vaken

Vakencorner




BottomBottom  Previous Topic Previous Topic  Next Topic Next Topic   Register To Post

« 1 2 (3) 4 »


Re: Teosofiska Samfundet & Illuminati
#28


See User information
Vet du vad den där conspiracy researchern heter som hade kopian av medlems certifikatet?Och har han någon hemsida? Eller finns det nån kopia av det här någonstans på nätet? Jag vill själv kolla om det är äkta eller inte har lite svårt att lita på mainstream media.

Posted on: 2009/6/15 17:09
 Top  Twitter  Facebook  Google Plus  Linkedin  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Mr. Wong 


Re: Teosofiska Samfundet & Illuminati
#27


See User information
Ytterligare kopplingar mellan Illuminati och det Teosofiska Samfundet är Rudolf Steiner som skrev många esoteriska böcker för Teosofin och om Raslära; han var en 33° Frimurare enligt mina källor.

Sankte Germain var antagligen mästare inom Rosicrucian order, Frimurare, Illuminati etc. Blavatsky inspirerades av Germain och hävdade att hon träffade honom.

Henry Wallace, läjunge till Roerich, var en 32° Frimurare.

Detta är den mest sanningsenliga och intressanta artikel jag läst på länge (den är högst relevant till ämnet):

http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/ ... ey_midnight_messenger.htm

Posted on: 2009/6/15 3:17
Anti-Korruptionsbyrån - Blogg om den Nya Världsordningen och Revisionism!
 Top  Twitter  Facebook  Google Plus  Linkedin  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Mr. Wong 


Anonym
Re: Teosofiska Samfundet & Illuminati
#26
Nej för det är lucifer hon pratar om. hon pratar inte om tomater eller något annat.

Sen säger hon att satan står för frihet och en massa annat som inte är sant. motsatsen till det hon säger om satan är sant.

Det är inte svårt att förstå hur eliten kan göra alla hemska saker dom gör när man förstår deras tro. och att studera symbolerna på dollarn och dom som ligger bakom den är en bra början.

Den falska messiah i islam är kallad "Al Aawar Al Dajjal" som översätts "Den enögde bedragaren"

"Satan cry aloud thou exalted most high oh my father satan the eye" -Aleister crowley


Edited by Malmoesoldier on 2009/6/15 2:13:49
 Top  Twitter  Facebook  Google Plus  Linkedin  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Mr. Wong 


Re: Teosofiska Samfundet & Illuminati
#25


See User information
Ja eller så kan hon lika gärna mena att allt är ett

Posted on: 2009/6/15 0:40
"We’ll take a million September 11’s over one moment of true insight toward our self-hate." - Kymatica
 Top  Twitter  Facebook  Google Plus  Linkedin  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Mr. Wong 


Anonym
Re: Teosofiska Samfundet & Illuminati
#24
Jag skrev ju det citatet som du nyss skrev innan. där säger hon att Lucifer är satan precis som manly p hall.

Ögat av horus symboliserar Satan för eliten.

 Top  Twitter  Facebook  Google Plus  Linkedin  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Mr. Wong 


Re: Teosofiska Samfundet & Illuminati
#23


See User information
Okej men de här citaten kan man tolka hur som helst om man inte läser helheten

"Lucifer is divine and terrestrial light, the "Holy Ghost" and "Satan," at one and the same time" Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine p.513.

------


Enligt Jordan Maxwell så är ögat på dollarn horus.

Posted on: 2009/6/15 0:12
"We’ll take a million September 11’s over one moment of true insight toward our self-hate." - Kymatica
 Top  Twitter  Facebook  Google Plus  Linkedin  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Mr. Wong 


Anonym
Re: Teosofiska Samfundet & Illuminati
#22
"Lucifer är en av guds högsta änglar och betyder ljusbäraren."

Lucifer är vad satan har blivit kallad, det är ingen annan. ingen kallar jesus för Lucifer.

"Djävulen är människans påhitt och finns bara i egot."

Jag pratar inte om vad jag själv tror, jag är inte religiös. jag pratar bara om vad dom personerna tror på.

"du borde ta och läsa böckerna först innan du tar citat ur sammanhangen"

Inte ett enda citat är ur sammanhangen, varför säger du det?. du kanske följer deras arbeten och tror det är något bra?. det är en självklarthet att dom inte kan vara ur sitt sammanhang.

Kom inte och anklaga mig utan att gå igenom det, jag postar bara fakta, inget som är ur sitt sammanhang.

Manly p hall erkänner i sina böcker att han dyrkar demoner och att lucifer är djävulen.

Blavatsky säger också att lucifer är satan och att satan är guden över jorden och att det är den enda guden. hon säger även att satan representerar frihet med mera, hon pratar väldigt positivt om honom, för hon är en satanist!. satan står inte för något av det hon säger.

"One of the most hidden secrets involves the so-called fall of Angels. Satan and his rebellious host will thus prove to have become the direct Saviours and Creators of divine man. Thus Satan, once he ceases to be viewed in the superstitious spirit of the church, grows into the grandiose image It is Satan who is the God of our planet and the only God. Satan (or Lucifer) represents the Centrifugal Energy of the Universe this ever-living symbol of self-sacrifice for the intellectual independence of humanity." H.P. Blavatsky

"Lucifer represents Life, Thought, Progress, Civilization, Liberty, Independence, Lucifer is the Logos, the Serpent, the Savior." H.P. Blavatsky


Edited by Malmoesoldier on 2009/6/15 0:14:05
Edited by Malmoesoldier on 2009/6/15 0:31:43
 Top  Twitter  Facebook  Google Plus  Linkedin  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Mr. Wong 


Re: Teosofiska Samfundet & Illuminati
#21


See User information
Lucifer är en av guds högsta änglar och betyder ljusbäraren.

Djävulen är människans påhitt och finns bara i egot.


Och Malmoesoldier du borde ta och läsa böckerna först innan du tar citat ur sammanhangen.

Posted on: 2009/6/14 23:39
"We’ll take a million September 11’s over one moment of true insight toward our self-hate." - Kymatica
 Top  Twitter  Facebook  Google Plus  Linkedin  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Mr. Wong 


Re: Teosofiska Samfundet & Illuminati
#20


See User information
Quote:

abbadon skrev:
Vart har du haft för dig att lucifer skulle va satan?


Jag tycker snarare bevisbördan ligger på dig! Du säger varför Satan och Lucifer inte är samma person men du säger inte vad namnet Lucifer kommer ifrån i så fall?

Även om det skulle vara så att Lucifer var en lokal kult/annan religion så är det fullt möjligt att judar/kristna skulle identifiera denne gud med Satan eftersom alla andra gudar än Yahweh var avgudar och därför från det onda. Baal-se-bul var en kananeisk gudom som i svensk folkmun har blivit bellsebub=satan. Det mest uppenbara är Jah-bul-on där tre orientaliska gudar möts i ett ord. Yah, Baal och On (Osiris, Egypten) Därifrån har vi ordet Djävulen (b och v ligger nära varandra i semitiska språk. Abraham kan också benämnas Avraham tex.)
Djävulen kallas också Apollon i Uppenbarelseboken. Där har man alltså identifierat honom med en grekisk gud.

Sen har vi ju flera ord som inte finns i Bibeln men som ändå betecknar djävulen som Fan och Hin håle tex

Andra biblisk termer är Ormen, Draken, Anklagaren, Odjuret m.m.

Jag tycker mig märka en trend bland nyandliga rörelser att frikoppla Lucifer från Satan, för att på så sätt legitimera sin gud gentemot satanismen, trots att deras föregångare, blavatsky, baily mfl hade kopplingen klar för sig. Framförallt märks det bland dem som närmar sig gnosticismen som var antikens motsvarighet till dagen new age. Man ser då Lucifer som den gode esoteriske guden och Yahweh som den onde skaparguden. (det sinnliga/andliga är gott, det materiella/fysiska är ont.) Man vänder helt på de judeokristna principerna. Som jag ser det är det bara ännu en dimridå på samma gamla dyrkan av ormen. Märk väl att ormen inom väldigt många religioner ses som helig, kundalini tex, men i judeokristen tro är ormen ondska.


/M

Posted on: 2009/6/14 1:23
"The age of communication means that everyone speaks at the same time" - Justin Sullivan, New Model Army
 Top  Twitter  Facebook  Google Plus  Linkedin  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Mr. Wong 


Re: Teosofiska Samfundet & Illuminati
#19


See User information
Nicholas Roerich

Resized Image
Resized Image
Resized Image

Quote:
Many of Henry Wallace's ideas originated with his guru, the Russian mystic and artist Nicholas Roerich. He was an adventurer/occultist in the tradition of Madame Blavatsky, Aleister Crowley and G. I. Gurdjieff. Roerich spent many years travelling through Nepal and Tibet studying with the lamas in the Buddhist monasteries of those countries. Roerich was searching for the lost city of Shambhala. In esoteric circles Shambhala is the home of the Ascended Masters, Secret Chiefs, or the Great White Brotherhood – the hidden hand behind the formation and guidance of Freemasons, the Sufis, the Knights Templars, the Rosicrucians, the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn and the Theosophical Society – both Wallace and Roerich were members of the Theosophical Society, this is how Wallace met his Master.

Roerich seems to have been an emissary of sorts for the Great White Brotherhood – even bringing a mysterious stone to guide the League of Nations on behalf of the Masters. According to legend, the 'Chintamani Stone' was believed to be a part of a magical meteorite from a solar system in the Orion constellation. This Chintamani Stone is sent wherever a spiritual mission vital to humanity is set up, and is returned when that mission is completed. 5

A mysterious stone was indeed mentioned by Wallace in one of his typical 'Dear Guru' letters to Roerich: “And I have thought of the admonition 'Await the Stone.' We await the Stone and we welcome you again to this glorious land of destiny.” 6 Not surprisingly, occultists regard Roerich as the guiding hand behind the placement of America's Great Seal and the All-Seeing Eye, and matter-of-factly state that it was at Roerich's insistence that Wallace approach Roosevelt about finally printing the All-Seeing Eye on the dollar bill.

Henry Wallace was well versed in occult knowledge himself. In a letter to Roerich he stated, “the search – whether it be for the lost word of Masonry, or the Holy Chalice, or the potentialities of the age to come – is the one supremely worthwhile objective. All else is karmic duty. But surely everyone is a potential Galahad? So may we strive for the Chalice and the flame above it.” The chalice he refers to, according to Michael Howard, is the Holy Grail, regarded by the Rosicrucians as a feminine symbol for perfection, and 'the age to come' is the dawning of the Aquarian Age. This I agree with, and further, "the age to come" is synonymous with Aleister Crowley's "New Age of Horus" – a Roerich occult contemporary. It seems that Novus Ordo Seclorum and Annuit Coeptis (He has blessed our beginning) has even deeper occult meanings than we're led to believe.


Manly Palmer Hall

Resized Image

”Att undertrycka uppror är att bevara status quo, ett villkor som binder den dödliga kroppen i ett tillstånd av intellektuellt och fysiskt slaveri. Men det är omöjligt att förslava människan blott genom att kedja dennes kropp; hjärnan måste även den kedjas, och för att möjliggöra detta är rädsla det bifallna vapnet. Den allmänne måste frukta livet, döden, frukta gud, frukta djävulen, och frukta mest överherrarna, ägarna av deras öden.”

Posted on: 2009/6/13 21:36
Anti-Korruptionsbyrån - Blogg om den Nya Världsordningen och Revisionism!
 Top  Twitter  Facebook  Google Plus  Linkedin  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Mr. Wong 


Anonym
Re: Teosofiska Samfundet & Illuminati
#18
En lite längre text om det som är värd att läsa.

In a day and age when the Scriptures are often mangled and twisted out of context it is important that we know why we teach what we do concerning Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28. We do not want to allegorize or read a deeper meaning into a passage unless the passage is clearly intended to be understood that way by the original author. We also recognize that some Bible scholars would take a different viewpoint on these passages and this is reflected in some study Bible notations.

In writing The Stranger the goal was to get down to the basics without being sidetracked on some of the exegetical challenges that exist. There are certain parts of Scripture that are harder to interpret and we would put Ezekiel 28 and Isaiah 14 into that category.

It is true that we do not know a whole lot about Satan and we do not want to overstep the revelation God has given us, but when you put all the pieces of the puzzle together, Ezekiel 28 and Isaiah 14 do play an important part. If you look up Satan in a Topical Bible, Ezekiel 28 and Isaiah 14 are the keystone passages about Satan. It is no small thing to ignore or limit their content. We believe there is enough evidence in Scripture to make it reasonably clear that Satan is the intended subject. In the following paragraphs, we have outlined a few of the reasons why we believe this is so.

Hermeneutics (principles of interpretation)
There is no doubt that both passages in question refer to earthly kings. Isaiah refers to the "king of Babylon." The passage in Ezekiel refers to the "ruler of Tyre" One could call this the greater context. But both passages also include parenthetic statements that would seem inappropriate, even impossible, if applied to a human. At this point one has to consider a basic hermeneutic principle sometimes referred to as the principle of double fulfillment or double reference.

Simply put, a single passage 'applying primarily to a person or event near at hand' can also have another person in mind. Examples of this can be seen with passages used of Christ.

Hosea 11:1 "When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son." The immediate context of the passage refers to Israel. But Matthew 2:14 applies this passage to Christ, " . . . out of Egypt I called my son." The principle of double reference would state that Israel was a son, nationally, but the greater "Son" was Christ.
Deuteronomy 18:15 "The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your own brothers. You must listen to him." The immediate context refers to Joshua. But Acts 3:22,23 applies this to Christ. Unless the Scriptures made this connection we would not even consider this verse as being applied in this fashion. The principle of double reference would state that Joshua was a prophet that must be listened too, but the greater prophet was Christ, and there was a greater urgency to listen to Him.
There are many more such examples that could be quoted, but this should suffice to show that the principle of double reference is a well-established Bible hermeneutic that must be considered when interpreting passages that seem to extend beyond the immediate.

Ezekiel 28
If this passage were referring exclusively to the ruler of Tyre, then you would certainly have to say that it is a case of imagery and even overstatement.

Could Ezekiel actually have had the "ruler" in mind when he described him as being "perfect and blameless" in all his ways? The doctrine of original sin is muddled when one considers that the "king of Tyre" is said to have been "blameless from the day he was created." In contrast to that statement, King David wrote "Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me." (Psalm 51:5) Satan was sinless when he was created, but that could not be said of any earthly ruler, not even King David.
It is said that the King of Tyre was 'created' instead of 'born.' If the word 'born' had been used it would certainly have ruled out Satan, but that is not the case.
The ruler of Tyre could not have been in the Garden of Eden. Satan was.
It seems strange that the king is described as being adorned with 'every precious stone.' Did he really have such wealth? If this were referring to a king, it would seem to be exaggeration.
The king was called a "guardian cherub." This would make it the only instance in the Old Testament where that word was used in reference to a human. That seems unlikely when you study how the word 'cherub' is used in other contexts.
At one time, the "king of Tyre" would have been in close fellowship with God, for it is said that he walked on the 'holy mount of God.' Obviously this could not have been the case; it would have to be imagery. The 'holy mount of God' is a direct reference to God's throne. On the other hand 'cherubs' are associated with closeness to God, as demonstrated in the construction of the 'Ark of the Covenant.' "The cherubim (pl. of cherub) were the "inner circle" of angels who had the closest access to God and guarded his holiness. "
There can be no reasonable doubt that the ruler of Tyre is not the only person being referred to here. On the other hand, it is quite reasonable to believe that the passage is referring to the ruling power behind the ruler of Tyre's actions.

It should be noted that addressing Satan through a human being is consistent with another passage in scripture. In Matthew 16:23 we see that "Jesus turned and said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the things of God, but the things of men." Jesus was talking at Peter, but directing his comments to Satan. Reading the passage carefully it is hard to determine just which part of the sentence was for Peter and which part was for Satan. (One feels the same uncertainty at times in Isaiah and Ezekiel.) Whichever the case, Peter got an earful, and Satan-the ruling power behind Peter's foolish words-was put in his place. In the same way, the ruler of Tyre would have been warned, and Satan-the ruling power behind his reign-would have been exposed.

Isaiah 14
To some extent, Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28 stand together. The first phrase in verse 12 is the key to this passage. Isaiah seems to switch gears and speak of someone more than the king of Babylon. Unless you also take the passage in Isaiah figuratively you are forced to consider the application of the principle of double reference.

It seems hard to envision the king of Babylon 'falling out of heaven.' The verse implies that the one who has fallen originally started out in heaven-that heaven was his original home. The fact that the fall from heaven is literal is enforced with the phrase 'You have been cast down to the earth.' This certainly could not apply to an earthly ruler.
The sin that the 'king' proposes in his five "I will's" seems to go far beyond any human's most outlandish and egotistical aspirations. On the other hand it is completely consistent with what one would expect of Satan.
How did the king propose to 'ascend into heaven'?
Did the king really think he could usurp God's throne?
Did he think he could sit on the sacred mountain? This indeed seems a most unlikely human ambition, even for a very evil king.
The reference to 'the stars of God' is usually interpreted as referring to angelic beings (Job 38:7). Did the king really think he could rule over them?
Did the king really think he could be like the Creator God-the Most High?
In addition to these questionable ambitions, the individual is called Lucifer, the "morning star," a word used to describe incredible brightness and beauty. Dr. Renald Showers gives a good explanation of this word in his book titled, "Angels."

Verse 12 refers to this being as, "O Lucifer, son of the morning." The name Lucifer does not appear in the Hebrew text. It is a Latin translation of the Hebrew word helel, which is in the text. The Hebrew word means "shining one." The root of this word "represents the giving off of light by celestial bodies."

The designation "son of the morning" is the Hebrew way of calling this being the "morning star." The word translated "morning" means "dawn" and refers to "the breaking of the day, that time just prior to sunrise." The morning star is so much brighter than all other stars that when the light of dawn makes all other stars invisible, the morning star is still visible.

The point of these designations is that the subject of verse 12 is a shining being of light. Just as the morning star is the brightest of all stars, so this being is the brightest of all shining beings of light created by God.

This point is significant due to several facts. As noted earlier, God called angels "stars" (Job 38:7). The Bible portrays angels, not mortal humans, as bright shining beings (Mt. 28:2-3; Rev. 10:1). The Apostle Paul called Satan "an angel of light" (2 Cor. 11:14).

In light of what has been seen, it can be concluded that Isaiah 14:12 is not referring to a human ruler of ancient Babylon. Instead, its subject is the brightest or greatest of all the angels who originally had heaven as his home.

In Revelation 22:16 this same word is used to describe the beauty of Christ. That it would also be applied to an evil king of Babylon is hard to comprehend. On the other hand, the passage makes sense if Isaiah did switch gears and began to lament over the one who was the driving force behind the king of Babylon, the great counterfeiter, Satan.

Franz Delitzsch gives a good conclusion as quoted by Charles Ryrie in Basic Theology.

. . . the fall of the king of Babylon is an antitype of the previous fall of Satan and a type of the future fall of Antichrist. Delitzsch says it concisely: "A retrospective glance is now cast at the self-deification of the king of Babylon, in which he was the antitype of the devil and the type of Antichrist." (Franz Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Prophecies of Isaiah [Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1875], 1:312). The passage transcends anything that can be said of an earthly king and has been understood from earliest times to also refer to Satan's fall as described in Luke 10:18.

In writing The Stranger, we did not want to fill it with 'maybe," and 'it could be.' Unbelievers have a hard time handling gray areas. We wanted as few of those as possible. It was our conviction that the passages in question are clear enough to teach them with conviction and certainty, both on the basis of sound exegesis and historical interpretation. If we could not be sure on those passages, then a host of other verses would have to be declared as vague. For example, the "serpent" in the Garden of Eden could not be taught as being Satan because the serpent is not identified in that passage as Satan. Yet we believe that the serpent was Satan and teach it with conviction because the whole body of Biblical revelation makes it clear. We believe the same applies to Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28.


It is interesting how God has revealed information to us about Satan throughout Scripture in the writings of the many different prophets and apostles. From all these different passages we get a unified and non-contradictory picture of what Satan is like and what he does.

In Luke 10:18, Luke tells us that Satan fell from heaven like a bolt of lightning and in Ezekiel 28, the prophet explains who threw him out of heaven and why.
1 Timothy 3:6 states that Satan came into judgment because of pride. Isaiah 14 gives us a detailed look at the nature of Satan's pride.
In John 8:44 Jesus calls Satan "the father of lies" and we see this master of lies at work in the garden in the form of a serpent. "Did God say...?" Satan asked deceptively. Gen 3:1
In Job 1:6-12 Job is accused by Satan as being a 'fair-weather' believer. We see that Satan is looking to find fault with Job, and eager to cause him to turn away from the Lord. In Revelation 12:10 Satan is described as 'the accuser of the brethren', and in 1 Peter 5: 8 he is described and an adversary who is walking about like a lion to see whom he can devour.

 Top  Twitter  Facebook  Google Plus  Linkedin  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Mr. Wong 


Anonym
Re: Teosofiska Samfundet & Illuminati
#17
Nu pratar jag inte om vad jag själv tror, men lucifer är satan för personerna jag pratar om, det är deras tro och deras religion.

Lucifer är bara ett namn som satan har fåt, inget konstigare än så. Lucifer betyder morgonstjärnan så det passar bra (jesus blev även kallad för morgonstjärnan, men inte av samma anledning som satan)

När Isaiah berättar att morgonstjärnan, sonen av morgonen blev nersparkad till jorden så får man exakt samma anledning som till varför satan blev nersparkad. och jesus sa att han såg den som blev nersparkad och att det var satan, alltså måste Isaiah mena satan. Kunge av tyre var aldrig i Eden eller i himlen men satan var det, och Ezekiel 28 berättar att den som blev nersparkad var i himmlen och i Eden, så alltså måste det vara satan som Isaiah och Ezekiel pratar om och som blev nersparkad som jesus vittnade till. dom pratar alltså om kraften bakom kungen av tyre, Satan.

Jag tycket dom gjorde ett bra jobb med att förklara detta i texten jag kopierade, bättre än mig.

men i slutet av dagen så handlar det om vad globalisterna tror och dom dyrkar satan. Henry wallace och FDR följde galningarna manly p hall, nicholas roerich och helena blavatsky arbeten.

Question: "Why are both Jesus and Satan referred to as the morning star?"

Answer: The first reference to the morning star as an individual is in Isaiah 14:12: “How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations!” (NIV). The KJV and NKJV both translate “morning star” as “Lucifer, son of the morning.” It is clear from the rest of the passage that Isaiah is referring to Satan’s fall from heaven (Luke 10:18). So in this case, the morning star refers to Satan. In Revelation 22:16, Jesus unmistakably identifies Himself as the morning star. Why are both Jesus and Satan described as the “morning star”?

It is interesting to note that the concept of the “morning star” is not the only concept that is applied to both Jesus and Satan. In Revelation 5:5, Jesus is referred to as the Lion of the tribe of Judah. In 1 Peter 5:8, Satan is compared to a lion, seeking someone to devour. The point is this, both Jesus and Satan, to a certain extent, have similarities to lions. Jesus is similar to a lion in that He is the King, He is royal and majestic. Satan is similar to a lion in that he seeks to devour other creatures. That is where the similarities between Jesus, Satan, and lions end, however. Jesus and Satan are like lions in very different ways.

The idea of a “bright morning star” is a star that outshines all the others. Satan, as perhaps the most beautiful creation of God, probably the most powerful of all the angels, was a bright morning star. Jesus, as God incarnate, the Lord of the universe, is THE bright and morning star. Jesus is the most holy and powerful “light” in all the universe. So, while both Jesus and Satan can be described as “bright morning stars,” in no sense is this equating Jesus and Satan. Satan is a created being. His light only exists to the extent that God created it. Jesus is the light of the world (John 9:5). Only Jesus’ light is self-existent. Satan may be a bright morning star, but he is only a poor imitation of the one true bright morning star, Jesus Christ, the light of the world.


Edited by Malmoesoldier on 2009/6/13 21:18:19
 Top  Twitter  Facebook  Google Plus  Linkedin  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Mr. Wong 


Re: Teosofiska Samfundet & Illuminati
#16


See User information
Vist de kanske dyrkar satan, men det betyder inte att det är lucifer.

bara googla lucifer isnt satan, då har du annan fakta.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucifer
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satan

Wiki så det borde slå in ett ljus i ämnet.

It may come as a surprise to many Christians that to the Jews and New Testament Christians there was no such person as Lucifer. To many Christians Lucifer is equivalent to Satan, the devil. How could it be that the Jews knew nothing of Lucifer, we find it clearly printed in our King James Bible in Isaiah 14. But then again it is not found in most contempary language versions. With the curiously notable exception of the New King James Version.

As way of introduction here is what The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia has to say about Lucifer:

Lucifer, the rendering of the Vulgate for the Hebrew phrase helal ("day-star") in Isa. 14:12; the verse is rendered in the Authorized Version as: How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!" The passage in question is a song of derision over the downfall of a Babylonian king; the figure used may trace back to a Hebrew or Babylonian astral myth like the Greek story of Phaethon, in which the day-star is cast out of heaven because of presumption. The term Lucifer is never used in Jewish legend; but Christian writers identified Lucifer with Satan who, according to the gospels (Luke 10:18), fell from heaven like lighting; accordingly, Lucifer became one of the terms for the devil in Christian theology. (Page 229)

Most Christians do realize that Jerome used the word in his Latin Vulgate Bible prepared sometime toward the latter half of the 4th century. But unfortunately that's about the sum total of their knowledge of the history of the word. Because tradition has for so long said that Lucifer is Satan, they do not question the word or concept any further. But where did this tradition come from, and why considering the many references to Satan in the New Testament did not the concept of Lucifer ever come up.

It is not to Jerome, however that we owe the teaching of Lucifer but to that most creative of theologians, Origen. (185-254 A.D.) It was he who first made the new connection between Satan and Lucifer. He brought together diverse Old Testament references from Job, Ezekiel and Isaiah. Arguing that Lucifer, the Prince of Tyre, and the Leviathan of Job, were all identical with the Devil. He used these texts to emphasize Satan's pride and his fall from heaven.

With the aid of Tertullian (155-After 220 A.D.) who taught that before Satan's fall he was not only an angel but the foremost angel. It is mainly to these three theologians, Origen, Tertullian, and Jerome that we derive the Lucifer myth. It should also be noted that the Lucifer myth can also be found in the Psedepigrapha in the book The Secrets of Enoch. But since it is currently felt that The Secrets of Enoch is likely a seventh century document (at least in its present form), therefor it is probably not the source of this Lucifer myth. ( I will for now refer to the idea that Lucifer is Satan as the Lucifer myth, hopefully by the end of the article you will agree that it is indeed a myth.)

An interesting side note is that Origen and later Augustine believed that the Devil's envy arose from pride. Thus the Devil envied God. Tertullian on the other hand believed that the Devil was jealous of humans. Believing that the Devil was furious that God had created humans in the divine image and had given them governance over the world. Needless to say Tertullian view lost out to that of Origen.

Origen's use of Isaiah 14:12 and Ezekiel 28:12-19 seem to be the two popular references used when people speak about Lucifer. Origen's third reference to Leviathan in Job 41:1-2 seems to have fallen into disrepute, possibly because it does not provide much information to add to the myth.

Posted on: 2009/6/13 19:43
Citat:
har lärt mig från historia att man ska kolla upp saker noggrant..
 Top  Twitter  Facebook  Google Plus  Linkedin  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Mr. Wong 


Anonym
Re: Teosofiska Samfundet & Illuminati
#15
Nej det räcker med det jag har postat. det bevisar det tydligt. om jag postar något så är det för det är fakta, då är det menat att du ska förstå det, jag ska inte behöva skriva något om det, vill du jag ska översätta texten till dig? bättre att klistra in bevisen istället.

Många av globalisterna idag dyrkar satan och experter i ämnet som manly p hall förstog att lucifer var djävulen, hans besatta studerande av ämnet gjorde inte att han tolka saker fel, han var en riktig expert i det.

Och det är som sagt manly p hall, nicholas roerich och helena blavatsky arbeten som henry wallace och FDR följde. Så dollarn symboliserar satan.

 Top  Twitter  Facebook  Google Plus  Linkedin  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Mr. Wong 


Re: Teosofiska Samfundet & Illuminati
#14


See User information
Jo vist man kan försöka sammankoppla men att en säger att det är det för att han tror det är det så betyder det att det inte är det.
Get my drift

Samt hebreiska namnet på "the shining one" är heylel och inte lucifer. Samt the hibreiska ordet är en beskrivning och hänvisar ej till något namn alls vilket lucifer gör.

Lucifer va även kallad the lightbringer även samma benämning på jesus. II Peter 1:19, Rev. 22:16

samt satan va ofta kallad draken men vilket aldrig lucifer blev kallad.

Samt också en teori att det kanske va lucifer stärker inga grunder, man kanske får kolla på annat håll vem den profilen kan va.


II Corinthians 11:14 så säger djävulen att kan kan förvandla sig till en ängel av ljus, men den grekiska är det inte transformera utan utklä sig som, maskerad.

I Jn. 3:8 om satan att han va ond från början, vilket inte kan stämma med om det skulle va en ängel.


kan du inte posta hur du tänker på saken istället för copy pasta.

Posted on: 2009/6/13 19:06
Citat:
har lärt mig från historia att man ska kolla upp saker noggrant..
 Top  Twitter  Facebook  Google Plus  Linkedin  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Mr. Wong 


Anonym
Re: Teosofiska Samfundet & Illuminati
#13
Så är det.

Teosofiska Samfundets grundare Blavatsky säger själv att lucifer är satan och manly p hall använder lucifer när han pratar om djävulen, djävulen är satan.

Isaiah 14:12-18 describes the fall from heaven of one called “Lucifer” in the King James Version and the “morning star, son of the dawn” in the NIV. Other Bible versions call him “Day Star,” “shining star,” and “the bright morning star.” These variations are due to differences of opinion about how to translate the Hebrew word helel. Regardless, the description of the one referred to shows us it can be none other than Satan. We know from Jesus’ own words in Luke 10 that Satan fell from heaven. So, when Isaiah refers to Lucifer or helel being cast down to earth (Isaiah 14:12), it can be none other than Satan. The reason for his fall is found in verses 13 and 14: “You said in your heart, ‘I will ascend to heaven; I will raise my throne above the stars of God; I will sit enthroned on the mount of assembly, on the utmost heights of the sacred mountain. I will ascend above the tops of the clouds; I will make myself like the Most High.’” This has always been Satan’s desire – to be God, and it is the very temptation he used in the Garden of Eden to get Eve to disobey God: “You shall be as God” (Genesis 3:5).

Ezekiel 28 is another passage thought to refer to Lucifer/Satan. Although it begins with Ezekiel being commanded by God to “take up a lament concerning the king of Tyre” (v. 12), an evil idolatrous king, it soon becomes clear that the passage is referring as well to the power behind that king—Satan. Verse 13 says he was “in Eden, the garden of God.” Clearly, the king of Tyre was never in Eden. Verse 14 says, “You were anointed as a guardian cherub, for so I ordained you.” Apparently, Lucifer/Satan had a position of guardian angel in heaven “among the fiery stones,” thought to be the shining precious jewels that are seen in other descriptions of heaven (Exodus 24:10; Revelation 21:18-21). Since the king of Tyre was never in heaven, either, this can only be describing Lucifer. The rest of the passage describes the reason he was cast out of heaven. Because of his beauty, his heart became proud and his wisdom was corrupted (v. 17). Pride in his perfection, wisdom and beauty (v. 12) became the source of his downfall, and God threw him to the earth (v. 17). This was witnessed by the Lord Jesus in heaven before His incarnation (Luke 10:18).

To summarize, the Hebrew word helel is translated "Lucifer." He was cast out of heaven for his sin of pride and his desire to be God. Jesus referred to seeing Satan being cast out of heaven. Therefore, we can conclude that Lucifer and Satan are one and the same.

 Top  Twitter  Facebook  Google Plus  Linkedin  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Mr. Wong 


Re: Teosofiska Samfundet & Illuminati
#12


See User information
Vart har du haft för dig att lucifer skulle va satan?

Posted on: 2009/6/13 18:34
Citat:
har lärt mig från historia att man ska kolla upp saker noggrant..
 Top  Twitter  Facebook  Google Plus  Linkedin  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Mr. Wong 


Anonym
Re: Teosofiska Samfundet & Illuminati
#11
Korrekt.

 Top  Twitter  Facebook  Google Plus  Linkedin  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Mr. Wong 


Re: Teosofiska Samfundet & Illuminati
#10


See User information
Hall var en 33° Frimurare också, om jag inte fått detta om bakfoten.

Posted on: 2009/6/13 14:45
Anti-Korruptionsbyrån - Blogg om den Nya Världsordningen och Revisionism!
 Top  Twitter  Facebook  Google Plus  Linkedin  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Mr. Wong 


Anonym
Re: Teosofiska Samfundet & Illuminati
#9
Lugnt. det är sjukt hur frimurare ser upp till manly p hall. The Scottish Rite Journal skrev för några år sen hur dom såg upp till honom, hur han var deras största filosof.

"Masonrys greatest philosopher" The scottish rite journal sept. 1990

 Top  Twitter  Facebook  Google Plus  Linkedin  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Mr. Wong 


Re: Teosofiska Samfundet & Illuminati
#8


See User information
Tack, Malmoesoldier.

Det visste jag inte. :)

Posted on: 2009/6/13 13:23
 Top  Twitter  Facebook  Google Plus  Linkedin  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Mr. Wong 


Anonym
Re: Teosofiska Samfundet & Illuminati
#7
"Illuminati, Teosofiska Sambundet dyrkar Lucifer, inte Satan."

Lucifer är satan, och det är satan djävulen som illuminati dyrkar. som jag precis visade med så använder manly p hall Lucifer för att beskriva djävulen.

Teosofiska Samfundet grundare Blavatsky skriver i sina böcker att "Satan är gud".

"Satan is the god of our planet, and the only god" Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine p.234.

"Lucifer is divine and terrestrial light, the "Holy Ghost" and "Satan," at one and the same time" Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine p.513.

 Top  Twitter  Facebook  Google Plus  Linkedin  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Mr. Wong 


Re: Teosofiska Samfundet & Illuminati
#6


See User information
Illuminati, Teosofiska Sambundet dyrkar Lucifer, inte Satan.

Tack för informationen, Malmoesoldier.

Posted on: 2009/6/13 11:53
Anti-Korruptionsbyrån - Blogg om den Nya Världsordningen och Revisionism!
 Top  Twitter  Facebook  Google Plus  Linkedin  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Mr. Wong 


Anonym
Re: Teosofiska Samfundet & Illuminati
#5
"If you look at an American one-dollar bill, you will find a pyramid with an “eye” on top. The Great Pyramid is often associated with Freemasonry, and many of the American founding fathers were Freemasons. The symbol comes from the Great Seal of the United States designed in 1782 by Charles Thompson. In 1934 the Secretary of Agriculture Henry Wallace convinced Secretary of the Treasury Henry Morgenthau to place it on the dollar. It appeared in 1935. Morgenthau did not know at the time that Wallace made the suggestion at the behest of his guru Nicholas Roerich. To Roerich, the eye represented the gaze of mahatmas, or super-evolved beings that guide the affairs and spiritual evolution of humanity. Roerich (d 1947) and his wife Helena (d 1955) followed the Theosophy teachingsof the colorful 19th century occultist, Helena P. Blavatsky(1831–1891). By 1925, the Roerichs had established a new theosophical group called Agni Yoga in New York and London, and later in Latvia, Russia, and India. Like Blavatsky, the Roerichs believed that mahatmas had chosen them as messengers to an elite core of mankind"
http://www.icsahome.com/infoserv_book ... v_theosophyandculture.htm

"On the reverse of our nation's Great Seal is an unfinished pyramid to represent human society itself, imperfect and incomplete. Above floats the symbol of the esoteric orders, the radiant triangle with its all-seeing eye. ... There is only one possible origin for these symbols, and that is the secret societies which came to this country 150 years before the Revolutionary War. ... There can be no question that the great seal was directly inspired by these orders of the human Quest, and that it set forth the purpose for this nation. ..." — Manly P. Hall 33rd Degree Freemason, The Secret Destiny of America, pp. 175, 181.

"Not only were many of the founders of the United States Government Masons, but they received aid from a secret and august body existing in Europe, which helped them to establish this country for a peculiar and particular purpose known only to the initiated few. The Great Seal is the signature of this exalted body - unseen and for the most part unknown - and the unfinished pyramid upon its reverse side is a trestleboard setting forth symbolically the task to the accomplishment of which the United States Government was dedicated from the day of its inception." Manley P. Hall 33rd Degree Freemason The Secret Teachings of All Ages

"The day has come when Fellow Craftsman must know and apply their knowledge. The lost key to their grade is the mastery of emotion , which places the energy of the universe at their disposal. Man can only expect to be entrusted with great power by proving his ability to use it constructively and selflessly. When the Mason learns that the key to the warrior on the block is the proper application of the dynamo of living power, he has learned the mystery of his Craft. The seething energies of Lucifer are in his hands, and before he may step onward and upward, he must prove his ability to properly apply energy. He must follow in the footsteps of his forefather, Tubal-Cain, who with the mighty strength of the war god hammered his sword into a plowshare." [Manly P. Hall, 33rd Degree, K.T., The Lost Keys of Freemasonry or The Secret of Hiram Abiff , Forward by Reynold E. Blight, 33rd Degree, K.T., Illustrations by J. Augustus Knapp, 32nd Degree, Macoy Publishing and Masonic Supply Company, Inc., Richmond, Virginia, p. 48; Emphasis Added]

"Who was Tubal Cain?" Answer: "He is the Vulcan of the pagans."
[William P. Peterson, Editor, Masonic Quiz Book: "Ask Me Brother", Chicago, Illinois, Charles T. Power Company, 1950, p. 18, 88, 131, 213; also found in John Yarker, The Arcane Schools: A Review of their Origin and Antiquity: With a General History of Freemasonry and Its Relation to the Theosophic Scientific and Philosophic Mysteries, Belfast, Ireland, William Tait, 1909, p. 30; also found in A. R. Chambers, Editor, Questions and Answers, 1972, p. 237; also found in Malcom Duncan, Duncan’s Ritual of Freemasonry, New York, David McKay Company, Inc., n.d. 3rd Edition, p. 94.]

"Vulcan was a sun deity who was associated with fire, thunderbolts and light. The festival in honor of him was called the Vulcania in which human sacrifices were offered."
[Percival George Woodcock, Short Dictionary of Mythology, New York, Philosophical Library, p. 152].

"According to Diel, he bears a family relationship to the Christian devil."
[J.E. Cirlot, translated by Jack Sage, A Dictionary of Symbols , New York, Dorset Press, 1991, p. 362].

"It is fascinating to know that he married Venus, another name for Lucifer or the devil ."
[Woodcock, op. cit., p. 150-151; Emphasis added]

"I hereby promise the Great Spirit Lucifuge, Prince of Demons, that each year I will bring unto him a human soul to do with as as it may please him, and in return Lucifuge promises to bestow upon me the treasures of the earth and fulfil my every desire for the length of my natural life. If I fail to bring him each year the offering specified above, then my own soul shall be forfeit to him.." Manly Palmer Hall 33rd The Secret Teaching Of All Ages Signed{ Invocant signs pact with his own blood } " page CIV \ 104.

 Top  Twitter  Facebook  Google Plus  Linkedin  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Mr. Wong 




« 1 2 (3) 4 »




dvd-infobeställning banner längst ned.
Ikoner
Paypal
Stötta Vaken med en månatlig donation
Facebook
Gå även med i vår facebook-grupp och bli en av de över 15 000 som diskuterar där.
Login
Annonsorer och reklam
Annonser:






Annonsorer och reklam 2


Creeper MediaCreeper
Vilka är Online
100 user(s) are online (100 user(s) are browsing Forum)

Members: 0
Guests: 100

more...
Nya medlemmar
test_user
test_user
01/01/2020
brifrida 09/05/2019
Turbozz 08/15/2019
Fr4nzz0n 07/30/2019
Egenerfarenhett 05/19/2019
Bloggar o Länkar

I11time.dk
911 Truth i Danmark.
Se verkligheten
Dissekerar skildringar från massmedia.
Den dolda agendan
Nyheter på svenska.
Klarsikt
Mats Sederholm & Linda Bjuvgård.
Dominic Johansson
Hjälp Dominic att komma hem.
Mjölkpallen
Mjölkpallen är samlingsplatsen där bonnförnuftet tros ha sitt säte.
911truth.no
911 Truth i Norge.
Nyhetsspeilet.no
Nyheter på norska.
En bild säger mer ...
Citat från eliten som bilder.
Folkvet
Sanningen är dold bland lögnerna
Fred & Frihet
Geoengineering.se
Hur påverkar geoengineering dig?
Grundläggande frihetsbegrepp på svenska

RSS