Occult

Archived Posts from this Category

Sun 13 Nov 2005

Runes

Posted by Henry under History , Ancient Civilizations , Occult , The Celts , The Early Development of the Ancient Civilizations
[11] Comments 

Runes were symbols, which functioned much like an alphabet, with the added dimension that each symbol held a deeper meaning and was used not only in writing but in the later corrupted religion became a tool in the conjuring of spells. There are several sets of runes, which have been used in this fashion, some devised as recently as in the 20th century. The oldest of these runes is called the Elder Futhark and I believe its originator was someone, which worshipped in truth, the God of this universe. My study of the Elder Futhark has led me to conclude that at the time these runes were invented they held to a monotheistic faith. The original God of the Celts was named Teiwaz. Some time later this monotheistic faith became corrupted by the druids, which turned toward an occult counterfeit of the Truth. Teiwaz is the same God, as Dyeus Pater, the God passed down to the Ur people by Noah. The science of philology has conclusively shown that the name Teiwaz is in fact a derivative of the ancient name for God in the Middle East- Dyeus Pater, which means "Sky Father" in the ancient Indo-European language.

The rune Tyr or Teiwaz,  has the sound of ‘T’ and it is from this rune that the day Tuesday is named. The symbol is a single arrow pointing heavenward. The fact that this is the only god represented by their runes is proof that at this early time the Celts were monotheistic and only devolved into polytheism through the deception of Satan as time wore on.

There is no mention of Odin in the description of the early runes making the satanic claim of his authorship of the runes an obvious invention in later times. The rune of the Elder Futhark, which occultists believe is associated with Odin, is the last rune known as Othala. The association is not because the rune in any way refers to Odin, but because the rune literally translated means “own earth”. It was initially a symbol of the inheritance of personal property, but since Satan is presently the Prince of this earth, I will concede that Odin has now, momentarily, usurped ownership of the earth. Odin’s character, takes on the familiar persona of all the gods, which represent Satan. In this sense he is almost identical to that of Cernunnos in that he offers his cornucopia to those who worship him. That is, he is associated with the hoarding of worldly possessions. Therefore, in that sense, the rune may be misapplied to him.

Read the full post
This is a preview of Runes.
(8624 words, estimated 34:30 mins reading time)

 

Sun 13 Nov 2005

Satan’s Universal Logos

Posted by Henry under History , Ancient Civilizations , Occult , Satanism , The Celts
No Comments 

The Serpent, The Wolf, The Raven or Blackbird, The Swine, Horns and the Cornucopia

For the most part, the Celtic pantheon of gods is synonymous to their Roman, Persian, Egyptian and Greek counterparts. Since the mythologies of the Ancients were all intertwined with the Zodiac, it makes perfect sense that there is an undeniable correlation in their commonality. Thus, their parallel aberrations from the original truth are also indicative of their common origin and of the common work of Satan among them to obscure the truth. But even more impressive is the correlation between the religions of the Old World and those of the New World separated by the Atlantic Ocean; the rituals and occult practices that developed as these deviated from the original true religion are uncannily similar.  Each of these cultures began with the truth and later corrupted the truth into a polytheistic system; this system was fairly uniform and then as time passed, small differences evolved in each culture. Here and there we find truly native gods, who arise in a specific locality, as demons continue in their perennial labor of creating further aberrations from the truth once held universally by the survivors of the Great Flood.

The names of these newly contrived gods, which in most cases is simply the name of the local demon, became assimilated into the previous pantheon being often times absorbed, under the name of a more prominent god, which may have been similar in character to that local god. For example local war gods may in many cases become epitaphs of Mercury or Mars, the prominent war god in Europe. There are some sixty names or titles of Celtic war-gods, which are related or generally equated with Mars. But, in all these cases there are distinct, common peculiarities, which belie the satanic origin of these gods; these are often associated with the snake or dragon and the crocodile in Egypt and Mayan cultures, the raven, the swine, the hare, the sea monster (hippopotamus in Egyptian and Hindu) and the wolf or they are universally pictured with the horns of a stag or a bull or a goat. Thus, continuing with the familiar motif of Nimrod, as the supposed deposer of God, when he donned the supposed head of the slain Divine Bull. Just as the basic character of the gods that describe the One and only True God have certain peculiarities in common; the gods that describe the person of Satan also possess similar familiar hallmarks. For example, such is the case for the universally popular theme of the corn-spirit, whether with the Celts in Europe or clear across the Atlantic in the North American Indian, or the god Cinteotl of Meso-America; this corn-spirit exhibits quite the same personality indicating that it has the same source as its genesis-Satan.

Read the full post
This is a preview of Satan’s Universal Logos.
(2692 words, estimated 10:46 mins reading time)

 

Sun 13 Nov 2005

The Historical Development of the Different Cultures

Posted by Henry under History , Ancient Civilizations , Occult , Satanism , The Religion of the Nephilim , The Early Development of the Ancient Civilizations
No Comments 
Permanent link to this post
(, estimated 0 secs reading time)

 

Sat 12 Nov 2005

Religious Existentialism and Tielhard de Chardin

Posted by Henry under Philosophy , Religion , Existentialism , Occult , Naturalism
No Comments 

Religious Existentialism and Tielhard de Chardin

      The 20th Century brought the existential philosophy into the realm of theology and radically changed the vast majority of Christian denominations. The New “existentially- based theology” created rifts and splits in veritably all the major denominations.
      This New Theology has permeated, not only all Christian denominations, but also it has managed to make inroads into the Jewish religion, as well as the Islamic faith.  If an individual were to listen to a Neo-orthodox (religious existentialist) talk, there would be very little in the verbiage or language used that would differentiate him from a more orthodox individual.  The difference is not in the words, but in the content or meaning they assign to those words.  They may talk about the “Cross of Christ” but mean something completely different from what a traditional Christian would understand by these words.  Traditional Christianity, when speaking of the Cross of Christ, speaks of the universal God stepping into time and space, becoming incarnate and willingly sacrificing his human life upon the cross for the express purpose of fulfilling God’s demand for judicial satisfaction for sin.  Not His sin, for He was sinless, but the sins of the world.  By His substitutionary death and through His shed blood, the penalty of sin was met.  On the third day He resurrected from the dead, declaring His power over death and sin and heralding His divine license to forgive.
The Neo-Orthodox would use these Christian phrases only as connotative, or symbolic words devoid of historical reality.  Their express purpose is to use emotive phrases, which create a religious feeling, without adherence to the true meaning or content of the words.  They do not believe in a uniformity of causes in an open system, but rather have abrogated their theological position to the existentialist camp.  They believe in the divided field of knowledge; belief in God is not achieved through a rational process, it is a mystical faith.  Belief in God is simply a blind leap of faith, faith in faith.  It is not faith in the historical and verifiable person of Christ. Therefore, when they speak of the “cross of Christ”, they are not referring to a real space-time historical event, but to a universal, or generalized feeling of sacrifice for the welfare of humanity.
      Their use of “God words” is only for emotive effect; there is no attempt to discern content.  Religion is allocated to the irrational unverifiable sector of the divided field of knowledge. 
In essence, these individuals are simply nothing more than atheists, existentialists, and or pantheists, which cannot live in the harshness and sterility of their lower story (by this I mean the rational sector of the divided field of knowledge). Therefore, they leap by blind faith into the irrational sector, while still maintaining by strict definition a closed system.           

 

Read the full post
This is a preview of Religious Existentialism and Tielhard de Chardin.
(1310 words, estimated 5:14 mins reading time)

 

Sat 12 Nov 2005

The OVP and the Spiritual Masters of the Occult

Posted by Henry under Philosophy , Psychology , Occult
No Comments 

Rogers’ Organismic Valuing Process (OVP)

 

 According to Rogers man has an inner guide, which he termed the “Organismic Valuing Process”. This OVP was deemed by him as infallible and is responsible for leading the person into self-actualization. Those experiences that promote actualization are good and desirable, thus we consider them as positive. Experience is for Rogers the highest level of authority, the “touchstone of validity”.  He is convinced that the only reality in which we can be certain is our own subjective world of experience; we are what we experience, reality is what we experience. However, this makes our fallible and often erred senses the final arbiter of reality. Therefore, our flawed senses cannot be relied upon to give us always a true or proper sense of reality.
Whether wittingly or unwittingly I do not know, but Rogers has created with this inner guide (OVP) a natural stepping stone for the New Age, occult doctrine that teaches us to submit to Inner Guides and Spiritual Masters. To the extent then that these forces are able to manipulate our experiences, then they effectively control our thinking and direction and become our fulcrum for reality. Conveniently, then since, the goal of the OVP is actualization; the OVP becomes the arbiter of good. Conversely, Rogers sees parental and societal behavior, as the culprit that keeps us from becoming a fully functioning person. If, however we are the product of evolution, then evolution is also the process responsible for man’s parental and societal behavior. How is it that evolution has chosen to progress in such conflictive manner as to harm our “well-being”? In every case the theoreticians cannot escape the need to assign categories of good and evil, yet in a naturalistic system this is, what Rogers would call incongruence; there is no good and evil, there just is.

 

Read the full post
This is a preview of The OVP and the Spiritual Masters of the Occult.
(562 words, estimated 2:15 mins reading time)

 

Sat 12 Nov 2005

Jung and the Shadow

Posted by Henry under Philosophy , Psychology , Religion , Occult , Naturalism
No Comments 

Jung and the Shadow

 

The evolutionary presupposition that ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny is also reflected in the field of psychology by the concept that Freud’s personality theory developed, namely that our personalities reflect and are developed determinalistically by our past. Jung went a step farther and posited that we have an evolutionary collective memory from our collective past that creates in us a collective unconsciousness, which deeply affects our personality.

 

“Jung believed that just as each of us accumulates and files all of our personal experiences in the personal unconscious, so does humankind collectively as a species, store the experience of the human and pre-human species in the collective unconscious. This heritage is passed to each new generation.
Whatever experiences are universal- those that are repeated relatively unchanged by each generation- becomes part of our personality. Our primitive past becomes the basis of human psyche, directing and influencing present behavior.” (Theories of Personality, by Duane Schultz, Sydney Ellen Schultz, Brooks/Cole Publishing Co., Pacific Grove, California, 1998, pg. 92)

 

He then moved one step further and claimed that our personalities were not just determined by our past, but could also be influenced by our future, as man seeks self-actualization. He, like Fromm, also saw man as having a transcendent need and theorized that the drive to self-actualize would overpower his influences in his early developmental years. This opened the door for the “human potential movement”, which later developed as a natural outworking of this and created an escape from the determinism and pessimism of Freud. Although, Jung conceptualized the conflict in a different terminology, he also was unable to provide a real solution, within the naturalistic framework. However, he must also be credited for stepping forth and admitting that man does have a transcendent need, even though he cannot create a basis for this; this admission is quite a step in a naturalistic system and is evidence of its deficiency to explain the way man is.
 I want to digress a bit here, because I believe that it is crucial in understanding the direction and in recognizing the forces behind that direction in the evolution of existential philosophy.  It is well documented that Jung’s mother was steeped in the occult and that he periodically spoke to “apparitions”.

 

Read the full post
This is a preview of Jung and the Shadow.
(5412 words, estimated 21:39 mins reading time)

 

Sat 12 Nov 2005

Which God?

Posted by Henry under Religion , Hinduism , Buhddism , Occult , Neo Orthodoxy
No Comments 

Man is a machine inextricably tied to the machine of the universe; in fact, they are really one and the same machine!

 

It has become quite apparent to me that pantheism is becoming the politically correct theology for most evolutionists. Here, they can dress the material universe with words that have religious connotations and in this way they avoid the obvious sterility of the machine universe their worldview irrevocably proposes. By believing in some nebulous force instead of a Personal Supreme Being, which would become the fulcrum of absolute morals, knowledge and transcendental meaning, they can remain in their relativistic framework of thinking and at the very same time avoid any specific moral restraints.
Pantheism is the belief that God and nature are the same.  The universe is God’s essence. God is not a Person, separate and distinct from the Universe, as is proposed in Monotheism. Through the use of “god-words” they therefore, hope to interject a semblance of religious undertones in which they hope to pin some transcendental significance to man. The prevalence and effectiveness of this psychological ploy is evidenced by the popularity of the late Carl Sagan’s fashionable mix between naturalistic science and pantheism.
The materialists argue on the basis of their fundamental presupposition of the uniformity of natural causes in a closed system. That is that the universe is an autonomous, self-contained closed system without external intervention outside of our observable and verifiable physical existence (without a Personal Creator outside the universe). To the Pantheist the universe and God are one and therefore by extension the material universe and organic life are of equal nature and value.
The alternative to this failed view is the Judeo-Christian concept of the uniformity of natural causes in a limited or open system. That is, a system of natural causes in which a Personal Creator is outside the universe and free to intervene and is not shackled by the physical determinism of a closed “machine”. This Personal Creator would not be limited, within the confines of the physical universe. He is outside of it and is therefore, unlike the pantheistic concept of God, who in essence is simply the machine within the closed system.
 Three separate but unified branches are now championing this pantheistic concept of reality. First, are the eastern pantheistic religions, such as Hinduism and Buddhism.  The second category is composed of the occult satanic religions and Secret Orders and the more palatable and consumer oriented form of occultism known as the New Age Movement. The third category is the New Theology, otherwise known as Neo-Orthodoxy.
Many in our modern culture have adopted, what they perceive to be a more politically correct form of theology in which they view God, as some amorphous cosmic spirit. They believe that by adopting such a view they can retain some form of religiosity, while avoiding the negative cultural hazards of believing in a Personal Supreme Being. If God is some nebulous energy, then He does not create any moral imperatives and this leaves them free to choose whatever morals they deem appropriate for their own individual tastes. In addition this removes any friction that may rise with others, for a nebulous spirit is never at odds with any other belief system. For this reason many feel that this is the more enlightened philosophical or religious position. This is the very basic theology espoused in many Christian denominations today and it is the basic framework of the “New Theology”.

 

Read the full post
This is a preview of Which God?.
(3434 words, estimated 13:44 mins reading time)