"shall not hurt them" in the Bible & "shall not harm ye at all" in the BOTL
[All emphasis mine.]
King James Bible, Mark chapter 16, verse 18, The Great Commission: "18. They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover." Source: http://biblehub.com/multi/mark/16-18.htm - http://biblehub.com/ - Bible Hub Online Bible Study Suite
The Book of the Law, chapter 2, verse 22: "22. I am the Snake that giveth Knowledge & Delight and bright glory, and stir the hearts of men with drunkenness. To worship me take wine and strange drugs whereof I will tell my prophet, & be drunk thereof! They shall not harm ye at all. It is a lie, this folly against self. The exposure of innocence is a lie. Be strong, o man! lust, enjoy all things of sense and rapture: fear not that any God shall deny thee for this." Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/oto/engccxx.htm - The Book of the Law Liber AL vel Legis sub figura CCXX as delivered by XCIII = 418 to DCLXVI
This is all very well, well & an interesting “coincidence”, but apart from listing the two different quotations there’s no accompanying text stating the relevance or significance of this thread, or the connectivity of the quotations to one another at all.
I’m sure I cannot be the only Lashtalian to be wondering “what this is all about?" here. Are you possibly suggesting that the subconscious mind of A.C. registered this bit from Mark in particular from his Bible reading, and then used it to regurgitate it in that verse from Liber AL ? In which case, it may have helped if you’d actually spelled that out. (And if so, I believe there are several other contenders for this which may be found in e.g. "The Gospel According To St Bernard Shaw" aka Liber 888, “Jesus”, etc.).
If not, though, then what would you be saying is the nature of the link betwen them there?
Norma N Joy Conquest
I don't know what the OP's suggestion was/is, but this (^) was certainly my first thought after reading the two quotes. After all, Liber AL is filled (killed? 😉 ) with concepts that are drawn from other (previous) sources.
Assuming that Liber AL was channeled (never mind whether the source was an external entity called Aiwass or an internal subconscious reservoir), we must (note the "imperative" 🙂 ) remember that any "channeled" message can only use what is already in place in the "medium's" brain (again: conscious or subconscious or unconscious).
You speak truth here, Shiva (- to paraphrase Errol Flynn in/as Robin Hood: "fluently")
Crowley's compelling "opposition to the Bible itself" - quoted at the top of this posting - and its influence on how The Book of the Law is written, is something I have written about in the thread http://www.lashtal.com/forum/http://www.lashtal.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=77572#p77572 - "Correspondences between Crowley´s pre-1904 works and Liber AL", and in the thread http://www.lashtal.com/forum/index.php?topic=6399.150 - "Liber L. vel Bogus - The real confession of Aleister Crowley".
In my Blog Blog, hosted on this site - http://www.lashtal.com/portal/resources/blogs/blogger/listings/wellreadwellbred.html - I am listing verses from The Bible and The Holy Books of Thelema, for the sake of comparison.
My point jamie barter, is that Crowley's compelling "opposition to the Bible itself" (and to the superstition of Judaism and Christianity), is something he was compelled to earlier than his initiation in 1898, and that this is likely to have influenced how The Holy Books of Thelema are written, where they contain quotes from The Bible, or texts which seems to resemble The Bible.
Below are quotes from Crowley's The Old Comment, The New Comment and The Comment called D, to The Book of the Law, chapter 2, verse 22, the verse quoted by me in the beginning of this thread. Adding bold I am pointing out the influence of Crowley's compelling "opposition to the Bible itself" - (and to the superstition of Judaism and Christianity):
The Old Comment: "22. Hadit now identifies himself with the Kundalini, the central magical force in man. This privilege of using wine and strange drugs has been confirmed; the drugs were indeed revealed. (P.S. And they have not harmed those who have used them in this Law.) Follows a curse against the cringing altruism of Christianity the yielding of the self to external impressions, the smothering of the Babe of Bliss beneath the flabby old nurse Convention." Source: http://hermetic.com/legis/new-comment/ - The New and Old Commentaries to Liber AL vel Legis, The Book of the Law by Aleister Crowley
The New Comment: "Wine and strange drugs do not harm people who are doing their will; they only poison people who are cancerous with Original Sin. In Latin countries where Sin is not taken seriously, and sex-expression is simple, wholesome, and free, drunkenness is a rare accident. It is only in Puritan countries, where self-analysis, under the whip of a coarse bully like Billy Sunday, brings the hearer to 'conviction of sin,' that he hits first the 'trail' and then the 'booze.'" [...] "[...] it is in the power of all so-called intoxicating drugs to reveal a man to himself. If this revelation declare a Star, then it shines brighter ever after. If it declare a Christian -- a thing not man nor beast, but a muddle of mind -- he craves the drug, no more for its analytical but for its numbing effect. [...]" Source: http://hermetic.com/legis/new-comment/ - The New and Old Commentaries to Liber AL vel Legis, The Book of the Law by Aleister Crowley
THE COMMENT CALLED "D": "22. Hadit is now described as the snake whose virtue is to give knowledge, for all knowledge consists in the art to perceive events as each new marriage with a new part of Nuit takes place." [...] "Every time we try to put ourselves in the place of some other person we give up truth for fancy. We do not, and we never can, see the world except with our own eyes. The world of one's neighbour is not even the same world as one's own--even if we could assume his point of view. It is a deadly mischief to practise this form of falsehood; and to acclaim it as a virtue in the Christian fashion, both a crime and a blunder." [...] "We must dismiss that bogey of those who wish to treat mankind as children without spirit or wit, to frighten us into slavish service to codes of conduct which suit their own servile nature, allay their fears, or procure easy preys for their greed by the threat of some God who will make trouble for those who dare to be themselves and do their own True Wills." Source: http://hermetic.com/legis/djeridensis/chapter-ii.html - THE COMMENT CALLED "D" – CHAPTER 2 [All bold mine.]
What this all about? 😀
No, actually I concur with Shiva's response.
Well well, well! I look forward to reading the final version of this well of information in due course
A.C.’s sources could also well be listed where they are outside the King James – maybe e.g., the Koran, etc., but perhaps this might be better in another place? I haven’t checked any of your sources in your blog for accuracy, well, but from what I can tell so far it seems to be very well researched & put together. As would be natural some of the entries give the appearance of being more valid & relevant than others and this could possibly be open to further discussion/ debate in the future, but taken as a whole your project seems to be an exercise of some potentially considerable value, providing of course that it continued to be carried out well, well.
Maybe more contributors could also wade in to give it some additional “welly” as it were…
Hope this finds you well, well & that you’ll excuse the gentle ribbing/ merciless punning – I’m afraid I couldn’t resist it… 😉