Some personal thoughts on the value of Satanism.

[Saint Frankenstein]

Let's be honest, can Satanism really stand on its own, without Christianity or the other Abrahamic religions? The word "satan" itself is merely about opposition. It is reactionary and needs to define itself against something. I mean, what is the point of opposition if you're not opposing something? Now, I realize that it can be taken many different ways, but I'm hitting a wall in my view of Satanism that I have hit before. That is, I'm having trouble seeing the value in something, be it a label or concept, that is defined around being opposed to something. It just starts to seem a bit vacuous to me. Rebellion and opposition is all well and good when there's a point. But it's empty when they are taken on as ends in of themselves.

Now don't get me wrong, I like Satan. He is certainly the hero of the Biblical narrative in my eyes when he is viewed in the Romantic way - the Promethean hero who saw a species full of potential but being held back by an unjust ruler and he frees them to decide their own destiny (this of course associates Satan with the Serpent). That is what drew me to Satanism in the first place and my concept of Satanism was based around the earlier Romantic view. (I have my issues with the Satanic scene, but I won't get into that here.)

But even that depends on a dualistic struggle against an opponent and self-defines as such. Even if you try to remove Yahweh from your personal paradigm and ignore Christianity, you are still left with the Abrahamic baggage that comes along with the very mantle of Satanism. This can be self-limiting, whether you are atheistic or theistic although the reasons why it can be self-limiting for atheists and theists may differ. What happens if or when Christianity isn't the mainstream paradigm of the West anymore? We are getting closer to that day, especially in Western Europe. When humanity moves on from the Abrahamic religions (which I think will happen eventually, even if far off into the future), what will become of Satanism then?

It's not that my core beliefs have changed, it's just that I'm questioning the label and symbolism I wish to wrap them in. I'm not really seeing the value of defining myself as an adversary. Not that I'm not an adversary towards various things, people, groups, etc., I just question labeling my personal spiritually as such.

There are some people who view Satanism as just the "bottom rung" of the Western Left Hand Path, for it is what you're going to come across first when you begin to explore the LHP. Usually people new to the LHP are coming from Christianity and so that is the symbolism they most respond to, so Satanism is a "no brainer" there. But what about when you want to move past that?

As for me, I'm considering more Luciferianism or Setianism. I agree with much of what Setians believe. I've never been much into Egyptian religion but I realize that Setianism isn't Kemetic Recon. Much of my beliefs are already influenced by Setianism, as it is and I do respect Set and understand much of the symbolism. It is helpful that it can stand on its own, regardless of the current social or religious paradigm. As for Luciferianism, I've always enjoyed the archetype of the Light Bearer, which is a very protean concept that can be applied to various things.

So, we'll see.

 

[technomage]

Sometimes, opposition is its own reward.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Just to let you know, I'm not exactly enlightened on the very specific details of Satanism, only bits and pieces, so apologies if I am a little off.

But I think Satanism itself wouldn't be able to stand on its own feet. Satanism itself, as I imagine it at least, would become useless when it reaches large and the mainstream it is against falls low. Similarly a vaccine would become useless once the virus it works against is no longer a threat. However the philosophy of being the opposition can move on and will remain relevant, and in my opinion useful.

I think the Left Hand Path is about moving on, evolution of the ego. It's a helpful tool that can be used to see the wall that blocks you from your major life goals and not only that, but just as well finding the crease in that wall. I'd say that the route you take next in your spiritual evolution is entirely based on your intentions in the first place.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Just to let you know, I'm not exactly enlightened on the very specific details of Satanism, only bits and pieces, so apologies if I am a little off.

No worries. Satanism is such a vague thing, anyway. There's so many different concepts of it.

But I think Satanism itself wouldn't be able to stand on its own feet. Satanism itself, as I imagine it at least, would become useless when it reaches large and the mainstream it is against falls low. Similarly a vaccine would become useless once the virus it works against is no longer a threat. However the philosophy of being the opposition can move on and will remain relevant, and in my opinion useful.

True. We all are opponents of something or other. But what value is it to base your beliefs around such a nebulous concept? Okay, so you're an adversary to mainstream culture. So are pretty much all subcultures, of which Satanism is but one. So that's not really saying much. I identify with multiple subcultures, all of which oppose the mainstream. But then I like some aspects of mainstream society.

I think the Left Hand Path is about moving on, evolution of the ego. It's a helpful tool that can be used to see the wall that blocks you from your major life goals and not only that, but just as well finding the crease in that wall. I'd say that the route you take next in your spiritual evolution is entirely based on your intentions in the first place.

I know what my larger spiritual goal is: To attain apotheosis.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

True. We all are opponents of something or other. But what value is it to base your beliefs around such a nebulous concept? Okay, so you're an adversary to mainstream culture. So are pretty much all subcultures, of which Satanism is but one. So that's not really saying much. I identify with multiple subcultures, all of which oppose the mainstream. But then I like some aspects of mainstream society.

Perhaps Satanism is more than just any ole subculture, maybe it's a subculture having its way with a shock factor. More like subculture looking to be the reverse of common culture rather than a subculture sitting alongside.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Perhaps Satanism is more than just any ole subculture, maybe it's a subculture having its way with a shock factor. More like subculture looking to be the reverse of common culture rather than a subculture sitting alongside.

In a lot of ways, it is, which is one of its failings because it tends to draw people of low quality character. We tend to get the crazies and psychos who are just into being "evil" and not much else.

 

[technomage]

I know what my larger spiritual goal is: To attain apotheosis.

Attain? “If that which you seek, you find not within yourself, you will never find without.”

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Attain? “If that which you seek, you find not within yourself, you will never find without.”

Where did I say I would find it outside of myself?

 

[technomage]

Where did I say I would find it outside of myself?

How do you "attain" something you've always had?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

How do you "attain" something you've always had?

I'm not a God yet. That's a process that takes several lifetimes. I'm using the concept in a spiritual sense. There's autotheism, which is metaphorical.

 

[technomage]

I'm not a God yet.

We'll have to agree to disagree on that.

And no, I'm not being at all facetious.

 

[ScottySatan]

Let's be honest, can Satanism really stand on its own, without Christianity or the other Abrahamic religions? The word "satan" itself is merely about opposition. It is reactionary and needs to define itself against something. I mean, what is the point of opposition if you're not opposing something? Now, I realize that it can be taken many different ways, but I'm hitting a wall in my view of Satanism that I have hit before. That is, I'm having trouble seeing the value in something, be it a label or concept, that is defined around being opposed to something. It just starts to seem a bit vacuous to me. Rebellion and opposition is all well and good when there's a point. But it's empty when they are taken on as ends in of themselves.

Thanks for sharing and being so articulate. I don't usually learn so much about someone in a post. I have an answer.

Satan IS reactionary. He always comes around second, but very soon after the first. It's said the baseball cap was invented a long long time ago, but the invention of wearing the baseball cap backwards came the next day.

The original sin is self-knowledge, be it in christianity or prehistoric beliefs. The original rhp was obedience to the tribe policy, and the original Satanist was a self-serving experimentalist. In christianity this is symbolized by the conflict around the tree of knowledge. To me, the first physical expression of Satan was the first person to be that self-serving experimentalist; the first guy who achieved self-awareness, the first guy to question the rules that kept his clan alive for years.

The word Satanism was put forward seriously in modern times for a shock factor. It's a word with power. The man himself said that in other times and places, other equivalent words are more appropriate. Of course Satan doesn't need abraham or his god, he predates and transcends those. He takes on the name of The Adversary of any environment.

My thoughts here are why I get very disappointed by people who think that Satanists are people who believe in the bible and root for the bad guy. I disagree with the people who are pro-bibleDevil more than those against. This is why atheistic Satanists are so weary of theistic ones, because most theistic ones we meet are just pro-bibleDevil; just heretical christians. I'm not accusing you of that, this just fits here.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

We'll have to agree to disagree on that.

And no, I'm not being at all facetious.

It's okay. It's just tied into my beliefs in an eternal soul and continuous rebirth.

 

[ScottySatan]

In a lot of ways, it is, which is one of its failings because it tends to draw people of low quality character. We tend to get the crazies and psychos who are just into being "evil" and not much else.

I agree there. I've had the same experience. This is really unfortunate. And you wonder why the LaVeyans are so concerned with "real" vs. "wannabe" Satanists?

I know what you're thinking, "But the Laveyans were a bunch of dicks too". Well, that's to be expected of any group: an incompetent majority.

Let's you and I figure out a way to meet the good ones.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Thanks for sharing and being so articulate. I don't usually learn so much about someone in a post. I have an answer.

Satan IS reactionary. He always comes around second, but very soon after the first. It's said the baseball cap was invented a long long time ago, but the invention of wearing the baseball cap backwards came the next day.

The original sin is self-knowledge, be it in christianity or prehistoric beliefs. The original rhp was obedience to the tribe policy, and the original Satanist was a self-serving experimentalist. In christianity this is symbolized by the conflict around the tree of knowledge. To me, the first physical expression of Satan was the first person to be that self-serving experimentalist; the first guy who achieved self-awareness, the first guy to question the rules that kept his clan alive for years.

The word Satanism was put forward seriously in modern times for a shock factor. It's a word with power. The man himself said that in other times and places, other equivalent words are more appropriate. Of course Satan doesn't need abraham or his god, he predates and transcends those. He takes on the name of The Adversary of any environment.

My thoughts here are why I get very disappointed by people who think that Satanists are people who believe in the bible and root for the bad guy. I disagree with the people who are pro-bibleDevil more than those against. This is why atheistic Satanists are so weary of theistic ones, because most theistic ones we meet are just pro-bibleDevil; just heretical christians. I'm not accusing you of that, this just fits here.

Thank you. Nothing against Satanists. If it works for you, that's awesome. I'm just not so sure that it's working for me. Setianism is beginning to seem very appealing and I love that it doesn't have the reactionary aspect or the Abrahamic baggage, plus I already agree with Setianism on many different things. Besides, studying Set gives me a chance to become familiar with a culture that I haven't looked into much.

I have met loony theistic Satanists and loony atheistic Satanists. Lol. The Satanic scene is all over the place.

But people attempting to form a theistic Satanist belief system are hampered by the fact that there's really not much to go on. So most theistic Satanists tend to mold their concept of Satan on a pre-Christian god like Pan, Prometheus or Enki. Then there's the question of how you wish to approach it. There's the Romantic tragic hero, who is really rather Christ-like, version of Satan that came about during the Enlightenment. Or there's the "dark", "evil" god of chaos that you see emphasized in black metal and in groups like the ONA, which is mostly based on inverted Christianity. (The LaVeyan concept of Satan falls inbetween the two or is a mixture, I suppose.) So that makes it very difficult to form a dynamic, living religion from. It's much easier to associate with a God who who shares some attributes with the positive ideal of Satan but who was actually worshiped and has a wealth of information such as mythology to base your views on. That is a definite strength that Setianism has over theistic Satanism.

 

[technomage]

It's okay. It's just tied into my beliefs in an eternal soul and continuous rebirth.

I can buy into that. Not from the point of "I know it happens," because I don't ... but from the point of view of "That makes sense, and I can believe it."

I'm probably going to butcher the explanation of this, but please bear with me.

I am ... fairly persuaded (again, this is belief, not knowledge) that we are all the same soul. We are both the authority and the rebel, both the winner and the loser ... both the aggressor and the victim. One soul, that keeps living different lives, then steps outside of time and chooses another life to live.

We are the created, and we are the creator.

That's why my path participates in both RHP and LHP thought. Either by itself is incomplete. We serve others, and we serve ourselves, each in turn, sometimes at the same time. We take, we give, we share ... we ARE.

We are what we are. Or if you want to look at it from the individual view, I AM THAT I AM.

That view stands at a certain tension with my natural skepticism, so I will not say my awareness is perfect (far from it). But yes, apotheosis is a process of discovering something we already have ... and have always had.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I agree there. I've had the same experience. This is really unfortunate. And you wonder why the LaVeyans are so concerned with "real" vs. "wannabe" Satanists?

I know what you're thinking, "But the Laveyans were a bunch of dicks too". Well, that's to be expected of any group.

Let's you and I figure out a way to meet the good ones.

Lol. I do have my problems with LaVeyans. I'm not a fan of Social Darwinism and eugenics (Gilmore supports eugenics) and I don't like the post-LaVey CoS. However, I like to think that I would've been a part of the original Church of Satan during the '60s. Also, I support any law-abiding and rational Satanist out there, atheist or theist. The ones that disgust me the most are the Joy of Satan and Order of Nine Angles types.

I would love to find a way to meet Satanists who aren't dicks. Lol.

 

[ScottySatan]

Setianism

But Setianism IS Satanic.

I personally decided to stick with Satanism and not adopt the anti-christ per se. I even smile and wear colors and stuff!

 

[ScottySatan]

Lol. I do have my problems with LaVeyans. I'm not a fan of Social Darwinism and eugenics (Gilmore supports eugenics) and I don't like the post-LaVey CoS. However, I like to think that I would've been a part of the original Church of Satan during the '60s. Also, I support any law-abiding and rational Satanist out there, atheist or theist. The ones that disgust me the most are the Joy of Satan and Order of Nine Angles types.

I would love to find a way to meet Satanists who aren't dicks. Lol.

I don't think you need to be Gilmore's mental twin to be an effective LaVeyan Satanist.

edited to add: I surprised I can say "dick" without censorship. dick dick dick.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I can buy into that. Not from the point of "I know it happens," because I don't ... but from the point of view of "That makes sense, and I can believe it."

I'm probably going to butcher the explanation of this, but please bear with me.

I am ... fairly persuaded (again, this is belief, not knowledge) that we are all the same soul. We are both the authority and the rebel, both the winner and the loser ... both the aggressor and the victim. One soul, that keeps living different lives, then steps outside of time and chooses another life to live.

We are the created, and we are the creator.

That's why my path participates in both RHP and LHP thought. Either by itself is incomplete. We serve others, and we serve ourselves, each in turn, sometimes at the same time. We take, we give, we share ... we ARE.

We are what we are. Or if you want to look at it from the individual view, I AM THAT I AM.

That view stands at a certain tension with my natural skepticism, so I will not say my awareness is perfect (far from it). But yes, apotheosis is a process of discovering something we already have ... and have always had.

Reminds me of the beliefs of a Finnish group called the Star of Azazel. They are a mixture of the LHP and RHP, too. They have definitely formed a version of Satanism that is very unique from what I've seen.

Star of Azazel

I don't believe in the "one consciousness" concept, however. I can understand where you're coming from, though.