Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Thelema And Mormonism.

Tsuzuki

By Tsuzuki
in General Discussions

Recommended Posts

Tsuzuki Mentor

Tsuzuki

Posted
Posted

Haven't been here in a while, but back in 2008 I commented that Aleister Crowley's brand of Thelema was incompatible with Mormonism.

You should know that I'm not a Thelemite, and I would be the first to admit that Crowley's brand of Thelema is incompatible with Mormonism.

Since then, I've studied Thelema more in depth, discovered that much of what I'd believed about it had been misinformation, and more recently joined the Ordo Templi Orientis. I would definitely identify as a Thelemite now, and I would also say that Mormonism and Thelema are compatible (as would other Mormons I've since met in the O.T.O.).

This quote by John A. Widtsoe does a pretty good job of summing up Thelema, though it's referring to Mormonism.

"The distinguishing characteristic of a person is the possession of will, the power to accept or reject, to move or to stand still, to obey or to disobey. From the very beginning the being now known as man possessed a will, and by the operation of his will has reached his present condition. Above all other things, man is a will. If that be so, the training and use of the will is man's first concern."

- Elder John A. Widtsoe, "Program of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints"

And here is an official explanation of Aleister Crowley's iconic phrase, "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law."

"According to Thelemic doctrine, the expression of Divine Law in the Æon of Horus is 'Do what thou wilt'. This 'Law of Thelema', as it is called, is not to be interpreted as a license to indulge every passing whim, but rather as the divine mandate to discover one’s True Will or true purpose in life, and to accomplish it; leaving others to do the same in their own unique ways. The 'acceptance' of the Law of Thelema is what defines a Thelemite; and the discovery and accomplishment of the True Will is the fundamental concern of all Thelemites."

In a nutshell, Thelema takes the Mormon concept of agency as its central tenent.

inquiringmind Veteran

inquiringmind

Posted
Posted

Didn't Crowely call himself "the great beast 666," don't you call yourself a "lucefarian apologist," and don't thelemites have the idea that God and the devil are the same person?

How are those concepts compatible with Mormonism?

And what about the law of chastity?

Is the lifestyle encouraged by Thelema compatible with the law of chastity?

Tsuzuki Mentor

Tsuzuki

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

Didn't Crowely call himself "the great beast 666,"

Other people called him that, and he ran with it at times (much in the same way that Mormons adopted the term used by their enemies), but he never seriously thought of himself as evil.

don't you call yourself a "lucefarian apologist,"

This is off topic, but I do identify as a Luciferian, and have since long before being a Thelemite.

http://en.wikipedia....sm_and_Satanism

"In contrast, Luciferianism seeks to enlighten all of humankind, and Luciferians are encouraged not to convert but to spread knowledge, understanding and tolerance wherever possible, helping others to realize the potential for greatness within themselves, and to achieve as much as they can. There is a spotlight on doing good and placing others before the self, regardless of who they are. While Satanists are deeply involved in living for the moment, content to remain who or what they currently are, Luciferians seek ways to aid humanity’s progression to the next stage of social, physical or intellectual evolution. One religion deals with the self, while the other deals with humanity as a whole and the natural world in which we live. In spite of using similar archetypes, the Luciferian pursuit of knowledge and understanding has little in common with the Satanic goal of immediate gratification."

and don't thelemites have the idea that God and the devil are the same person?

No. There is also no universally agreed upon view of God in Thelema (some Thelemites are athiests, though most aren't), but many Thelemites view the concept of godhood as similar to Joseoph Smith's view in the King Follet Discourse. However, in Thelema we are already considered Gods.

"Every man and woman is a star." - The Book of the Law I:3

http://lib.oto-usa.o.../liber0220.html

How are those concepts compatible with Mormonism?

That is all misinformation.

And what about the law of chastity?

Is the lifestyle encouraged by Thelema compatible with the law of chastity?

That's up to the individual Thelemite. There is no specific Thelemic lifestyle. If it's part of someone's True Will to be chaste, then they should be chaste. However, let it be because it's actually their will, and not because someone forced chastity on them (agency). Edited by Tsuzuki
Tacenda Grand Master

Tacenda

Posted
Posted

Other people called him that, and he ran with it at times (much in the same way that Mormons adopted the term used by their enemies), but he never seriously thought of himself as evil.

This is off topic, but I do identify as a Luciferian, and have since long before being a Thelemite.

http://en.wikipedia....sm_and_Satanism

"In contrast, Luciferianism seeks to enlighten all of humankind, and Luciferians are encouraged not to convert but to spread knowledge, understanding and tolerance wherever possible, helping others to realize the potential for greatness within themselves, and to achieve as much as they can. There is a spotlight on doing good and placing others before the self, regardless of who they are. While Satanists are deeply involved in living for the moment, content to remain who or what they currently are, Luciferians seek ways to aid humanity’s progression to the next stage of social, physical or intellectual evolution. One religion deals with the self, while the other deals with humanity as a whole and the natural world in which we live. In spite of using similar archetypes, the Luciferian pursuit of knowledge and understanding has little in common with the Satanic goal of immediate gratification."

No. There is also no universally agreed upon view of God in Thelema (some Thelemites are athiests, though most aren't), but many Thelemites view the concept of godhood as similar to Joseoph Smith's view in the King Follet Discourse. However, in Thelema we are already considered Gods.

"Every man and woman is a star." - The Book of the Law I:3

http://lib.oto-usa.o.../liber0220.html

That is all misinformation.

That's up to the individual Thelemite. There is no specific Thelemic lifestyle. If it's part of someone's True Will to be chaste, then they should be chaste. However, let it be because it's actually their will, and not because someone forced chastity on them (agency).

This philosophy of men becoming Gods scares me because to me it is what Lucifer wanted A & E to do in the garden. They chose to follow the devil. Maybe it is a sin to believe we're to become Gods. Maybe it's false info. What if we aren't supposed to believe in that and we LDS and apparently others are not going to make it. This has been a deterrent for me to fully get back in the game. Those picketers outside during conference time yelling that our church is of the devil, is this where that stems from? Is their both a Satan and a Lucifer. Is this why some Satanists adopted Masonry along with maybe some Luciferians, but Satanists use it in another way? Masonry is a ladder to becoming more enlightened and they also go about doing good. Maybe Joseph incorporated alot of Masonry into the church? Should I be worried, not asking you, but my fellow LDS.
Tacenda Grand Master

Tacenda

Posted
Posted

Tsuzuki, glad to have you back. I've missed you.

Tacenda, what do you think the difference is between "Every man and woman is a star." and Psalms 82:6,Romans 8:17, or Revelation 3:21?

These scriptures do not mean that with the non LDS Christian. Why is that? Are we as LDS "grasping for straws" so to speak, in order to make a case for our theology? Just asking, I'm so on the fence right now with my belief of it all. Trying very hard to come to terms, it's hard to do especially when I've been taught from the cradle. I worry that it's my conditioning to believe a certain way, just trying to erase all of it and start new in all the thought processes on religion. But thanks Nathair, also, did you use these in any missionary discussions? And if so, what were the comments if you don't mind me asking. Again, thanks, I was worried I was going to get a tongue lashing or something along those lines.
Questing Beast Veteran

Questing Beast

Posted
Posted

...

In a nutshell, Thelema takes the Mormon concept of agency as its central tenent.

A "central tenet" does not a religion make. Especially if all manner of additives of a superstitious and occult or ancient hedonistic nature are part and parcel to "discovering your true inner self", etc. Of course "agency" is a central tenet, because it allows the individual to do whatever s/he wants without answering to anybody. Therein lies permissiveness and ultimately a crash, if what one is seeking to give licence to is any degree of hedonism. By "hedonism" I mean specifically self-indulgence without acceptance of the consequences as being ones own fault....

Nathair/|\ Mentor

Nathair/|\

Posted
Posted

These scriptures do not mean that with the non LDS Christian. Why is that? Are we as LDS "grasping for straws" so to speak, in order to make a case for our theology? Just asking, I'm so on the fence right now with my belief of it all. Trying very hard to come to terms, it's hard to do especially when I've been taught from the cradle. I worry that it's my conditioning to believe a certain way, just trying to erase all of it and start new in all the thought processes on religion. But thanks Nathair, also, did you use these in any missionary discussions? And if so, what were the comments if you don't mind me asking. Again, thanks, I was worried I was going to get a tongue lashing or something along those lines.

My mission was 15 years ago, and I've never been any good at keeping a journal, sorry about that.

You can read more about our potential to become like Heavenly Father in the scriptures here. LDS doctrine on this is largely from the revelations Joseph Smith received. Crowley received most of his innovations, I understand, from Aiwass, his Holy Guardian Angel.

Questing Beast Veteran

Questing Beast

Posted
Posted (edited)

These scriptures do not mean that with the non LDS Christian. Why is that? Are we as LDS "grasping for straws" so to speak, in order to make a case for our theology? Just asking, I'm so on the fence right now with my belief of it all. Trying very hard to come to terms, it's hard to do especially when I've been taught from the cradle. I worry that it's my conditioning to believe a certain way, just trying to erase all of it and start new in all the thought processes on religion. ...

Being born "Mormon" and raised in the faith does make one wonder at some point of questioning, if everything is unduly colored by that upbringing. How will I know if I am even capable of seeing truth, if my indoctrination is so ingrained that everything I study and think about is pushed through a "filter" of indoctrination? We have a couple of options: try and toss everything out, clear our minds of all belief and "start over" (is this even possible?), or open our minds the best we can to the widest religious world view we possibly can, while not "tossing out" anything more than seems necessary in order to be true to what we believe. This can be a long process of dissociation with the Church, or it can be immediate like an amputation. I favor the former approach, because it is less disruptive to family and friends, to relationships, which is what I think religion's main purpose is all about. Religion should have as its focus the needs of others above the self. We already possess enough self-interest without religion, so I don't worry about neglecting myself! Staying in the "Mormon way" is a good thing. Trying to believe as much of it as possible can't be a bad thing. Letting everyone have their beliefs without feeling a need to disabuse them of their "ignorance" is charity, and behaving as God does toward each of us in our own ignorance and quest for knowledge. None of us knows very much....

Edited by Questing Beast
1
BlueDreams Grand Master

BlueDreams

Posted
Posted

His Tzuzuki, good to see you again! I don't have much to add beyond that. Just happy to see you again

This philosophy of men becoming Gods scares me because to me it is what Lucifer wanted A & E to do in the garden. They chose to follow the devil. Maybe it is a sin to believe we're to become Gods. Maybe it's false info. What if we aren't supposed to believe in that and we LDS and apparently others are not going to make it. This has been a deterrent for me to fully get back in the game.

------

These scriptures do not mean that with the non LDS Christian. Why is that? Are we as LDS "grasping for straws" so to speak, in order to make a case for our theology? Just asking, I'm so on the fence right now with my belief of it all. Trying very hard to come to terms, it's hard to do especially when I've been taught from the cradle. I worry that it's my conditioning to believe a certain way, just trying to erase all of it and start new in all the thought processes on religion.

Why should it scare you? If it makes you feel better I usually work to think of it in strictly scriptural terminology. We are the children of God, we have the capacity to become like Him...not only kinda like Them, but to be one in Christ. Similar ideas have been taught (think theosis). This isn't exactly reinventing the wheel and it's not "grasping at straws." Many Non-lds christians don't believe it because they've been taught a number of underlying assumptions that do not support this idea. You've already mentioned one of them (ideals around the fall). It doesn't mean these assumptions are more valid, it means they come from a different point of reference. One that I personally find far more problematic at times and indicative of greco-roman influence.

But think of it this way. Considering the general premise to the LDS church (there was an apostasy, philosophies of men are prevelant in mainstreams though/teachings, and that many plain and precious truths were lost), then not only is it ok that non-lds see it differently but there better be some major differences....ones that alter the picture of who we are and why we're here and how God interacts with us. If there isn't, then the restoration is pretty useless. Often, by "wiping the slate" (which personally, I think is a futile task.....there is no such thing as a clean slated person. No one can read the bible, look at any faith, etc without their opinions, concerns, uncertainty and POV effecting their view), you're just replacing one set of beliefs with another with the same assumption that they are correct.

Those picketers outside during conference time yelling that our church is of the devil, is this where that stems from? Is their both a Satan and a Lucifer.

No they're saying that because they have a poor view of what it is to be LDS. Honestly their view is just about 3 steps higher than the westboro baptists on accuracy and validity in message. Their opinion stems from their belief that we're a cult and they build/screen all other information based on this premise.

Is this why some Satanists adopted Masonry along with maybe some Luciferians, but Satanists use it in another way? Masonry is a ladder to becoming more enlightened and they also go about doing good. Maybe Joseph incorporated alot of Masonry into the church? Should I be worried, not asking you, but my fellow LDS.

Huh??....yeah, I wouldn't worry about it. And just so you know....my memory's fairly rusty but I'm pretty sure Tzuzuki is lds....just a very esoteric one.

With luv,

Bd

1
Tacenda Grand Master

Tacenda

Posted
Posted

His Tzuzuki, good to see you again! I don't have much to add beyond that. Just happy to see you again

Why should it scare you? If it makes you feel better I usually work to think of it in strictly scriptural terminology. We are the children of God, we have the capacity to become like Him...not only kinda like Them, but to be one in Christ. Similar ideas have been taught (think theosis). This isn't exactly reinventing the wheel and it's not "grasping at straws." Many Non-lds christians don't believe it because they've been taught a number of underlying assumptions that do not support this idea. You've already mentioned one of them (ideals around the fall). It doesn't mean these assumptions are more valid, it means they come from a different point of reference. One that I personally find far more problematic at times and indicative of greco-roman influence.

But think of it this way. Considering the general premise to the LDS church (there was an apostasy, philosophies of men are prevelant in mainstreams though/teachings, and that many plain and precious truths were lost), then not only is it ok that non-lds see it differently but there better be some major differences....ones that alter the picture of who we are and why we're here and how God interacts with us. If there isn't, then the restoration is pretty useless. Often, by "wiping the slate" (which personally, I think is a futile task.....there is no such thing as a clean slated person. No one can read the bible, look at any faith, etc without their opinions, concerns, uncertainty and POV effecting their view), you're just replacing one set of beliefs with another with the same assumption that they are correct.

No they're saying that because they have a poor view of what it is to be LDS. Honestly their view is just about 3 steps higher than the westboro baptists on accuracy and validity in message. Their opinion stems from their belief that we're a cult and they build/screen all other information based on this premise.

Huh??....yeah, I wouldn't worry about it. And just so you know....my memory's fairly rusty but I'm pretty sure Tzuzuki is lds....just a very esoteric one.

With luv,

Bd

Thanks for your feedback, I read his posts while groggy and half asleep on my cell phone this morning, with buggy's in my eyes. So dumb sometimes. It helps to have someone like you and Nathair set me straight. I must be one those who are tossed to and fro. Maybe I wasn't meant to be any religion. Can't come to terms.
Tacenda Grand Master

Tacenda

Posted
Posted (edited)

Being born "Mormon" and raised in the faith does make one wonder at some point of questioning, if everything is unduly colored by that upbringing. How will I know if I am even capable of seeing truth, if my indoctrination is so ingrained that everything I study and think about is pushed through a "filter" of indoctrination? We have a couple of options: try and toss everything out, clear our minds of all belief and "start over" (is this even possible?), or open our minds the best we can to the widest religious world view we possibly can, while not "tossing out" anything more than seems necessary in order to be true to what we believe. This can be a long process of dissociation with the Church, or it can be immediate like an amputation. I favor the former approach, because it is less disruptive to family and friends, to relationships, which is what I think religion's main purpose is all about. Religion should have as its focus the needs of others above the self. We already possess enough self-interest without religion, so I don't worry about neglecting myself! Staying in the "Mormon way" is a good thing. Trying to believe as much of it as possible can't be a bad thing. Letting everyone have their beliefs without feeling a need to disabuse them of their "ignorance" is charity, and behaving as God does toward each of us in our own ignorance and quest for knowledge. None of us knows very much....

QB thanks for this. I could never free myself totally of Mormonism, it's my makeup and my family are all LDS and I love them. There is something about them, that is so endearing. Maybe God does want us to be like Him and the EV's or others that want to believe we are sinners and no good all the time is wrong. It's so hard because when I listen to some sermons I think yeah that's right, we are lowly and we must always show our devotions to our Lord and Saviour. And when I'm with the LDS or listen to them, like the introduction in the Manti Pageant, we aren't lowly but children of God. But then I hear the other side say that we become children, adopted children to Him, but it isn't immediate, we have to be born again. And I also hear from the non LDS Christian, that being baptised is a showing of our love and devotion after having been given Grace. But the LDS side is that we have to strive to be forgiven of our sins first and be baptised first before that Grace can happen. See what I'm up against? Thanks for the great insight, you have some good ones. Edited by Tacenda
Nathair/|\ Mentor

Nathair/|\

Posted
Posted

Tacenda, you might find discursive meditation helpful. It's a very useful tool for figuring out what you really believe. The link is to a Druid site, but we got the technique from the Church of England, so you don't have to feel like you are getting into something unChristian by using it.

1
thesometimesaint Grand Master

thesometimesaint

Posted
Posted

Tsuzuki:

Long time no see. It's good to see you back.

Tacenda:

In LDS theology we can't just believe then sit back, be a bump on a log and expect exaltation. We have become as salt that has lost its savor. Good for nothing, and to be cast out and trod under the feet of men.

Adam and Eve's transgression was they didn't obey God. God confirms that they have become like God in knowing good from evil. The idea of theosis is well established in the Bible and the early Christian fathers. We are the sons and daughters of God the Father and through adoption become the heirs of and the children of Christ.

Tsuzuki Mentor

Tsuzuki

Posted
  • Author
Posted

A "central tenet" does not a religion make.

Many Thelemites would argue that it's more a philosophy than a religion.

Especially if all manner of additives of a superstitious and occult or ancient hedonistic nature are part and parcel to "discovering your true inner self", etc. Of course "agency" is a central tenet, because it allows the individual to do whatever s/he wants without answering to anybody. Therein lies permissiveness and ultimately a crash, if what one is seeking to give licence to is any degree of hedonism. By "hedonism" I mean specifically self-indulgence without acceptance of the consequences as being ones own fault....

Yet Thelemites do accept the natural consequences of their actions. It's true that consensual sexuality is not a sin in Thelema and many of the mysteries are conveyed with sexual symbolism (personally, if there is a God, I think He/She/It/They care about human sexuality about as much as bonobo sexuality), but indiscriminant unprotected sex can lead to unwanted pregnancy and infection, and relevent to a Mormon Thelemite, breaking covenants can interfere with the effectiveness of others in the future.
Tsuzuki Mentor

Tsuzuki

Posted
  • Author
Posted

And just so you know....my memory's fairly rusty but I'm pretty sure Tzuzuki is lds....just a very esoteric one.

I'm Mormon in the Sterling McMurrin sense. Though some Thelemites have gotten on my case for being too atheist, I would more identify as an ignostic.

http://en.wikipedia....iki/Ignosticism

http://en.wikipedia....ing_M._McMurrin

Tsuzuki Mentor

Tsuzuki

Posted
  • Author
Posted

You're an interesting guy. Ignostic, eh? I hadn't heard of that.

I can assure you, I am increadibly boring.
JKimball Rookie

JKimball

Posted
Posted

Thanks for posting about this, Tsuzuki. I sometimes wonder what Thelemites and Luciferians believe but I've never known any that I could ask. Are you free to discuss all their teachings, or are there some things that you promise not to teach to outsiders?

I'm curious what you mean by compatible. I have only learned a very little about it, but I did have the impression that there are some distinct similarities that mormon theology shares with these mystery religions that it does not share with mainstream Christianity. But as far as the doctrine goes, I would have to say they are very much incompatible as mormon doctrine relies heavily, if not entirely on the Atonement of Jesus Christ, which for all I know, is completely ignored by Thelema and Luciferianism. Comparing the two gives me the sense that we are back at the grand pre-mortal council again, debating whether or not we need a savior.

I think the Crowley quote is very interesting and has some power to it. It actually reminds me of this scripture:

Abraham 3:17 - "...there is nothing that the Lord thy God shall take in his heart to do but what he will do it."

But the mormon perspective on that concept very importantly includes obedience, as the Widstoe quote you provided includes. Also, the quote from Elder Neal A. Maxwell likewise emphasizes the importance of will combined with obedience to God: "The submission of one's will, is really the only uniquely personal thing we have to place on God's altar."

So while both doctrines seem to agree that using our agency is fundamentally important, I'm guessing Thelema would not agree that we should submit our will, and is therefore incompatible. What do you think?

1
Questing Beast Veteran

Questing Beast

Posted
Posted

@JKimball: Wow, I haven't seen that happen before. How did you do that? I'm sure you have no idea either.

I think that submitting your will to God is diametrically opposed to this "core tenet" of the hedonists or those allowing themselves to decide what is hedonism to them and what is not, rather than believe that God might actually have a lot to say on the topic, i.e. define "sin". It seems that these alternate ideas about the importance of the individual will, as core to any philosophy or religion, are just sophistries to excuse broken promises, or avoid making promises to another in the first place....

1
Robert F. Smith Grand Master

Robert F. Smith

Posted
Posted

Being born "Mormon" and raised in the faith does make one wonder at some point of questioning, if everything is unduly colored by that upbringing. How will I know if I am even capable of seeing truth, if my indoctrination is so ingrained that everything I study and think about is pushed through a "filter" of indoctrination? We have a couple of options: try and toss everything out, clear our minds of all belief and "start over" (is this even possible?), or open our minds the best we can to the widest religious world view we possibly can, while not "tossing out" anything more than seems necessary in order to be true to what we believe. This can be a long process of dissociation with the Church, or it can be immediate like an amputation. I favor the former approach, because it is less disruptive to family and friends, to relationships, which is what I think religion's main purpose is all about. Religion should have as its focus the needs of others above the self. We already possess enough self-interest without religion, so I don't worry about neglecting myself! Staying in the "Mormon way" is a good thing. Trying to believe as much of it as possible can't be a bad thing. Letting everyone have their beliefs without feeling a need to disabuse them of their "ignorance" is charity, and behaving as God does toward each of us in our own ignorance and quest for knowledge. None of us knows very much....

Are you suggesting that a dissociative psychopathology is your choice?

Robert F. Smith Grand Master

Robert F. Smith

Posted
Posted

........................................

But think of it this way. Considering the general premise to the LDS church (there was an apostasy, philosophies of men are prevelant in mainstreams though/teachings, and that many plain and precious truths were lost), then not only is it ok that non-lds see it differently but there better be some major differences....ones that alter the picture of who we are and why we're here and how God interacts with us. If there isn't, then the restoration is pretty useless. Often, by "wiping the slate" (which personally, I think is a futile task.....there is no such thing as a clean slated person. No one can read the bible, look at any faith, etc without their opinions, concerns, uncertainty and POV effecting their view), you're just replacing one set of beliefs with another with the same assumption that they are correct.

.......................................

True enough.

However, the difference presumably lies in a coherent matchup with the real world, which Mormonism has and the other religions do not.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...