The Church of Satan

[abecorvinus]

To some people Anton LaVey was a genius, some think he was a madman. What do you think?

[FilthyLilSecret6]

I think he was pretty much an average guy. I just finished reading The Satanic Witch, and it seems basically a lot about psychology. I really enjoyed it, I think it was a great book. I think LaVey was pretty much just picking up on stuff most people don't, and that makes certain people think he's crazy.

[WretchedSpawn]

smart guy with a small hint of nuts

satanism is actually a sect started by a former carney named Anton Zander LaVey. Yes, a former carney. The basics of Satanism, in a nutshell, are worship thyself. Even LaVey was pretty tongue-in-cheek about his own religion. but at end of the day thats what it all is self preservation right? so smart i thinks

[blackxrose]

I agree with WretchedS.
LaVey was a smart guy who believed in different things than other people.
He is just a writer that knew alot about psycology and that made a style of a new religion that does not worship god or satan or heaven or hell.

[~The Reverend Godless~]

LaVey was a visionary that just happened to be at the right place and the right time. His ideals were and are radical even by todays jaded standards, self worship is a high honour that puts the religious ZEALOTS in their place. He was one of the greatest satireist and philosophers of this era in my opinion!

[darkangel]

people think he was crazy because he spoke of something that was new and people then couldnt comprehend. But what he said made a lot of sence but people are put off, even today, because of the name "satanism"

[antichrist superstar]

not many other people thought that way when it was wrote, and even the people that did couldnt have spoke so well, if you've seen him publicly speak, you'll know what i mean.

[dolliesque]

Personally...in regards to Anton LaVey and The Church of Satan, I do not agree with a lot of it.

I can see how it could work for some people, but it's not right for me.

I know Satan is supposed to be a symbol in this - but it's basically "The Church of Me," rather then "The Church of Satan."

Still, amazing man for his time, and I think he opened it up a little more for Satanism to be accepted? Of course not all the way, as there's still a ton of people who just won't accept it...but it seems better off now then it used to be at least in that regards.

[isis]

i have never read any of his books but now i think i will. jest reading this makes me want to know more.

[Dr. Beauregard]

dolliesque i think that you closest to the matter of which he was trying to point out, which to my knowledge and some others is self preservation. for instance you cant call satanism humanism; because that would be the course you can take in college.

[Sinistar666]

*Throws 2 pennies in well*

Not trying to complicate things, but LaVey should not be synonymous with "Satanism." Maybe with the terms "Modern Satanism" or LaVeyan Satanism" because of the other Satanic perspectives that others choose to relate themselves to. To others, the Al-Jilwah is written about their Satanism or Michael Acquino's "Diabolicon" speaks to others. In other words, Satanism is not how just one perceives it. It depends on the individual and some of those individuals choose to see Satan as something more than what they see in the mirror.

Thanks for your time.

[Lady Dunsany]

This is true, some see him as a fallen angel, some as the devil in physical form, and other as an idea. Some view Pan as Satan. I am assuming there are different branches for different beliefs. My little group viewed him as part man part animal. Ah well to each his own as with anything.

[Sinistar666]

I apologize. That thread should've been under "Basics."

[Lady Dunsany]

You are right, but then Oh well.

[Mercie352]

To some people Anton LaVey was a genius, some think he was a madman. What do you think?


Its like Christians mixing up the Man with the message. Or overlooking the message for the messenger.

I personally don't care who Anton LaVey is or was. Its what he wrote, how much of my own thoughts I see in it to call myself a satanist; how practical his message was, and if it produces real world results for me.

Mercie

[Sinistar666]

[quote=Mercie352

Its like Christians mixing up the Man with the message. Or overlooking the message for the messenger.

I personally don't care who Anton LaVey is or was. Its what he wrote, how much of my own thoughts I see in it to call myself a satanist; how practical his message was, and if it produces real world results for me.

Mercie
[/quote]

Yes, the internet is a great way to discuss things with others but real world actions are what truly count.

As far as LaVey goes, I thought that the Satanic Bible was an eye opener the first time I read it although he derived many of his ideas from Friedrich Nietzsche and Ayn Rand. Yet, still enlightening and a good first book for those wishing to deprogram themselves from Christian dogma.

[Stelionis Ignigenae]

As far as LaVey goes, I thought that the Satanic Bible was an eye opener the first time I read it although he derived many of his ideas from Friedrich Nietzsche and Ayn Rand. Yet, still enlightening and a good first book for those wishing to deprogram themselves from Christian dogma.


A lot of people don't know it but the original version of The Satanic Bible has recognition paid to Ayn Rand, Friedrich Nietzsche and Ragnar Redbeard. Avon chose to omit it, for what reason I can't say.

[SWM]

I wouldn't classify it as a religion myself. Its self gratification with fancy words. It encompasses the traits of Satan i.e. pride, lust, gluttony ext. If you don't actually worship per say, its not really a religion is it? Levey is an idealist, not devout. I can be selfish sometimes, but 'do onto others as you would have them do onto you', is my rule. I find that it yields better results than 'me first'.

[Stelionis Ignigenae]

I wouldn't classify it as a religion myself. Its self gratification with fancy words. It encompasses the traits of Satan i.e. pride, lust, gluttony ext. If you don't actually worship per say, its not really a religion is it? Levey is an idealist, not devout. I can be selfish sometimes, but 'do onto others as you would have them do onto you', is my rule. I find that it yields better results than 'me first'.


Would you say that Buddhism is not a religion?

[SWM]

I see your point. Why would a religion on finding inner peace without a deity be any different from one that worships oneself? Excellent argument.

I think Buddhism is more of a religion than LaVeyen[LaVey'n?] Satanism because of the process of enlightenment (i.e. self gratification vs. enlightenment). Buddhists realize that they can or can't be enlightened more often than not, where base selfishness is a blind towards the rest of the world in Satanism. I'm biased in this retrospect, because I find good will towards my fellow man more approachable than the "**** and Burn" of Satanism.

[Stelionis Ignigenae]

I see your point. Why would a religion on finding inner peace without a deity be any different from one that worships oneself? Excellent argument.

I think Buddhism is more of a religion than LaVeyen[LaVey'n?] Satanism because of the process of enlightenment (i.e. self gratification vs. enlightenment). Buddhists realize that they can or can't be enlightened more often than not, where base selfishness is a blind towards the rest of the world in Satanism. I'm biased in this retrospect, because I find good will towards my fellow man more approachable than the "**** and Burn" of Satanism.


Self gratification without care or responsibility is not what Satanism is really about. Rational self interest and hedonism is. A Satanist only says "**** and Burn" to those who go out of their way to make the world a worse place to live in for the Satanist. I've found myself in positions before in which by doing something to benefit myself, I appeared to be doing something selfless. I also have no problem with acting selflessly towards those few I love, like my fiancee. The Satanist only rejects the proposition that we should be selfless without good reason, or towards those who seek our destruction.

But as far as criteria for a religion goes, we do have deity worship, in the form of self worship. In recognizing that man is more likely than not to have some god, the Satanist chooses himself, rather than having that choice made for him by chance or the design of others. So by your criteria we are more of a religion than Buddhism ever will be. :P

[Lady Dunsany]

Interesting. I am enjoying this.

[SWM]

I think you missed my point. I agreed with you for most of your argument. When you brought up the Buddhism comparison, I agreed with you. I believe my quote was:


I see your point. Why would a religion on finding inner peace without a deity be any different from one that worships oneself? Excellent argument.

And as I said before, I am biased. How can I base an opinion off of satanists like you, if I don't know you? All of the Satanists that I know either worship the ideals of Satan, or practice a mixed dogma of anti Christianity with Lucifer as a catalyst.

These websites are also what fuels my scorn on Satanism. (Not the worship itself, but the fact that many Satanists are ignorant, in my opinion. Note that I said many, not most or all.)

http://www.joyofsatan.org/

http://www.satansheaven.com/index.htm

However, I know of one website that issues reason and philosophy rather than hate and ignorance.

http://www.theisticsatanism.com/index.html

As I am not a theistic satanist, and that I do not worship Satan, I still find this website an immeasurable resource. You argue that in appearing selfless, you are actually advancing your own personal endeavors. This is not the same as actually being selfless. This doesn't make you look good when you approach your finance and say,

"No really I mean it this time, that other time was just to make me look good. No really I mean it! I love you."

I'll assume that you do in fact mean what you say, but from an objective and outside perspective, it doesn't lend you any credibility. It only advances what your religion is about.

The only way I can say that you are wrong, is by comparing our moral systems. Since we are grossly different in some ways, I will not do this. It would be an unfair comparison and it would waste both of our time arguing who is right and who is wrong. I think it would be much easier to keep apples with apples and oranges with oranges.

[Stelionis Ignigenae]

Ah, my apologies. Fair enough. I missed your point.


You argue that in appearing selfless, you are actually advancing your own personal endeavors. This is not the same as actually being selfless.

I never said it was, but the same effect is achieved, and I believe with greater efficiency, since my natural instincts and rational interests are focused in the same direction.

I do find it interesting however that you associate a lack of genuine selflessness with a lack of honesty. I never suggested that I lied about being selfless, in fact I will often (rather grouchely) correct peoples false assumptions in such cases. I of course don't intend to gain credibility with anyone by relating this to you (on the internet such intentions are at best fantastical), merely to pose the possibility that the popular teachings of moral virtue and human behavior might be misleading, if not false.

As to the question of these theistic Satanists, criminal organizations, and others looking to capitalize on the gullibility of people looking for something to believe in, I hold these organization and the people that run them with special contempt. Why should be plainly obvious.

Your right, it is useless to argue with anyone on the internet about moral absolutes. I reject such absolutist dichotomies anyway, so such an argument would quickly become comical, at both our expense. I will leave you with this one point, however. I am at least honest enough to tell you that I am selfish, and that I act in my own interests. I am willing to gamble that you have not and will not see such honesty often.

[SWM]

I will leave you with this one point, however. I am at least honest enough to tell you that I am selfish, and that I act in my own interests. I am willing to gamble that you have not and will not see such honesty often.

A well won gamble indeed! Honesty is a hard thing to come by. I salute you in your steadfast opinions and argumentative skills upholding said opinions.

Friends?

[Lady Dunsany]

Isn't religion just a word. I was a Buddhist for many moons but never thought of it as a religion just a way of life as Theosophy. Is being selfish in what you believe really selfish. If you look out for yourself is that wrong. In the Black Arts in which I was raised by my Father the idea of caring for others than ones self was moot, but in Satanism I do not see it as a bad thing just a way to merge with the light within. Can someone explain to me what is so wrong with this? I had seen atrocities made in the word of the demon and I do not see that with Satanism. I am extremely in awe of the beauty and poetry of this and am just curious as to how it comes together. Thank You.

[SWM]

I would, but I'm afraid I don't know the question you're asking?

[Lady Dunsany]

I am not really asking a question. I see the beauty and poetry in everything and my point is there is selfishness in everything we do, whether self preservation or practicing magick, just as there is good in everything we do. We would have to be saints to actually think of others and not ourselves all the time. Only a Bodhisattva would be in that league.

[Stelionis Ignigenae]

Can someone explain to me what is so wrong with this?

Some people get unsettled by the nasty side of Satanism, which is treating those who would harm you cruelly and without mercy. Some people are disturbed by the suggestion that this is not a moral universe, and that there is no agent, divine or otherwise, meting out justice for their actions. Some people just get hung up on the word Satan. Mostly it is the people who would have nothing going for them if they did not have the good guy image to fall back on.

[Stelionis Ignigenae]

Friends?

Friendly acquaintances. I don't know you well enough to claim you as a friend. ;)

[Lady Dunsany]

Can someone explain to me what is so wrong with this?

Some people get unsettled by the nasty side of Satanism, which is treating those who would harm you cruelly and without mercy. Some people are disturbed by the suggestion that this is not a moral universe, and that there is no agent, divine or otherwise, meting out justice for their actions. Some people just get hung up on the word Satan. Mostly it is the people who would have nothing going for them if they did not have the good guy image to fall back on.

Thank You.

[SWM]

Friends?

Friendly acquaintances. I don't know you well enough to claim you as a friend. ;)


More or less what I meant! Lol

[Strider]

Thank You.
And some people paraphrase Laveys sorry bloody bible way too much!

[Strider]

i have never read any of his books but now i think i will. jest reading this makes me want to know more.
I do think though dear Isis that the CoS etc will have little to teach a genuine seeker after learning that is fresh and unsaid before. However, all grist to the mill!
Much love
Strider

[isis]

thank you Strider much as i would like to read that book, sadly i have not gotten around in buying it yeat. if you or any one would like tell me any good books i can get my hands on to jest let me know.

[EtuMalku]

As always my highest recommendation is 'The Asetian Bible' by Luis Marques