Satanism; Sound or Sham?

All other religions speak of spiritual “evolution” or “salvation” or “gnosis” or “enlightenment” or some other change in what you are to be “okay”.

But, why not just choose to be God and then get on with living your life by using reason to alter what you do.

Is Dr. LaVey’s Satanism sound?

In other words, Satanism says identity is not utility and what you are is immutable and needs to not be confused with your actions (mental or physical).

Because this is in revolt and opposition to all the other religions and mystical schools of humankind, it may be called Satanism after the figure in our culture’s mythos who most clearly represents the Opposer.

Satanism inverts the supposed “evolution nonsense” and cuts to the goal.

Why try to become a God when the only requirement is to simply recognize yourself as one?

Being God is a matter of self definition, not “powers and abilities far beyond those of mortal men” (as Superman himself learned when in the first film with Christopher Reeves he was devastated at his inability to save his foster father, Jonathan Kent, from a fatal heart attack).

Being God is to abandon forever the need to have self-esteem and to have to measure yourself against anyone or anything. (I could write an entire book on the importance of this one point alone).

Being God is not something you can achieve. It is something you choose.

Those who make that choice are condemned by the religions of the world as “evil”, “selfish”, and they are called Satanists.

Dr. LaVey codified this foundation into an entirely new religion.

As you may have gathered, I do recognize some good points made by the ideas defininf what is known as Satanism - {The Church of Satan}

Would such a “religion” be justified in being one?

Philosphically, regardless of the dressing and devil horns, is the idea of Satanism sound?

No more or less sound than the premise of most religion, but dammit, if you’re going to believe in patently silly things, can’t you at least try to have some dignity? Take this whole satanist thing. You’d be a only mildly out-there branch of humanists if you didn’t adopt the symbol of all evil as your primary symbol. The fact that you did speaks volumes most of which I read as your primary desire is to point and laugh at people who can’t differentiate between symbol and substance.

All IMO, of course.

It seems to me that religions make an assertion in at least one of two different areas of knowledge:

  1. How ought people to live their lives?
  2. What is the nature of reality? (how things really are)

Buddhism does alot for #1, but not alot with #2, whereas western religions try to make claims about both. Some other religions might focus more or less on those, but I think those two questions are the centerpiece of religion.

So, in as much Satanism has something to say about true nature of man, and what man ought to do about his nature (embrace it), I’d say it’s a genuine religion by my standards.

Satanism is more of a philosophy than a religion, being that it does not recognize a “god or gods” per say. It is a religion of self. This link

Has some good info on mainstream Satanist.

I personally find that Satanism makes far more sense than the Christian religion. Self responsibility is the focus, and only you are to blame for your own situation. You just can’t dismiss things away as the will of god.

Because you aren’t God. That’s why.

On the face of it, the samsara/nirvana distinction certainly involves a lot of ontological heavy lifting, as does the doctrine of anicca, etc., but ultimately it all mixes together. Especially in Zen, however, the moral component fades far into the background, followed by the philosophy shortly afterwards.

Here’s one of the major reasons I am agnostic. Or at least why I don’t give much credence to Christianity. It’s the lack of propaganda from the so called opposition. Consider how in any other situation where you have two factions seeking the support of the people, propaganda flies in all directions.

In the case of Christianity and evil, Satan never appealed to the people to see his side. I see this as a clue that he doesn’t exist and neither does Jesus as the son of a god etc.

Remember that Satan rebelled because he did not want to serve the god that created him. There is nothing inherently evil about this stance.
The evil aspect was inserted by the creators of the Bible.
Christians of course will say that Satan doesn’t need a following, that it’s better for him if people don’t even believe in him.
That’s just too convenient.

So to address the OP, I don’t see that Satanism as it is now is based on any religion that Satan might have adopted.
Just a bunch of hooie, I think.

How do you know?

I’m a bit of a secular humanist myself which makes me primed for the satanic church already.

But I can’t bite down on some of their philosophies and the name they choose for themselves is an attempt to clash with the Christian church which I want no part of.

In short I think it’s valid I just think it’s silly.

From the OP:

Based on what I’ve read on Satanist websites, ExecutiveJesus,, Satanists place a lot of importance on self-esteem.

What if Satan won the heavenly revolt and is in fact now in charge ? Not that strange…

The way the bible is filled with bloodshed and suffering its not that far fetched. Of course the devil would need to give his new religion a “good” outview in order to trick people… and thousands of years later we have the vatican protecting pedophiles, protesting vs Gay rights, trying to keep women under control. A major religious war US vs Muslims. Christians are some of the least tolerant theists… etc…

Ok... so maybe not... but maybe yes... 

Satanists just like the name for the shock value I think.

To really understand why Satanism was chosen as the name, you have to keep in mind that the movement started in the middle of the 1960s, back when counterculture was just getting started. It was really an attempt to set LaVey’s movement as opposite from popular culture as was possible.

To really understand why Satanism was chosen as the name, you have to keep in mind that the movement started in the middle of the 1960s, back when counterculture was just getting started. It was really an attempt to set LaVey’s movement as opposite from popular culture as was possible.

Technically, you will not find one Church of Satan member who backs the idea of satanism being a counter to Christianity. They find it merely to be a myth, movement, ect. They don’t believe in the christian idea of satan.

However, when talking to most, you’ll find a very rooted hatred with the Church. As one might expect.

But again, the theories of Satanism have nothing to do with Christianity. The term “satan” goes back way before the Bible.

Posted by ExecutiveJesus:

Does it? My understanding is that it comes from the Hebrew word shaitan – “adversary” – and I have never heard of any recorded usage of it predating the Book of Job.

Posted by Rashak Mani:

As a matter of fact, there is a religious tradition, Gnosticism, which regards the Biblical Yahweh, who rules this world, as an evil being – while at the same time believing in a higher, more detached, Supreme Being. This has nothing to do with the modern Church of Satan, of course. Gnosticism, dating from the First Century A.D., did give rise to several later sects, such as the Bogomils and Cathars. From

Note that the Demiurge was supreme on this earth from the start, and did not rise to power by rebelling against his own God – so it is probably a mistake to identify the Demiurge with Satan.

From the same site at

Mormons are Gnostics? Interesting . . .

Also from the Religious Tolerance website, at

I’ve read Lavey and was surprised to find him not nearly as stupid as I expected. However as robertliguori said there is really nothing in it except wome watered down humanism dressed up with pentagrams and black cloaks.

The ego-centric philosophy that La Vey propounds is developed much better by Nietzche and Aristotle. Hell, Nietzche is even scarier, for cryin’ out loud.

Also you can’t be god. You can’t even be agod. Sorry, guys, but human you came into the world and human you shall leave it.

Posted by Larry Borgia:

Speak for yourself, Larry. Some of us have higher ambitions. In fact, some of us were never really “human” in the first place. If you are a true Superior Abnormal Mutant of Atlantean Yeti descent, please check out the Church of the SubGenius, If you are not, please commit suicide immediately. Praise “Bob”!

Here’s a good summary of Satanic ethics, from the website of the Church of Satan, All of these were written by LaVey.

Say what you will about this, but it is definitely a value system, in the sense that Plan Nine from Outer Space is definitely a motion picture.

Also from

What bothers me about Satanism is the needless inclusion of Satan as a symbol to dress up what’s basically egoism to further piss off intolerant Christians. (Note that I say “intolerant Christians” because I am well aware that there are many quite tolerant Christians.) The way I see it, if you’re not pissing such people off already with your lifestyle, you’re doing something wrong.

And if you are pissing them off with your lifestyle, why not add a little zest by throwing in Satan?