Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by DerepentLEstranger
For one there is no evidence for the Great Flood. Second, I can find no source that would place it to around 5,000 years ago. Then there's the fact
that there should then be evidence of three other catastrophic events occurring before that on the same 5,000 year cycle yet you cannot provide me
with any. You have also failed to explain why, if the Popol Vuh were accurate, that it only accounts for time up to 20,000 years ago. What of
the other 80,000 years of human history? What of the other 4.5 billion years of Earth history? Your entire theory is based upon one tiny aspect of a
manuscript that isn't supported by fact. Furthermore, as I have stated previously, it doesn't even accurately reflect traditional Mayan beliefs. Find
me one example outside of post-Columbian sources, such as the Popol Vuh and the books of the Chilam Balam, that speak of multiple ages.
such a narrow and restricted point of view
i can see you are not interested in examining beliefs , but imposing your own, me thinks.
and i will not be jumping through your hoops for your amusement, or whatever it is you think you are doing here.
if you are unaware of the fact that most of mesoamerican records were intentionally destroyed, why book burnings are a periodic event throughout human
history and why TCOTBIP do this, or examples of the concept of World Ages in christian, Greco-roman, Hindu, and many other belief systems...
why should the popol vuh cover the entirety of human history? or 4.5billion yrs for that matter? pedantic much?
also the your claim that the
Popol Vuh and the books of the
Chilam Balam don't count, having been corrupted by christian apocalyptism is
spurious and self serving at best; considering earlier copies were conveniently destroyed [never mind the false claims by the RC priesthood that
beliefs and practices known since the late Paleolithic/Mesolithic/early Neolithic, such as the dying and resurrecting god, the eating of the god, were
satan having a laugh at their expense, you are very much like these priests by the way

]
you also continue to avoid answering the questions i asked
Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger
reply to post by Xcalibur254
i see you here, at it again,
trying to futilely prevent,divert, and obstruct
the Immanentization of the Eschaton
www.chaosmatrix.org...
why?
are you afeared of change?
does the present order of things suit and soothe you?
the purpose of all calendars, being the keeping track of cyclical events
tell me, O wise Whistler past the Graveyard,
all the previous Ages[Suns] ended with a catastrophe of global proportions,
what makes the current Age/Sun special or exempt?

edit on 6-1-2012 by DerepentLEstranger
because: pic
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 1997 09:42:39 -0600 (MDT)
From: J B Bell (cipher@eschatek.com)
To: zee-list
Subject: Re: Source of "Immanentize the Eschaton"
On Sun, 5 Oct 1997, Theta 8008 wrote: > >Does anyone know what the original source of the phrase "Immanentize the > >Eschaton" is? I've
been able to track it back as far as the Principia > >Discordia, but can't find any earlier sources. Is this it? Or is there > >an earlier
source? > > It is actually discussed in theology. In THE ILLUMINATI PAPERS, RAW > talks about articles in NATIONAL REVIEW (W.F. Buckley mag)
in the 60's > that referred to imanentization with regard to (I think) Neo-gosticism). > The book is at home, so I'll look it up later and write
back. > Zero
I have seen the phrase used in an anti-heretical paper. My head about exploded when I read it; I had been thinking it was original to RAW. Nothing new
under the sun, of course. I think the charge was levelled against Martin Buber where I read it, but honestly my memory is faulty on this point, except
that I am very certain that it appears to be a theological term, specifically a heresy, that predates RAW significantly.
A little note on this oft-misunderstood phrase: many people confuse it with the idea of "imm*i*nentizing" the eschaton. Imminent means "real soon".
Immanent means "everywhere" or "all-permeating", perhaps. The eschaton, as every good Chaote knows, is the End of Everything. "Immanentizing the
eschaton" refers to the heretical idea that the eschaton is in fact a state of being, accessible at any time, rather than some chronological event. Of
course, in the theological usage, it doesn't normally refer to magickal efforts to make apocalypse happen, as the Chaote's looser usage usually
means.
in short
Why Believe in 2012?
Why not?

edit on 6-1-2012 by DerepentLEstranger because: (no reason given)