Talk:From Hell I Write/@comment-33125381-20170917164526/@comment-5699173-20170917190825

A few things regarding your criticisms:

1. I don't see how he got Satanism and Luciferianism "completely wrong", or used the wrong symbols. The author himself said he's done his research. While it's true that there are people who call themselves Satanists but use Satan as more of a symbol, there are also those who call themselves Satanists and actually believe in him as a deity or an archetype/guide of some sort. And while there aren't many Satanists or Luciferians who are anything like the Hoffmisters (I've had contact with a lot of them), what's wrong with taking some artistic liberties? Unlike, say, Voodoo, which gets a largely unwarranted bad rap, there's at least some justification for Satanists being portrayed the way they are in this story and many others, since Satan is supposedly the embodiment of human evil. As for the symbols, yes, it's true that the inverted cross is traditionally a Catholic symbol, but the swastika was a Hindu symbol and was also on a Catholic church before Hitler hijacked it.

2. No offense here, but really? There's tons of stories of (adult) evildoers going to Hell for being evil. Why advocate such a tired cliché? Not to say that this pasta doesn't have any clichés (in fact, it has its fair share, despite being well-written overall), but there's no reason to do it again.

3. Demonic possession is just that: possession. The demon claiming a soul as its own so that it can drag it off to Hell upon the death of the host's body if no action is taken (i.e. an exorcism), all while using the body for its own malicious ends. I believe that was Pazuzu's plan in ''The Exorcist. ''That's pretty much the case here, too. Eileen is feeding souls to Lucifer by turning them into zombie slaves. You don't offer a sacrifice on an altar dedicated to your deity of choice and expect another deity to claim it.