The Satanic Temple - Dominate Satanic Organization | Forum

Zach Black Owner
Zach Black May 7
  In the last few years the TST has  generated more attention towards Satanism than the CoS has done in its lifetime. With the unveiling of the Baphomet monument , gettign the 10 commandments monument removed and now the documentary ' hail satan? ' out in theaters what is next? 

Seems safe to say TST is the dominate Satanic Organization as of today. Like them or not. My opinion has been overstated so I will hold off on it here. What are your thoughts? 

( Boy that post took all of a minute to make :).  ) 

The Forum post is edited by Zach Black May 7
Zach Black Owner
Zach Black May 7
Not sure what that pseudo goat headed  statue really is, but I believe they opted for the titless version for fear of it being rejected due to pornographic reasons. I thought the afro on the boy was a nice touch. Interesting enough.  Well, as I remarked at Lucien " nothing more satanic than changing the public perception of what Satanism is to suit your agenda ". 
Brother Shamus
 They can call it whatever they want, but the more they give the world a pacified ideology to associate with satanism the more they will invalidate their own claim to the title.

Its PR intent is antithetical to what satanism is.

This has been done to death, though.

Association by title only, and then whatever fluffy PR sanitizing does for the public view. They really do have the capacity to present the wikipedia variety and make it like the Methodist Church and gay pride. 

 Non issue to a practicing core satanist.

They cast satanism as attainment through the same loving principles that guide all other white-light religion. One could argue it's a "human" thing before any religious principle. Or maybe a wiring to be guided by the comfort of cultural acceptance. 

LHP is more in line with pain. Serenity attained through staying willful and actively seeking what others throw away.  Being you despite how painful it gets. To make a concise reference to this tendency consider the movie version of Braveheart.  As he is being cut open he still won't ask for a merciful death.   Or better yet Seinfeld. The episode where George fought with employer and still got in his office. Doesn't matter the principle driving it. This is the LHP tendency as seen in nature. They can often time become martyrs of one cause or another... or just die.

In my VERY unpopular opinion, "it" is a total and complete rejection of certain aspects of their environment and that born need to stand in defiance of _____.  And it is as self regulatory within the genetic memory and code as fucking gay people.

Not only is it born, it is a genetic mutation that doesn't seek comfort in social norms. Much of the time they exhibit opposite reactions to the things that drive conformity. That's its religious is a direct response to the species genetic memory and predisposition towards that line of thinking. The iconoclastic organism prevents stagnation.

It is a mutation that seeks to keep even ideas or 'nomos' from having a monopoly. It is an ideological gene pool.

I don't know if this is the gold I am supposed to derive from this, but it's what came from my own abysmal leaden experience.  

The Forum post is edited by Brother Shamus May 8
Owner/Admin May 8

Quote from AK

Yes. Because nothing is more satanic than accquiessing to public perception and majority-held opinion.


*because have even more time on my hands than usual lately:

There's a concept I use pretty frequently. It's called a "useless machine". There's a link below demonstrating what one is - it's pretty neat and it serves as a pretty good analogy for what TST is. A useless machine is a machine that has the appearance of serving some function. It does function, it has all the design, planning, moving parts, etc. It closely resembles any other machine that does a particular job, like say, a money counter, card shuffler, coffee maker, etc except that a useless machine doesn't actually do anything useful. It's a novelty item. That's all it is. It's functional. It does something in that it does make noise and it does move, but for all this functionality it has no purpose and the only objective it manages to achieve is creating the illusion of achieving an objective.

None of their "accomplisments" are actual accomplishments. No there there. A zero-sum process.  Their points are moot ones. Like emphatically and loudly insisting that the wheel-chair bound kid remain seated while the bus is in motion as a means to ensure that order is maintained.

Like this box:

 ^that *is* TST summed-up. 

If you are going to bounce off my quote at least make it accurate. Read it again. Pretty fucking simple. 

ZB - "  " nothing more satanic than changing the public perception of what Satanism is to suit your agenda "

AK - " Yes. Because nothing is more satanic than accquiessing to public perception and majority-held opinion.

Nuff said. 

The Forum post is edited by Owner/Admin May 8
Tkwilliams Member
Tkwilliams May 8
It's just some people using the "shock rock" formula it get the attention necessary to make the world around them reflect what they have decided it should look like. It will pass quickly i am sure the rest of the satanic organizations will receive some new members from this surge,  the ones that figure out that the group they are in is vapid boaring, or shallow or whatever.  The rest will age and move on. We might even get a 60 minute style show exposing all the money fraud and lies later. Good times
Brother Shamus
It is "bait and switch shock rock", whatever the intent. It is Alice Cooper after he realized Karla is poison (allegedly) and became reborn in the Superstition Mountains, literally.   

You want Rob Zombie and Marylin Manson glorifying the Manson family with your shock rock,  you know, "for the aesthetic". TST somehow managed to make shock rock fit for the Nebraska State Fair as opener to 311. 

The Forum post is edited by Brother Shamus May 8
Anna May 9
TST did a great job in pooping into the liberal nest. If some moderate religious people haven't yet associated LGBT movement, feminism, abortion, secular state, tolerance for immigrants etc with the Devil, they will certainly do that now thanks to TST campaigns. That will make a larger part of society more radical in opposition to any changes. Of course, it all depends on what their objectives are. If their aim was solely to draw attention to themselves, they certainly succeeded. But if they intended to advance any social or political cause, putting Satan on their banners was a rather poor choice.
Owner/Admin May 10
TST .... for the record. TST is a atheistic, flying pasta monster, liberal, leftist activist organization using Satanism to push their agenda. Period. The vast majority of its members including founders and admin are NOT Satanists. Most have not even read the Satanic Bible. 

Now, that is not to say what they have done is anti-satanic or not aligned with goals or agendas that you might presume Satanists are aligned with.  Ya know. . . .  I was not going to make this video. I told myself to leave it be.  But, seriously i feel a strange moral obligation at this point. I know people are gonna think ego reasons, jealousy, personal agendas.....ect. It is really not. 

To be continued. Time for the unveiling. 

Brother Shamus
I'm gonna play the Jesus' advocate for a second.

I agree with a separation of church and state. And no one give me any too cool for school copouts. I like my artificial societal control mechanisms to remain secular.  

Fun fact: In certain places you can not buy a car on Sunday. Blue Laws. That is another way of saying it does relate to you.

So heres a slightly different analysis on TST:

Problem seen: incursion of Christian morality taking a place in way that treads on theocracy.

Precedent: The Pastafarians vs. Kansas State School Board.

TST:  replace flying Italian food with a Satan of sorts.

The issue here is irrelevant to whether or not  constitutionalists (TST) are Satanists for real and true. Like them, Kansas allowing a creationist segment in public schools triggers my irk as well.  Difference is my reaction would tend towards an anarchist cookbook of suggestions on how to combat indoctrination individually a la lex talionis before government come'n-helpus or trollish coloring books.

But let's put the devil aside and focus on the political action group they are.

It seems to me this group is reminding people what the first amendment says. If states want to evoke their rights religiously the fuzzy baphomet brigade will be there to raise awarenes through Satan's petting zoo and carnival.

So when you make them a political action group that travels the land to call out religious monopolies, while firmly deferring to rule of law and personal liberty, they are hard to disagree with.  

If you consider them the trolling wing of the ACLU it fits better.
The Forum post is edited by Brother Shamus May 10
Tkwilliams Member
Tkwilliams May 14
I don't like the ACLU either. So it fits just fine to me.
Obscura TITS
Obscura Jun 8
I really have a thing for hot goats.
antonmesmer Jun 25
re: TST v CoS, and the problem of defining Satanism...

As I see it, LaVeyan Satanism was a reaction to (1) Christian theology, with its doctrine of Original Sin and the rejection of this world in favor of the "kingdom of heaven," and (2) 60's psychedelic counterculture ("turn on, tune in, and drop out") and the Eastern spirituality that grew beside it (particularly around San Francisco). Both were seen as essentially life-denying, and as rejecting human nature. 

The Satanic Temple's philosophy is specifically a reaction to the Religious Right in America, from the "Satanic panic" of the 80's, and the moral policing of groups like the PMRC, to today's efforts to overturn Roe v Wade. The Christianity it opposes has become a political machine (with cable networks, lobbyists, law firms, etc.), and so they respond with local organizing, propaganda, and lawsuits. 

To make that more 'real' for those who don't follow politics: One of the President's personal attorney's is Jay Sekulow. 

"Jay Alan Sekulow is chief counsel at the American Center for Law & Justice [ACLJ]. He hosts a radio and television talk show. Sekulow is a frequent guest commentator on the Christian Broadcasting Network and the Fox News Channel." (Wikipedia)

The ACLJ actively fights to oppose the separation of church and state. You can download a pamphlet titled, “Does the Separation of Church and State really exist?” from their website... And their "chief counsel" works for POTUS.

However each group views itself now, whatever good they may be doing (or not), both the CoS and TST were only reactions to what Christians were doing & saying, and are only "Satanic" in the sense of being Opponents or Accusers of the Powers-That-Be of their respective eras.

They are Job's "Satan" - debating with the Master about the nature of the human animals, but ultimately still playing by the Master's rules. Neither of them is really about Satan per se, which to me seems strange. Imagine saying, "I'm a Buddhist... but it's not really about the Buddha."

I don't think the philosophy of Satanism was ever workable within the organization LaVey created to perpetuate it. He claimed that Satanism was a religion of the Individual, the Alien Elite, but demanded absolute adherence to his vision of that philosophy. LaVey - not Satan or the Satanist, who is supposed to be his own god - was the measure of all things Satanic. His personal tastes were Satanism. 

LaVey recreated himself (his biography was surely more myth than reality), and then created (largely from bits and pieces of other people's writings) a virtual playground where you could be Special, as long as you played along with his delusions (like one of the mannequins in his Den of Iniquity). 

>> We must defend the legend of the Black Pope... because if he's just some Jewish kid from Chicago who failed at life (but told some interesting stories), then maybe we're not wizards and gods. <<

In a sense, LaVey may have been the only real Satanist to ever be a member. He was the only god - creating a world where he made the rules, and others had to play along or be cast out... rejected by the king of outcasts.

That being said, here is my attempt to answer the question, “What is Satanism?” in a way that ignores any current orthodoxy (as any devil would), and takes the term at face value.

The Satanist is one who strives to be more Satan-like, as the Christian is one who strives to be more Christ-like. Or, we could go further and say, the Satanist is one who strives to become a Satan, as the Buddhist is one who strives to become a Buddha.

The objective of Satanism is for the adherent to embody the Satan-Lucifer archetype by cultivating self awareness (the 'gift of Satan' in the primordial Garden; Genesis 3) and sovereignty, or rulership (the divine-king who ascends to the stars; Isaiah 14) of your inner and outer world.

If you understand that, you can skip all of the books on "Satanism" and just begin the Work.

Satanism has no leaders.

Satanism is not a community.

Satanism has no commandments.

Satanism has no position on political or social issues.

If you need an ideology to tell you what's right or wrong (sheep seeking shepherds), Satanism isn't it.

* Hail Thy Self. * Do as Thou Wilt. *

The Forum post is edited by antonmesmer Jun 25
antonmesmer Jun 25
Anything we say about "Satanists do this," or "Satanists believe that," is just personal opinion or preference. And I explained how I currently use the term. I don't do "black masses" or "destruction rituals," and never have in the 30 years since I read TSB. But you have fun with that.
The Forum post is edited by antonmesmer Jun 25
Tkwilliams Member
Tkwilliams Jun 25
Anton. I enjoyed your reply and agree with point of view. 
antonmesmer Jun 25
Ok, I'll play along. But if you're going to 'correct' me, please do some homework, first, so we can both learn something. 

>>For what I know Satanists in general has only performed black masses in their younger years so they could be liberated from their background of dogma whatever it was religious or ideological.<<

Eh, not necessarily. It doesn't have to be something from your background. The target or object of the rite could be anything seen as having some kind of influence or power in your society. Today, you could probably design something aimed at Trump, or SJW's, for example. In LaVey's time, you could have done something against the drug culture, or something supporting the Vietnam war (renouncing pacifism and the "make love not war" crowd). 

And it doesn't actually have to be about liberating yourself with some act of sacrilege. That was the Black Mass as invented by the Catholic Church. It was the original "satanic ritual abuse" claim - we were desecrating hosts, or sacrificing babies, or whatever their perverted imaginations could come up with. You could, instead, practice it as an actual sacrament. A ritual to connect yourself to some higher principle. Maybe substitute the host/wafer with a symbol of the Fruit from the Tree, and go from there. 

>>When it comes to the destruction ritual then it's only based on vengeance so of course those Satanists who never have been violated would have no reason to perform it.<<

A destruction ritual would only be necessary for an unresolved issue. So, like if the individual or group was beyond your reach, where you couldn't handle it, then a destruction ritual would be a way of reaching across space/time to get to them. LaVey claimed that "curses" like that actually work. If I did something like that, I would just use it as an emotional release, and then try to let it go.

But a ritual should never be a substitute for taking action out in the world. If someone has "wronged" me, or "violated" me in some way that is sufficient to motivate me to act... well, I'll act. 

I've also never done a "lust ritual" to get laid. That's the area of lesser magic. But I have done a kind of inverted lust ritual... I became emotionally attached to someone, only to realize that she would end up bringing a lot of negativity into my life, so I did a ritual to sever any emotional or "spiritual" ties to her. I guess it "worked." She apparently moved to another State soon after (she called me from jail), and my feelings for her quickly faded (not because of the jail thing; I was frequently ducking charges myself). 

>>See that's what I consider to be one of the biggest problem with TST.<<

Really? The "biggest problem with TST" is they confuse "Lucifer" with "Satan"?

>>They mistakenly believes that Satan and Lucifer is the same archetype and they refuse to accept the fact that they are wrong...<<

There's no "wrong" here, just interpretation. 

>>Satan and Lucifer is not the same archetype. The misconception comes from a later translation of a bibel [sic] verse.<<

No, the translation has nothing to do with why people connect them together. That's a theological issue. The "Lucifer" passage in Isaiah (about the King of Babylon) talks about how he has "fallen," and then later there's something about, "I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven." (Luke 10:18) And BOOM! Lucifer = Satan. (After tying in Ezekiel 28, addressed to the King of Tyre, to make him a celestial being.)

It's the same kind of weak argument they use to connect the Serpent in the Garden with Satan. Genesis doesn't say it was Satan in the Garden. But later we find, "He seized the dragon — that old serpent, who is the devil, Satan — and bound him in chains for a thousand years." (Revelation 20:2) So, obviously, Serpent in the Garden = Satan, too. 

That's not much evidence to me, but it has become part of the Satanic myth, so that's part of the material we have to work with. 

>>Lucifer was a roman sun god and in satanic ritual he plays the role as the second crown prince of hell after Satan...<<

To the extent that there is any evidence for a Roman deity called "Lucifer," he would be a stellar figure - having to do with the stars and planets - not a solar figure. Here's a page with actual excerpts from source material:

And that "crown prince of hell" stuff doesn't mean anything outside of LaVey's Bible. If you want to structure your reality that way, have at it. 

The Forum post is edited by antonmesmer Jun 25
antonmesmer Jun 25
You are correct, though, that there's a problem with the translation. 

The Hebrew name is something like "heylel ben shahar."  The translation to English is debatable, but it could be something like, "bright one, son of the dawn." But "Lucifer" means "light bearer." So, technically, it doesn't fit the passage. You have to make a stretch from "bright one, son of the dawn" = "morning star" = "venus" = "Lucifer." I don't see any other way Jerome fits "Lucifer" into that verse. 
antonmesmer Jun 25

>>Also the black mass and the destruction ritual can be performed in groups and they may be more effective in groups.<<

Oh, so you believe rituals actually do something outside of your own consciousness? To me it's self hypnosis at best, and self delusion at worst. 

>>The four crown princes of hell comes from traditional occultism so they do means something outside the satanic world.<<

There is something like this idea in the old grimoires, but I haven't looked at any of those in at least 20 years. I want to say the ones I saw referred to something like "dukes" or "grand dukes" or whatever. But I'm going to have to call "bullshit." 

Please give us a source from "traditional occultism" that lists both "Satan" and "Lucifer" as two of the "four crown princes of hell." I don't believe that's a thing, outside of TSB. It doesn't even have to list Belial and Leviathan as the other two.  

>>Satan being Lucifer and Lucifer being Satan is indeed an interpretation issue that comes from Christian tradition which again proves why TST is wrong here.<<

What is your fascination with TST? NO ONE thinks TST is an authority on Satanism. 

HOWEVER... there is no "wrong." It's all just stories. It's all myth. 

I used the term "Satan-Lucifer" as a kind of composite figure, like Set-Typhon (combining an Egyptian neter with a Greek deity). I can do that. Because I say so. That's how made up stuff works.   

>>Satan and Lucifer is not the same when it comes to mythology and history. Satan is not limited to Christian mythology. He is also a part of jewish and islamic mythology.<<

Yes! And they contradict each other. So... which one is "right"? Here's a hint: all of them. 

antonmesmer Jun 25

>>First of all, do you know the story of Iblis?<<

Yeah, I actually did some studying on the history of Islam, from it's origins to modern times. Lots of fun facts in there. Like, some people think Muhammad may have had epilepsy or some other brain issue that caused seizures, which led to hallucinations. And some of the holy sites, like the Kaaba, may have been Arab pagan holy sites, stolen from them just like the Christians did to European pagans. 

In 20th century America, we had the rise of Black Muslims, beginning with, I believe, the Moorish Science folks in 1930's Detroit (I think... haven't read that stuff in a long time). The 60's saw the growth of the Nation of Islam (WD Fard Muhammad, Malcolm X, Farrakhan), followed by the Black Stone Rangers, a Chicago street gang that adopted Islam as its cornerstone (becoming El Rukns, and the Almighty Black P. Stone Nation).

What did you need to know?

I hope you're not going to get into a bunch of Yezidi stuff. It's very unlikely that they were ever, in any sense, devil worshippers. 

>>Here is the source to the four crown princes of hell...<<

Wikipedia pages? Seriously? That is not a source. 

For shits and giggles, I checked them out anyway. The only time it uses the phrase "four crown princes of hell" was in reference to LaVey's Bible. So, try again. With an actual quote from an actual book, please. 

>>"I use the term Odin and Kali as a kind of composite figure. I can do that because I says so. That's how made up stuff works"... <<

Finally you're getting it. 

The Forum post is edited by antonmesmer Jun 25
antonmesmer Jun 25
You must be on some really good shit. 


Quote from Seeker
A perfect example of fear as a result of cognitive dissonance... You are not interested to learn perhaps because you are from TST... Thank you for the conversation.

antonmesmer Jun 25
Before I hunt down the book, can you tell me if it uses the same four as LaVey?
Quote from PlasmoticJezebel The "Four crowned princes of hell" originates as early as the 14th century with "The Book of Abramelin the Mage" - a decidedly white-light grimoire if ever there were one. 

The Forum post is edited by antonmesmer Jun 25
Pages: 1 2 »
Certain features and pages can only be viewed by registered users.

Join Now

Like and Share

Donate - PayPal

This site is largely funded by donations. You can show your support by donating. Thanks. Every dollar helps. You need not a PayPal to donate either just a debit or credit card.

Satanic International Network was created by Zach Black in 2009 and is currently the most widely used social networking site for Satanists of its kind.
Zach Black-Social Media YouTube - satanicinternational & thesatanicnetwork FaceBook - SatanicInternational ( Zach Black) Instagram - satanicinternational