Satanism II

This is a thread for those who want to discuss the nature of carnal desire, the seven deadly sins, the nature of Satan in all religions (Is he real/Not real), and so on and so forth.

There are other Satanatic religions, rather than the one created by Anton LaVey, who was the founder of the CoS. I will continue to post facts here, and the such, maybe once or twice a week.

Seven Deadly Sins…arent they:
Gluttony
Greed
Sloth
Lust
Pride
Wrath
Envy

I would argue that all 7 of those ‘sins’ are completely unavoidable, and the caracature of human nature.
Of course, demonizing these natural human qualities served as a means to an end, and indeed I think they were engineered to do just that; constant guilt.
I will provide a full case argument …sin by sin…as to why they are natural and even benificial, if anyone really calls me on this.

And yes, it is true, that recently other satanic ‘religions’ have sprouted forth. But as none of them contain any form or dogma, they aren’t really religions.

The three I would say might qualify are Luciferianism, (which stands on judeo-christian and kabalistic dogma) Setianism, (which is very organized and closed to the public, worshipping the egyptian snake-god…set.) and of course, Satanism, as codified in the Satanic bible.

These 3 are as different from each other as can be in almost all respects, and placing them under the same category based only on a name, seems to me to be folly.
Example:Imagine a cult of people sprung up that worshipped Karl Marx. They believed marx was a deity, and physically represented all of his communist doctrine. They believed that by following to the letter, the manifesto, would garner them a good spot in some egalatarian commie heaven.
Imagine these people call themselves Marxists. Now compare these people with actual Marxists, that follow and promote communism because they feel it is the right way to be, for them, because they happen to see the world that way, for whatever reason.
There is the difference between Satanism and these other religions brandishing it’s moniker.
Also, Avie, beware of ‘facts’ online.
90% of what you’ll find will be kooky spooky teenage angst and blatent anti-cos propaganda.
I would suggest
religioustolerance.org/satanism.htm
churchofsatan.com
satanism101.com
and of course, my personal favorite
dpjs.co.uk/
And as for Satanisms theistic bastard children, here is some relevant information
angelfire.com/ny5/dvera/
here is one with a rather entertaining creation story involving aliens
joyofsatan.com/
Some essays on the subject
altreligion.about.com/library/bl … tanism.htm

This is an interesting point regarding the so-called seven sins which are actually required in this world for human survival. The structure of ecumenical politics is designed to take these basic attributes of human nature and give them a negative meaning as they no longer serve a beneficial purpose to modern society.

It is obvious that Envy, Wrath, Pride, Lust, and Greed are general requirements for the survival of the fittest. Sloth and Gluttony are merely results of population overgrowth and overproduction. I don’t think the Satan of the Bible was ever one to be lazy or gluttonous. The Bible’s God is remarkably more lazy than anything - always having someone else do something for him… It’s no wonder the Hebrew God embodies all seven sins. Ecumenical politics dictate these given attributes of God, which man possesses, illeagal in the hands of man. Thus, to keep man from empowering himself with the disposition of God, these result is obvious.

It’s no wonder some religions are well crafted forms of enslavement.

Being lazy is resting more than the body actually needs. It lends itself to physical comfort.
Being gluttonous is eating more than you need to stay alive. A big turkey dinner is a good example.
These are ‘sins’ of which I think we are all guilty.

Although I agree with this… and most of “satanism”… I still think it’s a rediculous notion to dub it “satanism”… and turn it into an “anti-religion” religion… It serves no other purpose then to provoke the general public… and as “artistic” as that may be… it’s not really anything other then good ol’ atheism… trying to get attention…

Not really.
Atheism is merely the denial of the notion of ‘god’ Atheism is not a religion, nor is it a philosophy. There are no tenets to atheism other than a general agreeance that god does not exist.
Satanism, however, contains both philosophy and dogma.
Atheism is but one tenet of many that make up Satanism, which is not only atheistic but also anti-theistic.

Reads like a rather steroidal self-help manual… And what kind of people read self-help manuals… People in dire need of help :unamused:

Ahh… I’ll just pop out and rape the lady who lives next door… It’s okay apparently. :confused:

Ahhh, yet another fool that concludes based on ignorance.
You should take up christianity, they dig that kinda thing.

So anyone that seeks to improve themselves is by default inferior? Please. I would counter people that are incaplable of improving and growing based on fixed preconceptions and rigid narrow thnking are the inferior ones.

It would be quite clear to you that you are completely full of shit had you only read our basic texts. But I supose some people prefer ignorance and coming off looking stupid.

Dear Dr. S.

Satanism: Christianity without it’s saving graces… :slight_smile:

Well, surely, if someone needs improving (or feels the need for self-improvement) does that not imply that they feel… inferior…? And if said person is willing to turn to something as bizzare as Satanism (whatever it’s current format) to achieve said improvement and taking into account that to a layman (which is what they would have to be at the outset of this course of self-improvement) Satanism is traditionally supposed to be ‘evil’ - would that not again imply that this person is desparate for any kind of help…? All in all - a person in dire need of help.

Perhaps you are an educated man, styling himself as the Crowleyesque ‘Great Beast’ of our time who knows how to read beyond the basic blurb of Satanism… But I guarrentee your basic punter will do exactly as I did… Skim the surface, pull out the bits that seem to justify what they’re feeling as ‘right’ and fall in love with the idea that ‘being evil is cool’… :confused:

You may be coming at satanism from the counter religious (or anti-religious) academic point of view - Hell - I dispise organised religion myself… but the majority will not, and be damaged by it. It’s not just ‘some’ people that prefer ignorance - it’s a ‘hell of a lot of people’ who prefer ignorance to thinking for themselves… As if that something thinking for them is satanism then… (Insert suitable expression of horror here)

Ahh… But I forgot - you don’t give a shit for anyone but yourself anyway, do you…?

I have read only the Satanic Bible, and am no satanist, but I still can see where you’ve gone horribly wrong.

Inferior to perfection maybe. You think that there is ever such a poin that people should stop improving and say ‘ah, i made it at last, time to settle down in my armchair’. Hrmm, methinks not. Even the greatest scientist, guru or philosopher still has plenty to learn in this world, and only the stupid ever claim that they’re done learning.

I read the Satanic Bible, at first expecting it to be ‘we’re evil, and it’s cool’. I was pleasantly surprised, because I’m not a blinkered moron.

Crowley came before Satanism as the official Church of Satan and Satanic Bible set up by Anton Lavey.
basic blurb of satanism? please, we could read only the basic blurb of christianity and sum it up as fear god, god smites. It wouldn’t do it justice.
So what if the basic punter skims through and doesn’t bother finding out what it’s really about? They aren’t Satanists by the definition of the word unless they know what they’re talking about. In the same way that the majority of ‘Christians’ who know nothing about their own religion are by no means a Christian.

I don’t like to just dismiss part of what someone says, but it’s hard to find any content to reply to here.

And just what is it, exactly, that the two share in common?

No.

A Satanist is a person that would take and learn from whatever works, regardless how ‘bizzar’ it is percieved to be.
You live in a world of frozen preconceptions…that’s what separates you from me.

Satanism doesn’t define itself as evil, it rejects the concepts of good and evil as over simplistic and ridiculous in any other sense than the subjective
Good is what you like, evil is what you don’t like.

Satanism is about helping yourself, and realizing the process doesn’t end.

I am not concerned with what ‘basic punters that just skim the material’ do
they are not Satanists, who cares?

Sheep will fall for anything, and there are a lot of black sheep as well as white ones. It is true, there are a lot of rebelious teens and clueless morons that fly the banner of Satanism without understanding what Satanism even is. Sure there are those out there that are not Satanists, but follow dogmatically what is written in the Satanic bible…and fine…the satanic bible is all about embracing your humanity rather than rejecting it as other religions would have you do. Whats so bad about that?
There is no way to keep Satanism only in the hands of Satanists. So what?

Where would you get a silly idea like that?

From noneedforaname’s post

Is a scientist likely to look to satanism for further understanding of the world…? A Guru perhaps, a philosopher perhaps… Anyway, what I mean is that for an individual (with the basic concepts: God= good/satan = bad) to look for self-improvement in satanism - he/she must have pretty much exhausted the less subjectively morally abhorrent opportunities for such. It’s hard to imagine Joe Schmoe who recently got demoted and is looking for a little confidence-building reading material walking into the bookshop and saying "Hey - I’m feeling down, where’s the section on satanism…?"

Would that not imply that for a person to undertake such an extreme path, their need must be equally desperate…?

Think of the terrible things that have been perpetrated by christians over the years (wether or not they have deeply explored theie religion - “they are by no means a christian” !!! :unamused: It doesn’t matter if you classify a person as a christian - it’s what they believe they are.) Are you saying that if we reversed the current situation, and Satanism had been the accepted ‘religion’ of the masses, that the world would be a better place…?

Let me re-phrase: Would you rather live in a society driven by the “laws of Satan” (here’s a link I googled http://groups.msn.com/TheGoddesssGuild/sataniclaws.msnw - faintly machiavellian) Would you prefer a pure society of ‘Hawks’ over the current mix…?

Dear Dr. S.,

Quote:

Er… Fallen angels - heaven/hell etc… :astonished:

And before you climb all over me with “modern satanism shares nothing with such outmoded primitive belief systems blah blah” if satanism has distanced itself from such christian dogma, why are you calling yourself “satanists”…? Anything else is just hedonism with a dash of “do as you wilt shall be the whole of the law” tossed in to spice things up. Careful, lucifer might turn up and take you to court for trademark infringement… :evilfun:

Erm… That’s a v-e-r-y broard definition there. How about “an open-minded free-thinker is a person that would take and learn from whatever works, regardless how ‘bizzare’ it is percieved to be.”
Or “A scientist…bla-bla”. Or “Someone with no sense of style”…

Surely there must be more to define you than that.

By that logic: I don’t like you - therefore you’re evil. Really Dr.S. is that it…? Or how about “more people dislike me than like me - therefore I must be evil… Whatever my personal view”

Hmm. “sheep” (and shepherds) now where have I heard that before…? :wink:

So you wash your hands of the ‘evil’ actions (I presume you do not like these actions ergo - they are evil) of people influenced by Satanism… But not well read in the subject…? By saying they are not ‘real’ satanists…? If they’d only read the fine print they wouldn’t have done it etc…? Do you have no sense of responsibility to those who you influence…?

I think the trouble is that you have diluted Satanism to the point where it resembles nothing in particular… What’s the difference between your waffling definitions of ‘neo-satanism’ and the diluted happy-clappy remnants of the old fire-and-brimstone christianity we get in churches today…? (At least they built some nice buildings and patronised the arts…) Or the satanic bible and a “how to become a successful person” article in Cosmopolitan…? As you say “the satanic bible is all about embracing your (singular) humanity” you preach only selfish individualism at the expense of the ‘sheep’ whom you seem to look down upon.

That’s where my ‘silly idea’ came from…

PS. We do actually agree on something:

However - what do you replace them with…? What are the 7 big no-no’s of satanism…? Dieting,charity,working-out,platonic love,humility,meekness and happiness in the advancement of your fellows…? :smiley:

Those ‘laws’ have nothing to do with Satanism.
Satanism is defined in the Satanic bible, and further clarified at churchofsatan.com.

Satanism incorperates none of these things.

For a handful of logically sound and reasonable reasons. however, I have answered this question already numerous times on this site, and do not care to do so again. look up the first Satanism thread.

Nope, that’s thelema. That statement is certainly not aplicable to Satanism, nor was crowley a Satanist by any standard.

Nope. A Satanist is defined by certain characteristics. one of which happens to be going with what works, regardless of popular opinion (unless the goal happens to be swaying a crowd)
It’s very simple.

Satanism is a part of who I am, but not all of me. And that was one characteristic of a Satanist, not a catchall definition of one.

If you truely hated me, and you felt you had justification, yes…in your eyes I would be evil. Yes that really is it. Or do you think that there is some objective universal ‘evil meter’ running out there, somewhere?

Sure, if you want to let other people define your opinions for you.
I for one will continue to form my own, as I choose.

You can’t fault me for their acurate labeling of themselves

Absolutely not. People are responsible for their own actions.

Sure, to someone that hasn’t read any of the basic texts or read anything about the philosophy, this is true.

I’ll assume by ‘neosatanism’ you are refering to devil worshippers and other such theists. the difference? none at all. An imaginary friend is an imaginary friend, regardless of what you name him.
And my deffinition certainly didn’t ‘waffle’

Putting ones self first does not mean putting oneself only
And recognising the majority of people as semi mindless mush brained atomitons and using that to your advantage doesn’t prevent forming personal relationships with those you judge worthy.

As a matter of fact, their are sins in Satanism. 9 of them.

  1. Stupidity
  2. Pretentiousness
  3. Solipsism
  4. Self-deceit
  5. Herd Conformity
  6. Lack of Perspective
  7. Forgetfulness of Past Orthodoxies
  8. Counterproductive Pride
  9. Lack of Aesthetics
    churchofsatan.com/Pages/Sins.html

I don’t mean to intrude on your discussion but I found the list of sins to be interesting…apparently I would be a sinner as a satanist only because of number 3. Heh.

You really think you are the only real thing in the universe?
Interesting. Thank you, for allowing me to exist as a figment of your imagination.
What that really refers to however is the real world behavior that can accompany that type of thinking. Projecting your rational, responses, and opinions onto others can be counter productive and even harmful.

It’s not about what I think, it is about what I know. I know I am a real thing in the universe, I don’t know if you are. I think you are, I just don’t know.

Knowledge is fickle like that. But just because it has no absolute standard doesnt mean you can’t draw the line somewhere.
The fact that you don’t want to cement your opinions(what you think) into beliefs (what you think you know) only shows you probably use your brain for thinking rather than absorbing television.
But I don’t know if I’d call that solipsism.

Dear Doc.,

Totally right, sorry, Francois Rabelais (1483-1553) coined "DO WHAT YOU WILL [FAY CE QUE VOULDRAS] " in his book on the fictional ‘Abbey of Theléme’. My bad.

Picked up some demographic studies on my trawl through the net…

James R. Lewis
Dept. of Philosophy and Religious Studies
University of Wisconsin, Stevens Point, USA
wrote:

full-link: http://www.uni-marburg.de/religionswissenschaft/journal/mjr/lewis2.html

Are you in there somewhere…?

We crossed-swords recently:

Same survey has Protestant: 55% /Catholic 20% / Jewish 1% (Tot 76%) on the ‘satanist religious hereitage scale’…

So apparently “quite a lot” is the answer to that question… :smiley:

sin no. 9 lack of aesthetics…
(used with a sing. or pl. verb) An artistically beautiful or pleasing appearance…

looking at the splash page for http://www.churchofsatan.com./ you’d have to say they are seriously guilty of that one… :astonished: