Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2018 0:57:07 GMT
It was on 1 May 1776 that Adam Weishaupt, a professor of law at the University of Ingolstadt, founded the Order of the Illuminati, a secret organisation formed to oppose religious influence on society and the abuse of power by the state by fostering a safe space for critique, debate and free speech. Inspired by the Freemasons and French Enlightenment philosophers, Weishaupt believed that society should no longer be dictated by religious virtues; instead he wanted to create a state of liberty and moral equality where knowledge was not restricted by religious prejudices. However religious and political conservatism ruled in Ingolstadt at that time, and subject matter taught at the Jesuit-controlled university where Weishaupt lectured was strictly monitored. After initially handpicking his five most talented law students to join, the network rapidly expanded, its members disseminating Weishaupt’s goals of enlightenment with radical teachings, while at the same time creating an elaborate network of informants who reported on the behaviour of state and religious figures in an effort to build up a wealth of information that the Illuminati could potentially exploit in their teachings. With the help of prominent German diplomat Baron Adolf Franz Friedrich, Freiherr von Knigge – who helped recruit Freemason lodges to the Illuminati cause – the clandestine group grew to more than 2,000 members throughout Bavaria, France, Hungary, Italy and Poland, among other places. Weishaupt was in many ways a revolutionary,” Klarner continued. “He liked the idea of teaching people to be better human beings. He wanted to change society, he was dreaming of a better world, of a better government. He started the Illuminati with the idea that everything known to human kind should be taught – something that was not allowed here at the university.” The organisation didn’t evade the establishment for long, however. Just a decade after its creation, the secret society was infiltrated by Bavarian authorities after its radical anti-state writings were intercepted by government authorities. The Illuminati was shut down and Weishaupt was banished from Ingolstadt to live the rest of his life in the German city of Gotha, 300km to the north. Yet the idea of a secret society revolting against the state has captured imaginations ever since, encapsulated in conspiracy theories cooked up by those who believe the Illuminati was never actually disbanded – a claim that has been widely debunked by historians. Even still, conspiracy theorists say that the organisation has been covertly working behind the scenes to subvert authority. The Illuminati has been suggested as the party responsible for the French Revolution, the assassination of US president John F Kennedy and even the 11 September 2001 terror attacks, and has become famous through books and films like Dan Brown’s “I think it’s one of the most interesting topics we look at here,” Eppelsheimer said as she studied the dusty spines in a section dedicated solely to Ingolstadt’s history. She delicately pulled out one of the smallest books on the shelf. It was Apologie der Illuminaten, a 1786 work written by Weishaupt in which he defended the creation of the Illuminati shortly after his exile from the city. “It’s crazy what the Illuminati has been made into,” the archivist said as she leafed through the pages of the well-worn manuscript. “What it’s been made into has nothing to do with the real Illuminati.” More of Weishaupt’s words can be found in small, unassuming volumes hidden among the city’s vast archive. It’s as though more than two centuries after its formation, Weishaupt’s Illuminati has continued to remain as elusive as possible. www.bbc.com/travel/story/20171127-the-birthplace-of-the-illuminati
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2018 19:33:03 GMT
I met a 32ND degree Freemason.. He was a cool guy. Spoke with him for hours. From Texas was living in my neighbourhood. spoke some real shit for hours. About Christianity he said, that there was this incident that they heard a voice from God but that was misinterpreted as Jesus heard that voice or something like that, I don't really remember and that's how Jesus was mistaken to be a God. He was a ducking hypocrite, knew all religions were fake but use to attend the church as a bishop. Considering Commonwealth countries he was the most powerful figure after the Queen. 32nd? How do they get such degrees? Or is it based on their age and the only degree they can go up to is the one they die on? 33 is the highest, based on tenure and work performed, he was a grandpa, he had this huge cross at his home which was custom made to his height. he thought I was the Cia and left the place in a month where he had been staying for years.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2018 19:34:26 GMT
They were the ones doing the torturing and killing during the Catholic inquisitions. They also conspired/attempted to kill king James in the Gunpowder Plot in England in 1605 because they knew he was giving the order for the KJV Bible to be created. Why aren't these criminals locked up? Lot they are ruling the world
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2018 6:33:38 GMT
So it's mostly freemansons and philosophers opposing religions? The Perfectibilists weren't against religion per se. They opposed mysticism (represented by the so-called Rosicrucians), as well as excess reason (represented by the Kantians). It was mostly an alternative Christian sect: they banned Jews, pagans, members of other secret societies (although they did make a few exceptions for admitting Jews, none of the leaders involved were Jews) and made it a priority to recruit those who were of the Christian religion. In one of his defenses, he denies that he wanted to reintroduced a natural religion and instead claims that he just wanted to reform the Christian religion. Weishaupt is even said to have called Jesus the grand master of his order. This Christian sect did however incorporate a few elements from paganism and Freemasonry. The pagan aspect was represented by Christoph Meiners while the Masonic aspect was represented by Knigge. The latter was essentially superficial dressing to help blend in. It's unknown to what extent the former paganism was involved, but the Perfectibilists were principally theistic rationalists, akin to the American Founding Fathers. Thomas Jefferson would have probably gotten along with Weishaupt. Four years after he had read about Weishaupt and commented on it in a letter, he would go on to pen a work on Jesus' ethics. Coincidence? I think not! Terry Melason has put considerable amount of time into correcting the misrepresentation of this order. Sadly, even he doesn't seem to have really understood Weishaupt, calling him a coward for not coming out into the open with his beliefs and describes some of his works as boring. He has demonstrated that he is a superficial gauger of Weishaupt, despite his deep familiarity with Illuminati literature.
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Oct 21, 2018 6:39:55 GMT
So it's mostly freemansons and philosophers opposing religions? The Perfectibilists weren't against religion per se. They opposed mysticism (represented by the so-called Rosicrucians), as well as excess rationality (represented by the Kantians). It was mostly an alternative Christian sect: they banned Jews, pagans, members of other secret societies (although they did make a few exceptions for admitting Jews, none of the leaders involved were Jews) and made it a priority to recruit those who were of the Christian religion. In one of his defenses, he denies that he wanted to reintroduced a natural religion and instead claims that he just wanted to reform the Christian religion. Weishaupt is even said to have called Jesus the grand master of his order. This Christian sect did however incorporate a few elements from paganism and Freemasonry. The pagan aspect was represented by Christoph Meiners while the Masonic aspect was represented by Knigge. The latter was essentially superficial dressing to help blend in. It's unknown to what extent the former paganism was involved, but the Perfectibilists were principally theistic rationalists, akin to the American Founding Fathers. Thomas Jefferson would have probably gotten along with Weishaupt. Four years after he had read about Weishaupt and commented on it in a letter, he would go on to pen a work on Jesus' ethics. Coincidence? I think not! Terry Melason has put considerable amount of time into correcting the misrepresentation of this order. Sadly, even he doesn't seem to have really understood Weishaupt, calling him a coward for not coming out into the open with his beliefs and describing some of his works as tedious. So of they banned Jews then they were racist. I'm guessing they would also be against Catholics and Orthodocs who seem to support mysticism I believe which is also from paganism. And would you say this new sect origionated in USA?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2018 6:51:55 GMT
The Perfectibilists weren't against religion per se. They opposed mysticism (represented by the so-called Rosicrucians), as well as excess rationality (represented by the Kantians). It was mostly an alternative Christian sect: they banned Jews, pagans, members of other secret societies (although they did make a few exceptions for admitting Jews, none of the leaders involved were Jews) and made it a priority to recruit those who were of the Christian religion. In one of his defenses, he denies that he wanted to reintroduced a natural religion and instead claims that he just wanted to reform the Christian religion. Weishaupt is even said to have called Jesus the grand master of his order. This Christian sect did however incorporate a few elements from paganism and Freemasonry. The pagan aspect was represented by Christoph Meiners while the Masonic aspect was represented by Knigge. The latter was essentially superficial dressing to help blend in. It's unknown to what extent the former paganism was involved, but the Perfectibilists were principally theistic rationalists, akin to the American Founding Fathers. Thomas Jefferson would have probably gotten along with Weishaupt. Four years after he had read about Weishaupt and commented on it in a letter, he would go on to pen a work on Jesus' ethics. Coincidence? I think not! Terry Melason has put considerable amount of time into correcting the misrepresentation of this order. Sadly, even he doesn't seem to have really understood Weishaupt, calling him a coward for not coming out into the open with his beliefs and describing some of his works as tedious. So of they banned Jews then they were racist. I'm guessing they would also be against Catholics and Orthodocs who seem to support mysticism I believe which is also from paganism. And would you say this new sect origionated in USA? The principle of exclusion was exercised by the Egyptians (Genesis 43:32). The Christians too excluded people (2 Cor. 6:15), as did the pagans under Julian (forbidding Christians from teaching about Plato). The Jews have their circumcision. The Hindus have their caste system. Exclusion was not always about race, but certainly ended up that way. While it's true that Meiners was a polygenist and openly racialist, this does not seem to have influenced Weishaupt that much. In Diogenes' Lamp, he poses the question: why can't everyone form one nation, speak one language, live under the same law, and have one religion? He points out the differences in their ways of thinking, tastes and preferences, but he does not go on to stress the differences between races as Julian did (in his essay against the Christians). Again, he did not intend to establish a natural religion, which would have surely taken the racial aspect into account. The Catholics (the Jesuits in particular) and Orthodox were infiltrating the mystical sects, such as Johann Christoph von Wöllner. These fellas who claimed to be Rosicrucians were directly opposed to the Perfectibilists. President George Washington, who was not active for over 30 years in Masonic lodges, expressed skepticism at the idea that the Illuminati could have established a base in America. In any case, if the Perfectibilists had ventured to the USA, they wouldn't even have needed to conceal themselves and would have just come out into the open with their ideas.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 21, 2018 20:45:56 GMT
So it's mostly freemansons and philosophers opposing religions? The Perfectibilists weren't against religion per se. They opposed mysticism (represented by the so-called Rosicrucians), as well as excess reason (represented by the Kantians). It was mostly an alternative Christian sect: they banned Jews, pagans, members of other secret societies (although they did make a few exceptions for admitting Jews, none of the leaders involved were Jews) and made it a priority to recruit those who were of the Christian religion. In one of his defenses, he denies that he wanted to reintroduced a natural religion and instead claims that he just wanted to reform the Christian religion. Weishaupt is even said to have called Jesus the grand master of his order. This Christian sect did however incorporate a few elements from paganism and Freemasonry. The pagan aspect was represented by Christoph Meiners while the Masonic aspect was represented by Knigge. The latter was essentially superficial dressing to help blend in. It's unknown to what extent the former paganism was involved, but the Perfectibilists were principally theistic rationalists, akin to the American Founding Fathers. Thomas Jefferson would have probably gotten along with Weishaupt. Four years after he had read about Weishaupt and commented on it in a letter, he would go on to pen a work on Jesus' ethics. Coincidence? I think not! Terry Melason has put considerable amount of time into correcting the misrepresentation of this order. Sadly, even he doesn't seem to have really understood Weishaupt, calling him a coward for not coming out into the open with his beliefs and describes some of his works as boring. He has demonstrated that he is a superficial gauger of Weishaupt, despite his deep familiarity with Illuminati literature. Founding fathers were not theistic rationalist though
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Oct 21, 2018 22:00:28 GMT
So of they banned Jews then they were racist. I'm guessing they would also be against Catholics and Orthodocs who seem to support mysticism I believe which is also from paganism. And would you say this new sect origionated in USA? The principle of exclusion was exercised by the Egyptians (Genesis 43:32). The Christians too excluded people (2 Cor. 6:15), as did the pagans under Julian (forbidding Christians from teaching about Plato). The Jews have their circumcision. The Hindus have their caste system. Exclusion was not always about race, but certainly ended up that way. While it's true that Meiners was a polygenist and openly racialist, this does not seem to have influenced Weishaupt that much. In Diogenes' Lamp, he poses the question: why can't everyone form one nation, speak one language, live under the same law, and have one religion? He points out the differences in their ways of thinking, tastes and preferences, but he does not go on to stress the differences between races as Julian did (in his essay against the Christians). Again, he did not intend to establish a natural religion, which would have surely taken the racial aspect into account. The Catholics (the Jesuits in particular) and Orthodox were infiltrating the mystical sects, such as Johann Christoph von Wöllner. These fellas who claimed to be Rosicrucians were directly opposed to the Perfectibilists. President George Washington, who was not active for over 30 years in Masonic lodges, expressed skepticism at the idea that the Illuminati could have established a base in America. In any case, if the Perfectibilists had ventured to the USA, they wouldn't even have needed to conceal themselves and would have just come out into the open with their ideas. Maybe people learned to exclude through time and mostly on race it wasn't so biblically. That doesn't mean those mentioned in the bible all weren't racist since it's also a religious book as well as a history book. So, sure the Egyptians may have been racist as a whole but also maybe it doesn't apply to every Egyptian. Also, the Jehovah followers weren't called to be racist since Moses married some person from a different race and ot angered his siblings that he did that. But then God got angry too. But not with Moses but with the siblings. He threatened to kill them if they didn't stop the racism. And in Corinthians it just means Christians must live differently than the nonChristians. It doesn't mean racism though since Christians are instructed to love everyone which is one of the commandments in OT and NT eliminating racism. They can still marry other races and Moses did and the disciples of Jesus preached to the Gentiles with excluding them because of race. Wait. The Jesuits are Catholics? Really? Can you elobarate more? Also I heard the founding fathers had Jesuits among them. Is it true or fasle?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 23, 2018 7:09:09 GMT
Founding fathers were not theistic rationalist though Jefferson distinguished his deism from the deism of the Jews. Thomas Paine defined deism as the belief in one deity yet emphasized that it meant putting into practice what was called moral virtues. He cites Psalm 19 and the book of Job, more particularly the latter, as the only truly deistic compositions. In contrast to the Old Testament, Jefferson cherished work and labour as the true mark of a chosen people. And in Corinthians it just means Christians must live differently than the nonChristians. It doesn't mean racism though since Christians are instructed to love everyone which is one of the commandments in OT and NT eliminating racism. Wait. The Jesuits are Catholics? Really? Can you elobarate more? Also I heard the founding fathers had Jesuits among them. Is it true or fasle? "Love your neighbor as yourself." First aspect to examine: as yourself. The demand to put others first at the expense of oneself is not found anywhere in nature. Without egotism, there would be no self-preservation. Nepotism, as seen in Trump's administration, furnishes an excellent example. By surrounding himself with his family, his interests are thoroughly protected. Egotism is only undesirable in excess. Second aspect to examine: your neighbor. This precept was delivered to Jews and their co-religionists, it grew up on Jewish grounds. It simply means Jew, love your fellow Jewish brethren. Third aspect to examine: Love. How can it be called love when Christian missionaries neglect their own people for foreigners? sourcebooks.fordham.edu/mod/1514luther.aspThe Founding Fathers had Freemasons, not Jesuits, among them. Two separate orders. The former started off humanistic before it veered off into a mystical slant.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 23, 2018 7:18:14 GMT
Founding fathers were not theistic rationalist though Jefferson distinguished his deism from the deism of the Jews. Thomas Paine defined deism as the belief in one deity yet emphasized that it meant putting into practice what was called moral virtues. He cites Psalm 19 and the book of Job, more particularly the latter, as the only truly deistic compositions. In contrast to the Old Testament, Jefferson cherished work and labour as the true mark of a chosen people. And in Corinthians it just means Christians must live differently than the nonChristians. It doesn't mean racism though since Christians are instructed to love everyone which is one of the commandments in OT and NT eliminating racism. Wait. The Jesuits are Catholics? Really? Can you elobarate more? Also I heard the founding fathers had Jesuits among them. Is it true or fasle? "Love your neighbor as yourself." First aspect to examine: as yourself. The demand to put others first at the expense of oneself is not found anywhere in nature. Without egotism, there would be no self-preservation. Nepotism, as seen in Trump's administration, furnishes an excellent example. By surrounding himself with his family, his interests are thoroughly protected. Egotism is only undesirable in excess. Second aspect to examine: your neighbor. This precept was delivered to Jews and their co-religionists, it grew up on Jewish grounds. It simply means Jew, love your fellow Jewish brethren. Third aspect to examine: Love. How can it be called love when Christian missionaries neglect their own people for foreigners? sourcebooks.fordham.edu/mod/1514luther.aspThe Founding Fathers had Freemasons, not Jesuits, among them. Two separate orders. The former started off humanistic before it veered off into a mystical slant. More or less we both mean the same thing..a theistic God is a personal God..neither of the founding fathers rested with that sort of assertion. It's pity the work of Thomas Paine especially age of reason is like unheard by most Americans considering he is a founding father. But no wonder why. Elites don't want such knowledge to be brought in front they rather promote bible, whereby Jesus flies in the air to meet God, walks on water and other ton of crap. Hallelujah.
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Oct 23, 2018 13:14:19 GMT
Founding fathers were not theistic rationalist though Jefferson distinguished his deism from the deism of the Jews. Thomas Paine defined deism as the belief in one deity yet emphasized that it meant putting into practice what was called moral virtues. He cites Psalm 19 and the book of Job, more particularly the latter, as the only truly deistic compositions. In contrast to the Old Testament, Jefferson cherished work and labour as the true mark of a chosen people. And in Corinthians it just means Christians must live differently than the nonChristians. It doesn't mean racism though since Christians are instructed to love everyone which is one of the commandments in OT and NT eliminating racism. Wait. The Jesuits are Catholics? Really? Can you elobarate more? Also I heard the founding fathers had Jesuits among them. Is it true or fasle? "Love your neighbor as yourself." First aspect to examine: as yourself. The demand to put others first at the expense of oneself is not found anywhere in nature. Without egotism, there would be no self-preservation. Nepotism, as seen in Trump's administration, furnishes an excellent example. By surrounding himself with his family, his interests are thoroughly protected. Egotism is only undesirable in excess. Second aspect to examine: your neighbor. This precept was delivered to Jews and their co-religionists, it grew up on Jewish grounds. It simply means Jew, love your fellow Jewish brethren. Third aspect to examine: Love. How can it be called love when Christian missionaries neglect their own people for foreigners? sourcebooks.fordham.edu/mod/1514luther.aspThe Founding Fathers had Freemasons, not Jesuits, among them. Two separate orders. The former started off humanistic before it veered off into a mystical slant. God just said to love everyone and made it a commandment. That way you don't ever hurt anyone emotionally or physically intentionally whether your own people or not. This is OT and NT commandment so not just for Jews. But salvation was taken away from Jews for the most part anyway and given to Gentiles since they didn't do a good job with it. What's the difference with Jesuits and Freemansons?
|
|