postmodern Satanism

and any Satanist properly so-calledmust take up their inverted cross andportray the adversarial characterinherent in the term, however, if this isthe fullness of meant indication, Iwould question the pragmatism insuch a stance. And so, the view ofSatan, and hence the concomitantSatanism expressed herein will be of afar more substantial nature. We canquibble over terminological disputessuch as atheism vs. theism or literal vs.symbolic, but in the end, what is reallyat issue is the degree of robustnesswith which one can identify a “Satan”within the empirical world. In otherwords, can one find a suitablyscientific application for the term? Andobviously, I would hold to anaffirmative answer to this question. Itis the combination of these factors, inaddition to the precise character of the