Another one! Beyonce' admits to being demon possessed.

Fair enough.

I see the reason you mentioned in the OP that this thread is aimed at those that already believe.

Lack of any evidence and nothing but assumptions and speculation is a pretty good reason to only preach to the choir.

hehe



ANYway.
the symbol for satan is nothing like the baphomet.
baphomet was based on the occult concept that the first adam was a hermaphrodite.
that is incorrect. the adam were a race of people, some of which were male and some of which were female, who were cloned/copied in the image of elohim (gods).

the idea of "pagan" is a catholic church word to denigrate religions that claimed there was more than one god. and of course, the text of the bible repeatedly makes reference to other gods, some in a divine council, some not.

Originally posted by aaron2209
Fair enough.

I see the reason you mentioned in the OP that this thread is aimed at those that already believe.

Lack of any evidence and nothing but assumptions and speculation is a pretty good reason to only preach to the choir.

And yet it's those who are disputing the OP who are the ones not even providing any evidence to back up their claim that it was metaphor.

they asked Russell simmons about beyonce, super bowl and the illuminati

lets just say...he slips up ...wtf

did he say "again" ......

Originally posted by LazarusTsiyr
reply to post by nomnom

 

She created the persona by giving it a name. But she said herself that a presence came into her. She merely gave it a name.

She didn't say she "feels" like a presence came into her. She said she felt something else come into her. She was saying literally that a presence came into her.]

Yes, a presence.... came into her. You realize what this means? It means that an alter, came into her ego. An alter ego, that she created. She named it.

There's nothing mysterious at all here. I've fully explained it, and used her own words to back it up.

She created an alter because of the stress of having to be more than she currently could accept into her core personality.

Then she grew through the experiences, and learned to merge the alter into her core personality. I did this long ago as well. It's what creative minds tend to do. They keep recreating, and merging their selves into one throughout their life. Trust me, I'm way, way different now than I was a decade ago. It's still all me. No demons necessary.

reply to post by LazarusTsiyr


Hilarious how you dont even try to answer my point. If you can prove those sources wrong then by all means go ahead.

More
Even more

I can literally keep pasting these untill you actually address the point.

reply to post by LazarusTsiyr


Why is there a demand to prove it was metaphoric yet no need for you to prove it was literal?

My assumption is just as valid as yours.

reply to post by nomnom

They're one in the same. ...

Fair, but that's a whole new update you're bringing to light with your sources. If you knew that, you could have brought it up earlier in the thread! It makes it look like you were stating a point, then seeking the proof, as it stands. As to the content, she could be masking it as an alter-ego, or she could have sought out it's actual death, such things happen. They tend to turn traitor to a host by default, by design, and wait until exposure before making adjustments to their living arrangements.

reply to post by LazarusTsiyr

Of course it's speculation, but at least my speculation has her own words to support it. The "pro-metaphorists" have nothing, not even her words, to support that claim.

That's exactly what I'm seeing. Also that there's a lot of swarm trolling go'in on in this thread by those who can't bare the truth.

reply to post by Northwarden


That's how my mind works. I intuit, then back it up later if bugged to it, and/or curious enough.

MBTI: ENTP

That's just an additional layer which isn't necessary. She still performs as if she's Sasha Fierce recently (after she announced the merger). If the alter was implanted and not wanted, she wouldn't have merged it willingly.

Occam's Razor

Originally posted by nomnom


Yes, a presence.... came into her. You realize what this means? It means that an alter, came into her ego. An alter ego, that she created. She named it.

It means she felt a presence come into her. And I believe that presence was demonic.

There's nothing mysterious at all here. I've fully explained it, and used her own words to back it up.

No, you didn't.

. I did this long ago as well. It's what creative minds tend to do. They keep recreating, and merging their selves into one throughout their life. Trust me, I'm way, way different now than I was a decade ago. It's still all me. No demons necessary.

How funny. Because I'm a creative mind also. And yet I've never had to create a fake persona in order to be creative. But I guess you'll just claim that I'm not creative.

Being different than you were decades ago is not the same as creating a false persona. I fail to see your connection. But whatever.

Originally posted by aaron2209
reply to post by LazarusTsiyr

 

Why is there a demand to prove it was metaphoric yet no need for you to prove it was literal?

My assumption is just as valid as yours.

Oh man I'm really getting tired of repeating myself. There's no "demand," for one thing. My point is there's nothing that says her words were a metaphor. It's literal until there's a reason to think it's not literal. I'm thinking Occam's Razor would apply here.

You can assume all you want. But if you are gonna sit here and tell me that she was speaking metaphorically there should be some reasoning to back that up. There should be some evidence. Something that she said that proves it was a metaphor. There's not. So we have to take it literally until something is produced to illustrate that it was a metaphor.

Not a really hard concept to grasp.

Originally posted by nomnom

That's just an additional layer which isn't necessary. She still performs as if she's Sasha Fierce recently (after she announced the merger). If the alter was implanted and not wanted, she wouldn't have merged it willingly.

Who said it wasn't wanted?

reply to post by LazarusTsiyr


No. Please refrain from putting words in my mouth. You've done this several times already. I said "tend to".

You have a tendency to take flexible statements as absolutes.

reply to post by LazarusTsiyr

Oh man I'm really getting tired of repeating myself.

Just tell em to read the thread and don't repeat yourself.

Originally posted by LazarusTsiyr
There should be some evidence. Something that she said that proves it was a metaphor. There's not.

A person who is speaking about their feelings and you want evidence? What evidence could there be? MRI while she is talking?

Originally posted by LazarusTsiyr
It means she felt a presence come into her. And I believe that presence was demonic.

Embhasis mine. I think this sums up the thread quite accurately.

An important piece of the puzzle may be this:

Her father worked for Xerox for 10 years. Look up "Xerox and the occult". The founder said communication with spirits led him to create Xerox.

en.wikipedia.org...

www.scribd.com...

There's also this:



Beyonce’s Sweet Dreams – Occult Mind Control

vigilantcitizen.com...

Originally posted by PsykoOps


A person who is speaking about their feelings and you want evidence? What evidence could there be? MRI while she is talking?

No she was talking about an experience. What I want is someone to back up that their claim that it wasn't literal, that it was a metaphor.

Embhasis mine. I think this sums up the thread quite accurately.

Well, no crap. I've said numerous times it was my personal belief. But yet again I have to repeat myself. If people bothered to read the posts and my replies I wouldn't have to. Heck, in the OP I said this was posted for those who believe in this stuff and want more info on it.

I also said that my belief was based on her own words, being taken literally because there's nothing to indicate a metaphor, and the symbolism she flashes and wears (like the Baphomet head).

Repeat, repeat, repeat, repeat.

But I guess bothering to read is asking too much for some people.

From this moment forward I'm not repeating myself anymore. If someone asks something I already addressed, I'm just gonna point that out. They can go find where I addressed their redundant question or talking point.

reply to post by kingofmd


I'm genuinely interested. Who is norman swarzkoff?

I think it's interesting to watch satan destroy the ones he made. lady gaga is being put out to pasture, right now, I believe. She's not going to recover from her "hip" problem. I believe we're watching the obozo administration unravel right now. And, of course, the vatican is going to start falling apart in only ways we can imagine right now.

satan destroys his own, and laughs.

Originally posted by LazarusTsiyr
My point is there's nothing that says her words were a metaphor. It's literal until there's a reason to think it's not literal. I'm thinking Occam's Razor would apply here.

and my point is there's nothing saying her words were literal except you and your assumptions.

You can assume all you want.

I shall as you will continue to do.

But if you are gonna sit here and tell me that she was speaking metaphorically there should be some reasoning to back that up. There should be some evidence. Something that she said that proves it was a metaphor. There's not.

That almost sounds like a demand No evidence to suggest it's literal either.

So we have to take it literally until something is produced to illustrate that it was a metaphor.

No we don't but you can assume all you want.