I've researched the Church of Satan... there's one close to where I live. While at one time I found them somewhat interesting, I never found it that appealing, to fight against something to such a degree, that like Bob was saying, it's sort of like a constant flying spaghetti monster fest. Many people think The Church of Satan was highly influenced by Aleister Crowley and I do at least find him and the things he did and believed to be far more interesting than satanism.

Lovecraft is up there with the Great Tricksters -- like Aleister Crowley and Toto from the Wizard of Oz.

If you had been reading more closely, you might have noticed that I never said the OT was irrelevant; I said that the moral and ceremonial laws given to Israel were done away with. It is still the word of God and much of it concerns prophecy which confirms Jesus as the Messiah and prophecy about the last days.

What you consider to be progress is to discard Gods laws and believe that you can enlighten yourself up to His level. This is exactly what caused humanity to fall in the first place; it's the same lie that human beings have been chasing since the beginning of time. What spiritual progressives/relativists cannot understand is that you can't build a ladder up to Heaven. You can't get anywhere near a holy God on your own. That holy God, in the person of Jesus Christ, had to bring a ladder down to Earth for us. And to get on that ladder you have to pay a very heavy price; you have to die. When you get on that ladder you don't get to do whatever you want anymore. You have to be holy as He is holy, and that's exactly what all of these seekers of the esoteric and "secret knowledge" don't want to do. That's all this relativity amounts to; justifying rebellion against God so you can do whatever you want. Or as aleister crowley summed it up "do as thou wilt shall be the whole of the law". That is from Satans lips to your ears.

It's well known amongst demon worshipers?

See, you were just complaining about apostasy in another post today. And yet it sounds like you're sort of buying into some sort of weird, middle ages Malleus Maleficarum stuff here. Nowhere in the bible does it say that marijuana use is a sin. Am I wrong about that? Or is this something that god told you personally? To me, it sounds like you're just buying into the antiquated perception of mainstream society that says that marijuana use is "evil". So you're going to base your gospel (remember, you're the one who's preaching) on the words of Aleister Crowley now? All of a sudden Aleister Crowley is the last word on what's holy or unholy? Seems to me like he's the last person whose word you would want to take on the subject.

Oh, but you used the word "abuse" right? Drug "abuse" is sinful and Satanic? Well, isn't the abuse of anything sinful and satanic? So it's kind of a moot point right? Can't you just as easily abuse butter, or adrenaline or the bible?

Well what about the legitimate use of a drug? Is using aspirin sinful and satanic? It sounds to me like you're pretty much writing off the use of any marijuana ever. Well what about someone dying of leukemia who hasn't eaten in a week because they're so sick? I'd like to see you say to that person that they were worshiping demons for taking marijuana to help them eat. That the sick or the dying should not receive comfort because of something Aleister Crowley said.

It sounds to me like you're guilty of letting the devil convince you of something that God has yet to let us know about.

I won't even get into the whole "burning bush" thing since I know you prefer to take any bible verse that suits your purpose literally.

>> ^shinyblurry:

What you think about me has no bearing on my witness here. Even if no one believes me, at least they will have the information if they ever wake up. Satan is real, and anyone who doesn't know God has been utterly deceived by him. It's been well known amongst demon worshippers that marijuana opens you to spiritual realms controlled by Satan. Aliester crowley stated that very clearly in his book of the law. Drug abuse of any kind is sinful and satanic, and invites possession.
>> ^Ryjkyj:
Shiny, it's comments like that that truly help illustrate the level of your ignorance.

Heh, this showed up on the Sift just the next day after I started giving serious consideration to joining the O.T.O.

As it happens, it's the only serious initiatory order with a presence within three hundred miles, so far as I can find. And, having bought a copy of Crowley's Thoth Tarot years ago, I've finally begun seriously studying it. Beautiful artwork, profound symbolism.>> ^gwiz665:

Ultimately Crowley was as hypocritical as the religions he disliked though, creating his own based on Magick and weirdness. As usual the small cults are based on hedonism and sex, and while everyone likes that, it doesn't make for intellectual honesty. Magick isn't real.


Crowley repeatedly cautioned against ascribing objective reality to the phenomena experienced in the practice of magic. Which is why he phrased the first goal of magic in such a ridiculous fashion as "the Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel." It is absurd, precisely in order to remind seekers that ascribing objective reality to such theories is always absurd. He did all sorts of things like this. He asked followers, for instance, to align their rituals so that "East" in the books always faced his home--indirectly indicating that it was entirely arbitrary what direction one faces.

People who assiduously practice magick really do have visions; experience communication with demons, angels, and gods; experience mystic transport; and realize the integration of the self. The reality of the experience trumps, for Crowley, any "objective" claims.

>> ^enoch:

"do what thou whilt may it harm none" was a traditional pagan saying

Eh, not really. Most pagans prior to the rise of Christianity would have shuddered at the statement, aside from a handful of obscure philosophers. Certainly not Plato, Pythagoras, or any of the other pagan writers so often accorded great spiritual insight.

Though such formulations do begin to make an appearance whenever Paganism arises in post-Christian contexts.

>> ^berticus:

The waiters of the best eating-houses mock the whole world; they estimate every client at his proper value.
This I know certainly, because they always treat me with profound respect. Thus they have flattered me into praising them thus publicly.
Yet it is true; and they have this insight because they serve, and because they can have no personal interest in the affairs of those whom they serve.
An absolute monarch would be absolutely wise and good.
But no man is strong enough to have no interest. Therefore the best king would be Pure Chance.
It is Pure Chance that rules the Universe; therefore, and only therefore, life is good.


Would that I could evoke *Quality.

That is the Breaks.

Beautiful Berticus, well done.

>> ^gwiz665:

"Do What Thou Wilt" an antithesis to Christianity.
Calling that satanism, is making it part of Christianity, since satan only exists in that.


"do what thou whilt may it harm none" was a traditional pagan saying but you can find the same inferrence in almost every religion.
you are correct in the statement concerning satanism,by its very terminology it is..by definition..a christian subset meant to be..as you stated..antithesis.
crowley rose through the ranks of the golden dawn and felt constrained by them.he moved onto a weird amalgamation of enochian magicks and heavily influenced by the rituals of calling and divination found in the book of solomon.

i have read a few books on crowley and either he was brilliant or batshit insane..maybe a combination of both which is most likely.
but for you atheists out there who abhorr religious hypocrisy...crowley is your hero.
he gave the church fits..literally.

Thank God I'm an Atheist!! (Previously stated by Aleister Crowley)

There really isn't any educational value in this film, aside from the correct claim that the church instituted holidays around the time of pagan holidays. (Which doesn't at all mean that the holidays remained pagan; they kept the trappings, but changed the substance.)

Easter has nothing to do with Ishtar. The name of the goddess of Easter was Eostre. It's probable that Eostre was the goddess of the sunrise, like the Roman Aurora; her name seems to be cognate with, e.g., the Greek goddess of the dawn Eos.

His explanation of the meaning of Easter is based on the Wiccan celebration of Ostara. (Ostara is a possible Germanization of Eostre, though the name is not to my knowledge found in any extant ancient or medieval texts.) Wiccan practices are not the same as those of ancient paganism. Wiccan rites borrow heavily from Ceremonial Magick (Aleister Crowley, Israel Regardie, and the like). That said, there are modern pagans who have revived the ancient holiday of Eostre to the best of their ability.

Yaaaay! Aleister Crowley on the Sift! He happens to be one of my very favorite historical miscreants! Great Sift Gwaan!

For anyone who's looking for a good (er... interesting) read, I suggest his novel 'Moonchild', a drug-induced frolick through the occult whose characters are thinly veiled representations of himself and his 'mortal' enemies, S.L.Macgregor Mathers, William Butler Yates, E.A. Waite, and more... for anyone with an itnerest in turn of the century occult or the Golden Dawn you will not be displeased!... however, be prepared to wade through a lot of esoteric nonsense and opium-pipe prose, it's worth it though, by the end, you will have a thorough admiration for the ego that claimed to have begun WWI as a means of sweeping the earth clean before 'ushering in a new era of Crowleyanity'!