Category: non-episodes

Posted on by

Messages from “The Mosque of Satan”

As mentioned in the 3-part “No, Dummy, It’s Not Like Catholics Vs. Protestants” episode series of Satansplain, there have been countless pseudo-Satanic groups over the years, quite often with names in the form of “[House of worship] of [evil deity]”. I’m sure I talked about the typical sort of person who feels the need to make these pointless things and why. Well, I’d like to share an exchange I had with somebody who messaged me recently.

Message #1

Hi I am founder of the Mosque of Satan and have recently got round to reading your Satanic Bible (after about 10 yrs since first downloading it): in order to compare any of our differences or similarities.

My particular interest was in the language used for the Enochian Keys – since in our Mosque of Satan we have what I have since come to believe may actually be the Atlantean language. Whether it actually is or Not is irrelevant, nonetheless I have gone through step-by-step in my most recent Esoteric-Themed Podcast on YouTube [uploaded in 2022]; exactly how I arrived at each letter or syllable (transposing 2 chakras down via use of chakra vowel-sounds and consonants, in order to reach the feminine inversion [of originally masculine Recitation]).

However No such explanation is given with your Enochian Keys.

Are we really expected to believe that someone heard voices, then jotted down what these revealed ?

(By the way I am recent a subscriber to your ‘Satansplain’ channel)

Was there enough here to make me roll me eyes? Absolutely. But tried giving a response more along the polite lines.

Bill’s Reply #1

Hello Devi,

I’ve never heard of the YouTube channel “Mosque of Satan”, and can’t seem to find it or any info on it.

Anyway, there is no authorized electronic version of The Satanic Bible (the foundational text of Satanism), so whatever version you “downloaded” a decade ago is an illegal bootleg. So I don’t know if it’s an accurate copy or says something the book doesn’t actually say. You can read more about that in my essay here: https://churchofsatan.com/free-satanic-bible-is-unsatanic/

As for somebody “hearing voices and jotting things down”, well that sounds like what practically any mystic or founder of any theistic religion has done. Satanism is a non-theistic religion, and as a Satanist I know that notions of entities like demons or gods are fictional creations of humans. I believe the same about “Atlanteans”, since there is no real evidence of a place called “Atlantis”. Regardless, as The Satanic Bible explicitly states in its introduction to the keys, the Keys do trace back to what was published by John Dee and Edward Kelley, which went through translations by different groups over the years. As The Satanic Bible states, what is presented is “an archaic but Satanically correct unvarnishing of the translation employed by the Order of the Golden Dawn in the late Nineteenth Century”. So, LaVey took what the Golden Dawn had used then, and offers a more Satanically moving translation that better works within the psychodramatic context of Satanic ritual. Likewise, “The barbaric tonal qualities of this language give it a truly magical effect which cannot be described.”

As stated earlier in The Satanic Bible, regarding the esoteric nature of the original Catholic mass in Latin, and how its English translation removed that esoteric quality to it, “It is much simpler to obtain an emotional reaction using words and phrases that cannot be understood than it is with statements which even the simplest mind will question when hearing them in an understandable language.” Thus I see no reason why a Satanist would need some sort of letter-by-letter translation of Enochian.

LaVey also points out in the following essay, “I find most annoying the person who demands a word-for-word translation of the Keys, not realizing they are virtually like Pigeon English in their lack of grammatical nuance and literary style. If they were to be translated literally, you may be assured that the chanter would sound most inarticulate!”

https://churchofsatan.com/enochian-pronunciation-guide/

Message #2 and Bill’s reply

Here was the reply I got back:

I recall downloading it from the actual Church of Satan website !

But my ‘Mosque of Satan’ is Not traceable via Google search for some reason, despite that 2022 podcast actually being CALLED ‘Mosque of Satan’ (since having changed it to ‘Nejraïg Of Satan’ to avoid people of a low intelligence clicking on it). Here’s a direct link to that most recent podcast, by the way: https://youtu.be/XRe3SznDTHQ

… a video on my channel, the channel of which would have been accessible via link on [this]; my Facebk profile. (Also having ‘Satanic-Themed’ playlist among channel sections on my homepage).

But after sending my initial message earlier on, I was reminded of the Roman Catholics having taught the prophet Muhammad [H.A.E] techniques for the invoking of Divine Revelation – and similarly, our friend John Dee (undoubtedly a Freemason or something); possibly having access to similar such techniques.

But I far from doubt in the power of these keys – my particular interest being Key 7 (despite having similar Satanic ‘Zikhr’ techniques of our own)

At this point, I know I could have taken the harsh road. It’s not like Satanism is ecumenical. Alas, I decided to just correct the more obvious mistake. I also figured, “Well, Satanism certainly doesn’t have a monopoly on the Enochian Keys. If some mystic likes the Enochian keys for some mystic reasons, so be it.” So here was my reply:

The official Church of Satan website has never made The Satanic Bible available for a free download. As I explained in the article, there are very good reasons why we’d never do that. Maybe you got it from fake site claiming to be the COS; those things show up from time to time.

Anyway, glad to hear that you enjoy the Keys. I use the ones from The Satanic Bible, and I do find the Enochian sound very moving.

I thought that maybe this pseudo-Satanist might then be off on their merry way. Nah. The onslaught of passive-aggressive, solipsistic lunacy came next.

Message #3: Oh boy, the “J” accusation

I’ve put the stupidest part in boldface.

The date I downloaded was August 2015 (with your memo being dated 2014).

But I was Not asking for a word-by-word definition [with the Enochian Keys]; since a translation has already been included, which is sufficient. What I was asking was the truth on how each letter & syllable was arrived at.

And have since learned via further research that the writers of these keys may have been attempting to decipher the then-thought-to be-lost Book of Enoch (which as we know today, can be found preserved in the Ethiopian Orthodox): what seems to be a Judaic take on the Book of Revelations.

Could it therefore be that your organisation is really Judaic and only posing as Satanic for purposes of deception ?

Or are your people merely comfortable operating around Jews (about as comfortable as I would feel operating around Muslims or Rastas): perhaps due to some Judaic ancestry ?

I personally find Jews rather unsettling: Judaism being deemed first of the patriarchal religions which took over from the Goddess Matrilinear in 2600BCE for the purposes of inverting World view at the time, towards the patriarchal.

Jah / Yah also deemed as ‘fallen’ under Satanism; us also going by the maxim / adage “the fallen always wins” !

Which leads me to the point of a major difference that seems to exist between us: ie. your organisation seeming to portray Satan in the masculine !

(Tho again, this could also be deception).

But the truth is that all religions began in the East and the origin of the word ‘Satan’ is pre-vedic term for Shakti: having been derived from vowel-sound and consonant of 6th main chakra [the most potently feminine chakra].

Moreover in Islam; when someone has been deemed or labelled ‘Satanic’: this usually implies that that individual displays traits or attributes which are feminine.

I therefore conclude that in proper Satanism we have sworn allegiance to the Goddess Lucifer Satana जीख्रूङ्गेय् ईएय्खेयेय्शेय् [Most High Most Exalted]; Goddess Of Life And True Creatrix Of The Entire Universe (via the same pledge / initiation given under my Satanic Themed playlist)

And then I get another message when I thought it couldn’t get any more ridiculous:

By the way, only Islam can have ‘Satan’ as fallen – a weak point for the other two main religions (who don’t know the name of their own fallen) !

But I tell you that for Christians it is ‘Allah’ (derived from vowel-sound and consonant of the most powerfully male chakra)

And in your organisation’s portrayal of ‘Satan’ as masculine, perhaps indicating that if Not Jews; then you are perhaps Christians [?]

Where to Begin?

With so much profound ignorance and stupidity here, it’s hard to know where to begin replying. Let’s break each part down one at a time:

“The date I downloaded was August 2015 (with your memo being dated 2014).”

Of course, the date he illegally downloaded The Satanic Bible and the date of my article doesn’t change the fact that he still illegally downloaded it, never mind the fact he’s basing his beliefs on something which Satanism clearly isn’t. But, more on that later.

“What I was asking was the truth on how each letter & syllable was arrived at.”

I have no idea what sort of process Dee & Kelley may have used to construct the Enochian. As a Satanist, I don’t see why I would care. The keys’ occult mystique gives them a certain novelty, which combined with their tonal quality, and their themes varied and vague enough to cover a variety of different ritual themes, simply make them good for the psychodrama of Satanic ritual. I don’t have a problem with people who are curious and want to pursue more about their origins, but I don’t see it as applicable to Satanism.

And now for the insanely stupid line

“Could it therefore be that your organisation is really Judaic and only posing as Satanic for purposes of deception ?”

This question is more loaded than Mel Gibson at a keg party. It’s hard to know where to begin. Granted, retarded antisemites like Devi show up to troll the Church of Satan all the time, though I never saw somebody do it in such an embarrassingly disconnected and passive-aggressive way.

The short answer to the question is, of course, “No”. Satanism is Satanism, and not Judaism, which is a fundamentally different religion. One has to be profoundly ignorant to not see this.

For the longer answer, let’s try to logically break down the underlying premises and conclusions built into this answer:

  • Premise #1: The Book of Enoch is part of the religion of Judaism.
  • Premise #2: Dee & Kelley somehow derived their letters and symbols for Enochian and in turn the Enochian Keys from the Book of Enoch.
  • Premise #3: Some variant of the Enochian Keys was later used by the Golden Dawn, and some variant on that is used in The Satanic Bible, the main text of the Church of Satan.
  • Premise #4: Anybody who’d utilize the Enochian Keys must believe in something about them mystically (the angels, the speaking animals, etc.).
  • CONCLUSION #1: Therefore, the Church of Satan’s belief system is based on Judaism.
  • Premise #5:  It’s better for public relations to be seen as explicitly Satanic instead of being seen as Jewish.
  • Premise #6: The Church of Satan has an interest in saying and teaching the precise opposite of what it allegedly secretly believes, and turning away people who express beliefs of what they allegedly secretly believe as an organization. (We could further break this down into other premises, but it’s still a necessary part of the argument within Devi’s rhetorical question.)
  • CONCLUSION #2: Therefore, the Church of Satan secretly embraces Judaism and is only pretending to be Satanists to trick people.

And now let’s examine them:

  • Premise #1 is itself already quite a stretch. The Book of Enoch is considered non-canonical in Judaism and in conflict with the Torah. There may be some weirder sects of Judaism or Christianity which do accept the book, but they’re the exceptions, not the rule.
  • Premise #2 is still questionable. Nobody seems to really know how Dee & Kelley arrived at the Enochian “language” and the Keys.
  • Premise #3: This one is true; we do have some variant of the Enochian Keys in The Satanic Bible.  However…
  • Premise #4 is simply incorrect. As already explained, Satanism is a strictly non-theistic religion, and the Enochian Keys are only used in Satanism within the theatrical setting of ritual, which is conducted as psychodrama.
  • On top of all this, we also see from The Satanic Bible’s “Infernal Names” and The Satanic Bible’s follow-up book (The Satanic Rituals) that Satanism utilizes mythology from all sorts of sources, hardly just Judeo-Christian. Therefore, Conclusion #1 is a complete non sequitur. Never mind the fact that by Devi’s own logic, he’s practicing Judaism himself by being an Enochian fan.
  • Premise #5 is such a joke that I can’t believe it even needs addressing, And yet, we see this one all the time from (and exclusively from) only the most disconnected, rabid antisemites. Obviously, as a Satanist I have no objection to rejecting Judaism itself. As Judaism is a spiritual religion, and we Satanists are anti-spiritual, we do reject Judaism. But it takes a profound amount of ignorance to think that by making up some connection between Satanists and Jews, one has somehow smeared Satanists. Satanism is an explicitly adversarial religion. As the name shows, we’re not looking for mass approval. The Church of Satan does rightfully correct misinformation about Satanism, but we are not some kind of anti-defamation league, as again that would be inapplicable to an explicitly adversarial religion (Satanism). 
  • And of course, Premise #6 is something which conspiracy theorists always seem too stupid to consider as being false. If my beliefs were “secretly” Jewish mysticism, then I’d see no point in being secretive about that; I would just join some Kabbalah groups one who teaches things like that, which they already do right in the open. Alas, I am a Satanist, so that’s not what I believe. What Satanists believe is what you see explicitly written in The Satanic Bible, and again, that sure isn’t Judaism.
  • This of course makes Conclusion #2 a complete non sequitur as well.

So to recap:

  • The Book of Enoch is an ancient Hebrew writing credited to the character of Enoch from the Old Testament, and as it talks about angels, demons, apocalyptic stuff with a messiah, and other supernatural things, we Satanists (being atheists) reject that. As The Satanic Bible states, Satanism is a religion of the carnal, not the spiritual, and gods are man-made. This stance of ours would still be the same even if the Book of Enoch was considered canonical by Judaism or Christianity, or if Dee & Kelley really somehow got their Enochian language by playing around with the Book of Enoch.
  • The re-re-re-translation of the Enochian Keys included in The Satanic Bible are there for psychodramatic purposes only. And of course, the notion that the Church of Satan is secretly “Judaic” and not Satanic is absurd, given that our beliefs are completely antithetical to Judaism (as well as the other spiritual religions of the world), and that publicly calling “The Church of Satan” is quite obviously not a P.R. move to “deceptively” hide something, let alone some other religion we don’t believe in like Judaism, which already gets an overwhelming amount of sympathy in the public in the first place.

And the Rest

“Or are your people merely comfortable operating around Jews (about as comfortable as I would feel operating around Muslims or Rastas): perhaps due to some Judaic ancestry ?”

What does “comfortable operating around” really mean here? Satanism is not an evangelical religion, and most Satanists are fine with keeping their religion private. The fact that a Jew is less likely to fly off the handle upon hearing the word “Satanist” than a Christian might is irrelevant. Satanists go about their day “operating around” non-Satanists all the time.

As for “Judaic ancestry”, this doesn’t make any sense either. First, as already shown, one would have to be profoundly ignorant to think that Satanism has theological roots in Judaism. A simple look at the Old Testament and The Satanic Bible show that the two religions (Satanism and Judaism) are fundamentally incompatible. If by “ancestry” Devi means Jewish ethnicity, then the question makes even less sense. An overwhelming number of members of the Church of Satan, just like an overwhelming number of people in the world in general, have no Jewish ethnicity. Ethnicity has nothing to do with whether two religions are compatible anyway.

“I personally find Jews rather unsettling:”

I have to wonder if Devi has ever met any Jews in person. I find that people desperate to link us to Jews have typically not. I also get the impression that Devi is from the UK and seems particularly keen on being friendly with Muslims (even though Islam is just as antithetical to Satanism as Judaism or Christianity is). Maybe the antisemitism is in line with that.

“Judaism being deemed first of the patriarchal religions which took over from the Goddess Matrilinear in 2600BCE for the purposes of inverting World view at the time, towards the patriarchal.”

Judaism was obviously the first of the three Abrahamic religions, but I’m not a feminist and thus don’t view the world in terms of “patriarchy”. Even so, some feminists believe the Greek and Roman pagan religions were “patriarchal”.

“Which leads me to the point of a major difference that seems to exist between us: ie. your organisation seeming to portray Satan in the masculine !”

This is another stupid line which needs some unpacking. First of all, this sort of solipsism we see with some pseudo-Satanists is off the charts, particularly from people who 1) don’t really bother to learn what Satanism actually is, 2) somehow feel the need to create a new “Satanic organization”, and 3) then approach us as if they’re somehow equal in stature to the Church of Satan and ready for some sort of ecumenical discussion.

The Church of Satan was the first in history to establish an actual codified religion calling itself Satanism. The major difference between Devi and myself is that I am a Satanist, whereas Devi seems some mystic with more than one screw loose. Regardless, “Satan” in the zeitgeist is typically a male character, and we may often metaphorically refer to Satan as such. But to point once again to The Infernal Names (which are in the book that Devi illegally downloaded but never got around to reading until after calling some social media content “The Mosque of Satan”) incorporate both masculine and feminine portrayals. Never mind the fact that a naked woman serves as the altar for Satanic group rituals.

“(Tho again, this could also be deception).”

No, it’s Devi jumping to erroneous conclusions based on false premises again.

“But the truth is that all religions began in the East”

This is not really true, either. Cultures all over the world ended up developing some kind of religion or another. Religion is not limited to the Abrahamic ones.

“and the origin of the word ‘Satan’ is pre-vedic term for Shakti:”

This is another false bit of trivia. The word “Satan” comes from Hebrew and means “adversary”. Hebrew is an Afro-Asiatic language whereas Sanskrit is Indo-European. So despite sharing some superficial consonant sounds, there is no evidence that the two words share the same etymological origins.

“Moreover in Islam; when someone has been deemed or labelled ‘Satanic’: this usually implies that that individual displays traits or attributes which are feminine.”

Yes, Muslims say lots of stupid shit. There have also been lots of lingual relations of “left” to the feminine or “sinister”, and so on. Which is why the next part makes even less sense:

“I therefore conclude that in proper Satanism we have sworn allegiance to the Goddess Lucifer Satana” […] By the way, only Islam can have ‘Satan’ as fallen – a weak point for the other two main religions (who don’t know the name of their own fallen) !“

So in an effort to get away from the “patriarchal” religion of Judaism, Devi looks to Islam, a religion in which he believes women are associated with Satan, while simultaneously priding himself in getting along with Muslims. And of course calls it all “proper Satanism” when it’s not Satanism. Also, the claim that “only Islam” can claim certain views of “Satan” is unfounded and irrelevant. I’m a Satanist, not a Muslim.

“But I tell you that for Christians it is ‘Allah’ (derived from vowel-sound and consonant of the most powerfully male chakra)”

And here we go again with the woo factor. Just because you examine origins of specific words and trace them back (correctly or incorrectly) to specific genders or old religions, does not mean that people using those words are somehow theologically tied to those alleged origins. The word “Monday” has its origins in “moon day”, but that doesn’t mean The Bangles song Manic Monday is a pagan moon goddess hymn.

“And in your organisation’s portrayal of ‘Satan’ as masculine, perhaps indicating that if Not Jews; then you are perhaps Christians [?]”

Of course not, as only a complete delusional and clueless retard would believe that. Thanks for playing!

Posted on by

Bill prank calls a conspiracy theorist

Not a full episode, but a “Satanic Anecdote” in the form of a subtle prank call. Enjoy.

00:00 – Intro
03:14 – The Call

Posted on by

About Mike Allen (“astralvpeace”)

Mike Allen is a Christian who blocked me on X after making dozens of harassing replies, seemingly all because I rejected his Christian proselytizing. He publicly stated he would “wreck every platform” I have. So as he did on X, he did the same from his profile on Facebook: made some nasty replies to various posts of mine before finally blocking me.

So if you see posts from this person on other Satansplain-affiliated places (e.g., one-word reply posts that just say “Trash”), that’s why. I can only imagine what his mother* or sister Sarah thinks of his behavior.

(* – Judith Lynn Imperatore of 714 Tolland Stage Rd, Tolland, CT)

Posted on by

Satansplain Merchandise!

The Satansplain merch store has launched! T-shirts, stickers, phone cases, and more! Go to this link! Order before March 18th for 27% off the normal price! Currently there are only two designs, but you’ll also see one more design each for Dr. Vincent Schitz (from the meme page of the same name) and Satanbear from The Devil’s Mischief.

Click here for the merch store!

Posted on by

Thoughts on A.I.-generated George Carlin

EDIT: I wrote most of this before giving a full listen to the A.I. generated “George Carlin” special. Recently I gave it a listen, and will add my thoughts to the end.

Part 1: Pre-listening Thoughts

Somebody used A.I. to “create” a new George Carlin comedy special. Kelly Carlin, his daughter, is livid. A number of people have been asking me what my take is. I’ve only heard a few samples so far, but here are my thoughts:

Like any fan, I have had that lingering thought in the back if my mind of “What would Carlin have to say about the state of the world today?” I think we can make some intelligent predictions, and AI likewise offers a way to do that in a more calculated way. However, it seems a lot of AI algorithms interject some bias of its programmers, especially political bias. I’ve seen a number of examples exposing this.

On top of this, we can only draw on his material up until he died in 2008. If Carlin had been alive 2008-2024, he could very well have ended up having a different perspective on things; that’s a significant period of time when lots of people were changing their mind on things. So again, I’m a bit skeptical of the overall predictability accuracy.

Also, Carlin’s specials typically included some topics that weren’t really topical at all. So how any AI program could predict and write a specific zany observational comedy routine on some apolitical topic (“the little world” as Carlin called it), I don’t know. I’m sure it’s possible though if you asked for something specifically. For example, “Write me a comedy bit on doughnuts, in the style of George Carlin”, and then insert that. Who knows, you might get something that would pass for a Carlin routine. (Especially given the general gullability of people who find bogus quotes attributed to him online and accept them as authentic, but I digress.) I suppose you could replace “doughnuts” in the request with “a trending, apolitical topic”. But whether anything like this was even taken into consideration, I don’t know.

But back to the political bias problem: I see a lot of people who presume Carlin would take their tribalist side on a lot of hot issues. I’m not so sure about that. For example, a lot of left-wingers hold up Carlin for his rants on religion and abortion, ignoring his condemnation of things like voting, politically correct language, and environmentalism hysteria. Conversely, I see right-wingers sharing clips of Carlin talking about “the owners” a.k.a. “deep state” of the country, ignoring all of his conservative-bashing material.

Finally, most self-proclaimed Carlin “fans” in my experience haven’t even heard most of his already-existing catalog of work. As a Carlin fanatic myself, I’m a bit disappointed when I run into somebody who says Carlin is their favorite comedian, yet has never bought a single album, book, or video of his, nor had made any effort to see him perform live back when they still had the chance. I realize that for most people, comedy typically doesn’t generate that same sort of level of devotion and support to the artist as, say, music does. But I don’t see why the world necessarily needs artificially-created Carlin when most of its target audience haven’t even heard “Class Clown” or read “Brain Droppings“.

I’ll probably get around to sitting down and listening to the whole thing, and then have more to say on it. But I don’t see the endeavor in and of itself as “blasphemy” to the work of Carlin (we’ve already seen living people rip him off) so much as something few people in the end really want and I’m skeptical could be done well. As much as I cringe at the idea, I’ll still have to listen and judge for myself.

In the meantime, as Kelly points out, it does bring up some important questions about AI and intellectual property. Should A.I. programs be barred from scraping copyrighted material and making something new out of it? And one of the questions I have: Is it fundamentally different from a living, breathing artist drawing from a set of influences and creating something new? I don’t have all the answers. But as the inherited and rightful owner of Carlin’s intellectual property, nobody should be taken aback by Kelly speaking out against, at the very least, somebody creating a product being passed off explicitly as a “George Carlin special”. Granted, I’ve been using an artificially spliced George Carlin introduction in episodes of The Devil’s Mischief for many years now, but it’s obviously no more serious than National Lampoon‘s album of spliced Nixon recordings. I’m sure however that if I were to use A.I. to create a “new Led Zeppelin song”, and then try to market it as such, Atlantic Records’ lawyers may very well knock on my door.

We’ll see where this goes. In the meantime, Carlin already left us with a wealth of actual, authentic work. So I suggest going out and buying the real stuff.

Part 2: And now that I’ve listened…

I have now taken a listen to the actual A.I. creation, “I’m Glad I’m Dead”. And overall, it was pretty much what I expected: a limited caricature of him. It was like the A.I. program was only fed the audio recordings of his special Life Is Worth Losing (2006) and maybe also You Are All Diseased (1999) and Complaints & Grievances (2001), and then a set of politically-biased Google news searches and Gen-Z Instagram posts picked the material, offset by maybe a handful of meme-driven opposing views.

To give some praise where it’s due, I think the A.I. generated some of the style and subtlety well. For example, Carlin’s occasional rapid listing of things rhythmically, or quickly rattling off statistics. Some of the topic transitions, too. The voice tone kept going back and forth between certainly sounding like a 65 year-old Carlin to unfortunately sounding like…I don’t know, some 20 year-old man.

As for the choice of material itself, I can see how somebody with a superficial knowledge of George Carlin might think it’s very much his style, but I would argue otherwise. We start with a rant about religion and monotheism, where it’s really a rehash of the same talking points we see on a typical atheism forum. This is a topic he already addressed in 1999 at the close of You Are All Diseased. So why would he just rehash the topic in 2024, especially in a more disconnected way? My guess is the A.I. was offset by the disproportionately large number of shares of the religion rants by atheists.

This eventually flows into a rant against gun ownership, which consists of just repeating the Democrat talking points we’ve all heard. It’s true that Carlin described himself as, when push comes to shove, politically left-leaning. He also took some shots (pardon the pun) here and there at “gun enthusiasts”. But this segment here was just one-way rhetoric done with a bad Carlin voice. Likewise, the calls throughout the special here and there for things like “equity” are out of place for somebody who was a shameless misanthrope, let alone fiercely against tribalism.

As I said earlier, I wasn’t sure if the whole thing would be social-political commentary (a lot of dweebs in the YouTube comments seem to be under the delusion he was a spoken word commentator and not a comedian; the reality was he was a comedian first and foremost). However, there were some segments that weren’t. This is what we would expect in a real George Carlin special. There was for example a fart joke, which, for something A.I.-generated, I was somewhat impressed by. There was also a segment on names and spelling, which I’m sure was inspired by his bits about people’s first names and his material about the English language in general.

Somewhere around the 40-55 minute segment in though, we get into something I think is more of Carlin’s style: criticizing the cowardice and incompetence of humans. There was also even some criticism about A.I. itself and self-referential material about whether the voice you hear is even real. Ironically, some of this matches the angry replies from the “George would have hated this” protesters in the comments.

I’m sure this won’t be the last attempt to create a “new George Carlin special”. Like any technology, I imagine A.I. will get better over time. We’ve already been living with A.I. in some form or another for years, whether it’s an ATM or a video game. But just as we have cinema CGI today that makes the CGI snake in Anaconda (1997) look like the low-bit pixelated snake from the Atari 2600 Indiana Jones game (1982), we may very well end up with A.I. and “deep fakes” that look indistinguishable from the real thing.

The next decade is going to be interesting. Maybe I should get to work on learning how to copyright myself.

Posted on by

Bill M. on The Devil’s Salon podcast

Recently I was a guest on The Devil’s Salon; a Satanic talk podcast for Satanic gentlemen. This was the Novemver 26, 2023 episode, titled “Comedy and Masculinity for the Satanic Gentleman with Magister Bill M.”. The show is available on a variety of platforms, including the links below.

Posted on by

Anton LaVey was an atheist and Satanism is a non-theistic religion

Despite the claims of some illiterate devil worshipers, Anton LaVey was an atheist. Meaning, he did not believe deities to exist. That includes Satan as an actual deity. There are multiple, independent sources where he states this position. You can read many of these in the article “What, The Devil?” at https://www.churchofsatan.com/what-the-devil/ .

And as if that weren’t enough, here are some additional quotes not even included in that essay:

  • From 1971, from his “Letters from the Devil” column: “The Satanist fully recognizes that Satan is nothing more than a symbolic entity representing man himself; his carnal and physical desires, his freedom from enshackling doctrines, and his intellectual capacity to reject those elements of man-made law which prevent him from engaging in life to the fullest. To suppose that Satan is a substitute for the Christian “God” is entirely erroneous. Man himself is the God; Satan is merely the symbolic representation of the WHOLE man and is given a place in Satanic ritual as a strengthening device to affirm one’s own convictions.”
  • In 1973, a double-record set called “The Occult Explosion” included an interview clip of LaVey, explaining Satanism. He explicitly states at the start, “Satan is to us a symbol, rather than an anthropomorphic being.” Some devil worshipers try quote-mining the next parts where he explains that any members of the Church of Satan “who are mystically inclined, would prefer to think of Satan in a very real, anthropomorphic way. Of course, we do not discourage this because we realize that to many individuals, a picture — a well-wrought picture of their mentor, or their tutilary divinity, is very important for them to conceptualize, ritualistically. However, Satan, symbolically, is a teacher: the informer of the whys and wherefores of the world.” He then goes on to explicitly state that Satanists are not Satan worshipers. In any case, using anthropomorphic images of Satan for ritualistic purposes and to help conceptualize concepts still isn’t “theistic Satanism”, and LaVey stresses that Satan is only a symbol.
Anton LaVey interview excerpt used in “The Occult Explosion”
  • From his biography, The Secret Life of a Satanist, we find this direct quote: “Satanism is not just an atheistic stance but an anti-theistic stance. We prefer destruction of mystically-oriented religions through active opposition rather than simple non-participation.”

The topic of atheism and non-theistic religions is also thoroughly covered in Satansplain #016:

Another tiresome claim is that LaVey claimed to believe in Satan in a 1974 Cloven Hoof newsletter. The letter in question was written by Michael Aquino, whose conflicting theistic beliefs led him to his exit from the Church of Satan. Anteater-worshiping Aquino of course spent the rest of his life trying to discredit LaVey and the Church of Satan. Read LaVey’s words from his essay Hoisted by His Own Patois.

Yet another lame argument is that Magistra Blanche Barton “confirmed” LaVey’s belief in a literal Satan in “The Barton Letter”. But rather than answering the question “Did Anton LaVey believe in Satan?”, she chose to answer a different question: “Did Anton LaVey believe in Satanism and the Church of Satan?” He certainly did.

Additionally, keep in mind that an atheist who personally eschews the term “atheist” for themselves is still an atheist. George Carlin for example didn’t like using the term for himself, even though he undoubtedly was an atheist. The same with Tom Lehrer, Bill Gates, and many other famous atheists. A lot more people who don’t believe in a deity, however, became more comfortable with using the term by the 2000s with the New Atheist movement. The fact that the Church of Satan has likewise become more open with using the term still doesn’t change the fact that we’ve always rejected the notion of gods, thus making us atheists by definition.

Another common argument we hear is, “You can’t be an atheist if you say you are your own god. Because that means you believe in a god and are thus not an atheist!” This argument stupidly overlooks the fact that saying “I am my own god” is symbolic. When a Satanist says, “I am my own god”, it does not mean, “I believe myself to literally be a supernatural deity.” Rather it means, “I put my own self in the role that most other people put ‘God’ in. Meaning, I am the one whom is most important in my life. I am the one I ultimately aim to please. I am the one most responsible for my life, for better or worse. If I run into problems in life, it is ultimately up to myself, not an actual deity, to find a way out of those problems.” An analogy I use is that it’s similar to how an entrepreneur can simultaneously say, “I don’t have a boss” and “I am my own boss”; only an illiterate would call this hypocrisy.

In summary, people claiming to be “Theistic LaVeyan Satanists” seemingly can’t read, or at least lack the mental capacity to comprehend metaphors. Anybody claiming that Anton LaVey “really” believed in a literal Satan and that the Church of Satan’s position somehow changed later, is simply lying. Don’t take my word for it; look at the documented evidence instead of going by hearsay, anecdotes, or by poetic waxing misread by people who can barely type.

Posted on by

Bill talks about Clive Barker’s “Nightbreed”

Recently I was a guest on the Reaper’s Underground podcast, this time to rant and rave about my favorite movie, Clive Barker’s “Nightbreed” (1990). I also talk about some of the Satanic significance of this film, read an excerpt from an essay written by Church of Satan High Priest Peter H. Gilmore from a rare reprint of the novel “Cabal”, show off my Nightbreed merchandise collection, and also read a bit from the original novel.