Is there any real organized religion devoted to devil worship, or is the idea just the product of heavy metal bands who want to look like they’re rejecting traditional values?
Life is a tragedy for those who feel and a comedy for those who think.
Actually, both. I’m pretty sure Anton LeVey (sp?)(author of the Satanic Bible) took himself and his “church” seriously, even if few other people did. Some more info on them can be found here: http://cti.itc.virginia.edu/~jkh8x/soc257/nrms/satanism/churchof.html
As to how organized they are, that’s up for debate. One of the tenets of the Satanic Chirch is “Satan represents all of the so-called sins…” which I assume includes sloth, meaning that they’re not the most motivated of churches. You never see em witnessing door-to-door.
“Everyone knows that all the good bands are affiliated with Satan.” -Bart Simpson.
Actaully, LeVey and party acted quite a bit like some of today’s so-called Christians:
Anton LeVey wrote a “how-to” book on Satanism, and entitled it The Satanic Bible…spelled out within were his philosophies, theories of magic, and “spell recipes”.
However, when trouble arose over his Satanic Bible, he proclaimed that it was at no time meant to be taken literally…
-David
. . . And I thought DrainBead was gonna have some competition from RoboDude for a moment . . .
When first published, the Satanic Bible outsold the christian bible ten to one on college campuses. It was followed up by a second book called I think, Satanic Ritual. It’s mostly a complete bastardization of Christian religion, for example Catholic Mass = The Black Mass. Devoted followers also read up on Aleister Crowley (SP?) and his books including Magick. Although they don’t seem overly organized there are cults that are, although I don’t know enough about them to make any claims.
That’s about it for my satanic knowledge. Great, now I have the heebie-jeebies!
My understanding about the more “solid” form of Satanism goes as follows:
Once upon a time, some mean ole God went and created the world and Adam & Eve and told them not to eat from some tree 'cause he wanted to keep them as slaves. Good guy Satan, who was expelled from Heaven due to his socialist views, comes along and says “Eat this here fruit and be freed from bondage.” God is annoyed and kicks out Adam & Eve and tries to punish them by saddling them with a heap of rules about what they can and can not due or else he’ll make life even more miserable for them. Only Satan knows that rebellion against God leads to freedom and wisdom and learning and heavy metal music and all the rest of that good stuff. Hail Satan!
For the record, this is sort of the same gist as Gnosticism, only with a couple different characters.
Anywho, what little I’ve seen of “real” Satanists has been gleaned from A Current Affair and Hard Copy. Let me tell you that anyone hoping to go to Satanist Church and be met by leather clad S&M babes is going to be one sorely disappointed devil worshipper.
“I guess one person can make a difference, although most of the time they probably shouldn’t.”
I’m sure in California theres a listing in the yellow pages for Satanic Churches.
Anyone know what happened to the leader of the Temple of Set, Michael Aquino.?
JOPHEIL – Here’s my problem (well, it’s not really a problem) with the sort of Satanism you describe, which I’ve heard of before.
If we posit, along the Christian theory, that Satan is Evil Incarnate, then positing a Satan that is good means you’re not really worshipping Satan (Evil Incarnate), you’re worshipping someone (or something) else and calling him/her/it by the name Satan. Does this make any sense? I suppose it depends on one’s point of view, but if someone said to me “I worship the Devil but he isn’t really bad, he’s actually good,” I would probably think (though not say) that person didn’t really worship the Devil. Know what I mean?
Jodi
Fiat Justitia
Jodiah –
I guess that’s part of the difference between “real” Satanism and the heavy metal, goat slaying, virgin raping stuff that upper middle class teens dabble in to get their parents to notice them.
Satanism as I described it doesn’t bother to posit Satan as Evil (or for that matter Good), but rather as Freedom, Chaos, Individualality or what-have-you. Its interest is more in having the person act as they wish and seek personal freedom in expression (be it drug use, sexual or more “moral” pursuits) than trying to “freak out” the Christian community.
Sheesh… now it sounds like I’m defending Satanism 
My original point was that the Satanism I described and have read about seems to be more like what you’d find in the Yellow Pages than the pentacle superimposed on a over-turned cross over a black altar variety.
“I guess one person can make a difference, although most of the time they probably shouldn’t.”
Here’s an old thread on this topic.
Not in mine. And yes, I checked. Orangecakes, are you aware that California is a huge place with a population of 35 million? We’re not all Charles Manson here.
::a little tired of stupid stereotypes::
~Harborina
“This is my sandbox. I’m not allowed to go in the deep end. That’s where I saw the leprechauns.”
Hey, I didn’t mean anything by that! I read somewhere that the Satanic Church was listed in the yellow pages.
I Wish I lived In California.
Although I once Did write to Charlie…
I ran across a Satanist’s webpage once, a long time ago. He was vehemently opposed to the notion that Satanism was Satan worship. “A true Satanist does not worship Satan,” he claimed.
His tenet seemed to be that, since most churches relegate everything that’s fun in life to the realm of Satan, then by golly, count him in Satan’s camp!
You rang?
Yer pal,
Satan
jodih said:
Isn’t this a bit like saying that somebody who claims to be a christian but does bad things (like leading inquisitions, burning heretics and witches, condemning gays 
) is not really a christian? Or that Catholics aren’t really christians, because they worship all those idols (saints, Mary)? Or that Jews aren’t really christians because - oh wait.
I see your point - the “standard” accepted concept of Satan is the incarnation of evil, so if someone is using a different concept for Satan, then they are not really Satanists by the “standard” definition. This leads in to a point I have that many people claim to worship “God”, but their concept of god is so different that they are by no means worshipping the same ideas. Yet they still cling to some notion of the same bible being the source of their beliefs.
As an obvious example, let’s take Deists. Their concept of god is not the personal, anthropomorphic, involved and responsive, controlling deity active in everyday life, but of a starting force for the universe that then stepped back and watched without interfering. Yet they look to the Holy Bible as the beginning concepts of what their notion of worship of this god is (picking and choosing the good elements and ignoring the bad elements as mistakes made by the predecessors). That seems as corrupt and stupid and non-sequitural to me as the example of Satanists you gave above seems to you.
I don’t know why anybody would want to worship my ex-husband, but here’s his number you can give him a call and ask him about it:
[phone number deleted for obvious reasons]
Meow!
[Note: This message has been edited by manhattan]
Don’t piss Kyla off, orangecakes, she’s from California and they all carry guns out there.
jodih, is Satan concieved of as evil incarnate in Christianity? I was under the impression that the story went:
The “light bearer” Lucifer (rather happy name for evil incarnate) was the highest and most powerful angel; he felt he was the equal of God and became ambitious, and led a rebellion of angels; he lost and was cast out of heaven, along with the rebels; he swore revenge on God and decided to destroy all His works.
Since God’s works include humankind Satan tries to lead people to temptation and get them to damn themselves. He’s also out to destroy the world, sort of. But he’s evil because he opposes God, the same way a human being would be evil if they opposed God (of course Satan is a much more powerful force for evil than a human being). I don’t think that’s the same as being evil itself, though. Satan, in this (I believe traditional) conception, has the capacity to do good if he wanted to.
Of course, I’m hardly a devout Christian. Perhaps I’m under a misconception about Satan.
Ok, one word on this and then I’m done so Nickrz doesn’t strike me down in a hail of hellfire and divine wrath.
Lucifer is not the same as Satan. The idea that they are one and the same is a rather recent one, but the Lucifer in the book of Isaiah is actually a reference to a king (most probably Nebuchadnezzar) who was cast out of power. From what I’ve read, “Lucifer” was a fairly common term for Venus way back in the ancient day (presumably pre-Greek astromony). At any rate, it has zilch to do with Satan (or Satan-el) which means roughly “accuser” or if you use the -el suffix, “accuser of God”.
As for Satan being “evil”, the Old Testament never makes reference to it (the serpent in the Garden being Satan is another fairly recent decision) and “accuser of God” seems to indicate Satan’s post being that of a court prosecutor who tries to convince God of man’s sins and unworth or an angel sent by God to tempt man and see how he reacts (i.e. Job). Satan being the opposite of God - and as such, Evil - really doesn’t come into play until the New Testament.
“I guess one person can make a difference, although most of the time they probably shouldn’t.”
Note to self: No underline function on
That’s true, Kyla. Some Californians are airhead/blonde/beachbunnys (or beachbozos).
But you do make most of the TV & motion pictures; & that’s reason enough to ridicule you all.
Have a nice day!
With magic, you can turn a frog into a prince. With science, you can turn a frog into a Ph.D, and you still have the frog you started with.