Satanism.

[Dantalion]

Well, a very simple question.

'Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law'.

If 'what I will' is promoting the well-being of others, be honest, fair, and in general a nice person to be with, wouldn't Satanism be the ultimate personality test ?

(not talking about the 'angry-at-God-christian' devilworshipping here)

[Divine Insight]

Isn't atheism already a true test of a person's character?

I've always thought that if a benevolent God actually exists that God should be far more impressed by a highly moral atheist than by a religious person who is merely trying to appease the God.

As far as your version of "Satanism" is concerned, why even bother? Do you really need a deity to say to you, "'Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law". And how would that different from atheism?

[Darias]

Atheism says nothing about the contents of one's character. It's just a lack of belief in gods. You can be the most moral or most evil person on earth and still be an atheist. That's not saying much because the same is true for labeling oneself as a Christian.

The only difference between a good atheist and a good Christian in our culture is that one understands where their morals come from, and the other believes they are re-enforced by providence; at the end of the day, they are the same.

As for the label of Satanist, I don't really like it myself. It has a lot of baggage and for believers, it makes them think you guys worship satan -- which isn't really the case.

[Dantalion]

Isn't atheism already a true test of a person's character?

I've always thought that if a benevolent God actually exists that God should be far more impressed by a highly moral atheist than by a religious person who is merely trying to appease the God.

As far as your version of "Satanism" is concerned, why even bother? Do you really need a deity to say to you, "'Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law". And how would that different from atheism?

Well I'm just talking about the moral issue here, which atheism says nothing about.
I also don't see it as a deity at all, it's pure individualism, and out of that individualism you choose to make other people happy.
Not because a deity says so, not because society says so, but because it's what you actually WANT.
To me, as far as morality goes, this is a much stronger answer to theists than our usual secular morality.
I'm not advocating Satanism here, because indeed it comes with a lot of baggage, I'm just saying that, from a pure morality viewpoint, 'do what thou wilt' is strong, makes sense, and allows you to immediately know what a person is made of.

Also, I think Satanism really does make for psychologically, emotionally, and intellectually 'stronger' people (in theory), because it's 'dogmas' actively encourage you to grow, achieve, take personal responsibility for your actions etc.
It's highly theatrical, which is why I kindly decline lol, but I see it as some kind of secret society for a select few, like Freemasons.

Let me put it this way, I'm an atheist, so meh, but for people that actually need to have religion or the things they feel religion can provide them, Satanism would actually make sense, even though most couldn't handle the responsibility that comes with a 'do what you will' lifestyle.

[Dantalion]

Take a look at how it sees deities for example, it's probably what most of us would say:

'Man—using his brain—invented all the Gods, doing so because many of our species cannot accept or control their personal egos, feeling compelled to conjure up one or a multiplicity of characters who can act without hindrance or guilt upon whims and desires. All Gods are thus externalized forms, magnified projections of the true nature of their creators, personifying aspects of the universe or personal temperaments which many of their followers find to be troubling. Worshipping any God is thus worshipping by proxy those who invented that God. Since the Satanist understands that all Gods are fiction, instead of bending a knee in worship to—or seeking friendship or unity with—such mythical entities, he places himself at the center of his own subjective universe as his own highest value.'

[Divine Insight]

Also, I think Satanism really does make for psychologically, emotionally, and intellectually 'stronger' people (in theory), because it's 'dogmas' actively encourage you to grow, achieve, take personal responsibility for your actions etc.

Well, it's true that some version of "Satanism" do indeed go far beyond what you've posted in the OP."

I've read some versions of "Satanism" and I agree that those particular versions seemed to have far higher moral values than even Christianity holds. And they also seemed to contain a far more practical presentation of these moral values.

I personally don't think any religion named "Satanism" is going to fair very well in the world when so many people associate the term "Satan" with a demonic demon who is supposedly against all that is good and holy.

So it seems to me that the very title of the philosophy is basically just a purposeful jab at Christians.

Surely there are purely secular psychological philosophies that offer a similar way of taking personal responsibility.

I mean, if you tell a Christian that your a "Satanist" the very first thought that is going to cross their mind is that you worship the Satan of their religion. Surely you wouldn't expect someone who has been taught Christianity to think any differently?

So as far as I can see as long as the philosophy retains the name "Satanism" it's basically just being used to prod a negative response from Christians.

I have problems enough with "Wicca". Mentioning anything associated with a "Witch" is almost the same as proclaiming to be Satan himself.

In real life encounters when people ask me my religious affiliation, I'll usually say that I like the philosophies of Taoism and Buddhism, and I won't even mention Wicca simply because I'm aware that most people don't have a good enough understanding of what Wicca truly is to fully appreciate it anyway. The thoughts they conjure up with respect to the term "Wicca" wouldn't have anything at all to do with how I view Wicca anyway. So in that sense the term is worthless as a communication tool.

I think in a similar away "Satanism" would be just as worthless or even more so.

No one would even have a clue what the term actually represents. They would no doubt instantly associated it with the Christian idea of Satan. So in that sense it would be a gross miscommunication anyway.

[Dantalion]

Also, I think Satanism really does make for psychologically, emotionally, and intellectually 'stronger' people (in theory), because it's 'dogmas' actively encourage you to grow, achieve, take personal responsibility for your actions etc.

Well, it's true that some version of "Satanism" do indeed go far beyond what you've posted in the OP."

I've read some versions of "Satanism" and I agree that those particular versions seemed to have far higher moral values than even Christianity holds. And they also seemed to contain a far more practical presentation of these moral values.

I personally don't think any religion named "Satanism" is going to fair very well in the world when so many people associate the term "Satan" with a demonic demon who is supposedly against all that is good and holy.

So it seems to me that the very title of the philosophy is basically just a purposeful jab at Christians.

Surely there are purely secular psychological philosophies that offer a similar way of taking personal responsibility.

I mean, if you tell a Christian that your a "Satanist" the very first thought that is going to cross their mind is that you worship the Satan of their religion. Surely you wouldn't expect someone who has been taught Christianity to think any differently?

So as far as I can see as long as the philosophy retains the name "Satanism" it's basically just being used to prod a negative response from Christians.

I have problems enough with "Wicca". Mentioning anything associated with a "Witch" is almost the same as proclaiming to be Satan himself.

In real life encounters when people ask me my religious affiliation, I'll usually say that I like the philosophies of Taoism and Buddhism, and I won't even mention Wicca simply because I'm aware that most people don't have a good enough understanding of what Wicca truly is to fully appreciate it anyway. The thoughts they conjure up with respect to the term "Wicca" wouldn't have anything at all to do with how I view Wicca anyway. So in that sense the term is worthless as a communication tool.

I think in a similar away "Satanism" would be just as worthless or even more so.

No one would even have a clue what the term actually represents. They would no doubt instantly associated it with the Christian idea of Satan. So in that sense it would be a gross miscommunication anyway.

True, but then again, one could say the same thing about the term 'atheism', it's reactionary, purposefully 'against' theism, maybe not always in an anti-theist way, but it still presents a very 'I am a-youguys' message.

So one could argue, this being a society with strong judeo-christian roots, the use of the word 'Satan' (adversary in Hebrew if I'm not mistaken) serves the same purpose as a-theism, albeit a bit stronger and more 'combative'.
I've found this on the CoS website, it's a bit too self-promoting for my tastes but a pretty interesting way to look at things:

''Accepting the axiomatic premise that no gods exist as independent supernatural entities means that Satanists are de facto atheists. We know that the objective universe is indifferent to us. Since our philosophy is self-centered, each Satanist sees himself as the most important person in his life. Each individual thus generates his own hierarchy of values and judges everything based on his own standards. Therefore, we Satanists appoint ourselves as the “Gods� in our subjective universes. That doesn’t mean we think we have the powers of a mythological deity, but it does mean that we revere the creative capacity in our species. So to distinguish ourselves from the atheists who simply reject God as non-existent, we call ourselves “I-theists,� with our own healthy ego as the center of our perspective. This is truly a blasphemous concept that flies in the face of just about every other religion, and it is why Satan serves us well as a symbol. He was described as the prideful one, refusing to bow to Jehovah. He is the one who questions authority, seeking liberty beyond the stultifying realm of Heaven. He is the figure championed by the likes of Mark Twain, Milton, and Byron as the independent critic who heroically stands on his own.''

[DiscipleOfTruth]

I haven't read the entire Satanic Bible yet, so forgive me if I am bit ignorant on the subject.

This law has always troubled me. In the fact that what if a person has the will to make a terrible mistake whether they realize it or not? It seems to me that this law encourages both sound and unsound selfishness with out questioning it enough to make sure the actions of such a randomized will wouldn't be a hazardous blunder.

The law feels good to think about, but we must not forget that in this life sometimes sacrifices to our will has to made in order achieve a much greater objective, even if such an objective isn't desired.

For example, let's say I want to murder someone. I can't think of a way that makes me feel convinced I can get away with it and I'd rather not go to prison for the rest of my life. So I reject my will in one situation to avoid a much greater situation I don't want to be in.

Second, I have to question the morality, what makes it right for me to murder someone? Why don't I just avoid them? Nothing stands out in my mind that shows letting the person live is going to cause more harm than good nor that I would personally suffer for not caring about it.

[Dantalion]

I haven't read the entire Satanic Bible yet, so forgive me if I am bit ignorant on the subject.

This law has always troubled me. In the fact that what if a person has the will to make a terrible mistake whether they realize it or not? It seems to me that this law encourages both sound and unsound selfishness with out questioning it enough to make sure the actions of such a randomized will wouldn't be a hazardous blunder.

The law feels good to think about, but we must not forget that in this life sometimes sacrifices to our will has to made in order achieve a much greater objective, even if such an objective isn't desired.

For example, let's say I want to murder someone. I can't think of a way that makes me feel convinced I can get away with it and I'd rather not go to prison for the rest of my life. So I reject my will in one situation to avoid a much greater situation I don't want to be in.

Second, I have to question the morality, what makes it right for me to murder someone? Why don't I just avoid them? Nothing stands out in my mind that shows letting the person live is going to cause more harm than good nor that I would personally suffer for not caring about it.

Well, I'd say the law works perfectly in your first example. Your will not to go to prison for the rest of your life is stronger than your will to murder someone.

Secondly, if you as an individual hold that murder is evil, and your will is to avoid evil, you will not murder, it's as simple as that.
That's why it's such an awesome law. Christians tend to fear this, stating a 'do what you will' will lead to violent anarchy, but that all depends on the individual in question no ?
If somebody lives according to a 'do what you will' philosophy, and he's basically a nice and friendly guy, that shows he's in fact, a good person.
It's a reflection of a person's true nature, if you will.

So ironically, it would also be the perfect basis to judge people's 'souls' on, if you were to believe in such a thing.

[DiscipleOfTruth]

Isn't the law defeated by those who decide to hurt people for all the wrong reasons because it was their will?