I'm working on some Cabal History research and I'm piecing together a rough timeline of when each secret society was "incorporated" into the Satanic Cabal we know today. Masons weren't always bad. This book's intro may be an indicator of the moment in time they were infiltrated and taken over. 1827.
(www.sacred-texts.com)
Cabal History Theory
Comments (18)
sorted by:
You may want to take a look at:
https://www.conspiracyarchive.com/PROOFS_OF_A_CONSPIRACY_John_Robison.pdf
It gave me the impression that masonry was originally, in some respect, a club for men to hang out, pass the time, and avoid serious discussion. Apparently one of the original rules was no discussion of politics and religion. This book discusses how masonry changed over time and became taken over by the Bavarian Illuminati and related people. Eventually it became a tool for the cabal.
How is it that we know the masons were not always evil?
Well, you could start by reading the book I posted.
The compiler who wrote the intro is against the Masons but the under the pretense that any secret society could eventually harbor bad actors that use the society to form a tyranny in government.
He didn't appear to assume the Masons were at that point yet, despite them disappearing William Morgan.
I might read it but right now I am dealing with the statements in your post.
I'm not trying to be agro fren, I guess I just don't understand why anyone needs a secret society for anything good. Private? Sure.
I mean, how would anyone not in the group know they started out as good if your group is hidden/unknown?
Do we all agree they haven't been good in a LONG time? How could we possibly know the "secret society" was once good if we only have the current evil society's word on it? See where I am going here? Without transparency.....
I'm not agro either. It's just frustrating that everything you're concerned about is covered in the book's intro. Just about anyway.
Basically all you are asking is the same line of thinking this dude puts forth.
He sees no good use for the secret societies other than to be bait for bad actors to take over and use the lesser members to unwittingly do bad while abusing tradition to self-serve their own interests.
Personally, I think secret societies are useful if you are trying to overthrow a tyrannical British Empire and needed a basis of secret handshakes and cipher codes to relay important messages. Not so much use after the fact. Remind you of any Federal Agencies post WWII and the Cold War?
Kinda like unions, they all outlive their usefulness and then resolve to become the bad guy and cause problems to justify their continued existence in cleaning up the messes they resort to making -- all up until the point they just do evil shit because they can at the behest of corrupt Globalist Powers.
Ok gotcha. I might still read it. Thank you for fleshing it out more.
To your examples, I tend to prefer having "known" societies who can do some secret activities for good IF needed, but heavily regulated by non secret rules known to all members of said society. Kinda like America is supposed to be.
For distinction, by known societies, I mean with a full charter known to all who are members. My understanding of the bricks is there is very very little transparency to the majority of the members. It is a power pyramid.
We don't.
How do you know there were always evil? I would say that the general way things go is to start off with good intentions and then become corrupted. The bad people would want a cover that is mostly good anyway. Once a group openly says hey, we plan to plunder, rape, murder, and generally do as much damage as possible, they draw resistance. As long as they can be excused by hiding behind the virtue of others, they can flourish.
I kinda feel like you answered your own question. Secret societies don't need to be secret if they exist for good reasons.
"Hey we are doing good things over here. No we won't tell you the details"....Yep that checks out.
I was not clear then. I think every organization tends to deteriorate from its original intent and it takes constant effort to stay on mission. Clubs, schools, governments, scouts, armies, family businesses--the original strong founders get replaced with weaklings and then the opportunists get in. It is entirely believable to me that a bunch of guys would start a club to get away from the wives to drink and smoke and joke and generally put aside their routine, a grown-up version of the boy vs. girl cliques that used to be very common.
I completely agree with all of this.
I guess I was thinking any society that starts as secret, pretty much "warp speeds" this deterioration to the point of not ever truly starting as good. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Joining such a society as anything but the leader just begs to be manipulated imo.
Why did the early Christians hide?
You can see how the Masons would have acquired power. They could do stuff that no-one else could - somewhat like the big tech whizzes of today. They could even be sent abroad to work there.
So imagine you are living in medieval times when hardly anyone ventures further than the next village and these people are travelling to foreign lands.
Now think what they are doing. They are building all the famous buildings in the world. They will come across all the movers and shakers who have the wherewithall to finance castles and cathedrals.
Also, if your castle needs some secret rooms, hidey holes, secret passages or dungeons then the Masons will know about them. Knowledge is power.
They were doing all that centuries before Adam Weisshaupt founded the Illuminati so the megalomaniacs had had lots of time to infiltrate the corridors of masonic power and subvert the organisation.
The Catholic Church is similar. Once a hierarchy is seen as a powerbase then it starts to attract the "wrong sort" of people. People who want power above all else.
When it comes to the Catholic Church I have two views that I think in combination both sides will find issue with yet must admit it is the ideal nature of the Church.
I believe two things can be true at the same time:
The Vatican should not exist.
There is a Universal Church instituted by Jesus through his authority and Apostolic succession.
So, how can both these be?
Jesus handed the keys of the kingdom to Peter, this is well understood. The Apostles, in addition, took this to mean there must be 12 to take on the leadership and proselytization effort and one among them to hold those keys, which is why they replaced Judas and saw Peter as their leader, respectively.
It is clear, Jesus' intent was to create an organized Church with rites of succession proceeding from His Authority. When Peter did wrong, he was not dogmatically immune. Paul chastised the hell out of him, and rightly so:
So, what is the conclusion? Well, look at the actions of the Apostles. They didn't stay put. They went to the people who hadn't heard the Good News and they preached endlessly of the Merciful nature of God having sent His Son to die for all, Jew and Gentile alike. When Peter hid among his own, he was rightly chastised. Peter went to claim Rome, and was killed for it. The mission of the Leader is to lead, even if that means risking their own security and life to do it.
That is the only "Leader" a Church should have. All should be evangelizing sacrificial lambs emulating fully the life of Jesus. Giving their lives selflessly and flipping tables in the temple when need be.
What does that leave the Church, though? Simple. It must be fluid and move endlessly. Churches get built and established, given to those who will look after it, and then the Leaders of the Church must move on to evangelize. If such a Church begins to corrupt, the Leaders must return wielding the fury of God, flip the tables, and whip the money changers with reeds.
When body ceases to move, it rots. So too acts the body of the Church. Any who slow and take to the roots of the Earth for security will be taken by the Earth to their grave. The Holy Spirit is always moving, so too must the Body of the Church and its Leaders.
That's my vision of the One True Church established by Jesus.
The church is the body of Christ & it's being chased by the dragon. Notice how they were able to shut down churches because of "covid" That's because the 1160 'days' of protection (350 years) has passed. It's all in the Bible:
https://greatawakening.win/p/12jJZIPVET/the-rest-of--revelations-1220-is/
1827 might have been the start of the infiltration. It's safe to assume it took a couple of decades for that infiltration to metastasize into control.
Thanks fren, saved to read later. Fascinating subject and so much obscured by the sands of time and intentions of men, to find a turning point would be impressive.
Tower of Babel ca. 2300 BC.