Modern Satanism is not monolithic; its beliefs and worldviews range from rigorously non‑theistic ethical systems to occultist metaphysical claims. A central distinction in scholarship and in the self‑descriptions of practitioners divides non‑theistic or symbolic Satanism—often associated with LaVeyan writings and with activist groups such as The Satanic Temple—from theistic or metaphysical Satanism and related currents such as the Temple of Set. This chapter lays out the principal frameworks, names core concepts, and highlights internal tensions that structure belief across the movement.
LaVeyan Satanism, as articulated most famously in Anton LaVey's The Satanic Bible (1969) and The Satanic Rituals (1972), presents Satan as a symbol of pride, individualism, and carnal human nature rather than as a literal supernatural being. Followers of this approach understand Satan as an archetype or emblem that encourages self‑assertion and the rejection of what LaVey framed as Christian asceticism. LaVey's published corpus contains overtly secular and materialist statements: for example, The Satanic Bible includes essays on egoism, indulgence, and social skepticism. Scholars place LaVeyan literature within a broader tradition of modern symbolic religions and secular ritualism, noting its rhetorical use of inverted Christian categories. A concrete, verifiable fact here is the publication date of The Satanic Bible (1969) and the existence of explicit essays within it advocating rational self‑interest.
By contrast, the Temple of Set, founded in 1975 by Michael A. Aquino and others who left the Church of Satan, takes a different metaphysical position. Temple of Set literature posits a metaphysical entity—Set, drawn from Egyptian mythology—as an intelligible, initiatory force and centers a magico‑occult praxis that treats spiritual transformation as an existential project. This creates a clear tension: on the one hand, LaVeyan Satanism is often described by adherents as atheistic, psychological, or symbolic; on the other, groups like the Temple of Set explicitly allow for supernatural or extra‑material claims. The 1975 founding of the Temple of Set is a verifiable turning point that exemplifies this divergence.
The Satanic Temple (TST), founded in 2013, articulates a third kind of worldview: non‑theistic activism that situates Satan as a metaphor for resistance to arbitrary authority, with an emphasis on pluralism, secularism, and social justice. TST's public statements, including its widely distributed "Seven Tenets," present moral prescriptions—such as compassion and justice—framed through Satanic symbolism. The principled non‑theism of TST makes it closer in some respects to LaVeyan symbolism, yet TST emphasizes collective political tactics and legal strategic action in ways that differ from LaVey's original theatrical ethos. The 2013 founding year is an anchor for scholars tracing contemporary activism.
Across these varieties several recurring philosophical elements can be identified. First, a pronounced focus on individual autonomy: many adherents emphasize self‑sovereignty, personal responsibility, and skepticism of external moral authorities. Second, a skepticism toward religious literalism and a preference for symbolic, psychodramatic, or therapeutic uses of ritual. Third, a valorization of the material world and present life rather than post‑mortem transcendence; this is especially true of LaVeyan and TST positions. Fourth, an ambivalence toward mainstream political categories: some adherents describe their orientation as libertarian, others as left‑leaning or activist, and these differences reflect broader tensions about the political implications of Satanic symbolism.
Ethically, modern Satanic writings exhibit a complex relationship with conventional moral language. LaVey's essays endorse self‑interest, retributive justice, and selective altruism; he explicitly criticized Christian virtue ethics. The Satanic Temple's published tenets articulate a pro‑civil‑liberties ethic that foregrounds compassion and rational inquiry. Scholars point out a productive tension here: both strains reject moral absolutism, but they diverge on whether communal ethical obligations should be foregrounded. Comparisons with secular humanism are common in scholarly literature: both modern Satanism and humanism often center human flourishing and reason, but Satanists deliberately adopt adversarial imagery and ritual aesthetics that humanists typically avoid.
Cosmologically the movements vary: LaVeyan texts tend to be agnostic or naturalistic about metaphysics, treating ritual as psychodrama; Temple of Set materials allow for experiential encounters with numinous entities; TST avoids metaphysical commitments and frames Satanism as a civic religion or ethical framework used to protect secular governance. These positions produce different ritual languages and differing conceptions of salvation or flourishing: LaVeyan readers seek self‑realization and social empowerment, Setians aim for initiatory transformation often described in metaphysical terms, and TST adherents aim for social justice and the protection of secular institutional boundaries.
Within the academic study of religion some scholars argue that modern Satanism functions as a ‘‘protest religion’’—a set of practices and narratives deliberately articulated in opposition to Christian hegemonic norms. Others highlight continuities with Western occult traditions or with modern consumer religion. These scholarly perspectives underscore a central tension: is modern Satanism best read as a coherent doctrine, a family resemblance of symbols and tactics, or as a set of rhetorical strategies deployed in specific social contexts? Both adherents and scholars supply evidence for each reading.
Finally, belief in modern Satanism is lived and negotiated. Many practitioners describe a syncretic trajectory: they may read LaVey's texts, participate in ritual theater, study occult manuals, and engage in political advocacy. Surveys and ethnographic studies show that self‑identifying Satanists often emphasize personal autonomy, skepticism of religious authority, and an interest in ritual aesthetics. These observed patterns align with the textual and organizational distinctions already described, reinforcing the claim that modern Satanism is a plural family of worldviews, variably symbolic, ethical, and occasionally metaphysical, each anchored in identifiable texts and institutional histories: The Satanic Bible (1969), Temple of Set founding (1975), and The Satanic Temple founding (2013) among them.