Speaking of that, did you know that there is a form of gnosticism that seems to say that there is this goddess, Pistis Sophia, that created a Demiurge god & hid him in a cloud, because she didn't create him with the consent of the highest father god that carries no name?
Some would say this Demiurge was called Yaldabaoth (& there may be some that believe he has some connection to, or even is YHWH) In Christian gnosticism some believe that Christ came down to free people from this god, etc
Have you heard of all that or did you just think of this on your own? Anyways, there was a time when I was curious of gnosticsm but then the group of them I was with, went all woke on me & kicked me out! Can you believe that? (Long story - we were talking politics, not religion but politics. They are incredibly woke libtards. In a calm voice I pointed to a simple contradiction which made the priest resign on the spot! lol! Then the bishop came in & kicked me out)
After that I began to wonder about all that stuff & went back to a more conventional church. Of course now even they are going all woke too so IDK! I figured I should point that out though, since you seemed to stumble upon this.
I am aware of Gnosticism and Sophia (AKA the "Holy Spirit" in Christian doctrine), and the Demiurge (which has origins 500 to possibly thousands of years before the Gnostics came online). I study all the ancient religions, as well as the more recent ones, not to find "the truth" but to find the similarities and the differences in their dogma. I use these ideas as references to dig deeper.
There is great scholarship out there, but if you restrict yourself to one ideal you will not see it. I recommend not looking to any one source for the Truth about Source, rather let your intuition guide you through all of the controversy. Recognize that pretty much all religions have the same source (the Cabal), or they have been taken over by them after the fact, and are thus controlled by them today.
I suggest the Truth can't be found in any "religion," rather the Truth Is Whatever It Is, and learning how to listen to it will help you to understand that it has already revealed itself.
Of course that doesn't necessarily help with some of the details, but the details of history aren't nearly as important as learning how to listen to Source when it speaks, which is all the time.
Beautifully said Slyver, IDK why you got the downvote. I'm curious which religions you think are cabal source vs the ones taken over by them. I had the sense that. before Constantine, Christianity was a bunch of independent churches honestly seeking the truth to at least some degree. Of course, there are some who would question Paul or even Peter but certainly not Jesus. I have had my own experience which tells me exactly how divine he truly is.
IDK if I have studied as much as you but I marvel at similarities between cultures which had no history of ever being in contact. For instance, the Orthodox Christians have a "40 day mass" for the dead. (Which in practice is usually performed a little more than 40 days after death but never before) and I have heard that the Tibetan Buddhists have a 49 day period after death, both of these periods have to do with the soul's journey after death to prepare for the next phase.
I've also thought of things like, since Abraham spoke a sematic and that the preface a' in those languages usually means 'of' or 'son of'. His name could have been: a'Braham and Brahan is very similar to Brahmin, which is the name of the highest god in the neighboring country (India) So it seems like there is some ancient connection between those 2 very different cultures.
Anyways, I'm just curious what else you may have noticed.
I'm curious which religions you think are cabal source vs the ones taken over by them
This is difficult to say. I could go through a list, but then I'd have to justify them, and that is a book length endeavor. In addition it would be largely speculative. I am constantly finding new evidence on these things that makes me lean one way or another. Not about everything, some are pretty clear cut, but some are so clouded in history, taking any sort of stand one way or the other seems foolish.
Christianity was a bunch of independent churches honestly seeking the truth to at least some degree.
I have that sense as well. My research suggests there was a lot of controversy of ideas, a lot of debate. Constantine ended that debate by making specific tenets (some taken from other religions, like Mithraism) into Roman Law (believe these things or else!).
I marvel at similarities between cultures which had no history of ever being in contact.
Those cultures had a lot of contact. The idea that there was no contact between East and West is a lie. Not only did they have contact (travel) between all those areas, their cultures were all founded (or subsumed) by the same group of people, the people we call the Scythians (or their progenitors).
The Scythians have been effectively removed from history, with nothing but lies, largely in the form of purposeful disconnections, left in its place. Until people understand who they were, it is impossible to understand the ancient world. You might know the Scythians as the Tartarians. They are the same group of people. People who look into Tartary are all forced to look into the wrong thing (giants, free energy, "Tartarians in America" and all that other bullshit). By keeping Tartary researchers focused on these mostly unrelated topics, it steers people away from that realization: Tartary was just Scythia, and Scythia ruled about 25% of the planet (approximately the area known as the USSR, though at times extending far beyond that) for 3000 to 5000 years.
Their removal from history in the early 20th century is, imo, the greatest scam of our Age, and likely the key to understanding everything.
You mean the people from the land which is in the middle between China, Russia, Europe, Middle East and India? It makes sense that there would have been something there. Especially since we barely know of much history from there.
What is the basis of Gnosticism, the Demiurge? While I agree that is a part of Gnostic teaching, the idea of a "demigod" (non-corporeal self-aware split apart from Source) that ruled the earth while pretending to be Source has origins that go back very far, thousands of years, long before there were people that call themselves "Gnostics," at least according to history.
And it is how people are controlled, in so many cases.
What is how people are controlled?
Negation - what is cannot be named, only what it is not.
I suggest that "naming" anything (in the way we do it) is a false naming in the sense that words have definitions, and definitions are always incomplete.
Gnosticism is what Marx, Rothschilds, Schwab use
Not really. They use what I call The One religion, but a specific sect of it. The One religion is the only religion that actually exists, all other religions are front organizations that lead to that same religion in their occult mysteries. Whether any particular religion started as front organizations, or has been taken over to join them is difficult to say, but that seems to be how it is set up now, and has been for at least two millennia, though likely much longer.
The One religion teaches that "Thou art God" as one of it's primary tenets. Inherent in that tenet is the connectedness of all things. We are all God (Source), thus we are all created equally Divine, created from and inseparably connected to the Fundamental.
Some of the sects of The One religion teach a focus on the "self" aspect of that Divinity, teaching how to rise above the other split-aparts of Source (other people). It is this literally self centered aspect that sets apart the teachings of The One religion of the Cabal and The One religion of other adherents.
Gnosticism does not, at least on the surface, present itself as a self centered cult, it is merely part of The One religion, and that can be confusing at first. There are many similarities between these different sects. The primary difference is the focus on self, or the focus on the connectedness, and the intrinsic respect in that connection. In this other aspect, to respect others is to respect yourself, because everyone is fundamentally Source.
There's a great deal more to it than that. At some point I will write it up formally. It's pretty important to understand The One religion, and the differences in the various associated cults I think.
Speaking of that, did you know that there is a form of gnosticism that seems to say that there is this goddess, Pistis Sophia, that created a Demiurge god & hid him in a cloud, because she didn't create him with the consent of the highest father god that carries no name?
Some would say this Demiurge was called Yaldabaoth (& there may be some that believe he has some connection to, or even is YHWH) In Christian gnosticism some believe that Christ came down to free people from this god, etc
Have you heard of all that or did you just think of this on your own? Anyways, there was a time when I was curious of gnosticsm but then the group of them I was with, went all woke on me & kicked me out! Can you believe that? (Long story - we were talking politics, not religion but politics. They are incredibly woke libtards. In a calm voice I pointed to a simple contradiction which made the priest resign on the spot! lol! Then the bishop came in & kicked me out)
After that I began to wonder about all that stuff & went back to a more conventional church. Of course now even they are going all woke too so IDK! I figured I should point that out though, since you seemed to stumble upon this.
I am aware of Gnosticism and Sophia (AKA the "Holy Spirit" in Christian doctrine), and the Demiurge (which has origins 500 to possibly thousands of years before the Gnostics came online). I study all the ancient religions, as well as the more recent ones, not to find "the truth" but to find the similarities and the differences in their dogma. I use these ideas as references to dig deeper.
There is great scholarship out there, but if you restrict yourself to one ideal you will not see it. I recommend not looking to any one source for the Truth about Source, rather let your intuition guide you through all of the controversy. Recognize that pretty much all religions have the same source (the Cabal), or they have been taken over by them after the fact, and are thus controlled by them today.
I suggest the Truth can't be found in any "religion," rather the Truth Is Whatever It Is, and learning how to listen to it will help you to understand that it has already revealed itself.
Of course that doesn't necessarily help with some of the details, but the details of history aren't nearly as important as learning how to listen to Source when it speaks, which is all the time.
Beautifully said Slyver, IDK why you got the downvote. I'm curious which religions you think are cabal source vs the ones taken over by them. I had the sense that. before Constantine, Christianity was a bunch of independent churches honestly seeking the truth to at least some degree. Of course, there are some who would question Paul or even Peter but certainly not Jesus. I have had my own experience which tells me exactly how divine he truly is.
IDK if I have studied as much as you but I marvel at similarities between cultures which had no history of ever being in contact. For instance, the Orthodox Christians have a "40 day mass" for the dead. (Which in practice is usually performed a little more than 40 days after death but never before) and I have heard that the Tibetan Buddhists have a 49 day period after death, both of these periods have to do with the soul's journey after death to prepare for the next phase.
I've also thought of things like, since Abraham spoke a sematic and that the preface a' in those languages usually means 'of' or 'son of'. His name could have been: a'Braham and Brahan is very similar to Brahmin, which is the name of the highest god in the neighboring country (India) So it seems like there is some ancient connection between those 2 very different cultures.
Anyways, I'm just curious what else you may have noticed.
This is difficult to say. I could go through a list, but then I'd have to justify them, and that is a book length endeavor. In addition it would be largely speculative. I am constantly finding new evidence on these things that makes me lean one way or another. Not about everything, some are pretty clear cut, but some are so clouded in history, taking any sort of stand one way or the other seems foolish.
I have that sense as well. My research suggests there was a lot of controversy of ideas, a lot of debate. Constantine ended that debate by making specific tenets (some taken from other religions, like Mithraism) into Roman Law (believe these things or else!).
Those cultures had a lot of contact. The idea that there was no contact between East and West is a lie. Not only did they have contact (travel) between all those areas, their cultures were all founded (or subsumed) by the same group of people, the people we call the Scythians (or their progenitors).
The Scythians have been effectively removed from history, with nothing but lies, largely in the form of purposeful disconnections, left in its place. Until people understand who they were, it is impossible to understand the ancient world. You might know the Scythians as the Tartarians. They are the same group of people. People who look into Tartary are all forced to look into the wrong thing (giants, free energy, "Tartarians in America" and all that other bullshit). By keeping Tartary researchers focused on these mostly unrelated topics, it steers people away from that realization: Tartary was just Scythia, and Scythia ruled about 25% of the planet (approximately the area known as the USSR, though at times extending far beyond that) for 3000 to 5000 years.
Their removal from history in the early 20th century is, imo, the greatest scam of our Age, and likely the key to understanding everything.
You mean the people from the land which is in the middle between China, Russia, Europe, Middle East and India? It makes sense that there would have been something there. Especially since we barely know of much history from there.
What is the basis of Gnosticism, the Demiurge? While I agree that is a part of Gnostic teaching, the idea of a "demigod" (non-corporeal self-aware split apart from Source) that ruled the earth while pretending to be Source has origins that go back very far, thousands of years, long before there were people that call themselves "Gnostics," at least according to history.
What is how people are controlled?
I suggest that "naming" anything (in the way we do it) is a false naming in the sense that words have definitions, and definitions are always incomplete.
Not really. They use what I call The One religion, but a specific sect of it. The One religion is the only religion that actually exists, all other religions are front organizations that lead to that same religion in their occult mysteries. Whether any particular religion started as front organizations, or has been taken over to join them is difficult to say, but that seems to be how it is set up now, and has been for at least two millennia, though likely much longer.
The One religion teaches that "Thou art God" as one of it's primary tenets. Inherent in that tenet is the connectedness of all things. We are all God (Source), thus we are all created equally Divine, created from and inseparably connected to the Fundamental.
Some of the sects of The One religion teach a focus on the "self" aspect of that Divinity, teaching how to rise above the other split-aparts of Source (other people). It is this literally self centered aspect that sets apart the teachings of The One religion of the Cabal and The One religion of other adherents.
Gnosticism does not, at least on the surface, present itself as a self centered cult, it is merely part of The One religion, and that can be confusing at first. There are many similarities between these different sects. The primary difference is the focus on self, or the focus on the connectedness, and the intrinsic respect in that connection. In this other aspect, to respect others is to respect yourself, because everyone is fundamentally Source.
There's a great deal more to it than that. At some point I will write it up formally. It's pretty important to understand The One religion, and the differences in the various associated cults I think.