I mean, both are about destruction though. If we just go by destruction caused, God kills so, so many more people in the Bible, and significantly more are killed in the name of God to this day. I mean, God’s wrath is literally legendary.
I don’t think the Satanic Temple really “retcons” much of Satan, it just views them in a different light. Despite the rhetoric, biblical Satan doesn’t really do that much outside of angering God by offering free will. As a symbol, he already champions self-determination. Now sure, there’s been a lot of biblical fanfic written in the last 2,000 years that has made him into a symbol of destruction, but all that fanfic was written by Catholics, not by the Satanic Temple. Should they really be held responsible for how Satan was portrayed in Milton’s Paradise Lost, a completely fictitious image made-up wholesale in 1667?
Well, Satan’s inspiration origin is Zoroastrian, where that entity was thought of as destructive will. There’s nothing inherently interesting about destruction for the sake of it, which is what that entity represents. God OTOH can make claims of being about more than just destruction. That’s the problem. So either retcon Satan or just be okay with being associated with murder symbol.
Maybe the modern Christian conceptualization of Satan comes from that, but the view is not Biblically supported. And isn’t that what’s supposed to matter to Christians?
I mean, both are about destruction though. If we just go by destruction caused, God kills so, so many more people in the Bible, and significantly more are killed in the name of God to this day. I mean, God’s wrath is literally legendary.
I don’t think the Satanic Temple really “retcons” much of Satan, it just views them in a different light. Despite the rhetoric, biblical Satan doesn’t really do that much outside of angering God by offering free will. As a symbol, he already champions self-determination. Now sure, there’s been a lot of biblical fanfic written in the last 2,000 years that has made him into a symbol of destruction, but all that fanfic was written by Catholics, not by the Satanic Temple. Should they really be held responsible for how Satan was portrayed in Milton’s Paradise Lost, a completely fictitious image made-up wholesale in 1667?
Well, Satan’s inspiration origin is Zoroastrian, where that entity was thought of as destructive will. There’s nothing inherently interesting about destruction for the sake of it, which is what that entity represents. God OTOH can make claims of being about more than just destruction. That’s the problem. So either retcon Satan or just be okay with being associated with murder symbol.
Maybe the modern Christian conceptualization of Satan comes from that, but the view is not Biblically supported. And isn’t that what’s supposed to matter to Christians?