Thoughts on Satanism

Specifically the anarchist, introverted philosophies of Laveyan Satanism. Despite my current religious beliefs, I am very intrigued by those of the Satanist. A religion based on rational arguments and human nature over mythology leads to very interesting beliefs, and I honestly think the only thing holding back the religion's popularity is its name.

I wonder what the world would be like if Satanism became a more popular religion, and the moral implications of such popularity. For example, would murder still be seen as morally wrong without a mainstream religion explicitly condemning it?

I wonder how it would influence most modern governments. For example, would police forces be abandoned in favor of individuals handling justice? Would societies end up in perfect? Or would all hell break loose like the typical individual's perception of anarchy? Where in between these two extremes would a society of Satanists exist?

I can relate far more to the rules set forth by LaVey as an atheist. It is pretty interesting that the basic tenants of LaVeyan Satanism include a direct prohibition on rape and harming children while nothing of the sort is explicitly condemned by its counterpart religion.

This does relate to one of my favored, even if imperfect, arguments when discussing the divine nature of the bible: How can you be sure the bible was inspired by "God" and not the "devil" himself; i.e. are you sure you're rooting for the right team? The god of the Old Testament can be described in many negative ways which would also be in line more with what the devil would be described--tyrannical, wrathful, impatient, selfish, etc. A great example from the very first chapters is the question of who lies to Adam and Eve about the apple? God tells them they will die, while the snake (implied to be a devil) tells them they will receive the knowledge of good and evil.

There are so many examples of the devil(s) wanting us to be free while "God" just wants us to be loyal servants. If I truly had to choose between the two, the choice should be obvious.

But, as I said, I'm an atheist. All of this is just posturing over ancient scripts written by primitive men.

LaVey Satanism basically only uses Christian symbols for the shock value -- in reality it's pretty much firmly grounded on defining a philosophy that rejects organized religion in whole and basing your life on moral guidelines independent of religion and beneficial to individuals and society as a whole.

I don't think anybody sane would actually go as far as worshipping the icon for evil that prevails in Christianity (IIRC most of the imagery for Hell, "the Devil", Satan and so on doesn't actually get described in the Bible anyway).

Those that follow LaVey Satanism still view murder as wrong, so it wouldn't really change anything. :p

I honestly don't care for religion, but LaVeyan Satanism looks to have some good ideals

chungy said:

Those that follow LaVey Satanism still view murder as wrong, so it wouldn't really change anything. :p

The eleventh Satanic Rule of the Earth is what captures my curiosity on this.

"When walking in open territory, bother no one. If someone bothers you, ask him to stop. If he does not stop, destroy him."

Murder now becomes acceptable in contexts different to what we usually see today. Most people today would not be able to kill another individual over being bothered. How much of that inability comes from what we are taught growing up, and how much of it comes from instinct? This question can bring many interesting interpretations based on what being "bothered" is to different people.

Nomad said:

This does relate to one of my favored, even if imperfect, arguments when discussing the divine nature of the bible: How can you be sure the bible was inspired by "God" and not the "devil" himself; i.e. are you sure you're rooting for the right team? The god of the Old Testament can be described in many negative ways which would also be in line more with what the devil would be described--tyrannical, wrathful, impatient, selfish, etc. A great example from the very first chapters is the question of who lies to Adam and Eve about the apple? God tells them they will die, while the snake (implied to be a devil) tells them they will receive the knowledge of good and evil.

A monistic view is found amongst those that perceive evil as part of the personality of god. Judaism rejects the dualistic perspective that evil was created by Satan or another deity. "I am the Lord, and there is none else. I form the light and create darkness, I make peace and create evil. I am the Lord, that does all these things." (Is. 45:6-7)

Hail Satan! SOON, they will all be mine!

Anyway this kind of thing (Church of Satan and stuff) used to slightly interest me only during early high-school. Immediately I realized it's just fancy atheistic talk, useful to de-religion people by providing similar, but simpler and friendlier substitutes (all that stuff about Satan liking fun and being in fact YOU is more likely to relate to a young mind, than all the contradictory and unsimpathetic Biblical God).

I wasn't Christian before being 'slightly interested' in satan webpaged and such, mind you, but I was immature.

It seems to me that humanity is in constant and desperate need of idols, while the free will and more or less clear consciousness don't need them to operate. And the fact that modern world is still poisoned by a plethora of awkward dogmatic and intolerant religions is indeed very sad, even though nowadays ministry changed their ways from witchhunt and inquisition to more devious ones, just like politicians. I admit that utter denial also looks pretty silly and unthoughtful (oh, it's very human, yes), but, on the contrary, blind faith or mindless obedience are no better. There is no absolute truth in the church, no matter which one.

And you could imagine endlessly an utopic society where man has finally set himself free from bonds of dogma, but I don't think that in reality any significant changes in this regard are about to come. Still mindless zealots and spiritual slaves.

All I know is that there's misinterpretation of the baphomet being related to Satan.

Avoozl said:

All I know is that there's misinterpretation of the baphomet being related to Satan.

Yeah; Baphomet is a corruption of the archetypical "horned god" of European pre-Christian pagan religions - druidism, naturism, etc.

The association of Baphomet with Satan would be through Christianity's demonization of all other religions' deities. So by equating the two, one is arguably adhering to a Christian viewpoint. Lulz.

flubbernugget said:

Specifically the anarchist, introverted philosophies of Laveyan Satanism.

The hedonistic, do-what-thou-wilt aspect of it is a childish and selfish way of thought and being. There is a reason most self-described laveyan followers are libertarians (although many vote GOP), they truly wish to watch the world burn.

As far as I am concerned, it is a repugnant thing in almost every way.

Quast said:

The hedonistic, do-what-thou-wilt aspect of it is a childish and selfish way of thought and being.

Agreed, but that's not satanism according to lavey. What he says is reject religious scripture and rules, then hypocritically gives you more religious scripture and rules.

most people who proclaim to be satanists are morons. Or at least as moronic as any other fundamentalist retard.

Satanism is a thing dumb teenagers do to shock their parents and look cool in front of their friends.

Demonologist said:

It seems to me that humanity is in constant and desperate need of idols, while the free will and more or less clear consciousness don't need them to operate. And the fact that modern world is still poisoned by a plethora of awkward dogmatic and intolerant religions is indeed very sad

Worst of all is the Cult of Mammon, which is the dominant faith. You will not find any politician who doesn't belong to that faith; you will not find any large company who isn't run by that church. They own and operate all mainstream medias, and the tenets of their religion are passed on as science.

darknation said:

most people who proclaim to be satanists are morons. Or at least as moronic as any other fundamentalist retard.

Anyone who adheres to any strict dogma is a moron (or at least morally underdeveloped), in my opinion.

LeVaying Satanism certainly makes some interesting points, and some of its guidelines are logical. But so are aspects of Buddhism and Cynicism. The only reason to swallow any doctrine whole, IMHO, is if one's own faculties are incapable of sorting through life's complexities.

Not saying atheist-agnostics are übermenschen or anything. Dogmatic religious beliefs are just one of the many, many intellectual crutches available. Sometimes I wonder if it's even possible to live completely without these figurative crutches. But that's a discussion for another thread.

SYS said:

A monistic view is found amongst those that perceive evil as part of the personality of god. Judaism rejects the dualistic perspective that evil was created by Satan or another deity. "I am the Lord, and there is none else. I form the light and create darkness, I make peace and create evil. I am the Lord, that does all these things." (Is. 45:6-7)

As I said, not a perfect argument against someone with a little biblical knowledge beyond the typical casual "Only on Christmas and Easter" churchgoer.

But the verse you bring up is the perfect opportunity to also bring up Epicurus's paradox of evil:

"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"

On having a quick gander at the Wikipedia entry, it all seems a bit shallow and hand-wavey, and not entirely consistent - e.g., it appears to commit, or encourage the committal of, 'Satanic Sins' 1 (Stupidity), 2 (Pretentiousness), 4 (Self-deceit), and 5 (Herd Conformity), so the path to devout Satanisim would seem to be fraught with certain difficulties.

Gez said:

Worst of all is the Cult of Mammon, which is the dominant faith. You will not find any politician who doesn't belong to that faith; you will not find any large company who isn't run by that church. They own and operate all mainstream medias, and the tenets of their religion are passed on as science.

I'm not sure I get your point clearly. If you mean people are greedy bastards - then it's hard to associate this fact with religion, it's a much wider matter. And if you mean the cult of hard labor when people dream of becoming reach one day and they work for that day and night wasting their life for nothing - then it's purely a societal sickness and perpetual naiveness of humankind. While religion rapes mind, materialistic issues rape flesh. That's the discussion on another level.

schwerpunk said:

Anyone who adheres to any strict dogma is a moron (or at least morally underdeveloped), in my opinion.

True.

schwerpunk said:

Dogmatic religious beliefs are just one of the many, many intellectual crutches available.

The fact is, this particular crutch is too deeply-rooted one, up to the point it becomes tyrannical and enthralling, a major instrument of mass manipulation in the hands of a chosen few. So, we're getting ass-fucked both physically and spiritually by politicians and clericals. A world of cum.

Yeah, I've seen this before, it looks pretty dumb. If you want to be an atheist then just be an atheist. I don't see anything interesting in a bunch of silly "magical" rituals and calling myself a "satanist". It just seems pretentious and very silly.

Well, being an atheist myself, I think this is, of course, yet another religion. It doesn't matter if it's God, Satan, Ra or Huitzilopochtli. It's religion. And it doesn't matter what we say. People don't believe out of logic. They believe because they want to believe. And they will keep like that.

P.S: A thread about Satanism and a thread about UFO's? This is going to be an interesting week at Doomworld.

Nomad said:

"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"

The lord works in mysterious ways....duuuuh!

I dont have much to say about satanism except that its fucking stupid just like all religions in general. I have to stop writing now because I can feel rage building up just thinking of the topic of religion.

Zed said:

P.S: A thread about Satanism and a thread about UFO's? This is going to be an interesting week at Doomworld.

(In my mind at least) this brings us naturally to another strange, arguably atheistic religion: Raëlism. Basically, intelligent design for materialists. Wikipedia has a good summary.

Ah yes. I hadn't heard of these guys until just recently, when I read this article. The mind does indeed boggle.

Paging Binary to the thread. =P

@schwerpunk: I was aware of that. As the wiki article states, some consider them fascist, a sect, etc. This only bring us again to the main topic (common to both threads): God? UFOs? TEH Universe? Bob Marley? As I told you, this is going to be interesting. Get your popcorn ready.

Sounds like a bunch of childish silliness to me.

I'll be honest, all I know about Satanism is from listening to Deicide and watching a handful of movies with vaguely Satanisty themes; i.e. absolutely nothing.

But if it has anything in common with the sort of nonsensical bullshit that most all other religions are based on, I'll pass.

@ DoomUK: Deicide's lyrics are childish Luciferian gibberish that hardly can be taken seriously. There's little to do with concepts of Satanism, more like personal hatred towards Christianity expressed through deliberate usage of the opposing imagery and cultural shock. It's acceptable for maximalistic youth, but seeing mature men doing this is funny and nothing else.
Every and each religion has considerable amount of nonsense, but there is also reasonable philosophic basis on certain points. The question is - do you actually want to search for it in fairytale-like garbage, narcotic mythology and controversial mysticism, and do you actually need supernatural crap in existential philosophy where everything is mundane. I'm not speaking of any particular lore, it applies perfectly to any religious creed. Of course it can be explained by veiled educational purpose for generations to come, but all the rude indoctrination and mind enslavement in this process overweights it and diminishes to the point below zero. Who needs education like this?

Seems like some people are just never satisfied with simple, mundane truths. They have to add complex, dramatic falsehoods to their beliefs to make it more palatable.

Nomad said:

As I said, not a perfect argument against someone with a little biblical knowledge beyond the typical casual "Only on Christmas and Easter" churchgoer.

But the verse you bring up is the perfect opportunity to also bring up Epicurus's paradox of evil:

"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"

I could never speak on the behalf of anything divine. For arguments sake - Malevolence. Creations of the divine grant freewill inclusive of the potential for evil in all of humanity. That's masturbation from 30 philosophy classes neither of us have ever had to attend.

I worship Cthulhu!