13 bloodlines of the Illumanati

page: 4
1
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 20 2004 @ 12:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tamahu

That's one little gripe I have with the way that many Rosicrucians, Theosophists and Masons in general, present Kemetic knowledge. They Hellenize the sh*t out of things.


Ummmm... you have that gripe with just us, eh? It's not that the whole of Western Society (that well known evil organisation) has been doing that for about 2000 years, eh?

Seriously, though... most people pick a language or a group of languages in which to express themselves and stick to it. Since Greek and Latin were academic languages, those are the ones used to express academic ideas. What's so wrong with that? I hardly think it's an insult to the Ancient Egyptians to call them Ancient Egyptians (if there are any around, which there aren't), any more than it is an insult to the Japanese to call them Japanese rather than nihonjin.




posted on May, 20 2004 @ 12:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tamahu
You're thinking of Iesous/Isis; and yes they sound somewhat similiar and are both Greek words; but Khonsu is correct.

That's one little gripe I have with the way that many Rosicrucians, Theosophists and Masons in general, present Kemetic knowledge. They Hellenize the sh*t out of things.

Why say "Hermes" or "Thoth"? People should recognize Tehuti instead.

Why say "Egypt" instead of Kemet?

It's 'Ausar', not "Osiris".


Yes, I do agree with you on the point of people not using the original and correct names however I don't think its simply a Rosicrucian, Theosophist, or Masonic issue, it's western civilization as a whole. Most people scholars and novices alike refer to the gods of Kemet and Kemet itself by their Greek conversions. Of course there are your exceptions and these are found within general society as well as within secret societies. In short like most things it comes down to what one has read, studied and ultimately the decision one makes in regards to the names one will use.



posted on May, 20 2004 @ 12:25 PM
link   
Alex has apparently been reading my mind and beat me to the punch.

Great minds think alike eh Alex?



posted on May, 20 2004 @ 12:41 PM
link   
Well the difference between the 85%(the masses) and the said groups, is that the latter ought to know better.

I've spoken with people who consider themselves to be descendents of the ancient Kemetians and also someone who definitely is a descendant. They would prefer that people respect the ancestors by using the correct names.

And if I were Japanese, I would prefer to be called Nihonjin. I'm sure that some people in Nippon do; they just don't make a big deal out of it. Besides; many Japanese people are sell-outs to their own culture. Have you seen "The Last Samurai"?

They've replaced the Samurai, with got damn McDonalds for Christ's sake. [img] www.wutangcorp.com...[/img] I mean, they had to keep up with the West somehow, or they would have been taken over eventually anyway(as if they weren't), but still...

And even more; I definitely wouldn't want people making up a Greek or Latin name for Amaterasu.




Peace




[Edited on 20-5-2004 by Tamahu]



posted on May, 20 2004 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tamahu
Well the difference between the 85%(the masses) and the said groups, is that the latter ought to know better.
[Edited on 20-5-2004 by Tamahu]


I hear you, but keep in mind many of the 5% should know better as well, and still use the Greek terms. Additionally my experience is that many of the 10% as well as many of the masses do know the real names, they simply resort to using the Greek ones either out of habit or because they are more easily recognized and therefore its easier to convey thoughts and ideas especially in the world of Academia.

Hotep



posted on May, 20 2004 @ 12:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Khonsu

Originally posted by Tamahu
Well the difference between the 85%(the masses) and the said groups, is that the latter ought to know better.
[Edited on 20-5-2004 by Tamahu]


I hear you, but keep in mind many of the 5% should know better as well, and still use the Greek terms. Additionally my experience is that many of the 10% as well as many of the masses do know the real names, they simply resort to using the Greek ones either out of habit or because they are more easily recognized and therefore its easier to convey thoughts and ideas especially in the world of Academia.

Hotep


And I see where you're coming from, because I sometimes have a hard time saying the original names, when I explain Kemetic things to people, because I'm so used to what I've been taught my whole life.

But now that we know; we should make an effort to keep these things as pure and untampered with as possible.




1





[Edited on 20-5-2004 by Tamahu]



posted on May, 22 2004 @ 06:27 AM
link   
Aeth, who does that refer to? Does anyone know?



posted on Mar, 27 2008 @ 10:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Hamilton
 

I think Hamilton is either very confused and has been misinformed in so far as his analysis and history of Cain is concerned. But I tend to believe that his purpose is just to mislead and confuse those on this forum. Cain was cursed by God for killing his brother Abel who gave his first fruits to God which was pleasing to God as well. Abel was obedient to God's sacrificial law while Cain was not. So God cursed him and put a mark on him so that no one shall harm him. This had to be done else Cain would have been killed as he was no longer under God's direct protection due to his wicked sin and defiance of God in saying "am I my brother's keeper". Here we see that Abel's death by his obedience to God foreshadows what happens to Jesus, Yeshua or Jehusuah (Christ). Abel took His life as we see Jesus' Brothers, Kinsmen took his life.

Cain is no Satanist but his works of wickedness made him a son of Satan (Bible - John 8:44).



posted on Mar, 28 2008 @ 10:57 PM
link   
reply to post by The Vagabond
 


If I remember correctly GOD rejected Cain's sacrifice either because he held back a portion or he didn't give of the fruits of his labor (ie. the first of his harvest).



posted on Mar, 28 2008 @ 11:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Khonsu
Jesus's name wasnt "Jesus" thats not hebrew, its Yashua.


Neither is "Yeshu'a." Yeshu'a is Aramaic, spoken in the region durring that period. Jesus is the Greek form of Yeshu'a and Yeshu'a is the Aramaic form of the Hebrew "Yehoshu'a." Which is plain to see Yehoshu'a is Hebrew for Joshua. So we all have it wrong.


If it was translated today we would call HIM Joshua.

[edit on 28-3-2008 by lazy1981]



posted on May, 14 2008 @ 01:01 AM
link   
Anyone ever heard of the all mighty Micha family!



posted on May, 18 2008 @ 10:42 PM
link   
how do you join please post



posted on May, 18 2008 @ 10:42 PM
link   
how do you join please post



posted on Aug, 23 2008 @ 02:47 PM
link   
reply to post by lazy1981
 


That's very interesting and I agree with that. I'm just wondering, what do you make of people calling on the name of "Jesus Christ" nowadays?



posted on Aug, 23 2008 @ 04:02 PM
link   
I believe it was Vagabond who earlier concluded the entire matter: the sons of Cain were wiped out during the flood. Only the sons of Seth survived. There are no sons of Cain bloodlines.

And for arguments sake-what difference would it make if there were? What is the point of a particular blood line? Honestly? After all these thousands of years any unusual DNA would be so diluted as to be unrecognizable from the teeming masses.

Also, since sons are seldom like their fathers in character, beliefs, values, etc., having a descendent bloodline is pretty useless for ruling the world (if that's the point of the bloodline argument).

No doubt there are "evil" people managing the policies tending toward global domination. That's enough of a conspiracy without giving it a theme of satanic bloodlines. I don't think you have to be of any particular bloodline to do evil. We are all descended from one fallen man (Adam) and even those who claim to be from the second man Adam (Jesus) still have to deal with their fallen nature. There is none righteous, no, not one.



posted on Sep, 19 2008 @ 06:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Hamilton
 


If Adam and Eve were created perfect by God, how could they have sinned ? You sin because you are imperfect. ( Perfect being the opposite of imperfect ). Having freedom of choice does not logically explain this basic fact. You sin because you're imperfect. If God created a perfect Adam and Eve and yet they still sinned, why did he send his son down thousands of years later to die for our sins ? It doesn't make sense. Similarly, how did Santa Clause get down those really narrow chimneys ?



posted on Sep, 24 2008 @ 05:34 PM
link   



posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 01:42 PM
link   
i am courious about more information about this whole new world order they talk about. was obama really elected president of the united states because he was believed to have a connection with illumanati.



posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 02:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Knightmare
 



posted on Nov, 8 2008 @ 01:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Hamilton
 


I thought Lilit(h) was Adam's first wife, made from the dirt & clay like Adam. She was refuted by Adam for her refusal to lay beneath him as she saw herself as his equal, so she fled. Hence Eve being created from Adam's rib, as a form of subjugation. Lilith then tempted Eve with the knowledge that led to their exile.





top topics
 
1
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join