Page 4 of 18 « First<23456>Last »
Topic Options
#56301 - 06/28/11 02:05 PM Re: Satanism and real live achievments [Re: Jake999]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
Not to mention that in these cases, we easily attribute each "benefit" we get to that great guy delivering it, as if he alone decided we deserve it and it makes us feel great being judged as such, but a car crash costing us an arm and a leg, seems to be interpreted differently.

If you deserve a cookie, you might deserve a spanking too.

All in all, these things mean nothing but are given meaning.

D.

Top
#56302 - 06/28/11 03:05 PM Re: Satanism and real live achievments [Re: William Wright]
Mister Cage Offline
stranger


Registered: 11/02/10
Posts: 49
 Originally Posted By: William Wright
Let me quote you, Dr. Aquino, so there is no misunderstanding:

“You will swear your body, mind, and soul to Our Lord Satan in his Rite of Baptism; and thereafter, as long as you remain true to your Oath, you shall receive all that you desire and deserve." As, of course, it always came to pass.

All that you desire? Really? What if you desire to flap your arms and fly? What if you desire to physically become a child again or raise your parents from the dead? Can’t you realize how ridiculous that statement is?



C'mon... your statement is also ridiculas William. Its clear that Aquino is speaking in Ritual context thats aimed to heighten the senses and motivation of the Initiate during Ceremony. You dont seem to get the context its used in.

However i do not disagree with you concerning exacts. No body is sprouting wings in the subjective universe...but how about the objective?

But what you must understand, and im sure you do because you are very attuned (after reviewing your prior threads and replies) that this "command" is an affirmation to effect tbe objective universe to anchor results in the subjective.

Top
#56303 - 06/28/11 03:36 PM Re: Satanism and real live achievments [Re: Mister Cage]
Hegesias Offline
active member


Registered: 02/16/11
Posts: 725
Correct me if I am missing something here, but there is only the will to power and all that something does is it's will to power. The disguised forms of the will to power and the more direct. Everything is power play. What is good about this is that peoples behaviour becomes transparent, and without the unnecessary, linear, process of morality as anything but something to be mechanised, there is no need to formalise things in order to retaliate by ones own will to power.

For example: A Mundane tries to make you feel guilty through his morality, this is a disguised form of the will to power, imposing a mild fear of socio-anarchy and nothing more, it is simple fear of uncertainty. I'm not sure as it's hard to remember, but what is important is that all the Mundanes say and do is not to be trusted, they believe their own lies, justifications, and the reality of this is invincible ignorance.

They will act surprised and shocked claiming that you are attacking them excessively for no reason simply because they believe themselves to be disguised and at a safe distance to impose on you without you noticing.

People are always attempting to inflict their will upon eachother. Every action toward another stems from a desire to bring that person under power. Whether a person is giving, proving to be in love with someone, or physically harming someone.

The only thing I respect is power and the only thing I despise is a much to vulgar display of power.

Wolves baring teeth creates equilibrium, and such is not peace, but respect.

So to both summarise and ask: Is there is no achievement to be had in the world except to learn how we respond to anticipations of socio-anarchy and how adept we are at expressing the will to power, in both direct and disguised forms, to mechanise abstract causal forms?
_________________________


Top
#56305 - 06/28/11 05:15 PM Re: Satanism and real live achievments [Re: Mister Cage]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2573
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: Mister Cage
@ mr. Aquino... i agree that we cant go out and "do Satanism" but you must admit that the Paths we incorporate that identify ourselves as LHP practitioners has aided us, or at least myself, in improving our quality of life via Will and advanced magical practices.

As I have detailed previously, the Satanic Bible was a hastily-thrown-together mishmash of different, unrelated documents: Redbeard, Dee, various Church mimeographed handouts ("Lucifer") and basic do-it-yourself ritual instructions. It was simply Peter Mayer of Avon's idea to surfboard a quick paperback on the 1968 publicity-wave of the Church of Satan.

The basic theme of the handouts was "You're being screwed and will continue to be unless you wake up, realize it, and take control of your own future." Here we are still in MS-R territory, and this is where most post-1975 devotees of the SB stop. There is nothing wrong with this, of course. It's what you see when the SB is brought up in the 600C, and it is, of course, good advice. Anton just wrote it simpler and rawer than, say, Peter Ouspensky in his Psychology of Man's Possible Evolution or William Irvine's A Guide to the Good Life.

So the question is: Where does Satan come into any of this? To satanatheists the answer is easy: He's just a symbol, a totem of awakened/undeceived savvy man. Anything beyond this, e.g. magical/metaphysical, is not only unnecessary but actually humiliating and self-abasing, because it seems to move back into the realm of "religion as a people-control device" as per the world's conventional slave-religions.

It is also essential to Atheism to deny anything beyond the material. It is only secure in its functionality if it rules out any outside factors or influences. It is Dana Scully at the beginning of The X-Files. For this reason one finds far more resistance to Satan in the 600C than, amusingly, among non-"Satanists". If there is anything that the 600C and Peter Gilmore's "Church of Satan" firmly agree on, it is that Satan does not exist. This is, I suspect, unique among the world's "-isms".

Yet within the original 1966-75 Church, we discovered that Satan was very real indeed, but in a remarkable way unique to this religion. He was a source which, when accessed, responded by activating and energizing something dormant within but intrinsic to each conscious being who recognized and invoked him. The result of this was a transformation of individual consciousness to something larger and more potent than that. [It indeed may be that the profane legend, and fear, of "dæmonic possession" is a pale reflection of this phenomenon.] You remain yourself, but become something more too. This is both what I myself experienced and what I saw in others who became authentic Satanists. We became apes picking up bones, and thereafter our entire conscious existence was never the same again.

Again where the original question of this thread is concerned, being such a Satanist is not by any means a ticket to social, financial, etc. success. Or happiness. The more you see with ruthless clarity [or "undefiled wisdom" if you like], the more complex, the greyer, the more ripple-effective everything becomes. Not to mention that, like Dr. Morbius, you simultaneously awaken the Dark Side of your own consciousness, your very own "monster from the id", which can destroy you just as inexorably as it did him [or Anton LaVey].

Indeed it is for these considerations that I have never recommended that anyone seek to become a Satanist [or since 1975 a Setian]. It is a consuming, obsessing, raging, ecstatic, and terrifying experience; and one which is not reversible if later regretted. But some individuals became Satanists then, or Setians now, not because of the Church then, or the Temple now, but because of something within themselves. The Church then, and the Temple now, merely identifies this phenomenon and seeks to encourage and enhance an intelligent, ethical unfolding manifestation of it.

Otherwise, continue on the MS-R path wisely recommended by satanatheists here, and you will indeed maximize your chances both for worldly prosperity and gratification therefrom.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#56307 - 06/28/11 05:54 PM Re: Satanism and real live achievments [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
MindFux Offline
member


Registered: 12/27/10
Posts: 174
MAA, my problem with your posts is that they are almost entirely filled with hokum devoid of any real meaning. You assign these 'mystical' axioms of your own devising, based on not a shred of rationality then attempt to use them as rational objections to a philosophy that compared to the wash you apply to the hog, is head and shoulders better. (Albeit still stopping so short of the goal posts in most cases one wonders whether they're even playing the right game).

 Quote:

As I have detailed previously, the Satanic Bible was a hastily-thrown-together mishmash of different, unrelated documents: Redbeard, Dee, various Church mimeographed handouts ("Lucifer") and basic do-it-yourself ritual instructions. It was simply Peter Mayer of Avon's idea to surfboard a quick paperback on the 1968 publicity-wave of the Church of Satan.


Certainly - so let me get this straight - your strung together hogwash based on mistranslation of Egyptian as a language is clearly better right? After all that's hung together from a collection of irrelevant and discredited research and meaningless speculation from your own mind.

Presumably 'Set' if such an 'entity' exists on anything other than the causal plane you hang the abstraction to - would pre and post date Egyptian culture. Surely then you are just hanging these archaic (and poorly understood by you) terms to a mythological figure in an effort to provide some sense of lineage to what is ultimately a 'current' or an 'aspect' of the self. This makes your 'mystical ascriptions' no better than any other religion as they are based on nothing more than a subjective impression of something acausal within a dimensionless mindspace rather than anything 'real'. Indeed if your philosophy had any merit presumably it would stand on its own two feet rather than requiring constant support from long dead memes, badly misunderstood due to poor knowledge of Egyptian. Why resort to 'Satan' and then 'Set' at all? Because it revealed itself to you as an Egyptian Diety. How convenient. How irrelevant.

 Quote:

It is also essential to Atheism to deny anything beyond the material. It is only secure in its functionality if it rules out any outside factors or influences. It is Dana Scully at the beginning of The X-Files. For this reason one finds far more resistance to Satan in the 600C than, amusingly, among non-"Satanists".


This is just dualist hogwash. You're throwing up this 'strawman' of what a 'Satanatheist' is based on what you want the people that adhere to it to be. You want people to define themselves by what they don't believe, rather than what they do.

Satan, as an 'entity', an 'archetype' (gah) a 'current' of the mind, an 'acausal entity', or a 'mystical being' is really irrelevant to the process of living the LHP.

Whether the force exists within or without is a matter of perspective the ultimate answer to which can never be 'known' so what it comes down to is what has a meaningful impact on the way one lives.

Engaging in endless mental masturbation about what 'it' is, is pointless as it does nothing more than attempt to box something up in a useful causal abstraction to allow one to start a cult. Or is 'belief' so important to the process of gnosis? Doesn't that smell a little Christian to you?

The experience of that acausal entity is what is at heart and one's 'theism' or otherwise does not preclude experience, or gnosis.

You want your form to be 'the form' and are using your strawman to support that, and only the blind would miss it. When contemplating that entity, whether it is objectively real or not matters little to the process of living - except oddly to theists where it is always their way is the best way, because they call it by a name they can't justify rationally rather than one they can. Their way is the best way because they 'believe' something irrational where others don't require belief at all. If that's rational to you, have at it, just don't act like others failing to adhere to that belief are somehow deficient, when in fact its 2 ways of looking at the same object when such object whether externally extant or not doesn't change however one sees it.

 Quote:
we discovered that Satan was very real indeed, but in a remarkable way unique to this religion. He was a source which, when accessed, responded by activating and energizing something dormant within but intrinsic to each conscious being who recognized and invoked him.


None of which requires a belief in anything metaphysical, unless you are so utterly Magian that one requires 'belief' in something for progress. If so, how thoroughly Christian of you. Many 'atheistic' Satanists regard Satan as real, just not in a sense your modernist philosophy will accept. That's your loss, don't tarnish them with that brush.

 Quote:
The Church then, and the Temple now, merely identifies this phenomenon and seeks to encourage and enhance an intelligent, ethical unfolding manifestation of it.


No, your manifestation of it requires a dressing of needless hokum and causal abstractions all of which distract an adherent from -doing-.

If you believe that performing ritual and stomping around does more than stroke yourself into a frenzy then have fun with that, but don't sell it like it's the Way. It's just your Way, and the Way of those so gullable as to swallow your view wholesale when your entire post could be set with the prefix "I think" or "I believe" and so doesn't represent a rational counterpoint to anything.

MF.


Edited by MindFux (06/28/11 06:05 PM)
Edit Reason: Clarification, spelling, typos and other evidence of a long assed day

Top
#56308 - 06/28/11 06:23 PM Re: Satanism and real live achievments [Re: Mister Cage]
Lamar Offline
member


Registered: 02/03/10
Posts: 226
Loc: Alabama
 Originally Posted By: Mister Cage


But if you've created a successful business from the ground up out of nothing...this is considered a sovereign feat. As i had. To put it one way...if your still working for someone else, you are not as "autonomous" as you may think...you are still not "self-governing" in accordance to LHP theory and practices. If you live paycheck by paycheck...you most likely have a lot of work to do to identify yourself as an accomplished Black Magician.

LHP practitioners and Satanists alike can measure life achievements by the "quality of life" they have manifested through the hard-won work of the Initiate. Its the going against the grain, the testing the fences to learn how to learn and using those uncommon tools to achieve goals that are above and beyond others! Do what i had....follow your dream and create something that contributes to your quality of life.


I disagree that a Satanist can only be called "successful" if he has built a buisness from the ground up. This is because not every Satanist wants to own a personal buisness. I do not. I do agree however that it is more Satanic to be successful in one's own personal interests to the point that one begins to thrive without the system. But more often than not it is more realistic to have a job to be able to pursue personal interests. Keep in mind though that personal interests, like people, are vast and varry in appearance. Perhaps one enjoys being a manager at a local 7/11. I don't see anything wrong with being a successful manager if it gets things done in one's life.

Top
#56310 - 06/28/11 07:07 PM Re: Satanism and real live achievments [Re: Empire of Dread]
assault_ninja Offline
Banned--Idiot
stranger


Registered: 06/14/11
Posts: 36
Not sure whether I should post it here, but if you're interested in connection between real world achievements and Satanism, I suggest you read this. Thanks to Dr. Aquino for mentioning it in his ebook.
Top
#56311 - 06/28/11 07:44 PM Re: Satanism and real live achievments [Re: MindFux]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2573
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: MindFux
MAA, my problem with your posts is that they are almost entirely filled with hokum devoid of any real meaning ...

Etc., which along with Mr. Wright illustrates the fear and antagonism satanatheists have for authentic Satanism better than anything I could say.

My response to you is the same as to him: Don't upset yourself about it, because you are clearly unsuited for it. Continue with your MS-R, label yourself however you wish (including "Satanist"), and enjoy life. There, wasn't that easy and painless?
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#56313 - 06/28/11 09:06 PM Re: Satanism and real live achievments [Re: Jake999]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2573
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: Jake999
It's the same thing that Christians use in their prayers when they say, "If it is God's Will." Of course, the Christians will tell you that if you don't get your desire, "It simply wasn't God's Will." In the theistic vernacular of the "LHP," it can be translated to..."You may have desired, but perhaps you didn't deserve."

An interesting point, but in actuality Christianity is fundamentally different from Satanism in this respect.

Christianity is based on the principle of human sin or imperfection which can only be corrected through divine intervention, e.g. Grace. The "sin" is that of separate consciousness and its expressed will; and since these are inherent in humanity, there is nothing a human can do to suppress, repress, or eliminate them - despite many attempts, ranging from prayer and monastic meditation to flagellation and torture/execution. Even in a state of "tentative Grace" (acceptance of Christ), such a human is all the more aware of his inherent deviation from what that Grace signifies (in theory, a return to "pure innocence" - as in pre-apple Eden). Thus the Christian must accept all that happens to him as "God's will", and of course the unpleasant things as no more than is deserved by his sin [and only, perhaps, something less because of Christ's intervention = Grace].

Satanists begin their awakening by first rejecting any notion of original/birthright "guilt" or "sin". For many this is a natural state of being; for others, indoctrinated in the slave religions, a "red pill" [or laxative] is necessary, and that is what the Black Mass is all about.

Whereupon the individual approaches the transformation of Satanic Baptism [or, later, Setian initiation] as a completely discretionary conscious entity. There is no enticement; there is no threat. Rather there is, as James Thomson described in in The City of Dreadful Night, only "Necessity Supreme": the Black Flame of the awakened Self, demanding its perfection and completion.

Following this transformation, the Satanist is not a passive, accepting, fate-embracing slave like the Christian. Indeed the Objective Universe is just as inert and indifferent to him now as it was before. What is different is not it, nor the MS-R tools which he still can use upon it, but rather his sense of what he is: no longer an animal but a god: Nietzsche's "horizon builder", de Maupassant's Horla, 2001's Star Child. His entire orientation changes from utility to creativity. Such Satanists/Setians standards and measurements of this have only incidental relationships to ordinary human interests.

 Quote:
So in his statement, "As of course, it always came to pass," he's making a correct and honest statement. Simply put, either they did or didn't get their desires. The devil is in the details.

Once again you are correct, but not for the apparent reason (mere rationalization). In the case of Satanic baptism/initiation, we were playing with an unknown fire no less than Ayesha with the Fire of Kôr. We saw its effects, or more accurately the beginning of them; but we did not understand why this should be, other than that it was catalyzed by commitment to Satan. In 1975 we finally understood, or, more accurately, began the long road to that Understanding.

Because of this transformation-absent-understanding in the Church, the change in individuals was apparent, but not its consequences. Satanists simply thought, spoke, and acted differently. Sometimes this worked to their personal/social benefit, othertimes not. It was very much the parable of the sighted man in H.G. Wells' The Country of the Blind. Just how dangerous this could be we did not fully appreciate until the 1980s.

_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#56314 - 06/28/11 10:36 PM Re: Satanism and real live achievments [Re: MindFux]
MatthewJ1
Unregistered



"Certainly - so let me get this straight - your strung together hogwash based on mistranslation of Egyptian as a language is clearly better right? After all that's hung together from a collection of irrelevant and discredited research and meaningless speculation from your own mind." M.F 600C

This has been one of the more interesting criticism's of Setian philosophy and I think it was addressed in another thread here.

There is an attempt to discredit the Word of Set by referring to the human scholarship of ancient Egypt and ancient Egyptian language.

Maybe this is a valid argument, but I would tend to argue (from my non-Setian point of view) that The Book of Coming Forth by Night is the Word of Set as perceived or apprehended by a man living in the United States in 1975.

I imagine that for an initiated Priest of Set this Word of Set is primary and is what it purports to be: the Word of Set and in fact the Word and the perception or apprehension of it from 1975 lies at the heart of the Modern or reconsecrated Temple of Set and is the genuine article. It is crucial for the understanding of this reconsecrated Temple.

It's not necesarily that the argument about the Egyptian language and mistranslation is wrong from a certain point of view; its just that this scholarship has been superceded or rather bears a relevance only to ancient Egypt and the study of ancient Egypt, as far as I can see, from a Setian point of view.

Why can't this Word be read in an evolutionary way? Words do change over time and our perception of them changes as well.

This will come across as a dissatisfying sort of response by some members. I would suggest though that to a Priest of Set it is an important point. The Word of Set as articulated by a man in 1975 as The Book of Coming Forth by Night seems to involve the evolution of meaning and the re-apprehension of the Neter?

Apart from saying this I am always rather fascianted by the image from 2001 of the monolith and of those apes who begin to recognise meaningless objects in the world as tools to be used. The consciousness underlying this change of perception is interesting to me and of course the consequences.

An important thread, this one.

Also don't be under the impression that worship has something to do with this, it does not from what I see. The relationship between the Neter and its manifestations and or its particular instances is more subtle and not worship based I think.


Edited by MatthewJ1 (06/28/11 10:38 PM)

Top
#56316 - 06/28/11 11:21 PM Re: Satanism and real live achievments [Re: ]
paolo sette Offline
member


Registered: 12/12/08
Posts: 263
Loc: IL, USA
 Originally Posted By: MatthewJ1
Why can't this Word be read in an evolutionary way? Words do change over time and our perception of them changes as well.


Nothing can be more illogical and contrary to common sense than the word: "xeper". The critic will be inclined to call it absurd, confusing and beyond the ken of ordinary reasoning. But, "xeper" is inflexible and protests that the so-called common sense way of looking at "xeper" is not final, and the reason you cannot attain a thoroughgoing comprehension of "xeper" is due to your unreasonable adherence to an interpretation of things.

If you really want to get to the bottom of "xeper", you must abandon your syllogisms, you must acquire a new way of observation whereby you can escape the tyranny of circumstances, and the one-sidedness of mere words.

Seb
_________________________
tathagata-svapratyatma-aryajnana-adhigama
666
[nig]-ge-na-da a-ba in-da-di nam-ti i-u-tu

Top
#56317 - 06/28/11 11:44 PM Re: Satanism and real live achievments [Re: Empire of Dread]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2573
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
Well, if you don't like "Xeper", how about "chocolate"?
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#56324 - 06/29/11 09:41 AM Re: Satanism and real live achievments [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
William Wright Offline
active member


Registered: 10/25/09
Posts: 862
Loc: Nashville
Mister Cage, you are correct that Dr. Aquino, with regard to the Rite of Baptism, was speaking in a ritual context, which often contains fictional elements meant to heighten the senses and motivation of the initiate during the ceremony. I’m just not sure Aquino is down with the fictional idea. I take it (and please correct me if I’m wrong, Dr. Aquino) that he believes everything he refers to in his rituals is nonfictional, just like his Set is nonfictional. When he speaks of swearing mind, body and soul to “Our Lord Satan,” that is exactly what he means.

Upon further reflection, it is doubtful I would’ve laughed in Aquino’s face. Doing so would not fit my personality. (I have two jobs, both in customer service. If I laughed at everyone who got under my skin, I would soon find myself unemployed.) I would’ve probably asked for clarification. Upon hearing that Aquino believed in a literal Satan who I should address as my lord, I hope I would have the nerve to walk away from Aquino and the Church he represented.

Fortunately in this day and age, Satanists have a variety of social networks to plug into. I’m glad I have the 600 Club as a resource, because most of the members here seem to “get it” (meaning, of course, that I generally agree with their way of looking at things).

MindFux, thank you for your post. You said what I wanted to say so much better than I could’ve said it.
_________________________
In Minecraft all chickens are spies.

Top
#56327 - 06/29/11 10:14 AM Re: Satanism and real live achievments [Re: William Wright]
MindFux Offline
member


Registered: 12/27/10
Posts: 174
 Quote:

There is an attempt to discredit the Word of Set by referring to the human scholarship of ancient Egypt and ancient Egyptian language.

Maybe this is a valid argument, but I would tend to argue (from my non-Setian point of view) that The Book of Coming Forth by Night is the Word of Set as perceived or apprehended by a man living in the United States in 1975.


The only reason this discourse arises in the first place is that it is the basis for the founding tenets of the ToS. Their misapprehension of basic Egyptian used to justify a splinter group from the CoS which is resultant from 'butthurt', retrospectively justified by some 'metaphysical' consideration.

If you want to believe one man's word based on nothing more than things that he has simply made up as he went along with no actual basis beyond that (and his abuse of discredited and out of date Egyptian concepts), then that is absolutely your prerogative, but the rest of your post was just waxing lyrical on what you believe. The fact is, there's nothing evolutionary going on here. He hung a mythos to something that is as simple as this at heart "I believe that a God speaks to me through my brain based on nothing more than my subjective impression and belief that is going on. Who's with me?" If that's your slice of cake, have fun with that, but stay the hell away from Churches or you'll be next at the baptism pit.

 Quote:

Why can't this Word be read in an evolutionary way? Words do change over time and our perception of them changes as well.


It can, but making up a new meaning for a word because it suits your cult isn't a natural 'evolution of the word'. It's making shit up because it suits a cult. You see that subtle difference?

 Quote:

Etc., which along with Mr. Wright illustrates the fear and antagonism satanatheists have for authentic Satanism better than anything I could say.


Ah the discrimination against the 'authentic' Satanist. Let me get this straight, an authentic 'Satanist' to you is someone who makes an irrational leap to the objective existence of a deity justified by nothing more than subjective experience couched in a completely made up mythos of their own devising, who then acts like those who don't adhere to it are somehow deficient, because that belief in your made up nonsense is somehow relevant to self discovery. That's exactly the same line of shit that Christians have fed the world for years. Even if your metaphysical underpinnings were correct, they remain 'unknowable' and hence irrelevant to anything meaningful. You making a point of distinction around belief disguised as philosophy speaks to how disingenuous and shit riddled your underlying concepts are. There is simply no intellectual honesty in such a position.

You're not suffering discrimination here MAA because you are a theist, or because it's a crusade against theism. You are making irrational, baseless claims based on events, linguistic concepts and mythology that you have entirely, and entirely dishonestly made up (while giving them a sheen of authenticity by hoping that no one actually reads a book on the subject of Egyptology).

Satanists, due to their very character will point out such irrational drivel. That's not discrimination, that's not 'hatred' that's just rational deconstruction of nonsense.

I can see why you don't like it, because you are a peddler of nonsense, but as long as you keep peddling it here in a forum, then I'll point out the logical incongruities wherever I see them. Just like when any other individual does the same.

Face it MAA, you don't even know what Xeper means, you just invented a new meaning for the word but harp back to its ancient Egyptian roots as justification for your childish little "I'm different" grab. It's embarrassing and would never have worked had you not hung from LaVey's coat tails in the first instance.

Your leap to 'theism' is based on nothing more than crap you've made up. Just because you've sold it to the gullible doesn't lend it any rational credibility, and until you can provide it with some, pucker up because we'll kiss often. ;\)

MF.



Edited by MindFux (06/29/11 10:20 AM)
Edit Reason: Clarification + corrections

Top
#56332 - 06/29/11 12:17 PM Re: Satanism and real live achievments [Re: William Wright]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2573
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: William Wright
I take it (and please correct me if I’m wrong, Dr. Aquino) that he believes everything he refers to in his rituals is nonfictional, just like his Set is nonfictional. When he speaks of swearing mind, body and soul to “Our Lord Satan,” that is exactly what he means.

Quite correct. And just incidentally, the formal title "Our Lord Satan" was initiated and used by Anton LaVey, as in the initiatory degree certificates on pages #163 & #298 of The Church of Satan. It was a customary and expected honorific within the Church in formal circumstances, though of course not conversationally.

 Quote:
Upon further reflection, it is doubtful I would’ve laughed in Aquino’s face. Doing so would not fit my personality. (I have two jobs, both in customer service. If I laughed at everyone who got under my skin, I would soon find myself unemployed.) I would’ve probably asked for clarification. Upon hearing that Aquino believed in a literal Satan who I should address as my lord, I hope I would have the nerve to walk away from Aquino and the Church he represented.

Why should that have required any nerve? I discussed Satan, Satanism, and the Church of Satan with thousands of questioners, many of whom didn't find it their cup of tea. Didn't bother me/didn't bother them. [Well a few Christian fundamentalists, visiting Jehovah's Witnesses, and one Hare Krishna who buttonholed me one day at LAX went a bit apeshit, but so what?]

 Quote:
Fortunately in this day and age, Satanists have a variety of social networks to plug into. I’m glad I have the 600 Club as a resource, because most of the members here seem to “get it” (meaning, of course, that I generally agree with their way of looking at things).

I agree with you that the 600C is a great resource consisting of bright people with carefully & sincerely thought-out viewpoints. There are a few jerks too, but again so what?
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
Page 4 of 18 « First<23456>Last »


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

Generated in 0.033 seconds of which 0.003 seconds were spent on 28 queries. Zlib compression disabled.