h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

hmmmmm......
Questions which arise after reading this article:

How new is 'modern' Satanism? What was 'old-fashioned' Satanism like?
I wonder about the folks who use an 'unpopular title as an excuse to do horrible things'.Are they Satanists?

'The devil-worshipers you see on day-time TV are not true Satanists, and have done nothing but give a Satanism an even worse reputation.' Do any Satanists call themselves devil worshipers? Do ALL Satanists really think there is no 'Devil/Satan'?

When did Satanists actually stop trying to bargain with metaphysical forces for fun and profit? Or did they ever really do this???

In other words; who are the 'real' Satanists? Do all practice as you describe, and the other images are all false stereotypes? Or ARE there still those who worship a being called Satan???

While the point about the seven deadly sins is well taken, even the Catholic church teaches that it is the EXCESS of any of these that is 'evil' [i.e., contrary to God's will]. Certainly ambition, appreciation of food, erotic love, etc., are all good things within themselves. It is only the overindulgence in these that is destructive. Although I most definitely would agree that the judeo-christian ethic has been somewhat heavy handed in the guilt/sin department...

Traditionally, Satanists have been connected with manipulation of physical and metaphysical forces for their own ends. Usually achieved by some kind of payment/contract involving Satan or other destructive forces of the universe. When did this connection vanish? And if it does not exist, why call yourselves Satanists? That's a pretty strong term historically to pick for a 'mascot'. And isn't hedonism, or epicureanism closer to what you are describing than what has been traditionally described as Satanism?

These are not meant to be confrontational questions, or argumentative. But as a wiccan [witch], I have *sigh* dealt with similar issues. I do not believe in the 'traditional' views of good and evil either, nor do I believe they are embodied in supernatural beings who are warring for our 'souls'. But I have always been somewhat apprehensive of the whole Satanist movement, as negative and destructive in both an historical and modern [outside of this article, that is] context.

peace
}:=8

PS I notice that the author of this article has not posted in the last several weeks. If he/she/it is no longer around, I would still like to hear from others of the Satanist persuasion.

No, I'm not Satanist, I'm Mormon, but very interested in other religion. Explain to me what Wicca is... no one has ever explained it to me well enough for me.

Well, I'm a wiccan like yourself, but I've got a couple Satanist friends, one of whom has done a lovely job of explaining it to me. Just wish I still had the email, because it would have been perfect for your questions. Hope the author's still around though...

Anyway, how he explained it is that the term Satanist has been applied to or used by many groups. He got me to sort of think of it like different polytheistic paths: connected in some ways, but completely different in many. You've got everything from kids running around in black clothes, chanting to call up the power of the Devil, to the philosophy discussed in the article. I've heard of five or so variations which use the term Satanist, some which are practically the same as the type described in the article (don't ask me to describe 'em, 'twas too long ago to remember). The validity of them is questionable, but the self-application of the term can in many cases be used for 'shock value', or show as the mascot, while in others serve as a way of setting the definite tone of how the particular belief is breaking away from the mainstream.

The fact is, 'The devil-worshipers you see on day-time TV' could technically be considered a type of Satanist, but that's one small section of a large group of people who use the title, and it really gives the term a bad connontation which it doesn't really deserve. It's like the lovely press we get from witch movies: the only type of Satanists the media will show will be those who conjure darker powers, and those who fit into the daytime TV role. The many intelligent, decent people who subscribe to the philosophy as this article described will continue to have the term they apply to themselves thought of as a long history of fear has made it.

"Traditionally, Satanists have been connected with manipulation of physical and metaphysical forces for their own ends. Usually achieved by some kind of payment/contract involving Satan or other destructive forces of the universe. When did this connection vanish? And if it does not exist, why call yourselves Satanists?"

I'm not entirely sure of an answer to that, but I have met some who do that. Some called themselves witches, others, Satanists. Such things I think will always exist. And if not, the rumor will still persist. But we still call ourselves witches, even though that term has been slandered for a long time. I don't know why they keep using the term, but I do think I should like to chat with the author of this article, since it was rather interesting.

Everything I said above was written with my limited knowledge... Feel free to correct me on anything I have made errors with.
~JS~

hullo, Antithesis!

Please come over to the Wiccan Forum and rummage around a bit. There's a list of some of the Guide articles related to Wicca, and a place to ask questions.

If you pick up some bits you have questions about, just post over there. I'll be around, and some others might pop in too.

http://www.h2g2.com/A196300

peace & blessings
}:=8

An english contemporary of Shakespeare, Christopher Marlowe, wrote a play called "The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus". In this play, a smart medical doctor guy sells his soul to a demon in return for all knowledge (which he doesn't use productively, but thats irrelivant). Chris invented this whole idea of a diabolic pact where the demon appears and you sign a written contract in blood yada yada. Lots of other poets, authors, and those wacky folk who write operas copied him. He may have been influenced by folk tales, but there was a lot of stuff he just 'made up'. Also, it should be mentioned that a lot of the 'Black Mass' hysteria was tied up in the witch burnings. According to paranoid folk in say... the 1500's... there were these 'Satanists' who danced around fires and conducted a mockery of the actual stuff that goes on during Catholic mass... they drank real blood, sacreficed babies etc etc. Most of this was hysteria, a lot of it was bad press for those pagans which were still around. (while I'm Wiccan in my leanings, I'm not sure how much of a direct connection with past traditions it has). I don't believe there to have been any actual 'Black Masses', so there weren't actually a bunch of 'Satanists' running around butchering babies... people just thought there were. The reason that LeVey chose to call his religion "Satanism" was because he didn't like Christianity. While he didn't set up 'anti-christianity' (that would be the Black Mass stuff I mentioned) he did set up what he _felt_ was Non-christianity.

Hope that helps to clear some of this stuff up.

As far as the "are these guys a religion" question goes... I think its a matter of oppinion. If you asked some of them, i think almost all would say that they are practicing a religion (and they are registered as such with the United States gov't, although they feel they should volentarily pay taxes since they don't think religions should be tax exempt... no need to go into all that). As to whether you who read this will consider them a religion... do you consider Athiesm a religion and do you think an Athiest should recieve those protections from persecution provided for in the law? (ie, should the decision to be an athiest be protected by bla-laws?) if your answer is yes, then you ought to consider LeVey-Satanism a religion.

This post has been removed.

Hmmm... speaking of questions...

If one were to make the statement "ideas like 'right' and 'wrong', 'good' and 'evil', 'desirable' and undesirable', are entirely subjective..." [meaning, what person A considers justified person B thinks is unjustified] do you think a Satanist would agree with it?

that is... is moral relativity a part of Satanism, or is the idea that there is no fundamental, universal, right and wrong contrary to the precepts of Satanism?

(I'm Mr. Relative myself)

a wonderfull question.

The reason the pentagram is inverted in the Satanic Bible's symbolism is because it's representing it's disdain for "good", hippocritcal religeons. Satanism states that Good and Evil are made up terms to make someone feel smug with themselves about doing something. It states that religeons that call themselves good are hippocritical because they're motivated by empowering themselves.

I don't know if that came out clearly or not, but i'm rather tired. In short, they think that good and bad are nonexistant, and were created by people in a subjective manor.

Hello...this is your absentee author...
Sorry to be so elusive, but my computer is @!#%@$ed up at the moment and is in the shop, so I am having to type
this on a friend's keys. First off I am very glad that the entry made it in, and very flattered at the attention and discussion
thus far. I could hardly hope for such open minded responses and I have a new confidence in the usefulness and non-biased
nature of this guide. I will contribute more when my keys are back in working order.
In response (from memory, pardon) to some of the questions...
Why do we call ourselves Satanists...
I do not speak for all Satanists, merely myself and others I know who feel the same. LaVey founded the actual, recognised
religion and gave it the title Satanism. This is what he titled his belief system and so this is what those who subscribe to it call themselves. As I stated before, the mythical being Satan is our "mascot." He defied God so that he could live his own life the way he wanted, make his own mistakes and learn his own truths. This is what the LaVey Satanist strives for everyday...free thought, free speech, individuality and non-complacency. Who would be a better role-model than the character who thought it "better to reign in hell than to serve in heaven?"
Do "Devil-Worshippers" call themselves Satanists...
Yes many do...and I suppose in their own way they have as much right as anyone. But they do not share the same beliefs as the actual recognised religion. It is like someone who believes Christ was a magician and has dedicated their life to learning his "tricks"
calling themselves a Christian. In a way, they have the right...but it is not the same thing as the "recognised" belief system of Christianity. I refer to them as Devil-Worshippers because they actually believe in Satan and think that "evil" and wickedness are the ways to gain favor from him. Most believe they go to hell when they die...another concept the Satanist does not believe.
As far as I know, there was not a religion called Satanism until LaVey coined the term. But I could be wrong for I am not an avid historian.
I will answer more as I can...when my computer feels better...any of you who wished to speak with me are welcome to write to my e-mail address and wait out a response...
[email protected]

thank you for the feedback and keep it going.
"Be your own God...you are the only one qualified"
tHEMEmAKER

That's cool... you've opened up a whole lot on the subject. A point to thoughtfully consider: in Mormon doctrine, Satan was cast out because he was in favor of a plan that forced everyone to be righteous. He favored it because there would be no one who was bad. Mormon religion is based on one's free agency to do bad as well as good. So it would kind of be different than the way you put it.