It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Eliphas Levi

page: 2
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 06:50 PM
link   
Yes, I know what your saying, and I think your wrong because Lucifer does not = Satan. Lucifer is not the name for satan, but the name of a regional king in the old testament. Satan would be the new testament entity.


Originally posted by TamahuBut yeah, if I've to go to hell for not believing in the "Jesus" of conventional non-Gnostic Roman-Christianity, Calvinism, Protestantism, etc. that has, for over 1500 years, enslaved and murdered more than any other 'religious' institution in known history; then I would rather go to hell.


Jesus enslaved and murdered people? Of course you would say that you meant that the idea of Jesus caused people to kill and enslave. And yet, I don't think so. The religion around Jesus is not innately good or evil, and in and of itself compels men to do nothing. That men and women pervert the name of the religion to kill and enslave does not actually mean anything as far as the validity of the religion. It only proves that men and women like to pervert the religion, as they do with all of society's institutions.

And even if we only want to count the number of murders and enslavements by cause, I am quite sure we would find that the vast majority is due to politics, not people claiming to do so in the name of religion. I know its unpopular to say that because bashing religion is now a new international past time, but I'm going to say it anyways.




posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 07:17 PM
link   
I never said that Lucifer and Satan are necessarily synonymous.

And I certainly didn't say that "Jesus enslaved and murdered people".


The "point" you seem to be missing, is that the Light and Fire of Lucifer is All-Inclusive, Non-Dual, without any reference point: "Unbounded Wholeness".

Perhaps the best Hieroglyph to illustrate the Christ(as a concept), is the symbol of RA-HERU:







With It's circumference nowhere and It's center everywhere.


Again, with "the fall of Adam and Eve", that same Light became obscured, within the Humans that fell, when the ego was created within the infradimensions or atomic-infernos of the humanoid psyche.

But it is that same Light nonetheless.

The existence of Satan(the ego), is like shining a Pure Light through a dirty glass, in a sense. The original source of that Light is Christus-Lucifer, while the light on the other side of the glass is obscured(Satan). But is still the same light.



The Mark Of The Beast 1

The Mark Of The Beast 2

49 levels of mind



As for conventional Christianity.... I was implying that the Roman-Catholic church conspired to keep the multitudes from discovering the Gnosis which was originally taught by Yehoshuah of Nazareth Himself.

Calvinism and Protestantism, etc. are unfortuantely not much more than a modified Romanism, for the fact that they reject the Gnosis which was taught by the Divine Man who they idolize.


Only Christ Within can redeem Adam from the fall.





[edit on 11-12-2007 by Tamahu]



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 07:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Tamahu
 


Yeah, since this is way off topic I'm just going to say OK. Debating religion would be way off topic in secret societies.



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 07:41 PM
link   
Fair enough.

However, what I'm saying here is basically what was taught by Eliphas Levi.

If you study his works you'll see what I mean.

He even shows that the Roman Catholic church knows, or at least use to know, that the Master Builder Yehoshuah Himself taught Gnosis.




[edit on 11-12-2007 by Tamahu]



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 11:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by amitheone
Albert Pike 33 degree Mason and leader of the Ku Klux Klan.


Well...since I have not yet gotten a reply to my inquiry for substantiation regarding the above seemingly incongruous appellation (at least to me), I did have some time to look it up myself.

And so just for anyone else's information who, like me, isn't all that well-versed in the personalities from Masonry, past and preset...

Albert Pike's affiliation with the KKK is totally unsubstantiated and there doesn't appear to be sufficient evidence to be able to say, for certain, one way or the other.

However, my personal opinion, after reading various arguments from both sides of it, is that it is MOST LIKELY a false accusation. My opinion is based mainly on the history of the KKK as compared to the life of Albert Pike. Furthermore, there are not any documents, written and preserved, on the subject, except by authors who were two or three times removed from the actual events, places, and times they were writing about.

Regardless, it definitely is not firm enough of an idea to warrant it being stated as fact as it is in the above-quoted post; and considering the volatile nature of the KKK's history I think that it is important to be as ACCURATE as POSSIBLE in addressing such things that affect reputations, especially of those no longer around to defend their name in person.

[I know there is another thread about that here but I just wanted to add that in here for the sake of keeping things 'real']



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 04:55 PM
link   
I've communicated online with a very learned Mason who was a member of the Nation of Islam and Nation of Gods and Earths, who confirmed much of what I'm about to say here, when I asked him about the supposed KKK membership of Albert Pike, and also the design of Washington D.C.

So it seems to me, that Albert Pike was most likely one of the founders of the original Ku Klux Klan(this was claimed also by a Shriner named Walter Fleming; and by Henry Coil, a Scottish Rite Freemason).

This is not necessarily a bad thing.

Kuklos means something like "To Encircle the Sun"(see the symbol of Tiphereth or RA-HERU a couple of posts back).

So the original Ku Klux Klan may have been a Templar off-shoot, who's job it was to conceal a certain Secret related to the Nature of the Sun.

It was later on, that the Ku Klux Klan degenerated into a extremely racist group of violent uneducated rednecks.

And it is said that Albert Pike resigned from the Confederate army, due to the latter's breaking of treaties with the Indians(I believe that Masonic Light(the ATS member who most of you know of) can confirm some of this as well).





And it is, again, interesting to note that even in modern times, the Nation of Islam and the KKK had called a truce(which may not be so relevant considering that the contemporary KKK is likely to be nothing like the original Ku Klux Klan).


In regard to this "Secret", if we look at the design of Washington D.C. in relation to Astrology and Time, in light of the following info...:


The Honorable Elijah Muhammad's "The Theology of Time"(The Secret of Time) and "The Science of Time".

David Ovason's "The Secret Architecture of Our Nation's Capital: The Masons and the Building of Washington, D.C.".

And maybe Norris Hansell's "Liberty at the Millennium" (see Benjamin Banneker, one of the designers of Washington D.C.).






...there are some important clues to be found therein, especially if we receive the Kalachakra Tantra: The Wheel of Time Initiation internally.


In fact, a great Master of the White Lodge, H.H. the 14th Dalai Lama, has been giving Kalachakra Initiations publicly within the last few years.

This Tantra is the basis of the Roerich's Agni Yoga(the Roerich's were also Theosophists).





[edit on 12-12-2007 by Tamahu]



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 05:53 PM
link   
Edit: Wrong thread.




[edit on 12-12-2007 by Tamahu]



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 06:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tamahu
So it seems to me, that Albert Pike was most likely one of the founders of the original Ku Klux Klan(this was claimed also by a Shriner named Walter Fleming; and by Henry Coil, a Scottish Rite Freemason).


The history of the KKK, itself, generally claims Nathan Bedford Forrest as the primary leader immediately following the civil war; which was the first start of the KKK. Forrest was a very rich man in the south - making his fortune on the backs of slaves. Therefore, his motivation for hate toward the freedmen was based on greed and was very intense.

Allegedly, he was installed as Grand Wizard in 1867 which was only 2 years after the end of the war.

The KKK began in 1866 by 6 individuals from Tennessee and that state appears to have been the central core of the movement. At first, it was somewhat non-serious although it was definitely inspired by confederates who were unhappy with the final result of the Civil War and the emancipation proclamation. Their initial goal was to reinstate more southern leadership in the nation. But very soon it turned very ugly and violent, directed at freedmen and those employed to help them as well as volunteer sympathizers.

The objective was to deny the freedmen their own share of citizenship according to the Constitution; such as voting rights and land ownership. The methods used, however, were far from political and were barbaric and cruel in extreme measures.

There were cases of men being castrated in front of white audiences and pregnant women being lynched and having their babies ripped out of their wombs.

Somewhere around the year 1874, the government had basically eradicated the movement but it reincarnated itself somewhere around 1915.


This is not necessarily a bad thing.


How can it be a good thing?


I'm not one to usually say something is 'bad' or 'good' but in the case of such violently extreme, unwarranted racism...I must say I think, without exception, that it was BAD and is still BAD. Inexcusable, IMO.

And I question the character of anyone who would have been connected with such activities, especially to the extent of being in a leadership position.


So the original Ku Klux Klan may have been a Templar off-shoot, who's job it was to conceal a certain Secret related to the Nature of the Sun.


No - it was totally inspired by the spirit of white supremacy and fueled by the bitter disappointment of the confederate slave-owners following the civil war.

From what I understand, Pike was mildly racist but no where near the degree which would define the type of person willing to murder and torture innocent people on the basis of skin color, driven by greed and loss of power, in an anonymous (cowardly) manner in the middle of the night.

I don't know much about Albert Pike but I do know considerably more about the history and activities of the KKK down through the years. I just don't see his involvement as being legitimate. And it certainly doesn't fit in with what I understand to be his general personal philosophies.


[edit on 12/12/2007 by queenannie38]



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 07:05 PM
link   
Well how can we know for sure, if we weren't actually there(unless we have the ability to view the Akashic Records
).

Of course we can do our best to sort out "documented" history.

However the info I presented here is at least worth looking into.


There are many who claim that the original Ku Klux Klan was not racist; at least not near as much as it is now, perhaps in the very beginning only as racist as Albert Pike himself might have been.

Maybe I'll dig up some old threads where Masonic Light suggested some of these things.


Trust me, as much "Aryan Pride" as Albert Pike may have had; he knows who the Original Man is.



Nobles of the Mystic Shrine of Ali





"9. Why does Muhammad make the Devil Study from
thirty-five to fifty years before he can call himself a
Muslim son? And wear the greatest and only Flag of the
Universe? And he must add a sword on the upper part of
the Holy and Greatest Universal Flag of Islam?"






[edit on 12-12-2007 by Tamahu]



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 09:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tamahu

Well how can we know for sure, if we weren't actually there(unless we have the ability to view the Akashic Records
).


Exactly.



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 12:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tamahu

I've communicated online with a very learned Mason who was a member of the Nation of Islam and Nation of Gods and Earths, who confirmed much of what I'm about to say here, when I asked him about the supposed KKK membership of Albert Pike, and also the design of Washington D.C.

So it seems to me, that Albert Pike was most likely one of the founders of the original Ku Klux Klan(this was claimed also by a Shriner named Walter Fleming; and by Henry Coil, a Scottish Rite Freemason).


Since there is no evidence linking Pike to the Ku Klux Klan, the Nation of Islam guy is simply repeating a rumor.

Also, there is a confusion over two different people who have the same. Dr. Walter Fleming, the Mason, was founder and first Imperial Potentate of the Shriners. This is not the same person, also named Walter Fleming, who wrote a sympathetic history of the Ku Klux Klan, and who without documentation listed Pike as an early member.



posted on Dec, 18 2007 @ 04:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by queenannie38

Originally posted by Tamahu

Well how can we know for sure, if we weren't actually there(unless we have the ability to view the Akashic Records
).


Exactly.




Of course I wasn't trying to say that physical and intellectual research do not have their place.

(Besides, how many of us are capable of viewing the Akashic Records?)

It is just that the "official" history is almost always heavily distorted, considering the fact that the vast majority of humanoids in this Kali-Yuga are liars and knaves(whether we have good intentions or not), especially the ones who are in a position to decide what is "documented" and what is not.


I'm also not trying to justify any type of racism from either side, of the KKK or the N.O.I.(but, to be honest, Caucus-asians generally get on my nerves more easily than other races, and I'm Caucasian myself).


Anyway, I was simply offering relevant clues about the Ku Klux Klan, clues that are over-looked by most.




[edit on 18-12-2007 by Tamahu]



posted on Dec, 19 2007 @ 09:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tamahu



Trust me, as much "Aryan Pride" as Albert Pike may have had; he knows who the Original Man is.


Pike believed that the Aryans were the original "civilized" people (see Pike's "Lectures On The Arya", "Lectures On The Indo-Aryans", and "Lectures On The Irano-Aryans"). He believed that the symbolism of modern Freemasonry originated with the Aryans.

But it's also important that Pike didn't use "Aryan" in the same sense it was used by the Nazis. While we as white men are descended from the Aryans, so are the people of India and Pakistan, who are not white.

Pike believed that the Hyksos were an Aryan line. It was the Hyksos that fisrt conquered and civilized Egypt, and introduced the Mysteries, which wre strikingly similar to those practiced by the ancient Aryans in the Indus Valley. The only written account of the Aryans is the Rig Veda, which is now a holy book of Hinduism. But the Veda is far older than Hinduism, and Pike believed it contained remnants of the original religion.



posted on Dec, 19 2007 @ 10:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Masonic Light
But it's also important that Pike didn't use "Aryan" in the same sense it was used by the Nazis. While we as white men are descended from the Aryans, so are the people of India and Pakistan, who are not white.


Right! And the only reason they are not is because of climate demanding changes in their skin's melatonin. Facial features are very similar, if you look closely.

And as a matter of fact, I'm not too sure but that the Teutonics and Franks are more a mixture of Druid with Aryan - with more A than D.


Pike believed that the Hyksos were an Aryan line. It was the Hyksos that fisrt conquered and civilized Egypt, and introduced the Mysteries, which wre strikingly similar to those practiced by the ancient Aryans in the Indus Valley. The only written account of the Aryans is the Rig Veda, which is now a holy book of Hinduism. But the Veda is far older than Hinduism, and Pike believed it contained remnants of the original religion.


Interesting! I believe that is true, as well - except that the Hyskos were likely a sub-set of the Hittites who were definitely Aryans originally from Indus. The more I research (both conventionally and unconventionally) I tend to believe that Indus and Egypt were two of the three branches of civilizations which arose after the ice age melted - originally from Sumer. The third would be the people of the Pacific Islands and the eastern North & South American peoples (such as the Peruvians' ancestors, the Maori, et al.). Edgar Cayce referred to those three branches as being of Og, Arya, and Atlan. Og being the Pacific and Atlan being the Egypt. Pretty much like the Bible speaks of Ham, Shem, and Japheth only not in semitic vocabulary.

The Indus seemed to have gotten their act together quite early on, though! The findings of their settlements are amazingly ordered and well-planned. But then again, so are a few of the ancient ruins down in Mexico.

[edit on 12/19/2007 by queenannie38]



posted on Dec, 19 2007 @ 10:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tamahu
Of course I wasn't trying to say that physical and intellectual research do not have their place.

(Besides, how many of us are capable of viewing the Akashic Records?)


Actually ALL of us CAN....but very few actually DO. Ego is the greatest barrier. If we seek information for the sole purpose of helping others in their various situations as well as mankind, in general...the library is always open.


My answer, therefore, wasn't facetious - I was simply stating agreement.



posted on Dec, 19 2007 @ 10:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Masonic Light
But the Veda is far older than Hinduism, and Pike believed it contained remnants of the original religion.


Oh yeah, and as an aside that you might find interesting (or not), in Sumer, there was no word for 'religion.' Spirituality was an accepted and integral part of everyone's daily life. Just a fact and a function, as it were.



posted on Dec, 19 2007 @ 10:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by queenannie38
If we seek information for the sole purpose of helping others in their various situations as well as mankind, in general...the library is always open.



No. The library is open without any if´s, but´s, conditions, restraints. Its a basic birthright.



posted on Dec, 19 2007 @ 11:53 AM
link   
I have to disagree with both of you. Around here, the library closes at 7.



posted on Dec, 19 2007 @ 12:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating

Originally posted by queenannie38
If we seek information for the sole purpose of helping others in their various situations as well as mankind, in general...the library is always open.



No. The library is open without any if´s, but´s, conditions, restraints. Its a basic birthright.


Yes. That's true. Yet not everyone GOES there. Maybe that is what I should have said. I don't know how to explain it. But the truth is that it is available to all yet not accessed by all.



posted on Dec, 19 2007 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Masonic Light
I have to disagree with both of you. Around here, the library closes at 7.





Silly!



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join