Believe it or not, LV Satanists wouldn’t disagree with that.
This is, of course, something that each LVS could and should decide for themself; but I disagree with the notion that Anton LaVey, or any of his writings, or any of the public ideas of his organisation, should adhere to Christ’s statement on love and sacrifice.
As you already know, LaVeyanism views man as being an animal. More specifically, as a biological machine that has been programmed by evolution, by civilization, and by experience. The second and third of these ‘programming languages’, so says LaVey, have been largely the result, in the West, of the slave-master mentality which Christianity has caused.
(Why is Satan, as an image, so intrinsic to LaVey’s thought? Amongst other reasons, because the Satanic archetype is one which reverses the ‘slave-master mentality’ of Christianity to a ‘master-slave’ mentality; and this is the beginning of the reasons that LaVey thought so highly of concepts like mass-hypnosis, of manipultation and control, and why he was so fascinated with people like Hitler and Stalin.)
The first of the ‘programming languages’, evolution, is one which has given man the primordial instinct of self-preservation. This, says LaVey, is the groundwork upon which all morality and society are based; and this is the reason why LaVey’s world was one which is bleak, hateful, and cruel. All men wish only what is best for themselves, and to state otherwise is to engage in hypocrisy, and to wear a ‘good-guy badge’: which is a psychological pose worn for the sake of being accepted by one’s peers and the society to which one belongs.
In this view, man is also entirely selfish and self-centred; which is what LaVey termed the ‘left hand path’ and how he interpreted ‘black’ magic. Furthermore, this view is also contradictory to the notion of self-less love and of sacrifice; which are viewed as being opposed to man’s most natural instinct of self-preservation.
You have stated, rightly, that LaVeyanism believes that men should love those who deserve their love. But what does this mean? It is not simply the notion that man cannot love everyone equally, but it is more than that. It centres on the notion that every Satanist is more than a mere man, but a sort of Nietzschean uebermensch, who is self-sufficient in his financial power, and thus does not depend upon or need the approval of society, who is intellectually and creatively a genius, and who controls others with a very deep understanding of human psychology. This is the ideal of Belial; he who is without a master. This is also the basis of the idea that people like Disney or Bill Gates exhibit(ed) ‘satanic’ traits.
Notice, furthermore, that human emotions are largely viewed as being a sort of ‘master’, which must be controlled; ‘induldgence but not compulsion’, as it is called by LaVey. (Put very basically, LaVeyanism ignores many human emotions as being the result of the ‘programming’ of Christianity; and that they are thus repressed in a very unhealthy manner unless they are released in the form of ritual, which in this case becomes a sort of psychotherapy. Is this wise? The potential for ‘neurosis’ is absolutely massive, and is the reason that many feel ‘burned out’ by Laveyanism, and leave it for other philosophies or religions.)
But the concept of ‘deserving love’, then, is based upon the concept of Belial meeting his equal, but never his master, as this is intrinsically impossible. The concept of self-less never comes into it; for indeed, LaVeyanism views that love itself is the result of the instinct of self-preservation, and that only the weak require other people in a compulsory manner. How are those loved viewed, then? Merely as equals who are to be indulged in, but never ruled over by.
Would a LaVeyanist die for such a person? Again, this depends on the individual, but the *ideal *states ‘absolutely no’! Why is this? Because it contradicts the most pure aspect of humanity, to do that which is necessary to survive and to live.
LaVeyanism would reconstruct Jesus’ words in this manner: there is no greater weakness in man, than to die for those to whom he is addicted, for he has become their slave, and they his master, a psychic vampire who has truly removed from its victim its very life force.
Edit: the most striking example, in my mind, of LaVey’s view of the purpose of human companionship, is that he kept in his house, a room that was made up to look like a bar, and in which were many mannequins, to whom he would speak and for whom he would play the caliope. If you have ever seen *I am Legend, *then you should have very little difficult imagining the scene.
LaVey viewed himself to be most in need of teaching others and being their master thereby, and even if they could not comprehend him, as a mannequin could not, he cared very little.
In the meantime, I’ll learn the points of view in other beliefs just for the heck of it!