There’s something up with geometric shapes.
Someone once said signs and symbols rule the world.
The G in the Freemason logo means geometry and the logo is made with tools to make geometric shapes.
The other day a shill accidentally revealed the circle with the star sign extracts energy from people. Then he deleted his account.
That circle star and other shapes like the Saturn symbol are found in many car logos which are seen by all when they drive.
Rothvhild once made a forum posts and empathizes that nature doesn’t have straight lines but shapes do.
Words act as manifesting tools because what we speak we usually believe and the law of faith attracts what we say to us. Do shapes have a similar effect?
Even the hex shape on the North Pole of Saturn also appears as a cube. They say this shape is used to hex earth but how? The only thing I found is that the shape represent the pattern of the soul and that the cube represent a prison. They also have a square with a circle inside which represents caging the infinite soul.
Another shill once mentioned the triangle represents the minimum opening shape for a portal and that the points represents energy, knowledge and willpower.
Lastly Modevil Cathedrals were made in a particular shape on purpose by the knight Templar.
What’s going on with these specific shapes appearing everywhere? Are they energy extractors?
I know the loosh harvested is moved around by those obelisks so these occult shapes might be part of that system.
The book correctly argues that the Trinity concept was before Judaism and Christianity. The trinity concept was taught by one of the first prophets in history way before Atlantis.
The Trinity Father, Son and Holy Spirit is really God split up into 3. The center nucleus is the Father (not as in gender though, this is pure energy) who is the personality of God, Christ which is the younger version and body of God, and Holy Spirit which is "outside of God". The Christ in the middle decides what to experience and the Holy Spirit becomes the experience while the Father inside offers good ideas to the Son similar to thought form. The Christ is then the Word that speaks what it wants to experience.
Jesus Christ (Yeshua de Josef) is basically the version of Christ in the upper area of the Universe while his body on Earth was his lower self but his supreme wisdom make even his lower self good. He was not of a virgin Mother. That was one of the things the Saturn Death Cult changed in the Bible to make it sound like their own religious beliefs. Mary was no virgin at all and many of the old cult beliefs were dragged into Christianity sometimes intentionally and sometimes through habit by the old occultists who converted to Christianity.
As any history book will show, The Council at Nicea was about this very concept. The gnostic fathers posited that to divide God into 3 was indeed polytheistic hyperdispensation which did not exist, for which they were murdered as reward in opposition to the new Pax Romana being formed. This same argument was being fought over in the Judaic Wars and was the very cause, apart from other obvious political machinations. God as Three is Polytheism by definition. God is ONE is the tradition, not the exception that 3 was, and is.
I know a little something about the subject, as I encountered the same issue when the 'String Theory' was presented to me by the head of cognitive scientists who coined the theory/term 'String Theory'. . In conversation, I posited a change in the name to 'String, Drum or Magic theory, 'depending on your perspective' to show that it was exactly a matter OF perspective that divides cognition/reality/God into three, rather than seeing it as the ONE that it truly is. This was successful in that the name was changed. I utilized the Monochord used by Pythagorus to teach harmony to students, with a single string plucked at measured points providing insight to the nature of harmony and mathematics. Again two subjects by perspective, but one in reality. I knew that introducing the concept of Spirit as 'that which bring the 'two' together as ONE, not Three, would not be accepted by science, so I used the term 'magic' as it is invisible. This was accepted for a time as it corrected inconsistencies in the original String theory. But I waited to see if they would be able to see the three as ONE, and they failed. They now attempt to remove the spirit as 'M', but don't know how to remove the inconvenient truthbomb. I didn't have time to explain the 'magic' as spirit, or to show how it becomes its own polytheistic 'trinity' when divided and isn't reconsilable ultimately. This a rarified subject and one who can't reach the height of it will always attempt to cast down those who see it. Misery loves company and project iniquity onto its subject-victim.
God is ONE not three. Christos is an ancient Greek philosophical concept term, not a blasphemous hyperdispensational god-man of polytheism. This was the argument of the jews against their usurpers, and the gnostics against theirs. The 'winner' of this argument by the murderous slanderers at Nicea became the focal point of the Pax Romana and 'Christianity' then became a roman state religion of control through dogma. None of these points are opinions, and neither bad science, nor bad religion can replace its inconvenient truths.
The gnostics were right if they said dividing God into three was polytheistic, but in those days there are several evidences that teachers knew the difference between tritheism and prototrinitarianism. Those tritheists who lurked were despised by Jew and Christian alike. The Jews wrote and recited the Birkat haMinim against these cultic tritheists (also ditheists) and other Judaizing sectarians, while the Christians ignored it because it didn't apply to them.
Also, no gnostics were murdered to my knowledge, you seem to be thinking of something else.
It's great to hear you contributed to M-theory and give some background. To the point at hand, if it's perspective that cognizes three, what happens when the One cognizes Himself? My answer is that He can cognize "Himself" as One, and He can also cognize "Himself Cognizing Himself" as Three (lover, love, beloved). One matter, two or three witnesses, is also the ancient rule. Therefore, we can cognize "God is not three" in your sense, but we need not contradict those who with different meaning are able to cognize "God is three".
"Christos" as used by Hebrew thinkers is exactly a translation of an ancient Hebrew term for the anointed ruler, used by David in 1000 BC without any Greek philosophy. It was never used for polytheism (except by the minor cults I allude to) and didn't connote or require any polytheism.
Nicea heard all the arguments and got 99% approval for its summary, with only three objectors who wouldn't budge, led by Arius. The minority's concerns were that what word by which we describe Jesus's "divine" nature as can only be a word that also applies to creation, because we have no word for the uncreated, only negations (a proper application of apophatic theology). This concern was not understood by the Niceans until much later, so the Arian churches continued to have gains in Western Europe for a couple centuries more because of calculated ambiguity on both sides.
Separately, the several Chalcedonian theology debates were closer to home and all the major wings retained their polities until in the 20th century they were all basically resolved semantically by agreement on essentials and liberty on understood frameworks of phrasing. I believe this is possible for those who continue Arian traditions today too. If you're interested in such a resolution, I'd suggest you first start by admitting the reality of what all the primitive Christians knew, the difference between polytheism and a monotheism that recognizes differences of cognition. Without making semantic adjustments for context your statement would not be read by trinitarians as truths or facts but as opinions and althist. The way to repair that breach is to speak honestly about what the prototrinitarians actually said, and the difference from what tritheists were separately accused of saying. Start with the fact that Paul was accused of polytheism for teaching "Jesus and Anastasia": that indicates what the true polytheists were actually teaching, by Paul being mistaken for one of them.
Again, Arius was a messenger, not the message. I feel no need to bring him up except in historic perspective as a victim of 'killing the messenger'.
The tech doesn't make sense unless Mary was a virgin. If you change Jesus's parentage you change the whole being you claim as God. Your first two paragraphs were fine but nobody ever presents evidence of these alleged Bible changes or claims of cabal power. More likely the cabal only wants to have exercised such power so they get shills to believe they did, much cheaper for them.
Read the Saturn Death Cult book. It explains it all.
The Freemason King James is another famous one that make lots of changes.
One of the biggest he made was to remove all mentions that Jesus meditated everyday from the Bible. This was done to make people forget how to get mentally closer to God for healing, joy and knowledge.
Which one is the Saturn death cult book? It's not 2,097 pages, is it? Okay, that was a slight indirect dig, but I know you can take it.
Saturn Death Cult is on Amazon. Its like 200 pages.
I know. I know there is a psyop to "debunk" the Urantia files because the deep state is scared the people will learn the beautiful truth about life when they read it.