Vexen Crabtree 2015

vexen

Vexen Crabtree's Live Journal

Sociology, Theology, Anti-Religion and Exploration: Forcing Humanity Forwards


Previous Entry Share Next Entry
Vexen Crabtree 2015
vexen

Hypocrisy, Plagiarism and LaVey by John Smith

Hypocrisy, Plagiarism and LaVey by John Smith
Tags:

  • 1

Sad, Sad

(Anonymous)
Just a sad attempt to excuse Christianity’s idiocy.

Conformity in your rebellion

(Anonymous)
I think the worst part of all of this, is that while most here are so frighten of one sort of comformity and praise, they so eagerly, and so blindly run into another.

There is little difference between Christians and Lavey's form of Satanism.

Oh, there isn't? But wait, there is more.

Christianity stole many of the Pagan's holidays, then attempted to monopolize religion by being a "supreme way" above all others, no matter how much older all the other religions might had been.

Lavey takes many of the pagan and older forms of santanic religons ideals, then also literally monopolize and claim to be the only true "Satanic" way, while also claiming to be the greatest way. Gee, that soulds a little familiar...

Both are uncompromising, arrogant and believe in their superiority. How is that much of a difference? Because one believes in god and one doesn't? Right. If Lavey's Satanism was the majority, it would be just like its so-called enemy.

The more things change the more they stay the same.

Anton LaVey

(Anonymous)
Anton LaVey was a great man. Who has the right to say otherwise??? He might have got ideas from other religions, however what religion hasn't? you are all hypocrites and i loathe you.

Baphomet Crowley LaVey
The Alien Elite

www.anton_lavey@the666club.com

Re: Anton LaVey

(Anonymous)
u r to be praised for this

So Satanism is wrong for Smulo?

(Anonymous)
So, after reading the article from john Smulo, I can´t understand if he only centralize in LaVey or in Satanism.

It´s simple to understand: Satanism is what it means "with or without LaVey", personally, I wished to meet LaVey, only to take a talk with him. He´s no one that another Satanist, hypocrite or not, but Satanism is true and more real than Christianism.

Thinks that The Christian Bible negate the basic Human desires, so a human will be a calf all life and after dying, he was SAVED....what? after death, we´re only rotten meat. There´s NO scientific proofs of another live. Christianism isn´t bad now, but in past it was the only way to keep the flock calm. So, only the Rich(**) could be who administer the thinking and the rest of people were "free and pure"....free of being as another living animal. If a man uses his own brain he was an heretic, remember that! (** Rich in material and cultural way [Remember that Joan of Arc doesn´t deserve to be a Messenger because he not even can´t read] That means that the only who have power, could be the one who will keep it and no men ar equal).

So... Smulo, don´t question Satanism at you have at least one proof of any valid Christian belief, specially Miracles or Live After Death (not Iron Maiden album)

Satanis.

our life

(Anonymous)
leave this be it is not for you to say
Anton was a wonderful man do not doubt him for he set many of us free.
we enjoy him
leave him be

Re: our life

(Anonymous)
We set ourselves free... that is the ESSSENCE of Satanism! Don't forget that!

The moment you say someone else saved you from anything (including saving you from oppression) YOU become a follower, no different then any mainstream religion!

If you don't get the point of Satanic idealism then don't call yourself one!

Re: our life (Anonymous) Expand
Re: our life (Anonymous) Expand
Whether or not this was the case is open for debate. However, what is clear is that Zeena and Nikolas’ motivation for making public the myths behind LaVey’s self-created persona does not in itself provide a case against the accuracy of their information. The lack of adequate refutation of such details by the Church of Satan or anyone else is telling.

[snip]

One begins to wonder whether LaVey ever observed the hypocrisy of the Christians he described in the first place, or if like the rest of his story bound life, he merely created it out of his active imagination.


The fact that the Christians have not refuted his points is also telling. To hold Christians to a different standard implies that you may be guilty of hypocrisy if you are one.

In the preface to The Satanic Bible, LaVey wrote: "Herein you will find truth--and fantasy. Each is necessary for the other to exist; but each must be recognized for what it is." A substantial amount of The Satanic Bible, and Satanism, is fantasy - and I believe that many Satanists recognize that, although most don't.

The reason that most don't is because the first way they find out about Satanaims is via the Satanic Bible written by Lavey and the CoS. All of which try to debunk{w/out anything more than bias w/lack of proof} all the other Satanist groups and movements and organizations,etc. So, they get brainwashed into Lavey as hero, CoS as only true satanism{much the same way many Christina herders do to their sheep}and don't care to look into the validity of Laveys claims about himself, the CoS's actions or integrity; they just trust them blindly.
Lavey and the Church are talking about the symbolism w/in Satanism if I'm not mistaken, they are'nt talking about Laveys confabulations{I was reading Laveys Bible the other night, and Lavey points out about braggarts and how their bragginbgs are done not because of a healthy ego-but because they have ego issues and self-esteem issues; it would seem Lavey himself was at the topof this list of oen of these types ofpeopledue to his continued confabulations and propagtaion of them-ditto for the CoS},
It's just as difficult to remain Satanist when those that introduced you to it, whom you at first thought were seriuosly enlightneed and w/great integrity, trun out to be just as hypocritical as Moses, Fundy Jesus, and the fundamentalist/evangelical Christia Church are{this leads most Christians to give up their faith or become liberal christians once they find these truths out}speaking of liberal Christians leaving fundy Catholicism and Protestantism and starting liberal denoms w/more personal integrity; this is what many other Organizations/sects of Modern Satanism have attempted to do in the face of Laveys and CoS hypocrisies, and they provide credible evidence to prove these allegations, but not eh coS-all they do attack all the oters and do it w/venom and bias and a lack of actual proof{sounds like what the Catholic Church did to the Protestant and visa versa}.

Hail Satan
HAIL REASON1

plagiarism of redbeard?

(Anonymous)
In the foreword to Might Is Right, LaVey claims that he dedicated the Satanic Bible "to Ragnar Redbeard, whose might is right." If this is true, then it looks like he gave credit where it was due. Also, although LaVey may not have had many truly original ideas, what does it matter? I don't worship Anton LaVey, nor do I think he was perfect. his putting different philosophies together to create Satanism is what was important. Whether or not he "plagiarized" or even created a totally false identity is a moot point. True Satanists will not stop being Satanists upon finding out that LaVey wasn't perfect in every way. Nor would they stop being Satanists if a plethora of unsatanic discoveries about LaVey were suddenly made, because it is simply what they are regardless of his actions.

Re: plagiarism of redbeard?

(Anonymous)
Read the Satanic Bible... there is a claim that there was a dedication to Ragnar Redbeard... but it is also claimed that they conveniently removed it... why? Why remove the only citation of others' ideas that LaVey took? Further, why did LaVey take much of Crowley's ideas... and Eliphas Levi's ideas... and defame them?!

A Complete Waste of Time

(Anonymous)
This Paster wrote an article, assuming that Satanists would care. I never heard Anton LaVey claim his ideas were without precedent, nor do I think any less of him for having used powerful material such as the "plagiarized" Ragnar Redbeard material. As for his not providing footnotes, I can say that the Bible has no footnotes, and if it did, no one would be a Christian. Therefore, in a Satanic Bible, why give footnotes? The difference is that Christians assume that they are receiving everything straight from "GOD", whereas Satanists who use their intellect (say it with me, Christians: in-tuh-lekt) never touted LaVey as a Perfect Being, rather as an author, a man with some ideas, but knew he gained his influences elsewhere. Case in point: all of the Infernal Names are from different cultures from all over the world, and LaVey even gives reference to that in the Satanic Bible. Well, I've squandered enough time here.

Re: A Complete Waste of Time

(Anonymous)
You obviously haven't read many bibles have you... the Christian Bible DOES have footnotes to clarify each verse!

Before you make a point, at least make an attempt to know what your talking about!

So What?

(Anonymous)
LaVey was no doubt a great man, who brought about the world’s first, aboveground, Satanic religion.

The CoS is not a "LaVey fan club". If every word he ever said about his life was false, then I respect him more for what he has achieved. It would be foolish to assume LaVey told the entire truth about his past (would you?), but this has no hold on the validity of Satanism as a religion whatsoever. Remember the Devil always has been the father of lies!

Remember LaVey taught us to question everything… including him.

At the end of the day, it really makes no difference whether he was lying or not. Satanism is here to stay! Moreover, it's still just as valid regardless of LaVey's credibility as a person. I certainly prefer the myth.

HAIL SATAN!
HAIL ANTON SZANDOR LAVEY!

Re: So What?

(Anonymous)
According to LaVey's own FBI files LaVey admitted that he had absolutely NO interest in Satanism at all, and the only reason he was involved in the opening of the Church of Satan was to make money. But, as we know from LaVey's bankruptcy forms, we know that he failed to do this. These are facts, facts that prove he was no Satanist.

A Satanist would at least have the ambition to get a job to make his money and run the church the best way he can!

I am an ordained minister (and I started my own church in 1999), I am a certified web designer, and I am a certifed Security Officer with connections in various governments. I am also working on a NEW Satanic Bible (I have approximately a quarter of the manuscript complete and I work on it in my spare time).

Re: So What? (Anonymous) Expand
Re: So What? (Anonymous) Expand

Satanism

(Anonymous)
Read the Satanic Bible... LaVey did not just take Satanic Doctrine from previous Satanists (like Aliester Crowley, Eliphas Levi, etc) he took their thoughts and ideas and claimed them as his own then defamed those he took ideas from!

LaVey did more harm to the Satanic Community from anywhere else! If you really respect what you think to be Satanism, then go deeper then what you learned from LaVey and learn from the earlier Satanists (George Bernard Shaw, Fredrich Nietzsche, Ragnar Redbeard, etc.)

It's time Satanists stopped praising LaVey for things that others brought to Satanism and the Satanic Community... and to those modern Satanists who are actually fighting to push the facts about Satanism instead of making futile attempts to make money off of Satanism (which is all Anton LaVey attempted... and failed to succeed in). Lets start THINKING for ourselves instead of sitting around being brainwashed by the late Anton LaVey and his excessors in the 'Church of Satan'. Wake up and smell the proverbial roses!

Ragnar Redbeard was a diabolicist, whose identity is not known. Of the two suspected authors who may have wrote under that name, neither are clearly Satanists. Nonetheless LaVey used the work, and only revealed his source later on. And possibly only because others found the source and raised questions. Which is cheeky, admittedly, but hardly defaming.

Nietzsche was not a Satanist. He would have enjoyed the mentality and creativity that surrounds the Church of Satan and it's members, but I doubt that he would have called himself a Satanist.

Levi was a raving mad paranoid Christian, a Christian demonologist and experimenter, maybe even a diabolical Christian... but all those things have in common the word "Christian", making him a Christian (even if a heretical one) or a Christian-Jew-Pagan, but no way near a Satanist.

George Bernard Shaw... who knows. I don't.

There was no Satanic community... the diabolicism and indulgent clubs (and countries, and royalty) exist in Europe as they have always done, unaffected by the American-based Church of Satan. No Satanic community existed... plenty of proto-Satanic communities have existed and continue to exist. If you count them as Satanic, they are undiminished. LaVey Satanism brought into the world a new lighthouse that slowly burns the world with a new illumination. Scarred sometimes by politics and human petit behaviour, as is every human organisation, but burning the world and dragging itself forwards nonetheless, with many wilful creatives pledging allegiance. None of this has harmed anyone, and I would not have any of it end.

LaVey may have tried, and may have failed, to make money in any way he saw fit. I don't really care about his motives, only his results. If his motives were selfish... would you be surprised? I wouldn't. The guy was a Satanist who *knew* his motives were selfish, just like everyone elses.

I have found very few members of the CoS (note that I exist in Europe, not the USA) who are brainwashed. I've also met the organizers of other Satanic groups in the UK and around Europe, and whether they're CoS or not none of them have seemed "brainwashed". They've been alert, wise, critical, powerful and indominatable. Apart from some of the younger kids, who have been critical, sceptical, intelligent even in their soemtimes misguided enthusiasm for all things alternative.

You can smell as many roses as you want; but I see no problem in tasting life and also being a member of the Church of Satan, to add one more voice to the social engineering war.

We think for ourselves. If we think for ourselves *and* we decide we want to pay a one-time fee to be a member of the CoS, do you think we're "wrong" because we think differently (in one choice) to you?

YOU OWN

(Anonymous)
Wow!! This is some good stuff. I'm trying to understand the satanic bible and this has helped

As a Spiritual Satanist, I think that the Satanic Bible is bollocks. Anton LaVey invokes the name of Satan and His demons, yet is profoundly quite atheist. I've found this with a lot of CoS members. Everyone practices Satanism in their own way, which is how it should be. I myself wasnt even born till 1984, so a lot of the stuff which was written and said about him, I hadnt even heard of till quite recently.
Everyone seems to be so concerned with the proper way of doing things, which to me seems to miss the point. I talk to people and they all seem to claim that CoS is the "only" way, and they demean people who think differently. Which is totally out of order I think, or is it just a yank thing?
Also, I see everybody who has posted a comment has done it anonymously, as if they scared of people knowing who they are.

http://www.dpjs.co.uk/true.html
There is no "true" Satanism. And yes, even members of the CoS accept that many forms of Satanism exist.

Some forms of Satanism:
http://www.dpjs.co.uk/righteous.html

These people who "all seem to cliam that CoS is the 'only' way", are clearly the wrong people for you. Find people who are not so! Find those who move forwards and do not care for denominations, only for results! They exist, I have found many such beautiful minds.

Re: re (Anonymous) Expand
Re: re (Anonymous) Expand

The article and various things.

To address the "Legend and Reality" article; I don't think that Zeena is one to talk about hypocrisy and abuse, being as she abandoned her pre-teen son in a foreign country, completely alone. I think that's pretty heavy abuse. And isn't advocating one thing and then suddenly changing your mind due to rather apparent personal reason, itsn't that somewhat hypocritical? Or calling your mother a "true satanist" and then changing your mind about that too, that seems just as hypocritical as anything they accuse LaVey of doing.

But saying that LaVey did beat his wives and Togar, and he did lie about everything, what the hell does that matter? That has nothing to do with what he said. And as for the plagiarism, the only reson he outright plagiarized was Redbeard, whom he referenced, just as he referenced Rand, Crowly, and the others. He was pretty straight forward about his influences, but he would outright lie as well. Personally, I think he did it because he wanted to fuck with people, to build a mystique. And I gotta say, the satanic bible is a far better read than anything Rand or Crowley ever fucking wrote, and that in my opinion is the shittiest of his books. The best of hiw work to me are the devils notebook and satan speaks, because you get a real feel for who he is. You get the feel of a very intelligent man who like fucking with people. A man who won't say dispell rumors, who in fact incourages them. I definitely don't think that makes him a fraud. He had a sense of humor, and he admitted he was a bullshitter about somethings, unlike Zeena, whom seems to have that very dangerous absolutist mentality to her.

So I guess my point is that what he said mattered, not whether or not he fuck marilyn monroe or beat his wife, and that Zeena isn't exactly a peachy clean example of rational truth herself.



It matters not whether you support LaVey, Satanism or Christianity. This article was biased, hypocritical and lacked context.

Parasites will always try and debunk LaVey and Satanism. Let them! Encourage them! Who gives?

And more often than not, they attempt to do so in a sloppy, uneducated, and redundant manner like this inane rabble scribbled by John Smulo.

I am too frequesntly dissapointed these days. The internet allows any idiot to write an 'essay' (Pah!) and publish the slop where an unsuspecting reader will, through no intention of their own, waste their all too valuable time reading it.

  • 1
?

Log in

No account? Create an account