Political Crossfire Forums

wormwood · Joined: 25 Sep 2005 Posts: 2341 Location: The P-Brane

Bassist:

Quote: This is also what Satanism is all about. Independent thought and (controlled) earthly indulgence. I have to disagree with you on this one. That is indeed what it CLAIMS to be about. What it is actually about is replacing one second party morality system for another. In other words, LeVey says don't follow some other flawed human beings morality (church fathers etc), then he proceeds to tell you HIS morality that you should blindly follow. If Levey wanted to teach people how to free their minds, he wouldn't have laid down guidelines for doing so.

Quote: If you're still confused, I suggest you read the Satanic Bible. Even if you disagree with it, it's still a very interesting and enlightening read. I disagree with this as well 8:) I wouldn't call it "enlightening", so much as entertaining. His life story is ten times more entertaining though. If you like his views on morality, you should look up the man he was trying to imitate; Alister Crowley.

superchick · Joined: 30 Sep 2004 Posts: 6546 Location: US

wormwood wrote: Quote: Did he or his disciples write a book that I am not aware of that shed a different light on who he is/was....I mean in another pretend sort of way?
So what you are saying is that
The Bible is a work of fiction and Jesus didn't exist, and Satan doesn't exist, but if he did, his story would be totally different and it shouldn't be confused with the pretend Satan in Christianity.
So to summarize:
The Bible is a work of fiction and in this work of fiction is a fictious account of a ficticious character, Satan. However, this ficticious character was not portrayed truthfully and honestly in this ficticious work. This ficticious character was factually portrayed in some other_____________ .....something and that account of Satan is to be taken seriously, although this character doesn't exist in reality.
...and you think I am the brainwashed, simple minded one? :lol: I thought this was a funny tirade.

Well you know, I aim to entertain.

:-D

BassistVIV · Joined: 09 Jul 2005 Posts: 847 Location: Florida

wormwood wrote: I have to disagree with you on this one. That is indeed what it CLAIMS to be about. What it is actually about is replacing one second party morality system for another. In other words, LeVey says don't follow some other flawed human beings morality (church fathers etc), then he proceeds to tell you HIS morality that you should blindly follow. If Levey wanted to teach people how to free their minds, he wouldn't have laid down guidelines for doing so.
You're thinking of LaVeyan Satanism, and we both know that he didn't invent Satanism. He merely popularized it. I'm going t have to disagree with your statement that he tells people to "blindly" follow him. He always encouraged free thought, and gave credit to people where credit is due. I will agree that a lot of people do blindly follow his teachings. I find LaVey's works interesting, and (in my opinion) he makes some good points. But he always gave credit to the people he quoted.

Quote: I disagree with this as well 8:) I wouldn't call it "enlightening", so much as entertaining. His life story is ten times more entertaining though. If you like his views on morality, you should look up the man he was trying to imitate; Alister Crowley.
I've done my research on Crowley, and I can't say that the two are similar at all. Crowley came first, but Crowley seemed more into actual magic, and LaVey seemed more focused on philosophy. I say that the Satanic bible is enlightening because it gives a general idea of what most Satanists agree upon as truth. Even if you don't agree with it, it gives you a different level of respect for Satanism if you don't know much about it.

wormwood · Joined: 25 Sep 2005 Posts: 2341 Location: The P-Brane

Quote: You're thinking of LaVeyan Satanism, and we both know that he didn't invent Satanism. No, but we were discussing Satanism in the context of the Satanic bible which he did invent. I hope you can see how I might make that mistake.

Quote: I'm going t have to disagree with your statement that he tells people to "blindly" follow him. He always encouraged free thought, and gave credit to people where credit is due. Ok to test your theory I opened up my copy to a random page and this is the first thing I read:

Quote: The Satanist believes in complete gratification of his ego. Satanism, in fact, is the only religion which advocates the intensification of the ego. Only if a person's own ego is sufficiently fulfilled, can he afford to be kind and complimentary to others without robbing himself of his self respect.... Religionists have kept their followers in line by suppressing their egos.

-Satanic bible, paperback pg. 94 Just basing this off of first glance I see many problems with this. First, he popularizes his belief by saying the Satanists believes this, instead of I believe this. So if you are a Satanists according to LeVey, you have already been told what you think. Then he tells you the ONLY way to be kind to other people and keep your self respect is the full intensification of the ego, which basically just sounds like insecurity of someone who feels taken advantage of. Then LeVey goes on about what every other religion does that is so bad, and since he does the opposite he must be right. It does not really seem to encourage genuine "independent thought". It really just seems like he is force feeding the reader his hostility toward some religious person that has wronged him in the past.

Quote: I find LaVey's works interesting, and (in my opinion) he makes some good points. But he always gave credit to the people he quoted Well yes and no. Read the section on Enochian which has no references. He does make some good points, although I find that I agreed with a lot more of his points at 16 than I do today. I think a society full of selfish people would be a terrible place to live. I think his fulfillment of ego was nothing more than a misunderstanding of Alister Crowley's people of the New Aeon.

Quote: I've done my research on Crowley, and I can't say that the two are similar at all. Then you have not done enough research :lol:

Quote: Crowley came first, but Crowley seemed more into actual magic, and LaVey seemed more focused on philosophy. Check out liber al, philosophy of thelema, or this link http://www.crystalinks.com/crowley.html
Then look in your Satanic Bible past page 106 and tell me you think all that stuff is. I'll give you a hint, most of it is the same enochian keys that Crowley had mastered 60 years before LeVey.

Quote: I say that the Satanic bible is enlightening because it gives a general idea of what most Satanists agree upon as truth. Fair enough.

Quote: Even if you don't agree with it, it gives you a different level of respect for Satanism if you don't know much about it True. But if someone looks to it for anything more than what it is, they are no better than the people they think they are condemning. It's not a guide to mental liberation, it is the perspective of a guy that thinks he has found enlightenment in bitterness 8:) Just my opinion, I don't mean to offend anyone's religion.

superchick · Joined: 30 Sep 2004 Posts: 6546 Location: US

wormwood wrote:

Secondly, the Character "Satan" (which just means adversary, and isn't indicative of a name), is based on older Sumerian mythology. He has gone by many names, but the oldest on record is ENKI (literally "Lord Earth") I believe. In the original stories ENKI is the protagonist and creator of humanity. Represented by the serpent, it was ENKI who gave knowledge to humanity. This spills over into the old testament version of creation where the serpent points out Gods lie, and says, surely you will not die this day...and convinces humans to eat the fruit. It is that same element of rebelliousness that humanity has been drawn to since the beginning of written history. In that sense, some non religious people like Satan, or what he represents, and what I wrote above should explain why people claim to have different stories or versions of Satan.

I can accept that as a belief system in that aspect, but I think the reason it is very easily confused is because of the fact that most Satanist/Luciferians are very anti-Christian. It's hard to deny that fact. That would be where I am getting the idea of the "biblical" Satan. It seems that is one of the pillars of the religion, "find fault in Christianity".

As a Christian, I would still believe that is the angle Luc./Sat. are coming from, because it is so strongly anti-Christian, but I understand that some may not be "worshipping" the devil. (atleast not in their mind, I would say otherwise)
Actually after considering this,I am going to assume that those that aren't so strongly anti-Christian as the cornerstone of their religion, but, have the same belief in these ideals wouldn't associate themselves with Luciferians/Satanist in this way and claim to be one.

BassistVIV · Joined: 09 Jul 2005 Posts: 847 Location: Florida

superchick wrote: wormwood wrote:

Secondly, the Character "Satan" (which just means adversary, and isn't indicative of a name), is based on older Sumerian mythology. He has gone by many names, but the oldest on record is ENKI (literally "Lord Earth") I believe. In the original stories ENKI is the protagonist and creator of humanity. Represented by the serpent, it was ENKI who gave knowledge to humanity. This spills over into the old testament version of creation where the serpent points out Gods lie, and says, surely you will not die this day...and convinces humans to eat the fruit. It is that same element of rebelliousness that humanity has been drawn to since the beginning of written history. In that sense, some non religious people like Satan, or what he represents, and what I wrote above should explain why people claim to have different stories or versions of Satan.

I can accept that as a belief system in that aspect, but I think the reason it is very easily confused is because of the fact that most Satanist/Luciferians are very anti-Christian. It's hard to deny that fact. That would be where I am getting the idea of the "biblical" Satan. It seems that is one of the pillars of the religion, "find fault in Christianity".

As a Christian, I would still believe that is the angle Luc./Sat. are coming from, because it is so strongly anti-Christian, but I understand that some may not be "worshipping" the devil.
Actually after considering this,I am going to assume that those that aren't so strongly anti-Christian as the cornerstone of their religion, but, have the same belief in these ideals wouldn't associate themselves with Luciferians/Satanist in this way and claim to be one.

I understand where you are coming from with this. That's why I was never able to refer to myself as a Satanist. It sounded too anti-Christian for me. I think it's philosophy that makes sense, but a philosophy is all it will ever be to me.

BassistVIV · Joined: 09 Jul 2005 Posts: 847 Location: Florida

wormwood wrote: No, but we were discussing Satanism in the context of the Satanic bible which he did invent. I hope you can see how I might make that mistake. Understandable.

Quote: Ok to test your theory I opened up my copy to a random page and this is the first thing I read:

Quote: The Satanist believes in complete gratification of his ego. Satanism, in fact, is the only religion which advocates the intensification of the ego. Only if a person's own ego is sufficiently fulfilled, can he afford to be kind and complimentary to others without robbing himself of his self respect.... Religionists have kept their followers in line by suppressing their egos.

-Satanic bible, paperback pg. 94 Just basing this off of first glance I see many problems with this. First, he popularizes his belief by saying the Satanists believes this, instead of I believe this. So if you are a Satanists according to LeVey, you have already been told what you think. Then he tells you the ONLY way to be kind to other people and keep your self respect is the full intensification of the ego, which basically just sounds like insecurity of someone who feels taken advantage of. Then LeVey goes on about what every other religion does that is so bad, and since he does the opposite he must be right. It does not really seem to encourage genuine "independent thought". It really just seems like he is force feeding the reader his hostility toward some religious person that has wronged him in the past.
I can understand how you might perceive it that way, but I think that LaVey was just very strong in his opinions of things. He might have come across as forcing it upon you, but he didn't condemn or threaten you with some kind of punishment if you didn't agree with him. He was just told things how be believed them to be, and didn't sugarcoat any of it.

Quote: Well yes and no. Read the section on Enochian which has no references. He does make some good points, although I find that I agreed with a lot more of his points at 16 than I do today. I think a society full of selfish people would be a terrible place to live. I think his fulfillment of ego was nothing more than a misunderstanding of Alister Crowley's people of the New Aeon.
Fair enough. I do agree that a society full of selfish people would probably not be a fun place to live. However, true Satanism doesn't float around that idea at all, and I don't think Satanism was ever intended to get that popular anyway.

Quote: Then you have not done enough research :lol:
Perhaps. I never had much interest in Crowley's works to be honest.

Quote: Check out liber al, philosophy of thelema, or this link http://www.crystalinks.com/crowley.html
Then look in your Satanic Bible past page 106 and tell me you think all that stuff is. I'll give you a hint, most of it is the same enochian keys that Crowley had mastered 60 years before LeVey.
Like I said before, I agree with you on the Enochian Key subject.

Quote: True. But if someone looks to it for anything more than what it is, they are no better than the people they think they are condemning. It's not a guide to mental liberation, it is the perspective of a guy that thinks he has found enlightenment in bitterness 8:) Just my opinion, I don't mean to offend anyone's religion.
I never took the Satanic Bible as anything outside of one man's thoughts. And don't worry, it's not my "religion", so no offense taken.

wormwood · Joined: 25 Sep 2005 Posts: 2341 Location: The P-Brane

Quote: I can accept that as a belief system in that aspect, but I think the reason it is very easily confused is because of the fact that most Satanist/Luciferians are very anti-Christian. It's hard to deny that fact. That would be where I am getting the idea of the "biblical" Satan. It seems that is one of the pillars of the religion, "find fault in Christianity". :lol: Very true. Well considering Satan isn't really that big of a character in Judaism, I would say it's a fairly safe bet that most card carrying satanists are anti-christian just based on the name choice. Oddly, I can fully understand both sides of this discussion. I grew up in the bible belt and I know all too well what's it's like to grow up or live in a "nauseatingly christian" area. Where every church takes a break from condemning each other to condemn you in all of their self righteous wisdom. I know how that can lead a person to make huge generalizations about religion and religious people based on personal resentment. That's why I bought the Satanic bible in the first place, I was looking for something that contained truth, and was against everything the people I hated stood for.

Quote: As a Christian, I would still believe that is the angle Luc./Sat. are coming from, because it is so strongly anti-Christian, but I understand that some may not be "worshipping" the devil. (atleast not in their mind, I would say otherwise)
Actually after considering this,I am going to assume that those that aren't so strongly anti-Christian as the cornerstone of their religion, but, have the same belief in these ideals wouldn't associate themselves with Luciferians/Satanist in this way and claim to be one.
I agree.

wormwood · Joined: 25 Sep 2005 Posts: 2341 Location: The P-Brane

Quote: I can understand how you might perceive it that way, but I think that LaVey was just very strong in his opinions of things. He might have come across as forcing it upon you, but he didn't condemn or threaten you with some kind of punishment if you didn't agree with him. No punishment, but you are a fool, a sheep, or misguided. Doesn't really sound like I'm free to believe what I want.

Quote: Fair enough. I do agree that a society full of selfish people would probably not be a fun place to live. However, true Satanism doesn't float around that idea at all, and I don't think Satanism was ever intended to get that popular anyway. Agreed.

Quote: Perhaps. I never had much interest in Crowley's works to be honest. If you read his philosophy stuff I bet you would like it.

Quote: I never took the Satanic Bible as anything outside of one man's thoughts. And don't worry, it's not my "religion", so no offense taken. I mean, I agree that he wrote some interesting observations about human nature, I just don't see how people could follow it religiously 8:)

superchick · Joined: 30 Sep 2004 Posts: 6546 Location: US

wormwood wrote: Quote: I can accept that as a belief system in that aspect, but I think the reason it is very easily confused is because of the fact that most Satanist/Luciferians are very anti-Christian. It's hard to deny that fact. That would be where I am getting the idea of the "biblical" Satan. It seems that is one of the pillars of the religion, "find fault in Christianity". :lol: Very true. Well considering Satan isn't really that big of a character in Judaism, I would say it's a fairly safe bet that most card carrying satanists are anti-christian just based on the name choice. Oddly, I can fully understand both sides of this discussion. I grew up in the bible belt and I know all too well what's it's like to grow up or live in a "nauseatingly christian" area. Where every church takes a break from condemning each other to condemn you in all of their self righteous wisdom. I know how that can lead a person to make huge generalizations about religion and religious people based on personal resentment. That's why I bought the Satanic bible in the first place, I was looking for something that contained truth, and was against everything the people I hated stood for.

Actually at one point I was an atheist annoyed with Christians also, but that is for another thread in the Religious section.

BassistVIV · Joined: 09 Jul 2005 Posts: 847 Location: Florida

wormwood wrote: No punishment, but you are a fool, a sheep, or misguided. Doesn't really sound like I'm free to believe what I want.
Again, he's just saying what he believes you to be. A bit judgemental, I'll agree, but he's free to believe whatever he wants about people. However, I personally think you're taking things a bit out of proportion.

Quote: If you read his philosophy stuff I bet you would like it.
Maybe on a day when I have nothing to do, I'll check it out.

Quote: I mean, I agree that he wrote some interesting observations about human nature, I just don't see how people could follow it religiously 8:)
I agree. LaVey didn't intend for people to follow it religiously, and anyone who does is going against everything they claim to stand for.

(For the record, I'm not a Satanist, in case anyone didn't know)

wormwood · Joined: 25 Sep 2005 Posts: 2341 Location: The P-Brane

Quote: Again, he's just saying what he believes you to be. A bit judgemental, I'll agree, but he's free to believe whatever he wants about people. However, I personally think you're taking things a bit out of proportion. Am I? Read from the preface, to right before the magic, a few times. It is all in the language. From the first words of the preface he sets up a false "us" and "them" dichotomy which he builds on slowly through the whole book. The impression that I was left with after a while, is that he explains how he was foolish and misguided once too, but now he knows the truth and other people are still fools, sheep, or self deluded. It's true this is just his opinion, but he does not really present it as such. He mostly just says things are this way or that way. Like I said, it's not that overt, read through a couple of times and tell me what you think.

Quote: Maybe on a day when I have nothing to do, I'll check it out. I'm just saying, if you like LeVey's perspective into the human condition, I think you would really enjoy Crowley's since that is where LeVey stole the most material :lol:

Quote: I agree. LaVey didn't intend for people to follow it religiously, and anyone who does is going against everything they claim to stand for. Except for the Church of Satan founded by LeVey himself in San Francisco :lol:

Quote: (For the record, I'm not a Satanist, in case anyone didn't know) Yeah, I know, I am just giving you sh*t because I became disillusioned when I realized almost everything about the man was a lie or plagiarism, and you were defending it. I do know that the book has merit, I just think he comes across as just as self righteous and preachy as the people he claims to hate.

BassistVIV · Joined: 09 Jul 2005 Posts: 847 Location: Florida

wormwood wrote: Am I? Read from the preface, to right before the magic, a few times. It is all in the language. From the first words of the preface he sets up a false "us" and "them" dichotomy which he builds on slowly through the whole book. The impression that I was left with after a while, is that he explains how he was foolish and misguided once too, but now he knows the truth and other people are still fools, sheep, or self deluded. It's true this is just his opinion, but he does not really present it as such. He mostly just says things are this way or that way. Like I said, it's not that overt, read through a couple of times and tell me what you think.
I understand where you're coming from with this, but I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree on this.

Quote: Except for the Church of Satan founded by LeVey himself in San Francisco :lol:
Just because free thought is encouraged doesn't mean that people of the same philosophy can't join together under one organization and fight for what they stand for. Besides, the Church of Satan isn't really much of a "church" anymore.

Quote: Yeah, I know, I am just giving you sh*t because I became disillusioned when I realized almost everything about the man was a lie or plagiarism, and you were defending it. I do know that the book has merit, I just think he comes across as just as self righteous and preachy as the people he claims to hate.
I somewhat agree with you on this. Nowadays I view LaVey as a good philosopher to start out on before going on to some of the more prominent ones. While not all of his material is necessarily his, you have to admit that he did a good job of popularizing it. I have a certain level of respect for LaVey, but I don't take him entirely seriously.