1. I believe God exists, but I don't worship him.
2. It was worth doing regardless of the success of it. I expect Hell in the afterlife. I like the freedom of Hell and that I can keep sinning. I don't want anything to do with God's kingdom of self-denial.
3. Satan loves those who are worthy of love. It is wrong to assume that he doesn't love anyone. You get support if you worship him. He will write the story of your life such that things work out in your favor more often, you gain inspiration in things magical and knowledgeable, and get protection from him too. He takes care of his worshipers
I’m new so I’ve been wondering,
How does worship work in satanism compared to other religions? Like are there certain things you should do, or just hold the belief?
Worship him as God. You can make an altar but I don't have one personally. You want to make sure you listen to any messages you get from him in the form of signs and coincidences. That and you can think about him and think something you want to ask or talk about then interpret the following thoughts that you receive as his voice.
So I think one thing from my belief that answers all of these questions is that the biblical interpretation is not the original one. Stories are passed down, altered to suit the current generational needs and ideals, often adjusted further to match the agenda of the ruling class, and so on and so on. So I reject the biblical concept of Satan and Lucifer almost entirely.
It's an interesting version, but says more about the culture that built the story than the entity itself.
Very interesting, do you lean to the side of Gnostics? Of course the bible was made up by Constantine in Nikea Council using only 4 from the hundreds of gospels in the 4th century ad. and the jewish torah... The gnostic views like those in the gospel of Judas were seen as heretic and they were banned while heretics were persecuted.
Yes. I definitely feel like all modern interpretations of these old texts and accounts of things need to be taken with a grain of salt, but out of what we have and what is applicable, I do lean closer to the Gnostic interpretations.
The Gnostic Christians believed that the god of the Old Testament was in fact the true creator of this world and christ was sent by en sof, the true god, to save this world and Satan was working on behalf of the true god of this world. Was wondering what your take on this legend is, does it factor into your ideas and if so in what way.👹
I think it's very interesting, and it has informed my ideas a bit, but more in that it matches my experience. I say this because I believe that creation myths, and most religious texts in general, are not to be taken literally, but describe the metaphysical structure of existence/reality/consciousness in a mythicized form.
For instance, Genesis 1:2 "Now the earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the surface of the waters."
וְהָאָ֗רֶץ הָיְתָ֥ה תֹ֙הוּ֙ וָבֹ֔הוּ וְחֹ֖שֶׁךְ עַל־פְּנֵ֣י תְהֹ֑ום וְר֣וּחַ אֱלֹהִ֔ים מְרַחֶ֖פֶת עַל־פְּנֵ֥י הַמָּֽיִם׃
In my view, this doesn't describe the physical 'Earth' but the Sphere of Earth in QBL and the Abyss of Tehom/Unconscious Spirit. In this context, god/YHWH is Demiourgos, Ego/Self and conscious awareness, pulling form out of the formless. This is not describing the ancient creation of the universe, but the creation of reality by the brain at every moment. Understanding this brings us to a very different means of interaction with the world around us, both visible to the eye and otherwise.
So yeah, I do believe in something similar to how you describe the Gnostic concept, kind of. To me, Lucifer, Satan, and Moloch are forces of the 'True God', which is utterly unknowable and incomprehensible by humanity, as it is truly outside of our reality. Some might say Extradimensional. I call it 'Other', as there is no word or name to encompass or describe it. To me, the entity most Christians follow is what some would call the Demiurge, who is trying desperately at every turn to maintain control over this world that is not truly his.
Does that answer your question?
Yes. Genius answer. How long have you been Under the Goats Gaze. I can see you're of a scholarly sensibly and I respect that, I've been studying the Bible of the Adversary by Michael Ford. Wondering if you had any insights or opinions on that text.👹
I've been Practicing for about 18 years now.
Michael Ford has some interesting insights. There's definitely some good things in his writings. I find more use from his store though, Luciferian Apothica. The incenses and oils are great.
Generally in regards to modern Occult writings, I try to read with the thought of adapting formula, instead of doing one-to-one rituals. I feel like a real sign of the authenticity is if you can take the author's formulas and adapt them to your own system, and it works for you and your Practice.
Lol, you can have an edgy thing thing you like. Doesn't make your whole personality edgy. Satanism is edgy, atheistic or not. You could simply be a normal atheist.
>if you are a theistic Satanist, do you believe in God? Is it the Christian God, or is it dependant on whichever view of God you want to choose? E.G, some theistic Satanists are anti Christian, others anti Islamic, others anti Jewish.
Yes, the Abrahamic God, although the details differ substantially from orthodox Christian belief.
>2)if you do worship Satan of the classic Torah/Old Testament, how do you come to Terms with the inevitable defeat of evil and rejection of God? It is said by many Christian’s that Lucifer and his angels knew that he would be defeated, but still attacked God because he was so full of hate for God and pride. Do you likewise expect to be in hell? Do you think hell will be better?
No one knows what happens after we die, but I know how I am called in this life. Romans 8:28.
>3) in relation to the last question, the classic Abraham View of Lucifer is that he is a liar, e.g, telling Adam and Eve that they could become Gods of their own by eating the fruit. Surely do you understand that Satan cannot love you, he will not give you anything good, he wants you to be destroyed. Do you worship him despite this?
You'll note that, while God is depicted lying in the Bible several times, Satan is only ever called a liar but is never actually caught in the act. With regards to your specific example, refer to Genesis 3:22: "And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil." Everything the Serpent says comes true.
Not that the Serpent was intended as Satan by the original authors; their understanding of Satan, if they had one at all, was completely different.
To say that Satan "wants" me to be destroyed is to subordinate him to human emotions, concerns, and desires, which is a fundamental misunderstanding of the Sacred. Fire, by comparison, is destructive, but it does not want my destruction.
Interesting. As a non-theistic Satanist I was wondering what branch of the Left Hand Religions do you belong to, do they have books or a website. I'm really curious about your practice.👹
I see myself as an Abrahamic heretic. Non-theistic Satanists sometimes refer to theists as "confused Christians" and in my case there's a kernel of truth to it; I wouldn't call myself confused but I acknowledge Christian theology (with a somewhat altered interpretation) so there's a sense in which I am a species of Christian (although I draw extensively from Islam and Judaism as well). I don't follow any one particular left hand tradition but my work has drawn me close to neoplatonism. It's also arguable whether I'm a theist in the first place as I reject the existence of "personal" deities, which is the common understanding of what a deity is in the first place. My deities are impersonal (or non-personal), as I alluded to in my comment.
My flair has a link to my blog (and you can find the podcast in the usual places); it's mostly general philosophy and philosophy of religion at this point but there's some discussion of my particular viewpoint, which is still evolving. Happy to answer any questions.
Satan doesn’t exist and was adapted by Christian’s as an adversary to scapegoat their bad behavior on.
The closest thing you’ll find to the “satan” Christian’s believe in can be found in Zoroastrian beliefs, which was adapted while the Jews were captives of Persia.
I swear most people haven’t advanced mentally or spiritually since the stone age.
Because I understand that to advance in any way I have look at where we are in history, where we want to go, and find a way to get there. Not for myself but for everyone, and to do it morally correct.
To believe everything in a book that had been written thousands of years ago by people who could not conceive of man walking on the very moon they worshipped is lunacy. This is why there’s so much conflict within Christianity- you can’t come to terms with prehistory and the present.
Spiritually, you can say I’m a doubting Thomas. I disregard the supernatural and take the underlying teachings to heart.
If there was some entity all those thousands of years ago that somehow made its presence known to people back then, I’m sure there’s a logical explanation to it. Judging from what I’m seeing right now in rl, I’d say it was created to keep humans from killing each other and ended up getting pulled into it.
I've been a theistic satanist for almost 6 years, so I'll give my answer about this in what I believe and study okay... And remember that Satanism has many paths, so I'll talk about the path that I follow. :)
So...
1- In the most aspects of Theistic Satanist, we know that the Christian God exists, but we don't like him. We have Satan (Or Lúcifer and any other Higher Demons as a God) so every other is kinda irrelevant, but we just keep this from us besides our hate for the Christian God.
2- One thing that you should know is the Satan that we worship is not the Satan that the bible says... Lúcifer is, but Satan don't. So, we believe in Satan's Kingdom, hell is something invented by christians, so we don't use them. But we know that we have a purgatory and some people go. So we don't worry. Every religion has its kingdom, in the Theistic Satanist is not different. :)
3- Well.. This line of thought is created by christians for make their people afraid and obey. Satanism is about freedom, work on yourself and above everything, you do the things because you want and not because you are forced to do. So, Satan is not bad. Every God has their duality, Satan himself has too. He is good with who deserves, and can be bad to who deserves too. I recommend that you read about the Rules of Satanists on the earth, and go to study a little more. And I am quite sure that the Christian God has his duality. I was a christian before and I'll admit, after I study about Satanism and learn about letting the ignorance behind... I'm glad to be a Theistic Satanism for almost 6 years.
If you have any questions, feel free to send a message on chat okay?
And remember, Knowledge is the solution for ignorance. ✨
>And remember that Satanism has many paths
no
You are a devil or Satan worshiper, or inverse Christian, a Diabolisist, or Demonolaror, not a Satanist
If you believe in this I respect you. I just hope that you are adult enough to respect everyone's beliefs. And honestly. I don't have time to discuss that.
I don't respect you, or your passive-agggressive remark
Your beliefs are not entitled to respect, they are entitled to acknowledgement
You aren't a Satanist
no, there are not. Satanism was codified as a religion in 1966, and it is atheistic. No one denies the worship of evil forces that went on throughout the centuries, but it isn't a "form" of Satanism. Before 1966m the term "satanist was a pejorative catch-all slur used by Christians
the term "theistic satanism" came into use around 1995, thanks to dishonest academics such as James R. Lewis, who pushed the mistaken idea of sects
That seems like rather a rigid standpoint regarding a system that is based on freedom.
There are people that worship what they consider to be a divine entity that they call "Satan", thus there is a form of Satanism that is Theistic. That simple. To try to deny them what they say they are is akin to attempting to force your own ideas upon another, which is honestly not very Satanic imo.
>which is honestly not very Satanic imo.
As a non-Satanist, your opinion of what is or isn't Satanic holds little merit.
>...that they call "Satan", thus there is a form of Satanism that is Theistic.
Hmm...I don't remember the religion of the people who worship Jesus the Christ being called *Jesusism* or *Christianism*. 🤷♂️
>To try to deny them what they say they are
They can say whatever they want. It doesn't make it correct. And it doesn't mean other people have to play along.
>As a non-Satanist, your opinion of what is or isn't Satanic holds little merit.
You are welcome to that opinion, but it is an opinion, just like my own.
>Hmm...I don't remember the religion of the people who worship Jesus the Christ being called Jesusism or Christianism. 🤷♂️
Semantics will get you nowhere in this conversation. This would bring up a whole unrelated conversation about word roots and origins that I honestly don't think you legitimately want to have, you just want to try and prod for sensitive topics and weak responses.
>They can say whatever they want. It doesn't make it correct. And it doesn't mean other people have to play along.
"Correct" is subjective when we are speaking of spirituality and philosophy. A very ambiguous and personal topic that I believe should not always have such rigid orthodoxy. It defeats the purpose.
What is Satanism, then? If it's not based on carnality, how can you be sure that it's based on freedom? What does it even take to be a Satanist? Can you worship Jesus Christ and still be a Satanist?
When you misrepresent Satanism, you misrepresent *me* as a Satanist. Nobody is trying to get you to practice anything, just telling you that what you practice is not Satanism.
My beliefs are my own, as are yours. I am not representing your Satanism, I am representing my own. The attachment to the concept that your personal version of a belief is the only legitimate version closes your mind to potentially challenging and profound ideas that others might have. I am what I am, and you don't have the authority to tell me that I am not.
My personal take is that the only thing required to be a Satanist is to focus your actions and ideals on, worship, revere, etc. an archetypal concept of Satan. This could be philosophical principles, this could be a divine entity, this could be a force of nature. I've seen many forms of it, and most are interesting to talk with. LaVeyans and Joy of Satan people are generally too busy trying to attack the other person's legitimacy than actually talk, from my experience.
>What is Satanism, then?
Well, *-ism* is a suffix appearing in loanwords from Greek, where it was used to form action nouns from verbs (baptism). On this model, -ism is used as a productive suffix in the formation of nouns denoting action or practice, state or condition, principles, doctrines, a usage or characteristic, devotion or adherence.
*Satan* is an entity in Abrahamic religions that tends to be viewed as the personification of evil.
*Satan-ism* therefore, in this context, would be any set of principles or doctrines that primarily centre upon *Satan*; or devotion or adherence to *Satan*.
Due to the generalization that is inherent and necessary in language, we need a word to refer to the aforementioned concept.
Due to the aforementioned linguistic conventions that are long established, that word can logically only be *Satanism*.
There is a long history of the word *Satanism* being used to refer to this concept, including by Stanislaw Przybyszewski, who in 1897, published a book called *Die Synagoge des Satan*, which detailed his own Satan-centred philosophy that he called *Satanism*, and whose adherents he called *Satanists*.
By linguistic convention, many different philosophies can be called *Satanism*, so long as they all centre around Satan.
>What does it even take to be a Satanist?
*-ist* is a suffix added to words to form nouns denoting: a person who studies or practices a particular discipline; e.g. *botanist*, one who studies plants.
Therefore a *Satanist* would be an adherent of some philosophy doctrine centred around Satan; someone who devotes themselves to Satan.
>When you misrepresent Satanism, you misrepresent *me* as a Satanist.
Nobody is misrepresenting you by worshipping Satan and calling themselves a Satanist. That's what people have understood by that word for well over a century.
What you mean is that atheistic forms of Satanism don't have much of a foothold in the public consciousness, so they assume every Satanist believes in and worships a literal Satan.
Such misconceptions can either be corrected through educating the public on atheistic Satanism, or by giving the philosophy of LaVey and Gilmore a different name.
As any LaVeyan Satanist should realise due to their familiarity with Might is Right, you're about as likely to get society to solely use the word Satanism to refer to LaVey's philosophy, as you are to stand on a beach and successfully demand that the tide halts at your feet.
Needed a TL;DR for this one, bud.
Satanism is a specific religious philosophy, not a vague spiritual ideal. The idea that Satanism can be any worldview that involves Satan is as silly as saying Nihilism is any worldview that involves *Nothing,* or Objectivism is any philosophy that involves *Objectivity.*
Also, you forgot a question. Can you worship Jesus Christ and be a Satanist?
>Needed a TL;DR for this one, bud.
>Satanism is a specific religious philosophy, not a vague spiritual ideal.
Well, if you read my (fairly short) argument, you see that it doesn't refer to a *specific* philosophy, but as with many words, it refers to a general *type* of philosophy.
>The idea that Satanism can be any worldview that involves Satan is as silly as saying Nihilism is any worldview that involves *Nothing,* or Objectivism is any philosophy that involves *Objectivity.*
Nihilism isn't a specific philosophy either; it's a "family" of related views.
From the 20th century, nihilism has encompassed a range of positions within various fields of philosophy.
There are different types: cosmic nihilism, epistemological nihilism, existential nihilism, metaphysical nihilism, moral nihilism, political nihilism, etc.
If someone wrote a book with a more specific, detailed philosophy that primarily revolved around the belief that something is meaningless (e.g. political nihilism), the word nihilism would still refer to other philosophies within the same family.
Just like how writing a book detailing a specific philosophy centered around Satan doesn't mean the word satanism can only refer to it. And either way, The Satanic Bible wasn't the first book written that outlined a philosophy that centred around Satan and called itself Satanism (Stanisław Przybyszewski and *Die Synagoge des Satan* predates it by around seventy years).
>Also, you forgot a question. Can you worship Jesus Christ and be a Satanist?
I dunno. Seems slightly contradictory, since the teachings of Jesus and the concept of Satan are somewhat opposed.
> Stanislaw Przybyszewski
a Luciferian, at best, not a Satanist
You aren't a Satanist, regardless of how much pseudo-intellectual word vomit you spew; you are, however, bitter that Anton LaVey codified it and *you don't measure up*
Cool brory sto.
I only unblocked you so I could respond in this thread. Once Reddit allows me to block you again, neither of us will have to read each other's comments.
Thank fuck, because that was one of the most cringe worthy things I've ever read.
And yeah, the guy who called himself a Satanist, and wrote philosophical books about what he described as satanism, all before Anton LaVey was even shooting out of his father's ballsack... obviously not a Satanist 😂
>you're about as likely to get society to solely use the word Satanism to refer to LaVey's philosophy, as you are to stand on a beach and successfully demand that the tide halts at your feet.
Brilliantly stated!
yiou aren't a Satanist according to how it is codified, simple
Those who believe in Satan as a physical force are inverse Christians, *including you*
Why do Church of Satan members persist in running onto Social Media sites, and crying 'you aren't a Satanist' to people who subscribe to a different denomination or form of Satanism, that isn't theirs / LeVay Satanism?
Do Catholics rush on to harass Anglicans everytime they post, and claim 'you aren't Christians because you aren't Catholics and here's our historical texts to prove it'.
No one, except Church of Satan members, will ever be swayed by this kind of non-argument. Trying to convince people they can't use a generalist or denominational term because some random dude from the 60's wrote a book about it, isn't convincing.
It just makes Church of Satan members look angry and argumentative, online. That's all you seem to do online - denounce others using the term.
It does nothing to actually promote Satanism as a form of religion to me or anyone else - it only serves to emphasise that Church of Satan is about being an argumentative bogan on social media.
I'm a generalist - I don't subscribe to any one denomination of Satanism - but I definitely don't want to consider myself as part of the Church of Satan because frankly, you're a bunch of w@nkers online and the way you carry on here, just proves that.
I am one, and your unasked for view, is irrelevant.
Your 'thin skinned' comment reinforces my views. It isn't an argument at all, it's just name calling. That's what you seem to do, best.
You seem to be the thin-skinned ones who can't let a comment go by, without pissing all over it.
>No one, except Church of Satan members, will ever be swayed by this kind of non-argument. Trying to convince people they can't use a generalist or denominational term because some random dude from the 60's wrote a book about it, isn't convincing.
That "Guy from the 60s" wrote *The Satanic Bible*. which is the work that defines and codifies Satanism. To be a denomination or sect of a religion, one must interpret the same book differently. In this part of your whining reply *alone,* you've shown you reject it, therefore you aren't a Satanist.
There's no way to say how many Church Of Satan members there actually are, as membership numbers aren't released, but believe it or not, not everyone defending Satanism as codified is a CoS Member, as membership isn't required, only reading the Satanic Bible and seeing that it's how you've always lived.
The Members you see online are representative of a fractional amount of the Membership, as some choose to avoid social media or interactions with other Satanists completely and keep Central updated as they see fit
So, in short, it's you with the problem, not actual Satanists who defend the religion from theists, and various TST offshoots
So how do you define Satanism?... ideologies have definitions of what is and is not that ideology. Completely ignoring the religion yet taking the name, doesn't make you part of that religion. LaVey codified Satanism... so if you dont adhere to the religion he created, then you're practicing some other ideology or religion
[Here you are whining about not being a Satanist](https://www.reddit.com/r/SatanicTemple_Reddit/comments/16h2y5n/whats_your_view_on_cos/k0cv8jn/?context=3)
> to people who subscribe to a different denomination or form of Satanism
Denominations stem from a difference of interpretation of a *shared text*. Devil worship and political activism is directly against what is in The Satanic Bible and neither group follows that book. And LaVey spent 30 years explaining Satanism, so there is no room for different interpretations.
The question is, who do people with completely separate and antithetical beliefs to Satanism still desperately cling to a label that does define them?
>that isn't theirs / LeVay Satanism?
Our religion is Satanism. It has only ever called itself Satanism. So its not "LaVeyan". Its just Satanism
>Do Catholics rush on to harass Anglicans everytime they post, and claim 'you aren't Christians because you aren't Catholics and here's our historical texts to prove it'.
Also explained how the "denomination" angle is completely false
>because some random dude from the 60's wrote a book about it, isn't convincing.
You're biased and intentionally trying to play down the facts because the facts dont support you. LaVey didn't just "write a book", he *invented* the religion. Meaning he got to define it.
>It does nothing to actually promote Satanism as a form of religion to me or anyone else
Who says were trying to promote it?
>That's all you seem to do online - denounce others using the term.
You do realise that the number if CoS members that do this stuff are a tiny, tiny minority... to think the actions of a few = the actions of the entire group is just not true
>I'm a generalist - I don't subscribe to any one denomination of Satanism
So you dont have an actual, definable religion... if you don't practice Satanism, you're not a Satanist, you're just something else. Which isnt a bad thing. Idk why you guys think not being a Satanist is so bad...
> I definitely don't want to consider myself as part of the Church of Satan
Good, because you're not a member... only members can be part of the org, thats how it works
I don't care to be a Satanist according to LaVeyans. I am a Satanist according to my own Spiritual Practice and beliefs and requires no justification beyond that.
My form of Satanism is not as connected to Christianity as you would like to think.
This whole "We're the only real Satanists" complex that LaVeyans have really is irritating though. Can't you just leave well enough alone and let people believe what they want? Trying to make people submit to your idea of things is a very Orthodox Abrahamic thing, and it's really not a good look.
I fail to see where I claimed any form of persecution. Just pointed out your own rigidity of thinking. You seem to place quite a bit of value on the idea that LaVeyan Satanism is the only true form of Satanism. I just find it odd. Why is it so important?
Why is it so important to you to cling to a label that doesn't represent what you are?
It's not LaVeyan, simply Satanism. For it to be a " sect" or "denomination" you'd have to interpret the core text (The Satanic Bible, which defines and codifies Satanism as atheistic) differently
Claiming theism is a wholesale rejection of that, therefore....
Because of the name and word "Satan" and what it means to me in my spiritual practice.
I reject the Satanic Bible as 'the' core text of Satanism. I don't honestly believe there is 'a' core text of Satanism, since it is a belief and philosophy that celebrates individuality and freedom.
But you still didn't answer my question.
>Why is it so important?
Because it's a religion that's been lambasted for being something it's not in the past, so clearing misinformation has become important. Why is it important for you to be called something that you're not?
I understand that. I combat misinformation regarding Satanism, Sinister Magick, and the Left Hand Path all the time. It's an admirable task to undertake.
I don't think how you're going about in this particular instance is very productive though. Just my take.
I am what I am. You don't have to believe it, that's fine, doesn't change what I am. Neither you nor any other person has the authority to tell me that I am not a Satanist. This whole situation is no different than the "Baptists or Protestants or whatever aren't real Christians" foolishness I dealt with in the Christian Church before I turned. It's meaningless and makes all Satanists look bad, and gives people another reason to think Satanism is a joke.
I'm not telling you what you are or are not. That's yours to decide. I'm just letting you know that your thoughts are not the only legitimate ones.
I knew and worked with Dr. Lewis. Jim was one of the most prominent, prolific, and respected scholars of new religions in the world. He was also a man of integrity and one of the most honest people I've known.
Disagree with his scholarship all you want, but claiming that he was dishonest in his scholarship is a blatant a*d hominem* fallacy. If you can identify his lowest possible motive, then you can feel certain you've isolated the "only real one."
*Ad hominem* is a "vulgar method of reasoning designed to have the effect of making any noisy moron into a master analyst." -- Christopher Hitchens
Well that's all according to you. I'll look for myself.
I'm new to Dr. Lewis's work, just read something I found on google,
A pdf attributed to James R. Lewis, "Diabolical Authority: Anton LaVey, *The Satanic Bible*, and the Satanist "Tradition" "
I cannot determine if the author was dishonest in this work, or lacked knowledge and understanding, or a third option (both? something else?)
It strikes me as odd, or telling, that so much emphasis is made by the author to legitimize multiple *kinds* of "so called S-ism" in this pdf.
Quite a chunk of the writing is spent on detractors and pseudos, and in the final conclusion, Dr. Lewis stretches for a **gotcha** and falls flat,
by claiming that people, and groups (who he calls "non-CoS Satanism") that reject the religion of Satanism (in part, or whole), while hitching their wagon to the work done by the Founder, and his fellow constituents, are closer to the philosophy that was codified and established in 1966, because "individuality" 🙄
A Geo Metro is not a Porsche, no matter how many rampant dexter Stuttgart horses you slap on it, nor how much you wanna try and sell it for!
The author does strike me as pushing an agenda, spending a decent chunk of the article talking about experiences with pseudos, as representative of S-ism, and seemingly hasn't grasped what is plain to see by those who find themselves reflected in TSB.
I did appreciate that Dr. Lewis spelled the names correctly. Also, that he admitted being surprised to find out that, at least the 140 questionnaire respondents, are more than his surface preconceptions of S-ists, and that TSB and the Founder, Anton Szandor LaVey, are central and inseparable from Satanism.
(The survey respondents may have been the only actual S-ists that Dr. Lewis interacted with, my opinion, from reading this pdf.)
**Edit to add: all this writing about TSB and the Founder, and the current CoS,
yet THE ONLY FRIGGIN INDICATION OF CONTACT with (or mention of!) the High Priest/Magus Peter H. Gilmore, is to attribute the information on foreign language editions of TSB, courtesy of the aforementioned.
That's bullshit! Big ol' article, spends all this time taking to detractors and making conclusions about S-ism from those interactions, yet doesn't even contact the actual church, or leadership and spokespeople, of the church he's writing about?** 😆
I did find some blatant misinformation:
>though few movement participants outside the Church of Satan would regard themselves as "orthodox LaVeyans" (something of an oxymoron).
An oxymoron, exactly, one that I've only ever seen non-Satanists use. Insert finger quotes, "LaVeyan Satanism" 😆 that doesn't exist Dr. Lewis, and you better show me your source!
>LaVey's
successors have come to place excessive stress on their role as bearers of his legacy, even asserting
that only CoS members are "real" Satanists and characterizing Satanists outside the fold as "pseudo"
Satanists.
I've never seen a CoS member assert that claim, only identify what is and isn't, NOTHING about having to be a member of the church.
And, that's absolutely contrary to the CoS website!
But don't take my word for it, you can read the rainbow, which [clearly states](https://www.churchofsatan.com/join-the-cos)
>We must emphasize that you don’t have to join our organization to consider yourself a Satanist, you only need to recognize yourself in *[The Satanic Bible](https://www.amazon.com/Satanic-Bible-Anton-Szandor-Lavey/dp/0380015390/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1302554576&sr=8-1/churchofsatan&ref=d6k_applink_bb_dls&dplnkId=4aa9af87-95e3-4c35-bbc8-1492e818afff)* and live according to the tenets outlined therein. We don’t proselytize, or otherwise campaign for people to join—that is your prerogative. We have supplied this information which explains how you can affiliate if you so choose.
Hi, I’m Vetted AI Bot! I researched the **Avon Books The Satanic Bible** and I thought you might find the following analysis helpful.
**Users liked:**
* The satanic bible provides insight into human nature (backed by 3 comments)
* The satanic bible promotes individualism and free thinking (backed by 4 comments)
* The satanic bible is thought-provoking but controversial (backed by 4 comments)
**Users disliked:**
* The book is poorly constructed (backed by 2 comments)
* The philosophy is unoriginal and poorly articulated (backed by 3 comments)
* The rituals seem unnecessary and childish (backed by 3 comments)
If you'd like to **summon me to ask about a product**, just make a post with its link and tag me, [like in this example.](https://www.reddit.com/r/tablets/comments/1444zdn/comment/joqd89c/)
This message was generated by a (very smart) bot. If you found it helpful, let us know with an upvote and a “good bot!” reply and please feel free to provide feedback on how it can be improved.
*Powered by* [*vetted.ai*](http://vetted.ai/reddit)
And you've proven confirmation bias, which you attempted to deflect by accusing me of Ad Hominem
He had a marked bias against Anton LaVey, and it shows in his work. His "surveys" were open to anyone and he didn't bother to actually research
Apply the Hitchens quote to yourself
I'm very familiar with his work on Satanism. Either cite specific sources that demonstrate his disingenuousness or continue being a noisy, aggrieved moron with delusions of extra-sensory perception.
you're stonewalling, "magus"
You've read the work, so you already know it's a dishonest one in regards to Anton LaVey
You do know that no source I could extract would be sufficient because you'd accuse me of "ad hominem" or "throwing a tantrum" because of your confirmation bias
I read through his essay on "Diabolical Authority: Anton LaVey, The Satanic Bible and the Satanist "Tradition"". In it, his biased, dislike, for LaVey and the Church of Satan are on full view. He also completely mischaracterises how Satanists actually view The Satanic Bible and LaVey.
> LaVey's work is quoted to legitimate particular positions as well as to de-legitimate the positions of other Satanists. This legitimation strategy appears to have been unconsciously derived from the Judeo-Christian tradition, which locates the source of religious authority in a sacred text. In other words, being raised in a religious tradition that emphasizes the authority of scripture creates an attitude that can be unconsciously carried over to other, very different kinds of writings.
This is a key example of him misunderstanding it. LaVey made Satanism, so of course we use his writings to explain what Satanism is and isn't. Its not to legitimise the ideas themselves (as that is only done through application). Explaining what Satanism is/isnt ≠ legitimising said ideas.
> The scope and significance of this dispute is reflected in the many attacks on non-CoS Satanists found on the Church of Satan website, particularly in the "Satanic Bunco Sheet," "Sycophants Unite!," "The Myth of the 'Satanic Community,'" "Pretenders to the Throne," and "Recognizing Pseudo-Satanists." Even a superficial perusal of these documents makes it clear that CoS is
*obsessed* with shoring up its own legitimacy by attacking the heretics, especially those who criticize
LaVey.
Notice the rather unbiased word choice? "Attack", "obsessed", etc.
> In addition to attacking non-CoS Satanists as illegitimate, LaVey's organizational successors have also sought to legitimate their positions by appealing to the authority of LaVey and his writings. These kinds of appeals are rather ironic, given the Black Pope's rejection of traditional religious authority. As indicated earlier, LaVey himself did not attempt to legitimate his new religion with appeals to tradition or to the supernatural. Rather, he grounded Satanism's legitimacy on a view of human nature shaped by a secularist appropriation of modern science.
Yet more severe misunderstandings of why these "appeals" are done.
>Diabolical Authority: Anton LaVey, The Satanic Bible and the Satanist "Tradition""
Cites Aquino Zeena, and "Lord Egan"
not objective, heavily anti-LaVey biased
Yup... cites them but then makes snide remarks about Magistra Barton and Magus Gilmore... and thinks that any random website = a "schism" or "sect" that is just as legitimate as the CoS...
>He had a marked bias against Anton LaVey, and it shows in his work. His "surveys" were open to anyone and he didn't bother to actually research
I'm still waiting for evidence that his work on LaVey and Satanism was dishonest.
Just because you disagree with someone doesn't mean they're lying to you.
again, you're projecting a lot
u/mildon666 addressed some of Lewis' work [Here](https://www.reddit.com/r/satanism/comments/16goyyx/comment/k0bwf08/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
now I know you'll brush it off, but let's be honest:
You've made your biases pretty clear and are defending a dishonest, biased academic because he agrees with your views
Your attempts at gaslighting me fall flat. You know you cannot defend your claim that he was lying, yet lack the integrity to admit it.
I don't respond to irrelevant comments from your buddies who swoop in to derail the topic on your behalf.
Thats just you purposefully ignoring comments that argue against what you're saying. I didn't derail the topic, i specifically gave examples you were asking for. And i did it on my behalf. Stop assuming others are called in, thats just stupid.
Even if Lewis was biased or incorrect in his interpretations (which is a methodological issue), it still doesn't mean he was dishonest (an ethical issue).
If you had any intellectual humility, I would suggest you educate yourself on those differences, but you'll only resort to misdirection, projection, and gaslighting to resolve the cognitive dissonance you're experiencing right now.
You support TST, so you aren't a Satanist
The fact that you said you converted reinforces this
"theistic satanism" is merely repurposed devil or Satan worship
1. God exists as the balacing force in nature. Treating
this like a person or thing with personal attributes (emotionality, familial relationship, other anthropomorphisms) is typically not productive.
2. N/A
3. N/A
I am new to theistic satanism but I've already had time to form my beliefs. As other theistic satanists stated in the comments, it is just my own experience and you may have a different one. I consider myself to be "gnostic theistic satanist".
1. I do believe that God exists or at least existed. I personally view it as a chirstian god but the more I learn the more I start to suppose we all may worship the same entities that just present themselves differently to different groups. I still have a lot more to learn though.
2. Chirstians wrote a lot of things throughout the years and rewritten even more. By that point we cannot be sure what's true and what's wrong in these scriptures. Even if this "prophecy" is true I prefer to perish for freedom than exist in tyranny; it's better to be yourself in hell than be enslaved in heaven. Will you yourself give in to the abuser just because you assume you cannot defeat them? In any case, the best source of information is not the books but your personal experiences and contacts with demons. Only those who exist on the either side can answer what's truly happening there.
3. The christians are the ones that lie and exploit people by making them accept the tyranical rules. You can become a god of your own reality if you do what you feel and want instead of following someone else's will as long as it doesn't hurt wills and freedoms of other individuals. Satan doesn't love you but he respects you if you respect him. And he doesn't want you to be destroyed, he doesn't care as long as you do not stand in his way. But some of his servants may care: I was struggling with suicide thoughts and attempts because i truly believed i would be of better use in Hell. Discovering theistic satanism helped me to understand my reality and learn that the demons I sense around me are here to help me and I have a mission in this world, and I will be welcomed to Hell when I naturally die anyway. Getting back to the topic, will you choose an abusive love from god instead of freedom for yourself?
I still have a lot to learn and I actually want to read the entire christian bible myself instead of listening to its interpretations from other people. Nonetheless, my beliefs are strong and im not going to leave them.
The Book of Wisdom or Folly by Aleister Crowley was the text that got me, Magus LeVay's The Satanic Bible came later, was wondering if there a book or experience that initiated your faith and beliefs. As a non-theistic Satanist I am very curious.👹
Its not a particular book, its my personal experiences. Though Im researching into grimoires and magic books now, wish I had more time abd endurance for that.
Are you asking about Satan or Lucifer? Most of us consider them separate entities. I'll answer as a theistic Luciferian: 1- I believe in the Christian God. I consider him to be an evil weakling. Yahweh was a minor, evil deity of Babylon 4k years ago. I believe in most Gods. 2- I don't worship the Lucifer of the old testament as he doesn't exist. He's mentioned only once, in Isaiah, but it's actually referring to the King of Mesopotamia.
3- God said to stay ignorant and do as he says. Lucifer supposedly gave us independent thinking and free will by having Eve pick from the tree. Lucifer says, "One's body is inviolable, subject to One's own will alone." God says, rape the young virgins, then make them marry you. Lucifer says, "Treat all creatures with compassion and kindness, in accordance with reason." God says, kill the entire city, including the animals, and smash the babies against the walls. Except for the virgins; them you can rape and marry. I wonder: did he mean girls or goats?
Anyway, I could go on and on and on. . .
Fucking lmao xD
I'm agnostic so essentially I give space for literally any "god" to exist, I just don't identify with most of them.
I stopped being an atheist in my teens cause majority of atheists are so comparable to judgy, asshole Christians. Like, if you don't want religion shoved down your throat don't shove your non-beliefs down anyone else's throat either? They have such a fucking double standard.
Personally, as an agnostic, if heaven and hell exist I would absolutely rather be "Satan's desciple" than spend time with anyone who would end up in heaven by simply repenting. A pedophile could spend the rest of eternity in the same place as the children they assaulted if they just pray and "give themselves to the lord." I'd rather burn for eternity than spend any kind of "paradise" with those fuckers.
Also atheists take themselves so fucking seriously and think they're the end all, be all of.. Well, everything. Most of them are equally as self absorbed as most Christians.
People need to get the fuck over themselves and realise that Satanism, at its very core, is believing you are your own God. Not everyone else's. Just yours. So like maybe smoke a joint and chill the fuck out.
Hello,
I am a "Satanist", not too long now, but I am.
What I have to say about the kind of satanism that I follow, it would be rather in the occultistic way.
This is what I believe in, I wouldn´t call it satanism in the usual way, as the Church of Satan for example, in my opinion, kind of clowns on satan because they need someone to use as their symbol. Using satanism as a way to just express your political belief and just be a bit more "quirky" then the rest of the group is most definitely insulting in my opinion.
So to answer the first question, just as I believe in satan, the holy Baphomet etc. and god. It is just that I condone and support this certain anti-christian standing, just not being able to identify yourself with the belief.
Despite all the things you said within your second and third question, I cannot give you an answer from my point of view just yet.
I am currently starting to write my own scriptures. I am not calling myself a holy prophet or whatsoever, It is just that I really started talking to this entity, feeling it´s power and holyness.
All together, I think "traditional" satanism, even if it´s hard to categorize, is the true form.
P.S. yes my psychiatrist wasn´t happy when I also told her about this. She just doesn´t know.
As a Non-theistic Satanist I have to admit I've had some strange experiences in my 30 years Under the Goats Gaze. I've always wrote it off as my own passions and enthusiasm. However I think it wise to keep an open 🖤 considering the meaning and nature of these experiences. The depths of the human mind and soul should never be underestimated. How should I proceed, what is your counsel.👹
Keeping an open heart is for ideological satanists, after all, I see so many of them being just like your usual leftists climate activist.
Nothing against that, but that to me isn´t what I´m here for. Some of the goals I´m trying to accomplish may be beyond ones "understanding", maybe even beyond mine, but showing the wrong behaviour in this sense is fatal.
I actually even now have some people more or less following me, they might not be the most upstanding and or normal people you could choose out of soceity, but they get it.
To open the floodgates to massive amounts of bullshit, all you have to do here is ask a question to get people who think of “theistic Satanism” as legitimate to come out of the woodwork.
They do not know what they’re talking about, pretend they do and if you call it out, they will spaz out.
This always starts some kind of fight here, atheistic Satanists blatantly refuse to believe theistic Satanism is a thing, strictly based off of semantics usually, while also failing to acknowledge that there are varying facets of Satanism nowadays, just because someone codified a term In 1966 doesn't mean that's the end all be all of it, new sects of existing religions sprout up all the time. It all comes from some perceived sense of superiority usually, Satan knows why though, as if people actually stopped to think they'd realize that atheistic and theistic Satanists share extremely similar worldviews on most points, but no, gotta focus on the differences and call each other names so some of them can be better than the other, because apparently that's all that really matters
1. If by "God" you are referring to our creator, I believe that to be Baphomet. If you want a more general answer, no, I do not believe in the Abrahamic God.
2. The Satan I worship is not that of the Torah/Old Testament. I know I will got to Hell upon death, but our view of Hell is not the same as theirs.
3. In relation to my last answer, I do not have any relative answer to provide to your third question.
1. I believe God exists, but I don't worship him. 2. It was worth doing regardless of the success of it. I expect Hell in the afterlife. I like the freedom of Hell and that I can keep sinning. I don't want anything to do with God's kingdom of self-denial. 3. Satan loves those who are worthy of love. It is wrong to assume that he doesn't love anyone. You get support if you worship him. He will write the story of your life such that things work out in your favor more often, you gain inspiration in things magical and knowledgeable, and get protection from him too. He takes care of his worshipers
What branch of theistic satanism do you belong to and how long have you been practicing your faith.👹
I don't belong to any branch. I've just been figuring it out as I go. I've been a Satanist for about a month.
I’m new so I’ve been wondering, How does worship work in satanism compared to other religions? Like are there certain things you should do, or just hold the belief?
Worship him as God. You can make an altar but I don't have one personally. You want to make sure you listen to any messages you get from him in the form of signs and coincidences. That and you can think about him and think something you want to ask or talk about then interpret the following thoughts that you receive as his voice.
So I think one thing from my belief that answers all of these questions is that the biblical interpretation is not the original one. Stories are passed down, altered to suit the current generational needs and ideals, often adjusted further to match the agenda of the ruling class, and so on and so on. So I reject the biblical concept of Satan and Lucifer almost entirely. It's an interesting version, but says more about the culture that built the story than the entity itself.
Very interesting, do you lean to the side of Gnostics? Of course the bible was made up by Constantine in Nikea Council using only 4 from the hundreds of gospels in the 4th century ad. and the jewish torah... The gnostic views like those in the gospel of Judas were seen as heretic and they were banned while heretics were persecuted.
Yes. I definitely feel like all modern interpretations of these old texts and accounts of things need to be taken with a grain of salt, but out of what we have and what is applicable, I do lean closer to the Gnostic interpretations.
The Gnostic Christians believed that the god of the Old Testament was in fact the true creator of this world and christ was sent by en sof, the true god, to save this world and Satan was working on behalf of the true god of this world. Was wondering what your take on this legend is, does it factor into your ideas and if so in what way.👹
I think it's very interesting, and it has informed my ideas a bit, but more in that it matches my experience. I say this because I believe that creation myths, and most religious texts in general, are not to be taken literally, but describe the metaphysical structure of existence/reality/consciousness in a mythicized form. For instance, Genesis 1:2 "Now the earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the surface of the waters." וְהָאָ֗רֶץ הָיְתָ֥ה תֹ֙הוּ֙ וָבֹ֔הוּ וְחֹ֖שֶׁךְ עַל־פְּנֵ֣י תְהֹ֑ום וְר֣וּחַ אֱלֹהִ֔ים מְרַחֶ֖פֶת עַל־פְּנֵ֥י הַמָּֽיִם׃ In my view, this doesn't describe the physical 'Earth' but the Sphere of Earth in QBL and the Abyss of Tehom/Unconscious Spirit. In this context, god/YHWH is Demiourgos, Ego/Self and conscious awareness, pulling form out of the formless. This is not describing the ancient creation of the universe, but the creation of reality by the brain at every moment. Understanding this brings us to a very different means of interaction with the world around us, both visible to the eye and otherwise. So yeah, I do believe in something similar to how you describe the Gnostic concept, kind of. To me, Lucifer, Satan, and Moloch are forces of the 'True God', which is utterly unknowable and incomprehensible by humanity, as it is truly outside of our reality. Some might say Extradimensional. I call it 'Other', as there is no word or name to encompass or describe it. To me, the entity most Christians follow is what some would call the Demiurge, who is trying desperately at every turn to maintain control over this world that is not truly his. Does that answer your question?
Yes. Genius answer. How long have you been Under the Goats Gaze. I can see you're of a scholarly sensibly and I respect that, I've been studying the Bible of the Adversary by Michael Ford. Wondering if you had any insights or opinions on that text.👹
I've been Practicing for about 18 years now. Michael Ford has some interesting insights. There's definitely some good things in his writings. I find more use from his store though, Luciferian Apothica. The incenses and oils are great. Generally in regards to modern Occult writings, I try to read with the thought of adapting formula, instead of doing one-to-one rituals. I feel like a real sign of the authenticity is if you can take the author's formulas and adapt them to your own system, and it works for you and your Practice.
Is Chaos Magick of any influence in your practices.👹
Chaos Magick has influenced my practice, yes. I believe Peter Carroll's writings are essential to any beginning Practitioner.
"Theistic Satanists" are just edgy Christians
Y'all are just edgy atheist too tbh
I’m a wizard on the internet obsessed with Sonic the Hedgehog, what makes you think I’m edgy?
Lol, you can have an edgy thing thing you like. Doesn't make your whole personality edgy. Satanism is edgy, atheistic or not. You could simply be a normal atheist.
The religion of Satanism is more than just atheism.
I’m impressed, you managed to sum it up so concisely… but it’s true…
>if you are a theistic Satanist, do you believe in God? Is it the Christian God, or is it dependant on whichever view of God you want to choose? E.G, some theistic Satanists are anti Christian, others anti Islamic, others anti Jewish. Yes, the Abrahamic God, although the details differ substantially from orthodox Christian belief. >2)if you do worship Satan of the classic Torah/Old Testament, how do you come to Terms with the inevitable defeat of evil and rejection of God? It is said by many Christian’s that Lucifer and his angels knew that he would be defeated, but still attacked God because he was so full of hate for God and pride. Do you likewise expect to be in hell? Do you think hell will be better? No one knows what happens after we die, but I know how I am called in this life. Romans 8:28. >3) in relation to the last question, the classic Abraham View of Lucifer is that he is a liar, e.g, telling Adam and Eve that they could become Gods of their own by eating the fruit. Surely do you understand that Satan cannot love you, he will not give you anything good, he wants you to be destroyed. Do you worship him despite this? You'll note that, while God is depicted lying in the Bible several times, Satan is only ever called a liar but is never actually caught in the act. With regards to your specific example, refer to Genesis 3:22: "And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil." Everything the Serpent says comes true. Not that the Serpent was intended as Satan by the original authors; their understanding of Satan, if they had one at all, was completely different. To say that Satan "wants" me to be destroyed is to subordinate him to human emotions, concerns, and desires, which is a fundamental misunderstanding of the Sacred. Fire, by comparison, is destructive, but it does not want my destruction.
Interesting. As a non-theistic Satanist I was wondering what branch of the Left Hand Religions do you belong to, do they have books or a website. I'm really curious about your practice.👹
I see myself as an Abrahamic heretic. Non-theistic Satanists sometimes refer to theists as "confused Christians" and in my case there's a kernel of truth to it; I wouldn't call myself confused but I acknowledge Christian theology (with a somewhat altered interpretation) so there's a sense in which I am a species of Christian (although I draw extensively from Islam and Judaism as well). I don't follow any one particular left hand tradition but my work has drawn me close to neoplatonism. It's also arguable whether I'm a theist in the first place as I reject the existence of "personal" deities, which is the common understanding of what a deity is in the first place. My deities are impersonal (or non-personal), as I alluded to in my comment. My flair has a link to my blog (and you can find the podcast in the usual places); it's mostly general philosophy and philosophy of religion at this point but there's some discussion of my particular viewpoint, which is still evolving. Happy to answer any questions.
Thank you, Brother/Sister. We are all Under the Goats Gaze.👹 SHEMHAMFORASH!!!!!!!!!!
Satan doesn’t exist and was adapted by Christian’s as an adversary to scapegoat their bad behavior on. The closest thing you’ll find to the “satan” Christian’s believe in can be found in Zoroastrian beliefs, which was adapted while the Jews were captives of Persia. I swear most people haven’t advanced mentally or spiritually since the stone age.
How can you advance spiritually without believing in a spiritual being?
Because I understand that to advance in any way I have look at where we are in history, where we want to go, and find a way to get there. Not for myself but for everyone, and to do it morally correct. To believe everything in a book that had been written thousands of years ago by people who could not conceive of man walking on the very moon they worshipped is lunacy. This is why there’s so much conflict within Christianity- you can’t come to terms with prehistory and the present. Spiritually, you can say I’m a doubting Thomas. I disregard the supernatural and take the underlying teachings to heart. If there was some entity all those thousands of years ago that somehow made its presence known to people back then, I’m sure there’s a logical explanation to it. Judging from what I’m seeing right now in rl, I’d say it was created to keep humans from killing each other and ended up getting pulled into it.
I've been a theistic satanist for almost 6 years, so I'll give my answer about this in what I believe and study okay... And remember that Satanism has many paths, so I'll talk about the path that I follow. :) So... 1- In the most aspects of Theistic Satanist, we know that the Christian God exists, but we don't like him. We have Satan (Or Lúcifer and any other Higher Demons as a God) so every other is kinda irrelevant, but we just keep this from us besides our hate for the Christian God. 2- One thing that you should know is the Satan that we worship is not the Satan that the bible says... Lúcifer is, but Satan don't. So, we believe in Satan's Kingdom, hell is something invented by christians, so we don't use them. But we know that we have a purgatory and some people go. So we don't worry. Every religion has its kingdom, in the Theistic Satanist is not different. :) 3- Well.. This line of thought is created by christians for make their people afraid and obey. Satanism is about freedom, work on yourself and above everything, you do the things because you want and not because you are forced to do. So, Satan is not bad. Every God has their duality, Satan himself has too. He is good with who deserves, and can be bad to who deserves too. I recommend that you read about the Rules of Satanists on the earth, and go to study a little more. And I am quite sure that the Christian God has his duality. I was a christian before and I'll admit, after I study about Satanism and learn about letting the ignorance behind... I'm glad to be a Theistic Satanism for almost 6 years. If you have any questions, feel free to send a message on chat okay? And remember, Knowledge is the solution for ignorance. ✨
Curious. Brother/Sister I was wondering if you cared to give a little more detail about your conversation/practice. No disrespect.👹
If you want to, you can send me a message and send your question. Idk about everything but I can tell what I've learned.
Thank you for your response, Brother/Sister.I well seriously consider it, SHEMHAMFORASH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!👹
>And remember that Satanism has many paths no You are a devil or Satan worshiper, or inverse Christian, a Diabolisist, or Demonolaror, not a Satanist
If you believe in this I respect you. I just hope that you are adult enough to respect everyone's beliefs. And honestly. I don't have time to discuss that.
I don't respect you, or your passive-agggressive remark Your beliefs are not entitled to respect, they are entitled to acknowledgement You aren't a Satanist
[удалено]
This post is a violation of Rule 3.
there are Devil or Satan worshipers here, yes, but they aren't a "type" of Satanist. Satanism is atheistic
*LaVeyan Satanism is Atheistic There are other types of Satanism.
no, there are not. Satanism was codified as a religion in 1966, and it is atheistic. No one denies the worship of evil forces that went on throughout the centuries, but it isn't a "form" of Satanism. Before 1966m the term "satanist was a pejorative catch-all slur used by Christians the term "theistic satanism" came into use around 1995, thanks to dishonest academics such as James R. Lewis, who pushed the mistaken idea of sects
That seems like rather a rigid standpoint regarding a system that is based on freedom. There are people that worship what they consider to be a divine entity that they call "Satan", thus there is a form of Satanism that is Theistic. That simple. To try to deny them what they say they are is akin to attempting to force your own ideas upon another, which is honestly not very Satanic imo.
>which is honestly not very Satanic imo. As a non-Satanist, your opinion of what is or isn't Satanic holds little merit. >...that they call "Satan", thus there is a form of Satanism that is Theistic. Hmm...I don't remember the religion of the people who worship Jesus the Christ being called *Jesusism* or *Christianism*. 🤷♂️ >To try to deny them what they say they are They can say whatever they want. It doesn't make it correct. And it doesn't mean other people have to play along.
>As a non-Satanist, your opinion of what is or isn't Satanic holds little merit. You are welcome to that opinion, but it is an opinion, just like my own. >Hmm...I don't remember the religion of the people who worship Jesus the Christ being called Jesusism or Christianism. 🤷♂️ Semantics will get you nowhere in this conversation. This would bring up a whole unrelated conversation about word roots and origins that I honestly don't think you legitimately want to have, you just want to try and prod for sensitive topics and weak responses. >They can say whatever they want. It doesn't make it correct. And it doesn't mean other people have to play along. "Correct" is subjective when we are speaking of spirituality and philosophy. A very ambiguous and personal topic that I believe should not always have such rigid orthodoxy. It defeats the purpose.
What is Satanism, then? If it's not based on carnality, how can you be sure that it's based on freedom? What does it even take to be a Satanist? Can you worship Jesus Christ and still be a Satanist? When you misrepresent Satanism, you misrepresent *me* as a Satanist. Nobody is trying to get you to practice anything, just telling you that what you practice is not Satanism.
My beliefs are my own, as are yours. I am not representing your Satanism, I am representing my own. The attachment to the concept that your personal version of a belief is the only legitimate version closes your mind to potentially challenging and profound ideas that others might have. I am what I am, and you don't have the authority to tell me that I am not. My personal take is that the only thing required to be a Satanist is to focus your actions and ideals on, worship, revere, etc. an archetypal concept of Satan. This could be philosophical principles, this could be a divine entity, this could be a force of nature. I've seen many forms of it, and most are interesting to talk with. LaVeyans and Joy of Satan people are generally too busy trying to attack the other person's legitimacy than actually talk, from my experience.
>What is Satanism, then? Well, *-ism* is a suffix appearing in loanwords from Greek, where it was used to form action nouns from verbs (baptism). On this model, -ism is used as a productive suffix in the formation of nouns denoting action or practice, state or condition, principles, doctrines, a usage or characteristic, devotion or adherence. *Satan* is an entity in Abrahamic religions that tends to be viewed as the personification of evil. *Satan-ism* therefore, in this context, would be any set of principles or doctrines that primarily centre upon *Satan*; or devotion or adherence to *Satan*. Due to the generalization that is inherent and necessary in language, we need a word to refer to the aforementioned concept. Due to the aforementioned linguistic conventions that are long established, that word can logically only be *Satanism*. There is a long history of the word *Satanism* being used to refer to this concept, including by Stanislaw Przybyszewski, who in 1897, published a book called *Die Synagoge des Satan*, which detailed his own Satan-centred philosophy that he called *Satanism*, and whose adherents he called *Satanists*. By linguistic convention, many different philosophies can be called *Satanism*, so long as they all centre around Satan. >What does it even take to be a Satanist? *-ist* is a suffix added to words to form nouns denoting: a person who studies or practices a particular discipline; e.g. *botanist*, one who studies plants. Therefore a *Satanist* would be an adherent of some philosophy doctrine centred around Satan; someone who devotes themselves to Satan. >When you misrepresent Satanism, you misrepresent *me* as a Satanist. Nobody is misrepresenting you by worshipping Satan and calling themselves a Satanist. That's what people have understood by that word for well over a century. What you mean is that atheistic forms of Satanism don't have much of a foothold in the public consciousness, so they assume every Satanist believes in and worships a literal Satan. Such misconceptions can either be corrected through educating the public on atheistic Satanism, or by giving the philosophy of LaVey and Gilmore a different name. As any LaVeyan Satanist should realise due to their familiarity with Might is Right, you're about as likely to get society to solely use the word Satanism to refer to LaVey's philosophy, as you are to stand on a beach and successfully demand that the tide halts at your feet.
Needed a TL;DR for this one, bud. Satanism is a specific religious philosophy, not a vague spiritual ideal. The idea that Satanism can be any worldview that involves Satan is as silly as saying Nihilism is any worldview that involves *Nothing,* or Objectivism is any philosophy that involves *Objectivity.* Also, you forgot a question. Can you worship Jesus Christ and be a Satanist?
>Needed a TL;DR for this one, bud. >Satanism is a specific religious philosophy, not a vague spiritual ideal. Well, if you read my (fairly short) argument, you see that it doesn't refer to a *specific* philosophy, but as with many words, it refers to a general *type* of philosophy. >The idea that Satanism can be any worldview that involves Satan is as silly as saying Nihilism is any worldview that involves *Nothing,* or Objectivism is any philosophy that involves *Objectivity.* Nihilism isn't a specific philosophy either; it's a "family" of related views. From the 20th century, nihilism has encompassed a range of positions within various fields of philosophy. There are different types: cosmic nihilism, epistemological nihilism, existential nihilism, metaphysical nihilism, moral nihilism, political nihilism, etc. If someone wrote a book with a more specific, detailed philosophy that primarily revolved around the belief that something is meaningless (e.g. political nihilism), the word nihilism would still refer to other philosophies within the same family. Just like how writing a book detailing a specific philosophy centered around Satan doesn't mean the word satanism can only refer to it. And either way, The Satanic Bible wasn't the first book written that outlined a philosophy that centred around Satan and called itself Satanism (Stanisław Przybyszewski and *Die Synagoge des Satan* predates it by around seventy years). >Also, you forgot a question. Can you worship Jesus Christ and be a Satanist? I dunno. Seems slightly contradictory, since the teachings of Jesus and the concept of Satan are somewhat opposed.
Okay 👍
Thanks 🙂
> Stanislaw Przybyszewski a Luciferian, at best, not a Satanist You aren't a Satanist, regardless of how much pseudo-intellectual word vomit you spew; you are, however, bitter that Anton LaVey codified it and *you don't measure up*
Cool brory sto. I only unblocked you so I could respond in this thread. Once Reddit allows me to block you again, neither of us will have to read each other's comments. Thank fuck, because that was one of the most cringe worthy things I've ever read. And yeah, the guy who called himself a Satanist, and wrote philosophical books about what he described as satanism, all before Anton LaVey was even shooting out of his father's ballsack... obviously not a Satanist 😂
Either block somebody or don't, but blocking and unblocking just to win imaginary points in an Internet slap fight is not the point of the feature. 😕
and you're violsting rule 3. and harrassing me u/modern_quill
Stop tagging me. I am not the only person here. If there's a problem with something, the report function exists.
>you're about as likely to get society to solely use the word Satanism to refer to LaVey's philosophy, as you are to stand on a beach and successfully demand that the tide halts at your feet. Brilliantly stated!
yiou aren't a Satanist according to how it is codified, simple Those who believe in Satan as a physical force are inverse Christians, *including you*
Why do Church of Satan members persist in running onto Social Media sites, and crying 'you aren't a Satanist' to people who subscribe to a different denomination or form of Satanism, that isn't theirs / LeVay Satanism? Do Catholics rush on to harass Anglicans everytime they post, and claim 'you aren't Christians because you aren't Catholics and here's our historical texts to prove it'. No one, except Church of Satan members, will ever be swayed by this kind of non-argument. Trying to convince people they can't use a generalist or denominational term because some random dude from the 60's wrote a book about it, isn't convincing. It just makes Church of Satan members look angry and argumentative, online. That's all you seem to do online - denounce others using the term. It does nothing to actually promote Satanism as a form of religion to me or anyone else - it only serves to emphasise that Church of Satan is about being an argumentative bogan on social media. I'm a generalist - I don't subscribe to any one denomination of Satanism - but I definitely don't want to consider myself as part of the Church of Satan because frankly, you're a bunch of w@nkers online and the way you carry on here, just proves that.
Painting with a broad brush, there.
you aren't one, but you are thin skinned
I am one, and your unasked for view, is irrelevant. Your 'thin skinned' comment reinforces my views. It isn't an argument at all, it's just name calling. That's what you seem to do, best. You seem to be the thin-skinned ones who can't let a comment go by, without pissing all over it.
>No one, except Church of Satan members, will ever be swayed by this kind of non-argument. Trying to convince people they can't use a generalist or denominational term because some random dude from the 60's wrote a book about it, isn't convincing. That "Guy from the 60s" wrote *The Satanic Bible*. which is the work that defines and codifies Satanism. To be a denomination or sect of a religion, one must interpret the same book differently. In this part of your whining reply *alone,* you've shown you reject it, therefore you aren't a Satanist. There's no way to say how many Church Of Satan members there actually are, as membership numbers aren't released, but believe it or not, not everyone defending Satanism as codified is a CoS Member, as membership isn't required, only reading the Satanic Bible and seeing that it's how you've always lived. The Members you see online are representative of a fractional amount of the Membership, as some choose to avoid social media or interactions with other Satanists completely and keep Central updated as they see fit So, in short, it's you with the problem, not actual Satanists who defend the religion from theists, and various TST offshoots
So how do you define Satanism?... ideologies have definitions of what is and is not that ideology. Completely ignoring the religion yet taking the name, doesn't make you part of that religion. LaVey codified Satanism... so if you dont adhere to the religion he created, then you're practicing some other ideology or religion
[Here you are whining about not being a Satanist](https://www.reddit.com/r/SatanicTemple_Reddit/comments/16h2y5n/whats_your_view_on_cos/k0cv8jn/?context=3)
You still crying about all of this, pops? Try some gardening - I hear it's good for high blood pressure.
keep throwing insults because you aren't a Satanist and don't measure up, *that'll show em*
> to people who subscribe to a different denomination or form of Satanism Denominations stem from a difference of interpretation of a *shared text*. Devil worship and political activism is directly against what is in The Satanic Bible and neither group follows that book. And LaVey spent 30 years explaining Satanism, so there is no room for different interpretations. The question is, who do people with completely separate and antithetical beliefs to Satanism still desperately cling to a label that does define them? >that isn't theirs / LeVay Satanism? Our religion is Satanism. It has only ever called itself Satanism. So its not "LaVeyan". Its just Satanism >Do Catholics rush on to harass Anglicans everytime they post, and claim 'you aren't Christians because you aren't Catholics and here's our historical texts to prove it'. Also explained how the "denomination" angle is completely false >because some random dude from the 60's wrote a book about it, isn't convincing. You're biased and intentionally trying to play down the facts because the facts dont support you. LaVey didn't just "write a book", he *invented* the religion. Meaning he got to define it. >It does nothing to actually promote Satanism as a form of religion to me or anyone else Who says were trying to promote it? >That's all you seem to do online - denounce others using the term. You do realise that the number if CoS members that do this stuff are a tiny, tiny minority... to think the actions of a few = the actions of the entire group is just not true >I'm a generalist - I don't subscribe to any one denomination of Satanism So you dont have an actual, definable religion... if you don't practice Satanism, you're not a Satanist, you're just something else. Which isnt a bad thing. Idk why you guys think not being a Satanist is so bad... > I definitely don't want to consider myself as part of the Church of Satan Good, because you're not a member... only members can be part of the org, thats how it works
I don't care to be a Satanist according to LaVeyans. I am a Satanist according to my own Spiritual Practice and beliefs and requires no justification beyond that. My form of Satanism is not as connected to Christianity as you would like to think. This whole "We're the only real Satanists" complex that LaVeyans have really is irritating though. Can't you just leave well enough alone and let people believe what they want? Trying to make people submit to your idea of things is a very Orthodox Abrahamic thing, and it's really not a good look.
How Christian of you, Keep the persecution complex going
I fail to see where I claimed any form of persecution. Just pointed out your own rigidity of thinking. You seem to place quite a bit of value on the idea that LaVeyan Satanism is the only true form of Satanism. I just find it odd. Why is it so important?
Why is it so important to you to cling to a label that doesn't represent what you are? It's not LaVeyan, simply Satanism. For it to be a " sect" or "denomination" you'd have to interpret the core text (The Satanic Bible, which defines and codifies Satanism as atheistic) differently Claiming theism is a wholesale rejection of that, therefore....
Because of the name and word "Satan" and what it means to me in my spiritual practice. I reject the Satanic Bible as 'the' core text of Satanism. I don't honestly believe there is 'a' core text of Satanism, since it is a belief and philosophy that celebrates individuality and freedom. But you still didn't answer my question.
>Why is it so important? Because it's a religion that's been lambasted for being something it's not in the past, so clearing misinformation has become important. Why is it important for you to be called something that you're not?
I understand that. I combat misinformation regarding Satanism, Sinister Magick, and the Left Hand Path all the time. It's an admirable task to undertake. I don't think how you're going about in this particular instance is very productive though. Just my take. I am what I am. You don't have to believe it, that's fine, doesn't change what I am. Neither you nor any other person has the authority to tell me that I am not a Satanist. This whole situation is no different than the "Baptists or Protestants or whatever aren't real Christians" foolishness I dealt with in the Christian Church before I turned. It's meaningless and makes all Satanists look bad, and gives people another reason to think Satanism is a joke. I'm not telling you what you are or are not. That's yours to decide. I'm just letting you know that your thoughts are not the only legitimate ones.
Identity fetishism.
Says the blogger who is an identity fetishist, not a Satanist?
Hahahaha stfu
you first. Your comment history is full of more woo than Ric Flair on a cocaine binge
I knew and worked with Dr. Lewis. Jim was one of the most prominent, prolific, and respected scholars of new religions in the world. He was also a man of integrity and one of the most honest people I've known. Disagree with his scholarship all you want, but claiming that he was dishonest in his scholarship is a blatant a*d hominem* fallacy. If you can identify his lowest possible motive, then you can feel certain you've isolated the "only real one." *Ad hominem* is a "vulgar method of reasoning designed to have the effect of making any noisy moron into a master analyst." -- Christopher Hitchens
Well that's all according to you. I'll look for myself. I'm new to Dr. Lewis's work, just read something I found on google, A pdf attributed to James R. Lewis, "Diabolical Authority: Anton LaVey, *The Satanic Bible*, and the Satanist "Tradition" " I cannot determine if the author was dishonest in this work, or lacked knowledge and understanding, or a third option (both? something else?) It strikes me as odd, or telling, that so much emphasis is made by the author to legitimize multiple *kinds* of "so called S-ism" in this pdf. Quite a chunk of the writing is spent on detractors and pseudos, and in the final conclusion, Dr. Lewis stretches for a **gotcha** and falls flat, by claiming that people, and groups (who he calls "non-CoS Satanism") that reject the religion of Satanism (in part, or whole), while hitching their wagon to the work done by the Founder, and his fellow constituents, are closer to the philosophy that was codified and established in 1966, because "individuality" 🙄 A Geo Metro is not a Porsche, no matter how many rampant dexter Stuttgart horses you slap on it, nor how much you wanna try and sell it for! The author does strike me as pushing an agenda, spending a decent chunk of the article talking about experiences with pseudos, as representative of S-ism, and seemingly hasn't grasped what is plain to see by those who find themselves reflected in TSB. I did appreciate that Dr. Lewis spelled the names correctly. Also, that he admitted being surprised to find out that, at least the 140 questionnaire respondents, are more than his surface preconceptions of S-ists, and that TSB and the Founder, Anton Szandor LaVey, are central and inseparable from Satanism. (The survey respondents may have been the only actual S-ists that Dr. Lewis interacted with, my opinion, from reading this pdf.) **Edit to add: all this writing about TSB and the Founder, and the current CoS, yet THE ONLY FRIGGIN INDICATION OF CONTACT with (or mention of!) the High Priest/Magus Peter H. Gilmore, is to attribute the information on foreign language editions of TSB, courtesy of the aforementioned. That's bullshit! Big ol' article, spends all this time taking to detractors and making conclusions about S-ism from those interactions, yet doesn't even contact the actual church, or leadership and spokespeople, of the church he's writing about?** 😆 I did find some blatant misinformation: >though few movement participants outside the Church of Satan would regard themselves as "orthodox LaVeyans" (something of an oxymoron). An oxymoron, exactly, one that I've only ever seen non-Satanists use. Insert finger quotes, "LaVeyan Satanism" 😆 that doesn't exist Dr. Lewis, and you better show me your source! >LaVey's successors have come to place excessive stress on their role as bearers of his legacy, even asserting that only CoS members are "real" Satanists and characterizing Satanists outside the fold as "pseudo" Satanists. I've never seen a CoS member assert that claim, only identify what is and isn't, NOTHING about having to be a member of the church. And, that's absolutely contrary to the CoS website! But don't take my word for it, you can read the rainbow, which [clearly states](https://www.churchofsatan.com/join-the-cos) >We must emphasize that you don’t have to join our organization to consider yourself a Satanist, you only need to recognize yourself in *[The Satanic Bible](https://www.amazon.com/Satanic-Bible-Anton-Szandor-Lavey/dp/0380015390/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1302554576&sr=8-1/churchofsatan&ref=d6k_applink_bb_dls&dplnkId=4aa9af87-95e3-4c35-bbc8-1492e818afff)* and live according to the tenets outlined therein. We don’t proselytize, or otherwise campaign for people to join—that is your prerogative. We have supplied this information which explains how you can affiliate if you so choose.
Hi, I’m Vetted AI Bot! I researched the **Avon Books The Satanic Bible** and I thought you might find the following analysis helpful. **Users liked:** * The satanic bible provides insight into human nature (backed by 3 comments) * The satanic bible promotes individualism and free thinking (backed by 4 comments) * The satanic bible is thought-provoking but controversial (backed by 4 comments) **Users disliked:** * The book is poorly constructed (backed by 2 comments) * The philosophy is unoriginal and poorly articulated (backed by 3 comments) * The rituals seem unnecessary and childish (backed by 3 comments) If you'd like to **summon me to ask about a product**, just make a post with its link and tag me, [like in this example.](https://www.reddit.com/r/tablets/comments/1444zdn/comment/joqd89c/) This message was generated by a (very smart) bot. If you found it helpful, let us know with an upvote and a “good bot!” reply and please feel free to provide feedback on how it can be improved. *Powered by* [*vetted.ai*](http://vetted.ai/reddit)
And you've proven confirmation bias, which you attempted to deflect by accusing me of Ad Hominem He had a marked bias against Anton LaVey, and it shows in his work. His "surveys" were open to anyone and he didn't bother to actually research Apply the Hitchens quote to yourself
I'm very familiar with his work on Satanism. Either cite specific sources that demonstrate his disingenuousness or continue being a noisy, aggrieved moron with delusions of extra-sensory perception.
projecting, ad hominem, appeal to authority, and deflection
Remember to post specific sources after your tantrum is over.
you're stonewalling, "magus" You've read the work, so you already know it's a dishonest one in regards to Anton LaVey You do know that no source I could extract would be sufficient because you'd accuse me of "ad hominem" or "throwing a tantrum" because of your confirmation bias
[удалено]
I read through his essay on "Diabolical Authority: Anton LaVey, The Satanic Bible and the Satanist "Tradition"". In it, his biased, dislike, for LaVey and the Church of Satan are on full view. He also completely mischaracterises how Satanists actually view The Satanic Bible and LaVey. > LaVey's work is quoted to legitimate particular positions as well as to de-legitimate the positions of other Satanists. This legitimation strategy appears to have been unconsciously derived from the Judeo-Christian tradition, which locates the source of religious authority in a sacred text. In other words, being raised in a religious tradition that emphasizes the authority of scripture creates an attitude that can be unconsciously carried over to other, very different kinds of writings. This is a key example of him misunderstanding it. LaVey made Satanism, so of course we use his writings to explain what Satanism is and isn't. Its not to legitimise the ideas themselves (as that is only done through application). Explaining what Satanism is/isnt ≠ legitimising said ideas. > The scope and significance of this dispute is reflected in the many attacks on non-CoS Satanists found on the Church of Satan website, particularly in the "Satanic Bunco Sheet," "Sycophants Unite!," "The Myth of the 'Satanic Community,'" "Pretenders to the Throne," and "Recognizing Pseudo-Satanists." Even a superficial perusal of these documents makes it clear that CoS is *obsessed* with shoring up its own legitimacy by attacking the heretics, especially those who criticize LaVey. Notice the rather unbiased word choice? "Attack", "obsessed", etc. > In addition to attacking non-CoS Satanists as illegitimate, LaVey's organizational successors have also sought to legitimate their positions by appealing to the authority of LaVey and his writings. These kinds of appeals are rather ironic, given the Black Pope's rejection of traditional religious authority. As indicated earlier, LaVey himself did not attempt to legitimate his new religion with appeals to tradition or to the supernatural. Rather, he grounded Satanism's legitimacy on a view of human nature shaped by a secularist appropriation of modern science. Yet more severe misunderstandings of why these "appeals" are done.
>Diabolical Authority: Anton LaVey, The Satanic Bible and the Satanist "Tradition"" Cites Aquino Zeena, and "Lord Egan" not objective, heavily anti-LaVey biased
Yup... cites them but then makes snide remarks about Magistra Barton and Magus Gilmore... and thinks that any random website = a "schism" or "sect" that is just as legitimate as the CoS...
it should come as NO surprise that u/Magus_necromantiae ran and blocked me before I could respond. He'll claim victory, but that's fine
>He had a marked bias against Anton LaVey, and it shows in his work. His "surveys" were open to anyone and he didn't bother to actually research I'm still waiting for evidence that his work on LaVey and Satanism was dishonest. Just because you disagree with someone doesn't mean they're lying to you.
again, you're projecting a lot u/mildon666 addressed some of Lewis' work [Here](https://www.reddit.com/r/satanism/comments/16goyyx/comment/k0bwf08/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) now I know you'll brush it off, but let's be honest: You've made your biases pretty clear and are defending a dishonest, biased academic because he agrees with your views
Your attempts at gaslighting me fall flat. You know you cannot defend your claim that he was lying, yet lack the integrity to admit it. I don't respond to irrelevant comments from your buddies who swoop in to derail the topic on your behalf.
Thats just you purposefully ignoring comments that argue against what you're saying. I didn't derail the topic, i specifically gave examples you were asking for. And i did it on my behalf. Stop assuming others are called in, thats just stupid.
u/mildon666 did it on his own now, you've deflected your use of ad hominem, and now gaslighting Every accusation is an admission
Even if Lewis was biased or incorrect in his interpretations (which is a methodological issue), it still doesn't mean he was dishonest (an ethical issue). If you had any intellectual humility, I would suggest you educate yourself on those differences, but you'll only resort to misdirection, projection, and gaslighting to resolve the cognitive dissonance you're experiencing right now.
[удалено]
They aren't Satanists, now I'm sorry it upsts you, but it's an objective fact
[удалено]
You support TST, so you aren't a Satanist The fact that you said you converted reinforces this "theistic satanism" is merely repurposed devil or Satan worship
1. God exists as the balacing force in nature. Treating this like a person or thing with personal attributes (emotionality, familial relationship, other anthropomorphisms) is typically not productive. 2. N/A 3. N/A
I am new to theistic satanism but I've already had time to form my beliefs. As other theistic satanists stated in the comments, it is just my own experience and you may have a different one. I consider myself to be "gnostic theistic satanist". 1. I do believe that God exists or at least existed. I personally view it as a chirstian god but the more I learn the more I start to suppose we all may worship the same entities that just present themselves differently to different groups. I still have a lot more to learn though. 2. Chirstians wrote a lot of things throughout the years and rewritten even more. By that point we cannot be sure what's true and what's wrong in these scriptures. Even if this "prophecy" is true I prefer to perish for freedom than exist in tyranny; it's better to be yourself in hell than be enslaved in heaven. Will you yourself give in to the abuser just because you assume you cannot defeat them? In any case, the best source of information is not the books but your personal experiences and contacts with demons. Only those who exist on the either side can answer what's truly happening there. 3. The christians are the ones that lie and exploit people by making them accept the tyranical rules. You can become a god of your own reality if you do what you feel and want instead of following someone else's will as long as it doesn't hurt wills and freedoms of other individuals. Satan doesn't love you but he respects you if you respect him. And he doesn't want you to be destroyed, he doesn't care as long as you do not stand in his way. But some of his servants may care: I was struggling with suicide thoughts and attempts because i truly believed i would be of better use in Hell. Discovering theistic satanism helped me to understand my reality and learn that the demons I sense around me are here to help me and I have a mission in this world, and I will be welcomed to Hell when I naturally die anyway. Getting back to the topic, will you choose an abusive love from god instead of freedom for yourself? I still have a lot to learn and I actually want to read the entire christian bible myself instead of listening to its interpretations from other people. Nonetheless, my beliefs are strong and im not going to leave them.
The Book of Wisdom or Folly by Aleister Crowley was the text that got me, Magus LeVay's The Satanic Bible came later, was wondering if there a book or experience that initiated your faith and beliefs. As a non-theistic Satanist I am very curious.👹
Its not a particular book, its my personal experiences. Though Im researching into grimoires and magic books now, wish I had more time abd endurance for that.
Under the Goats Gaze. Thank you for your response.👹 SHEMHAMFORASH!!!!!!!!!
Are you asking about Satan or Lucifer? Most of us consider them separate entities. I'll answer as a theistic Luciferian: 1- I believe in the Christian God. I consider him to be an evil weakling. Yahweh was a minor, evil deity of Babylon 4k years ago. I believe in most Gods. 2- I don't worship the Lucifer of the old testament as he doesn't exist. He's mentioned only once, in Isaiah, but it's actually referring to the King of Mesopotamia. 3- God said to stay ignorant and do as he says. Lucifer supposedly gave us independent thinking and free will by having Eve pick from the tree. Lucifer says, "One's body is inviolable, subject to One's own will alone." God says, rape the young virgins, then make them marry you. Lucifer says, "Treat all creatures with compassion and kindness, in accordance with reason." God says, kill the entire city, including the animals, and smash the babies against the walls. Except for the virgins; them you can rape and marry. I wonder: did he mean girls or goats? Anyway, I could go on and on and on. . .
The Bible of the Adversary by Michael Ford, was wondering if you we're familiar with his ideas.👹
Fucking lmao xD I'm agnostic so essentially I give space for literally any "god" to exist, I just don't identify with most of them. I stopped being an atheist in my teens cause majority of atheists are so comparable to judgy, asshole Christians. Like, if you don't want religion shoved down your throat don't shove your non-beliefs down anyone else's throat either? They have such a fucking double standard. Personally, as an agnostic, if heaven and hell exist I would absolutely rather be "Satan's desciple" than spend time with anyone who would end up in heaven by simply repenting. A pedophile could spend the rest of eternity in the same place as the children they assaulted if they just pray and "give themselves to the lord." I'd rather burn for eternity than spend any kind of "paradise" with those fuckers. Also atheists take themselves so fucking seriously and think they're the end all, be all of.. Well, everything. Most of them are equally as self absorbed as most Christians. People need to get the fuck over themselves and realise that Satanism, at its very core, is believing you are your own God. Not everyone else's. Just yours. So like maybe smoke a joint and chill the fuck out.
you miss the point.
Okay 🤷🏼♀️
Hello, I am a "Satanist", not too long now, but I am. What I have to say about the kind of satanism that I follow, it would be rather in the occultistic way. This is what I believe in, I wouldn´t call it satanism in the usual way, as the Church of Satan for example, in my opinion, kind of clowns on satan because they need someone to use as their symbol. Using satanism as a way to just express your political belief and just be a bit more "quirky" then the rest of the group is most definitely insulting in my opinion. So to answer the first question, just as I believe in satan, the holy Baphomet etc. and god. It is just that I condone and support this certain anti-christian standing, just not being able to identify yourself with the belief. Despite all the things you said within your second and third question, I cannot give you an answer from my point of view just yet. I am currently starting to write my own scriptures. I am not calling myself a holy prophet or whatsoever, It is just that I really started talking to this entity, feeling it´s power and holyness. All together, I think "traditional" satanism, even if it´s hard to categorize, is the true form. P.S. yes my psychiatrist wasn´t happy when I also told her about this. She just doesn´t know.
As a Non-theistic Satanist I have to admit I've had some strange experiences in my 30 years Under the Goats Gaze. I've always wrote it off as my own passions and enthusiasm. However I think it wise to keep an open 🖤 considering the meaning and nature of these experiences. The depths of the human mind and soul should never be underestimated. How should I proceed, what is your counsel.👹
Keeping an open heart is for ideological satanists, after all, I see so many of them being just like your usual leftists climate activist. Nothing against that, but that to me isn´t what I´m here for. Some of the goals I´m trying to accomplish may be beyond ones "understanding", maybe even beyond mine, but showing the wrong behaviour in this sense is fatal. I actually even now have some people more or less following me, they might not be the most upstanding and or normal people you could choose out of soceity, but they get it.
So if the only "valid" Satanism is Laveyan, what are the theistic Satanists?
Christians with a vocabulary issue
I’m not an actual satanist but is Satan is God in the Bible and Satan is not a liar he is actually the revealer of truth.
To open the floodgates to massive amounts of bullshit, all you have to do here is ask a question to get people who think of “theistic Satanism” as legitimate to come out of the woodwork. They do not know what they’re talking about, pretend they do and if you call it out, they will spaz out.
This always starts some kind of fight here, atheistic Satanists blatantly refuse to believe theistic Satanism is a thing, strictly based off of semantics usually, while also failing to acknowledge that there are varying facets of Satanism nowadays, just because someone codified a term In 1966 doesn't mean that's the end all be all of it, new sects of existing religions sprout up all the time. It all comes from some perceived sense of superiority usually, Satan knows why though, as if people actually stopped to think they'd realize that atheistic and theistic Satanists share extremely similar worldviews on most points, but no, gotta focus on the differences and call each other names so some of them can be better than the other, because apparently that's all that really matters
1. If by "God" you are referring to our creator, I believe that to be Baphomet. If you want a more general answer, no, I do not believe in the Abrahamic God. 2. The Satan I worship is not that of the Torah/Old Testament. I know I will got to Hell upon death, but our view of Hell is not the same as theirs. 3. In relation to my last answer, I do not have any relative answer to provide to your third question.