Page all of 2 12>
Topic Options
#39869 - 07/03/10 04:22 PM CoS Precepts
Mr Objective Offline
stranger


Registered: 05/18/10
Posts: 6
Here is what I found on Religious Tolerance . Org. I am going to comment on the ones that I may be in conflict with

CoS beliefs:

The Nine Satanic Statements: These form the core of the Church of Satan beliefs. They were written by Anton LaVey. In abridged form, they state that Satan represents:

Indulgence, not abstinence.

Comment: I'm a weightloss counselor and I have seen the ravages of greedy gluttony and extreme hedonism and addiction. I believe people are healthiest with a proper balance.

Vital existence, not spiritual pipe dreams.

Comment: Bingo!

Undefiled wisdom, not hypocritical self-deceit.

Kindness to those deserving of it, not love wasted on ingrates.

Comment: I have an inlaw who is not easy to love. She was abused by her parents. In spite of the urge to choke the shit out of her we have treated her with kindness and she responded in a positive way and she is much easier to love.

Vengeance, not turning the other cheek.

Comment: We all fuck up but some tolerance with a stern warning might serve the situation better. I tend to cut most people slack. However; I think think the idea of turning the other cheek does more harm than good by allowing bullies and punk to remain bullies and punks. I think here in the US there are some corporate CEO's and other members of the power elite who are in need of a bullet in their hearts. I have to judge whether to come down on somebody with both feet and how many times they need to be stomped.

Responsibility to the responsible, instead of concern for psychic vampires.

Comment: Couldn't agree more.

Man as just another animal - the most vicious of all.

Comment: True that man is an animal but man is unique. Something happened during the evolutionary process to make us the most intelligent animal so I don't see us as "just another animal."


Gratification of all ones desires.

Comment: Some people have some twisted desires


The best friend that the Christian Church has had as he has kept it in business for centuries.

The nine Satanic sins are:

Stupidity, pretentiousness, solipsism, self-deceit, herd conformity, lack of perspective, forgetfulness of past orthodoxies, counterproductive pride, and lack of aesthetics.

The Eleven Satanic Rules of the Earth are:

These are 11 rules of behavior written by Anton LaVey in 1967.

They include rules governing conversations, behavior towards guests, avoiding theft, acknowledging the power of magic, avoiding harm to children, refraining from killing animals, and behavior towards others.

Theology:


People have created Gods in many forms; pick one that might be useful to you.

Heaven and Hell do not exist.

Satan is not closely related to the modern (post 1400 AD) concept of the Christian devil. Satanists view Satan as a pre-Christian life principle which represents the carnal, earthly, and mundane aspects of life.

Satan is not a being, a living entity; he is a force of nature.

Human life is held in sacred regard. Children in particular are not to be harmed.



"Satan...represents love, kindness and respect to those who deserve it."

Black Masses (parodies of the Roman Catholic religious service) are not normally performed by Satanists (except on rare occasions for their entertainment or publicity value).

Top
#39870 - 07/03/10 04:39 PM Re: CoS Precepts [Re: Mr Objective]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
You might want to go to the source, rather than a second hand accounting without context. You might actually find you're less at odds or at odds for another reason... like having read the text and disagree, rather than the Cliff Notes version.
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#39872 - 07/03/10 04:41 PM Re: CoS Precepts [Re: Mr Objective]
6Satan6Archist6 Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/16/08
Posts: 2509
 Quote:
Comment: I'm a weightloss counselor and I have seen the ravages of greedy gluttony and extreme hedonism and addiction. I believe people are healthiest with a proper balance.


Indulgence not compulsion goes with indulgence instead of abstinence.

 Quote:
I have an inlaw who is not easy to love. She was abused by her parents. In spite of the urge to choke the shit out of her we have treated her with kindness and she responded in a positive way and she is much easier to love.


If you feel like she is deserving of love then love her. The part of TSB you are referring to was meant to counter the compulsive love for everyone that Christianity teaches. If you try to love everyone all you do is cheapen that love.

 Quote:
We all fuck up but some tolerance with a stern warning might serve the situation better. I tend to cut most people slack. However; I think think the idea of turning the other cheek does more harm than good by allowing bullies and punk to remain bullies and punks. I think here in the US there are some corporate CEO's and other members of the power elite who are in need of a bullet in their hearts. I have to judge whether to come down on somebody with both feet and how many times they need to be stomped.


Yes, not all problems have to be solved by taking it to blows. Just keep in mind there are more ways to get revenge than resulting to physical violence. Again, really meant more to be a reverse of the Christian teaching of "turn the other cheek" but it is not without merit.

 Quote:
True that man is an animal but man is unique. Something happened during the evolutionary process to make us the most intelligent animal so I don't see us as "just another animal."


Man IS just another animal. Simply because we are "rational beings" doesn't take that away.

 Quote:
Some people have some twisted desires


This is true but if you indulge in those desires there can and probably will be consequences which you must accept. Of course, there are certain desires that would condemned by CoS because they conflict with other tenets of the philosophy. Pedophilia, for instance, is an example of this.
_________________________
No gods. No masters.

Top
#39873 - 07/03/10 04:50 PM Re: CoS Precepts [Re: 6Satan6Archist6]
Mongrel Offline
stranger


Registered: 06/20/10
Posts: 7
One thing I did notice while reading that is he failed to post a link to the information. Although I do agree that going to the source rather than a second hand account would have been much better. I have read several of your posts Mr Objective and I for one am at a loss as to what your getting at? Do you have a point to prove or are you being sincerely honest here?
Top
#39875 - 07/03/10 05:08 PM Re: CoS Precepts [Re: Jake999]
Mr Objective Offline
stranger


Registered: 05/18/10
Posts: 6
 Originally Posted By: Jake999
You might want to go to the source, rather than a second hand accounting without context. You might actually find you're less at odds or at odds for another reason... like having read the text and disagree, rather than the Cliff Notes version.


Good point.

Mostly I presented this for academic discussion and to present some talking points.

Being that Levey's Satanism is a very young belief system people are not familiar with it and often get the Cliff Notes version. Christianity as taught in the church is a very biased and truncated version. In the entire xian Bible there there are only about 260 positive versions. The rest is either absurdities, contradictions, injustice, and cruelty compliments of their "loving God".

I need to dig deeper and I am.

Right now I am interested in knowing the thoughts of others regarding some of the talking points I brought up.

Top
#39878 - 07/03/10 05:20 PM Re: CoS Precepts [Re: Mr Objective]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
LA VEY. L-A (space) VEY.
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#39883 - 07/03/10 07:13 PM Re: CoS Precepts [Re: Mr Objective]
Morgan Offline
Princess of Hell
stalker


Registered: 08/29/07
Posts: 2956
Loc: New York City
Why don't you read the book?
It free on this site.
Go to the media room, and read it.
Then think about it.

This site has been up in various forms for over 10 years at this point. A lot of the blue/green colored members are very knowledgeable about this subject. A few of the older members have been involved with Satanism for over 25-30+ years.

I think if you read the book, plus read the forum, especially the various pages in the Satanism 101, a lot of your basic questions will be answered.

It's not a matter of ignoring your talking points, but trying to expand your views/knowledge so you have a better basis for understanding what some of us may be talking about in this and the other forum sections.

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



Top
#39889 - 07/03/10 09:51 PM Re: CoS Precepts [Re: Jake999]
Meq Offline
Banned
active member


Registered: 08/28/07
Posts: 861
 Originally Posted By: Jake999
LA VEY. L-A (space) VEY.

Actually "Levey" was his birth name, Howard Stanton Levey. He later adopted the name Anton Szandor LaVey (also written "La Vey"), although there was no evidence this was adopted as his legal name.

Top
#39890 - 07/03/10 10:13 PM Re: CoS Precepts [Re: Meq]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
So,,,

The man wrote under the name Anton Szandor LaVey and was copy written under Anton Szandor LaVey, which is all that is required within the legal structures to be known as Anton Szandor LaVey. This is the same as Samuel Langhorne Clemmens being known as Mark Twain, or Richard Bachman being known as Stephen King, or Eric Blair being known as George Orwell... we could go on forever.

The man wrote The Satanic Bible, The Compleat Witch and The Satanic Rituals as well as hundreds of pieces for magazines, interviews, The Cloven Hoof and other venues, all as Anton Szandor LaVey. He was PAID for his works as Anton Szandor LaVey. I saw one of his royalty checks and deposited it in his bank account that was under the name of Anton Szandor LaVey.

Seems to me his bonafides were at least as good as Richard Bachman as Steven King or Eric Blair as George Orwell.
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#39893 - 07/03/10 10:37 PM Re: CoS Precepts [Re: Jake999]
Meq Offline
Banned
active member


Registered: 08/28/07
Posts: 861
Jake, I wasn't questioning the validity of his use of the name "Anton Szandor LaVey" as an author.

The issue at stake here is that he never officially renounced his birth-name of Harold Stanton Levey.
As such, "Levey" still remains a valid spelling of his surname.

Top
#39894 - 07/03/10 10:42 PM Re: CoS Precepts [Re: Meq]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
There is no "issue at stake" except in you mind.

Levey, when associated with any life or dealings he had outside of the Church of Satan MIGHT be used as a spelling for his name. It was no big secret.

La Vey is correct for his dealings within the structure of the Church or Satan and as a writer.

Issue at stake my ass.
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#39896 - 07/03/10 11:03 PM The Nine Satanic Statements [Re: Mr Objective]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2521
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: Mr Objective
CoS beliefs:

The nine Satanic statements: These form the core of the Church of Satan beliefs. They were written by Anton LaVey.

Not exactly.

 Originally Posted By: M.A.A., The Church of Satan
APPENDIX 11: THE HIDDEN SOURCE OF THE SATANIC PHILOSOPHY
- by George C. Smith II°
The Scroll of Set #XIII-3, June XXII/1987

... Let us examine the Nine Satanic Statements in view of the Rand work Atlas Shrugged. In Galt’s speech (pages #936-993) is the written source of most of the philosophical ideas expressed in the Satanic Bible. Here are the first clear, contemporary statements which led to the glorification of man’s pride and the denouncing of the life-killing concept called altruism. Here also is a vindication of rationality and the inevitable cause of the failure of the Church of Satan to encompass the needs of intelligent and curious minds.

Note that the sequential order of these Atlas Shrugged quotations parallels the order of the Nine Satanic Statements.

1. LaVey: Satan represents indulgence instead of abstinence.

Rand: A doctrine that gives you, as an ideal, the role of a sacrificial animal seeking slaughter on the altars of others, is giving you death as your standard. By the grace of reality and the nature of life, man - every man - is an end in himself. He exists for his own sake, and the achievement of his own happiness is his highest moral purpose. (page 940)

2. LaVey: Satan represents vital existence instead of spiritual pipe dreams.

Rand: My morality, the morality of reason, is contained in a single axiom: existence exists - and in a single choice: to live. The rest proceeds from these. (page 944)

3. LaVey: Satan represents undefiled wisdom instead of hypocritical self-deceit.

Rand: Honesty is not a social duty, not a sacrifice for the sake of others, but the most profoundly selfish virtue man can practice: his refusal to sacrifice the reality of his own existence to the deluded consciousness of others. (page 945)

4. LaVey: Satan represents kindness to those who deserve it instead of love wasted on ingrates.

Rand: To withhold your contempt from men’s vices is an act of moral counterfeiting, and to withhold your admiration from their virtues is an act of moral embezzlement. (page 946)

5. LaVey: Satan represents vengeance instead of turning the other cheek.

Rand: When a man attempts to deal with me by force, I answer him by force. (page 950)

6. LaVey: Satan represents responsibility to the responsible instead of concern for psychic vampires.

Rand: You have been using fear as your weapon, and have been bringing death to man as his punishment for rejecting your morality. We offer him life as his reward for accepting ours. (page 950)

7. LaVey: Satan represents man as just another animal - sometimes better, more often worse than those that walk on all-fours - who, because of his “divine spiritual and intellectual development”, has become the most vicious animal of all.

Rand: Damnation is the start of your morality; destruction is its purpose, means, and end.Your code begins by damning man as evil, then demands that he practice a good which it defines as impossible for him to practice. It demands, as his first proof of virtue, that he accept his own depravity without proof. It demands that he start not with a standard of value but with a standard of evil, which is himself, by means of which he is then to define the good; the good is that which he is not. (page 951)

8. LaVey: Satan represents all of the so-called sins, as they all lead to physical, mental, or emotional gratification.

Rand: What is the nature of the guilt that your teachers call his Original Sin? What are the evils man acquired when he fell from a state they consider perfection? Their myth declares that he ate the fruit of the tree of knowledge - he acquired a mind and became a rational being. It was the knowledge of good and evil; he became a moral being. He was sentenced to earn his bread by his labor; he became a productive being. He was sentenced to experience desire; he acquired the capacity of sexual enjoyment. The evils for which they damn him are reason, morality, creativeness, joy - all the cardinal values of his existence. (page 951)


9. LaVey: Satan has been the best friend the church has ever had, as he has kept it in business all these years.

Rand: And as he now crawls through the wreckage, groping blindly for a way to live, your teachers offer him the help of a morality that proclaims that he’ll find no solution and must seek no fulfillment on Earth. Real existence, they tell him, is that which he cannot perceive, true consciousness is the faculty of perceiving the non-existent - and if he is unable to understand it, that is the proof that his existence is evil and his consciousness impotent. (page 952)
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#39897 - 07/03/10 11:24 PM JAKE [Re: Jake999]
BFranklin Offline
stranger


Registered: 11/27/09
Posts: 33
Loc: Boston
JAKE,

Holy SHIT (please pardon my use of the word "holy"...) You castigate a newbie for critiquing the Satanic Bible (which at least shows that he is contemplating it seriously) and then you engage in a family squabble about the spelling of A.S.L.'s name?...and spelling mistakes in those posts, too! Tsk Tsk

(Okay, I'm bending over...fire back)
_________________________
"Democracy is 2 wolves and a lamb deciding what to eat. Liberty is a well-armed lamb"
-B Franklin

Top
#39899 - 07/04/10 12:00 AM Re: JAKE [Re: BFranklin]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2521
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
I'm with Jake here on the subject of Anton's name. Throughout his entire adult life [including the Church of Satan], he chose to be "Anton Szandor LaVey", and that was entirely and rightfully his prerogative. [BTW He signed and typewrote "LaVey" without any space between the "a" & "V".] It was much more exotic and cool than "Howard Stanton Levey", which is really only of biographical [foot]note.

Would you have enjoyed the original Frankenstein Monster as much if he were played by Bill Pratt? Or all those macho Westerns and War flicks starring Marion Morrison? And so on ...
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#39900 - 07/04/10 12:08 AM Re: CoS Precepts [Re: Meq]
ta2zz Offline
veteran member


Registered: 08/28/07
Posts: 1552
Loc: Connecticut

Last I read here in the states, most will accept your name change legally by usage. If Mr LaVey was cashing checks made out to him you can be assured it was considered his legal name if papers were ever filed in court or not.

It's 2010 people a quick Google search should teach you enough to understand if your ideas hold enough water to be worth posting.

~T~
_________________________
We are the music makers, And we are the dreamers of dreams. ~Arthur William Edgar O'Shaughnessy

Top
#39904 - 07/04/10 12:44 AM Re: JAKE [Re: BFranklin]
Morgan Offline
Princess of Hell
stalker


Registered: 08/29/07
Posts: 2956
Loc: New York City
Side note...
BFranklin, just because someone name is in white do not assume they are a newbie. If you would check under Meq or Mr Objective's name profile, you would see the date they signed up, and the amount of posts they have written.

One is a newbie. The other one is far from new to this site. They both just happens to have earned a white colored status.

Plus, Jake and Aquino have personal experience with the Gentleman in question. They knew him to say the very least, and were aware of just exactly how he used his name.

I included both names because Meq got involved in the discussion in regards to his name, and dropped his 2 incorrect cents in.

Morgan


Edited by Morgan (07/04/10 01:17 AM)
Edit Reason: To make clearer the reasoning for Meq.
_________________________
Courage Conquering Fear
Fuck em if they can't take a joke
Don't Like What I Say, Kiss My Ass



Top
#39905 - 07/04/10 12:55 AM Re: JAKE [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
 Originally Posted By: Michael A.Aquino
I'm with Jake here on the subject of Anton's name. Throughout his entire adult life [including the Church of Satan], he chose to be "Anton Szandor LaVey", and that was entirely and rightfully his prerogative. [BTW He signed and typewrote "LaVey" without any space between the "a" & "V".] It was much more exotic and cool than "Howard Stanton Levey", which is really only of biographical [foot]note.


LOL! I have to apologize for the space... believe it or not, I was just frustrated from seeing the one millionth time...
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#39906 - 07/04/10 01:11 AM Re: [Re: Morgan]
Meq Offline
Banned
active member


Registered: 08/28/07
Posts: 861
Morgan, I'm pretty sure BFranklin was referring to Mr Objective's "newbie" status. My post count is publicly viewable by all my posts.

Any particular reason to drag out the forum's dirty laundry in public?

 Originally Posted By: Michael A.Aquino
I'm with Jake here on the subject of Anton's name. Throughout his entire adult life [including the Church of Satan], he chose to be "Anton Szandor LaVey", and that was entirely and rightfully his prerogative. [BTW He signed and typewrote "LaVey" without any space between the "a" & "V".] It was much more exotic and cool than "Howard Stanton Levey", which is really only of biographical [foot]note.

I agree with that Jake and Aquino, having read up on US laws giving rights to acquired names. My only point was that he didn't legally renounce his birthname so was technically still 'Levey' too (although in general including business use 'LaVey' would have been accepted as well as his strong preference).


Edited by Meq (07/04/10 01:18 AM)
Edit Reason: More added

Top
#39927 - 07/04/10 07:37 AM Re: CoS Precepts [Re: ta2zz]
Mongrel Offline
stranger


Registered: 06/20/10
Posts: 7
 Originally Posted By: ta2zz

Last I read here in the states, most will accept your name change legally by usage. If Mr LaVey was cashing checks made out to him you can be assured it was considered his legal name if papers were ever filed in court or not.

It's 2010 people a quick Google search should teach you enough to understand if your ideas hold enough water to be worth posting.

~T~


True. But I believe in order to do that you have to set up an account under your pen name at a banking institution. Don't quote me on this I just remember seeing it some where.

Top
#39929 - 07/04/10 08:42 AM Re:MEQ and MORGAN [Re: Meq]
BFranklin Offline
stranger


Registered: 11/27/09
Posts: 33
Loc: Boston
 Originally Posted By: Meq
Morgan, I'm pretty sure BFranklin was referring to Mr Objective's "newbie" status.


Correct, Meq. Here’s the proof:

(Quoting myself) “…a newbie…critiquing the Satanic Bible…” <-- That would be Mr. Objective. I knew Mr. Objective is a newbie because his intro was the newest one at the time of my crime. I know Meq is a veteran member.

But I also know Morgan was just trying to help me out, so I respect her for that. I’m sure it was just a blonde moment.

Another misunderstanding all around is that I was NOT debating whether Jake was right or Meq was right, just pulling Jake’s tail (in good fun) for THE ACT OF quibbling about spelling the name.

Again… “in good fun,” I do hope it was taken as such.
_________________________
"Democracy is 2 wolves and a lamb deciding what to eat. Liberty is a well-armed lamb"
-B Franklin

Top
#39931 - 07/04/10 09:20 AM enough [Re: BFranklin]
Morgan Offline
Princess of Hell
stalker


Registered: 08/29/07
Posts: 2956
Loc: New York City
BFranklin, on this board which has been around for many years, you are known for your words and actions.

When you act, or say things or get in the middle of something, "just for good fun" or as another new member said "as a jest", you do a disservice to yourself and the members here.

This place is built on honesty, respect, intelligence, and personal character. The members don't tolerate lies, ignorance, or pettiness very well. This is supposed to be a place of knowledge, of learning, and mutual understanding.

You are given the respect you earn by your words, your character, and your actions. When in general an individual dishonors themselves, you can't expect others here to take them seriously anymore.

As I stated previously, Meq got into the middle of something he was wrong about, thus why his name was mentioned.

As to your comment in regards to me having a blonde moment. I find it quite disrespectful. As funny as you think you are, you are not.

I think its time that this thread be locked or put back on track.

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



Top
#39942 - 07/04/10 03:34 PM Re: enough [Re: Morgan]
Asmedious Moderator Offline
Moderator
senior member


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 1725
Loc: New York
I was very seriously thinking about changing my legal name a few months ago. There are different ways to to it legally, and to differing degrees. This is specifically for the United States, in the state of New York.

You can simply start using any name that you wish without doing any legal paper work on it. However, this method will not get you a drivers license, a bank account and certainly not a passport.
However, about twenty years ago I adopted a middle name and just started using it when filling out paperwork for job applications and just about everything else. No one has ever questioned it, and when I checked my credit rating about three years after adopting the name, it was on there.

If you want a legitimate identification with a new name you need to file a “Change of Name” form at your local court house, and pay the filing fees as well. Eventually the court will send you a form stating that your name has been approved or disapproved. More often then not, name changes are approved unless they are found to be done for illegitimate purposes, such as attempting to throw creditors off you track or to deceive the public. You also might run into complications if you are attempting to take on the name of a celebrity, so I wouldn’t recommend becoming Elvis Presley legally.

At this point you usually do not have to make a personal appearance in a court hearing for the name change, but within two weeks or so of receiving notice from the court that your name has been approved you do have to take out an add in a local news publication and announce the name change.

The reason that I didn’t go through with my legal name change is because I’m a naturalized citizen, and from my research it would be a major hassle to get my name changed on my naturalization certificate. Probably would need a lawyer for that, and at this point it’s just not worth it.
_________________________
"The first order of government is the protection of its citizens right to be left alone."

Top
#40002 - 07/05/10 10:19 PM Re: CoS Precepts [Re: Mr Objective]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



I want to address some of the points made in the opening post.

One point I want to make: the works of Dr. LaVey are not just CoS beliefs, they are, in my view, the works which define and codify the religion of Satanism itself.

There is no substitute for reading the works of Dr. LaVey.

There are excellent threads here at the 600 Club which should be read as well.

I also recommend reading the CoS website, which has some tremendous core information, and some of the written works of the current CoS hierarchy are an excellent source of information as well – particularly High Priest Gilmore’s work, Magister Nemo’s work and Magister Svengali’s work.

And last, but not least, I feel that one should confront the challenge offered by the works of Dr. Aquino. One may agree or disagree with the central proposition put forth, but the sheer amount of knowledge is astounding. I love all of the history and those classic Hoof articles, interviews and other policy documents, which make up many of the appendices of the CoS ebook. There is a lot of great learning here.

One last thing: Pentagonal Revisionism is not included in the documents listed in the opening post. Pentagonal Revisionism must be included. I really don’t trust this religious tolerance.com.

Top
Page all of 2 12>


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

Generated in 0.037 seconds of which 0.002 seconds were spent on 36 queries. Zlib compression disabled.