What do you think?
Rate this book
The Satanic Bible
This book is not for laveyans, luciferans, or devil worshipers! This book introduces the basics of High Priest Caesar 999's true Spiritual Satanic Religion which he calls Spiritual Satanism 999. This book is for those who are ready to begin their mystical Spiritual Satanic journey! There are many new religious and magickal concepts and many new definitions to Satanic Terminology in this New Age Satanic Religion.
This is an older version of my Satanic Bible, which is no longer available! The latest versions are The Satanic Bible by Rev. Caesar 999 (Published in 2007. 978-0-615-16991-0), and The Satanic Bible 2012 (Published in 2011. 978-0-9840313-1-3).
This is an older version of my Satanic Bible, which is no longer available! The latest versions are The Satanic Bible by Rev. Caesar 999 (Published in 2007. 978-0-615-16991-0), and The Satanic Bible 2012 (Published in 2011. 978-0-9840313-1-3).
199 pages, Paperback
First published November 3, 2006
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
November 4, 2008
I'm not a devil worshiper. Just someone curious about the religion & if it fits the stereotype society has of it. I agree that if this was called "Humanism" most people wouldn't have a problem with it. It's all in the name. All the people going around drawing pentagrams & standing in the middle calling out Satan, believing in killing for Satin, etc...obviously have not read the Satanic Bible. It is not as it's made out to be. The book wouldn't be for just anyone to follow, but it is one that was interesting to read.
February 23, 2018
"Responsibility to the responsible instead of concern for psychic vampires!"
Laughable...
Another one from the myriad of wannabes, who completely misunderstood Satanism, so they need their own satanic denomination. Not worthy reading, absolute trash.
The fact that this book has almost nothing to do with Satanism, except for some snatched LaVey's concepts aside - the language used throughout this book suggests that the writer wasn't even a grown up in the time of writing, as the verbalization is beyond piss poor. If I jumped from the height of "reverend's" ego to the "height" of his intelligence, the fall would kill me instantly.
Laughable...
Another one from the myriad of wannabes, who completely misunderstood Satanism, so they need their own satanic denomination. Not worthy reading, absolute trash.
The fact that this book has almost nothing to do with Satanism, except for some snatched LaVey's concepts aside - the language used throughout this book suggests that the writer wasn't even a grown up in the time of writing, as the verbalization is beyond piss poor. If I jumped from the height of "reverend's" ego to the "height" of his intelligence, the fall would kill me instantly.
October 10, 2008
If you wanna know what it's about and don't wanna read it......here;
Be a self-absorbed hedonist.
Still a decent enough read.
Be a self-absorbed hedonist.
Still a decent enough read.
January 30, 2009
This book is awesome!
July 29, 2026
I picked this up because I wanted to understand it for myself instead of relying on the reputation that has followed it for decades. Books like this tend to be talked about far more than they are actually read, so I was curious to see whether it was genuinely provocative or simply benefiting from controversy. After finishing it, I can honestly say it landed somewhere in the middle for me. There are ideas in here that challenge conventional thinking in interesting ways, especially around self-determination, personal responsibility, and rejecting blind conformity. At the same time, I found myself wishing there was more substance beneath the dramatic presentation. It often felt like the book was trying very hard to shock the reader, and after a while that effect started to wear off.
One thing I did appreciate was that it made me stop and examine why certain beliefs become so deeply ingrained. Even when I disagreed with the author's conclusions, I thought there was some value in engaging with perspectives outside my own comfort zone. That said, I also felt the arguments weren't always as original or as intellectually rigorous as they're sometimes made out to be. Many sections repeat the same underlying point in different words, and there's a confidence to the writing that occasionally comes across as dismissive rather than persuasive. I don't mind reading bold opinions, actually I quite enjoy that, but I prefer when they're backed up with stronger reasoning instead of simply asserting that opposing views are foolish.
The writing style itself was another mixed experience for me. It's very theatrical and deliberately provocative, which suits the overall message but also makes the book feel a little dated. There were moments where I could almost imagine how groundbreaking it must have seemed when it first appeared, but reading it now, parts of it felt more performative than revolutionary. I also found the constant emphasis on individualism became repetitive. I understood the point fairly early on, yet the book kept circling back to it without adding many new layers. I was expecting a deeper philosophical discussion, and instead I got something that felt surprisingly surface level in places.
Something else that stood out to me was how black-and-white many of the ideas seemed. Human nature is messy and full of contradictions, but this book often presents people as though they're driven by simple motivations that can neatly explain everything. That didn't really ring true for me. I also think readers who are expecting a genuine religious text in the traditional sense may be surprised. It's much more of a philosophical manifesto with symbolic language than a detailed spiritual guide. That distinction is important because I think a lot of the misconceptions surrounding the book come from people who have never actually opened it.
Emotionally, I finished it feeling more thoughtful than convinced. I wasn't offended by it, nor was I particularly inspired. Instead, I found myself reflecting more on the culture surrounding the book than the content itself. Its reputation almost overshadows what's actually written on the pages. I can absolutely understand why some readers connect with its emphasis on personal agency and questioning authority, but I also think its more cynical outlook limits the conversation it tries to have. Life feels more complicated than the worldview presented here, and I found myself wanting more nuance and a little more humility.
Overall, this ended up being an interesting read, though not one I would revisit. I'm glad I read it because it's always better to form my own opinion than rely on assumptions, and I don't regret the time I spent with it. Still, I don't think it fully lived up to its cultural status. It's provocative without always being profound, confident without always being convincing, and memorable more because of its image than its arguments. I'd recommend it to readers who are curious about its influence or want to understand an often misunderstood book firsthand, but I'd also suggest going into it with realistic expectations rather than expecting some life-changing philosophical masterpiece. Three stars feels about right for me.
One thing I did appreciate was that it made me stop and examine why certain beliefs become so deeply ingrained. Even when I disagreed with the author's conclusions, I thought there was some value in engaging with perspectives outside my own comfort zone. That said, I also felt the arguments weren't always as original or as intellectually rigorous as they're sometimes made out to be. Many sections repeat the same underlying point in different words, and there's a confidence to the writing that occasionally comes across as dismissive rather than persuasive. I don't mind reading bold opinions, actually I quite enjoy that, but I prefer when they're backed up with stronger reasoning instead of simply asserting that opposing views are foolish.
The writing style itself was another mixed experience for me. It's very theatrical and deliberately provocative, which suits the overall message but also makes the book feel a little dated. There were moments where I could almost imagine how groundbreaking it must have seemed when it first appeared, but reading it now, parts of it felt more performative than revolutionary. I also found the constant emphasis on individualism became repetitive. I understood the point fairly early on, yet the book kept circling back to it without adding many new layers. I was expecting a deeper philosophical discussion, and instead I got something that felt surprisingly surface level in places.
Something else that stood out to me was how black-and-white many of the ideas seemed. Human nature is messy and full of contradictions, but this book often presents people as though they're driven by simple motivations that can neatly explain everything. That didn't really ring true for me. I also think readers who are expecting a genuine religious text in the traditional sense may be surprised. It's much more of a philosophical manifesto with symbolic language than a detailed spiritual guide. That distinction is important because I think a lot of the misconceptions surrounding the book come from people who have never actually opened it.
Emotionally, I finished it feeling more thoughtful than convinced. I wasn't offended by it, nor was I particularly inspired. Instead, I found myself reflecting more on the culture surrounding the book than the content itself. Its reputation almost overshadows what's actually written on the pages. I can absolutely understand why some readers connect with its emphasis on personal agency and questioning authority, but I also think its more cynical outlook limits the conversation it tries to have. Life feels more complicated than the worldview presented here, and I found myself wanting more nuance and a little more humility.
Overall, this ended up being an interesting read, though not one I would revisit. I'm glad I read it because it's always better to form my own opinion than rely on assumptions, and I don't regret the time I spent with it. Still, I don't think it fully lived up to its cultural status. It's provocative without always being profound, confident without always being convincing, and memorable more because of its image than its arguments. I'd recommend it to readers who are curious about its influence or want to understand an often misunderstood book firsthand, but I'd also suggest going into it with realistic expectations rather than expecting some life-changing philosophical masterpiece. Three stars feels about right for me.
October 13, 2021
Very usefull in current events
Currently Reading
June 29, 20081
Want to Read
January 26, 2013it col
November 15, 2016
How do you read a book on this app
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews