What is your opinion on Levayan Satanism. Just to be clear, LeVayan satanists are atheists, and they don't believe in an actual satan. The character of Satan, who they regard as fictional is a symbol of indulgence, vengence instead of turning the other cheek, etc. After reading about the core values, I found that I didn't find anything I disagreed with, but I have no wish to identify myself as a satanist. They see themselves as a religion, although I do not, and I j=don't particularly feel the need or desire to associate myself with any religion.
What do you think the pros and cons are to identifying as a Satanist rather than just as an atheist?
For reference, here are the 11 Satanic Rules of the Earth:
Do not give opinions or advice unless you are asked.
Do not tell your troubles to others unless you are sure they want to hear them.
When in another’s lair, show him respect or else do not go there.
If a guest in your lair annoys you, treat him cruelly and without mercy.
Do not make sexual advances unless you are given the mating signal.
Do not take that which does not belong to you unless it is a burden to the other person and he cries out to be relieved.
Acknowledge the power of magic if you have employed it successfully to obtain your desires. If you deny the power of magic after having called upon it with success, you will lose all you have obtained.
Do not complain about anything to which you need not subject yourself.
Do not harm little children.
Do not kill non-human animals unless you are attacked or for your food.
When walking in open territory, bother no one. If someone bothers you, ask him to stop. If he does not stop, destroy him.
And the nine Satanic Statements:
Satan represents indulgence instead of abstinence!
Satan represents vital existence instead of spiritual pipe dreams!
Satan represents undefiled wisdom instead of hypocritical self-deceit!
Satan represents kindness to those who deserve it instead of love wasted on ingrates!
Satan represents vengeance instead of turning the other cheek!
Satan represents responsibility to the responsible instead of concern for psychic vampires!
Satan represents man as just another animal, sometimes better, more often worse than those that walk on all-fours, who, because of his “divine spiritual and intellectual development,” has become the most vicious animal of all!
Satan represents all of the so-called sins, as they all lead to physical, mental, or emotional gratification!
Satan has been the best friend the Church has ever had, as He has kept it in business all these years!
I'd like to know what you all think.
Subscription Note:
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
I've read the book, and it was incredibly satisfying. Loved it, its hysterical how the Rules of the Earth are more applicable than the Bible's 10 commandments. They also actual make complete sense as well. I think everybody should read it, its a great parody on the Christian belief.
As far as I know(and I might be wrong here)
Satan was just an adversary of god in the old testament.
Now that we know that god is the evil guy, one has to assume that Satan is the good guy compared to god that is.
Satan symbol is the snake and in the old testament the snake is a symbol of medicine and healing.
In fact his symbol is still in use today in hospitals, you see the snakes(usually 2) around a green cross. like this one:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/57/Caduceus.svg/10...
Christian hype made the snake evil and such, but in reality the snake represented regeneration and good health.
It has a mention also in the bible when the jews were venerating other gods before they were united under yahweh.
While שטן (satan) does indeed mean "adversary," I doubt that every occurrence in the Tanakh of the word שטן should be understood as a (human) adversary as opposed to the angelic adversary whom most Christians refer to as "the devil" (from Gr. ὁ διάβολος). In fact, this isn't the standard in Jewish literature either.
For example, in the Babylonian Talmud, Seder Nezikin, Massekhet Sanhedrin 95a, Gemara, it is written,
יומא חד נפק לשכור בזאי אתא שטן ואדמי ליה כטביא פתק ביה גירא ולא מטייה...
that is,
One day, he (King David) went out to Shekhor Bezai. Satan came and appeared before him as a deer. He shot an arrow at him, but it did not reach him...
Now, based on the reasoning that שטן always means a human adversary, we're forced to believe that the rabbis of the Gemara wrote that a man appeared as a deer in front of David. Obviously that idea is nonsensical. Elsewhere in Jewish literature, Satan is said to assume the form of a bird (כציפרתא; San. 107a), a woman (כאיתתא; Kid. 81a), a poor man (כעניא; Kid. 81a), etc. Therefore, this particular שטן is no mere man.
Coincidentally, the New Testament refers to Satan as "the old serpent" (ὁ ὄφις ὁ ἀρχαῖος) (Rev. 12:9, 20:2), an allusion to the serpent in Gan Eden (Gen. 3). This Greek phrase has its equivalent in the Hebrew phrase הנחש הקדמוני (ha-nachash ha-kadmoni), which is mentioned in various Jewish literature, such as Tzeror ha-Mor, Sotah 9b, Sanhedrin 29a, etc.
Jewish literature often equates Satan with the evil inclination (yezter ha-ra) and the Angel of Death (Bava Batra 16a: הוא שטן הוא יצר הרע הוא מלאך המות). But, it also equates him/ it with Sama'el, the name of an angel. For example, in Tzeror ha-Mor,1 it is written,
נחש הקדמוני הוא שטן הוא יצר הרע הצד ציד הוא סמאל
The old serpent is Satan; he is the evil inclination; he is "he who has taken venison" (cp. Gen. 27:33); he is Sama'el.
Should Satan always be understood as a human adversary? No.
Where is Satan in the OT? Many places.
As the evil inclination (יצר הרע), he influences man to sin (Bava Batra 16a; Gen. 6:5, 8:21).
As the Angel of Death, he has power to take a man's soul (תנא יורד ומתעה ועולה ומרגיז נוטל רשות ונוטל נשמה; Bava Batra 16a; Job 2:6: אך את נפשו שמור).
So satan does not exist as a being but is refering to the self.
This is a psychological game to make you think that part of you is evil, and we should call those actions of that evil part as sins.
Now what are those actions can be defined by GOD i.e. the church, i.e. the institution . i.e. The state. The Roman emperor (at the time) i.e. GOD (since the roman emperor was god in those times)
That's good information, but does that have anything to do with LeVayan Satanism?
yes, you can go and tell them that they got a mistranslation lol
I'm not sure I follow. Satanists don't believe Satan is real. Who got a mistranslation? Who am I supposed to go tell? I'm completely lost here.
Yeah, does not compute. Anyway, funny you should start this thread, Szandora LaVey preforms regularly here at a local dive bar. She will probably be there Friday night. Small world.
And the nine Satanic Statements:
Satan represents indulgence instead of abstinence!
Satan represents vital existence instead of spiritual pipe dreams!
Satan represents undefiled wisdom instead of hypocritical self-deceit!
Satan represents kindness to those who deserve it instead of love wasted on ingrates!
Satan represents vengeance instead of turning the other cheek!
Satan represents responsibility to the responsible instead of concern for psychic vampires!
Satan represents man as just another animal, sometimes better, more often worse than those that walk on all-fours, who, because of his “divine spiritual and intellectual development,” has become the most vicious animal of all!
Satan represents all of the so-called sins, as they all lead to physical, mental, or emotional gratification!
Satan has been the best friend the Church has ever had, as He has kept it in business all these years!
whose statements are those?
These statements were developed by Anton LeVay. They are referring to the character of satan, who they regard as fictional, but who they see as symbolic as representing these things.
yes if you encounter someone who endorses those statements then, you know more about Satan to challenge more their claims.
That was was the reason of my post.
was talking about those
I don't think this kind of Satanism religion is purely atheistic in approached because they still acknowledge magic just like Wiccan religion.
Atheism is a binary sorter on the question of god's existence (at best).There are atheists who believe all kinds of non-sense: magic, cryptozoology, ghosts, alien abductions, nutty conspiracy theories, free energy, Holocaust denial; just to name a few. I doubt we could get every active (atheist) poster on this site to agree to the non-sense of anyone of those topics I just mentioned.
Actually, they condemn wicca/voodo/macick as not being real and they see it as a negative thing like they see other religions. They explain somewhere on the website that the rituals they perform are not thought to be magical or have any supernatural effective. They are intended to have an effect mentally.
From the official Church of Satan website:
"Greater Magic, which is our name for our ritual practice, is basically meant as self-transformational psychodrama. That is it serves as a means to purge oneself of unwanted emotional baggage that might be hindering a daily pursuit of joy in life. We do not require that anyone accept that it is more than this. The pageantry of ritual is a drama meant for emotional stimulation, not a belief in or worship of any power higher than the projected will of the magician. That is why we call it an “intellectual decompression chamber.”"
Not sure if it is true, but I heard an account concerning Anton LaVey's death, and that he was extremely distressed shortly before passing and kept saying while on his deathbed, "something is very wrong here - I have made a terrible mistake".
Some poster here apparently may have access to his daughter and they might try to confirm this. I wonder if she is a Satanist, especially if that account of his last moments and confession is true.
Unfortunately the LaVey that I have some contact with is the (ex)wife of Anton's grandson, and never met Anton. For what it is worth, his deathbed conversation story is fiction, as the claim has no source. Just like the fictional Darwin deathbed conversion.
I see...thanks for the response. I looked up Szandora, and it seems that she is into the same type of thing as the late Anton.
Christ made reference to the place we call "hell" many times in the Gospels. Not sure why some Christians believe in Heaven and not it's antithesis. As for the atheist (or Satanist), I suppose he feels that he need not worry either way.
As for Satanism, LeVay had it right; you need not specifically do the "will" of or "worship" Satan. You need only to do an "act of worship". You need only to indulge in your own desires, ignore God, carry out your own will, based on your own instincts, and that is more than enough for him (Satan) to have victory in your life.
Essentially, the contention is that you are rejecting Christ and worshipping Satan in doing so, without really making it a formal religion or "spiritual" endeavor. You see, we are all spiritual creatures first and foremost, so the rest really is just an "act", or at least very temporary state of existence until we die and enter Eternity.
Following LeVay's rules or prescription(s), you certainly may or may not live like an animal (I am sure many of his members lead very fulfilling and even refined lifestyles), but it sounds like you would most certainly die like one....
without hope. If the story of his death were true, I would not be surprised. I would also not be surprised if people tried even harder to suppress it.
Actually, Satanists don't worship Satan. I don't know if you read what I wrote, or if you have read the Satanic Bible, but Levayan Satanists are atheists, and they don't belueve in a god or a Devil. The point of Satanism is to put youraself before others, and that is pretty much it. They don't worship or give victory to Satan any more than I do. I don't know on what grounds you would say a Satanist would die like an animal, but I certainly disagree.
Yes, I did read it (your post) and I am aware of the nature of LaVey's Church and belief system.
That was precisely my point. Such practices, regardless of the semantics or intention ("we believe in Satan", "we don't believe in Satan"), offer the same end result. And the same "vacuum" where Christ is absent, and whereby Satan himself can exploit. So, in my opinion Anton had it right in that he paradoxically named the Church after the deity, despite the central "belief" to the contrary about Satan's very existence.
My dear, it makes no difference whether we believe in gravity or not, it is acting upon us every day. Similarly (but with much greater consequences), just because you don't believe in God or Satan....
"Dying like an animal" was not meant to diminish or underline the indignity of the Satanist's death, as opposed to the non-satanist or theist. It was meant to show that it is a death without the HOPE of life afterwards.
This is a fate that most humans do not ascribe to. However, it IS a fate most humans who believe that we are just animals ascribe to. It also happens to be the belief of the LaVey Church Satanist. Hence, the statement...no disrespect intended.
So you are not just saying these things about Satanists. You are saying these things about every atheist, or even more, every thesit or deist who is not a Christian. Well, you are correct thst I don't have any hope for an afterlife. I don't see that as a negative thing though. Why would I want an afterlife? I think it goes without saying that I disagree with you, so it doesn't really mean anything to me when you say that a life without Jesus is being exploited by Satan. I simply don't believe that to be true. I'm not sure why you bother to bring it up knowing that atheists don't regard the two as real, and it basically derailed the conversation, as it has nothing to do with Satanism as opposed to atheism alone.
Side note: Don't call me your dear. It's patronizing and disrespectful. Do not talk down to me.
"Why would I want an afterlife?"
Perhaps you prefer death and eventual non-existence.
Sounds like you'll fit in just fine over at the COS lol.
Seriously though, the true irony is that despite your lack of belief and immature way, you seem to be desperately searching for some meaning in your life and a better Way.
If so, I would go elsewhere. That Church will chew up your soul and spit out the remains before you even know what is happening.
And if you really care for your husband like you say you do, you won't prostitute yourself to such a thing.
Eventually you will attract multiple sex partners and so will he, which will destroy your marriage and cause him to despise you.
As always, it is your choice.
"Perhaps you prefer death and eventual non-existence."
I don't prefer one or the other. I concern myself with this life, the only one that I know to exist, and I am not concerned with an afterlife for which there is no evidence or justification in believing in. It just so happens that I don't find an afterlife appealing.
"Seriously though, the true irony is that despite your lack of belief and immature way, you seem to be desperately searching for some meaning in your life and a better Way."
Why do you claim I'm immature? I find it interesting that you would say so after your first patronizing remark. I also don't know on what ground you claim I am "desperately" searching for some meaning in my life and a "better way." That's a completely unfounded and arrogant remark to make, and someone with thinner skin would probably take offense to it. My life has plenty of meaning, and I don't think there is a better way to live my life than the way I live it now.
"If so, I would go elsewhere. That Church will chew up your soul and spit out the remains before you even know what is happening."
I don't believe in souls. Regardless, I thought I made it pretty clear in my post that I am not a Satanist, nor do I feel the need to label myself a part of any religion. I do not, however, believe that those who choose to call themselves Satanists are doing themselves any harm by being part of the Church.
"And if you really care for your husband like you say you do, you won't prostitute yourself to such a thing.
Eventually you will attract multiple sex partners and so will he, which will destroy your marriage and cause him to despise you."
What the Hell kind of Statement is this? Why do you equate Satanism to prostituation? What makes you think Satanism means multiple sex partners? Why do you assume, without knowing a single thing about me, that I would ever desire any sex partner other than my husband? The Satanic Bible itself says that nobody should feel obligated to engage in sexual promiscuity if they prefer to be monogomous. It also says that if a person prefers to remain completely asexual then that is what they should do. You are just running wild with your assumptions, and it is clear you have no idea what Satanism is, which is fine in itself. You wouldn't be expected to know anything about it if you have never looked into it, but if you haven't then you should stop talking about it and making incorrect assumptions as if you had a single clue what you were talking about.
Wow, Erik! Didn't know you are a prophet, seeing into others' futures! That's quite amazing!
Just another example of how religious people think can judge, condemn, discriminate because they are "righteous" believers.
Way to cross the line Eric...
Not crossing the line. Just observing that she is a young and seemingly happily married person, and did not want to see any harm come to her.
My apologies ex_c_a, if I made you to feel unfairly "judged"...
...I saw your reply and was going to further explain in response, but I guess this poster (Prag) kinda preempted me if that regard.
Been a bit busy today, but let me know if you would like to discuss further. Thanks
Matthew 7:1-3King James Version (KJV)
1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
When you become become less busy why don't you read and live by the book you claim to live by?
THAT IS NOT AN APOLOGY! The reason she feels “unfairly” is not “if I made you to feel” but because you intentionally degraded her. How about changing it to: (1) I’m sorry for implying you would “prostitute yourself” (2) I’m also sorry for saying: “Eventually you will attract multiple sex partners and so will he, which will destroy your marriage and cause him to despise you.”
I must say, you are an excellent poster boy for Christianity. The same moral code as your god, you both promote misogyny.
The original poster literally asked for opinions. She presented information, and invited the discourse in a very warm and open ended fashion, "I'd like to know what you all think."
If the varying opinions are too "strong" for you, ImFree, than perhaps you should avoid controversial topics altogether. "Ex-c_a" herself has already asserted that she does not have "thin skin", so let her be your guide.
The expression of "prostitute" in my statement was used as a verb. Hence the form, "...don't prostitute yourself to such a thing." That is, to exchange something valuable and worthy, such as the poster's current life and happy marriage, for a life of service within the Satanic Church and all it's trappings. In my opinion, that would be an unworthy exchange for the poster and her husband.
To further clarify, we see politicians frequently engage in this sort of policy and practice everyday, in what many people or citizens would describe as a "selling out". Often times, I am sure that this behavior may very well include a literal exchange of money and sex, but it need not include either for the description or "judgement" to be fitting.
My reference to the multiple sex partners was however direct and literal, and was a proscription against what is a stark reality about the Organization itself. To ignore this aspect of the COS is to be uninformed, if not naive.
So, my instincts (despite your "judgements" concerning me and my character, ImFree), were to protect and not to persecute. Much like you, Prag, and Jeff feel compelled to do now. That is not misogyny, and it is also something far removed from reducing a women's sexuality and emotional depth to a "mating signal".
Perhaps you are an excellent and even better poster boy for chivalry, ImFree lol. Despite the many claims to the contrary concerning both it (chivalry) and God, perhaps at least one of them is not yet "dead".
Be advised, I will no longer discuss or "debate" this particular issue with any one other than "ex-christian_atheist".
...much "credit" to CyberLN for initially "having the poster's back" as well. At least her response was somewhat constructive and pertinent. I "liked" long before the controversy started :-)
"controversy"? Just to you.
I don't believe a word you say. Neither do others here, but that holds true in most everything I've seen you write here. Your loss of credibility is of your own doing. Continue on, let the comedy continue. : ) I must say, I enjoy watching you discredit yourself.
Pages