What is everyone's opinion of Satanism (meaning what was defined in the Satanic Bible by Anton La Vey)? Is anyone here a Satanist? If you do or do not like it, why? I'll post my own response to this soon after some others do so it will be neutral.
Even the Spiritual World is divided between Liberals and Conservatives.
Liberals are those who use the Power of the Collective to build up Civilizations and Paradices. Heaven is the Creation of the Collective of God.
Conservatives are the Barbarians who wish to ride in and plunder all that the Liberals have built of their honest labor. And they wish to use Force to enslave the Collective -- placing themselves above it but not within it.
It brings us to the core definition of Good and Evil. Good is the impulses of Love which bring society together and make all Souls One in Spirit. Evil is the impulse to divide and pillage. Any temptation to put oneself before the good of others is inherently Evil.
what makes you think that if a person is selfish that they want to rape and pillage?
What I like about LaVey's Satanism is the emphasis on individuality, accountability, intellectualism, and personal strength. However, I have a problem with the first Satanic statement: "Satan represents indulgence, instead of abstinence!". I believe self-discipline is crucial in every facet of our lives - it is what keeps us from becoming sub-animalistic.
I know that to them, Satan represents all of these qualities, but I wouldn't be surprised if they partially used the term "Satanism" for a shock effect; I would respect the religion more if they used a different term, but Satanism is certainly not evil. It's refreshing to find a non-traditional faith that doesn't believe in universal interconnection and that love is the key to everything! But then again, many (if not most) modern Satanists are atheists/agnostics and do not concern themselves with deities or spirits.
a lot of satanists follow chaos magick... which is an odd mix of things.
Quote from: Moonburn33what makes you think that if a person is selfish that they want to rape and pillage?
It's their moral orientation. If you are selfish, then why not rape and pillage. People rape and pillage all the time. Going to Thailand on vacation where some poor farmer will be pressed into selling his 10 year old daughter so that you may have a plaything -- that is rape. Exploiting others, which is the Entire Point of Capitalism, is pillage.
You often see people even take pride in selfishness. When people put their cars or old musical instruments up for sale, they will brag about how much more they got than they seriously thought their item was worth, and they gloat and laugh about how they managed to victimize another person. yes, it is only small time rape and pillage, but these people, in addition to being evil, are also only small.
Indeed, once you know a person is inherently selfish, then there is no crime that you could not suspect them of. They may refrain from criminal acts, but only because they have the fear of terrible consequences. If they were assured they would never get caught, there would be no end to their evil.
Many evil people are convinced that everyone is selfish. this is simply not true. There are many people in the world who are other-directed. They always think in terms of family, community and society. In America, they are the BLUES. the selfish ones are the REDS. Yes, the BLUES are the minority, but they are not far behind. However, it does not bode well that morality is now out of office and that Selfishness now Rules the World. It appears like the 21st Century is about to replay the 20th... oh what fun to do all of that over again.
Quote from: Asif
...but I wouldn't be surprised if they partially used the term "Satanism" for a shock effect; I would respect the religion more if they used a different term, but Satanism is certainly not evil.
Oh, no, don't make that mistake. Satanism IS evil. The moral orientation of Satanism is toward the individual -- the goals are hedonistic and the goals are for material acquisition and sexual conquest. Society and Civilization are presented as targets.
What you mistake for Virtue is what Selfish People always present as Virtue -- the cultivation of Strength to Domineer Others -- the Rugged Individual -- the Self Made Man. All of these 'Virtuous Figures' are simply models of Lucifer.
You need to decide upon what your Ideal is. Do you have a Civilized Ideal. Or do you have a Barbarian Ideal. Do you want to uphold a Civilization, or do you want to Conquer, and destroy so that in gathering a big bag of loot you may satisfy that you have gotten more than if you had lived as part of an honest community.
Amazon.com
One might expect The Satanic Bible at least to offer a few prancing demons or a virgin sacrifice, but if you hopped this train expecting a tour of the house of horrors, you're on the wrong ride. Far from a manual for conquering the realms of earth, air, fire, and water, The Satanic Bible is Anton LaVey's manifesto of a new religion separate from the "traditional" Judeo-Christian definitions of Satanism. While LaVey rails against the deceit of the Christian church and white magicians, he busily weaves his own deceptions.
The Satanic Bible claims the heritage of a horde of evil deities--Bile', Dagon, Moloch, and Yao Tzin to name a few--but these ancient gods have no coherent connection between each other or to Satanism, except that all have been categorized by Christianity as "evil." Calling on these ancient names like a magician shouting, "Abracadabra," LaVey attempts to shatter the classical depiction of Satanism as a cult of black mass and child sacrifice. As the smoke clears, he leads us through a surprisingly logical argument in favor of a life focused on self-indulgence. The Satanic Bible is less bible and more philosophy (with a few rituals thrown in to keep us entertained), but this philosophy is the backbone of a religion that, until LaVey entered the scene, was merely a myth of the Christian church. It took LaVey, and The Satanic Bible, to turn this myth into a legitimate public religion. --Brian Patterson
Product Description:
Called "The Black Pope" by many of his followers, Anton La Vey began the road to High Priesthood of the (lurch of Satan when he was only 16 years old and an organ player in a carnival:
"On Saturday night I would see men lusting after halfnaked girls dancing at the carnival, and on Sunday morning when I was playing the organ for tent-show evangelists at the other end of the carnival lot, I would see these same men sitting in the pews with their wives and children, asking God to forgive them and purge them of carnal desires. And the next Saturday night they'd be back at The carnival or some other place of indulgence.
"I knew then that the Christian Church thrives on hypocrisy, and that man's carnal nature will out!"
From that time early in his life his path was clear. Finally, on the last night of April, 1966 -- Walpurgisnacht, the most important festival of the believers in witchcraft -- LaVey shaved his head in the tradition of Ancient executioners and announced the formation of The Church Of Satan. He had seen the need for a church that would recapture man's body and his carnal desires as objects of celebration. "Since worship of fleshly things produces pleasure," he said, "there would then be a temple of glorious indulgence . . ."
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0380015390/qid=1101822066/sr=8-1/ref=pd_csp_1/102-1868820-9220168?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
I have not read this yet but plan to some day. Having not read it I cannot really comment on it, but I will say that those I have talked to who have read it give it much praise. From what I have gathered it is better taken as a philosophy rather than a religion.
Leo Volont: Satanists do not rape or pillage. While it does emphasize selfishness, it is conservative selfishness. Selfishness left unchecked leads to anarchy, which is unmanageable and dangerous, even for the strongest people.
Read the Satanic rules of the earth, they not only have rules against rape, but against harming children or animals.
Quote from: TyciolRead the Satanic rules of the earth, they not only have rules against rape, but against harming children or animals.
Satan telling you that he does not believe in Rape and Pillage is like George Bush saying that he is a compassionate conservative.
Goodness is Community mindedness, selflessness, and sharing. Love.
Evil and Your Satanism is all that is selfish and springs from selfishness. Whether you like it or not, every criminal act involving one person victimizing another for his own selfish ends, is Satanic.
Essentially Satanism is the motivating force of Barbarism as it seeks to destroy Civilization. Throughout History there has never been much of a shortage of Barbarians. They recruit among people who think they can do better for themselves by plundering the Greater Community then by working with it.
I'm referring to Satanism as set out in the Satanic Bible by Anton La Vey, not devil worshiping animal sacrifice biblical Antichrist Satanism. This is not theistic, it has very little to do with the Satan from the Holy Bible of Christianity.
Before I go on to argue further Leo, do you understand this, and have you read the Satanic Bible? If not, you have no reason to be debating here. No more than I would to debate Christianity if I hadn't heard of Jesus or the Ten Commandments.
Most Satanist don't even believe in a Satan.
Some christians don't, and with good reason:
http://www.potts.net.au/Stand/satan/ot_satan.htm (a good biblical argument for the non existance of a devil)
I study the Bible a lot, but it is by NO MEANS my "holy book" or moral guidance. I share the OPINION that there is no Satan.
Antons choice of the name "Satanism", has done wonders for the modern church. Nothing quite like an xtian fundy spotting the Satanic Bible in a book store :wink: I can only imagine the shock when the Satanic Bible was new. Because of his choice of words, secular humanist have a bad name, and the church gets more members with a little realism to strengthen the myth that "the Devils gonna get 'ya!"
My OPINION:
Satanist = Humanist
Devil Worshiper = Rebelious youths who want shock value
Lucifarian (sp) = Moron. Lucifer was NEVER the name of a being. Its a planet. If a religion can't get the name of their god right . . .
I belive that anything concievable in the mind exists on some level which is why I think importiant to control your thoughts aswell as your actions.
Who knows, maybe thats why (according to Spectral Dragon's topic a few months ago)fantasy universes exist in the astral.
Lucifer was the name of a torch-bearer, and it was not simply a planet. If you'll look at roman mythology, many gods and planets shared names too.
Tyciol is right.
And as for anyone saying that Satanism is inherently self-destructive should keep their mouths shut. Worshipping the self means soothing and cultivating the self. It's about doing what you truly want to do- even loving and caring for the sick... if you're into that sort of thing :P
Well, he was a planet AND a deity, as many deities are represented by planets.
Tyciol is right, 'Lucifer' translates as 'light bearer' and was the name of a minor Roman deity, who was identified with the Morning Star, hense the name 'light bearer'. There was nothing particlularly 'evil' about him, he was just a minor deity; there is a couple of references the the quite harmless Lucifer in the poems of the Roman poet Ovid for example, dated to the late 1st centuryBC.
However there is also the hebrew diety of misrule, Satan, who only took shape in Hebrew doctrine as a personification of 'evil' in the 3rd century bc or so, due to influence from Zoarastianism.
now this character, while having no direct relation the the Roman deity, DID share a few charactersistics, hense when Christianised Romans came to write about Satan they noted the similarites and gennerly used the name Lucifer, but now to apply to this Hebrew deity.
by the end of the Roman perod, the original Roman diety had been fogotten with the Hebrew Satan figure now happily using the name 'Lucifer' for himself.
As for LeVay's satanism, i agree Satanists do not actually believe in a horned devil figure laughing it up in hell, but more as a metaphor for individualism.
I disagree with the idea that satanists are simply 'Humanists' in the modern sense. This implies that the Humanism movement champions self centred individulism and personal gain above everything else.. this is not correct and sounds more like christian propaganda.
Humanists are very concerned with morality, just as anyone else, they just believe in a secular morality, in the spirit of the best greek philosophers and modern philosophers like kant and Hume etc.
If we are being more correct here, satanism equals 'modern capatilist ideals', ie personal gain, competition, make as much money and material gain as possible, you are number one, no one else is going to look after you, you have to do it yousef, law of the jungle etc.
These are all the rules of modern western capitalist society.
The satanist simply says that rather than feel guity about this reality (which is what it is, we can wax on about ideals but the above description is about how the world actually *is* not how it 'should' be), instead we should celebrate this fact about ourselves..
There is also a warped sense of humour involved of course, since it must be known that the use of the christians satan figure is bound to annoy conservatives, and is partly the reason they use it...
In fact LeVay's satanism is not that remarkable or controversial upon examination.
I want to point out the distinction however between Satanism and the concept of 'devil worship' found in goth/nu metal and hollywood movies.
Christian conservatives havent actually got round to the fact that this is a myth.. black sabbaths etc only became written about in the 17th century, by christian monks no less.
While sporadic cases of 'real' devil worship occur today they are always traced back to rebel teens who like to try and rebel by 'worshipping satan'; the great irony is that in their urge to rebel against the christian beliefs of their parents, they actually end up *reinforcing* their parents religion, since satan is a christian figure!!!!
If they really want to rebel, why no become a Muslim, or a Hindu, or a pagan???
All this is a bit to complicated for the press and much of hollywood unfortunalty, which is where most christian conservatives get their information from!
Douglas
Yes you are all correct on what you say about the name Lucifer.
But is there really enough information available on this "minor diety" to have a religion named after him/her/it?
I'm asking - I really don't know. But in my opionion, based on my limited knowlege: NO.
>> " . . . for those who believe that "Lucifer" refers to Satan is that the same title ('morning star' or 'light-bearer') is used to refer to Jesus, in 2 Peter 1:19, where the Greek text has exactly the same term: 'phos-phoros' 'light-bearer.' This is also the term used for Jesus in Revelation 22:16." << http://www.lds-mormon.com/lucifer.shtml
I find the historical origins of "the Devil" very interesting.
Gandalf said:
>> I disagree with the idea that satanists are simply 'Humanists' in the modern sense. This implies that the Humanism movement champions self centred individulism and personal gain above everything else.. this is not correct and sounds more like christian propaganda.
Humanists are very concerned with morality, just as anyone else, they just believe in a secular morality, in the spirit of the best greek philosophers and modern philosophers like kant and Hume etc.
If we are being more correct here, satanism equals 'modern capatilist ideals', ie personal gain, competition, make as much money and material gain as possible, you are number one, no one else is going to look after you, you have to do it yousef, law of the jungle etc. <<
VERY good points. Thank You.
fuji257_
you re right, there is not enough on the minor roman deity to make a religion out of it, not because we dont know enough, we do, it just that there isnt much to know, he was responsible for making sure the Morning star came up every day, that's it.
Any 'religion' would have to be based on the Hebrew Satan figure, the one who eventially adopted the name Lucifer as well; this is where we get to Le Vay's satanism.. which is metaphorical rather than literal....
What the church didnt realise when they made up their devil worship/black sabbath mythology was how utterly absurd it all was..
no sane minded individual would 'give their souls to satan in return for a bit of material gain', metaphorically they might, but not in a literal sense.. how could you enjoy your gains knowing you were going to roast in hell afterwards and be used as satan's sex aid? I would challenge you to find anyone who would actually consider this who wasnt nuts.. the only ones who might were those who didnt believe it in any case, which just reinforces my point about how absurd it is.
The church liked to spread the idea that there WERE people who would consider this a good trade but there has been NO EVIDENCE of any such things taking place in recorded history, i cant emphaise this enough..
the only thing that MAY have occured is some christian accidentally bumping inot some pagan practice out in the sticks somewhere and mistaking this for 'devil worship' but thats about it..
The ONLY time we have EVER had any confirmed 'devil worship' (outside of LeVay) is within the past century thanks to the spread of hollywood movies etc and it is ALWAYS traced back to rebellious teens trying to be 'evil' or nutcases who have watched said movies and taken them as fact.
the devil worshp myth is one of the most bizarre myths ever spread by the church and is alive and well today, being peddled by the christian right, often in the shape of nightmarish satanist conspiracies to control the world.
Le Vay's philosophy has just made this a lot more complicated now thanks to his use of the term 'satanism'.. thanks mr LeVay
Douglas
Such complications incite thoughts. Thoughts people need to have to fully shed the dogma they've had drilled into them. As adamant as I am, the morality is still deep within me. I don't know what's religion, what's parental, what's experience, and what's me.
I have many friends who are Satanists (by the Church of Satan, run by Anton LeVay) and they are by no means devil worshippers or Luciferians. I dislike people who are so ignorant to not know the difference. My friends are all good people who simply, as the D&D nerds would say, are alignment True Neutral and not so caught up with worrying about others or having others fret over them. In a way, parts of me are still Satanist -- as I was a practising one only a year ago. While now I am following the path of Buddha, I can't help but stray and become a little .. . peeved when I see such idiocy as those who blindly label Satanists as the Christian enemy. After all, having to INVENT an enemy is elementary and only proves your lack of faith.
You could try a bit of both you know :) Just because most satanists want material wealth and pride/ego, it doesn't mean you have to be like them. It's all about what you want!
It might be more proper to say 'founded' by Anton La Vey, since he's dead now and can't run it. I forget who runs it now... I thought about joining but it figures, the second I do they boost up the membership fee from $100 to $200. Screw that, they'd better lower it, otherwise I'm saving for other stuff.
Quote from: TyciolYou could try a bit of both you know :) Just because most satanists want material wealth and pride/ego, it doesn't mean you have to be like them. It's all about what you want!
It might be more proper to say 'founded' by Anton La Vey, since he's dead now and can't run it. I forget who runs it now... I thought about joining but it figures, the second I do they boost up the membership fee from $100 to $200. Screw that, they'd better lower it, otherwise I'm saving for other stuff.
True, true. I do think that I *am* a bit of both. I find it hard to commit myself fully to anything, since doubt still appears every so often. I've been told by some people that I'm too kind and giving to be a Satanist, but by others that I'm way too fiery and selfish to be a Buddhist. I know that I refer to what other people say a lot, but it's hard to just ignore other opinions. I guess a part of me really admires and loves my touchy, yet proud, Aries nature -- and another part wants to be a calm, Shinto priestess in a Buddhist temple. Eh. But this isn't the feudal era.
I didn't know Buddhists had to be unselfish or Satanists uncharitable... that's news to me.
Well, you know how people are.
Stereotypical.
Most of it comes from me blowing up at idiots and them saying "I thought you were trying for enlightenment." To which I respond, "I am. It's hard. *punch!*"
Even Christians can be violent and sadistic. Many evil acts are committed in the name of God. Satanism does not always play a role.
Lucifer as Satan is a lie, Lucifer is latin for "Venus".
Leo you remind me alot of myself, and for that I want to tell you about the dream I had, it comforted me so maybe it'll do the same for you.
I spoke to what I can only describe as God or some sort of diety. He explained to me that there is two types of people, one that needs security, one that needs liberation, though completely differant they move in constant sync and precise motion like a mirror reflection. They derive from the two prime energies, law and chaos.
Science and aicent egyption lore claim chaos created everything, however without a LAW to bind them what would keep chaos and it's word solid? Without law life could not exsist, without chaos life could not exsist, it's like looking at half a glass of milk really.
He told me it was part of our nature to want to destroy the other, lawful men try overwhelm the chaotic with thier larger quantities, chaotics try to overpower lawful with thier stronger auras.These two energies can be seen in everything. And by knowing but a tiny bit about someone I could now determine what they feel, when they'll feel it, and what they'll feel next.
It made me feel bad at first, after all, this met that some I loved were of opposing energy, but that got me to thinking, why can't we use eachother for our own benefit? By doing my part to help the chaos, the chaos will want to repay in gratitude by helping the law, is it right to call what i'm planning to do good? It's benneficial to everyone, but it relies on deceit and selfishness, traits asscosiated with "thw law" itself.
If you ask me the Judeo Christian's take on good and evil is but a battle of law and chaos politics. The only "evil" is ignorance and suffering, noone wants to suffer, and noone bennefits from ignorance.
This "good" we've been taught is nothing but a peversion of the law.
This "evil" we've been warned of is just a dellisuional chaos.
Quote from: The AlphaOmegaEven Christians can be violent and sadistic. Many evil acts are committed in the name of God. Satanism does not always play a role.
'Even'? 'Can'?
Satanism has NEVER played a role. No one has ever been killed because of Satanism. Nearly all religious acts were committed in the name of one omnipotent deity or the other, Yahweh being the most popular, he being the most notorious.
Um, I'm not sure if you agree or disagree with your quotations there, doesn't matter I suppose. I think more important than Christian or Satanic, is extremist. So many Christians take their beliefs to such extremes that they often believe killing in God's name is justified. But they are not alone. There is not a single religion in which at least a few members inflict atrocities in the name of that religion... even (and often especially) if it goes against that religions actual beliefs. It's this "your opinion versus my opinion" mentality that is the true cause of all this conflict in the first place. There are many beliefs. In each belief there are many members who go against it. There is hypocrisy in each and every religious sect on this planet. Does that not make us equals?
No, it does not make us equals.
Christianity has many instances in the bible where God kills, or people kill for him and God favours it. 'Thou shalt not kill' is misplaced, and ignored, making it subjective to all readers. It uses a non-individual approach, promotes converting others (as has been done through violence), as well as intolerance of others who 'sin'.
No one has killed in the name of Satanism, they can only use it as an excuse. The 'don't break the law' statement is quite clear, and can never be circumvented. There aren't any human sacrifices allowed either, unlike the many sacrifices in the Holy Bible.
I haven't studied much about satanism, but to make the statement that no one has killed in the name of satan is pure fallacy. Of course people have sacrificed (men, women and babies) in the name of satan. Whether it goes against the belief (I doubt it does) does not mean it is not done. Just as many atrocities have been done in satans name as in Gods. Thus, in a sense, the religions are equals. The beliefs and teachings are different, but somewhere around the world you can find followers of both beliefs that commit the very same acts in the name of their God (or satan)... equals in the sense that despite the belief, the actions carried out in the name of that belief can somewhere be found as the very same. It is true that there are instances in the bible that God agrees with killing... it is also true that some teachings of satan agree with killing as well. The difference is in context, not in action.
False.
First off, nowhere near as many people have been killed in the name of Satan as god.
Secondly, there is a difference between being killed in the name of Satan, and being killed in the name of Satanism.
Satanists do not believe in Satan as a deity.
Also as the concept of satan is a christian concept anyway, (or more accuratly, a concept from late judaism whch then influenced christianity and islam), there is really no difference in who has killed more. Anyone who acknowledges satan is a product of christianity in any case, as it is through christianity that they first encountered 'Satan', so all this debate about 'who killed more' is a moot point.
How many people has christianity killed is a more accurate point. or how many people has religion killed even better.
or how about how many people has science killed?
Doug
..or how many people people have killed, and are still killing this very minute. It's just animalistic. :/
Science doesn't kill anyone, accidents and misuse by PEOPLE do.
Christianity has killed a lot of people, but there's not even a need to go that broad. The number of people killed in the NAME of it is enough.
Science doesn't kill anyone, accidents and misuse by PEOPLE do.
Christianity has killed a lot of people, but there's not even a need to go that broad. The number of people killed in the NAME of it is enough.
Tyciol_
People have been killed in the NAME of science just as much as they have been through religion.
I'm afraid science doesnt have much of a better track record than religion once you look at it properly.
Try the theory of eugenics, survival of the fittest and other late 19th century/early 20th century racial doctrines based on science of its day, resulting in the logical conclusion of the nazi death camps.
Of course you will say 'but that wasnt proper science, that was a twisted corrupted perversion of science, warped in order to justify certain ideas'.
My answer is complete agreement. But it is the exact same process that happens with religious persecution and genocide and torture based on religious priniciples. They are also justifed through a perversion and twisting of religious ideas, in all likelyhood quite the opposite of what the originator had intended.
In one way, you are right.. religion and science themselves do not kill people, but both have been used in exactly the same way in order to justify murder. Science has inspired just as much in the way of death and horror as religion has. And dont get me started on the technology of war, which science has also playe a full an active role in.
For this reason, It really strikes me as utter naivity when some people, particlurly anti-religion types, say that there would be no problems in the world if there was no religion and only pure science: absolute naivity.
The true source of the problem is not, religion or science.. it is Human Beings...
If you think about it, science works off of a belief system much like religion and there are people who would question it or accept it whole-heartedly the same as people who are religious. Theorists and scientists are ridiculed for their beliefs in how the Science of the Universe (tm) works and there are those who choose to believe the mainstream views and ridicule those who try to think about it differently.
The world was once flat and the center of the universe. Those that tried to explain differently didn't do so well.
What a load. The Nazi rise was not based on science, it was based in racism and even some strange religious practises (not sure what they were... some christian aspects but mostly a bunch of weird pagan stuff I heard). The Nazi rise was not based on evolution at all, and the concept of wiping out your enemies to repopulate the world with your choice of people was not originated by science at all.
Once again ,you misunderstand what i'm saying. i'm saying that nazi atrocity was *justified* through a perverse interpretation of current science.
Just as other atrocities are justified through a perverse interpretation of religion.
So what I'm saying is that it is utter naivity for secularists to imagine that in a world of 'pure science' with no religion (their ideal world), then there would be less atrocities. This is wrong, as people generely make use of whatever's around to justify their reasons fo doing something and making it 'right'.
And if you think that eugenic theories of science were not DEEPLY influential (even in america) and did not have an impact on racism and the ideologies of nazism then you do nothing more than display your utter ignorance of the wider context of the period.
Doug
I'm not saying there would be none, but there would definitely be less. Religion generally propagates ignorance whereas science propagates learning, so you can't help but be better educated on the decisions you make.
I don't believe the Nazis founded it on a perversion of science either, it was far more racism than science or evolution that was being warped. It was based more on the idea that other races were evil and impure and were conspiring to destroy their way of life, bringing them down and enslaving them and that they needed to be punished for it.
The Satanism that I'm familiar with teaches that Satan was the true creator of mankind. It teaches kindness and morality and also teaches that yaweh was the evil one. I assume there are satanists who worship the traditional christian idea of Satan, in which case I'm sure morality does not play a major role.
I am not a satanist or christian and I do not believe in either god or satan but I like to read about other religions.
I was curious if anyone else is familiar with this other form of Satanism. Myself, Im not familiar with any other kind.
Quote from: MindFreakThe Satanism that I'm familiar with teaches that Satan was the true creator of mankind. It teaches kindness and morality and also teaches that yaweh was the evil one. I assume there are satanists who worship the traditional christian idea of Satan, in which case I'm sure morality does not play a major role.
I am not a satanist or christian and I do not believe in either god or satan but I like to read about other religions.
I was curious if anyone else is familiar with this other form of Satanism. Myself, Im not familiar with any other kind.
That's some kind of theistic satanism. People have practised all sorts of things they label satanism just as much as they practise things labeled Christianity, differing all over the place.
The official Satanism, is the one established by Anton La Vey in 1966 through publishing The Satanic Bible and establishment of the Church of Satan. All others lost out, and should find new names, and for the most part, they have. The ones who don't are just pathetic.
Any form of Satanism that encourages kindness is certainly less pathetic than one that does not.
I read this somewhere..
" Mankind is created from the blood of the evil and from the soul of divinity, so mankind possesses the key by which he can open the gates of absolute evil, and he possesses the weapons by which the evil was defeated in a time beyond knowledge and his consciousness is the covenant between spirit and matter"
would this mean anything?
I was a Satanist last year but I wasn't the type of a satanist who chops the cats heads off or drinks blood of animals etc. I was a modern one: P It was because of the sins that Satanism has like 7 deadly sins but there were only 3 in Satanism I think, that was the reason that I became a Satanist. But then I realized that I can consider those sins by not being a Satanist too. I'm an agnostic now and living the life on my own, with my own thoughts, own believes of myself and the world
I have not read through all of your guys posts yet..
But have any of you met satan in the astral?? This guy just pisses me off. He watches me constantly (not him personally but the fallen angles do)
I have fought satan himself with the help of King Jesus. He actually HATES projectors cause he can not do anything to us in the astral except scare us. He does not of any power over me. He promised me many things tho if I stop fighting him and join him.
But I can't say I have a religion I would classify myself as a "Christian" if anyone asks tho. I just follow the bible for the religious of the modern world have been corrupted.
-The Projector-
Quote
But have any of you met satan in the astral?? This guy just pisses me off. He watches me constantly (not him personally but the fallen angles do)
I've only met Lucifer and a few demons while in astral. I've nearly had a kundalini raising with his help, but it was stopped because I was afraid of not being able to fully control it.
You have to remember that there are two Satan entities. One is Lucifer - and he is certainly friendly, and second is a thought form created as a scapegoat by religions like Christianity. My friend met the second one in astral once and said that it was the most scary experience in his life.
I was a Spiritual Satanist, but not anymore, because every religion carries some limitations and there's no religion I can 100% agree with.
What do you mean friendly?? Or waz that a joke? That guy is an A-Hole I will fight him any chance I get. Lucifer wants to take me out of the astral or join him. He kept promising me 'impossible' things like being able to project anytime and stuff. He is a liar.
QuoteI've only met Lucifer and a few demons while in astral. I've nearly had a kundalini raising with his help, but it was stopped because I was afraid of not being able to fully control it.
Did you seek him?
What did the Lucifer you see look like? When I saw him he was a pretty boy but with dark eyes and black hair. He dresses kinda fancy too.
-The Projector-
Bascially, if you believe in 'the devil' or 'lucifer' you will get him. Eventually you will begin to see past this 'thought = action' process but how close you are to this realisation is impossible for me to tell exactly, but it sounds like you still have pretty far to go.
Doug
Don't talk down to me.
I'm not trying to. I just wanted to give a bit of general advice that might save you and others a lot of time. It's up to the people who read it if they want to take that advice or not!
Doug
Quote from: ProjectorWhat do you mean friendly?? Or waz that a joke? That guy is an A-Hole I will fight him any chance I get. Lucifer wants to take me out of the astral or join him. He kept promising me 'impossible' things like being able to project anytime and stuff. He is a liar.
Why didn't you accept it? Being able to project anytime must awesome. :roll:
I already can do that.
-The Projector-
same thing happened to me with a spontaneous kundalini awaking in the presence of lucifier/satan/devil (whoever we're talking about). we have a fairly intimate relationship in the astral, but this time he actually manifested in the physical. crazy...any i did the same thing...it was like really bad drugs. my body went ice cold. i was sweating like mad...and i cracked!!! totally out of left field and very scary.
here's a link i think some of you will enjoy
DEVIL LIVED
http://viewzone.com/devil.html
333
La Vey, did some good with his pointing out the scam of christian priestcrafters and alot of the nine satanic rules are a saner way to live. Alot of the satanic bible was taken from Might is Right. I give credit to the spiritual satanist's they helped me find what I had been looking for, for awhile.
Regardless of how you cut it....
Satanism is an extremist sect of Christianity.
What does this mean? This means that Satanists need the bible and the dogmas of Christianity to even exist as a 'religion'.
If Christianity disappeared one day in a 'poof of logic', then Satanism would disappear at the same time.
Peace,
Beth
Extremists of any kind disappoint me, their is just no room for other peoples view points. Makes me think of Brave New World. Yech!!
also, is this off topic? Defiantly. But I was wondering if it really is possible to change your appearance in the astral. How could you trust anyone?
"Hello, I'm this person, trust me."
"Oh know, I've been tricked!"
Don't want to end up like that since I hear so very often that people have met all these dead people in the astral and it could all be a trick...
Is there any kind of question you can ask that can verify who someone is?
Like asking a question you Don't know the answer to then researching the info to make sure its correct.
Not asking something you already know the answer 2 because some creatures can pull the information from your mind?
Quote from: ProjectorI already can do that.
-The Projector-
Projector, my dear sir, you are a jewel. Your once sentence responses and close-minded boasting are truly without parallel. I especially liked the bolding, that was a nice touch.
See, I find myself in doubt that you can project at all. *smile* If you could, I would hope very much that you would have brought back something a little more meaningful than "kicking butt with King Jesus."
But of course, my expectations may be too high...?
Quote from: BethRegardless of how you cut it....
Satanism is an extremist sect of Christianity.
What does this mean? This means that Satanists need the bible and the dogmas of Christianity to even exist as a 'religion'.
If Christianity disappeared one day in a 'poof of logic', then Satanism would disappear at the same time.
Peace,
Beth
Christianity needs Satan to exist more then Satanist need the Christian god to exist. Who would follow the Christian god with all the rules if the punishment wasn't so terrible, especially when the other guy is offering Godhood.
Good point Mindless!
Very good point!!
Yes, mindless, now that so much time has passed since these ancient texts were written and people's beliefs have taken over their ability to think rationally, it works the other way around as well.
But...the fact remains that:
The writers of the bible INVENTED 'Satan'. Without Christianity, 'Satan' would never have been an image in anyone's imagination.
In other words, Christianity made 'Satan' in the image of the 'ultimate bad guy' that they needed to 'save people from'.
This does not mean that there are no 'bad guys' out there. But rather, that the image of Satan is purely Christian.
Peace,
Beth
Actually I'm fairly sure from what I've studied the original idea of the horn-god Jews called "Satan",as that is their word for adversity, was a pagan god of fertility...and sex outside certain conditions is clearly a terrible sin :roll: . The bible originally never actually referred to the snake in Eden as Satan, he is only directly called that when he is the leader of the "fallen" who very well may have be the people that worshiped the god of fertility, and to challenge God on the obedience of Job. In my opinion there were many "Satans" and the idea of this enemy turned into the concept of a actual being over time.
That doesn't argue with what you said, just wanted to give my thoughts on it.
Mindless,
And what you say is pretty much true, i.e. 'stn' means 'adversary' 'opponent' or really anything that 'gets in the way' of truth and righteousness. In the bible, the word was first used as the different verbs/nouns that it represents, then it became personified as 'The Adversary' in The Book of Job, and then in the New Testament, the word became an actual proper noun by transliterating the Semitic word into Greek making it 'Satan'.
I cannot verify what you say about the whole pagan fertility thing within ancient Judaism, except to say that in later Christianity, that was indeed the case; this may well have been where the 'images' for Satan originally came from and yes, they could have been forming as such over many centuries.
It was the success of Christianity, however, that the survival of such characters was ultimately ensured. That is why I 'credit' Christianity with the propagation of 'Satan'. They are mutually dependent upon one another through the shared myths and stories of the bible.
Peace,
Beth
I don't believe in anything i just know things from experience, "Enki" that god is a nice and good god who trys to show people that u can become gods yourself but using the powers u are born with to an advantage, i like judicial Satanism, i just don't get why people actually think they will hang with Enki after they die, I'm sure they can but its like that's all your living for is it? good meditation methods and power usage from the site www.joyofsatan.com very good site u should all check it out, and check on the "Sumerians" and find out some real info about how humans were created, why, and whats been going for past few thousand years, really interesting stuff, also go read "the 12Th planet" really good book :)
-mega-
Well Mega, I don't quite know what to say...except...with more knowledge and more experience in life perhaps you will outgrow that nonsense...I sure hope so.
By the way...Enki was a make-believe character too...!
Take care,
Beth
I cannot verify what you say about the whole pagan fertility thing within ancient Judaism, except to say that in later Christianity, that was indeed the case; this may well have been where the 'images' for Satan originally came from and yes, they could have been forming as such over many centuries.
Well the christian image of 'satan' complete with horns and trident IS a pagan throwback: to be exact, later christian writers assimilated pre-christian pagan symbols such as the 'horned god' (european forest god archetype/Greek Pan) and trident (Poseidon/Neptune) and equated them with the christians' 'satan' figure. The idea was to discredit the earlier pagan religions.. a propaganda campaign basically.
The popular medieval image of satan with cloven hoofs and horns etc (still popular today) is quite obviously the pagan 'pan' of greek mythology.
Indeed even the name 'Lucifer', later used by christians in their formulation of the satan mythology, used the name of a minor Roman god: Lucifer, meaning 'light bearer'. He was originally nothing sinister. He actually represented Venus in her morning aspect as the Morning Star, hense the name. Later on the name Lucifer was pasted on to the christian image as the name 'light bearer' made a good translation.
I feel sorry for the original Lucifer however, a minor and quite innocent god of Roman antiquity (He is mentioned in the poems of Ovid for example)... now he is the prince of evil... what a character assasination!
Doug
PS I agree with Beth: 'Satan' is very much a christian deity and part of the christian pantheon. Of course christians do not like to refer to him as a deity properly speaking, as they say that only a creater 'first cause' being is properly a 'god', but that is only the judeo-christian definition of a god. If you think outside of the christian box for a moment, satan is very much a deity in the common mould.
For this reason, 'satanists' are actually deviant christians and the hilarious irony is, their very act of rebellion is actually serving to reinforce what they claim to oppose as they are still operating very much within the judeo-christian framework. (btw I'm talking here about teeny goth 'satanists', not the 'Church of Satan' people who are quite different.. they are actually not 'satanists' in the usual christian sense but are more 'chaos magicians', using the satan figure as an archetype- it's actually an interesting read if you check their site, its not exactly the church's perception of 'satanism').
...'satanists' are actually deviant christians and the hilarious irony is, their very act of rebellion is actually serving to reinforce what they claim to oppose as they are still operating very much within the judeo-christian framework.
Doug,
Nice Pith for the Goths!!!...
:? Oh groan.....I know....that was not a very good wordplay... Alas! Would that I could be as creative as James!! :wink:
And of course, you are right. Thanks also for futher explaining how the image of Satan was essentially created through pagan symbolism.
Peace,
Beth :D
Satan is the back-side of Christ and Christ is the back-side of Satan -- the two are one and the same.
The mind is what it thinks be it SATAN or CHRIST.
If this is difficult to swallow then: to the Jews Jesus personified Satan because he defied everything they valued -- like their "chosen race." To the gentiles he was a savior.
Hitler was the same story: to the post WW I Germans he was an utter savior, but to the rest of the world he was Satan himself.
Again the saint is always the back side of the same sinner... he has to be because the mind is always what it thinks, be it the saint or its back-side, the sinner.
why so much terrible history here ? :lol:
lets see here....
the name 'lucifer' used in scripture to refer to satan actually has nothing to do with the minor roman god. And that is obvious because they have nothing in common! 'lucifer' is just the roman word for 'light-bearer'. Its just a description of satan!
Also, there is really no such thing as judeo-christianity and....
hitler was not seen by the rest of the world as satan, quite the opposite in fact. He had alot of financial support from british and americans. Lots of europeans admired him. Hell, even when his armies came to the eastern front the slavs welcomed them as liberators.
Anyway thats off topic..hmm lets see here satanism..satanism..
uhm,
well its like a pair of clothes,
you grow out of it and throw it away.
Quote
Hell, even when his armies came to the eastern front the slavs welcomed them as liberators.
This is simply a lie. Germans were always regarded as enemies after first world war. People remembered the terror of first German occupation.
It seems we cannot have a topic about anything that seems bad that isn't these days. Sigh.
I don't personally believe in the concept of fullfilling your personal desires first. I just can't seem to cross that barrier for some odd reason.