Yeah, well, Malak Taus pretty much denies LeVey’s major, doesn’t he?
Yes.
Are they legit, or just playing dress up. I know someone who claims to have been a theistic satanist, thelemic, and claimed she could ‘do’ things, and out of body travel.
mhmm
what do you think? you know this woman; does she seem credible to you?
The O.T.O. are not Satanic, although some of it’s members may be. You can be a member of the O.T.O. AND a member of a Satanic church, but most people in the O.T.O. are not Satanists.
The O.T.O. is a branch of Western Esotericsm. It was started probably in Germany or Austria, but in its current form is most shaped by Aleister Crowley. It is a Thelemic group, based on the Law: “Do what thou wilt.”
The O.T.O. claims to have one secret, and one secret only. There are a series of initiations and works which you have to go through to gain knowledge of that secret. With every initiation you are given another hint as to the secret.
In reality, it’s a club where people get together, hang out, and argue about even weirder esoteric stuff than we talk about here.
As for your friend’s claims, I cannot say. If she was/is a member of the O.T.O., she’s pretty much Thelemic by definition. If she’s also a theistic Satanist, that’s something she’s into on her own time outside of the O.T.O. As for the traveling out of body, I can say both that it’s never been scientifically proven and also that I believe I’ve done it myself, but I don’t have anything like the amount of control over it I’d like to have, or the ability to prove it to anyone. I’m still learning.
As for “are they legit, or are they playing dress up?” I’m not sure how to answer that. I wonder that of myself some nights. Certainly many or most of the members you’re likely to meet are sincere. Is there a secret inner circle laughing at all the lower idiots whilst rubbing dues money over their gleaming naked bodies and snorting blow off hookers asses? I have no idea.
Note: I am not a member of the O.T.O., so what I say about it should be taken as the impression of someone involved in similar but different organizations, and who has friends who are O.T.O. members who have answered some of my questions.
If you’d like to find out more, start with the wikipediaentry. That should keep you up for the rest of the night. 
Well…she claims to be the habitation, many demons live in her, they rape her, at times in public, and is an archtype.
ok
does all that seem credible to you?
Satanism and Vampirism are not mutually exclusive, one can be both (which I am).
I do know exactly what you’re referring to but the fact that you insist on using the word cult demonstrates that you don’t know what you’re talking about. Stop throwing loaded terminology around as it’s not progressing the discussion or demonstrating that you’re anything other than ignorant of what you’re derriding.
I’m going to go out on a limb here and assert that you’re not, in fact, a vampire.
If Satanism actually exists, as a cohesive set of spiritual beliefs honestly held by a number of adherents, it is, by definition, a cult. Sorry if you don’t like the word, but it would be literally correct - again, assuming anyone really believes in Satanism.
Not what they think it should be, what they would expect it to be based on the name.
Hey this is supposed to be a lighthearted thread. Firmly tongue in cheek. I don’t think Satanist should do or be anything specific. And I didn’t expect or want them to be the boogieman (except to superstitious fundies). I kind of expected them to be somewhat of an antithetical reaction to religious conservatism, with a resultant streak of nonconformity, and maybe have a little bit of macabre window dressing. Satanists can be whatever they want. I just find it really amusing and ironic that they are so moderate given the extreme nature of their title. They seem a lot more reserved than other mainstream groups with less macabre names.
You gave the impression, to me at least, that this wasn’t just your particular preference, but also the general position of Satanism itself. And I wouldn’t have expected the baby sacrifice, but I would have expected (for Satanists, not you) a little more indulgence - not getting wrecked - but also not a fear of experimenting with things; and a little less reverence for the law - not murder and mayhem and vandalism - but also not so hardline, especially where it concerns blue laws or consensual crime.
This is interesting and I think actually addresses the point of the OP more directly than the other stuff you and others have said. More of this please. 
I guess what I’m getting at is, most of the Satanists I’ve talked to about Satanism tend to stress the ways in which it’s not like a B movie horror film, and won’t destroy civilization, or corrupt the children.
So I get that Satanists aren’t the boogieman, but now I’m wondering what’s the point in the shock value. Sure, there was a time when just advertising not being Christian was a huge taboo and I’m wondering if that’s all there was to it. Now that that’s no longer a big deal, is there anything else about Satanism that rises to a level of nonconformity worthy of it’s name? Is there anything still edgy about it, by today’s standards? Is it actually so tame, or does is just seem that way from being described in a defensive way?
I find it ironic that you are apparently insisting on the common language definition of a vampire but on the common language definition of a cult.
And ftr, I agree with your first sentence.
Best possible neighbors, then.
Tell you what, why don’t we do that over cheesecake on Saturday? 
You have to remember that Satanism was founded in the midst of the counter-culture movement of the 60s, so whilst I wouldn’t necessarily say that the name was used for shock value, it was used to make a point. There was a certain amount of backpedalling that had to happen during the 80s due to the Satanic panic to try and protect the religion against all the shit that was thrown against it, which probably took the edge off the religion somewhat (it also made the Church of Satan a lot more cautious about anyone who was associated with it and could potentially bring it into disrepute). Also, as society moved on through the latter course of the 20th century a lot of its values became more in line with Satanic values, so what stands out in the religion now are the more unusual parts. The idea of being atheistic and carnal nowadays just doesn’t seem that radical.
Oh, and just to address a comment upthread about Satanists being easy to draw over to atheism - that’s not much of a challenge as Satanism is an atheistic religion. The ones who believe in a god/devil are pseudo/theistic-satanists.
WhyNot - we’ll have to agree to disagree over Satanism having ownership of the name. I maintain that people who subscribed to the belief systems of the satanists in France in the 17th century (for example) wouldn’t have described themselves as satanists, even if they literally were worshipping Satan. Again, those people defined themselves by what they were not, rather than what they were. I don’t personally think that that equates to a belief system in and of itself, and that LaVey was the first one to actually codify something coherent and deliberately and consciously use the name.
Excuse me? You find it ironic I’m using an accepted definition of two words?
What’s ironic about that?
Well, most who know her believe her. Some think her ill, but she has a good job, etc.
She used to practice ceremonial magick and didn’t need props at times.
Isn’t there a chapter in the Satanic Bible that berates Psychic Vampirism? If so, how do you reconcile LaVey’s criticism of vampirism with your own beliefs?
Because the Vampirism of the Temple isn’t the same thing as psychic vampirism, they’re two separate things. The Temple and the Church of Satan have a friendly relationship with one another, if their beliefs were opposed that wouldn’t be the case.
I know from previous threads that you are not allowed to go into too much detail, but what type of vampirism are we talking here then? Not drinking blood, assuming the version of the Vampire Bible I read online was a legitimate copy and according to you, not psychic vampirism. Although from my reading of the VB this is exactly how it appears.
Getting back on topic, the thing I fail to understand after reading about 50% of the Satanic Bible is if Satanists believe in no god, then why not just be atheists?
I, as a humanist atheist, do not accept the thesis that we (humans) need ritualistic religion. I am uncomfortable with the whole belief in Satan, although I accept that this could possibly be a hangover from my lightweight C of E upbringing.
The CoS does appear to be quite bland and unthreatening when compared to other groups and indeed seem to make themselves out to be model members of society i.e no black masses, no sacrifices, no overdoing intoxicants etc. Surely if they want to have any impact they need to raise their profile and retain the ability to shock?
As you say I can’t discuss the Temple’s teachings, but I assure you they’re different to psychic vampirism which is simply a phrase to describe people who are social/emotional parasites.
Not everyone agrees with you. I’m not one for ritual or ceremony particularly but I find the Satanic stance on lots of things to be very much in synch with my own. But Satanism is largely a very do-it-yourself religion, the Satanic Bible provides a foundation but it doesn’t prescribe very much, it’s more a description of an outlook on life which you either share or you don’t. Some people decide to use ritual and ceremony, others don’t. It’s what works for you. I’m an atheist and don’t feel the need to discuss Satanism with people who I don’t know well, it’s not a badge of honour or anything and frequently requires more explanation than I’m willing to go into.
Possibly, and again I would say that partly that’s the whole point of Satanism, to entirely reject a system of thinking and morality that is antithetical to atheism. I didn’t need that myself as I was never religious but it’s useful for some people.
Why do you think the COS wants to shock or be the bad guys? The people within it want a fulfilling life and suffering criminal records for misdeeds or having substance abuse issues get in the way of that. Satanists don’t need a bad guy badge to be happy with who they are.
It is compared to the One True Church!