Is Satanism too bland?

Great Debates
1

Satanists used to be the boogieman but I’m not sure they deserve that reputation. Sure, when Christianity was the norm, rejecting that gave you some street cred. But nowadays your average Christian only makes it to church for weddings and Easter.

They have more rules than your average Joe follows, and warn against breaking laws. If you want to rebel you’re better off joining the anarchists.

They claim to be for indulgence, but only in moderation, and frown upon excessive intoxicants. They’ve got nothing on hedonists, swingers, and the stereotypical American Big Mac enthusiast.

They say “destroy your enemies” but we’ve got more to fear from corporate execs.

The people they used to get mistaken for - devil worshipping cultists into brainwashing, human sacrifice, and cannabilism - have pretty much been debunked as an urban legend. They aren’t that much more macabre than half of today’s teenagers with their goth/heavy metal/wiccan lifestyle.

There’s some dominance/power play but pretty tame by the BSDM scene standards.

They get into less fights than punks and skinheads. Every other Tranny is probably twice as nasty. The few I’ve had conversations with came off as more friendly and polite than your typical New Yorker.

So Satanists, I’m calling you out! Prove that you still deserve your bad boy image. :smiley:

2

You’re talking about the LaVeyans, right? They’ve always been the “Meh” of Satanists.

I’m sure there’s some 14 y/o malcontent who’s hailing Satan, molesting his little sister & torturing his dog, who can creep you out plenty.

3

I once infiltrated the church of satan, or at least their online manifestation. Took a few weeks to gain some level of trust. They’re basically a bunch of closet nazis. They greet each other with Heil Satan! (or HS) for short.

I managed to get into conversation with one of their leading lights who went by the nick Josef Mengele. I asked him why he had chosen such a nick and he gave me a big long answer about how they worked in similar fields and they shared a birthday and how they were both interested in social eugenics.

They’re not proper satanists as far as I’m concerned. Proper satanists hold black masses with Unholy Altars and worship the Lord of Despair and so on.

4

mutantmoose, it sounds like you infiltrated a group of very confused people. Like their web site should have a caption “People Unclear on the Concept.”

5

Go look through the classified ads in the back of any of the heavy metal magazines. You’ll find people you wouldn’t necessarily want to be around.

6

ultrafilter’s got it right. The scary “real” satanists aren’t the LeVayans, they’re the Norwegian black metal psychos. There you’ve got your theistic Satanism, white supremacy, murder, suicides and even a bit of good old fashioned cannibalism.

7

That scene is played out, it never spread beyond Norway, and it’s not clear how much of it was real Satanism and how much was a pissing contest that got out of hand. What I had in mind are the uncounted numbers of teenagers and young adults here in America who are, for whatever reason, just not quite right in the head.

I was reading one of those metal magazines once where they had an interview with Glen Benton of Deicide, one of the few metal musicians who is definitely a genuine Satanist. He was talking about living in a gated community to keep himself protected from the freaks. My first thought was that he might want to look in the mirror, but then I saw the classified ads and realized exactly what he was worried about.

8

Cannibalism can do that to a group. How is a church supposed to grow if its adherents keep eating each other?

9

Heh. It’s not that I mind them not being creepy, it’s just that I’d expect them to at least be more rule breaking and indulgent.

10

While I wouldn’t talk loudly about it in front of Greven [The Count - Varg Vikarnes], the Norwegian black metal satanists played themselves out during the early 90s and never truly resurfaced. Mostly because we hit upon the neo-nazi resurgence back then and since the immigrant crime sprees have kept the capital’s level of violence at it’s proper gruesome level.

(I’m more of a Satanism née Prattchett’s Alistair Crowley man, myself. As an aggregate of fear, hate and rage, Oslo traffic - especially inside “ring 1” - has a far greater cumulative effect.)

11

Raids on other, weaker churches for “recruiting” purposes?

12

Actually, much of what you refer to does not (or did not, depending on your view of the NBM scene) have anything to do with what was (or is) happening in Norway.

The cannibalism was a rumor that was denied by Øystein Aarseth, who was the supposed cannibal.

I’ve never read anything anywhere of heard anything about white supremacy being a part of the NBM scene.

The people in the NBM scene were not Satanists, really. They rejected Christianity as a false religion that was forced on them. First King Olaf I converted, then King Olaf II made great strides in converting Norwegians to the church. In 1536, when Norway was ruled by Denmark, they were forced to embrace Lutheranism, another form of Christianity. Jews and Jesuits were not allowed into Norway under the 1814 constitution.The Sámi (a shamanistic nature-based religion) were converted in a campaign that lasted for more than 200 years. Until the ban on Jews was lifted in 1851, atheists were not allowed in Norway. In fact it wasn’t until the Norwegian constitution was amended in 1964 that citizens had freedom to choose their own religion.

Norway does have an official state church, btw, the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Norway, which traces its roots back to the 9th century AD and has been known in more or less it’s current form since 1537.

Church burnings did take place, with over 50 incidents from 1992-1996. The position of the arsonists, like Aarseth and others, was that they were destroying the buildings of false gods and usurpers, interlopers and oppressors who had taken over Norway.

A lot of the more notorious things that the NBM scene is known for were either isolated incidents (the suicide of Per Yngve Ohlin; the murder of Øystein Aarseth) or fabrications (white supremacy, cannibalism, the Black Metal Inner Circle, etc.).

Did churches get burned? Yes. For Satan? No.

13

For Wotan, then?

14

I find it quite funny when people say that Satanists aren’t what others think they should be. Satanism is a defined religion with a clear founder, doctrine and set of scriptures - it is what it is, not what people think it should be. As for it being a boogie man, again that was hysterical fear of what Satanism was perceived to be, not what it was.

jackdavinci - what purpose would it serve for Satanists to start doing the things you think they should? As you probably know from my previous thread on the subject I’m a Satanist and I don’t particularly want to break laws, get fried or sacrifice animals/babies. Just not my thing, I’m afraid. I think what sets Satanists apart is our ability to think unconventionally and not be constrained by traditional morality if it doesn’t suit us. “Sure, I do that too” the average doper might say, but when you scratch the surface you find that far more people are working on Christian/traditional sub-routines than they often realise.

15

In contrast, I wouldn’t be bothered by a neighbor who worshiped Malik Tuus, the Peacock Angel.

16

Would that be a member of that 90s rap clan?

There’s an “official” version out there? As in before someone defined, founded, and wrote a book on it, there was no such thing as the concept of satanism? Or did someone just capitalize on a generic concept and add layers of structure to it? Sounds like the traditional religious gambit to me.

17

Yes - Anton LaVey founded Satanism in the 60s, the cornerstone of the religion is the Satanic Bible. Prior to that the word Satanism was used to describe the mythical activities of devil worshipers but they, even if they were real, were merely carrying out a Christian heresy, not practicing a disctinct religion.

The title “LaVeyan Satanism” is used but Satanists don’t accept that title because prior to LaVey there wasn’t anything called Satanism with a defined meaning. In effect the brand was created and copyrighted.

18

Euronymous, like lots of ‘Satanists’, said one thing to the fanzines, and another to the mainstream media. Whether he actually made soup out of Dead’s brains or not, the first thing he did when he found the body was get his camera and take photos, which were spread far and wide (even ending up on bootleg covers).

Are you serious? You’ve never heard of Varg Vikernes? Or is this like a True Scotsman thing (ie no true BM fan would be a White Supremacist). There are a load of interviews with major bands in the mid nineties when racism came up - sure, it was more in the Polish ‘scene’ (which seems to have been about ten people in total), but also in Norway.

There’s a pertinent comment from Euronymous here:

Even if the circle was only ten people, for a year or two they were ‘for real’ - Bard Faust stabbing someone just to know what it’s like to kill; terrorism; etc. They claimed they were doing it for Satan, or in his name, so to me, that’s what matters.

19

The biggest difference I’ve seen between Satanists and, say, fundamentalist Xians is that Satanists are a little easier to convert to Atheism.

All the so-called Satanists that I’ve met seem to be reacting to an oppressively religious background by running to the other extreme. They’ve rejected god but not religion and in doing so have gotten things ass-backwards–instead of losing the myth aspect of religion they drop the morality.

Disclaimer: I’m not an expert on Satanism and I certainly don’t intend to suggest that Illuminatiprimus (for instance) is anything like the ones I’ve met.

20

I’m sorry, but this is just not correct.

Satanic “pertaining to Satan” is first recorded 1667 (in “Paradise Lost”); meaning “diabolical” is from 1793. Satanism “worship of Satan” dates from 1896, with ref. to France, where it was said to be active at that time; Satanist is attested from 1559, applied by their enemies to Protestant sects.

Crowley absolutely chose the name and the assorted cultural baggage on purpose as part of his desensitizing phase, you know that.

I’m all for the free expression of New Religious Movements, you know that too, but I will never quite understand why Witches, Vampires and, yes, Satanists chose those precise names for themselves if not to piss people off, confuse and scare them and feed into their own need to be persecuted. Even when I call myself a Witch, I’m doing so in order to deliberately shock and/or provoke, otherwise I call myself a neopagan or a pagan; I just wish more people would admit this.