2
2EyesOpen 2 points ago +2 / -0

Crowley was saying that occultists had been using a 'useless' version of tarot and his corrected it. He was rewarded in reputation and reput and given title within occult circles as a result, due to the insight. He wasn't wrong. 16 and 17 had been switched. The conversation can be raised to principles and Crowley dropped from the conversation once this is understood and knowledge is no longer feared or hated.

Detachment from reality does ruin everything, agreed.

3
2EyesOpen 3 points ago +3 / -0

I have no desire to defend Aleister Crowley's actions. Including producing the Moon Child that became known to the world as 'Barbara (Pearce/Percy) Bush.' I find many faults in the theosophist cosmology/philosophy, let alone Luciferians who attempt to use it.

Re: The knowledge of the tree of life. That knowledge is what eventually distinguishes free will and the human soul. 'She' as the feminine nature of receptivity, specifically knowledge was the one chosen to 'tempt'. Eve means 'beginning'. Adam means blood red clay. And this understanding of components as symbolic clears up misconceptions created by literal interpretations. It isn't for everyone. Lest they be as godS. Interesting quote.

Q, the Star. Divine Inspiration, 17.

Is a re-righting of the inverted interpretation of all things. A 'New Outpouring' of informational and spiritual knowledge aka Great Awakening, as the card showing the woman pouring water from a vase suggests. It's Elijah/Elisha to the church of the times. It happens as a cycle. Each book of the Old Testament is one of these cycles as explained in the stories. In this way, 'It's going to be biblical'.

3
2EyesOpen 3 points ago +3 / -0

There is a deep dark reason why 'The Sea People' histories are destroyed, faked or convoluted to this day in discussion of what happened in that epic time. Somebody did something to Egypt and their calendar was skewed to cover as well. This happened more than once in Egypt.

Many wore the horns of baal and made ships from the cedars of Lebanon.

Same as it ever was. Every single time.

2
2EyesOpen 2 points ago +2 / -0

In general, I agree with your statement. Crowley was a cad and crazy as a fox.

I'd add that Lust certainly isn't a virtue. But it certainly is one of the most powerful forces and I'm guessing its hold on Crowley's psyche might explain his decision to rename.

Luciferianism gains traction as 'correction' when orthodox religion fails to explain. Two thieves on the cross which is seen as symbol by the theosophist, and literal instrument of torture to the literlist. This creates impossible arguments rather than enlightened discussion. Same can be said about the strange 'coincidence' of Ishtar/Easter occurring over the same 3 days as the sun's vernal equinox. Discuss or argue, your choice. Be as wise as the serpents.........

4
2EyesOpen 4 points ago +4 / -0

Crowley made claim that cards of the tarot had been 'switched' in the past in order to protect it 'from the profane'. His reassembly of the cards gave him claim as poohbah to Theosophists, as it seemed to clear up issues that the switched cards presented.

This was in reference to the switch of the Tzaddi and The Star cards, numbers 16 and 17, where 17 represents Divine Inspiration.

He re-named other cards to 'more accurately represent' the cards as named according to his research and understanding.

The word occult means 'hidden knowledge'. Be as wise as the serpent, yet 'blameless' (a better word than 'innocent') as a lamb.

2
2EyesOpen 2 points ago +2 / -0

I met the grandson of Jose Delgado. He too was in behavioral 'science' psychology from Argentina. He was visiting the local psychology department to share information.

I recognised him by both his name and the fact that he looked very much like his grandfather at his age. I decided to approach to discover the reason for his presence, and decided to tell him that as a student in the department, I'd witnessed lab monkeys with lightbulbs screwed into their skulls to identify brain processes and to 'map' the brain. I asked if it wasn't the case that the ultimate result of that in the wrong hands would be mind control......and his reaction was a huge 'tell' about his position. He wouldn't make eye contact and quit speaking.

Same as it ever was.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hasan-i_Sabbah

2
2EyesOpen 2 points ago +2 / -0

Since we're treating fiction as fact, Hans Solo is still locked in graphite in Star Wars, what should we do?

3
2EyesOpen 3 points ago +3 / -0

There is no such thing as 'occults'. The word occult means literally 'secret knowledge'. There also is no such thing as Qanons or Qanon stuff. People with secret/hidden knowledge are not the same as those who follow a dogmatic charasmatic which is a cult. Note the prefix occ which signifies 'to see' as in occular. Some see one thing, some see another, and some see very little at all.

2
2EyesOpen 2 points ago +2 / -0

Same for you. Sunday School is over. You failed, I'm done with your oxymoronic statements, and I have better things to do than enter a battle of wits against an unarmed opponent.

2
2EyesOpen 2 points ago +2 / -0

Holy cow Sunday School is over, you failed, and I'm done with you. I have more important things to do with my time than have a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent.

2
2EyesOpen 2 points ago +2 / -0

Shame on you for having only arguments with no answers. You need it explained as if to a five year old, but that's for children in Sunday School. When I was a child, I spake as a child. Things change when the the divinity is sought and found.

2
2EyesOpen 2 points ago +2 / -0

No you fool, monotheism is the opposite of so-called Unitarian. But you digress.

2
2EyesOpen 2 points ago +2 / -0

Im trying to raise the conversation to the height of divinity and you, my confused friend, are belittling God with blasphemous hyper-dispensations you learned in Sunday School.

2
2EyesOpen 2 points ago +2 / -0

Repent from your error and learn the one true god.

1
2EyesOpen 1 point ago +1 / -0

Trinitarian monotheism is a giant midget.

1
2EyesOpen 1 point ago +1 / -0

It doesn't 'belong' to Arius any more than any idea 'belongs' to anyone.

Skapegoating isn't a philosophical or theological point.

2
2EyesOpen 2 points ago +2 / -0

The history of the argument isn't contained in the bible except peripherally.

2
2EyesOpen 2 points ago +2 / -0

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'.

2
2EyesOpen 2 points ago +2 / -0

Not sure why the messenger is killed in the attempt to enlighten. The subject is what needs the attention.

2
2EyesOpen 2 points ago +2 / -0

'When two come together 'in my name'. To discover the name and the source from which it comes is to understand.

1
2EyesOpen 1 point ago +1 / -0

No one attacked 'the' bible. It sounds like you reject monotheism.

view more: Next ›