[LHP] The Western Left Hand

[Sutekh]

.

Does this mean, like the Church of Satan today, The Temple of Set is specifically non theistic?

The answer is no, the Temple of Set in my own opinion composes of people with a theistic or a non theistic belief, some may view set as an archetype or a conscious entity.

 

[Sutekh]

After all Set in my own opinion is the causer of change upon today's aeon.

 

[ThirtyThree]

.


The answer is no, the Temple of Set in my own opinion composes of people with a theistic or a non theistic belief, some may view set as an archetype or a conscious entity.

Exactly, and all of these members are defined as "LHP", right?

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

Wow, this thread. It's like some sort of nazi disinformation campaign, or trip to opposite world.

If the ToS doesn't qualify for your 'western left hand path(lol, I cant even type that without laughing), then what the heck does? Saying it isn't theistic is hilarious to anyone that knows the first thing about it.

Who exactly, 'came by night' and bestowed aquino with his special knowledge(ala paul of tarsus)? What does aquino mean when he refers to all non believers as 'satanatheists'(yes, that's what he calls non theistic satanists)?

So much cluelessness.

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

Try harder maybe you'll knock some sense into yourself

Well, I won't be getting any sense here, so I suppose that might be the best option.

Look, I would love for something you say to be coherent so we could discuss it and make headway, but pretty much all of this is based on your own lack of understanding and wild assumptions based on said lack. If you provide something coherent, some tie in to the LHP from all of this, some reason all of these unrelated assertions should be tied together, anything..then we can discuss, then awesome!. I won't hold my breath though, as some of us have been waiting literally years for you to figure out the basics.

 

[EtuMalku]

Wow, this thread. It's like some sort of nazi disinformation campaign, or trip to opposite world.

If the ToS doesn't qualify for your 'western left hand path(lol, I cant even type that without laughing), then what the heck does? Saying it isn't theistic is hilarious to anyone that knows the first thing about it.

Who exactly, 'came by night' and bestowed aquino with his special knowledge(ala paul of tarsus)? What does aquino mean when he refers to all non believers as 'satanatheists'(yes, that's what he calls non theistic satanists)?

So much cluelessness.

As usual you misunderstood everything . . . scary, you are

 

[EtuMalku]

If the ToS doesn't qualify for your 'western left hand path(lol, I cant even type that without laughing), then what the heck does?

Where did you get that from? See, you are unable to comprehend things. The ToS is as WLHP as you get.

Who exactly, 'came by night' and bestowed aquino with his special knowledge(ala paul of tarsus)? What does aquino mean when he refers to all non believers as 'satanatheists'(yes, that's what he calls non theistic satanists)?

The quick answer is 'Set' did. The longer answer would be a waste of time on you.

Look, I would love for something you say to be coherent so we could discuss it and make headway, but pretty much all of this is based on your own lack of understanding and wild assumptions based on said lack. If you provide something coherent, some tie in to the LHP from all of this, some reason all of these unrelated assertions should be tied together, anything..then we can discuss, then awesome!. I won't hold my breath though, as some of us have been waiting literally years for you to figure out the basics.

If you can't find anything here to discuss, debate, etc. then leave . . . no one is making you stay here.

 

[Onyx]

Todays Church of Satan frowns upon and scorns actual belief in a literal Satan.

I've been struggling over this issue lately. At the very beginning of this interview, Anton LaVey talks about some members being "mystically inclined":

He seems flexible in terms of literal belief, but draws the line at actual worship. This seems reasonable to me, as bowing down or praying to an external diety would not be compatible with self-worship.

But assuming that anyone who professes belief in a real deity is a "worshipper" seems like a error in logic to me, especially if Satan is viewed as a mentor or friend: the "well-wrought picture" as mentioned in the video.

My own personal views are compatible with the Church of Satan, but I'm wondering what others think. Thank you.

 

[Sutekh]

I've been struggling over this issue lately. At the very beginning of this interview, Anton LaVey talks about some members being "mystically inclined":

He seems flexible in terms of literal belief, but draws the line at actual worship. This seems reasonable to me, as bowing down or praying to an external diety would not be compatible with self-worship.

But assuming that anyone who professes belief in a real deity is a "worshipper" seems like a error in logic to me, especially if Satan is viewed as a mentor or friend: the "well-wrought picture" as mentioned in the video.

My own personal views are compatible with the Church of Satan, but I'm wondering what others think. Thank you.

What I personally think is more or less with the Church of Satan's view of devil worship per say on worshiping a literal Satan. Many "Satanists" who might be on the path of worshiping a literal Satan may disagree of course. Whether I agree with the Church of Satan's philosophy and ideology, I myself have had experiences from my workings of GM or Greater Magick. I have personally felt the darkness of a presence inside of me before, I cannot of course necessarily explain to you of what my experiences were like. But I do primarily believe that Magick can cause a change among aeons by evoking or invoking an archetype be it Set or Satan. Even though I more or less Subscribe to LaVey's philosophy, I primarily agree with the Temple of Sets view on the subjective universe and the objective universe, I believe that you are able to primarily activate your subjective thought patterns and send it out to the objective universe and to create a change be it manipulating the cosmic laws that restrain you among the objective universe.

 

[Sutekh]

Exactly, and all of these members are defined as "LHP", right?

Of course.

 

[crossfire]

I've been struggling over this issue lately. At the very beginning of this interview, Anton LaVey talks about some members being "mystically inclined"

"Mystically inclined" can refer to breaking through the veil between the conscious mind and the unconscious mind, which is what you want to do for individuation to occur.

 

[ThirtyThree]

Of course.

Is it then fair to say that Etu is incorrect, when he stated that the "Western LHP" is non theistic?

 

[crossfire]

One thing I have noticed regarding non-theists, theists, and gods, & naturalists and supernaturalists: oftentimes the differences between these is a matter of semantics: a tribal god of a theist might be referred to as a "cultural egregore" by a non theist, just as the scientifically verified placebo effect might be referred to as "just the placebo effect" by one person, which then discounts the actual wonderousness of the placebo effect in regards to mind over matter.

 

[Sutekh]

Is it then fair to say that Etu is incorrect, when he stated that the "Western LHP" is non theistic?

I more or less stay neutral on theism and non theism frankly, Whether the Temple of Set is an organization composed of theism. I find the Temple of Sets theism to be pragmatic and intelligent. "Do I agree that the LHP is non theistic?" Eh, the answer is probably a no. Some organization's of the Left hand Path can be theistic, Some of their theism can be at times pragmatic and intelligent. I am pretty sure I could mention the ONA on this thread on the debate section, but they are an example of an intelligent and a pragmatic theism. Whether or not some people may not like them which I can understand, I would to that extent consider them a Left Hand Path organization.

 

[Sutekh]

I personally agree with some of the Luciferian and Satanic approach of not bowing down to literal beings.

 

[Adramelek]

I've been struggling over this issue lately. At the very beginning of this interview, Anton LaVey talks about some members being "mystically inclined":

He seems flexible in terms of literal belief, but draws the line at actual worship. This seems reasonable to me, as bowing down or praying to an external diety would not be compatible with self-worship.

By many accounts Anton LaVey in the early days of the Church of Satan did believe in the literal existence of Satan, recognizing the Powers of Darkness as forces or "vibrations" in Satanic Magic. Here is a Temple of Set account of Black Magick, the Prince of Darkness, and Setian philosophy by Dr. Michael Aquino;

 

[crossfire]

Is it then fair to say that Etu is incorrect, when he stated that the "Western LHP" is non theistic?

I would (from my personal point of view) describe the western LHP as non-theistic in that it is "not dependent on theism." I would say that clinging to a "no-god" belief (atheism) might be a hindrance as compared to holding no beliefs whatsoever regarding "god." I would say that clinging to a god-belief (theism) makes the LHP much more dangerous as far as maintaining a stable mind, imo.

 

[Sutekh]

By many accounts Anton LaVey in the early days of the Church of Satan did believe in the literal existence of Satan, recognizing the Powers of Darkness as forces or vibrations in Satanic Magic. Here is a Temple of Set account of Black Magick and Setian philosophy by Dr. Michael Aquino;

The thing that I find to be confusing is traveling back to the past and finding out about LaVeys beliefs in the literal existence of Satan? I find it hard to believe in a persons own story of who'm he knew him quite a while back in the COS. I am not necessarily trying to start an argument but I find it rather confusing at times if LaVey believed in the existence of the Prince of Darkness. We do however know LaVeys circles of people who were interested in mysticism and esotericism. I do think that the doctor Aquino is a very truthful man whether or not I think it was a sad decision of him leaving the Church of Satan I can probably understand his own experiences and his esoteric belief.

 

[EtuMalku]

Is it then fair to say that Etu is incorrect, when he stated that the "Western LHP" is non theistic?

How would this objective deity function in the WLHP philosophy as stated in the OP?

 

[Onyx]

By many accounts Anton LaVey in the early days of the Church of Satan did believe in the literal existence of Satan, recognizing the Powers of Darkness as forces or vibrations in Satanic Magic. Here is a Temple of Set account of Black Magick, the Prince of Darkness, and Setian philosophy by Dr. Michael Aquino;

A good video, thank you. I almost fell off the chair at the Robitussin part.

Anton LaVey's writings never led me to think he was a theist, but I wasn't there to know him in person. Regardless, it does seem clear that some members did believe in a real Satan. But it doesn't matter to me, I'm happy to draw upon anything that I can benefit from.