Michael W. Ford

[Semjaza]

I wasn't sure whether I should stick this in Books or here, but oh well.

Anyone have any thoughts on this guy or his books (Liber HVHI, Luciferian Witchcraft), etc? They looked intriguing...

Cheers,

Semjaza

[Rudas Starblaze]

ive never heard of him. but to be honest, to some people, Lucifer really has nothing to do with satanism. but, i will keep this here for those who would be interested. if you want, feel free to post an identical thread in books if ya want to. it wouldnt hurt!;)

[Stormbeard]

I've not heard of the guy.

However, as Rudy said, we'll leave the thread here. I believe since it's about Lucy it's relevent. :devil:

[David19]

I have heard of him, although I haven't read any of his books yet, but I do intend too, they look very interesting and cool.

Sorry I can't give more of an opinion, but I'm sure someone here has to have read one of his books, at least.

[morganxpage]

His books are on a form of Satanism, and from what I hear, it's all hogwash. That said, I have yet to read them myself.

[Shield_Wolf]

I've herd of him, though I haven't read any of his book yet ether. And I've herd good things about the books from people I know.

[Sesen]

:lol: Well add me to the list of people who have never read his books. I hadn't heard of the guy until I read this thread. Last night, however, I was reading a few articles on this site I came across, and they were written by Michael W. Ford. If you haven't read them already, they might give a better idea of what his books are like. http://algol.chaosmagic.com/articles.htm

[Shield_Wolf]

:lol: Well add me to the list of people who have never read his books. I hadn't heard of the guy until I read this thread. Last night, however, I was reading a few articles on this site I came across, and they were written by Michael W. Ford. If you haven't read them already, they might give a better idea of what his books are like. http://algol.chaosmagic.com/articles.htm

Thank you for the link. I was trying to find it before, I thought I had it booked marked but guess I was wrong. I do now though.

[David19]

Thanks for the link too, Sesen, some of his articles are really cool.

[Russ]

His books are on a form of Satanism, and from what I hear, it's all hogwash. That said, I have yet to read them myself.

From what I know it's based off of Chaos Magick. So it could all be hogwash... The question is "How well does the hodwash work?"

[AnaRQy]

Wow, a Satanism forum that's never heard of Michael Ford, and someone who'd never read anything he wrote yet calls his works hogwash? Quite interesting!

Michael's books could be considered Satanic as most left hand path beliefs go, but his subject matter is about Predatory Spiritualism and Persian Sorcery aka Yatuk-Dinoih. The reason his book is called Luciferian Witchcraft is because the archetypes of Satan/Lucifer/Lilith are actually Hebrew representations of the Persian deities Ahriman/Az. So, Luciferian or Satanist is a term people understand in modern times, but the basis of his book predates Abrahamic religions.

As for myself, I own every one of his books in hardcover, as well as the ritual musick he puts out under project names Black Funeral, Psychonaut 75, Hexentanz, and Ordo Tyrannis. For more details on his works, please visit luciferianwitchcraft.com.

Ave Satanas!

[Stormbeard]

To be honest, I couldn't care less what the guy has to say on Satanism. I am a Satanist because that's the name which fits the beliefs to which I subscribe. I did not decide one day to simply be a Satanist. I have nothing to research.

Also, Satanic Rituals are ridiculous. No ritual is neccessary.

[Russ]

To be honest, I couldn't care less what the guy has to say on Satanism. I am a Satanist because that's the name which fits the beliefs to which I subscribe. I did not decide one day to simply be a Satanist. I have nothing to research.

Also, Satanic Rituals are ridiculous. No ritual is neccessary.

Only if your one of the Materialistic Atheistic types.

[Stormbeard]

I am atheistic. In fact, I think the entire idea of theology is ridiculous. That however, is for another thread, on a different website.

[AnaRQy]

To be honest, I couldn't care less what the guy has to say on Satanism. I am a Satanist because that's the name which fits the beliefs to which I subscribe. I did not decide one day to simply be a Satanist. I have nothing to research.

Also, Satanic Rituals are ridiculous. No ritual is neccessary.

If you don't believe in a deity called Satan, how are you a Satanist? That's like a Christian saying they don't believe in Christ, please explain.

[Stormbeard]

If you don't believe in a deity called Satan, how are you a Satanist? That's like a Christian saying they don't believe in Christ, please explain.
Do Muslims worship Musla?

If you think Satanism is about worshipping Satan, you are sorely mistaken.

[Russ]

Do Muslims worship Musla?

If you think Satanism is about worshiping Satan, you are sorely mistaken.

Actually he isn't. Atheistic Satanist are far in the minority.

[Stormbeard]

Actually he isn't. Atheistic Satanist are far in the minority.

Where are you getting your facts? The Church of Satan is the largest group of recognised Satanists, and that's an atheistic order.

[David19]

Where are you getting your facts? The Church of Satan is the largest group of recognised Satanists, and that's an atheistic order.

Just wanted to add something here, from what I've heard atheistic Satanism (not just Laveyan) is the largest offline, but online, there's a growing population of Theistic Satanists (and then you have the Temple of Set, which is, I think, big offline too).

[AnaRQy]

Do Muslims worship Musla?

If you think Satanism is about worshipping Satan, you are sorely mistaken.

The funny thing is that LaVey was secretly Theistic. He knew there was something more to the energy he was tapping into than pure psychodrama.

An interesting, albeit slightly biased, read on the early years of the Church of Satan, as well as some of the rituals pre-Satanic Bible:

http://www.xeper.org/maquino/nm/COS.pdf

Good for historical purposes, if not for a more behind the scenes look at the Church of Satan.

[David19]

The funny thing is that LaVey was secretly Theistic. He knew there was something more to the energy he was tapping into than pure psychodrama.

An interesting, albeit slightly biased, read on the early years of the Church of Satan, as well as some of the rituals pre-Satanic Bible:

http://www.xeper.org/maquino/nm/COS.pdf

Good for historical purposes, if not for a more behind the scenes look at the Church of Satan.

Thanks for that very interesting link, obvously, I haven't read it all yet, as it's 986 pages, but it seems quite cool, and I really want to learn more about the history of Satanism, like Lavey and a lot of other forms, especially Theistic.

[Stormbeard]

LeVey was interested in selling books. The Church of Satan is a ridiculous pantomime. And I'll say it again, ritual is pointless.

[Atheos]

His books are on a form of Satanism, and from what I hear, it's all hogwash.

Elaborate

[BlackMagicalCat]

I have a copy of his book. The Azal,ucel Edition

I dont think it is wise,,to call forth Satan(or anyone else) in any ritual,,if you think he is not real.Your wasting your time.

Praising him,,hailing him,,when to you,,he doesnt exist,,to me,,seems foolish.

A name in the Occult,,matters.The energy you are connecting to comes from somewhere,,and just because you think Satan,,in his many forms and names,,does not exist,,doesnt mean he doesnt.

So if you pledge your aliegance to him,and borrow his name,,and call yourself by his name,,dont be surprised if he comes to claim that which has been pledged to him.That which is called by his name.

You are servant to the God you invoke in ritual and or prayer.You are not greater than Satan,,he is greater than you.

And Satan doesnt like to give up that which belongs to him.

Its no different than,,,invoking santa claus,,or the easter bunny in a ritual,,if you thought they were not real.If you call yourself a Satanists,,the name you use and are borrowing,,belongs to someone..although it is not his only name.

There is energy and power when you invoke the name of Satan,,and the power comes from somewhere other than from you.

Some brands of satanism,,is nothing more than part of the christian religion,,without a God to oppose and a bible to read backwards,,you wouldnt have a religion.You wouldnt be able to call yourself a satanists,,if the name satan wasnt in the bible,and you would have to find another God to oppose.

You took his name,,the name you call yourself by,,from the scriptures.(bible)

It would be just like praying,,in the name of the Father,,the Son,,and the Holy Spirit,,amen,,and then claiming you didnt really believe in them. You just gutted your own prayer.

It seems to me,,some people,,like to be thought of as bad,,and tough,,so they embrace the name,,Satan,,and call themself,,satanists,,while knowing nothing about to whom,,that name belongs to.

Thats what I think.

[BlackMagicalCat]

LeVey was interested in selling books. The Church of Satan is a ridiculous pantomime. And I'll say it again, ritual is pointless.

To you it may be,,but,,rituals and prayers,,invokations,,songs,,chants,,they all go hand in hand.
While you may not be affected by any rituals,,or prayers,,doesnt mean others have not been transformed by them.

Rituals..prayers,,can change the person who is doing them.A process of transormation,,just like dancing,,chanting,,singing,,,preaching,,speaking,,words,,and actions will put in motion ripples,,that will determine what your life becomes,,and what you become.

Every action you make,,and every thing you do,matters,,including rituals.

So,,you can only rightfully say,,TO YOU rituals are pointless,,but you can not truthfully speak for others.

A ritual can change a persons life for ever.

[Sage Rainsong]

I have heard of him, and I have thumbed through his books at this amazing occult store, when I was in Seattle. He has some interesting ideas but quite honestly, it is not my path and sometimes I wonder where he gets his sources from. If nothing else I think that he is kind of hot lol! He does have a youtbe channel if anyone is interested:

http://www.youtube.com/user/akhtya75

[Stormbeard]

To you it may be,,but,,rituals and prayers,,invokations,,songs,,chants,,they all go hand in hand.
While you may not be affected by any rituals,,or prayers,,doesnt mean others have not been transformed by them.

Rituals..prayers,,can change the person who is doing them.A process of transormation,,just like dancing,,chanting,,singing,,,preaching,,speaking,,words,,and actions will put in motion ripples,,that will determine what your life becomes,,and what you become.

Every action you make,,and every thing you do,matters,,including rituals.

So,,you can only rightfully say,,TO YOU rituals are pointless,,but you can not truthfully speak for others.

A ritual can change a persons life for ever.

That's the most long winded way of saying "That's just your opinion" ever.

Basically, yes I find ritual pointless. With the exception of meditation as a relaxation technique, ritual serves the same purpose as prayer. To give you the feeling you are doing/have done something when you have really done nothing.

[David19]

I have heard of him, and I have thumbed through his books at this amazing occult store, when I was in Seattle. He has some interesting ideas but quite honestly, it is not my path and sometimes I wonder where he gets his sources from. If nothing else I think that he is kind of hot lol! He does have a youtbe channel if anyone is interested:

http://www.youtube.com/user/akhtya75

Thanks for that link, I've actually downloaded quite a few of his books (not Luciferian Witchcraft, unfortunely), he has some interesting ideas, I wouldn't say I follow his path, but, he does have some interesting ideas (BTW, Sage, if you want the link to download them, I'll send you a PM).

And, I also think he's quite hot, so you're not alone there :thumbsup:.

[Stormbeard]

And, I also think he's quite hot

<3 Oh Dave

[Sage Rainsong]

Thanks for that link, I've actually downloaded quite a few of his books (not Luciferian Witchcraft, unfortunely), he has some interesting ideas, I wouldn't say I follow his path, but, he does have some interesting ideas (BTW, Sage, if you want the link to download them, I'll send you a PM).

And, I also think he's quite hot, so you're not alone there :thumbsup:.

I would love them. Thanks for the offer.

[David19]

<3 Oh Dave

Now, if you were gay, or bi, you'd feel differently ;).

[Hangatyr 13]

I like watching Ford's Youtube videos. He speaks clearly and doesn't try to act like a freak to show everyone how "evil" he is. I'm very interested in reading this guy's books.

He has an initiatory order called the Order of Phosphorus. It has a few articles.
www.luciferianwitchcraft.com/toph.htm

[Deerwoman]

Someone who read too much Paul Huson, Osman-Spare, Chumbley, Cochrane, and Michael Howard and thought he could capitalize on it. Amalgamations of other's works not worth the money in my honest opinion. Might as well read the source material instead :goodgrief

[Darth Brooks]

From what I have read of his work thus far, he's another one of these Western LHPers who have no real concept of what being on the LHP originally meant, and who turns the RHP/LHP distinction into a "union with the universe" vs. "isolate intelligence" dichotomy, which is not really in keeping with the historical implications of these terms. Neither the RHP nor the LHP are ideological distinctions; they are merely methodological distinctions, meaning they aren't necessarily about what one believes or doesn't believe. Instead, they have more to do with how one practices one's rituals, or what methods one uses in one's rituals to achieve the end result. Technically an RHPer and an LHPer can practice the exact same religion, like Buddhism or Tantra or whatever, but the RHPer will use traditional ascetic methods to cultivate the raw mystical experience of that religion (i.e., fasting, sexual abstinence, etc.), while the LHPer will use more carnal methods (i.e. feasting, drug use, sexual indulgence, etc.).

Also, just from reading a few paragraphs of Ford's work, I can easily tell that he was either once affiliated with the Temple of Set, or at least subscribes to a lot of their theories, because he practically repeats many of the kinds of things I've heard ToS members say. His rituals to Set are no doubt influenced by Don Webb's work, which is good IMO, but he also seems to enjoy suggesting that "Seth-an" is an actual cult title of Set from Egypt, from which the word "Satan" is derived. To my knowledge this theory was first postulated by Dr. Michael A. Aquino of the ToS, and it has never been substantiated.

Also, I find Ford's recurring claim that the worship of Set is synonymous with Satanism to be insulting. That to me that would be like saying Judaism is synonymous with Christianity. While there are certainly a few similarities, that does not make them exactly the same. For one thing, the cult of Set was around first, and our forefathers had no reservations about the Abrahamic God whatsoever, seeing as how they made synchronic connections between Set and YHWH, as well as other Semitic storm Gods (like Ba'al), for the purposes of their rituals. Hell, in the ancient world, YHWH practically was a devil in the eyes of surrounding pagan cultures like the Greeks and Egyptians. Curiously, Ford does not seem to account for these facts in his claims about the Setian path. He would apparently rather have us believe that the worship of Set is and must always be adversarial toward the Jewish God.

Have to agree with Deerwoman, nothing this guy has written is really original, it's all been said and written before, both the parts that are true and the parts that are inaccurate.

[David19]

Someone who read too much Paul Huson, Osman-Spare, Chumbley, Cochrane, and Michael Howard and thought he could capitalize on it. Amalgamations of other's works not worth the money in my honest opinion. Might as well read the source material instead :goodgrief

I think that's quite likely, and I'd definitely recommend all the other authors before Ford, especially Huson and Spare and Cochrane (who, IMO, don't get nearly enough attention as they truly deserve), Chumbley's works are, IMO, just damn difficult to read and understand, maybe I need to evolve more or something (i.e. get smarter), or maybe I need to be initiated to understand it, but, I only understand a tiny bit of what he's saying in his books. I've never read Howard's stuff, but, I might check them out (he wrote a book on the Fallen Angels, if I'm not mistaken, which makes me really want to read him, but, I've also heard he's not the greatest author.


From what I have read of his work thus far, he's another one of these Western LHPers who have no real concept of what being on the LHP originally meant, and who turns the RHP/LHP distinction into a "union with the universe" vs. "isolate intelligence" dichotomy, which is not really in keeping with the historical implications of these terms. Neither the RHP nor the LHP are ideological distinctions; they are merely methodological distinctions, meaning they aren't necessarily about what one believes or doesn't believe. Instead, they have more to do with how one practices one's rituals, or what methods one uses in one's rituals to achieve the end result. Technically an RHPer and an LHPer can practice the exact same religion, like Buddhism or Tantra or whatever, but the RHPer will use traditional ascetic methods to cultivate the raw mystical experience of that religion (i.e., fasting, sexual abstinence, etc.), while the LHPer will use more carnal methods (i.e. feasting, drug use, sexual indulgence, etc.).

QFT, in the words of Zeena and Nikolas Schreck, authors of 'Demons of the Flesh', I think, Ford could be catagorised as a New Age Satanist. He doesn't seem to understand much on the LHP, as it's traditionally understood, I'd recommend the Schreck's (and some other Temple of Set authors) for better approach..

Ford's work just seems to use New Age visualizations (which, IMO, aren't magic, visualization can be used in magic, like in some Eastern paths, but, it's not really the same as what passes for visualization in the Western occult texts, which are just thinking of images in your mind), with some Satanic imagery.

I do like, however, how he seems to have made the Persian Zoroastrian LHP more widely known, and has done some work with Zoroastrian concepts, which, IMO, is quite cool (I really am very interested in Zoroastrianism, it seems an amazingly beautiful religion).


Also, just from reading a few paragraphs of Ford's work, I can easily tell that he was either once affiliated with the Temple of Set, or at least subscribes to a lot of their theories, because he practically repeats many of the kinds of things I've heard ToS members say. His rituals to Set are no doubt influenced by Don Webb's work, which is good IMO, but he also seems to enjoy suggesting that "Seth-an" is an actual cult title of Set from Egypt, from which the word "Satan" is derived. To my knowledge this theory was first postulated by Dr. Michael A. Aquino of the ToS, and it has never been substantiated.

Also, I find Ford's recurring claim that the worship of Set is synonymous with Satanism to be insulting. That to me that would be like saying Judaism is synonymous with Christianity. While there are certainly a few similarities, that does not make them exactly the same. For one thing, the cult of Set was around first, and our forefathers had no reservations about the Abrahamic God whatsoever, seeing as how they made synchronic connections between Set and YHWH, as well as other Semitic storm Gods (like Ba'al), for the purposes of their rituals. Hell, in the ancient world, YHWH practically was a devil in the eyes of surrounding pagan cultures like the Greeks and Egyptians. Curiously, Ford does not seem to account for these facts in his claims about the Setian path. He would apparently rather have us believe that the worship of Set is and must always be adversarial toward the Jewish God.

Have to agree with Deerwoman, nothing this guy has written is really original, it's all been said and written before, both the parts that are true and the parts that are inaccurate.

Again, QFT, and that's something that annoys me too, that he seems to think, and so do many other Satanists, that YHWH and Set are at odds, when, IMO, they are, if not the same, probably, related on some level (maybe manifestations of the same force, different but connected?).

[Torey]

I wasn't sure whether I should stick this in Books or here, but oh well.

Anyone have any thoughts on this guy or his books (Liber HVHI, Luciferian Witchcraft), etc? They looked intriguing...

Cheers,

Semjaza

I think that he has some good points and is definitely educated in the Occult, but I think that he needs to look at investing in a professional editor for his books.

[VenusSatanas]

"Wow, a Satanism forum that's never heard of Michael Ford, and someone who'd never read anything he wrote yet calls his works hogwash? Quite interesting!" :thumbsup:

I know, right?
Michael ford is a prolific writer. His information can easily be found on Wikipedia. Michael Ford was trained by Nathaniel Harris, who was a former student of Andrew Chumbley. They both promote their own created method of witchcraft that they claim is in their family lineage.

Michael Ford's sources vary considerably. His book , Luciferian Witchcraft draws from sources like Carroll and Sherwin, and AO Spare, and his book Liber HVHI was derived from authors like Kenneth Grant and Zoroastrian mythology.

He tends to weave a patchwork of a mythology of his own, relating Satan, Lucifer, and other gods to 'Samael', etc. Mixing mythologies regardless of their sources. He cross references his own books repeatedly in his writing making it necessary to buy the entire collection of his books in order to understand what he is trying to explain.

His books are also badly edited, with missing references and incomplete bibliographies. He is Luciferian, as his writings indicate, and he does not consider himself to be a Satanist. I see no value in his books as I have noticed that they are badly researched, with many missing pieces, and explanations which are not clear. If this is an intentional disguise for mystical knowledge, it is badly done.

I appreciate authors like Ford for making the Left hand path more acceptable and popular, but for a reliable reference source, I think I will stick to the classics.


Venus Satanas
http://www.spiritualsatanist.com/

[Hangatyr 13]

Since my last post in this thread, I've read two of Michael W. Ford's books: Beginning Luciferian Magick and The Bible of the Adversary.

Beginning Luciferian Magick is kind of an overview of almost all of the many sub-paradigms that MWF works with and it's badly edited, so it's sporadic as Hell. It's also kind of an advertizement for all of his other books, but it gives you a better idea of where you might want to go from there because he has an ass load of them. It has a self-initiation ritual in it, but I don't like it. For some reason, it has you calling Cain and three Egyptian gods in the four directions. There's also a part in the book that, in very Paul Huson-like fashion, calls for the recitation of the Lord's Prayer backwords. I guess that makes sense though, seeing as it's for beginners, presumably, recovering Christians.

The Bible of the Adversary is a good book. He still references other books of his in this one which kind of annoys me, and it's also badly edited, but I like his writing style and his Ahrimanic sub-paradigm is interesting. He goes a bit more into his own style of Western evocation in this one, which has nothing to do with calling upon angels and Yaweh to constrain demons and more to do with kind of getting the big demons to kind of "pull rank" on the little demons, lol. I like it better though. I swear, I want to puke sometimes when I read the old grimoires. The devotional section towards the end is damn near useless. There's a self-initiation ritual in this one too. Its opening uses Persian words and an inverted triangle traced across the body (not the worst antinomian adaptation of the Cabalistic Cross I've seen), but it's followed by the calling of various Infernal Princes and demons in like eight directions for some reason.

Over all, I like MWF's style of writing (even though he needs to hire an editor badly) and I like his overall vision of Luciferianism regardless of all the details. It looks similar to Setianism, but more balanced and antinomian.

[Torey]

Since my last post in this thread, I've read two of Michael W. Ford's books: Beginning Luciferian Magick and The Bible of the Adversary.

Beginning Luciferian Magick is kind of an overview of almost all of the many sub-paradigms that MWF works with and it's badly edited, so it's sporadic as Hell. It's also kind of an advertizement for all of his other books, but it gives you a better idea of where you might want to go from there because he has an ass load of them. It has a self-initiation ritual in it, but I don't like it. For some reason, it has you calling Cain and three Egyptian gods in the four directions. There's also a part in the book that, in very Paul Huson-like fashion, calls for the recitation of the Lord's Prayer backwords. I guess that makes sense though, seeing as it's for beginners, presumably, recovering Christians.

The Bible of the Adversary is a good book. He still references other books of his in this one which kind of annoys me, and it's also badly edited, but I like his writing style and his Ahrimanic sub-paradigm is interesting. He goes a bit more into his own style of Western evocation in this one, which has nothing to do with calling upon angels and Yaweh to constrain demons and more to do with kind of getting the big demons to kind of "pull rank" on the little demons, lol. I like it better though. I swear, I want to puke sometimes when I read the old grimoires. The devotional section towards the end is damn near useless. There's a self-initiation ritual in this one too. Its opening uses Persian words and an inverted triangle traced across the body (not the worst antinomian adaptation of the Cabalistic Cross I've seen), but it's followed by the calling of various Infernal Princes and demons in like eight directions for some reason.

Over all, I like MWF's style of writing (even though he needs to hire an editor badly) and I like his overall vision of Luciferianism regardless of all the details. It looks similar to Setianism, but more balanced and antinomian.

This is a really good review. You are nicer than I would have been about it, though. :)

[David19]

Since my last post in this thread, I've read two of Michael W. Ford's books: Beginning Luciferian Magick and The Bible of the Adversary.

Beginning Luciferian Magick is kind of an overview of almost all of the many sub-paradigms that MWF works with and it's badly edited, so it's sporadic as Hell. It's also kind of an advertizement for all of his other books, but it gives you a better idea of where you might want to go from there because he has an ass load of them. It has a self-initiation ritual in it, but I don't like it. For some reason, it has you calling Cain and three Egyptian gods in the four directions. There's also a part in the book that, in very Paul Huson-like fashion, calls for the recitation of the Lord's Prayer backwords. I guess that makes sense though, seeing as it's for beginners, presumably, recovering Christians.

The Bible of the Adversary is a good book. He still references other books of his in this one which kind of annoys me, and it's also badly edited, but I like his writing style and his Ahrimanic sub-paradigm is interesting. He goes a bit more into his own style of Western evocation in this one, which has nothing to do with calling upon angels and Yaweh to constrain demons and more to do with kind of getting the big demons to kind of "pull rank" on the little demons, lol. I like it better though. I swear, I want to puke sometimes when I read the old grimoires. The devotional section towards the end is damn near useless. There's a self-initiation ritual in this one too. Its opening uses Persian words and an inverted triangle traced across the body (not the worst antinomian adaptation of the Cabalistic Cross I've seen), but it's followed by the calling of various Infernal Princes and demons in like eight directions for some reason.

Over all, I like MWF's style of writing (even though he needs to hire an editor badly) and I like his overall vision of Luciferianism regardless of all the details. It looks similar to Setianism, but more balanced and antinomian.

You know, 'The Bible of the Adversary' sounds very interesting, I might check it out, hopefully as a download, I'm not sure if I'd want to pay for his work. Personally, I think Ford has some interesting ideas, but, I think a lot of it is quite New Agey, the way he describes certain things. Also, the way he talks about blood magic, like he says "sacrifice should never be done" or it's "better to visualize the blood", well, that just sounds like he wants acceptance from the mainstream, and doesn't want to appear evil. Now, while I'm not saying there's anything wrong with not sacrificing animals or using human blood in magic, the fact is many people and groups in the past did use it, and, apparantly, got results, so it's not something that can just be easily dismissed, IMO, anyway.

[Torey]

Also, the way he talks about blood magic, like he says "sacrifice should never be done" or it's "better to visualize the blood", well, that just sounds like he wants acceptance from the mainstream, and doesn't want to appear evil.

I'd be interested to know why he thinks that it's 'better' to visualize the blood. Hmmm :)

[David19]

I'd be interested to know why he thinks that it's 'better' to visualize the blood. Hmmm :)

I'm not sure, from what I've read of his works, he likes to come across as dark, but, "not too dark", like he'll say something about Satan, demons, Ahriman (the Zoroastrian Evil God), or whatever, but, then, basically, say "and, we're not evil, we don't sacrifice animals or humans", it kind of gets annoying, it's like he wants acceptance of others (again, I'm not saying he should sacrifice humans or animals, but, there's no need to whitewash things), personally, I think Thomas Karlson's book 'Qabala, QLiphoth, & Goetic Magic' (http://www.amazon.com/Qabalah-Qliphoth-Goetic-Thomas-Karlsson/dp/0972182012/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1250646108&sr=1-1) sounds a lot more interesting (I haven't got it yet, and it's quite expensive, but, it definitely looks and sounds very cool).

[Torey]

I may check out that title, as well. It seems like there is a similarity between Ford and Konstantinos - they both want the reputation for being dark and dangerous, but also want to be accepted as 'good guys' by the Pagan community. Ahhh well whatever floats their boats. :)

[David19]

I may check out that title, as well. It seems like there is a similarity between Ford and Konstantinos - they both want the reputation for being dark and dangerous, but also want to be accepted as 'good guys' by the Pagan community. Ahhh well whatever floats their boats. :)

I can't comment on Karlson's book, as I haven't read it yet, but, from what I've heard, his work is definitely a lot better than Ford and Konstantinos, who, IMO, are more dark/Gothic New Agers, that's one of the reasons I really want to check out Karlson's work, also, apparantly, he's a student of Kenneth Grant (Grant is someone who, while quite controversial, and you probably need some salt when reading his books, is still definitely someone you should read, IMO, anyway).

[Torey]

I can't comment on Karlson's book, as I haven't read it yet, but, from what I've heard, his work is definitely a lot better than Ford and Konstantinos, who, IMO, are more dark/Gothic New Agers, that's one of the reasons I really want to check out Karlson's work, also, apparantly, he's a student of Kenneth Grant (Grant is someone who, while quite controversial, and you probably need some salt when reading his books, is still definitely someone you should read, IMO, anyway).

I've been thirsting to get my hands on a Grant book for a while - I can't afford hundreds of dollars for a book, though. :(

[David19]

I've been thirsting to get my hands on a Grant book for a while - I can't afford hundreds of dollars for a book, though. :(

You and me both!, I'd say Grants books are interesting, even if you don't agree with him. If you find them too expensive, I know where you can download a few of his books, just let me know if you want the link :).

[SpiritCaller]

I have read Luciferian Witchcraft, and sadly I was not a fan. To top it off, he rambled on and there were way too many grammatical errors and no editing. That was a big turn off and made me question whether he wanted to get the book out quickly and earn money or just pretend he knew everything and didn't care if it was edited or not.

The information was interesting, but since it's a throwoff of Chaos Magick and other stuff, it's unique but not very sound in the sense of religion or spirituality, at least not for me.

I definitely wouldn't recommend his books (although he did have quite a bit of interesting information), but to each his own.

[Torey]

You and me both!, I'd say Grants books are interesting, even if you don't agree with him. If you find them too expensive, I know where you can download a few of his books, just let me know if you want the link :).

It would be an understatement to say 'yes'! :hahugh: