From: Pale Rider Area: Base of Set To: Triple Six 18 Apr 92 05:24:00 Subject: Re: QUICKIE DEFINITIONS UpdReq TS> TS> I don't see it as something that should be defined as a TS> 'Satanism TS> TS> is' answer. We need more of a 'Satanism is not' answer. E.I. TS> TS> Satanism isn't killing animals, spraypainting Satin Rules on TS> TS> underpasses, or digging up graves cause it's cool. TS> TS> Amen, Brother! I have just come across some new information on sacrifices. LaVey may try to down play the idea of human sacrifice by Satanists, but there is another "great man" that said different in the Satanist/Occult community. Look in Magick by Aleister Crowley pages 217, 219, 220, and 222. Aleister Crowley noted that "the hightest spiritual working" required the sacrifice of a male child. "It is necessary for us to consider carefully the problems connected with the bloody sacrifice... the bloody sacrifice has from time immemorial been the most considered part of Magick.... "It would be unwise to condemn as irrational the practice of those savages who tear the heart and liver from an adversary, and devour them while yet warm. In any case it was the theory of the ancient Magicians that any living being is a storehouse of energy... At the death of the animal this energy is liberated suddenly. "The animal should therefore be killed within the Circle, or the Triangle, as the case may be, so that its energy cannot escape.... For the highest spiritual working one must accordingly choose that victim which contains the greatest and purest force. A male child of perfect innocence and high intelligence is the most satisfactory and suitable victim.... "Those magicians who object to the use of blood have endeavored to replace it with incense.... "But the bloody sacrifice, though more dangerous, is more efficacious; and for nearly all purposes human sacrifice is the best.... The method of killing is practically uniform. The animal should be stabbed to the heart, or its throat severed, in either case by the knife." When I read this quote in the Salt Lake City Messenger, I was shocked. That is a sharp contrast to the negative attitude that most people in here have against Satanic activities that are illegal. And the thing is that Aleister Crowley is the main guy that most people seem to read around here. It looks like illegal activities are apart of Satanism. You can't say that this book was some fiction book or a book written for housewives. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Frc Area: Base of Set To: Phule 18 Apr 92 09:00:00 Subject: Re: ENLIGHTENMENT UpdReq Ph> Now is the time to speak of many things, of shoes, and ships, Ph> and ceiling wax, of cabbages and kings. ...and mimsy were the boregroves. The slithy troves did gyre and gimbal in the wabe. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Frc Area: Base of Set To: Phule 18 Apr 92 09:02:00 Subject: Re: Visibility UpdReq Ph> If you meet the buddha on the path to enlightenment, KILL Ph> HIM! If one happens upon this scene, kill them all! A) God will sort them out B) There is no God; they die in vain C) None of the above 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Frc Area: Base of Set To: Jeff Mccord 18 Apr 92 09:10:00 Subject: Re: satan UpdReq JM> In the Bible, the Word of God, satan is defeated. Now, why do JM> satanists insist on thinking that satan will win? He is already JM> defeated by the blood of Jesus. DO you all have a bible that says JM> the opposite? This demonstrates particularly well how people (me included, although I try to be aware of when I am) tie "truth" to the color of the lenses they happen to be viewing things through. For instance, you seem to assume that people here accept the Bible as a valid reference point in the manner that you do. One you remove that particular assumption, you will see that the question as you pose it is essentially meaningless to most of us. And while we're speaking of it; which "Satanists" here have insisted that "Satan will win"? 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Frc Area: Base of Set To: Pale Rider 18 Apr 92 09:24:00 Subject: Re: QUICKIE DEFINITIONS UpdReq PR> I have just come across some new information on sacrifices. Perhaps new _to YOU_! PR> Look in Magick by Aleister Crowley pages 217, 219, 220, and 222. PR> Aleister Crowley noted that "the hightest spiritual working" PR> required the sacrifice of a male child. You might wish to read chapter 69, _The Book of Lies_ for a more complete understanding of what Aleister was speaking of in this statement. You forgot to mention that he also claimed to have made this "sacrifice" at least several hundred times! Also, investigate what the VIII* of the OTO concerns. (hint: it has to do with semen) PR> "It would be unwise to condemn as irrational the practice of those PR> savages who tear the heart and liver from an adversary, and devour PR> them while yet warm. In any case it was the theory of the ancient PR> Magicians that any living being is a storehouse of energy... At the PR> death of the animal this energy is liberated suddenly. PR> "The animal should therefore be killed within the Circle, or the PR> Triangle, as the case may be, so that its energy cannot escape.... Yes, Aleister did sacrifice animals in some of his Workings. As abhorent as I think it is; he is essentially correct! Read the chapter of Leviticus in the Torah for a _real_ exegesis on this! BTW, why assume that we all have bumper stickers that read: "Aleister said it; I believe it......and THAT SETTLES IT!" PR> And the thing is that Aleister Crowley is the main guy that most people PR> seem to read around here. It looks like illegal activities are PR> apart of Satanism. You can't say that this book was some fiction PR> book or a book written for housewives. The first statement you make is an absurd leap to conclusion. The second sentence does not seem to reference anything in the rest of your post. Where did THAT come from? I'd agree with the last sentence. If animal sacrifice in itself is the central tenent of your "Satanism Test", then the Jews are excellent Satanists! 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Phule Area: Base of Set To: Azrael 18 Apr 92 16:14:00 Subject: Re: ENLIGHTENMENT UpdReq I was being as perfectly serious as one who follows my path can be. If people do not accept that they are ignorant, if they know that they know somthing and won't even try to open their mind, then thay are trulay in a sad state of affairs. The phulish one. Everything is relative, theoretically speaking. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Phule Area: Base of Set To: Frc 18 Apr 92 16:16:00 Subject: Re: Visibility UpdReq Definitely 'C' Fnord, the Phulish one. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Azrael Area: Base of Set To: Phule 19 Apr 92 01:48:00 Subject: Re: ENLIGHTENMENT UpdReq I fail to understand people that don't realize thier ignorance, Seems the more I learn the more I realize just how litte I actually know (or should I say thought I knew). 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Pale Rider Area: Base of Set To: Frc 19 Apr 92 02:54:00 Subject: Re: QUICKIE DEFINITIONS UpdReq Fr> You might wish to read chapter 69, _The Book of Lies_ for a more Fr> complete I do not have the book. I just read the quote in a paper about Satanic infiltration in Mormonism. Fr> Also, investigate what the VIII* of the OTO concerns. Fr> (hint: it has to do with semen) My paper that I am using does say something about the practive of autoerotic (VIII degree) and heterosexual (IX degree) sex magic. Crowley's new rituals added an experimental degree for homosexual...magic (XI degree). Fr> If animal sacrifice in itself is the central tenent of your "Satanism Fr> Test", Fr> then the Jews are excellent Satanists! At the moment, Jews do make excellent Satanists! You are either a part of the kingdom of light or the kingdom of darkness, and since the Jews (non-MJ) reject Christ, they are apart of the kingdom of darkness. As I have said before, sacrifices are now forbidden because Jesus became the sacrifice. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Bobby Meizer Area: Base of Set To: Diane Vera 17 Apr 92 14:56:32 Subject: RE: Which way does your pentagram point?Rec'd UpdReq In a message to Frc written on Sunday, April 12, 1992 at 21:30:04, Diane Vera writes: DV> Well, who invented the "Baphomet" (the goat's head in a downward- DV> pointing pentagram)? Was it invented by the Church of Satan? If I believe that the originator of the so-called 'Baphomet' symbol in modern times is the 19th century French writer Eliphas Levi (Alphonse Louis Constant), and it is definitely public domain. Perhaps a specific and singular design of it could be copywritten? 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Bobby Meizer Area: Base of Set To: Frater Almost 17 Apr 92 19:46:22 Subject: Re: left-handed? Rec'd UpdReq On 03/29/92 you wrote: As to the test.... I am young and will learn. Further, You make it sound like I will recieve such a test.... Do you know something that I don't? ;) The test has already begun. How are you doing so far? 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Diane Vera Area: Base of Set To: Jeff Mccord 19 Apr 92 10:01:04 Subject: satan Sent UpdReq On April 17, you wrote a message to All, titled "satan": . JM > I have one question, and I would like someone to answer this POLITELY since my intentions are not starting a "war" between Christian and Satanist or Set, or whatever... .Interesting how you say, "I would like someone to answer this POLITELY" rather than "I hope my question doesn't offend anyone".... .Also, how come you don't capitalize the name "Satan"? And how come you capitalized the word "Satanist" in one paragraph but not in the next? . JM > In the Bible, the Word of God, satan is defeated. Now, why do satanists insist on thinking that satan will win? He is already defeated by the blood of Jesus. DO you all have a bible that says the opposite? .Most Satanists do not believe in the literal existence of either the Christian God *or* the Christian Satan, let alone the existence of a cosmic battle in which either side gets to win or lose. .*Symbolically* speaking, however, it does seem likely that "Satan" will "win". During the past few centuries, the Church has gradually been losing its hold, and Western culture has gradually become more and more individualistic (i.e. "Satanic"). Unlike some folks on this echo, I don't think Christianity is on its deathbed; but I do think the continuing advance of scientific knowledge will tend to lessen Christianity's influence. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Diane Vera Area: Base of Set To: Tony Iannotti 19 Apr 92 10:02:18 Subject: satan Rec'd Sent UpdReq On April 18, you responded to Jeff Mccord's April 17 message to All, "satan": . JM > In the Bible, the Word of God, satan is defeated. Now, why do satanists insist on thinking that satan will win? He is already defeated by the blood of Jesus. DO you all have a bible that says the opposite? . TI > Sure, most bibles see it that way. (Satanic Bible, Marriage of Heaven & Hell, Book of the Law, Gargantua & Pantagruel, Satan in te Suburbs, The Focus of Life, many others.) Need copies of any? .You mentioned two books, SATAN IN THE SUBURBS and THE FOCUS OF LIFE, which I'm unfamiliar with. (Actually, that first title does sound vaguely familiar.) Could you please tell us a little about them, like who the authors are, and what they're basically about? .And are you selling or otherwise getting rid of copies? 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Diane Vera Area: Base of Set To: The Sinistar 19 Apr 92 10:04:04 Subject: Re: QUICKIE DEFINITIONS Sent UpdReq On April 14, you responded to Dirge's April 11 message to me, "QUICKIE DEFINITIONS": . Di > "Educating the public"? That's almost a contradiction in terms! What care we for the public? Satanism isn't, and never was, a mass movement. Better tolet the public wallow in their television wrestling; let them have their misconceptions of what Satanism is or isn't, and let them reap the rewards of their "short attention spans". . Si > But by letting the public wallow, we in turn disadvantage ourselves in the fact that the general public believes us to be 'animal killing, child molesting weirdos who all need to burn.' . Di > Besides, as you pointed out so well, we all have our own conception of what Satanism is; no single group or individual can hope to define it. . Si > I don't see it as something that should be defined as a 'Satanism is' answer. We need more of a 'Satanism is not' answer. E.I. Satanism isn't killing animals, spraypainting Satin Rules on underpasses, or digging up graves cause it's cool. .Right. However, in order to convincingly tell people what Satanism is NOT, we do need to give them some idea what it *IS*. (And, to honestly do this, we need to point out that there are many forms of Satanism.) 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Diane Vera Area: Base of Set To: Balanone 19 Apr 92 10:05:18 Subject: Re: ToS and "Nature" Sent UpdReq On April 6, you replied to my April 4 message to you "Re: ToS and 'Nature'": . DV > Anyhow, as I said, I do agree that DV > Christianity is RHP if one defines "RHP" as any religion or philosophy which aims to make the individual a part of something larger than oneself, at the expense of individuality as long as (1) the "something larger than oneself" is not necessarily the natural universe and (2) the individual's consciousness is either subordinated *or* "merged", but not necessarily "merged". . Ba > We're saying basically the same thing. The differences between our views here seem to be fairly minor, in that you see distinctions that are important to you (distinctions which I'm willing to grant are probably important to Christians), and I've determined that for me those distinctions aren't important (that the Christians are misleading themselves in that area). .No, I'm not talking about a distinction which is important just to me personally, or just to Christians. I'm talking about not sounding like a religious illiterate. Anybody who knows anything about comparative religion knows that the aim of Christianity is NOT "to merge the individual consciousness with the natural Universe". .However, Christianity does have some key attitudes in common with religions which do have such an aim, and those key attitudes -- accurately stated -- are a reasonable definition of "RHP". .By the way, did you see the string of 4 messages I posted to you on April 12, with the following titles? . Cross-posting What is Satanism? Re: Lewis Stead's view of Thorsson (and possibly the ToS) Satanism, neo-Paganism, and me .Don't feel obliged to respond to those messages if you don't want; I'm just wondering if we're having technical problems. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Diane Vera Area: Base of Set To: Frater Almost 19 Apr 92 10:06:38 Subject: satan Rec'd Sent UpdReq On April 18, you responded to Jeff Mccord's April 17 message to All, "satan": . FA > Reductio Ad Absurdum: By Frater Almost Christ taught: "Love thy enemies." Christs enemy was Satan. Ergo, Christ "Loved" Satan. Satanists Love Satan. Christians hate Satan. Christ said that all who would do as he taught would go to heaven. Christ said that all who didn't do as he taught were going to hell. Since Satanists Love the "Enemy" as Christ taught, they will go to Heaven and all Christians will go to Hell. .I love it! .You should consider getting it published, if you haven't done so already. I would suggest sending it to either ABRASAX or BLACK FLAME. .By the way, may I borrow it for use as a comeback next time I have occasion to correspond with the sysop of WestWind? (He's been kidding me with taglines like "Easy credit terms - Satan".) 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Diane Vera Area: Base of Set To: Bobby Meizer 19 Apr 92 10:07:42 Subject: RE: Which way does your pentagram point?Sent UpdReq On April 17, you replied to my April 12 message to Frc, "Which way does your pentagram point?": . DV > Well, who invented the "Baphomet" (the goat's head in a downward-pointing pentagram)? Was it invented by the Church of Satan? . BM > I believe that the originator of the so-called 'Baphomet' symbol in modern times is the 19th century French writer Eliphas Levi (Alphonse Louis Constant), and it is definitely public domain. Perhaps a specific and singular design of it could be copywritten? .There's a well-known drawing of Baphomet (a goat-headed deity allegedly worshipped by the Knights Templar) associated with Eliphas Levi, but as I recall, that drawing does not include a goat's head in a downward-pointing pentagram. The latter symbol is what CoS refers to as the "Baphomet". .I'm wondering when, how, and by whom the downward-pointing pentagram came to be associated with Satanism. Do you know anything about the history of the use of downward-pointing pentagrams by various kinds of occultists? 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Charles Nemo Area: Base of Set To: Lady Byron 19 Apr 92 10:16:24 Subject: Mail Sent UpdReq Looking forward to it! All the Beast, Nemo 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Ammond Shadowcraft Area: Base of Set To: Azrael 18 Apr 92 21:12:00 Subject: Re: ENLIGHTENMENT UpdReq In a message to Phule <04-16-92 15:02> Azrael wrote: Az> I have a question for you...If ignorance ibliss, why aren't more Az> people happy? It's probably more appropriate to write that ignorance can lead to bliss, but mosty it leads to suffering. It's good to nurture one's Xeper, not consume it (which can easily be done ignorantly). 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Ammond Shadowcraft Area: Base of Set To: Jeff Mccord 18 Apr 92 21:21:00 Subject: Re: satan UpdReq In a message to All <04-17-92 14:40> Jeff Mccord wrote: JM> In the Bible, the Word of God, satan is defeated. Now, why do JM> satanists insist on thinking that satan will win? He is already JM> defeated by the blood of Jesus. DO you all have a bible that says JM> the opposite? One must look at the meaning *behind* the symbols, not just the meaning of the symbols. When the Jewish-Christian wrote REVELATIONS he wrote from his own vision of the future. Many think that future was accomplished under the Roman emperor Domitian. The symbol Satan, God and Jesus, are symptons of human personality, including the propensity for establishing *labels* for the unknown (numinous). The Blood of Jesus never did anything for anyone except in poetic myth (where it can do anything the mind sets it to). One of the goals of the intelligent is to see through ancient poetic myth, reach the kernal of the myth and bring that kernal into a contemporary setting. Still, some poetic myths just aren't worth continuing. The Blood of Jesus poetic-myth is one of those not worth continuing. The meek may inherent the earth but we're going to the stars... 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Grendel Area: Base of Set To: Jeff Mccord 18 Apr 92 19:49:16 Subject: satan UpdReq In a msg on , Jeff Mccord of 1:170/811 writes: JM> I have one question, and I would like someone to answer this JM> POLITELY since JM> my intentions are not starting a "war" between Christian and JM> Satanist or Set, or whatever... JM> In the Bible, the Word of God, satan is defeated. Now, why JM> do satanists insist on thinking that satan will win? He is JM> already defeated by the blood of Jesus. DO you all have a bible JM> that says the opposite? Who believes in the Bible? The Christians, not anyone here. Wassail, Grendel 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Frater Almost Area: Base of Set To: Bobby Meizer 19 Apr 92 14:31:16 Subject: Test UpdReq Recently, I noticced this message from Mr. Bobby Meizer.... BM> The test has already begun. How are you doing so far? I think I have the multiple choice down and the "True/False" is always 50-50 but the essay questions might be a stumper. Could you pass me a cheat sheet? ;) Pax et Lox et Sox of Jox. 93 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Frater Almost Area: Base of Set To: Diane Vera 19 Apr 92 14:35:56 Subject: satan Rec'd UpdReq Well, portions of it aren't mine at all. I saw the thing about "Christ loving Satan because he was his enemy" in a discussion about the Church of the Process on here a few months back but, essentially, the logic is all mine and, of course, 100% correct. Use it at your whim. I now officialy make it "Public Domain" and, thus, copyable and attributed to anyone who might actually believe it. It works for me! :) As to getting it published..... Perchance soon, no? I might have a newsletter in the works and may-hap it will appear there. Take care and I'll see you in Heaven! ;-) Pax et Lox and the Sox of Jox. 93 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Nrrys Area: Base of Set To: Lady Byron 18 Apr 92 00:00:08 Subject: What is Satanism? UpdReq LB>To Setians, Satan is seen as a combination of LB>Set and Har-Wer. He was useful only during the Age of LB>Satan (1966-1976, I believe) to prepare us for the Aeon of LB>Set. You may find a study of this transition most LB>interesting. Hmm... How would one go about "studying" that transition? I find the differences between then and now to be MOST significant... May you never thirst! NRRYS ___ X SLMR 2.1a X Cthulhu saves! (in case he's hungry later...) 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Lady Byron Area: Base of Set To: Nrrys 18 Apr 92 15:53:56 Subject: What is Satanism? UpdReq LB>To Setians, Satan is seen as a combination of LB>Set and Har-Wer. He was useful only during the Age of LB>Satan (1966-1976, I believe) to prepare us for the Aeon of LB>Set. You may find a study of this transition most LB>interesting. N> Hmm... How would one go about "studying" that transition? I find the N> differences between then and now to be MOST significant... Good question. I just remembered that most of that material is in the Temple of Set's _Ruby Tablet_. However, I can check with the Priesthood and see if it is possible to give you a copy of a rather good article on the subject. I will try, anyway. One thing you might try is reading through _The Satanic Bible_, then reading the Temple's informational letter. You can get an idea, at least,how the aeons have "changed tunes." Better yet, read Crowley's _The Book of the Law_, then the other two. Interesting! Lady Byron :)= 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Lady Byron Area: Base of Set To: Azrael 18 Apr 92 16:08:40 Subject: Re: ENLIGHTENMENT UpdReq A> I have a question for you...If ignorance ibliss, why A> aren't more people happy? The majority of people will always find something to bitch about. Lady Byron :)= 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Lady Byron Area: Base of Set To: Charles Nemo 18 Apr 92 16:10:00 Subject: Dark Theater UpdReq Got the tape today! I actually like it! I was never sure exactly what Gothic Rock was. I might even haul off and get the CD. Info on the band is coming to you via my latest snail to you. Lady Byron :)= 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Nrrys Area: Base of Set To: Ammond Shadowcraft 18 Apr 92 11:17:00 Subject: Re: Visibility UpdReq In a message to Nosferat you wrote: AS>RAW can seem useless to those whose nervous AS>systems are unprepared for "warp speed." But does that AS>mean those who have "warp" capable minds should hassle AS>those who can't even get their minds off the earth? AS> Maybe. Only if it's enjoyable. B^) I wonder if you at one point in your life considered yourself to be a Discordian? You seem to have a good grasp of it, anyways. There was an interesting thread over in Magicknet where people were saying that the Discordian attitude that it is OK (or even a necessary duty) to mess with people's heads is fascist. (I suppose the fact that one Discordian worded this as "a boot to the head" didn't help the understanding!) I don't label myself as a Discordian, but then I don't really believe in labeling individuals. I personally DO NOT have a problem with interfering with someone's free will, though I would have to grok "right action". I find it interesting that many (most?) of the "Satanists" here seem to have a stricter ethical code than me. Some even seem to be "tied in knots" from it. I consider ethical rules to be necessary for those who haven't evolved beyond a certain point. May you never thirst! NRRYS ___ X SLMR 2.1a X Chastity : The most unnatural of the perversions. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Nrrys Area: Base of Set To: Linda Beebe 18 Apr 92 20:09:04 Subject: Re: Satanism in General UpdReq LB>HI Yo! LB>Your "handle" is interesting... LB>but I guess you aren't going to clue us in on it's meaning?? Waiting is... LB>it's just kind of a running joke, when my friends and I are LB>called New Agers, most of what we find most truthful, is LB>very old...IE: Buddhism... LB>it aggravates me to NO end to find Eastern Philosphy now LB>sold UNDER the label of new age in book stores... LB>JUST a pet peeve...grin You must patronise the WRONG bookstores... I try to support those stores that are run by knowledgeable people. LB>Nr> Only if you don't want to be mistaken for a "crystal weenie"! LB>never owned a cyrstal till a year ago, when someone gave me one...grin LB>but I UNDERstand...I'm just being "cute"... Hmm... how "cute" are you? :-) LB>so recommend some "beginners" pagan reading... _Drawing Down the Moon_ is, by far, the best first book, and can be found in "mundane" book stores. It has a reading list in the back, both books and periodicals, and a list of "organisations". You could also pick up a copy of the magazine _Green Egg_, but only in an "Occult" book store... LB>I'm about 1/4 black foot, and the rest Irish...wild combo...grin My Ex was (is?) 1/4 black foot, but I'll TRY not to hold it against you! ;^) LB>Nr> LB>all things have purpose...all things were created by the same LB>Nr> force... LB>Nr> May the force be with you! (Sorry, couldn't resist :^) LB>I read a lot of Joseph Campbell...this is where the "force" LB>came from, though he does say that the concepts in Star LB>Wars was rather advanced...grin I heard that George Lucas said that the Star Wars concept of "The Force" was taken from Joe... LB>Nr> Well, as long as you're not going to talk about extraterrestrials LB>Nr> here ;^) LB>and what IF I AM?? Well, the concept of "Ancient Astronauts", et all, is considered very much "New Age" by most Pagans (and Satanists?). And is probably at least off-topic here... May you never thirst! NRRYS ___ X SLMR 2.1a X I'm an antisolipsist: Everybody exists except me... 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Nrrys Area: Base of Set To: The Sinistar 18 Apr 92 20:15:06 Subject: Re: What is Satanism? UpdReq TS>It is up to the individual Setian as to whether or not he/she believes in TS>Set as a literal entity. The Temple states that it does TS>not want the Setian to blindly follow a literal Set, but TS>rather come to realize through time that he does exist. TS>Setian I* and Adept II* are degrees that the belief in Set TS>is up the the individual. Priest/Priestess III* & up, it TS>is a requirement, but by then the Setian has no doubt TS>experienced Set and been "touched" by him in workings, etc TS>to have a firm grasp, and not a blind following. I like the Temple's philosophy on this point... Thou art god! NRRYS ___ X SLMR 2.1a X Work is for people yenom who don't know how to dnes party 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Nrrys Area: Base of Set To: Astral Invader 18 Apr 92 20:18:08 Subject: Re: What is Satanism? UpdReq AI>Generally speaking, the Priesthood views Set as a 'literal' AI>entity....however 'literal' is certainly definable even in AI>this area...The I and II degrees are essentially dependent AI>on how the individual wishes to Xeper in this AI>regard....Ideas of 'divine energies' and 'influences' AI>certainly differ.... Yes, there are many trails that lead to the same Path... May you never thirst! NRRYS ___ X SLMR 2.1a X Hard to soar w/ the Dragons when you work w/ Gargoyles... 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Nrrys Area: Base of Set To: Phule 18 Apr 92 20:20:10 Subject: Re: Visibility UpdReq PH>Hey, I'm no longer nosferat, i am now PH>PHULE Does this mean that you will be haunting our refigerators? Kallisti! NRRYS ___ X SLMR 2.1a X Love is grand... Divorce is twenty grand... 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Markie Chao Area: Base of Set To: Frater Almost 19 Apr 92 19:07:22 Subject: satan UpdReq FA> Reductio Ad Absurdum: By Frater Almost FA> FA> Christ taught: "Love thy enemies." FA> Christs enemy was Satan. FA> Ergo, Christ "Loved" Satan. FA> Satanists Love Satan. FA> Chrisitians hate Satan. FA> Christ said that all who would do as he taught would go to heaven. FA> Christ said that all who didn't do as he taught were going to hell. FA> Since Satanists Love the "Enemy" as Christ taught, FA> they will go to Heaven and all Christians will go FA> to Hell. This is called simple Aristotelian logic. Well done Almost. :) 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Markie Chao Area: Base of Set To: Frc 19 Apr 92 19:09:12 Subject: Re: satan UpdReq F> And while we're speaking of it; which "Satanists" F> here have insisted that F> "Satan will win"? And how many of us even bother to own a bible anymore except in some cases for reference? 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Markie Chao Area: Base of Set To: Diane Vera 19 Apr 92 19:12:16 Subject: satan UpdReq DV> You mentioned two books, SATAN IN THE SUBURBS and THE FOCUS OF LIFE, DV> which I'm unfamiliar with. (Actually, that first title does sound DV> vaguely familiar.) Could you please tell us a little about them, DV> like who the authors are, and what they're basically about? DV> . DV> And are you selling or otherwise getting rid of copies? I'm not familiar with the first book either, but Focus of Life is by A.O. Spare and I could send photo copies if Tony doesn't have some already made up. Nachash was planning to put the texts of all the Spare books in his files so you may check on that, since Tony usually gets all the good stuff too. I don't know if he has had time to do the typing in yet. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718