THE ARCANE ARCHIVE
	a cache of usenet and other text files pertaining to occult, mystical, and spiritual subjects.

To: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.politics.satanism,alt.christnet.satanism,alt.satanism
From: boboroshi@satanservice.org (SOD of the CoE)
Subject: Origins and Definitions of Satanism (was Did LaVey invent Satanism?)
Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2000 06:22:28 GMT

50000405 IVom Hail Satan!

Satanist bupahs  writes:
>The entire point of my argument is LaVey did not invent 

he seems to have invented (perhaps with help) modern Satanism
(esp. of the type promoted by himself and his church, which
I call CoSatanism).

>nor father Satanism 

he seems to be the main figure behind modern Satanism at least,
and I haven't found any others before him who wished to be
identified as Satanists before him. RMerciless says that he
knows of one, but I didn't catch that reference. the
Luciferians merely described their path as Satanism, but why
did they bother with the distinguishment "Luciferianism"?

>and that there is more than ONE version of practiced Satanism. 

this goes without saying as long as one doesn't intend to
CONTROL what is provided the description of 'Satanism'. you
and I are more liberal in our acceptance here. an example
of a place where the CoSatanists would draw a line and
likely say that a self-described Satanist didn't really
qualify is when they begin to engage animal sacrifices.
now I happen to have been told by some CoSatanists that
they have performed animal sacrifices (in which they were
intending to eat the animal afterward), yet some of the
CoSatanists are adamantly against this and LaVey pretty
much speaks against it in his bible. even more would say
that people like Richard Ramirez or Sean Sellers are not
Satanists, though some like me would accept them as
Satanist sociopaths.

[bupahs to Tani]
>Do you get some form of royalty for pushing Marsh's article?

they have a mutual back-scratching society going.

>Why does the CoS care what SOME PEOPLE in the FCoS do? 

that's obvious, because of the word "First" which Lord Egan
has cleverly inserted into your church's name.

>I never said that no one else could think freely. Free Thought
>extends past the CoS you do realize, just because my practiced
>version of Satanism differs from yours it does not make it any
>less valid.

the never-ending quandry: either CoSatanists claim that
LaVey instructed "do what you will and be responsible for
your actions" (which is false, he instructed 'do unto others
as they do unto you') or they cry foul when someone doing what 
they will wishes to be responsible for practicing Satanism in 
a way which they don't see is compatible with some OTHER
notion about what LaVey said. it is confusing, but becomes
rather understandable over time. the point is to be more right
about something than someone else.
 
>Its not a waste of time to dispel lies spewed forth by certain
>CoS Priests. 

it is if you don't actually "dispel" them, if you are merely
one of a number of voices spewing back. they aren't really
worth your time, I think. the better ones will make themselves
known and you will be able to discern them and interact with
them in a reasonable fashion. HPaulis is cool, for example,
and even Tani is fine if you don't mind her long posts and
feel you must agree with her.

>I advertise my organization every time I post and
>wake up one more person to the CoS' blatant misrepresentation
>and lies.

all organizations eventually engage this type of propagandizing.
it is for this reason that we should skeptically examine any
organization claiming to be "Thelemic" or "Satanic" (because
these predominantly individualistic spiritual philosophies
are not really containable inside an organization, which will
inevitably violate these standards for self-preservation and
self-identification).

>...The Church of Satan does not have an exclusive right to Satanism, 

but they may be Satanic in claiming to have such.

>they are not the only version of Satanism, 

depending on who you ask as regards the criteria.

>The Church of Satan has passed on, the CoS died the minute its 
>representatives started ignoring their organizations own teachings.

all organizations which have as their foundational philosophy the
support of the individual eventually turn to supporting the
expressions of their OWN personnel at the expense of those who
have not become members of their cadre and contributed to the
group (herd) ego. this is a principle I think you will even find
in your First Church of Satan eventually. the smaller the org,
the more likely it can hold out, of course. ;>

blessed beast!

boboroshi
Satanic Outreach Director,
Church of Euthanasia (http://www.churchofeuthanasia.org/)
-- 
mailto:nagasiva@luckymojo.com ; http://www.luckymojo.com/nagasiva.html
mailto:boboroshi@satanservice.org ; http://www.satanservice.org/ 
emailed replies may be posted; cc replies if response desired