Page 10 of 14 « First<89101112>Last »
Topic Options
#60901 - 11/02/11 10:16 PM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: SkaffenAmtiskaw]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2576
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: SkaffenAmtiskaw
... I have read your book. It's interesting, but I don't intend to get into the blow-by-blow refutation of your claims on the simple grounds that I have neither the time nor the inclination to prove your assertions to be founded on personal delusions ...

We're not talking about differing subjective impressions of GBM workings, which are necessarily individual. You accused me of falsifying historical events and facts. If you can't be bothered to substantiate this, then perhaps you should not assert it.

 Quote:
... I distinctly remember your refusal to acknowledge the evolutionary process giving rise to the human eye as a result of natural selection, a point I refuted by pointing out several processes causing this development, as well as giving my sources ("The Selfish Gene", among others). This didn't dissuade you from making your point, stridently ignoring the case for natural selection in favour of the guiding hand of Set.

Kindly point me to that exchange, so that I may review what you said and whatever reply I made. I am not a geneticist, but I suspect I may have mentioned The Neck of the Giraffe, which, as you can see by its Amazon reviews, gets both bouquets and brickbats. I also touch upon human evolution in the Introcaution to Secret of the Lost Ark/Grail Mission, but that you read at your peril.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#60905 - 11/02/11 10:45 PM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: TheInsane]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2576
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: TheInsane
... This in regards to your claim os "Satanisms original, centuries-established meaning" which are proven to be false. Your definition of Satanism is not the original - not has it been established for centuries.

"Satan" has been around for centuries, and "Satanism" is normally used to discuss his worship. It's a quibble to disassociate them, as a Google-search will demonstrate.

 Quote:
Jake also adressed the question regarding belief or no-belief in Satan as a being. TSB doesnt make Satan out to be a metaphysical being (even though it is vague) and the audio clip included in Jakes post shows clearly on the idea of Satan used symbolically even though some like to think of him as real in the ritual chamber.

So what question here am I supposed to have dodged? Satan was acknowledged as very real indeed within the Church, and symbolic-as-convenient outside the Church. The ritual chamber was not a place to lie or deceive oneself either. Very much the contrary: It was an environment in which all inhibitions against daring to speak raw truth were removed. If you did not speak the Invocation to Satan and mean it, you were wasting your time [and his].

 Originally Posted By: Anton Szandor LaVey, The Cloven Hoof, March 1970
And what do they do, now that it is safe to use His Great Infernal Name? They deny Him! They have the opportunity to cast the very creed of defamation, which killed their brothers and sisters of the past - cast that creed before the world in triumphal mockery of its age of unreason! But no! They do not thrust the bifid barb of Satan aloft and shout, “He has triumphed!” His Art and Works which brought men to the rack and thumbscrew, can now be learned in safety! But No! He is denied! Denied by those who cry up His Art and ply His Work!

Let it be known that every man who delves into the Arts of Darkness must give the Devil and His Children the due their years of infamy deserve! Satan’s Name will not be denied! Let no man shun or mock His Name who plays His winning game, or Despair, Depletion, and Destruction await!
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#60906 - 11/02/11 11:05 PM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: Jake999]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2576
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: Jake999
I've already pointed you to articles I had in The Hoof.

And I believe I responded that I don't have those specific post-75 issues. Neither, presumably, does anyone else here. They would be relevant to the extent that they substantiate that you were something more than an ASLV-groupie & gopher. [Or they might just be emotional rants (as you've done here) about outside-6114 people/events, in which case they wouldn't.] Nor, of course, were Hoof articles the only evidence I invited you to provide. One must conclude that you do not because you cannot.

 Quote:
And you know that someone who made it to be an Administrator would not be that way.

"Administrator" = gopher. Q.E.D.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#60912 - 11/02/11 11:27 PM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
Sure. There were times I was a gopher... I served at the pleasure of the High Priest of the Church of Satan. And your point is?

Hell, if I swept floors, asshole, I was one thing you weren't, and that was LOYAL.

So talk your shit. I have NEVER made amy claims that I was anything in the Church of Satan other than an Administrator. I took over from Wanda Slattery, by the way. I've made no claims of anything other than my LOYALTY (look the word up, if you need to know what it means) to Dr. LaVey and the Church of Satan.

And what would that have to do with the subject at hand. Nothing at all, Mikey. People have found you out for the big mouthed fraud you are, and trying to switch the subject to Jake just isn't going to cut it. Deal with your own shit, boy, because YOU are the one who's making the claims of who is and who is not a Satanist. People just don't care what you think.

Jake is not the cause of your problems. Jake would be no problem for you if you were not trying to lord your supposed superiority of thought on others. If you were simply being civil without trying to act superior, you and I probably would have no problems at all.
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#60928 - 11/03/11 12:35 AM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Fnord Offline
senior member


Registered: 01/11/10
Posts: 2085
Loc: Texas
 Originally Posted By: Michael A.Aquino

Kindly point me to that exchange, so that I may review what you said and whatever reply I made.



Forgive my one liner response but I think he's referring to that deception of Atheism thread located HERE.

One of my personal favorites!

Top
#60954 - 11/03/11 01:30 AM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
TheInsane Offline
member


Registered: 09/16/09
Posts: 356
 Originally Posted By: Michael A.Aquino
 Originally Posted By: TheInsane
... This in regards to your claim os "Satanisms original, centuries-established meaning" which are proven to be false. Your definition of Satanism is not the original - not has it been established for centuries.



"Satan" has been around for centuries, and "Satanism" is normally used to discuss his worship. It's a quibble to disassociate them, as a Google-search will demonstrate.


Yes, Satan has been around for centuries but hardly always as a metaphysical beeing. And hardly always as the one who opposes God. Self procliamed Satanism as a religion or philosophy is by all means a new thing in the history of the world (unless anyone has any new information that no one knows about).

The word Satanism hasnt meant the worship of an anthropomorphic being "for centuries" as you claim. It was used to detect heretics of the church. Sometimes by their own choice but more often just people who were in some kind of opposition to the power centre at the time. Satanism had no charachteristics beyond church men in power seeing things in people and events that they felt went against the interests of the Christian religion.

They did not in any way seperate the worship of Satan from the worship on any other gods or perhaps the disbelief in them all. At was all Satanism to them because from their worldview everything that was not of God was of Satan.

So the meaning of the word Satanism (a word that hasnt really been proven to exist for that long) has never been generally accepted as the worship of the metaphysical being called Satan much less for centuries. If this was ever the general definition of Satanism it is a very new notion since science took over the humanities.

Simply put, if we go back to history all documents tend to support that Satanism used to be what powerful Christians viewed as anti-christian. This is really non-refutable and never is there a set criteria for a belief in a metaphysical being (even though Im sure most would admit that those who do can be Satanists as well).

In todays scientific research on Satanism I have seen none that defines Satanism as the belief and worship in a metaphysical being exclusively (even though most admit those who do can be Satanists as well).

 Quote:
So what question here am I supposed to have dodged? Satan was acknowledged as very real indeed within the Church, and symbolic-as-convenient outside the Church. The ritual chamber was not a place to lie or deceive oneself either.


Well this gives fuel to the fire that Anton in large were just telling people what they wanted to hear. Bending the view on his own ideas so that they would fit better with the views of whoever he was talking to.

The quote you refer to is indeed valid but it never discusses the nature of the Satan that it refers to. It never mentions a metaphysical being and I believe Anton never really did in regards to what Satan was to him. Anton never denied Satan but his definition of what Satan was was never, as far as I know, built on a a view of him as a metaphysical being.

And again if the things in the ritual chamber were or werent seen as "real" in his own mind - who knows? However from his writing it is clear that it was intended as fantasy and role playing to expand ones will:

"The difference is that the Satanist KNOWS he is practicing a form of contrived ignorance in order to expand his will. . ." (TSB - The Intellectual Decompression Chamber).

Top
#60963 - 11/03/11 01:49 AM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: Jake999]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2576
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: Jake999
... And what would that have to do with the subject at hand.

You chose to characterize me as delusional and incompetent to understand Anton LaVey back on page #2, and have been on a constantly and increasingly R. Lee Ermey verbal rampage all the way up to this page #10.

By the time you got to page #7 [and even after I so graciously bought you a beer], you were YELLING that I had no business "judging anyone else as a Satanist". It seemed only appropriate to examine your own understanding of the term as you adamantly claimed it for yourself. It appears just to consist of your admiration for Anton as a friend and your various paperwork services in his home - commendable in themselves but not indicative of personal Satanism per se.

I have overlooked your rudeness [anyone else I would just have sent here *] because I basically like you and also appreciate more than most what a complex situation 6114 was in the years after 1975. I wasn't there, of course, but I knew the entire family quite well enough to sense it; and obviously there was nothing I could do about it.

I also knew the answers to my questions of you before I asked them, because over the same years the Temple of Set was regularly contacted by disillusioned individuals who had joined what they had believed to be the pre-1975 nationwide Church only to find it evaporated into nothing more than an occasional ASLV-written Cloven Hoof. Anton's disdain for his latter-day followers was also a very common impression - well beyond any ordinary sour grapes.

All of which is to say that I don't blame you for not becoming the kind of Satanist the Church inspired and educated prior to 1975. Had you done so/attempted to revive the functional organization, you would have been quietly but firmly disconnected.

A part of the pre-1975 problem [but not the degree-selling crisis] was that Anton was increasingly uncomfortable as an "organizational CEO". He was an artist, with an artist's inclinations [and neuroses]. One of the reasons we worked well together was that I was quite the other thing: an altruist with organizational experience and aptitude.

It's always struck me as particularly ironic when detractors accuse me of a runaway ego and a desire to displace Anton, since nothing could be further from the truth. There is no better testimony to this than the structure and history of the Temple of Set, which has been completely check/balanced from its founding, and which has progressed methodically through several High Priests/Priestesses to date.

For what it is worth, in my opinion your involvement with the LaVeys was probably one of the best things that happened to them in the 1980s. I suspect that if you had stayed longer, Densley would never have gotten the foothold she did, and the family would have had its best chance of staying happily together. All of them. And Anton damned sure wouldn't have spent his last days dying on a couch in the Purple Room surrounded by rotting kitchen stench either.

You and I both have enough ghosts of our own not to borrow each other's, I daresay.

* O.K. you can go there anyway for that "Mikey".
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#60967 - 11/03/11 01:52 AM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Morgan Offline
Princess of Hell
stalker


Registered: 08/29/07
Posts: 2956
Loc: New York City
Okay people,enough with the personal insults.
Get the topic back on track without all the personal attack nonsense.

Get back on topic nicely, stfu, or a few people are getting a time out, and the colors don't matter.

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



Top
#60975 - 11/03/11 02:22 AM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: TheInsane]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2576
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: TheInsane
... Yes, Satan has been around for centuries but hardly always as a metaphysical beeing. And hardly always as the one who opposes God. Self procliamed Satanism as a religion or philosophy is by all means a new thing in the history of the world (unless anyone has any new information that no one knows about).

I'm sorry, but I still see this line of objection as a quibble. Concerning pre-Church of Satan Satanism, cf. also COS Chapter #1.

 Quote:
... Well this gives fuel to the fire that Anton in large were just telling people what they wanted to hear. Bending the view on his own ideas so that they would fit better with the views of whoever he was talking to.

That was occasionally but not invariably true outside the Church; sometimes he wanted to shock, leg-pull, or just deflect.

 Quote:
The quote you refer to is indeed valid but it never discusses the nature of the Satan that it refers to. It never mentions a metaphysical being and I believe Anton never really did in regards to what Satan was to him. Anton never denied Satan but his definition of what Satan was was never, as far as I know, built on a a view of him as a metaphysical being.

Then the Invocation to Satan and the Adult Baptism Rite, etc. would go right over your head. As I have said many times, and as you will see throughout the various quotations from many Satanists in CoS, this was never even in question within the Church. If it had been, we would have been debating it as ferociously as here.

 Quote:
"The difference is that the Satanist KNOWS he is practicing a form of contrived ignorance in order to expand his will. . ." (TSB - The Intellectual Decompression Chamber).

A selective misreading; see the preceding paragraph. The "decompression" period/sequence at the beginning and end of each working is indeed a kind of "blasting" of the celebrants' normal inhibitions and points of reference, including, pointedly, the profane-world skepticism that all religious/magical ritual is impotent nonsense. At the conclusion of the decompression, all commenced the working with an unobstructed focus and will.

This is not an unimportant feature of Black Magic, incidentally. Experiment with it yourself and see how difficult it is, but also the difference between workings with and without it. The latter retains the confusion and inhibitions, often getting no further than a pageant.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#60977 - 11/03/11 02:29 AM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: Morgan]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2576
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: Morgan
Okay people,enough with the personal insults.
Get the topic back on track without all the personal attack nonsense.

Get back on topic nicely, stfu, or a few people are getting a time out, and the colors don't matter.

Probably not a good idea to piss off W.W.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#60979 - 11/03/11 02:35 AM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
Fair enough.

My chief problem is the dogmatic approach you have been taking to OTHER PEOPLE'S lives. You can hallucinate or visualize whatever it is in another person's mind or life but that does not make it so. You've played fast and loose with some kind of idea that Satan has to be the same thing for everyone, and despite what anyone says, you seem to feel that your theistic approach is the only way to go.

Now, it's obvious that YOU believe LaVey believed in an anthropomorphic manifestation of Satan... we've seen direct evidence that he didn't and LaVey isn't here to refute your claims. All we have is an audio recording in which he categorically proclaims he does not believe in an anthropomorphic being, (this during the same time frame you claim he did) and also explaining why he felt it was ok for "mystical types" to believe in it. We also have ME, who can personally recount personal conversations between my self and LaVey where he spoke openly about his belief in Satan as a symbol. In a court of law, I think I know which side a judgement might well fall.

OBVIOUSLY, there has to be some disconnect. I can only assume, knowing LaVey's style, that he was writing to his audience when he wrote to you. I know for a fact that he didn't write that way to others... hell, I was a gopher, remember... I typed his correspondences to at times.

Your theism can't be denied. You have said you were contacted by SET. You believe in a physical manifestation of god(s) and fanatically claim to the existence of them with nothing but personal faith and belief. There's an old saying, "If you talk to God, you're religious. If God talks to you, you're delusional." I can't help but believe that there is actually truth in that quip without some tangible proof. If LaVey himself had told me he spoke to Satan on the telephone, I would AT LEAST have asked him for the phone bill.

As for being locked in with LaVey... he and I disagreed on things and argued about them, sometimes to the point of absurdity. He and I had VASTLY different opinions on the role of women, on military service (he suggested that I throw away 15 years of service and just work for the church, to which I asked, "Are you out of your fucking mind?) and other things as well. We were in agreement with many points, and I can include the precepts of Pentagonal Revisionism, the role of Satanism in the rising "Satanic imagery in rock music," and how to encorporate our message without it being lost in the hype" although he could never understand how I could actually listen to it, and much more. You see, I was only a gopher.

Whether or not I would have made a difference in The Church of Satan had I stayed on is a moot point. I KNOW I made a difference while I was there, and that LaVey considered my opinions and counsel. But while my heart and "soul" belonged to the Church of Satan, my ass belonged to Uncle Sam. My oath of loyalty that I gave to LaVey has not expired, nor has my oath of allegiance to my country. I would have taken or delivered a bullet for both, and still would.

So when someone comes into my world and says things that I know are not true to the best of my belief and personal knowledge, I have a duty to that man's legacy to speak up. I don't care if a person is the Ipsissimus of the Temple of Set or the President of the United States. And if I fight, I'm going to fight HARD.

But I would do the same thing if someone said something about you that was blatantly wrong to the best of my belief and personal knowledge, as in the case of the child molestation charges, etc. They were investigated and proven to be unfounded... so no one has the right to bring them up as some kind of fact. I would fight that and demand proof.

My only problem in this thread is that you seem to feel that your ideas trump the individual rights of others to have their own opinions. Sure, you make cute but condescending statements, but people these days are too intelligent not to read them for what they are. You can only speak for yourself... your beliefs... but unless you can come up with tangible proofs (and self citing is not proof) then people will challenge you, and rightly so.

Long post, I know, but it's where I stand. I wouldn't put up with Christians proclaiming Jesus is the ONLY WAY, nor Muslims proclaiming that infidelity to Allah is death. Can't see any difference in someone proclaiming that their way is the only true way because they are from the Temple of Set. Show me the talking Aardvark, and maybe I can be swayed.
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#60993 - 11/03/11 04:21 AM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
SkaffenAmtiskaw Moderator Offline
veteran member


Registered: 06/24/09
Posts: 1318
It's funny you should mention the giraffe.

As for the remainder of your post, I refer you to my former post. Have fun proving that Set exists, that he revealed himself to you, and that Anton LaVey always believed in a literal Satan. I don't believe it, and neither do many others here, but if you say that others do, maybe it will become true.

That being said, I find your posts a source of inspiration, and it's always fresh to read a different take on things. Keeps the brain from growing stale. Have fun.
_________________________
"I'd rather be right than consistent" - Winston Churchill

Top
#61000 - 11/03/11 06:51 AM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Octavian Offline
pledge


Registered: 09/30/11
Posts: 81
The Setian religion is one of the most beautiful, elegant and profound religion's I have encountered.

I enjoy reading as much as I can and learning more. I dislike seeing it made a mockery of, or trashed by anyone.

Dr. you may not intend this, but when you go after those you don't consider Satanist's, you are going after people and their identities and you appear to be trashing those peoples identities. I don't think you mean to do this, but that's how it comes across sometimes.

Obviously everybody here can learn so much from you (I already have) just as we can learn from Jake. I also dislike seeing you and Jake at each others throats, or Jake's important contributions diminished in anyway.

I wish we could get past this whole 1975 crisis thing and what LaVey did and didn't believe at that time. I mean that view has been expressed a few times now, both here and in your writings and it has been passionately fought out.

I would very much like to learn more about Setian philosophy itself from you over time, and also about some of the many other things which took place during that early C/S period. I am sure you could bring a wealth of information regarding the practices of the early C/S. You have already done this. I am sure others want to get more insights as well.

Anyway, this post is not meant as some sort of rebuke or lecture, but an invitation to move forward.

Kind regards

Top
#61001 - 11/03/11 08:46 AM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: Octavian]
Vondraco Offline
stranger


Registered: 10/19/11
Posts: 28
Loc: Houston, TX
 Originally Posted By: Octavian
The Setian religion is one of the most beautiful, elegant and profound religion's I have encountered.

I take it that you don't get out much.

 Originally Posted By: Ocavian
Obviously everybody here can learn so much from you (I already have) just as we can learn from Jake. I also dislike seeing you and Jake at each others throats, or Jake's important contributions diminished in anyway.


Certainly, Dr. Aquino is worth reading and learning from. I learned a fair bit from him in My time as s Setian. I do not think that he defines Satanism, however, and neither do I think that he is any less delusional than Paul of Tarsus.

If you wish to be a Satanist, you've got to do it by yourself. If you just want to be Setian, then feel free to regurgitate Aquino's teachings ad nauseum.

-- V


Edited by Vondraco (11/03/11 08:50 AM)
_________________________
Mathematician by training, Philosopher by nature
Genius by genetics, Hedonist by desire!

Top
#61005 - 11/03/11 11:32 AM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
William Wright Offline
active member


Registered: 10/25/09
Posts: 862
Loc: Nashville
OK, fair enough. “Setian” refers to a formal title within the Temple of Set and doesn’t necessarily denote whether a particular member fits your idea of what constitutes an authentic Setian. Title before authenticity - got it.

I have a couple more questions for you, Dr. Aquino. The first one has to do with Anton LaVey. You would, I’m sure, argue that at one time he had what you claim you have, a sacred connection to/consecration by the Prince of Darkness. If this consecration is as wonderful as you say it is, why would he give it up?

Some would argue that he never had “it” in the first place, that what he had was the street smarts and imagination to pull off an elaborate ruse that he eventually grew tired of perpetuating. Of course you have a different take on the matter.

The second question has to do with something you said to me earlier in this thread. Commenting on belief in Satan within the pre-1975 CoS (and presumably Set within the ToS), you said that a “blind faith” belief was/is viewed as inappropriate, “a mere mirror-flip from the slave religions”. And yet here you are, doing your damndest to sell us on believing in a literal Satan/Set, hammering the idea into our heads over and over. How do you reconcile these two seemingly conflicting positions?
_________________________
In Minecraft all chickens are spies.

Top
Page 10 of 14 « First<89101112>Last »


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

Generated in 0.033 seconds of which 0.004 seconds were spent on 29 queries. Zlib compression disabled.