Page all of 16 12345>Last »
Topic Options
#47769 - 02/01/11 10:55 AM Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?"
Fnord Offline
senior member


Registered: 01/11/10
Posts: 2085
Loc: Texas
This seems to be a popular sentiment out there on the Satanic internet.

We've touched on the edges of it in other related arguments such as the ones dealing with what Satanism is and isn't and who might or might not have the right to define it.

My primary interest in starting this thread is to get very specific about what it is, in precise terms, that is out dated about Satanism as codified by Anton LaVey.

Please do not branch off into other discussion about what is and what isn't Satanism. If you think that Satanism, again as codified by Anton LaVey, is in some way out dated, please specifically cite examples of what is out dated about it (preferably examples from The Satanic Bible, but other works stem from that and so could be included in the discourse).
_________________________
Dead and gone. Syonara.

Top
#47802 - 02/01/11 02:47 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Fnord]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3812
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
I don't think it can ever be outdated, because I don't think he really created anything that wasn't already there. In my eyes, he put his finger on a pulse that was already beating, gave it a name and crystalized it in written form when nobody really had before.

He noted different elements of this current touched upon by the great authors of the LHP past, and showed how they are all elements of a thing, and called that thing 'Satanism', and for very good reason.

The real question to me isn't whether he was the first word on Satanism, or if his message is still relevant, because that is self evident to me, but whether he was the LAST word. On this final point, I don't really agree.

Satanism is built on a sound and powerful philosophical core, but a philosophy that is not DONE, but rather ENSHRINED, isn't worth too much. In my eyes, viewing it as the latter is an insult to the work done by LaVey, and his memory.
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#47807 - 02/01/11 02:57 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Fnord]
Jason King Offline
Banned/Martyrdom Denied
active member


Registered: 10/24/10
Posts: 731
Loc: 65?1%833Q!92A24 (It's a code)
I rotes me a hole book aboot it. I even cawled it Postmodern Satanism, just for gaggles and faggles.

On a serious note, LaVey was far too reactionary in his definition/understanding of the Current. I prefer the proactive stance of . . . say . . .Jason King.

I'll rejoin, but I figured I'd give you an extra length of rope. You're going to need it.

JK
_________________________



Top
#47812 - 02/01/11 03:49 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Jason King]
Fnord Offline
senior member


Registered: 01/11/10
Posts: 2085
Loc: Texas

 Originally Posted By: Jason King
I figured I'd give you an extra length of rope. You're going to need it.


I am? Interesting, considering I have yet to take a position.

 Originally Posted By: Jason King
I'll rejoin...


Thank you, please do.
_________________________
Dead and gone. Syonara.

Top
#47813 - 02/01/11 03:51 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Fnord]
TheInsane Offline
member


Registered: 09/16/09
Posts: 356
There are core ideas of LaVeyan Satanism and then there are all the rest. When reading TSB I can easily see that it wasn’t written today or for the people of today in the way LaVey goes into detail into certain aspects of the philosophy. While the foundation may remain the same I very much doubt that there would be a big need for a section on “Satanic Sex” in a modern day SB for example. The idea behind it may still be used but today I doubt it would need to be the largest chapter of a SB (I think Im right on this but I don’t have a copy around so I can check the length of the chapter).

I do agree with Jason that LaVey in general tended to be way to reactionary for my taste and I also think that is a trait of the environment that shaped him. If we look into the philosophical parts of TSB almost everything is a reaction – and mainly to Christianity. As far as Satanism goes I think this is very common and what should be active and positive often tends to fall into reaction and negativity. Sometimes the best way is to break free and separate oneself from “the enemy” (not saying LaVey didn’t do that but TSB is still very much an answer to Christianity than it is a plunge into deep Satanic philosophy).

LaVey was very much a product of his time and it can be easily seen in his works which may make certain parts of it seem outdated or a little bit alien. As I said before, not the main idea but perhaps the way it is written about and the obvious feeling of a need to write it. I don’t know how it is for anyone else, maybe youre still stuck in a highly religious environment, but I feel like what needed to be said in the 60’s about Satanism isn’t necessarily what needs to be said about it today.

Top
#47814 - 02/01/11 03:57 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: TheInsane]
Fnord Offline
senior member


Registered: 01/11/10
Posts: 2085
Loc: Texas
So what you've basically said in all of that is that the core is still valid but that you think the language used to describe those core values aren't to your liking?
_________________________
Dead and gone. Syonara.

Top
#47815 - 02/01/11 04:06 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Fnord]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3812
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Certainly the 60s were a different time, and the use of shock and awe to present Satanism as a reactionary force is what propelled it into the limelight. It is the form he used, to present Satanism in contrast with the main thing it stood against philosophically, which was Christianity, to highlight what it WAS about. As such, I think there is plenty that is proactive about TSB.

Nowadays we wouldn't need to use this sort of form, which would probably be largely ignored. People aren't shocked by much anymore, and the christian religion becomes less relevant in and of itself as the days go on. The current of submission and obedience it represents though, is stronger than ever.

He used the form he did because of the times he lived in, but even with that form being dated the substance behind it hasn't changed a whit.
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#47817 - 02/01/11 04:18 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Dan_Dread]
TheInsane Offline
member


Registered: 09/16/09
Posts: 356
 Originally Posted By: Dan_Dread
CAs such, I think there is plenty that is proactive about TSB.


Could you give some examples? I could think of a few things but mainly it is a very reactionary book.

 Originally Posted By: Fnord
So what you've basically said in all of that is that the core is still valid but that you think the language used to describe those core values aren't to your liking?


Well, I would prefer a more active and positive approach but I realize it was different times and different needs in how to present things. Just saying that reading TSB today may give you a feeling of outdatedness because of how it is written. But then again you cant escape your place in time and your writings must reflect where you are at the given moment. Sadly I think some get stuck in the reactionary fold of Satanism and never quite escapes.

Top
#47819 - 02/01/11 04:27 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: TheInsane]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3812
Loc: Vancouver, Canada

 Originally Posted By: "theinsane"
Could you give some examples? I could think of a few things but mainly it is a very reactionary book.

Sure. Take the 9 statements for instance. They use reactionary form because they are stated by way of contrast, but the first half of each statement is proactive in nature. The Idea of man as his own god, which is the core of the philosophy, is also proactive, but delivered by way of contrast to conventional religion. The idea of magic as psychodrama is also quite an important, and proactive concept. LaVeys style was to deliver ideas by way of contrast.

I guess whether or not you see this as reactionary is a matter of perception. Myself, I have never had any need to use catharsis on christianity, or any other religion as I have never been a believer, yet I have found everything I need to build outwards within TSB. Like I said, not the last word..it will be a sad day when there is nobody left to DO Satanic philosophy, but still it was the first.
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#47821 - 02/01/11 04:47 PM Anton LaVey's Satanism is Outdated [Re: Fnord]
nocTifer Offline
pledge


Registered: 11/07/09
Posts: 87
Loc: Khazakstan
hi Fnord,
 Originally Posted By: Fnord
This {that Anton LaVey's Satanism is outdated} seems to be a popular sentiment out there on the Satanic internet.

that'd be nice. I'm willing to entertain the notion and provide feedback from my quarter.

 Originally Posted By: Fnord
We've touched on the edges of it in other related arguments such as the ones dealing with what Satanism is and isn't

that is a perpetual attempt to dominate the (dwindling?) subculture through posturing and little more. it appears to be a left-over of Protestant vying in the aftermath of domain-peddling by religious institutions which it superceded (Roman and other Catholicisms, primarily). note the historical development of emphasis on individualist authoritative focus, the interest in spearheading a mock-catholicism by the early CoS, and the 'wild west' venue for the origins for something reflecting off of subversion ideology reactions.

 Originally Posted By: Fnord
and who might or might not have the right to define it.

definitions are used by authors and mapped in their aftermath by dictionary makers. only individual cults prop up these dogmas, and they are thereafter the programmers of their members' minds. those outside their cultus are not constrained except within totalitarian theocracies (definitely on the way out), and imagining that they now apply is an alarmist or zealous advocation without much merit.

 Originally Posted By: Fnord
...what {is it}, in precise terms, that is {outdated} about Satanism as codified by Anton LaVey{?} ...please specifically cite examples of what is out dated about it (preferably examples from The Satanic Bible ....

The Outdatedness of Bibles as Magical Books of Authority

one of the most outdated aspects of LaVeyan Satanism is its tendency to use a magic book to prop up someone's social or cultic authority. haven't you had enough of that from the Christians? my theory is that the novelty of scrolls, later the books, and still later publishing, wowed the gullible religious, whose priesthood then lorded it over them and prevented them from reading the woowoo magic language of Latin.

for all the (self-)religious and anti-religious rebelling against the Christians, very many of you appear to want a Bible to replace your parental magic book. I am not really a party to it, excepting that i was born into the environ, generally, in which the Church of Satan was formed (San Francisco Bay Area, 1960s, agnostic household). I find it valuable to point out the problems and advantages of all religions, but religion the world 'round shares these problems, and Christians aren't alone. it appears to be a function of inadequate education and science that we still have religion, and i think it serves some remedial and preservative aims. demonizing it is just applying the religious "solution" to the religious problem.

self-reliance, individual sovereignty (as promoted by many of the New Age cults including Thelema, Neopaganism to an extent, and Satanism to an extent), and the dismantling of the architecture of moral panics as a means to sociopolitical ends (often through religious or folkloric vectors using rumor, innuendo, slander, and playing on ignorant human bigotry) seem to be the main benefits of Satanism and its kindred constructs. Bibles, churches, and (black/white) popes are a temporary and expiring caricature with arguable staying power as long as the institutions employing them retain their prestige.

as i was growing up in a fragmenting Christian culture, this seemed to me the main crux-point and weakness of (at least localized) religious advocations: their focus on a glorified magic book to help them solve their problems, answer their (in some cases deep and important) philosophical dilemmas, and secure their social integrity (as by creeds). this is not assisted much by making it a variable, as do the Freemasons ('Volume of Sacred Law' which most members just 'plug-in' their Bible, Tanakh, or Qur'an to supply) or Wiccans ('Book of Shadows' which is an even less impressive magical and ritual record and traditional diary). numerous competing 'Bibles' have seen publication, and this is all well and good in a struggle against the whole magic book phenomenon.

as the state of scholarly analysis begins to improve (read: secularize and grow some teeth) and it becomes apparent how religion ignores its supposed authoritative books as it desires in order to pursue its very human interests, establish the past as the foundation of religious superheros for the purpose of supplementing its gods, etc.), religions relying on these types of constructs will be (and have been in some cases) cast aside and into museums as historical oddities, trotted out occasionally by brand new cults or with sci-fi/fantasy/horror magic books like the Necronomicon. while it may have impressed the Christian culture of its time, and provided an entre to be taken seriously by adherents of a religious institution whose power is extant yet waning, to those who understand its rudimentary principles of self-empowerment, it is training wheels that ought be cast off as outdated by those who are ready for this. just as the Church of Satan put down its Christian Black Masses because they'd worn out their catalyzing power for those who sustained them, this 'Satanic' Bible has for many of us either never seemed appropriate for anything but apology to Christians, or was relegated to legitimizing processes needed to a get a point across.

as Satanists mature, and as more Satanists arise who came from outside of any Christian background (as i did) provide their input to the possibly dwindling movement, we will begin to focus less on what Christians or gullible religious find interesting to us, and also focus less on that which concerns anti-theists who have a beef with Christianity. instead, authority will center on the individual, results will be the evaluating fulcrum of any mechanisms engaged, and the props of legitimation like some singular Bible will be left behind for those who are still emergent from their Christian envelope. if Satanism expands outward you should be about to discern 'The Satanic Qur'an' (though Salman Rushdie may have already worn this one out a bit), and possibly 'The Satanic Talmud' or 'The Satanic Tanakh' (i'm already seeing 'Jewish Satanists' on the rise as regards visibility). all of these will likely have less staying power through time and constitute triggering liberation devices for their users.


The Outdatedness of Popes (or Their Churches) as Social Authorities

alongside this externalizing plea for authoritative underpinnings, the author and promoter of this Bible bears no special cosmic stamp of genius, power, or authority. his promoters will attempt to glorify him regardless of his initiatic nature, and his family and successors can be expected to zealously promote his magnitude as a superhero in conventional religious style. by 100 years from now we should expect that stories will be told about his having signed a pact with Satan, that he was born of a virgin (or a harlot), and that he had miraculous powers (with several successful curses under his belt; that one's already underway). attempting to stop this process is futile.

the momentum of religion may be seen in the Thelemic subculture as it glorifies Aleister Crowley regardless of his extremely repugnant character (his strengths of endurance lie in his written word, prose) and in the Satanist as it does the same with Anton. this is, to those of us who understand it, a diversion engulfing the gullible for purpose of social transformation. one may witness the legitimating process in witchcraft religion in the aftermath of Gerald Gardner and the numerous diversifying cults in his wake, largely replacing him with others (Alexandrians focussing on Alex Saunders, Georgians focussed on George Patterson, and many others), then tending to decentralize.

dynastic tendencies in which a family, a clan of individuals, or some oligarchic principle council determined authoritative succession went out of favour with the passing of theocratic rule. with the rise of democracies and a step away from aristocratic class to successive landed gentry, successors might be promoted by the influential, and yet discernment between state and religion and a focus on meritocracy (however ephemeral and artificial) makes a mockery of the edifice of the Roman Catholics or shadowy secret societies such as the Church of Satan and its Council of Nine Unknown Men outdated and useful only for its initiatic purposes, gaining a foothold for the expansion of the rebel cultus.


Social Conversation and Spiritual Technology

the real strength of Satanism as it develops will not be found in its degradation into the Methods of Religion either for promotion or for social integrity. publications and publicists have their place, but the ongoing social conversation pitting subversion ideologies against novelty religion and anti-theistic rationalism will continue and become pertinent as they make use of evaluations by sociologists, folklorists, and anthropologists documenting the actualities associated with these cults and gods, and all of the institutions with which they are associated.

too wide a gap may be seen to have developed between conservative religious cults, on the one hand, and critical scholarly secular evaluations on the other, so as to consolidate a lasting scientific scrutiny of religion and moral panics. the Satanic Panic and the rise of religious Satanism may be seen as a step along the way to a gradual reproachment between these religious and the anti-religious who have emerged from their ranks to engage with them a struggle for supremacy.

long-term, the techniques or pragmatic subjective technologies that extend beyond mere sociopolitical contrivance ought to be examined for what they are in the cold light of clinical scrutiny, and even if they firm up some kind of overall placebo-effect or chamber-operation techniques which are cognitive tools, they should be omitted from demonizing ("occultnik", etc.) and subjected to rational evaluation. the rise of the individual as primarily important where these technologies are concerned makes Bibles, churches, cults, and whatever may promote them to a secularizing establishment outdated as we begin to winnow fantasy from reality, social leverage from sustainable personal development.

comments, rebuttals welcomed.
_________________________
Troll Towelhead, Grand Mufti of Satanism
http://www.facebook.com/Tr0llT0welhead
http://www.gospel-of-satan.com

Top
#47823 - 02/01/11 05:01 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Fnord]
Moravagine Offline
stranger


Registered: 11/02/10
Posts: 16
A condensed and modernized version of TSB might simply run: "Man is god. Have at it." TSR is completely useless.

The portions on sex and magic were written for a specific audience, and quite likely totally irrelevant nowadays. Dare I suggest that "Satan" should also be binned? What is left? [see above]

Top
#47827 - 02/01/11 05:30 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Fnord]
Dimitri Offline
stalker


Registered: 07/13/08
Posts: 3119
I have troubles with the statement LaVey's Satanism being outdated. While there might be a whole discussion about who started with Satanism and are the true founding fathers of the philosophy (anyone is entitled to their opinions, all I can say is that there is only Satanism), I don't see the core being outdated.

The Satanic philosophy has always been about the individual and his/her progression in social/economical/intellectual status and position. It is thus in my honest opinion that if a person finds something lacking with Satanism that it is not so much the philosophy being outdated, but moreover the individual who is running short and probably should start to consider if Satanism is really their philosophy. And that goes for about ANY individual who started using adjectives like "progressive", "spiritual", "postmodern", "red",..
A person might know a lot of the philosophy and have read various works many fellow travellers see as a vital part for understanding the philosophy, but theory without experience doesn't cut the cake.

Satanism remains Satanism, LaVey is the person who should be admired of holding up a mirror and let the persons see for themselves what was already known. He simply wrote down what most Satanists already knew and gave the ability to identify and classify the persons who at least dared to take a look in that mirror and embraced what they saw.
_________________________
Ut vivat, crescat et floreat

Top
#47830 - 02/01/11 05:49 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Moravagine]
XiaoGui17 Offline
active member


Registered: 10/21/09
Posts: 1126
Loc: Amarillo, TX
I don't know if TSB is outdated so much as sloppy.

The Book of Satan is fodder for every troll who wants to whine about plagiarism.

The Book of Lucifer is the most valuable original material in there, but if LaVey had published that alone TSB would’ve been a pamphlet.

The theoretical material on ritual magic in the Book of Belial was okay.

The Book of Leviathan has some glaring mythological inaccuracies that make me wince.

King, while I like your book, your shameless plug is making Aquino blush.


Edited by XiaoGui17 (02/01/11 05:50 PM)
_________________________
Wir halten uns an Regeln, Wenn man uns regeln lässt

Top
#47849 - 02/02/11 12:02 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Moravagine]
Simon Jester Offline
stranger


Registered: 10/24/09
Posts: 36
 Originally Posted By: Moravagine
"Man is god. Have at it."


I love it! It's hardly enough to make a fortune cookie, but would a "satanist" really need anything more?

I've just gone over TSB one last time. My impressions of it have not altered. There is nothing in it of "bedrock philosophy" or commonsense, the closest I came were the lifted portions from MIR. It remains a vague curiosity - a mock self-help manual, full of factual errors, outright fraud and loads of metaphysical/psychological BS.

For the OP: Do you feel there is anything of relevance in TSB?

Top
#47855 - 02/02/11 01:42 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Fnord]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



An important thread this. As usual my thoughts are my own.

Apparently Dr. LaVey was reactionary? I thought he was actually progressive and it was the Christian's who were reactionary.

I mean shit the guy was saying that one should enjoy this life to the fullest cause it was the only one to be had; and one should indulge in all the vices and sins in a responsible manner. He also acknowledged that might is right is a fundamental truth and that one can obtain their own Godhood and their own freedom.

This is definitely reactionary shit.

Apparently Dr. LaVey was reactionary in some other way with regard to some current? Well shit, I mean it is Satanism and that S word does have its own history and its own meaning. Fundamentally it gains its meaning from the system of religious and cultural thought/practice it arose within: doesn't it? And LaVey does seem to situate his thought in opposition to Christianity and the cowering ones. Satan is the accuser, or the adversary, or the opposition?

Words gain their meaning because they are not this and they are not that. They gain meaning through their opposition to each other, and further because they partake of a context, a history of usage.

Oh well, maybe Satanism can be changed to whatever just like one can name Minimalism, the Baroque; or chess, football, or a dog, a cat etc.

I am definitely going to write my own book on this cause I am ready to re - define as many words as possible and then claim some sort of saviour status.

Top
#47875 - 02/02/11 09:00 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: ]
Jason King Offline
Banned/Martyrdom Denied
active member


Registered: 10/24/10
Posts: 731
Loc: 65?1%833Q!92A24 (It's a code)
You never took the rope, Fnord, but I promised a rejoinder, so here goes. When I use the term "reactionary" to determine the Satanic stance of Anton LaVey, I am not using it as a political descriptor (pace Aquino). What I am saying is that his "satan," and hence his Satan-ism is a reaction to Christian memes and mores. The 9 Statements reduce to : "this instead of that". And I seem to remember another sage who spoke in terms of "you have heard it said . . . but I say".

Postmodern Satanism opens with a word cloud for the book, but I also did one on TSB, which can be viewed here. It is interesting to compare them, and to see how certain words (god, devil, christian, hell) make his cloud but are absent from mine. And the converse comparison sheds further light, as progressive terms such as science, consciousness, process, and energy occupy roughly the same relative positions in my cloud. Also, LaVey's obsession with sex will be evident, especially in the top-left quadrant of his cloud.

In short, postmodern Satanism begins with the ontological realization that the world is adversarial to the core, i.e. Satanic. This is not because a "bad guy" exists in a religious story, but because the world is what it is. It is not a re-action, it is a bald recognition of states of affairs in their natural equanimity. I'm not a Satanist because I want to be "different," I'm a Satanist because it is the most natural understanding of the world of phenomena. I'm not re-acting, I'm recognizing and ACTing.

JK
_________________________



Top
#47889 - 02/02/11 01:49 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Simon Jester]
Fnord Offline
senior member


Registered: 01/11/10
Posts: 2085
Loc: Texas
 Originally Posted By: Simon Jester

For the OP: Do you feel there is anything of relevance in TSB?


Sure I do.

I’ve never regarded The Satanic Bible as an operations manual for Satanism though. It never struck me as the kind of book that attempts to explain anything (like the Christian bible) and is more metaphorical in nature than it is anything else. To me it serves as a sort of personal call to arms to question that which is most evidently hypocritical in most people’s lives (religion).

TSB is a primer that introduces the power of the individual to begin questioning the long held ‘truths’ around them. Let’s face it, Christianity has a great marketing plan that is reinforced throughout the year via the vehicles of various holidays and the existence of subtle (and non subtle) social pressures that encourage people to become involved as well as to discourage folk from investigating things that are off the path of societal norms.

In my view, TSB is great at what it does. I can’t really see how any of it could possibly be outdated because it doesn’t really espouse any concepts that have a shelf life. I can understand theinsane’s issues with the language of the text, though I tend to like to read fiery and dramatic diatribes with the occasional clever turn of phrase. I think the ideas introduced in TSB are indeed representative of the foundational bedrock of Satanism.


Is Satanism, as codified by Anton LaVey, reactionary? Indeed it is. TSB is reactionary to Christianity and I hold that this stance is valid today. Ask any Satanist where they came from and at least the preponderance of those questioned will say that they have some form of Christianity (or the abrahamic 3) in their past. That TSB begins by dismantling the obvious is not troublesome to me, it is a primer. The most valuable sentence in the work is “Satanism demands study.”


Once one begins to break down the religious memes around them, where do they go then? Those with a mind will begin to turn the vastly important tool of DOUBT onto any and everything. The ‘studying’ in Satanism is really the application of doubt to external definitions of everything under the sun (and beyond) with the goal of applying individual meaning. The former I would liken to Dread’s Autodiabolic Method and the latter could be illustrated by Aquino’s concept of The Grail Quest.


I want to explore the idea of Satanism being reactionary. The consensus seems to be that a key component to Satanism is the understanding that the universe is adversarial (JK, among others). I agree with this concept. I don’t believe that ‘adversarial’, though, can exist in a vacuum. You have to have something to be adversarial against or you produce a null set\division by zero.


In my view, a reaction is often times the impetus for one to become proactive. The definition of being proactive is to recognize some future event that may occur and react to that by taking steps to avoid it (or work the conditions favorably). If I want to be a proactive Satanist, for example, I might look to the future and attempt to identify something that would block my progress or the progress of Satanism and react to those ideas by proactively dealing with them the best I can. If, by being a proactive Satanist, I am simply “act” ing in the now to promote myself and/or promote Satanism, I’m really reacting to the idea that Satanism isn’t strong enough, isn’t well regarded enough, or even to the idea that Satanism doesn’t have enough good promoters. There is nothing wrong in this, though the foundational ideas of personal power are in TSB.


My own experience is that I’m often presented with an idea (either self generated or obtained externally). I will generally automatically doubt anything that comes my way and begin to explore it (the opposite of Faith). This exploration leads to wherever it leads, the scrap pile or the impetus to move forward. Loosely, it could look like this:

Idea > Doubt (reaction) > Test (reaction) > Result (discard or become Proactive).

These basic foundational tenets are woven throughout the Satanic Bible (in metaphor and in plain English). Is that the only place to get them? Of course it isn’t. To a Satanist though, or to one interested in Satanism, TSB should be a compendium of recognizable foundational tenets (and probably illustrative of thoughts that the reader has had prior to reading the work).


I’ll take my position now. It’s not outdated. I hold that it is an integral and necessary part of the study of Satanism.

I’ll close this post with a quote from our new friend:
“The Satanist is not looking for a book to DEFINE their worldview … The best that can be accomplished is for a signpost to be offered…” –Jason King


Take TSB like that. Apply it and move forward.


(PS, King, just saw your links in your last post... will watch and comment soon... busy day today!)
_________________________
Dead and gone. Syonara.

Top
#47891 - 02/02/11 03:17 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Fnord]
myk5 Offline
member


Registered: 01/24/11
Posts: 137
Well, I consider the Satanic Bible to be as much a work of entertainment as an occult manual, similar to Ambrose Bierce perhaps.

But I will argue for the virtue of the TSB. I was first exposed to TSB after struggling to make sense of the writings of A Crowley, who was a very obnoxious and self absorbed read but non the less provided more intellectual meat than I found in classic grimoires or the Hoodoo books I found. Understand that this is occurring as I'm entering my teen years, and I'm already arriving at my own ideas of how and why magic works.

The Satanic Bible for me was a real revelation. Anton LaVey, it can be argued, presented no new idea, but what he did establish was putting together all the elements of a complete magic system and in such a way that was crystal clear , a coherent magical theory not at all obfuscated (As Crowley loves to do).

The Satanic Bible matched many of the conclusions i'd been arriving at anyway. That it was so reactionary, as in reaction against Christianity, it was off putting to me as I'd been wanting to leave Christianity and a paradigm reacting to those beliefs is the opposite of leaving them behind. I did use the Satanic Bible straight (I still begin any new paradigm straight, I feel it's disrespectful not to), and did produce a profoundly unexpected result that was exactly my intention the very next day.

Because the magical model presented by A. LaVey is so mature and the reaction against Christianity so lighthearted - it's a simple thing to take from TSB it's magical paradigm as an independent module and apply it as you wish. I believe Chaos Magic (which with Zen Buddhism are paradigms that largely mirror what I already believe) owes a great deal to Anton LaVey, the principles he established are principles accepted by most Chaos magicians.

As for any magical model being out dated - your magical practice is your own. If you start with one thing and move to something else, the thing you started out with for you may exist as out-dated. But another may start with what you have moved to and then move to what you started from believing that the upgrade. Depending on your talents, aptitudes and interests - you may both be right.

Perhaps it's like wanting to know what the best martial art system is. And largely the answer is determined by how you want to defend yourself and what your body and instincts best lend themselves to. There may be a best martial art for YOU, there is no best martial art for everyone.

Top
#47913 - 02/02/11 08:00 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Fnord]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



Okay, another post.

The key point as usual is this: who or what is Satan?

Here are some quotes:

“The semantic meaning of Satan is the "adversary" or "opposition" or the "accuser". The very word "devil" comes from the Indian devi which means "god". Satan represents opposition to all religions which serve to frustrate and condemn man for his natural instincts. He has been given an evil role simply because he represents the carnal, earthly, and mundane aspects of life.” LaVey TSB

“In short, postmodern Satanism begins with the ontological realization that the world is adversarial to the core, i.e. Satanic. “ JK 600C

“Most Satanists do not accept Satan as an anthropomorphic being with cloven hooves, a barbed tail, and horns. He merely represents a force in nature - the powers of darkness which have been named just that because no religion has taken these forces out of the darkness. Nor has science been able to apply technical terminology to this force. It is an untapped reservoir that few can make use of because they lack the ability to use a tool without having to first break down and label all the parts which make it run. It is this incessant need to analyse which prohibits most people from taking advantage of this many faceted key to the unknown – which the Satanist chooses to call "Satan". LaVey TSB

“Postmodern Satanism opens with a word cloud for the book, but I also did one on TSB, which can be viewed here. It is interesting to compare them, and to see how certain words (god, devil, christian, hell) make his cloud but are absent from mine. And the converse comparison sheds further light, as progressive terms such as science, consciousness, process, and energy occupy roughly the same relative positions in my cloud.” JK 600C

I have two questions here:

1. Hasn’t Dr. LaVey (in TSB) already set down the basic conceptual framework for the ontological shift and the new ontological position, which re-contextualises the word Satan as adversarial and predominantly universal, such as an adversarial universe, an adversarial conscious/unconscious relation, an adversarial force, being, or energy, even if this is not yet been articulated and clarified (or obscured) in scientific terms?
2. Doesn’t the naming of Satan, in any form, as adversarial, require one, from the outset, to start from the work of Dr. LaVey; that is with the definition of Satan as the adversary, as the opposition, or as the accuser, as per the Judeo-Christian system and the deeply oppositional stance LaVey takes with regard to that system?

I personally do not think The Satanic Bible by Dr. LaVey will be superseded, built on, maybe.

It still remains the most basic piece of Satanic literature, in my view, and it still must be studied by all who come knocking at this door.

Top
#47920 - 02/03/11 12:13 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Fnord]
Harvey Offline
stranger


Registered: 03/28/10
Posts: 39
Howdy Fnord. Your "voice" seems a little familiar.

TSB might serve as a primer for someone who hails from a religious background/environment. For me though, it contains little of value. Very little. My awakening came about while sifting through old bookstores. Sure, I bumped into LaVey along the way, but found infinitely more value in Sade, Wilmot, Nietzche, Redbeard, London, Seutonius, Machiavelli and the legends of old. Some things very nearly jumped off the shelves. And so it went.

 Quote:
Once one begins to break down the religious memes around them, where do they go then? Those with a mind will begin to turn the vastly important tool of DOUBT onto any and everything.


Quite so. Now, let's apply this method to LaVey, "Satanism" or what you will: Thesis + Antithesis = TA DAA! It's gone...

 Quote:
I hold that it is an integral and necessary part of the study of Satanism.


I like the way you phrased that. ;\)

Top
#47923 - 02/03/11 12:56 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Harvey]
JWG Offline
pledge


Registered: 10/29/09
Posts: 68
 Originally Posted By: Harvey
Howdy Fnord. Your "voice" seems a little familiar.

TSB might serve as a primer for someone who hails from a religious background/environment. For me though, it contains little of value. Very little. My awakening came about while sifting through old bookstores. Sure, I bumped into LaVey along the way, but found infinitely more value in Sade, Wilmot, Nietzche, Redbeard, London, Seutonius, Machiavelli and the legends of old. Some things very nearly jumped off the shelves. And so it went.


I'd find that many similar core messages are found in those individuals. As far as I've hard, many if not all of them were influential in Anton's own synthesized philosophy that was later manifested as Satanism and the Church of Satan.

Satanism and the Church of Satan certainly uses antinomianism focused around the Judeo-Christian faith to send it's message across. I can certainly understand someone who isn't familiar with that faith would not find the metaphorical delivery very potent as one who was (the majority of the audience of the CoS: the United States, where it was founded).

While the message and philosophy that Satanism holds at it's core may be packaged for such an audience, the message itself delivered is still the same in my opinion.
_________________________
In every real man a child is hidden that wants to play.
-Friedrich Nietzsche


Top
#47979 - 02/03/11 03:41 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Fnord]
Meatl Gear Offline
stranger


Registered: 08/11/09
Posts: 41
I do not think Lavey's Satanism is outdated, it is merely narrowly defined. For instance, to Lavey a devil worshiper isn't a satanist because Satanism is supposed to be about self-worship.

The debate comes more from different perspectives, then from Lavey being oudated.

With the rise of the internet, the actual Church of Satan may be less important.


Edited by Meatl Gear (02/03/11 03:42 PM)

Top
#47980 - 02/03/11 03:53 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Meatl Gear]
Fnord Offline
senior member


Registered: 01/11/10
Posts: 2085
Loc: Texas
It isn't at all narrowly defined. Your understanding is narrow.

I'm almost at the point where I'm willing to offer you a bribe to simply stop posting.
_________________________
Dead and gone. Syonara.

Top
#47984 - 02/03/11 04:06 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Fnord]
Meatl Gear Offline
stranger


Registered: 08/11/09
Posts: 41
If as noted in other posts, Satanism (along with most other left hand path views) is a reaction to Christianity, then Satanism cannot be outdated because Christianity is not outdated. Therefore the reaction to it is still relevant.

Edited by Meatl Gear (02/03/11 04:16 PM)

Top
#47985 - 02/03/11 04:17 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: ]
Jason King Offline
Banned/Martyrdom Denied
active member


Registered: 10/24/10
Posts: 731
Loc: 65?1%833Q!92A24 (It's a code)
 Quote:
1. Hasn’t Dr. LaVey (in TSB) already set down the basic conceptual framework for the ontological shift and the new ontological position, which re-contextualises the word Satan as adversarial and predominantly universal, such as an adversarial universe, an adversarial conscious/unconscious relation, an adversarial force, being, or energy, even if this is not yet been articulated and clarified (or obscured) in scientific terms?
2. Doesn’t the naming of Satan, in any form, as adversarial, require one, from the outset, to start from the work of Dr. LaVey; that is with the definition of Satan as the adversary, as the opposition, or as the accuser, as per the Judeo-Christian system and the deeply oppositional stance LaVey takes with regard to that system?


If I answer both with a simple "no," I'll be guilty of the infamous one-liner. So I'll give a brief pair of rejoinders:

1) When I scour TSB for an understanding of what I deem The Current, I find the closest comprehension given on the ultimate page of Wolfe's Introduction, not in any of ASL's own words.

2) I take nothing away from LaVey as a doorman, but he neither coined the term "satan," nor was he the first to understand the mythic Satan as a protagonist (as opposed to religious antagonist).

When I say "ontological adversarialism" (i.e. the Satanic Current) I am referring to how the world operates. Its mechanism for producing change and betterment. Lions hunt gazelles and gazelles elude lions. This process makes both the lion and the gazelle (or the surviving members of said species) stronger. THIS is the adversity. THIS is the Satanism. Thus I can say, with a completely straight face, Christianity (and all its precursors and heirs) is a facet/manifestation of ontological Satanism, and not vice versa.

JK
_________________________



Top
#47994 - 02/03/11 06:43 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Jason King]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



Thank you for your post Jason.

Ultimately, by naming this ontological adversarialism Satanic you have had to draw on a meaning - connection provided by the Judeo-Christian system. You may have been able to remove much of the semantic detritus connected with this word Satanic, as it functions within this Judeo-Christian system, by stepping out of that system and into this larger ontological adversarialism, but this tenuous and yet critical connection still exists.

Because this specific word Satan emerged within the Judeo – Christian system and because they had control of it, any philosophy, which purported to be Satanic, had to first of all step in and take control of this word and make it speak from the point of view of a Satanist, within and against the framework of the Judeo-Christian system. It must articulate its oppositional and adversarial stance in regards this Judeo-Christian system, in some detail, as the first order of business.

This is the pioneering work of Dr. LaVey and his organisation.

I do, however, draw a distinction between Dr. LaVey’s thoughts in relation to the behaviours and actions of a Satanist, and the ontological or cosmological viewpoint of LaVey.

I would like to draw on a couple more quotes from Dr. LaVey to clarify, what I believe his position is:

In Relation to God/Gods

“It is a popular misconception that the Satanist does not believe in God. The concept of "God", as interpreted by man, has been so varied throughout the ages, that the Satanist simply accepts the definition which suits him best. Man has always created his gods, rather than his gods creating him. God is, to some, benign - to others, terrifying. To the Satanist "God" - by whatever name he is called, or by no name at all - is seen as the balancing factor in nature, and not as being concerned with suffering. This powerful force which permeates and balances the universe is far too impersonal to care about the happiness or misery of flesh-and-blood creatures on this ball of dirt upon which we live.” LaVey TSB

“The Satanist realizes that man, and the action and reaction of the universe, is responsible for everything, and doesn't mislead himself into thinking that someone cares.” LaVey TSB

In Relation to Satan

“Most Satanists do not accept Satan as an anthropomorphic being with cloven hooves, a barbed tail, and horns. He merely represents a force in nature - the powers of darkness which have been named just that because no religion has taken these forces out of the darkness. Nor has science been able to apply technical terminology to this force. It is an untapped reservoir that few can make use of because they lack the ability use a tool without having to first break down and label all the parts which make it run. It is this incessant need to analyze which prohibits most people from taking advantage of this many faceted key to the unknown – which the Satanist chooses to call "Satan". LaVey TSB

In Relation to the Satanic Current as adversarialism

Satanism has been thought of as being synonymous with cruelty and brutality. This is so only because people are afraid to face the truth - and the truth is that human beings are not all benign or all loving.” LaVey TSB in relation to Love and Hate.

“In this arid wilderness of steel and stone I raise up my voice that you may hear. To the East and to the West I beckon. To the North and to the South I show a sign
proclaiming: Death to the weakling, wealth to the strong!” quoting MIR. LaVey TSB

There are a lot of Might is Right passages in the Book of Satan that I could quote to show how Dr. LaVey’s thinking about this Satanic current ran.

I still maintain that Dr. LaVey had identified this Satanic current and spoken about it long before you did. His thoughts on Satan as the dark force of nature are enough for me. The fact that his reflections regarding this adversarialism also may have been filtered primarily through an oppositional stance to the Judeo-Christian system does do him credit. Why? Because he is a Satanist laying down the principles of a specifically Satanic religion and he muct work against the those who defined the word first.

Top
#47996 - 02/03/11 07:03 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Jason King]
nocTifer Offline
pledge


Registered: 11/07/09
Posts: 87
Loc: Khazakstan
 Originally Posted By: MatthewJ1
1. Hasn’t Dr. LaVey (in TSB) already set down the basic conceptual framework for the ontological shift and the new ontological position ...?

 Originally Posted By: "Jason King"
...the closest comprehension {is} given on the ultimate page of Wolfe's Introduction {for an understanding of what I deem The Current}.

He had 2 (1969, 1976), though I haven't tried to compare them. Something like this?
 Originally Posted By: "Burton Wolfe, 1969"
...the great contribution to civilized thought made by the Church of Satan is its celebration of the complete human being instead of the spirit alone. The signs are everywhere that humanity is striving to burst the restrictive bonds of religion. ... Man is no longer willing to wait for any afterlife that promises to reward the clean, {'pure ...spirit'}. There is a mood of neo-paganism and hedonism, and from it have emerged a wide variety of intelligent individuals ... who are interested in carrying the liberation of the flesh all the way to a formal religion.

Or more like this?
 Originally Posted By: "Burton Wolfe, 1976"
There is a ceaseless universal quest for entertainment, gourmet foods and wines, adventure, enjoyment of the here and now. Humanity is no longer willing to wait for any afterlife that promises to reward the clean, {'pure ... spirit'}. There is a mood of neopaganism and hedonism, and from it there have emerged a wide variety of brilliant individuals ... who are interested in formalizing and perpetuating this all-pervading religion and way of life. ... Satanism is a blatantly selfish, brutal philosophy. It is based on the belief that human beings are inherently selfish, violent creatures, that life is a Darwinian struggle for survival of the fittest, that only the strong survive and the earth will be ruled by those who fight to win the ceaseless competition that exists in all jungles - including those of urbanized society.

 Originally Posted By: MatthewJ1
2. Doesn’t the naming of Satan, in any form, as adversarial, require one, from the outset, to start from the work of Dr. LaVey ...?
 Originally Posted By: "Jason King"
{LaVey} neither coined the term "satan," nor was he the first to understand the mythic Satan as a protagonist (as opposed to religious antagonist).

Indeed, the Jewish 'Satan' angel was an antagonist to human beings (and the fictional Job in particular; the better to provide a cautionary tale about hubris in the face of worldly success). The Christians recast a resolved Satan as an adversary to the Jesus character and the whole of Christian religious authority (the better to calumnize their competition). Romantic poets, at least, vivified Satan into heroic proportion, even as occasional Christians sought to use him to criticize Christians ("Letters from Earth" by Twain amongst them).

 Originally Posted By: "Jason King"
When I say "ontological adversarialism" (i.e. the Satanic Current) I am referring to how the world operates. Its mechanism for producing change and betterment. ... Christianity (and all its precursors and heirs) is a facet/manifestation of ontological Satanism, and not vice versa.

Operations of their own are too often supposed an over-estimated betterment outcome. Theories of evolution, for example, are too often supposed to yield 'the fittest' outside the terran particularities of their development. Is there reliable criteria by which we may evaluate this 'betterment' in the terran Satanic Current you are describing?


Edited by nocTifer (02/03/11 07:05 PM)
_________________________
Troll Towelhead, Grand Mufti of Satanism
http://www.facebook.com/Tr0llT0welhead
http://www.gospel-of-satan.com

Top
#48002 - 02/03/11 08:33 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: nocTifer]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



To Noc,

Thanks for providing these Burton quotes.

A couple of questions popped into my head when I read them:

1. Wouldn't Burton's thinking here reflect Dr. LaVey's thinking as well. I mean surely LaVey wouldn't have let Burton do the intro in his book if Burton's words didn't reflect LaVey's thoughts.

2. How did Burton reach this conclusion regarding the Satanic current? Maybe he had always known this; maybe he had read other works (along with TSB) which expressed it; or maybe he had discusssed these things with Dr. LaVey himself and other members of the Church. Wasn't Burton a member of the Priesthood of Mendes?

LaVey knew of this Satanic current for sure. Why didn't he say more about it at the time in his book? Who knows, maybe he didn't want to scare the shit out of the natives? Maybe it was a bit of Lesser Magical knavery?

Sheesh, anyway Jake and Dr. Aquino can no doubt explain it better than I can if they can bothered rehashing the same old thing again.

I know one thing: I'm sticking with LaVey all the way.

Top
#48037 - 02/04/11 08:52 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: JWG]
Harvey Offline
stranger


Registered: 03/28/10
Posts: 39
 Originally Posted By: JWG


I'd find that many similar core messages are found in those individuals [Sade, Wilmot, Nietzche, Redbeard, London, Seutonius, Machiavelli etc]. As far as I've hard, many if not all of them were influential in Anton's own synthesized philosophy that was later manifested as Satanism and the Church of Satan.


True. But most of the individuals that I mentioned were more apt to apply their various philosophies. They are typically remembered for their deeds.

For instance - LaVey is reputed to have been a passionate Darwinist/Lamarckian, with precious little to substantiate such a claim. How seriously can he have taken Ragnar, Darwin, Nietzche or even himself? Can a man really claim to be elite if his accomplishments amount to a flamboyant but financially unrewarding imposture? I would consider him a failure.

Top
#48041 - 02/04/11 11:23 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Harvey]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
And YOUR claim to success would be? Really. If you're going to pass judgement on who you consider a failure, you need to come up with some indication as to why you have this supposed authority.

Where's your claim to such earthly success that you can declare the life's work of someone else to be a failure?
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#48042 - 02/04/11 11:41 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Harvey]
Antonio Offline
stranger


Registered: 01/27/11
Posts: 38
 Quote:
True. But most of the individuals that I mentioned were more apt to apply their various philosophies. They are typically remembered for their deeds.


Are they really remembered for their deeds?. Lets take a look: Machiavelli was a lousy politician, Nietzsche a powerless madman with delusions of grandeur, Sade a sanctimonious poseur...

However, they were all original and deeply influential thinkers and I don't think it's fair to compare them with Anton. It is clear to me that Szandor LaVey's work isn't as groundbreaking as those of the other thinkers. But that was not his goal, he only wanted to provide a religion for certain rebel individuals that have indeed benefited from it.


 Quote:
For instance - LaVey is reputed to have been a passionate Darwinist/Lamarckian, with precious little to substantiate such a claim. How seriously can he have taken Ragnar, Darwin, Nietzche or even himself? Can a man really claim to be elite if his accomplishments amount to a flamboyant but financially unrewarding imposture? I would consider him a failure.


LaVey was ultimately a practical man, not a high brow intellectual. And I admire LaVey for creating a religion for modernity. I don't consider him a failure.

He did create something new, although not as original or powerful as it could have been. That said, his creation was a notorious success despite it's own shortcomings.

Top
#48043 - 02/04/11 11:43 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Jake999]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
It might be interesting to note several other "failures."

Oscar Wilde, the playwrite... died alone and bankrupt.

Bela Lugosi, the actor (Dracula). Made 70 feature films... died bankrupt.

Joe Louis, Heavyweight Boxing Champion of the World... died bankrupt, courtesy of the I.R.S.

Veronica Lake, Hollywood Starlet... died bankrupt.

Florenz Zeigfield, Producer of Broadway shows... died bankrupt.

Ed Wood, Hollywood Director of many films... died bankrupt.

Judy Garland, Actess and Singer ... died bankrupt.

Sammy Davis, Jr, Singer and Dancer ... died bankrupt.

Charlie Parker, Jazz great... died bankrupt.

Stephen Foster, song writer, "America's First Composer"... died bankrupt.

Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, composer... died bankrupt.

Vincent Van Gogh, Painter... died bankrupt.

Nikola Tesla, Inventor... died bankrupt.

Michelangelo... died bankrupt.

Charles Goodyear, Inventor (Vulcanized Rubber)... died bankrupt.

Gridley Bryant, Inventor (Railway Carriage)... died bankrupt.

Jan Ernst Matzeliger, inventor (shoe lasting machine)... died bankrupt.

The list could go on and on. One's contributions and influence of course cannot of course be indicated solely by their bank accounts.
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#48050 - 02/04/11 02:59 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Fnord]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2521
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
Seems to me that this thread is off on three different tracks:

(1) Is Anton LaVey's Satanic philosophy outdated?

(2) Is Anton LaVey's personal significance outdated?

(3) Is the Satanic Bible outdated?

#(3) is the easiest to answer [and I have done so previously]. The SB was never intended by Anton to be either his magnum opus or the endallandbeall of Satanism. It was a 1969 publicity gesture, much like Satanis, suggested and backed by Peter Mayer at Avon. Anton just took all of the "rainbow sheet" mimeograph handouts he gave out to new Church members and called them the "Book of Lucifer". He took the Church's similarly-mimeoed ritual instructions and called them the "Book of Belial". Then he padded these with Redbeard up front and Dee in back to meet Peter's page requirements for a paperback. That was that. Doctrinally the SB is a snapshot of where Anton and the Church were in 1969, period.

From my Church of Satan you can see that both Anton and the Church went far beyond this simple base by 1975; and thereafter he took both himself and the Church's name in a quite different direction.

I continue to think that COS does the most comprehensive job of explaining and evaluating Anton's significance as an individual. He was, very simply, a genius and an artist in the best and worst senses of both terms. "There is no genius," said Aristotle, "without a mixture of madness." He was also a showman, in the sense that in addition to his true self he deliberately crafted and displayed several artificial personæ for what he considered appropriate audiences and/or situations. He did this not for base reasons (to posture, cheat, or defraud), but because he saw it as essential to maximizing his control of outcomes, which I would unhesitatingly argue were before 1975 both selfless and idealistic. Again COS substantiates and documents this. [And yes, it is surprisingly and ironically different from the popular media image, which tended to portray him as a Devil-schtick weirdo somewhere between vaudevillian and neo-fascistic.]

Philosophically and doctrinally Anton and the Church didn't necessarily bite off more than they could chew, but they did bite off more than they could chew in 10 years. What seemed at first like just a poke in society's hypocritical eye with Halloween-party trimmings progressively complicated itself into positive ethical questions as well as grapplings that went beyond the platitudes of modern Judæo/Christianity. "Satanism" went from being just a smart-ass "bounce off the wall" to an authentic Ding an sich ("thing in itself"). And this caught all of us, including Anton, rather by surprise. We had to keep ripping out walls and expanding the house to contain Wilbur Whateley's constantly-growing brother, as it were.

Hence evaluating Anton in a Church/philosophical sense 1966-75 is a bit like evaluating Nazi Germany 1933-45. Both of them got way ahead of themselves. They were not peaceful train rides; they were the mine carts in Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom. They both crashed long before they had a chance to mature.

Post-1975 I would contend that Anton jettisoned the idea of both a philosophical school of thought and an actual organization based upon it. "Satanism" for him became simply reflective of himself and his lifestyle. Both continued to be very interesting and exotic, but not philosophical in an impersonal sense. It was as this point that would-be Satanists branched out into ASLV idolizers/imitators [as in the Gilmore group] or independent thinkers/doers [as in 600C].

Hence Anton is not "outdated" unless you're seeing him with the limited groupie-vision of a Gilmoron. Rather he is inspirational both in his philosophy and in his artistry. The study of both, as in COS, is stimulating and enriching. The first can and should be built upon, as the Temple of Set has done in its way and as the 600C is doing in a different way. The second is properly there to be enjoyed and admired, but only fools attempt to imitate it.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#48054 - 02/04/11 04:17 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Antonio Offline
stranger


Registered: 01/27/11
Posts: 38
 Quote:
It was as this point that would-be Satanists branched out into ASLV idolizers/imitators [as in the Gilmore group] or independent thinkers/doers [as in 600C].


I am not sure it can be divided that simply. There are smart and stupid people in both groups. Gilmore being one of the wise ones, of course.


 Quote:
Hence Anton is not "outdated" unless you're seeing him with the limited groupie-vision of a Gilmoron.


I don't understand the hate towards Gilmore. He seems an intelligent and charming guy. Clearly not an idiot as so many here want to portray him, suprisingly including Michael Aquino himself. For me he is worthy of being at the helm of the CoS.

If people here believe they are so original that Gilmore is boring to them, why dont they start their own religion?. It seems they can't because of lack of vision and understanding.

Note: I understand Aquino started "The Temple of Set" so my message is not specifically aimed at him.

Top
#48055 - 02/04/11 04:34 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
While we might disagree on some points, I would actually pretty much agree with the majority of what you've written, Dr. Aquino.

A main problem with many of the LaVey detractors is that they know so damned little about him, the Church and anything beyond The Satanic Bible, that they assume that is all there is or ever will be to the story. Much as with you... you joined the Church of Satan, rebelled and formed the Temple of Set... and FLASH!!!... a weird mutation of ECI locks into place and there's nothing else until Joe Blow is born, reads a book and knows it all.

The information is out there... there is legend and lore, but bedrock as well... but you'd have to get out from behind a computer and find it, and find older people who might actually know something about him and his times. And that's a resource that gets rarer and rarer as the years move on. Soon, all that will be left will be the legend and lore and badly written Wikis, taken for gospel by those too jaded or too self absorbed to comprehend anything else.

Soon, everyone will KNOW that Stanton LaVey was actually Anton's son. Everyone will KNOW that all he ever wrote was The Satanic Bible, The Satanic Rituals and The Satanic Witch (The Compleat Witch... what's that?). All of the bullshit will become reality when there is no one to counter it. It will be the popular mythology that everyone KNOWS, although little will be fact. And to paraphrase what Robert Wuhl said in his HBO special Assume The Position: "When the legend ibecomes fact, teach the legend."

LOL!!! GILMORON... I think I got a chubby from that one.
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#48056 - 02/04/11 04:59 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Antonio]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
 Originally Posted By: Antonio

I don't understand the hate towards Gilmore. He seems an intelligent and charming guy. Clearly not an idiot as so many here want to portray him, suprisingly including Michael Aquino himself. For me he is worthy of being at the helm of the COS.


No offense meant, Antonio. You seem a good sort, but you're young and he's all you know and you have little experience to draw from. Let me explain it this way.

I've dined in some fantastic restaurants around the world and have tasted foi gras, and escargots and prime rib with a Kentucky Kiss... fine dining. Wonderful tastes and wine to make the palate sing.

You've been fed well, but you've only had a ham sandwich. Now, there's nothing wrong with that ham sandwich, if that's what you have. I've spiced it up by baking the ham, and adding a little pinapple, brown sugar and a drizzling of melted cheese. It's good, but it's still a ham sandwich. Your palate knows it and is comfortable with it.

But once you've had the foi gras, the prime rib, and other haute cuisine, it's just a ham sandwich, no matter how you dress it up.

(I never thought I would be comparing Dr. LaVey to food...
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#48061 - 02/04/11 05:29 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Antonio]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



To Harvey,

Can you please refer me to a bookstore, or to a link on Amazon where I can buy your written works?

Also how does it feel to be so discussed and well known so many years after your death?

Kindest regards

Top
#48081 - 02/05/11 02:14 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Jake999]
Harvey Offline
stranger


Registered: 03/28/10
Posts: 39
 Originally Posted By: Jake999
And YOUR claim to success would be? Really. If you're going to pass judgement on who you consider a failure, you need to come up with some indication as to why you have this supposed authority.

Where's your claim to such earthly success that you can declare the life's work of someone else to be a failure?


Hello Jake,

I do not claim any authority. Like most of us, I am a legend in my own mind \:\/ . I am, however, perfectly capable of recognizing hypocrisy when it is right in front of me. This may be an unpopular sentiment, but other than codifying a philosophy and running a grand hoodwink, what other tangible result did LaVey produce?

For all practical purposes I consider material success to be the only quantifiable standard of measure. I've never sought validation through others. I do not court fame [and just as well, I'll concede ;\) ]. Bearing that in mind - I have done quite well for myself. Having put in the hard yards and built myself up from nothing, I am of independent means and free to do as I please. I've succeeded in my endeavours - I will not leave this world as a pauper. I'm sure there are others here who can say as much. That is as it should be.

Top
#48082 - 02/05/11 02:29 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Antonio]
6Satan6Archist6 Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/16/08
Posts: 2509
 Quote:
I don't understand the hate towards Gilmore. He seems an intelligent and charming guy. Clearly not an idiot as so many here want to portray him...


While he may indeed be an intelligent individual that does nothing, in my mind, to alter the fact that he is a pompous douche-bag with a grandiose superiority complex and little reason for it.
_________________________
No gods. No masters.

Top
#48083 - 02/05/11 02:54 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: ]
Harvey Offline
stranger


Registered: 03/28/10
Posts: 39
 Originally Posted By: MatthewJ1
To Harvey,

Can you please refer me to a bookstore, or to a link on Amazon where I can buy your written works?


Sure thing, Bubba. Anything for my fans ;\) .

My estate has been instructed to withold publication of my memoirs until 2111. I have been advised by legal counsel that such startling revelations would rock the world, resulting in financial and legal complications for my kin. It's a pity, but what am I to do?

Pre-orders are currently being taken. Publcation will be offered through Lulu or a similarly reputable outfit. A Paypal deposit of US $100 must be lodged no later than Dec 31st 2012. The remaining 90% can be paid in yearly installments. PM for further details.

Thank you

 Quote:
Also how does it feel to be so discussed and well known so many years after your death?


It's a dream come true! Some might sneer at such an ambition, of that I'm aware, but for me it has been a life-long goal. Every word and motion [wilst living... of more recent times I've mellowed, you understand] was carefully orchestrated to win the hearts and minds of my fellow Ubermensch.

Warm regards,

King Shit Phd. LLD yadda yadda

Top
#48090 - 02/05/11 07:55 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Antonio]
Moravagine Offline
stranger


Registered: 11/02/10
Posts: 16
 Originally Posted By: Antonio
 Quote:
True. But most of the individuals that I mentioned were more apt to apply their various philosophies. They are typically remembered for their deeds.


Are they really remembered for their deeds?. Lets take a look: Machiavelli was a lousy politician, Nietzsche a powerless madman with delusions of grandeur, Sade a sanctimonious poseur...


I think Harvey said most of those individuals. Scratch Nietzche, obviously. I assume that in context, by Machiavelli he intended Borgia; and by Seutonius the Caesars, rather than the authors themselves. Correct?

I'm not certain how Sade could be considered a poseur. His phiolsophy and life were largely consistent. Desmond spent most of his days trying to foment revolution. London was a strong and adventurous man who lived a rich and varied life: far nearer a Wolf Larsen than LaVey was Redbeard. I presume the Caesars and Borgia require no mention.

 Quote:
However, they were all original and deeply influential thinkers and I don't think it's fair to compare them with Anton. It is clear to me that Szandor LaVey's work isn't as groundbreaking as those of the other thinkers.


Very true.

 Quote:
But that was not his goal, he only wanted to provide a religion for certain rebel individuals that have indeed benefited from it.


Yeah... I dunno. A religion for atheists? Maybe it's not quite the right word.

I could well be wrong here, but my overall impression is that LaVey saw a hole in the market and tried to fill it. A carnival huckster playing the rubes. I admire the level of cynicism he demonstrated in doing so, but I suspect that he overestimated the market. His theatrics and mythologising certainly did not constitute a viable business proposition.

Top
#48091 - 02/05/11 08:15 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Jake999]
Moravagine Offline
stranger


Registered: 11/02/10
Posts: 16
Umm, Jake...

How many people in your list of bankrupts do you think would have incorperated Redbeardian phrases or sentiments into their daily lives? How about Nietzche? Shaw? Their philosophies were rather uncompromising. I think that's the kicker in this instance.

LaVey has produced a body of work. It will no doubt outlive all of us here. I guess that counts for something.

Ed Wood made your list! I love it. LOVE IT! \:D

Top
#48094 - 02/05/11 09:25 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Moravagine]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
We'll probably never know definitively who influenced who for what in historical figures, but we can surmise that many of them had similar traits and similar attitudes, if only in our own hallucinations. \:\)

People can argue, "What has ANYBODY done." Really... it's a cop out. LaVey's influence opened the doors for Satanism's acceptance in western philosophies, for sure, but there is a direct correlation between LaVey and his bringing of the "Satanic aesthetic" into public consciousness and a lasting presence of that ideal that stands today.

You can start with rock and roll, although LaVey was never a fan of the genre itself as it was in the 70's and beyond, artists rushed toward his imagery and the cache of satanic graphic arts that's become a staple today. Now, some people will even credit him with "gothic dress" and the gloomy facade so many gothic groups take up, but I personally credit Dr. Aquino's Temple of Set, whose members tended to look more to the "vampiric" and darker, broodier end of the spectrum. LaVey's people tended to be more in your face flashes of black and red, brighter colors, women wearing more sexualized stylings... many of your typical rock and roll babes dressed a lot like the women you might see at the Black House. The ladies at the Black House rocked that style from the 70s and early 80's!

For many, the first time they had ever heard of objects or buildings having a disturbing effect on things around them was through LaVey's writings, particularly The Law of the Trapezoid. Post LaVey, it seemed like everybody saw trapezoids and knew why they were called frustrums. They started searching their "haunted houses" for lines out of kilter and sightlines disturbed.

We won't even go into detail within The Compleat Witch for concepts of style and dress and feminine control that have become standards in fashion. Yeah... I know... but EVERYBODY's fashions are that way. They weren't always... check the copyright. Did the trend start before or after The Compleat Witch? My guess is you'll find that the feminization of women despite the DE-feminization attempts of women's groups (Feminists) will bring you back to the very concepts found there.

LaVey was influential in movies, in art, he was a prolific writer, he was an accomplished musician. He spoke at least two other languages that I know of... lost me on Italian in about 3 seconds... and he made being bald COOL (for anyone except me... I'd look like Elmer Fudd).

Hell. Today we have a hundred LaVey and/or Aquino wannabes who know where they went wrong and will be glad to tell you, once they get off work at their local fast food joint or gas station. They've never stepped inside the rarified air of the ritual chamber... but they can tell you why it doesn't work. They've read a book or two or six on various "occult subjects" and are experts, because it says, here on page 233...

Look... the proof is in the pudding. If someone HAS to bash LaVey or Aquino to make themselves look good, I suppose that's what they have to do. But printing up your own books on LuLu doesn't make you an acclaimed author. It makes you someone who wrote a book and has it up for sale on a site that prints to order.

How many copies of The Satanic Bible have been sold since 1969... or Satanic Rituals... or copies of The Compleat Witch/The Satanic Witch? How many people download it for free from the web because they are too timid to buy one directly from a dealer? Royalties from sales keep coming in to LaVey's heirs, although, due to internet rip offs, undoubtably has decreased. (Which brings up an of-the-subject point... I KNOW that pdfs are convenient, but PLEASE buy the hardcovers of these books. It's only fair to the authors who only make a small amount from each sale.)

Dr. LaVey's body of work lives on, as you say. And now, all of this time after his death, he is still popular and controversial as he was in 1966. A quick search on Google will show 173,000 hits for Anton LaVey, 1,260,000 for Church of Satan, 395,000 for The Satanic Bible, 159,000 for The Satanic Rituals, 51,400 for The Compleat Witch, and 172,000 for The Satanic Witch (the revised name of The Compleat Witch.)

Legacy? Yes. I think so.

_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#48101 - 02/05/11 11:31 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Jake999]
Antonio Offline
stranger


Registered: 01/27/11
Posts: 38
 Quote:
PLEASE buy the hardcovers of these books. It's only fair to the authors who only make a small amount from each sale.

Can you still buy brand new harcover versions of LaVey's work?. I thought they were out of print.

Top
#48102 - 02/05/11 11:35 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism Outdated? [Re: ]
nocTifer Offline
pledge


Registered: 11/07/09
Posts: 87
Loc: Khazakstan
It is duplicitous to ignore the failures of those one lauds while emphasizing the lack of success of those who seek to point to standards of success they respect.

It is unimportant what or who someone might have influenced in the past in an evaluation as to whether or not what they originally stood for is now outdated.

In an evaluation of 'philosophies of life', due to the diversity and reproductive success of the human animal there is no reason any need be regarded as 'dated' or 'outdated'. Fans may always be found for the peculiarities and extremes. Those seeking to encompass convention, self-serving interest, or opposition to status quo cannot ever truly be displaced due to their common appeal.

Aspects of the background culture employed for temporary purpose, on the other hand, are very likely to become outdated and useless, especially for those who gain a great deal of exposure to the initial application, or for those who find their own application outside of the original context.


Edited by nocTifer (02/05/11 11:38 AM)
_________________________
Troll Towelhead, Grand Mufti of Satanism
http://www.facebook.com/Tr0llT0welhead
http://www.gospel-of-satan.com

Top
#48103 - 02/05/11 11:47 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: 6Satan6Archist6]
Antonio Offline
stranger


Registered: 01/27/11
Posts: 38
 Quote:
While he may indeed be an intelligent individual that does nothing, in my mind, to alter the fact that he is a pompous douche-bag with a grandiose superiority complex and little reason for it.


I have the distinct impression he is a humble man, besides the sinister undertones of his manners and speech. Even if he were indeed arrogant, he still would have his intelligence and education to back it up to some degree.

Funnily enough, after reading some of your posts on this forum, I see you as a character that perfectly fits your description above.

Are you projecting your own shortcomings onto others?.

Top
#48104 - 02/05/11 11:51 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism Outdated? [Re: Antonio]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
 Originally Posted By: Antonio
 Quote:
PLEASE buy the hardcovers of these books. It's only fair to the authors who only make a small amount from each sale.

Can you still buy brand new harcover versions of LaVey's work?. I thought they were out of print.


My mistake... was typing during my 1st cup of coffee.

I meant "hard copies," and in this instance, paperbacks, because yes, the hard covers have long since gone the way of the dodo.
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#48108 - 02/05/11 12:06 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism Outdated? [Re: Jake999]
Antonio Offline
stranger


Registered: 01/27/11
Posts: 38
 Originally Posted By: Jake999
hard covers have long since gone the way of the dodo.


That's sad. Can someone take the task of printing them in harcover versions to sell them?.

Top
#48109 - 02/05/11 12:10 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Antonio]
6Satan6Archist6 Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/16/08
Posts: 2509
No, I am not projecting anything, I'm merely stating an opinion. One that apparently got your panties in a bunch.
_________________________
No gods. No masters.

Top
#48110 - 02/05/11 12:16 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: 6Satan6Archist6]
Antonio Offline
stranger


Registered: 01/27/11
Posts: 38
Before claiming someone is arrogant, it's better to make sure you are not guilty of the same mistake you are pointing out in others. Are you sure you don't come out as arrogant yourself?.

Anyway, perhaps you see some aspect of his personality that I don't. That's fine to me.

Top
#48112 - 02/05/11 12:23 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Antonio]
6Satan6Archist6 Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/16/08
Posts: 2509
I can say whatever I want about whoever I want and no one, least of all you, can stop me. People can think I am arrogant all they want, I'm certainly not going to lose any sleep over it.

My disdain for Gilmore comes from more than his arrogance, though, he is also a hypocritical jackass and something about his face says "punch me". I'm not sure why but whenever I see him I get the urge to punch him. Some people just rub me the wrong way I guess.
_________________________
No gods. No masters.

Top
#48114 - 02/05/11 12:48 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: 6Satan6Archist6]
Antonio Offline
stranger


Registered: 01/27/11
Posts: 38
Besides the little credibility you may have, of course you can say anything you want. Keep in mind that your public persona is seriously compromised by your unsubstantiated claims and baseless pride.

BTW, Gilmore comes out as a much more credible individual than you are. That may explain your desire to punch him, because you clearly feel you can't be his better.

Top
#48116 - 02/05/11 12:59 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Antonio]
6Satan6Archist6 Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/16/08
Posts: 2509
You know absolutely nothing about my credibility therefore you are not qualified to speak on it. Also, my "public persona" i.e. my real life is not in the least bit affected by anything I post on here. There is only a small group of people on this site who know what my real name is.

Every claim I have made has been backed up with evidence elsewhere on this site. That you have failed to notice is your problem alone. And I can assure you that the amount of pride I have is not at all baseless. Your claims that my claims are unsubstantiated are themselves unsubstantiated and the same can be said about your calling my pride "baseless".

Oh and I could best Gilmore at many things: shooting, welding, cooking and cunnilingus are but a few of them.

I wonder why you are feel the need to defend him so much. One thing is for sure: you would be a perfect match for the ass-licking festival that is today's Church of Satan.
_________________________
No gods. No masters.

Top
#48118 - 02/05/11 01:00 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Antonio]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3812
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Antonio, when it comes to credibility you really have no leg to stand on in this place, nor are you in any position to point fingers.

Your arrogance would not be so laughable if it were not resting squarely on ignorance and a false sense of entitlement, but it is, so we laugh.

If you feel the LaVey fan club that is the modern day CoS, and it's leader that has coasted on the coattails of a man long dead is so 'credible', perhaps you should take your sycophantic position over to LttD. You have contributed nothing here of any depth, scope, or worth, and your understanding is infantile.

Another 'instant expert' from a deep and seemingly inexhaustible pool of them being shat out by the internet. Boring.
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#48122 - 02/05/11 02:35 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Dan_Dread]
Antonio Offline
stranger


Registered: 01/27/11
Posts: 38
Ha!. You are no different from the CoS' elitists you claim to be superior to. Just because you hold the forum title of "Familiar" doesn't make you an expert on the subject.

BTW, I never claimed any title or credentials, just pointing out the obvious. If you can't differentiate between a knowledgeable person and the satanist charicature, you are simply ignorant.

Step down from your pedestals. You are a just a group of arrogant nobodies typing behind a computer screen pretending to be someone important.

Top
#48124 - 02/05/11 02:38 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Antonio]
SkaffenAmtiskaw Moderator Offline
veteran member


Registered: 06/24/09
Posts: 1318
I warned you. Now leave.
_________________________
"I'd rather be right than consistent" - Winston Churchill

Top
#48165 - 02/05/11 11:04 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism Outdated? [Re: Jake999]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2521
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: Jake999
... the hard covers have long since gone the way of the dodo.

You haven't missed much, because [unlike the original Compleat Witch, which was a high-quality typeset hardcover] the 1972 hardcover SB & SR were just photocopy blowups from the Avon paperback pages in very cheap hardcover. [Only my new SB Introduction was typeset.] That's the way University Books operated at the time. And there was just one printing run of each. Anton was less annoyed than Diane and I were; he said that the fuzzy blow-ups gave the text an "antique" look. The power of positive thinking!]

One of my now-and-then projects has been to start assembling a new volume, titled the SB, which would consist of the original SB & SR together, freshly formatted & in color, with all of the grammar and composition structure cleaned up, and extensively footnoted/annotated. The result could be made available in .pdf form, for anyone to download and fine-paper print & custom-bind; or it could be preprinted & bound thus - something like I did the 2nd Edition of The Church of Satan: [faux] black elephant-hide with a silver-embossed Baphomet on the cover.

Here are a couple of the draft pages so far:



There are a few problems, of course:

(1) The ©s for both books are still active. After all the ASLV-croak legal circus, I'm not sure who actually owns them, and haven't tried to find out. If Gilmore owns them now, I doubt he'd give permission for something like this unless he could mess with it, which is out of the question. So if this project ever sees public access, it would probably be in the post-PG future.

(2) There is a huge amount of interesting annotation & footnoting information for both SB & SR texts. Comprehensively done, this could dwarf the text itself. The result would be a very scholarly reference work, but possibly at the expense of the original "stand-alone" atmosphere and glamour, as it were. Still pondering that.

Anyway, this is just a long-term occasional-dabble right now.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#48185 - 02/06/11 06:38 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism Outdated? [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Dimitri Offline
stalker


Registered: 07/13/08
Posts: 3119
 Quote:
(2) There is a huge amount of interesting annotation & footnoting information for both SB & SR texts. Comprehensively done, this could dwarf the text itself. The result would be a very scholarly reference work, but possibly at the expense of the original "stand-alone" atmosphere and glamour, as it were. Still pondering that.

There is always the possibility to make 2 versions. One being the "original" with perhaps a more cleaned up look (or some small changes to let the book breath an atmosphere of long-passed ages and antiquity... I'm thinking of a hard-leathery bound cover with a baphomet encrusted in the middle and pages with a golden side), the other one being the scholars book which is practically the same except for addendum's and footnotes.

And to think as a real business person, you could make the scholar version just a little more expensive. Cashing in twice the money for almost the same texts. (I know it sounds like blasphemy to most who hold ASL in high regards, but in these modern times it is best to be economically oriented).


Edited by Dimitri (02/06/11 06:39 AM)
_________________________
Ut vivat, crescat et floreat

Top
#48192 - 02/06/11 08:20 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism Outdated? [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


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

There are a few problems, of course:

(1) The ©s for both books are still active. After all the ASLV-croak legal circus, I'm not sure who actually owns them, and haven't tried to find out. If Gilmore owns them now, I doubt he'd give permission for something like this unless he could mess with it, which is out of the question. So if this project ever sees public access, it would probably be in the post-PG future.

(2) There is a huge amount of interesting annotation & footnoting information for both SB & SR texts. Comprehensively done, this could dwarf the text itself. The result would be a very scholarly reference work, but possibly at the expense of the original "stand-alone" atmosphere and glamour, as it were. Still pondering that.

Anyway, this is just a long-term occasional-dabble right now.


If I'm going to be honest with you, the idea comes off as crass and trying to glom onto Dr, LaVey's accomplishments, as if they were your own. No matter how you spin it, it's not going to look good. After the history you've had with The Church, I'd say it's probably about the worst idea you have ever had.

AND I can pretty much predict that you will spend the rest of your life in litigation, because the copyrighted material is in the hands of the family, and even there, it's convoluted.
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#48200 - 02/06/11 10:10 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism Outdated? [Re: Jake999]
Jason King Offline
Banned/Martyrdom Denied
active member


Registered: 10/24/10
Posts: 731
Loc: 65?1%833Q!92A24 (It's a code)
 Originally Posted By: Jake999
If I'm going to be honest with you, the idea comes off as crass and trying to glom onto Dr, LaVey's accomplishments, as if they were your own. No matter how you spin it, it's not going to look good. After the history you've had with The Church, I'd say it's probably about the worst idea you have ever had.

AND I can pretty much predict that you will spend the rest of your life in litigation, because the copyrighted material is in the hands of the family, and even there, it's convoluted.


I agree with your second paragraph on the sheer practicalities. However, we can all dream a little dream. And I happen to think this particular dream would be an interesting one to see played out, even if only on the Dreamtime of the internet..

As a sidebar, I would find less than a small dose of irony in an eventuality where ASL's heirs sued ANYONE for copyright infringement.

JK
_________________________



Top
#48209 - 02/06/11 12:42 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism Outdated? [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Mahakala Offline
lurker


Registered: 02/06/11
Posts: 4

"
There are a few problems, of course:

(1) The ©s for both books are still active. After all the ASLV-croak legal circus, I'm not sure who actually owns them, and haven't tried to find out. If Gilmore owns them now, I doubt he'd give permission for something like this unless he could mess with it, which is out of the question. So if this project ever sees public access, it would probably be in the post-PG future."

Dr.Aquino,

If you might recall, Zeena and Blanche (maybe Karla too, I don't remember) took all these issues to court after LaVey's death. As a result, Blanche was awarded the CoS and Zeena acquired the copyrights to the Satanic Bible and the Satanic Rituals.
This is old news. The details were published in a San Francisco newspaper at the time. There was and may still be an online copy of the article.
Perhaps Zeena would give you permission for such an undertaking. It would be interesting.

Top
#48210 - 02/06/11 12:46 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism Outdated? [Re: Mahakala]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
Karla also has royalty rights to Dr. LaVey's books, and the chances of her granting any kind of permission to Dr. Aquino for anything would be roughly somewhere between a snowball's chance in Hell and slim and none. Of course, that's an underestimation on my part.

I would pay to be a fly on the wall when he asked her.
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#48214 - 02/06/11 01:42 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism Outdated? [Re: Jason King]
XiaoGui17 Offline
active member


Registered: 10/21/09
Posts: 1126
Loc: Amarillo, TX
 Originally Posted By: Jason King
As a sidebar, I would find less than a small dose of irony in an eventuality where ASL's heirs sued ANYONE for copyright infringement.


I was wondering if anyone would have the balls to say that. I can't say I'm surprised who did...

While parts of TSB may be considered plagiarism, copyright infringement they are not. Everything LaVey used was in the public domain.

Many consider giving away one's work freely (or anonymously/pseudonymously) to be a means to wider distribution. In practice, it causes perceived devaluation of the work. Profit, on the other hand, enables the author to afford greater distribution and publicity.

If the intent behind the original works was expression, one could say LaVey did the original authors a favor. (Heck, how people had heard of Might is Right before TSB?) By recognizing the strategic value of copyright (and trademark), LaVey got both prominence and profit.
_________________________
Wir halten uns an Regeln, Wenn man uns regeln lässt

Top
#48226 - 02/06/11 03:28 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism Outdated? [Re: Jake999]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2521
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: Jake999
If I'm going to be honest with you, the idea comes off as crass and trying to glom onto Dr, LaVey's accomplishments, as if they were your own. No matter how you spin it, it's not going to look good. After the history you've had with The Church, I'd say it's probably about the worst idea you have ever had.

Actually annotated editions of classic works can be very interesting, and if done properly not at all disrespectful. Among such in my library are Paradise Lost a/Isaac Asimov, Dracula a/Leonard Wolfe, and 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea a/Walter J. Miller. [There are also more recent annotated editions of Dracula and 20K Leagues.] Properly and carefully done [as these examples], annotated editions can be a definite enhancement of the original work and a gold mine of source, background, and detail information. So I am not concerned about that aspect, nor my qualifications to do it where the SB & SR are concerned.

I would need to take especial care, as I touched upon above, in considerations like text clean-up. My inclination is to put everything in proper English, grammar, and composition. That I could do very easily; I am one of those "00%" SAT English freaks. The problem is that if everything is made completely perfect, Anton might start sounding less like Anton LaVey and more like George Sanders or Rex Harrison. That obviously wouldn't do. [You can already see this problem in my drafts of the Prologue & 9SS. Even corrections as straightforward as noun/pronoun alignment and proper verbage ["All have" or "Each has", not "Each have"] impact the tone. The same for the punctuation corrections in the 9SS. And while "Christian church" is more accurate than "church", it's not the original. Etc.]

Annotations, incidentally, do not mean "gotcha!" sharpshooting. My a/SB, for instance, would not make an issue about the "Book of Satan" plagiarism; it would simply add RR's name to it and footnote information about him. Etc.

 Quote:
AND I can pretty much predict that you will spend the rest of your life in litigation, because the copyrighted material is in the hands of the family, and even there, it's convoluted.

I already noted that, and it is one of the reasons this is a long-term, back-burner project. If/when I get it done, it would probably just sit dormant until/unless there were an opportunity for it to see daylight. For instance a post-Gilmore ©-holder might welcome it. Not a present concern.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#48229 - 02/06/11 03:42 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism Outdated? [Re: Jake999]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2521
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: Jake999
Karla also has royalty rights to Dr. LaVey's books, and the chances of her granting any kind of permission to Dr. Aquino for anything would be roughly somewhere between a snowball's chance in Hell and slim and none. Of course, that's an underestimation on my part.

I would pay to be a fly on the wall when he asked her.

I haven't had any contact with Karla since 1975, so frankly do not know what she thinks about me personally. Prior to that unfortunate moment we were very close friends. I can also understand and respect her standing by her father come-what-may; blood may not be "the life", but it is indeed thicker than water.

Obviously Karla would need to see something like this a/SB to form an opinion on it. I have no problem whatever with that. Indeed it would be that much better if she, Zeena, and Diane, along with qualified others (such as your esteemed self) would pre-critique it.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#48230 - 02/06/11 04:20 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Fnord]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
 Originally Posted By: Fnord
My primary interest in starting this thread is to get very specific about what it is, in precise terms, that is out dated about Satanism as codified by Anton LaVey.


Any book will, after enough time, be outdated at some levels. But I think the important question is not as much as it is outdated as it is still being valuable.

And there it depends on whom you ask. When looking at the group of people entering Satanism, it becomes rather clear that laveyan Satanism seems to be more valuable to people in the USA than in Europe. The answer to it is quite simple; religion doesn't have a that strong hold upon most Euro-countries, and as such, morals are more loose. So, evidently, laveyan Satanism loses value and as a result, becomes outdated.

If culture changes, value is redefined.

D.

Top
#48237 - 02/06/11 05:06 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Diavolo]
TheInsane Offline
member


Registered: 09/16/09
Posts: 356
An annotated version of TSB by Dr. Aquino would be highly enjoyable read. And to be honest it can be done if he were to only publish the annotations and then just refer to chapter, page # or whatever is necessary.
Top
#48239 - 02/06/11 05:53 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: TheInsane]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2521
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: TheInsane
An annotated version of TSB by Dr. Aquino would be highly enjoyable read. And to be honest it can be done if he were to only publish the annotations and then just refer to chapter, page # or whatever is necessary.

Then it would become a "study guide".

Of course that would preclude my doing any clean-up of the two originals, which is a significant part of my interest. And, as brought out above, arguably a mixed blessing/curse.

In writing the stories on my webpage, one of my obsessions was, again, precise English/grammar/sentence structure. [My 5th-grade English teacher bludgeoned sentence-diagramming into us, and woe unto him who split an infinitive or left a participle dangling!] This became a bit of a problem in The Dark Side, because people - even Andromedans - don't speak in full, correct sentences. Particularly in the middle of combat. It was also a chore to keep 4-letter-words out of it. As Jake will attest, it was impossible in Vietnam to say anything to anyone else without the work "fuck"/"fucking" in the middle of it. On Bien Hoa Airbase the USAF had a forklift manufactured by the Muder company which I routinely used for boxes of PSYOP leaflets. The USAF had painted a special nameplate on it: MUDER FORKER.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#48241 - 02/06/11 06:12 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
What the fuck are you fucking talking about... when the fuck is my DEROS... grab my fuckin' ass a bookie bird and di di mao back to the land of the Big fuckin' PX. dinki dau mother fucker!!!

Yeah... I kinda (fuckin) remember.
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#48244 - 02/06/11 07:02 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Fnord]
XiaoGui17 Offline
active member


Registered: 10/21/09
Posts: 1126
Loc: Amarillo, TX
It just occurred to me that there's a certain element of The Satanic Witch that's “outdated.”

Some complain about old-fashioned beauty standards or sexism. I disagree--LaVey's beauty standards are classic, and women aren't necessarily reduced to sex objects just because they employ sex appeal, despite some feminists' claims.

But one thing that is outdated is apathy about other women’s opinions. LaVey is right that a woman liked by men will be disliked by other (jealous) women. Back when The Compleat Witch was written, it was sensible to disregard other women’s opinions because it was mostly a man’s world. But now that many women hold positions of power, it can be dangerous to rouse the ire of the wrong woman.

From Memoirs of a Geisha by Arthur Golden:
“You have a lovely arm, and beautiful skin. You should make sure every man who sits near you sees it at least once.”
So I went on, pouring tea again and again, until Mameha felt satisfied that I drew my sleeve out of the way enough to show my arm without being too obvious what I was doing…*
She asked me to do it again, this time pretending I was pouring tea for the mistress of the Ichiriki. I showed my arm in just the same way, and Mameha made a face at once.
“For heaven’s sake, I’m a woman,” she said. “Why are you showing me your arm that way? Probably you’re just trying to make me angry… You’re showing me how youthful and beautiful you are, while I’m already old and decrepit…”


*Similar to the wardrobe malfunctions LaVey recommends in The Satanic Witch. Many of the same points on seduction are found in both TSW and Memoirs of a Geisha.
_________________________
Wir halten uns an Regeln, Wenn man uns regeln lässt

Top
#48281 - 02/07/11 02:23 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: XiaoGui17]
Dimitri Offline
stalker


Registered: 07/13/08
Posts: 3119
 Quote:
But one thing that is outdated is apathy about other women’s opinions. LaVey is right that a woman liked by men will be disliked by other (jealous) women. Back when The Compleat Witch was written, it was sensible to disregard other women’s opinions because it was mostly a man’s world.

The beauty of the Compleat witch is that a man wrote it from the perspective of a woman. It barely is sexism and apathy from men towards women since, if you have read the book properly, it contains many elements of feminism while at the same time motivating women to display their natural gifts of beauty and seduction in a non-degrading way.
_________________________
Ut vivat, crescat et floreat

Top
#48316 - 02/07/11 05:03 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: XiaoGui17]
XiaoGui17 Offline
active member


Registered: 10/21/09
Posts: 1126
Loc: Amarillo, TX
 Originally Posted By: Dimitri
The beauty of the Compleat witch is that a man wrote it from the perspective of a woman. It barely is sexism and apathy from men towards women...


I wasn't claiming that The Compleat Witch was "apathy from men towards women"; I was saying that LaVey told women to disregard the opinions of other women. In the section on "Bitchcraft":

In the business world, the most successful women are those who have used their feminine wiles in reaching the top, not really concerning themselves about the other woman’s approval but concentrating on bewitching men. Then, once they have reached the top, they can easily charm other women. They have become strong enough so that other women, knowing themselves to be in a much lesser position, either refrain from venting their envy, refuse to entertain it in the first place or, if they are stupid enough to try, make fools of themselves.

That was all well and good back when most bosses were men anyway, but now that a good many women do hold higher positions, women need to be a bit more cautious.

 Originally Posted By: Dimitri
...if you have read the book properly, it contains many elements of feminism while at the same time motivating women to display their natural gifts of beauty and seduction in a non-degrading way.


I basically said this in my post, right here:
 Originally Posted By: XiaoGui17
Some complain about old-fashioned beauty standards or sexism. I disagree--LaVey's beauty standards are classic, and women aren't necessarily reduced to sex objects just because they employ sex appeal, despite some feminists' claims.


Did I fail to read The Compleat Witch "properly," or did you fail to read my post properly?


Edited by XiaoGui17 (02/07/11 05:03 PM)
_________________________
Wir halten uns an Regeln, Wenn man uns regeln lässt

Top
#48349 - 02/08/11 03:54 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: XiaoGui17]
Dimitri Offline
stalker


Registered: 07/13/08
Posts: 3119
 Quote:

I wasn't claiming that The Compleat Witch was "apathy from men towards women"; I was saying that LaVey told women to disregard the opinions of other women. In the section on "Bitchcraft":

In the business world, the most successful women are those who have used their feminine wiles in reaching the top, not really concerning themselves about the other woman’s approval but concentrating on bewitching men. Then, once they have reached the top, they can easily charm other women. They have become strong enough so that other women, knowing themselves to be in a much lesser position, either refrain from venting their envy, refuse to entertain it in the first place or, if they are stupid enough to try, make fools of themselves.

That was all well and good back when most bosses were men anyway, but now that a good many women do hold higher positions, women need to be a bit more cautious.

It has been said many times before that Satanism is for a specific kind of human beings. I indeed think you haven't read it properly since you still believe that women towards each other should be more "kind". Bitchcraft is not limited towards men only and certain principles can be applied against other women. If I remember correctly there are even strategies to take-out other women in high positions by the use of male attention and jealousy.

In other words: why care about the opinions of other women if it is about a personal raising of status? You seem to be still stuck with the premise of "we women"... hand-holding sheep mentality.

So far your statement you have improved when you returned to the boards... still seeing no change.
_________________________
Ut vivat, crescat et floreat

Top
#48409 - 02/08/11 05:03 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Fnord]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2521
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
Chapter #9 of my Church of Satan consists of an extensive analysis of The Compleat Witch. I took a look at it to see whether some points from it would be appropriate here, but after re-reading the chapter I think it is best taken as a whole.

I will add only this anecdote [not in the chapter]: that on one occasion when Diane LaVey and my mother went out shopping together, Diane said that the CW was OK with her except that she could have done without Anton's seamed-nylons-&-garter-belt fetish, because pantyhose were so much more comfortable.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#48411 - 02/08/11 05:23 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
I don't think I ever saw Lady Diane in seamed stockings, although she was always impeccably dressed. She was rocking The Compleat Witch the first night I met her in a blood red blouse, black skirt and heels, with the blouse strategically opened to the perfect level and her hair and makeup were perfect.

I don't think I ever saw her with a hair out of place. She looked GOOD... and she knew it. When she was on, she was ON and a star.
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#48413 - 02/08/11 05:41 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
The Zebu Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/08/08
Posts: 1640
Loc: Orlando, FL
I actually started making my own "stripped down" hardcover Satanic Bible for bookshelf purposes, which was essentially the portions from Might is Right (labeled as such) with the Enochian Keys (in English, and Dee's Angelic script-- with the pseudo-Enochian "Shaitan" suitably replaced with "Choronzon".)

I don't know if I'll ever finish it, but if I do, maybe I could earn a few bucks off of selling a Print-on-Demand version for all the kiddies out there.
_________________________
«Recibe, ¡oh Lucifer! la sangre de esta víctima que sacrifico en tu honor.»

Top
#48431 - 02/08/11 10:54 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Dimitri]
XiaoGui17 Offline
active member


Registered: 10/21/09
Posts: 1126
Loc: Amarillo, TX
 Originally Posted By: Dimitri
I indeed think you haven't read it properly since you still believe that women towards each other should be more "kind".


No, I said that other women are now more dangerous than they used to be. Why is "kind" in quotation marks? Where did I say that? I didn't even say anything remotely like that and you're putting quotation marks around a word I didn't use...

 Originally Posted By: Dimitri
Bitchcraft is not limited towards men only and certain principles can be applied against other women. If I remember correctly there are even strategies to take-out other women in high positions by the use of male attention and jealousy.


Yes, I mentioned this. I swear, it's like I post one thing and you read another. I really get sick of being "corrected" with something I essentially said in the first place.

 Originally Posted By: Dimitri
In other words: why care about the opinions of other women if it is about a personal raising of status?


Simple; sometimes other women can make or break one's status. That was my whole point.

 Originally Posted By: Dimitri
You seem to be still stuck with the premise of "we women"... hand-holding sheep mentality.


I hold nothing of the sort. I said other women can be dangerous to cross. That's hardly promoting some type of lovey-dovey sisterhood.

 Originally Posted By: Dimitri
So far your statement you have improved when you returned to the boards... still seeing no change.


And I see that you still read something completely 180 degrees from whatever it is I type.
_________________________
Wir halten uns an Regeln, Wenn man uns regeln lässt

Top
#48432 - 02/08/11 11:17 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: XiaoGui17]
Morgan Offline
Princess of Hell
stalker


Registered: 08/29/07
Posts: 2956
Loc: New York City
"LaVey is right that a woman liked by men will be disliked by other (jealous) women."
This I feel is very true, plus the stronger or more liked the woman is by men, the more she will be hated by certain jealous women.

"But now that many women hold positions of power, it can be dangerous to rouse the ire of the wrong woman."
Irony...

It has always been dangerous to rouse the ire of the wrong woman, just look at Lucrezia Borgia or Pamela Harriman as an example. Some people may just be unaware of the power behind the throne.

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



Top
#48433 - 02/08/11 11:26 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Morgan]
XiaoGui17 Offline
active member


Registered: 10/21/09
Posts: 1126
Loc: Amarillo, TX
 Originally Posted By: Morgan
"But now that many women hold positions of power, it can be dangerous to rouse the ire of the wrong woman."
Irony...


I had a certain someone in mind when I wrote that, actually. That's basically most of the lesson I took away from my last run here.
_________________________
Wir halten uns an Regeln, Wenn man uns regeln lässt

Top
#48437 - 02/09/11 01:35 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Morgan]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2521
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: Wicked Wanda
"But now that many women hold positions of power, it can be dangerous to rouse the ire of the wrong woman."
Irony...

_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#48620 - 02/11/11 02:02 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism Outdated? [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Groenoordhallen Offline
stranger


Registered: 07/04/10
Posts: 8
Dr. Aquino wrote: "My inclination is to put everything in proper English, grammar, and composition. That I could do very easily; I am one of those "00%" SAT English freaks."

Dr. Aquino,

I am not that good at writing correct English, so I feel a bit hesitant about mentioning this, but are you sure you care that much about proper English and grammar? I always thought that your English was far from perfect. A good example is your writing the possessive case of "thou" as "thy" where this should have been "thine". You know that it's "thine" before a vowel and "thy" before a consonant. Yet your works are rife with errors in this respect. Right at the beginning of The Diabolicon for instance: "Let thy eyes be touched anew ...", which should have been "Let thine eyes ...".

So maybe you are not the best candidate to cast the first stone at Anton LaVey's English ...

--G

Top
#48623 - 02/11/11 03:19 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Morgan]
manofsteel Offline
member


Registered: 05/08/10
Posts: 153
Loc: Indiana U.S.
I find this too be very true. My wife who has many friends and most of them are not ss good looking as her are constantly trying to find faults with her so they have something to throw back on her. It can be somthing as simple as I might make more money than her friends husbands and that somehow turns into a big deal. Women are definetely very judgemental and critical of others and they will spend countless hours to find something to discredit the other one. It is so much easier as a man, who has the best lookin wife or the biggest dick and we're good to go. If not we beat the shit out of eachother and then we're back to normal. Way to much drama

Edited by manofsteel (02/11/11 03:20 AM)
_________________________
Amongst the sheep emerges a wolf.

Top
#48666 - 02/11/11 11:52 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism Outdated? [Re: Groenoordhallen]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2521
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: Groenoordhallen
I always thought that your English was far from perfect. A good example is your writing the possessive case of "thou" as "thy" where this should have been "thine". You know that it's "thine" before a vowel and "thy" before a consonant. Yet your works are rife with errors in this respect. Right at the beginning of The Diabolicon for instance: "Let thy eyes be touched anew ...", which should have been "Let thine eyes ...".

I will cop a plea on the whole thou/thee/thy/thine/thwwhh business; I am reasonably good at Yuggothic [since I made it up myself], and fortunately SAT did not test thwwhhs.

My assumption was:
Thou - 1st person singular subjective: Thou art, thou shalt be, etc.
Thee - 1st person singular objective: This is for thee, etc.
Thy - 1st person active possessive: It is thy widget.
Thine - 1st person passive possessive: The widget is thine.
Hast - 2nd person singular: Thou hast.
Hath - 3rd person singular: He hath.

When thou gettest into plurals, they return to conventional English: We, you (plural), they get [not getteth or gettest]. Etc.

So far in the SB Prologue I just did a quick tweak accordingly, but I would actually prefer to get rid of that stuff completely - not just because it twisteth my [not mine] tongue, but just to keep the whole book consistent.

Verily hast thou made thy point.

In modern American English I am confident of my exactitude. I would be more cautious across the Pond, however, where the British don't write English as correctly as we do. ;\)

I confess to one peculiarity: It's conventional in American writing to always put commas & periods inside close-quotes, no matter what they're punctuating. I put them inside/outside according to what they punctuate. Hence:

Conventional: He said, "Buy me a loaf of bread."
And: This article is entitled "Better Bread."

MAA: He said, "Buy me a loaf of bread."
But: This article is entitled "Better Bread".

None of the above should keep anyone awake at night.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#49333 - 02/21/11 11:33 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: ]
Hegesias Offline
active member


Registered: 02/16/11
Posts: 725
Anton LaVey was not consigned to being a 'Satanist' or any other established system, he was a human being and a great philosopher with empathy in the naturalistic flow of things, to make clear those concepts that we can come to see emerge from our own nature into actuality. These things are very outdated, they will be with us on this Earth always because Satanism is self transcendence, self overcoming and self preservation. In fact Satanism is not by the very fabric of it's concept Satanism at all but simply 'us' as what we are individually without pretending otherwise. The word Satan and any connotations with past paradigms ought to be discarded soon as possible in ones mind and see what lies beneath the aestheticism and rectory faculties of the past, because Satanism is something else now being the same in concept—anti-contemporary society and re valuation of all values. Today's values being different to the 60's we must apply an adaptable mindset to Satanism.
_________________________


Top
#49346 - 02/22/11 01:14 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Hegesias]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



I primarily saw this thread as a challenge to the notion that Dr. LaVey’s work was still relevant by so – called Postmodern Satanist’s.

I would like to briefly address this Postmodern Satanism and make a couple of other points.

One of the first victims of postmodern thinking is the possibility of originality; closely followed by the notion of authorship and the privileging and centrality of the self.

The whole premise of Satanism is based on the privileging and centrality of the self; with originality and authenticity of thinking and practice derived from such a self.

Postmodern Satanism is a contradiction in terms at this level.

A claim may be raised that this Postmodern Satanism is about transcending the so - called limited and historically and culturally specific viewpoint of LaVey by articulating a new ontological position, but postmodern thought itself militates against the whole notion of objectivity, or universal truth. In which case how can one claim that the adversarial or that might is right constitutes a science of being, or essential, or core truth, or reality?

Postmodern Satanism does not work at this level.

I won’t even get into magic and how it is possible within postmodern thinking.

Satanism, in my view, is fundamentally Modern or rather Modernist, to be more precise. And I mean that in a philosophical and aesthetic sense.

To think that the work of LaVey is only a reaction to the Judeo-Christian system is to fundamentally underestimate LaVey and demonstrates a lack of understanding of the wide variety of things he was into and insights he had to make.

To think that LaVey and his work is somehow trapped in the 1960’s and therefore superseded misses the point: LaVey was a man of the 1930’s and 1940’s – his ECI comes from that period of time.

Satanism, in my view, has nothing to do with self – transcendence or self – overcoming.

The re-evaluation of all values is already addressed in LaVey’s work.

To discard the word Satan and any of its connotations with past paradigms means to discard Satanism itself.

Top
#49375 - 02/22/11 12:56 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: ]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
 Originally Posted By: MatthewJ1
I primarily saw this thread as a challenge to the notion that Dr. LaVey’s work was still relevant by so – called Postmodern Satanist’s.


Would you be so kind to explain what exactly you consider "Postmodern" satanists or "Postmodern" Satanism? From your critique I have a hard time imagining what specific group you actually talk about.

D.

Top
#49385 - 02/22/11 04:22 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Diavolo]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



I am referring to the book by Jason King called Postmodern Satanism and I am referring to those individuals who are calling themselves Postmodern Satanist's.
Top
#49386 - 02/22/11 04:23 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: ]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
Ah ok, thanks for the clarification. The idea came to mind but I wasn't sure.

D.

Top
#49414 - 02/22/11 09:50 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Diavolo]
Hegesias Offline
active member


Registered: 02/16/11
Posts: 725
Informative, I am far from an expert on LaVeyan Satanism, I read the book when I was at school, when I went that is. I made connotations with my contemplations of Nietzsche, so I apologise if I have made error here as I am more interested in this topic than to claim to be knowledgeable.

My learnings are of Traditional Satanism. But still I can't see how Satanism could ever be outdated because it never has been, nor will it ever be an established contemporary or otherwise ethos, but a means to progression, in an individualistic way, to take from and progress from, to make ones own.

I'll leave this one for the experts in this field.
_________________________


Top
#49424 - 02/22/11 10:43 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: ]
XiaoGui17 Offline
active member


Registered: 10/21/09
Posts: 1126
Loc: Amarillo, TX
WARNING: High probability of TL;DR ahead.

I would like to address three things in your post, Matthew: the purpose of this thread, the position of Postmodern Satanism concerning LaVey, and how postmodern thought is mixed with Satanism. One at a time…

 Originally Posted By: MatthewJ1
I primarily saw this thread as a challenge to the notion that Dr. LaVey’s work was still relevant by so – called Postmodern Satanist’s.


I got the impression that this thread was a challenge to those who claim Satanism is outdated, not those who claim it’s relevant. I also think you’ve misunderstood PS’s position regarding LaVey precisely because you’ve attributed to position described in the original post to PS without qualification.

 Originally Posted By: MatthewJ1
To think that the work of LaVey is only a reaction to the Judeo-Christian system is to fundamentally underestimate LaVey and demonstrates a lack of understanding of the wide variety of things he was into and insights he had to make.

To think that LaVey and his work is somehow trapped in the 1960’s and therefore superseded misses the point: LaVey was a man of the 1930’s and 1940’s – his ECI comes from that period of time.

The re-evaluation of all values is already addressed in LaVey’s work.


1) Postmodern Satanism never states that LaVey is only a reaction to the Judeo-Christian system.
2) Postmodern Satanism never states that LaVey is trapped in the 60’s. It does state that LaVey’s philosophy is superceded, but it doesn’t attribute it to any particular time period.
3) Postmodern Satanism never denies that LaVey addressed the concept of re-evaluating all values.

It is worth noting that some LaVeyan Satanists can only parrot LaVey’s words without thinking for themselves (think the current CoS). It’s more those who are stuck on LaVey that are being left behind than LaVey himself.

 Originally Posted By: MatthewJ1
One of the first victims of postmodern thinking is the possibility of originality; closely followed by the notion of authorship and the privileging and centrality of the self.

The whole premise of Satanism is based on the privileging and centrality of the self; with originality and authenticity of thinking and practice derived from such a self.


Satanism is about thinking and evaluating ideas for oneself, not necessarily coming up with novel new ideas. I see Satanism as more about skepticism than originality. Much of what LaVey’s own work was drawn from other sources. There’s nothing wrong with that, but it does shore up the idea that there’s nothing new under the sun.

 Originally Posted By: MatthewJ1
A claim may be raised that this Postmodern Satanism is about transcending the so - called limited and historically and culturally specific viewpoint of LaVey by articulating a new ontological position, but postmodern thought itself militates against the whole notion of objectivity, or universal truth. In which case how can one claim that the adversarial or that might is right constitutes a science of being, or essential, or core truth, or reality?


“Just as Anton LaVey’s philosophy has been superceded, so too will my own, for such is the nature of the world. No book has the power to codify reality for all times and places…”
-Postmodern Satanism

I think the quote addresses yours.

 Originally Posted By: MatthewJ1
Satanism, in my view, has nothing to do with self – transcendence or self – overcoming.


I think that depends on how you define self-transcendence. Self-improvement and self-discipline involve transcending one’s current self in order to achieve one’s desired Self. I’d consider such endeavors Satanic.

 Originally Posted By: MatthewJ1
To discard the word Satan and any of its connotations with past paradigms means to discard Satanism itself.


I didn’t think Postmodern Satanism was trying to do this, either.
_________________________
Wir halten uns an Regeln, Wenn man uns regeln lässt

Top
#49432 - 02/23/11 12:41 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: XiaoGui17]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



To Dear Xiao,

You are far too likeable to argue with over this whole modern/postmodern Satanism guff so I must concede.

You win!

P.S. Please post more often here at the 600C. Thank you.


Edited by MatthewJ1 (02/23/11 01:18 AM)
Edit Reason: Too much thinking on mod/post mod Satanism

Top
#49445 - 02/23/11 05:13 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: ]
XiaoGui17 Offline
active member


Registered: 10/21/09
Posts: 1126
Loc: Amarillo, TX
That was a little too easy, but I'm relieved that I won't have to prepare another book in response. :P I considered discarding the post entirely halfway through, but then I figured I had put so much into it I may as well finish.

But thank you. \:\) I try not to post for the sake of posting, but to stick to when I actually have something to say. My activity correlates with the number of active and interesting threads, as well as how much spare time I have.
_________________________
Wir halten uns an Regeln, Wenn man uns regeln lässt

Top
#49449 - 02/23/11 09:30 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: XiaoGui17]
Fnord Offline
senior member


Registered: 01/11/10
Posts: 2085
Loc: Texas
 Originally Posted By: XiaoGui17

Satanism is about thinking and evaluating ideas for oneself, not necessarily coming up with novel new ideas.


And that, along with several disparaging remarks I read about LaVey's work(s), was the impetus for starting this thread. There is nothing outdated in the core principles outlined in TSB, which speaks directly to taking the onus upon oneself. Those ideas are timeless, and the fact that LaVey drew inspiration from earlier texts only speaks to the truth of this. I can see how some might be off-put by the presentation as that was, indeed, a product of its time, but the core values remain relevant and perhaps even more so with each new generation.

 Originally Posted By: XiaoGui17
I see Satanism as more about skepticism than originality.


Yes. Doubt is the underlying key. Doubt leads to exploration which leads to wider understanding(s). It's precisely the thing god didn't want to happen to men because it would cause them to have misgivings about his word (opposite of faith). And then, along came Eve, a child of his own creation, to send it all into turmoil. Or was she designed that way? ;\)

Disclaimer: To the retarded, I do not believe that bible stories are literal truth... being that they are widely known, they can occasionally serve as tools to make one's point.
_________________________
Dead and gone. Syonara.

Top
#49464 - 02/23/11 02:46 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Fnord]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
The question reminds me of a comic series called Slaine.



The underlying story in the first books was about the battle between the old horned god and Slaine. The old horned god refused to die when his seven year reign had ended and through “unnaturally” prolonging his life, slowly turned into a rotting infertile corpse, the very antithesis of what he was. Slaine could not do else but battle and destroy Slough Feg and his followers. Through this victory he became the new incarnation of the horned god, someone similar but new, but only for the seven year reign allowed. After that he embraced his necessary death.

D.


Edited by Diavolo (02/23/11 02:58 PM)

Top
#50052 - 02/27/11 08:42 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: XiaoGui17]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



To Xiao,

I have decided to respond to your post with one of my own, which you can assess and critique if you wish to. I think that is the more courteous approach than just saying you win! Most of this post will be in the form of quotes.

I believe you and others will be able to join the dots together in order to gain a vision of the larger picture.


In Relation to Hegesias’ Post, My Responses to his Post and Xiao’s Comments

“2) Postmodern Satanism never states that LaVey is trapped in the 60’s. It does state that LaVey’s philosophy is superceded, but it doesn’t attribute it to any particular time period.
3) Postmodern Satanism never denies that LaVey addressed the concept of re-evaluating all values.” Xiao 600C. 22/02/2011

“The word Satan and any connotations with past paradigms ought to be discarded soon as possible in ones mind and see what lies beneath the aestheticism and rectory faculties of the past, because Satanism is something else now being the same in concept—anti-contemporary society and re valuation of all values. Today's values being different to the 60's we must apply an adaptable mindset to Satanism.” Hegesias 600C. 21/02/2011

“To think that LaVey and his work is somehow trapped in the 1960’s and therefore superseded misses the point: LaVey was a man of the 1930’s and 1940’s – his ECI comes from that period of time.

The re-evaluation of all values is already addressed in LaVey’s work.

To discard the word Satan and any of its connotations with past paradigms means to discard Satanism itself.” MattJ1 600C. 22/02/2011


In Relation to LaVey and his Work as a Reaction to the Judeo-Christian System

“1) Postmodern Satanism never states that LaVey is only a reaction to the Judeo-Christian system. Xiao 600C. 22/02/2011

Postmodern Satanism is an attempt to offer a proactive vision of the Satanic philosophy, one which does not depend on the Judeo-Christian model for the interpretation of its labels. Now granted, this cannot be avoided entirely, given the historical development of the term "satan," however, it can be done ontologically, which is the entire point of the volume. LaVey was incapable of doing this, which is why I have moved beyond his reactionary model towards an understanding of the Adversary as an evolutionary hypostasis, rather than the "other team's bad guy". JK 600C. 16/12/2010

“When I use the term "reactionary" to determine the Satanic stance of Anton LaVey, I am not using it as a political descriptor (pace Aquino). What I am saying is that his "satan," and hence his Satan-ism is a reaction to Christian memes and mores.” JK 600C. 02/02/2011

“To think that the work of LaVey is only a reaction to the Judeo-Christian system is to fundamentally underestimate LaVey and demonstrates a lack of understanding of the wide variety of things he was into and insights he had to make.”
MattJ1 600C. 22/02/2011


In Relation to the Ontological and Ontological Adversarialism

“In short, Postmodern Satanism begins with the ontological realization that the world is adversarial to the core, i.e. Satanic.” JK 600C. 02/02/2011

“When I say "ontological adversarialism" (i.e. the Satanic Current) I am referring to how the world operates. Its mechanism for producing change and betterment. Lions hunt gazelles and gazelles elude lions. This process makes both the lion and the gazelle (or the surviving members of said species) stronger. THIS is the adversity. THIS is the Satanism.” JK 600C. 03/02/2011

“A claim may be raised that this Postmodern Satanism is about transcending the so - called limited and historically and culturally specific viewpoint of LaVey by articulating a new ontological position, but postmodern thought itself militates against the whole notion of objectivity, or universal truth. In which case how can one claim that the adversarial or that might is right constitutes a science of being, or essential, or core truth, or reality?” MattJ1 600C. 22/02/2011

“Just as Anton LaVey’s philosophy has been superceded, so too will my own, for such is the nature of the world. No book has the power to codify reality for all times and places…” – JK Postmodern Satanism (Provided by Xiao)

Satanism has been thought of as being synonymous with cruelty and brutality. This is so only because people are afraid to face the truth - and the truth is that human beings are not all benign or all loving.” LaVey TSB in relation to Love and Hate. (Provided by MattJ1)

“In this arid wilderness of steel and stone I raise up my voice that you may hear. To the East and to the West I beckon. To the North and to the South I show a sign
proclaiming: Death to the weakling, wealth to the strong!” quoting MIR. LaVey TSB (Provided by MattJ1)

There are a lot of Might is Right passages in the 'Book of Satan' that I could quote to show how Dr. LaVey’s thinking about this Satanic current ran.” Matt J1 600C. 3/02/2011


And Finally – the Modern/Postmodern Question in Postmodern Satanism

“On a more serious note I think any work which attempts to describe a postmodern Satanism is going to have to define its terms carefully and then position itself within the current modern/postmodern debate, or else set its own position and explain that position and how it differs from the current debate.

There should at least be some reference made to Baudrillard, Lyotard, Habermas, Jameson etc. and possibly the more prominent Post-Structuralist’s.

I am not sure whether JK has addressed these issues in his work, but I feel they must be addressed. And LaVey and his work must be addressed as well I think.” MattJ1 600C. 14/12/2010

“Just so further straw men are avoided, it should be clear that the usage of the designator "postmodern" is a reference to moving the idea of Satanism beyond the "modern" (i.e. LaVeyan), and NOT a reference to the school of thought so-called. The work defines itself, and attempts to baste it in the juices of unconnected philosophies is to fail to be truly critical of the thing in question.” JK 600C. 16/12/2010

“I would propose that myth and science are closer than many modernists are willing to admit.” JK Postmodern Satanism

“…it may be helpful to quote from W.V.O. Quine (a modern, even if deceased, analytical philosopher)…” JK Postmodern Satanism

“Both quotations are taken from Quine’s seminal essay “Two Dogmas of Empiricism,” one of the most foundational pieces in the modern philosophies of science and
mathematics. “ JK Postmodern Satanism

“However, my approach is colored by the very same postmodern spirit in which Quine’s observation is offered. To be precise, if there is no place within the modern mindset for Satan, then, like Zeus, Hermes, and Apollo, he becomes a flawed analytical posit. But on the other hand, if the mythic character of Satan presents relevance to the modern mind, then it seems justified to regard him as being just as valid a concept as the electron or the null set. And this is nothing more than a postmodern way of saying that Satan is real.” JK Postmodern Satanism.

The above last four quotes tend to suggest that the words modern and postmodern are being used in different ways in the book P.S.

Unfortunately, I feel that there is a great deal of confusion underlying this work Postmodern Satanism, but there is also an enormous potential here as well.

I definitely want to make more time to really read into this book to see what other things are there.

Cheers

Top
#50065 - 02/27/11 10:25 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: ]
XiaoGui17 Offline
active member


Registered: 10/21/09
Posts: 1126
Loc: Amarillo, TX
First, thank you to Fnord whose post I did not see until just now. I'm not sure why that is. I'm glad I was able to express what you were getting at.

To MatthewJ1...

I can definitely see where you got 60's-limited from Hegesias's post, but if he considers himself a Postmodern Satanist, this is news to me.

You have a point about Jason King describing LaVey as a Judeo-Xian reaction. I hadn't seen that in Postmodern Satanism, but it's clear that King has asserted that. For some reason, in his book he's very diplomatic regarding LaVey, but on YouTube/forums he's a little more abrasive.

As for the meaning of "postmodern" in Postmodern Satanism, you've definitely demonstrated its different use.

I'll stand by my assertion that King's work has value, but I will note one particular bias of his. King tends to assume the popular is also the shallow, and prefers to develop deeper understandings of the obscure. As such, he tends not to see LaVey beyond the surface of popular perception. (I honestly think he does the same with Richard Dawkins.) I take his criticisms of popular figures with a grain of salt.
_________________________
Wir halten uns an Regeln, Wenn man uns regeln lässt

Top
#50086 - 02/28/11 04:46 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: ]
nferno6 Offline
stranger


Registered: 02/27/11
Posts: 11
Loc: Sweden
Even if it was outdated, what could one add or take away from it?
It is and should be the common sense of any realistic satanist.
To any others who aspire to learn, it is the easiest teaching material available. (I doubt that common sense could be tought though) But I am from a small little country on the bottom of Africa, so for all I know there are hundreds of other books by now.
_________________________
Lost and alone on the road to the end
Look to the east and smile at the dark

Top
#50098 - 02/28/11 10:29 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: XiaoGui17]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
 Originally Posted By: XiaoGui17
King tends to assume the popular is also the shallow, and prefers to develop deeper understandings of the obscure. As such, he tends not to see LaVey beyond the surface of popular perception. (I honestly think he does the same with Richard Dawkins.) I take his criticisms of popular figures with a grain of salt.


And he is very right to see it as such. Popular is by definition created for, understood and accepted by the populus, and therefor does not have depth at all, since depth starts there where the popular ends. Mind you, one can still enjoy the popular but anyone considering it deep is by definition of a lower intelligence than the average man considering it obvious.

D.

Top
#50212 - 02/28/11 08:35 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Diavolo]
XiaoGui17 Offline
active member


Registered: 10/21/09
Posts: 1126
Loc: Amarillo, TX
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
Popular is by definition created for, understood and accepted by the populus... (emphasis added)


Not necessarily. Sometimes things that were never intended to be popular nevertheless catch on in the crowd, due to misunderstanding caused by the crowd's shallowness. Sometimes fads cause people to like something for the sake of being 'cool,' without actually appreciating its full value. It reminds me of Transmetropolitan, in which Spider Jerusalem is incessantly pissed off that his work has become popular because he feels the major portion of his fans, despite their expressions of adoration, don't 'get' him.

I think of LaVey like that. Lots of people claim to like him, to the point that he could be considered 'popular,' at least among those who consider themselves Satanists. But what percentage of the folks who name LaVey as an influence actually understand what he had to say?
_________________________
Wir halten uns an Regeln, Wenn man uns regeln lässt

Top
#50213 - 02/28/11 08:51 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: XiaoGui17]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
 Originally Posted By: XiaoGui17
I think of LaVey like that. Lots of people claim to like him, to the point that he could be considered 'popular,' at least among those who consider themselves Satanists. But what percentage of the folks who name LaVey as an influence actually understand what he had to say?


Exactly.

It's been said that if Jesus returned, he wouldn't recognize Christianity... same thing with Anton LaVey. Look... the guy was larger than life when he was alive, and the myths and legends continued after he died. You see me here on the boards constantly telling people that what they've heard about LaVey isn't reality... was he a rock star... did he do drugs... any number of things. The reason people make up the silly crap about him is because they are trying in some way to glom on to his image and his cache. They take snippets of The Satanic Bible, perhaps a chapter name, and try to weave a whole life's story out of it and make everything LaVey ever said or did into some mysterious or inscrutable cypher.

LaVey's vision of Satanism isn't that hard to understand, and if you are of the same relative mindset, not that hard to accept. For some reason, people who can't fit the mold decide that they'll make the mold fit them and it'll be just the same. It's not. It's simply people afraid to say, "LaVey's Satanic Bible was good and interesting, but it just doesn't fit my life as completely as I would like." Still others will define their own values as far in left field as you can get from LaVey's and still, for some ungodly (pun intended) reason, still try to find a way to include him. Flattering, but wrong. The correct idea would be to say, "I'm a Satanist who believes that A +B = C, and while others may not agree, it's my core understanding of myself."

There's no crime in not agreeing with LaVey. There's only a crime against one's own sense of self to enslave themselves to an ideal they can't REALLY embrace. LaVey said a lot of things, and many of them work for ME... but I AM me. If they don't work for you... great. He wouldn't really give a rat's ass.

_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#50226 - 03/01/11 02:20 AM Are LaVey's Core SB Principles Outdated? [Re: Fnord]
nocTifer Offline
pledge


Registered: 11/07/09
Posts: 87
Loc: Khazakstan
Hi Fnord,
 Originally Posted By: Fnord
...My primary interest in starting this thread {examining the basis for whether Anton LaVey's Satanism is 'outdated'} is to get very specific about what it is, in precise terms, that is out dated about Satanism as codified by Anton LaVey.
I was specific regarding 2 things: A) the SB as a magic book, and B) the Black Pope or his church as a Satanic authority. You additionally asked that we
 Originally Posted By: Fnord
...specifically cite examples of what is out dated about it (preferably examples from The Satanic Bible, but other works stem from that and so could be included in the discourse).

As this thread proceeds I notice a failure to cite anything interior to the Bible with any specificity as you have requested. My impression is that this primarily is a result of it containing insufficient substance, and being in sufficient disarray, as not to make too serious a treatment feasible. Secondarily, those who might have an interest in the task are either not up to it or the focus of analysis would be too insubstantial to warrant the effort. That said, I will make a preliminary attempt here prior to examining the effort by Chris Mathews as a service to Satanians. I will try to be unbiased in my evaluation, though surely some will be offended by my expressions.

 Originally Posted By: Fnord
...There is nothing outdated in the core principles outlined in TSB, which speaks directly to taking the onus upon oneself. Those ideas are timeless ...

I would be more convinced of this if some intellect from the Satanic subculture were able to sift out from the SB these 'core values' for examination. That nobody seems to have done an annotated version of the SB (see above in this thread), not even online(!) that I can see (compare the dearth of attention to Commentaries on Crowley's scripture by 'Thelemites' - appalling!), and that no such exegesis yet exists, some 50 years after its publication, is perhaps a testimony to its lack of importance as a document, or to the general low intellectual calibre associated to the cultus.

 Originally Posted By: Fnord
 Originally Posted By: XiaoGui17
I see Satanism as more about skepticism than originality.
Yes. Doubt is the underlying key. Doubt leads to exploration which leads to wider understanding(s). ...
I'll try to keep this in mind as I proceed through its sections with a general evaluation. I grounded myself before ever coming to Satanist materials in philosophical, religious, and occult studies. I have owned and read several SBs, have read much of the literature on Satanism in both book and periodical form, have followed out secondary literature, and developed my own ideas separately and NOT in competition with Anton LaVey, Michael Aquino (the latter's Church of Satan was quite helpful to an understanding of the SB!), their successors or groups. During the 1980s and 1990s I contrasted this with moral panic literature which I also study, on into Y2K alarmism.

I'll make a very brief start on the SB, pinpointing outdated aspects and will attempt to identify core principles. The 'Underground Version' seems to be missing a a bit of text, so while I will ignore Introductions and Enochian Calls, I'll refer to my hard text and old notes concurrently.
  • Preface: "Here is Satanic thought from a truly Satanic point of view." Nice.
  • Prologue: It is arguable that there is no way to easily identify all of these 'demon gods of the past' with the left-hand path. One might criticize the repeated and persistent emphasis on light, sparks, and flames which a 'religion of the dark' might seem to rationally prioritize either in comparison or reaction (i.e. the outdatedness of some of its thematic symbolism).
  • Nine Statements: Identifying the rational limit to indulgence, the character of undefiled wisdom, the optimum time for vengeance, and any actualities there may be to spiritual and intellectual development, have proven troublesome for those who took these words to heart. Locking Satan into what Christianity calls 'sins' seems a reactionary and dated choice. Not having come from a Christian background, I cannot see that their embrace is so liberating (quite the opposite in the Satanist subculture).
  • Book of Satan, Infernal Diatribe: Its stark dualism and simplistic evaluation of religion (Christianity in particular) may set the proper context for the following rant, and yet this context is dated. Neopaganism, Dark Paganism, Demonolatry, and other alternatives to Christianity exist, and form a part of that of which Satanism was but a segment of reaction.

    For those of us who weren't raised with the demonizing of nonChristian religions, with testaments, a golden rule, ten commandments, see no reason for redemption, believe in no evil, have been subjected to no dogma, think of Jehovah as some invading warrior god, and have no interest in or understanding of whited sepulchers, this first section is of little use. If we proclaim that might is right, perhaps it serves to underscore this.

    Likewise the second, with its crucifix, prophets, creed, and enthroned lie, as it presents to us nothing new in its testing standard, so its religious detritus seems outdated.

    In its third, more than half of its verses are queries and not well-founded by mere implication. As for the last verses, they underscore an aggressive, hateful principle which some within the Satanist subculture find essential, identifying. Is its spiteful vengeance 'the Law of the Jungle'? Not as I was taught it. Is the supposed respect gained in carrying out this retribution 'in {their} brains and sinews' truly immortal as proclaimed? Hardly. That appeal to immortality, everlastingness, and enduring existence, are outdated also. We who do not fear death and are content with our lot and the influence we shall have in our lives need no principles of 'immortal spirits'. This is a mere displacement upon a greater lie - one that those such as I never bought.

    The fourth, while sound in its pronouncements upon the importance of the present, once more focusses upon Christian religious doctrines for its contrast. I never have understood who needs, or what the value is for, 'redemption', aside from the empty bottles that I 'delivered' to the corner store.

    The fifth is set in the form of the Sermon on the Mount, and therefore dated to those force-fed on its capitulations (I was not). Its 'vassals', 'Messiahs', 'lambs of God', 'righteousness' and 'eternal flame' ... "{dwelling} within the flesh of the Satanist!" are contextual to the Christian or post-Christian culture. Those such as I, had I not steeped myself in and made great effort to unravel the puzzles of these terms I found amongst the religious who seemed so odd and whom I curiously questioned, might never become familiar with what they mean or to what they relate.
Not even touching on 'the core principles'? Perhaps people get this far and determine its character is too anti-Christian or power-glorifying to be interesting or useful to them. Perhaps I'll continue in this thread to evaluate the SB. Maybe someone else will take on the Book of Lucifer. ;\)
_________________________
Troll Towelhead, Grand Mufti of Satanism
http://www.facebook.com/Tr0llT0welhead
http://www.gospel-of-satan.com

Top
#50230 - 03/01/11 02:49 AM Re: Are LaVey's Core SB Principles Outdated? [Re: nocTifer]
XiaoGui17 Offline
active member


Registered: 10/21/09
Posts: 1126
Loc: Amarillo, TX
 Originally Posted By: nocTifer
That nobody seems to have done an annotated version of the SB (see above in this thread), not even online(!) that I can see (compare the dearth of attention to Commentaries on Crowley's scripture by 'Thelemites' - appalling!), and that no such exegesis yet exists, some 50 years after its publication, is perhaps a testimony to its lack of importance as a document, or to the general low intellectual calibre associated to the cultus.


Or, ya know, it might have something to do with it being pretty straightforward in the first place and needing little explanation. That, and those who need it explained to them probably aren't ever going to get it anyway. I'm jes' sayin'.

 Originally Posted By: nocTifer
Identifying the rational limit to indulgence, the character of undefiled wisdom, the optimum time for vengeance, and any actualities there may be to spiritual and intellectual development, have proven troublesome for those who took these words to heart.


Really? I hadn't had that hard of a time.

 Originally Posted By: nocTifer
Neopaganism, Dark Paganism, Demonolatry, and other alternatives to Christianity exist, and form a part of that of which Satanism was but a segment of reaction.


I'm pretty sure that omission wasn't an oversight.

 Originally Posted By: nocTifer
For those of us who weren't raised with the demonizing of nonChristian religions, with testaments, a golden rule, ten commandments, see no reason for redemption, believe in no evil, have been subjected to no dogma, think of Jehovah as some invading warrior god, and have no interest in or understanding of whited sepulchers, this first section is of little use.


I wasn't raised a Christian, but the ideas expressed in the Book of Satan are still invigorating to me. Slave morality pervades every corner of our culture, far beyond the Judeo-Christian paradigm. The idea that selflessness is virtue is widely accepted, even by non-Christians. Christian metaphor and imagery are useful in that they are commonly recognized, so much that New Testament analogies have now become common colloquialisms (blind leading the blind, pearls before swine, straight and narrow, beam in one's eye, etc).

Goodness forbid someone express himself effectively instead of obscurely. Crowley is deliberately esoteric--which is why he requires analysis and explanation. It's a convenient way to be if you want to be the final authority, because you can never contradict yourself if you've said nothing. LaVey is up front enough that anyone who's ready to hear what he has to say can understand without assistance. I'd hardly consider that a failure.
_________________________
Wir halten uns an Regeln, Wenn man uns regeln lässt

Top
#50246 - 03/01/11 08:11 AM Re: Are LaVey's Core SB Principles Outdated? [Re: XiaoGui17]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3812
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
General response -

Satanism was born of it's time, a reaction the same way any other philosophy or religion, including Mr. Kings PS, is a reaction. Nothing is born in a void, and I would wager to say that if not for LaVeys work(and the Satanic subculture that was born of it), no posmodern Satanism, in the same way that if not for the judeo-xian culture of the early 20th century, no TSB.

Everything comes from the last thing(s), nothing is born in a void.

Satanism is a very distinct philosophy, and PS is distinct from THAT. Nothing is superseded, only a new audience catered to. Personally I am of the sort that still finds much value in LaVeys core ideas, and have developed my philosophy on top of them.
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#50254 - 03/01/11 11:03 AM Re: Are LaVey's Core SB Principles Outdated? [Re: Dan_Dread]
Jason King Offline
Banned/Martyrdom Denied
active member


Registered: 10/24/10
Posts: 731
Loc: 65?1%833Q!92A24 (It's a code)
 Originally Posted By: Dan_Dread
General response -

Satanism was born of it's time, a reaction the same way any other philosophy or religion, including Mr. Kings PS, is a reaction. Nothing is born in a void, and I would wager to say that if not for LaVeys work(and the Satanic subculture that was born of it), no posmodern Satanism, in the same way that if not for the judeo-xian culture of the early 20th century, no TSB.

Everything comes from the last thing(s), nothing is born in a void.

Satanism is a very distinct philosophy, and PS is distinct from THAT. Nothing is superseded, only a new audience catered to. Personally I am of the sort that still finds much value in LaVeys core ideas, and have developed my philosophy on top of them.


You are correct to remark (as some guy did a few centuries ago) that there is nothing new under the sun. However, every sunrise brings novelty, which makes for a most interesting panorama. Hence, everything is superceded in a mere lifetime.

Dan, I'm only so good at reading the branching tree in it's lateral extensions, so I don't know if PS would never have occurred without LaVey. I do know that it never would've existed without Bloom, or some other "natural Satanist". LaVey is not that important in my development, honestly. I encountered him early in my life, but he struck me as an empty gong. At that point in my development, Crowley, GD, and the Simonomicon held far more promise.

I've grown up in the last twenty-plus years, but that relative valorization still pretty much holds (except for the fact that I've since substituted even better shit, I guess I did some Supercedin').

JK
_________________________



Top
#50255 - 03/01/11 11:27 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: XiaoGui17]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
 Originally Posted By: XiaoGui17
I think of LaVey like that. Lots of people claim to like him, to the point that he could be considered 'popular,' at least among those who consider themselves Satanists. But what percentage of the folks who name LaVey as an influence actually understand what he had to say?


That's besides the point. It is not because the dumb can't see the obvious, the obvious becomes deep.

Look, I'm not going to diss Lavey here or TSB, some here see it as valuable and if it is to them, who am I to disagree. Like Jake said; if it works, it's good. But the idea that TSB is deep or Lavey is a deep thinker is simply not true. To state it a bit blasphemous but it illustrates my point quite well; Lavey was a deep thinker in the same respect Mickey Mouse was a great actor.

There are parts of the SB or "mashed up" influences one can frown upon and wonder why the hell anyone would try to combine those. It claims being influenced by some thinkers but at the same time shows it didn't know them too well or only picked that what was fitting and disregarded anything conflicting.

Personally I don't think TSB was intended as a deep philosophical work and I also don't think Lavey had those qualities. It was a lighter work, more intended as amusement and such is many of those living by the philosophy. There's nothing wrong with it; they sure could do worse but it simply can't be considered deep.

D.

Top
#50258 - 03/01/11 12:08 PM Re: Are LaVey's Core SB Principles Outdated? [Re: nocTifer]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2521
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: nocTifer
That nobody seems to have done an annotated version of the SB (see above in this thread), not even online(!) that I can see, and that no such exegesis yet exists, some 50 years after its publication, is perhaps a testimony to its lack of importance as a document, or to the general low intellectual calibre associated to the cultus.

The SB, SR. & CW all have fairly extensive analytical chapters to themselves in my Church of Satan. The obstacle to an annotated edition of any of these continues to be its copyright. By comparison, the Crowley copyright was so internationally disputed for so long that all sorts of reprints & annotated editions of his works appeared.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#50290 - 03/01/11 07:29 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Diavolo]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



To Diavolo,

“King tends to assume the popular is also the shallow, and prefers to develop deeper understandings of the obscure. As such, he tends not to see LaVey beyond the surface of popular perception. (I honestly think he does the same with Richard Dawkins.) I take his criticisms of popular figures with a grain of salt.” Xiao

“And he is very right to see it as such. Popular is by definition created for, understood and accepted by the populus, and therefor does not have depth at all, since depth starts there where the popular ends. Mind you, one can still enjoy the popular but anyone considering it deep is by definition of a lower intelligence than the average man considering it obvious.” Diavolo

I would argue that Nietzsche is in fact more popular than LaVey. I think you will find that more of Nietzsche’s books are sold than LaVey’s in a given year.

I would also argue that many more people are reading Nietzsche on college campuses than are reading LaVey.

I would also like to argue that Nietzsche isn’t really even a Satanist. Why? Because Nietzsche does not have a relationship with something called Satan, whether Satan is regarded as a symbol, or as a conscious entity, or as a principle or form etc.

I invite you to provide me with some quotes from Nietzsche works, where he talks about his relationship with Satan.

There is another reason why Nietzsche is not really a true Satanist in my eyes: he does not develop and engage in the religious ritualising and magical practice which is the hallmark of an aware and accomplished Satanist.

What is Nietzsche’s magical practice?

Nietzsche is an aspect of Satanism, his work is drawn on to build something greater, but he is not the great well spring of Satanism – LaVey is. He took the pieces of a jigsaw and then put it together and gave a name to a rare type of human being who has always been.

The real crux of this criticism of LaVey’s work though is, of course, his apparent “simplicity.” A book like The Satanic Bible is intended to be straight forward so a person can identify themselves as a Satanist, or not as a Satanist, and then can act accordingly with some sort of initial guidelines in place. But I personally think you need to take another look at LaVey’s total body of work and at the influences on his work (besides Nietzsche, please) to get a better grasp of his complete thoughts.

To Noc T,

I don’t understand your position.

You use names like NocTifer, or Nagasiva Yronwode and you apparently identify or have a relationship with Kali? Is that correct? I think I read that somewhere and listened to you on a program on The Ooze about it?

If so, then isn’t it also true that this Kali has come from a specific cultural context, a religious/philosophical tradition? Yes?

Why/how is this Kali and its cultural context or religious/philosophical tradition of more value than Satan and the cultural context or religious/philosophical from within which Satan emerged?

How can you deny one and affirm the other and justify that as legitimate, particularly given the fact that the Judeo-Christian system has had so much more impact on our western societies?

How/Why is TSB superseded, but any significant documents/treatises regarding Kali are not?

I honestly don’t think anybody has shown how The Satanic Bible or any of LaVey’s works have been superseded or outdated at all.

Top
#50299 - 03/02/11 12:06 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: ]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



One more post from me in this thread. I apologise if this post is perceived as a simple and obvious one.

I question the assumption that the most powerful message is the most complex message.

The more complex a message is the less people there are who are going to understand it; and the less people there are who can advocate it and explain it correctly.

Again, a complex message will tend to be more misunderstood and more misinterpreted then a simple and straight forward message.

Power and control (in my view) are primarily exercised in a society through messages which name and which define or classify, and which advocate a type of response or action.

Most people (I would argue) tend to believe that Satanist’s are devil worshippers, and many would argue that Satanist’s are criminals who engage in all sorts of illegal activities. Some people would attempt to advocate certain actions be taken against Satanist’s as a result of these claims.

How do you convince people that you are neither a criminal, nor a devil worshipper if this above definition offends you?

How do you explain what Satanism is, so people actually know why you call yourself a Satanist; how you see the world, and what your sets of values may be?

The more complex your message is, the more likely that it is wrong or is going to be misunderstood by both your opponents and even by your supporters.

The more complex your message is, the more likely that your opponents are going to take advantage of you by deliberately twisting and confusing your position so as to gain the support of others.

To have no definition is to desert the field and leave the enemy with a victory.

To rely on a complex definition which is more subject to possible error, misinterpretation and a lack of consensus is to potentially hand the enemy a weapon in their battle to define you and that label which you hold dear.

The Satanic Bible by Dr. LaVey is a simple straightforward book which I think adequately explains what Satanism is and what Satanism is not, and as such it can be relied upon when you need to explain your basic position. Or you can just say: look just read the book.

There is great power in clarity and simplicity in my view, particularly in the battle to explain your position against the enemy. This is one of the reasons why I like the book so much.

Top
#50300 - 03/02/11 12:08 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Diavolo]
XiaoGui17 Offline
active member


Registered: 10/21/09
Posts: 1126
Loc: Amarillo, TX
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
But the idea that TSB is deep or Lavey is a deep thinker is simply not true...Personally I don't think TSB was intended as a deep philosophical work and I also don't think Lavey had those qualities. It was a lighter work, more intended as amusement and such is many of those living by the philosophy. There's nothing wrong with it; they sure could do worse but it simply can't be considered deep.


I don’t think LaVey is especially deep--just deeper than one would initially think if they were to ask the kid at the local Hot Topic to comment on LaVey. I know he’s not exactly Schopenhauer, but there’s a little more to him than “I hate Jesus!”
_________________________
Wir halten uns an Regeln, Wenn man uns regeln lässt

Top
#50304 - 03/02/11 01:12 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: XiaoGui17]
Dave Pellani Offline
Banned. Moron.
pledge


Registered: 02/27/11
Posts: 66
Loc: Hawaii USA
I totally agree. Deep he is not, but intelligent, and crazy like fox. A prankster who loves to play with paradox and people's minds. Actually, what i really like about him is his blunt, straightforward, take no prisoners, no nonsense approach. It a little complicated, but that matches his personality. His message is rather simple. That is what baffles me, how this guy could be so misunderstood.

It just doesn't need to be that complicated. Lay it out, brief and to the point. It makes it much easier for the solitary practitioner. Eventually, one reads, studies, and then one must act and think for himself. I think LaVey lays the groundwork for that very well.
_________________________
Welcome To The Abyss

Top
#50306 - 03/02/11 02:12 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Dave Pellani]
Hegesias Offline
active member


Registered: 02/16/11
Posts: 725
Bare in mind that LaVey was somebody that had not finished explaining things in his mind.

The consciousness does not define a persons depth it is the mirror between objective reality and our Will, desire, and our subjecture. Is perceptual depth what defines a persons depth? his/ her emotional depth? What is this depth you are talking about?

Complexity of character or transparency of character? does this define depth?

An intricate portrayal of a complex mind at work, is this depth? A simplistic portrayal with an object made clear, is this showing depth?

What is depth? The intensity of our mind and heart at the time of expression which is to be received by others?

Even the most complex philosophical thoughts will always stem from a base desire to think them, some of us trace back from complexity and may portray that which is closer to the cause of thought and feeling itself. This applies to Satanism because the root is the simplicity of ourselves, to discover ourselves and trace back from whichever abstractions we are at in the modern world to the source of ourselves—and all that which makes us carnal.

I'm not sure if anyone here was correlating depth with complexity but a deep person would either be they who never arrive at a conclusion always with a gravity towards the deeper meaning, they who also recognise the deeper meaning of things without the need to complicate or embellish these understandings, they are something which cannot be fathomed. Who are these deep people? No person can be understood fully, to think you know somebody is to render oneself conceited and this may be considered as a self rendered shallowness which is unnecessary.

Certainly, I do not consider myself more intelligent than others or deeper than others in any regard of emotional or philosophical terms but that I recognise there are those who are easily distracted from their own emotion, subjective thought, and objectives being tantalised by extrinsic comforts. Most people cannot concentrate on what is intrinsic in their own lives let alone ponder over somebody else's depth that they never even met or ever had a personal esoteric empathic link with.

What is depth? Certainly not anything which can be portrayed in an extrovert sense but something which only personalised contact can recognise? how can anyone assume they have reached the centre of another's dark soul... from reading a book.

However LaVey was just a man. Women are something else.

Insight and simplicity. Depth.
_________________________


Top
#50314 - 03/02/11 06:18 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Hegesias]
Dimitri Offline
stalker


Registered: 07/13/08
Posts: 3119
 Quote:
What is depth? Certainly not anything which can be portrayed in an extrovert sense but something which only personalised contact can recognise? how can anyone assume they have reached the centre of another's dark soul... from reading a book.

The depth of a persons writings and actions does not so much lie within the words and actions itself, but moreover the interpretation and continued thinking of the perceiver of these words and actions.

*While some may find great philosophical depths in LaVey, Myatt, Anton Long, Plato, Nietschze, Aristotles, Rand, Rabelais,....
Others just may find them dull, boring and childish rebels without a cause. It is only to those whose views are more or less in line with the other ones view that depth might be found. The factor of recognition and the ability to mirror ideas to ones own life and position is important to find depth.

*To those that think Anton LaVey's Satanism is outdated it is but an indication that their views might possibly be not in the same line as his. Agreed there might be given various facts like that it was written in the 60ies - 70ies and that a bit of the reactionary or social spirits are embedded along the lines etc...
But as in Satanism as I live it: take out the things which are of relevance and pay respects to those persons who enabeld to steer or helped to form the biggest part of your current views.


* These are more or less general responses and not really adressed to a person in particular.


Edited by Dimitri (03/02/11 06:20 AM)
_________________________
Ut vivat, crescat et floreat

Top
#50319 - 03/02/11 07:38 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Dave Pellani]
XiaoGui17 Offline
active member


Registered: 10/21/09
Posts: 1126
Loc: Amarillo, TX
 Originally Posted By: Dave Pellani
Actually, what i really like about him is his blunt, straightforward, take no prisoners, no nonsense approach... His message is rather simple. That is what baffles me, how this guy could be so misunderstood.

It's not so much hard to understand as it is hard to swallow. ;\)

Ayn Rand was the same way. One of the reasons Atlas Shrugged would break your toe if you dropped it is because Rand got sick of people misunderstanding her message. She made a point of driving her points into the ground, just to make darn sure it wasn't the slightest bit ambiguous...and people still missed the point.

People misinterpret TSB for the same reason they misinterpret the Bible: they don't match it, but they want it to match them.
_________________________
Wir halten uns an Regeln, Wenn man uns regeln lässt

Top
#50322 - 03/02/11 09:34 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: XiaoGui17]
Autodidact Offline
member


Registered: 01/23/10
Posts: 428
 Originally Posted By: XiaoGui17
People misinterpret TSB for the same reason they misinterpret the Bible: they don't match it, but they want it to match them.


Very true. Being able to see things from a point of view not your own; being able to view reality objectively; being able to understand your view/opinions/beliefs may not be correct; being able to actually change them based on improvement or correction; these are all skills that many do not possess.

It's far, far easier and more comforting to mentally whitewash things that don't line up with your current reality tunnel.

A possible contributing factor, I understand, may also be that the skills generally bundled under "liberal arts" seem to have been declining in the teaching curriculum over time. If this is actually true (lots of hearsay, I have not verified myself), then new, young readers of TSB (or the Bible, for that matter) will have less ability to think critically about it, less experience to compare it with, and less of humanity's great literature (much of which deals with human nature) to verify with.
_________________________
An nescis, mi fili, quantilla prudentia mundus regatur?

Top
#50324 - 03/02/11 10:55 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Autodidact]
Fnord Offline
senior member


Registered: 01/11/10
Posts: 2085
Loc: Texas
General Response regarding depth:

I think as far as Satanism is concerned, it's up to the individual to apply the basics and create the depth for themselves (Satanism demands study). Too much framework means too much prescribed dogma and at some point someone is gonna have to make some shit up to fill in the blanks to make it more widely palatable (i.e. every other religion on the planet).

Satanism, i.e. TSB, doesn't attempt to establish itself as a rule book, but is rather an observation of truth that often flies in the face of conventional wisdom (RHP stuff).

At its core it's an observation of the human animal with the false covers stripped off.

If it were any more 'in depth' it might serve to do folks thinkin' for 'em (which would be markedly un-Satanic).
_________________________
Dead and gone. Syonara.

Top
#50325 - 03/02/11 11:24 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: ]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
 Originally Posted By: MatthewJ1
I would argue that Nietzsche is in fact more popular than LaVey. I think you will find that more of Nietzsche’s books are sold than LaVey’s in a given year.

I would also argue that many more people are reading Nietzsche on college campuses than are reading LaVey.

I would also like to argue that Nietzsche isn’t really even a Satanist. Why? Because Nietzsche does not have a relationship with something called Satan, whether Satan is regarded as a symbol, or as a conscious entity, or as a principle or form etc.

I invite you to provide me with some quotes from Nietzsche works, where he talks about his relationship with Satan.

There is another reason why Nietzsche is not really a true Satanist in my eyes: he does not develop and engage in the religious ritualising and magical practice which is the hallmark of an aware and accomplished Satanist.

What is Nietzsche’s magical practice?

Nietzsche is an aspect of Satanism, his work is drawn on to build something greater, but he is not the great well spring of Satanism – LaVey is. He took the pieces of a jigsaw and then put it together and gave a name to a rare type of human being who has always been.

The real crux of this criticism of LaVey’s work though is, of course, his apparent “simplicity.” A book like The Satanic Bible is intended to be straight forward so a person can identify themselves as a Satanist, or not as a Satanist, and then can act accordingly with some sort of initial guidelines in place. But I personally think you need to take another look at LaVey’s total body of work and at the influences on his work (besides Nietzsche, please) to get a better grasp of his complete thoughts.


Being popular implies, in my book, suited or intended for the masses and even when some might vehemently disagree, that is exactly what TSB is. Nietzsche I would not really consider as such. The fact that the masses don't embrace TSB doesn't change the fact that it is written at their level and in their tongue. It is a book for the average person, with this implying someone having an average understanding or average level of knowledge. Of course, as such, it is an ideal introduction to proceed from, but as ever, introductions just introduce. If people consider TSB deep, I seriously wonder what else they read.

I don't think I ever said Nietzsche was a satanist but when looking at his ideas, one can't deny he was more satanic than most other satanic spearheads. He took it to the level it is supposed to be and didn't stop where it got hot. If there is one satanic master out there, it is Freddy. Of course he never considered himself as such and his magical practice, well let's not get into that. As is well known, I find magic a tool for the weak and the greater it gets, the weaker it appears. Not intending to insult anyone but I can't look at it without thinking; go out there and get your hands dirty instead of praying in a funny manner.

Of course when it solely resides in the realm of amusement or personal exploration, I am not bothered at all. Then it's almost action-meditation. Even when that's not my thing, I can see the value it can have to others.

I have taken enough looks at Lavey's work and it doesn't change my opinion; it is not for me. If it is the thing others prefer, have a go at it, but don't try to convince me it is the Best of the West. I don't see that.

Btw, the fact that you ask if Nietzsche ever called himself a satanist, makes me wonder if you consider Satanism solely a matter of labeling and as such, begs the question if you think satanists ever existed before TSB.

D.

Top
#50327 - 03/02/11 11:31 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: XiaoGui17]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
 Originally Posted By: XiaoGui17
I don’t think LaVey is especially deep--just deeper than one would initially think if they were to ask the kid at the local Hot Topic to comment on LaVey. I know he’s not exactly Schopenhauer, but there’s a little more to him than “I hate Jesus!”


Mind you, I think Lavey was excellent at what he did and what he created was a darn great product. I'm not arguing that or him.

It's like thinking "Rambo" is a great movie; there is nothing wrong with it but when people start to say "Rambo" is about the deepest philosophical cinema there is, others will say "oh really?"

Of course the typical Hot Topic Teen will not know much about Lavey or understand it, often not because he doesn't get it but because all he knows about it are some fragments or second hand information. Reading books isn't what many consider a fruitful pastime any longer. But the same goes for Nietzsche; I'd bet of all satanists wielding the inevitable Nietzsche quotes or parts, only a minority has read or is reasonable familiar with his ideas.

D.

Top
#50329 - 03/02/11 12:30 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: ]
Autodidact Offline
member


Registered: 01/23/10
Posts: 428
 Originally Posted By: MatthewJ1
Power and control (in my view) are primarily exercised in a society through messages which name and which define or classify, and which advocate a type of response or action.

Most people (I would argue) tend to believe that Satanist’s are devil worshippers, and many would argue that Satanist’s are criminals who engage in all sorts of illegal activities. Some people would attempt to advocate certain actions be taken against Satanist’s as a result of these claims.

How do you convince people that you are neither a criminal, nor a devil worshipper if this above definition offends you?

How do you explain what Satanism is, so people actually know why you call yourself a Satanist; how you see the world, and what your sets of values may be?


Communication has at least two processes, transmitting and receiving. The receiver filters the message through their current world view/understanding/beliefs/etc.

As you said, most people as the receiver believe Satanists are devil worshipers and criminals. When you tell them you are a Satanist, what do you suppose is the mental model they're going to immediately jump to?

To do so is to start behind; for those who work solely on their own belief or understanding, it is to have already lost the discussion, as they have already permanently classified you. For all others, it's an uphill battle just to get back level, because you are not using the same vocabulary - "Satanist" means two different things.

If communicating to someone else (not a Satanist) your beliefs and philosophies is really that important, leave the word "Satanist" until the end of the discussion - it'll save you both a lot of time.
_________________________
An nescis, mi fili, quantilla prudentia mundus regatur?

Top
#50342 - 03/02/11 03:54 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Diavolo]
XiaoGui17 Offline
active member


Registered: 10/21/09
Posts: 1126
Loc: Amarillo, TX
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
Of course the typical Hot Topic Teen will not know much about Lavey or understand it, often not because he doesn't get it but because all he knows about it are some fragments or second hand information. Reading books isn't what many consider a fruitful pastime any longer. But the same goes for Nietzsche; I'd bet of all satanists wielding the inevitable Nietzsche quotes or parts, only a minority has read or is reasonable familiar with his ideas.


Quite true. I knew a guy who (on his MySpace page) listed some of his favorite authors as Sun Tzu, Machiavelli, and Herman Melville. Turns out, he hadn't read any of them; he picked up the reading list from Tupac and copy-pasted it onto his profile. He also had a (bad, cheaply done) tattoo of Nefertiti on his chest (because Tupac did), but he couldn't even recall her name, much less her significance.

Sometimes people will name-drop anything if they think it will help them look cool/get laid...
_________________________
Wir halten uns an Regeln, Wenn man uns regeln lässt

Top
#50343 - 03/02/11 05:06 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: XiaoGui17]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
 Originally Posted By: XiaoGui17

Sometimes people will name-drop anything if they think it will help them look cool/get laid...


Hey, baby... Thomas Jefferson. George Washington. Colonel Sanders. Barney the Dinosaur. Are you horny yet???
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#50368 - 03/02/11 09:40 PM Re: Are LaVey's Core SB Principles Outdated? [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered




To Dr. Aquino,

Can I ask you some questions if you have time?

You have been on Geraldo and Oprah over the years, have given interviews and appeared on radio programs with Christian’s and other people etc. etc.

How does someone publicly represent Satanism? How did you do it, particularly during the period prior to the 1975 crisis and during the later “Satanic Panic” period?

Did you find that you needed a reasonably fixed definition of what Satanism is or was in order to defend yourself, or Satanism, or to make people understand what you were trying to say?

Did you find that your opponents or your audience had many pre-conceived negative ideas about what Satanism was? How did you attempt to change their point of view?

If I remember correctly you and Dr. LaVey are/were firm supporters of Professor Szasz. I tend to agree with Szasz when he talks about the power of definition. Do you think that Szasz’s comments on the power of definition are relevant to Satanism today?

Top
#50375 - 03/02/11 11:57 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Diavolo]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



To Diavolo,

I do think Satanist’s existed before TSB, though I don’t think many of those people explicitly adopted the name of Satanist. I think TSB describes a certain type of person. I also think it provides the right sort of person with some tools they can start to use and explore.

I do think highly of TSB and feel that the definition of Satanism and of a Satanist is included inside that book.

I feel that there is a fixed definition of Satanism and the only way one can call Nietzsche or anybody Satanic is to assess the person and their actions/words against the standard or definition of Satanism set down. Again, one needs to have a fairly firm definition of Satanism from the outset to determine whether someone or something is Satanic.

(You will get no argument from me on the quality of Nietzsche's thinking. He was profound, Freud was right about him.)

Top
#50391 - 03/03/11 11:40 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: ]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
 Originally Posted By: MatthewJ1
Again, one needs to have a fairly firm definition of Satanism from the outset to determine whether someone or something is Satanic.


But of course not, just watching how a person behaves or acts is often enough to know. People are so fixated on definitions that Satanism is slowly sliding into this "mental construct" where being one or not, seems to solely depend upon what one says or prefers while the actuality of Satanism is only, and I'll repeat that; only proven through ones deeds.

No matter how intelligent or "true" one sounds, when they lead a life of averageness, they never understood the point.

D.

Top
#50407 - 03/03/11 04:06 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Diavolo]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



Okay, one last post from me in this thread.

I'm sorry but you do assume a definition when you determine that living fully, or that certain acts, behaviours, and deeds constitute a Satanic lifestyle. Even a Christian assumes that they are living fully as well.

But anyway to each their own. Cheers

Top
#50408 - 03/03/11 04:13 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: ]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
No need to not continue, I don't mind the differences in our views.

I don't assume a definition because what I recognize in others (what we practically call satanic in this argument) is a resemblance to what I am. And as such, no definition is needed since I myself am the criteria to define what the other is or is not.

D.

Top
#50409 - 03/03/11 04:23 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: ]
Caladrius Offline
member


Registered: 07/25/09
Posts: 318
Loc: SoCal
 Originally Posted By: MatthewJ1


I'm sorry but you do assume a definition when you determine that living fully, or that certain acts, behaviours, and deeds constitute a Satanic lifestyle.


Cause & Effect maybe?

You first skate board. The subculture of skaters manifests from this Action/deed. Afterwards a definition may follow.

You first Surf. A subculture of Surfing may manifest from this action/deed. Afterwards a definition may follow that Describes.

A person may be gay. Live the "lifestyle." A subculture will manifest from such "lifestyle." A definition of this "lifestyle" may later develop to Describe it.

In all three cases, if there is a definition of the memeplex, it is a definition which describes what a group of people already do naturally when left to their own devices.

When you work backwards and first create a definition, then forced oneself or others to obey or follow that definition or they are "fake/false/heathen/infidel/etc" then that definition is no longer Descriptive of one's Nature or another's Nature. It becomes an Imposition, Assertion, a forcing of oneself or others to follow.

Is Satanism something that comes Naturally to a Satanist or is it a set of defined principles that is imposed or that one must follow to be a Satanist?


Edited by Caladrius (03/03/11 04:24 PM)
_________________________
.:.gone fishing.:.

Top
#50412 - 03/03/11 06:02 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Diavolo]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



Thank you for your invitation. I will add a couple more posts if you like.

Sometimes it can be difficult to judge the emotion behinds someone’s writing.

I also find that I don’t have that much time during the day, so I usually only post once or twice a day, if at all.

I do indeed think that living authentically and significantly (whatever those terms may mean to each individual) is a cornerstone of what it means to be Satanic.

I also tend to agree with the notion that an individual who has consciously and deliberately declined to blindly follow socially imposed rules, or tablets of good and evil, and who has taken personal responsibility for their choices, and as a result have achieved their own sense of Godhood, is in a position to determine whether someone or something is Satanic, as per their judgement, or their perceived commonality with the individual, thing or action in question.

The question is: how does this godlike individual come to see him or herself as specifically Satanic, rather than as something else?

Another question I have at this time: how does one become a member of the 600 Club for instance?

There must be some sort of commonly held position in order for any sort of community to arise, while acknowledging that a Satanic community may be an oxymoron or a myth or whatever.

Consider the notion of a new member – a male in this case. How does this person go from just living his life, to identifying his specific way of living as Satanic? He surely must go through a process of naming himself, of adopting this word Satanist after identifying himself with others who have already adopted this name and have communicated with him in some form?

Surely he must start by already being a Satanist, of already living as a Satanist, but at some stage he will become aware that his way of living has been described as Satanic by someone else who shares his clarity and his courage.

I feel that The Satanic Bible by Dr. LaVey is the book which people primarily use to identify themselves as Satanist’s, and as such it has not been superseded by any other form of mirror.

Maybe others will identify themselves as Satanist’s through other means – I wish them well with that.

Top
#50415 - 03/03/11 08:47 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: ]
Followingme. Offline
lurker


Registered: 02/09/11
Posts: 2
We must ultimately remember that Anton LaVey knows what he is doing. The very fact that he appeared with Ernest Borgnine in the Devil's Rain is testimony to his awareness and discernment. But, the thing is, as Boyd Rice has stated, the Apocalypse that the bible seesms to prophecy is actually going on right now. Anton LaVey, we may assume, is a REAL DEVIL when it comes to planning and strategies...
Top
#50422 - 03/04/11 02:09 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Diavolo]
Dave Pellani Offline
Banned. Moron.
pledge


Registered: 02/27/11
Posts: 66
Loc: Hawaii USA
Actually, in your analogy here you make some very good points about magickal practices. The only way to "understand" the methodology of the sorcerer is to practice it, then share the experience and validation with others, if you should so desire.. Other than that, intellectualizing or ridiculing it is pointless. Nothing wrong with intellectualizing in general, it broadens your horizons, and creates a deeper thought process and a wider open mind. But to the sorcerer, you are not so much interested in public opinion or debate, or theory, especially theory that is not practiced by the theoreticist, who tends to just conceptualize everything, as you are the outcome of your own magickal will and skill, and how that actually works for out for you.

What comes to manifestation is what you could call "proof of the pudding" There are so many signs of magickal workings and their outcome and ability to control the environment around you, just on that front alone, not to mention many others, that makes it more than enough validation that your "connection" to sentient beings is indeed real, and the ability to work with their powers. It can't be psychosis or delusion once you get to that level.

One illustration would be what the typical philospher might consider "co incidence" Well, I thnk we all experience that to a certain degree, where it tends NOT to be frequent. However, where I depart from the realm of co incidence, or "chance" and into the the realm of will to manifestation is when so many things are happening, and falling into a pattern of desired outcome through ritual, it can't possibly be all by chance. Then you have to look around and say; Fuck, there is something pretty dynamic and astounding going on here, Etc Etc.


Edited by Dave Pellani (03/04/11 02:10 AM)
_________________________
Welcome To The Abyss

Top
#50429 - 03/04/11 01:59 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: ]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
 Originally Posted By: MatthewJ1
The question is: how does this godlike individual come to see him or herself as specifically Satanic, rather than as something else?

Another question I have at this time: how does one become a member of the 600 Club for instance?

There must be some sort of commonly held position in order for any sort of community to arise, while acknowledging that a Satanic community may be an oxymoron or a myth or whatever.


Behind my writing, expect hardly any emotion at all, I just say my thing fully realizing it is my thing and not intending to force it to be yours.

The question is "why call it satanic?" indeed. There is a difference, as has been mentioned by others and me before, between serving the memeplex and letting the memeplex serve you. This means that while Satanism is an identity to many, and as such, defining what they are, to others it is a means to an end and instead of it defining them, it is a deliberately chosen representation suitable to accomplish intended goals.

As I said before, I judge others upon a similarity to what I am. Satanists share some of those similarities. The very reason I joined the 600, ages ago, was because there was this similarity; not always in what they think as in how they think. It is not that I had a predefined definition of what I am and as such, found people that completely matched that, as that some of those people had more in common with me than others.

Again, there is no clear definition and as you can observe, many of us old-timers are quite different in what we prefer, believe or even like, and it is pretty hard to define Satanism as such that it would fit us all. At least when using the standard definitions of what Satanism is, or is not.

I understand people prefer a clear definition on what it is but the question one should ask oneself is; why does that matter to them? In the answer, you'll often find who is serving or letting serve the memeplex.

D.

Top
#50433 - 03/04/11 03:35 PM SB Analyzed for Outdatedness [Re: XiaoGui17]
nocTifer Offline
pledge


Registered: 11/07/09
Posts: 87
Loc: Khazakstan
Always a pleasure to exchange thoughts with you on topics of relevance, XiaoGui17.
 Originally Posted By: XiaoGui17
I wasn't raised a Christian, but the ideas expressed in the Book of Satan are still invigorating to me.

Excellent. I am not arguing that they will serve nobody at all. The problem with exaggerated evaluations such as 'outdated' is that they provide no contextual delimiter or aim for which we might consider this qualitative assessment. We should be asking 'Outdated for what purpose?' or '...from the standpoint of what cutural background?', for example. Obviously for someone like me, who is differently opposed to Christianity (such that I don't want or need it to be part of my theology, my special documents, have sought to revolutionize the whole of the cosmos to my liking in exaggerated opposition to its bases), the SB isn't just outdated, it is ill-fitted, since it participates in or comes from a place that I never have. Therefore when I provide an evaluation of whether or not it seems outdated, my reaction is an extreme which does not apply to people like you and I greatly appreciate your contrast of opinion here. So be it. Next we may attempt to determine if you are exemplary of an important cross-section or segment of some society (US/American I presume), and whether those who are coming to Satanism are as well-served as ever by this document and its contents.

 Originally Posted By: XiaoGui17
Slave morality pervades every corner of our culture, far beyond the Judeo-Christian paradigm.

With the empowerment of the individual, the stratification of the cosmos in perceptual filtration, the artificial encapsulation by choice of one's engagements, and globalizing elements of culture breaking down morality, etc., for more and more of us that to which you are referring ceases to be a problem. I suspect that for those who are hooked into certain cultures, those interested and tuned into Fox News or general network television for example, or those who live in the US Bible Belt, this must certainly seem ubiquitous, even though it is not. Where I live in rural California it does not, and yet perhaps this new 'Wild West' burgeons forth the lifeblood of Satanism whether or not it is proclaimed and associates to Bibles.

With my exploration of religion I have stopped thinking of "a Judeo-Christian paradigm" as in any sense real. There are sets of paradigms promoted by these religious, often mutually contradictory. It is this notion in part also to what I was referring by 'outdated', since insofar as it is featured in the SB (and we might issue this criticism about Satanism as a whole), it seems to play to those who believe in such a monolith (a fictitious one propped up by conservative Abrahamic religious, by my assessment).

 Originally Posted By: XiaoGui17
The idea that selflessness is virtue is widely accepted, even by non-Christians. Christian metaphor and imagery are useful in that they are commonly recognized, so much that New Testament analogies have now become common colloquialisms (blind leading the blind, pearls before swine, straight and narrow, beam in one's eye, etc).

This is an excellent observation as to the text's value, though it may suppose that these phrases aren't proliferating new meanings through time. Examining the multiplying meanings for colloquialisms (see 'turn the other cheek' for a very eye-opening example of the capacity for culture to twist and tease out multitudinous meanings to terms and catch-phrases), we can observe the repercussion of Protestant struggles amongst smaller and smaller cults using these terms and phrases as bludgeons of plied rhetoric, and endorsing at their most liberal the individual interpretation of not only scripture, but of deity and one's relationship to it. Contrary to dogmatic or simplistic anti-Christianity, there are liberating aspects of most aged and expansive religious systems.

What with the development of state religions, and Abrahamic contention, there are discernments even about FOR WHAT one throws away one's life or will as part of a 'virtuous or noble cause'. The vague or simple idea of 'selflessness' is at base undermined insofar as one may be discerned as being 'misled by the wayward', a 'tool of the wicked'. Several rallying alternatives to this 'selfless virtue' may be found not the least of which is that 'the road to Hell is paved with good intentions!'

All of that said, your emphasis here on what might be called 'the call to selfishness as virtue' (if it can be seen through the exortations of Christian and anti-Christian terminology, most of that for which i care little except to put it in its cultural and historical place and leave it where it was found, not to retain it as a lasting aspect of Satanity!!) is a good one. We might ask, perhaps along with those who favour the expressions of Ayn Rand, whether less polemical and religious contributions such as The Art of Selfishness, The Act of Will, or any number of New Thought sources beyond the rudiments of Crowley could substitute for what is otherwise mired in struggles with Pauline and Synoptic idiocy.

 Originally Posted By: XiaoGui17
...LaVey is up front enough that anyone who's ready to hear what he has to say can understand without assistance. I'd hardly consider that a failure.

We're not really discussing failure, to my knowledge. The more vague 'outdated' quality could be clarified by an analysis of what makes a thing outdated, for whom, for use toward what ends, etc., etc., and this is not likely to be done anytime sooner than 'scriptural' exegesis. I'll lend my effort in part to it all, and hope to demonstrate my service to Satanians thereby. Thank you for your excellent responses and criticisms.
_________________________
Troll Towelhead, Grand Mufti of Satanism
http://www.facebook.com/Tr0llT0welhead
http://www.gospel-of-satan.com

Top
#50435 - 03/04/11 04:04 PM Satanic Scripture Exegesis and Analysis [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
nocTifer Offline
pledge


Registered: 11/07/09
Posts: 87
Loc: Khazakstan
 Originally Posted By: Michael A.Aquino
The SB, SR. & CW all have fairly extensive analytical chapters to themselves in my Church of Satan.

Thank you for pointing this out, Doctor Aquino. I was aware of it, and mentioned your book in my post as of substantial assistance in coming to an evaluation of the SB. I did not seek to downplay your contribution in the slightest, and think it should form the basis of an entire sociocultural and temporal analysis that extends in many different directions.

I was attempting to contrast in part what has been done within extensive religious systems among multiple authors and specialists both inside and outside of religious contexts even in some cases with very recent scripture, and lamenting the lack of attention that these texts (including yours in reflection) have received given that they are truly of import to those supporting them. I do not conclude entirely along the lines of my latter option, that Satanity is comprised of the unintelligent, and yet the reactionary and turn-over quality of it, as compared to something like Scientology or Zen Buddhism, seems to predispose it to certain uses that make scripture at times completely unimportant or decentralised (as compared, say, to the lyrics of Mayhem, Morbid Angel, or King Diamond, or indeed to whatever scripture that one may oneself write; compare yours in The Book of Coming Forth By Night or my own in The Gospel of Satan).

Along with others, I join in congratulating you on what you have put out so far, and, as I think I implied to you privately, what draws my greatest enthusiasm (primarily due to my fondness for the genre to which I hope to have contributed meagerly) is what I am greatly enjoying right now reading: your text The Dark Side, after finishing Wicked by Maguire. I look forward to completing this and then moving on to The Morlindalë. To me, this relates more properly to scripture that I have found inspirational (probably because I like dramas as part of religious fiction, from many of the Jesus stories to those of the Buddha and beyond). One day I hope to put together an essay evaluating the originals as compared to the narrative alternatives so constructed and your work will be afforded a special place within it.

 Originally Posted By: Michael A.Aquino
The obstacle to an annotated edition of any of these continues to be its copyright. By comparison, the Crowley copyright was so internationally disputed for so long that all sorts of reprints & annotated editions of his works appeared.

Excellent discernment and point. Did Crowley's Commentaries themselves feature as a bone of legal contention? I know that Motta, Grant and Regardie all published versions. I've not ever heard a request to take down web-versions of these expressions, and would be in a position to have received one (moreso it was about secret documents, sex magic, etc.).
_________________________
Troll Towelhead, Grand Mufti of Satanism
http://www.facebook.com/Tr0llT0welhead
http://www.gospel-of-satan.com

Top
#50437 - 03/04/11 05:28 PM Re: Satanic Scripture Exegesis and Analysis [Re: nocTifer]
nocTifer Offline
pledge


Registered: 11/07/09
Posts: 87
Loc: Khazakstan
 Originally Posted By: Michael A.Aquino
The SB, SR. & CW all have fairly extensive analytical chapters to themselves in my Church of Satan.

Beyond that already mentioned, here is the detail, as I could summarize it, of what may be referenced within that text inclusive of what lies beyond the chapters you mention, for the interested:
SB Chapter 5, Appendices 1, 10-13
SR Chapter 22, Appendices 2-7, 20, 44, 63, 68-75
CW/SW Chapter 9, Appendices 18, 23-24, 145
_________________________
Troll Towelhead, Grand Mufti of Satanism
http://www.facebook.com/Tr0llT0welhead
http://www.gospel-of-satan.com

Top
#50440 - 03/04/11 09:16 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Diavolo]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2521
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
It's like thinking "Rambo" is a great movie; there is nothing wrong with it but when people start to say "Rambo" is about the deepest philosophical cinema there is, others will say "oh really?"

That's only because they haven't personally experienced M60 machine gun nirvana, which is a profoundly enlightening experience, not to mention instantly leveling the karma of all receivers of its Truth.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#50442 - 03/04/11 10:11 PM Re: Are LaVey's Core SB Principles Outdated? [Re: ]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2521
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: MatthewJ1
How does someone publicly represent Satanism? How did you do it, particularly during the period prior to the 1975 crisis and during the later “Satanic Panic” period?

It depends upon the audience and the environment (interviewer, other participants, interview context). You have to tailor your response to all of the above, but at all times remember that you're communicating to the audience, not to the environment.

In the average media interview situation, the audience may take away perhaps 5% of what is said, so you need to decide in advance what that 5% should be and emphasize it.

As I have pointed out previously on the 600C, for the overwhelming majority of people on this planet, "Satanism" = "the worst possible kind of evil". Most don't have any idea about it beyond what they see in horror films. So my most essential 5%-point was that "our [the Church of Satan's] Satanism has nothing to do with that kind of behavior, but is a positive, law-abiding religion in its own right". If that point could be gotten across in a general-audience situation, it was successful.

The more sophisticated and pre-informed the audience, of course, the more you could depart from this basic theme. In my Church of Satan appendices there are many examples of more complex & interesting discussions, both verbal and in print, by Anton, myself, and other Satanists. Anton also enjoyed responding to questions in the context of his own character, experiences, and artistry. I on the other hand was [and have remained] very averse to this and prefer to keep discussions impersonal and abstract.

I learned to be very careful about humor, because it can easily be misunderstood as insensitivity or insult, particularly by people who are already frightened of you. Satanism to me was as comfortable as an old pair of Levis, while to many people it is their worst nightmare come to life. In the late 1980s Stephen Flowers and I were invited to Killeen, Texas to discuss Satanism before an auditorium full of law-enforcement officers from several states. For what I thought was "fun" I started it out with a film clip of the main ritual scene from The Devil's Rain. When I turned the lights on and was about to comment on Hollywood imagination, I was startled to see looks of sheer horror on most of the audience. I had to say "McHale's Navy" and "Star Trek" several times to cut through it.

All of the above is why I have said that unless you are absolutely dedicated to Satan and Satanism, and adamant that nothing less reflects who and what you truly are, you should not call yourself a "Satanist". Out in the world beyond the original Church of Satan, or this 600C, it will just do you far more damage than it will bring you pleasure. [As my father used to say: "Sometimes the fucking you get is not worth the fucking you take."]

 Quote:
If I remember correctly you and Dr. LaVey are/were firm supporters of Professor Szasz. I tend to agree with Szasz when he talks about the power of definition. Do you think that Szasz’s comments on the power of definition are relevant to Satanism today?

Of course. That's once again what that 5% is all about. But remember that in the case of "Satanism" where most people are concerned, you're dealing with a subrational emotional image, not a rational/reasoned definition. This is what Stephen and I had reinforced to us in Killeen.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#50443 - 03/04/11 10:47 PM Re: Are LaVey's Core SB Principles Outdated? [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


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

All of the above is why I have said that unless you are absolutely dedicated to Satan and Satanism, and adamant that nothing less reflects who and what you truly are, you should not call yourself a "Satanist". Out in the world beyond the original Church of Satan, or this 600C, it will just do you far more damage than it will bring you pleasure. [As my father used to say: "Sometimes the fucking you get is not worth the fucking you take."]


You and I will probably agree to disagree on many things during our lives, but here, "truer words was never spoked." You want to represent, you'd better be on top of your game... ALWAYS.
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#50505 - 03/05/11 11:08 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Dave Pellani Offline
Banned. Moron.
pledge


Registered: 02/27/11
Posts: 66
Loc: Hawaii USA
Dr. Aquino, you’re up to your old tricks again, addressing such thought provoking questions to us. If I were to come up with a short answer to that question, I would answer yes, and no.

As I sit down to write this, I am greeted by a monster flash of a lightning bolt, and thunder, and a driving rainstorm, perhaps a sign of Satan’s blessing upon what you do, or a spinoff of the 12 Dreams of Dr. Sardonicus.

I put a little more thought into this over some morning coffee, and it seems to me that the influence of scholars such as Nietzsche on the advancement of Satanism is relatively undisputable, although I think he had a mundane, extreme and limited view in terms of how to get beyond the dogma and moralistic delusions of Judeo Christianity, as though they had invented the concept of “god” themselves, while he hints at the relevance of the gods of other cultures. Unfortunately, I think he may have confused as many seekers as he enlightened. Although he was a brilliant visionary, and there is a great deal to be learned from him, beyond a shadow of a doubt.

I would say no to your question, because of the timeless nature of the traditions that LaVey spoke of, which, to a certain extent, cannot be out dated. I think the same could be said of Crowley, although, when I read the Book of the Law, or Equinox of the Gods, sometimes I am left with more questions than answers, which is thought provoking, enlightening, and invigorating in it’s own rite, and a fair enough challenge to discern. But a 180 from the straight forward approach undertaken by LaVey. It’s pretty obvious that there is little to no comparison between these authors.

I would say yes to the point of drawing an analogy between LaVey’s vision with that of the esotericism of the Temple of Set. In that sense, perhaps LaVey had one too many self imposed limitations as a teacher of the Black Arts. But he always seems to end up compensating for it, somehow. The information age has provided us with a great many supplemental tools with which to further expand our horizons. The TOS has obviously evolved into an advanced, multi dimensional portal to the expansion of the methodolgy envisioned by LaVey. It is one thing to be an individualist, as you make some very interesting and fascinating points in your book, Church of Satan, and your associates on the Temple of Set website, as to the negative effects of excessive, exaggerated, out of control egocentricity, self absorption, and indulgence. Clearly, these attributes were too much for some of the CoS establishment to balance, or juggle, if you will. And you do point out, rather eloquently, that LaVey did not bear sole responsibility for the failure of the organization to flourish as he originally intended. At least, I would assume that he originally intended it to flourish. You would know that better than anyone.

But, by and large, I suggest to anyone that if you want to understand what Satanism really is, look no further than the “Church of Satan


Edited by Dave Pellani (03/05/11 11:10 PM)
_________________________
Welcome To The Abyss

Top
#50507 - 03/06/11 01:22 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Dave Pellani]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2521
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: Dave Pellani
Dr. Aquino, you’re up to your old tricks again, addressing such thought provoking questions to us ...

Assuming that you're referring to the thread question, it was Fnord's, not mine. Just tossed my 2¢ in along the way. \:\)
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#50523 - 03/06/11 07:55 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



Thanks for your response Dr. Aquino. It was thought provoking post.

I don’t want to move this thread too far away from its original intention, but I was thinking about the notion of Hollywood’s imagination and the way Satanism has been represented in mainstream film.

I am interested in the way a certain definition of Satanism has been expressed visually. And particularly the representation of the definition of Satanism maintained by the early Church.

The question: has any mainstream film ever nailed an accurate representation of Satanism?

I recall reading in the CoS ebook about the Church’s general reaction to a film like The Exorcist, which was such a funny and reactionary/hysterical sort of thing; and a film like Rosemary’s Baby, which had a seemingly more mundane, and yet more sophisticated sort of feel to it, and actually a far more frightening impact. I certainly feel there is a differing definition of Satanism underpinning each movie.

I tend to like the old LaVey favourites, such as the film noir and German Expressionist movies, like the original Scarface, The Sea Wolf, Scarlet Street and Metropolis etc.

I know these films are old and rather neglected, but they still seem to sum up something essential regarding Satanism. I feel they form an important part of what Dr. LaVey had to say and they illustrate his codification of Satanism.

(The Gangster appears to have been re-released! I have been snooping around at Amazon for about 12 months now, hoping that this film would come back. Good times!)

(Thanks to Diavolo and Jake for their thought provoking posts as well.)

Top
#50531 - 03/06/11 11:26 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: ]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2521
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: MatthewJ1
The question: has any mainstream film ever nailed an accurate representation of Satanism?

Well, let's start with these:

 Originally Posted By: Temple of Set Reading List, Category #6: Satanism
F6A. The Devil’s Rain. 1975. MA: “In 1974 CE Robert Fuest, who directed the Dr. Phibes films, decided to film a horror movie with Satanism as its theme. He took an anemic novel about Wiccan-witchcraft in New England and hired Anton LaVey as technical advisor to spice it up, which he did - adding touches of LaVey artwork, Mexican extras chanting Enochian Keys, and ‘Satanic Priest’ Ernest Borgnine intoning extracts from the invocation in my ‘Ceremony of the Nine Angles’ in #6L. The setting was moved to Durango, Mexico (‘Redstone’), and the colorful cast included Ida Lupino, William Shatner [just before the Star Trek movie revival], John Travolta [his screen debut - a fight & fall downstairs], and cameos for Anton (a gold-helmeted Priest) and Diane (Borgnine’s colonial-era wife) LaVey. While the film was [and is] lots of fun for those in the know about all this, it bombed at the box office and is today only rarely shown on television. See discussion in #6N.”

F6B. Asylum of Satan. 1975. Charles Kissinger, Carla Borelli. DVD: “Something Weird Video” #ID1598SWDVDMA: “Around 1971CE, when I was Priest III° of the C/S Nineveh Grotto in Louisville, Kentucky, a local commercial film company decided to try for the big time by making a Satanic horror movie - using local theatrical talent. Since they had a Church of Satan in town, they asked us if we would handle the ritual scene. I wrote the script, Nineveh designed the chamber, and we imported the Rosemary’s Baby devil-suit [with a new head] from Hollywood. The result of all this was a turkey of a movie with, if I say so, a rather zesty ritual sequence. The company is no longer in existence, but somehow this thing survived as a videocassette - and later, in 2002, as a digitally-remastered, widescreen DVD, complete with a commentary by the original filmmakers which is at least as charming as the film itself Dry-ice, rubber snakes & bugs, and plaid trousers on the hero will all scare you frightfully. See discussion in #6N.”

F6C. The Devil Rides Out. Hammer Films, 1968. Screenplay by Richard Matheson. Director: Terence Fisher. Christopher Lee. (LVT-2) MA: “Probably one of the best Hammer films ever made - now available in a Hammer Collection DVD (Anchor Bay #DV10666). It is a very accurate screenplay of Dennis Wheatley’s first and most famous Satanism novel. Look for Charles Gray’s silky-evil portrayal of Mocata, the character whom Wheatley specifically modeled after Aleister Crowley, an acquaintance of his. [One other Wheatley Satanism novel, To the Devil a Daughter, was also made into a film, but it is a ghastly mess which bears no comparison to the book. Wheatley’s novels are generally available in British editions, with occasional American publication. Other novels in his ‘Satanism’ series include The Satanist, They Used Dark Forces, and The Ka of Gifford Hillary.”

F6D. Fade to Black. 1983. Dennis Christopher and Linda Kerridge, Mickey Rourke. Director: Vernon Zimmerman. MA: “In the flavor of Anger’s Hollywood Babylon books, this is a horror movie about a young, aliented film buff, Eric Binford, who, in a different application of lycanthropy, assumes various characters from classic films to give himself ‘their powers’. Readers of #6N will recognize the parallels to the 1974+ interests of Anton LaVey, to include the presence of Marilyn Monroe as Eric’s ideal woman and ‘death angel’.”

F6E. Rosemary’s Baby. 1968. Mia Farrow, John Cassavetes, Ruth Gordon, Sidney Blackmer, Maurice Evans, Ralph Bellamy. Produced by William Castle. Directed by Roman Polanski. MA: “This film is so well known to contemporary Satanists that little need be said. After the smash success of the novel, Polanski filmed it with virtually no modifications whatever. Contrary to rumor, Anton LaVey did not play the part of the Devil in it, but consulted briefly with Polanski in Los Angeles before the film was shot at the Dakota building in New York City. Unusual music by Christopher Komeda, who died shortly afterwards. Chocolate mousse was added to Levin’s story because of the excellent CM at the ‘Ile de France’ restaurant across West 72nd from the Dakota - where the Priesthood had a dinner meeting at the 3rd Eastern Conclave of the C/S at Halloween 1972. See further discussion in #6N.”

F6F. The Abominable Dr. Phibes. 1971. Vincent Price, Joseph Cotten, Hugh Griffith, Terry-Thomas. Director: Robert Fuest. MA: “A campy horror movie with Price as a disfigured ex-vaudevillain (nice pun) seeking vengeance against a team of physicians he believes responsible for the death of his wife. What makes the movie is the lush atmosphere of Art Nouveau/Art Deco with which Phibes surrounds himself in the magical ‘universe’ he has created for himself. See further discussion in #6N.”

F6G. Dr. Phibes Rises Again. 1972. Vincent Price, Robert Quarry, Terry-Thomas. Director: Robert Fuest. MA: “The success of #F6F prompted this sequel, even more lavish than the original. Phibes travels to Egypt in search of the river of immortality, dispatching assorted inconvenient archæologists and policemen on the way. See further discussion in #6N.”

F6H. The Brotherhood of Satan. 1971. Strother Martin, L.Q. Jones. MA: “After the success of Rosemary’s Baby, Hollywood floundered around trying to capitalize on the Satanism theme with a couple of failures like The Mephisto Waltz. #F6H was the first film to start ‘getting it right’, and it was the brainchild of a little-known producer/director, L.Q. Jones, who also starred as the sheriff in the film. Strother Martin plays a surprisingly effective Satanic Priest.”

F6I. The Black Cat. Universal, 1934. Boris Karloff, Bela Lugosi. MA: “A remarkable essay in Art Deco/Satanism starring Karloff as the Satanist and Lugosi as his only-slightly-less-sinister opponent. The story line, centering on a house modeled after the Ennis-Brown house in Hollywood, has nothing to do with the Poe version. Included is a stylized Black Mass - about as close as Hollywood would come to UFA-expressionism.”

F6J. The Magus. ca. 1968. Michael Caine, Anthony Quinn, Candice Bergen, Anna Karina. Director: Guy Green. Screenplay by John Fowles. MA: “The Magus, like Lord of the Rings, is one of those novels which is so subtle and complex that you have to read it about 2-3 times before you really begin to absorb it. The film was an excellent translation of the book to the screen - but only for persons who had previously digested the book. To a first-time viewer it was dreadfully confusing. To make matters worse, subsequent television showings have butchered the film down to such a mess that it is virtually incoherent. Nevertheless, if you have read the book, the film is a fine set of illustrations to accompany it. Perfectly cast, with Quinn as Conchis, Caine as Nicholas, and Bergen as Lily/Julie. Now available in an uncut DVD.”

F6K. Satanis, the Devil’s Mass. 1970. DVD: “Something Weird Video” DVD #ID1615SWDVD. MA: “Satanis was a commercial documentary of the Church of Satan in San Francisco, filmed in 1968CE and shown almost exclusively in a San Francisco art-theater. Satanis includes ritual sequences, interviews with Anton, Diane, and Karla LaVey, and footage of the premises of the original Central Grotto house on California Street in San Francisco. An amusing sequence shows the blessing of Isaac Bonewits’ penis by Anton LaVey. IB was later tossed out of the C/S and went on to become a self-proclaimed ‘druid’. Whether the spell is still effective is not known.”

F6L. The Seven Faces of Dr. Lao. 1964. Tony Randall, Barbara Eden. Produced by George Pal. (LVT-3) MA: “On the whole, a pretty effective film treatment of #6W - a bit more lighthearted than the somewhat savage novel, however.”

F6M. The Omen. 1976. MA: “See #6X.”

F6N. Damien: Omen II. 1978. MA: “See #6Y.”

F6O. The Final Conflict. 1981. MA: “See #6Z.”

It will be noted that some of these films focus more on "reflections" of Satanism in non-"formal" situations, rather than on Satanism per se. Using this criterion, doubtless many more such "reflections" or "applications" could be cited.

I of course saw #F6E back in 1968, but the film that really did it for me was #F6C (which I saw the following year in the 82d Airborne Division theater at Fort Bragg).

The ghost of Anton LaVey haunts #F6F, #F6G, #F6L, and most disconcertingly #F6D, wherein Eric Binford is as close to a Compleat Witch "dæmonic self" of Anton as you'll ever see.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#50534 - 03/06/11 11:39 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



Yes, I have seen the Phibes films and Satanis and they were great! I will never forget the first time I saw that total environemt of Phibes'. Quite incredible.

There are so many films here which I want to buy and watch - so much to do, so little time.

Am particularly interested in The Magus. Anthony Quinn - one of the best actors ever.

Thanks for these Dr. Aquino. I tend to get wrapped up in the books on the Temples reading list and not its films.

Top
#52498 - 04/08/11 05:36 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Fnord]
mightisright Offline
stranger


Registered: 04/08/11
Posts: 24
I disagree, I think that LaVeyan Satanism is truly why Satanism is recognized world-wide. This is important!
Top
#52504 - 04/08/11 06:15 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: mightisright]
Asmedious Moderator Offline
Moderator
senior member


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 1725
Loc: New York
To say that Lavey's Satanism is outdated is the same as saying that Satanism is outdated. I disagree with that.
_________________________
"The first order of government is the protection of its citizens right to be left alone."

Top
#52505 - 04/08/11 06:37 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Asmedious]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
 Originally Posted By: Asmedious
To say that Lavey's Satanism is outdated is the same as saying that Satanism is outdated. I disagree with that.


Hell, As... it means I'M OUTDATED! I may be a little moldy, like an aged cheddar, but that doesn't mean I'm not still vital and strong. Like LaVey's Satanism, I may not be everyone's cup o' tea, but if one is intelligent (and that truly is the hallmark of a satanic mind), they simply find someone else better suited to their sensibilities.

Strange... people seem to have this need to say how wrong LaVey was, yet in reality, nothing else is out there that's entrenched in the public psyche. Even those who claim to "hold the keys," as the Mormons say, can't hold a candle to LaVey's captaincy of the ship.
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#52506 - 04/08/11 06:37 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Asmedious]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
It depends. Some people might find much use in what Lavey wrote and it might show them an option they never considered before. Others might see little use in it since they awakened already and defined their own path.

As such, outdated is a matter of how practical or important it is to an individual. To some it is, to others not at all.

D.

Top
#52511 - 04/08/11 07:00 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Diavolo]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
My point exactly D.

Seems to me that if it was of such little import to people, they would simply move on, yet many simply don't have that ability. They glom onto The Church of Satan and need to use it to somehow show how they're evolved... if they WERE, they would be beyond clinging to any connection to such an "outmoded" institution. They would have ideas of their own and not need to even mention LaVey or The Church.

That would be a novel treat for me. Someone with something to say who can talk the talk AND walk the walk. I'm not holding my breath waiting.
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#52513 - 04/08/11 07:13 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Diavolo]
Asmedious Moderator Offline
Moderator
senior member


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 1725
Loc: New York
For me the Doc’s books and videos of him are like comfort food. They are things that I enjoy looking at and watching on quiet nights. I find them relaxing and they simply make me happy.
I realized most of the things that were in the TSB years before I read it but that doesn’t make it outdated, because the ideas themselves are not outdated as far as I’m concerned. I would go as far as to say that in today’s politically correct climate, the core ideas of T.S.B are just as relevant as they ever were if not more so.

Old and practiced doesn’t mean the same as "outdated."


Edited by Asmedious (04/08/11 07:14 PM)
_________________________
"The first order of government is the protection of its citizens right to be left alone."

Top
#52606 - 04/10/11 01:20 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Asmedious]
Zakary Offline
pledge


Registered: 11/12/07
Posts: 75
There are many great points made here..... Lavey certainly intended to simplify practise and break down concepts into a more consumable and more importantly socially relevant medium. Things always appear out moded after a time..... Like many here I love Lavey in a very nostalgic way..... we grew up nurtured on TSB. I have come to appreciate the works of the ONA after a time...... appreciating the complexity therein..... The TOS offering modern expansion of Crowleys work.... simplifying the same. I must say I'm a LaVey fan...... but each to their own.
Top
#68340 - 07/05/12 01:29 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Asmedious]
Latvian Offline
member


Registered: 07/15/11
Posts: 475
Loc: EU, Latvia, Riga (old town)
 Originally Posted By: Asmedious
To say that Lavey's Satanism is outdated is the same as saying that Satanism is outdated. I disagree with that.
I agree. I read first Lavey's works in 90ties and I was teenager - it was realy fresh breeze for me and at he beginning of our century (2000 and upwards) their writings meant me even more and now I can truly say, that I highly value his great works about core principles of Satanism.

We are Satanists and not religionists, it means we are not static, but truly dynamic - every one of us takes from LaVey's works, what is necessary for us individually!
_________________________
In Sorte Diaboli

Top
#68344 - 07/05/12 04:32 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Latvian]
IcyClawz Offline
stranger


Registered: 06/19/12
Posts: 25
Loc: Israel
 Originally Posted By: Latvian
 Originally Posted By: Asmedious
To say that Lavey's Satanism is outdated is the same as saying that Satanism is outdated. I disagree with that.
I agree. I read first Lavey's works in 90ties and I was teenager - it was realy fresh breeze for me and at he beginning of our century (2000 and upwards) their writings meant me even more and now I can truly say, that I highly value his great works about core principles of Satanism.

We are Satanists and not religionists, it means we are not static, but truly dynamic - every one of us takes from LaVey's works, what is necessary for us individually!

Exactly. The philosophy is pretty much common in many aspects between Satanists, but while one may use the rituals in TSB, others, like me, for instance, prefer other ways achieving similar things. The important part is that we are The Free People.
_________________________
Just take me out of this damn fascist country... I want to live in Germany, badly.

Top
#68345 - 07/05/12 05:39 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Fnord]
Chemical Offline
stranger


Registered: 06/13/12
Posts: 46
Loc: Portugal
I believe that is possible to look past the "christianity thing" when reading the SB, and thus the "outdatedness" At least, that was what I attempted to do.
Religion is not as much a weight today as it was back then, however the content on the book remains valid if you take society and media into account. I mean, even though religion has lost most of it's influence on people's lives, peer pressure from media and stereothypes increases, and one's individuality is "threatened" at all times


Edited by Chemical (07/05/12 05:42 AM)
_________________________
I'm not a puppet. I am a Granade.

Top
#68352 - 07/05/12 09:47 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: IcyClawz]
Latvian Offline
member


Registered: 07/15/11
Posts: 475
Loc: EU, Latvia, Riga (old town)
 Originally Posted By: IcyClawz
... The philosophy is pretty much common in many aspects between Satanists,...The important part is that we are The Free People.
You're right! LaVey wrote: 'The Satanist should have the ability to decide what is just' and Satanism is individualistic and not legalistic, even when we speak about statements, rules etc...

People, who start interesting about Satanism or just want to fake their true motives and want to do their brainwashing for 'fallen ones' or even we, when we begin their LHP, quite often see Satanism too legalistically... At the beginning many assume Satanism like other religions, where are a lot of rules, laws, even taboos with heavy consequences because of disobedience... It is not compulsory for us, Satanists to follow all laws or statements, what is written even in in the Satanic Bible etc... We are free and we usually don't discuss about someone, who broken one of Nine Satanic Statements or did some Satanic Sins..., we are really free and live lives, which fit the best for us and our pack.
_________________________
In Sorte Diaboli

Top
#68444 - 07/06/12 07:49 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Chemical]
Fnord Offline
senior member


Registered: 01/11/10
Posts: 2085
Loc: Texas
 Originally Posted By: Chemical

Religion is not as much a weight today as it was back then, however the content on the book remains valid if you take society and media into account.


Yet, more people across the world identify with one of the three abrahamic religions today than ever in the past. There may be an argument about proportional shares when compared to overall population, but I think religion is as prevalent today as it ever was (particularly with Dec. 2012 coming and the age of the population).
_________________________
Dead and gone. Syonara.

Top
#68495 - 07/07/12 07:57 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Fnord]
RAIDER Offline
member


Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 152
Loc: PA
LaVey wrote some good shit.....I've gathered: he knew how to read people, was insightful concerning interactions with other humans, reasonable in his expectations of what motivates people, their actual needs, etc.
The shit about Satanism is entertaining and somewhat researched.....not all the info shared is acurate...but his brand of Satanism put in place a foundation for others to build upon. He got things started...in a modern, out in public way.
People haven't changed, what motivates humans hasn't changed...fo rme LaVey's Satanism ( or approach to it) is still valid.
_________________________
DARK WOLF

Top
#68538 - 07/08/12 12:25 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Fnord]
Chemical Offline
stranger


Registered: 06/13/12
Posts: 46
Loc: Portugal
Yes, that is true indeed. However, (maybe it's just from where I stand) the feeling I get is that people seem more interested in identifying with something than to actually live up to whatever the principles of their so-called beliefs are. Hence what I said.

Edited by Chemical (07/08/12 12:34 PM)
_________________________
I'm not a puppet. I am a Granade.

Top
#68649 - 07/10/12 11:41 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Chemical]
Latvian Offline
member


Registered: 07/15/11
Posts: 475
Loc: EU, Latvia, Riga (old town)
 Originally Posted By: Chemical
...the feeling I get is that people seem more interested in identifying with something than to actually live up to whatever the principles of their so-called beliefs are...
Of course we, Satanists have to have our own ideology or principles of ideology and common aims, even rules - it's of course more important for the group or our pack and it’s not so important for every individual in general.

We, Satanists are free, when we are in our own private territory - we can act how we please and live how we want and we don’t annoy anyone when we are in neutral territory, but there the 600 Club is real Satanic community and LaVey’s writings make us one!
_________________________
In Sorte Diaboli

Top
#68663 - 07/10/12 05:16 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Latvian]
Chemical Offline
stranger


Registered: 06/13/12
Posts: 46
Loc: Portugal
Yes, the writings of LaVey do unite us, with such beliefs, in a way.
But, isn't it more about indulging your own nature than to have a properly organized community? It seems to me to be more "pure" than most religions.
The idea of liberty and self-acceptance was what lured me to TSB and his work at first, the knowledge pursue, and not the idea of some outcast society that's against everything and everyone. Something more truthful, "earthly", and not the metaphysical and psychologically impairing junk most churchs and doctrines shove down your throat.
I hope I'm expressing myself clearly \:\)
_________________________
I'm not a puppet. I am a Granade.

Top
#68679 - 07/11/12 02:29 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Chemical]
Latvian Offline
member


Registered: 07/15/11
Posts: 475
Loc: EU, Latvia, Riga (old town)
 Originally Posted By: Chemical
...isn't it more about indulging your own nature than to have a properly organized community?... I hope I'm expressing myself clearly \:\)
Perfect! Of course Satanism is about indulgence instead of abstinence, Satanism is about vital existence instead of spiritual pipe dreams, Satanism is undefiled wisdom instead of hypocritical self-deceit etc...

Of course we are free in comunity, but we have to learn to be loyal to our own or our pack... It's my opinion!
_________________________
In Sorte Diaboli

Top
#68684 - 07/11/12 03:27 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Latvian]
DreamMystery Offline
member


Registered: 01/01/12
Posts: 167
Loc: Here
I agree with Latvian. There is power in a group of individuals who agree on basic attitudes. As long as there is no establishment of Orthodoxy or Orthopraxy. Humans are social animals like it or not.
We derive benefit from collaboration and interdependance. As long as the individual (seen as equal) is the fundamental Value or end in itself of the group I see no problems.

Those outside the group of "Satanism" can be seen as whatever value you give them.

So I guess I am saying hierarchy is fine between groups but is not good within the group if you are an individualist.

Attempts to hierarchy within Satanism lead away from Satanism.

Attempts to establish hierarchy outside of Satanism lead towards Satanism.

Top
#68685 - 07/11/12 04:02 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: DreamMystery]
Latvian Offline
member


Registered: 07/15/11
Posts: 475
Loc: EU, Latvia, Riga (old town)
 Originally Posted By: DreamMystery
...So I guess I am saying hierarchy is fine between groups but is not good within the group if you are an individualist. Attempts to hierarchy within Satanism lead away from Satanism...
Can You explain more? Please explain a bit more, what You exactly think!

I personally think, that hierarchy is in every society and community and isn't bad. We cannot avoid stratification... Hierarchy is drive for every member of group to be in right place in right time and it motivates every individual reach heights and better position!

In SU and now in North Korea atheistically orientated regimes tried to make alive some utopias - all are equal (of course without elite of country, who are more equal as others) and result is quite bad... You can compare with South Korea, where are free market, freedom, but always hierarchy too…, or before 1989 You saw real difference between West Germany (BDR)and East Germany (DDR).

I worked 17 years as teacher and was for some years ( six and half) headmaster too and I know how important is hierarchy for successful school work and I can give many examples – even now in my new job..., where I'm IT admin - everyone is sorted by rights etc... Even here in the 600 Club You can see smart hierarchy!
_________________________
In Sorte Diaboli

Top
#68689 - 07/11/12 05:23 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Latvian]
Dimitri Offline
stalker


Registered: 07/13/08
Posts: 3119
 Quote:
Of course we are free in comunity, but we have to learn to be loyal to our own or our pack... It's my opinion!

I might be the first to speak about kindred honor, but in reality it still is to be deserved and proven to be worthy of it. Agreeing with my words and/or even claiming, pushing of being on "the same side" is not going to cut it. I am not loyal to myself as I change through time.. words of mine in the past I no longer belief in nor morals and ideas I am no longer supportive of.

Proclaiming individuality, kindred honor and loyalty to the pack is "nice". Lest not to forget the idea of "being the alfa" when doing so. Otherwise you are still stuck with egalitarian group think... a little something keen of being forgotten by the self-proclaimed averagist entering it.
_________________________
Ut vivat, crescat et floreat

Top
#68691 - 07/11/12 05:33 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Dimitri]
Latvian Offline
member


Registered: 07/15/11
Posts: 475
Loc: EU, Latvia, Riga (old town)
 Originally Posted By: Dimitri
I might be the first to speak about kindred honor, but in reality it still is to be deserved and proven to be worthy of it...I am not loyal to myself as I change through time...
First point!
- Yes, everyone of us goes through the test and we have to deserve our place and not inherit - like some king's son, who in reality dosn't know nothing about his dad's stragle and smart ways to organize system, which works...
Second point
- I agree - We all are in movement or on they way to the aim and today's truth replaces yesterdays looks, ideals and true values - it's normal progress!
_________________________
In Sorte Diaboli

Top
#68692 - 07/11/12 05:53 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Latvian]
DreamMystery Offline
member


Registered: 01/01/12
Posts: 167
Loc: Here
I guess the conflict I see is this. Hierarchy results in the benefit of the group. The corporation achieves its goal of profit through implementing hierarchy. But is the individual always profiting from this? Certainly if they pay employees properly.

I'm not advocating economic communism, obviously capitalism works much better.

What if the organisation is Satanism? What is the "profit" or productive output of Satanism? Isn't the product successful and free individuals?

So I am saying that the goal of Satanism is not the spread of Satanism, the product of Satanism is successful, morally free individuals.

It is kind of paradoxical, a group which doesn't serve itself as a group, but inspires each individual separately to succeed even at the cost of groups he may be a part of.

I think this is a deep issue in Satanism worthy of debate.

I see any group as a Hobbesian "Leviathan" or super-organism.
The group is one big individual which seeks its own dominance within the community of groups. This dominance seeking comes at the price of individuals within the group, who are sacrificed for the greater good of the group.

It doesn't have to be a conscious process for each individual, most likely it is hidden. The work of Foucault on diffuse power structures shows the mechanisms at work.

Top
#68695 - 07/11/12 06:26 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: DreamMystery]
Latvian Offline
member


Registered: 07/15/11
Posts: 475
Loc: EU, Latvia, Riga (old town)
 Originally Posted By: DreamMystery
..So I am saying that the goal of Satanism is not the spread of Satanism, the product of Satanism is successful, morally free individuals. It is kind of paradoxical, a group which doesn't serve itself as a group, but inspires each individual separately to succeed ... I think this is a deep issue in Satanism worthy of debate.
Yes, it really worthy of discussions! First thanks for Your answer and explanation of Your view!

I agree, that Satanic community has to inspire each individual separately to succeed and Satanism is only voluntary movement and nothing to do with converting masses or brainwashed people, who always are in seek for people, who will think for them, who will say what is right or wrong etc. One of the main fears of herd is responsibility, but Lavey said very good in 6. satanic statement: ‘Satan represents responsibility to the responsible’.
_________________________
In Sorte Diaboli

Top
#71096 - 09/21/12 04:21 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Latvian]
Le Deluge Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/05/12
Posts: 1790
It isn't outdated. I know people who walked down that path. I often find them to be the "pull yourself up by the bootstraps" types. I'm not too sure LaVey intended it to be a "complete" system or praxis. I can see value for some in the organizational structure of CoS, others do better blazing trails. His wasn't the last word on it by any means.

It isn't my personal path. I may list him as a favorite author. I find a lot of the LaVey-derivative "Satanisms" out there to be idiotic.

I believe he correctly identifies altruism as a form of subservience. He forms something of a dialectic between egoism and altruism (a la Rand). Yet, his answer seems to lie in the "Might is Right" of Redbeard. It is ideal for people clawing their way up the ladder. I think you may reach a point where it loses its luster. I see a divergence of folks going balls out sans "morality" and a milder Epicurean streak of self-fullfilment and quietude. I think how one views "Satan" metaphysically is secondary to the choice of praxis. Outdated? No. Final word? No.
_________________________
Apres Moi ... Le Deluge

Top
#71615 - 10/07/12 11:58 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Le Deluge]
aerial_dc Offline
pledge


Registered: 10/01/12
Posts: 79
 Originally Posted By: Le Deluge
He forms something of a dialectic between egoism and altruism (a la Rand). Yet, his answer seems to lie in the "Might is Right" of Redbeard.

Anton LaVey incorporated a whole lot of ideas from various sources into his idea of Satanism. The Satanic Bible is a very direct, condensed, straight forward presentation of these ideas. No one has come up with anything like it which could be considered more modern(that I've discovered). There's nothing in that book I can think of that can't be applied to today. Le Deluge, I'd have to agree it's not outdated.
_________________________
Not about to see your light.

Top
#71616 - 10/08/12 12:29 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: aerial_dc]
Le Deluge Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/05/12
Posts: 1790
 Originally Posted By: aerial_dc

Anton LaVey incorporated a whole lot of ideas from various sources into his idea of Satanism. The Satanic Bible is a very direct, condensed, straight forward presentation of these ideas. No one has come up with anything like it which could be considered more modern(that I've discovered). There's nothing in that book I can think of that can't be applied to today. Le Deluge, I'd have to agree it's not outdated.


Oh, certainly. I don't see it as a "closed" system. I think if it resonates with a person, they will be able to apply it. The LaVeyan Satanists I relate to are self-made, honorable, creative people. I don't see how it would become outdated. The essence remains even if the terminology becomes odd. I think some reach a point where the "struggle" becomes less. They choose their battles wisely. They are easy to relate to and deal with. I don't identify as such, but I believe it to be a valid path for those who truly identify as satanist.
_________________________
Apres Moi ... Le Deluge

Top
#71661 - 10/09/12 06:45 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Le Deluge]
MoSa Offline
member


Registered: 12/29/11
Posts: 191
Calling LaVey's Satanism is outdated is truly my favorite sin of all times, it truly represents all kinds of misreading levels.

The thing I like the most about Anton LaVey is he touched the side that almost every one neglected about humans, which is his darker side and how to deal with it.

Oh did I ever mention, I returned to Islam again and I do have to say that being here and all what I 've read about Satanism widened my view of religion and Islam in particular and how to live in this world?

Oddly to say, I misread Islam my self and Anton helped me out.

would like very much to discuss my view on how Islam and Satanism as defined my Anton LaVey can relate and do not you guys think that this is a thread hijacking, basically I benefited of what's available at hand.

Cheers
_________________________
I am sure you can recognize who I am...
But if you don't....let me introduce my self...

Top
#71678 - 10/09/12 01:12 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: MoSa]
Le Deluge Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/05/12
Posts: 1790
 Originally Posted By: MoSa

would like very much to discuss my view on how Islam and Satanism as defined my Anton LaVey can relate and do not you guys think that this is a thread hijacking, basically I benefited of what's available at hand.

Cheers


@Mosa: Have a go. You might demonstrate how LaVey helped you clarify your path. That would show current application. The mods will move it if necessary.


Edited by Le Deluge (10/09/12 01:19 PM)
Edit Reason: Grammatical Torture! Caffeine Drip Required!
_________________________
Apres Moi ... Le Deluge

Top
#71686 - 10/09/12 05:13 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Le Deluge]
MoSa Offline
member


Registered: 12/29/11
Posts: 191
 Originally Posted By: Le Deluge
 Originally Posted By: MoSa

would like very much to discuss my view on how Islam and Satanism as defined my Anton LaVey can relate and do not you guys think that this is a thread hijacking, basically I benefited of what's available at hand.

Cheers


@Mosa: Have a go. You might demonstrate how LaVey helped you clarify your path. That would show current application. The mods will move it if necessary.


Very well, for the sake of finding this in a later time I will be mentioning one point because tell now I am still digesting everything I 've learned and sooner or later it will be written down once I settle on the words to be said.

That said, one of the very first things I 've learned is the connection of Satan to man and GOD despite we would agree on them being projections of ones mind on the objects around him and it's actions reactions or them being real entities.

I matter the most, given that I must look carefully to what's my intended role in this world and wither I have a choice or it's a matter of "as is" or "do as said".

Every thing has another meaning and what differs is how I judge things, and to judge things I must know at least 90% of things around me despite what's it called.

This is huge and can not be put in simple words cause I kinda build in my head some certain rules of judgment that would lead eventually to state facts.

So, the most basic idea is it's all about me in the first place and how do I sign every action with my name not some one's else.

You can aid this idea by asking specific questions.

Cheers
_________________________
I am sure you can recognize who I am...
But if you don't....let me introduce my self...

Top
#71688 - 10/09/12 05:39 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: MoSa]
Le Deluge Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/05/12
Posts: 1790
 Originally Posted By: MoSa


Very well, for the sake of finding this in a later time I will be mentioning one point because tell now I am still digesting everything I 've learned and sooner or later it will be written down once I settle on the words to be said.

That said, one of the very first things I 've learned is the connection of Satan to man and GOD despite we would agree on them being projections of ones mind on the objects around him and it's actions reactions or them being real entities.

I matter the most, given that I must look carefully to what's my intended role in this world and wither I have a choice or it's a matter of "as is" or "do as said".

Every thing has another meaning and what differs is how I judge things, and to judge things I must know at least 90% of things around me despite what's it called.

This is huge and can not be put in simple words cause I kinda build in my head some certain rules of judgment that would lead eventually to state facts.

So, the most basic idea is it's all about me in the first place and how do I sign every action with my name not some one's else.

You can aid this idea by asking specific questions.

Cheers


I get the gist of what you're saying. Your first point being you place yourself first. I take it in terms of judgment, you have to use an adequate lens regardless of terminology? Makes sense. The phenomena/experience is more important than how we denote it.

I'm not entire clearly on the Satan-God-Man projection. I take it you came to view Satan and God as projections of man?

All seem applicable to me given LaVey's system. I guess we could denote this as an introduction to your path. Would be interested to hear more about how you arrived on this path after islam. Your upbringing?
_________________________
Apres Moi ... Le Deluge

Top
#71702 - 10/10/12 04:21 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Le Deluge]
MoSa Offline
member


Registered: 12/29/11
Posts: 191
 Originally Posted By: Le Deluge


I get the gist of what you're saying. Your first point being you place yourself first. I take it in terms of judgment, you have to use an adequate lens regardless of terminology? Makes sense. The phenomena/experience is more important than how we denote it.


I'm not entire clearly on the Satan-God-Man projection. I take it you came to view Satan and God as projections of man?


This is one of the very few times my words and what I really have to say get's 100% understood, thank you.

Yes, you're correct in assuming I meant that Satan and God were meant to be as only projections of one's mind.

I got the LaVey's shock effect differently ..... then I settled on this understanding is that every thing around us is named by us humans...if I saw some action of mercy or sympathy I give it a name like angelic or from GOD, if you rooted actions to the very first thing that started the wave of actions you 'll be surprised.

Take this example, Tom wakes up late to work so he rushes to work cracks up some cars on his way....some screams ..

If I rooted this action way back to why in the first place Tom woke up late I 'll find that he spent a great deal of his night watching porn (sample of a man's choice-able actions) || I 'll find that he was held in custody for being a suspect for a crime he never made (Sample of man's fate, the one he has no power on)
In Islam there is a definition, this is another subject but follow me.

Try this method on everything you know, what caused the cause.

This was my initiative idea that was formed before returning back to Islam with a new understanding.

So I viewed God, Satan, Angels demons are just projections of man's mind on everything around him and touches his feelings.

There was some where I 've read about this experiment that was done to see how man dreams of something during his sleep.

The part I want to mention is they tested flashing light on the eyes of sleeping test subjects and when they woke up they dreamed of fire, hell!

Now this pretty much aids the part of projections, but thinking out of the box leads to that there is really a greater force that created this world, wither you call it Allah, Jesus it does not really matter.

All what matters after admitting that there is a creator of all things the question moves on to wither do he speaks to us or not and if I followed his orders will it be his orders or some one else by proxy?

It was the Jinn's issue which made me leave Islam and it's the same that made me come back, among others of course.

That what led me back to Islam, "This part needs further specific questions."

 Originally Posted By: Le Deluge

All seem applicable to me given LaVey's system. I guess we could denote this as an introduction to your path. Would be interested to hear more about how you arrived on this path after Islam. Your upbringing?


You have my word, help me out with questions and I am all yours as much as I can.
_________________________
I am sure you can recognize who I am...
But if you don't....let me introduce my self...

Top
#71729 - 10/10/12 03:36 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Fnord]
Zach_Black Offline
member


Registered: 05/14/11
Posts: 541
Loc: San Diego, California
I got a couple issues with LaVeyan Satanism. I know you are asking how LaVeyan Satanism is outdated. I am gonna stray off the topic just a bit and give reasons why some of it was never practical to begin with.


Lets start with the Eleven Satanic Rules of the Earth.

1. Do not give opinions or advice unless you are asked.

I agree with this in theory. But I do not know anyone including Satanists that actually do this.

2. Do not tell your troubles to others unless you are sure they want to hear them.

Again this is not practical. Humans are by nature a social animal. Albeit often annoying.

5. Do not make sexual advances unless you are given the mating signal.

First off,what the fuck is the mating signal? I am gonna assume LaVey was talking about showing some sort of sexual interest.Few people follow this rule either. I would never get laid if I followed this ' rule'.

6. Do not take that which does not belong to you unless it is a burden to the other person and he cries out to be relieved.

This is kinda retarded. And for me an inversion of what I believe. I don't steal from individuals. But, I got no problem lifting shit from Wal-Mart or any other mega cooperation.

7. Acknowledge the power of magic if you have employed it successfully to obtain your desires. If you deny the power of magic after having called upon it with success, you will lose all you have obtained.

What is this Harry Potter's cliffs notes? This is kinda silly even for those such as myself who don't practice greater magic or ritual.

10. Do not kill non-human animals unless you are attacked or for your food.

I agree with this for the most part. But, what if you were a fur trader or depended on killing animals to put food on your families table?

11. When walking in open territory, bother no one. If someone bothers you, ask him to stop. If he does not stop, destroy him.
This is silly.In an ideal world maybe it has merit.But not in this society. I would have a string of bodies following me around if I applied this rule.


Edited by blackzach (10/10/12 03:39 PM)
Edit Reason: Type-o
_________________________
http://satanicinternationalnetwork.com/

Top
#71733 - 10/10/12 04:18 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: MoSa]
Le Deluge Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/05/12
Posts: 1790
 Quote:
It was the Jinn's issue which made me leave Islam and it's the same that made me come back, among others of course.

That what led me back to Islam, "This part needs further specific questions.


Well, how did you apply LaVey back to islam? I have rudimentary knowledge based on the quran. It seems a stretch. I have read some sufi parables which may relate somehow? I'm not really clear on this point. Most LaVeyan Satanists would reject a lot of the premises inherent to islam, but it is your path. How do you apply it?



Edited by Le Deluge (10/10/12 04:38 PM)
Edit Reason: Grammatical Torture! Caffeine Drip Required!
_________________________
Apres Moi ... Le Deluge

Top
#71734 - 10/10/12 04:23 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Zach_Black]
Le Deluge Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/05/12
Posts: 1790
 Originally Posted By: blackzach


11. When walking in open territory, bother no one. If someone bothers you, ask him to stop. If he does not stop, destroy him.
This is silly.In an ideal world maybe it has merit.But not in this society. I would have a string of bodies following me around if I applied this rule.


This is one of my personal favorites. I understand survival of the fittest, Redbeard, etc. That is fine. Personally, I don't seek out adversaries. They appear in my daily life anyways. Frankly, it is more common that they appear as challenges than other people. That part is relevant. People bothering me as I walk in open territory? Please. People can be annoying, but why would I not continue walking? Is this not taking Redbeard to a point of absurdity? I agree with you on some other points as well. I tend to prefer to "live and let live". People "bothering" me in open territory is just part of the gig. If I seriously "stopped walking", I would be in a most unpleasant place.


Edited by Le Deluge (10/10/12 04:26 PM)
Edit Reason: Grammatical Torture! Caffeine Drip Required!
_________________________
Apres Moi ... Le Deluge

Top
#71770 - 10/11/12 06:10 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Le Deluge]
Naama Offline
member


Registered: 07/23/12
Posts: 318
Loc: NewYork
1. Do not give opinions or advice unless you are asked.

When somebody opens a thread on SIN, for example. with a question, statement, e.t.c..
its surely already is an invitation to everyone to come and tell their opinion.
Now, example. Happened last year:
I was somewhat high(on drugs) and I was next to woman, a stranger who had her hair bleached very bad, orange color... I came to her and started to explain her how she can fix her problem. I was insisting and giving her my suggestions.
.
.

WTF, and why did I do that. I still don't know. ///Maybe she liked it like that...orange strikes...
So I broke this commandment. LOL

2. Do not tell your troubles to others unless you are sure they want to hear them.

Of course my girlfriend has to be in the reflective mood before contemplating upon my problem
in order to have a chance to sit down with me
and contribute to solving it
so before sharing a problem with my friend I have to carefully estimate her curent mood...


5. Do not make sexual advances unless you are given the mating signal.

It means that if I am a man and I have a "target" - I have to woo and seduce it slowly and carefully. That's what would create a harmonious chain of mating signals.
Not just: "nice boobs, wanna fuck?"
(See the thread "pick-up lines" on SIN)



6. Do not take that which does not belong to you unless it is a burden to the other person and he cries out to be relieved.

I don't touch anything that belongs to other people. But can not guarantee anything too. AND I do know how to shoplift, some methods.

7. Acknowledge the power of magic if you have employed it successfully to obtain your desires. If you deny the power of magic after having called upon it with success, you will lose all you have obtained.

If I was invoking the archetype of Lucifer, for example, in order to acheive some goal.
And after a while... lets say... in a completely different circumstances I will state (for some reason) that I do not believe in Satan AT ALL.
Naturally consequently, the next time it would be much more difficult for me to invoke the archetype again. Because I set this chain of thinking. Simple psychology, or cybernetics of human mind, or whatever you call it...

10. Do not kill non-human animals unless you are attacked or for your food.

I don't wear fur. Yess.
And, Zach - trading or hunting would be the same "for food". Just one person does it for the other.


11. When walking in open territory, bother no one. If someone bothers you, ask him to stop. If he does not stop, destroy him.

I never destroyed anyone in open territory. But I'm getting better talking about the skill of protecting myself from such things as unreasonable attacks from strangers on the street or other public places. I get it a lot. Its my karma.
Ive developed some "magnetic field" around me, so to speak, and its much more difficult for stupid people to get me now. Before I would react to numerous provocations... Now I have some answers at my hand already.
For example: "go ahead, press the charges against me"... Its a very useful one.


Edited by Naama (10/11/12 06:16 AM)
_________________________
http://i57.tinypic.com/2j498ih.jpg

Top
#71776 - 10/11/12 11:22 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: MoSa]
Asmedious Moderator Offline
Moderator
senior member


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 1725
Loc: New York
 Quote:
There was some where I 've read about this experiment that was done to see how man dreams of something during his sleep.

The part I want to mention is they tested flashing light on the eyes of sleeping test subjects and when they woke up they dreamed of fire, hell!

Now this pretty much aids the part of projections, but thinking out of the box leads to that there is really a greater force that created this world, wither you call it Allah, Jesus it does not really matter.


I don't think that the experiment proves a greater force. All it proves is that there is an IDEA of a greater force in the subconscious of the subjects, which can be activated through experiments.

In order to POSSIBLY give credence to this experiment the people who took part would have to be individuals who were never exposed to the idea of a Heaven and Hell, or a “greater force.” In this case one could assume that what they dreamed about originated from outside of the persons mind.
_________________________
"The first order of government is the protection of its citizens right to be left alone."

Top
#71834 - 10/12/12 07:58 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Asmedious]
MoSa Offline
member


Registered: 12/29/11
Posts: 191
 Originally Posted By: Asmedious
 Quote:
There was some where I 've read about this experiment that was done to see how man dreams of something during his sleep.

The part I want to mention is they tested flashing light on the eyes of sleeping test subjects and when they woke up they dreamed of fire, hell!

Now this pretty much aids the part of projections, but thinking out of the box leads to that there is really a greater force that created this world, wither you call it Allah, Jesus it does not really matter.


I don't think that the experiment proves a greater force. All it proves is that there is an IDEA of a greater force in the subconscious of the subjects, which can be activated through experiments.

In order to POSSIBLY give credence to this experiment the people who took part would have to be individuals who were never exposed to the idea of a Heaven and Hell, or a “greater force.” In this case one could assume that what they dreamed about originated from outside of the persons mind.


Interesting point but lacks on tiny little thing you neglected to say!

There is no one on this earth that does not fear fire!

My kids are two years old, they do not speak yet but bubble talk and yet they fear fire because it can hurt them and so is animals...every creature on this earth fears fire.

Remind again, Hell as an idea and a description what is it's first theme or component or factor of name it self? ah..it's fire.

So given that it does not really matter whither it's from out side one's head or inside..

The idea is there, deal with it.
_________________________
I am sure you can recognize who I am...
But if you don't....let me introduce my self...

Top
#71836 - 10/12/12 08:29 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Le Deluge]
MoSa Offline
member


Registered: 12/29/11
Posts: 191
 Originally Posted By: Le Deluge

Well, how did you apply LaVey back to islam? I have rudimentary knowledge based on the quran. It seems a stretch. I have read some sufi parables which may relate somehow? I'm not really clear on this point. Most LaVeyan Satanists would reject a lot of the premises inherent to islam, but it is your path. How do you apply it?



I 'll be mentioning the thing I recall it's common between the to worlds of Satanism and Islam as greater subjects with multitude layers of subjects as they fit more Lifestyles than religion with rituals.

The Jinn, Anton said he never found ghosts or demons and neither did I!, yet they're mentioned in Quran...so to apply Anton's philosophy on this subject I found my self asking...why do not we see them? why do not we have a mean or a way to interact with them if they so live on this earth like and not like angels lives in the heavens and comes to us upon higher orders?

when I applied Anton's philosophy to this, I came up with this.

Jinn do exist in a parallel world to this one and they are not meant to deal with us nor we deal with them, if some one was given the ability to deal with them greed will take action.

Imagine, that some one deals with Jinn who are invisible and asked them to steal some one, or appear to him in scary figures.

It will be chaos!, so they are meant to live and see us and we do not see them except in special cases and this would be abnormalities of the first law (They see us while we do not, they are not meant to harm us and we do not harm them back)

In Islam there're orders to ask Allah for his help on them, like
 Quote:

Narrated by Anas: Whenever the Prophet went to answer the call of nature, he used to say, " Allah−umma inni a`udhu bika minal khubuthi wal khaba'ith i.e. O Allah, I seek Refuge with You from all offensive and wicked things (evil deeds and evil spirits).

Sahih al-Bukhary, The Book of Ablution, Hadith Number:142, Narrated by: Anas Ibn-Malik


http://www.hadithtranslations.com/AhadithContentPage.aspx?setID=1&bookID=4&hadithID=142

Still, given that all...my entire role is no to live life and deals in it with out the fear of them and even if abnormalities occur I deal with them as told by prophet Muhammad.

Another thing related to the Jinn also, is who has the upper hand Man or Jinn.

[27:38] He said (to his own men): "Ye chiefs! which of you can bring me her throne before they come to me in submission?"

[27:39] Said an 'Ifrit, of the Jinns: "I will bring it to thee before thou rise from thy council: indeed I have full strength for the purpose, and may be trusted."

 Quote:


[27:40] Said one who had knowledge of the Book: "I will bring it to thee within the twinkling of an eye!" Then when (Solomon) saw it placed firmly before him, he said: "This is by the Grace of my Lord! - to test me whether I am grateful or ungrateful! and if any is grateful, truly his gratitude is (a gain) for his own soul; but if any is ungrateful, truly my Lord is Free of all Needs, Supreme in Honour !"


Almost every one said the one who said this is either Another Jinn, one of Solimans ministares Asif Bin Brakhia.

To apply Anton's philosophy on this I opened Quran and read all the phrases that speaks of Jinn I found another ones that says

 Quote:

5. 'And verily, we thought that men and jinns would not utter a lie against Allah.

6. 'And verily, there were men among mankind who took shelter with the masculine among the jinns, but they (jinns) increased them (mankind) in sin and disbelief.


Man has the upper hand clearly, now what this has to do again with Soliman?

 Quote:

34. And, indeed We did try Sulaiman (Solomon) and We placed on his throne Jasadan (a devil, so he lost his kingdom for a while) but he did return (to his throne and kingdom by the Grace of Allah and he did return) to Allah with obedience and in repentance.

35. He said: "My Lord! Forgive me, and bestow upon me a kingdom such as shall not belong to any other after me: Verily, You are the Bestower."

36. So, We subjected to him the wind, it blew gently to his order whithersoever he willed,

37. And also the Shayatin (devils) from the jinns (including) every kind of builder and diver,

38. And also others bound in fetters.

39. [Saying of Allah to Sulaiman (Solomon)]: "This is Our gift, so spend you or withhold, no account will be asked."

40. And verily, he enjoyed a near access to Us, and a good final return (Paradise).


Soliman was the one who knew how to bring Balkis's thrown and he was challenging the Jinn so they would know his power as a man over them.

Now again, what's all with Soliman?

It all started with him actually, in the Islamic lore Jinn were before Man but there is no actual mentioning of them except with Soliman's era and the coming of the two angels Harrot and Maroot.

Now no one will ever understand my words about the Jinn unless he read about the Jinn in the Islamic lore and know all what to be said about them from where do they live, for how long do they live..what do they eat etc....

Now I am not saying that this is authentic information's, I am just saying let's do math upon what do we have in hands.

Every thing can has different results when put together

This was one part,there are other things to be said too, but it's really tiring to describe such a huge subject with no specific questions.

PS: I would like also to say that the Jinn as a subject have a great deal of mentioning in magic which if I recall correctly how Anton got into it all in the first place, I just wanted to point out the significance

Will discuss the Eleven Rules of the Earth and the Nine Satanic Sins, Nine Satanic Statements in a later time.
Questions?


Edited by MoSa (10/12/12 08:39 AM)
_________________________
I am sure you can recognize who I am...
But if you don't....let me introduce my self...

Top
#71847 - 10/12/12 12:33 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: MoSa]
Asmedious Moderator Offline
Moderator
senior member


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 1725
Loc: New York
 Quote:
There is no one on this earth that does not fear fire!

My kids are two years old, they do not speak yet but bubble talk and yet they fear fire because it can hurt them and so is animals...every creature on this earth fears fire.

Remind again, Hell as an idea and a description what is it's first theme or component or factor of name it self? ah..it's fire.

So given that it does not really matter whither it's from out side one's head or inside..

The idea is there, deal with it.


Ok, let's assume that the flashing light caused the subjects to dream of Fire.
Every human being is aware of fire these days, so it would not be a surprise that a flashing light in their faces while asleep would cause them to dream of fire.

Fire is not the same as Hell. Dreaming of fire alone does not prove the existance of an after life. It only proves that the subject is aware that fire exists.

So again, dreaming of Hell or Heaven does not prove that either exists outside the mind of an individual if that individual is aware of the CONCEPT of either.

I have dreamed of fluffy pink dinasours, yet I'm not going to run around claiming that they actually exist in reality.
_________________________
"The first order of government is the protection of its citizens right to be left alone."

Top
#71848 - 10/12/12 12:48 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Asmedious]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
 Originally Posted By: MoSa
There is no one on this earth that does not fear fire!


I think it is actually the opposite. Instead of everyone being afraid of fire, most people are attracted and fascinated.

Let's not forget we come from a lineage where fire was considered to be almost sacred and it only takes a campfire during a night to feel something similar as people did thousands of years ago.

D.

Top
#71850 - 10/12/12 12:59 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: MoSa]
Asmedious Moderator Offline
Moderator
senior member


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 1725
Loc: New York
 Quote:

when I applied Anton's philosophy to this, I came up with this.

Jinn do exist in a parallel world to this one and they are not meant to deal with us nor we deal with them, if some one was given the ability to deal with them greed will take action.






Where in Anton LaVey's philosophy does it say exactly, that if you can't see something that they must exist in a parallel universe?

 Quote:

Imagine, that some one deals with Jinn who are invisible and asked them to steal some one, or appear to him in scary figures.

It will be chaos!, so they are meant to live and see us and we do not see them except in special cases and this would be abnormalities of the first law (They see us while we do not, they are not meant to harm us and we do not harm them back)






The key word here is “Imagine.” Yes, I can imagine everything that you state, but all this proves is that it's in our minds. Imagination, guessing, hoping and dreaming is not reality. They are fantasies that have no merit in the real world. The only way that these imagined ideas and fantasies can impact the real world is when those who dream them decide to take action based upon their delusions and infect the world in some tangible way. Most of the time nothing positive comes out of it, only oppression, pain and slavery.

 Quote:


In Islam there're orders to ask Allah for his help on them, like






Orders written by long dead people made of flesh and blood, who lived so long ago that their bones don't even exist. So why should anyone with common sense care about their orders and delusions?

Just because something is written, does not make it so. Even a child can comprehend this if their mental development is not soiled by parasitic adults.

 Quote:

Still, given that all...my entire role is no to live life and deals in it with out the fear of them and even if abnormalities occur I deal with them as told by prophet Muhammad.

Another thing related to the Jinn also, is who has the upper hand Man or Jinn.

[27:38] He said (to his own men): "Ye chiefs! which of you can bring me her throne before they come to me in submission?"

[27:39] Said an 'Ifrit, of the Jinns: "I will bring it to thee before thou rise from thy council: indeed I have full strength for the purpose, and may be trusted."






None of this, has ANYTHING what so ever to do with Satanism. As a matter of fact, it is all against the Satanic principle of thinking for oneself.

You are using the language of broken slaves. People who cannot think for themselves, but instead rehash the words of other people, relying on ancient unprovable ideas, to justify their very existence.

Most religion is the crutch of slaves who fear everything, including life itself, evident by the proclaimed desire (often a lie) to wish for death and an imagined after life, more so then to live in the here and now.
What's worse is that they fear that the world is going to get wise to their insanity, and attempt to force others to follow along their self destructive path.

The only followers of religion are the weak, desperate, hopeless, and mentally deficient, or those that fear their safety and are forced to pretend that they believe their psychotic oppressors.

Sir, you have proven nothing here, but your desire to serve and humble yourself, even going so far as to rely on the dreams and delusions of people who have died long ago.
_________________________
"The first order of government is the protection of its citizens right to be left alone."

Top
#71853 - 10/12/12 05:03 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Asmedious]
MoSa Offline
member


Registered: 12/29/11
Posts: 191
 Originally Posted By: Asmedious
.... dreaming of Hell or Heaven does not prove that either exists outside the mind of an individual if that individual is aware of the CONCEPT of either.....


Never said I am sure they do exist!, I only said I upgraded my idea of the Heavens and Hell are just projections of a pure human feeling and so is God and Satan to there is a creator of this world why there is no Heavens and Hell.

My point is it's not exactly the assurance of Heavens and Hell because even in Islam no one is certain of going to Heaven in the end!, it's up to him Allah to decide who goes and who do not.

Now, all I am saying is what if you took this elements 'heavens and hell' and dealt with it as is!?, like yes I 'll be doing my best and live life as a good person "no one want's to be bad right? it makes no sense at all".

And believe me, I can tell the mass's anything I want and they 'll do what they can. only.

So again, I never assured there is; it's just why not!?
_________________________
I am sure you can recognize who I am...
But if you don't....let me introduce my self...

Top
#71854 - 10/12/12 05:06 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Diavolo]
MoSa Offline
member


Registered: 12/29/11
Posts: 191
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
 Originally Posted By: MoSa
There is no one on this earth that does not fear fire!


I think it is actually the opposite. Instead of everyone being afraid of fire, most people are attracted and fascinated.

Let's not forget we come from a lineage where fire was considered to be almost sacred and it only takes a campfire during a night to feel something similar as people did thousands of years ago.

D.


You're just being playful right? I mean I am sure you understood what I meant by fearing of fire...I simply can not see some camp fire away from me like 500 meters and scream like a little bitch!

I am sure you know what I meant, I trust your judgment.
_________________________
I am sure you can recognize who I am...
But if you don't....let me introduce my self...

Top
#71855 - 10/12/12 05:33 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Asmedious]
MoSa Offline
member


Registered: 12/29/11
Posts: 191
 Originally Posted By: Asmedious

Where in Anton LaVey's philosophy does it say exactly, that if you can't see something that they must exist in a parallel universe?


There is none!, it's just another interpretation to be added to everything else.

 Originally Posted By: Asmedious

The key word here is “Imagine.” Yes, I can imagine everything that you state....


Yes, very true..and the key word here is "Action" all what above will demand a certain action you'd take.

Now, given that my actions is go on with life as is until I am faced with any abnormalities and deal with that state and move on, not drop dead with first misinterpreted event like saying I am obsessed or some one cast a spell on me.

Move on, and ask the greater force for aid while moving on.

That reminded me to say that I did not exactly learn, I simply was reminded in a very strong way of the path I took; everything Anton teaches is semi identical in Islam.

 Originally Posted By: Asmedious


Orders written by long dead people made of flesh and blood.....



It's just the language barrier that prevents this from perfection, meant by orders like teachings and good words to be remembered, not orders when broken a punishment will occur.

It's entirely up to you to say "O'Allah keep the evil away from me" or not \:\)

 Originally Posted By: Asmedious


Sir, you have proven nothing here, but your desire to serve and humble yourself, even going so far as to rely on the dreams and delusions of people who have died long ago.


Will, the fact is you're very true...in Islam you're not exactly praying for Allah; you're praying for your self...he does not need your prayers, it only helps you.

And frankly, I love the dead...they are peaceful and full of wisdom and can not do any thing wrong any more.

If I have no past I have no future, and I really see it's an absurd idea to leave what was their best and not be like it.

I just have to remind you of two things I want every next reply to be built on.

I am not saying I am 100 right nor do what I have to say is what will work for every one knowing that this in the depth of my heart will but that's not the case over here.

I am simply exampling as much as I can how I benefited from Anton's version of what Satanism is and how do I apply them in real life actions, like for instance it's really common in our country that some one when facing a bad day or misfortune to say some one envied me, now when ever I hear that I 'd instantly replied then whats your faults...how are you responsible or not!? it's impossible to be the fault of Satan and envy only right? that's just a simple example no matter how it looks silly to you...people do live this shit every day.

Again, I am not here for a breaching mission or converting any one ... in fact despite all the differences we might have I enjoy being here, you guys use your minds and do logic..I like that and did already learned some new tricks along the way.

One more time and this would be the third in a row...I am only doing this to _explain_, so kindly treat me as such.


Cheers
_________________________
I am sure you can recognize who I am...
But if you don't....let me introduce my self...

Top
#71856 - 10/12/12 05:45 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: MoSa]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
I'm not being playful, we all have a certain fascination with fire and cultures in which fire doesn't play a role no longer, the fascination tends to last longer.

Stating everyone is afraid of fire because they run screaming when it's a giant wall of fire is like saying everyone is afraid of mice because when it's a 500 pound one, we also run.

D.

Top
#71857 - 10/12/12 05:51 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Diavolo]
MoSa Offline
member


Registered: 12/29/11
Posts: 191
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
I'm not being playful, we all have a certain fascination with fire and cultures in which fire doesn't play a role no longer, the fascination tends to last longer.

Stating everyone is afraid of fire because they run screaming when it's a giant wall of fire is like saying everyone is afraid of mice because when it's a 500 pound one, we also run.

D.


Then perhaps I have to explain it in another way!, Humans fear of fire because it burns and cause great damage..now we all differ on how we deal with it..some are brave and can jump through fire like in Circus and some it's their job to deal with Fire like firemen.


But every one fears of fire eventually ... it's just on a different levels.
_________________________
I am sure you can recognize who I am...
But if you don't....let me introduce my self...

Top
#71858 - 10/12/12 06:05 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: MoSa]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
Sure I don't disagree that at some level fire will be scary but you can't build a theory on the "deadly form" of that which is just one of the all too many things humans fear.

I browsed the subject and after a survey they did, the top list seems to be:

1. Public speaking
2. Heights
3. Insects and bugs
4. Financial problems
5. Deep water
6. Sickness
7. Death
8. Flying
9. Loneliness
10. Dogs
11. Driving/riding in a car
12. Darkness
13. Elevators
14. Escalators

Some of those are of course modern fears but one of all times is, without a doubt, darkness, feared by cave and modern man and here fire is actually our friend.

D.

Top
#71860 - 10/12/12 06:22 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Diavolo]
MoSa Offline
member


Registered: 12/29/11
Posts: 191
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
Some of those are of course modern fears but one of all times is, without a doubt, darkness, feared by cave and modern man and here fire is actually our friend.

D.



Now what do we get out of this? Man do Fear! that's no.1

No.2 Man do think and make use of things around him and quoting you "Here fire is actually our friend"

No.3 Since man do fear darkness and basically what he do not know, he would certainly enjoy any form of guides...written or spoken as long as it leads him to live a happy life.

Now I am not saying everyone "Should" follow some dead folks written code! while they do but they really do not have to...it's out there take it or leave it ... it's up to you.


Edited by MoSa (10/12/12 06:26 PM)
Edit Reason: deleting portions of text
_________________________
I am sure you can recognize who I am...
But if you don't....let me introduce my self...

Top
#71862 - 10/12/12 06:34 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: MoSa]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
Hell as we know it is an invention of man and used as a control strategy. Claiming there is some fundamental truth behind it by linking it to a shared fear of fire is giving credit to religious nonsense which simply deserves none.

Some people might fear hell but it isn't because we all have an innate fear of fire.

This video is refreshing. Disregarding his belief in god and the good of humanity, what he has to say about hell and religion are some of the most intelligent things I've ever heard from a priest.

D.

Top
#71863 - 10/12/12 06:48 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Diavolo]
MoSa Offline
member


Registered: 12/29/11
Posts: 191
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
Hell as we know it is an invention of man and used as a control strategy. Claiming there is some fundamental truth behind it by linking it to a shared fear of fire is giving credit to religious nonsense which simply deserves none.

Some people might fear hell but it isn't because we all have an innate fear of fire.

This video is refreshing. Disregarding his belief in god and the good of humanity, what he has to say about hell and religion are some of the most intelligent things I've ever heard from a priest.

D.


You know, I never quite understood those who trap them selves in fear of hell!, there is heavens to work for!.

In Quran Satan when he disobeyed Allah and was cast away from Heavens along with Adam and Eve, he asked Allah to give him eternal life till the Judgment day so he can seduce as much man as he can to prove to Allah that Man is not worthy of his love and preference.

believe it or not and like it or not this is how I see it happened, shit happened already he got cast out and yet still he is still at work no matter what..that is being responsible.

Given that, it does not really matter if there is heavens and hell or Allah or Satan as much as it matters how man lives his life...now this can be done in many ways; one of them is committing to religion benefiting from the elder's experiments in life.

Islam is wrongfully thought as a mere religion of rituals only, it has dogma and lifestyle that flexible to suit every one once the main idea and core idea got grasped correctly.

So when we speak of religions please do know that Islam is not like any thing else despite all the similarities you might find


Edited by MoSa (10/12/12 06:51 PM)
Edit Reason: editing
_________________________
I am sure you can recognize who I am...
But if you don't....let me introduce my self...

Top
#71864 - 10/12/12 08:19 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: MoSa]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
I see religion quite similar as the domestication of animals done by man.

The shepherd invest his time in the herd and in return gains maximal use. The herd endures this exploitation because the shepherd enables them to survive in a world in which they no longer can on their own.

It's the same for all religions; shepherds and goats.

D.

Top
#71874 - 10/13/12 04:06 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Diavolo]
MoSa Offline
member


Registered: 12/29/11
Posts: 191
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
I see religion quite similar as the domestication of animals done by man.

The shepherd invest his time in the herd and in return gains maximal use. The herd endures this exploitation because the shepherd enables them to survive in a world in which they no longer can on their own.

It's the same for all religions; shepherds and goats.

D.


That's why I cautioned you of mixing thee religions as is with Islam.

Islam is the first and only religion that cares about man than God!

In Islam the what to do for God is fairly simple, admit he is one with no partner nor a child or mistress not he is not like anything else.

Simple and logic, while when compared to other religions you'd find that the what to do to your fellow man is vast.

for example,

 Quote:
"Smiling at your brother is charity"


 Quote:
"Whoever believes in God and the Last Day (the Day of Judgment) should do good to his neighbor"


 Quote:
"God does not judge you according to your appearance and your wealth, but He looks at your hearts and looks into your deeds"


 Quote:
"A man walking along a path felt very thirsty. Reaching a well, he descended into it, drank his fill, and came up. Then he saw a dog with its tongue hanging out, trying to lick up mud to quench its thirst. The man said, “This dog is feeling the same thirst that I felt.” So he went down into the well again, filled his shoe with water, and gave the dog a drink. So, God thanked him and forgave his sins.} The Prophet was asked, “Messenger of God, are we rewarded for kindness towards animals?” He said: {There is a reward for kindness to every living animal or human."

http://hwhk.ibda3.org/t196-topic



This was just a sample!

Islam is a lifestyle that is really flexible to suit anyone.

do I hear some one asking about magic? there is an idea behind it, if you understood it everything next is simple.

Why would I ask the help of a being like me while I have the creator of all beings to ask?, Man is the supreme being of all times.

It's even in Quran,
 Quote:
And there were men from mankind who sought refuge in men from the jinn, so they [only] increased them in burden.

http://quran.com/72/6



We have everything we need, we just need to trust and that's the second similarity between Islam and LaVey's Satanism.

Now that leaves the issues you 'd might have with this in a couple of questions.

Do the God hear us? did he send prophets?

Did I neglected anything to talk about?
_________________________
I am sure you can recognize who I am...
But if you don't....let me introduce my self...

Top
#71877 - 10/13/12 07:49 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: MoSa]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
Mosa come on.

Islam is the same nonsense as those other desert religions out there, stone age worldviews compiled by power-hungry primates.

Saying it is better is like saying that lethal injection is better than the electric chair. While we could argue that, we know for sure both options still suck if you are the one subjected to them.

Doesn't Islam translate as submission? That directly shows the role of man. Aren't they groveling in the dirt while praying five times a day? What a demanding little bitch that allah is. The christian god is already satisfied if you do it once, in a life-time.

"Prophet make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall be their home."

"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last day, nor hold the forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and his messenger, nor acknowledge the Religion of Truth from among the People of the Book, until they pay the Jiziyah with willing submission."

I can keep quoting such nonsense and we'll see it's all the same crap. The quran, and all those other holy books, are barely worth the use as toilet paper.

As I said, shepherds and goats.

D.


Edited by Diavolo (10/13/12 08:40 AM)
Edit Reason: added

Top
#71878 - 10/13/12 08:42 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Diavolo]
MoSa Offline
member


Registered: 12/29/11
Posts: 191
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
Mosa come on.

Islam is the same nonsense as those other desert religions out there, stone age worldviews compiled by power-hungry primates.

Saying it is better is like saying that lethal injection is better than the electric chair. While we could argue that, we know for sure both options still suck if you are the one subjected to them.

Doesn't Islam translate as submission? That directly shows the role of man. On his knees, groveling.

"Prophet make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall be their home."

"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last day, nor hold the forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and his messenger, nor acknowledge the Religion of Truth from among the People of the Book, until they pay the Jiziyah with willing submission."

I can keep quoting such nonsense and we'll see it's all the same crap. The quran, and all those other holy books, are barely worth the use as toilet paper.

As I said, shepherds and goats.

D.


It is indeed submission to God, but how you understand submission will control the rest of your actions.

Here is another interpretation of submission.

 Quote:


Indeed, your Lord is Allah , who created the heavens and earth in six days and then established Himself above the Throne. He covers the night with the day, [another night] chasing it rapidly; and [He created] the sun, the moon, and the stars, subjected by His command. Unquestionably, His is the creation and the command; blessed is Allah , Lord of the worlds.

Call upon your Lord in humility and privately; indeed, He does not like transgressors.

And cause not corruption upon the earth after its reformation. And invoke Him in fear and aspiration. Indeed, the mercy of Allah is near to the doers of good.



Key word here is [fear,aspiration]....think about it ...you can fear him or love him its up to you and what ever turn's you on to do good deeds.

So I can understand submission with visualizing hell and fire and every scary shit out there _OR_ I visualize the heavens and angels and all.

Again, no assurance to anything but the very main question remains "why not!" and it's all about living a good life eventually.

PS: I just found this inspirational, you can paint some fire and get warm or get some real fire and get warm in either both cases you need to get warm!



Edited by MoSa (10/13/12 08:47 AM)
Edit Reason: adding
_________________________
I am sure you can recognize who I am...
But if you don't....let me introduce my self...

Top
#71879 - 10/13/12 08:56 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: MoSa]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
Why would I take any of the desert crap serious?

They're all compilations written by man with a specific purpose in mind and that purpose certainly wasn't any god's will. It's the same for the quran; it's as historically accurate as the bible, a compilation constructed long after it was so called written down.
It too is an underclass religion that came to power by exploiting the illiterate and incompetent mass in their respective societies to obtain power.

It's just another typical example of slave-morality which again reevaluates weakness as strength. What's good about living life when you're living theirs?

Only the goats see their condition as good. The shepherd just laughs.

D.

Top
#71880 - 10/13/12 09:06 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Diavolo]
MoSa Offline
member


Registered: 12/29/11
Posts: 191
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
Why would I take any of the desert crap serious?

They're all compilations written by man with a specific purpose in mind and that purpose certainly wasn't any god's will. It's the same for the quran; it's as historically accurate as the bible, a compilation constructed long after it was so called written down.
It too is an underclass religion that came to power by exploiting the illiterate and incompetent mass in their respective societies to obtain power.

It's just another typical example of slave-morality which again reevaluates weakness as strength. What's good about living life when you're living theirs?

Only the goats see their condition as good. The shepherd just laughs.

D.


The way I see this, is I would be living mine not any one's else because I have the choice to be thankful for the great force that created me and for it's Allah _OR_ I can choose to be ignorant and not be thankful.

I can choose to smile when I see a fellow man and I can choose not to.

what happens when we're dead no one is 100% sure of it even the prophet Mohamed said he does not know what Allah will do to him but he wishes he would treat him with mercy!.

Yet you still see this as shepherd and goats and slaves ... it's your call \:D but one of the things the prophet Mohamed did was siting slaves free and putting an end to the slavery system.
_________________________
I am sure you can recognize who I am...
But if you don't....let me introduce my self...

Top
#71882 - 10/13/12 09:31 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: MoSa]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
I don't know.

From what I know, if even that part is historically correct, Mohamed started out as a shepherd before he moved up in society by screwing old pussy. He might have had his realization while herding his goats and during those long hours understood the real advantages of domestication. It's only one small step from goats to humans but one giant leap for Mohamed.

But even that is giving credit where none is due because it is most probable the quran is just a patchwork compiled by those leeching on society in an imaginary allah's name and if there ever was something remotely resembling this fictional Mohamed, when reading the shit, he'd too say; “What the fuck?”

It's a system that pretended to remove physical shackles but just replaced them with psychological ones.

Shepherds don't need to chain the goats, they chain themselves.

D.

Top
#71895 - 10/13/12 03:41 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: MoSa]
Dimitri Offline
stalker


Registered: 07/13/08
Posts: 3119
[quick reply]
There are aspects in ASL writings when applied to "modern" life proof to be outdated.

The 11 Satanic rules of the earth, in my opinion, are based on outdated gender roles and behavior.

When inspecting them I could not help but to notice correlations can be drawn with behavioral manners a gentleman should have who was raised as a child/teenager in 1940-1950 with a blend of revolutionizing thought which was typical in the 60ies-70ies.

And even if they are not stereotypical to the time they were written down they surely are a throw to a past in which they were granted as formal, natural behavior. A bit of his character and liking towards a certain era of his liking seemed to have been rubbed off.
@MOSA
 Quote:
Never said I am sure they do exist!, I only said I upgraded my idea of the Heavens and Hell are just projections of a pure human feeling and so is God and Satan to there is a creator of this world why there is no Heavens and Hell.

Upgrading shit with more shit leaves you with a huge pile of shit.

Now I might be legging behind a bit, but I shall expand on your fire example. While you stated people fear fire you fail to notice the circumstance in which the fear comes to surface.

The same is applied in religion. The people adhere to a god as they fear the unknown and anything disrupting their mental "stability" or peace of mind by whatever idea has been brainwashed into their skulls. Any religion is a sheep herding pass-time with a blend of local tradition and hopeful thought to avoid great disappointment when the next clan infighting results in having your wife(s) stoned to death for revealing her eyes.

This as a result from cultural/local practices being dogmatized and transferred through time and (geographical)space with a blend of "divine will" so very few people see where it actually originated and see the obsolescence of the thing in modern time in the first place.

Which brings me to the next question, why is someone like you who is a follower of Islam residing in a place that opposes the bigger part of your ideals?


Edited by Dimitri (10/13/12 04:13 PM)
Edit Reason: Urgh.. illness is killing me AND my grammar/vocabulary
_________________________
Ut vivat, crescat et floreat

Top
#71899 - 10/13/12 04:52 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Dimitri]
MoSa Offline
member


Registered: 12/29/11
Posts: 191
@Dimitri

I 'll quote you.

"Edit Reason: Urgh.. illness is killing me"

kindly do not move with this subject any further tell I am able to reply.

You can discuss the posted ideas/comments as you like but do not split subjects so I 'd know where I am standing and how am gonna add my word.

That of course is after your permissions all of you.

Please do accept my regards.

Mosa
_________________________
I am sure you can recognize who I am...
But if you don't....let me introduce my self...

Top
#71918 - 10/14/12 02:16 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: MoSa]
Dimitri Offline
stalker


Registered: 07/13/08
Posts: 3119
 Quote:
kindly do not move with this subject any further tell I am able to reply.

You can discuss the posted ideas/comments as you like but do not split subjects so I 'd know where I am standing and how am gonna add my word.

If your focus were clear and if you did know where you're standing, an answer might have been given in an instant and not an excuse for time-out.

A question has been raised, kindly answer to it.
_________________________
Ut vivat, crescat et floreat

Top
#71926 - 10/14/12 10:03 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Dimitri]
MoSa Offline
member


Registered: 12/29/11
Posts: 191
 Originally Posted By: Diavolo
I don't know.

From what I know, if even that part is historically correct, Mohamed started out as a shepherd before he moved up in society by screwing old pussy. He might have had his realization while herding his goats and during those long hours understood the real advantages of domestication. It's only one small step from goats to humans but one giant leap for Mohamed.

But even that is giving credit where none is due because it is most probable the quran is just a patchwork compiled by those leeching on society in an imaginary allah's name and if there ever was something remotely resembling this fictional Mohamed, when reading the shit, he'd too say; “What the fuck?”

It's a system that pretended to remove physical shackles but just replaced them with psychological ones.

Shepherds don't need to chain the goats, they chain themselves.

D.



Apparently you know nothing of Mohamed's life, please be my guest in this read "Do know that this is one of the best books ever written about Mohamed's life that almost every one agreed on, how so? what makes Islam different from almost everything else is that the story's of the old are still told as it happened after all this years ... this is much like having a big family of your own.

The Sealed Nectar == Life of Mohamed from Before his birth tell after he is dead

http://ompldr.org/vZnZtbg/AR-Raheeq%20Al-Makhtum%20(The%20Seald%20Nectar).pdf



 Originally Posted By: Dimitri
[quick reply]
There are aspects in ASL writings when applied to "modern" life proof to be outdated.

The 11 Satanic rules of the earth, in my opinion, are based on outdated gender roles and behavior.

When inspecting them I could not help but to notice correlations can be drawn with behavioral manners a gentleman should have who was raised as a child/teenager in 1940-1950 with a blend of revolutionizing thought which was typical in the 60ies-70ies.

And even if they are not stereotypical to the time they were written down they surely are a throw to a past in which they were granted as formal, natural behavior. A bit of his character and liking towards a certain era of his liking seemed to have been rubbed off.

@MOSA
 Quote:
Never said I am sure they do exist!, I only said I upgraded my idea of the Heavens and Hell are just projections of a pure human feeling and so is God and Satan to there is a creator of this world why there is no Heavens and Hell.

Upgrading shit with more shit leaves you with a huge pile of shit.

Now I might be legging behind a bit, but I shall expand on your fire example. While you stated people fear fire you fail to notice the circumstance in which the fear comes to surface.

The same is applied in religion. The people adhere to a god as they fear the unknown and anything disrupting their mental "stability" or peace of mind by whatever idea has been brainwashed into their skulls. Any religion is a sheep herding pass-time with a blend of local tradition and hopeful thought to avoid great disappointment when the next clan infighting results in having your wife(s) stoned to death for revealing her eyes.

This as a result from cultural/local practices being dogmatized and transferred through time and (geographical)space with a blend of "divine will" so very few people see where it actually originated and see the obsolescence of the thing in modern time in the first place.

Which brings me to the next question, why is someone like you who is a follower of Islam residing in a place that opposes the bigger part of your ideals?



First things first \:\)

 Originally Posted By: Dimitri


Upgrading shit with more shit leaves you with a huge pile of shit.



I miss choose my words, the next few words descries bretty much the stages I 've been through and I 'll expand my explanation.

 Quote:


[6:74] And [mention, O Muhammad], when Abraham said to his father Azar, "Do you take idols as deities? Indeed, I see you and your people to be in manifest error."

[6:75] And thus did We show Abraham the realm of the heavens and the earth that he would be among the certain [in faith]

[6:76] So when the night covered him [with darkness], he saw a star. He said, "This is my lord." But when it set, he said, "I like not those that disappear."

[6:77] And when he saw the moon rising, he said, "This is my lord." But when it set, he said, "Unless my Lord guides me, I will surely be among the people gone astray."

[6:78] And when he saw the sun rising, he said, "This is my lord; this is greater." But when it set, he said, "O my people, indeed I am free from what you associate with Allah.

[6:79] Indeed, I have turned my face toward He who created the heavens and the earth, inclining toward truth, and I am not of those who associate others with Allah."



I went from thinking I am alone and imagining things and naming them so I can recognize them later to really knowing that this is not imagination.

Now to expand on this, I have seen no devil nor heard one! but I do admit that there is God, so what makes it not possible that Satan exist representing the factor of struggle? I looked into Allah's actions and I knew he is not like anything I know.

And the ones who recognized Allah before me said things about him, I do my own math and come up with results based upon what exactly do I know.

Now the most factor that brings this up or down is history!, prophecies of so called dead people while they're not really dead..they still live among us through their legacy a look into their prophecies would certainly bring belief or disbelief.

I invite you to read/listen/hear the ones of Islam.

http://forsanhaq.com/showthread.php?t=71957
http://www.islam2you.com/forums/threads/domain951/

The second part of your question is

 Originally Posted By: Dimitri


why is someone like you who is a follower of Islam residing in a place that opposes the bigger part of your ideals?




Because of this scholar http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hudhayfah_ibn_al-Yaman and Satan him Self

Now this Scholar Hudhayfah was the only one that was asking the prophet Mohamed about the bad things that would happen so he could avoid it while every one else asked about the Heavens and all the goods they 'd get.

And Satan, let's say I 've a great admiration for his will and despite it's a curse to not have any rest.

But still, he represents to me the repel against everything I hate despite he is one of them.

He knows Man like no one else of creatures, he is old with vast knowledge..so basically I came here to study what *you* have to say about Satan and that almost lead to every thing else.

Oh and of course it was the fascination with all the buzz about black magic and being able to do everything with extreme means and methods man is not used to.

If I was going to be proud of anything I 've learned from Anton it would be this "Not like most"

PS: I wish to add during the time I went off Islam I was defying almost everything I know everything that is taboo to me.

A fellow Satanist now became Muslim too once told me you won't know if the water is cold or not tell you jump.

And so I did.

\:\)


Edited by MoSa (10/14/12 10:12 AM)
Edit Reason: addition
_________________________
I am sure you can recognize who I am...
But if you don't....let me introduce my self...

Top
#71931 - 10/14/12 10:29 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: MoSa]
Dimitri Offline
stalker


Registered: 07/13/08
Posts: 3119
 Quote:
I miss choose my words, the next few words descries bretty much the stages I 've been through and I 'll expand my explanation.

If the quoted part is representing the stages of evolution in your belief I can only conclude you managed to get from believing in the tangible and observable "here and now" towards a vaguely defined concept because you couldn't withstand the praxis (of the uncertain unknown) of the first?

If there ever was an account needed to believe in devolution I'd wholeheartedly recommend your life-story.

I can see your jump and reasoning towards what you belief. Your fascination and so-called "lession" learned from ASL seems like a cheap excuse to troll the boards with prayers and writings of Islamic thought. Yeah, perhaps not really trolling but still a certain preaching when reading your last 5 posts.
_________________________
Ut vivat, crescat et floreat

Top
#71987 - 10/15/12 07:02 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Dimitri]
Fnord Offline
senior member


Registered: 01/11/10
Posts: 2085
Loc: Texas
We were discussing what to do about this thread and the general consensus was that we should clip it off at the point where it went astray (when allah entered the conversation).

A few people put too much effort and thought into their posts, despite MoSa's inanity, so I don't feel right about deleting them.

Bottom line, allah has no business in this thread and I should have been paying better attention and stopped it before it got started.

So, I'm going to leave it as is for now, but no more discussion about Satanic islam... it's retarded.

Thank you, Zach, by the way, for trying to steer the discussion back on point.

From here forward please address the topic of Anton LaVey's Satanism and whether or not you think it's outdated.
_________________________
Dead and gone. Syonara.

Top
#73496 - 12/03/12 02:18 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Dan_Dread]
jason mcdaniel Offline
banned
stranger


Registered: 04/01/12
Posts: 15
Loc: wenatchee wa,
noone made the human condition more palitable than Anton LaVey and for that i will be eternally greatful im just saddened to see my lord being passed bye like some dimestore novelty like me i know he first loved me before i knew how to love him he is the one who offered to save me and id venture to say he was the same god who told the preists to go offer christ the rod of arron and the staff of moses he loved him more then any of the rest of us ever did and fore mans sin not eves sin mans sin he was ridicu8led persecuted and forced farthest from the light he didnt flee the light and i want to say im soory i know thats not true that christ does still love him and so do i but toist philosophy states to overcome a force one must first uplift it i see no better a toist in the world than anton and im ashamed to admit that i was such a coward to beleive i could do it on my own i miss having anton in his rightful seat i miss him my shame is in knowing i had the chance to learn from the best instead im stuck here listening to the rest i met him in 1995 at mideavel times but was so afraid of pissing off christ by following that hungry yearning to know the truth that i lost the only man that ever looked at me for what i was and made me feel important enough to be worthy of being loved that may sound sappy to you but all i could say was that i loved him and i was sorry and thanked him for having so much courage but i was to proud to admit how much i needed him just like christ was and now my life is my hell please forgive me i will accept any help the church has to offer me i am the all singing all dancing crap of the universe i am not special i am not a uniqe individual snowflake im just some one who misses hearing obout how great anton is and how wonderful it is to be an american please forgive my sobbing self pity i just got a chance that most never get to travel to france with him and learn under his direct tutilage and im ashamed of myself that i didnt
Top
#73509 - 12/03/12 06:55 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: jason mcdaniel]
Nemesis Offline
senior member


Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 2175
Loc: US
Jason, I appreciate that you're new, but you need to separate your walls of text into paragraphs and use some punctuation. I'm not saying this to be an asshole, but because the human brain prefers to process information in an orderly way. A solid block of text is a jumble of information which no one will want to read.

http://lrs.ed.uiuc.edu/students/fwalters/para.html
_________________________
Nothing is sacred.

Top
#73545 - 12/03/12 07:33 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Nemesis]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2521
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: Nemesis
... the human brain prefers to process information in an orderly way.

On the other hand [as I may have mentioned previously]:

Can you read this?

Olny srmat poelpe can.

I cdnuolt blveiee taht I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd waht I was rdanieg. The phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid, aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it denos't mtater in waht oredr the ltetres in a wrod are, the olny iprnoatmt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Amzanig huh? yaeh and I awlyas tghuhot slpeling was ipmorantt!
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#73548 - 12/03/12 07:46 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Le Deluge Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/05/12
Posts: 1790
 Originally Posted By: Michael A.Aquino
 Originally Posted By: Nemesis
... the human brain prefers to process information in an orderly way.

On the other hand [as I may have mentioned previously]:

Can you read this?

Olny srmat poelpe can.

I cdnuolt blveiee taht I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd waht I was rdanieg. The phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid, aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it denos't mtater in waht oredr the ltetres in a wrod are, the olny iprnoatmt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Amzanig huh? yaeh and I awlyas tghuhot slpeling was ipmorantt!


It is an interesting phenomena. The one thing I do notice: I can't "speed read" it. My eyes have to follow the text line by line. I can usually apply Evelyn Wood or my own methodology. It ultimately depends on how precise my own thesis needs to be in response. I read that fine, but it does take that extra few seconds to catch it.
_________________________
Apres Moi ... Le Deluge

Top
#73551 - 12/03/12 08:34 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Nemesis Offline
senior member


Registered: 09/01/07
Posts: 2175
Loc: US
Ah, but you're still using punctuation and capitalization! The words may be jumbled, but it doesn't scream "word salad" in quite the same way as Jason's post did.

Nice try, smrat ass!
_________________________
Nothing is sacred.

Top
#73552 - 12/03/12 09:57 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Nemesis]
Fnord Offline
senior member


Registered: 01/11/10
Posts: 2085
Loc: Texas
This thread reminds me of a '59 Chevrolet I once had. I aligned the front end, changed the tires, replaced the tie rods and the damn thing would inevitably try to veer off the road.

I think if this thread had a steering wheel and you were to let go of it and punch it you'd be driving in circles or nose first in the ditch.

Oh jeezus.. I finally noticed smrat ass. Didn't even register the first time. \:\)
_________________________
Dead and gone. Syonara.

Top
#73554 - 12/03/12 10:07 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Fnord]
Le Deluge Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/05/12
Posts: 1790
Haha. Magically aligns the '59 Chevy.

San Francisco native Anton LaVey codified his Satanism in 1966. Is it now outdated?!? Take 15.



Edited by Le Deluge (12/03/12 10:22 PM)
Edit Reason: superfluous subquestion
_________________________
Apres Moi ... Le Deluge

Top
#77420 - 06/25/13 12:32 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Diavolo]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 6681
Loc: Virginia
Quite the read. Thanks to all for your participation. My cheeks hurt from that perma-smile I was rockin'

 Quote:
Personally I don't think TSB was intended as a deep philosophical work and I also don't think Lavey had those qualities. It was a lighter work, more intended as amusement and such is many of those living by the philosophy. There's nothing wrong with it; they sure could do worse but it simply can't be considered deep.


I couldn't agree more with this sentiment (where is this guy?). Dissing LaVey aside(much like Diavalo's comment), it's just unfavorable to reduce it to: "Tell me something I don't already know asshole!" I always considered the SB to be a short-work written for Christians. A prop in the theater. Considering the eras, it manifests their superstitions and fears into something tangible and material. "The boogeyman is real and you've found him!"

I figured LaVey calculated the cultus that would form from it, considering that he had a tendancy to attract a club of fanboys and fangirls. Perhaps what actually formed was under-estimated... Then again, maybe not. He was enticing to those that sought to dabble in the Arcane and out in the open (How Diabolical!).

Cults of personality are rarely out-dated. In the early days, the media coverage was fantastic (not so much in recent years)! A collection of real artifacts for the religious to point at and clinch their Bible God even tighter.

To answer your question Fnord, I'd say it will never go out of style (in that context). I don't negate that applying the title to myself directly affiliates me with all this Tomfoolery (by the Religious and Satanist alike). I use it, and more often than not to my advantage. The only real down-side to it is the pains in watching people get used by it. Ouch!

I'm often a bit taken-back by the intelligible being dumbed-down and shackled by what they claim they've broken free of. It's hard Work building paradigms, getting trapped by them and finding a way out. That effort is timeless. One can only hope that lessons are learned well before the the pen is dropped to start a new architecture (next time create a trap door!).

In the 21st century, information is the new commerce. The SB is becoming normalized to a degree that the impact isn't all that profound when compared to the 20th. Cliff-notes of the ideals therein can be found on web-pages, blogs, and forums like this one. I'd imagine that it just caters to those that are time-restricted or too lazy to read the original works the ideas were extrapolated from. Plus, you have to account for the number of people that don't really have a need for the mask of Satan, many rely on personal observation and experiential knowledge.

We might point to a person and say: Hey, I recognize that guy as a Satanist (even if he doesn't self-identify that way), but that's just our own imaginings and projection. Such as the case with Howard Bloom (e.g.).
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#93093 - 09/23/14 10:20 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Fnord]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 6681
Loc: Virginia
I came across this article this morning and it reminded me of this thread.

The byproduct of The Satanic Temple's endeavors seems to be bringing 'Theistic Satanism' to the forefront. Dis-info within the article aside,

 Quote:
The Church of Satan, while encouraging of the concept of intelligence and disobeying social mores, has come out to say that The Satanic Temple should not brand themselves with “Satanism” because they do not worship Satan.



once again the subject of Atheism as Satanism is being analyzed.

 Quote:
Charles Haynes, a senior scholar at the First Amendment Center in Washington, D.C., said Friday that the Satanists reflect the increasing diversity in America, a country founded on religious freedom, as protestant Christianity's influence has lessened. source


Grand Mufti Troll Towelhead may see his dream manifest in his lifetime. Eventually, Satanism as a manifestation of the LHP will become obsolete and will be replaced with Fluffy Bunny Satanism.

 Quote:
"It's peaceful," said Jex Blackmore, 32, local leader and part of the temple's executive ministry. "The idea of sacrifice specifically is to appease some demon or some god, and that's a supernatural belief that we don't subscribe to."


Plenty do, especially of the dark-paganism variety. While those folks tend to eat what they sacrifice, the propaganda circulated by The Temples of Satan (GM Blackwood) claims he would never eat the animal that was intended for sacrifice. He tends to choose sick animals, so putting them out of their misery for Satan is his way of a humane kill (allegedly).

This whole diversity thing is full of this stuff. It spices things up and makes it far more entertaining. Satanism as a LHP practice isn't so much outdated as it is reserved for a specific type of person (born not made). I see this stuff as necessary, otherwise we just end up with homogeneity that ends up the next Jesus Christ. Parroting the orthodoxy as the only true way. I don't know about you but I don't want that. I know what it is, I don't need to dispel misconceptions or run off half-cocked to correct disinfo as a public service. Let them eat cake.
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#93107 - 09/23/14 01:33 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: SIN3]
CanisMachina42 Offline
active member


Registered: 08/10/13
Posts: 1146
Loc: San Diego, CA
I think it's the; "if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem" mentality.

It can border on militant in some cases. As I often do I come back to a genuine aversion towards intolerance or seeming intolerant. What happened to indifference? Many are so conscious not to transgress societal norms that it becomes fear. The prospect of possibly having everything taken away forces one to temper their views in order to avoid that millstone altogether.

The emphasis on Atheism (removing all gnostic and dare I say theistic traces) is self preservation.

What good is a belief if you lose your ass for it.


Edited by CanisMachina42 (09/23/14 01:49 PM)

Top
#93110 - 09/23/14 02:18 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: CanisMachina42]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 6681
Loc: Virginia
The way I see it is like this, I can be intolerant when it comes to what I'll accept in personal practice. It doesn't have anything to do with what other people do. Why should I care if people worship Satan? It's fascinating to me. This belief they have in divinities. In tandem there's also the shift in paradigm, in which believers adopt a new way of life.

Look at the Amish as an example. They are a part of society without being 'of it' to a certain extent. It certainly doesn't stop them from making high quality furniture (the stuff that can last a lifetime) at a price (capitalism).

What sense would it make for me to brow-beat the Amish to conform to my way of life? My ideals? That's hypocrisy at it's finest. That would be like me saying "I do what I want but you do what I want too!"

Diversity is vital to any society for it to survive. Otherwise we'd all be eating bland porridge wondering if there's something more palatable out there.

 Quote:
What good is a belief if you lose your ass for it.


This assumes that all believers lose their ass. When conflicted, the Amish raise a barn. The 'Work' is vital to maintaining a certain quality of life. Ever met a miserable Amish person?

Yeah, me either.
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#93119 - 09/23/14 04:17 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: SIN3]
CanisMachina42 Offline
active member


Registered: 08/10/13
Posts: 1146
Loc: San Diego, CA
I don't understand what the big taboo is surrounding Satan to begin with. I have never had that superstition. I remember, even at 11 thinking it was so cool when the cash register total was 6.66, I would even save them. The most amusing part was always the look of confusion. I guess most people buy an additional item just to avoid that discomfort.

It's so ingrained, even carrying an alleged genetic marker, to have superstition. It is genuinely feared to the core. This fear is what can trigger righteous indignation. Through no fault of their own.

I think it's fairly obvious the reason for the sedate version is to quell any possible chance of that anger coming into play.

Still I don't Satan Lite as being able to change the superstition any time soon. Change it any way you want, but to a true believer The Devil will always be the creator of all hate, lies, deception, and chaos, and never the way of the universe.

Top
#93122 - 09/23/14 04:42 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: CanisMachina42]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 6681
Loc: Virginia
You and me both. As young as I can remember, I kept thinking to myself "I want to meet such a creature hated this much", then I realized it was all just thought forms created in head space.

Some of my family members are extremely superstitious. It's weird too because the most superstitious of the bunch are first generation American born, not carry overs from Italy. Even if these superstitions were familial indoctrinations, the power of the matriarch is still strong, that's the Satan. It's not Dad that pounds this stuff into their kid's heads, it was Mom. Over the years it hasn't wavered either, I can point out the obvious a hundred times over and it's the same thing. They think I'm just being an asshole vs. trying to smack some sense into them. Now-a-days I just smile and nod, what the hell else can you do? They just won't let go of the shit.

Anytime something went wonky, it's easy to blame it on the Devil, why work at it when a scapegoat is so readily available?

The taboo of embracing the Devil would mean that they are alone in this struggle and that terrifies them even more than any boogeyman hiding in the shadows.
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#93163 - 09/24/14 10:53 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: CanisMachina42]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 6681
Loc: Virginia
Here is a follow-up.

 Quote:


Q: The Satanic Temple claims not to believe in the Devil. Why do you call yourselves Satanists?

A: This question is often the first to trouble and confuse the minds of the many who feel that Satan universally represents all that is horrific and anti-human, and that "religion" belongs solely to the superstitious.

Ours is not the Satan of medieval witch-hunting mythology, but the eternal rebel in opposition to tyranny — the literary Satan best exemplified by authors such as Milton, Blake, Shelley, and Anatole France. The self-identified Satanist embraces their outsider status and is drawn to the forbidden, anomalous, and the hidden. We identify with the symbolism of "blasphemy" as an expression of liberation from superstition. We bow to no God, or gods, and we reject all arbitrary edicts and unjust authority.

We have no concern or sympathy for those who wish to preserve the myth of a Satanic cult conspiracy lurking underneath the surface of society, working dutifully toward destruction of the Common Good. If history has taught us anything regarding false allegations related to witchcraft and Satanism, it's that the most horrific evil has always taken place when "good" people are moved by delusional fear to purge their community of a maligned "other".

Contrary to popular perception, I argue that religion cannot be defined to require a belief in the supernatural. At its best, religion provides a narrative context, sense of purpose, symbolic structure, identity, values, and a body of practice. Religions enjoy certain privileges and exemptions that would be reprehensible — in a pluralistic society — to reserve for supernaturalists alone. While we reject superstition, our values are no less sincerely held. And while we view Satanism in metaphorical terms, our tenets and symbolism are far from arbitrary.

In short, we call ourselves Satanists because Satanists we are.



I wonder if it's cognitive dissonance. I'm guessing the 'myth' he's referring to is that of wide-spread SRA BUT... He seems to negate the number of people that also identify as Satanists that commit murder and sacrifice. To say "Well, those people aren't REAL Satanists!" is just a form of denial. Why not just address it directly? When asked myself, I certainly do and the world doesn't end.

So while he has no sympathy for those that seek to preserve this so-called myth, excuse me while my apathy towards this sort of shit is distilled.
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#93174 - 09/24/14 04:01 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: SIN3]
Czereda Offline
senior member


Registered: 03/14/11
Posts: 1763
Loc: Poland
 Quote:
He seems to negate the number of people that also identify as Satanists that commit murder and sacrifice. To say "Well, those people aren't REAL Satanists!" is just a form of denial.


Then we come back to the same old questions: What is Satanism? Does calling yourself a Satanist make you one?

Sure, there are cases of self-professed Satanists committing ritual murders or simple murders. The case I'm most familiar with and that stuck in my memory was the one that happened in my country some 15 or 16 years ago. I wrote about it in another thread. It's also the most characteristic because it was a real ritual murder involving Satanic symbols and so on. Two teenagers who claimed to be Satanists killed their younger friends; a guy and a girl. The victims belonged to the cult too, they were lured to an old abandoned bunker, being sure it was going to be a casual ritual. They were told to kneel down and then they were stabbed with a knife. The perpetrators, after they were caught, confessed their crime and said they did it because they wanted to go to Hell. The reaction of some journalists was: "They aren't Satanists."

And now the question is whether these guys were Satanists or not. They claimed to be ones but were they? No matter how you slice it, the answer seems to be no. Even if you apply some sinister standards to them, it's still obvious they were puppets on the strings of the dark part of their psyche. Sure, they were attracted to the dark and forbidden but they were far from being its masters.
_________________________
Anna Czereda
O9A Meme Cat

Top
#93176 - 09/24/14 05:58 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Czereda]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 6681
Loc: Virginia
Well, according to the TST anyone is a Satanist if they say so. Besides that, they also take the position that there's all sorts of Satanisms. Plenty of these would-be Satanists make that claim. Including but not limited to Theists, Luciferians, Spiritual, et. al.

If you recall the podcast I did, this was also central to the discussion of the so-called "Progression of Satanism".

So I guess it boils back to autonomy. If you're self-governed and not pinned down by any sort of orthodoxy, then calling yourself a Satanist is enough.

It doesn't really matter what I personally think, at the end of the day. These folks are seeking to be acknowledged and accepted as Satanists regardless if they fit the bill.
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#93660 - 10/12/14 10:32 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: SIN3]
OldTimer666 Offline
stranger


Registered: 06/15/14
Posts: 13
ASL came along at just the right time in American pop culture as well as the right time for religious change in this nation. The philosophy he put forth will never be outdated. I often wonder how things would have played out differently had he lived longer. Of course we can lament for hours over the direction that the CoS has taken under Gilmore and Barton, or the family infighting that followed his death---- But, that's not what I am referring to. I wonder if the advance of the internet would have pulled an aging LaVey out his seclusion and back into the spotlight. Would the instant access to millions, have provided him a more stabile financial foundation, and would all the changes since his death, have spurred a new evolution in LaVeyan Satanism?
_________________________
Back in the Day.......

Top
#93663 - 10/12/14 11:18 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: OldTimer666]
FemaleSatan Offline
member


Registered: 10/19/11
Posts: 555
Loc: The Dirty South
 Quote:
American pop culture


The philosophy he put forth will never be outdated.



You do realize that simply by mentioning pop culture you point to the potential loss of relevancy that LaVeyan Satanism is suffering at this point in time?

Culture evolves and what is considered taboo evolves along with it. The things that LaVey points to as being Satanic are now pretty fucking mainstream and it makes the philosophy he put forth not do what it did in the 60s.

Look around you man, most of the values LaVey props up (sexual freedom, individuality, etc) are what most people value today.
_________________________
http://female-satan.blogspot.com


Top
#93664 - 10/12/14 12:08 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: FemaleSatan]
OldTimer666 Offline
stranger


Registered: 06/15/14
Posts: 13
To pretend that LaVey and his success wasn't at least partially due to the pop culture appeal of the time is silly. Yes, some of what was "shocking" back in 1969, is not as shocking today. I think that even LaVey realized that the "shock and awe" aspect would fade in time, and was only a hook to pull people in.

Although some of the shock value has worn off, the underlying principles are just as relevant today as they were 40+ years ago.
_________________________
Back in the Day.......

Top
#93669 - 10/13/14 08:46 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: OldTimer666]
FemaleSatan Offline
member


Registered: 10/19/11
Posts: 555
Loc: The Dirty South
 Quote:
To pretend that LaVey and his success wasn't at least partially due to the pop culture appeal of the time is silly.


I didn't claim that LaVey's success wasn't due to the pop culture appeal. I even think it's a fundamental reason that he 'gets it' while others do not.

 Quote:
Yes, some of what was "shocking" back in 1969, is not as shocking today. I think that even LaVey realized that the "shock and awe" aspect would fade in time, and was only a hook to pull people in.


See this is where we part ways man. I firmly believe that Satanism should be shocking, should buck the current societal trends and even embrace cutting against that grain. That's the fundamental aspect of what LaVey did that is relevant, he was counter cultural, it's the only underlying principle I see in the mess that Satanism is.
_________________________
http://female-satan.blogspot.com


Top
#93675 - 10/13/14 10:34 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: OldTimer666]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 6681
Loc: Virginia
 Quote:
I wonder if the advance of the internet would have pulled an aging LaVey out his seclusion and back into the spotlight. Would the instant access to millions, have provided him a more stabile financial foundation, and would all the changes since his death, have spurred a new evolution in LaVeyan Satanism?



Lest we forget that LaVey died in poor health, broke and with troubles in every sphere of his social habitat. He didn't bathe regularly, he attempted to justify this by saying: "Let your natural body odor flow..." It didn't exactly help matters in his already troubled marriage. He didn't take care of his teeth, his snaggle tooth mug just added to his aesthetic. Like a used car salesman he just moved from gig to gig, he was doing what he "wanted", not what was necessary right? He was the quintessential Libertine. LaVeyan-ism is as outdated as the Libertine movement.

It wasn't HIS philosophy that compelled him, he was compelled by already existing concepts that sprang up thousands of years before him. No matter the form, their persistent presence in every human society should tell you that it has nil to do with the messenger.
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#93680 - 10/13/14 04:27 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: FemaleSatan]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2521
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: FemaleSatan
 Quote:
To pretend that LaVey and his success wasn't at least partially due to the pop culture appeal of the time is silly.

I didn't claim that LaVey's success wasn't due to the pop culture appeal. I even think it's a fundamental reason that he 'gets it' while others do not.

Many historical "events" have involved not just individuals like Napoleon or Hitler, but social, economic, etc. circumstances which gave them an opportunity and an audience. So it was with Anton LaVey. This is not to minimize his own genius or courage, just to say that he had a much better shot in 60s San Francisco than he would have had ten years earlier in Salt Lakes City. ;\) Ira Levin came along at the right moment too!
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#95638 - 01/13/15 10:46 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Fnord]
Occult1969 Offline
stranger


Registered: 12/05/14
Posts: 8
All I can say about the Church of Satan in regards to Gilmore is that he is very arrogant toward Theistic Satanists. I'm all about whatever works for you but don't put down others for their beliefs!! Also, I feel Anton LaVey was full of shit regarding his Atheistic philosophy! There were many who felt he believed in the Actual Prince of Darkness himself!!
Top
#95639 - 01/13/15 10:48 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Occult1969]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 6681
Loc: Virginia
 Quote:
but don't put down others for their beliefs!!


Why not? Is he arrogant or antagonistic? If your beliefs can be assaulted, you probably don't believe it as vehemently as you think.
_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#95641 - 01/13/15 11:24 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Occult1969]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3812
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Of course you are right. Peoples beliefs are sacred, and should never even be questioned unless the question is punctuated both fore and aft with sincere apologies. Nothing good has ever come from honest scrutiny..its just so awkward you know?

You're also right about old LaVey there, all those interviews and essays he wrote that were quite explicit about his non theistic views were a total ruse. He was just trying too hard you know? Like he was covering something. I find it possible he may have actually been a reptilian.
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#95644 - 01/13/15 01:54 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Dan_Dread]
BlackSacrament Offline
stranger


Registered: 12/25/14
Posts: 21
Loc: USA
 Originally Posted By: Dan_Dread
You're also right about old LaVey there, all those interviews and essays he wrote that were quite explicit about his non theistic views were a total ruse. He was just trying too hard you know? Like he was covering something. I find it possible he may have actually been a reptilian.


I thought it was common knowledge that we were being secretly ruled over by Illuminati Reptilian Overlords.

If you'll excuse me, I need to adjust my tin foil hat.
_________________________
"Let it be made known; you are superior."-The Black Sacrament

Top
#95645 - 01/13/15 02:34 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Occult1969]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2521
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: Occult1969
I feel Anton lavey was full of shit regarding his Atheistic philosophy! There were many who felt he believed in the Actual Prince of Darkness himself!

As is quite adequately evidenced and documented in The Church of Satan, Anton sincerely believed in and openly acknowledged Satan as a metaphysical being prior to 1975. So, for that matter, did everyone else in the original Church, which is exactly why the crisis of 1975 ended it as an actual church. Thereafter Anton just operated the name as a personal, and cynical, business, for whose "marks" he cared nothing and was indeed openly contemptuous.

This is the travesty that Densley promoted, Gilmore bought into, and which still flounders along in a state of pathetic and ludicrous identity crisis: not a church, not believing in Satan, reciting insincere incantations to wall-hanging Baphomets which are no longer Gates but just inert pieces of painted pressboard.

The "outdating" of the original Church, however, had nothing to do with human issues/incidents of sincerity per se. An authentic reality exists and continues whether or not it is recognized and endorsed by an audience. Rather what evolved within the Church was an increasing realization that its iconography was inaccurate and inadequate. In short, "Satan" was a construct of Judæo-Christian mythology, which came more and more into focus as phony: a rag-bag of borrowed and butchered superstitions from preexisting Egyptian and Mesopotamian metaphysics.

So if Anton had not imploded the Church with his degree-selling decision in 1975, I have no doubt that it would have continued to evolve beyond J/C into something very much like the subsequent Temple of Set, but with Anton still its High Priest and myself still as a completely gruntled IV°. It might or might not have changed its name, because pre-75 we were already well on the way to expanding Satan well beyond the J/C scarecrow to a much more independent apprehension.

You see some echoes of this, indeed, with 600C, which struggles in many ways to be sincerely "Satanic" without either being imprisoned in old J/C stereotypes on one hand or capitulating into the vacuous play-acting of the Gilmorons on the other. There's a clear, collective desire here to be authentic, while still carrying the traditional name and image forward.

Some of these efforts are better than others, and some of them also get entangled with spasms of Atheism/materialism, as though anything at all metaphysical is somehow a sellout to comic-book-religion (by which I mean the entire "mainstream") self-delusion. It is precisely because the original Church of Satan, for all its naïveté, was so exciting and such a breath of fresh air.

As I see it, having watched this forum for a few years now, even the more intelligent jerks here are here because there's something gnawing at them to be authentic in their persons, and for which Satan seems the best idealization. That's cool. As I often quote the good Dr. Jessup in this regard:

 Originally Posted By: Edward Jessup, Ph.D., Altered States
I’m a man in search of his true self. How archetypically American can you get?

Everybody’s looking for his true self. We’re all trying to fulfill ourselves, understand ourselves, get in touch with ourselves, get ahold of ourselves, face the reality of ourselves, explore ourselves, expand ourselves.

Ever since we dispensed with God, we’ve got nothing but ourselves to explain this meaningless horror of life. We’re all weekending at est or meditating for forty minutes a day or squatting on floors in a communal OM or locking arms in quasi-Sufi dances or stripping off the deceptions of civilized life and jumping naked into a swimming pool filled with other naked searchers for self.

Well, I think that true self, that original self, that first self, is a real, mensurate, quantifiable thing, tangible and incarnate. And I’m going to find the fucker!

FTF is what initiation is all about, actually. ;\)
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#95665 - 01/13/15 09:10 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
antikarmatomic Offline
BANNED
stalker


Registered: 09/22/13
Posts: 3208
Loc: El Mundo
I dunno, man – I suspect he probably ventured into another coil ahead of schedule and just didn't bother to inform anyone.

Perhaps he had very fucking solid reasons - you think I'd want the FBI at my door for merely looking, like, too hard into the nature of human condition – because it, like, ruined some psyops investigation or whatever? Running grottoes and such? Shit! Who wants to be the next Wilhelm Reich or Jesus Christ for that matter? Any takers?

Does any of that sound life-affirming, much less “fun”.

I figure it was as much about the money as (*sigh what an already boring allegory*) GWAR was

It's lonely at the top, and even lonelier to apprehend that there is no “top”... it just becomes more isolate and asymptomatically so.

From where I sit, he at least tried (though I still can't fathom why bother)

Shit, Christ tried too – but his “niggaz” didn't quite get “it” either and went off espousing silliness. To where 2000 years later... I can't even get a decent divorce with out shelling out a fuck-ton of money to some greedy ass-lawyers.

That shit happens when you start dealing with paradox and levels of indirection of what it is to be “you; man”. (human)

He made the simple fallacy of assuming that those who understand BASIC can grok C and that those that grok C understand ASM while at the same time eschewing the tedious and arbitrary nature of binary and punch-cards all the while while discarding the nature of voltage in the first place.

So far as I can tell he fell into a level of recursion that could only be understood to himself alone and was, in his own way, just describing (in his later works - Satan Speaks) his own solitary hell for even having tried.

Such as become of djinn and obscure c-list philosophers (Christ, too among them)

(and maybe a few enough who were smart enough not to say a damn thing about it - then again, I wasn't there, so how the fuck should I know?)

Seems to me there were people taking the concepts of tail-end recursion and apprehending them as for-loops with explicit degrees and titles and what-not (especially the what-not) trying to navigate a tree of indeterminate and innumerable branches (in the likeness of an oak, even)

*does the OS nessitate the code, or does the code faciliate the OS?

*shrugs you tell me* ;\)

(and I'm not even of the c/s current anyway – I simply have eyes... my mommy gave them to me – perhaps she's intrinsically a shinigami :p )

Anyway, none of this is a personal jab, or whatever (I dig your writings), but from the pot I'm shitting in you might have made a mistake somewhere back there – long before I was born... and who knows? It might have been a necessary one to have made.

Only time will tell.


Edited by antikarmatomic (01/13/15 09:49 PM)
_________________________
Angelic harlequins and sinister clowns.

Top
#95666 - 01/13/15 09:35 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
NEN Offline
pledge


Registered: 12/25/14
Posts: 75
Loc: Texas
 Originally Posted By: Michael A.Aquino

As is quite adequately evidenced and documented in The Church of Satan, Anton sincerely believed in and openly acknowledged Satan as a metaphysical being prior to 1975. So, for that matter, did everyone else in the original Church, which is exactly why the crisis of 1975 ended it as an actual church.


Wow. As a historical account of someone who was there, this is phenomenal. It's hard to get this kind of inside information by just reading books. Why did Anton abandon the metaphysical being stance? I'm clearly an outsider looking in, but this is interesting.

Top
#95667 - 01/13/15 11:21 PM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: NEN]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2521
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: NEN
 Originally Posted By: Michael A.Aquino
As is quite adequately evidenced and documented in The Church of Satan, Anton sincerely believed in and openly acknowledged Satan as a metaphysical being prior to 1975. So, for that matter, did everyone else in the original Church, which is exactly why the crisis of 1975 ended it as an actual church.

Wow. As a historical account of someone who was there, this is phenomenal. It's hard to get this kind of inside information by just reading books. Why did Anton abandon the metaphysical being stance? I'm clearly an outsider looking in, but this is interesting.

In this case the COS book is the best source, since it examines the entire history of the Church along with Anton's evolving perceptions and attitudes. The "2013 Postface" includes a summing-up of the problems and pressures that resulted in the 1975 crisis.

It's important to bear in mind, as the book also evidences, that we were all in the same boat of attempting to comprehend and grapple with the Pandora's Jar opened in 1966. I was the next-senior official, and I didn't see the crisis coming, though some warning signs were clearly there in retrospect: 20/20 hindsight:

 Originally Posted By: Robert E. Lee
The war was an unnecessary condition of affairs, and might have been avoided if forbearance and wisdom had been practiced on both sides.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#95672 - 01/14/15 09:15 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3812
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
There is an interview with lavey from the early years, I believe it is from that 'occult explosion'(1973) documentary where he explicitly, in no uncertain language, explains his views on theism and why he allowed theists into his organisation.

The whole damned Munster family can write 3 bazillion page PDFs of utterly creative revisionism, but the horses mouth is right there for anyone not so easily bamboozled by f list celebrity to investigate.
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#95675 - 01/14/15 10:12 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Dan_Dread]
SIN3 Offline
stalker


Registered: 05/14/13
Posts: 6681
Loc: Virginia
 Quote:
I believe it is from that 'occult explosion'(1973) documentary


Speak of the Devil includes plenty of stock footage from early interviews with LaVey and is still readily available for download and purchase. His views about literal devil worship and devil worshipers are crystal clear.

I will honestly never understand why it matters to NoObs anyway, even if they just read the books it's clear from the get-go (or it should be)

To paraphrase some key points:

-If you're going to be a Sinner, be the best on the block.

-Man has a proclivity towards religion, and 'religion' can be plenty of things (train collecting was used as an analogy), so go do it with a full heart and for self-serving reasons not because you think it's what other people want you to do.

-Don't follow LaVey like a guru, it's the ideas that resonate, the ideas he begged, borrowed and stole from a variety of sources and put it right where they belong - the Devil's business. These same ideas the reader also came to naturally (vs. indoctrination) hence "BORN NOT MADE"... ETC.

If this dead carcass is being dragged around it's because you can't fit a square peg in a round hole without constantly hitting it with a hammer.



_________________________
SINJONES.com

Top
#95715 - 01/15/15 09:39 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Occult1969 Offline
stranger


Registered: 12/05/14
Posts: 8
Dear Mr. Aquino:
Thank you for the insight on Anton LaVey's early goals and his beliefs as opposed to what happened after 1975. Also, I want to thank you for starting the Temple of Set and I feel it was the true revolutionary organization that was needed in 1975. You have done so much for the Satanic/magical community and I feel you are a very sincere individual who has never fluffed over anything.

Warm regards,
Occult1969

Top
#95721 - 01/15/15 10:32 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Occult1969]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2521
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: Occult1969
Dear Mr. Aquino: Thank you ...

My appreciation for your gracious comments. In 2013, when I finally published The Church of Satan, I added an extensive "Postface 2013" to it, taking a fresh look-back at Anton and the Church: addressing not just what happened, but how substantive the entire episode was, and finally whether it was "worth it".

I think it was a very honest effort by people with good intentions (including Anton), that, if it didn't "bite off more than it could chew", certainly never anticipated the size of the bite it took. What began as a satirical, countercultural lark in 1966 wound up grappling with some of the most central, and taboo, questions of human existence. Amidst an external environment that was at best amusedly tolerant, more often contemptuous and outright dangerous.

It's an almost impossible story. I remarked in the book that more than one alumnus/a of the Church, upon reading COS, has commented to me, "If I had't lived through it, I would have found it too bizarre to believe."

Anton LaVey was not a perfect man, but I will go to my grave maintaining, as COS does, that he was a very good and honest man who, like Colonel Kurtz in Apocalypse Now, simply reached a personal breaking point. Many, indeed most people drift through their lives without finding, much less testing theirs; they are scarcely in a position to rush to judgment. In COS' Preface I quote Maurice Conchis, the enigmatic magician from John Fowles' The Magus, concerning the French aristocrat who had inspired his own initiation as a youth:

 Originally Posted By: Conchis
Whenever I see a photograph of a teeming horde of Chinese peasants, or of some military procession, whenever I see a cheap newspaper crammed with advertisements for mass-produced rubbish. Or the rubbish itself that large stores sell. Whenever I see the horrors of the pax Americana, of civilizations condemned to century after century of mediocrity because of over-population and under-education, I see also de Deukans. Whenever I see lack of space and lack of grace, I think of him. One day, many millennia from now, there will perhaps be a world in which there are only such châteaux, or their equivalents, and such men and women. And instead of their having to grow, like mushrooms, from a putrescent compost of inequality and exploitation, they will come from an evolution as controlled and ordered as de Deukans’ tiny world at Givray-le-Duc. Apollo will reign again. And Dionysus will return to the shadows from which he came.


Edited by Michael A.Aquino (01/15/15 10:34 AM)
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#95726 - 01/15/15 11:46 AM Re: Anton LaVey's Satanism is "outdated?" [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
G.Belbo Offline
stranger


Registered: 06/04/14
Posts: 18
Loc: Greece
Certainly not. Just as UNIVAC 1108 is still the best pc around. Oh, and wasn't stagnation and dogmatism characteristics of the other side?

(sorry for the one-line)
_________________________
All my heroes have failed.

Top
Page all of 16 12345>Last »


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

Generated in 0.253 seconds of which 0.008 seconds were spent on 252 queries. Zlib compression disabled.