Page 3 of 8 <12345>Last »
Topic Options
#27436 - 07/23/09 03:41 PM Re: First Satanic Church vs. The Church Of Satan [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
 Originally Posted By: Michael A.Aquino

If you're still around SF, email me sometime and we'll do it - before all of the city's ancient restaurants disappear. Blum's, Zim's, the Hippo, Joe's, Maye's ... all gone. \:\( The Lost Weekend is now Rick's; it's ghostly to see the ceiling outlines of the old organ platform still there.


Thanks for the kind offer, but I'm currently just north of Memphis. After retiring from the military in 1989, I was fortunate enough to go to work for a company that was refurbishing military bases closed under BRAC. We took over Mare Island and converted it back to civilian use, so I was making good $$$, and I was smart enough to buy a home in the Fairfield area in 1980. So, with stock investments, a little good luck and an obscenely bloated real estate market, we were able to retire when I turned 53, left the state and bought several properties locally, where I now reside and have rental homes.

I STILL miss the San Francisco Bay Area, especially for its eclectic and sometimes bizarre people, but definitely for the fantastic cuisine. But BBQ and Billy Bob ain't half bad either.

And sorry for going off topic...
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#27447 - 07/23/09 08:53 PM Re: First Satanic Church vs. The Church Of Satan [Re: Jake999]
Satansfarm Offline
member


Registered: 01/12/08
Posts: 352
Loc: america
As far as factions within the left hand path disagreeing with each other, I consider this to be healthy. If everyone agrees, it gets boring fast. I don't get along with people just because they profess to have the same club card. Quite frankly, anything at all that smacks of some kind of fraternity or hierarchy implies exclusivity to me. I refuse to have to prove myself to anyone.
Though I may have learned alot from Dr. LaVey, I continue to research on my own. After all, it is I who reaps the rewards or consequences of my actions, not any group.

Top
#27490 - 07/25/09 04:42 PM Re: First Satanic Church vs. The Church Of Satan [Re: Satansfarm]
Fist Moderator Offline
veteran member


Registered: 08/31/07
Posts: 1453
Loc: B'mo Cautious MF
General comments:

This is truly awesome and unique. Both Jake and Micheal A. have first hand knowledge of the inner works of the CoS in it's heyday and are laying it out here. You youngin's should shut the fuck up and listen. You might just learn something.

Honestly, why is this not in a book? Would such a thing be possible? Could we get a collection of interviews and develop a storyline of how the CoS came to be, evolved and latter collapsed? I have an author in mind whom I know personally. If I could work out the details do you think I could get much participation from good sources?

In any event, it seems to me that Zeena would have been the better heir to the CoS throne. In the interviews I have seen with her and Nicholas they seem to be interested in moving the CoS forward.

Gilmore and the current crop seem only interested in resting on the coat tails and laurels of LaVey and pop-culture icons like Marilyn Manson. Honestly, does anyone actually look 'up' to Gilmore?

Karla, god love her, actually seems interested in taking the Church back to it's Sideshow Revival roots. Can I get witness!? Not that there is anything wrong with that, but I am looking to fry bigger fish. Of course, I think 'we' would well welcome her gracing us with a token post or two in the same way that Micheal has.

Never the less, when I look out into the great Abyss of the internet sideshow I see nothing more powerful than myself. I see no church or group that has anything to offer me. I only see where I have things to offer them. Given this reality, I would much rather work on building better connections and opportunities between the like minds and fellow travelers in my own orbit. I have long said that The 600 Club should be THE premier nexus for travelers of the LHP.

Now, to that end, I do rather appreciate the Setian perspective. In my experience they always bring their A-game to any conversation and would only serve to raise the discourse here.
_________________________
I am the Devil and I am here to do the Devil's work.

Top
#27509 - 07/26/09 01:05 AM Re: First Satanic Church vs. The Church Of Satan [Re: Fist]
Meq Offline
Banned
active member


Registered: 08/28/07
Posts: 861
 Originally Posted By: Fist
Karla, god love her, actually seems interested in taking the Church back to it's Sideshow Revival roots.... I think 'we' would well welcome her gracing us with a token post or two in the same way that Micheal has.

A reverse "Amen" to that. This site does, after all, have a prominent link banner on Karla's site as the "Official Forum of the Satanic Church".

I know Karla is a very busy person and strongly favors "in-person" contact to the ambiguities of the World Wide Web, but still, I feel one single post from her would greatly enrich this site's status as a Satanic Community.
Perhaps she has her personal reasons for not doing so, and I'm interested in if Rick would like to enlighten us if that is the case.

As for Gilmore... I have wondered if he ever lurks here, or even posts anonymously. Neither would surprise me to be honest. He did feel strongly enough about this site to write a whole article denouncing 'us', which found its way into his 'Satanic Scriptures' (google "The Myth of the Satanic Community"). Yet doesn't his church have its very own Internet forum (LttD)?

As for Anton's grandson Stanton, if he cleans himself up it would be interesting to have him here also - although given his history of behavior Rick has understandably expressed strong reservations about having him as a member.

Top
#27521 - 07/26/09 05:12 AM Re: First Satanic Church vs. The Church Of Satan [Re: SkaffenAmtiskaw]
Morgan Offline
Princess of Hell
stalker


Registered: 08/29/07
Posts: 2956
Loc: New York City
"This online community, however, has appeared to me since I first found it to be a meeting ground for people of strong will, great ability and intelligence. People do not come here to be adored. They come here to correspond and exchange experiences, test their arguments, learn from others (another issue the Magus addresses, by the way) and expose to themselves where they may be wrong or weak. As such, this community is not a circle-jerk club or a weeping hearts circle. It is a testing ground for nuclear weapons and a brain trust for growing Satanists."

Exactly, and thus why the current CoS doesn't like it.
The current CoS wants followers, cow-towing, and those who don't question.

We are different, we question, we learn, and we want more.

Morgan
_________________________
Courage Conquering Fear
Fuck em if they can't take a joke
Don't Like What I Say, Kiss My Ass



Top
#27528 - 07/26/09 10:11 AM Re: First Satanic Church vs. The Church Of Satan [Re: SkaffenAmtiskaw]
The Zebu Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/08/08
Posts: 1638
Loc: Orlando, FL
It think Gilmore's general message was, "Satanists cannot have an online presence unless it is overseen by the Church of Satan".... although he does make very valid points about the posers and lonely-hearts-clubs one runs into frequently on the Left-Hand-Web.

I should like to converse with Karla some time, but in a way I'm glad she doesn't meddle in the forum and make it some attempt to form an "online congregation", which might overshadow or undermine the FSC's real-world efforts and make it seem like some lame internet-only group like most communities out there.
_________________________
«Recibe, ˇoh Lucifer! la sangre de esta víctima que sacrifico en tu honor.»

Top
#27543 - 07/26/09 12:39 PM Re: First Satanic Church vs. The Church Of Satan [Re: The Zebu]
Nemesis Offline
senior member


Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 2175
Loc: US
Somehow I don't think Karla would do that sort of thing. Mr. Aquino contributes to the forum without ever stooping to "recruitment" measures. If anything, I'd hope Karla would join and occasionally contribute to a conversation like our Setian member ;\)
_________________________
Nothing is sacred.

Top
#27547 - 07/26/09 02:23 PM Re: First Satanic Church vs. The Church Of Satan [Re: Nemesis]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
Welllllll...

I can see very well where a healthy dose of condemnation can be applied to the "Satanic Community" on line, because in reality, if it wasn't for Wikipedia and Google, the halls of chat would be mostly as silent as "that voiceless bird that feeds upon the brain-pulp of him (her) who hath tormented me..." There are so many "experts," whose vast experience amounts to little more than the ability to click a few keys and claim the glory of plagiarism... or at least a healthy rewrite.

And when someone with real experience does come aboard, they're often treated to some of the most inane prattle, endless arguments over minutia, one-upsmanship and blatant ignorance that it's no real surprise when they leave. The web has formed a crucible that has become a melting pot of egalitarian shallow acceptance, made tepid due to its dilution of expectancy and it's acceptance of mediocrity.

Is there a reality of Satanism beyond the computer screen and the assumed credibility based on the ability to click keys in a somewhat comprehensible way? You'd be hard pressed to prove it, because in truth, and I wish it weren't so, the vast majority of those on line only have experience through the exploits and opinions expressed on those Wikipedia and Google pages. And just who writes these pages? People just like those reading. I can all but guarantee you that those who wrote the pages on The Church of Satan's formative years were not there to experience them live and in person... again, I wish that were not true.

And in the end, maybe the web is the ONLY real "Satanic Community." In constructing one's own alternative reality, it can act as one's very own intellectual decompression chamber... you can be what you want to be. It gives those who have not a sense of having. It's akin to casting one's vision of the Is To Be in ritual, although there's no followup required to bring the vision into fruition, other than logging in later to see if there's a response.
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#27548 - 07/26/09 03:23 PM Re: First Satanic Church vs. The Church Of Satan [Re: Meq]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
senior member


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2435
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: Meq
Dr Aquino,

From what I read of your "Temple of Set" ebook, the schism with the Church of Satan was largely due to the question of, and I quote, "Did it believe in Satan and his fellow dćmons as actual intelligent, active, willful entities extant in time and space?"

Intelligence and will when applied to metaphysical entities are an anthropomorphization. This entails an anthropomorphic worldview, projecting our humanity where it isn't so. As such, the universe becomes smaller, not larger.

 Originally Posted By: Michael A.Aquino
The significance of isolate self consciousness (of which Setians comprehend Set the neter, and of which Satan is the derivative reflection within J/C mythology) is that it is distinct from the universe, a discretionary actor upon it. The greater your realization of this in your own being, the greater your understanding of the other/natural neteru (collectively the ectropy of the universe - what J/C cartoons as "God"), the more you evolve from an active/reactive meat machine into a divine consciousness in which universal supports & reinforcements are as unnecessary as training wheels on a bicycle.

That sounds a lot like a crypto-Gnostic notion of 'god above god'. We have a spark from the divine beyond the limitations of our worldly flesh with which we can escape the causal reality of the universe.

Fine for those who despise our natural and carnal nature, but in contrast, the upshot of the work of thinkers like Spinoza is that we cannot escape from the causal nature of the universe. We can only hope to understand and appreciate our place in it, and find freedom from the tyranny of unhealthy emotion by understanding how the laws of nature guide all our physical and mental life.

We can, in short, become a more adapted meat machine. We cannot transcend our fleshly nature and rise to a truly metaphysical divine state.

Let's start with a Wiki-Quiki:

 Originally Posted By: Wikipedia
Gnosticism (Greek: γνῶσις gnōsis, knowledge) refers to diverse, syncretistic religious movements in antiquity consisting of various belief systems generally united in the teaching that humans are divine souls trapped in a material world created by an imperfect god, the demiurge; this being is frequently identified with the Abrahamic god, and is contrasted with a superior entity, referred to by several terms including Pleroma and Godhead.

Using this definition [granted there are other, fancier ones] for now, gnosticism shows the influence of the ancient Mystery religions upon Christianity. And it is just as apparent why the Christian churches were so adamant about stamping it out, e.g. a personal path to Heaven/Grace/Jesus/God was a free lunch.

There is a similarity to Setian philosophy only insofar as we recognize the psyche/ka/soul as essentially independent of the material body, and reliant upon it only for a sort of educational realization of itself through the physical senses. You begin to find out who you are by sensing and rejecting what you aren't. With most people, this begins and ends with their physical body. Initiation continues the process within the body and its senses towards the psyche.

There are many problems with this, for instance that of self awareness without the construction/articulation of a thought-process (which is habitually built up from sensory material). Descartes quoth "Cogito, ergo sum." and supposed that he had eliminated sensory misinformation; but what could he "cogito" without it?

There are answers to this in Eastern techniques of meditation, not to mention more fun stuff in the West like John Lilly's sensory-deprivation tank experiments [see again Paddy Chayefsky's Altered States and the lively 1980 film made from it].

But Christian Gnosticism postulates that there is still a true, universal Godhead to which materially-freed souls return, therein presumably to be absorbed, reblended, and consciousness-melded. The lower, materialist "Demiurge" is just getting in the way of this.

Set, on the other hand, is not a "master universal god", but the neter of isolate consciousness of self distinct from it. As with the other neteru, human manifestation of this is a "particularization of the general". You might compare the Gnostic Christian Godhead to the collective natural neteru, the ectropic principles/laws of physical existence.

 Quote:
Fine for those who despise our natural and carnal nature ...

One of the ironies of modern Satanism is that it began with supposed rejection of the spiritual and glorification of the natural/carnal. But this was a false dichotomy, because Christians wallow in carnality too; they just pretend they don't. And in the 66-75 Church of Satan, consequent to our acknowledgment of carnality, we were increasingly able to see that it was not the end or limit of our personalities. Rather it was something that needed to be fully understood in order to be transcended. We began to see the Powers of Darkness as significant and important precisely because they lift the Satanist beyond a world in which he is the slave of his body and the material universe of which it is a cog. Greater Black Magic (GBM) involves the conscious creation of universes, somewhat like Nietzsche's "horizon building" save that he did not search into the presence or power that enabled this feature of consciousness.

This kind of GBM can be used for exalted aspirations: one's personal Grail Quest, as it were. But it can also be used on baser levels, and a pertinent example of this is indeed Anton LaVey post-1975, who constructed a universe of preferred and limited horizons for himself in which he dwelled thereafter. He and his actions were reasonable and justified if you saw into that universe, eccentric and paranoid if you did not. This is perhaps the greatest danger of GBM: that you can create/exist in universes which are incompatible and get into trouble with the creatures of one while indwelling the other. [And if you smell some HPL here, you're right.]

Now in this context let's go back to the thread topic. What is it that's off-kilter about the post-75 "Church of Satan"? Just that it's an Anton LaVey fan club misusing "Church" and "Satan" accordingly? No, that's really just incidental. The real reason that it's so confused about itself is that it's trying to imitate [without understanding] Anton's GBM universe while insisting that it only exists in the material one. Hence its behavior here just comes across clumsy and silly.

Karla, on the other hand, is doing what her Dad did, e.g. creating her own GBM universe; but she doesn't live constantly within it as he did. She does it selectively and deliberately, on the occasions/events where it is potent. Otherwise she exists quite awarely and competently in what I term "the World of Horrors". Hence her FSC has a clarity of identity, even if its public outbursts are a bit startling to staid old San Francisco.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#27855 - 08/03/09 10:57 AM Re: First Satanic Church vs. The Church Of Satan [Re: Meq]
wolf Offline
stranger


Registered: 07/27/09
Posts: 27
Loc: Denmark
 Originally Posted By: Meq
As for Gilmore... I have wondered if he ever lurks here, or even posts anonymously. Neither would surprise me to be honest.

I doubt it somewhat. If the Church of Satan is anything like about ten years ago, probably a handful of people are actively "spying" on the forums to see what other groups might be cooking up, and which new (non-)Satanists appear. Peter Gilmore himself really did seem to read boards and other forums such as alt.Satanism; I base this on occasional emails I and others would receive from him asking to help clear something up, but more often than not he'd appear unaware of it when something came up. I'm very certain that if he ever wants something posted, he'll ask someone to do it.
_________________________
A comfortable falsehood will always win out over an uncomfortable truth. (Myself)

Top
#27857 - 08/03/09 11:16 AM Re: First Satanic Church vs. The Church Of Satan [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
wolf Offline
stranger


Registered: 07/27/09
Posts: 27
Loc: Denmark
 Originally Posted By: Michael A.Aquino
There is no reason it should have been your experience [that LaVey believed in a literal Devil] unless you were ordained to the Priesthood of Mendes III°+ prior to 1975, which you weren't. That experience and consecration took the apprehension of Satan, and his Church, to an entirely different order of perception.

It's easy to find indications of LaVey believing in the Devil based on those of his writings that are more or less deliberately ambiguous. But then, one could find such indications in much of my own writing, and I certainly don't believe in the Devil. No-one can know for certain whether LaVey really believed in the Devil, but if such a belief held any importance in his group, I would expect that his magical circle and the initial, higher-ranking membership of the Church of Satan would have left some material indicating it: figures illustrating magical connections, writing about the "true nature" of Satan, etc.

<sociology_warning> In most groups believing in some deity, the deity has a central role. For obvious reasons, followers (and founders) of such groups are quite occupied figuring out what that deity wants and how to communicate with it. LaVey appears to have left very little material about such a deity, so if he really believed in Satan, it seems he can't have cared much. </sociology_warning>

If LaVey really believed in the Devil, I'd have expected you to own copies of such material that supports it with little doubt to be raised. This is entirely absent from, e.g., your The Church of Satan, however, and that lends quite some credibility to those that maintain that LaVey was an Atheist.


Edited by wolf (08/03/09 11:19 AM)
_________________________
A comfortable falsehood will always win out over an uncomfortable truth. (Myself)

Top
#27858 - 08/03/09 02:16 PM Re: First Satanic Church vs. The Church Of Satan [Re: wolf]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
senior member


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2435
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: wolf
If LaVey really believed in the Devil, I'd have expected you to own copies of such material that supports it with little doubt to be raised. This is entirely absent from, e.g., your The Church of Satan, however, and that lends quite some credibility to those that maintain that LaVey was an atheist.

??? From my Church of Satan:

 Quote:
I’m in league with the Devil as much as any mortal can possibly be.
- Anton Szandor LaVey
Satanis, the Devil’s Mass, IV/1969

* * *
In the name of Satan, the ruler of the Earth, the king of the world, I command the forces of Darkness to bestow their Infernal power upon me! Open wide the gates of Hell, and come forth from the Abyss to greet me as your brother and friend!
Grant me the indulgences of which I speak! I have taken thy name as a part of myself! I live as the beasts of the field, rejoicing in the fleshly life! I favor the just and curse the rotten!
By all the gods of the Pit, I command that these things of which I speak shall come to pass! Come forth, and answer to your names by manifesting my desires!
- Anton Szandor LaVey
The Satanic Bible, IV/1969

* * *
And what do they do, now that it is safe to use His Great Infernal Name? They deny Him! They have the opportunity to cast the very creed of defamation, which killed their brothers and sisters of the past - cast that creed before the world in triumphal mockery of its age of unreason! But no! They do not thrust the bifid barb of Satan aloft and shout, “He has triumphed!” His Art and Works which brought men to the rack and thumbscrew, can now be learned in safety! But No! He is denied! Denied by those who cry up His Art and ply His Work!
Let it be known that every man who delves into the Arts of Darkness must give the Devil and His Children the due their years of infamy deserve! Satan’s Name will not be denied! Let no man shun or mock His Name who plays His winning game, or Despair, Depletion, and Destruction await!
- Anton Szandor LaVey
Cloven Hoof, March V/1970

* * *
And before our sight Satan lost shape and became again the essence of Lucifer, and we beheld a brilliance that infused all of Hell and sent great bolts of prismic light into the surrounding void. And the brilliance said, I am Lucifer revealed, who am the Eternal Flame. I go now to Earth, for no longer shall man be confounded in Godly ignorance. And then the brilliance became as a flash of fire in the vastness of space, and we knew that Satan had departed from Hell.
But on Earth, where man wandered in mindless bliss, the firmament blazed forth with fiery tongues, and all the land was covered by the Black Flame, which burned not, though it bewildered the eye to see it.
And Raphael and his guardian Angels were dismayed, for nowhere could they see man or the spirit which had come to him. Then did Raphael call upon Michael to strike the Black Flame with the force of God, but even then was the Flame vanishing of its own accord. And at first it seemed that Earth was unchanged, but in the eyes of man did Raphael see the first gleam of thought.
- The Statement of Azazel, The Diabolicon, V/1970

* * *
I received the Diabolicon safely. It is indeed a work which will have a lasting impact. It is done in an ageless manner and with complete awareness.
You have my sincere gratitude for the fine gift you have so graciously bestowed upon us, and you may be assured that it will assume a meaningful place in the Order.
- Anton Szandor LaVey to Michael A. Aquino
March 27, V/1970

* * *
Through this, the Black Flame of Satan, thou walkest in Hell. Thy senses are awakened to the joy of rebirth. The gates are flung wide, and thy passage is heralded by the deathless cries of His guardian beasts. His searing brand shall be evermore emblazoned on thy consciousness; its fiery meaning shall make thee free.
The blood of those who fail is eternally bright on the jaws of Death, and the hounds of night pursue their hapless quarry relentlessly. They who walk amongst us who bear deceit: verily they shall perish in blindness. Turn thy back on the vile and despise them; follow the Black Flame to unending beauty in mind and body.
- Anton Szandor LaVey
The Satanic Rituals, VII/1972

* * *
Hear, my anointed man, in whose mortal flesh I, Satan, have chosen to inspire my material Self - into whose keeping I have given my true Church - whom I have made Magister within the Realm of my Shining Trapezoid - whom I have incarnated as a Magus - Hear, now, Anton Szandor LaVey.
Recall first the pact which, years ago, you drew up before me, and to which you set your own name. Think not that I have been unmindful of that act long past, pale and lonely though it might seem beside the wreaths you have won from your own kind. You could not know but that you risked more than your life - yet you stretched forth your Will through the darkness of the angles to seek mine. Though you have brought many honors to me, never was there such as this.
Take now the pact. In that chamber which you know to be most beloved of me, build now with your own hands a Flame that is sacred to me. Let your hands pass through the Fire - once for each angle of my Shining Trapezohedron. Speak again that great Key which suspends the barrier between Hell and Earth, that I may bear witness to that which you undertake in my name.
Receive now my tribute. Our pact shall be consumed in the Flame, and with this act I release you from your bond with me. Through your alliance with the Powers of Darkness you have been granted knowledge far beyond that normally accorded your race. And for this you have been manifest as a Magus. But now - of my own Will and bound by no pact - I, Satan, bestow upon you my greatest gift - for which there is no degree in my Order. By my Will, Anton Szandor LaVey, you are divest of your human substance and become in your Self a Daimon.
- The Ninth Solstice Message
North Solstice IX/1974

* * *
The follow-up to the Diabolicon was cybernetic in its timing and content. It pleases me that you perceive that which you do. All titles aside, you have entered a new realm of comprehension, and truly deserve the name of “Satanist”.
- Anton Szandor LaVey to Michael A. Aquino
August 22, IX/1974

Incidentally I happened to see Anton's written Pact with Satan, which he kept in a private strongbox along with a few other personal items. I of course was not invited to photocopy it at the time, and I can only suppose he did ceremonially burn it consequent to the Ninth Solstice Message. [He brought out the strongbox one evening because he and I happened to be discussing The King in Yellow, and he also kept his rare first edition of same in that box.]

As for testimony from the "higher ranking initial membership [pre-1975]", I suppose I might mention that I was the single and sole member of the Church raised by Anton to the second level of the fourth degree: Magister Templi IV°/II'. The only one senior to me was Anton himself (Magus V°). The other Masters, most notably John Ferro and Charles Steenbarger, were Magistri Caverni IV°/I'.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#27861 - 08/03/09 03:21 PM Re: First Satanic Church vs. The Church Of Satan [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
wolf Offline
stranger


Registered: 07/27/09
Posts: 27
Loc: Denmark
 Originally Posted By: Michael A.Aquino
??? From my Church of Satan:

Thanks. I don't actually remember all of these quotes, but presumably that's because none of them convinced me that LaVey might have believed in the Devil when I read your book. I'm using a similar language in various texts because of the symbolic impact in appropriate contexts, so it's certainly possible to write such passages without believing in Satan. For the same reason, it is the apparent context of the examples you provided that doesn't convince me, as the quotes all seem to be written in a context where symbolism is important--that is, they seem to have been intended to convey a message that is hard to express otherwise.

To me, still the best indicator that LaVey might have believed in something was his dabbling with the occult like so many others at that time, his references to this force that he felt he might be tapping into, etc. However, noting how few such direct references he has made in a non-ritualistic context, I find it difficult to believe it can have mattered much to him, making him more of an unnecessarily (in my opinion) open-minded agnostic than an actual believer.
_________________________
A comfortable falsehood will always win out over an uncomfortable truth. (Myself)

Top
#27891 - 08/03/09 10:42 PM Re: First Satanic Church vs. The Church Of Satan [Re: wolf]
6Satan6Archist6 Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/16/08
Posts: 2509
Does it really matter what LaVey might have believed? Is it really worth arguing over?

The only person who can really answer that question, i.e. the man himself, is dead.

The writings of LaVey resonate with me, Satanism fits with who I am. Wheter or not the person who codified it believed in a literal Satan does not matter to me because it has no effect on me.

I fail to see why anyone else would care either.
_________________________
No gods. No masters.

Top
#27892 - 08/03/09 11:20 PM Re: First Satanic Church vs. The Church Of Satan [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
I've seen many of these quotes and am firmly convinced that they're a case of flowery symbology. I won't of course deny you your opinion, but it having been in the company of Dr. LaVey when his creative juices were flowing and his fingers were flying across the keys of his Mac, some of the most symbolically eloquent phraseology often resulted. Much of it fit in with his immersion into his own world inside the Black House, for application in rituals and in support of some correspondence or Cloven Hoof entry at the time.

I'd liken it to Robert Frost or Carl Sandberg in their poetic license. Words to stir emotion and the wandering of one's imagination into the many possibilities that exist within a world of one's creation; options that simply do not exist in the world beyond those walls. He brought personification to the impersonal nature of the universe, much as Sandberg sought to breath life into an inanimate Chicago in his 1916 poem.

But while I can't agree with your assessment or his theistic belief, I'd urge you to hold on to that memory, if it holds meaning for you. I'm sure we all carry vivid and indelible images of whatever time we spent in his company.


Edited by Jake999 (08/03/09 11:21 PM)
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
Page 3 of 8 <12345>Last »


Moderator:  Woland, TV is God, fakepropht, SkaffenAmtiskaw, Asmedious, Fist 
Hop to:

Generated in 0.031 seconds of which 0.002 seconds were spent on 28 queries. Zlib compression disabled.