This is unexpected.

[DeistPaladin]

As if Hedonism or Satanism has anything to do with Naturalistic Panthesim.

OK, I'll go really slow here. My original response post said

To be honest, I have a similar reaction to your stated identity.

So, you see, I was trying to explain my reaction to his idea of Satanism by using a comparative. It's called "an analogy".

Clear?

[Zenith]

I just realized I'm a satanist, as defined by religioustolerance.com.

By the way, I've remembered some things...
1. There was a kind of online test that showed you what religion represents you best (which actually said, "which is your religion"). Forgot the name of the site. Anyway, it was funnily made: perhaps any ordinary man had Satanism on one of the first 3 religions that represent him most. If you were an atheist or seemed to say atheistic things, the first (the religion that represented you most) was Satanism. I believe the test had stupid, or at least not well thought questions and answers (you had to check some checkboxes to questions).

2. religioustolerance.com remembers me of some interesting, quite unpleasant things: it claims to be objective towards religions (as far as I remember), but it is not:
a) Wicca and things like sorcery and Satanism are regarded as something "good" and "nice". I sincerely regard wicca and sorcery as something foolish, especially when I imagine a man bowing down to the image of the Horned God (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Horned_God.JPG). While Satanism is not at all a religion asking its adepts to be "good" and "fair" and "honest".
b) The topics regarding Islam seemed to have been written (at least when I was looking on that site) by muslims: Muslims and only muslims could have written "(pbuh)" after mentioning a prophet, like Muhammud (e.g. "Muhammud (pbuh) ...."). pbuh means "peace be upon him". Now what I've found about Islam from there was nothing shocking or something (if it was written by muslims, it is quite obvious) so it was shown as something pretty 'good'.
c) The things that were written for Christianity were, funnily, from Zeitgeist and The Da Vinci Code (they were written as "resources" or something in the bottom of the page). Funnily, because the Da Vinci Code was a very subjective story that tried to prove how "the real Jesus" was (i.e. they said that Jesus existed), while Zeitgeist claimed that Jesus never existed, but that he was only a fairytale! (in other words, the resources used were contradicting each other, but were used as absolute truths that complete each other). And, the author of the topics of Christianity didn't seem to be a christian.

Anyway, I believe that a site that shows correctly and objectively all religions is quite impossible. And if one would try to do that, the "fair" way would be to call a representative of every religion and denomination to show the basics of his religion. Anyway, the problem is that you'll never get to know how a religion actually is, if you're looking on a site that deals with "religions". Besides of the fact that those representative would never represent everyone's beliefs. The only possible way to know a religion is to study it yourself (read their holy books, speak with adherents of that religion, etc.).

[A Dead Relative]

If you're looking for a virgin to sacrifice, I better hide.

You have room to hide my left little toe?

My toes aren't virgins.

You're dead... just how would a little sacrifice hurt you?

Good point. Bring it on!

[FadingW]

I looked up satanism a while back and to this day I am somewhat puzzled.

It appears to be a creed based on what people actually do. Why bother ritualizing what is commonplace?

For me it seems that if there is to be a belief system, better to put it's ideals out of reach so that there may be something to live up to.

[ib.me.ub]

As if Hedonism or Satanism has anything to do with Naturalistic Panthesim.

OK, I'll go really slow here. My original response post said

To be honest, I have a similar reaction to your stated identity.

So, you see, I was trying to explain my reaction to his idea of Satanism by using a comparative. It's called "an analogy".

Clear?

pff. Yeah, about as clear as mud. I just find it interesting your choice of example & the way you worded it.

[DeistPaladin]

pff. Yeah, about as clear as mud. I just find it interesting your choice of example & the way you worded it.

OK, I'll try one last time.

People who invoke deities or other supernatural agents in the labels they use to describe their beliefs ought to have, as a bare minimum, some belief that said deity/supernatural agent is a conscious being that's out there somewhere.

Otherwise, they're atheists who are engaging in category confusion.

[R-e-n-n-a-t]

Satanic Bible, Book of Lucifer, On the Choice of a Human Sacrifice Wrote:
The use of a human sacrifice in a Satanic ritual does not imply that the sacrifice is
slaughtered “to appease the gods.” Symbolically, the victim is destroyed through the working of a hex or curse, which in turn leads to the physical, mental or emotional destruction of the “sacrifice” in ways and means not attributable to the magician.
The only time a Satanist would perform a human sacrifice would be if it were to serve a twofold purpose; that being to release the magician’s wrath in the throwing of a curse, and more important, to dispose of a totally obnoxious and deserving individual.
Under NO circumstances would a Satanist sacrifice any animal or baby! For centuries, propagandists of the right‐hand path have been prattling over the supposed sacrifices of small children and voluptuous maidens at the hands of diabolists.
...
The question arises, “Who, then, would be considered a fit and proper human sacrifice, and how is one qualified to pass judgment on such a person?” The answer is brutally simple. Anyone who has unjustly wronged you—one who has “gone out of his way” to hurt you—to deliberately cause trouble and hardship for you or those dear to you. In short, a person asking to be cursed by their very actions.
When a person, by his reprehensible behavior, practically cries out to be destroyed, it is truly your moral obligation to indulge them their wish. The person who takes every opportunity to “pick on” others is often mistakenly called “sadistic.” In reality, this person is a misdirected masochist who is working towards his own destruction. The reason a person viciously strikes out against you is because they are afraid of you or what you represent, or are resentful of your happiness. They are weak, insecure, and on extremely shaky ground when you throw your curse, and they make ideal human sacrifices.
It is sometimes easy to overlook the actual wrongdoing of the victim of your curse, when one considers how “unhappy” a person he really is. It is not so easy, though, to retrace the damaging footsteps of your antagonist and make right those practical situations he or she has made wrong.
The “ideal sacrifice” may be emotionally insecure, but nonetheless can, in the machinations of his insecurity, cause severe damage to your tranquility or sound reputation. “Mental illness,” “nervous breakdown,” “maladjustment,” “anxiety neuroses,”
“broken homes,” “sibling rivalry,” etc., etc., ad infinitum have too long been convenient excuses for vicious and irresponsible actions. Anyone who says “we must try to understand” those who make life miserable for those undeserving of misery is aiding and abetting a social cancer! The apologists for these rabid humans deserve any clobberings they get at the hands of their charges!
Mad dogs are destroyed, and they need help far more than the human who conveniently made froths at the mouth when irrational behavior is in order! It is easy to say, “So what!—these people are insecure, so they can’t hurt me.” But the fact remains—given the opportunity they would destroy you!
Therefore, you have every right to (symbolically) destroy them, and if your curse provokes their actual annihilation, rejoice that you have been instrumental in ridding the world of a pest! If your success or happiness disturbs a person—you owe him nothing! He is made to be trampled under foot! IF PEOPLE HAD TO TAKE THE CONSEQUENCES OF THEIR OWN ACTIONS, THEY WOULD THINK TWICE!


Yep, I agree with all of that. I'm not sure you understand the definition of Satanic magic though, you may want to check wikipedia. It's defined as a means to accomplish something that otherwise could not be accomplished. 'Magic' isn't required to be magical to work, just emotional.
Also, to be clear, I'm a modernist LavVeyan Satanist. Not a traditional theistic one. That would be stupid.

*edit* The Book of Lucifer sounds pretty theistic, care to explain? Last I checked, LaVeyans don't believe in lucifer. Satan is used as a metaphor for a facet of yourself.

One last answer, I don't consider LaVeyan (I stress, LaVeyan) Satanism a religion. It doesn't involve worship of anything except yourself, and the definitions are quite different. Magic, for example, isn't magical, and god doesn't refer to a powerful magical entity. This is a deliberate attempt to spit in the face of traditional religious pov's. I have done quite a bit of forum lurking by the way, and so far, with one notable exception, I've agreed with everything the Satanists have said.

---

@ FadingW

I think it's only ritualized so that it's organized and powerful. Religions have stayed powerful because they're organized and comitted. The only way it's possible to compete directly is to gather and organize around our own ideas. This, I think, is why it's ritualized and focused around a belief; it's for power and coordination in direct competition with opposing factions.

---

@ib.me.ub

I agree with both of those philosophies as well.

---

@everyone

a quote from the Satanist High Priest:

"I believe all religions are insane. When you admit to the presence of a god, you are abdicating reason."

[frankiej]

I've always just seen LaVeyan Satanism as a form of Hedonism, which i suppose is a decent way to live, however with carrying such a name it is bound to strike up controversy.

Sometimes I feel that maybe the term Satanism was chosen is just to try and get a reaction...

I see a Satanist as an attention seeking hedonist.
But hey, thats just what I think

[Zenith]

Although I certainly know nothing about Satanism (and by your post it sounds like you know very little about it either), I find it hard to believe that a religion called Satanism doesn't have at least some doctrinal calls to worship and/or praise Satan.

Believe it or not, mainstream or "LaVey" Satanism has nothing to do with Satan, in the Christian sense. Satan is a symbol to them. Most of them don't even believe in a deity of any sort. Of course, there are Satanists that do believe in Satan. Some that even believe the bible is true. It is a very diverse religion. (I read a book about it once. It was there. I couldn't resist)

I know that "LaVey" satanists are allowed to practice any religion, even though they are satanists, if they think that divulging the secret beliefs would not be a good to them (e.g. a priest or a pastor or an archbishop or something can be a satanist, while pretending to be a very faithful servant of God. He wouldn't say to his fellows that he is a satanist, because he would lose reputation, friends, money, etc.)

As about believing in God, I know it's written that:

It is a popular misconception that the Satanist does not believe in God. The concept of “God,” as interpreted by man, has been so varied throughout the ages, that the Satanist simply accepts the definition which suits him best. Man has always created his gods, rather than his gods creating him. God is, to some, benign—to others, terrifying. To the Satanist “God”—by whatever name he is called, or by no name at all—is seen as the balancing factor in nature, and not as being concerned with suffering. This powerful force which permeates and balances the universe is far too impersonal to care about the happiness or misery of flesh‐and‐blood creatures on this ball of dirt upon which we live.
...
Just as the Satanist does not pray to God for assistance, he does not pray for forgiveness for his wrong doings. In other religions, when one commits a wrong he either prays to God for forgiveness, or confesses to an intermediary and asks him to pray to God for forgiveness for his sins. The Satanist knows that praying does no good, confessing to another human being, like himself, accomplishes even less—and is, furthermore, degrading.

As about the Bible, it is impossible for a satanist to believe the Bible without being picky. In other words, he may believe in some way the bible and get to the conclusion that Jesus Christ is actually Lucifer, or something. But really, sincere devout christians they cannot be, as the satanic bible vehemently opposes christianity and the christian bible as being the ultimate truth.

[Zenith]

Yep, I agree with all of that. I'm not sure you understand the definition of Satanic magic though, you may want to check wikipedia. It's defined as a means to accomplish something that otherwise could not be accomplished. 'Magic' isn't required to be magical to work, just emotional.
Also, to be clear, I'm a modernist LavVeyan Satanist. Not a traditional theistic one. That would be stupid.

In the Satanic Bible, "magic" does not mean only to use someone's feelings against him, or to deceive him.

HERE are three types of ceremony incorporated in the practice of Satanic magic. Each of these correspond to a basic human emotion. The first of these we shall call a sex ritual.
A sex ritual is what is commonly known as a love charm or spell. The purpose in performing such a ritual is to create desire on the part of the person whom you desire, or to summon a sex partner to fulfill your desires. If you have no specific person or type of person in mind strong enough to cause direct sexual feeling culminating in orgasm, you will not succeed in performing as successful working. The reason for this is that even if the ritual was successful, by accident, what good would it serve if you could not take advantage of your eventual opportunity because of lack of stimulation or desire? It is easy to confuse enchantment for your ulterior motives, with spell‐casting to satisfy your sexual desires.
...
The second type of ritual is of a compassionate nature. The compassion, or sentiment, ritual is performed for the purpose of helping others, or helping oneself. Health, domestic happiness, business activities, material success, and scholastic prowess are but a few of the situations covered in a compassion ritual. It might be said that this form of ceremony could fall into the realm of genuine charity, bearing in mind that “charity begins at home.”
The third motivating force is that of destruction. This is a ceremony used for anger, annoyance, disdain, contempt, or just plain hate. It is known as a hex, curse, or destroying agent.
...
On the other hand, the “enlightened” man, who doesn’t place any stock in such “superstition,” relegates his instinctive fear of the curse to his unconscious, thereby nourishing it into a phenomenally destructive force that will multiply with each succeeding misfortune. Of course, every time a new setback occurs, the non‐believer will automatically deny any connection with the curse, especially to himself. The emphatic conscious denial of the potential of the curse is the very ingredient that will create its success, through setting‐up of accident prone situations. In many instances, the victim will deny any magical significance to his fate, even unto his dying gasp
...
but the victim of a hex or curse is much more prone to destruction if he DOES NOT believe in it!
...
Therefore, never attempt to convince the skeptic upon whom you wish to place a curse. Allow him to scoff. To enlighten him would lessen your chance of success. Listen with benign assurance as he laughs at your magic, knowing his days are filled with turmoil all the while. If he is despicable enough, by Satan’s grace, he might even die—laughing!

The Satanist performs his ritual to insure the outcome of his desires, and he would not waste his time nor force of will on something so inconclusive as rolling a pencil off a table, etc. through the application of magic. The amount of energy needed to levitate a teacup (genuinely) would be of sufficient force to place an idea in a group of people’s heads half‐way across the earth, in turn, motivating them in accordance with your will. The Satanist knows that even if you succeeded in lifting the teacup from the table, it would be assumed that trickery was used anyway. Therefore, if the Satanist wants to float objects in mid‐air, he uses wires, mirrors, or other devices, and saves his force for self‐aggrandizement.
...
The best time to cast your spell or charm, hex or curse, is when your target is at his most receptive state. Receptivity to the will of the magician is assured when the recipient is as passive as possible. No matter how strong‐willed one is, he is naturally passive while he is asleep; therefore, the best time to throw your magical energy towards your target is when he or she sleeps.
There are certain periods of the sleep cycle that are better than others for susceptibility to outside influences. When a person is normally fatigued from a day’s activities, he will “sleep like a log” until his mind and body are rested. This period of profound sleep usually lasts about four to six hours, after which the period of “dream sleep” occurs which lasts two or three hours, or until awakening. It is during this “dream sleep” that the mind is most receptive to outside or unconscious influence.
...
This is why a “primitive” magician can utilize a mud doll or crude drawing to successful advantage in his magical ceremonies. To HIM, the image is as accurate as needs be.
Anything which serves to intensify the emotions during a ritual will contribute to its success. Any drawing, painting, sculpture, writing, photograph, article of clothing, scent, sound, music, tableau, or contrived situation that can be incorporated into the ceremony will serve the sorcerer well.
...
To insure the destruction of an enemy, you must destroy them by proxy! They must be shot, stabbed, sickened, burned, smashed, drowned, or rent in the most vividly convincing manner!
...
If, in attempting to attain your goal through either greater or lesser magic, you find yourself failing consistently, think about these things:... Are you a gross, lumpy, lewd‐mouthed, snaggle‐toothed loafer who is desirous of a luscious young stripper? If so, you’d better learn to use the balance factor, or else expect to fail consistently!
...
The aspiring witch who deludes herself into thinking that a powerful enough working will always succeed, despite a magical imbalance, is forgetting one essential rule: MAGIC IS LIKE NATURE ITSELF, AND SUCCESS IN MAGIC REQUIRES WORKING IN HARMONY WITH NATURE, NOT AGAINST IT.

So, about "It's defined as a means to accomplish something that otherwise could not be accomplished. 'Magic' isn't required to be magical to work, just emotional.":
if you claim that if one makes a ritual in order that you would die, the ritual works, and you die... it was nothing 'magical'? If you claim that this 'magic' is actually an "energy" that you somehow obtain, gather, and increase through ritual, and then unleash it into the universe to do what you desire, is not magic, then I don't know what the big difference is between this non-magical 'magic' and the traditional "sorcery", "magic", i.e. you only give an explanation to it.

*edit* The Book of Lucifer sounds pretty theistic, care to explain? Last I checked, LaVeyans don't believe in lucifer. Satan is used as a metaphor for a facet of yourself.

The Book of Lucifer doesn't sound theistic at all.
The only thing that seems to claim the existence of some supernatural beings is in:

Supposedly, demons are malevolent spirits with attributes conductive to the deterioration of the people or events that they touch upon. The Greek word demon meant a guardian spirit or source of inspiration, and to be sure, later theologians invented legion upon legion of these harbingers of inspiration—all wicked.
An indication of the cowardice of “magicians” of the right‐hand path is the practice of calling upon a particular demon (who would supposedly be a minion of the devil) to do his bidding. The assumption is that the demon, being only a flunky of the devil, is easier to control. Occult lore states that only the most formidably “protected” or insanely foolhardy sorcerer would try to call forth the Devil himself.
The Satanist does not furtively call upon these “lesser” devils, but brazenly invokes those who people that infernal army of long‐standing outrage—the Devils themselves!

Though it's written above that "The devils of mankind are many, and their origins diversified. The performance of Satanic ritual does not embrace the calling forth of demons; this practice is followed only by those who are in fear of the very forces they conjure.". Which does make it be a bit confusing: you call forth devils that you believe that they do not exist?? and we're supposed to call it "authentic atheism"?

It seems that daimonion originally meant a "spirit", not a "guardian spirit" or "source of inspiration". And back then, there should have been the idea of "good spirits" and "evil spirits", so you can't turn them all "good". It seems that daimonion was usually used as "evil spirit", while pneuma (another word for "spirit") was usually used of non-evil spirits.

Anyway, it does sound odd to make an incantation like:

Can the wings of the winds hear your voices of wonder?; O you!, the great spawn of the worms of the Earth!, whom the Hell fire frames in the depth of my jaws!, whom I have prepared as cups for a wedding or as flowers regaling the chambers of lust!
Stronger are your feet than the barren stone! Mightier are your voices than the manifold winds! For you are become as a building such as is not, save in the mind of the All‐Powerful manifestation of Satan!
Arise!, saith the First! Move therefore unto his servants! Show yourselves in power, and make me a strong seer‐of‐things, for I am of Him that liveth forever!

By the way, do you really believe that the Enochian language really existed as they claim and that the Enochian keys really existed since ages, as he claims and that he, by unknown mysterious means he got to know them and to know them correctly and to translate them correctly??

THE magical language used in Satanic ritual is Enochian, a language thought to be older than Sanskrit, with a sound grammatical and syntactical bases. It resembles Arabic in some sounds and Hebrew and Latin in others. It first appeared in print in 1659 in a biography of John Dee, the famous Sixteenth Century seer and court astrologer. This work, by Meric Casaubon, describes the occultist Dee’s activities with his associate, Edward Kelly, in the art of scrying or crystal gazing.
...
For many years the Enochian Keys, or Calls, have been shrouded in secrecy. The few printings that have existed completely eliminate the correct wording, as the proper translation has been disguised through the use of euphemisms, and only designed to throw the inept magician and/or would‐be inquisitor off the track.
...
Dispensing with such once‐pragmatic whitewashing in terms such as “holy” and “angelic,” and arbitrarily chosen groups of numbers, the purpose of which were only to act as substitutes for “blasphemous” words—here, then, are the TRUE Enochian Calls, as received from an unknown hand.

By the way, what I've found about the Enochian language:

Enochian is a name often applied to an occult or angelic language recorded in the private journals of John Dee and his seer Edward Kelley in the late 16th century. The men claimed that it was revealed to them by angels. Some contemporary scholars of magick consider it a constructed language that is nonetheless viable for magickal workings, while other scholars of constructed languages simply consider it a very poor imitation of an ancient language, with grammar derived primarily from English.

If you really believe the Enochian keys and Enochian language to be authentic, what is that which makes you blindly believe that?

And know that it was the first and the only time in my life when I've heard - and that was from the Satanic Bible - that Dracula is the Romanian name for devil
OMG!!
The Romanian name for "devil" is "diavol" or "drac"! "Dracula" comes first from Vlad Dracul, which was a historical person, in middle ages. Back then, "dragon" was translated in romanian as "drac":

Vlad II received the surname Dracul in 1431, after being inducted into the Order of the Dragon

while one of his sons was called "Vlad the Impaler (Romanian: Vlad Țepeș pronounced [ˈvlad ˈt͡sepeʃ]) or simply as Dracula"
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vlad_tepes)
It was all about the "Order of the Dragon".

Perhaps Anton LaVey should have not trusted his gypsy romanian grandma so much...