[ home ] [ tv / art / wooo ] [ ost / lit / bane ] [ dup / oven / dunk ] [ truth ]

/truth/ - Paranomal

Seek the Truth
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
File
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)

  [Go to bottom]   [Catalog]   [Return]   [Archive]

File: 1625748038215.jpg (421.52 KB, 1200x1199, 1200:1199, Antichrist-by-Luca-Signore….jpg) ImgOps Exif iqdb

 No.1851[Last 50 Posts]

Can you guys give me the /truth/ on the Antichrist?

 No.1852

File: 1625760761639.jpg (130.88 KB, 628x1024, 157:256, 1625673666029.jpg) ImgOps Exif iqdb

>>1851
He has arrived.

 No.1854

I HATE THE ANTICHRIST
I HATE THE ANTICHRIST
I HATE THE ANTICHRIST
I HATE THE ANTICHRIST
I HATE THE ANTICHRIST
I HATE THE ANTICHRIST
I HATE THE ANTICHRIST
I HATE THE ANTICHRIST
I HATE THE ANTICHRIST
I HATE THE ANTICHRIST
I HATE THE ANTICHRIST
I HATE THE ANTICHRIST

 No.1863

>>1854
fuck off with your hatepeach antiantichrist incel

 No.1868

File: 1625873409757.jpg (132.58 KB, 1024x683, 1024:683, literallymetbh.jpg) ImgOps Exif iqdb

>>1854
what did you just say

 No.1869

File: 1625874026526.png (294.21 KB, 594x622, 297:311, b34a7307c59e881021a3dfddb8….png) ImgOps iqdb

>>1854
YO WHAT THE FUCK SAY SIKE RIGHT NOW

 No.1872

File: 1625955898224.png (148.4 KB, 488x488, 1:1, 1618818440056.png) ImgOps iqdb

>>1854
uh, goy…

 No.1879

>>1851
Gematria is your friend.

 No.1880

>>1852
Oh shit.

 No.1881

>>1880
Man I'm not worried by an anti-christ that can be distracted with an argument on the rates of high interest savings accounts.

 No.1899

They are hobbits too smart for their own good, nobody should have let them learn how to communicate.

 No.2074

Me. I'm him.

 No.2082

I fucking hate the son of a bitch. Fuck the Antichrist. I'll fight the bastard right now.

 No.2083

He can only appear when the third temple is completed in israel. Jews will worship him. His appearance basically will bring about the end of all things but he himself has little to no power.
Oliver Cromwell undid the ban on Jews in the UK when he became Britain's first prime minister in the hopes that it would lead to them building the third temple and summoning the antichrist (this is real).

 No.2127

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
Antichrist like like a "job" or "position". The position is something against the church.

 No.2128

The Antichrist wants you to get vaccinated. Don't do it. No matter the cost. Don't get the mark of the beast.

 No.2137

File: 1631678571965-0.webm (3.6 MB, 1280x720, 16:9, Jews are the apocolypse r….webm) ImgOps iqdb

File: 1631678571965-1.png (105.37 KB, 640x265, 128:53, Hitler and the New World O….png) ImgOps iqdb

It could be a Jewish New world order, theosophy NWO, Nazi NWO, or whatever type of NWO, as long as it unites the world. The religion of the NWO will be a global religion that pretends to be all accepting, but will worship Satan instead of God.

 No.2138

>>2137
Revelation was written about events happening contemporaneous to its writing.

 No.2140

File: 1631773725688.jpg (76.7 KB, 1080x686, 540:343, Screenshot_20210821-172114….jpg) ImgOps Exif iqdb

>>2138
epic post industrial society take. What other earth shattering claims do you have that I can find from the average young retard, leftist or ignorant professor anywhere in the west?

 No.2141

File: 1631815852865.jpg (46.32 KB, 560x560, 1:1, 4ac0b7086967cb13758a2b4069….jpg) ImgOps Exif iqdb

>>2137
>Nazi NWO

 No.2142

>>2141
Whats you're point?

 No.2143

File: 1631849936826.png (491.41 KB, 757x678, 757:678, Listen here.png) ImgOps iqdb

>>2140
You sound like an asspained evangelical. The seven mountains that the Whore of Babylon sits on match up to the seven hills of Rome. "666" translates to the Hebrew version of "Nero Caesar" in gematria. The Greek word translated as "mark" is "charagma," which meant the emperor's seal and could also mean the image of the emperor that appeared on coins. There were rumors that Nero was still alive and would return at the time Revelation was written (most likely during the reign of Domitian). Look up the Nero Redivivus legend. People seriously believed he'd return centuries after he died.

The most likely interpretation of Revelation is that it's a message to first-century Christians to hold firm to their beliefs in the face of perceived persecution and that God is ultimately in charge.

 No.2151

>>2138
This is the Preterist take yes?

 No.2152

>>2151
Yes. There's some truth to it but saying that's all it is misses the point. The wounded head, for example probably isn't a reference to Nero coming back and is more likely a prophecy of how the Anti-Christ or "Man of Sin" will fake a resurrection to mock Christ's real one. This is why partial-Preterism is the chad position.

 No.2156

It's Both, Rome and the one world government.

It is about the entire world generally. But explicit typologies designate that the "Mystery Babylon" entity in Revelation 17-19 is the Roman empire/catholicism. This is probably where you are getting that connection from. The whore sitting on the beast represents the unholy fusion of state and "church". It also represents the so-called last kingdom of Antichrist. This last kingdom has to occur before God the Son, our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ returns. The church was always meant to represent the kingdom of Christ. We are supposed to be His ambassadors, as it says in the New Testament. Jesus said in John 18:36, "My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence."

Hence, we see that any entities that are a creation of the corrupt form known as the state church, of which Roman Catholicism is just one, are overall represented by this whore sitting on a beast. The whore itself being the one who corrupts the kings of earth through her fornication, by allowing grievous, ungodly and unrepentant sinners in its midst simply because they are powerful or important. Constantine the Great for instance. The beast that this whore rides on is the state apparatus, which was originally the Roman Empire; later it fallaciously called itself "Christendom," being the enemy of truth and liberty under God; and the same will ultimately end up being the New World Order / One World Government in the end times. All along this time, this entity has the constant idea of using the state apparatus to crush those that do not agree with its leaders by force, imprisoning or torturing them, such as in the various persecutions and Inquisitions. It doesn't really follow the Bible or any of the precepts of Christ, it only outwardly pretends to do so, this enormous pretence being one of satan's tools to bring the masses under its sway, under a totally false church, a congregation of the polluted and damned, by alluring to the lusts of their flesh, using it to tell them sinful behavior is appropriate, telling them to kill and destroy those who do not assimilate and recognize its leaders, etc.

Sometimes the state church is split into multiple units. When this happens, you get wars like the Thirty Years War where different state churches battle for supremacy. In the end times, it is predicted that there will be one massive state church, this being the great whore of Babylon that Revelation speaks of. And the beast that it sits on would be the One World Government that it tries to create. But yes in general the book of Revelation deals with the world, not just the area of the old Roman Empire.

 No.2158

File: 1632870995949.jpeg (583.5 KB, 2860x1265, 52:23, index.jpeg) ImgOps iqdb

>>2138
only people who have never read revelation say this

 No.2159

>>2158
So what you are saying is the preterist view of the bible is false? How about this, Geneisis was pursuant to a cataclysmic ancient nuclear war on Mars and the creatures that escaped were jews hence the weird alien names?

 No.2161

>>2159
Makes about as much sense as anything else in this deranged Jewish fable.

 No.2164

File: 1632882835653.jpg (29.2 KB, 700x450, 14:9, 1387506289870.jpg) ImgOps Exif iqdb

>>2158
No, total futurism is just a coping technique for window-licking Left Behind fans who think they can divorce the Bible from its historical context.

Also,
>Kent Hovind

 No.2167

Do people here really believe in the kike fairy tales?

 No.2171

>>2167
Christian beliefs are deeply ingrained into a lot of people, and so accepting that their ancient Semitic fables aren't true would mean asking them to remove an important emotional and cultural foundation from their lives and asking them to reorient their entire belief system.

 No.2172

>>2171
Henotheism is the answer. One god but many lesser deity

 No.2173

>>2172
I don't think gods exist at all in the traditional sense. I'm sure powerful spirits exist, but they don't seem to be as individually important as ancient people seemed to think they were. Or prone to engaging in the same kind of interpersonal drama that the Olympians got up to.

 No.2176

File: 1632980393247.jpg (61.34 KB, 716x571, 716:571, Atheism.jpg) ImgOps Exif iqdb


 No.2181

>>2176
>believing in kike fairy tales to own the kikes

 No.2184

>>2181
I didn't clicked, let me guess, some amerimutt evangelistic cope, right?

 No.2185

>>2184
It's the usual argument that not believing in Jew fables is Jewish because Jews are overrepresented among atheist activist fags.

 No.2186

>>2185
>>2176
>IT WAH DA JOOOOOS!
Please go back to /dup/ and stay there, child. Jews are not the scapegoat here, mundie.

 No.2187

File: 1633064006064.png (1.55 MB, 1237x918, 1237:918, Untitled.png) ImgOps iqdb

>Revelation 13:3One of the heads of the beast appeared to be mortally wounded. But the mortal wound was healed, ""and the whole world"" marveled and followed the beast. 4They worshiped the dragon who had given authority to the beast, and they worshiped the beast, saying, "Who is like the beast, and who can wage war against it?"

>Revelation 13:7 Then the beast was permitted to wage war against the saints and to conquer them, and it was given authority ""over every tribe and people and tongue and nation""


>Revelation 13:16And the second beast required all people small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their forehead, 17so that no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark-the name of the beast or the number of its name.

 No.2189

>>2181
>>2185
>Cherry picking which Jews you listen to.
Your own racial logic contradicts you.

 No.2190

File: 1633065939535.jpeg (72.09 KB, 588x985, 588:985, 1613238629607.jpeg) ImgOps iqdb

>>2186
Jews suck. There's no use denying it. You also forgot your picture.
>>2189
>not believing Jew fairy tales means you must be a New Atheist

 No.2192

>>2190
Either you're a fedora fag, or you're some flavour of autistic LARP. There's no 'good' option if you so vehemently reject your culture's (assuming, in good faith, you're a white European, though that might be too much to ask for nowadays) core beliefs as 'Jew fairy tales'.

 No.2193

>>2186
You're trying too hard to bait.
>>2185
>If you don't believe at the Jew fables you're atheistic
I've had a debate with a faggot on /dup/ about this before, it seems that some people are unable to understand that there are other religions or forms of spirituality.

 No.2194

>>2192
You're the same groyper faggot crying about "LARPagans" for the last three months?

 No.2196

>>2194
>y-y-you're m-m-muh boogeyman

 No.2197

>>2196
Ah yes, the same faggot also crying about "boogeyman" all the time.

 No.2198

>>2197
I live rent free in your head, eh, schizo? Good.

 No.2199

>>2198
I just have good memory, especially for lolcows, bud.

 No.2200

>>2199
No, youre paranoid and seeing ghosts where there are none. I dont even know what a 'groyper' is, yet you think I am one. Get a grip you fucking fedora tipping faggot.

 No.2201

>>2199
He's not the boogeyman guy, I am. Get on with the thread now, bud.

 No.2202

>>2201
No, Im the real boogeyman!

 No.2205

File: 1633115650707.gif (1.08 MB, 400x560, 5:7, 1624603527294.gif) ImgOps iqdb

>>2192
>Either you're a fedora fag, or you're some flavour of autistic LARP.
Or just someone who doesn't subscribe to either ancient legends or narrow-minded materialism.
>There's no 'good' option if you so vehemently reject your culture's (assuming, in good faith, you're a white European, though that might be too much to ask for nowadays) core beliefs as 'Jew fairy tales'.
You could use the same argument against people in the Roman Empire who converted to Christianity. The idea that you should believe in complete nonsense just because your ancestors did is a completely braindead take.

 No.2208

File: 1633138882951.jpg (137.98 KB, 773x500, 773:500, Judiams and satanism 3.jpg) ImgOps Exif iqdb

>>2205
Satanism and all it's many forms is also jewish.

 No.2211

>samefagging this hard on a dead imageboard
sad

 No.2212

>>2211
Telling the truth about your mundie programming is an action worth of praise, not deridement as "samefagging." It's a service to the public.

 No.2213

>>2212
You larping as ruddup is lame at this point, pal.

 No.2214

>>2213
>larping
Half the people using /truth/ (a good 2.5 people) have no idea of how "magic" is often performed. Blaming the jews is an extension to this blind ignorance. Knowledge is no larp.

 No.2215

File: 1633150715851.jpg (94.76 KB, 907x447, 907:447, yahwehasherah4.jpg) ImgOps Exif iqdb

>>2208
In the sense that it's an offshoot of Semitic mythology. The Abrahamic religions are just outgrowths of older religious traditions, which Abrahamists consider satanic.

Also, that's the Sabbatic Goat that's become synonymous with Baphomet, not Shekinah. Funny that you bring up Shekinah. That concept is a development from Asherah, Yahweh's wife that ended up getting retconned. Sabbateanism was a 17th century Jewish messianic movement that led to its offshoot, Frankism. The Frankists were anti-Talmudic antinomians influenced by gnosticism had nothing to do with devil worship. Frankism seems to have had parallels to LaVeyan Satanism in its emphasis on transgressing social norms, but then you might as well call Nietzsche or Max Stirner satanists for their radically individualist views. On top of that, Lilith is a separate demon from Satan.

 No.2216

>>2215
Individualism is inherently satanist.

 No.2217

File: 1633152145397.png (18.72 KB, 400x400, 1:1, what_the_fuck_am_I_reading.png) ImgOps iqdb


 No.2218

>>2217
Ignore the edgy incels from /pol/.

 No.2220

File: 1633159490560.png (86.11 KB, 833x426, 833:426, zZfGPyzlPUcjGZlo.png) ImgOps iqdb


 No.2221

>>2218
Okay tranny

 No.2223

File: 1633197547649.webm (13.84 MB, 854x480, 427:240, That Movie that you Proba….webm) ImgOps iqdb

>>2215
>Also, that's the Sabbatic Goat that's become synonymous with Baphomet, not Shekinah
> The Frankists were anti-Talmudic antinomians influenced by gnosticism had nothing to do with devil worship
You think that you have to worship satan to be a satanist? It's a lot easier then you think, There are atheistic Satanists.
>but then you might as well call Nietzsche or Max Stirner satanists for their radically individualist views.
Absolutely, it's very clear that Max stiner is very clearly a practicing satanist despite not directly worshiping Satan. How is Doing what you want different from Do what thou wilt. With Nietzsche hes is clearly against God.

There are many kinds and degrees of satanism, but basically just being against God is satanism.

 No.2226

>>2223
>You think that you have to worship satan to be a satanist?
Yes, that's literally what being a satanist means.
>There are atheistic Satanists.
The Church of Satan crowd are just capitalizing on the shock value and edgy aesthetic appeal of satanism for the attention and money. Remember, they charge $200 for registration. In terms of what their actual beliefs are, they draw from people like Nietzsche, Ragnar Redbeard, and Ayn Rand. They're fake satanists who represent themselves as the only true satanists.
>Absolutely, it's very clear that Max stiner is very clearly a practicing satanist despite not directly worshiping Satan.
That's like saying you can be a Christian without worshiping Jesus.
>How is Doing what you want different from Do what thou wilt.
"Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law" is from Thelema, not satanism. It's not about doing whatever you want, it's about an individual finding their True Will and pursuing it. The True Will is an individual's calling or destiny (in a non-fatalistic sense). Even though Crowley saw every man and woman as a star, he believed some shine brighter than others and that only a few had what it takes to follow their True Will.
>There are many kinds and degrees of satanism, but basically just being against God is satanism.
The only true satanism is theistic satanism. Everyone else is either a poseur or is mislabeled by Christians to try and scare people into the fold. One of Christianity's most successful tactics has been to play on people's fear of eternal punishment and the unknown.

 No.2227

File: 1633207082066.webm (2.34 MB, 632x452, 158:113, Lord of destruction.webm) ImgOps iqdb

>>2226
>The Church of Satan crowd are just capitalizing on the shock value and edgy aesthetic appeal of satanism for the attention and money.
One "fake" organization doesn't invalidate all of Atheistic Satanism.
>That's like saying you can be a Christian without worshiping Jesus.
Satanism can mean a lot of things to many people, some see Satan as a guide or a personification of rebellion, thus they can be satanists without actually worshiping Satan. Christianity is different because it doesn't care about your individualism, You have to believe in God and that Christ is God, or else you're a Christian heretic.
>"Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law" is from Thelema, not satanism.
Are you seriously saying the Occult isn't satanic? Magick is not satanic? Hinduism isn't directly from Satanism either yet it's still satanic, if you know what you're worshiping.
>it's about an individual finding their True Will and pursuing it.
How is finding the true will not like the Anarchist principal of allowing other to pursue what they want?
>The only true satanism is theistic satanism.
Lots of Atheistic Satanists would disagree with you. Even some Christian organizations are Satanic like The Catholic Church or woke protestanism. This is like saying Wicca isn't satanic, sure it doesn't directly say it's satanic, but it was started by a freemason (who are Luciferian, therefore satanic) and they sometimes practice magick, or sometimes worship a horned being, or somethings are atheistic and don't believe in the super natural at all. The point is when the satanic themes are there (like Magick, paganism, reincarnation) it's obvious when something is satanic. You don't have to wear a robe and do a ritual to be a satanist, the devil doesn't lose any power if you believe in it or not.

 No.2229

>>2227
>One "fake" organization doesn't invalidate all of Atheistic Satanism.
There's no such thing as atheistic satanism. The concept never existed before Anton LaVey came along and his followers tried to to redefine what satanism actually meant. Real satanism is devil worship.
>Satanism can mean a lot of things to many people, some see Satan as a guide or a personification of rebellion, thus they can be satanists without actually worshiping Satan. Christianity is different because it doesn't care about your individualism, You have to believe in God and that Christ is God, or else you're a Christian heretic.
Those satanists are historical revisionists. The term "satanism" being used as reference to a belief system entailed the idea of actually worshiping Satan prior to the creation of the Church of Satan.
>Are you seriously saying the Occult isn't satanic? Magick is not satanic? Hinduism isn't directly from Satanism either yet it's still satanic, if you know what you're worshiping.
Of course it's not. "Occult" just means "hidden," as in hidden knowledge. The occult is based upon examination of the principles of reality that exoteric religious traditions have kept hidden from the public. There's a lot of bullshit in the occult, but the aim is ultimately for people to better understand themselves and existence. "God," if you want to call it that, is something to be found inside yourself. That's why occultists emphasize practices like meditation and out-of-body experiences. The point of meditation is to still the mind and get the individual closer in touch with the source of all reality, and out-of-body experiences show how our outer realities are based on our inner realities. Magick just entails tapping into the universal subconscious mind ("God") and reshaping reality by belief and intent. The rituals are aids that have no power in and of themselves. There are some occultists who are satanists, like the Temple of Set (who seem to be sick fucks judging from the allegations surrounding Michael Aquino), but occultism usually has nothing to do with satanism.

And Hinduism has absolutely nothing to do with satanism.
>How is finding the true will not like the Anarchist principal of allowing other to pursue what they want?
It's a lot like that. Everyone has their own True Will, and Crowley considered it every individual's duty to find their True Will and to pursue it relentlessly while giving others the space to flourish and do the same. Everyone's path is different.
>Lots of Atheistic Satanists would disagree with you.
They're just wannabes and poseurs.
>Even some Christian organizations are Satanic like The Catholic Church or woke protestanism. This is like saying Wicca isn't satanic, sure it doesn't directly say it's satanic, but it was started by a freemason (who are Luciferian, therefore satanic) and they sometimes practice magick, or sometimes worship a horned being, or somethings are atheistic and don't believe in the super natural at all. The point is when the satanic themes are there (like Magick, paganism, reincarnation) it's obvious when something is satanic. You don't have to wear a robe and do a ritual to be a satanist, the devil doesn't lose any power if you believe in it or not.
You're starting from the conclusion that if something contradicts Christianity (and your specific version of it), then Satan must be behind it. That's a pretty big claim considering there's no more evidence of Satan's existence than there is of any other mythological figure. The fact that reincarnation is an idea that was so prevalent among ancient societies all around the world and has continued to be acknowledged by out-of-body travelers (even Westerners with no experience in esoteric traditions frequently claimed to have seen their past lives during near-death experiences) leads me to lend a lot more credence to it than I do the claim that it's pushed by a legendary being we have no real evidence of. The simplest explanation is that there's likely some kind of truth to it, rather it being the result of some insidious conspiracy by Satan to lead people astray.

 No.2230

>>2221
t. NeetSoc Larper

 No.2231

>>2230
I call you a tranny and you call me a natsoc larper. Thats beautiful, tranny anon. You proved my point.

 No.2232

>>2229
Stupid pajeet faggot

 No.2233

>>1851
DEAD
E
A
D

BOARD
O
A
R
D

 No.2234

File: 1633281532575.jpg (9.1 KB, 210x251, 210:251, 1323832035404.jpg) ImgOps Exif iqdb

>>2232
Need some salve for that impotent butthurt?

 No.2235

File: 1633289506618.webm (7.88 MB, 720x480, 3:2, What Lies In Plain Sight ….webm) ImgOps iqdb

>>2229
>The concept never existed before Anton LaVey came along and his followers tried to to redefine what satanism actually meant.
That's just your opinion, There are certain branches of Judaism where they don't believe in God which can be seen as a sort of atheism. Why do you care if there are atheistic satanists refining satanism?
>Real satanism is devil worship.
LaVey did Satanic rites and ceremonies, they weren't for worship but were still magical acts. You don't need to believe in the devil to follow it's evil.
>Those satanists are historical revisionists. The term "satanism" being used as reference to a belief system entailed the idea of actually worshiping Satan prior to the creation of the Church of Satan.
Where does it say that Satan has to be worshiped to be a satanist?
>"God," if you want to call it that, is something to be found inside yourself. That's why occultists emphasize practices like meditation and out-of-body experiences.
This hidden knowledge often happens to have Satan it, self-godhood or believing you're a God is directly from Satan in the Bible.
>Magick just entails tapping into the universal subconscious mind ("God")
The "universe" is not God, God wouldn't promote the use of magic, which is the conjuring of demons.
>but occultism usually has nothing to do with satanism.
You previously said it's not Satanism?
>And Hinduism has absolutely nothing to do with satanism.
So worshiping Hare Krishna, the lord of destruction, the serpent of eternity, the prince of demons is not satanic? That makes no sense.
>It's a lot like that.
So then you agree that anarchism is a lot like "Do what thou wilt"?
>They're just wannabes and poseurs.
That's not a good argument, Satanism is like feminism it can be whatever the feminists wants it to be, sex positive, anti-sex and so on..
>You're starting from the conclusion that if something contradicts Christianity (and your specific version of it), then Satan must be behind it.
Do the elite not worship Satan? Well some are luciferians who don't actually worship Satan/Lucifer but see him as a guide to self-Godhood.
>leads me to lend a lot more credence to it than I do the claim that it's pushed by a legendary being we have no real evidence of
The irony is that you can actually talk to Satan with the same practices as out of body experiences or other communications with spiritual entities. If the devil wasn't real then why do those in power worship him and it appears to work since they are powerful. despite them being exposed so much. There are many books written on Satanic ritual abuse.
>The simplest explanation is that there's likely some kind of truth to it, rather it being the result of some insidious conspiracy by Satan to lead people astray.
Okay, i disagree, There are many kinds of Satanism, and the idea of the Devil has rein of the earth is biblical, the elite using Satan and promoting satanic themes in media and politics is proof.

 No.2236

>>2235
>That's just your opinion,
It's the truth. When used in reference to a belief system, it was used to describe devil worship for decades before LaVey became prominent:
https://www.etymonline.com/word/satanism
>LaVey did Satanic rites and ceremonies, they weren't for worship but were still magical acts.
Rituals themselves have no power without belief and intent.
>You don't need to believe in the devil to follow it's evil.
You're still an infidel who needs to submit to Allah whether or not you believe in the revelations of the Prophet (PBUH).
>This hidden knowledge often happens to have Satan it, self-godhood or believing you're a God is directly from Satan in the Bible.
Only specific branches of occultism concern themselves with Satan. Most have no relation. Occultism is a vague umbrella term and not one exact idea.

Everything that exists is an extension of God. There's nothing that exists apart from God.
>The "universe" is not God, God wouldn't promote the use of magic, which is the conjuring of demons.
You're begging the question.
>You previously said it's not Satanism?
Occultism isn't satanism, but satanism is occultism. There's nothing inherently satanic about occultism itself. It's an extremely broad category
>So worshiping Hare Krishna, the lord of destruction, the serpent of eternity, the prince of demons is not satanic? That makes no sense.
It's Krishna, not "Hare Krishna." Hare Krishnas are the guys with the shaved heads and saffron robes who hassle people in airports. Krishna isn't Shiva. Brahma is the creator god, Vishnu, is the preserver, and Shiva is the destroyer. Shiva also acts as a judge of good and evil and a protector. The Hindu gods can be pretty complex figures. On top of that, Hinduism is more of a grouping of many disparate religious traditions than one single religion. There are Hindu polytheists, henotheists, non-dualists (like Advaita Vedanta), and even atheistic Hindus depending on the tradition. It's more of a cultural thing than it is a matter having certain religious beliefs.

You're starting from the assumption that Satan is real and that any outward similarity that other mythological figures have to your conception of Satan means that they must be one and the same, even though Hebrew religious traditions originated from the same pagan influences as everything else.
>So then you agree that anarchism is a lot like "Do what thou wilt"?
Theoretically you could have Thelemite anarchism, but it wouldn't result in that in the real world. Real anarchism just creates a power vacuum for aggressive power seekers to stomp all over everyone else. I don't think that would be compatible with Thelema, but then again Crowley was a complete self-centered asshole junkie who wasn't able to live up to his own philosophy.
>That's not a good argument, Satanism is like feminism it can be whatever the feminists wants it to be, sex positive, anti-sex and so on..
Based on what? That concept among self-proclaimed satanists never existed prior to LaVey.
>Do the elite not worship Satan? Well some are luciferians who don't actually worship Satan/Lucifer but see him as a guide to self-Godhood.
I don't know what the elites actually believe. I doubt actual devil worship is common among them.
>The irony is that you can actually talk to Satan with the same practices as out of body experiences or other communications with spiritual entities.
Based on what? You're just traveling to other planes of existence, and you can communicate with all sorts of beings. There are hellish negative planes as well as higher heavenly planes and everything in between.
>If the devil wasn't real then why do those in power worship him
I don't know how common actual satanism is among the elites, but I doubt it's as prevalent as it's made out to be. The people in charge seem to be a mix of self-serving materialists desperate to create a heaven on earth for themselves at the expense of everyone else and arrogant left-hand-path occultists with a sociopathic bent. There seems to be something fishy going on, as the Finders Cult leaks show.
>and it appears to work since they are powerful. despite them being exposed so much.
That's like saying that European monarchs' invocation of the divine right of kings worked, since they stayed in power for so long.
>There are many books written on Satanic ritual abuse.
And I don't know how true those claims actually are.
>the elite using Satan and promoting satanic themes in media and politics is proof.
Satanic themes and imagery are appealing to a ton of people and are still considered edgy and transgressive.

 No.2238

>>2233
>>2234
t. Yakuza pedo.

 No.2239

>>2238
For me, it's the McChicken. The best fast food sandwich. I even ask for extra McChicken sauce packets and the staff is so friendly and more than willing to oblige.

One time I asked for McChicken sauce packets and they gave me three. I said, "Wow, three for free!" and the nice friendly McDonald's worker laughed and said, "I'm going to call you 3-for-free!".

Now the staff greets me with "hey it's 3-for-free!" and ALWAYS give me three packets. It's such a fun and cool atmosphere at my local McDonald's restaurant, I go there at least 3 times a week for lunch and a large iced coffee with milk instead of cream, 1-2 times for breakfast on the weekend, and maybe once for dinner when I'm in a rush but want a great meal that is affordable, fast, and can match my daily nutritional needs.

I even dip my fries in McChicken sauce, it's delicious! What a great restaurant.

 No.2241

File: 1633398396053.jpg (166.08 KB, 769x1279, 769:1279, Lion's paw.jpg) ImgOps Exif iqdb

>>2236
In the book "The Devil's Party: Satanism in modernity" by oxford university Scholars of religious studies classify LaVey Satanism as a new religious movement. LaVeyan Satanism also influenced the New Age movement heavily. Similar to Wicca, Satanism has gone through many changes, there are even atheist wiccans who still practice magic. There are even Atheistic Luciferians. I get why LaVey pissed off theist satanists, but they don't really convince me personally.
>Rituals themselves have no power without belief and intent.
From what little i've read about magic, there is a "magical" and then a psychological aspect to magic. You don't need to believe in real spirits to make Thoughtforms.
>You're still an infidel who needs to submit to Allah
I understand that it's just my christian point of view, but Islam is false for many reasons including it's stone paganism.
>Everything that exists is an extension of God. There's nothing that exists apart from God.
God is intimately involved with everything, but i wouldn't say The Christian God is an extension of everything, that sounds like oneness to me.
>You're begging the question.
The Biblical definition of God wouldn't promote witchcraft.
>There's nothing inherently satanic about occultism itself.
Astrology, alchemy, natural magic, the New Age, the hermetic order of the Golden Dawn, and especially theosophy, are not satanic?
>It's more of a cultural thing than it is a matter having certain religious beliefs.
Isn't Krishna a god, that would imply that it's worshiped?

Satan doesn't need to be real, he just needs followers (through worship or as a guide)in powerful places.
>even though Hebrew religious traditions originated from the same pagan influences as everything else.
The pagan side of Christianity is only in the roman catholic church. The bible warns against paganism, and doesn't ask you to worship nature, or symbols, in fact it warns against that.
>Real anarchism just creates a power vacuum for aggressive power seekers to stomp all over everyone else.
Domination is supposedly more of an egoist trait than an anarchist one, in my opinion.
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/sidney-e-parker-archists-anarchists-and-egoists
>I don't know what the elites actually believe. I doubt actual devil worship is common among them.
Many of them are freemasons which is secretly satanism, but it's the worship of lucifer is at the end of the degrees, and sometimes it's more about self-godhood. There are many documentaries about it from ex-satanist, ex-cia, ex-freemasons. There is a rumor that LaVey was a freemason since he is doing a freemason sign in pic related, but it's hard to prove. Friedrich Nietzsche is clearly a freemason. This is why Satanism is such a broad category for me, there is so much diversity in it. You could say Neitzsche is just an atheist, but hes also following lucifer.
>Based on what?
I guess based on anecdotes of people who have opened their third eye and exposed themselves to the source/universe/satan and felt it's distinct coldness. Others were able to find God and felt the opposite.
>There are hellish negative planes as well as higher heavenly planes and everything in between.
You must be familiar with the right and left hand path, both angelic and hellish beings are both on the same dangerous side. Lucifer is presented as an angel of light, the devil (and his demons)can be whatever you want it to be, whatever agrees with you more.

 No.2242

File: 1633399337261.jpg (232.21 KB, 854x625, 854:625, Ayn rand.jpg) ImgOps Exif iqdb

>>2236
Also there is this.

 No.2243

>>2242
So Levy satanism is just being jewish?

 No.2244

File: 1633414866175.jpg (292.25 KB, 1920x1080, 16:9, good goys.jpg) ImgOps Exif iqdb

>>2242
>NOOOO GOYIM, YOU MUST SACRIFICE YOURSELF FOR ALL THOSE AFRICAN IMMIGRANTS! AND FOR THE WARS FOR ISRAEL TOO!!! YOU NEED TO BE EMOTIONAL INSTEAD OF RATIONAL!!!

 No.2246

>>2243
Well after all satanism is just jews being open about their beliefs

 No.2247

>all these lefty tranny infiltrators shilling for satanism
Curious

 No.2249


 No.2250

>>2242
I think there's a lot in Satanism that runs on contradiction to what Ayn Rand espoused, also a lot of stuff added by Satanism that Ayn Rand (powername: alizia rosenbaum) would not have approved of.

See the link to the encyclopedia dramatica article on Satanism posted above for a better exploration of what I mean.

Satanism is Ayn Rand and Frederick Neitzsche as poorly understood by a moron who hasn't read the works of either, and just likes to name drop them to look more intellectual and philosophical then they would ever be capable of being, then just adds extra edge and pretention to it all.

Satanism doesn't have either philosophy in it, it's just pure edge, and a lot of it is in full contradiction of the teachings of either philosopher.

No way in hell would all these arbitrary rules be imposed by anyone who is an actual neitzschean or randroid, nor would these "goals" be aspired to by either of them.

These are edgelord corruptions of both ideologies by someone who only understands them in the way some outsider who wants to cherry pick some philosopher to excuse being a pretentiously edgy asshole would.

Neitsche was not in rejection of morality, but of objective or received morality, he saw personal or subjective morality as being of utmost importance, and essential to the salvation of mankind, when he wrote of the subhumans, he was talking about those who rejected morality in it's entirety, both personal and collective, he put these types of nihilists and egoists below the common man of the christians and communists.

Rand was in favor of morality as being dictated by rational self-interest, which a lot of people interpret as a sort of scrooge type mentality, but in actuality, what it means is that you only do what you want to do, and if you want to do good, that means you must do good, if scrooge cares about a charity enough to make a donation (be it for reasons of his own heart, his own beliefs, or his own interests), he must donate to it, rather than saying "only look after yourself and harden the heart to everyone else" she says "look after the things you care about, including yourself, and if you don't care to look after something or someone, you don't have to until you do care to do so". She also had a rule against forcing people to do tings against their will, or forcing yourself upon someone else, this includes children, so all these rules that force others to do this or that and restrict their freedoms against their wills would be wholly opposed by Rand.

Lastly, both of these philosophers strongly reject the rituals and pretension of satanism, as both of them were advocates of reason and practicality over irrationality and tradition, had either of them been alive at the same time as levay, they would've declared him a representative of all they were against, the perversion of their philosophies by those who did not know anything of it, and purposefully misrepresented it.

 No.2251

>>2250
Yeah well Rand had a smelly vag and so did Nietzsche.

 No.2253

>>2251
So you got yourself acquainted with Ayn Rand's vag? and Frederick Nietzsche's?

My point is, LeVay was a poser for both of them.

 No.2254

>>2250
>Satanism is Ayn Rand and Frederick Neitzsche as poorly understood by a moron who hasn't read the works of either
regardless of how different their philosophy is to satanism, Just them being against God is satanic. Karl Marx was a proven satanic priest yet i don't think communism was satanism. Even though there is the theory that the Jesuits created communism in the 1600s-1700s.

 No.2256

File: 1633561683547.png (338.97 KB, 500x386, 250:193, Gahoole2_Image.png) ImgOps iqdb

>>2247
>Pagans and gnostics are satanists

 No.2257

File: 1633561870659.gif (1.63 MB, 320x193, 320:193, Boy, come on.gif) ImgOps iqdb

>>2256
>Worshiping sun deities and believing God is evil isn't satanic.

 No.2258

File: 1633562042699.jpg (184.11 KB, 700x2048, 175:512, kikeonastick2.jpg) ImgOps Exif iqdb

>>2244
Nice disinfo, shill who probably never even read the bible

 No.2259

>>2258
I personally wouldn't reply to shitty strawmen about Christinaity.

 No.2260

>>2258
>Paul (powername: Saul) was a jew and a tax collector for the romans who aided them in persecuting christians, also, the word "jews" is not translated correctly, he is talking about the jews who rejected christianity, which originally was only for the jews, jesus himself forbade preaching to gentiles, but like all christians since himself, he was wiling to forsake the words of christ to preserve the \religion he had started, and preached to gentiles as a move of desperation, last, this quote even admits that christians were themselves jews, as they were forbidden from speaking to gentiles by the jewish authority, which was the same rule that was applied to all jews, who were a famously insular people.

origen was not a biblical figure, he was a christian, living in a time where most christians were biblically illiterate, and who acted more on the christian community and it's interests, rater than anything to do with the bible or the figures therein.

Like most christians throughout history, Jerome also had no clue about their holy book or it's contents, even as scholars, they were instructed to pay attention to what was useful, rather than what was biblical, saints are not martyrs for biblical christianity, they are martyrs for the christian religion.

Christ in Luke 19:27 was badass, I wish all the jesus's in the bible were like tis version of him, props to whoever came up with the lines of this jesus.

Christians hating jews is an old pattern that has persisted through history, it needed not be biblically based, as it resulted from jewish practices that would upset any people, even the soviets, who had the full force of judaism upon them, eventually turned on their masters and started turning on the jews, and it was most conveniently at that time that the ussr started to collapse.

So you could make the case of communism being anti-jewish as well, the truth is that all civilizations eventually realize they cant just ignore the harm the jewish parasite is doing to them, and has to turn against them.

Hitler was publically christian, but was he one privately? he was a politician, who needs to get the people behind him in order to accomplish anything, in a largely christian germany where his supporters were strongly religious, he would have to play the crowd in this way to gain any chance at seizing power.

Think about how most of the ZOGpuppets throughout history have been publicly christian, even the likes of george bush and barrack obama were heavy on the jesus, do you think either of them were honest about having faith? I don't. I think they were pretending to be believers at a time when voter demographics meant that demagoguery required pretending to love christ as their lord and savior. Politicians are actors, they play a role, and read a script.

Your image and message do not line up, there only two quotes from the bible in it, both are mistranslated, one quite clearly, the other, only probably, but both are also awesome sounding.

 No.2261

File: 1633570661012-0.jpg (1.8 MB, 3840x2160, 16:9, 1955602-Karl-Marx-Quote-Ma….jpg) ImgOps Exif iqdb

File: 1633570661012-1.jpg (192.46 KB, 988x720, 247:180, 12068994_835356646562610_4….jpg) ImgOps Exif iqdb

File: 1633570661012-2.jpg (68.39 KB, 640x640, 1:1, christian-communist-not-su….jpg) ImgOps Exif iqdb

File: 1633570661012-3.png (481.52 KB, 827x1024, 827:1024, jesus_socialist.png) ImgOps iqdb

File: 1633570661012-4.jpg (134.7 KB, 774x1032, 3:4, socialist_jesus_by_frankok….jpg) ImgOps Exif iqdb

Christianity is divorced from politics, but, like Islam, it makes political statements and advisements, which are given by the religion's founders in the form of demands.

The issue is that, unlike Islam, the political message of Christianity is not practical for running a functional society, so the solution was to divorce the recommendations of Christ from the Christian religion.

This was easy in times when the average Christian was biblically ignorant, having never read the Holy Bible and just received the carefully curated readings from priests who would then fill sermons with lots of their own opinions and instructions on how exactly to interpret the words of the Good Book.

But the truth of the matter is this, every book in the Bible was a compilation of the most popular stories and quotes from the largest of the many sects of Christians, most of whom have differed wildly from one another on topics that most Christians denominations that exist today would agree on, just to give you an impression of how divergent these different groups were in their beliefs and practices.

The content of the Bible was compiled not with consistency or truthfulness in mind, but purely out of political considerations, they wanted to unite the most powerful groups of Christians together and create the universal church of Christ, which would never come apart, the catholic church.

Most did not expect the people who would follow their religion to ever have access to the book, let alone be able to read it, it was always intended to be in the hands of people who would use their wisdom to select whatever was useful from the pages, then embellish it with their own ability to move crowds in a politically useful direction, thus it was of no concern that Jesus seemed to be advocating for things which lead nations to destruction.

It was only when the masses became literate and had access to the book that religious leaders within Christianity panicked, they thought that reading the thing themselves would result in either the destruction of Christian faith or Christian nations, because they knew some stuff in there might catch on.

They later found that people see what they want to see, social engineering was a formidable force, and people are typically intelligent enough to reinterpret bad advice from a person they respect as being good advice that's misinterpreted.

The fact is that Christianity is not shaped by the Holy Bible, the many different versions of Jesus Christ, and the words he may or may not have said according to the book. Christianity is the product of Christians, the believers, with a larger effect of their fellows on each other then anything the religion is supposedly based on, Christianity is the community, and the memes that are generally held by members of that community, not the props, that's why extra-biblical stuff is treated as if it was canon by Christians, biblical stuff comes as a surprise to them, and there's many denominations of how to be Christian than just the one, even though they all supposedly come from one common source.

However, one can say that there's a lot of quotes from Jesus that supports things like globalism, redistribution, pacifism, etc. But one can also say that there's quotes that go against it as well, given that there are many different conflicting versions of the son of god and savior of man in a single book, let alone the whole of the new testament.

Two people could each say Jesus supported one or the other of two different conflicting ideologies according to the Bible and both could be right. Jesus is inconsistent.

Communism is Christianity without the supernatural aspect to it, as an ideology, communism is very materialistic and hostile to Christianity based on this one difference, however, the commonalities on other positions between some of the words of Christ and the words of Marx are too uncanny to be ignored, it may be that Marx thought Jesus was correct on a lot of things regarding politics and economics, but that he was wrong on spiritual grounds, this would explain his degree of hostility towards Christianity, just as it would for the Jacobins, who came before Marx and espoused the same communistic ideas.

If you want to go earlier, there's the book "utopia", which predates Marx and the Jacobins, it illustrated a communist society in terms of politics and economics, but this was not communist in that it was a very heavily Christian society being described.

The idea of various communist policies is not alien to Christians, there's the story of "New Harmony" in early American Idaho, and the Hutterites, whose ideas come very close to the "Christian Communism" societies of the past.

Selective quotations from the Bible aren't very reliable for arguing any position because the Bible takes stances that contradict itself, and the quotes are usually divorced from their context, and the bible is typically a translation of a translation of a translation, with each step introducing editorial meddling due to some political or religious agenda or another.

Just take out the secularism from communism, or the religion from the words of christ, and you will find a lot of parallels in the recommendations of policy, you will also find conflicts, because Jesus disagrees with other versions of himself in the bible quite a bit.

 No.2262

>>2261
But some versions of him in the bible would say a lot of the things that a socialist or communist would say.

I think the attempts by christians in the past to implement the policies of marx (before marx had existed), with the obvious exception of the violent imposition of state atheism, speaks to the failures of marxist ideologies not being due to godlessness or jewishness, these policies are impractical and divorced from reality, they fail on paper and in practice, and not due to human nature, rather, due to the fact that they are poorly thought out, based on the assumptive belief in falsehoods, and do not work because no thought is given to how they could work.

 No.2263

>>2261
>faggot pushing and derailing with Satanism is also a leftypol commie tranny
Wow real shocker there Jesus fucking Christ

 No.2265

>>2263
What? how did you get that from my post history? whose posts have you been reading?

I obviously don't like communism or satanism.

I called LeVay a poser who has no clue about anything relating to the philosophers he namedrops and I called his followers losers.

I also clearly have no love for communism in tat I described the system as not working, being divorced from reality, impractical, with no thought to how it would work, etc.

Tranny? where did you get that from? I never said anything that would indicate that I was that kind of mentally ill.

I was never abused, and I'm not feminine in the slightest.

I'm simply calling things as they are, that's all, as for why, it's because I think that good opinion and good action can only be arrived at on a foundation of truth and knowledge, not on a foundation of falsehoods and misconceptions. Garbage in, Garbage out.

 No.2266

>>1851
The antichrist is anyone who isn't a Christian.
It's not a single person or creature, it's multitudes.
All the other villains of the revelations are different people and creatures from the antichrists.

 No.2268

>>2266
In the bible it speaks of multitudes of Anti-christ as anyone who denies Christ and also a specific anti-christ who is given power over the world in revelation.

 No.2269

>>2268
Yes, and who is this? It is the beast, correct?
The one who rules over the people of the world who have taken his mark.

 No.2270

>>2269
>Revelation 13:5 The beast was given a mouth to speak arrogant and blasphemous words, and authority to act for 42 months. 6And the beast opened its mouth to speak blasphemies against God and to slander His name and His tabernacle-those who dwell in heaven.

>7Then the beast was permitted to wage war against the saints and to conquer them, and it was given authority over every tribe and people and tongue and nation. 8And all who dwell on the earth will worship the beast-all whose names have not been written from the foundation of the world in the Book of Life belonging to the Lamb who was slain.a

Yes, the beast.

 No.2271

>>2265
>reddit spacing essays
Just fucking leave, you're so inauthentic it's painful.

 No.2272

File: 1633585436836.jpg (87.04 KB, 750x745, 150:149, reddit spacing existed bef….jpg) ImgOps Exif iqdb


 No.2274

>>2272
>cope image
Its not just your spacing that earmarks you as an interloper, you faggot.

 No.2275

>>2261
John 18:36

 No.2276

>>2241
>From what little i've read about magic, there is a "magical" and then a psychological aspect to magic. You don't need to believe in real spirits to make Thoughtforms.
I think that's just from materialists who don't want to admit the two are tied together.
>Astrology, alchemy, natural magic, the New Age, the hermetic order of the Golden Dawn, and especially theosophy, are not satanic?
No, but satanism can make use of the different occult areas of study.
>Isn't Krishna a god, that would imply that it's worshiped?
Yes, but there are Hindus who don't believe that the gods are actual beings. They seem them as symbolic of different aspects of one god or don't even believe in any gods whatsoever. You could say they worship the gods in kind of a similar way to how Shintoists in Japan or Sea of Faith types in the West worship. I think that's more of a phenomenon among more affluent Hindus than the poorer or more rural ones though.
>I guess based on anecdotes of people who have opened their third eye and exposed themselves to the source/universe/satan and felt it's distinct coldness. Others were able to find God and felt the opposite.
I think that's "the Void" that you're talking about. It seems to be a reflective state than anything. I'm skeptical of a lot of the stuff on this site (and put more stock into experienced out-of-body travelers' accounts than what people with NDEs have to say), but this link goes into more detail:
https://near-death.com/void/

The closer a plane is to the Absolute, the more blissful it's said to be.
>The pagan side of Christianity is only in the roman catholic church. The bible warns against paganism, and doesn't ask you to worship nature, or symbols, in fact it warns against that.
But Christianity grew out of the religion of the ancient Hebrews, which grew out of Middle-Eastern pagan traditions. Zoroastrianism could have been an influence too, but I'm not as certain about that as a lot of people seem to be.
>Many of them are freemasons which is secretly satanism
I doubt that.
>There is a rumor that LaVey was a freemason since he is doing a freemason sign in pic related, but it's hard to prove. Friedrich Nietzsche is clearly a freemason. This is why Satanism is such a broad category for me, there is so much diversity in it. You could say Neitzsche is just an atheist, but hes also following lucifer.
I can't find any evidence of LaVey being involved with the Freemasons, although I wouldn't put it past him to have studied them to confuse people and play off their mystique. Just look at how often he lied about his background to build up his image. The gesture he's doing in the photo is also different from the one in the illustration, since he's doing it with a closed hand.

The hand-in-jacket pose wasn't exclusive to Freemasonry. It was par for the course for portraits back then. From what I've read, the ancient Greeks sometimes considered it impolite to speak with your hands outside your clothing. This practice fell out of fashion but was revived in the 18th century by artists and intellectuals looking to the Greco-Roman world for inspiration and mostly became unfashionable again by the end of the 19th. There is a picture of Stalin posing that way though.
>both angelic and hellish beings are both on the same dangerous side.
In what sense? People who have been on the higher realms report encountering unconditionally loving beings and often end up changing their lives for the better after their experiences.

What evidence is there that the beings of the higher planes are evil when those who encounter them have nothing but positive things to say about them?
>>2250
Nietzsche definitely wouldn't have approved of the way followers of the Church of Satan slavishly adhere to the value system of Anton LaVey. So much for marching to the beat of your own drum.
>>2261
>The idea of various communist policies is not alien to Christians, there's the story of "New Harmony" in early American Idaho, and the Hutterites, whose ideas come very close to the "Christian Communism" societies of the past.
There was also John Humphrey Noyes and the Oneida Community. They were interesting in that their ideology of "Bible Communism" promoted forms of polyamory and child rearing that emphasized emotional detachment to an extreme degree and also promoted an incest-based form of faux eugenics they called "stirpiculture." Charles Guiteau was also an unpopular member of the commune prior to shooting James A. Garfield.

That just goes to show how flexible interpretations of the Bible can get.

 No.2277

>>2272
You don't have to respond to him you know, nobody else would, just carry on. If your posts are worth a shot someone will talk to you regardless of some autist having a meltdown over double spaces.

 No.2278

File: 1633646067623.jpg (105.19 KB, 539x524, 539:524, shaq.jpg) ImgOps Exif iqdb

>>2276
>No
In The Secret Doctrine Madame Blavasky says "It is Satan who is the God of our planet and the only God." Even by your standards theosophy is satanism.
>But Christianity grew out of the religion of the ancient Hebrews, which grew out of Middle-Eastern pagan traditions.
Yes, but it went against it, like moloch worship and child sacrifice as well as paganism.
>I doubt that.
Why do you doubt that? Some of them are openly freemasons (wearing masonic rings) while some only show themselves through masonic symbols which is rough evidence.
>This practice fell out of fashion but was revived in the 18th century by artists and intellectuals looking to the Greco-Roman world for inspiration and mostly became unfashionable again by the end of the 19th.
secret societies could have started the trend in the 1700s which was when they were popularized.
>In what sense? People who have been on the higher realms report encountering unconditionally loving beings and often end up changing their lives for the better after their experiences.
There was an experience where this New Ager tried to talk to angelic beings about Jesus Christ and it upset them, and they started attacking him. He had to have an deliverance performed on him. Inviting demons into your body is a dangerous practice, even if they disguise as angels or family member.

I gatta ask since you didn't answer my question, why are you against the concept of atheistic satanism? often times it's theistic satanists that have a problem with it? Just out of my curiosity.

 No.2279

>>2277
I'm not >>2265 , but i appreciate the thought.

 No.2443

File: 1634347950177.jpg (61.1 KB, 945x517, 945:517, derek prince.jpg) ImgOps Exif iqdb

The Enemies We Face by Derek Prince, is an explanation of the satanic spiritual power structure, which eventually goes into the antichrist.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3q3GgIIONs Part 1 The Structure of Satan's Kingdom
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cd6AvqELGLk Part 2 The Nature of Witchcraft
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3c7WuI9pGg Part 3 The Spirit of Antichrist
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8vnMDtQvjk Part 4 The Church's Victory

 No.2454

>>2278
>In The Secret Doctrine Madame Blavasky says "It is Satan who is the God of our planet and the only God." Even by your standards theosophy is satanism.
Here's what she actually wrote:
>It is "Satan who is the god of our planet and the only god," and this without any allusive metaphor to its wickedness and depravity. For he is one with the Logos, "the first son, eldest of the gods," in the order of microcosmic (divine) evolution; Saturn (Satan), astronomically, "is the seventh and last in the order of macrocosmic emanation, being the circumference of the kingdom of which Phoebus (the light of wisdom, also the Sun) is the centre." The Gnostics were right, then, in calling the Jewish god "an angel of matter," or he who breathed (conscious) life into Adam, and he whose planet was Saturn
She seems to be equating Saturn with Satan and Jehovah as a satanic demiurge figure.
https://blavatskytheosophy.com/satan-is-the-only-god-did-blavatsky-really-say-that/

You can confirm the quote here:
https://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/sd-pdf/SecretDoctrineVol2_eBook.pdf
>Yes, but it went against it, like moloch worship and child sacrifice as well as paganism.
It was a gradual transition from polytheism to henotheism to monotheism. That doesn't fit into the idea of the Bible as revealed truth if it happened in a way indistinguishable to the development of any other religion.
>Why do you doubt that? Some of them are openly freemasons (wearing masonic rings) while some only show themselves through masonic symbols which is rough evidence.
I doubt Freemasons have anything to do with satanism. Luciferianism wouldn't surprise me though.
>secret societies could have started the trend in the 1700s which was when they were popularized.
The simplest explanation is that it was just more of the ancient LARPing that was en vogue since the Renaissance. Maybe you could even trace that kind of thing back to the "we was Romans" posturing that Charlemagne started.
>There was an experience where this New Ager tried to talk to angelic beings about Jesus Christ and it upset them, and they started attacking him.
I've heard the same story repeated, but it was about aliens instead. I don't know the source. I wouldn't take one story as gospel, especially considering that experiences on other planes are projections of our mental state and sometimes are closer to dreams than representative of any larger consensus reality (i.e., somewhere populated and created by other beings we can interact with). The out-of-body traveler Jurgen Ziewe described encountering someone he thought was his wife, for example, and it took him a little bit to realize it wasn't actually her spirit but a highly accurate copy that was easily confused for the real thing at first glance. His take is that dreams are a related phenomenon to astral projections, albeit a hazy one for most people.

The overall pattern from accounts like these suggests that beings on the more "heavenly" planes are truly benevolent in character in comparison to the lower ones. That doesn't mean that all beings on other planes are trustworthy or anything. That's one of the reasons I'm skeptical of people who claim to engage in channeling.
>I gatta ask since you didn't answer my question, why are you against the concept of atheistic satanism? often times it's theistic satanists that have a problem with it? Just out of my curiosity.
My problem is that that LaVey was a huckster trying to capitalize on the notoriety of satanism, and his followers are NPCs who think they're independent thinkers. They're apparently so independent that they outsource all their thinking to other people. I also don't like LaVeyans' materialistic focus, nor do I agree with more spiritually focused groups who either worship the devil or otherwise cling to Abrahamic conceptions of the universe while pretending to oppose them.

 No.2460

>>2454
Blavatskytheosphy.com is just wrong on a lot of things, even though the Author and you are right about "it is Satan who is the God of our planet and the only God" being just a quote and not a statement. However it's very easily to prove That Blavatsky is worshiping Satan, as well as believing in Satanic concepts like human godhood, and inverting Christianity, which shouldn't be a surprise to anyone who has come across her books.
http://www.mgr.org/FalseDawn-CH10.html
>In Volume II (of the Secret Doctrine) , Anthropogenesis, Blavatsky continued to exalt the Devil. She said: "Satan will now be shown, in the teaching of the Secret Doctrine, allegorized as Good, and Sacrifice, a God of Wisdom, under different names."[15] Blavatsky added, "In this case it is but natural - even from the dead letter standpoint - to view Satan, the Serpent of Genesis, as the real creator and benefactor, the Father of Spiritual mankind. For it is he who was the 'Harbinger of Light,' bright radiant Lucifer, who opened the eyes of the automaton created by Jehovah, as alleged; and he who was the first to whisper: 'in the day ye eat thereof ye shall be as Elohim, knowing good and evil' - can only be regarded in the light of a Saviour. An 'adversary' to Jehovah the 'personating spirit,' he still remains in esoteric truth the ever-loving 'Messenger' (the angel), the Seraphim and Cherubim who both knew well, and loved still more, and who conferred on us spiritual, instead of physical immortality - the latter a kind of static immortality that would have transformed man into an undying 'Wandering Jew.'"[16]
>for the context plainly shows these statements must be understood in reference to the king of the Babylonians."
In the bible there are mentions of Spiritual entities speaking through people, such as Luke 22:43 "And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him." So when a king is talking about being the most high it's possible that Satan could be influencing him and speaking through him.
>The word "Lucifer" occurs only once in the entire Bible.
That's technically true, but 2 Corinthians 11:14 "And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light." It's kind of surprising that the author missed that.

The Secret doctrine also contradicts the blog saying that Lucifer isn't satan by saying "Their prince is called in the Kabala Samael, the Angel of Death, who is also the seducing serpent Satan ; but that Satan is also Lucifer, the bright angel of Light, the Light and Life-bringer, the " Soul " alienated from the Holy Ones, the other angels, and for a period, anticipating the time when they would have descended on Earth to incarnate in their turn.".
>It was a gradual transition from polytheism to henotheism to monotheism.
The Bible has mostly stayed the same, acknowledging the other gods but warning against worshiping them, even in the OT.
>That doesn't fit into the idea of the Bible as revealed truth if it happened in a way indistinguishable to the development of any other religion.
How would you consider it the same as other Religions?
>I wouldn't take one story as gospel
True, but i would test all spirits.
>I doubt Freemasons have anything to do with satanism. Luciferianism wouldn't surprise me though.
Listen to Ex-Mansons, they'll explain it better than i would, https://www.bitchute.com/video/uNpvPBYLagSN/ It's a long video, but if you're bored and want to listen to someone.

 No.2539

>>2460
>Blavatskytheosphy.com is just wrong on a lot of things, even though the Author and you are right about "it is Satan who is the God of our planet and the only God" being just a quote and not a statement. However it's very easily to prove That Blavatsky is worshiping Satan, as well as believing in Satanic concepts like human godhood, and inverting Christianity, which shouldn't be a surprise to anyone who has come across her books.
Blavatsky didn't even believe in Satan. From Volume 1 of Isis Unveiled, Page 472:
>[T]he existence of the devil is a fiction, which no theology is able to demonstrate.
She was a monist who believed that what you could call God and Satan were intertwined, and she was deliberately provocative. She used Satan as a synonym for Lucifer and celebrated John Milton's Satan as a symbol of "free-will and independent thought," but he was far from a central figure to her. Here's are a couple quotes from a debate in Lucifer magazine in December 1888, around the same time as The Secret Doctrine:
>Our magazine is essentially controversial, and was founded for the purpose of throwing light upon "the hidden things of darkness"-of religious superstition pre-eminently. And what superstition can be compared to that which accepts a "personal" God, or a "personal" devil?
>Why then should Mr. Headley address his opponent, while saying: "it is not true, as Mr. May asserts, that good and evil, or Jesus and the Devil, are one and the same," instead of taking to task for it Lactantius, the Church father, who was the first to say so more than a millennium ago, by stating that the Logos or Christ was "the first-born brother of Satan"? Or why again, should not our reverend friend explain to us the real meaning of that verse in Revelation (xxii, 16) which makes Jesus say: "I Jesus… am… the bright and morning Star," i.e., Phosphoros and Lucifer respectively in the Greek and Latin texts…
You can find these two quotes here:
https://www.theosophy.world/sites/default/files/ebooks/Collected_Writings_Volume_X_(1888-1889).pdf

I recently read Gary Lachman's Blavatsky biography to get a better understanding of her, and the author mentioned how impenetrable The Secret Doctrine actually is to understand and questioned whether she literally believed all of it (like all the gobbledygook about Atlantis and Lemuria and root races). Blavatsky seemed to like messing with people. She apparently told a credulous visitor who was annoying her that the Earth was shaped like a giant dumbbell. For whatever it's worth, readers were apparently told not to read The Secret Doctrine cover to cover as a means of trying to understand it. I can't say I'm sure exactly what she believed, but I found this footnote quote from page 442 of Volume 1 of The Secret Doctrine that hints that it's not necessarily all of Christianity she despised:
>On the other hand the Serpent, brought as an exemplar of wisdom to follow, is now regarded as the symbol of the Devil. The esoteric pearl of Christ's religion degraded into Christian theology, may indeed be said to have chosen a strange and unfitting shell to be born in and evolved from.
That's really not that surprising considering that the Western esoteric tradition that inspired Blavatsky since she was a young girl going through her grandfather's occult library often drew from Christianity. The Rosicrucians are one example of that. Blavatsky considered herself a Buddhist (although she clearly wasn't a conventional one), but she also swallowed a heaping helping of Western occultism as far as formative influences go.

Thumbing your nose at (exoteric) Christianity and advocating pantheism also aren't exclusive to satanism. Not only did Blavatsky coin the Left-Hand/Right-Hand Path dichotomy, but she was said to be a celibate teetotaler (who smoked like a chimney and had an unhealthy diet) who criticized followers of the Left-Hand Path as black magicians and threats to society. That more or less puts her at odds with the majority of satanists. And if that wasn't enough, Blavatsky also detested ritual and ceremonial magic. That means grimoires and all the goetia business is out the window.
>In the bible there are mentions of Spiritual entities speaking through people, such as Luke 22:43 "And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him." So when a king is talking about being the most high it's possible that Satan could be influencing him and speaking through him.
The context was the author of Isaiah taunting the king in Isaiah 14:12 with the word that used to be translated as "Lucifer." Nowadays they use phrases like "morning star" or "shining one."
>The Bible has mostly stayed the same, acknowledging the other gods but warning against worshiping them, even in the OT.
>How would you consider it the same as other Religions?
It's just a blending and evolution of things that came before it. It grew out of Canaanite and Babylonian polytheism before becoming monolatrous and finally denying the existence of other deities altogether (or accusing them of being demons masquerading as gods). The god of the Hebrews was the result of combining the Elohist and Yahwist traditions. Then after the Persian influence during the Exile, it ended up getting infused with Zoroastrian traits. Apocalypticism is one of them. The Christian beliefs in heaven and hell were influenced by the Greek pagan ideas of the Elysian Fields and Tartarus. The ancient Hebrews just had Sheol prior to the Second Temple period (at which point competing ideas were floating around, including the Sadducees' lack of belief in an afterlife and the Pharisees' supposed idea of a future resurrection of the dead), and even that is thought by many to just refer to the grave. Later on, people like St. Augustine ended up taking a good dose of Neoplatonist philosophy and incorporating it into Christianity.

It all looks exactly like the development of a man-made belief system that evolved over many centuries and not divine truth handed down from on high.
>True, but i would test all spirits.
I've heard of other people reacting the same way to hostile "aliens," and it didn't seem to bother them. But that was a second-hand story, and I don't know the source.
>Listen to Ex-Mansons, they'll explain it better than i would, https://www.bitchute.com/video/uNpvPBYLagSN/ It's a long video, but if you're bored and want to listen to someone.
I'd like a better source than a d-list entertainer with a history of being considered a complete weirdo. Skipping around, the "evidence" seems to be the typical apophenic "redpills" revolving around drawing questionable connections based on people making theatrical (or even mundane) gestures or common visual motifs (pyramids, lightning bolts, and even eyes). He even used the classic "hidden 666 that nobody in their right mind would recognize unless they're actively looking for it" meme from what I saw.

I'm not necessarily opposed to the idea of Freemasons having some kind of secret (and possibly nefarious) agenda, but I haven't seen much in the way of credible evidence that they're up to anything these days other than being a place for the potentially rich and powerful to meet up. They did seem to be a modernizing force during the Age of Enlightenment, but then again I don't know whether it was conspiracy or just an expected part of 18th century intellectual life to sympathize with ideas like classical liberalism and rationalism. There are also different lodges to account for. I've read that some traditions attracted more conservative members than others.

 No.2542

File: 1635871785513.webm (14.26 MB, 480x360, 4:3, The Epic of Gilgamesh Flo….webm) ImgOps iqdb

>>2539
She clearly believed in Lucifer. Or do you believe that Lucifer isn't related to Satan?
>footnote quote from page 442 of Volume 1 of The Secret Doctrine that hints that it's not necessarily all of Christianity she despised:
either way her lucifer promotion was heavily influential on the new world order and theosophy. Here is a good documentary on theosophy, Helena Blavastsky, and the New world order https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LEM4ZY0wfw It provides a lot of documentation.

>Thumbing your nose at (exoteric) Christianity and advocating pantheism also aren't exclusive to satanism.

You're right but it still helps satanism. Zachary King who was an ex-high priest of organized Satanism says that "Satanic cults" infiltrate and promote groups that aren't exactly devil worship (like atheism) against Christianity because ultimately they still help their cause.
>That more or less puts her at odds with the majority of satanists.
Sure, power struggles exist, but they're still on on the same side. Just because one group/person is against certain kinds of magick, but promotes the New world order and Lucifer doesn't mean shes/they're against satanism as a whole. The ancient mystery religions are the precursor to modern satanic belief systems.
>It grew out of Canaanite and Babylonian polytheism before becoming monolatrous and finally denying the existence of other deities altogether (or accusing them of being demons masquerading as gods).
There are times where the Bible uses the word "god" to refer to something that isn't a god, but what is something that is worshiped or has major influence. For example 2 Corinthians 4:4 "In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them." or Psalm 82:6 "I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.". Also the Old Testament and the New Testament build off each other.
>It all looks exactly like the development of a man-made belief system that evolved over many centuries and not divine truth handed down from on high.
You can find similarities in the bible to old pagan religions like the global flood, but that doesn't mean they were copied or influenced, the bible could have had it's own account of the events. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mp3HpDOOWS8 https://yewtu.be/watch?v=mp3HpDOOWS8 Most scholars don't believe that Genesis was taken from pagan legends. The Old Testament Jews were simply wicked people who disobeyed God and worshiped pagan gods.

>I'd like a better source than a d-list entertainer with a history of being considered a complete weirdo.

From Albert Pike in Morals and Dogma."That which we must say to a crowd is-We worship a God, but it is the God that one adores without superstition. To you, Sovereign Grand Inspectors General, we say this, that you may repeat it to the Brethren of the 32nd, 31st, and 30th degrees-The Masonic Religion should be, by all of us initates of the high degrees, maintained in the purity of the Luciferian Doctrine. If Lucifer were not God, would Adonay whose deeds prove his cruelty, perdify and hatred of man, barbarism and repulsion for science, would Adonay and his priests, calumniate him? Yes, Lucifer is God, and unfortunately Adonay is also god. For the eternal law is that there is no light without shade, no beauty without ugliness, no white without black, for the absolute can only exist as two gods: darkness being necessary to the statue, and the brake to the locomotive. Thus, the doctrine of Satanism is a heresy; and the true and pure philosophical religion is the belief in Lucifer, the equal of Adonay; but Lucifer, God of Light and God of Good, is struggling for humanity against Adonay, the God of Darkness and Evil.vii"

"The true name of Satan, the Kabalists say, is Yahweh (GOD) reversed; for Satan is not a black god, but a negation of God…the Kabala imagined Him to be a "most occult light."vi" There is also Jim Shaw's book "A deadly deception" about when he was a 33 degree freemason.
>but I haven't seen much in the way of credible evidence that they're up to anything these days other than being a place for the potentially rich and powerful to meet up.
That's is just at the lowest levels, as they go up in degree they do more spiritually damning practices like cursing their future family, controlling spirits (through Corn, wine, and oil) and lucifer worship.

 No.2560

>>2542
>She clearly believed in Lucifer. Or do you believe that Lucifer isn't related to Satan?
The concept of Lucifer predates the conflation of Lucifer with Satan. See Phosphorus/Hesophorus. While the writer of Isaiah didn't intend for the "Lucifer" remark to refer to a rebellious angel who would become Satan, that's what it eventually started becoming used for. Blavatsky was using "Satan" in a symbolic sense, similar to how she used the term "Christ." She didn't believe in worshiping any literal higher beings period.
>either way her lucifer promotion was heavily influential on the new world order and theosophy. Here is a good documentary on theosophy, Helena Blavastsky, and the New world order https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LEM4ZY0wfw It provides a lot of documentation.
Writing this a few minutes in, and it already looks sketchy. So far the narrator has mentioned supposed anti-Christian conspiracies and tried to paint monism, astrology, esotericism, and even meditation as evil. Most of those go all the way back to Hermeticism, and Christian mystics often drew freely from Hermeticism and its associated beliefs and practices. Isaac Newton was a famously devout Christian, and yet he was interested in alchemy and was strongly influenced by the Rosicrucians. There were many Christian mystics who historically engaged in a form of meditation, albeit different from the more Eastern style. But there is the hesychasm tradition within the Eastern Orthodox Church, which even used special breathing techniques, similar to the oriental religions.

The narrator mentioned that Blavatsky was said to have The Secret Doctrine channeled to her by an "ascended master." He's talking out his ass. Blavatsky never used that term. She would mention "masters" who she was supposedly in communication with, but to her they were just spiritually advanced bodhisattvas who incarnated as humans on Earth to help the rest of us while maintaining a low profile. They weren't incorporeal beings "out there" who are open to channeling by anyone who knows what they're doing. Blavatsky detested practices associated with Spiritualism like channeling and thought the mediums who claimed to contact the dead were being duped by impostor spirits or their own imaginations. Later on it led to the "Maitreya" and ascended master teachings that fundamentalists sometimes speculate will be connected to the Antichrist.

The ascended master teachings came from Neo-Theosophists like Alice Bailey and not Blavatasky. Neo-Theosophists ended up taking over the organizations, but they weren't orthodox Theosophists. They parted ways with Blavatsky on a number of issues. They personified God and venerated "Master Jesus" in a way Blavatsky didn't. It was Annie Besant and C.W. Leadbeater who first used the term "New Age" that Bailey would popularize. Blavatsky had this to say about the upcoming age in her article Our Cycle and the Next:
>But what has the new cycle in store for humanity? Will it be merely a continuation of the present, only in darker and more terrible colours? Or shall a new day dawn for mankind, a day of pure sunlight, of truth, of charity, of true happiness for all? The answer depends mainly on the few Theosophists who, true to their colours through good repute and ill, still fight the battle of Truth against the powers of Darkness.
It then concludes with this:
>But if not, then the storm will burst, and our boasted western civilization and enlightenment will sink in such a sea of horror that its parallel History has never yet recorded.
For her, the fortune of humanity during the upcoming cycle would rest on the work of Theosophists and was far from guaranteed. Unfortunately for her, her followers ignored her teachings and went in a totally different path.

I gave up around 10 minutes in. The narrator just repeats hearsay from fundamentalist headcases as fact without actually examining their claims. It was funny to see him start making accusations against the Zeitgeist kooks though.

>You're right but it still helps satanism. Zachary King who was an ex-high priest of organized Satanism says that "Satanic cults" infiltrate and promote groups that aren't exactly devil worship (like atheism) against Christianity because ultimately they still help their cause.

I don't buy this guy's story at all. He says he was introduced to magick at age 12 by playing as a wizard in Dungeons & Dragons and wondering if you could do magic in real life. He supposedly performed a spell in front of a demon in the mirror and got $1,000 the next day. Then he says he was introduced to a Satanic Dungeons & Dragons group that had video games, pinball machines, a barbecue pit, an in-ground swimming pool, and an extensive collection of science fiction movies (which must have been hard to get back in the '70s). He claims he moved on to the "World Church of Satan," an organization I'm not getting any relevant search results for that aren't related to him but is supposedly a globe-spanning organization. The cult supposedly had a CEO and board of directors, and he said he was personally chosen by Satan himself to become a "High Wizard." He says he was performing Satanic rituals in abortion clinics and claimed to have performed well over a hundred abortions (which he apparently had been doing since he was a teenager) and was sought out by politicians, celebrities, and the rich to perform spells. He even claims he was in Munich with Bill Gates and the Bilderberg Group and watched him introduce everyone in the room to adrenochrome.

His stories read like they're taken straight out of Chick tracts and don't seem to have anything to back them up.
>Sure, power struggles exist, but they're still on on the same side. Just because one group/person is against certain kinds of magick, but promotes the New world order and Lucifer doesn't mean shes/they're against satanism as a whole.
Where did Blavatsky promote the New World Order?
>The ancient mystery religions are the precursor to modern satanic belief systems.
By that logic, Christianity has to be thrown out because it can ultimately be traced back to ancient Levantine paganism.

There were also a few people in the Roman world who regarded Christianity as a mystery religion in the early days.

 No.2562

File: 1636869647482.png (65.01 KB, 508x385, 508:385, The Babylonian Genesis - T….png) ImgOps iqdb

>>2560
>You can find similarities in the bible to old pagan religions like the global flood, but that doesn't mean they were copied or influenced, the bible could have had it's own account of the events. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mp3HpDOOWS8 https://yewtu.be/watch?v=mp3HpDOOWS8 Most scholars don't believe that Genesis was taken from pagan legends. The Old Testament Jews were simply wicked people who disobeyed God and worshiped pagan gods.
There are similarities other than having similar flood myths. Pic related shows the similarities between the Babylonian creation myth and the Hebrews'. The story of Enkidu and Shamhat in The Epic of Gilgamesh also bears some resemblance to the story of Adam and Eve. It's also interesting to note that the Garden of Eden is mentioned in association with what are though to be the Tigris and Euphrates, and even Abraham supposedly came from Ur.

Archaeological evidence has shown that Babylonian stories reached Palestine, Egypt, and even Anatolia even before the Hebrew exposure to Babylonian culture during the Exile. It's pretty reasonable to assume that at least some in Hebrew society would have been familiar with these stories before that. There seem to be too many similarities to be coincidental (refer to this for a comparison of the flood stories: https://isthatinthebible.wordpress.com/2021/04/07/noahs-flood-competing-visions-of-a-mesopotamian-tradition/), and the copies of the Hebrew versions that have been found to post-date the others. That means that the influence was almost certainly not the other way around.

Yahweh seems to have originated from a pantheon that could have included El, Baal, and Asherah (who was possibly his consort). There are Old Testament passages that point to a conception of a god with remnant traits of a typical pagan god rather than the more abstract one that would catch on later. There are some notable examples in Genesis. God is said to physically walk around in the Garden of Eden in the second creation account. He asks Adam where he went when Adam and Eve hid, as if he genuinely didn't know. You see something similar happens when Cain kills Abel and God asks where Abel went. In the Tower of Babel story, God is said to have physically "[come] down to see the city and the tower" (per the KJV). There's also Judges 1:19, the infamous verse about the men of Judah being unable to defeat their enemies' iron chariots despite having God backing them up. Yahweh wasn't originally a universal, all-powerful god judging from the evidence. He began as a pagan deity, and the heathen traditions that are criticized in the Old Testament are vestiges of his origins.

From The Bible Unearthed:
>The existence of high places and other forms of ancestral and household god worship was not-as the books of Kings imply-apostasy from an earlier, purer faith. It was part of the timeless tradition of the hill country settlers of Judah, who worshiped YHWH along with a variety of gods and goddesses known or adapted from the cults of neighboring peoples. YHWH, in short, was worshiped in a wide variety of ways-and sometimes pictured as having a heavenly entourage. From the indirect (and pointedly negative) evidence of the books of Kings, we learn that priests in the countryside also regularly burned incense on the high places to the sun, the moon, and the stars.

The idea that the god of the Hebrews grew out of pagan traditions is hardly a controversial one.

 No.2563

>>2562
>From Albert Pike in Morals and Dogma."That which we must say to a crowd is-We worship a God, but it is the God that one adores without superstition. To you, Sovereign Grand Inspectors General, we say this, that you may repeat it to the Brethren of the 32nd, 31st, and 30th degrees-The Masonic Religion should be, by all of us initates of the high degrees, maintained in the purity of the Luciferian Doctrine. If Lucifer were not God, would Adonay whose deeds prove his cruelty, perdify and hatred of man, barbarism and repulsion for science, would Adonay and his priests, calumniate him? Yes, Lucifer is God, and unfortunately Adonay is also god. For the eternal law is that there is no light without shade, no beauty without ugliness, no white without black, for the absolute can only exist as two gods: darkness being necessary to the statue, and the brake to the locomotive. Thus, the doctrine of Satanism is a heresy; and the true and pure philosophical religion is the belief in Lucifer, the equal of Adonay; but Lucifer, God of Light and God of Good, is struggling for humanity against Adonay, the God of Darkness and Evil.vii"
I searched a PDF of Morals and Dogma, and that quote was nowhere to be found. That's not surprising considering that forged quote of his floating around that supposedly predicted the World Wars and used the term "fascists" and "Nazism" decades before the terms were even coined.

Even then, that quote is explicitly anti-Satanism.
>"The true name of Satan, the Kabalists say, is Yahweh (GOD) reversed; for Satan is not a black god, but a negation of God…the Kabala imagined Him to be a "most occult light."vi"
This is the full quote:
>The true name of Satan, the Kabalists say, is that of Yahveh reversed; for Satan is not a
black god, but the negation of God. The Devil is the personification of Atheism or Idolatry.
It then goes on:
>For the Initiates, this is not a Person, but a Force, created for good, but which may serve
for evil. It is the instrument of Liberty or Free Will. They represent this Force, which
presides over the physical generation, under the mythologic and horned form of the God
PAN; thence came the he-goat of the Sabbat, brother of the Ancient Serpent, and the Light-
bearer or Phosphor, of which the poets have made the false Lucifer of the legend.
Some more quotes:
>The belief in dualism in some shape, was universal. Those who held that everything
emanated from God, aspired to God, and re-entered into God, believed that, among those
emanations were two adverse Principles, of Light and Darkness, Good and Evil. This
prevailed in Central Asia and in Syria; while in Egypt it assumed the form of Greek
speculation. In the former, a second Intellectual Principle was admitted, active in its
Empire of Darkness, audacious against the Empire of Light. So the Persians and Sabeans
understood it. In Egypt, this second Principle was Matter, as the word was used by the
Platonic School, with its sad attributes, Vacuity, Darkness, and Death. In their theory,
matter could be animated only by the low communication of a principle of divine life. It
resists the influences that would spiritualize it. That resisting Power is Satan, the rebellious
Matter, Matter that does not partake of God.
>Hypocrisy is the homage that vice and wrong pay to virtue and justice. It is .Satan
attempting to clothe himself in the angelic vesture of light. It is equally detestable in
morals, politics, and religion; in the man and in the nation. To do injustice under the
pretence of equity and fairness; to reprove vice in public and commit it in private; to
pretend to charitable opinion and censoriously condemn; to profess the principles of
Masonic beneficence, and close the ear to the wail of distress and the cry of suffering; to
eulogize the intelligence of the people, and plot to deceive and be-tray them by means of
their ignorance and simplicity; to prate of purity, and peculate; of honor, and basely
abandon a sinking cause; of disinterestedness, and sell one's vote for place and power, are
hypocrisies as common as they are infamous and disgraceful. To steal the livery of the
Court of God to serve the Devil withal; to pretend to believe in a God of mercy and a
Redeemer of love, and persecute those of a different faith; to devour widows' houses, and
for a pretence make long prayers; to preach continence, and wallow in lust; to inculcate
humility, and in pride surpass Lucifer; to pay tithe, and omit the weightier matters of the
law, judgment, mercy and faith; to strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel; to make clean the
outside of the cup and platter, keeping them full within of extortion and excess; to appear
outwardly righteous unto men, but within be full of hypocrisy and iniquity, is indeed to be
like unto whited sepulchres, which appear beautiful outward, but are within full of bones
of the dead and of all uncleanness.
On the Masonic checkerboard symbolism:
>The pavement, alternately black and white, symbolizes, whether so intended or not, the
Good and Evil Principles of the Egyptian and Persian creed. It is the warfare of Michael
and Satan, of the Gods and Titans, of Balder and Lok; between light and shadow, which is
darkness; Day and Night; Freedom and Despotism; Religious Liberty and the Arbitrary
Dogmas of a Church that thinks for its votaries, and whose Pontiff claims to be infallible,
and the decretals of its Councils to constitute a gospel.
He seems to have been far from a Satanist.

>There is also Jim Shaw's book "A deadly deception" about when he was a 33 degree freemason.

He seems to be a fraud:
https://www.travelingtemplar.com/2019/08/anti-mason-jim-shaw.html
>That's is just at the lowest levels, as they go up in degree they do more spiritually damning practices like cursing their future family, controlling spirits (through Corn, wine, and oil) and lucifer worship.
Maybe, but I'd like to hear from people who made it all the way to the top. In any case, I've got a history of Freemasonry on my reading list to go through at some point.

 No.2564

>>2563
Sorry about the crappy formatting here.

 No.2575

>>2560
>The concept of Lucifer predates the conflation of Lucifer with Satan.
How so? Can you show me a belief system for lucifer that predates the Bible?
>While the writer of Isaiah didn't intend for the "Lucifer" remark to refer to a rebellious angel who would become Satan, that's what it eventually started becoming used for.
Yes Isaih isn't a good quote for the Bible showing Satan is lucifer, 2 Corinthians 11:14 is better, "And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light."

>So far the narrator has mentioned supposed anti-Christian conspiracies

There are many anti-christian conspiracies, like Christ myth theory or the pagan version of the Christ myth theory (which isn't supported by mainstream scholars), there was even a book called the Christ conspiracy. And the hoax that Christ was a copy of pagan gods in the zeitgeist and some comedian also said it on tv i forget who.
>and tried to paint monism, astrology, esotericism, and even meditation as evil.
a belief that God is oneness or the source, astrology, meditation (there are some anecdotes stating that it's used to open your mind to demons) and especially esotericism are not of the Christian God. There are some esoteric interpretations of the Bible where it's believed to invert Christ and God with a good lucifer and an evil God. Sure there have been Christian Heretics (like that cathars or the gnostics) in the past but that is not a part of Biblical Christianity. Just because Christians practice something doesn't make it compatible with the teachings of Christ. There are also Christian occultist who would use The Christian God to protect them from the magic they did.

>Blavatsky detested practices associated with Spiritualism like channeling and thought the mediums who claimed to contact the dead were being duped by impostor spirits or their own imaginations.

So i guess that term Ascended Masters was applied after Blavastsky talked about the "Masters of the Ancient Wisdom". According to Madame Blavatsky: The Mother of Modern Spirituality. New York: Jeremy P. Tarcher/Penguin She also claimed that while in Tibet, Morya and Koot Hoomi helped her develop and control her psychic powers. Among the abilities that she ascribed to these "Masters" were clairvoyance, clairaudience, telepathy, and the ability to control another's consciousness, to dematerialize and rematerialize physical objects, and to project their astral bodies, thus giving the appearance of being in two places at once. According to The Theosophical Enlightenment-State University of New York Press (1994) - Joscelyn Godwin "Spiritualism was a fact that had to be faced, especially if one was writing for spiritualist magazines, and Mrs. Penny took part in the endless debate about what entities were actually communicating through the mediums: were they the souls of the dead, as most spiritualists believed, or were they mindless discarnate "shells" and elementaries, as Madame Blavatsky was now proclaiming? ". According to the 1930 "Ascended Master" concept in The History of the "I AM" Activity and Saint Germain Foundation and New Religions: A Guide: New Religious Movements, Sects and Alternative Spiritualities, "Ascended Masters" are believed to be humans who have lived in a succession of reincarnations in physical bodies or cosmic beings (beings originated from the great central sun of light in the beginning of all times). So the new term can mean also reach the definition of the origin.
>I gave up around 10 minutes in.
I appreciate that you took a look at it, i wasn't expecting you to watch a the full 2hours.
>He claims he moved on to the "World Church of Satan," an organization I'm not getting any relevant search results for that aren't related to him but is supposedly a globe-spanning organization.
I can't find it either, but if it's an underground business for people to commit "sins" i would imagine it would include seriously illegal activity that would not be broadcasted so openly. There is also Roger Morneau's testimony of organized Satanism/demon worship https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gONKiy9yi5I he actually has made some books about it. Then there is Fritz Springmeier, who has put out books on the satanic bloodlines and MKUltra.

 No.2576


>Where did Blavatsky promote the New World Order?

The Age of Aquarius is the the New world order. "Theosophists-at any rate, some of them - who understand the hidden meaning of the universally expected Avatar, Messiah's, Sosioshe and Christs - know that it is no 'end of the world' but the consummation of the ages i.e., the close of a cycle which is now fast approaching…" From her Lucifer A theosophical Magazine September 1887 to February 1888. Here is the magazine if you want to read it yourself, i checked it so i don't quote a false quote again. https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/60852/pg60852-images.html
>By that logic, Christianity has to be thrown out because it can ultimately be traced back to ancient Levantine paganism.
Sorry my wording was misleading. The old mystery religions with their secrecy associated with the particulars of the initiation and the ritual practice, which may not be revealed to outsiders was the precursor to the satanic secret societies specifically. Biblical Christianity has no secrecy or rituals. I know that the early Christians met in secrecy, but i don't remember why(maybe persecution from the Romans?), but that is not the same as illuminating yourself and not being able to reveal it's secrets.
>pic
https://www.worldhistory.org/article/225/enuma-elish---the-babylonian-epic-of-creation---fu/ I can't seem to find most of the exact quotes your image is referencing on the actual tablets of Enuma Elish. Unless maybe the translation i have is wrong and Meadow-land has been translated to mean firmament or something. There are similarities and but more differences, it could be personal accounts of something that really happened. The part of Enkidu and Shamhat is really really different from Adam and Eve, i don't think it's that similar at all personally.

>God is said to have physically "[come] down to see the city and the tower" (per the KJV)

It could be that God takes a symbolic incorporeal appearance like a cloud like he did with the Israelites in the desert with Moses in Deuteronomy 31:15. There is another veiw that God walking refers to a theophany. Another theory is based on the Hebrew phrase translated "the cool of the day." This could be literally translated "the wind of that day." Some think this might refer to a strong wind. If so, Adam and Eve's reaction makes more sense. They heard God's approach as a terrible wind that lashed the trees of the garden, and they took cover.
>The idea that the god of the Hebrews grew out of pagan traditions is hardly a controversial one.
I can't seem to find too much about this topic.
>I searched a PDF of Morals and Dogma, and that quote was nowhere to be found.
That's was retarded, please excuse me.
There is also the quote by A.C. De La Rive, La Femme et L'enfant dans La Franc-Maconnerie Universelle, Page 588. Cited from 'The question of freemasonry, ( 2nd edition 1986 by Edward Decker pp12-14) "Oui, Lucifer est Dieu, et malheureusement Adonaï" which translates to "Yes, Lucifer is God, and alas Adonai" Roughly translated the full quote is:
"That which we must say to the crowd is, we worship a god, but it is the god one adores without superstition. To you sovereign grand inspector general, we say this and you may repeat it to the brethren of the 32nd, 31st and 30th degrees - the Masonic religion should be by all of us initiates of the high degrees, maintained in the purity of the luciferian doctrine.
If lucifer were not god, would Adonay (the God of the Christians) whose deeds prove cruelty, perfidy and hatred of man, barbarism and repulsion for science, would Adonay and His priests, calumniate Him?
Yes, lucifer is god, and unfortunately Adonay is also God, for the eternal law is that there is no light without shade, no beauty without ugliness, no white without black, for the absolute can only exist as two gods. darkness being necessary for light to serve as its foil, as the pedestal is necessary to the statue, and the brake to the locomotive.
Thus, the doctrine of Satanism is heresy, and the true and pure philosophical religion is the belief in lucifer, the equal of Adonay, but lucifer, god of light and god of good, is struggling for humanity against Adonay, the god of darkness and evil"
https://archive.org/details/RiveACDeLaLaFemmeEtLenfantDansLaFrancMaconnerieUniverselle1894/page/n5/mode/2up Supposidly the Confession of Gabriel Jogand-Pagès, better known as Léo Taxil https://www.christian-restoration.com/fmasonry/Taxil.html debunks this quote, but If you read his full confession it records "A voice. "That was a successful prank!" Another listener. "These Freemasons were your accomplices!" M. Léo Taxil "You bet!… "".
As well as from Thirty third degree Mason Manley P. Hall amplifies the luciferian doctrine on page 48 of his book 'The Lost keys of Freemasonry' "When the Mason learns that the key to the warrior on the block is the proper application of the dynamo of living power, he has learned the mystery of his Craft. The seething energies of Lucifer are in his hands and before he may step onward and upward, he must prove his ability to properly apply energy" http://www.cedarcitylodge.org/books/The_Lost_Keys_of_Freemasonry.pdf
>He seems to be a fraud:
Thank you for bringing that article to my attention. I can now disregard his book along with other books i was reading with quotes that never existed. Yeah copy pasting from books always messes the formatting.


[Last 50 Posts]
[Go to top] [Catalog] [Return][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home ] [ tv / art / wooo ] [ ost / lit / bane ] [ dup / oven / dunk ] [ truth ]