Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: D-fendr
That about sums it up.

Nothing at all in that book or that blurb backs up the claim that Parsons was a "practicing Satanist".

Incidentally, the "Antichrist" is a Christian conception, not a Satanist construct.
69 posted on 02/24/2006 11:56:38 AM PST by augggh (Falsehood is invariably the child of fear in one form or another. - AC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies ]


To: augggh
What do you suppose was his duties as leader of the temple?
73 posted on 02/24/2006 12:01:17 PM PST by zeeba neighba (Onward into the fog, dear evolutionaries, there's tapioca just ahead!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies ]

To: augggh

Calling a follower of Aleister "The Beast" Crowley not a Satanist is a distinction with little difference.

Satanist (or Black Magik practicioners) also take Christian constructs and pervert them, as you surely must know. Crowley took "The Beast" and Babalon from Christian references.

As to whether Crowley, Hubbard or Parsons were Satanists, I'm not sure it's a distinction worth arguing over, like debating whether Crowley was sick or just very twisted.

However, you are aware of Parson and The Church of Thelema, yes? And the moonchild? And Parson's "The Book of Babalon"?


81 posted on 02/24/2006 12:18:24 PM PST by D-fendr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson