Page 9 of 14 « First<7891011>Last »
Topic Options
#60852 - 11/02/11 12:57 PM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Dan_Dread Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/08/08
Posts: 3883
Loc: Vancouver, Canada
Seems I am in quite good company in the sig of asshurtery. \:\)
_________________________
ADM
ideological vandal

Top
#60854 - 11/02/11 01:37 PM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: Dan_Dread]
Caladrius Offline
member


Registered: 07/25/09
Posts: 320
Loc: SoCal
Hey look, MindFux made it back on the coveted Ignore List of Set. MF's a thorn in the side of Set. If Set were a mobster, you named guys would be wacked for knowing too much.

I see Mike has produced a letter from 'on high' 'verifying' his Satanic creds. He has that personality type of these nerd boys I used to know in high school ((the over achiever type)). The ones that get into these meaningless debates and has to always be right, where they pull out their dictionaries and special letters. As if LaVey has some special power to dub and knight a person a bona fide Satanist. Not only did LaVey name him a troo Satanist, but Set himself made him a Magus lol.


Edited by Caladrius (11/02/11 01:39 PM)
_________________________
Chloe 352

Top
#60859 - 11/02/11 02:28 PM 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
 Originally Posted By: Michael A.Aquino
 Originally Posted By: William Wright
Dr. Aquino, on page six of this thread I asked you a couple questions, and you did not answer them. I understand that this thread has taken on a life of its own and that you may have been preoccupied with other posts, so I’ll ask again:

Do you consider members of your organization who do not believe in a literal Set, who think of Set only in symbolic terms, to be authentic Setians? If so, why do you consider Satanists with a similar take on Satan not to be authentic Satanists?

Please answer this time.

Actually you asked this on page #2 of this thread, whereupon I indeed answered you. As you seem not to pay attention, but just keep asking this same question over and over and over again in various threads, how many times would you like me to repeat the answer?

I originally said, “You dismiss Satanists who don’t believe in the existence of Satan as poseurs, yet you recognize those in your organization who don’t believe in the existence of Set as Setians. No hypocrisy there…” You responded that the term “Setian” refers to a “formal affiliation” in the Temple of Set. I rephrased what I said to include the word “authentic”, because of course “authentic” and “formal affiliation” are altogether different things.

Would you agree, Dr. Aquino, that although Setians who don't believe in a literal Set may be formally addressed as Setians, they are not authentic Setians, just as Satanists who don't believe in a literal Satan are not authentic Satanists? Would you agree that those members of your organization who think of Set only in symbolic terms are SINOs – Setians In Name Only, and therefore not really Setians at all?
_________________________
In Minecraft all chickens are spies.

Top
#60860 - 11/02/11 02:36 PM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: Caladrius]
6Satan6Archist6 Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/16/08
Posts: 2509
The real funny thing is how much stock Mikey puts into LaVey's written declaration of him as a Satanist. Especially since he maintains that LaVey started to sell the degrees. Now, I don't know if that story is true and I don't care either way.

However, if it is true then clearly the degrees and the titles that went with them really meant nothing (to LaVey) in the first place. Since Mikey believes that LaVey started selling the degrees he should realize that they were never valid and you'd think he'd stop boasting about this "accomplishment" like a 10 year expired food handler's permit.
_________________________
No gods. No masters.

Top
#60861 - 11/02/11 02:37 PM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
 Originally Posted By: Michael A.Aquino
 Originally Posted By: Jake999
When the truth doesn't fit, embrace the delusion. The man's invested in his delusions, and can't afford to admit error, so he simply ignores the inconvenient.

O.K., Jake, you've said [shouted, actually] that Anton didn't consider me a Satanist, and that he didn't believe in Satan. And also that he considered you a Satanist. Let's take these in order:



Explicit enough for you? The "followup to the Diabolicon" is of course the
Ninth Solstice Message (COS Appendix #111), which is about as "literal Satan" as you can get.

Now let's go to your claims concerning yourself. Would you please share with everyone here any mention of you by Anton in any of his writings - books, articles, Cloven Hoof, letters, etc. - in which he discusses, characterizes, recognizes, or in any other way acknowledges you as a Satanist? I'm not talking about just a good buddy or a helper-out around 6114; I'm talking about his evaluation of and respect for you as a committed, dedicated, and competent practicing Satanist. Thanks.


Simply put, PRIOR to tour "rebellion" against the Church of Satan, LaVey did include you as a Satanist, and gave you the the benefit of the doubt even after you left. HOWEVER... he no longer held any respect for you. Hell, man, grow the fuck up!

As I said early on when you came up with this tired old canard that "LaVey never mentioned YOU, (meaning of course me.) I replied, and still say, "GOOD. It shows I was doing my job." I was taken on as Administrator NOT to make a splash or to "get my name in lights," but to make the system run more smoothly and professionally, with an emphasis on INTERNAL matters. Why the fuck would I be mentioned in books? If I was doing my job, I SHOULDN'T be. And in making those kinds of ludicrous statements to bolster your own petty, condescending attitudes about anyone who ISN'T YOU, I will repeat what LaVey told me regarding you in as any kind of administrator.

"He was ok, but anal and needed so much hand holding. It was great if you needed a piece for The Cloven Hoof or something, because you could tell him you needed something on "red" and he would give you 5000 words. But damn it, Jake, the man acted like he deserved a medal for every little thing he did. That's why I was a bit
reluctant to bring in another military man."

I told him that I thought it COULD be because you were an officer, and every officer I ever knew had is own "I love me" wall in his office or his home. LaVey grinned and said, "Yes, he has one of those too."

So we see, even this far down the road, things haven't changed.

And No, LaVey and I didn't write letters. He saw me every week, at least once a week, standing right next to him. He and I could speak directly. We spoke on the phone when he wanted to speak to be or bring me in at other than normal times, so that I could make arrangements to do so because I was an enlisted man, unlike you as an officer... I worked for a living.

Granted. Pre 1975 LaVey might have given you kudos on any number of things. But once you put your knife squarely in his back and twisted it, moron, he might just have that angelic epiphany that said, "Damn maybe he's not quite what he presented himself to be." As I said, LaVey was a man, just like any other, and prone to mistakes, but when he made one, he was NOT going to make the same one twice.

If you REALLY want me to post some "I love me" bullshit, I could always post my inscriptions from my signed copies of The Satanic Bible, Satanic Rituals and The Compleat Witch!!! My working name at that time was "Jeremy (after his nephew), but they're still really neato. I still have the OFFIZHOL Baphomet stamp from the back office if you would like to see that... oh oh... looky what else I have. Give it a mother fucking break.

You fucked up. Plain and simple, Aquino. You left the Church of Satan and thought you would inherit LaVey's thunder. You didn't. You became just another footnote, with the distinction of being terminally butthurt. A theist who speaks to Aardvarks. My generation of Satanist wrote you off decades ago, and it sure as hell looks like you're doing no better with this one.


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


Top
#60863 - 11/02/11 02:43 PM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
SkaffenAmtiskaw Moderator Offline
veteran member


Registered: 06/24/09
Posts: 1318
While I appreciate your efforts to respond in a calm, reasonable manner to every accusation and question that is levelled at you on this forum - so reasonable, in fact, that I hope all new members take a page from your book so they can hold their own with dignity and poise - I have no intention of getting into a discussion on the veracity of your statements, here or in your book. I pointed out the reason why the thread had turned to loud name-calling and invective. Furthermore, were I to address any statement you had made, you would have backed up your version of events by quoting your books, letters, correspondences and sundry notes, diligently annotated and updated. The thing is, even David Irving, the renowned Holocaust denier (and no further comparison to you) can quote sources, research and notes, as well as testimony to back up his claims. You claim that Set is a real being, that he manifested to Anton LaVey in the guise of Satan, that when Anton (as per your claims) sold titles to the CoS, Set disavowed LaVey and anointed you High Priest of the Temple of Set, inaugurating the Aeon of Set. All of this is allegedly true, since you have showed the text to others, who agreed that it was genuine. 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. If you are convinced you are right, nothing will change your mind. We have debated before, and 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. Confirmation bias. I suspect you will do the same to this post, and gleefully continue to quote sources that will back your hypotheses, disregarding any and all information to the contrary. Or quoting your sources at them. Which is fine if you like this sort of thing. I, for one, have better things to do with my time.
_________________________
"I'd rather be right than consistent" - Winston Churchill

Top
#60888 - 11/02/11 06:33 PM 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
I also aksed him questions regarding the information I and Jake provided. I did so three times I believe but Mr. Aquino choose to ignore it every time since they both proved his statements wrong.

Which questions where, please?


http://www.the600club.com/topic60004-2.html post #60553 and the following replies by Jake and Diavolo (who you should put off ignore). 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.

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.

Top
#60890 - 11/02/11 07:19 PM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: SkaffenAmtiskaw]
Oxus Offline
member


Registered: 04/15/10
Posts: 510
 Originally Posted By: SkaffenAmtiskaw
We have debated before, and 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.
If I may comment on this portion of your post, and in no way am I an expert here. Ironically, I am about halfway through Dawkin's "God Delusion" and am sure some of you can explain this better than I.

Dawkin's makes reference to possibilities other than, and possibly in ToS' case, Natural Selection completely. Whereas he acknowledges the life of memes within NS, there is also the possibility of our (Humankind) consciousness and intelligence paving the way for evolution.

Set, being the god/principle of Isolate Intelligence and existing outside from the objective universe (as well as separate from the other Egyptian pantheon) may very well 'fit' the bill rather than the randomness of Natural Selection or a mindless meme.

Luciferianism differs from Satanism (or does it, I'm still confused as to what exactly Satanism is?) in this very same way, that there is an intelligent and guiding factor involved in our evolution though not simply some divine being not connected to our very Self.

I'll stop there as I have probably dug myself a hole to which the many of you wish to bury me in.

Top
#60892 - 11/02/11 07:38 PM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
arjunasAscent Offline
pledge


Registered: 04/25/11
Posts: 69
Loc: PA, US
If i'm interrupting the flow of the thread feel free to delete.

 Originally Posted By: Michael A.Aquino
Satanism is the worship of and allegiance to Satan the metaphysical being. Anything else is something else.


I dealt with these notions in the satan can lick my balls thread. Excerpt:

 Originally Posted By: arjunasAscent in 'satan can lick my balls'

There's maybe three "schools of thought" in Satanism, one materialistic/empiricist, another focused on the psyche and subjective experience, and a last bent on transcendental experience that many in this forum would consider RHP nonsense.


So you embrace a metaphysical Satan, like Crowley, Mathers, and LaVey did at certain points in their trajectory. They never personified Satan however; He was most often symbolic but sometimes a cosmic phenomena or impulse of universal emanation believed to exist in every living and dying thing. An antropomorphic manifestation of Satan seems absurd though perhaps one could mystically experience it. It makes a good movie at least; even if such an experience were attainable would it be worth the effort given how unlikely and ridiculous it seems?

 Quote:
[Posers] are either somewhere along the path to summoning up the moral and intellectual courage to become authentic Satanists, or trying to legitimize their hypocrisy


What do you mean by "courage"? What is an authentic Satanist? What is there in an "authentic" satanist that makes him "more legitimate" than a materialistic satanist?


Edited by arjunasAscent (11/02/11 08:24 PM)
_________________________
Words are mere sound and smoke dimming the heavenly light - Goethe

Top
#60894 - 11/02/11 08:34 PM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: Oxus]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
 Originally Posted By: Oxus
Dawkin's makes reference to possibilities other than, and possibly in ToS' case, Natural Selection completely. Whereas he acknowledges the life of memes within NS, there is also the possibility of our (Humankind) consciousness and intelligence paving the way for evolution.

Set, being the god/principle of Isolate Intelligence and existing outside from the objective universe (as well as separate from the other Egyptian pantheon) may very well 'fit' the bill rather than the randomness of Natural Selection or a mindless meme.

Luciferianism differs from Satanism (or does it, I'm still confused as to what exactly Satanism is?) in this very same way, that there is an intelligent and guiding factor involved in our evolution though not simply some divine being not connected to our very Self.

I'll stop there as I have probably dug myself a hole to which the many of you wish to bury me in.


Evolution is blind which implies nothing is driven towards a certain sort of mutation (which has very little to do with randomness). It only implies that when a specific mutation happens, and it is better fitted for its environment, it will have better options at survival and thus reproduction. Mutations are not always positive; there are negative mutations too which, evidently, just go extinct. Unless protected as we human tend to do.

Consciousness is the result of such a blind process. What we are now is because all those that weren't like us died. That's all there is to it. Which implies consciousness has been a benefit for our survival but not special since all other lifeforms we see now, survived too. There is nothing more special about us than any insect of your choice. Of course because of our consciousness, intelligence and all following, we became somehow top of the food-chain, as long as we decide the conditions of course. But again, we are a simply one step in the chain of a blind process.

The whole confusion about our uniqueness is only caused because it feels as such which not necessarily implies it is such. There is nothing non-natural about consciousness, it is simply an evolved form of awareness. The only thing which slightly differs in us and a minority of other animals is self-awareness which is an epiphenomenon of our brain. Once a brain has developed to a certain stage, self-awareness kicks in. We know this because babies are only self-aware after a certain age. Before the required neural connections are made, they are only aware.

When we notice that these things happen natural, there is no longer any reason to add something “divine” to the equation.

D.

Top
#60895 - 11/02/11 08:52 PM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: William Wright]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2573
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: William Wright
... Would you agree, Dr. Aquino, that although Setians who don't believe in a literal Set may be formally addressed as Setians, they are not authentic Setians, just as Satanists who don't believe in a literal Satan are not authentic Satanists?

No, because the terms have different connotations. The Temple of Set uses the term "Setian" both as a general formal affiliation identifier and as the initiatory title of the I°. We are not concerned with use of the term by nonInitiates of the Temple, unless of course they are using it to misrepresent themselves as affiliates.

In the original Church of Satan we were similarly proprietary about the initiatory degree titles, and "Satanist" similarly referred to both affiliation generally and the I°. There were very few other "Satanism" groups around back then - a few short-lived spin-offs and some organizations such as the Process inaccurately so-labeled.

So in these two contexts my previous answer to you remains accurate.

"Satanism" in the post-1975 era has no simple organizational proprietorship anymore, though Gilmore would probably try to claim it. The Temple of Set is interested in it only insofar as our pre-1975 ancestry is concerned.

So the term is essentially up-for-grabs: by Satanic-Panic promoters, Christian scarecrow-makers [think The Exorcist, etc.], rock musicians, T-shirt makers, tattoo artists, and the venerable 600C. Anton LaVey obviously milked it as a personal adjective post-75, but that was all.

The general theme of the 600C is "Satanism = Atheism in spooky dress-up", which is understandable since Atheism by itself is boring. The old Baph up-top adds some sex to the show, certainly. Nevertheless there is a basic problem here, because Satanism and Atheism are really two different things, and it is precisely the "Satan"-glamor of Satanism that such atheists seek. Call yourself a "Satanist" and people shiver with delicious delight: "You mean like in Eyes Wide Shut? Ooo!" But if you follow up with "No, I don't believe in Satan, don't believe in magic, and don't do rituals except for play-acting", all that "Ooo!" deflates and everyone just wonders why the misleading-affectation.

Within the 600C everything is comfy, because no one points this out. Or didn't until I did, which has clearly pissed if-the-shoe-fits readers off. My reasons for being such a party-pooper are twofold: first, because as noted I have a nostalgic regard for the Church's proprietorship [key the Camelot soundtrack in the background here], and second, to smack you kids [politely] alongside-your-heads and say, "If you're serious about this, and don't want to make fools of yourselves outside your clubhouse, you're going to have to do a lot better than Atheism-in-drag."

This thread is a good one insofar as it faces this issue; it's a waste of time if it's deflected into irrelevant flaming. The threads in the "Satanism"-area are generally good, but they still flounder because everyone's only sure what "Satanism" is not - not what it is.

You are all dancing around the scariest, most mysterious, most powerful factor in the phenomenon of human existence. This is not the time to dig your toes into the carpet. It either seizes you like a fever and reconstitutes your entire being, or, as Kesey would say, you're off the bus.

Social-externally the limitations of the term "Satanism" within an iconographic J/C context remain, but you can deal with that just as we did: by extending what is essential to it into other contexts; the Satanic Rituals is a good example of this. Indeed the Satan-phenomenon appears everywhere.

So quit fucking around and be Satanists if this is what's boiling up inside you.

That answer your question?
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#60896 - 11/02/11 09:24 PM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
6Satan6Archist6 Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/16/08
Posts: 2509
 Quote:
The general theme of the 600C is "Satanism = Atheism in spooky dress-up", which is understandable since Atheism by itself is boring. The old Baph up-top adds some sex to the show, certainly. Nevertheless there is a basic problem here, because Satanism and Atheism are really two different things, and it is precisely the "Satan"-glamor of Satanism that such atheists seek. Call yourself a "Satanist" and people shiver with delicious delight: "You mean like in Eyes Wide Shut? Ooo!" But if you follow up with "No, I don't believe in Satan, don't believe in magic, and don't do rituals except for play-acting", all that "Ooo!" deflates and everyone just wonders why the misleading-affectation.


Speaking only for myself: I am an Atheist because I do not believe in the existence of any gods. I am a Satanist because I am sickened by and vehemently disagree with Judeo-Christian religion and the tenets thereof. Since they have chosen to call the antithesis of their God (who, through Jesus, represents how people are "supposed" to behave) Satan - and since I have made a conscious decision to be nothing like they (the faithful) expect people to be like, I identify with Satan. But only insofar as "Satan" is the representation of the opposite of all that is "good and holy"; the prideful SOB who refused to submit, to grovel, to be a slave.

It's like with my "666" tattoo; no, I am not in the Aryan Brotherhood, no I am not a Devil Worshiper. But, 666 is the number of the Antichrist and since I am anti-Christ(ian), it fits. Also, I get a kick out of making the religious uncomfortable, it's fun for me.

Ultimately, the name/term/whatever-the-fuck-you-wanna-call-it "Satan(ism/ist)" isn't as important as what it represents. However, in the frame of reference in which I extist - meaning Amerikkka - Christianity is the most popular religion around; and since I am opposed to It, I, as previously stated, identify with their biggest Opposition I.E. Satan. But I am not stupid enough to believe that any of their made up characters, their vehicles for the expression of their beliefs.

In essence: Atheism is the rejection of the belief in their God (as well as all others), Satanism is the rejection of their life-denying-man-is-flawed-and-needs-to-feel-ashamed-for-being-human-and-seek-forgiveness philosophy.
_________________________
No gods. No masters.

Top
#60898 - 11/02/11 09:32 PM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
RAIDER Offline
member


Registered: 09/09/11
Posts: 152
Loc: PA
Herd mentality would dictate that we all have the same view, beliefs, and expression of Satanism and Satan...back to the original topic, Satanism is not what people do anyway, even though all humans are self serving folk ( even those who I know who view themselves as selfless thrive on the ego gratification that they get from 'helping others'), because of the very real self deceit they practice.
_________________________
DARK WOLF

Top
#60899 - 11/02/11 09:36 PM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: Jake999]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2573
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: Jake999
... If you REALLY want me to post some "I love me" bullshit, I could always post my inscriptions from my signed copies of The Satanic Bible, Satanic Rituals and The Compleat Witch!!! My working name at that time was "Jeremy (after his nephew), but they're still really neato. I still have the OFFIZHOL Baphomet stamp from the back office if you would like to see that... oh oh... looky what else I have. Give it a mother fucking break ...

This latest tirade aside, everyone already takes it for granted that you were a useful gopher for Anton around the house, in-between Tony Fazzini and Sharon Densley. That was not what I asked. I am interested in evidence that "Satanism" to you was significant and practical in your life at the time, and that Anton's opinion and evaluation of you recognized this character and competence. Anyone could be a 6114-groupie, wave the Satanic Bible in the air, and say, "I dig everything in here!" How about some of your own correspondence to post-75 members concerning issues and aspects of Satanism? Articles you wrote for the Cloven Hoof? Notes, transcripts, or others' reactions to presentations you gave or group functions at which you presided? Black Magical workings you undertook and their outcome? Examinations you took for any degree you were given?

In short, I am interested in Jake the Satanist and Black Magician, not Jake the gopher. If I have misjudged you, let's clear it up.

And yes, I do think it would be interesting to see .jpgs of how Anton inscribed your copies of his books.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#60900 - 11/02/11 09:58 PM Re: Isn't Satanism what people do anyway? [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
Sorry, Clown. I don't see any need to entertain you.

I've already pointed you to articles I had in The Hoof.

You've made yourself look like and ass. It's not my place to help you deflect. And you know that someone who made it to be an Administrator would not be that way.

So I see no reason to play your games.
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
Page 9 of 14 « First<7891011>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.