[civilian_number_two]

New topic for Satanism talk removed from Star Wars "Jedi religion" thread.

For original topic see here:

http://www.chefelf.c...topic=3196&st=0

This post has been edited by civilian_number_two: 20 May 2005 - 11:13 PM

[Mnesymone]

What in heck was all that about - when the heck did disciples of Anton LaVey and the Great Beast turn up here at ChefElf.Com?
I don't know it just strikes me as odd - LaVey and Crowley were charlatans who made up stuff as they went along... LaVey more so - his Satanist Bible bore no resemblance to the Biblical Satan and he made a shiny nickel out of it... even now his franchise is still alive and kicking as this thread proves.

[Slade]

Crowley was a scholar of the occult and in fact helped found scientific skepticism. He was also in the Golden Dawn. I haven't looked that far into the ocult, but I'm not going to assume he was a charlatan. His system has to do with self-actualization through mysticism, which also having not looked into, I'm not going to discount or assume it's true either.

I don't know much about the Church of Satan (cue lightning strike and whinney of startled horses), but I've looked at some of the stuff and a lot is basic common sense which seems to have been thrown under the label of Lucifer for shock value (or hooking people who like to be rebellious for the sake of rebellion), and the rest is utter bollocks.

The subject of the Sith: From what I've seen, it's more about embracing ones emotions, rather than detaching yourself from all elements of your humanity like the Jedi are supposed to. The trouble is that without emotion being tempered by a bit of reason (well, what fallicy of reason humans possess), people tend to flock to it and become zealots, and a whole lot of assholes used it to gain power. But it's all just because Lucas needed a big bad (very definitively) "evil" force for the heros to fight anyhow.

I could get farther into it, but it's really not worth my effort. When you draw back on your young age in defense of an argument, you need to get your facts straight. I'd say you sound like an existentialist, except you've got it all skewed, SWiU. And darkness is the absence of light, nothing more. Either way, that's not a justification for anything, and you can't use a black-and-white polar opposite system that somehow relys on itself to exist as something to live by. And religion isn't confined to a box. It is the box. Ok, I'm done. I hate having to bring up asinine things and take swipes at them.

AND TYPING IN ALL CAPITALS IS THE BEST WAY TO MAKE PEOPLE WANT TO POKE YOU IN THE EYE. Especially around here.

Edit: (SP?), a little bit more.

This post has been edited by Slade: 21 May 2005 - 04:20 PM

[azryan]

If it was fine for starwarsisus to preach that he/she follows the late con man Howard Stanton Levey then I think it’s fine for me to prove the flaws in doing so.
That was lame for whoever deleted a couple of my posts here.

At it’s most simplistic core ‘principles/rules’ there are some very good and logical things in it his Church of Satan.

All those things were plagiarized from Ayn Rand’s Objectivist philosophy though.

Here’s a link to the facts on this con man who’s ‘chruch’ was formed simply to make him money and who invented a whole string of lies about himself to make him seem impressive to suckers.

http://www.thefirewi...brary/anton.htm

Odd too that his CoS focuses on countering/mentioning only Judeo/Christian church when Objectivism is far more complete and rejects all religions.

Plus then he mimics so many things specifically from Judeo/Christian religion like ‘Satan’ as sometimes a character, and sometimes a symbol -he can’t seem to decide which it is?

And have priests and churches. That’s embracing/copying elements of exactly what they claim to reject and dementing the whole concept of Objectivism.

Note- they specifically admit they cop Ayn Rand’s ideas on their site. They didn’t use to, but I guess now that she’s dead, he’s dead... they can get away with it.

[civilian_number_two]

I'm not sure what's so wrong about stealing Ayn Rand's ideas. She wanted people to adopt them, right? To claim a copyright on a personal philosophy would be like copyrighting religion, wouldn't it?

I had some fun a while back talking about Ayn Rand. If you're interested, take a look here.

[azryan]

“-I'm not sure what's so wrong about stealing Ayn Rand's ideas.-“

Stealing is a crime. In written form it’s called plagiarism.

I can see you’re just trying to say she wanted people to learn from her and pass it on right?

That this Satanic Bible stole her ideas and claimed them as his own without crediting her as a source and then profiting off of selling it to suckers is the ‘bad’ part.

They do reference Ayn Rand on their dorky web site now though.

Anyway.... I think only the confused ‘starwarsisus’ kid’s the only one who’s into this con man’s scheme so the rest of us are just wasting our time I suspect to go on about the grand Church of Satanic Halloween Masks.

[azryan]

Good stuff BTW on your Ayn Rand comments.

I find her to have been tremendously logical but her problem was that she would start with an opinion that she held to be a fact and while everything she'd say after that made perfect sense.... if you don't agree with her opinion it all fell apart.

I don't agree with many of her points but I do like how she put (the attempt at least) to be logical and rational in place of being superstitious and blind to facts of life as so many of people still do today.

This post has been edited by azryan: 21 May 2005 - 08:48 PM

[Slade]

Posts deleted you say? Strange, since the mod policy is to never delete stuff, mostly just hide it from you guys. Normally we move topics or set certain posts to be invisible, and neither of that seemed to happen here. If people baleet/delort posts, you lose what they had to say, works if a mod makes a bad call or if someone needs evidence to yell at somebody...

Yeah, I'm done here, unless the topic gets out of hand.

Edit: More out of hand than trying to claim that StarWars stuff can be considered a religion and worshiping the Grand Church of Satan.

This post has been edited by Slade: 21 May 2005 - 10:07 PM

[StarWarsIsUs]

Crowley was a scholar of the occult and in fact helped found scientific skepticism. He was also in the Golden Dawn. I haven't looked that far into the ocult, but I'm not going to assume he was a charlatan. His system has to do with self-actualization through mysticism, which also having not looked into, I'm not going to discount or assume it's true either.

At least you have background information. Did you know Crowley also created a religion (still alive today), called Thelema? It goes along the lines of the Book of Law, and it's main rule is: Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law!

But this law does not mean what many take it as. Thelema teaches that we were formed by the universe, with a purpose to carry out in life, and this purpose is our 'true will.' You are supposed to do nothing but what you were meant to do.

But I'm not a thelemite, and do not claim to be.

[barend]

What in heck was all that about - when the heck did disciples of Anton LaVey and the Great Beast turn up here at ChefElf.Com?
I don't know it just strikes me as odd - LaVey and Crowley were charlatans who made up stuff as they went along... LaVey more so - his Satanist Bible bore no resemblance to the Biblical Satan and he made a shiny nickel out of it... even now his franchise is still alive and kicking as this thread proves.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Satan, in reality, has little to do with satanism.

LeVey's satanism is more of a philsosphy about accepting carnal desires, treating your surroundsings with respect, not bring harm to others unjustly, and avoiding herd conformity. (with leftfeild references to the acceptance of magic and lycanthropy).

When Levey was younger he had quite a thing for dressing up like gangsters, he has always gone for the 'darker' image... and satan seemed like the obvious choice to bump it up a notch.

he has even said in interviews that the involvement of satan goes little beyond the title... it was just a more appropriate an affiliation for what they were about, but 'being evil' is not what sataniusm is about.

"do as thou wilt" refers more to not doing as others would have you do.
it was a reactionary clause to the biblical request: "do as you would have others do onto you." as most people take advantage of people who live that way.

This post has been edited by barend: 22 May 2005 - 08:40 PM

[Mnesymone]

I remember the Great Beast and do what thou wilt... that was pretty much it for Thelema - not the most complex of scriptures - but the Great Beast was a very vain man so I'd pretty much disregard him as a reliable source of anything... before he assumed the name 'the Great Beast', back when he was Aleister Crowley he wrote poetry - and he considered Shakespeare to be the greatest poet in the English language after himself - says it all really.

[StarWarsIsUs]

"""""The essential concept of Thelema is "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law," which is not a hedonistic license to do anything you want. Quite the opposite. It is rather a charge to discard the "desires" of the ego and discover the True Will of one's being (something like "destiny" you might say) and accomplish it. This is not really the "doing" of a specific task, but more the spontaneous Wu Wei of Taoism.""""""

It is somewhat a task, considering that you have to live your life, in all aspects, to find your true will. Spontaneous... yet with deed.

This post has been edited by StarWarsIsUs: 23 May 2005 - 07:48 AM

[Mnesymone]

No... do what thou wilt was very hedonist - it was because of the excessive and rather orgiastic nature of the Thelemite presence in the Mediterranean that Mussolini drove the Great Beast out... if you don't think it was hedonistic at its core, look at the other name Aleister Crowley assumed after the Great Beast - the King of Depravity... even when he was Aleister Crowley he was primarily interested in debauchery - the aforementioned poetry he thought was so good was erotic poetry after all.
Though later interpretations of do what thou wilt may have made it more spiritual, the Great Beast was essentially using the principle of Thelema to get his thang on.

[Slade]

So he creates his own religion and then uses it wrongly to excuse his own behavior? That's pretty funny.

[Mnesymone]

No he created his own religion to have enjoyable enjoyabilities and people have misinterpreted it as an actual religion... usually it is the other way around.

Laughable.
And LaVey made his religion to earn him some spending money. Funny old thing, religion.