Illuminati = luciferians ?

The whole Satan mythos serves a very useful social purpose.

1. God was omnipotent and could not be questioned.
2. The entity that became Satan threw in a few cool suggestions and was banished to the netherworld to do rather uncool stuff.
3. People who act in the name of God are omnipotent and ought not be questioned.
4. People who question them are heretics, evil pawns of Satan.

Works for most religions on the planet.

Oh for CHRIST's SAKE!!! LUCIFER IS NOT SATAN!!! Will you Fundamentalists please learn how to Read & Read more than one book other than KJV Bible!

How easy it must have been for the Aliens to control the Monkey's Mind when they first landed on this Planet!!!

i couldn't agree more on that matter. the fallen light-angel is not the same entity as satan. he was the bringer of light, the one who cared for humankind. the one who questioned god, the one that didn't want mankind to suffer, and for that he was cast down from the heavens. satan is only invented by man. but there is great evil amongst us. evil as old as the universe itself, maybe even older. well enough said from me.

Originally posted by Seraphim_Serpente
Oh for CHRIST's SAKE!!! LUCIFER IS NOT SATAN!!! Will you Fundamentalists please learn how to Read & Read more than one book other than KJV Bible!

How easy it must have been for the Aliens to control the Monkey's Mind when they first landed on this Planet!!!

If you're referring to other earlier Bibles, you're sadly mistaken. The problem lies in the interpretation, not the translation.
The word Lucifer stems from a mis-interpretation in the 5th century Latin Vulgate Bible. The Tyndale Bible, The Great Bible, The Geneva Bible and the others all carried on the mistake. As the 14th century scholar Erasmus pointed out - the Vulgate contained literally thousands of errors. Nearly all were passed down to later versions until the KJV literally rewrote the book from it's original languages.

Don't disregard the KJV - it's probably the best of the bunch and is probably the most accurate of the works. All of the others were near enough literal translations of the Vulgate. When the KJV was complied, the scholars went back to the original Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic and ironed out most of the mistakes in translation made in the Vulgate.

The KJV is Crap - BAD Translation. The whole Combining of Old & New Testaments is based on the notion that Jesus was a Jew - What if he wasn't - what if most of the Orthodox Jews of the Time Hated him? What if Jesus was actually teaching a "Semitic" version of Buddhism?

This is what you get when you translate Semitic Texts into Latin & then into English -> Something that is entirely Alien to your Culture & Contrary to Logic & Reason. You get a bunch of Brainwashed Zombies Running around Rambling about "Satan" & "Lucifer" & "God" & "Jesus" -> I prefer Science!!!

Originally posted by Seraphim_Serpente
Oh for CHRIST's SAKE!!! LUCIFER IS NOT SATAN!!! Will you Fundamentalists please learn how to Read & Read more than one book other than KJV Bible!

I have seen this arguement before but never followed up on it.

Are you splitting hairs?
Know what i mean?
How about this one....
You're comparing apples to oranges!
Well YEAH, they're BOTH FRUITS!

You can spin it anyway you wish, but the fact of the matter is that whether its satan or lucifer, it is not Jesus Christ, and anything that is not Jesus Christ, is by default anti-christ.
Apples oranges peaches pears, a fruit is a fruit and you're splitting hairs

[EDIT] sorry, forgot to answer the post that started this thread!
YES , illuminati=lucifarian.
samliquidation.com...

[edit on 16-7-2004 by Antimyth]

Originally posted by Seraphim_Serpente
The KJV is Crap - BAD Translation. The whole Combining of Old & New Testaments is based on the notion that Jesus was a Jew - What if he wasn't - what if most of the Orthodox Jews of the Time Hated him? What if Jesus was actually teaching a "Semitic" version of Buddhism?

Again, I have to disagree. Nearly all of the other translations were political because of the Reformation and as already stated, leaned heavily on the corrupt translations of the Vulgate. The KJV was made so that the politics of the time were cast aside and the people were given a Bible which was as close to the original as possible - the authors went back to the source. You can't blame the KJV for the translation/interpretation of the original languages - it could only work with what it got. The translation of the KJV is not perfect - there are times when Tyndale's Bible reads better, but in general, the KJV is the best. Probably only the Geneva Bible comes close but that is overshadowed by it's leaning towards Protestantism.

As for Jesus not being a Jew? If he existed, I find this unlikely. The evidence points to him being a Nazearoean Jew. There were many different types of Judaism back in his day and just because the word Jew is used doesn't mean that Jesus' outlook would have followed the Orthodox. It's easy therefore to see why he was hated by the mainstream. Anyone who comes along and tries to change your religion from the inside is seen as an enemy.


By the way Antimyth - your statement that Lucifer is not Jesus is open to question. Jesus refers to himself as the Morning Star - the same name that is given to Lucifer.
The error probably came about with Jerome in the Vulgate. Lucifer was a reference to a Babylonian king. As Babylon was a Judaic enemy, Jerome probably thought that the passage was referring to yet another enemy - Satan. It's a misinterpretation, not a translation error.
The problem comes with the literal translation of Lucifer - bringer of light. Jesus stated many times that he himself was a bringer of light.





[edit on 17-7-2004 by Leveller]

I have got a copy of the Tyndale New Testament - Translated directly from the Greek To English - I think that its a VERY GOOD Translation. So good that the Pope had Tyndale's Bones Smashed after he was Buried as revenge for going over his head. In addition The part that I really care about are the Gospels - of which there are more that the Four contained in most NT's. I don't really subscribe to dogmatic rantings about the Apocalypse.

It reads well doesn't it? I find the language in places to be better than even the KJV. It's certainly more understandable. I realise that is quite a claim when you look at the words of most language experts who claim, that along with the works of Shakespeare, the KJV helped to shape the English language.
But the problem is that Tynedale based it on the Vulgate. You therefore get the errors translated. The KJV doesn't have this problem to the same degree - it was translated straight from the original languages.

Regarding the Apocalypse - Tynedale almost didn't include the last four books - that's why they're at the end. He, like many scholars, didn't believe that they were authentic.

If you want a good read on the subject, I heartily recommend "In The Beginning" by Alister McGrath. It's not too heavy going and does shed some light on the subject about how the Bibles of history evolved.





[edit on 17-7-2004 by Leveller]

I find it strange that I often see people saying that the Illuminati founders were scientists.
Of the founding members that I am aware of (according to Baruell's "The Illuminati") none of them were men of science in the normal sense.
They were mostly public figures, philosophers, bankers and politicians, not engineers, mathematicians and scientific researchers as we would think of the term today.

A good living example of a society that closely mirrors the Illuminati social belief structure today is North Korea.

In fact it is so similar that you would almost have to say that they ARE the Illuminati or taste of what the world will be like if they ever come to take power.

I think the real conspiracy here, is something to do with the fact that Satan is an anagram of Santa. Is Chris Cringle head of the Illuminati?

Originally posted by MrNECROS
A good living example of a society that closely mirrors the Illuminati social belief structure today is North Korea.

Actually, North Korea is a perfect example of a society that parallels the beliefs of those who were opposed to the Illuminati. The Illuminati were anti-feudal, having adopted the Enlightenment principles of the free market.
The Illuminati stood for freedom of religion and speech, while their opposition denounced freedom as "decadent" (in the same manner as the North Korean Maoists).
Also, many Illuminati members were Freemasons and artists. The North Korean Communist Party has labeled Freemasons as "conspirators against the state", and it is a crime to be a Mason there. Art is also highly censored.

Methinks "Necros" would feel right at home in Pyongyang with his anti-Masonic comrades; they would no doubt appreciate his propaganda.

Fiat Lvx.

Originally posted by Masonic Light
The Illuminati were anti-feudal, having adopted the Enlightenment principles of the free market.

Free Market Principles!
If you believe in the 'free market' I have some ocean front property you might be interested in.
In a 'free market' system people follow the all mighty $atanic Dollar.
There IS an all mighty, and it sure aint the dollar.
Again I state, if it is not based on Jesus Christ then it is by default anti-christ.

Originally posted by Antimyth

Free Market Principles!
If you believe in the 'free market' I have some ocean front property you might be interested in.

Perhaps you would feel at home in North Korea too!

Again I state, if it is not based on Jesus Christ then it is by default anti-christ.

It is precisely this sort of fanaticism that holds the human race in bondage.

Jesus of Nazareth was not an economist; however, he did instruct people to follow him only after they've given everything they had to the poor. After you've sold your home, car, belongings, and computer, and given all the proceeds to the poor, then you may talk to me about "what is based on Jesus Christ".

Fiat Lvx.

Leveler - what Part of "Directly from the Greek" do you not understand?
My book Starts with the Gospel of St. Matthew & ends with the "Revelation of St. John the Divine" - > the Prophetic stuff like the Apocalypse of St. John has a lot of interesting info - but I don't really live my life in Fear of the Apocalypse - the Light & the Darkness are with us NOW - we simply need to CHOOSE!!!

Anti-Myth - are you a Communist? What are you doing using Capitalist Technology like the Internet?

Masonic-Light - you are cool dude - we should hang out!!!

Masonic Lite - I normally resist having a direct go at someone over a post but seriously, do you really think The Illuminati were the good guys?
On what reference material other than the Tomb Raider movie do you base your ideas?
I don't know of any writings that describe the cult in the manner you do, please provide some actual reference materials to support this rather unusual view?

So far the only stuff I've been able to find is either directly from or cross referenced from Barruel and Robinson's books or The Catholic Encyclopedia and none of it has anything nice to say about The Illuminati.

On a side note I was wondering if anyone knows if it is possible to get a copy of the Illuminati Encyclopedia that they published, supposedly to subvert and morally decay the population?

They apparently ran several thousand copies originally.

[edit on 7/19/04 by The Axeman]

Originally posted by MrNECROS
Masonic Lite - I normally resist having a direct go at someone over a post but seriously, do you really think The Illuminati were the good guys?
On what reference material other than the Tomb Raider movie do you base your ideas?

From any of Weishaupt's writings, from Von Knigge's writings, from Goethe's writings, and from Mozart's pro-Illuminati opera Die Zauberflote. All these were written from the "horse's mouth", i.e., the men who composed the Illuminati, and their writings put forth their worldview.
I've never seen "Tomb Raider", but it was my understanding this was a fictional movie similar to Raiders of the Lost Ark, and I have no idea how anyone could confuse an action film with the history of an Enlightenment-era revolutionary movement.

I don't know of any writings that describe the cult in the manner you do, please provide some actual reference materials to support this rather unusual view?

Interesting that you should label a group of freedom fighters a "cult"...the North Koreans did the same thing, BTW, in labeling the pro-democratic Union of Proletarian Students a "cult". For references materials, see any and all of the above, including Weishaupt's "In Defense of Illuminism".

So far the only stuff I've been able to find is either directly from or cross referenced from Barruel and Robinson's books or The Catholic Encyclopedia and none of it has anything nice to say about The Illuminati.

That's sort of like saying that the only information I've read about Franklin D. Roosevelt comes from the primary sources of Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler: since neither Hitler nor Mussolini has anything nice to say about FDR, FDR has to be a bad guy.
Of course the Church, Barruel, and Robinson were hostile to the Illuminati: they were hostile to the entire Enlightenment, not only Illuminati. They were opposed also to "reading societies", Freemasonry, liberalism, free thought, Voltaire, Newton, and freedom in general. They saw he Enlightenment as an attempt by intellectuals to undermine society by introducing "decadence", i.e., individual liberty.
The Illuminati were defended in the US by Jefferson, who applauded their goal of establishing a liberal democracy in Bavaria. You can read Jefferson's quote, along with info about Illuminati here:

freemasonry.bcy.ca...

On a side note I was wondering if anyone knows if it is possible to get a copy of the Illuminati Encyclopedia that they published, supposedly to subvert and morally decay the population?

This is covered in the link above. When the Illuminati called for freedom of speech, the press, and religion, and equality for women, their opponents called such things "subverting the moral prudence of the populace". Again, to the Illuminati's opponents, all freedom is decadence, because it disrupts the "natural order" of the "divine rights" of king and church. The same people accused the American forefathers of the same "moral corruption".

This being the case, thank God for "moral decay"; I am free because of it.

Fiat Lvx.

Anyone have any idea where any of these works are available?
On a side note I wouldn't have thought that creating a world without private property was in line with the free market.
I don't really want to pick through your postings, they are largely self indulgent tripe that seems to shift and sway all over the place.

To further explain the North Korea reference in line with the explaination of Barruel and Robinson along with several others is that you have a "living god" in the form of Chairman Kim who creates the focus for all the creative energies of the society, all the works and pagentry of the people is channeled towards the unity of the people through this focus.
There is a life-long process of ritual and mind control and all individual pleasures are regarded as gifts from Kim.
The society has a massive secret police to whom pretty much everyone is at least patially affiliated with and they actively kidnap foreigners, particularly South Koreans and Japanese to either brainwash and send back as spies or even replace them with similar looking people who will spend their lives impersonating the individual.

Their spy network is quite good (they even managaed to get Donald Rumsfeld's company to sell them all the necessary parts for their nuke programme) it has to be because the country is in an absolute mess with widespread famine and disease in the rural areas.
None of this matters really because to quote Adam Weishaupt - "The means are justified by the ends."

Illuminati is a secret sect. Luciferian is not. Both can be useful to one another...or not.