I'd like to ask a question....

What do you, as Christians, think of a man who:

>called himself "The Great Beast, 666"?
>created a religion that was opposed to Christianity?
>advocated the use of drugs and "sex magick"?
>was, even according to HIS FOLLOWERS, possesed by a demon for much of his life?
>made his wife have bestiality with a goat as part of a "magic ritual", slashed the goat's throat, and then drank it's blood?
>concecrated human feces as a "communion host" (as in The Lord's Supper) and then ate it?
>was said to have molested children, and even his own poetry alludes to it?
>prescribed a method of developing the will that involved cutting the forearm with a razor everytime a person thought of themselves in the term "I"?
>claimed to be many things he wasn't, including a Scottish Laird, a Russian count, an Egyptian prince, and an Medical Doctor?
>died a junkie in a flophouse, despite the fact he said in his "sacred scripture", "Success Is Your Proof",
>died a junkie in a flophouse, despite the fact he said could teach people to use drugs and not become addictied...even though he couldn't do it himself?
>may have even played a part in the creation of Wicca, directly or indirectly?

I've been taking flack for my description of Aleister Crowley from someone who claims to be a "former" occultist turned Christian. I get my information from things written about him by people who actually knew Crowley, like Collin Wilson (who's actually a fan of Crowley!). I'm not the one saying these things, his early biographers (who actually knew him) said them. http://usminc.org/crowley.html Am I wrong to do it? Do I need to sugar coat it to avoid hurting someone's feelings out there?

How can a man like this be defended by Christians??? Am I missing something??? Am I wrong? Or am I being "biased", "infantile" and "insulting"?

Sorry, but I call a spade a spade.

I know the person you're talking about. That person waded in waters deeper than you can possibly imagine. I didn't see the thread that was yanked, but I understand you do not believe that person is a former occultist who is now a Christian. I tell you flatly that you are wrong, very wrong, about that person. I call a spade a spade as well.

I don't care what you write about Crowley. I do care about the aspersions you are casting against my Christian friend.

Oh, by the way, 'flophouse' isn't an accurate description for the building where Crowley died. Perhaps it's a cultural thing between the US and the UK. I know the guy who subsequently lived in Crowley's room in the boarding house (a peculiar English institution- have holidayed in many over the years), and also knew Crowley's biographer Gerald Suster (I was part of his Company of Heaven ritual group). I still miss Gerald even now; for all his occult interests, he was an old-school English gentleman, a dying breed.

Sounds like a man who needed and recieved a savior.

I know the person you're talking about. That person waded in waters deeper than you can possibly imagine. I didn't see the thread that was yanked, but I understand you do not believe that person is a former occultist who is now a Christian. I tell you flatly that you are wrong, very wrong, about that person. I call a spade a spade as well.

I don't care what you write about Crowley. I do care about the aspersions you are casting against my Christian friend.

It happened on another forum. I don't know if it was your friend or not, but that person certainly cast plenty of aspersion on me. I have no doubt whoever they were was into the occult, I just don't think they're completely free of it.

It happened on another forum. I don't know if it was your friend or not, but that person certainly cast plenty of aspersion on me. I have no doubt whoever they were was into the occult, I just don't think they're completely free of it.

yeah I was wondering about that myself. I thought there was some conflict here that took place or something due to beth's comment

I'd like to ask a question....

What do you, as Christians, think of a man who:

>called himself "The Great Beast, 666"?
>created a religion that was opposed to Christianity?
>advocated the use of drugs and "sex magick"?
>was, even according to HIS FOLLOWERS, possesed by a demon for much of his life?
>made his wife have bestiality with a goat as part of a "magic ritual", slashed the goat's throat, and then drank it's blood?
>concecrated human feces as a "communion host" (as in The Lord's Supper) and then ate it?
>was said to have molested children, and even his own poetry alludes to it?
>prescribed a method of developing the will that involved cutting the forearm with a razor everytime a person thought of themselves in the term "I"?
>claimed to be many things he wasn't, including a Scottish Laird, a Russian count, an Egyptian prince, and an Medical Doctor?
>died a junkie in a flophouse, despite the fact he said in his "sacred scripture", "Success Is Your Proof",
>died a junkie in a flophouse, despite the fact he said could teach people to use drugs and not become addictied...even though he couldn't do it himself?
>may have even played a part in the creation of Wicca, directly or indirectly?

I've been taking flack for my description of Aleister Crowley from someone who claims to be a "former" occultist turned Christian. I get my information from things written about him by people who actually knew Crowley, like Collin Wilson (who's actually a fan of Crowley!). I'm not the one saying these things, his early biographers (who actually knew him) said them. http://usminc.org/crowley.html Am I wrong to do it? Do I need to sugar coat it to avoid hurting someone's feelings out there?

How can a man like this be defended by Christians??? Am I missing something??? Am I wrong? Or am I being "biased", "infantile" and "insulting"?

Sorry, but I call a spade a spade.

If someone has turned from their sins and received Christ they are a new creation.

2Co 5:17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new.

If they are forgiven God wipes the slate clean and promises to remember no more:

Heb 8:12 FOR I WILL BE MERCIFUL TO THEIR UNRIGHTEOUSNESS, AND THEIR SINS AND THEIR LAWLESS DEEDS I WILL REMEMBER NO MORE."

Before we accept Christ we are sinners, we have all sinned and all fallen short. We might like to pick on specific sins as being "worse" than others, but Scripture is clear about breaking any part of the law:

Jas 2:10 For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all.

Your descriptions are clearly of Crowley, but I'm not sure what response you expect. He was a sinner who needed a Saviour - whether he ever did repent or not isn't something I know, and as a former occultist myself it's only for the grace of God that I'm not left to rot in a deep hole.

If someone has turned from their sins and received Christ they are a new creation.

2Co 5:17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new.

If they are forgiven God wipes the slate clean and promises to remember no more:

Heb 8:12 FOR I WILL BE MERCIFUL TO THEIR UNRIGHTEOUSNESS, AND THEIR SINS AND THEIR LAWLESS DEEDS I WILL REMEMBER NO MORE."

Before we accept Christ we are sinners, we have all sinned and all fallen short. We might like to pick on specific sins as being "worse" than others, but Scripture is clear about breaking any part of the law:

Jas 2:10 For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all.

Your descriptions are clearly of Crowley, but I'm not sure what response you expect. He was a sinner who needed a Saviour - whether he ever did repent or not isn't something I know, and as a former occultist myself it's only for the grace of God that I'm not left to rot in a deep hole.

I don't think Crowley's repentance is the real issue with Doc's website. Even if he did repent his teachings and life still inspire many who gravitate toward the macabre. It's sorta like the issue with Darwin's alleged repentance. It might save him but his theory still deceives many.I have read many of the articles on Zoom's site and I think his motive is to expose the fruit one will reap if they follow the same path. I might also mention that I found the article so graphic that I couldn't finish it. You probably can't finish it either Tango. But we are both now children of the light. The article was written for those still bound so I support it's web presence(and I'm not saying you don't)

However,there for a minute I did think of you or maybe daughter when bethany defended whoever zoom was talking about. I have read both of your testimonies. I glad that the good doctor cleared that up.;)

I don't think Crowley's repentance is the real issue with Doc's website. Even if he did repent his teachings and life still inspire many who gravitate toward the macabre. It's sorta like the issue with Darwin's alleged repentance. It might save him but his theory still deceives many.I have read many of the articles on Zoom's site and I think his motive is to expose the fruit one will reap if they follow the same path. I might also mention that I found the article so graphic that I couldn't finish it. You probably can't finish it either Tango. But we are both now children of the light. The article was written for those still bound so I support it's web presence(and I'm not saying you don't)


Halleujah! You've gotten the point!:D It's amazing how many people out there in TV Land can't get it and want to start a game of online Trivial Pursuit! You're right, all I'm saying is, when you look at Crowley in the right light, he wasn't some kind of demi-god or prophet. I know of at least one person that wound up dead using his methods, and I'm sure there are many, many more.

Sorry if you found it too graphic, but in this generation of "Saw" films and internet porn, I don't think most people are so shocked by it until they can't read it all. If I didn't tell everything, people wouldn't realize how evil Crowley truly was. If you think about it, isn't that how cults work? Mormons don't tell you they think God had sexual intercourse with the Virgin Mary or the old doctrines of "Blood Atonement" when you call for the free Book of Mormon. Sometimes you just have to spell it all out.

I do pity the Crowley, truly, (and I have never heard anything about him "repenting") but I can't sugar coat the truth. There's too much of that going on already. If he could come back from the dead, I honestly don't think he'd want me to sugar coat it either.

There was someone on another forum who said my website was "infantile", "filled with innacuarices" and "the same old same old" and made some very personal attacks on me, and then claimed to know descendents of Crowley or something or another and pretened to know the "real" story. Yeah, whatever. Whoever that person was, I doubt they are completely converted. If some pusillanimous Christian unjustly slams my website just as Wiccans, Satanists, and Rosicrucians, etc., do everyday, how are they any different? I can't see how they are. I find it hard any real Christian could attack my website the way they did.

When I first started going to church for the first time in many years since my youth, I wasn't completely changed either. I was probably best described as a "Universalist". I went to church, got communion, but still had my tarot cards, my candle spells, my various bottles of "anointing oils", etc. It wasn't until I was confirmed a member, and receieved the Holy Ghost that I actually realized what I was doing was wrong. I wound up burning my tarot cards and getting rid of the other stuff.

It's harder to leave anything occultic than you might think. Only the Holy Ghost can accomplish it. I'll pray for whoever it was that unjustly criticized the website.:pray:

I just needed to see if anyone could get the point, or if I'm alone out here. Thanks!

Paul Washer calls a spade a spade stop an consider what this man of God says when speaking of sinners.

http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docid=3816153383092639273&hl=en&autoPlay=true&playerMode=simple

Jude

http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u298/hogndog/twocents.gif

Paul Washer calls a spade a spade stop an consider what this man of God says when speaking of sinners.

http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docid=3816153383092639273&hl=en&autoPlay=true&playerMode=simple

Jude

http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u298/hogndog/twocents.gif


LOL! I am listening to that right now. I was about 53 minutes into it when you posted this.

Scottizzle posted this link of the same message on youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uuabITeO4l8

A while back and I just read his thread

He is a man who understands the responsibility that a spiritual leader has and he doesn't play games with the cross

Dr. ZZ: your website is excellent, you are doing fine work, please keep it up.

a Christian defend crowley? before there was such a thing as the internet, i would have never thought it possible. but since looking at Christian websites the past 10 years, i'm not surprised at all. if you really want to stir them up, say something negative about St. potter.

I'd like to ask a question....

What do you, as Christians, think of a man who:

>called himself "The Great Beast, 666"?
>created a religion that was opposed to Christianity?
>advocated the use of drugs and "sex magick"?
>was, even according to HIS FOLLOWERS, possesed by a demon for much of his life?
>made his wife have bestiality with a goat as part of a "magic ritual", slashed the goat's throat, and then drank it's blood?
>concecrated human feces as a "communion host" (as in The Lord's Supper) and then ate it?
>was said to have molested children, and even his own poetry alludes to it?
>prescribed a method of developing the will that involved cutting the forearm with a razor everytime a person thought of themselves in the term "I"?
>claimed to be many things he wasn't, including a Scottish Laird, a Russian count, an Egyptian prince, and an Medical Doctor?
>died a junkie in a flophouse, despite the fact he said in his "sacred scripture", "Success Is Your Proof",
>died a junkie in a flophouse, despite the fact he said could teach people to use drugs and not become addictied...even though he couldn't do it himself?
>may have even played a part in the creation of Wicca, directly or indirectly?

I've been taking flack for my description of Aleister Crowley from someone who claims to be a "former" occultist turned Christian. I get my information from things written about him by people who actually knew Crowley, like Collin Wilson (who's actually a fan of Crowley!). I'm not the one saying these things, his early biographers (who actually knew him) said them. http://usminc.org/crowley.html Am I wrong to do it? Do I need to sugar coat it to avoid hurting someone's feelings out there?

How can a man like this be defended by Christians??? Am I missing something??? Am I wrong? Or am I being "biased", "infantile" and "insulting"?

Sorry, but I call a spade a spade.
May I ask why you are bringing an old argument to a new website? What does it matter what we think, or you think? You shouldn't be carrying old grudges. Whatever problems you have had on other websites, why do you want to drag them over here? I know it's always tempting to have the last word, but why would you think we'd be interested?

Your descriptions are clearly of Crowley, but I'm not sure what response you expect.

I just expect other Christians on other forums not to try to defend him and falsely criticize my website.

The point of my webpage on Crowley is "Look at him and then decide if he really had all the answers". I do point out the "unflattering" things about his life, but I think people need to know about them, and I can't see how pretending they didn't happen helps anyone.

May I ask why you are bringing an old argument to a new website? What does it matter what we think, or you think? You shouldn't be carrying old grudges. Whatever problems you have had on other websites, why do you want to drag them over here? I know it's always tempting to have the last word, but why would you think we'd be interested?

Sometimes a person just needs a word of encouragement, and some of the people are interested. If you're not interested, no one's forcing you to post anything.

You don't need to misrepresent people who can't answer back in order to get a "word of encouragement." The individual that you are suggesting is not genuinely Christian in your initial post ("someone who claims to be a "former" occultist turned Christian") is in fact born again. You may disagree with them, but you don't have to libel them across the internet.

So did Aleister turn to Christ in the end or not? That's what I'm wondering? I'm not asking for a judgment call of his salvation, asking for the story, if there is one. The thing is, if he is... That deserves mention and while I'm clearly not going to defend his past life, as a Christian he'd be a new creation in Christ. As offensive as forgiveness is to most. If Aleister died a Christian then I'm not completely interested in, "look at the horrible things this man did". I'm interested in, "look where this man came from and see where he wound up (believing in Jesus Christ)".

I just expect other Christians on other forums not to try to defend him and falsely criticize my website.

The point of my webpage on Crowley is "Look at him and then decide if he really had all the answers". I do point out the "unflattering" things about his life, but I think people need to know about them, and I can't see how pretending they didn't happen helps anyone.

So why are you bringing it here? I don't see anyone defending Crowley, or elevating him to the status of a prophet or a demi-god.

But if you really want to get into bashing people many would deem evil, I'd respectfully remind you of the words of Jesus, "let him without sin cast the first stone". We are all sinners, not just Crowley.

This thread has ran quite the course... and is getting closer to finger pointing the more we proceed. Before it gets to that point, it has been decided to close the thread.