The main group that call themselves "Satanists" today are a non-deist organisation. Whilst they call themselves Satanists and will often say "Hail Satan" they do not actually believe a supernatural being of that name exists. The main goal of The Church of Satan is campaigning for the separation of church and state, and upholding the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
It's been a feature of the English and Scottish legal systems since at least the 1500s, though it has also been possible since 1695 to make an affirmation rather than an oath to a deity.
Some sources claim that the practice dates back in England to maybe the 9th century. However, these days, swearing an Oath on the Bible / Gospel Book (or some other holy book) in a legal setting is no longer required / a necessity.
That which you quote are but a minor grouping in the USA. It is in the European region and the Indian sub-continent where such beliefs were rife in medieval times.
It's as true this side of the Atlantic as the other - modern Satanism is a fringe religion/anti-religion. Most people who call themselves Satanists do so mainly as a protest against their experiences with overbearing religious zealots.
You asked why Satanists exist in the 21st century. The group called "The Church of Satan" are the most prominent "Satanic" organisation today and they do not actually believe that Satan/Lucifer/Beelzebub/The Devil exists. Why you're now talking about medieval times in the Indian subcontinent is a bit confusing to be honest.
You've clearly not heard Coles Radio then.
You don't have to swear on a bible or other book. You can simply affirm that what you are saying is the truth.
That would be The Promissory Oaths Act, 1868. Been subsequently amended by The Oaths Act, 1978.
By definition, an Oath has to make reference to a higher power.
which can be substituted by a pledge to the same effect:
Trying to establish the fact that Satanism is not a practice of recent time, but one going back for hundreds of years. If as you say that "The Church of Satan" do not actually believe that Satan as an entity exists, then they cannot be viewed as Satanists in the understood meaning of that word. Aleister Crowley (1875-1947) in Britain was a believer of occultist views that formed the basis of his religion of Thelema that had leanings towards certain past Satanist beliefs.
Fact established, point still unclear.
Nowadays, it seems that the people most likely to believe an actual Devil exists, are followers of Abrahamic faiths. There are smaller groups who claim to actually worship Satan (such as those influenced by the likes of Crowley and La Vey) but this is very much a niche position. Those people also have the same burden of proof as Christians and Muslims.
Quite.
Not for sometime has this been the case.
But even as a Classics scholar you would admit that the original Greek and the translated English convey slightly different meanings, even if you did the translation "correctly" with no errors.
Which of the two parts of my posting that you were referring to.? The one about the Qu'ran is still as I said was.
I hope that you found it interesting reading, as Xenophon as a war historian wrote exactly as he found.
Oh yes Xenophon is an interesting read, prefer Thucydides though.
Can the same usually be said for @Xenophon PCDGS's posts though? (At least we've now determined where Paul's user name has undoubtedly come from!)
The 12th century, when it also applied to jury members.
I was wondering down many centuries ago when this first so applied.
Though, as I pointed out above, it hasn't been a requirement in England since 1695 and 1715(?) in Scotland.
Within the context of the UK, I don't think there was any real devotion to the Greek version of the Greco-Roman Partheon of Gods.
Quite. Some seem to think a day of rest means sitting at home twiddling your thumbs all day. Can some people really not think of mentally stimulating and uplifting leisure activities that don't require going to a shop? How did they get through the pandemic at its peak? I guess I'm lucky, I have people I can spend time with who give me an emotional uplift. I have hobbies and interests which also give me an emotional uplift. I've had a lovely hike today up a modest hill at the head of glen Isla, near Glenshee, a very quiet and lonely glen, a complete and pleasant contrast to rammed full Horsham. You don't have to spend money to enhance quality of life.
As a retail/hospitality worker that works shifts, I don’t like the idea of one of my days off per week being mandated to appease the increasingly irrelevant/tedious religious/traditionalist lobby. Especially so when everything is closed on that day and I can not use it as productively as I may wish subsequently. Sunday trading is already inconvenient enough, because you finish your shift and everything is closed (we need to do our shopping too), and it funnels all your customers into a narrow time period and they are all gobsmacked and complaining that it’s busy or that you’re closing early. Retail establishments should be able to choose their own opening hours and lengths on a Sunday in line with demand.
Working at weekends should be a personal choice, this does not apply to most shop workers and various public services industries. It’s sign up to weekend work in your contract or no job.
