From: Ammond Shadowcraft Area: Base of Set To: Azrael 22 Apr 92 08:34:00 Subject: Re: ENLIGHTENMENT UpdReq In a message to Ammond Shadowcraft <04-20-92 13:06> Azrael wrote: Az> ZOOOOMMMMM...sorry but that one went over my head. Please explain. Please explain what? You didn't quote anything. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Ammond Shadowcraft Area: Base of Set To: Jeff Mccord 22 Apr 92 08:39:00 Subject: Re: satan UpdReq In a message to Ammond Shadowcraft <04-20-92 20:06> Jeff Mccord wrote: JM> AS> The Blood of Jesus never did anything for anyone except JM> in JM> AS> poetic myth (where it can do anything the mind sets it to). One JM> of JM> JM> The Blood of Jesus symbolizes the forgiveness of sins. The Blood JM> is what frightens satan and all his demons. I assure you the Blood of Jesus frightens no one, including me. You see the Blood of Jesus is puss-filled piss. It has symbolic meaning only for those who allow their vain imaginations to overcome them. It seems you worship a dead guy on a stick. One who you imagine is still alive. Sorry. It just ain't so even though your peers tell you so. Self-deception is rampant in the Christian churches. Your self-deception overwhelms you. You'll get over it. Most Christians do. I and many others did. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Ammond Shadowcraft Area: Base of Set To: Jeff Mccord 22 Apr 92 08:46:00 Subject: Re: satan UpdReq In a message to Astral Invader <04-20-92 19:55> Jeff Mccord wrote: JM> In Luke 6:27, "But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do JM> good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for JM> those who mistreat you." Luke is speaking of man. Speaking for myself, the Bible is nothing more than primate excrement on plant fiber. (Like lower animals marking their territory with excrement humans mark their mental territory with inky excrement on paper.) 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Ammond Shadowcraft Area: Base of Set To: Jeff Mccord 22 Apr 92 08:47:00 Subject: Re: satan UpdReq In a message to Ammond Shadowcraft <04-20-92 20:06> Jeff Mccord wrote: JM> You are either for God or JM> against God. You missed the most obvious and believable choice. God is an imagination. (In the past I've termed this as viral information.) 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Ammond Shadowcraft Area: Base of Set To: Pale Rider 22 Apr 92 08:49:00 Subject: Re: QUICKIE DEFINITIONS UpdReq In a message to Frc <04-20-92 23:23> Pale Rider wrote: PR> From scattered information that I read in the past, probably PR> atleast a year ago. I thought that it was common knowledge how evil PR> Aleister Crowley was.... Aleister wasn't evil, he was awake, frighteningly awake. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Ammond Shadowcraft Area: Base of Set To: Lady Byron 22 Apr 92 08:52:00 Subject: Re: What is Satanism? UpdReq In a message to Nrrys <04-20-92 12:04> Lady Byron wrote: LB> Well, we're all different. Crowley is recognized as the Magus of the LB> Aeon of Har-Wer, followed by LaVey and the Age of Satan. Dr. Aquino LB> is now the recognized Magus of the Aeon of Set. Crowley's aeon is LB> important from the standpoint of seeing how the aeons have evolved. LB> There is always something to learn from each aeon. Besides, he was a LB> downright interesting character! Why does all thsi remind me of Dispensationalism? }B^) 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Ammond Shadowcraft Area: Base of Set To: Jeff Mccord 23 Apr 92 07:52:00 Subject: Re: satan UpdReq In a message to Pale Rider <04-21-92 16:21> Jeff Mccord wrote: JM> how well your relationship with God is. I understand that satanists JM> know the JM> Bible - I am glad. And I do not want to start any wars. I am just JM> curious on JM> how they believe. This board shows satanic religion and I want to JM> show my Christianity religion too. I think it is fair. I ask only JM> the Holy Spirit to guide me. Then you MUST realize that on the network(s) there is an ettiquite which requires the participants to police their own actions. The fact that you don't police your actions proves that you are proud, not humble. Perhaps you have a spirit of pride and need to confess that and get rid of it. Afterwards, there are more than a few echoes which would love to have your active, witnessing participation. And in case you missed my earlier posts, the Holy Spirit is your imagination, nothing more. Be *responsible* for yourself and your actions NOW. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Ammond Shadowcraft Area: Base of Set To: Jeff Mccord 23 Apr 92 07:54:00 Subject: Re: satan UpdReq In a message to Astral Invader <04-21-92 16:34> Jeff Mccord wrote: JM> True, the Word of God is sometimes misunderstood... but be real, JM> why would God command us to love satan? Satan is the creator of evil JM> - he JM> rebelled against God... your statement is like saying, "Why don't JM> Christians JM> witness to satan?" - He is already sentenced to hell. With every post you prove yourself to be more stupid and ignorant. It's a shame you can't see that. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Ammond Shadowcraft Area: Base of Set To: Pale Rider 23 Apr 92 07:57:00 Subject: Re: QUICKIE DEFINITIONS UpdReq In a message to Astral Invader <04-21-92 23:55> Pale Rider wrote: PR> You mean Aleister Crowley didn't commit illegal acts like a baby PR> sacrifice or animal sacrifices? He did some things which SOME people consider illegial. So what? I'm sure you've jay-walked a couple times. Things become clearer when you read PORTABLE DARKNESS, which concerns what lays behind Aleister's writing. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Ammond Shadowcraft Area: Base of Set To: Markie Chao 23 Apr 92 08:00:00 Subject: Re: Visibility Rec'd UpdReq In a message to Ammond Shadowcraft <04-22-92 18:23> Markie Chao wrote: MC> I went through most of my occult life, which is most of my life, not MC> fitting any labels. Then, when I read A.O. Spare started calling MC> myself a Chaos Magician. Almost immediately after that I heard about MC> the IOT and suddenly the label had a somewhat different meaning, but MC> why let that bother me? With my writing and all I find myself MC> somewhat re-defining the term Chaos Magician, bringing it out of the MC> sphere of the IOT definition into more widespread use. Always a MC> radical...;) That's great. There is another type of game which is termed an infinite game. Whereas finite players play within boundaries, infinite gamesplayers play WITH boundaries. You seem to be doing well. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Pale Rider Area: Base of Set To: Triple Six 24 Apr 92 09:52:00 Subject: Re: QUICKIE DEFINITIONS UpdReq TS> The quote was referring to a sexual formula, not a human sacrifice in TS> the mundane sense of the word. Ever heard of the "little death?" Is this clearly stated in the book that it is a sexual formula, or is this something that the followers of Crowley came up with in their deep searches into Crowley's teachings? 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Azrael Area: Base of Set To: Astral Invader 24 Apr 92 12:45:00 Subject: Re: Setian Philosophy UpdReq It was tough but, at that time my beliefs were firmly planted in Christianity. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Astral Invader Area: Base of Set To: Balanone 24 Apr 92 14:54:00 Subject: Re: What is Satanism? UpdReq Ba> That's for sure! Even with my long membership and wide Ba> correspondence within the Temple of Set, I was surprised at Ba> the variation in the Priesthood's views concerning Set Ba> expressed in the _Ruby Tablet_ article on Initiation and Ba> Recognition distributed at last year's Conclave. The Temple is such a diverse group of people I wonder sometimes how anything can be unanimously agreed upon!!..I have seen so many various 'Setian' personalities in the brief span of my involvement that I often wonder what each individual has in common with the next.... There's definetely not a Setian stereotype....That's for sure!!.. X&R, /Astral/ 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Astral Invader Area: Base of Set To: Azrael 24 Apr 92 15:00:00 Subject: Re: Setian Philosophy UpdReq Az> It was tough but, at that time my beliefs were firmly planted in Az> Christianity. I can imagine....Not to mention a little confusing perhaps?... /Astral/ 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Jeff Mccord Area: Base of Set To: Frater Almost 24 Apr 92 16:58:00 Subject: Re: satan Rec'd UpdReq FA> Sin then shouldn't we, also, more vehemently hate the root of all sin FA> (which is Satan and Evil) which would be... GOD! God did created satan, which his real name was Lucifer. But Lucifer chose to rebel, and was kicked out of Heaven. Read the Bible - it might help you answer your own questions! FA> You see, you're talking to a man who has seen up-front and first-hand FA> all forms of corruption in the churches. I was once a very "devout" FA> Christian but, upon discovering how hypocritical the entire thing I am sorry that you had to see that. True, there are some hypocrites in probably every church, Christian or Satanic... but those people should not be looked up to. It sounds like to me, you quit your Christianity because of other people. What a lame excuse! Did you not have a RELATIONSHIP with Jesus? If you did, I found it hard to believe that you left Him because of someone elses own ignorance... 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Jeff Mccord Area: Base of Set To: Ammond Shadowcraft 24 Apr 92 17:00:00 Subject: Re: satan UpdReq AS> Since all Gods are illusionary you've fooled yourself. Easy AS> to do isn't it?? B^) You seem to "think" you know a lot, don't you. I suspect that you don't believe in a God, do you? Well, like I said, you are free to your opinion, and I guess we can found what is the TRUTH when we die. I hope, for your sake, that God isn't true! 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Markie Chao Area: Base of Set To: Frater Almost 25 Apr 92 11:37:00 Subject: venting Rec'd Sent UpdReq FA> but ready and vent a little hard-earned steam, eh? FA> Lauch a little. I can't help but to think that God FA> does every now and then. ;-) Pax. 93 I dunno FA, I haven't seen you puke frogs yet...or locusts for that matter. ;) 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Markie Chao Area: Base of Set To: Ammond Shadowcraft 25 Apr 92 11:41:12 Subject: Blood of Jesus Sent UpdReq Isn't anybody going to point out the blood sacrifice in all this Jesus stuff to this guy? 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Markie Chao Area: Base of Set To: Ammond Shadowcraft 25 Apr 92 11:42:34 Subject: bible Sent UpdReq AS> Speaking for myself, the Bible is nothing AS> more than primate excrement on plant fiber. (Like AS> lower animals marking their territory with AS> excrement humans mark their mental territory with AS> inky excrement on paper.) Hey! You're underestimating the best selling book in the publishing world! Don't you know there is mega money in selling these things to the ignorant fools who have to have several copies in their homes? One for every baby, forget that the little fool can't read, only $5-$100 each, depending on binding. Good business, how many books do you buy copies for all your relatives and even for complete strangers? Amber series maybe... 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Tony Iannotti Area: Base of Set To: Diane Vera 25 Apr 92 12:16:12 Subject: Books Rec'd Sent UpdReq Hiya Diane, sorry to take so long to get back to you. The two books you asked about are by Austin Osman Spare and Bertrand Russell. _The Focus of Life:_ Moreland Press, London, 1921. (Spare) (reprinted by Askin, 1976) A philosophical piece, reminds me of Gibran espouseing Neitzche. Aphorisms, Soliloquy, and Pictures! _Satan in the Suburbs:_ Simon & Schuster, NY, 1953., (Russell) Collection of stories by Russell, one of which gives the book it's title. Not really Satan triumphant, but unconquered and recurrent. I think I can get you copies of both. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Diane Vera Area: Base of Set To: Jeff Mccord 25 Apr 92 12:32:14 Subject: Re: satan Sent UpdReq On April 21, you wrote to Pale Rider "Re: satan": . JM > I understand that satanists know the Bible - I am glad. .Not only that, but most of us on this echo are ex-Christians. (Ex- evangelical Christians of your very own stripe, no less.) *Nothing* you say about Christianity or the Bible is likely to be news to anyone here. . JM > And I do not want to start any wars. I am just curious on how they believe. .Then could you please just ask questions about Satanism and Setianism, and keep your remarks about Christianity and the Bible to an absolute minimum? . JM > This board shows satanic religion and I want to show my Christianity religion too. I think it is fair. ."Fair"??? Look. You are allowed far more privileges on Purgatory, and in this echo, than a Satanist or Setian would be allowed on a Christian board, which is none at all. So don't claim "fairness" as your justification for using your privileges in an annoying manner. .I don't think any of us are bothered by what you say, per se. It's just that, as Markie Chao said, we've heard it all before. All it does is take up our time and run up our phone bills unnecessarily. . JM > I ask only the Holy Spirit to guide me. I post what I feel like the Spirit wants me to say. .Then could you please ask the "Holy Spirit" to teach you some manners? 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Diane Vera Area: Base of Set To: Lady Byron 25 Apr 92 12:33:56 Subject: Set/Satan (again) Sent UpdReq On April 20, you wrote me a two-part message, "Set/Satan (again)" in reply to my April 18 message to you, "What is Satanism?" . LB > I don't believe Setianism in any way renders Satanism obsolete .I'm glad to hear this. . LB > I was speaking of the image of LaVey's Satan, the Christian reactionary. That is not something that Setians NOR Satanists (hopefully) have a need for any longer. Satan, whether you prefer the symbology of Set or not, is useful in that he represents the individual. It is the opposing of Christianity that gets boring to me. .I don't think the anti-Christian type of Satanism is obsolete. As long as hard-core fundamentalist Christianity continues to exist, there will always be people who need the anti-Christian type of Satanism, as a way of freeing themselves from Christianity's after- effects. It does get boring to other types of Satanists; but I think there *will* be a place for it for a long, long time. .What perhaps *is* obsolete is LaVey's concept of a religion based on total selfishness, rather than a more enlightened self-interest such as most Setians seems to advocate. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Diane Vera Area: Base of Set To: Balanone 25 Apr 92 12:38:34 Subject: Re: ToS and "Nature" Sent UpdReq On April 20, you replied to my April 19 message to you, "Re: ToS and 'Nature'": . DV > 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. . B > (That type of comment is not like you.) .Yes, it was rather undiplomatic. I'm sorry. Let me try again. .Although there are many aspects of ToS philosophy (what I've seen of it so far) that I do admire, there are some aspects of it that don't make any sense to me at all; nor do the attempted explanations make any sense to me. Nor do I think they would make sense to anyone who is well-read about comparative religion. . DV > Anybody who knows anything about comparative religion knows that the aim of Christianity is NOT "to merge the individual consciousness with the natural Universe". . B > If you look strictly at their own terms and their own discussions, then I agree. But if you start out with the Setian (and common Satanic?) assumption that there is no "God", and if you explore the consequences of that which they are attempting to do (follow the will of a non- existent god) from that (Setian) point of view, then the result of success *is* the merging of the individual consciousness with the natural Universe .I don't see how that result logically follows at all. Moreover, your statement contradicts the ToS "General Information and Admissions Polices" document's statement that the goal of merging one's consciousness with the universe is an "illusion". If union with the Universe is an illusion for those who in fact seek it, how can it be an actual result for those (such as Christians) who do *not* seek it? . B > (or the loss of that individuality to the natural and mechanistic / unthinking universe). .What Christians usually lose their individuality *to* is an organized Church (or a more loosely-defined evangelical Christian subculture), not "the natural and mechanistic / unthinking universe". .Is there some reason why Setians feel it is important to believe that Christianity seeks union with the natural universe? Is there, for example, some key passage in THE BOOK OF COMING FORTH BY NIGHT that would be meaningless without this belief about Christianity? (I hope you don't feel insulted by that last question. It seems to me that *no one* is immune to embracing unsound beliefs for unsound reasons. I myself have a long history of falling in love with various unsound ideas which I later rejected or at least modified. A commitment to rejecting nonsense does not make one immune, though hopefully it does enable one to recover sooner.) .(continued next message) 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Diane Vera Area: Base of Set To: Balanone 25 Apr 92 12:40:10 Subject: Tos and "Nature" (continued) Sent UpdReq (part 2 of 2) .A further comment regarding my April 19 message: . B > 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), .Another category of people these distinctions are important to is people who actually *do* seek "union with the natural universe". Such people see a vast gulf between their own religions (such as Wicca) and the Judaeo-Christian tradition in which humans are supposed to have "dominion over" the natural universe. .Wiccans and Setians both divide all religions into two categories: Nature-worshipping religions versus religions that encourage human dominance over Nature. To both Wiccans and Setians, Christianity is in the "not my kind" category. Both the Wiccan and the Setian categorizations are vast over-simplifications; but of the two, the Wiccan categorization seems to me to be the more logically coherent. It at least makes *some* sense, whereas the Setian categorization makes no sense to me at all. Setians calling Christianity a "Nature-worshipping religion" makes even less sense to me than Wiccans calling Setianism a mere "Christian heresy". .The Setian "LHP vs. RHP" distinction *would* make sense if only Setians would sever that distinction from the "Nature-worshipping religions vs. Psyche-worshipping religions" dichotomy and instead just define "LHP vs. RHP" in terms of how a religion perceives the individual Will. (Some "RHP" religions, such as Christianity, are *not* "Nature-worshipping religions", whereas some "LHP" religions, such as LaVey Satanism, *are* in a sense "Nature-worshipping religions", certainly more so than Christianity.) .There *is* a historical link between Christianity and ancient Nature-worshipping religions. But instead of calling Christianity a "Nature-worshipping religion" and making the blatantly erroneous claim that Christianity seeks "union with the Universe", it would be far more accurate to say that Christianity justifies its assault on individuality on the basis of mythology inherited from Nature- worshipping religions. All "RHP" religions are *linked to* Nature-worshipping religion in this way; but that isn't the same thing as saying that all "RHP" religions are themselves Nature- worshipping religions, or that they all seek union with the universe. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Diane Vera Area: Base of Set To: Balanone 25 Apr 92 12:42:08 Subject: Re: What is Satanism? Sent UpdReq On April 16, you replied to my April 12 message to you, "What is Satanism?": . DV > Organized Satanism conspicuously lacks any just-plain Satanist religious organizations. . B > I can see what you're driving at. I only question the type of organization which you propose and whether it's realistic. You seem to indicate that the pre-1975 CoS was such an organization, but the ToS is not. Yet the only difference I see between "Setians" and pre-1975 CoS "Satanists" is our current emphasis on Xeper as an Aeonic perception which expands upon and supercedes Indulgence. .Another difference (which is more pertinent to the definition of "Satanism") is that many Setians are ambivalent as to whether they're even "Satanists" or not. You yourself identify as a "Satanist" only because, as you said to me in your April 16 message to me "Re: Lewis Stead's view of Thorsson (and possibly the ToS)": . B > If I'm going to be tarred with that brush, I'm going to have something to say about the quality of tar used. .Back to your message "Re: What is Satanism?": .Let me re-phrase my point, which I didn't state quite accurately. Organized Satanism today is dominated by two groups: (1) ToS, which only secondarily thinks of itself as "Satanist", and (2) the post- 1975 CoS, which is no longer functioning as a religious/magic(k)al organization, but only as a political soapbox for LaVey and his cronies. There will be no logically coherent basis for defining Satanism *as a religion* (or as a form of magick) as long as the organized "Satanist" scene is dominated by groups that are either not primarily Satanist or not primarily religious/magic(k)al. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Vitriol Area: Base of Set To: Frater Almost 25 Apr 92 00:55:10 Subject: Re: satan Rec'd Sent UpdReq -=> Frater Almost sent a message to Markie Chao on 21 Apr 92 02:09:20 <=- -=> satan <=- FA> Between Aristotle and Socrates, I think I've got my Greek Bases FA> covered. Hey! Who's that guy on Plato?! ;-) Pax. 93 Just remember: If Euripides trousers, Eumenides trousers. 418 ... Greetings from Interzone! 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Vitriol Area: Base of Set To: Azrael 25 Apr 92 00:58:06 Subject: Re: ENLIGHTENMENT Sent UpdReq -=> Azrael sent a message to Lady Byron on 20 Apr 92 13:09:00 <=- -=> Re: ENLIGHTENMENT <=- LB> The majority of people will always find something to bitch about. A> have you noticed that even when they have nothing to bitch about, they A> bitch about the fact they have nothing to bitch about. Oh, quit bitching! 418 ... that name which the Companions of the Royal Arch blaspheme.. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Vitriol Area: Base of Set To: Jeff Mccord 25 Apr 92 01:15:10 Subject: Re: non-Christians not allowed! Sent UpdReq -=> Markie Chao sent a message to Jeff Mccord on 21 Apr 92 22:30:22 <=- -=> Re: non-Christians not allowed! <=- MC> I've heard this bit so many times... MC> You don't make us uncomfortable, but it is an irritation to have this MC> same crap shoveled at us over and over from more like you under this MC> flimsy guise of it being your duty to try to save us. This shit is MC> boring and costs the sysops money. This echo is about Set, you wanna MC> learn what the Temple of Set is about? Ask here. You wanna preach? MC> Go somewhere else. We've heard it. We're not interested. We are MC> laughing at you and occasionally you get the occasional groan of "Not MC> this shit again", you cannot save us, we don't want your salvation. MC> We can save ourselves because your imaginary threat of hellfire is MC> mythological and the only thing we have to save ourselves from is the MC> constant drone of ever `helpful' xtians trying to tell us how to think MC> and live. DITTO. If you understand nothing else, understand this: if you truly beleive what you have said your intentions are, then you will stop preaching immediately. This for two reasons: one, you have made the offer and now it is up to all to make their choice, and two, because it will have just the opposite effect of what you claim to be your reasons for being here - all you will do is get on everyone's nerves. On the other hand, if you keep on bible-thumping, everyone will know that you are a liar and a hypocrite (I didn't say you are, I said *if you keep on*) and are only here to harrass others and feed your own ego by getting attention and disrupting this echo - at other people's expense, BTW. _O_ VITRIOL _O_ | 418 | ... the slaves shall serve. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Vitriol Area: Base of Set To: Azrael 25 Apr 92 01:14:22 Subject: Re: Setian Philosophy Sent UpdReq -=> Azrael sent a message to Astral Invader on 22 Apr 92 16:56:00 <=- -=> Re: Setian Philosophy <=- A> was damn fun to look at. She was very open about what she wanted. I A> wanted it too...However if I had done anything (I politely avoided her A> advancements...boy was that tough) I would have succeeded in A> destroying her beliefs. Two birds with one stone? >;-) 418 ... Magic is the Science and Art of accelerating synchronicity. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Vitriol Area: Base of Set To: Lady Byron 25 Apr 92 01:24:36 Subject: Re: Temple of the Vampire Sent UpdReq -=> Lady Byron sent a message to Dirge on 21 Apr 92 15:59:44 <=- -=> Temple of the Vampire <=- LB> The Temple of the Vampire (not to be confoozed with the Order of the LB> Vampyre within the Temple of Set) is, apparently, an organization that LB> makes a religion out of sucking the life force out of other people LB> from the astral plane to attain immortality. Hehehe... not to mention sucking a hundred smackers from their suckers, er, applicants! 418 ... "True liberty consists in fearing neither men, nor gods." 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Vitriol Area: Base of Set To: Frater Almost 25 Apr 92 01:27:42 Subject: Re: satan Rec'd Sent UpdReq -=> Frater Almost sent a message to Astral Invader on 24 Apr 92 04:13:21 <=- -=> Re: satan <=- AI> like to introduce you to our new line of John the AI> Baptist Tupperware....' FA> Oooo! I'll take the big tray with the bloody head on it and the FA> carrot & celery sticks all around it! Nummmy Yummy! ;-) Pax. 93 One of these days, if things get really dead on an approriate echo, I'll post my Thelemic rewrite of the play of Salome. It's almost as good as the old lampshade-on-the-head! ;-) 418 ... And Sister Tsetse laid a loving kiss on Brother Puff-adder's nose 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Frater Almost Area: Base of Set To: Jeff Mccord 25 Apr 92 18:04:28 Subject: Re: satan Sent UpdReq Recently, I who am GOD, noted as follows... JM> me, you quit your Christianity because of other JM> people. What a lame excuse! Did you not have a JM> RELATIONSHIP with Jesus? If you did, I found it Yes... But his ars was way too loose for me so I told him to go crucify himself. Look, it ain't amusing anymore. Take your xtianity and go back to north-east budda-bump nowhere and praise your slave god. I'm tired of messing with you. I left Xtianity because it is wrong, false, condones murder, and hates individuality. Thank you. Pax. 93 . 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Frater Almost Area: Base of Set To: Markie Chao 25 Apr 92 18:07:30 Subject: venting Sent UpdReq Maybe not forgsd or locusts but when the ulcers act up, blood and dead babies do spew forth! }:> Pax. 93 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Ammond Shadowcraft Area: Base of Set To: Pale Rider 24 Apr 92 08:24:00 Subject: Re: satan UpdReq In a message to Frater Almost <04-22-92 08:50> Pale Rider wrote: PR> Don't ever compare me to the Bakker's, Swaggert, or Roberts! I am PR> not a hypocrite. When I had backslided, I didn't claim to be a PR> Christian. In fact, when I did something and someone confronted me PR> about it, I told them that I wasn't a Christian and to get off my PR> back. So I am not a hypocrite. I am definitely a Christian now, PR> because I follow God, and I do His will, and try to live the way He PR> wants me to live. It appears you are still a hypocrite. Jesus had not a pillow to lay his head upon and you have a house?? Jesus had not a coin to his name and you have a computer. Go and sell *all* you have and give the proceeds to the poor you hypocrite! Until then you lie to us and don't even know you are lying. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Ammond Shadowcraft Area: Base of Set To: Pale Rider 24 Apr 92 08:30:00 Subject: Re: QUICKIE DEFINITIONS UpdReq In a message to Triple Six <04-23-92 00:55> Pale Rider wrote: PR> Is that quote not true? Is it out of context? Please show me why PR> people are getting upset over me quoting it. Because: you didn't think for yourself, you didn't question authority and you did a incomplete job. I give you a D. Try harder next time. Did you sell your computer yet?? Fedd the poor with the money?? 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Lady Byron Area: Base of Set To: Charles Nemo 23 Apr 92 12:44:12 Subject: Dark Theater UpdReq CN> I will revert shortly with some interesting info from England. Great! Looking forward to it! Lady Byron :)= 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Lady Byron Area: Base of Set To: Azrael 23 Apr 92 12:45:42 Subject: Re: Setian Philosophy UpdReq A> However, misplaced arrogance ie being arrogant to A> someone seeking understanding; is to me rather like A> being arrogant to a child. The child does not Yes, that's true. That is one of the things I find most disgruntling about a particular Satanic "tradition." I don't think arrogance, per se, is necessary, but more of an "aristocratic" nature. This is a more mature attitude, I think, whereas arrogance implies a need to *prove* you need to believe in yourself. LB> True, oneness and blending with the universal consciousness is not LB> sought. I, for one, find it rather undesirable, to say the least. LB> If interested, I will tell you more in another missive as to why. A> Yes I would like to hear more of your thoughts on A> this. I do not believe that I have a proper A> understanding of your beliefs on this. Searching to blend with Oneness or become enlightened will, in the process, destroy one's ego. This is seen as desirable by the RHP but not desirable to the LHP. It's really a matter of plain choice, though one can get more emotional about it when the alternatives are dissected. The benefit of keeping one's ego allows one to retain an identity and personal consciousness that allows individual experience. One need not lose the ego to become a god (or even like a god). In fact, the ego is enhanced! And in this case, ego is not mere pride, but the part of oneself that declares, "I am separate, unique and individual, and a beautiful part of the creation. I can also become more." It is assumed by Setians that we were not "separated" from the Oneness as a mistake, purely to spend our entire lives getting back "home." That would be pointless, and it would be assuming that God (or whatever) is an idiot. We believe (or, I certainly do) that we are to glory in ourSelves, and not be afraid to experience life rather than constantly prepare for our death. Lady Byron :)= 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Lady Byron Area: Base of Set To: Azrael 23 Apr 92 12:52:38 Subject: Re: left-hand? UpdReq A> I am not at this time prepared to seek information A> from the Temple itself. I do not feel that I have A> enough to offer in return. In one of the writting The Temple's information letter is just that -- informational. There is nothing asked in return. It is sent to those who request information on the Temple and what we do. A> enough to offer in return. In one of the writting A> that I d/led it stated that the Temple was leery of A> new people. That it had come across too many that A> leeched information from the Temple. Due to my A> lack of knowledge in the ways of occult thinking, I A> fear that I might appear to fall into this catagory. There is no information that you could "leech" from the Temple at this point because you are not a member, and only members are privy to the documents of the Temple. Lady Byron :)= 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Lady Byron Area: Base of Set To: Azrael 23 Apr 92 12:55:30 Subject: Re: Blood-sucking? UpdReq A> I not had the chance to speak w/ anyone on specfic A> orders. So can't comment on this one. I am truly A> enjoying your patience and posts. Thanks No problem-o! Lady Byron :)= 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718 From: Balanone Area: Base of Set To: Azrael 24 Apr 92 05:42:58 Subject: Re: left-hand? UpdReq On 22 Apr 92 16:36:00, Azrael posted a message to Balanone concerning "Re: left-hand?"... Ba> The one point I feel you may have missed is that those of us Ba> who belong to an organization like the Temple of Set are able Ba> to discuss them within the organization, with others who Ba> already share a common language and symbolism, so that these Ba> discussions are easier. A> A> I see your point and completely understand. However, would you also A> agree that a group (any group) thinking along the same lines would A> tend to think (generally speaking) alike? If so, then would it not be A> beneficial for the group to discuss outside itself, to some degree, to A> check for possible alternatives previously unthought of by the group A> (due to like thinking). Yes, and that is at least part of the reason we have discussions like we do with people like Diane Vera, Markie Chao, Nick Frost, etc. (Another part of the reason -- we like them.) The problems I mentioned earlier still exist -- it takes a *lot* of echo mail before we begin to seriously understand each other's vocabulary, but it seems the mutual benefits are worth it. Ba> There are no modern books on Setian principles as such. Much Ba> of what we deal with has been written about from other Ba> angles, and you'll find those books listed in the Temple's Ba> reading list, which I believe is available in Purgatory's Ba> file system. A> A> Thanks I have and now must admit that I have plenty to read. You're not alone. I haven't "caught up" on my reading in over a decade! Balanone PP ... A journey of 1000 miles begins with a 2 hour delay before takeoff. 718499927771849992777184999277718499927771849992777184999277718