that night...

Can you guess my source here???

[DouglasKC]

Excuse me, but the "night of the dead" is indeed a Christian holy day. It is next Saturday. IN Catholic countries, people dress up and visit the graves of their loved ones.

Wow...sorry I didn't even know there was such a day.

I'm sorry if American have secularized holy days into pagan holidays. This is the fruit of Calvanism: That claims any frivolity is evil. This idea goes way back to Gnosticism, if you know your bible studies, which is the idea that anything of the human body is evil, and only the spirit is good.

The days that God ordained as holy are listed in the bible. These are the days I was referring to that have been replaced by society.

As for Christ dressing up for a 'pagan ceremony': isn't there a parable about a guy thrown out from a wedding feast because he didn't wear the right wedding garment? Wasn't Christ criticized for eating and drinking with sinners? Wasn't his first miracle performed at a wedding feast-- and Near Eastern weddings were pretty rambunctious.

Weddings were ordained by God in the begining with Adam and Eve so they are a biblical rite. My example was meant to show that Christ wouldn't participate in a pagan holiday over His own holy days.

As for holy days, didn't Paul instruct people not to argue about which days to celebrate the Lord?

No, although I don't doubt that many people read that into his words. He was actually referring to days that the Jews traditionally fasted on and how fasting on certain days didn't make one holier than those who didn't.

[DouglasKC]

Rom 14:5-12 5 One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. 6 He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord. He who eats meat, eats to the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who abstains, does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God. 7 For none of us lives to himself alone and none of us dies to himself alone. 8 If we live, we live to the Lord; and if we die, we die to the Lord. So, whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord.

Here's the passage in question. If you read the chapter Paul is obviously talking about eating and drinking practices because that's the focus of the chapter. Paul isn't referring to holy days. If he was he would use the word:

heorte
Of uncertain affinity; a festival: - feast, holyday.

which in the new testament always refers to God's holy days. Instead he uses the word "hemera" which means a regular day.

So again in context Paul is talking specifically about how fasting on one day or another doesn't really matter. He's not making a general statement that says God doesn't care whether or not we celebrate pagan holidays.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

Concerning the terms Satan and Devil:

Set, Satan, and Shaitan are the same. "Satan" is a Hebrew word for the pagan Egyptian Set. Satan, Shaitan, Set or Seth ("Set-hn" as spoken in the ancient Hebrew) is a pagan entity, the "adversary" of Judaic theology. (A "pagan" is anyone not Judaic, Christian or Muslim.)

The Greeks called Set "Typhon," who was the war god assigned to Upper Egypt. This also represents another contravention to the "accepted" etymologies of words like "typhoon" in English, which is erroneously listed as the Cantonese "tai fung" in many dictionaries. English has more commonalties with Greek and Latin.which is erroneously listed as the Cantonese "tai fung" in many dictionaries. English has more commonalties with Greek and Latin.

The Egyptian priest Manetho associated the Jews with the Hyksos and Moses with the Egyptian priest Osarsiph. It was at this time that the belief the Jews worshipped an ass – an animal holy to the Egyptian god Set was established. Both the Jews and the pagan Egyptians used the labels (i.e., Satan, Set, Seth, or "Set-hn" as spoken in the ancient Hebrew) to defame each other. How fitting that amidst this epic struggle and bloody conflict, the entity known as Satan was born into the World. Such conflict continued through the Maccabean period (with Antiochus Epiphanes), and continues into modern times on several fronts.

There is a recurring theme that alludes to the hostility between the pagan Egyptians and the Judaic. Often it is claimed by the Neo-Pagans that Satan is only found in Christianity. How can this be if Satan is undeniably a Hebrew word adapted from the name of the pagan Egyptian god Set? The Jewish synod of rabbinical authority will deny that Satan even exists. This cannot be reconciled with the fact that it is a Hebrew word...

Thomas Hobbes, having been fluent in both Greek and Latin by age 9, has this to support my assertions in Leviathan:

Part III. Of a Christian Commonwealth.

Chap. xxxviii. Of Eternal Life, Hell, Salvation, and Redemption.

[12] And first, for the tormentors, we have their nature and properties exactly and properly delivered by the names of the Enemy (or Satan), the Accuser (or Diabolus), the Destroyer (or Abaddon). Which significant names (Satan, Devil, Abaddon) set not forth to us any individual person, as proper names do, but only an office or quality, and are therefore appellatives, which ought not to have been left untranslated (as they are in the Latin and modern Bibles), because thereby they seem to be the proper names of demons, and men are the more easily seduced to believe the doctrine of devils, which at that time was the religion of the Gentiles, and contrary to that of Moses, and of Christ.

[13] And because by the Enemy, the Accuser, and Destroyer, is meant the enemy of them that shall be in the kingdom of God, therefore if the kingdom of God after the resurrection be upon the earth (as in the former Chapter I have shewn by Scripture it seems to be), the Enemy and his kingdom must be on earth also. For so also was it in the time before the Jews had deposed God. For God's kingdom was in Israel, and the nations round about were the kingdoms of the Enemy...

Now, since you are so well educated on such matters, perhaps you can lend a literary criticism to the etymology of our language and culture instead of the ad hominems...

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

Halloween is the idolatry of an image or an office known as Satan by Christians and all else who share the practice...

Set, Satan, and Shaitan are the same. "Satan" is a Hebrew word for the pagan Egyptian Set. Satan, Shaitan, Set or Seth ("Set-hn" as spoken in the ancient Hebrew) is a pagan entity, the "adversary" of Judaic theology. (A "pagan" is anyone not Judaic, Christian or Muslim.)

The Greeks called Set "Typhon," who was the war god assigned to Upper Egypt. This also represents another contravention to the "accepted" etymologies of words like "typhoon" in English, which is erroneously listed as the Cantonese "tai fung" in many dictionaries. English has more commonalties with Greek and Latin.

The Egyptian priest Manetho associated the Jews with the Hyksos and Moses with the Egyptian priest Osarsiph. It was at this time that the belief the Jews worshipped an ass – an animal holy to the Egyptian god Set was established. Both the Jews and the pagan Egyptians used the labels (i.e., Satan, Set, Seth, or "Set-hn" as spoken in the ancient Hebrew) to defame each other. How fitting that amidst this epic struggle and bloody conflict, the entity known as Satan was born into the World. Such conflict continued through the Maccabean period (with Antiochus Epiphanes), and continues into modern times on several fronts.

There is a recurring theme that alludes to the hostility between the pagan Egyptians and the Judaic. Often it is claimed by the Neo-Pagans that Satan is only found in Christianity. How can this be if Satan is undeniably a Hebrew word adapted from the name of the pagan Egyptian god Set? The Jewish synod of rabbinical authority will deny that Satan even exists. This cannot be reconciled with the fact that it is a Hebrew word...

Thomas Hobbes, having been fluent in both Greek and Latin by age 9, has this to support my assertions in Leviathan:

Part III. Of a Christian Commonwealth.

Chap. xxxviii. Of Eternal Life, Hell, Salvation, and Redemption.

[12] And first, for the tormentors, we have their nature and properties exactly and properly delivered by the names of the Enemy (or Satan), the Accuser (or Diabolus), the Destroyer (or Abaddon). Which significant names (Satan, Devil, Abaddon) set not forth to us any individual person, as proper names do, but only an office or quality, and are therefore appellatives, which ought not to have been left untranslated (as they are in the Latin and modern Bibles), because thereby they seem to be the proper names of demons, and men are the more easily seduced to believe the doctrine of devils, which at that time was the religion of the Gentiles, and contrary to that of Moses, and of Christ.

[13] And because by the Enemy, the Accuser, and Destroyer, is meant the enemy of them that shall be in the kingdom of God, therefore if the kingdom of God after the resurrection be upon the earth (as in the former Chapter I have shewn by Scripture it seems to be), the Enemy and his kingdom must be on earth also. For so also was it in the time before the Jews had deposed God. For God's kingdom was in Israel, and the nations round about were the kingdoms of the Enemy; and consequently, by Satan is meant any earthly enemy of the Church.

[LadyDoc]

The days that God ordained as holy are listed in the bible.

But most Christians don't celebrate passover, or the other holy days God ordained in the Bible. That was my point. Haloween is short for "all hallows eve" which in modern English is "the eve of all saints day". All Saints day is a feast in Catholic countries, reminding us that all good Christians who die in the Lord are saints.

The next day, all souls day, is the day you visit the graves of your loved ones. In Mexico, it is called the day of the dead.

If you follow the rules of Judism, then you can argue Haloween is pagan. But historically it is not. It coresponds to a Wiccan holiday, but there is a real questio if it was truly a "pagan" holiday. (much of Wicca is modern and made up, not scientifically accurate as a religion)

And the majority of Christians for the last two thousand years have happily celebrated "pagan" feasts without qualms, because Christianity took the "good" in the feast and baptised it to teach us how to follow the Lord.

So instead of witchcraft and satanism, Haloween was baptised into recognizing that good conquers evil, that the devil hates to be laughed at, and that death is not the end of life, and that our loved dead will meet us in the next world.

Your argument about paganism is true ONLY because "puritans" who follow legalistic Christianity prefer to shun holidays, allowing a moral vacuum to be filled with occultish practices instead of Christian practices, and you will affirm the Wiccan claims, and allow the day to be used to promote the modern religion of Wicca.

We need to take back this very Christian holiday, not leave it to the satanists...

[Catholicguy]

However, the Bible does claim that Lucifer was the most beautiful of your God's creations.

<> It has been a LONG time since I asked you to source this in the Bible.

When you do, I'll give you a cookie, as a treat<>

119 posted on 10/25/2002 7:20 AM EDT by Catholicguy

<> ...still waiting....<>

[drstevej]

The reference is Ezekiel 28. The description of the "King of Tyre" is taken to be a description of Lucifer due to the Eden reference and the parallel to Isaiah 14's description of the fall of Lucifer.

[Cvengr]

I wonder about the kids who dress up in slacks, white long sleeve shirts, tie and ride their bicycles to trick or treat as LDS missionaries. Now that sends chills down my spine. ;^)

[LadyDoc]

There are dangers in Haloween as it is now celebrated:
(a lot of my answers are to make one think about the REAL problem, which is evil, not simply to badger bible verses out of context or to question other Christian's faith)

Michael Brown puts it this way:

---

From the archives:

HALLOWEEN: IT'S TIME TO COME AGAINST THE DEVIL'S CHRISTMAS

by Michael H. Brown

A few years ago, I began putting plastic rosaries in with candy for the trick-or-treaters. That made me feel good. In my own little way I thought I was reclaiming some land. I thought I was taking some turf back from the devil. After all, Halloween is supposed to be "all hallows' eve," the vigil for a celebration of our hallowed saints.

No more. Now, it's the devil's Christmas. Look around. There are orange porch lights, trees decorated with ghouls, and lawn figurines (witches, vampires, and assorted monsters). A couple years ago when I was speaking in Catskill, New York, a woman told me that at a house nearby was a "nativity" scene with demons instead of Jesus, Mary, and Joseph.

This is not just kid's stuff. It's serious business. Halloween is an old flashback to pagan idolatry, and while Christianity replaced it with a holiday to honor the saints (in the eighth century), the devil has reassumed it in this spiritual tug-of-war.

I realize the danger of seeing a devil under every rock. There's no use getting paranoid. For most, Halloween is just an excuse to have a little fun, and in the right way, it can be fun.

But the bottom line is that Halloween as now presented is based on the occult and it's woefully unwise for our society to become immersed in that or in anything that involves spells, witches, or wizards, including Harry Potter (whose movie, ironically, is coming out now). The fact is that pagans, druids, and witches recognize eight feasts during the year, and Halloween (or Samhain, eve of witchcraft's "new year") is the most popular. It's one of the high feast days of both witchcraft and satanism. The Celts believed that during Samhain the veil separating the living from the dead was at its thinnest. They believed that on the evening of October 31, evil spirits and the souls of the dead passed through the barrier and entered the world of the living. Occultists consider Halloween to be one of the most powerful times to cast a spell.

Look at the ghoulish faces on TV. Look at the macabre celebration of the dead. Where Christ and God and the Holy Spirit focus on life, the devil focuses on death. Where Catholics pray for the deceased, especially purgatorial souls, Halloween tries to bring spirits from the hellfire.

And aligning oneself with that may not be as harmless as you think. When we invoke an energy (when we honor it with a statue or image), we invite it in. Just as a holy statue brings Jesus and the Blessed mother, so can a dark one bring demons.

Am I saying that dressing as a demon will cause a child to become possessed?

I'm not saying that. But it comes with a clear element of danger. And even if it didn't, do we want our kids to treat the devil as a game? Do we want them to revel in death, in tombstones, in darkness?

"God says, 'Don't imitate evil!' (Deuteronomy 18:9-11). Think about it: would Jesus enjoy kids dressed up as evil spirits? As Freddie Kruegers? Would He want to see our little ones resembling His nemesis?

Bring back All Hallows' Eve. Bring back the "holy day" by dressing your kids as saints or angels. Take back evil territory just as Christ conquered pagan strongholds.



http://www.spiritdaily.com/halloween2.htm

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

I think your history is in error. Be that as it may: You fail to see the parallel with the modern phenomena of idolatry in astrology, tarot cards, psychics, crystals, the Satanic family altar of television, fantasy games, children's toy crazes, and all the other related goofy things commonly accepted within the insipid mentality of comic book pop culture.

You do get to the real meat of the issue when you say:

But most Christians don't celebrate passover, or the other holy days God ordained in the Bible.

What I am asking here in this thread is - - why not? Judaism is the basis of Christianity.

I will agree that Wicca is a cult of the psychotic...

Controversy over the origin of the word witch is valid when one considers the etymology of the term in other languages: venifica (Latin), hexe (German), streghe (Italian), etc. Only in it's English form has the word assumed a benign origin: wicca, purportedly meaning "wise."

Any debate must center on recent claims that advance a positive and socially acceptable meaning for a term that has in all ages and most languages meant "poisoner," "frightener," "enchanter," "spell-caster," or "evil woman."

Anthropologists have shown that even in primitive societies, notably the Azande, the definition of witch carries malevolent connotations. Therefore, are we to assume that the only "good" witches in the world were English witches? This, however, becomes difficult to accept when one considers the term wizard, which stems from the Middle English wysard = wise, versus the Old English wican = to bend, from whence witch is supposedly derived. All in all, it seems to be an unsuccessful attempt to legitimize a word that probably originated by onomatopoeia - the formation of a word that sounds like what it is intended to mean!

My contention is that like the term wicca, Halloween is another phantasm analagous to this very same idolatry...

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

I wonder about the kids who dress up in slacks, white long sleeve shirts, tie and ride their bicycles to trick or treat as LDS missionaries. Now that sends chills down my spine. ;^)

Since you bring it up, from time to time I have gotten young LDS adults visit me. I am always welcoming and cordial. I love talking to people. Once there were three young ladies. Very pretty. I considered conversion. Although ten years their senior, it would be absolute bliss having such beautiful, radiant wives who are so intelligent and articulate bearing my children. ;^)

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

...allowing a moral vacuum to be filled with occultish practices...

"Morals" are a deceptive replacement for the "avoidance of sin." "Morals" are a human invention. Conviction of the Holy Spirit is of God, not of man...

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

However, the Bible does claim that Lucifer was the most beautiful of your God's creations.

It has been a LONG time since I asked you to source this in the Bible.

The reference is Ezekiel 28. The description of the "King of Tyre" is taken to be a description of Lucifer due to the Eden reference and the parallel to Isaiah 14's description of the fall of Lucifer.

167 posted on 10/27/2002 3:45 AM PST by drstevej

Thank-you drstevej... I knew it was in there somewhere.

[DouglasKC]

Halloween is the idolatry of an image or an office known as Satan by Christians and all else who share the practice...

Agreed but it's a tough row to hoe convincing people of that. Most people today are comfortable with popular culture and customs no matter how debased they are.

[DouglasKC]

But most Christians don't celebrate passover, or the other holy days God ordained in the Bible. That was my point. Haloween is short for "all hallows eve" which in modern English is "the eve of all saints day". All Saints day is a feast in Catholic countries, reminding us that all good Christians who die in the Lord are saints.

It's my belief that this is a major problem. Originally God personally ordained holy days to be observed by his people. In the years after Christ's death these days were phased out by Christianity and new days were added. New days were then combined with pagan days in order to "convert" as many pagans as possible.

The process is called synectism. From the link: "Syncretism is the process by which elements of one religion are assimilated into another religion resulting in a change in the fundamental tenets or nature of those religions."

Satan has made pagan holidays more important than God's holy days by first replacing God's days with man's day...and then replacing man's days with his days.

[DouglasKC]

Bring back All Hallows' Eve. Bring back the "holy day" by dressing your kids as saints or angels. Take back evil territory just as Christ conquered pagan strongholds.

I don't think this works. No matter what you call it this day is still being honored by marking it as an occassion.

Economically Christians are still buying candy, supplies, apples, etc and giving manufacturers incentive to keep producing merchandise.

Culturally non-Christians see churches holding events on that night and figure if it's okay for churches to have a "fall feast" (or whatever they're calling them today) on that night then it's okay for them to go trick or treating.

A more effective method would be to stop celebrating it all together. If every Christian stopped partcipating the finacial effects would be felt very quickly and the cultural effects wouldn't be far behind.

[DouglasKC]

"Morals" are a deceptive replacement for the "avoidance of sin." "Morals" are a human invention. Conviction of the Holy Spirit is of God, not of man...

Are you sure you're an atheist??

[Catholicguy]

However, the Bible does claim that Lucifer was the most beautiful of your God's creations.

<>It has been a LONG time since I asked you to source this in the Bible.<> The reference is Ezekiel 28. The description of the "King of Tyre" is taken to be a description of Lucifer due to the Eden reference and the parallel to Isaiah 14's description of the fall of Lucifer.

167 posted on 10/27/2002 3:45 AM PST by drstevej

Thank-you drstevej... I knew it was in there somewhere.

<> drstevej is wrong, sorry Sir F. As the Douai notes "The King of Tyre, by his dignity and his natural perfections, bore in himself a certain resemblance to God by reason of which might be called the seal of reseemblace, & ect. But what is here said to him is commonly said of Lucifer, the king over all the children of pride. A seal is perfect when it represents things exactly. The prophet speaks ironically, to repress the King's vanity>

Sorry, both of you. Care to try again:)<>

[Catholicguy]

reseemblace= resemblance

[drstevej]

CG, I said the description of the "King of Tyre" is taken to be a description of lucifer. Biblical scholars are not all agreed on the identity of the King of Tyre. Many see this as either a dierct reference to Lucifer or a comparison of the King (or Prince) of Tyre to Lucifer.

In any case I was pointing out to our friend the passages usually given as reference for the point he cited. The Douai is one interpretation of the text, but hardly the only possible interpretation. It is not an easy passage to interpret.