Dude, are you kidding me? You seriously think that the Catholic Church evolved from sun-worship? I won't go into the fact that you think Saint Ignatius of Loyola and the Society of Jesus are conspirators, because that is ridick as well. Come on, man...
The words are his.
There is no doubt that Christianity and most religions are derived from Heliopolitanism and sun (or son) worship. I have all proof necessary including their own words and the artifacts from archaeology.
So DUDE - - start to read and work on getting a better learning attitude too.
quote:
Originally posted by runlola
hmmm for a minute there I thought you where talking about me dude
Luciferians like Loyola
well, I really don't like this guy if he is responsible for me
going through catechism & confirmation.
LOL! That was the first thing that occured to me too.
Robert,
quote:
There is no doubt that Christianity and most religions are derived from Heliopolitanism and sun (or son) worship. I have all proof necessary including their own words and the artifacts from archaeology.
And just what proof do you have for Christianity's derivation from sun worship?
The words of Ignatius Loyola above are the words of an initiate describing the experience of the ritual of Heliopolitanism. But I have thousands of other statements from them and their Saints; and you can look to the Father of Biblical Archaeology to see that the Bible is a Phoenician Literary Legacy. I have hundreds of well referenced scholarly presentations from many accepted scholars - do you know where Christ studied or do you believe that he never had to - just as most Christians do? Would you like a list of books and authors? Perhaps a Biblio from one of my books? Or you could read my book Diverse Druids and actually start some research of your own.
Start at John 10: 34.
or how about how modern christianity and the concept of satan is based on the intermingling of zoroastrianism and messianic judeaism in rome. or how the ten commandments were ripped off of earlier writings by egyptians.
so what. we know that every religion is a hodgepodge of religions that came before it. you're presenting the information in a sensationalist way... wahoo.
and lucifer is not satan.
and the druids worshipped a lot of things. so what if they worshipped the sun. they had a completely different symbolism and archetypal layout. i'm tired of people citing the druids as being one of the few of the elite the bearers of secret occult knowledge. here's a hint for you, just so you don't get sidetracked: secret occult knowledge has to do with a person's own level of development, not conspiracies. you need a mind capable of comprehending it.
Dear M
I did not say Lucifer is Satan. And I have the facts on the Druids more than you or any actual scholar - you will see a review by OBOD soon that gives me some credit even if they will be threatened by my assertion that there are no Druids today.
As to you quoting the law of the Magi and talking about what even the Britannica acknowledges about Zoroastrian roots of Christianity - that is fluff bunny stuff. Who are the Zoroastrians and from whence comes their knowledge?
Just so you know - top Rosicrucians have regarded me as an alchemist.
Do you know what a Baird (my last name) is?
A nutjob?
Start giving proof that we should stop believing Church's historical evidence and start believing yours. And if these rose-cross people regard you as an alchemist, why don't you use your philosopher's stone and make some gold to sell? Then you won't have to write books to make money and you can keep the secrets hidden. A secret is not a secret if someone spills the beans.
So far, there is just a lot of hot air blowing around in here. Where is evidence for any of this from primary source material?
quote:
do you know where Christ studied or do you believe that he never had to - just as most Christians do?
If Christ studied, it would have been around Galilee or Jerusalem. But he may not have, being the son of a carpenter.
quote:
Or you could read my book Diverse Druids and actually start some research of your own
So I am to believe it's true because you say it's true? I have seen nothing in your posts to make me believe what you say is true.
1. zoroastrians came from persia. the concept of the struggle between good and evil started back in the old traditions as the conflict in mankind's heart. later traditions described the conflict as arising from an external source (Angra Mainyu). these later traditions went on to influence a number of cults in rome, including christianity. this was actually the first monotheistic religion (dating before the brief sun worship of egypt)(read "from the ashes of angels" or the classic "what the great religions believe")
2. in defense of you, robert, i will say that anyone who knows about the philosopher's stone and tries to use it to convert lead (or is it silver, i can't remember) into gold for money will lose the ability to do so. i have no doubt about your credentials.
3. i'd like to see your sources on the druids. (just curious)
4. i actually know someone with the last name of baird, so it doesn't always have druidic connotations.
Yes. there is lots of 'primary source material' in my books (many books). Look at the thread called The Star People and you will see a Table of Contents which has quotes from some authorities in many fields of science.
A Baird may not know hwat a Baird is - but this Baird does.
The idea that Loyola was a Luciferian certainly is interesting.
I think it's relevant that during the reign of Constantine in the mid 4th century, there was unrest and constant threat of all out war in the Roman empire between followers of Mithraism and Christianity.
After having a vision that merged the the sun with the cross, the emperor Constantine decided that Mithraism, by far the most popular religion, would be absorbed into Christianity.. Amongst many other compromises , though, the day of worship for the new amalgamate became Sunday (the holy day for Mithraism which was, of course, a Sun worshipping religion) instead of Saturday (the Jewish Sabbath).
Catholicism has a suprising number of similarities to the Sun worship religion.
"Long before the advent of Jesus, Mithra was said to have been born of a virgin mother, in a cave, at the time of Christmas, and died on a cross at Easter. Baptism was practised, and the sign of the cross was made on the foreheads of all newly-baptised converts. Mithra was considered to be the saviour of the world, conferring on his followers an eternal life in Heaven, and, similar to the story of Jesus, he died to save all others, provided that they were his followers " http://members.aol.com/MercStG/ChriMithPage1.html
In the early 1600's the conflict of ideology between Rosicrucians and the Jesuits came to a head with the 30 years war in western Europe. The nature of this conflict is well documented and presented by the historian Frances Yates in the book "The Rosicrucian Enlightenment".
The army of Christ founded by Loyola saved from certain death an institution that had been ensconced for many centuries as the mediator between man and God in the west. The light and life recognized is the external light and the external, ritualized, religious life. That's the nature of an exoteric religion and it was, I think, the basis of the natural conflict with the esoteric order.
I think that the role of the Lucifer spirits is similar to the myth of Prometheus who stole fire from the gods and gave it to humanity. These mythical bringers of light are responsible for our minds and free will and therefore the ability to interact with the world as we do.
Personally I think it's entirely plausible that Loyola and his Jesuits are in fact Luciferians. The interesting thing is that so are Rosicrucians.
"RELATION TO CHRISTIANITY
A similarity between Mithra and Christ struck even early observers, such as Justin, Tertullian, and other Fathers, and in recent times has been urged to prove that Christianity is but an adaptation of Mithraism, or at most the outcome of the same religious ideas and aspirations (e.g. Robertson, "Pagan Christs", 1903). Against this erroneous and unscientific procedure, which is not endorsed by the greatest living authority on Mithraism, the following considerations must be brought forward. (1) Our knowledge regarding Mithraism is very imperfect; some 600 brief inscriptions, mostly dedicatory, some 300 often fragmentary, exiguous, almost identical monuments, a few casual references in the Fathers or Acts of the Martyrs, and a brief polemic against Mithraism which the Armenian Eznig about 450 probably copied from Theodore of Mopsuestia (d. 428) who lived when Mithraism was almost a thing of the past-these are our only sources, unless we include the Avesta in which Mithra is indeed mentioned, but which cannot be an authority for Roman Mithraism with which Christianity is compared. Our knowledge is mostly ingenious guess-work; of the real inner working of Mithraism and the sense in which it was understood by those who professed it at the advent of Christianity, we know nothing. (2) Some apparent similarities exist; but in a number of details it is quite probable that Mithraism was the borrower from Christianity. Tertullian about 200 could say: "hesterni sumus et omnia vestra implevimus" ("we are but of yesterday, yet your whole world is full of us"). It is not unnatural to suppose that a religion which filled the whole world, should have been copied at least in some details by another religion which was quite popular during the third century. Moreover the resemblances pointed out are superficial and external. Similarity in words and names is nothing; it is the sense that matters. During these centuries Christianity was coining its own technical terms, and naturally took names, terms, and expressions current in that day; and so did Mithraism. But under identical terms each system thought its own thoughts. Mithra is called a mediator; and so is Christ; but Mithra originally only in a cosmogonic or astronomical sense; Christ, being God and man, is by nature the Mediator between God and man. And so in similar instances. Mithraism had a Eucharist, but the idea of a sacred banquet is as old as the human race and existed at all ages and amongst all peoples. Mithra saved the world by sacrificing a bull; Christ by sacrificing Himself. It is hardly possible to conceive a more radical difference than that between Mithra taurochonos and Christ crucified. Christ was born of a Virgin; there is nothing to prove that the same was believed of Mithra born from the rock. Christ was born in a cave; and Mithraists worshipped in a cave, but Mithra was born under a tree near a river. Much as been made of the presence of adoring shepherds; but their existence on sculptures has not been proven, and considering that man had not yet appeared, it is an anachronism to suppose their presence. (3) Christ was an historical personage, recently born in a well known town of Judea, and crucified under a Roman governor, whose name figured in the ordinary official lists. Mithra was an abstraction, a personification not even of the sun but of the diffused daylight; his incarnation, if such it may be called, was supposed to have happened before the creation of the human race, before all history. The small Mithraic congregations were like masonic lodges for a few and for men only and even those mostly of one class, the military; a religion that excludes the half of the human race bears no comparison to the religion of Christ. Mithraism was all comprehensive and tolerant of every other cult, the Pater Patrum himself was an adept in a number of other religions; Christianity was essential exclusive, condemning every other religion in the world, alone and unique in its majesty."
Unfortunately for the Catholic Encyclopedia, the evidence we have today of Christianity's usurpation of the symbolism of ancient Sun based religions is so overwhelming that I'm surprised there's even an argument about this.
The major holiday in Christianity is Christmas. The 25th of December is the day the Sun begins it's journey back towards the tropic of Cancer. It reaches the tropic of Capricorn on the 21st of December, the winter solstice, and remains relatively immobile until the 25th when it begins the journey North. The Sun was therefore considered to be born on that day.
Much more interesting though, is Easter. That holiday is always the first Sunday after the full moon that occurs after the 21st of March, the spring Equinox.
The Sun on the 21st is directly over the equator. On the day of the full moon, the moon is directly opposite the sun on the other side of the Earth forming the horizontal arm of the cross. The Earth's axis forms the vertical pillar. Thus the sun is said to be crucified, ie: it is involved in the phenomenal world; because Easter is after this has occured, the sun has, at that time, been resurected out of hell.
All this symbolism has existed and been known since time immemorial.
Edit: by the way, in no way do these facts weaken Christianity. On the contrary, it is a major strength in my view.
The Catholic Encyclopedia has more to say on the subject:
"ORIGIN OF DATE
The Gospels. Concerning the date of Christ's birth the Gospels give no help; upon their data contradictory arguments are based. The census would have been impossible in winter: a whole population could not then be put in motion. Again, in winter it must have been; then only field labour was suspended. But Rome was not thus considerate. Authorities moreover differ as to whether shepherds could or would keep flocks exposed during the nights of the rainy season.
Zachary's temple service. Arguments based on Zachary's temple ministry are unreliable, though the calculations of antiquity (see above) have been revived in yet more complicated form, e.g. by Friedlieb (Leben J. Christi des Erlösers, Münster, 1887, p. 312). The twenty-four classes of Jewish priests, it is urged, served each a week in the Temple; Zachary was in the eighth class, Abia. The Temple was destroyed 9 Ab, A.D. 70; late rabbinical tradition says that class 1, Jojarib, was then serving. From these untrustworthy data, assuming that Christ was born A.U.C. 749, and that never in seventy turbulent years the weekly succession failed, it is calculated that the eighth class was serving 2-9 October, A.U.C. 748, whence Christ's conception falls in March, and birth presumably in December. Kellner (op. cit., pp. 106, 107) shows how hopeless is the calculation of Zachary's week from any point before or after it.
Analogy to Old Testament festivals. It seems impossible, on analogy of the relation of Passover and Pentecost to Easter and Whitsuntide, to connect the Nativity with the feast of Tabernacles, as did, e.g., Lightfoot (Horæ Hebr, et Talm., II, 32), arguing from Old Testament prophecy, e.g. Zacharias 14:16 sqq,; combining, too, the fact of Christ's death in Nisan with Daniel's prophecy of a three and one-half years' ministry (9:27), he puts the birth in Tisri, i.e. September. As undesirable is it to connect 25 December with the Eastern (December) feast of Dedication (Jos. Ant. Jud., XII, vii, 6).
Natalis Invicti. The well-known solar feast, however, of Natalis Invicti, celebrated on 25 December, has a strong claim on the responsibility for our December date. For the history of the solar cult, its position in the Roman Empire, and syncretism with Mithraism, see Cumont's epoch-making "Textes et Monuments" etc., I, ii, 4, 6, p. 355. Mommsen (Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, 12, p. 338) has collected the evidence for the feast, which reached its climax of popularity under Aurelian in 274. Filippo del Torre in 1700 first saw its importance; it is marked, as has been said, without addition in Philocalus' Calendar. It would be impossible here even to outline the history of solar symbolism and language as applied to God, the Messiah, and Christ in Jewish or Chrisian canonical, patristic, or devotional works. Hymns and Christmas offices abound in instances; the texts are well arranged by Cumont (op. cit., addit. Note C, p. 355).
The earliest rapprochement of the births of Christ and the sun is in Cypr., "De pasch. Comp.", xix, "O quam præclare providentia ut illo die quo natus est Sol . . . nasceretur Christus." - "O, how wonderfully acted Providence that on that day on which that Sun was born . . . Christ should be born." - In the fourth century, Chrysostom, "del Solst. Et Æquin." (II, p. 118, ed. 1588), says: "Sed et dominus noster nascitur mense decembris . . . VIII Kal. Ian. . . . Sed et Invicti Natalem appelant. Quis utique tam invictus nisi dominus noster? . . . Vel quod dicant Solis esse natalem, ipse est Sol iustitiæ." - "But Our Lord, too, is born in the month of December . . . the eight before the calends of January [25 December] . . ., But they call it the 'Birthday of the Unconquered'. Who indeed is so unconquered as Our Lord . . .? Or, if they say that it is the birthday of the Sun, He is the Sun of Justice." Already Tertullian (Apol., 16; cf. Ad. Nat., I, 13; Orig. c. Cels., VIII, 67, etc) had to assert that Sol was not the Christians' God; Augustine (Tract xxxiv, in Joan. In P. L., XXXV, 1652) denounces the heretical indentification of Christ with Sol. Pope Leo I (Serm. xxxvii in nat. dom., VII, 4; xxii, II, 6 in P. L., LIV, 218 and 198) bitterly reproves solar survivals -- Christians, on the very doorstep of the Apostles' basilica, turn to adore the rising sun. Sun-worship has bequeathed features to modern popular worship in Armenia, where Chistians had once temporarily and externally conformed to the cult of the material sun (Cumont, op. cit., p. 356).
But even should a deliberate and legitimate "baptism" of a pagan feast be seen here no more than the transference of the date need be supposed. The "mountain-birth" of Mithra and Christ's in the "grotto" have nothing in common: Mithra's adoring shepherds (Cumont, op. cit., I, ii, 4, p. 304 sqq.) are rather borrowed from Christian sources than vice versa.
Other theories of pagan origin. The origin of Christmas should not be sought in the Saturnalia (1-23 December) nor even in the midnight holy birth at Eleusis (see J.E. Harrison, Prolegom., p. 549) with its probable connection through Phrygia with the Naasene heretics, or even with the Alexandrian ceremony quoted above; nor yet in rites analogous to the midwinter cult at Delphi of the cradled Dionysus, with his revocation from the sea to a new birth (Harrison, op. cit., 402 sqq.).
The astronomical theory. Duchesne (Les origines du culte chrétien, Paris, 1902, 262 sqq.) advances the "astronomical" theory that, given 25 March as Christ's death-day [historically impossible, but a tradition old as Tertullian (Adv. Jud., 8)], the popular instinct, demanding an exact number of years in a Divine life, would place His conception on the same date, His birth 25 December. This theory is best supported by the fact that certain Montanists (Sozomen, Hist. Eccl., VII, 18) kept Easter on 6 April; both 25 December and 6 January are thus simultaneously explained. The reckoning, moreover, is wholly in keeping with the arguments based on number and astronomy and "convenience", then so popular. Unfortunately, there is no contemporary evidence for the celebration in the fourth century of Christ's conception on 25 March.
Conclusion. The present writer in inclined to think that, be the origin of the feast in East or West, and though the abundance of analogous midwinter festivals may indefinitely have helped the choice of the December date, the same instinct which set Natalis Invicti at the winter solstice will have sufficed, apart from deliberate adaptation or curious calculation, to set the Christian feast there too."
Surely there's symbolism in the sun being like the Son who is the second person of the Trinity. Even the words are pronounced the same in English! But, as stated above, worship of the material sun, the star Sol is not Christian at all. Indeed, Christianity is the next step from moving away from animistic paganism into the Truth. Jesus Christ is more than a ball of gas that gives the world life, He is God, who gives the universe being.
if you wanted to split hairs, the priest's account of Jesus (the vision he had) COULD be construed as just him having some sort of overwhelming divine light emanating from him. as for him (jesus) being described as an orb.. any alternate thoughts?
THe alternate thought is that Mr. Baird is misquoting St. Ignatius or someone else. In order to make something ridiculous sound true, you have to make up and/or construe facts.
just as a thought, current thought at the vatican was that the perfect manifestation of matter would be a sphere. perhaps the priest was embellishing his vision with the philosophy of the time.
YES!!!
Have you read Windswept House by Malachi Martin?
Dear Antonius
Those are the words of Loyola - sorry to say this but it is you who is selling alternatives and pablum.
As to the observation that ROsicrucians are also Luciferians like Albert Pike and the Masons - this too is true. And the Hegelian Dialectic of 'playing both ends against the middle' did not just arrive upon the scene with the writings of Hegel. The issue is - who plays these ends against the 'poor huddled and ignorant' masses.
to get to the heart of MY concern with this thread. so what if the catholic church has been influenced by heliopolitanism? As a rule, i consider myself pagan and do not see the danger in this. what exactly was the point that you were trying to make with this information? was it purely scholarly or...?
Ok, so if St. Ignatius actually said that, please show me where you got it, so I can look it up and then tell you that you're right.
Dear Moonbeam
All religions have been used to manage people for at least 5000 years. James Joyce refers to this as a 'nightmare'. Today the Luciferians run the world. As a person this should concern you - as a pagan you have a better insight hopefully, now that you know the game was always the same.
Dear Antonius
I suppose I could check the references in my books - but why would I? I already know I am right and you already see many people have good research on the same point. If you were to check the Cistercian/Hibernians, Basilian Fathers (Basilidae back to Hecateus and before) and other arms of this 'octopus' you would see Ignatius was just another dupe in a larger and more complex scenario. I posted another author's link who says he will be working with me soon under the thread the Star People. Lots of people are starting to clue in to a far larger historical fact than simple conspiracy theory. Jim Marrs was one of the first to recognize the merit of my research and you can see his comment to that effect at my publisher's web site. The fact of Ignoatius' participation in this is a minor point.
okay, i am familiar with this hypothesis (because with all conspiracies, there is no real evidence.. because- and get this-...... it's a conspiracy!)
i actually believe that there is a group that runs the whole of human society- whatever their name is. i would think that if i wanted to govern a society secretly i would never name my organization. because society functions exactly like a giant mind in its functions. and as we all know, you can't fight or contend with or otherwise resolve a nebulous idea that has no face. the pyramid with the eye at its apex is more a law of nature than anything else. all things (sentient beings) establish a heirarchy when allowed to function on their own. it's common sense- the logical conclusion. now. -as to whether they have our best interests at heart, i have this to say.
they (the ones at the tippity top) can't get involved with the affairs of the rest of us- because of an ethical obligation to allow us to have our own free will(among other things). so they let old families and clans gather wealth and do their own thing- and they "the eye of the pyramid" have to let them do so, because they choose to. ultimately, i think that they (old families- the hyper-wealthy, those that are above money) will not be able to halt the induced psychological progression of our species. this is what "they", the "luciferians" are counting on.
that's what i've arrived at.
Yes, that is good - and the involvement of those at the 'tippity top' might sometimes be important. Here are some authors on the same esoteric trail that I have used to some extent - I hope to be part of a documentary they are doing though this was just offered yesterday on my first contact to them. Usually there is a lot of negotiating and research to do - but it would be good for both of our efforts to bring people to the point of knowing what is really going-down.
THE SHINING ONES:
Philip Gardiner and his associate Gary Osborn are studying real history and they seem to be onto the Earth Energy Grid and all the same things I deal with in Diverse Druids. Here is an excerpt from the web site of these authors of a book called The Shining Ones. The see the guild zoomorphic guide of the spider in the same way I see the 'octopus' it would seem.
"If you can predict simple human emotional activity, then you can control it and utilise it for your own powerful ends. If you could create a war at the peak of the emotional warring high, then you would have the advantage. Need to reduce the population of a nation, then depress the atmosphere and increase the suicide rate every 3.86 years. Of course, the real manipulation of populations is much more subtle.
From the greatest and most powerful Shining One of the sun to the stars, the myriad shining ones, which also have an effect on us.
Although astrology is seen as a crank belief, Michel Gauquelin, a French psychologist, placed the hypothesis that we are affected by the position of the planets at our time of birth firmly on the doorstep of science.
He showed that the position of the stars had some indication as to what line of work one may enter later in life. This was not related to the practice of astrology or the horoscopes in the daily newspapers, but a serious, scientific data analysis. The psychologist, Hans Eysenck said, 'How ever much it may go against the grain, I think we must admit that there is something here that requires explanation'. His results, however, only seemed to work within the members of the higher professionals, the same response not being achievable with unskilled workers.
The study of the stars goes back thousands of years. Some say 4,000 BC Sumeria was the first to do so. Others put this even earlier and say that ancient man was studying the stars 32,000 years ago. Their evidence is an engraved antler from Abri Blanchard, France, with a strange pattern of notches or calendrical phases of the moon. {Similar to the Marshack lunar calendar and a root for Ogham.}
With all the evidence on patterns, rhythms and electromagnetism that affect our bodies, it is no wonder that modern science has taken another look at the ancient art of astrology, which has been neglected due to the widespread misuse of generic horoscopes.
It may be that ancient man was using both his 'hidden powers' of cyclical understanding, and the tools of the earth around him.
As long ago as 3000BC, the Indian sage, Parasar, used Natal Astrology in his work. Megalithic structures have many astrological and Earth alignments. The Pyramids map the stars, obeying the Hermetic lore of 'as above so below'. Ziggurats, temples, floor paintings, carvings and forty-mile long lines etched into the ground all convey the ancient and global belief in astrological predictions.
The very earliest almanacs contained weather forecasts based upon astrological predictions. In the countries of Arabia, the position of the stars was consistent with the weather. The ancient priesthood would have appeared to be in the know all the time, and therefore would appear holy and godlike; it was little wonder that they became incorporated into the symbolic format and titles of the stars.
The Babylonians, and especially people in the Middle East, studied the stars mathematically and attempted, even as long as 5,000 years ago, to scientifically log the reactions and effects of the stars. They produced a calendar and perfect measures of time, essential for a people without clocks.
The patterns and rhythms of the stars, with their gravitational and radiation activity have enormous effects upon our universe. But could they also affect us individually and collectively? The cosmic radiation hitting and passing through our planet is millions of years old. It comes in cycles, as does the solar wind. The cycles increase and decrease, but nevertheless there is a pattern.
Our species has been on this planet, and life has been part of the vast universe long enough for there to be some marked and observable effect.
The Buddhist Wheel of Life reflects the understanding the ancients had of this cyclic life of ours. It depicts, amongst others, creatures of passion, stupidity and hatred, and shows how we endlessly repeat the same things, it also reveals that the ancient Buddhist, religious leaders, understood the cyclic nature of man and the universe. The Wheel culminates in the twelve links in the chain of causation on the search for truth - is this where man will also end up?
We should be on the look out for common threads; links between civilisations and time. The web that man has spread across the many thousands of years is complex and cluttered. Historians would have us believe that various human achievements sprang up spontaneously and simultaneously across the continents. Mathematically, this is in error.
There are too many coincidences, too many simultaneous eruptions of human culture and achievement, from the buildings that share a common purpose as solar and astral temples to the emergence of the ancient cross as a symbol.
The reasons for the links, which are not separate accidents, will become clear later on.
In 1957, Tom Lethbridge wrote a book called Gogmagog. He claimed that Druidism and Brahmanism were linked and shared a common origin. We will show just how close this was to the truth. Lethbridge believed that their ancient religion was somehow related to and existed for the Earth Goddess, also associated with the Moon Goddess and often cross-linked. This is true in that She was one of the deities worshipped by the ancient priesthood, to whom the Brahmins and Druids were related. The Earth/Moon Goddess, or Mother, had many names, Gaia or Ge, Isis, Astarte and eventually culminating in the Virgin Mary or even Mary Magdalene.
There are many belief systems in the world, but they all come from one basic and undeniable core, invented and evolved separately by the Shining Ones. A secret ancient group who utilised the subtle cyclic energies and patterns of the globe against the masses, for their own personal power and for the greater good of a singular religious organisation. This religious organisation evolved its power base over vast periods of time. Individuals who recognised and understood the power of the mind and held the power for themselves in a growing group of religious leaders." (2)
The reason it is easy to accept the idea of Loyola as a Luciferian is that no alchemist, no rosicrucian, no saint, reaches that level of spiritual enlightenment by being a goody two shoes. He or she does it through a hard fought battle.
We exist in a world of amazing potential because we are in a state of the knowledge of polarity (the knowledge of good and evil). Only in the physical state as we know it now is it possible to fully experience that principle. This is what the "lucifer spirits" have brought about.
Since it is a principle, having black and white, up and down, yesterday and tomorrow, also means having life and death, good and evil. Birth and death would have little significance if we remembered how we were before we were born and knew how we will be after we die. It would all just be one continuum. The contrast is what permits us the degree of conscious awareness that we have.
Being a Luciferian essentially means accepting this polarity, honoring it, harnessing it.
This is the means by which it is possible for the art of alchemy to exist. That, in fact, is the reason that alchemy has been the force it has been in western civilizations. The darkness is greatest in the west because of western civilization's material success. Nowhere in the world do people have their feet as firmly set on the ground as they do here. A deeper black brings a brighter white.
This is done today as it always has been using the language of the birds not only described but fluently spoken by Fulcanelli and many others whose writings are available everywhere.
Secret societies, so called, operate on the same principle. The techniques used make use of these conditions to bring about something that would otherwise be impossible. Certainly initiates have and do wield immense power. That power is balanced. The black and the white are in a delicate dance of balance.
This is not something that exists because of anyone or any group's evil intentions. Looking to the outside to put a finger on the cad responsible is a waste of time. It exists as a necessary condition of our state, a state that must be overcome by each individually. One is not a member of the "ignorant and huddled masses" unless one believes and allows oneself to be.
Dear Jarthur
There is much truth in what you say and yet the time for power over others through secrets is past. To continue to act in the manner of those who would not share their learning or develop ethics for the society at large - puts the world in ever increasing danger.
There is a great deal to learn from Bloom's Lucifer Principle and Fulcanelli can send one to a lot of coded and fantastic searches. St. Germain is a De Medicis and Rothschild agent that turned over the Templar spy network to them. Do we need spies making the rich richer and abusing the free potential for all mankind to create and not simply follow those who enjoy getting more of their vaunted ONE PIE?
Hi,
It seems a lot of emphasis is put on the details of mechanics that have brought the christian belief system to where we see it today, a pale and insignificant shadow of itself. (fortunately)
That historically, people have controlled the dissemination of information is no longer debatable, we know that this has been the main force for control of the masses since time out of mind. So we should not be the slightest bit surprised to find the founding fathers of christianity also used this mechanism.
Does it really matter what happened way back when ? No. Can we now take any of the people who were responsible for the controlling behaviour of religion to task for their actions ? No. So why do we need to rehash it all in intelligent discussion, do we need another book about it anyway ? No. (my opinion)
Do we really need to know which recorded history of Jesus' travels in the world to study at various Mystery Schools is the correct one ? No. Isn't it enough to know he was recorded in other coutries shortly after his death and supposed ressurrection ? Yes it is, because it illustrates how the masses were duped and brainwashed to believe the BIG LIE. (that he died for our sins) Another control mechanism.
And can someone tell me how and when Jesus became God ? It is something that has bugged me now for a little while, this ridiculous assertion that the man Jesus was/is the Creator God. What utter crappola ! That is merely Dogma with a capitol D and Brainwash with a upper case B, as well.
All we need to know is that all religions are man made, and therefore extremely fallible.. that it is now time for Sharing the gems of truth instead of aligning with any Belief-System... that we are not the insignificant little souls the religionists would have us believe.. that it is We who are the powerful beings in our own right, irrespective of what anyone else tells us.
A slight change of tack here....
I do find it interesting that the Hebrews entered Egypt with the first couple of books of the Bible already a part of their belief system. They learned the stories from the Sumerian civilization who had recorded what the 'gods' told them about the creative forces that made our world and established the solar system the way it is now, as well as the physical creation of the original Homo-Sapien and then Homo-Sapien-Sapien (Us).
Within the stories the Hebrew's had, the 'god' who was responsible for the physical creation of the body was seen as the bad guy because he was told by the Elohim to allow his creations to be destroyed, and he refused to accept the order. He was then depicted as a snake in the Sumerian literature because of the symbol he used for his place of creation... the Caduceus, which we use today in our health sector.
Give that little gem a few hundred years in the hands of religous controllers and it turned into the illustration of Satan. A minor twist to be sure, but one with massive repercussions. In this simple way, the whole history of the christian religion can be seen as being opposed to the spiritual growth(Remembering)of us humans. No more needs to be said then, because the action of such a doing says it all.
While R.B.Baird's assertion that no Druids exist today is correct in it's scope.. it is only this way because of the destructive nature of the Christian religion and the Roman's who preceeded it's coming... which absolutely set out to wipe from the world all and any traces of of what we call Paganism. What could not be destroyed was usurped, taken into the church's folds and ressurrected as Christian Sacred places, etc.
Those who attempt to live according to their perception of Druidism should not be assaulted by the revelation that they too are a bland shadow of the belief system/lifestyle it once was. In their own way they are trying to bring things full circle to a more sensible scenario of humans living with the forces of nature and the energies that surround us. That in itself is honourable.
And lastly, IMHO, I think it hideous to come to this forum, post articles based on your specialised field of research then assert an elitist attitude of personal greatness and knowledge. Then be rather bad-mannered to other forum members who disagree with your perception. Dear brother, you are undoubtedly well studied, but those manners need some attention.
Love Always. [:)]
Throughout history, ALL religions have taken bits and pieces of the preexisting ones in order to get buy in from the people who practiced these religions. After successfully brainwashing people, they would then destroy the preexisting temples and place their own on those very same spots. The church is not STUPID! They are cunning and manipulative but not STUPID! They knew than as they know now that in order to make a new religion more paletable to people, they needed to incorporate some of the old into the new.
Narrow Fundimentalist thinking (of any kind) disallows any free thought and is an example of the exact brainwashing that the church was out to accomplish and they are good at it in some cases. Woo Hoo!!! They've got that brainwashing technique down!!! And still they are repressing free thinking because so many people believe that the myths the church spoon feeds them is the ABSOLUTE truth. They also believe that if one thinks for themselves, it is the work of the DEVIL[}:)]. Fundimentalist thinking proclaims,"What I say is right, I have all the answers because it's in MY spiritual text and since you disagree with me, you are going to hell!" What horsesh*t!!! Oh and by the way, That is the definition of self
Righteousness --- which is a sin... To proclaim to have all the answers and only your answers are right. If you proclaim to not have all the answers you are at least still open to new ideas and learning... ever evolving. It's when you claim to have all the answers that you stop growing.
OF COURSE Christianity is based on other preexisting religions. I have heard the Therory that Jarthur stated:
quote:
Catholicism has a suprising number of similarities to the Sun worship religion.
"Long before the advent of Jesus, Mithra was said to have been born of a virgin mother, in a cave, at the time of Christmas, and died on a cross at Easter. Baptism was practised, and the sign of the cross was made on the foreheads of all newly-baptised converts. Mithra was considered to be the saviour of the world, conferring on his followers an eternal life in Heaven, and, similar to the story of Jesus, he died to save all others, provided that they were his followers " http://members.aol.com/MercStG/ChriMithPage1.html
And I too have found it a bit too "coincidental" for it to be mere Coincidence.
It might also be an interesting fact for you to know that Constantine himself was Pagan and that in order to unite his empire and cease the civil religious unrest he renounced his own religion, adopted Christianity, the new religion, and declared Christianity the official religion of the Roman Empire.
Kerri
Dear T
The assertions you arrogantly make in questioning my approach are mitigated by your own admission I am right. You also ask some basic questions such as when did Jesus (an amalgam) become God? This is when Pauline (Roman) Christianity became ascendant around the 5th C. and the Arians and Gnostics (even the Celtic) Churches were made heretics or under actual frontal attack as the Libraries they had from pre-Christian times were destroyed.
I can see no greater influence on our present unethical state of the world than that achieved by religions and especially the Judaeo-Christian-Islamic cult. You say we need not know the matter of their deceits and I say only through knowing will we be free of the constructs and tricks or astral traps they have CONSTRUCTED. The laws of our nations and the very existence of those nations is predicated on their Manifest Destiny lies. The courts are making huge awards for the destruction of prior culture (Canada's SUpreme Court recently regarding the Indians)as they also charge an Indian leader for saying some truth about the Jews wrecking a Holocaust upon the Indians. Most people including rabbis do not even know what a Jew is.
You exhibit this as you refer to Hebrews and Sumer and early books of the Bible. The Father of Biblical Archaeology has no difficulty proving 'the Bible is a Phoenician literary legacy'. Sumer was colonized out of the Byblos (Dilmun) corporate trading venture of the Phownicians on the Persian Gulf where recent wars are rife. Hebrew as a language is a sacerdotal Phoenician Keltic code of the builders of the Great Pyramid (arch-tectons are like Arch-Druids - see The Septuagint refer to the family of Jesus in this word that means architect).
It is fine to accuse the messenger who does the work you obviously have not done of being arrogant. What pray tell does it do for your ego to make such an accusation? Are you speaking for others or trying to make yourself seem important? Might I suggest you learn and listen or read befre making further negative comments or else do some research and find some errors so that your audience might be impressed.
Dear L
YES! I too liked that quote from Jarthur. Constantine never did convert and his kids went so far as to boil other relatives till dead as well as make Constantine a God in the normal Roman so-called pagan manner. But those Romans were just Empire-Builders and then they started a HOLY EMPEROR. That is non-sense on the very face of it. How can one be HOLY and wreck havoc as an Emperor? Unfortunately that is just the same as our present Emperor GeorgeII and his speaking to God while having the War on Terra.
The Romano-British Empire today has the US (which they have always controlled) taking the lead for the Holy Alliance that seeks like the Treaty of Tordesillas clearly stated - to dominate the whole world which they only allow lesser people to hold a lease on the land. WE must throw off the shackles of those who maintain power and seek to convince us there is only ONE PIE. We must learn to co-operate in Brotherhood - which is the concept of Iesa that Jesus is said to have accepted as his titular mission. I do not believe he would have been so 'nuts' as to try to say he was a Messiah (Christos).
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Bruce Baird
Dear T
The assertions you arrogantly make in questioning my approach are mitigated by your own admission I am right.
Ahem...
Who's the one being arrogant?
K
RBB,
I did not join this thread to make some vain attempt to try and prove you wrong. Your work is obviously top notch, and this is borne out in the fact that you do have a number of books published. Yet this does not make a person the highest authority on a subject. Witness Sitchin's apparent supremacy in his field, yet there are those who also worked with the British Museum to decipher the Sumerian Tablets who do claim that he has added considerably to the basic translations.
One such person is a very dear friend of mine who took him to task for his additions.
"You say we need not know the matter of their deceits and I say only through knowing will we be free of the constructs and tricks or astral traps they have CONSTRUCTED."
My initial reaction to your original post here, was based on a simple premise. We humans do waste valuable life-time and effort in searching out Details that we really do not need to know for our personal spiritual growth. We like to make things far more difficult than they need to be. And I see, in my opinion, that while you enjoy the work you do, and the rewards it provides, the majority could easily come under the heading of stuff we do not need to know the details of. One or two basic facts to show the controlling nature of the united forces behind our being kept in the dark from truth is all that is required. Again this is only my opinion RBB.
My statement about the Hebrews going to Egypt with the first books of the bible, and the inclusion of the twist that caused the good guy to be represented to us as Satan, is meant primarily for the average reader. Hence the non-inclusion of the information you added.
One thing I have learned is that information needs to be directed at the 'lowest common denominator' for the messages to be comprehensible to the majority. Hence the directive of simplicity.
"It is fine to accuse the messenger who does the work you obviously have not done of being arrogant."
It is your approach that I found arrogant, and the way you responded to those who questioned you or offered any form of opposition.
"What pray tell does it do for your ego to make such an accusation?"
It does nothing for my Ego, as the ego is not what responded to your thread.
"Are you speaking for others or trying to make yourself seem important?"
Neither. I do not need to SEEM important my friend, as one of the few thousand people today who actually can and does help people to come to experience their Higher-Self without the clutter of belief-systems, my work is important.
"Might I suggest you learn and listen or read befre making further negative comments or else do some research and find some errors so that your audience might be impressed."
My ego seeks not to find errors in your work RBB, neither do I seek to impress an audience. I find it interesting that so many people see what another says as 'negative statements'. This is an indictation of a deeper issue.
"WE must throw off the shackles of those who maintain power and seek to convince us there is only ONE PIE. We must learn to co-operate in Brotherhood - which is the concept of Iesa that Jesus is said to have accepted as his titular mission. I do not believe he would have been so 'nuts' as to try to say he was a Messiah (Christos)."
Agreed, he did not accept the title of Messiah. I consider his 'mission' was to open peoples eyes to the sameness of our nature and condition, and to help others to realize that it is we who are the great Spirits in our own right. So the refusal of the Messiah title dovetails nicely into his possible desire for non-attachment to any Belief-System, including the traditional messianic legacy of the Jews.
Lastly, it is my perception that each of us can and does have the ability to Remember exactly who and what we are as Souls, and that the means to this awareness are very simple. Hence my attitude of being at variance with the complications of historical knowledge, the pursuit of it and the presentation of it in the public domain.
Love Always. [:)]
Dear T
A thoroughly reasonable response and one I agree with on a personal level. I tried to avoid the telling of real histry and my PURPOSE for most of my life. There are (as yet) so 'rewards' and lots of nay-sayers who continue to promote the wars and rife that are so common due to a lack of real history.
If all people were like you - I would be FREE!
Hi Robert,
I for one would love to hear and/or read about your purpose, and personal life story, perhaps that may be a subject for a new book ?
Agreed about the nay-sayers ! In my work there is a lot of opposition from the establishment within the New Age Industry. Nothing much has changed where we humans are concerned, most people will only share their gifts for a suitably high fee, which is at loggerheads to my personal ethics. This is the major problem from the NAI, who do not want the current system to change as they would then be needing to look for other ways to make their little fortunes.
And, you are free Robert. You are free to choose, to experience, to walk against the ways of the current world system and to do something different. You are free to help others see the light you bring with the truths you write about. An ancient Druid maxim states, " The Truth Against the World" So very apt, even in this day and age.
I need to apologize for jumping on you with my first post in this thread, it was un-loving of me to have done so, and for that my friend I am sorry.
Love Always. [:)]
Dear T
You need not apologize. There was some truth in your words and constructive criticism is always welcome. We seem to agree a great deal and I have indeed written many biographical books - I think you would like the wrap around of the Frabato bio I did called Hitler vs. Frabato and 'The Charm of Making'. People on the Path (My Meetings with Remarkable Men) is available for free along with any other e-book purchased till month end at W-M. So you would get two for about $5.
Agreed about the NAI too - and my book Cherokee People (Will Return) addresses that.
As to the New Age strife and infighting - it pains me even more than the hegemony and its foul effluent.
I can make an argument that I'm the rugged individualist here because I'm Catholic. The Catholic Church today is not like the "institution" or "establishment" it was when it persecuted Galileo, when popes, however being the Vicar of Christ, were hypocrites. The Church promotes scholasticism for cryin' out loud, St. Thomas Aquinas being the brilliant philosopher/theologian that he was. God gave us our free will, and we chose to eat fruit. There are privileges and yet also consequences with that choice.
And as far as choosing to create more problems or prevent/mend them, the Church seems the best way, and I believe it is the Way. There are a million conspiracy theories a million different ways with the conspirators having a million different names. Luciferians, Jesuits, Patriots, Illuminati, Shining Ones, Aliens, US Govt, Euro Royalty, Maitreya. Perhaps these millions of conspiracy theories are meant to confuse us and make us stray and err?
I believe that the first Deceiver was the serpent, Satan. Who is like God? Do you think you can make yourself like God in your lifetime? That you can eat of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil and thus become like God? If you say that it's the other way around, that God lies and the serpent tells the truth, then show me how you are like God.
If we tear down all that came before us and call them liars, who are we to believe? Would you lie to your own son or daughter? I accept what has been handed down to me by my fathers and their fathers before them.
All can be doubted, and what then of Doubt Itself? Is it possible to doubt Doubt Itself? I would say not, since then we wouldn't know if we're doubting it or not, would we?
Consequently, we become paralyzed in thought, by having no knowledge. I say that we must believe in order to grow. I would rather believe the Church than the million splinter groups.
Humility is the answer and the killer of Pride, the first sin.
You can make an argument for that in certain places where people are uniformed and do not care about the lack of individuality that the dogma and laws put in place by the hegemony of church and state has brought about.
If you have a dog-ma what happens to your kar-ma?
Eh? I didn't understand that.
As for karma, I think it's taking the "golden rule" to the next level. Not just "treat other how you want to be treated" but basically what you do to others you do to yourself. And, it fits in with Christian thought I suppose. The next life is based on what you do in this life. If you make life hell for other people, you just may find yourself in hell.
Ah, wait, I understand it now. You say that I am not an individual because I belong to the Catholic Church. Do you think that I am not allowed to think differently than the Catholic Church?
How much belief in individuality do you need when you consider the Church's pro-life stance? By allowing the unborn baby to have a chance at life, we are promoting it's individuality. If we chose for it, and thought for it, we'd conclude that it's life is not worth living.
Basically, in order to properly and plausibly present a conspiracy theory, or any theory that goes against the Establishment, you need to disprove the Establishment's position beyond reasonable doubt. By calling them liars is just a lot of hot air.
Yes, that is true. Name calling is pretty useless. And in fact I think many of those in my lineage have indeed tried hard to educate the masses as they did the things the paradigm sought to do. The Templars for example (Those given the Papal Passport) ended feudalism after the Church slow-roasted their leader Jacques de Molay. Thus I say it is those who do the name-calling and do not engage in proof or fact are the real conspiracy theorists. They imagine they feel big by association with powerful groups.
It is also true that Catholicism includes every variety of belief - hell they even have voudou practitioners (Santeria) that they say are Catholic.
But when you suggest you are the 'only rugged individualist' - PSSHAHH!
That is the most ludicrous statement you could possibly make.
As to Karma being Christian - yes in some way. It was taken out of the dogma around the time it became mere Roman Empire as they wielded an increasing control over their former conquered lands without even needing a full time army or having to share the spoils with the Italian citizenry. It was called The Law of Retribution.
Do you know that the Pope said there is no heaven or Hell in 1999 as he apologized "for two millennia of heinous acts."
Yeshua was a researcher of truth and the churchians who had him killed (Roman agents) have put foul deeds and words behind him or his name. As Muggeridge said - if Jesus were alive today he would be drugged or imprisoned.
Real individuals who actually 'look within' to see why Jesus (if he existed) said what he said in John 10:34 {Did you check it out?} are not going to accept the word of man and his priestly manipulative minions.
Eyo. I'm working on the John 10:34 interpretation, but thanks for bringing it up since I've never seen it before. Very interesting... I am curious as to what Old Testament Jesus is referring to.
As for JP2 saying that there's no heaven or hell... I find that to be very, very far fetched. It's against the Catechism, and a main eschatological teaching. If you could provide me with exactly where you got that info, I'll be happy to look at it. And for apologizing, yes, JP2 has apologized to quite a few people quite a few times. And there's nothing wrong with that. John Paul II is one of the best popes we've had in a while, as far as I know.
...
Dear Shinobi
You say correctly:
they don't have physical 'places' in which they take up space.
I say that is not what they have been saying for the 'two millennia of heinous acts' and that actually means they do not EXIST in the way most people have been programmed to think of them. The head Catholic in Toronto when posed the issue of what the Pope had said was so disingenuous as to say the Pope is a feeble old man. Of course as a Luciferian (means Jesuit and Alumbrados if you do the research) his kind always knew Hel of the Druidic or Keltic Tree was not a bad place or anything like Hell.
Dear Antonius
There is a passage in Psalms that mirrors John 10:34 and one other in the normal Bibles (of which there are thousands of supposedly Divine Scriptural interpretations). If you go into the apocrypha like the Gospel of Thomas which the church tried to destroy you find a lot more of the real Source of what Jesus (Appolonius, Issa and others of the amalgam) studied.
Why have those who arranged these horrors tried to blame the Jews (and in an indirect manner, all 'sinners') for the death of Jesus? He did not claim to be a co-equal member of the Holy Trinity. It wasn't the Jews who 'killed our Saviour'. John Ralston Saul says this about the whole matter
"HOLY TRINITY-CHRISTIAN A pre-alchemist alchemist concept developed by early Christian administrators to soften the hard-edged simplicity of straight monotheism.
The three-in-one/one-in-three mystery of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost {That the beatniks called 'Laddio, Daddio and Spook'.} made tritheism official. The subsequent almost-deification of the Virgin Mary made it quatrotheism {And raised un-natural 'virginity' or possible non-sense such as immaculate conceptions, which fathers must have loved and priests certainly benefit from, to heights of increasing obscenity!}. Twelve Disciples as semi-deities then made it sextusdecitheism. Finally, cart-loads of saints raised to quarter-deification turned Christianity into plain, old-fashioned polytheism. By the time of the Crusades, it was the most polytheistic religion ever to have existed, with the possible exception of Hinduism. This untenable contradiction between the assertion of monotheism and the reality of polytheism was dealt with {And this is the MOST important observation of a technique known in psychology as 'projection of a pluperfect paranoid' or the 'BIG LIE' of alphabet soup agencies and 'black ops'; the less organized criminals like the Mafia call it a 'frame-up'.} by accusing other religions of the Christian fault. The Church - Catholic and later Protestant - turned aggressively on the two most clearly monotheistic religions in view {Also they began at least 700 years of war, A CRUSADE! against the remnants of the Kelts in Ireland.) - Judaism and Islam - and persecuted them as heathen or pagan. ..These pagans must therefore be converted, conquered {ego 'Manifest Destiny'} and/or killed for their own good in order that they may benefit from the singularity of the Holy Trinity, plus appendages.
HOLY TRINITY - POST CHRISTIAN So far Nietzsche has been wrong about GOD. We have not managed to become Him in His place. Instead we have replaced God with a yet more abstract divinity based upon pure rational power... Organization or structure replaced the Father, TECHNOLOGY displaced the Son and the Holy Ghost gave way to information. The new priesthood was made up of technocrats. As the etymology of the word 'technocrat' indicates, from the beginning they were to be specialists in power... And they would stand guard over information." (5)
The fears and apathy of average people are as much to blame for this history of managed and 'guarded information' that records the acts of bad people. 'We are all our brother's keepers' is not just an idle platitude. The Druidic concept called IESA or 'The Brotherhood of Man' apprehended the Cosmic Thought Field of Faraday and Tesla or the 'Cosmic Soup' of Deepak Chopra. NASA scientists have just announced that Life is Everywhere including microbes in outer space. They talk about cell membrane formation that makes we wonder if these are conscious connected 'info packets'(Tesla) or 'templates' (Teilhard de Chardin) from which energy can create in a manner more akin to ancient creationist theories of the supposed pagans.
...
Dear Shinobi
The quote from the alchemist Aquinas should be taken in conjunction with the Augustinian Credo that Bobik of Notre Dame still writes about and which is designed to make all things seem possible even though false. I could quote him for you on this matter. In any event it does not change the fact that the church has been promoting Hell sinse the time of Dante Aligheri as a physical place or a real place in line with Heaven rather than the Quantum Many Worlds Interpretation. I can show where Catholic scholars like St. Robert Bellarmine also presaged this kind of thing.
The matter of the Toronto affair is from an ex-roomate of mine who wrote letters to the Archbishop here and then went to meet him. This roomate grew up in Poland and knew Carol (Pope John II) personally and met him when he escaped Poland as well. This roomate and I agree the current Pope is a breath of fresh air despite his anti-woman stance on things like abortion and priesthood issues. In fact if you read what I have said here you will find I am not so sure Malachi Martin (advisor to three recent Popes and Vatican Professor) is not right. BECAUSE it is the stupidity of average people who make the world what it is.
However, I do raise appropriate questions about that. But again - if you know what a Baird is (my last name) you will see I am quite into the Heliopolitan or Luciferian mix. I have been accredited as an alchemist by top Rosicrucians of the Christian Mystery Schools. So when I say something you interpret as being bad about the Jesuit/Alumbrados/Illuminati you should know I think they have done a lot of good things and it is not they who are as much the problem as a possible solution to the problems. Those solutions require understanding the forces of power that have historically been held secret.
...
Dear S
No real association with the Bardic (Bhairdic or Bairdic) Tradition also known as the Qabala or Verbal Tradition going back into great antiquitty - other than the fact that I am a Baird - genetically. And yes, there is genetic information transfer IMO. It is my opinion that no Druids or Bairds of that system are alive today - although the Kahuna and some Brujos might be close in some respects. The Bairds were the teachers and historians who kept the books like the Tsaltair na Tara which might be what Strabo refers to as a 7000 year written history of the people of Tartessus/Iberia. These books were destroyed so the Catholics could empower themselves as originators.
I will go get the quote from Aquinas on Aristotle and Augustinian things from Bobik.
I am still going to get the Bobik quote but this is actually more on point.
AUGSBURG and the Reformation:
We should all know that Nostradamus was a Jesuit and he was most supported by the De Medicis. I am almost certain he was a member of the Alumbrados or Illuminati who founded the Jesuits along with the Borgia (Pope Alexander VI) money to institute the Aquinas legacy we have already covered as their universities became the cornerstone of educating people to a New World Order. David Ovason writes about Nostradamus being a Hibernian and I think his scholarship is the only reasonable work done on the man who probably was adept enough to have made a Philosopher's Stone. Nostradamus was a Jew and so are the Milesian Stuarts or Bruttii whose history I have documented in books like Who is a Jew. Ovason's book is The Secrets of Nostradamus and he details an important part of one quatrain dealing with Augsburg. Here is why Augsburg is important according to history and Pelikan from the Rockefeller-Bush institute called Yale.
"In their explanation of how there could be a just war in the light of the unqualified way Jesus had condemned violence and the unequivocal way he had exalted peace, Reformers such as Luther repeated much of the medieval doctrine of Augustine and Aquinas, while adding their own perspectives on the ethical and political meaning of the Gospels. There was, however, one aspect of the treatment of war in medieval theology on which Luther broke radically with his predecessors: the idea of a crusade. As a solution for the moral ambiguity of war that went beyond the tragic necessity implied in the Augustinian idea of a just war, the crusade imprinted the sacred sign of the cross of Jesus on the cause of 'Holy Peace and Holy War.' (15) 'To take the cross' meant to go off to war against the Turk in Palestine, wearing a cross of red cloth on the shoulder of one's outer garment. While there is serious inconsistency between the accounts given by our several sources on the sermon preached by Pope Urban II at the Council of Clermont on 27 November 1095, it does seem clear that he promised remission of sins and indulgences to those who took the cross. He seems, moreover, to have described the death of those who, after taking the cross, fell in battle against the Turkish infidels as a kind of participation in the sufferings and death of Christ. In the event, as Runciman has put it, this 'Crusading fervour' in the name of Jesus 'always provided an excuse for killing God's enemies' and led to pogroms against Jews, it even led to what he calls 'the great betrayal of Christendom,' the sack of Christian Constantinople by Christian Crusaders on the Fourth Crusade in 1204, a 'crime against humanity' and 'an act of gigantic political folly,' as well as a flagrant negation of the teachings of the very One in whose name they had gone forth and whose cross they bore. (16)
By the period of the Reformation, the atmosphere had changed drastically; as one historian has put it, albeit with some exaggeration, 'in the sixteenth century the idea of a Crusade falls into oblivion.' (17) It is more precise to say, with another scholar, that 'the idea of the crusade continued to haunt the imagination of western princes until the seventeenth century.' (18) {And the rhetoric of George Bush in 2004 is certainly reminiscent of the same folly.} What fell into virtual oblivion was the practical possibility of a Crusade to Palestine to free the Holy Land from the infidel, for now the infidel had become a clear and present danger to Christian Europe itself. In 1453, Constantinople, the capital of the Byzantine empire, which had been the victim of Western Christian aggression in 1204, fell to the Ottoman Turks, who during the next three-quarters of a century threatened central Europe: Belgrade surrendered to them in 1520, Vienna was in danger, and in 1526 at the battle of Mohacs the army of Hungary and its king, Louis II, fell before the superior might of the Turkish armies. Thanks to the recent invention of printing, a vast propaganda literature on the Turkish peril spread over central Europe, with some calling for compromise and appeasement and others for war and even for a revival of the Crusade—directed this time not against the Turks who had taken Palestine, but against the Turks who had pointed a dagger at the very heart of Western Christendom. All of this came at the very time that the Reformation seemed to be pointing its own dagger at Christendom, dividing the Christian forces just when they needed to unite against the common enemy. The coincidence of the two threats was the occasion for the convoking of the diet of the Holy Roman Empire at Augsburg in 1530, where the Augsburg Confession presented the case for the Lutheran Reformation.
That confession made it the official position of the Reformation party that, since 'all government in the world and all established rule and laws were instituted and ordained by God,' {This is the crux of the thesis that there is indeed a plan or conspiracy and if you believe man has not made these nations then you are a dupe.} it was perfectly legitimate for Christians to 'punish evildoers with the sword' and to 'engage in just wars.' Specifically, it declared that Emperor Charles V, 'His Imperial Majesty, may in salutary and godly fashion imitate the example of David {The House of David and the House of The Bruce are the people that still do this stuff of men.} in making war on the Turk.' (19)
But the parallel between the Holy Roman Emperor and the ancient king of Israel did not make the emperor a theocratic ruler, who governed and waged war in the name of Jesus. The reason given for approving war against the Turk was, therefore, not the Crusade ideal of a holy war against the enemy of the cross of Christ; rather it was that, as the 'incumbent of a royal office.' Charles V, like King David of Israel, had the right, indeed the obligation, of 'the defense and protection of [his] subjects.' Luther's treatise of 1526 on the Turkish was took the same position. It was mistaken to preach a Crusade and to urge 'the emperor, as guardian of the church and defender of the faith,' to take arms against the Turks; on the contrary, taking arms against the Turks would be the duty of the rulers of Europe, 'whether they themselves were Christians or not,' in keeping with their calling in the world to govern. (20) {Give this double-speak due consideration.} In its validation of war against the Turks, the mainstream of the Reformation rejected the Crusade ideal but insisted on the just war theory: such a war was legitimate on account of the Jesus who had acknowledged that Pontius Pilate and Caesar possessed an authority that came from God (John 19:11), {If any doubt the ancient Hegelian sophistication; this is an example of their deceit.} not on account of the Jesus whose crucifixion under Pontius Pilate had placed authority into the hands of his disciples and his church (Matt. 28:19-20)." (21)
Philip Melanchthon prepared the Augsburg Confession which is the written system tens of millions of Lutherans are enamoured with. The German nobility at the 1530 Diet asked for some changes to it or rejected it but we need to understand why these nobles are so interested in using religion to gain power over the people in any event. We don't really need anti-Semites like Luther even if he was right about the Papacy being a thoroughly detestable power-mongering institution. But I ask why did the subsequent Peace of Augsburg that allowed cities to have religious freedom really occur? Why would there ever have been a need to keep people in feudal religious control? Why do the historians not ask who was playing this game in the first place and why do they not see the inner sanctum 'play both ends against the middle' and only occasionally see the de-population efforts at work?
Philip of Hesse and his Hesse-Battenbergs who later worked with the Rothschilds saw the impact of the Augsburg Confession would garner greater power for them. They organized a league called Schmalkaldic in Thuringia in December of 1530. History tells us they did this to defend themselves against The Catholic Emperor Charles V. It would be mere speculation to suggest that the Islamic or Turkish threat was part of a larger intrigue wherein the Semite ancestors of Sargon in that part of the world saw fit to work with their friends in Germany as they later did when disallowing the average Jews of Germany to be free to leave Germany. Yes, Hitler offered to do this twice during the war after the gas chambers were already doing their foul deeds. The Rothschild backers of Balfour and the stated need of a State of Israel in Palestine was behind the Holocaust. The Swiss and Turkish Jewish leaders declined the offer unless the State of Israel could be made legal. The average Jew thinks this kind of fact is pure fiction but it is their perception that is fiction. Eichmann tried to create a state of Israel before the war, but I have dealt with these matters in other books and must try to control my rage at this juncture.
I hope the reader knows by now that Hegel is a neoplatonic philosopher and his refinement of the 'play both ends against the middle' use of Fukayama's 'absolute religions' is the main thrust of what ails governance of people and life on earth. Thus we had Nostradamus the Hibernian Jew founding the Jesuits while Protestantism came to the fore. They had all bases covered and were able to keep the attention of people away from themselves for a long time and still are benefiting from all this intrigue. This theme was never more evident than in the 20th Century when certain people funded both Hitler and Stalin who really were part of the Hegelian dialectic and not really so different as it might seem. Here is a very small part of the story in the words of another university professor. The May Day celebrations in the Soviet Union occur on the same fateful day that celebrates the founding of the Adam Weisthaupt Illuminati backed by William of Hesse. I have quoted Yeltsin saying 'they' created this experiment. 'They' includes Lord Rothschild who openly stated he would replace the Czar. 'They' are the upper elite who have to reign in the lesser or 'tinker parvenu nobility' (words of HRH Nicholas de Vere) from time to time.
"In a sense, the Peace of Augsburg was a compromise between those who believed in the absolute rule of Rome over all religious matters and those who wanted local congregations to choose between Roman Catholicism and Lutheranism. According to this agreement, the ruler of a principality or city determined the religious makeup of the area he ruled. Some of the principalities (those in southern Germany) remained loyal to Rome and some (mainly those in the north) embraced Lutheranism. This kind of church/state relationship became the rule and stayed that way into the twentieth century." (22)
Here is the Bobik quote.
Here is the crux of the matter and propaganda laid out by Augustine. "In q.73, Aquinas asks: UTRUM competio divinorum operum debeat septimo diei ascribi. The Scriptures say explicitly of the seventh day: 'On the seventh day God completed His work which He had made' (Genesis, 2, 2). Here, a throughout his reflections on the initial production of things by God, Aquinas proceeds with Augustine's teaching on scriptural interpretation in mind, namely THIS teaching, which emphasizes TWO points:
As Augustine teaches, 'two' things are to be observed in questions of this kind. The first is this; to hold to the truth of Scripture unwaveringly. The second is this, since Divine Scripture can be interpreted in many ways; not to adhere so tenaciously to a given exposition of it as to presume to assert it as the meaning of Scripture, if it has been shown with certitude to be false; lest Scripture be ridiculed by those who do not believe, and obstacles be placed in the way of their becoming believers."(9)
This is current teaching from Notre Dame University. They still don't want to get in the way of 'true believers' even though they don't believe in the seven day fiction. It would be better to teach the truth wouldn't it? The Jewish coming to America is a central theme in Mormonism. The site found near Tucson called Rhoda after a leader from the home of Phoenicians called Rhodes where Posidonius had lived is a fine example of artifactual evidence ridiculed by non-experts against the very experts who properly gathered it. This was during the 6th to 8th Century AD after the Ostrogoths up and disappeared from Italy. The Ostrogoths are Benjaminites or Merovingians who had been taken to Arcadia in Greece when the other tribes of Israel waged war upon them and the Phoenicians came to their aid.
It is hard to imagine this once Sacred Cow called Columbus' Discovery of America ever existed but there are many who still cling to the lie and all it represents about superior races and 'Manifest Destiny'. The courts might even overturn sovereign status for countries if they were to know the truth.
I read your position on abortion. It is not addressing anything that I consider relevant to why abortion is none of other people's business unless government is to seriously endeavour to lead society towards a better world. In that case I favor mandatory early reversible sterilization until such time as the individual proves they are financially and spiritually or psychologically capable of raising a contributor to society. I do agree the soul enters the body at conception.
Since that kind of management is left to warfare and other genocidal programs at present I consider the woman deserves the right to make her own choices so that no baby born will have to be sufferring the kind of unsoulful growth evident wherever the Catholics have encouraged procreation to make more sheeple (and yes India has the same issues and worse - due to cows considered equally sacred).
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/illuminati.htm
Ignatius Loyola – Luciferian or Heliopolitan:
I kid you not! Lucifer is the 'light-bringer' and just as Hitler was a 'torch-bearer for Jesus' we have the Luciferians inside the Catholic Church to this day as I have covered from the likes of Malachi Martin who was a Papal advisor to three Popes and taught Jewish studies (Kaballah?) at the Vatican College until recently. Indeed all the Alumbrados (means Illuminati) people are 'light-bearers' or en-'light'-ened ones. That includes Rodrigo Borgia (Pope Alexander VI) who I have dealt with in many books. I have already mentioned this Idiot's Guide has no mention of the Alumbrados founding the Jesuits or any intrigue related thereto including even the mere mention of Hibernians like Thomas Carlyle, Goethe, Saint Bernard as one, and other things related thereto. This does not surprise me one iota. Read the description of Jesus by Ignatius Loyola and think long and hard about whether I am right about his being inspired by the sun-worship or Heliopolitanism of the Druids; which is the basis of the Masons according to Thomas Paine who was higher up in the 'octopus'.
"The Society of Jesus was founded by Ignatius of Loyola, who could be seen as the Catholic Reformation's equivalent to Martin Luther. {Whose name is suggestive of Lucifer too.} Loyola has been referred to as one of the most important—if not the most important—figures of the Catholic Reformation.
Loyola was born Inigo de Oñez y Loyola around 1491. He was born at his family's ancestral castle in Guipúzcoa. When he was old enough, he entered the military service, where he served until 1521 when he was seriously wounded in battle. During his recovery from his wounds, he read about the lives of the saints of the church, and he was motivated to devote his life to spiritual service. He hung up his sword and spent a year in prayer and meditation at a cave near the Manresa monastery. While there, Loyola fasted, knelt in prayer for seven hours a day, and flagellated himself to the point of endangering his health. {I grew up near a Manresa Lodge that had some weird goings-on and I often wonder when I see them in places like Sedona or other earth-based religious areas. I am sure he spoke with them or received instruction from them at this time.}
Loyola later described this time as an incredible 'mystical' experience during which he had blinding visions of heaven and hell and Christ and Satan. He saw Jesus as 'a big round form shining as gold.'...
...Loyola and the Jesuits welcomed only those whose spirituality reflected his {N.B.} and those who were willing to engage in unquestioned obedience to the pope.{Giving up their possessions like the Templars too.} Any applicant who had even a hint of bad character or lack of orthodoxy was rejected. {Really? What orthodoxy might that be?}...
...The mission of the Jesuits was to educate the young, to lead people back from Protestantism to Catholicism, and to take the Catholic message to new areas of the world.
They were successful in all three endeavours." (3)
Dear T
I hear a Wiccan group out of Georgia has reviewed Diverse Druids and it will be on their site once they have finished some constructions. You had mentioned your work in the New Age genre and I thought you might find it interesting that this group has already sent their review to the New Age Journal.
Well I am a high school student who has been taught at a Jesuit Run school for the past 2 years. And in the theology classes and other books I have read, it's quite obvious that other 'pagan' religions influenced the course of the foundation of the Jesuits. However, in the Old Testament and how Judiasm was formed was through the 'splicing of religions' or syncrotism and this is true of all religions. For example, the Hebrews coming out of Egypt (a much smaller group than normally depicted 100-500 most likely) enter Cannan and basically have a single message, not nessecarily a religion, and that is that thier God is a God who liberates them from slavery. And Moses when recieving the 10 commandments was the first 'solid' instructions for worshipping them. So the Hebrews come to Cannan and want more people to believe in thier God so, with the vast majority of the cannonites being slaves to masters. Thier message spread quickly and this is where the problems began, these uneducated (for the most part) pagan worshipers go to follow a 'single God' and there is little information on how to. So basically this syncronism (splicing of pagan rites and incorporating them into the forming religion) happened when the people spread out to recruit people to the religion with no doctoral standard. And this is how 'sacrifices' were so common in the old testament, not that the faith actually wanted or believed in it. And ignatious had beliefs that he wanted his 'order' to be strong believers in the teachings of Jesus-not counting alot of the Old Testament, and believers in the Pope as a way of showing commitment to God. This initailly started as his uneducated views from reading books on saints and the bible-uninfluenced, but as he began teaching it was very very hard to find people to follow him so he initially incorportated some catholic and protestant views. As time went on and they spread to less educated countries they too began trying to get people to join thier Society of Jesus. So a majority of the written doctorates in the faith often have mentions of various cults, secret societies, or beliefs that greatly contradict thiers and aren't meant for everyone but were later meant to dissapear. And this syncrotism is, even today, causing some trouble in the Society of Jesus. The other thing I see in accurate about Luciferians being like jesuits is that you mentioned Various Illuminati people who 'FOUNDED' it And this is very inaccurate. The Illumaniti were looking first off at a world order that is under one belief so they needed to spread thier influence, this happend after a majority of the doctorates were actually formed. It's the same as saying the Free Masons are an Anarchist group, the Illumanitis did the same thing there. While not saying they influenced the society, they did not control it and alot of the misconceptions from the doctorates are due to syncrotism and most are later contradicted by more modern papers so others are studied not followed.
I hope this helped clear some things up, any questions just say or message me, Sorry for the legnth.
Well I am a high school student who has been taught at a Jesuit Run school for the past 2 years. And in the theology classes and other books I have read, it's quite obvious that other 'pagan' religions influenced the course of the foundation of the Jesuits. However, in the Old Testament and how Judiasm was formed was through the 'splicing of religions' or syncrotism and this is true of all religions. For example, the Hebrews coming out of Egypt (a much smaller group than normally depicted 100-500 most likely) enter Cannan and basically have a single message, not nessecarily a religion, and that is that thier God is a God who liberates them from slavery. And Moses when recieving the 10 commandments was the first 'solid' instructions for worshipping them. So the Hebrews come to Cannan and want more people to believe in thier God so, with the vast majority of the cannonites being slaves to masters. Thier message spread quickly and this is where the problems began, these uneducated (for the most part) pagan worshipers go to follow a 'single God' and there is little information on how to. So basically this syncronism (splicing of pagan rites and incorporating them into the forming religion) happened when the people spread out to recruit people to the religion with no doctoral standard. And this is how 'sacrifices' were so common in the old testament, not that the faith actually wanted or believed in it. And ignatious had beliefs that he wanted his 'order' to be strong believers in the teachings of Jesus-not counting alot of the Old Testament, and believers in the Pope as a way of showing commitment to God. This initailly started as his uneducated views from reading books on saints and the bible-uninfluenced, but as he began teaching it was very very hard to find people to follow him so he initially incorportated some catholic and protestant views. As time went on and they spread to less educated countries they too began trying to get people to join thier Society of Jesus. So a majority of the written doctorates in the faith often have mentions of various cults, secret societies, or beliefs that greatly contradict thiers and aren't meant for everyone but were later meant to dissapear. And this syncrotism is, even today, causing some trouble in the Society of Jesus. The other thing I see in accurate about Luciferians being like jesuits is that you mentioned Various Illuminati people who 'FOUNDED' it And this is very inaccurate. The Illumaniti were looking first off at a world order that is under one belief so they needed to spread thier influence, this happend after a majority of the doctorates were actually formed. It's the same as saying the Free Masons are an Anarchist group, the Illumanitis did the same thing there. While not saying they influenced the society, they did not control it and alot of the misconceptions from the doctorates are due to syncrotism and most are later contradicted by more modern papers so others are studied not followed.
I hope this helped clear some things up, any questions just say or message me, Sorry for the legnth.
Hi..
The Ten Commandments are in earlier religions and the Books of the Dead and Ma'at.
The Syncretism of beliefs is a managed thing in history throughout the last 5000 years of this 'nightmare' (James Joyce).
The Alumbrados (another name for Illuminati) included the De Medicis and Borgias as well as the Jesuit Nostradamus but your school system (even if they knew) would not draw these things to your attention.
Malachi Martin was a Vatican professor and advisor to three Popes and reading him might get you ready to read my work.
Actually they have brought to our attention the people you mentioned. Hell, St. Ignatious was taught for 8 years by a head alumbrados memeber. Also, as aforementioned the 10 commandments are part of several religious. I mean even Jesus is regaurded in a few religious. The point is that not every Jesuit or person of a religion is going to be good. Look at hitler or Stalin, but we must assume the majority of any relgion upholds the beliefs of a greater good as is mentioned numerous times by st. ignatious in the phrase 'Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam' For the greater glory of God' So do not assume if one mystic that is against a religion stands for means that the religion is false. Besides Nostrodomous was regarded as a hertic.So think on that.
My Lord!!!! :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:
I just found this post & excuse my German but what the &^%*?
Catholicism is one of the most false religions on this earth teaching unless you are a catholic you will go to hell.
Hitler a torch bearer for Jesus again what the &*^%,Holy S**t, like too la fong.
Apart from the fact Hitler loved wearing woman's clothes & not to mention he killed & tortured millions says to me that "Guest" is in some serious urgent need of counseling & should stop using mind altering chemicals.
The fact that "Guest" believes this tripe is enough to make me wet myself with laughter.... :lol:
GET A LIFE!!
Christian
Jesus Said..I am the Truth, The Light...The Way...Never did he say the Catholic Church is those things....Man puts God in buildings, I put god inside me..
Praise the True Church.....The Body is the Temple....Look after it
Love & Light
Christian
Catholicism is one of the most false religions on this earth teaching unless you are a catholic you will go to hell.
two points:
1) um.. *some*catholics are not the only christians to say that only by their particular brand of christianity shall you get to heaven... in fact you will find plenty of evangelical protestants saying just the same thing.
2) You are also wrong and this shows your lack of knowledge about modern catholic doctrines.. in fact the catholic church now officially acknowledges that not just other branches of christianity but even *non* christians and members of other religions or no religion (athiests etc) are still loved by god and get into heaven providing they are *good people* at heart, even if mis-informed in some cases, although of course the church advocates its own official catholic doctrine as the best way to be close to god.
So in this regard Official catholicism is actually very sensible and ahead of many evangelical protestant sects who DO rant about how we all can only be 'saved' by adhering to their own particlular brand of christianity, and preching eternal damnation to those who dont ('eternal' damnation being another innacuracy).
Of course you will always get those catholics who do not accept the official line just as not all evangelicals are as crazed as the ones I just mentioned.
So it would be helpful if you actually aquired some facts before you started making sweeping generalisations and sectarian rants.
Doug (who is not even a christian!).
I have the Facts...
Everybody goes to Heaven...Everybody(AN EXTREMELY Small percentage will face spiritual death)
I got my Facts Directly....Where do you get yours???
From A book???
Catholicism is going Dowwwwn
Religion will NEVER own Lord Jesus Christ EVER
Catholicism is going Dowwwwn
I think you have some issues.
Doug
Well I hope Catholicism is going down....
I bonking h8 that religion
Bring on the personal attacks NumbNuts :D
why do you hate Catholicism?
I went to Church with my wife & was told I could not have Communion.
We got married & wasn't allowed to get married in a catholic church
because I'm Church of England.
Was told by a catholic priest that Only Catholic Who go to the true church go to heaven.
They call the Pope "Holy Father" lol what an insult...God is the Holy Father end of story.
Pope John Paul ii is a great man but just that he is & will never be the Holy Father.
I pray to the Holy Father through Jesus Christ I don't pray to the pope.
Catholics place more emphasis n the Blessed Virgin Mary than they do Jesus hence Hail Marys etc(Jesus is mentioned once).
Catholicism is the problem of all religions in this world...
They have appointed a new pope years Ago (Pope Pius xiii) (Father Robert Lyons)He is in America...check it out on Google!!!!
My wife is Roman Catholic so its not the people I don't like just the Heresies that church commits.
The Artefact's from Egypt and other places the Catholic church has STOLEN.
I could go on & on & they are all True Facts!!!
Love & Light
Christian
The Catholic Church DENIES man what Christ gave freely to ALL men unless your Catholic of course!!!
Love & Light
Christian
its no big deal man, religion is just a form of control (please don't hurt me)
If We did get married in the Catholic church & had children we would have to sign a Piece of paper declaring any children we have would be brought up Catholic hence we got married in the Church of England or as it is here the Anglican Church....They gave us both communion(My wife is Catholic) And Received a blessing & no contracts to sign apart from the wedding papers and it was all before God...
Latetr a catholic priest said our marriage was not recognized by God because it didn't take place in the catholic church....You ask me why I hate Catholicism!!!!
Why would I hurt you Brother Neo???
I agree religion is ALL about control...
God Bless you
Love & Light
Christian
hahaha! signing a contract for religion? that IS retarded, but of course when you are as enlightened as me it's not too stupid
Quote from: NeoSaturnhahaha! signing a contract for religion? that IS retarded, but of course when you are as enlightened as me it's not too stupid
Please explain!!
you see religion is simply a form of control. god instated it to make people civilized.
Think of it this way: how many people have a religion? too many to count, now imagine all the good behavior religion brings in, now imagine all those people without etiquette. scary eh?
i think got put in religion to keep things from going over the top, and he did a good job, so therefore i believe most religions not to be wrong (i only like monotheism, no offense)
Each to their own
God never brought in religion Man did
Jesus destroyed the temple then 3 days later restored it...He never restored it in Buildings or Groups but rather in man himself...My Body is my temple(Church).
I to am enlightened & don't need religion(Man Made) I do need the religion of Jesus Christ which is be kind to your fellow man etc love as I have loved you etc...not sectarianism...
God never wants to control man hence free will...He does however want us to come to Them Freely (Father Son Holy Ghost & Mother) There can be no son without a mother!!! :wink:
Love & Light
Christian
I still don't see how your experiences justify your abject *hatred* for the entire Catholic Church.. just because the local Catholic Church where you are is arseing around... that hardly means the entire Catholic Church should be tarred by the same brush.
by the same token, some evangelical protestant sects are obscene in my opinion but that doesnt mean they all are.
Likewise, the Anglican Church (Church of England) has some extreme sections within in who preach against women and gay clergy but there are many other branches, the mainstream in fact who is far more enlightened.
In Scotland where i live, where the dominant state church is the Church of Scotland (Presbeteryian Protestant) most of the church is ok but you get some crazy fundamentalist branches, esp up in the highlands, who would probably still burn heretics if they could get away with it!
I feel sorry for your bad experience with your local branch of the Catholic Church but you need to get a grip on yourself!
Going round *hating* anything and ranting about it is hardly an example that jesus himself would endorse!
Doug
MrBurgo look into Gnosticism, you seem to be saying exactly what they say. Just incase your interested.
I looked into it but not fully understood...Please Explain :)
Another blast from my past.
I kid you not! Lucifer is the 'light-bringer' and just as Hitler was a 'torch-bearer for Jesus' we have the Luciferians inside the Catholic Church to this day as I have covered from the likes of Malachi Martin who was a Papal advisor to three Popes and taught Jewish studies (Kaballah?) at the Vatican College until recently. Indeed all the Alumbrados (means Illuminati) people are 'light-bearers' or en-'light'-need ones. That includes Rodrigo Borgia (Pope Alexander VI) who I have dealt with in many books. I have already mentioned this Idiot's Guide has no mention of the Alumbrados founding the Jesuits or any intrigue related thereto including even the mere mention of Hibernians like Thomas Carlyle, Goethe, Saint Bernard as one, and other things related thereto. This does not surprise me one iota. Read the description of Jesus by Ignatius Loyola and think long and hard about whether I am right about his being inspired by the sun-worship or Heliopolitanism of the Druids; which is the basis of the Masons according to Thomas Paine who was higher up in the 'octopus'.
"The Society of Jesus was founded by Ignatius of Loyola, who could be seen as the Catholic Reformation's equivalent to Martin Luther. {Whose name is suggestive of Lucifer too.} Loyola has been referred to as one of the most important--if not the most important--figures of the Catholic Reformation.
Loyola was born Inigo de Oñez y Loyola around 1491. He was born at his family's ancestral castle in Guipúzcoa. When he was old enough, he entered the military service, where he served until 1521 when he was seriously wounded in battle. During his recovery from his wounds, he read about the lives of the saints of the church, and he was motivated to devote his life to spiritual service. He hung up his sword and spent a year in prayer and meditation at a cave near the Manresa monastery. While there, Loyola fasted, knelt in prayer for seven hours a day, and flagellated himself to the point of endangering his health. {I grew up near a Manresa Lodge that had some weird goings-on and I often wonder when I see them in places like Sedona or other earth-based religious areas. I am sure he spoke with them or received instruction from them at this time.}
Loyola later described this time as an incredible 'mystical' experience during which he had blinding visions of heaven and hell and Christ and Satan. He saw Jesus as 'a big round form shining as gold.'...
...Loyola and the Jesuits welcomed only those whose spirituality reflected his {N.B.} and those who were willing to engage in unquestioned obedience to the pope.{Giving up their possessions like the Templars too.} Any applicant who had even a hint of bad character or lack of orthodoxy was rejected. {Really? What orthodoxy might that be?}...
...The mission of the Jesuits was to educate the young, to lead people back from Protestantism to Catholicism, and to take the Catholic message to new areas of the world.
They were successful in all three endeavours." (3)
Jesus and the Gnostic Cathars
http://www.eastrovedica.com/html/gnosticcathars.htm
Hammurabi (1792-1750 B.C.) was a great MAN who had the vision and wisdom to pronounce and codify that a girl is the legal property of her father until sold by him to her husband. In Athens women were brought up to be ignorant so that men could feel important and manlier as they abused and lorded it over 'the weaker sex' during the time of Socrates. He felt differently and it probably contributed to his being forced to drink hemlock. He said: "If the difference consists only in women bearing and men begetting children, this does not amount to a proof that a woman differs from a man in respect of the sort of education she should receive."
"All things truly wicked start from innocence."
― Ernest Hemingway
"More generally, as I shall repeat in Chapter 8, one of the truly bad effects of religion is that it teaches us that it is a virtue to be satisfied with not understanding."
― Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion
"Being ignorant is not so much a shame, as being unwilling to learn."
― Benjamin Franklin
"It's an universal law-- intolerance is the first sign of an inadequate education. An ill-educated person behaves with arrogant impatience, whereas truly profound education breeds humility."
― Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
"That which we manifest is before us; we are the creators of our own destiny. Be it through intention or ignorance, our successes and our failures have been brought on by none other than ourselves."
― Garth Stein
"He knows nothing; and he thinks he knows everything. That points clearly to a political career."
― George Bernard Shaw, Major Barbara
"There is nothing in the record of the past two years when both Houses of Congress have been controlled by the Republican Party which can lead any person to believe that those promises will be fulfilled in the future. They follow the Hitler line - no matter how big the lie; repeat it often enough and the masses will regard it as truth."
― John F. Kennedy
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science."
― Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man
"Education is a system of imposed ignorance."
― Noam Chomsky, Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media
"I examined the poets, and I look on them as people whose talent overawes both themselves and others, people who present themselves as wise men and are taken as such, when they are nothing of the sort.
From poets, I moved to artists. No one was more ignorant about the arts than I; no one was more convinced that artists possessed really beautiful secrets. However, I noticed that their condition was no better than that of the poets and that both of them have the same misconceptions. Because the most skillful among them excel in their specialty, they look upon themselves as the wisest of men. In my eyes, this presumption completely tarnished their knowledge. As a result, putting myself in the place of the oracle and asking myself what I would prefer to be — what I was or what they were, to know what they have learned or to know that I know nothing — I replied to myself and to the god: I wish to remain who I am.
We do not know — neither the sophists, nor the orators, nor the artists, nor I— what the True, the Good, and the Beautiful are. But there is this difference between us: although these people know nothing, they all believe they know something; whereas, I, if I know nothing, at least have no doubts about it. As a result, all this superiority in wisdom which the oracle has attributed to me reduces itself to the single point that I am strongly convinced that I am ignorant of what I do not know."
― Socrates
Not long ago it was Blasphemy and worse to study Kabbalah - but the forces for truth and learning have gotten the upper hand for the moment when we see so many studying and benefitting from the not so ancient Tree of Life which is derived from far more ancient verbal traditions or Qabala. Is religion a psychiatric symptom, is society wavering and waffling as it allows and uses religion rather than teach the fundamental spiritual reality? The astronomical knowledge origins are more ancient than almost all other sources of civilization in the evolution of man. It leads many who are deceived to think religions have been correct about all manner of miracles or prophecies. You need to read this if you need to know, qabala or your religion. It addresses Aeons or eons and yugas or what came from observing the dog star Sirius and a lot more.
http://www.astronargon.us/A%20Greek%...0Sephiroth.pdf