Christianity and Th...
 
Notifications
Clear all

Christianity and Thelema

Page 9 / 16

Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 5807
 
Posted by: @kidneyhawk

STOP quoting sources and throwing these at us as if they somehow demonstrate a point.

Well, look, I asked Well to knock off the constant quoting, but not to stop completely because he sometimes pulls up some points of interest, in favor of what he thinks and what his experiences are. I even asked, "What is your experience in this matter?"

No response. But the long, documented posts continued.

Posted by: @kidneyhawk

I honestly don't understand your opinion, perspective or point at ALL.

Yes, there is much information delivered, but to what end? It always helps to know what point someone is making. We don't know if he believes in the Elohim merry band, if he thinks they're demons, or if he embraces YHVH as the almighty top dog.

It's easier to dispute anything he says or re-prints than to engage in details. I hereby invoke the "It's all crap" alternative rule of law and order.

 


ReplyQuote
Tiger
(@tiger)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 1781
 

" a cosmic warfare between Satan’s powers and God’s, is initiated by Satan sucessfully temting humanity into a state of sin and misery. "

Cool i was thinking it was ordinary humanity generating the condition. Good thing Jesus came to let us know that it will be resolved some time in the distant future. Oh wait i think the scriptures said that when the true messiah comes things would change as a result, he would change the world and things would not be the same old same old. Lord have mercy.


ReplyQuote
hermitas
(@hermitas)
Member
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 115
 

You guys ever hear of the documentary hypothesis? 

https://www.wabashcenter.wabash.edu/syllabi/r/reed/20050210C/3.pdf

The short version is that these different names for God also reflect passages of different style and emphasis in the Hebrew Scriptures. It is hypothesized that they reflect different historical periods of language and theology. In other words, stories and retellings of stories from different time periods were woven together in the same modern text. 

The best example has to do with the repeated creation story in Genesis 1 and 2 (See link above).

Genesis 1 reads like this great cosmic scene, where “Elohim” creates by fiat.

Genesis 2:4 starts a repetition of the creation story, but this time “YHWH Elohim” creates man from earth and seems to have a body.

Qabalists have historically made a big deal about these changes in name and style, but... maybe it’s just what happens when you compile various sources into one.

This is what they teach in seminary anyway.

It’s a little divergent from the OP, but it seems to be coming up. 

 


ReplyQuote
wellreadwellbred
(@wellreadwellbred)
Member
Joined: 9 years ago
Posts: 1114
 

Shiva: "Almighty God" is not YHVH the revealer of his dual nature, who says "Do this" and "Don't Do that." The All-mighty doesn't say anything. Human dorks brush against him (it) and then the names come forth.

It's not a question of being "allowed." He can't speak. He is dumb. The All-mighty is dumb. That's why he sends people down here to make-up, and reveal, his name, which is an errore because he (it) is nameless."

Who came up with, or invented, the concept of that "The All-mighty doesn't say anything."? And who came up with, or invented the idea that "The All-mighty is dumb"

The inventor[-s] of Kabbala?

 

Shiva: "All the Elohim, and YHVH (and according to AC, this included Aiwass - but he only wrote this in one sentence and did not bang any drum about it), and Baal, and any other archons, is a continuation of this pantheon of reptilian, winged, dragon entities."

Where did AC write this one centence?

 

Shiva: "... one of the archons [elohim] was masquerading as the almighty godfather of the demonic mafia?"

According to the belief system of the Mormons Church, the elohim are more or less equal, and Jesus Christ and Satan are brothers. This, and the fact that the belief system of the Mormon Church is nontrinitarian and posits many gods (polytheism and that any human has the potential to become a god), is the reason that Christian churches do not accept the Mormons Church as a christian church.


ReplyQuote
dom
 dom
(@dom)
Member
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 2962
Topic starter  
Posted by: @wellreadwellbred

Shiva, Dom asks the following questions with respect to messages channeled to Aleister Crowley and Alice Bailey respectively, will you please be so compassionate (yes I know, "... Compassion is the vice of kings: (II:21.) ..." and all that Jazz ), as to try to answer his questions, from your point of view as an initiate??:.................................................................................etc etc etc ....................................................................................................................

 

 

..was ...err...kind of asking you as you were the one who provided the quotes in your post. 

 

Posted by: @kidneyhawk

Wellbred-

I just saw that Shiva indulged you.

We'll see if you respond with more than cut and paste quotations.

This relentless  <ahem> quirk of his for producing very lengthy quotes as answers is ingrained.  It's been around for years I believe. The only way to stop it is if it comes form the Moderator.   The posters here have tolerance for crazy uncles with weird habits so they just learned to roll with it.   See it as a real world study of the phenomena known as scotoma.   That is, confront him with it and then watch your confrontation fly completely over his head

https://www.lashtal.com/wiki/Aleister_Crowley_Timeline


ReplyQuote
Tiger
(@tiger)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 1781
 

Baʿal is well-attested in surviving inscriptions and was popular in theophoric divus force bear carrying names throughout the Levant.
The Phoenician Baʿal is generally identified with El. Ugaritic records show he was thought to intervene actively in the world of man as the son of the more ALOOF estranged idiot deaf and dumb aspect of El. From Canaan, worship of Baʿal spread to Egypt by the Middle Kingdom and throughout the Mediterranean following the waves of Phoenician colonization.
Baʿal Berith Lord of the Covenant
El Berith God of the Covenant
Baalyah Yahweh is Baʿal
Jerubbaal Baal will contend


ReplyQuote
Tiger
(@tiger)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 1781
 

Queen of heaven , Anat-Yahu, Asherah, Astarte, Ishtar, was venerated as Yahweh's consort kept in his temples in Jerusalem, Bethel, and Samaria.
The name "Israel" is based on that of El, the head of the Canaanite pantheon; not Isra Yahweh.

The term Israel first enters historical records in the 13th century BCE with the Merneptah Stele.
The worship of Yahweh is attested to as early as the 12th century BCE.
There is no attestation or record of even Yahweh's name, let alone his origin or character, until more than five-hundred years later, with the Mesha Stele.
The Kenite hypothesis states that Yahweh was a Midianite deity, who made his way in to the proto-Israelites.


ReplyQuote
wellreadwellbred
(@wellreadwellbred)
Member
Joined: 9 years ago
Posts: 1114
 

Dom: "..was ...err...kind of asking you as you were the one who provided the quotes in your post. "

Dom, on page 6 in this thread kidneyhawk starts mentioning Alice Bailey: 

kidneyhawk: "What might be helpful to Barbara is to get a copy of Alice Bailey's Initiation: Human and Solar AND the Unfinished Autobiography. Read these and ENJOY THEM. ..."

And after this both kidneyhawk and Shiva have written about this Alice Bailey in this thread.

I did not introduce the subject matter of Alice Bailey to this thread, and I do not know much about her. But it might be the case that Shiva or kidneyhawk can provide you with some answers, with respect to you questions relating to Alice Bailey.

 


dom liked
ReplyQuote
wellreadwellbred
(@wellreadwellbred)
Member
Joined: 9 years ago
Posts: 1114
 

Shiva: "I asked Well to knock off the constant quoting, but not to stop completely because he sometimes pulls up some points of interest, in favor of what he thinks and what his experiences are. I even asked, "What is your experience in this matter?"

No response. [...]"

Not true, my response is within the laste posting on page 7 in this thread. 

 

Shiva: "... there is much information delivered, but to what end? It always helps to know what point someone is making. We don't know if he believes in the Elohim merry band, if he thinks they're demons, or if he embraces YHVH as the almighty top dog."

The book by the biblical scholar, and expert in the ancient near east, Michael Heiser, that I quoted from, is a mere summation of what is well known to biblical scholars with respect to the elohim, and it demonstrates that the Jehova mentioned in the Christian Bible, is unique and supreme among all other elohim mentioned in the Christian Bible. 

As to the point I am making, duh!?!

This is a thread titled Christianity and Thelema, and out of my persistent generosity, I am simply providing relevant paraphrased information from an easy to read, easily available, popular on Amazon.com, very well research, book, covering the subject matter of the elohim from the point of view of Christianity.   

And with respect to the subject matter of the elohim from the point of view of [AC's ?] Thelema, I am simply curious about where Aleister Crowley did write this one sentence about all the elohim, mentioned by shiva?

Shiva: "All the Elohim, and YHVH (and according to AC, this included Aiwass - but he only wrote this in one sentence and did not bang any drum about it), and Baal, and any other archons, is a continuation of this pantheon of reptilian, winged, dragon entities."

 


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 5807
 
Posted by: @tiger

when the true messiah comes things would change as a result, he would change the world and things would not be the same old same old. Lord have mercy.

This is True. Depending on the context, which is generally attributed to some external being who will cause synthesis to occur and all difference will become married in divine joy and people will sigh with relief that they slipped past the punishment phase.

Earlier, I said the our job is to get straight with the source, while disregarding any encounters with lesser beings, demons, or YHVHs. I neglected to point out that this would involve you (anyone) going through the levels, like in an elevator-lift. The "floors" (really zones) will include ...

1. Basic Practices (the "Work")
2. Intermediate Practices (more "work")
3. Supernal Practices (wu-wei "Work that is not work")
4. Christ Consciousness (or The Bodhisattva State)
5. Adi (primordial consciousness)
6. Rigpa (no concepts)
7. Nirvana

The order given is not exact and the aspirant may bounce around like a ping-pong ball while traversing these 7 realms. Other models may apply.

So, internally, you (anyone) become your own savior. 

Posted by: @hermitas

You guys

This suggests a difference between you (yourself) and us (the collective bickerate).

Posted by: @hermitas

The short version is that these different names for God also reflect passages of different style and emphasis in the Hebrew Scriptures. It is hypothesized that they reflect different historical periods of language and theology. In other words, stories and retellings of stories from different time periods were woven together in the same modern text. 

We guys were already bickering about this, throwing in bits and pieces of your documentary, revolving around the synthetic manipulation of Nice.

Yes, all the names are different viewpoints from different folks in different time zones. The problem comes in when the names themselves are applied, because the source don't have a name.

Posted by: @hermitas

Qabalists have historically made a big deal about these changes in name and style, but... maybe it’s just what happens when you compile various sources into one.

Yeah, that's it. (Seriously and without slander or humorification). Thumbs up.

Posted by: @wellreadwellbred

Who came up with, or invented, the concept of that "The All-mighty doesn't say anything."? And who came up with, or invented the idea that "The All-mighty is dumb"

I did.

I am writing about my own experience(s), and expressing my own opinions, not referring to some external web link where somebody else is expressing their opinion.

Posted by: @wellreadwellbred

Where did AC write this one centence?

I have no idea. I don't have an index or Table of Contempts handy. But this one sentence has been quoted multiple times in recent history here on the many LAShTAL forums, so it shouldn't be hard to find. The key search word might be "Sumerian" or Sumeria," if you need an external, quoted quote.

The one sentence should be included in The Ten Demandments, because it either shows (a) The devil is in charge of The Garden of Eden or (b) Derranged thoughtforms - each (both) of which may be the same thing.

Posted by: @wellreadwellbred

According to the belief system of the Mormons Church

Oh, those loonies. By the way, what is the belief system of the WellRead church?

Posted by: @wellreadwellbred

any human has the potential to become a god

This is heretical thinking from the Roman viewpoint, but fits nicely into the The Thelemic paradigm. I guess I'll go join the Mormons. They're right next door, only one State away. I refer to their HH (Holy Headquarters).

Posted by: @dom

the phenomena known as scotoma.

I never heard or read that, what was it, scrotuma?

But I get the part about the supracoronal ("above the head") passageway.

Posted by: @tiger

the son of the more ALOOF estranged idiot deaf and dumb aspect of El.

Now we're getting somewhere. The primary clear light is dumb (which means speechless, not stupid). The secondary clear light is where we (anyone) gets to chat with El (a pseudonym for the nameless ultimacy). But spoken words don't cut it. Everyone with any real experience knows El transmits soundless words, telepathically, but in lear, flat, neutral, unaccented, middle-American English).

Then the mind of the profiteer adds names to the roster according to his/her accented lingo. For example, Alice Bailey said The Tibetan, Djwhal Khul, was made-up by HPB based upon one of her Punjabi (not Tibetan) mentors, Dayal Singh Majithia1848–1898, a Punjabi banker and reformist, who was renamed Djwhal Khul.

The following screen-grab from the irrefutably ultimate source, The Hot Zones of ..., proves this to be true ...

image
Posted by: @tiger

From Canaan, worship of Baʿal spread to Egypt by the Middle Kingdom

By what name was this persona known in Egypt?

Posted by: @wellreadwellbred

I did not introduce the subject matter of Alice Bailey to this thread, and I do not know much about her. But it might be the case that Shiva or kidneyhawk can provide you with some answers, with respect to you questions relating to Alice Bailey.

I accept full and complete responsibility for the Bailey reference, except for the part I can dump on KH (Koot Hoomi, KidneyHawk).

Nobody, including Barbara, asked any questions about Bailey.

You see how long and contorted the endless posting has become? Dissection of minutiae. 

 


ReplyQuote
hermitas
(@hermitas)
Member
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 115
 
Posted by: @wellreadwellbred

easy to read, easily available, popular on Amazon.com, very well research, book, covering the subject matter of the elohim from the point of view of Christianity

I really want to rebel against this and claim Christianity has always been monotheistic, but Paul actually does say some things about “gods” and “lords” that can be made into a legitimate argument for the point being made. 

Interesting.


ReplyQuote
dom
 dom
(@dom)
Member
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 2962
Topic starter  

Has anyone read this book?  Early on he claims that John the Baptist knew that he was Elijah reincarnated;

The Secret History of the World

 

by Jonathan Black

 

THE INTERNATIONAL BESTSELLER

The complete history of the world, from the beginning of time to the present day, based on the beliefs and writings of the secret societies.

Jonathan Black examines the end of the world and the coming of the Antichrist. Or is the Antichrist already here? How will he make himself known and what will become of the world when he does? Willl it be the end of Time?

Having studied theology and learnt from initiates of all the great secret societies of the world, Jonathan Black has learned that it is possible to reach an altered state of consciousness in which we can see things about the way the world works that hidden from our everyday commonsensical consciousness. This history shows that by using secret techniques, people such as Leonardo da Vinci, Isaac Newton and George Washington have worked themselves into this altered state - and have been able to access supernatural levels of intelligence.

This book will leave you questioning every aspect of your life and spotting hidden messages in the very fabric of society and in life itself. It will open your mind to a new way of living and leave you questioning everything you have been taught - and everything you've taught your children.

https://www.lashtal.com/wiki/Aleister_Crowley_Timeline


ReplyQuote
ignant666
(@ignant666)
Tangin
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 3551
 
Posted by: @dom

Has anyone read this book?

Probably not, or at least i hope so.

It is clear from the blurb you reproduce that this person is a cuckoo-pants-person who could not aspire to the august title of "fruitcake", or even "nut-bar", on his most lucid day.

Posted by: @shiva

what is the belief system of the WellRead church?

Some sort of Protestant Xianity, though he won't admit it. My best guess.

 


ReplyQuote
dom
 dom
(@dom)
Member
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 2962
Topic starter  
Posted by: @ignant666
Posted by: @dom

Has anyone read this book?

Probably not, or at least i hope so.

It is clear from the blurb you reproduce that this person is a cuckoo-pants-person who could not aspire to the august title of "fruitcake", or even "nut-bar", on his most lucid day.

 

Well I guess that you would've said that about The Baptist out there in the desert ranting about Herod's immorality and the coming of The Lord.  

 

Anyway, spoiler alert; the Antichrist resides in Eastern Europe. 

https://www.lashtal.com/wiki/Aleister_Crowley_Timeline


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 5807
 
Posted by: @dom

and George Washington have worked themselves into this altered state - and have been able to access supernatural levels of intelligence.

Wasn't it George who grew hemp (for rope, you know)?

I see the word supernatural being bandied about (again). 

I missed the quote where J the B knew J was Elijah.

I undertand that the Nice people at Nicea removed all references to reinc, but we know a few slipped through.

Posted by: @hermitas

Christianity has always been monotheistic

Elohim is a plural designation. See Allan Bennett's thesis on Elohim.

Also, the Liber describes God the creator telling his fellows, "Look, they have become like us ..." just before the eviction from Eden. The very first book (Generous) lays out a plural godly scenario. The Christians (of Nice) chose this fable as the basis of the new Liber.

However, you may be right, even if you are left-handed or left-leaning. Christianity doesn't get under way until The NEW Testament, so by then the gods were most retired in favor of YHVH, who couldn't be the one, true God because he has a name, but that's another matter.

Posted by: @ignant666

Some sort of Protestant Xianity

But what is he protesting against? You best guess will suffice.

Posted by: @dom

Anyway, spoiler alert; the Antichrist resides in Eastern Europe. 

What? I though he was born and died in England. And his second-in-line was born somewhere Stateside and died in Pasadena. Please tell me I'm not wrong, and that I don't have to rearrange my entire geography of cosmology.


ReplyQuote
Jamie J Barter
(@jamiejbarter)
Member
Joined: 5 years ago
Posts: 1821
 
Posted by: @shiva
Posted by: @wellreadwellbred

(yes I know, "... Compassion is the vice of kings: (II:21.)

This means Kings are allow to exercise the vice.

It also means Kings are the only people capable of committing the vice, and that they are naughty and shouldn't really because in terms of strict darwinist survival of the fittest it goes against the grain.

I don't necessarily subscribe to this view myself; "am just saying".

- Someone else [has] got another opinion [?]

Posted by: @wellreadwellbred

The first cosmic fall, is caused by Satan, one among the elohim who decided to rebel aginst governance of God, and was thus expelled from the divine council.

He was in charge (the chairman?) of the "Earthly Free Thinking" sub-committee, wasn't he?

Posted by: @wellreadwellbred

Nephilim were the offspring of the elohim ("sons of god") members of the divine council comming to earth out of lust for human women.

Beauty pageant.

Posted by: @wellreadwellbred

“the ruling authority of the gods allotted to the nations was declared illegitimate and null by the work of Christ”., is how Heiser explains Jesus’s victory.

Football match. (One-nil).

Posted by: @wellreadwellbred

Nephilim, the wicked offspring of marriages between humans and angels before the flood.

Do you mean wicked as in, "work the work of wickedness" (AL III:44) ?

Posted by: @shiva
Posted by: @wellreadwellbred

(2) (some of the elohim) the “sons of God” in Genesis 6 leaving heaven to take human wives

This is unthinkable.  Alternatively, think how you might feel if your wife or daughter was taken by, say, this fellow

But these fellows might all be shape-shifters (as in the siddhi)

Also "just sayin",

N Joy


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 5807
 
Posted by: @jamiejbarter

But these fellows might all be shape-shifters

Of course they are. That's why there are so many versions, and so many legends about them that differ, causing WellBred to stay busy .

I think our neighbors are among them. They look humanoid, but their habits ...


ReplyQuote
Tiger
(@tiger)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 1781
 

@Shiva
By what name was this persona known in Egypt?

Re’ammin a deity at Memphis and other several areas. His cult center was built for him at Baal Saphon near Tanis in the northern Delta.
https://egyptian-gods.org/egyptian-gods-baal/

Nephilim, the wicked offspring of marriages between humans and angels before the flood.
Do you mean wicked as in, "work the work of wickedness" (AL III:44) ?

Wicked as in they are Wicked shape-shifting bene elohim mingling the divine nature with human nature. Crossing the boundaries and transmitting forbidden esoteric magical mysteries as well as knowledge of precious stones, cutting of roots and herbs, mining, forging, chemical behaviours of the inter-metallic compounds and how they can be mixed; and how to beautify.

what is the belief system of the WellRead church?

A spanking sacrificial ransom redemption inculcation discipline.


ReplyQuote
hermitas
(@hermitas)
Member
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 115
 

Re: Christianity and Thelema

I’ve been deeply and profoundly both. 

I can tell you that my change from one to the other caused significant changes in my personality.

People talk about the “formulae” of Osiris versus Horus. Yeah, I feel it.

I went from guiltily crucifying my impulses to freely learning from them. 

As someone who grew up in the sort of Bhakti religion that is Evangelical Christianity, I’ve said before that, looking backward, I used to call this Angel “Jesus” and make it wear its safest mask.

That religion provided me with a great life growing up. It’s only looking backward from this freer position that it looks so crippled and stifled - spiritually and intellectually enslaved. I don’t want that for my children. 

So on with the evolution.


ReplyQuote
hermitas
(@hermitas)
Member
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 115
 
Posted by: @dom

Do you see any compatibility between the teachings of Christ and Thelema?  If so where and how? Furthermore if so how do you reconcile this considering that this is not the aeon of 'the dying god?'

More on topic...

The only compatibility I see is in an inference from one of Christ's teachings: "If you have done it to the least of these my brothers, you have done it unto me." (Matthew 25:40)

From this, one may extrapolate the esoteric idea of the divinity inherent in all persons as well as our fundamental unity. Or, at least, some do. In this, I see some similarity in the idea that "every man and every woman is a star."

The question then is "How should one live in relationship to these divine others?" Christ's answer seems to be that the Kingdom of God (in the living world) is made up of brothers and sisters, children of God who love one another.  But it immediately breaks off into incompatibility with Thelema when Jesus' answer would further be that each should live in submission to each other. 

 

 


ReplyQuote
dom
 dom
(@dom)
Member
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 2962
Topic starter  
Posted by: @hermitas

More on topic...

The only compatibility I see is in an inference from one of Christ's teachings: "If you have done it to the least of these my brothers, you have done it unto me." (Matthew 25:40)

...

.Yes this is about Karma as are most or even all of Christ's teachings.  This is fitting as the Aeon of Maat is either here or nearby.  If you don't understand that then His teachings will lead to confusion.......as seen here;

The question then is "How should one live in relationship to these divine others?" Christ's answer seems to be that the Kingdom of God (in the living world) is made up of brothers and sisters, children of God who love one another.  But it immediately breaks off into incompatibility with Thelema when Jesus' answer would further be that each should live in submission to each other. 

The idea that Thelema (unlike Christianity) is about throwing your weight around on the weak and that there are no consequences thereby  is missing the point.

https://www.lashtal.com/wiki/Aleister_Crowley_Timeline


ReplyQuote
hermitas
(@hermitas)
Member
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 115
 
Posted by: @dom

If you don't understand that then His teachings will lead to confusion.......as seen here;

The question then is "How should one live in relationship to these divine others?" Christ's answer seems to be that the Kingdom of God (in the living world) is made up of brothers and sisters, children of God who love one another.  But it immediately breaks off into incompatibility with Thelema when Jesus' answer would further be that each should live in submission to each other. 

The idea that Thelema (unlike Christianity) is about throwing your weight around on the weak and that there are no consequences thereby  is missing the point.

lmao... Truly, you are a model of submission. 


ReplyQuote
hermitas
(@hermitas)
Member
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 115
 
Posted by: @dom

Yes this is about Karma as are most or even all of Christ's teachings.

I can see a lot of that. "Judge not, lest you be judged," and "For if you forgive other people when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive others their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins," which I interpret more in a karmic sense. 

But Thelema is absolutely not "turn the other cheek" *unless* turning the other cheek is more in line with accomplishing your will. In my view, the Thelemite's response should be relative to one's will  - with the end goal determining whether to fight or submit.

Now... We could get into it over Jesus' more aggressive bits - the cleansing of the Temple (Matthew 21:12, et al.), the mocking of the Pharisees (Matthew 12:34), the instruction to the disciples to buy a sword (Luke 22:36). 

And *that's* where the conversation might get interesting - maybe. But on the whole, the "teachings of Christ" as held up by Christianity through the centuries are considered teachings of self-sacrifice and submission. 


ReplyQuote
dom
 dom
(@dom)
Member
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 2962
Topic starter  
Posted by: @hermitas
Posted by: @dom

Yes this is about Karma as are most or even all of Christ's teachings.

I can see a lot of that. "Judge not, lest you be judged," and "For if you forgive other people when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive others their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins," which I interpret more in a karmic sense. 

But Thelema is absolutely not "turn the other cheek" *unless* turning the other cheek is more in line with accomplishing your will. In my view, the Thelemite's response should be relative to one's will  - with the end goal determining whether to fight or submit.

No, the turning of the cheek and offer him your coat etc is a classic example of Christ's teachings flying over people's heads.  You honestly think that Christ, Son of God wanted EVERYONE to be a bitch so only the evil prosper? Again, apply Karma to that teaching and you should get it.

https://www.lashtal.com/wiki/Aleister_Crowley_Timeline


ReplyQuote
hermitas
(@hermitas)
Member
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 115
 
Posted by: @dom

No, the turning of the cheek and offer him your coat etc is a classic example of Christ's teachings flying over people's heads.  You honestly think that Christ, Son of God wanted EVERYONE to be a bitch so only the evil prosper? Again, apply Karma to that teaching and you should get it.

Ah... But let’s distinguish first between whether I view Christ so simply and whether Christianity at the end of the Osirian Aeon views Christ so simply. 

I do not view Jesus so simply, but I’ve learned it doesn’t matter what I think. I am 1 in 50,000,000, and what matters is the larger scale understanding of humanity and what it needs. 


ReplyQuote
hermitas
(@hermitas)
Member
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 115
 

Let me refer to what I was taught as a teenager and what stuck with me...

Basically, yes, you are supposed to turn the other cheek, give to your own detriment, etc. *precisely because* this is an act that changes the world, just as Jesus dying on the cross was an act that changed the world - changes peoples’ hearts.

But if you have to defend yourself, then God understands and forgives *if* you are a Christian.

That’s what most Christians I know actually believe and live in practice. 

No, it is not consistent with itself. Yes, the selfless ideal would actually lead to a worse world (though they would debate that in spite of themselves). But that’s the real world teaching that goes together with the contradictory ideal.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 5807
 
Posted by: @tiger

Re’ammin a deity at Memphis and other

Reamin' (dreamin'?), you say.

Never heard of him. But your source is sound, so I'll go along.

However, I see no reason to worship this fellow.

Posted by: @tiger

transmitting forbidden esoteric magical mysteries as well as knowledge of precious stones, cutting of roots and herbs, mining, forging, chemical behaviours of the inter-metallic compounds and how they can be mixed; and how to beautify.

"Forbidden esoteric mysteries?" I knew Aiwass was mixed up in this. 

I can, today (not yester, maybe not manana), now only assume that we all have one, or more?, of these Elos in our personal hierarchy. But then I've actually held that concept for decades. In particular, I adhere to the Lucifer convention, wherein we are all fallen angels, bringing the light into the dark zone.

"Thoth, Hermes, Hermitas, Mercury, Lucifer, (Prometheus), Oh-Din - By whatever name I invoke you, you are nameless unto eternity."

Posted by: @dom

The idea that Thelema (unlike Christianity) is about throwing your weight around on the weak and that there are no consequences thereby  is missing the point.

I think the point is to apply all these concepts interiorly. The Kingdom is within you, so is AL III, and so are the obstacles to entering said realms. UK/EU Brexit rules may still cloud the matter.

 


ReplyQuote
dom
 dom
(@dom)
Member
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 2962
Topic starter  
Posted by: @hermitas

Let me refer to what I was taught as a teenager and what stuck with me...

Basically, yes, you are supposed to turn the other cheek, give to your own detriment, etc. *precisely because* this is an act that changes the world

Why was your cheek getting smacked in the first place?

https://www.lashtal.com/wiki/Aleister_Crowley_Timeline


ReplyQuote
hermitas
(@hermitas)
Member
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 115
 
Posted by: @dom
Posted by: @hermitas

Let me refer to what I was taught as a teenager and what stuck with me...

Basically, yes, you are supposed to turn the other cheek, give to your own detriment, etc. *precisely because* this is an act that changes the world

Why was your cheek getting smacked in the first place?

Would you believe I’m a smart ass?


ReplyQuote
dom
 dom
(@dom)
Member
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 2962
Topic starter  
Posted by: @hermitas
Why was your cheek getting smacked in the first place?

Would you believe I’m a smart ass?

I think Christ is asking, "Why was your cheek getting smacked in the first place?"

https://www.lashtal.com/wiki/Aleister_Crowley_Timeline


ReplyQuote
hermitas
(@hermitas)
Member
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 115
 
Posted by: @dom
Posted by: @hermitas
Why was your cheek getting smacked in the first place?

Would you believe I’m a smart ass?

I think Christ is asking, "Why was your cheek getting smacked in the first place?"

So your take on this teaching is “take it because you probably deserved it”? Or what’s your point?

 


ReplyQuote
dom
 dom
(@dom)
Member
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 2962
Topic starter  
Posted by: @hermitas
Posted by: @dom
Posted by: @hermitas
Why was your cheek getting smacked in the first place?

Would you believe I’m a smart ass?

I think Christ is asking, "Why was your cheek getting smacked in the first place?"

So your take on this teaching is “take it because you probably deserved it”? Or what’s your point?

 

Not exactly but very nearly.   I think you are being asked to contemplate the past when your/his/her metaphorical or actual cheek got smacked and it hurt.   How did it come about?  

https://www.lashtal.com/wiki/Aleister_Crowley_Timeline


ReplyQuote
dom
 dom
(@dom)
Member
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 2962
Topic starter  

How about 'the meek' inheriting the earth or  Mathew 8:20 ; “The foxes have holes, and the birds of the sky places of rest, but the Son of Man has nowhere He may lay the head”?  What do you make of these lines?   

https://www.lashtal.com/wiki/Aleister_Crowley_Timeline


ReplyQuote
Jamie J Barter
(@jamiejbarter)
Member
Joined: 5 years ago
Posts: 1821
 
Posted by: @hermitas

But it immediately breaks off into incompatibility with Thelema when Jesus' answer would further be that each should live in submission to each other. 

"I'm more meek than you are!"

"No - I am!"

In terms of the pecking order of the human pack, someone's got to be at the bottom of the heap just as much as someone's got to be at the top.  It's just that it doesn't seem like something anyone would meaningfully or gainfully aspire to, for any reason.

Non-grovellingly yours,

N Joy


ReplyQuote
Pertinax
(@pertinax)
Member
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 55
 
Posted by: @dom

How about 'the meek' inheriting the earth or  Mathew 8:20 ; “The foxes have holes, and the birds of the sky places of rest, but the Son of Man has nowhere He may lay the head”?  What do you make of these lines?   

The word 'meek' can be a turnoff I think. To me it gives images of mousey Victorian scullery maids and other 'wouldn't say boo to a ghost' types. As Crowley notes, nobody ever gave the meek anything. However, on inspection I find this interpretation to be misleading.

The meek, I feel, refers to the silent majority of humanity who simply get on with life without causing too much trouble for others. Wars are fought, won and lost, cities are built and destroyed kings and princes arise, lords of the earth, and fall just as quickly. The ordinary man persists.

To me this passage means that in the end, life continues much as it always has, and those who vainly try to wear crowns and coronets or other trappings of power and prestige soon disappear into the history books. Christ was teaching, in his fashion, something equivalent to the Buddhist doctrine (observable fact rather than simply doctrine I think) of impermanence.

At the risk of appearing OT, the following poem sums up my feelings on the matter quite well, particularly the last verse:

https://www.poetryloverspage.com/poets/kipling/philadelphia.html

 


ReplyQuote
Jamie J Barter
(@jamiejbarter)
Member
Joined: 5 years ago
Posts: 1821
 
Posted by: @pertinax

The meek, I feel, refers to the silent majority of humanity who simply get on with life without causing too much trouble for others.

You mean those who just about get by, living lives in Thoreau's words "of quiet desperation" - the "keep calm & carry on", "mustn't grumble", borderline-ovine mentality of human mediocrity? 

Whatever virtue they may possess (whatever), they are however by their very nature open and vulnerable to the machinations of the politicians, the manipulators purely out for their own benefit & the psychopaths with their own agendas.  Not really anything worthwhile for anyone to aspire to?

Posted by: @pertinax

To me this passage means that in the end, life continues much as it always has, and those who vainly try to wear crowns and coronets or other trappings of power and prestige soon disappear into the history books. Christ was teaching, in his fashion, something equivalent to the Buddhist doctrine (observable fact rather than simply doctrine I think) of impermanence.

Yes, in terms of aspiration all tings pass away.  In that case the teaching fashion seems rather indirect, though, and not strictly equivalent.

Posted by: @pertinax

The ordinary man persists.

Up to a(n impermanent) point he does.  But I suppose that, in terms of the lowest of the low & the meekest of the meek even Joe Sensible Average must come across as something relatively memorable (rather like as in the country of the blind, where the cock-eyed man is the once & future king...)

N Joy


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 5807
 
Posted by: @pertinax

I find this interpretation to be misleading.

Without having read further in your reply, yet, I butt in to say - "Meek" is an English word translation of some Greek or Aramaic word that we ( at least "I") don't know, and the translators are not to be trusted. I suspect "humble" is more correct, but I'm not a lingoist, and who says the forst writer wrote it down correctly?

 


ReplyQuote
Pertinax
(@pertinax)
Member
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 55
 
Posted by: @jamiejbarter

You mean those who just about get by, living lives in Thoreau's words "of quiet desperation" - the "keep calm & carry on", "mustn't grumble", borderline-ovine mentality of human mediocrity? 

Nope, that's definitely not what I mean. I mean simply ordinary people, rather than those who are always trying to 'get' something, be it power, money, fame etc. I don't personally consider ordinariness to be a borderline-ovine mentality, nor daily life a life of 'quiet desperation', except in those who live below the poverty line or under some other oppressive regime, but they are not the 'meek', they are the 'oppressed', and nobody ever said anything about them inheriting anything. 

Posted by: @pertinax

To me this passage means that in the end, life continues much as it always has, and those who vainly try to wear crowns and coronets or other trappings of power and prestige soon disappear into the history books. Christ was teaching, in his fashion, something equivalent to the Buddhist doctrine (observable fact rather than simply doctrine I think) of impermanence.

Yes, in terms of aspiration all tings pass away.  In that case the teaching fashion seems rather indirect, though, and not strictly equivalent.

Not strictly equivalent no, he was talking about humans life as it is usually lived, I feel that impermanence is a much more fundamental fact of existence.

Up to a(n impermanent) point he does.  But I suppose that, in terms of the lowest of the low & the meekest of the meek even Joe Sensible Average must come across as something relatively memorable (rather like as in the country of the blind, where the cock-eyed man is the once & future king...)

If you read my link you will see that I mean something slightly different. Man persists (until we manage to wipe ourselves out), while men continue to live and die in endless succession, we are all just passing through after all. By 'meek', I understand what you refer to as Joe Average, ordinary people. Not mud-groveling sub-humans or the oppressed poor, there is nothing noble about that. 

Let me put it another way, by the 'meek', Christ meant something similar to what we refer to as 'Men of Earth'.


ReplyQuote
Pertinax
(@pertinax)
Member
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 55
 
Posted by: @shiva

Without having read further in your reply, yet, I butt in to say - "Meek" is an English word translation of some Greek or Aramaic word that we ( at least "I") don't know, and the translators are not to be trusted. I suspect "humble" is more correct, but I'm not a lingoist, and who says the forst writer wrote it down correctly?

 

The common english word comes from the Norse 'mjukr', meaning soft, or gentle. However the word in the Bible comes from the Greek, both in the New and Old Testament (derived from the Septuagint which was in Greek, and was the version Christ would have been familiar with).

Interestingly enough, a query on the WWW finds the word in the bible translated from the Greek 'Praus', which means 'strength under control'. This of course refers to the XI atu, strength (lust in the Thoth tarot), giving an entirely novel slant on what Christ appears to be saying, reflected more properly in the stoic self-reliance of the medieval monk or friar rather than the servile mud-groveling image of the slave-Christian, cringing and cowering beneath an angry demon-god. 

https://www.mattnorman.com/meek/

https://www.biblewise.com/bible_study/questions/definition-meekness.php

@jamiejbarter Based on what I have just learned, I must adjust my understanding, rather than simple ordinary 'plain ol' Joe', Christ evidently meant those who exercise self-discipline, can direct their strength in the original sense. A MoE is only such insofar as he knows when and how to exercise his energies, and when to hold back.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 5807
 
Posted by: @pertinax

Interestingly enough, a query on the WWW finds the word in the bible translated from the Greek 'Praus', which means 'strength under control'.

Aha. That is interesting, isn't it?

 


ReplyQuote
Tiger
(@tiger)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 1781
 

Well that's a mighty round about way getting the translators to correct meek to say that lust shall inherit the earth and put in what they want to put in and have the english non norse go along with it.

The adjective meek describes a person who is willing to go along with whatever other people want to do, like a meek classmate who won't speak up, even when he or she is treated unfairly. quiet, gentle, and easily imposed on; with a submissive, tractable, docile, disposition.
https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/meek

1: enduring injury with patience and without resentment : mild a meek child dominated by his brothers
2 : deficient in spirit and courage : submissive "I don't care," came the meek reply
3 : not violent or strong : moderate his delivery varied from a meek, melodic patter to rapid-fire scriptural allusions
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/meek


ReplyQuote
dom
 dom
(@dom)
Member
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 2962
Topic starter  
Posted by: @shiva
Posted by: @pertinax

 

Without having read further in your reply, yet, I butt in to say - "Meek" is an English word translation of some Greek or Aramaic word that we ( at least "I") don't know, and the translators are not to be trusted. I suspect "humble" is more correct, but I'm not a lingoist, and who says the forst writer wrote it down correctly?

 

In other words the non humble inherit nothing of worth, yes, that makes sense.  Humility is spiritual quietude or meditative receptivity.  There's only one way to go once you reach Hara and that's down.  

https://www.lashtal.com/wiki/Aleister_Crowley_Timeline


ReplyQuote
hermitas
(@hermitas)
Member
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 115
 

I was taught that the inheritance of the meek (gentle, mild, humble) was the “new heavens and a new earth“ that are created for the saints after the events of John’s Apocalypse. That was the “Earth” that the meek inherited.

- that all of the Beatitudes were paid off in the future heaven.  


ReplyQuote
hermitas
(@hermitas)
Member
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 115
 

I know this has been true of me, and I think it’s common that we who have seen merit in some of the teachings attributed to Jesus end up taking scissors and paste to the gospels, looking for evidence that there is a great master from another aeon buried under layers of folk superstition and theology.

I created my own ancient master of wax to try to bridge between the religions, but both sides teamed up together to crucify my wax master as well. 

There is no point. I can’t redeem it. It has become full of hardened projection and delusion, mental and spiritual slavery. It has become black with it.

My wax master Jesus lowers his head in assent and inwardly burns against the religion that bears his name.

What does yours do?


ReplyQuote
christibrany
(@christibrany)
Yuggothian
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2856
 
Posted by: @dom

How about 'the meek' inheriting the earth or  Mathew 8:20 ; “The foxes have holes, and the birds of the sky places of rest, but the Son of Man has nowhere He may lay the head”?  What do you make of these lines?   

To me that reads like justification for the animals don't have souls kind of thought, so they have no Burden as such towards enlightenment, and can rest easy without the higher knowledge troubling their animal brains.

Now if that is true or not, I dunno. Some cats and dogs I met were very humanlike even to the point of caring for you, not the other way around. 


ReplyQuote
dom
 dom
(@dom)
Member
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 2962
Topic starter  
Posted by: @christibrany
Posted by: @dom

How about 'the meek' inheriting the earth or  Mathew 8:20 ; “The foxes have holes, and the birds of the sky places of rest, but the Son of Man has nowhere He may lay the head”?  What do you make of these lines?   

To me that reads like justification for the animals don't have souls kind of thought, so they have no Burden as such towards enlightenment, and can rest easy without the higher knowledge troubling their animal brains.

Now if that is true or not, I dunno. Some cats and dogs I met were very humanlike even to the point of caring for you, not the other way around. 

I think it means you know that you are not your body, your clothes,  your car, your job, your net worth and you don't really own any land, you as in pure consciousness you can't take these things with you when you go.

See the 4 attachments and 8 worldly concerns if Buddhism.

https://www.lashtal.com/wiki/Aleister_Crowley_Timeline


ReplyQuote
christibrany
(@christibrany)
Yuggothian
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2856
 

@dom

 

But then why make the differentiation between animals and humans if its only about material existence and not the soul(s)?  Your pet duck can't take it's food with it when it's gone either? 


ReplyQuote
dom
 dom
(@dom)
Member
Joined: 6 years ago
Posts: 2962
Topic starter  
Posted by: @christibrany

@dom

 

But then why make the differentiation between animals and humans if its only about material existence and not the soul(s)?  Your pet duck can't take it's food with it when it's gone either? 

It is about the soul, it's about the Kingdom of Heaven and leaving behind The 8 worldly concerns and The 4 attachments of Buddhism.

 

See it in it's fuller context here, Luke chapter 9;

 

57As they were walking along the road, someone said to Jesus, “I will follow You wherever You go.” 58 Jesus replied,  Foxes have dens and birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay His head.” 59Then He said to another man, “Follow Me.”

 

It's similar to Mathew 19:23;

Then Jesus said to His disciples, “Truly I tell you, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven.

 

https://www.lashtal.com/wiki/Aleister_Crowley_Timeline


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 5807
 
Posted by: @tiger

put in what they want to put in and have the english non norse go along with it.

Why this little research project, thanks be to God and his agent Pertinax, has unearthed the very core of the "slave god" tradition. We now have evidence before the Tribunal that the Nice Nicean delegates, or their bosses, or their meek assistants, put a purposeful, mis-translated "spin" on the deal, with the "inheriting the Earth" part held out as a carrot for being servile ... the "inheriting" part to come later. Much later. 

Posted by: @tiger

willing to go along with whatever other people want to do

In Human Design, this is one of the 4 categories (types) of people. They are called "Reflectors." They are not in any kind of majority. taking up only ~01% of humanity. Such people have no "core" of their own. ALL of their centers are OPEN, meaning they blow with whatever breeze is in the wind. We humorously call them "drones."

For an alternative context, note that "All dogs are reflectors."

 


ReplyQuote
Pertinax
(@pertinax)
Member
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 55
 
Posted by: @shiva

Aha. That is interesting, isn't it?

It is indeed, and despite the subsequent meanderings and that the fact of original meaning of the word that was translated into English as 'Meek' seems to have been ignored by most here, the meaning of Christ's words are piercingly simple.

My Bible (Douay-Rheims, not KJV) has it "Blessed are the meek, for they shall possess the land", although I believe the World English translation has it "Blessed are the gentle", so don't get hung up on the English translation, instead go back to the Greek, the language it was written in, even before Latin.

https://biblehub.com/lexicon/matthew/5-5.htm

'Praeis' (πραεῖς) refers to the breaking in of livestock: A horse, while much stronger than it's master, more than capable of overpowering him, is nonetheless trained, disciplined, to respond to his voice, and his voice alone. All that wild strength at the call of a single intellect. Strength under Control.

This is the very image of the XIth Atu, and the crux of what it means to be a Thelemite.

Christ's meaning here (personal opinion alert, feel free to disagree), is that man, by heeding the word of God, would inherit the earth (i.e. take ownership of his world). We, as Thelemites can understand God as The Holy Guardian Angel, or the inmost Self (que theological wrangling). Then we have, 'blessed are those who heed the will of the Angel and respond to it, for they shall inherit the earth'.

In modern parlance: get real quiet, learn to listen to that still, small voice at the heart of creation, discipline yourself so that all of your energy goes towards following out that silent guidance, and the world is your oyster.


ReplyQuote
Page 9 / 16
Share: