satanism

Sapien

mountainyman wrote:

Which do you fall into, please answer directly.

Please edit less selectively. You refused to consider an idea and I posited an alternative. Why are you being so reductive.

MM

Why am I being reductive? It is you who have dragged me through the vagaries of your contempt for paganism for thousands of words, only to dump it and declare it irrelevant after inducing me to write veritable essays on the subject in response to your disdainfully laconic dismissals. You have simply dropped lines of debate that I have painstakingly pursued, as soon as it seem they weren't going to work out in your favour. I find your conduct in this thread contemptible and intellectually dishonest.

I presented the synopsis of our exchange on the matter of the existence of historical satanic organisations with the explicit appeal that you supplement it with text that I had omitted but that you feel is relevant, or with any further additions that you would like to make. And then answer it. You have made the following statement: "It did not remain undiscovered this secret satanic organisation was pretty comprehensively destroyed by the dominicans in the 16th century." Do you have evidence to support it, or do you wish to revoke it. Please answer directly.

My personal spiritual interests are of precisely no relevance to this discussion - and I find it hugely presumptuous of you to demand that I disclose such information; not to mention devious in intention. I would be entirely within decorum to refuse to lower myself to your squalid interrogations - but I have made a point of being completely open about my spirituality on these fora, and I will not allow the behaviour of a weaselly hector to change that.

I am an esotericist involved in the endeavour towards spiritual, mental and intellectual advancement. I use innumerable systems and constructs towards this end. I have no particular interest in Luciferianism - my familiarity with it is in passing.

Nevyn

mountainyman you were banned from christianty and now have come here to play, either take part in the debate/disscusion or don't but do not try and muddy the water with slurs implied or otherwise.

Consider yourself forwarned.

Kernel

Ahh Satanism. I dabbled a little when I was an angst-ridden teenager. Studied up a bit, no doubt spurred on by my musical tastes of the time. The problem with Satanism, as soon becomes apparent when you read the Satanic Bible by Anton Lavey, is that it's theology simply consists of anti-Christian theology, and as such there is very little substance or worth to it. Soon after reading this trash I rejected it. Lavey made a lot of money from this simple and ill-thought out 'theology' and cashed in on the anti-Christian mood of the times.

From a spiritual aspect, it also debases man from a spiritual entity to a simple animal, and as such lauds an animalistic and ego-centric viewpoint which is not a society many of us would want to live in - or indeed be permitted to live in - since it would be ripe with murders, rapes, drug abuse and general self-indulgence. It goes against everything spirituality teaches us, in terms of the development of our understanding of our souls and our spiritual nature.

It is not widespread because of it's core failings, although there is evidence to suggest that many powerful people practice some aspects of it and older versions of Luciferian cult worship (it may be because such beliefs sit better with the greedy capitalist warpigs who are widespread in the power elite - but such debate is for conspiracy - read 'Behold a Pale Horse' by William Cooper for more info).

If you want a well thought out, yet introspective spirituality, try Buddhism instead. Although ultimately in practicing such a religion you are removing yourself from belief in an external creator - ie. God.

Zillah

Kernel wrote:

From a spiritual aspect, it also debases man from a spiritual entity to a simple animal, and as such lauds an animalistic and ego-centric viewpoint which is not a society many of us would want to live in - or indeed be permitted to live in - since it would be ripe with murders, rapes, drug abuse and general self-indulgence. It goes against everything spirituality teaches us, in terms of the development of our understanding of our souls and our spiritual nature.

I take great exception to the notion that morality somehow requires spirituality. One can be a soulless, ego-centric animal who is perfectly moral. I'd like to consider myself one. It just requires a bit of extra thought.

For example;
I won't rape anyone, I don't want to, it would be horrible for me.
I will fight to the death for my friends, not because of some hoity-toity spiritually derived morality, but because I love and want them. I'm indulging my own want for my friends.
I won't rob a bank because I don't want to be arrested and I think such acts would ruin my life in many ways.

Every last bit of this is entirely selfish, it has nothing to do with spirituality or higher notions of "humanity". But I am a very moral person, I just also happen to be supremely self-centred.

If you're familiar with genetics, I think the concepts of geneotype and phenotype would be an excellent metaphor.

mountainyman

Sapien & Thaedydal,

I would be grateful if you could point to any example of contempt for paganism or slurs thereon in this discussion and even more grateful if you could do so by the afternoon of wednesday

Thaedydal,
I was banned from the Christianity forum because of comments made on the feedback forum regarding Sapien's behaviour on the Christianity forum.

Sapien,
I wish you every success in your innumerable esoterecist practises however i would note in passing that I would not have engaged in this discussion, at some length, had I not believed that the veneration of Lucifer formed part of that practise in some manner other the purely aesthetic or notional. I also note that in terms of texts dealing with Lucifer predating the old testament, I'm still in the dark.


MM

Talliesin

mountainyman wrote:

I was banned from the Christianity forum because of comments made on the feedback forum regarding Sapien's behaviour on the Christianity forum.

No you weren't. You are either lying or not bothering to take note of the comments made at the time. Still, it made up my mind as to whether or not to unban you before I headed off for a bit this week.

If you manage to get yourself simultaneously banned from two forums in this category a permanent I'll consider a cat-ban.

Kernel

Zillah wrote:

I take great exception to the notion that morality somehow requires spirituality. One can be a soulless, ego-centric animal who is perfectly moral. I'd like to consider myself one. It just requires a bit of extra thought.

Morality doesn't require spirituality, but morality in mankind has usually sprung from spiritual beliefs and affected our civilisation and society in such ways as to have allowed a system of ethical conduct independent of religion. Even in studies of primitive tribes, the ethical/moral code is usually derived from spiritual beliefs. These spiritual beliefs seem widespread throughout even isolated tribes.

The most dangerous belief system to morality in history is capitalism and the love of money - as expressed when Christ states: 'You cannot worship God and Mammon'. Atheism is simply an empty and self-centred 'belief' system - a stepping stone to nihilism.

You hint at genetics - perhaps referring to the famously dour view of Richard Dawkins - expressed in his book 'The Selfish Gene'. Dawkins believes we act out in entirely (genetically driven) selfish ways, even when we seem to be performing a selfless task. Perhaps in the 'natural-state' of man this may be true, but when we add spirituality and religion to the mix, our actions and moral beliefs evolve. Even a historical view on the effect of religion on individuals' actions shows that his view is somewhat simplistic - though not entirely without merit of course.

There is an irony in addressing Satanism in a spirituality thread, since Satanism completely rejects our spiritual nature and debases man to the level of an animal.

Zillah

Kernel wrote:

You hint at genetics - perhaps referring to the famously dour view of Richard Dawkins - expressed in his book 'The Selfish Gene'. Dawkins believes we act out in entirely (genetically driven) selfish ways, even when we seem to be performing a selfless task.

I havn't read it but if your summary is accurate then I wholly agree with him. Dour or not, that doesn't take away from the logical consistency. Behaviours that lead to your genes not being carried on, lead to your genes not being carried on, and hence the capacity for that behaviour being bred out.

Perhaps in the 'natural-state' of man this may be true, but when we add spirituality and religion to the mix, our actions and moral beliefs evolve

I completely disagree. "Religion" is a genetic trait. There is a "god" centre of the brain, when stimulated people report a supernatural sensation. Our societal programming leans towards shamans and acolytes, you can see it everywhere from Psychics to Christian Priests and tribal leaders. The capacity to become a religious/moral leader or to become a follower is hardwired into the brain, as much as familial units, warrior-camaderie and women gossipping.

The exact teachings that those shamas provide vary, but its a self regulating system, those that are counter productive get bred out, like any other genetic trait.

Kernel

Zillah wrote:

Behaviours that lead to your genes not being carried on, lead to your genes not being carried on, and hence the capacity for that behaviour being bred out.

How do you account for human compassion for a stranger leading to self-sacrifice of ones life? That is a usless trait for survival of your genetic line.

Zillah wrote:

I completely disagree. "Religion" is a genetic trait. There is a "god" centre of the brain, when stimulated people report a supernatural sensation.

I disagree with the 'God-gene' hypothesis - it strikes me as overly cynical. Yes, there are areas of the brain which are stimulated by spirituality, but why not? That's how our brain works, all human experience results in areas of the brain being electrically active. Christ spread a revolutionary message at the time, and knew it would lead to his death - and yet he sacrificed himself/his genes for it. All but one of the apostles died horrible deaths because of spreading their message - and gained nothing material for it. What use has such behaviour got in terms of natural selection and survival of the fittest?

You also need to ask yourself, as an atheist, why you are so interested in Spirituality and the Paranormal - what is it you are seeking Zillah? And will you merely be tormenting yourself by continuing to reject it?

Zillah

Kernel wrote:

How do you account for human compassion for a stranger leading to self-sacrifice of ones life? That is a usless trait for survival of your genetic line.

Bridge building. If I risk my life to save a stranger, and I do save this person, then two things will happen. 1, I'm a brave hero in my own tribe so I get more women and stuff, and 2, that other person's tribe is now grateful, or even in debt. Lets trade! Oh hell, lets join the tribes together and between us we'll be powerful enough to subjugate the entire area.

And lo, the first Kingdom was born...

I disagree with the 'God-gene' hypothesis - it strikes me as overly cynical.

Again, something being "dour" or "cynical" does not refute its logic. If you accept that human behaviour is influenced by genes, then you have to see how religion can serve as a social glue. Even if we could prove and agree the absolute lack of the supernatural, there would still be religion.

Yes, there are areas of the brain which are stimulated by spirituality, but why not? That's how our brain works, all human experience results in areas of the brain being electrically active.

And if I poke that part of the brain the person feels like God is in the room. Meaning that whenever someone feels like God is in the room if may just be their brain poking itself.

Christ spread a revolutionary message at the time, and knew it would lead to his death - and yet he sacrificed himself/his genes for it.

He was trying to become a great religious leader. In such a position he would have had the capacity to sire a great line of progeny and ensure their survival through his massive social power.

It just so happens he sucked at politics and managed to piss off both the Jewish leaders and the Romans. There is nothing mystical about Jesus' death, he was executed as an insurgent threat and for storming into the temple and wrecking up the place.

All but one of the apostles died horrible deaths because of spreading their message - and gained nothing material for it. What use has such behaviour got in terms of natural selection and survival of the fittest?

Again, had they been smarter about how they went about it they would have survived, become powerful leaders and sired a long line of progeny.

Bear in mind that I'm not saying that your genes give you a cohesive and logical plan. All they do is give you a powerful compulsion for certain behaviours and more often than not those behaviours are a good thing. Becoming the village shaman is a good thing, becoming a witch doctor is a good thing, but occasionally becoming a shaman when the local Roman govenor wants no shamans, its a bad thing.

You also need to ask yourself, as an atheist, why you are so interested in Spirituality and the Paranormal - what is it you are seeking Zillah? And will you merely be tormenting yourself by continuing to reject it?

I'm not an atheist, technically I'm an agnostic. And its the very fact that the paranormal challenges what I know to be correct that intrigues me. I need to find out if its crazy delluded people, or if there is something going on there.

Sapien

mountainyman wrote:

I was banned from the Christianity forum because of comments made on the feedback forum regarding Sapien's behaviour on the Christianity forum.

News to me.

mountainyman wrote:

I would not have engaged in this discussion, at some length, had I not believed that the veneration of Lucifer formed part of that practise in some manner other the purely aesthetic or notional.

Why not? What gave you the impression that it did?

mountainyman wrote:

I also note that in terms of texts dealing with Lucifer predating the old testament, I'm still in the dark.

I never said that such texts exist. In fact, I'm pretty sure they don't.

Dragan

solidgear wrote:

" Was there a verse that said "you shall have no other Gods above me". A commandment I believe.

Something can only be "anti" something else if it was developed within it's infrastructure "being anti - establishment " being a good example. You cannot assume that all other religions are Anti Christian because at the time of there inception they may have known nothing about Christiandom.

You seem to be arguing purely from the point of your beliefs, as opposed to intelligently.

WilliamMelmoth

solidgear wrote: »

Is satanism alive & well in Ireland? How does one find out about it here?

Hi everyone, just joined Boards.ie so excuse the 6year gap between the above quote and my reply but I do think this is an interesting thread worth reviving.

So do I think Satanism is alive and well in Ireland? Well, that depends on how you define Satan really. If you see a world run by a good guy and a bad guy, and that a satanist is on the side of the bad guy then I would say yes, satanism (small 's') is alive and well in many teenagers seeking to release some rebellious angst. Thank fully I am not one of them. One the other hand, if you see a world or cosmos run by regular laws, which is opposed by desire, and you see Satan as an emblem of that desire, then Satanism is alive and well in me.
Satan is an archetype, a kind a symbol of a rebel against cosmic injustices. It is a potent and powerful symbol for many beginning on a path of Self discovery and individual sovereignty (aka the Left Hand Path). Such an emblem can provide a model and can help the individual burn away guilt or past inheritated belief systems (normally indoctrinated into a child).
So yes, very much alive and very well.


Will

smithcity

WilliamMelmoth wrote: »

So do I think Satanism is alive and well in Ireland? Well, that depends on how you define Satan really. If you see a world run by a good guy and a bad guy, and that a satanist is on the side of the bad guy then I would say yes, satanism (small 's') is alive and well in many teenagers seeking to release some rebellious angst.

I don't know if the Church of Satan is active in Ireland, but when I was younger I met a handful of people who considered themselves as Satanists in the vein of Anton LaVey. For some of them there was very much an air of teenage angst but I had some very interesting conversations with others who approached it as a valid contrarian philosophy.

WilliamMelmoth

smithcity wrote: »

I don't know if the Church of Satan is active in Ireland, but when I was younger I met a handful of people who considered themselves as Satanists in the vein of Anton LaVey. For some of them there was very much an air of teenage angst but I had some very interesting conversations with others who approached it as a valid contrarian philosophy.

For sure, I have known many who began with LeVayen Satanism but not many who stuck with it exclusively through the years. I myself have a well worn copy of the Satanic Bible and the Satanic Rituals here in my apartment and from my experience 'Indulgence' (the key word of the Church if Satan) only takes you so far. Like I mentioned above Satanism is a great way to experience a breaking away with cultural norms through deliberate acts of antinomianism (to go against culturally conditioned values) and the Church of Satan is a fascinating history of such. Although, since LaVeys death back in the 90s, the CoS seems more like an Anton LeVay worship Society, well the card carrying membership does anyway. Kinda ironic when you think about it.
There was a huge split away from the CoS in the 70s when LaVey turned the CoS into his own personal business and stopped exploring Darkness and Greater Black Magic as a means of Self refinement. This split resulted in the Temple of Set (www.xeper.org) which to my mind is the most progressive form of Satanism, high Satanism if you will.
The ToS is definitely active in Ireland, I know that from personal experience (see here www.hellfirelodge.com ).
I might start a differ thread about the ToS in the future.

Will

smithcity

WilliamMelmoth wrote: »

Like I mentioned above Satanism is a great way to experience a breaking away with cultural norms through deliberate acts of antinomianism (to go against culturally conditioned values) and the Church of Satan is a fascinating history of such.

I used to be far better informed about all this than I am now. I remember when I first learned about LaVey and the Temple of Set, I felt that they were more or less offshoots of Crowley era Thelema. They seemed to have very similar philosophies based on not so different "religious" paradigms

WilliamMelmoth

smithcity wrote: »

I used to be far better informed about all this than I am now. I remember when I first learned about LaVey and the Temple of Set, I felt that they were more or less offshoots of Crowley era Thelema. They seemed to have very similar philosophies based on not so different "religious" paradigms

Well they are all Left Hand Path in that they practice antinomianism, Self deification, initiation and Magic. Outside of that, each is very very different. There are 2 very different branches of Left Hand Path, the Immanent and the Transcendental. The Immanent is more objectivist and rational with a material outlook, with methods normally steeped in diabolical imagery and a focus specifically on the mundane (objective) world. This is exemplified by LaVeyan Satanism with its carnal approach to the universe.
Transcendental LHP has it focus on the intellect or psyche (psyche centric ) and is highly idealistic with methods usually founded on archetypes or some sort of platonic forms. In this branch Self divinising is especially pronounced with much focus on the subjective world of the individual, this results in a far more intellectual approach to the universe. The ToS would be a good example of this.

smithcity

Lol, well when you put it like that, I imagine Thelema would fall somewhere between the two, depending on what mood Crowley was in on any given day, carnal or transcendental.

WilliamMelmoth

smithcity wrote: »

Lol, well when you put it like that, I imagine Thelema would fall somewhere between the two, depending on what mood Crowley was in on any given day, carnal or transcendental.

Yes possibly. In many ways I think Crowley understood that too (despite being a precursor to the CoS and the ToS). I believe Crowley saw his mundane personality as a fiendish daemon, but his true Self he saw as God like, his Higher Self being reborn after an annihilation of the personality.
I've experience with Satanism and the Temple of Set but not the OTO, I only know Crowley from what I have read in available literature. Again, another fascinating and accomplished individual.

smithcity

Again, he's someone I used to be well versed on but it's all half remembered now. I read everything of his that I could get my hands on, but struggled with a lot of it. I found that when I started reading Crowley, I then had to read Agrippa and Eliphas Levi just to understand the references, and then had to read something else in order to understand them, and back and back it went down the rabbit hole till I found myself reading biographies of John Dee and supposed copies of the Goetia et al.

Although I found a lot of the broad ideas very appealing and easy to understand, when it got down to the nitty gritty it was incomprehensible to me.

WilliamMelmoth

smithcity wrote: »

Again, he's someone I used to be well versed on but it's all half remembered now. I read everything of his that I could get my hands on, but struggled with a lot of it. I found that when I started reading Crowley, I then had to read Agrippa and Eliphas Levi just to understand the references, and then had to read something else in order to understand them, and back and back it went down the rabbit hole till I found myself reading biographies of John Dee and supposed copies of the Goetia et al.

Although I found a lot of the broad ideas very appealing and easy to understand, when it got down to the nitty gritty it was incomprehensible to me.

It really depends on your Intentions and why you are learning or studying different magical paradigms. Is it the history? The mystery? Part of a great work? Etc or is it for some sort of Self change or personal evolution? Thats one of the things LaVey was good at, taking a blowtorch to all the occultnik mystical nonsense out there and creating a system dealing with fundamentals that can deliver results without all the occultnik trappings.

MorezCOTR

I'm a novice on the Left Hand Path as in I dedicated to SATAN 2 months ago, and am having the experience of my life walking the path to HIM. It has enlightened me so much and yes its a lonely path (Satan walks with me) but most fullfilling. I wish to make contact with fellow Satanists in Ireland and to share from them gems of knowledge and experiences.
Private Message me if you are a Satanist and want to converse more about our journey along the Left Hand Path.

WilliamMelmoth

MorezCOTR wrote: »

I'm a novice on the Left Hand Path as in I dedicated to SATAN 2 months ago, and am having the experience of my life walking the path to HIM. It has enlightened me so much and yes its a lonely path (Satan walks with me) but most fullfilling. I wish to make contact with fellow Satanists in Ireland and to share from them gems of knowledge and experiences.
Private Message me if you are a Satanist and want to converse more about our journey along the Left Hand Path.

Greetings MorezCOTR,
For the purpose of this thread I thought I would post my questions here and not in a PM.
I am glad to hear you are finding your path enlightening. Can I ask how do you define both Satan and Satanism? I ask this as these definitions will form the basis of our exchanges.
Will

MorezCOTR

WilliamMelmoth wrote: »

Greetings MorezCOTR,
Can I ask how do you define both Satan and Satanism?
Will

Satan to me is the True God and I believe and love him unconditionally as I feel I'm HIS child. I see nothing evil in HIM only wonderful beauty and truth, much honesty and love also.

Satanism to me then is a decision to dedicate yourself wholey to Satan and walk on his path of enlightenment to HIM, eventually leading you through the gates of Hell to be by his side for eternity.

I hope this answers your question.
AVE SATANAS 666
Morez

WilliamMelmoth

MorezCOTR wrote: »

Satan to me is the True God and I believe and love him unconditionally as I feel I'm HIS child. I see nothing evil in HIM only wonderful beauty and truth, much honesty and love also.

Satanism to me then is a decision to dedicate yourself wholey to Satan and walk on his path of enlightenment to HIM, eventually leading you through the gates of Hell to be by his side for eternity.

I hope this answers your question.
AVE SATANAS 666
Morez

Not really, being honest. As you, by your own admission, are new to Satanism and the Left Hand Path You may need to 'dig' deeper and learn some more about the organising principles behind Left Hand Path thinking and application. This is one of the main reasons I recently started A Temple of Set thread on Boards.ie, to discuss such concepts.
Can you be more specific as to how you have arrived at your runderstanding of Satan? What discernment have you used in reaching this opinion about Satan and Satanism?
One of the tenants of LHP Schools is Individualism, of being a Self starter and energising force in ones own life. Dedicating ones life to any external god or gods is decidedly un Satanic in that sense as you are submitting both your power, drive and results to another being or principle. The Satanist ultimately knows that he/she is responsible and only sacrifices self to the self, not to some outwardly given standard. I'm pretty sure Satan does not love you unconditionally or conditionally. Think of Satan (or in a wider context, the Prince of Darkness) as a role model, nothing more, nothing less.

MorezCOTR

Not really, being honest. As you, by your own admission, are new to Satanism and the Left Hand Path You may need to 'dig' deeper and learn some more about the organising principles behind Left Hand Path thinking and application. This is one of the main reasons I recently started A Temple of Set thread on Boards.ie, to discuss such concepts.
Can you be more specific as to how you have arrived at your runderstanding of Satan? What discernment have you used in reaching this opinion about Satan and Satanism?
One of the tenants of LHP Schools is Individualism, of being a Self starter and energising force in ones own life. Dedicating ones life to any external god or gods is decidedly un Satanic in that sense as you are submitting both your power, drive and results to another being or principle. The Satanist ultimately knows that he/she is responsible and only sacrifices self to the self, not to some outwardly given standard. I'm pretty sure Satan does not love you unconditionally or conditionally. Think of Satan (or in a wider context, the Prince of Darkness) as a role model, nothing more, nothing less.

I do have much to learn as I journey on my Left Hand Path and I will listen to your wise words brother William, I only know what I feel so far on this journey and that is what I have written above. I'm open to being enlightened by your knowledge and experience.
HAIL SATAN

WilliamMelmoth

MorezCOTR wrote: »

I do have much to learn as I journey on my Left Hand Path and I will listen to your wise words brother William, I only know what I feel so far on this journey and that is what I have written above. I'm open to being enlightened by your knowledge and experience.
HAIL SATAN

Lol, well that's all good and well but the work is up to you.
My advice, read this book. At the very least it may provide a context for what you feel.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Uncle-Setnakts-Essential-Guide-Left/dp/1885972105/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1339794321&sr=8-5

Once you have that context it will greatly improve your understanding, that's when the fun begins.

MorezCOTR

WilliamMelmoth wrote: »

Lol, well that's all good and well but the work is up to you.
My advice, read this book. At the very least it may provide a context for what you feel.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Uncle-Setnakts-Essential-Guide-Left/dp/1885972105/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1339794321&sr=8-5

Once you have that context it will greatly improve your understanding, that's when the fun begins.

I'm about to order this book on Amazon, can I ask is it available in PDF for reading online anywhere? I thank you for your knowledge and guidance. I have sent you a PM also if you can reply when you get a chance.

Xeper
Morez

WilliamMelmoth

Paperback only it seems.

Northclare

I remember years ago when I was 13 someone told me Westport house has a history of satanic worship.
And some strange things happened,there was a concrete cross there which was upsidedown....
Is Seth the same as Satan.