The Three-Ring Circus of Satan: a review of eight books about LaVeyan Satanism

Jewish date:  14 Siwan 5772 (Parashath BeHa‘alothekha).


Today’s holidays:  Monday of the Ninth Week of Ordinary Time (Roman Catholicism), Feast Day of St. Werner Klemperer (Church of the SubGenius).

The Three-Ring Circus of Satan:  a review of eight books about LaVeyan Satanism

by Aaron Solomon Adelman

I know the title sounds a bit like mockery, but the relevance will be revealed later on.

The books examined in this review are:

1)  The Satanic Bible by Anton Szandor LaVey (LaVey The Satanic Bible), describing the philosophy and basic rituals of LaVeyan Satanism (what LaVey claims as his lifelong belief system) and the Church of Satanism (founded April 30, 1966 by LaVey).

2)  The Satanic Rituals by Anton Szandor LaVey (LaVey The Satanic Rituals), which expands on LaVeyan Satanic rituals.

3)  The Satanic Witch by Anton Szandor LaVey (LaVey The Satanic Witch), an extending discourse on magic.

4, 5)  The Devil’s Notebook by Anton Szandor LaVey (LaVey The Devil’s Notebook) and Satan Speaks! by Anton Szando LaVey (LaVey Satan Speaks!), books of essays on various topics on LaVeyan Satanism and whatever else LaVey felt like writing about.

6)  The Secret Life of a Satanist by Blanche Barton (Barton), a biography of LaVey by his last wife.

7)  The Satanic Scriptures by Peter H. Gilmore (Gilmore), a book of essays by the current high priest of the Church of Satan.

8)  Satan Wants You by Arthur Lyons (Lyons), a history of various things called Satanism.

As LaVey is the founder of LaVeyan Satanism, with Barton and Gilmore merely following in his footsteps, this review will focus heavily on LaVey’s work.

Theology and moral philosophy:  Before actually discussing these books, it is imperative to note what these books are not.  The classical idea of Satanism is a paranoid Christian fantasy of the worship of Satan.  LaVeyan Satanism is not Satanism in the original sense.  Much like Ayn Rand (Rand The Virtue of Selfishness, a New Concept of Egoism. With Additional Articles by Nathaniel Branden; Rand Atlas Shrugged; Adelman "Faking Reality: A Moral Review of Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged"), Anton Szandor LaVey is rebelling against Christianity—or rather his vision of Christianity—and taking a 180-degree turn.  The result, LaVeyan Satanism, is unconventional so far as traditional religion is concerned and strongly resembles Rand’s Objectivism on many points.

1) Like the theology of Objectivism, the theology of LaVeyan Satanism is atheistic without the least bit of proof.  While rejecting God in the Christian sense of the term (LaVey The Satanic Bible 40-43), he embraces another “god”:  himself (LaVey The Satanic Bible 44-45, 96).  LaVey believes that all people should treat themselves as their own deity, the exact religious equivalent of Objectivist selfishness.  This axiom forms the core of his personal morality.  LaVey has worked out a system of how to be selfish, not in an idiotically short-sighted fashion, but in an organized manner to bring one the most benefit and indulgence possible (LaVey The Satanic Bible 25).  This includes being compassionate and loving to those one considers worthy of compassion and love (LaVey The Satanic Bible 64), and there is also a variant on the golden rule:  “Do unto others as they do unto you” (LaVey The Satanic Bible 51).

2) LaVey sees those who annoy him as worthy of destruction.  He views religious people in general and Christians in particular as possessing even trait he despises; he sees them as a bunch of stupid, hypocritical doormats who hate life and pleasure, that are unjust, and that never create anything new or improve this world (LaVey The Satanic Bible 23, 25, 29-43, 46-52, 54-57, 61-65, 76-77, 82-86, 92-95, 110-11, 20, 35, 38-39; LaVey The Satanic Rituals 14, 17, 26-27, 31-35; LaVey The Devil’s Notebook 56, 84-88, 93-94).  Rand has essentially the same views about non-Objectivists.

3) LaVey does not preach to convert others to his moral system; rather he reaches out to those who already believe as he does.  The style of his writing is so insulting to those who do not agree with him that those who disagree are likely to quickly stop reading  Likewise, Rand insults those who do not agree with her and preaches to the choir in Atlas Shrugged.

4) Both LaVey and Rand are interested in recreating the world around them to their own liking.  Rand dreams of destroying the world to let the “superior” Objectivists taking over, while LaVey dreams of a stratified society with “superior” Satanists lording it over their “inferior” opponents.  LaVey also promotes the creation and usage of “artificial human companions”.

5) Both LaVey and Rand ground their moral systems in the naturalistic fallacy (LaVey The Satanic Bible 51).  Both contrast their systems repeatedly with other moral systems and religions—or rather their visions thereof.  Though while Rand cannot be bothered to name her opponents’ moral systems, LaVey harps frequently on Christianity.

Now, if this were all there were to LaVeyan Satanism, anyone reading this should be yawning.  A clone of Rand’s Objectivism naturally has all the problems of Objectivism, compounded with the fact that the clone is plagiarized.  However, what else there is to LaVeyan Satanism is anything but yawn-worthy.

Salesmanship:  Despite the logic behind it, being selfish, no matter under what name it goes, is not an honestly marketable philosophy.  Those who are not selfish usually have no interest in becoming selfish (or are unlikely to admit it), because people usually hate those who are selfish, and those who already are selfish have no need for someone to tell them how to be selfish and are unlikely to pay anyone for the privilege.  To make such a moral philosophy more salable, LaVey has wrapped up being selfish with other ideas that are easier to sell.  When people try to sell an ugly philosophy, they wrap it up in whatever righteousness and talent in their background they can.  Thus Ann Coulter, a lawyer, plays the lawyer to push extreme conservative paranoia (Adelman "Review of Godless: The Church of Liberalism by Ann Coulter"; Coulter); Richard Dawkins, a scientist, makes his claims of atheism in the name of science (Adelman "Delusional Victory:  A Review of Richard Dawkins’s the God Delusion"; Dawkins); Bill Maher, a comedian, pushes atheism by dredging up everything he finds ridiculous in religion (Adelman "Appeal to Ridicule: A Review of Bill Maher’s Religulous"; Charles); and Ben Stein, who wrote speeches for Richard Nixon, plays politics to defend creationism (Adelman "No Honesty Allowed: A Review of Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed"; Frankowski).  LaVey has a different background; he learned the art of showmanship in the circus and the carnival (Barton 29-43).  And so to the idea of selfishness LaVey adds the prestige of religion, controversy, and magic, and the result is the Church of Satan.

The prestige of religion:  While Rand dresses her moral system in the trappings of formal philosophy, LaVey dresses his in the trappings of religion.  Formal philosophy has never been popular.  It is an intellectual pursuit, one for which few people ever receive training.  Unlike science, formal philosophy has few, if any, people doing public relations to tell everyone that it a great and wonderful field.  In fact, even scientists, who are smart enough to understand philosophy, usually pay little attention to what philosophers have to say.  Religion, on the other hand, has a massive following, with the majority of humanity following a religion.  As a philosophy, Objectivism is something that elitist snobs follow.  As a religion, LaVeyan Satanism is something that more ordinary people can practice.  Furthermore, religion has the advantage that most countries at least pay lip service to freedom of religion.  An Objectivist cannot claim “freedom of philosophy” to act antisocially and get away with it.  But a LaVeyan Satanist can justify unusual behavior on the grounds of “freedom of religion” and get accommodation in the West, especially the United States.

Controversy:  Controversy is a great way to attract attention, and the more controversial, the better it works.  As such LaVey has created something deliberately controversial, and it is clear that the controversy is meant for attention and not the quest for actual knowledge, because LaVey has no interest in associating with anyone who will contradict him (LaVey Satan Speaks! 37-38)—something dangerous for anyone interested in knowledge above being right.  In all of the reviewed books, footnotes or specific references of any sort are rare.  A few verses from the Christian Bible are noted, and Arthur Lyons is especially nice in citing his sources when he quotes someone.  (Most of the LaVeyan Satanist literature seems to be propaganda.  Lyons seems to be thinking more academically.)  But for the most part, the books reviewed are littered with offense-inducing nontrivial claims.  For example:

1. “All religions of a spiritual nature are inventions of man” (LaVey The Satanic Bible 44).  (As noted before, no proof of invention of religions—or that atheism is correct, for that matter—is ever given.)
2. “Sexual activity certainly is condoned and encouraged by Satanism, but obviously the fact that it is the only religion which honestly takes this stand, is the reason it has been traditionally given so much literary space” (LaVey The Satanic Bible 85).  (No proof is given that Satanism is the only pro-sex religion.  Therefore any conclusion based on the unproven premise is premature.)
3. “Satanism does not sacrifice its god, as do other religions” (LaVey The Satanic Bible 138).  (Your reviewer is not aware of any religion sacrificing its god.  In many, if not most, religions, this is outright impossible, and it is difficult to imagine that if such an action were possible that it would be looked upon with favor except by a truly masochistic god.  The nearest your author is aware of is the crucifixion of Jesus, but this is a forced interpretation.)
4. “There is not a person on this earth who is completely devoid of ornamentation.” (LaVey The Satanic Bible 46)  (LaVey ignores the existence of nudists.)
5. “There has never been a great ‘love’ movement in the history of the world that hasn’t wound up killing countless numbers of people, we must assume, to prove how much they loved them!  Every hypocrite who ever walked the earth has had pockets buldging [sic] with love!” (LaVey The Satanic Bible 64).  (Sarcasm about the Nazis, Stalinists, and Maoists being full of love would be appropriate here.  Sarcasm about Flower Children massacring millions would also be appropriate.)
6. Attempts to link Jews and Zionists with Nazism (LaVey Satan Speaks! 20-22, 69-72; Barton 56-57), especially claims of cooperation between Zionists and Nazis during World War II (LaVey Satan Speaks! 70-71; Barton 57).  (Anyone who does not understand why this is a priori unbelievable and requires solid proof to be worthy of being taken seriously is incompetent with regard to logic and reason and has no business making arguments of any kind.)

Given the utility of controversy, The Satanic Bible is not merely an exposition on LaVey’s moral philosophy; it is also a rhetorical attack on religion in general and Christianity in particular.  (He claims, in contrast, that Satanism is an “un-religion” (LaVey The Satanic Bible 14).)  As noted above, he makes charges frequently of religion uniformly supporting a caricature of Christianity:  opposing pleasure in all forms, denying humanity’s animal nature and needs, and turning people into sheep—charges he never gives sources for.  LaVey also plays the antiquity card by claiming that Satanism existed before him (LaVey The Satanic Bible 171) and makes insinuations about people tried for witchcraft (LaVey The Satanic Bible 111), various evil historical figures (LaVey The Satanic Bible 104-05), Galileo Galilei and Leonardo da Vinci (LaVey The Satanic Rituals 32), the Illuminati (LaVey The Satanic Rituals 78), the Knights Templar (LaVey The Satanic Rituals 54-55), the Yezidis (LaVey The Satanic Rituals 54-55, 51-155), post-Christianization Russians (LaVey The Satanic Rituals 131-36), H. P. Lovecraft (LaVey The Satanic Rituals 175-79), the Jews (LaVey Satan Speaks! 20-22, 69-72), and practically any writer or artist he likes (LaVey Satan Speaks! 61, 64-65).  Given the sparse sourcing in LaVeyan Satanic literature and the fact that many of the alleged facts which LaVey presents are not blatantly obvious, any sensible reader should be (metaphorically) hearing alarm bells indicating that LaVey either does not care if anyone believes his version of history or not, so long as he gets the attention he needs to sell his books, or he is deliberately targeting the uncritical antireligious.

Note:  For the record, were LaVey still alive, he would be chewed out for his mischaracterization of religion by the unconventional Rabbi Shmuley Boteach, author of Kosher Sex (Boteach), who is unquestionably sex-positive.

Evil:  LaVey is not content to stir up controversy in claims about history and other people’s religions; how he frames his own religion is also deliberately controversial—and in a way which is a serious break with Rand.  Throughout LaVeyan Satanism books, “evil” is the term used for what LaVeyan Satanism stands for; in essence, to a LaVeyan Satanist, “evil” is the new “good”.  Strictly speaking, this is a huge terminological blunder.  “Good” is the term conventionally used for morally correct behavior, regardless of the moral system involved, and “evil” is used for morally incorrect behavior.  To use “evil” to denote what is morally correct is to sow confusion and controversy—exactly what LaVey wants.  LaVey also misidentifies his ideology with evil as defined in Christianity (or probably any other religion with a moral code), when in reality his “evil” is not identical with the Christian notion of evil (or the notion of evil propagated by probably any other religion with a moral code).  The Satanic Bible does not advocate murder,  rape,  theft (for the most part),  child abuse,  abortion,  slavery,  bestiality,  senseless or counterproductive cruelty,  or breaking the law.  Such dishonesty is apparently not sufficiently effective, as in the later Satan Speaks! he makes the blatantly outrageous claim of finding nothing wrong with the plan for world conquest laid out in the infamous forgery The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion (LaVey Satan Speaks! 71).

Symbolism:  Another publicity tactic in LaVeyan Satanism is the use of Satan as a symbol.  Now, it is perfectly possible to use an entity one does not truly believe in as a symbol.  E.g., in the 1939 MGM film The Wizard of Oz, the Tin Woodman sings, “I’d be friends with the sparrows / and the boy who shoots the arrows / if I only had a heart”, and no one seriously thinks that he is truly seeking a closer relationship with the Roman god Cupid or even believes that Cupid exists (Fleming).  But LaVey pushes symbolism to a new level.  Despite his claims of quasi-atheism, on practically every page of The Satanic Bible LaVey talks about Satan as if he were a real entity instead of merely a symbol of everything LaVey finds praiseworthy.  He also frequently makes use of God as a symbol for everything he finds detestable.  Taken out of context, much of the book could easily be interpreted as promoting the actual worship of the Christian Satan.  LaVey also has no qualms about using the alleged evil deities and quasi-deities of all religions in the same manner as and as virtual synonyms for his version of Satan (LaVey The Satanic Bible 56, 58-60, 145-46).  Such confusing and counter-conventional symbolism can only help to sow confusion and controversy.

Magic:  Anyone can be selfish or misuse words and symbols for free.  In order to get people to pay attention and buy his books, LaVey offers something no one else—not even Rand—can provide:  magic, not the tongue-in-cheek kind, but the kind that magicians only pretend that they do.  (It may be safely assumed that LaVey never was able to truly work magic, as he poorly rationalizes not using magic for the sorts of “minor” feats that would be expected in proper testing of magical efficacy (LaVey The Satanic Bible 121-22).)  Ritual in LaVeyan Satanism is not for worship, but rather is a method of creating the right emotional state so that the participants can use it to accomplish something in the real world (LaVey The Satanic Bible 111).  At the very least, LaVeyan ritual is supposed to provide an emotional release, but it also has magical aims, such as love spells and curses to cause the downfall of enemies.  The descriptions of how to perform magic are extensive and nontrivial—especially The Satanic Witch, which details how women may use magic to manipulate others for their own benefit—thus providing motivation for the selfish to buy LaVey’s books.

Recycling and plagiarism:  LaVey considers all rituals fantasy (LaVey The Satanic Rituals 15).  Since one fantasy is as good as another, logically one may use whatever fantasy one feels will accomplish the chosen task—any fantasy.  E.g., he cites the case of a wizard who quoted a poem of Rudyard Kipling for a spell (LaVey The Satanic Bible 143).  The Satanic Bible and The Satanic Rituals thus freely borrow (in reality or LaVey’s fantasy) from the Enochian Keys of the mystic John Dee (LaVey The Satanic Bible 153-272), the Black Mass (LaVey The Satanic Bible 99-105; LaVey The Satanic Rituals 31-53), The City of Dreadful Night by James Thomson (LaVey The Satanic Rituals 54-75; Thomson), pre-Christian Russian paganism (LaVey The Satanic Rituals 131-50), the Yezidi religion (LaVey The Satanic Rituals 151-72), The Island of Dr. Moreau by Jules Verne (LaVey The Satanic Rituals 76-105; Wells, chapter 12), bad science-fiction movies (LaVey The Satanic Rituals 106-30), and the Cthulhu Mythos of H. P. Lovecraft (LaVey The Satanic Rituals 171-202; Lovecraft).  Recycling rituals serves to create an illusion of a Satanic history that never really existed, thus creating prestige among the uncritical, not to mention saving LaVey a lot of effort in composing rituals.  However, LaVey’s dishonesty is deeper than that.  The ritual borrowed from The Island of Dr. Moreau is done so without correct attribution; he claims the ritual was borrowed by Wells from the Illuminati (LaVey The Satanic Rituals 78).  Plagiarism is also not limited to rituals. John Smulo also correctly notes that in The Satanic Bible, LaVey clearly plagiarized the (possibly parodical) radical tract Might is Right (Redbeard; Smulo 28).

Ignorance of Hebrew and the Hebrew Bible:  LaVey uses the “magic” word “Shemhamforash” as an exclamation in his rituals (LaVey The Satanic Bible 130, 34, 48, 50, 52; LaVey The Satanic Rituals 43, 45).  This is a Hebrew term, hashShem hamMeforash, which refers to the Divine name YHWH.  Considering LaVey’s unapologetic hatred for the God of Israel, invoking YHWH should be the last thing he wants to do.  Likewise problematic is his use of the Hebrew term Liwyathan (Leviathan) in the LaVeyan Satanic Baphomet symbol (LaVey The Satanic Bible 136), found on the covers of The Satanic Bible, The Satanic Rituals, The Satanic Witch, The Devil’s Notebook, and The Satanic Scriptures.  The most positive reference to Liwyathan in the Hebrew Bible is as YHWH’s pet sea monster (Psalms 104:26); other references depict Liwyathan as being destroyed by YHWH (Isaiah 27:1; Psalms 74:14).  The symbol therefore backfires, giving the impression of something less powerful than YHWH and not a real threat, perhaps even something amusing.  One could even make such an argument about the use of Satan as a symbol.  In the Hebrew Bible and New Testament, the Adversary (hasSaṭan) is never depicted as anything anywhere on par with YHWH or the Trinity; one cannot really expect anyone to have any hope when fighting against an immortal, transcendent creator deity.  Given LaVey’s emblematic use of a symbol which signifies something vastly inferior to what his archenemies believe in, he might as be wearing an “I AM A LOSER” T-shirt.

Also:  LaVey believes that saṭan (“Satan”) means “opposite” (LaVey The Satanic Rituals 13), whereas it only means “adversary”.  Furthermore, LaVey claims that beliyya‘al (“Belial”) means “without a master” (LaVey The Satanic Bible 109), an interpretation without any etymological sense.  The actual meaning is probably closer to “useless”, which is an accurate description of the utility of LaVey’s work for understanding Hebrew.

Was LaVey crazy?:  Probably not.  LaVey makes no secret that he does not care to be around people in general (LaVey The Devil’s Notebook 139-42).  However, unless they are willing to live in isolated places away from all the comforts of civilization, even the worst misanthropes have to deal with other human beings.  What LaVey seems to have done is use LaVeyan Satanism as a way of dealing with other human beings on his own terms.  With the aura of selfishness and evil he created around himself, people would naturally tend to avoid him.  Those who did go near him, whether willingly or out of necessity, would naturally feel the need to treat him with deference, fearing what he might do.  (Angering someone with real magic powers would be a bad idea.)  Even his followers fit into this scheme.  They would have to honor him and do his bidding to learn from him or advance in the Church of Satan.  E.g., he expects those around him to agree with him, and there are incidents of LaVey taking bribes for people to advance in the Church of Satan.  The Satanic Witch especially reflects this.  Women learning from him how to be “witches” would have to look and act the way he wanted; despite it all allegedly being for their own benefit, he would get to be around women dressed according to his tastes—like whores—and being liable to “accidental” wardrobe malfunctions.  How much LaVey believes of what he claims is unclear, but he seems to have arranged everything for his own benefit.

Setting a bad example:  Barton follows LaVey’s example closely in The Secret Life of a Satanist.  Though the style of a biography is naturally different from a philosophical tract or a book of rituals, she nevertheless faithfully reflects the bad attitude that LaVey and all who agree with him are great and that everyone else is not.  Gilmore’s The Satanic Scriptures reads like a lower-quality version of LaVey’s books of essays.  He falls in line with LaVey in practically everything and even rationalizes away predictions of LaVey that turned out to be wrong; this book is not worth delving into except by those who wish to become scholars of LaVeyan Satanism.

Much of the bad example set by LaVey (and Rand) is echoed more recently by the likes of Ann Coulter, Richard Dawkins, Ben Stein, and Bill Maher.  The reader may remember that all of these people rated an F on the Adelman theological rating system.  There is not necessarily any direct connection between LaVey and Rand on one hand and Coulter, Dawkins, Stein, and Maher on the other.  However, everyone using unjustifiable rhetoric makes it easier for others to get used to it and come to consider it acceptable.  This does not make for a more harmonious society.

Conclusion:  LaVeyan Satanism appears designed for publicity and selling literature.  There is a consistent pattern of deliberately controversial claims in all books examined other that Lyons’, with little to back up said claims and much disregard for truth.  LaVey also used other people’s material without proper (or any) attribution.  These books are highly recommended for anyone with a strong stomach who wants to know how not to write religious tracts.

Overall classification:  Religious/philosophical literature meant to attract the selfish and scare off everyone else.  On the bright side, at least LaVeyan Satanic literature, once one gets past the bluster and aura of evil, can be amusing.  (Except for Gilmore’s The Satanic Scriptures, which is not as fun as LaVey’s work.)

Theological rating:  F, prefiguring other Fs.  The entire Church of Satan is hereby banned from theology for life and afterlife.  LaVey may make for amusing reading, but amusing bad is only good when it comes to fiction.

Bibliography:

Adelman, Aaron Solomon. "Appeal to Ridicule: A Review of Bill Maher’s Religulous."  (2009).  .

---. "Delusional Victory:  A Review of Richard Dawkins’s The God Delusion."  (2009).  .

---. "Faking Reality: A Moral Review of Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged."  (2012).  .

---. "No Honesty Allowed: A Review of Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed."  (2009).  .

---. "Review of Godless: The Church of Liberalism by Ann Coulter."  (2007).  .

Barton, Blanche. The Secret Life of a Satanist:  The Authorized Biography of Anton Lavey. Los Angeles, CA: Feral House, 1990. Print.

Boteach, Shmuel. Kosher Sex:  A Recipe for Passion and Intimacy. 1st ed. New York: Doubleday, 1999. Print.

Religulous. 2008. DVD. West, Palmer, et al., 2008-10-03.

Coulter, Ann. Godless:  The Church of Liberalism. New York: Crown Forum, 2006. Print.

Dawkins, Richard. The God Delusion. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 2006. Print.

The Wizard of Oz. 1939. DVD. LeRoy, Mervin and Arthur Freed, 1939-08-25.

Expelled:  No Intelligence Allowed. 2008. DVD. Craft, Logan, et al., 2008-04-10.

Gilmore, Peter H. The Satanic Scriptures. 1st ed. Baltimore, MD: Scapegoat Publishing, 2007. Print.

LaVey, Anton Szandor. The Devil’s Notebook. Portland, OR: Feral House, 1992. Print.

---. Satan Speaks! Venice, CA: Feral House, 1998. Print.

---. The Satanic Bible. New York: Avon Books, 1969. Print.

---. The Satanic Rituals. New York: Avon, 1972. Print.

---. The Satanic Witch. Venice, CA: Feral House, 1989. Print.

Lovecraft, H.P. "The Call of Cthulhu".  1928. Web page. Weird Tales. 2006-07-26. .

Lyons, Arthur. Satan Wants You:  The Cult of Devil Worship in America. New York: Mysterious Press, 1988. Print.

Rand, Ayn. Atlas Shrugged. New York:  Random House, 1957. New York: Signet, 1957. Print.

---. The Virtue of Selfishness, a New Concept of Egoism. With Additional Articles by Nathaniel Branden. A Signet Book, P2602. New York: New American Library, 1964. Print.

Redbeard, Ragnar. "Might Is Right".  1896. PDF file.  Loompanics (partial): 2008-05-20. .

Smulo, John. "Christ’s Advocate:  An Incarnational Apologetic to Satanism".  2001. PDF file. 2008-06-06. .

Thomson, James. "The City of Dreadful Night".  1880. Project Gutenberg Release #1238 (March 1998). 2008-07-06. .

Wells, H. G. "The Island of Doctor Moreau".  2004. Project Gutenberg EText #159.  (2004-10-14):  Project Gutenberg. .

The end of the world, Indonesian intolerance of atheism, and bacon-flavored syrup

Jewish date:  14 ’Iyyar 5772 (Parashath Behar).

Today’s holidays:  Day 29 of the ‘Omer (Judaism), Pesaḥ Sheni (Judaism), Fifth Sunday of Easter (Roman Catholicism), Feast Day of St. Guiness (The Stout) (Church of the SubGenius), Feast of Saint George (Arabs in Israel).

Greetings.

I am going too long between posts again.  I am still rereading my LaVeyan Satanism books, finding rather a lot of the attitudes of Ayn Rand in there.  In the meantime, I would like to comment on a few items in the news:

1) “Miami cult who tattoo themselves with 666 say the world will END on June 30”:  I have no idea what self-proclaimed Antichrist Jose de Luis de Jesus of Growing in Grace International is thinking.  Please note that predictions of the end of the world so far have been all wrong, and I have no a priori reason to believe that De Jesus’s prediction is any different.  But I have marked the date in iCal, and if the world does end, I will be downright shocked and the first to admit he was actually right (if I still exist in some form at that point).

2) “Atheist in Indonesia Facing 11 Years in Prison for Saying 'God Doesn't Exist'”:  Indonesia has the reputation of being a fairly tolerant predominantly Muslim country.  Yet Alex Aan, an atheist who posted on Facebook his belief that God does not exist, was beaten up by an unruly mob and sentenced to 11 years in prison for his beliefs.  There is a very obvious question of why the government of Indonesia recognizes only six religions (Catholicism, Protestantism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, and Confucianism), suggesting that the government is more interested in maintaining peace between the existing religious groups rather than enforce a general tolerance for all religions.  That an atheist can be so maltreated is definitely not consistent with freedom of religion.

3) “Rabbi Approved: Kosher Bacon Syrup”:  Harold sent me a link to this, and it just struck me as weird. There is no actual bacon in the syrup.  The only thing wrong with it is mar’ith ‘ayin, that it may create the false appearance of consuming bacon.  Then again, the product is clearly labeled as bacon-flavored on the label.

Peace.

’Aharon/Aaron

The Fast of ’Ester and miscellany

Jewish date:  13 ’Adhar 5772 (Parashath Ki Thissa’).

Today’s holidays:  Fast of ’Ester (Judaism), Feast Day of Perpetua and Felicity (Roman Catholicism), Bahá’í Month of Fasting (Bahá’í Faith), Feast Day of St. Barbara Eden.

Greetings.

Current holiday alert:  The Purim season is upon us.  Today is the Fast of ’Ester, which commemorates the fasting by ’Ester and the rest of the Jewish people preceding her approaching the Persian king ’Aḥashwerosh to save them from the machinations of the evil Haman.  Tomorrow is Purim and the day after that Purim Shushan, which celebrate the victory of the Jews over their enemies.  The story is recounted in the Book of Esther.

I have decided to take advantage of the fast day to note a few items from the news recently.

1) “Doctors 'should have the right to kill unwanted or disabled babies at birth as they are not a real person' claims Oxford academic”:  This is an example of why I did not go into bioethics, considering it a field of non-problems.  As I noted in my review of Atlas Shrugged, morality is a matter of opinion.  The bioethicist in question is of the opinion that newborn babies do not qualify as people and thus killing handicapped or unwanted babies is not murder.  While she is entitled to her opinion, her arguments are doomed to fall on deaf ears unless she can either justify them to others in terms of their own moral systems or convince others that hers is right.  The reported reactions strongly suggest she has failed horribly.

2) “The Middle East’s real apartheid”:  A piece on the hypocrisy of how the term “apartheid” is used by anti-Semites, noting the severe discrimination in Arab/Muslim countries.

3) “Witnessing 'child witch' exorcism in the DR Congo”:  This is an illustration of why beliefs need to have some basis in reality.  The results of believing that children are possessed can be disastrously cruel.

4) “Atheist group targets Muslims, Jews with ‘myth’ billboards in Arabic and Hebrew”:  Yes, the militant atheist PR machine is at it again.  And now they’re putting up billboards in and around New York City proclaiming to Jews and Muslims in Hebrew and Arabic about their gods “You know it’s a myth… and you have a choice.”  This itself is a mistake, as not everyone knows that YHWH and ’Allāh are myths, and those who believe in these gods are quite likely to wonder the people running these ads are thinking.  (A billboard is not a good medium to make even a half-decent argument for practically anything.)  The article gives some idea what the atheist PR machine is thinking:

Dave Silverman, the president of American Atheists, said the signs are intended to reach atheists in the Muslim and Jewish enclaves who may feel isolated because they are surrounded by believers. “Those communities are designed to keep atheists in the ranks,” he says. “If there are atheists in those communities, we are reaching out to them. We are letting them know that we see them, we acknowledge them and they don't have to live that way if they don’t want to.”

I get the impression that Mr. Silverman is living in a fantasy world.  In the United States, nonbelievers can—and do—leave their belief communities.  No one is stopping atheists from leaving the Jewish and Muslim communities.  No one is even stopping them from expressing atheistic beliefs or remaining in their communities if they do so.  And if the American Atheists are trying to reach nonbelievers who have trouble getting out, they should be advertising in more isolated places, such as Kiryas Joel and New Square.

Peace, and have an easy fast and a happy Purim.

’Aharon/Aaron

The Rapture and Pesaḥ preparation

Greetings.

Jewish date:  18 ’Iyyar 5771 (Parashath BeMidhbar).

Today’s holidays:  Day 33 of the ‘Omer/Lagh ba‘Omer (Judaism), Fifth Sunday of Easter (Roman Catholicism), Feast Day of St. Elphinstone (Church of the SubGenius).

Topic 1:  This is a followup to the last post, in which your humble blogger noted that Saturday (21 May 2011) was supposed to be the Rapture according to Harold Camping.  (This is actually the second time he has predicted the Rapture; the first was 1994.)  As should be obvious to anyone, he was wrong—as everyone who has predicted the end of the world as we know it has been before.  Other people have felt inclined to comment on this whole incident, both on when the Rapture was supposed to occur and the silence from Harold Camping afterwards (“Predictor of May 21 doomsday to watch it on TV”, “Broadcaster silent as "Judgment Day" hours tick by”, “The Rapture Is Not Saturday -- It's Tonight”, “As hours tick by, "Judgment Day" looks a dud”).  At least one atheist has taken advantage of it for profit by agreeing to take care of people’s pets after the Rapture if paid in advance (“After The Rapture, Who Will Walk Your Dog?”).  Some people downright made fun of it:





Personally I do not find the failure of the Rapture to appear so funny.  Some people actually believed that Camping was right and spend their life savings.  Now these people look like a bunch of idiots, are broke, and are going to have to deal with the social and economic consequences.  Great going, Camping.

Topic 2:  More on Pesaḥ (Passover) in Israel.  Preparation for Pesaḥ was largely unremarkable, though made somewhat easier because I have a small apartment and thus not much to clean.  Having a small apartment also makes it a lot easier to search for ḥameṣ (leavened grain products, which are forbidden on Pesaḥ), as there was less area to search.

Getting rid of ḥameṣ was accomplished by making sure I ate it all before Pesaḥ.  The common practice of selling one’s ḥameṣ to a non-Jew before Pesaḥ was totally irrelevant to me.  Some, such as the Ga’on of Vilna, have decried the practice as not being a real sale, at least as normally performed; in my case, if I had any ḥameṣ left, it was in the form of individual crumbs or grains hidden in inaccessible parts of my apartment.  In practical terms, such ḥameṣ is worthless and unsellable.  No one in their right mind is going to buy isolated crumbs, and if they really wanted to buy such crumbs (maybe due to insanity), one cannot really take possession of and exercise the authority of ownership on something one has no real access to.  Such a sale would therefore be, to say the least, absurd.  I therefore relied on disowning any such ḥameṣ, which is pretty easy since it was nothing anyone would want anyway.

There is a common practice of burning any ḥameṣ left over on the morning before Pesaḥ, and this was practiced very publicly over here.  There is a field next to the local mall, and there were large piles of and barrels filled with ḥameṣ being burned.

That is my shadow you see in front.  I personally would have preferred that a lot of this ḥameṣ would have been given to non-Jews (no point in wasting edible food), but there are very few people who are visibly non-Jewish here in Giv‘ath Shemu’el.

Now somebody prod me to talk about the sedher, qiṭniyyoth, and yom ṭov sheni on Tuesday.  If I pick up the pace, I may actually get caught up with discussing the Jewish holidays before Shavu‘oth…

Peace and enjoy burning stuff this Lagh ba‘Omer.

’Aharon/Aaron

It was not just the Temple Mount which the Muslims stole

Greetings.

Jewish date:  26 Tishri 5771 (Parashath Noaḥ).

Today’s holidays:  Feast Day of Francis of Assisi (Roman Catholicism), Feast Day of St. Buster Keaton (Church of the SubGenius).

Worthy cause of the day:  “Stop 'Corn Sugar' Now!”.

The Tishri holidays are over, and I am trying to do something worthwhile waiting to hear back from someone in order to be able to move to Israel.

Topic 1:  “Atheists, Jews top religious knowledge survey” and “Survey: Americans don't know much about religion”.  That a lot of Americans know very little about religion is unsurprising; that is why this blog exists in the first place.  That some groups (Jews, Mormons) tend to know more than average is also unsurprising, since some groups do value knowledge.  That atheists and agnostics should tend to have better than average knowledge of religion is indeed paradoxical, but there is more to belief than just knowing basic facts.  The question I want answered is how knowledge and belief are interacting.

Image of the Babri Mosque via Wikipedia

Topic 2:  “India's top court gives green light for mosque verdict” and “India braces for ruling on contested holy site”.  If you thought that the Temple Mount was the only site Muslims were fighting over with members of a different religion, think again.  These articles report on a coming legal fight over Ram Janmabhoomi in Ayodhya, which Hindus claim as the birthplace of Rama, one of the avatars of the god Vishnu.  After the Muslim conquest of India, the Muslims demolished the Hindu temple there built the Babri Mosque in 1528.  Naturally, the Hindus were not pleased at the desecration.  In 1949 idols of Rama showed up at the mosque, Hindus demanded to pray at the site, the Muslims refused, and a legal fight began.  The lawsuit apparently did not resolve quickly enough, because a Hindu mob destroyed the Babri Mosque in 1992.  While the Hindus currently have control of the site, a new legal battle is in the works.  Yes, there is a lot of politics involved in the case.  But politics has to work on feelings that people actually have, and Hindus, having been persecuted under Muslim rule (no surprise there), have had every reason to want to tear down every mosque built on one of their holy sites.  If the courts rule in favor of the Muslims, I expect Hindu politicians in India to use it as reason to rally Hindus against Muslims.

Also:  Further incidents of stealing houses of worship from other religions and converting them into mosques are listed in the Wikipedia article “Conversion of non-Muslim places of worship into mosques”.    Such behavior is not the way of a religion of peace, and, yes, the Muslims have made a lot of enemies.

Topic 3:  For today’s religious humor, something relevant to this week’s parashah (Torah portion): “Bill Cosby Noah”:


Peace (the genuine kind).

Aaron

The UN only values human life when politically convenient

Greetings.

Jewish date:  29 Tammuz 5770 (Parashath Devarim).

Today’s holidays:  The Three Weeks (Judaism), Lailat al Miraj (Islam), Fifteenth Sunday of Ordinary Time (Roman Catholicism), St. Ponco Villa (Church of the SubGenius).

Note:  I am not discussing a Gospel-based film today, because I have not yet gotten around to watching The Miracle Maker yet.

Topic 1:  Today’s anti-Semitism update:  “The UN Bias Against Israel and Human Life” is two graphs which shows how much emphasis the United Nations puts on human life with respect to where human lives are lost.  Not only has the UN been outstandingly disproportionately critical of Israel (46,000 dead, almost all due to self-defense, 223 resolutions against; next to lowest death toll listed is Rwanda with 800,000 dead, next to highest most criticized is Yugoslavia with 58 resolutions against), but these graphs make a mockery of the idea that atheism is inherently more moral than more conventional religions.  Four of the countries listed—China, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, North Korea, and Yugoslavia—are all communist countries.  The Soviet Union is responsible for over 5 million deaths, and China for 31.5 million deaths.

Also:  The video “When we die as martyrs - Palestinian Children” gives some idea of why real peace between Israel and its enemies is currently impossible:

Yes, this is a children’s video promoting jihad and historical revisionism—behavior and ideology in blatant contradiction to peace and conciliation.  And if “Without Palestine, what meaning is there to childhood?!”, then childhood has been meaningless to Arabs for a long time.  There never has been a country of Palestine.  Before the State of Israel, the territory was controlled by the British, and before that the Ottoman Empire.  And yet there was no push for a “Palestinian” state until 1967, when “Palestine” became an excuse to wage jihad against Jews.  Also note “Trust the Palestinian Authority?”; the Palestinian Authority is saying one thing in English and another in Arabic again.

Topic 2:  More religious oppression:  “Muslim Mob Kills Wife, Children of Christian in Pakistan”, “Sealed Church in Bogor, Indonesia Appeals to UN”, “Punjab soup kitchen forbidden to Christians”.

Topic 3:  For today’s religious humor: “If yu seez dis, iz too”:


Peace.

Aaron

No, studying science will not turn you into an atheist

Image suggested by Zemata and used due to lack of a better idea of what picture to use for this post via Wikipedia

Greetings.

Jewish date:  11 Siwan 5770 (Parashath BeHa‘alothekha).

Today’s holidays:  Monday of the Eighth Week of Ordinary Time (Roman Catholicism), Victory over the U.S. Day (Can.) (Church of the Subgenius), Saints Cyril and Methodius Day (Christianity), Feast of Hermes (Thelema).

Worthy causes of the day:  “ColorOfChange.org:  Tell Fox: "Fire John Stossel"”, “Blackwater is just the tip of the iceberg”, “Stop the Comcast-NBC Merger | Free Press”, “Stop The Drill | Oceana North America”, “American Insurance Companies: Stop Canceling Women's Policies - Take Action Today @ The Breast Cancer Site”, “Save Gulf Sea Turtles - Take Action Today @ The Rainforest Site”, “action.firedoglake.com | Sign the petition to President Obama: End plans for offshore drilling”, “Take Action: TrueMajority.org:  NO BAILOUT FOR BP”, and “MoveOn.org Political Action: No Bailouts for Big Oil”.

Topic 1:  Today’s anti-Semitism update:  “"Jew Producer" Silenced: Comedy Central Update”.  “No Nukes?” is a cogent argument why Israel should not give up its nuclear weapons.

On the theme of religious intolerance one may also add “Muhammad cartoonist in hiding after arson attack”, “Endless violence against Christian women of Kandhamal”, “Vietnam police charge six villagers over Catholic funeral”, “Beijing warns US over Falun Gong”, “Protestant clergyman arrested in Guangzhou”, “UZBEKISTAN: Large raid and almost immediate trial starts against registered church”, and “Lao Christians Expelled from Village Suffer Critical Illnesses”.  Yes, it is an ugly, intolerant world out there where some people think they can suppress other people’s beliefs out of existence, as if the existence of only one set of beliefs made them true.

Topic 2:  “From Point of Inquiry: Does Studying Science Cause Atheism, or Vice-Versa?”.  The results of someone actually studying the question, rather than just pulling an answer out of thin air, violate common expectations:  people’s basic religious beliefs, whether accepting a religion or atheism, are normally not affected by science education.  Keep in mind that science is only well-suited for dealing with what can be observed.  As such, making good scientific arguments about lies beyond our universe (such as gods) is fraught with serious problems.

Topic 3:  For today’s religious humor (courtesy of Jason):  Sh'koyach - The New Age Jewish Comic Strip!  And no, this is not a LOLcat image, for a change.  It is a comic strip about a shrimp who moves in with an Orthodox Jew in order to avoid being eaten.

Peace.

Aaron

Scientism and false dichotomies

Image via Wikipedia

Greetings.

Jewish date:  18 Nisan 5770.

Today’s holidays:  Ḥol hamMo‘edh Pesaḥ (AKA Passover; Judaism), Day 3 of the ‘Omer (Judaism), Good Friday (Roman Catholicism).

Worthy cause of the day:  “MoveOn.org Political Action: Say no to off-shore drilling”, “Take Action: No legitimacy for Bashir | Save Darfur”, “action.firedoglake.com | Sign the petition to President Obama: Say NO to offshore drilling”, “Invest in America's Clean Energy Future: Join the Earth Day Revolution - The Petition Site”, “GOP hate intensifies” and Retire Ronald [McDonald].

Topic 1:  “Survivors”.  This Dry Bones cartoon justifiably attacks Barack Obama for complaining about Israel when he should be worrying about Iran.  (And, as I have mentioned before, expect material complaining about this to keep coming until Obama stops following the tradition of US presidents as far back as I can remember of trying to get Israel to be suicidally stupid.)

Topic 2:  “Blinded by Scientism” and “Recovering Sight after Scientism”.  One of the claims sometimes made by militant atheists is scientism, the belief that all belief systems other than science are invalid.  These two articles correctly note that science itself cannot support scientism.  This requires support from a system other than science to demonstrate scientism—a contradiction with the premises of scientism itself.  I cannot say I agree with everything in these articles (though to be fair, I think I need to educate myself further on philosophy), but at least some of the reasoning is sound.

Topic 3:  “Seeing Secular Zionism in a Positive Light”:  This article is a great reminder to beware of false dichotomies.  It is very easy to forget that human-created categories are not rigid or real entities in themselves.  This article complains about the dichotomization of the world of many (or at least many vocal) Ḥaredhi Jews into Ḥaredhi-good versus non-Ḥaredhi-bad.  This artificial division blatantly ignores anything good done non-Ḥaredhim, be they religious, secular or Zionist, and everything bad done by Ḥaredhim.  This division also ignores that religiousness is not Boolean (true versus false), but rather very much a multidimensional continuum of shades of gray; statistics are given in this article on Pesaḥ observance in Israel, and clearly most Jews considered secularists in Israel observe Pesaḥ to some degree.  While people on the edges of the continuum tend to make the most noise, almost everyone is somewhere closer to the middle.  As far as I can tell, this lesson holds true in general, not just in discussing Judaism in Israel.

Topic 4:  For today’s religious humor, in the spirit of Pesaḥ:  “Passover Videos on YouTube”, courtesy of Jacob Richman.  This should keep you busy for a long while.

Peace, ḥagh sameaḥ, and Shabbath shalom.

Aaron