More Satanism Stuff [Archive]

CCCPneubauten

19th April 2006, 22:03

The Church is Satan is a total waste of time. The basis for the Satanic Bible of LeVay is the wacko ideas from folks like Rand and 'like minded' philospphers

Disciple of Prometheus

19th April 2006, 22:45

Originally posted by [email protected] 19 2006, 09:18 PM
The Church is Satan is a total waste of time. The basis for the Satanic Bible of LeVay is the wacko ideas from folks like Rand and 'like minded' philospphers
No, the Satanic Bible is composed of a lot more than "Rand ideas," I suggest going to the Satanism thread or actually study the Satanic Bible.

Furthermore you know nothing of what really goes on in the Church of Satan, so you have no basis in which to criticize anything to which that entails, all you appear to know is the bare minimum of Satanism, a lot of which is probably borrowed of wikipedia.

I mean you can't even spell the founder's name correctly, :D .

CCCPneubauten

20th April 2006, 00:37

Disciple of Prometheus

20th April 2006, 01:13

Philosophically, it could be described as heavily influenced by the writings of Niccolò Machiavelli, Friedrich Nietzsche, Ayn Rand, Ragnar Redbeard, Sigmund Freud, Marquis De Sade, Jack London, Wyndham Lewis, Ambrose Bierce, Mark Twain and a few others; "Satan" is appropriated as a positive symbol of this worldview, and is considered to exist only as the Dark Force in nature and as a positive symbol.

:D , Good so you have read up on Satanism. Is Jack London not the real name of Ragnar Redbeard, considering Ragnar Redbeard was just a pen name?

Anton LaVey advocated a type of natural stratification into castes, where the (Satanic) elite could be protected from "interference from apologists for incompetence". He denounced democracy, the welfare state, and feminism as systems that viewed mass uniformity amongst races, sexes and varying intelligences as virtuous.

Source? I have heard him being labeled as a misogynist of sorts, but hardly have I ever heard him being racist, infact he always denounced racism. Nor have I heard of some societal Satanic elite, when he speaks of Satanists as an elite group of people is because we are usually ambitious, and succeed greatly in the endeavors in which we pursue, thus making us the elite of the parts of culture we reside in.

7. Satan represents man as just another animal, sometimes better, more often worse than those that walk on all-fours, who, because of his “divine spiritual and intellectual development,” has become the most vicious animal of all!

Darwin said basically the same thing, are you going to denounce him to? Or did you over look the sarcasm, and meaning of it?

7. Acknowledge the power of magic if you have employed it successfully to obtain your desires. If you deny the power of magic after having called upon it with success, you will lose all you have obtained.

There is a special meaning to when he and we refer to magick. Magick in the popular sense, is not magick that the Satanist employs, nor is it the magick LaVey was talking about.

Satanism is filled with all kinds of 'majik' and other crap I don't care to waste time on. All it is is smoke and mirrors and it has popularity just as a novelty counter-culture movement.

The aesthetics of Satanism act as a barrier to those who think their to "high and mighty," and to those to stupid release what LaVey was actually talking about, because people can't look past the "smoke and mirrors," the holy men and Hollywood have put around it, to get to the true heart of Satanism, I niether denounce nor encourage the "smoke and mirrors," because you either get or you don't. Satanism is not for everyone, nor is it intended for everyone.

Sidenote: I suggest moving this to the Satanism thread, so as not to further digress from the topic of this thread.

CCCPneubauten

20th April 2006, 03:04

But you do understand....it IS a religion, it DOES have a fascist type system of priests and what have you.

IF you are ana 'anarchist' it seems you'd oppose this. I mean do you VOTE on who is the high priest?

'Magick' is a gimic, still a parlor trick just for laughs. I didn't think people took it for real anymore. Be it "Satanist' or not.

Disciple of Prometheus

20th April 2006, 23:06

But you do understand....it IS a religion, it DOES have a fascist type system of priests and what have you.

No, priests of the Church of Satan, are determined by which members are active within the church via, essays and what have you, and have been in the church for a number of years, and have shown a firm belief and a good deal of knowledge of Satanism.

They do not walk around with black hooded robes, and an inverse pentagram about their necks, if that is the impression you got, the priests in the Church of Satan, are completely different from catholic priests, and or christian preachers, and don't really hold any massive authority over Satanists, like say a catholic priest would.

There is NO parallels to the Church of Satan, and to regular religious organizations, nor does it have a "fascist type system."

IF you are ana 'anarchist' it seems you'd oppose this. I mean do you VOTE on who is the high priest?

Take in to consideration I am not to familiar with the inner mechanics of the Church of Satan as they are today, I just know some of the history and evolution of the church.

However Anton LaVey originally just had a little circle of friends where he would be the main lecturer, and would talk about magick, cannibalism, and other odd topics of the day, and was sorta like a club of sorts and that slowly formed by regulars that frequented the black house into the magick circle I believe it was called, then with the urging of a friend, it evolved into being called the Church of Satan, and LaVey and his wife became High Priest and Priestess, and there friends got names like reverend and magus, and wasn't to formal of a thing.

Then they more people wanted to join in the Church of Satan, so LaVey took the essays from papers, that had been handed out to members, on various subjects, and "going ons" in the church, and what have you, then he started drafting the Satanic Bible, and from there the church spun off like a whirlwind into what it is today; but bear in my mind originally he didn't want the church to international, he thought it was better if it was a face to face religion, not some vatican like thing, because up until the church became really popular all this happened inside of the "black house," (his house), in San Francisco.

Then when he died the church was headed by his wife/gf Blanche Barton, then from their the position was given to the current High Priest Peter Gilmore, who was probably elected by the council of nine, which is the church's administrative body which over sees memberships, events, documents, news, and stuff.

The High Priest I am assuming is decided by what member, (probally a priest) would be best suited for and would be able to successfully handle the title of High Priest, who has shown a great deal of knowledge and understanding of Satanism for years, and who stand out above the rest, and who the council of nine agress to have run the church; don't confuse this or try to parallel this to the vatican, High Priest Gilmore was not chosen by some holy paper, and puffs of smoke coming from a chimney.

The Church of Satan does not hold any political party as their party, infact if you search through the archives you can find links to Communist and Anarchist literature and bands.

'Magick' is a gimic, still a parlor trick just for laughs. I didn't think people took it for real anymore. Be it "Satanist' or not.

The magick I and we talk about is not like "ooooo," mumbo jumbo, and secret hand gestures, and the forming of protective circles like wiccans do, it based upon knowledge of psychology, symbolism, and psychodrama, there is nothing uber mystical about it, and it is completely different from the archaic neo-pagan white-liter crap.

CCCPneubauten

21st April 2006, 00:19

http://www.teachingreligion.com/images/satanism.gif
No, priests of the Church of Satan, are determined by which members are active within the church via, essays and what have you, and have been in the church for a number of years, and have shown a firm belief and a good deal of knowledge of Satanism.

So just say it, there isn't much democracy at all it seems.

Sounds like picking a leader in the USSR, or just have good knowledge with Leninism, write a few things here and there, and boop, you now lead.

Now the rest of your post was just history I already knew, and you just saying how you don't have much control over the priest system, or at least as much as a Catholic does.

Not to much else you said, other than you have the funny idea that there is really 'majic' out there.

Oh and of course it's all psychological, all religion is.

You can talk to anyone who has been duped into thinking that crap is real and see they temselves have been brainwashed.

Religion is Religion is Religionbe it a bunch of stupid kids sitting in a circle talking about how much they hate Catholics or the Catholics themselves.

Odd you said there was no unside down pentagrams....considering this is of course the symbol for Satanism I find that hard to believe.

Also I just watched the 'Black Mass' and what did I see? A guy (Anton) ina stupid Devil costume, and a bunch of guys chanting in black robes, how opposite of what you said.

What a joke, you've got to be kidding me. (http://home.swipnet.se/~w-67496/satanism/bilder/anton.jpg)

Disciple of Prometheus

21st April 2006, 01:31

So just say it, there isn't much democracy at all it seems.

Sounds like picking a leader in the USSR, or just have good knowledge with Leninism, write a few things here and there, and boop, you now lead.

Satanism spans more than just what is blatantly Satanic, it could be psychology, art, music, etc.

Marilyn Manson being the prime example, I don't think he was a member prior to meeting Anton but showed he knew his stuff well enough to become a priest, and it shows that priesthood is not this "high horse," thing where you have to think a certain way to be in the "club."

There is no parallel to the Church of Satan, and the USSR, the USSR was a Communist state in charge of a nation, the Church of Satan is an organization that is not founded by any aid of the state, and remains solely by itself, it is an international organization so I think it would be difficult to ask every single solitary Satanist, who should be the new High Priest, and furthermore there has only been a change from High Priests one time, from LaVey to Gilmore, so from my standpoint sense I don't know the inner mechanics of the church it would be hard to determine the democratic process of the church, I was making an educated guess.

Not to much else you said, other than you have the funny idea that there is really 'majic' out there.

"Majic," how witty? I already explained magick somewhat in the Satanism thread, so I don't really feel the need to reiterate.

Religion is Religion is Religionbe it a bunch of stupid kids sitting in a circle talking about how much they hate Catholics or the Catholics themselves.

I don't sit around in a circle talking about how much "I hate catholics," or any such non-sense, and for someone who claims to know "oh so much," about Satanism, I think you could make this distinction.

Odd you said there was no unside down pentagrams....considering this is of course the symbol for Satanism I find that hard to believe.

Did you not read my post, I said and I quote;

"They do not walk around with black hooded robes, and an inverse pentagram about their necks."-Disciple of Prometheus

I never said we do not use the inverse pentagram, we use both the inverse pentagram, and the baphomet (which you have shown for who knows why, not really any point in it) as symbols, I was trying to illustrate what people think Satanic priests would wear, considering what priests usually wear.

Also I just watched the 'Black Mass' and what did I see? A guy (Anton) ina stupid Devil costume, and a bunch of guys chanting in black robes, how opposite of what you said.

Yea, and I bet you think rock stars wear stage costumes when there not on stage and are out and about to? In Satanic Rituals by Anton LaVey he clearly says that rituals are a lot like plays, and plays usually have costumes, hence the fancy dress, Satanists do wear robes and such for rituals, much in the same manner an actor would wear a costume for a play, to invoke intended emotion of the play, and psychodrama. It wasn't the opposite of what I said at all, I was talking about public dress, not pictures taken from publicity, and ritual photos.

I mean heaven forbid people post pictures of Anton like this, oh no then he would look (gasp!) just like one of us, no one wants to show pictures of him with his grandson, or with him wearing regular clothes.

Anton LaVey. (http://www.churchofsatan.com/Graphics/News/LaVey05.jpg)

Anton playing the organ. (http://www.churchofsatan.com/Graphics/News/LaVeykeys.jpg)

CCCPneubauten

22nd April 2006, 02:15

Disciple of Prometheus....

"They do not walk around with black hooded robes, and an inverse pentagram about their necks."

"Yea, and I bet you think rock stars wear stage costumes when there not on stage and are out and about to? In Satanic Rituals by Anton LaVey he clearly says that rituals are a lot like plays, and plays usually have costumes, hence the fancy dress, Satanists do wear robes and such for rituals, much in the same manner an actor would wear a costume for a play, to invoke intended emotion of the play, and psychodrama."

Hahahahaha. Wow, I know I don't know much about Satanism due to the fact it is a joke and it is nothing more than a blip on the 'religion radar' it is a total waste of reading.

I find it odd that you contradict yourself.

Disciple of Prometheus

22nd April 2006, 16:35

How did I contradict myself? The fact is I didn't, so naturally your ignoring the fact that I already explained myself.

I said I that when I was talking about walking around in black hooded robes, and inverse pentagrams, I was talking about what the lay person would think a Satanic priest would wear, that is why I said;

"They do not walk around with black hooded robes, and an inverse pentagram about their necks."

The "do not walk around," should imply to those paying attention, that walking around clothes, would mean the clothes averagely worn, i.e., street clothes, hence their is no contradiction, because in the second quote I was talking about ritual dress, or clothes worn in ritual;

"..Satanists do wear robes and such for rituals."

There again I said "for rituals," and again implying that I was not talking about street clothes, but clothes worn for ritual purposes.

No contradiction, your not fooling anyone.

Your trying to spin this whole thing around saying that "Satanism is stupid because it has 'majik,' and that is superstitious, hardy har har har," argument is flawed in and of itself, because one does not have to do rituals, or magick to be a Satanist in good standing, Satanism could cut the ritual portion out and still be the religion it is today, so thus your argument is flawed.

Satanism is much more than just magick, it is a philosophy, a mind set, a prexisting way of living. What I mean by that is, people don't convert to Satanism; those who remain Satanists for years realize that the Satanic Bible, and the Satanic philosophy of life, only gave voice to feelings, and ideas they had all along way before the even picked up the book, and that their is no need to change at all, which makes it truly a unique religion.

You can't get past the word magick, it acts as a psycholgical barrier, because in your mind anything that has the word magick in it, is instantly superstitious end of story. But your still not realizing the definition has been redefined by the Satanic lexicon, and that I am talking about something completely different from what your thinking, and ranting about.

So what if Satanism isn't popular, it's not supposed to be, Satanism is for the individuals who find it to suit them best, not those following the herd mindset, which is, "if it's popular it must be true," and those looking for a purpose, this is not that kind of religion.

Truly going by behavior alone, Satanism is the most popular religion in the world.

CCCPneubauten

23rd April 2006, 17:35

You said they don't wear them and now they do...but only at centain times.

Whatever...how lame is that even if you have to wear a robe at anytime?

1. Satanism is Reactionary

The fact is, the best philosophies are developed out of the embrace of something positive, not out of reaction to something negative. But Satanism is overwhelmingly reactionary. The "reactionary factor" is evident even in the name of "Satanism." Satanism is a reaction to the hypocritical, stupid, tired, weak, boring, failings of mainstream philosophies and religions. Rather than developing concepts intrinsic to itself, Satanism gathers its strength and power by feeding off of the weaknesses and failings of other systems of thought. The great pitfall with this is that Satanism can only be as strong as that which it reacts to. Like the Radical Protestants whose power and persuasion relied solely on the evils of Roman Catholicism and later died when the Roman Catholics got their act together, Satanism depends on the ignorance and stupidity of modern Christianity and other white light religions.

2. Satanism is Mainly Rhetoric

Related to Satanism being reactionary, Satanism is "philosophy light" and "rhetoric heavy." Anton LaVey's greatest skill was that of a rhetorician. Satanism, if one scratches much beyond the surface, proves to be intellectually shallow. There's just not a lot to it. My gut reaction to the SB was, "It's Dale Carnegie's How to Win Friends and Influence People with an 'evil' twist and a large dose of Friederich Nietzsche thrown in. Satanism gets people motivated, excited, and impassioned.like all good rhetoric. But in the end, it's not intellectually satisfying as a philosophy in its own right.

People need people. Many of us wish it weren't so because people have let us down, but the fact is, no man is an island. Satanists' claim of godhood denies this fact which is fundamental and necessary to humanity. This is one area where Satanists seem unable to face reality effectively. While individuals do in fact have much more power and potential than most ever acknowledge or realize, no one is independently god or independently powerful. In fact, you can only attain power if people give it to you. And when I say people need people, I don't just mean in terms of their usefulness, I mean people need the support and care of others. Babies will die if they receive no loving affection, and adults are no different. We all depend on others if we are going to be healthy and productive. Making independent claims of divinity, while it feels good, feeds one's ego, and has some self-empowering results, leads to a denial of that reality. And denying reality is always a pitfall; those that consistently deny reality will eventually find themselves powerless.

And here is where I hold sympathies for Satanists. When "Satan" no longer shocks, one of the most "interesting" aspects of Satanism is lost. Satanism actually needs to grow into larger boots! I think if Anton LaVey were alive today he'd realize his short sightedness. Satanism needs to have the flexibility to change with the times. As our world grows more and more secular, Satanists will be left holding yet one more tired, reactionary philosophy.

I would add that "Satan" has already been given a thorough definition by the world which is not entirely in accord with the Satanist's definition of Satan. Rather than merely redefining and recreating a "Satan" to one's own liking as La Vey did, a more appropriate symbol should by chosen. Simple! Obvious!

Don't worry, Satanism will fade out like the others.

Disciple of Prometheus

24th April 2006, 00:40

I will address both of your points.

Point 1:

Satanism is not reactionary, on the contrary it is the first religion, it will be the last religion, it was there at the dawn of man, and it will me there when humanity invariably commits suicide because man has become it's own enemy.

Now before you call me a hypocrite when I said Satanism was founded in 1966 (which it was), I am talking about the Satanic way of life, the things that matter most to man, which is survival. Pre-religious man, thought only about survival, he had sex when he wanted, ate when he wanted, etc., and was constantly vigilant of the world around him, and nothing more, this was a Satanic life.

Spirituality is reactionary to Carnality, when man evolved and had recreational time, he began to try to explain events and occurrences to the world around him, that's where you get lighting gods, fire gods, sky gods, and what have you, man had no explanation for such occurrences, then when faced with death, more and more theories happened, they lived a harsh life, a very trying life compared to our world today, so naturally they wouldn't think we would just return to the soil, there had to be some solace to look forward to, this couldn't be it, so man invented the afterlife.

Then as ages went on, and Memetic engineering took place, via story telling, and priests/shamans, they became more sophisticated, rituals more intricate, spirituality more influential, till it evolved to what it is today, where man has turned it's back on the Carnality, in favor of spirituality because it's traditional, and the Memetic engineering is to far ingrained.

My point being Satanism is about returning to man, the Carnality to which it has lost, via the paradigm of the adversary (Carnality), and since christianity is the main spiritual colossus of our world the adversary has taken the name Satan.

Satanism doesn't thrive on the "evil holy god," to be it's theological Atlas, that is also contrary I seldom talk about christianity or other religions unless the topic has been brought up. Satanism uses christian satire sure, and symbolic, and poetic references to illustrate better to modern man, thoughts, feelings, and a mind set, that is far older than religion itself. Nor does it thrive on any white-light philosophies, sure it borrows ideas and veins of thought from people, but what philosopher hasn't, every philosopher in history has influences that they build upon, Satanism is no different.

Satanism isn't "intellectually fulfilling," to you because a). Your not a Satanist and have an apparent anti-Satanist outlook, and b). You only look at the surface of Satanism, and not dig deeper, and expand upon it. Satanism is still a relatively new philosophy, and not very many authors have picked up where Anton left off, so really for the inquisitive minds who want to just get an overview there only option for blatantly Satanic books are the one's LaVey authored.

Sure I could list some other books that could be qualified as Satanic, but I don't think that is what you are looking for.

Point 2:

There is a lot more to Satanism than what LaVey wrote. He left a lot of room for the individual to expand upon for him or herself, and personally I think this was purposely done, not out of laziness of LaVey's part, but because for the Satanic Bible, since it outlines the basic philosophy of Satanism, it would be less like to be dogmatic.

I think he wanted people to think, and make up ideas for themselves, and find there own particular path of Satanism, not just him laying it out for them, like most religions do. My view of Satanism, is not the same as High Priest Gilmore's view of Satanism, that's why it's known as a religion of individuals, because though we are bond by a common way of thinking we are all different due to our on view and interpretation of what Satanism is.

People need people sure, LaVey never said go be an island, or some loner. Individualism does not equal being a loner, same for Selfishness, they both mean concerned for one's goals, life, and rights. LaVey encouraged people to love strongly who they wanted and to hate strongly who deserved their hatred, however not hate to the point of stubbornness or counter-productivity.

You can be an individual and still love someone fully and passionately, it just means you don't go out and commit self-sacrifice because you feel guilty to an imaginary spectator if you don't. It means you stand up for yourself, and not get swept up into the herd mentality.

None of the great thinkers followed the herd mentality. All we know today, all that has been invented, came about by people thinking out side the box, or herd, and expanding upon old individuals ideas, which goes back to point one, which is no philosophy is safe from influences, we all build upon what was before us, if we didn't, we wouldn't evolve.

Evolution did not go back to square one every time, it went to square two, then builded upon that and went two square three, and so on and so forth.

Egoism is not counterproductive, especially in the Satanic sense of the word, it means you should have pride, but not to the point of counterproductive arrogance that a lot of people fall into.

Self divinity, or Autotheism, means that you see your self the only force that is worthy enough to dictate your morals, your life, and your personal code, and not have some "god/ess," decide that for you, so in a theological sense a god or goddess is a force that guides and dictates what you should think, and where you should go, so thus if you are your own god, you guide yourself, and you think for yourself, Self-sufficiency.

You are your own redeemer and god.

Satanism encourages Secularism, it does not go against it, secularism is one of the great allies to Satanism, so thus it won't be "holding yet one more tired, reactionary philosophy," Carnality, and Intellectualism is the ultimate goal for Satanism, and Secularism, and Atheism are allies for we strive for the same goal.

Satanism could be called many things, Hedonism, Atheism, Secularism, Autotheism, mild Nihilism, Empiricism, Materialism, Autotheism, but if such a symbol that represents all these, and already exists, and would be easily recognized, to people, why not use it? Did Communism invent the sickle, and the hammer, then made there symbol? No, sickles and hammers already existed prior to Communism, they were used because not only what they repersented, but also because they were easily recognizable, instead of some made up symbol, it was based on things people knew.

Satan, or Shaitain as it was spelled, translates from Hebrew meaning adversary. Satan is the adversary the opposite of god. Satan is to Carnality, as god is to spirituality, so thus represents, rationalism, empiricism, freedom, liberty, indulgence, to gods or spirituality's, irrationalism, blind faith, servitude, oppression, and abstinence; that is the heart, meaning, and symbolism of the adversary, Satan is against all of what god stands for, (speaking poetically of course), so if god has a hold of the populace, and since the winners write history, this is no different, than one state slandering another state.

Satanism will never fade away, just as Carnality is eternal, so Satanism, because they are one in the same.