Guest post: The Layered Deception Called Religion



The machinery that the international bankers and mercantile elite have been creating and maintaining for generations to control and change this world is based on a few basic principles of competition and cooperation, among others; but the lower you get in the echelons of this machine, the more diverse the elaboration of these principles becomes, and the more the mechanisms and interrelationships change like a kaleidoscope.

The only way to form a picture of this world of closely interwoven power structures is to learn to separate the wheat from the chaff and to glean all the pieces of the puzzle bit by bit from a multitude of information written from a multitude of angles.

In studying this subject, it is good to keep in mind that there are works written by persons who are trying to look in from the outside, works written by persons who are accepted but not initiated members, and initiated members whose works belong in the limited hangout category without exception.

Thus far my imaging is far from complete, and there is undoubtedly much to polish. I have started to write down my perceptions in the hope that this will provide a basis for anyone who seriously investigates this subject. I hope for positive contributions from those who are prepared to put their own views next to mine and to weigh them up against each other and add to them.

Because Catholicism was the first hierarchy to transcend national boundaries in the same way that multinational corporations, world banks and fraternities do today I devote much attention to it. It is my strong impression that the driving force behind (and within) Catholicism is the same as that behind all today’s dominant power structures including the major religions which apart from Talmudism were created later and are closely intertwined. As far as I can discern now, this driving force originates in the highest echelons of Talmudic Judaism. These are practically synonymous with the self-appointed elite of this world.

Don’t get me wrong, I am not talking about the Jews but high ranking Talmudists. It is the Jews who have probably suffered more than any other group of people at the hands of these Talmudic leaders.

As you study this matter, keep in mind that civilizations with the additional regulations in the early days of civilization were usually governed by a Priest class. As far as I can tell, politics and regulation have their origins in religion.


Talmudic law is a rehash of Babylonian law and never had anything to do with the law of the twelve tribes of Israel as given to Moses according to the Old Testament. When a rabbi speaks of the Torah, usually referring to the first five books of the Old Testament, he is talking about the Torah SheBea’al Peh, i.e., the Talmud and other rabbinic sacred texts.

(N.B. Israel was the new name given to Jacob after struggling a whole night with an angel to test his merit. This Jacob is the father of ten of the twelve patriarchs of the tribes of Israel and grandfather of the patriarchs of two tribes. When these tribes conquered and occupied Canaan they renamed it Israel after their patriarch of patriarchs. Names in ancient times were more of a title or description of one’s role within a certain context. Upon being assigned a new role or within a different context names also change. Israel means something like “Thou hast behaved royally with God” or “God reigns”. This name has nothing to do with Isis, Ra and El as is regularly assumed, although the “el” in Israel is the Hebrew word for god.)

From the very beginning, a subversive group within the Israelite community who were called the Pharisees sought to rule over the Israelites. It is this group that Christ accuses in the New Testament of calling themselves Jews but not being Jews, and is referred to by him as a synagogue of Satan (Satan is a title meaning adversary. According to the Bible, the adversary against the creator’s original plan started with Lucifer. It is for this reason that he is also called the Satan, but he is not the only one to receive this title.). The New Testament makes it clear that being a Jew is not dependent on outward appearances such as circumcision but on faith. Not being Jewish is probably meant here metaphorically, but some believe that the early Pharisees, who were masters of virtue signaling, came from a Canaanite remnant.

To take over leadership of the tribes of Israel, these Pharisees came up with the story that in addition to the written law as given to Moses, there is an explanation of a deeper meaning of the law that was transmitted orally. This was the first Talmud also called the Jerusalem Talmud. It was also the first time that a deeper or esoteric meaning of the Bible books was mentioned in order to adapt them and derive a totally different regulation or doctrine from them.

It is striking how often this is still done and how credibly it comes across to people who are not familiar with the contents of the Bible. The most common method of coming up with an apparent explanation of the Bible is to take themes, characters, texts, and even numbers from the original context and place them within a context that has nothing to do with the original text and then claim that this explains what the Bible is about. As we will see later, the teachings of Christianity were also shaped in this manner. The books of the Bible are written around a very clear and well-defined storyline that runs from Genesis to Revelation. Since most people are familiar with Biblical characters and themes but not with the context in which they belong, it is very easy to fall for this kind of deception.


It was later, when the Israelites were in exile in Babylon under Nebuchadnezzar, that the Pharisees became acquainted with the Babylonian rules of property, labor and (slave-) trade and began developing a Talmud that distorted the original Jewish law into the Babylonian one. This Talmud is called the The Babylonian Talmud and is one of the most important works on which modern Talmudism is based.

Both the Roman Empire and Talmudism are the main heirs of this Babylonian rule and are closely intertwined, as the following text shows:

What I think I can also gather from this text is that Babylonia was an autonomous city state in Babylon similar to City of London and the Vatican. Correct me if I’m wrong.

The Pharisees who developed the Talmud and Talmudism were, according to the Bible, causal to the death of Christ and were very fierce and feared persecutors of his first followers. In the early days they worked their way into key positions within the religion established by Constantine as they had done in the Roman governing body when the Roman Empire had conquered the territory of the Israelites. These Pharisees understood well that as counselors they could assert their influence unseen from behind the throne.

Constantine himself was aware of this rise to power and pushed back the influence of Talmudic Jews. His son Constantius got along well with the Pharisees and, after succeeding his father, granted them more influence than they ever had before. I have a strong impression that the Christians who were entrusted with important offices after 324 were crypto Jews as is still often the case with Christians in positions of influence in the dominant hierarchies of this world.

Taking over power by occupying key positions but leaving the façade of a hierarchy intact so that this takeover is not visible, is a common tactic of the ruling oligarchy of this world, as is marrying off sons and daughters to King’s houses and other rich and powerful families. The power that today’s elite has drawn to itself is still maintained by marrying off exclusively within their own ranks, and is still rarely visible.

It is noteworthy that the Old Testament mentions a dream that Nebuchadnezzar is said to have had of a statue with a head of gold representing his empire, then Babylonia. This statue symbolized his empire and the empires to follow, expressed by the chest and arms of silver representing the Mede/Persian empire, the belly and loins of copper representing the Greek empire and the legs of iron representing the Roman empire — thus of an increasingly harder metal — ending in the feet, which were made of pieces of iron held together by loam.

The prophet Daniel’s explanation of this dream, who was in exile in Babylon in those days was the following: “And that ye have seen the feet and the toes partly of potter’s clay and partly of iron, signifies, that this shall be a divided kingdom [ ] That ye have seen iron mingled with clayey loam, means: they shall mingle by marriage, but shall not form a coherent whole with each other, as iron does not mingle with loam” (Daniel 2:41-43)

In the New Testament Revelation 18:23 reads: “For thy merchants were the great men of the earth, for by thy sorceries (deceptions) were all nations deceived.”


The religions and secret societies of this world both have an outer circle with an exoteric teaching for the uninitiated and an inner circle with an esoteric teaching for the initiated. In the end, religious institutions are nothing more than secret societies as secret societies are religious institutions. In the case of Christianity, the exoteric teaching is the teaching that is falsely claimed to be based on the Bible. Christianity disguises its paganistic and mystical beliefs under a layer of complicated theology and Biblical themes texts and characters.

One angle from which to approach the Bible is that it is a collection of books that tell of the harmony that is original to this world and how we lost it when the concept of hierarchy took hold. It is on hierarchy, not harmony that all power in this world is based. For this reason, among others, the Bible has been shrouded in mists for 2,000 years by rulers of religious hierarchies. By using biblical themes to disguise the pagan and mystical teachings of Christianity, the Bible is hidden from view even though it appears to be at the center of Christian doctrine. A very successful execution of hiding in plain sight.

Like all religious institutions including secret societies and fraternities, Christianity has its origins in the Sun Cult as it was known in Babylon under Nimrod, also known as The Old Religion or Baäl worship. There are more and older variations on this theme but almost all of today’s institutions and cults derived from the sun cult find their common origin in this Babylonian empire, not infrequently also by their own admission. They are all elaborations of the same principle and all have the same goal (albeit via different paths) and for this reason they can be perfectly combined.

In the solar cult, the central focus is Sirius. Where the sun illuminates the material world, Sirius illuminates the spiritual world according to these teachings. Every mystery religion and cult represents a system for enlightenment and self-deification. Of all these systems, today the Kabbalah under the influence of Freemasonry is by far the most popular. However I have the impression that this is a watered down version for the goyim. The dark side opposing the light of the sun and it’s life giving properties is often represented in the Solar cult by the planet Saturn. This planet is also referred to as black sun, black star or dark star.

The Talmudic Jews, who have considerably less to do with the twelve tribes of Israel than they like to claim, believe that the god and creator of this earth descended to earth through the sefirot of the kabbalistic tree of life and the paths that connect them and along that way has descended in a form expressed in matter. This form, according to their teaching, we now know as the Jews. The Kabbalah is said to represent a way back to the original divine state. This is very similar to the Gnostic teaching that we are angels trapped in matter.

Kabbalah emerged from the ancient mystery religions, which, along with the regulations for property, trade and labor as practiced in the new Babylonian empire under Nebuchadnezzar, is part of Talmudism. An important addition of the Pharisees to the Babylonian system of contracts and vows was the idea that the Jews have a God-given right to treat non-Jews as slaves and cattle.

It is these Talmudic Jews who also put Gnosticism on the map. Gnosticism and kabbalah are the pillars of the teachings for initiates, both in the great religions and in secret societies and fraternities. The Knights Templar, whose leadership like the Jesuits consisted mainly of Talmudic Jews, preserved the ancient knowledge of the mystics and formed the inner heart of the inner circle of the Catholic religion.

The Knights Templar were exempt from all local laws and only had to answer to the Pope. Since power in this world is not on the throne but behind it I suspect that both the Knights Templar and the Pope answered to the same hidden rulers. Their innovative banking systems — derived from Babylonian money magic — gave them control of some 1,000 fortifications during the Crusades.

The end of the Crusades gave the Knights Templar less purpose, but after 200 years of integration, they still had power and authority in cities across Europe. They became a “state within a state”, and this created a lot of tension.

Banking began with these crypto (Talmudic) Jewish Templars. Their banking system from the beginning generated not only wealth but also power. Thus, I am convinced that both the religious world and the world of lodges and fraternities have been controlled for generations by a relatively small group of families that we now find among the super-rich banking and trading families who almost without exception adhere to Talmudism, at least outwardly, and therefore call themselves Jews.


The Roman Catholic Church claims that its origin is the death, resurrection and ascension of Jesus Christ and that it is the church for which Jesus Christ died, the church established and built up by the apostles. But even a cursory reading of the New Testament shows that the Catholic Church does not find its origin in the teachings of Jesus or his apostles.

The fact that Christianity seems to want to fight paganism has everything to do with the occult/mystical knowledge that paganism harbors and on which the power of rulers has been based for as long as hierarchy has been a concept in this world.

This is also why it is absurd to think that a ruler like Constantine would have embraced the ideas adhered to by the first followers of Christ and only allowed paganistic influences to make the transition to the new state religion easier for paganists.

This would have meant that he would have favored an ideology that advocates having no ambition in this world, placing no value on status and possessions, living in community of means of livelihood with fellow believers, not waging war or participating in it, preferring harmony strictly to hierarchy, and humbly allowing themselves to be led by God’s holy spirit until Christ comes back to take his God-given place on the world throne, and until then recognizing only God as authority.

This is why this group who said they were “of the way” was perceived as subversive. There is no earthly leader who has use for a population whose philosophy of life is at odds with the position of the ruler himself and the hierarchy he rules. This also makes the idea that Constantine would have made this a state religion because it would be pacifying out of the question.

Constantine is said to have envisioned Christianity as a religion that could unite the Roman Empire at a time when it was beginning to fall apart. At that time, almost every city in the Roman Empire had its own god with its own temple and there were many territories conquered by Rome with their own religions which in turn had their influence on religious thinking in the Roman Empire.

The supremacy of the Roman bishop called pope was created thanks to the power and influence of the Roman emperors. While most other bishops (and Catholics) resisted the idea of the Roman bishop as supreme, the Roman bishop eventually rose to supremacy. After the western half of the Roman Empire collapsed, the popes assumed the title that had previously belonged to the Roman emperors, Pontifex Maximus. The idea that the Roman bishop is the replacement for Christ and the supreme leader of the Christian Church is completely foreign to the Bible.

The original message of the gospel is that thanks to the atoning sacrifice of Christ a personal harmonious relationship with the creator is possible again and that this is the first step on the way to regaining harmony in his creation. There are some guidelines indicated for how to restore and maintain this relationship but according to the Bible, this relationship is personal and how to shape it is everyone’s own responsibility. The idea of a hierarchical institution that places itself between God and his creation is completely at odds with the gospel.

Of the many different variations on the solar cult, from 1st to the 5th century AD, Mithraism was a popular religion especially among Roman soldiers. On Roman territory there were at least 1,500 temples to Mithras, a deity originating in Zoroastrianism of ancient Persia, who balanced the good forces and the evil forces, represented respectively by Ahura Mazdâ (lord wisdom) and Angra Mainyu (evil spirit). Mithras was also called the sun god and on December 25, the birthday of this Sol Invictus or Invincible Sun was celebrated. This celebration took place a few days after the solstice of December 21.

The Romans also celebrated the god Saturn whom they equated with Cronus during the feast of the Saturnalia, this divinity was also celebrated together with the birth of the new Sun, during the Winter Solstice, i.e. in the period when Christians now celebrate the birth of Jesus, unaware of how this is an occult commemoration to the ancient dark god.

Regarding the birth day of Jesus as described in the Bible; Joseph and Mary were on their way to their birthplace because the Emperor Augustus had issued an order that everyone in his empire, which included Israel in those days, must be registered at the place where they came from. According to historiography, this must have been sometime in the spring, about four to six years BC.

It is possible that Constantine, like his father, venerated this sun god. It is also Constantine who proclaimed the Dies Solis (day of the sun, today’s Sunday) as the official day of rest in the Western Roman Empire, not the Catholic Church as is often assumed. The Sabbath, the day of rest as mentioned in the Bible lasted from Friday evening sunset to Saturday evening sunset.

One of the central features of Mithraism was a sacrificial meal, in which the flesh of a bull was eaten and the blood of that bull was drunk. Mithras was said to be present in the flesh and blood of the bull, and when ingested it brought salvation to those who had partaken of the meal.

It was easy for Constantine and his successors to replace the sacrificial meal of Mithraism with the idea of Holy or Christian Communion. On the other hand, the sacrament as a consumption of the literal body and blood of Jesus is not taught in the Bible. The idea of bread and wine being miraculously transformed into the literal body and blood of Jesus (transubstantiation) as taught in the Catholic religion is also not found in the Bible. Mithraism, like Christianity, had seven sacraments. These too are not found anywhere in the Bible.

Luther, who claimed to want to purge Catholicism of pagan influences, added the Christmas tree to the celebration of Christmas. This was originally the midwinter tree from the Germanic solstice or midwinter festival celebrated around December 21.

The midwinter horn blown during this period from December 2 to announce the coming of the light was Christianized in the Middle Ages and is now used to announce the coming of Christ. Since, according to the New Testament, the coming of Christ took place more than 2,000 years ago, this is a peculiar custom for a religion that claims to be Christian. Talmudism rejects the New Testament and teaches that the Messiah has yet to come for the first time.

Another custom from this Germanic tradition is the burning sun wheel that was turned to welcome the returning sun. This is where the Advent wreath originated.


What is now called Easter is associated within Christianity with the Jewish Passover feast. In reality, this is the feast of Ishtar who originated in Mesopotamia where the Assyrians founded the first Babylonian dynasty. She is the main Babylonian and Assyrian goddess, associated with love, fertility and war and counterpart to the Phoenician Astarte.

This feast was a celebration of the rebirth of nature in spring. To make it a little more plausible that this feast was related to the Jewish Passover, it has been made that this Old Testament celebration looked forward not only to the death/sacrifice of the coming Messiah, which means anointed of God (called the Christ in the New Testament, from the Greek word christos meaning anointed one) as was originally the case but also to his resurrection.

On top of that, Easter and Passover do not fall on the same date. The gap between these two celebrations varies from year to year because Passover had a fixed date on the Jewish calendar while Easter has a fixed date on the Roman calendar.

None of the feasts of Christianity can be found in the Bible, nor is there a requirement to celebrate these feasts. The feasts appointed by law in the Old Testament book of Leviticus are described in most Bible translations as holy gatherings, but in Hebrew one can also read that these are holy rehearsals. On a side note, this has nothing to do with the concept of religion as we know it today, there has never been an Old Testament Judaic religion.

Paul declared in the New Testament that these sacred Old Testament rehearsals were shadows of future events that were recent history at the time of Paul’s declaration. He was referring, among other things, to the last atoning sacrifice of the last high priest who would sacrifice himself.

The elements in the Old Testament Jewish culture that are explained as religious are primarily prophetic and had no function after these prophecies were fulfilled in the New Testament. It was with the last sacrifice that the covenant with the Jewish people was fulfilled and the Jewish law was abolished after which a new covenant was made with all mankind. This is why the books of the Bible are divided into an Old Testament and a New Testament. The Hebrew term for covenant is berit, which means “to bind or bind together”. In Greek it is translated as syntheke, “to bind together” or diatheke, “will, testament”.

Even if the feasts of Christianity were truly derived from the Old Testament Jewish feasts, since the coming of Jesus as savior and his sacrifice of which the prescribed Jewish customs were a foreshadowing were fulfilled at the beginning of the New Testament, the continued celebration of these Old Testament feasts is an absolute denial of the atoning sacrifice and therefore of Christ and the gospel. The disciples were instructed by Christ to remember only the supper and the sharing of the bread and wine with the following words: “Do this, time and again, to remember me” (Luke 22:19).

It is custom in Satanist circles to pass the bread and wine around on the date of the original supper but to explicitly not use any of it. Jehovah’s Witnesses do the exact same thing on the exact same date. They are taught that only the anointed, of which there are only a few left, may eat of the bread and drink the wine. For the rest of the believers, as in good Satanic custom, this is strictly forbidden.


Another recognizable theme from the solar cult visible in Christianity is the worship of mother with the child of god. The similarity in the story of Tammuz and Semiramis with Christ and Mary served well in the creation of the Catholic Church and the use of Biblical themes to obscure the true nature of this institution.

Semiramis was the wife of Nimrod. Before that she was his mother, making Nimrod the original bad mf’r. She is depicted in the lore as a beautiful and powerful witch. Nimrod was known as a great hunter and slayer of man. Together they would found the great pagan religions. After Nimrod died, Semirames noticed that she was beginning to lose influence in the Babylonian empire. Therefore, she encouraged the Babylonians to worship the sun as a tribute to her husband Nimrod.

She claimed that she had been fertilized through solar rays by her deceased husband, who had now become the sun. The son she gave birth to — named Tammuz —  is said to have been born on December 25. Hence, Christmas is a celebration of the simultaneous birth of the son of darkness and the son of light and the celebration of the returning sun and its dark counterpart Saturn. In this the Gnostic nature of Christianity shines through.

Whereas according to the Bible there is only one worshipable God, in Christianity the mother and child motif (or the mother or child alone) is also worshiped. Most denominations go so far as to claim that Christ is God in human form. The Bible is clear that this Christ who is called the Word in John 1:1 is an expression of an eternal and therefore formless God (eternity is the absence of time and therefore of space and form. Hence, God has neither a beginning nor an end and no shape) as a father can be recognizable in his son but not God himself. And it does not stop there; the paganistic multiplicity of gods has been replaced in Christianity for a whole pantheon of worshipable saints.

The ancient Egyptians, who had great influence on early religious thought, arranged their gods or goddesses into trinities. There is no biblical basis for such a trinity doctrine any more than there is for the idea of an eternal soul, which has its origins in Greek philosophy, or for the departure of this soul to heaven or hell after death. As noted before, what is often done with such teachings is to take a text, theme, or person out of the context of the Bible and place it in the context of a pagan or self-invented teaching.

More on the origin of the trinity doctrine:

The Cult of Isis, a religion centered around the Egyptian mother goddess, was given a pseudo-biblical twist by replacing Isis with Mary. Many titles used for Isis, such as the Queen of Heaven, the Mother of God and Theotokos (meaning God-bearer) were assigned to Mary.

There is not a word in the Bible about the papacy, the worship and adoration of Mary, the perpetual virginity of Mary (the apostle Mark mentions by name four brothers of Christ, begotten by Joseph with Mary), the Assumption of Mary into heaven, or Mary as co-redeemer or co-mediator, praying to saints in heaven, apostolic succession, the regulations for the functioning of the church such as the sacraments, infant baptism, confession of sin to a priest, purgatory, indulgences or the equal authority of church traditions and the Bible.


The pagan narratives on which Christianity is based are older than Christianity, but based on the timeline of the history of this world as used in the Bible, the early Biblical narratives (not necessarily the books themselves) are about as old as Paganism. From the tone in which many Biblical stories are written, it can be concluded that the Bible clearly posits itself against Paganism and the religions that arose from it.

The Bible presents itself not as a religious collection of books but rather historical and prophetic. The 66 books that make up the Bible were written over a period of 3500 years, the last book of which was written almost 2000 years ago. The Christian religion is not based on the Bible but tries very hard to make it appear that way.

Inserting Biblical themes and characters into pagan narratives is still a very widespread practice, even outside of Christianity. Since the comparisons of Mystical/Pagan teachings with those of Christianity are very valid and this world lives in the false belief that Christianity is based on the Bible, Christianity erroneously gives the impression of bridging the gap between the Bible and pagan teachings. In the Netherlands we have the expression: if you want to hit a dog, there is always a stick to be found. The comparisons of pagan and mystical teachings with the Bible fall into this category without exception.

In order to determine whether such comparisons with the Bible are valid, it is necessary to be familiar with the Bible itself. Most persons who value these inaccurate comparisons only know the Bible by hearsay but have never made the effort to be truly familiar with this collection of books. Most people are familiar only with statements about the Bible, fragments of it or narratives or teachings falsely claimed to be Biblical but not with the Bible itself.

Although themes and persons from the gospels describing the life of Christ are often made to fit into mystical narratives like for example the sun passing through the zodiac, these narratives cannot in any way be made to fit into the gospels and certainly not into the full story of the Bible of which the gospels are an inseparable part.


That there has really been an authentic protest against the Catholic religion in the form of Protestantism seems to me to be implausible. Protestantism claims to aim to bring Christian doctrine back to the original Biblical teachings but has only added more pagan symbolism and has been a major catalyst for the development of Rosicrucianism.

Moreover, such an protest highlights the lie that Catholicism and by extension all of Christianity would have begun with the teachings of first century followers of Christ who called themselves Nazoraeans (also referred to as Nazarenes, not to be confused with Nazirean) or said to be of “the way”. It is typical, to say the least, that these Nazoreans are described in the writings of some church fathers as an organized Judeo-Christian sect with its own specific views.

The fact that Luther’s seal was a cross with a rose on it suggests that Protestantism was a step towards bridging the gap between Christian and mystical teachings. Consider that Christian teachings are themselves paganistic and mystical narratives in to which Biblical text, themes and characters are forced to sell them as Biblical.

The article “Joseph Smith and Kabbalah – The Occult Connection” gives a concise description of the development of interest in mystical movements in the Renaissance in relation to Protestantism:

This war too, like most wars of the past few hundred years, appears to have been staged and directed from behind the scenes by the usual suspects. Of all the purposes this apparent war has served, one purpose is obvious; related but opposing dynamics reinforce each other. This has been used conveniently many times as with the Democratic and Republican parties, the Beatles and the Stones, Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Mormons, etc.


Within Freemasonry, the principle of an outer circle with an exoteric doctrine for the uninitiated and an inner circle with an esoteric doctrine for the initiated is divided between the blue lodge with 3 degrees and a red lodge with 30 degrees of which (of the total of 33 degrees) the thirty-third is an honorary title. This makes the 32nd degree, Master of the Royal Secret, the highest degree of development in the system as broadly practiced within Freemasonry. The third degree, Master Mason, is the highest degree for the uninitiated.

Among members of the echelons of the inner circle in Freemasonry there is the notion that members of the blue lodge often have an even poorer understanding of what Freemasonry really entails than people who are not members at all, such as non-initiates in religious institutions have no idea what the religion they follow really entails. But on the other hand, within the red lodge, members of the lower echelons are unaware of what is going on in the higher ones and within all echelons, there are select groups and networks that the other members don’t know about.

The teachings and objectives of the inner circle are diametrically opposed to those of the outer circle. It is custom within societies, brotherhoods and religious institutes to continue to radiate to the outside world the values and objectives of the outer circle after initiation in to the inner circle and to maintain strict secrecy about the ideas and associated practices of the inner circle.

Since the religious world is very closely intertwined with Freemasonry, I assume that initiation into the inner circle of any religion amounts to pretty much the same thing as initiation into the red lodge including the various echelons in which to ascend and the theory and practice offered.


According to the online Catholic Encyclopedia, the name “Freemason” originally referred to a highly skilled Catholic mason exempt from the supervision of the trade guilds as early as 1155 AD. These former craftsmen were largely responsible for Gothic architecture and the construction of many Gothic cathedrals throughout Europe. They took a vow to remain faithful to the God of the Bible and to the Holy Church and to abhor heresy.

The abundance of pagan and mystical motifs incorporated into cathedrals and churches elucidates the value of such a vow, and what loyalty to the Holy Church really means. The early Freemasons were clearly initiated in the mysteries and pagan traditions. One example is Rosslyn Chapel, which has gained notoriety thanks to pseudo conspiracy works such as The Da Vinci Code and The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail.

Rosslyn Chapel was built as a Christian house of worship, but unknown to the uninitiated, it was designed, through its symbolism and occult features, to honor Lucifer. Like similar buildings on the mainland, it is said to have been secretly consecrated with Babylonian rites, including blood sacrifices and the burial of spellbound objects. The St. Clair family at whose behest Rosslyn Chapel was built had ties to the Knights Templar and Templar symbols can be found in the chapel.

Many of the symbols used by the Knights Templar who were the forerunners of the Jesuits, who have close ties to Freemasonry and which were founded by Ignatius of Loyola at the same time he founded the Alumbrados, now called the Illuminati and the governing body of worldwide Freemasonry, can be found in both Christianity and Freemasonry. The Cross in Crown symbol, which Albert Pike says is a Western variation on lingam yoni but to the uninitiated means Christ is King, is a telling example.

It was these Catholic craftsmen who founded private lodges to share their knowledge among themselves. Later, non-craftsmen who were interested in the mysteries were also admitted to these lodges; they were called accepted or speculative masons. At that time it was only the craftsmen or operative masons who called themselves Freemasons.

The use of the name “Freemason” is said to have changed with the founding of the Grand Lodge of London and Westminster on June 24, 1717(=88). This was the dawn of worldwide Grand Lodge or Grand Orient Freemasonry. In France, the first Grand Lodge was established in 1771(=88). This is the beginning of Freemasonry as we know it today, but Masonic lodges where the mystical traditions of this world are studied and practiced existed long before Grand Orient Freemasonry.

Grand Orient or Grand Lodge Freemasonry usually has one Grand Lodge per country (Italy has three) or district that determines whether other Masonic lodges can be recognized as authentic Freemasonry. If a country does not have a Grand Lodge, then Masonic lodges can be recognized by a foreign lodge. Each individual Grand Lodge determines for itself what the criteria are for recognizing lodges as authentic Freemasonry. Each Grand Lodge also determines for itself which other Grand Lodge may officially count itself under Grand Lodge Freemasonry. Representatives of the Grand Lodges that recognize each other meet once a year.

This suggests that lodges and Grand lodges are independent institutions, but that is an illusion. This world of lodges, like the rest of the world, is manipulated and controlled from behind the scenes by networks known to few and, as with religious institutions, most members are severely brainwashed.

In a letter dated January 22, 1870, Giuseppe Mazzini, Director of the Illuminati in the mid-1800s, wrote to Albert Pike, Freemasonry’s most prominent reformer and author of Morals and Dogma (which can be considered the Masonic Bible):

“We must allow all of the federations to continue just as they are, with their systems, their central authorities and diverse modes of correspondence between high grades of the same rite, organized as they are at present, but we must create a super rite, which will remain unknown, to which we will call those Masons of high degree whom we shall select. With regard to our brothers in masonry, these man must be pledged to the strictest secrecy. Trough this supreme rite, we will govern all Freemasonry which will become the one International Center, the more powerful because it’s direction will be unknown.”

There are hundreds of different lodges that are not immediately recognizable as Freemasonry but can be counted among them. Here is a small selection:


That the police also go hand in hand with Freemasonry illustrates that religions and fraternities are traditionally meant to exercise authority. Above are a few examples of police emblems with the masonic compass and square symbol:

Another telling example is the seal of the Essex police force (

It’s a variation on the logo of what is know as The Hidden Empire. That logo consists of three bars placed one above the other as can be seen in the logo of Allsave Cybersecurity (hired by Evil Corp with a logo almost identical to that of CIA front Enron) where Eliot works in Mr. Robot:

or in the rather dark video of On to the next one by Jay Z (J.C.):

The difference is that the bars have been replaced by Arab swords used for ritual beheadings like the one in a mural at the Denver Airport:

There was once a fuss over the arrest of three individuals who claimed to be members of an organization they called called The Masonic Fraternal Police Department:

The site of this Masonic Fraternal Police Department stated the following:

“The Masonic Fraternal Organization is the oldest and most respected organization in the World.[ ] The first Police Department was created by the Knights Templar’s back in 1100 B.C.”

The idea that the primary purpose of the strong arm of the law is to protect the possessors’ property from the non-possessors is not out of the blue.


Protestantism has an offshoot in the form of small separatist movements that claim to be disappointed in Protestantism and to have formed themselves radically along the lines of the first congregations supposedly founded by the Apostles or groups around individuals who have proclaimed themselves to be contemporary prophets. As far as can be ascertained, these groups such as the Millerites and the Russelites (and the Seventh Day Adventists and Jehovah’s Witnesses that emerged from them), the Mormons, the Pentecostal Congregation etc. all have their origins in Freemasonry. One of the many signs on the wall is the frequent use of the cross in crown symbol.

Other telling examples are in the architecture of the Mormon Nauvoo temple:

or the Salt Lake Assembly Hall:


Another topic is the apparent Catholic origin of Islam, which points to a shared origin of both Christianity and Islam, and by that I do not mean the Bible.

An interesting lecture on this subject was given by Walter Veith, a high-ranking Freemason masquerading as an evangelist who has his origins in the very Masonic little group known as the Seventh-day Adventists. This lecture is a Christian version of a limited hangout but with some basic knowledge, the sense can be fairly well distinguished from the nonsense.

This version has helpful time stamps but the sound quality is compromised:

This version has better sound quality, but the time stamps are not included:

Veith shows that Islam has its origins in Catholicism, but in doing so he obscures the driving force behind the development of both these world religions. Bear in mind that Islam is based on a rewriting of the Bible in which Jesus is reduced to no more than a prophet. It is this reduction of Christ that has pulled the entire backbone out of the Biblical story. The coming of the son of God, a man without sin, as well as his atoning sacrifice are central themes in both the Old and New Testament and are the main part of the thread that runs through the entire Bible from Genesis to Revelation. The Old and New Testament as well as the 66 individual books no longer have any coherence in its Islamic “rewriting”.

I want to reiterate that Talmudists do not recognize the Christ as mentioned in the New Testament as the Messiah whose coming is foreshadowed in the Old Testament.

Following is a quote as used by Walter Veith in his lecture (see either version linked above):

“Islam is the message of the Qur-aan. It’s a perfect and practical religion of Equality, Fraternity and Liberty. Islam as divined by the Qur-aan means Submission to the supreme being, And compliance with His Laws which constitutes Nature including Man himself.” Vide 82:3, 30:30

We know the first part of this quote from the French revolution initiated by French Freemasonry under the auspices of the hidden governing body about which Guiseppe Mazzini wrote to Albert Pike.


What many people who have broken away from the religion in which they were raised (or in which they became involved) do not realize is that they are still brainwashed.

What I often observe, and have experienced myself is that Christian religious brainwashing makes people hungry for anything that sounds different or directly contradicts what they have been taught within these religious institutions not realizing that the Bible itself contradicts Christian teachings.

This leads them from the misconception that their former religion would be based on the Bible, into a world of deception and unsubstantiated theories about the meaning and origin of the Bible, which completely plays into the hands of the shapers and leaders of the Christian world.

Keep in mind that before the Counter-Reformation, a period of renewal within the Roman Catholic Church (in the 16th century through the early 17th century), it was forbidden for Catholics to read the Bible.

167 thoughts on “Guest post: The Layered Deception Called Religion

    1. XS,

      In terms of the three bars (reflective of The Hidden Empire), do they represent the three phases of the sun: rising, midday, and setting (AKA Horus, Ra, and Osiris, respectively)? Am I on the right track? I have not been able to find any information on this. Can you advise? Thanks.


      1. I don’t know, I can only speculate. My assosiation is three levels of existence, body soul and spirit. Three is also supposed to be a magic number.


  1. Excellent write-up, I read it in one attempt as I couldn’t stop.

    I’d just like to comment on one particular detail of the 25th of December and its meaning. In my opinion, these few days after the winter solstice are above or beyond any religious context if one is able to look at it objectively. And I also think that the so-called pagans knew perfectly well what is to be honored during this short period. The most natural phenomenon occurs on the 21st December as the Earth’s poles reach maximum tilt from the Sun. In other words, that’s when the new “season” of life begins here on Earth – length of the daytime begins to prolong again and a new cycle of life is about to begin, as it takes 3 full days for this phenomenon to appear measurable by the most primitive way of observation using the stick and its shadow as the measurement setup.

    It all comes to down to observing the Nature and its cycles. There’s absolutely nothing magical in it, but I can understand the need to worship this celestial event up to a point. It seems as a nice way to show mother Nature the respect she deserves and a homage to the Sun for making life possible in the first place. Like living in cohesion with the surrounding space…something we have collectively forgotten on the way. So whatever the historians try to convey as the true meaning of this phenomenon is far beyond its most fundamental meaning.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Celebrations and ritual also serve to create a sense of influence and malleability in a reality that is difficult to comprehend.

      I can imagine that people who are not sure that the light will return every year, show gratitude and make sacrifices to what or whoever they believe determines these matters. In the case of the sun, that is usually the sun itself.

      The major difference between the pagan customs and the biblical message is the worship and celebration of the creation or of the creator himself.

      The way back to cohesion or harmony, according to the biblical narrative, is possible through a common source of harmony in loving one and the same God, expressed in the message to love God above all else and your neighbor as yourself.

      Love can be a harmonizing dynamic as long as it is not tampered with, as is common in the practice of magic.

      Thank you for your compliment.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. I don’t know if you were also thinking of a comparison with Christ’s resurrection after three days when writing your post but that would mean that Christmas is the celebration of his death and resurrection, not his birthday.


        1. It’s all one big mess ever since the inception of religion as the control mechanism. I wasn’t thinking about resurrection after 3 days or anything as silly as that, but you do have a point here – Christ’s story is definitely an allegory of such celestial phenomenon with his birthday occurring 3 days after the winter solstice and his alleged resurrection following the same pattern. So in a way, Christ’s narrative is twice repeated metaphoric story about the same celestial phenomenon.

          You’ve mentioned Christ’s death…but…he was never actually dead. 😉


          1. “Christ’s story is definitely an allegory of such celestial phenomenon”

            I think you misunderstood me. The story of Christ is most certainly not an allegory of a celestial phenomenon. That’s what the article is about, taking things out of their original context and putting them in a different context and then claiming that that explains the original story. The idea that this is an allegory of a celestial phenomenon does not fit the original story in any way. Nor was the Biblical Christ born on December 25.

            I would urge you to read the section on Christmas again. I tried to make it clear that Christmas and Christianity have nothing to do with the Bible or Christ but have their origins in the solar cult.


            1. I apologize, XS, but I thought until a second ago that I was talking about the same issue here – worshiping of the Sun. Celebration of christmas is one way of celebrating the beginning of a new crop season, that was my line of thought above. Or did I miss something?


              1. Yes and no, that’s the knot I’m trying to untangle in the article. Christmas and Christianity are indeed based primarily on the sun cult but have nothing to do with the Bible.

                The Christ figure as you encounter him in the Bible has been taken from its original context and then incorporated into stories and practices of the solar cult to sell the solar cult as Christian or Biblical.

                Christianity is the solar cult that has donned a pseudo-Biblical guise by taking biblical stories, themes and characters from the original context and fitting into a context completely foreign to the original.

                To give an example, the Biblical Christ is not born on 25 December but must have been born sometime in the spring according to the census that Joseph and Mary were heading to according to the original narration of Christ’s life story.

                His life story and how it fits into the full story of the Bible make it clear that this could have had nothing to do with celestial phenomena.

                The original character called Christ in Christianity is originally Mithras. That fact is obscured in the teachings of the outer circle of Christianity by mainly speaking in pseudo-Biblical parables. Once initiated into the inner circle, the message is Gnostic, not Biblical.


          2. “You’ve mentioned Christ’s death…but…he was never actually dead.”

            That’s assuming he was even a real person, for starters. I go with completely fictional. If there’s any convincing evidence to the contrary, I’d like to see that.


      2. On a more mundane level, it was also a means to prepare for planting the crops, the sun is reborn after three days of stasis (something a proto priest class would undoubtedly have noticed in the dim days of antiquity).. the calendar was a prerequisite for agricultural societies.. and much of pagan life was of course Agrarian with it’s associated festivals placed around key dates relatable to tilling, planting etc etc.. something not too important to desert dwelling nomads, that would ‘trade’ for these essentials.. and whose beliefs were probably more inward looking and thus elitist..

        Unfortunately these elitist nomads now run the financial systems of the world and undoubtedly as you illustrate, have for a very long time..


        1. “Unfortunately these elitist nomads now run the financial systems of the world and undoubtedly as you illustrate”

          The elites are adhering to a body of thought that started with a subversive group within the desert dwelling nomads. That was for only 40 years by the way, they lived in Canaan/Israel for hundreds of years. I don’t get the impression they have much to do with the original Jews anymore.


  2. There was an author, “DM Murdock” aka Achayra something or other, fake death 12/25/2015, who wrote extensively about the Christ Conspiracy, and the idea, which resonates, that the savior dies on the solstice and rises again after three days. Her writing was to me mushy, unintelligible. Very little of clarity came through. That could be me. Are you familiar at all?


    1. Not with the writer, but I am with with the theory. Here, Christ’s death and resurrection have been taken out of the original context and placed in another context foreign to the original story. If this is really about the sun the whole Bible would be about the sun.

      The sacrifice of a man without sin who sacrifices himself to compensate for the first sin of the first man, who brought sin into the world (the Hebrew word translated with sin can also be explained as missing your mark or purpose) is described in the Bible as a unique one-time event.

      It is with this final sacrifice made once by the last high priest by sacrificing himself (instead of the usual non human sacrifices) that the first or old covenant with the people of Israel, the people from whom this priest was born, is fulfilled and a second or new covenant is made with all mankind. Hence an Old and a New Testament.

      According to the Bible, this sacrifice redeems us from the guilt that sin has burdened us with and allows us to restore our connection to an eternal God which means eternal life.

      The Bible speaks of two kinds of death. From the first a resurrection is possible to make a well-considered and well-informed choice of conforming to God’s harmony or determining for ourselves what is good and what is evil.

      The first death is described as a kind of sleep from which you can be awakened. The second is a definitive end to your existence.


    2. I just came across an email from Stephers with a link to Acharya S’s book, completely forgotten.

      Acharya’s premises are that Christianity began with the Christ of the Bible and that this Christ would be God Himself as Christianity teaches.

      Biblical content is lumped together with the teachings of Christianity. Since these are very different I don’t think that is justified.

      The idea that Christianity is based on the Bible is so deeply ingrained in the consciousness of this world that it is taken for granted by researchers of these subjects.


      1. XS,
        I appreciate your contribution. The subject is so vast and complex, I am having a hard time sorting out different parts of your story. I will take one sentence as an example. You said: “Biblical content is lumped together with the teachings of Christianity. Since these are very different I don’t think that is justified.”

        Yes, it is “lumped together,” for a very good reason, I believe. The new testament departs from the old testament in many ways, for many reasons. The world changed. The Roman Empire changed the world. Ancient Greek philosophy changed the world. Hellenistic philosophy and “cults” like the skeptics, stoics and many others changed the way man thought about the gods, and the conditions in which man was living at that time. Rome adopted Christianity as the state religion, making the Roman church the moral law of the known world, and therefore, arguably, the world’s first universal, world religion, and the law of the land with the force of the Roman Empire and its armies, politics, society and culture squarely behind it. Now, that makes a pretty solid foundation, I believe, for lumping together the teachings of Christianity and Bible content, which I will argue should not be studied or interpreted as historical fact (literalism); instead I prefer an holistic, allegorical interpretation. I am also arguing these allegorical Bible stories are not that different from much of what is taught as Christian doctrine/dogma.

        I’m not a practicing Christian, but have my (biases) favorite philosophers, theologians, psychologists and historical political personalities. The nice thing is that nothing that happened 2,000 years ago can be “proved,” neither by a preponderance of evidence, nor beyond a reasonable doubt. So, your theories are as good as any, and criticism is a certainty when dealing with the unknowable.

        Thanks for putting your thoughts out there.


        1. I hope you will revisit the article. I think I’ve made a pretty good case that Christianity has nothing to do with the Bible, nor was it adopted by Rome but brought into existence by it. The reasons why are also in the article.

          The reason why the Old and New Testaments are inseparable and anything but deviate from each other but rather complement each other as two clearly distinguishable parts of one and the same story can also be found in the article.

          Reading about the Bible is not the same as reading the Bible. This is where most of the confusion about the subjects of Bible and Christianity start.

          The sentence you took as an example is not from my article, but from an answer to a question from Mark.


  3. Life marches on, as does religion. You might enjoy this latest use of religion to defend what I consider the ultimate performance in mechanical trans-humanism. Institutional forms of religion always seem to flow, like water, uphill towards money.

    “Ultimately, what constitutes a person cannot be defined by any philosophical system or legal code. Consciousness cannot be constrained within the parameters of a software program, and the experience of human life can never be reproduced by circuits and algorithms. No matter how close a simulation can be achieved by plastic and pixels, it will never be anything close to living.” – Raul Diego

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Interesting post. I just don’t buy it. Too much information that is taken out of context and put together anew to give the reader the impression any of that information somehow fits together. Congratulation, you have just created a great work of fiction.


    1. By all means, correct what you think is wrong. I am here to learn, not to preach. But I do have some strong convictions, just turning around the core message on me is not gonna cut it.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Don’t kid yourself, everyone is preaching, including you. Your article is a sermon, don’t you know that? Yes, you do have some strong convictions that are very clear in that tripe. It sounds great, scholarly even, you no doubt are very intelligent. But you got so smart your bias fell out.

        The reason I get agitated about your tripe is foolish Christian parents gave their children to Universities to have their faith they were raised up in shipwrecked by the so called “educated” like yourself who speak with an air of authority that naive young people never saw coming.

        We live in a world of massive deception about very pertinent, prominent matters, given the nature of this particular website need I list them? You claim that the Bible, true Christianity (Roman Catholicism is not) is yet another part of deception, a control mechanism to keep man in the dark and in line. Yet, there is truth, is there not and you claim to be preaching that, no? You have plenty of compatriots, disciples and the only reason for your article is to ensnare more. That is a fact preacher XS. There are plenty of apologetics defanging “Zeitgeist” type tripe like yours.

        You well know the Bible addresses your messaging but then why do you care because for you the Bible is the plague that menaces mankind. The Bible predicts that the whole world will systemically kill Christians like myself for NOT denying Jesus and the very Bible you denigrate. Hmmm, I wonder why? So, nice job doing your layman’s part to sow and water the seeds in that process. Which, you might sarcastically say, ‘Are you not happy I am fulfilling your “scripture”?’ No, I am not, because God created you and loves you (benevolently) and I do too. This is a plea to you to reconsider this path you are on because the end for you is not delightful. Do not harden your heart as Pharoah did because if God seals that hardness it is too late, if He has not already.

        This is my second post in response to this article, I guess my first set the sarcasm alarms off as it did not contain any vulgarity, profanity or the like and apparently did not make the cut. Here is hoping this makes the cut and if it doesn’t congratulations, I will move on. When my website is up I will post this and as well dissect XS’s sermon.


        1. Yes, your first snarky comment still sits in moderation, dripping with sarcasm. The piece had just published and I did not want the author, who is new to writing here, to be blasted in that manner right at the get-go. There are now many more comments, and you are more restrained in this comment and at least write in a manner that might elicit a response, if XS feels like doing so.


          1. Thank you, Mark, for posting the second. I get what you are saying and understand. I am actually a nice guy and no doubt I could do better in getting my point across less emotionally. Still agitated and annoyed though after initial run through article but anymore, attacks on “Christianity” is fun sport and an easy target. Unfortunately, it will not wane but wax worse. (yes, the Bible told me so). Anyway, why I took the time to even respond (to an article) is not typical for me.

            It is what it is. Having read other comments and XS, when I get time I will carefully re-read XS piece and further comment.

            Liked by 1 person

        2. it doesn’t sound like you love him, Bri. That was a bit Harsh ! I’ve come down on the Man before myself. But he does have a right to speak his piece and beliefs.


          1. “Open rebuke is better than secret love. Faithful are the wounds of a friend; but the kisses of an enemy are deceitful.” (yes, it is Bible)

            God LOVED the residents of Sodom and Gomorrah until their cup of iniquity without repentance was full, Trig. We know this from the Bible that XS claims to admire(?) claiming “Christianity” is the evil…(um, ok, I guess).

            Modern definition of love is toleration of everything excepting Bible believers and doers (modified for XS sake as he portends true followers of the Bible could not possibly be “Christians”). True love means sometimes speaking the truth even when it hurts. Unfortunately, when agendas are in play my kind of comments are hardly taken to heart and easily dismissed. It is nice that you are concerned with XS feelings though. Read again the quote at the top of this post.

            Where did I say XS does not have a right to speak his piece and beliefs?


            1. I’m with you, Brian, Christianity has some great values, both in the old and the new testament and replacing those with all kinds of new age stuff, sorcery and witchcraft (which they are obviously doing) is very much detrimental. But looking at the roots of Christianity and examining whether it might have been created for a specific, sinister purpose that has now been completed, is very important. I absolutely frown upon the concept that values are to be sought after in books, they should come from your family and ancestors. I would still much rather side with genuine Christians than with anyone who believes in magic and numbers.


              1. “Christianity has some great values, both in the old and the new testament”

                Christianity has nothing to do with the Old or New Testament, it merely pretends to be a Bible-based religion, but is anything but.

                What had hoped to demonstrate with this article is that all religion can be traced to the solar cult and the major world religions are heavily influenced by Talmudism which, like Christianity, falsely claims to have something to do with the Bible.


        3. Maybe I misread this completely, but it seems to me that XS is not impugning the Bible in any way, but merely pointing out how so called Christianity has departed from it.

          Pretty hard to dispute that, only to what degree. The fact that the churches pretty much all played along with the COVID scam is enough to show how much they are “missing the mark.”

          Liked by 1 person

          1. @INSIDE BASEBALL

            I even go one step further. What I hope to have shown is that Christianity from the beginning never had anything to do with the Bible or the first persons who claimed to be followers of Christ.


            1. Yes, I stand corrected. It’s hard to mentally extricate the two because we are so conditioned. God is no respecter of persons (status) and each of us must take up his cross (stand up as the I AM). Religion is a fundamental contradiction to this hidden in plain sight.


              1. “It’s hard to mentally extricate the two because we are so conditioned.”

                Very true, that’s the article in a nutshell.


          2. Good call, you read it right, I did not. I have re-read most of the article now and will finish sometime this week and address my error, yes, mine.

            Again, good call.


        4. @Brian R.

          “You claim that the Bible is yet another part of deception”

          I most definitively do not. I claim Christianity being a Bible based religion is a deception and to understand what the Bible is about you have to study the Bible not teachings or opinions about the Bible.

          If there is one thing my article opposes its “Zeitgeist type tripe”. I am actually a bit offended to be compared with it. It’s exactly that kind of blatant misdirection I am trying to expose in this article but I do believe this kind of misdirection started with Christianity.

          As far as I understand the Bible, it opposes the hierarchical system of government of this world. I believe that’s one reason why a hierarchical religion is created to hide it in plain sight.

          There is no such thing as a true or Bible based Christian religion. All Christian religions find their origin in Catholicism and no so called protestant Christian religion really opposes it but rather elaborates on the initial lie of a Bible based religion.


        5. Ok, just to follow up on my original train wreck of a response (to this article) as I said I would when I had time. I am going to start by attempting some levity.

          I imagined that Jesus in watching me compose that original response and hit the send button, winced, did a face palm, slowly shaking and tilting his head downward. Only to then remove his hand, raise his head and break out in a big smile knowing that even though I did not (speed)read the article correctly my gut instinct was riled in defense of HIM and HIS word when I erroneously thought it was under attack. He likes that child-like zeal, BUT he then reaches for the paddle to do the necessary discipline.

          But good news for me, it was a light tap, because it came in the form of a reply from INSIDE BASEBALL where he/she says, “Maybe I misread this completely…” That was my first clue that I might have messed up. I knew then that maybe I needed to go back and actually read the article. What is really cool about INSIDE BASEBALL’s response was the humility in saying, “Maybe I misread this completely…” Rather than lambasting me and suggesting I actually read the article. And he/she would have been right to do so. This commendation to INSIDE BASEBALL applies as well to XS.

          That said, excellent article, XS! There were a few things that led to a perfect storm of error on my part. One being, that as much as I now know that I agree with you in this article I certainly did not expect to see it here on this site. So, kudos to Mark for inviting you to write such a meaningful article and posting it. Another component of that perfect storm element was the title that infers the word religion negatively. (more on that later). The other element was XS use of the word Christianity, negatively, as well.

          You commented, XS, that you were offended that anyone would liken what you wrote to “Zeitgeist” type misdirection and propaganda. You are exactly right to be offended. Your article was actually a form of correction to that, an apologetic. I am quite certain that in my apologizing to you, that you are the sort that would accept that and forgive me. Go ahead, I dare you, tell me I am wrong.

          Rather than making this unnecessarily longer than it probably already is let me say that I agree with most of what is in the article. But then I am no one of consequence whose opinion will rock anybody else’s boat one way or the other. I do want to emphasize some semantical issues for me and some critical exceptions I have with what you seem to believe, XS.

          I do not know if the title is yours, XS, or Mark’s but religion is not a bad word. I go to the Bible first when it comes to most matters and when we look at the scriptures there is only one reference that would connote the word positively or contrary and that verse(s) is James 1:26-27,

          “If any man among you seem to be religious, and bridleth not his tongue, but deceiveth his own heart, this man’s religion is vain. Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.”

          Religion is merely what one practices. A Satanist can be religious. A follower of Jesus Christ is hopefully religious. Those two are not doing the same thing but they are religious. Satanism is a Religion. Following the Bible, Jesus Christ, is a Religion. A Religion is a discipline, it is an amalgamation of the likeminded religious in their creed. There is nothing inherently wrong with Religion. One would hope that any employee, soldier, child, disciple would religiously follow their Boss/Superior/Parent/Masters commands. There can only be fault in what it is we are religious about.

          Your use of this word, Christianity, really threw me off. Christian is not a bad word. We find it being used in scripture itself in reference to early followers, such as:

          In Acts 11:26 “…and the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.”
          In Acts 26:28 “Then Agrippa said unto Paul, Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian.”

          And more importantly, we have the apostle Peter ascribing “Yet if any man suffer as a Christian…” in 1 Peter 4:16 to those who follow Jesus.

          Christianity is shorthand plurality describing “many Christians”, followers of Jesus. That there are many sects and denominations that cannot all be right about everything is without question. Portending to be a follower of The WORD, Jesus, does not imply doing it 100% as Jesus Himself did. We can only try. Let every man be persuaded according to the dictates of his conscience as filtered through The WORD. God himself will judge, commend and/or convict.

          I consider myself not a protestant at all but in the line of Baptist, independent that is. Roman Catholicism is not and never has been espousing the Truth but is rather anti-christ and specifically erected for that purpose. You agree with me but you disparage the term Christianity by assigning it to the RCC. Yes, Christianity would be a bad moniker if you called Nazis Christians but they are not and nor is the RCC. (RCC actually facilitated Nazis) Now, if you go to a dictionary or any reference that they might ascribe RCC to Christianity does not make it so. Anymore than the myriad of massive lies we are inundated with by so called “experts” and authorities. Don’t get me started. Calling yourself a Christian is legimated as a verb NOT a noun.

          I am a Christian and am a part of Christianity notwithstanding your belief that Christianity is anti-bible. I actually think we are on the same page but dealing with semantics. I hope you recognize my point.

          I do not nor will I ever be a part of a hierarchal church government such as SBC, which is why I am independent. It should be noted that there is not a mystical universal church without walls. We know this because the Apostle Paul established local churches and a local church hierarchy (offices) within each local church. Jesus addressed SEVEN locality of churches in the book of Revelation. One CAN have a very serious, religious devotion to our creator apart from congregating with others whether outside or within the four walls of a building. But when possible we are commanded by the scripture to assemble ourselves together and to not do so where possible is disobedience. There is plenty of scripture to back that claim.

          A little aside to the word JEW. Biblically we know that Israel was divided into two kingdoms, southern and northern. The southern was comprised of two tribes, Judah and Benjamin. The northern the other ten tribes. Long story short, the southern kingdom, Judah and Benjamin for disobedience, as noted in your article, were taken into captivity to Babylon. The northern by Assyria and dispersed. For spiritual adultery God divorced the northern 10 tribes, the “House of Israel.” They never returned; they assimilated as GENTILES, losing their identity. Judah and Benjamin returned from Babylonian captivity to their land, these are the Jews. This is why the term Jew is so prevalent in the New Testament. The common misconception is all Israel (12 tribes) are Jews. This helps us to better understand Jesus saying,

          “But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” Matthew 15:24

          The House of Israel is referencing the 10 tribes God divorced. See here in this verse among others the contrast referencing the southern Kingdom (Judah and Benjamin) under King Rehoboam to the “House of Israel”, the northern Kingdom.

          “And when Rehoboam was come to Jerusalem, he assembled all the house of Judah, with the tribe of Benjamin, an hundred and fourscore thousand chosen men, which were warriors, to fight against the house of Israel, to bring the kingdom again to Rehoboam the son of Solomon.” 1Kings 12:21

          This is not commonly understood what JEW references. And yes, Benjamites are called Jews too, but only the tribes Judah and Benjamin. Following is a reference to Benjamites being called Jews:

          “Now in Shushan the palace there was a certain Jew, whose name was Mordecai, the son of Jair, the son of Shimei, the son of Kish, a Benjamite” Esther 2:5 

          Understanding what JEW really refers to is important and has theological implications. I won’t take space here to expand.

          You seem to be assigning hierarchy with evil. Hierarchy is not a bad word. Sure, hierarchies in a bad, treacherous system can give hierarchies a bad name I suppose. God has a hierarchy. He even calls certain men to lead others, that is a hierarchy, WE are a part of a hierarchy. Any hierarchy God implements is pure and purposeful but freewill creatures can and do (in the interim) obviate that or at least deter.

          There is so much in your article, XS, to which we agree. I won’t take space patting you on the back but just remember that thought when this post will seem severely imbalanced with disagreements.

          The two major issues I have with your article are these:

          You say:
          1) ‘There is no biblical basis for such a trinity doctrine…’

          Perhaps one day I will take the time address this but you could not be more wrong. Jesus had to be God in the flesh as no other sacrifice but God himself would satisfy. Jehovah Witness organization I know believe as you do but they had to excise the Bible; read the warning in Revelations 22:19, not a good idea to do that. Unfortunately for the JW org. they didn’t excise enough as you can still use their perverted bible to prove Jesus is God. Go to Psalms 102 and who is that passage referencing? Jehovah. Go to Hebrew 1 and who is that referencing? The Son, Jesus. Figure it out, it isn’t hard. With the Holy Spirity, one in the same Godhead, the trinity. That is a nail in that coffin, just one nail.

          2) …any more than there is for the idea of an eternal soul…’

          I don’t have the time right now to responsibly address this biblically, but this, your doctrine is very dangerous. Outside of biblical apologetics but simple rational reasoning: Given the nature of man, most all would gladly set aside any future eternal glory for giving in to their flesh and impulses NOW realizing that there are no eternal consequences for doing the evil God forbids them to do and hurts so many others.

          I have to ask you, XS, as you distance yourself from “Christianity” and seems to be a proponent of the Bible, what are you? What do you call yourself. What does your group of likeminded worshippers call yourselves?

          Again, you have written a lot of good here. I particularly like your exposing Islam as a creation of RCC. If only more people understood that. All roads lead to ROME! It’s Bible! Don’t take my caveats as anything other than hoping that iron sharpens iron. You are a great thinker and writer. For me the test of a great writer is when you do NOT agree with them but you admire their gift with language, the pen and paper. With your article there was far more to agree with than not but some of what I disagree are somewhat critical in the end.

          Did I pass the sarcasm alarms, Mark?


          1. “there is only one reference that would connote the word (religion) positively or contrary and that verse(s) is James 1:26-27”

            Both the Dutch word “Godsdienst” and “religie” are translated into the English word “religion”.

            The quality of the word “Godsdienst” as you encounter it in most Dutch translations of this text segment is to serve or be obedient to God. To explain what I think that means:

            The shortest text in the Bible is: “God is love”. The message of Christ presented to us in the Bible as son and representative of God is to love God above all and our neighbor as ourselves. In practice that means as much as striving for a loving harmony with your fellow human beings, a harmony that can only be found from a common source of harmony.

            If everyone in this world would do that, everyone would be free to give as much as they have to give in the certainty of getting what they need themselves. It is this message in a world in which it is the most normal thing to take care of yourself first, often at the expense of others, and only after that to see if anyone else needs anything from you that the Bible appeals to me.

            The word religion as I use it in the text reverts to a hierarchical institution of worship. I am convinced that this has its origin in the solar cult and has a mainly political function, as religion does, and has been the beginning of a hierarchical system that gives power to people over others where the bible talks about living together in harmony. Hierarchy is a construct that allows people to have dominion over other people which has never served any purpose other than being able to abuse others.

            “He even calls certain men to lead others, that is a hierarchy”

            God calling people to lead others has to do with responsibility and making yourself subservient to others and a greater whole. This is made clear by Christ when he tells a reluctant Peter that if he does not let him wash his feet he cannot partake of his kingdom.

            “Christian is not a bad word. We find it being used in scripture itself in reference to early followers”

            Christians is the name that the Romans gave to the followers of Christ, these followers eventually went along with it. This designation has been hijacked by the Catholic Church and now refers to a follower of any denomination of Christianity. The word Christian has long ceased to be synonymous with a follower of Christ.

            “I actually think we are on the same page but dealing with semantics.”

            Partly yes, but also with context and the changing meaning of words over time. A good example is the word Jew. This originally referred to members of the tribe of Judah including the small tribe of Benjamin included therein as you pointed out yourself. In everyday usage, that same word now refers to someone who adheres to Talmudism which is called, very misleading, Judaism.

            Regarding the trinity doctrine:

            The Trinity doctrine is a Catholic doctrine, not a biblical one. Here is an article that explains how this doctrine came to be:


            Hebrews 1 distinguishes between God and Christ by stating that God first spoke to the fathers through the prophets and then spoke through the son.

            Only the sacrifice of a sinless man who offers himself voluntarily is enough to make up for the first man’s disobedience according to the Bible.

            Regarding the idea of an eternal soul:

            The Bible speaks of eternal life or eternal death, not of an eternal soul. The death we are dying now is called the first death which is compared to a deep sleep. From this death a resurrection is possible, according to the Bible this will take place at the end of the millennial kingdom of Christ who sits on the throne on behalf of God.

            With the last judgment of God it is determined whether a person remains alive forever or dies a death from which no resurrection is possible. A loving God does not scare his children into obedience with the prospect of eternal torture., he gives them a well-informed and carefully considered choice.

            “What do you call yourself. What does your group of likeminded worshipers call yourselves?”

            I don’t belong to a group. It is striking that you assume without question that I belong to a group. That the first Christians gathered in groups does not imply a mandate to still do so.

            I even believe that Christianity created the need to be very suspicious of organizations calling themselves Christian and claim that you can only be a follower of Christ if you belong to a self-proclaimed Christian group.

            More important than that is the message of the Bible that a relationship with the creator is a personal one and that you will have to figure out how to shape and maintain it yourself and not let others impose rules on you.

            Liked by 1 person

    2. What in the world is your moniker about? Are you out of your mind, really? Jewish revolutionary spirit?? OMFG


        1. Like you can’t understand the Talmud without a Rabbi?

          You are pretty much proving my point here…

          Has it ever occurred to you that someone who tells you that you cannot understand the Bible without him or her would rather not have you think for yourself?

          I hope that one day you will succeed in liberating yourself from religious dogma. I really do.


          1. Like you can’t understand the Talmud without a Rabbi?

            Talmud is judaistic rabbinical jewish explanation of Torah, so you following a Rabbi.


            1. I made this comparison because, as can be read in the article, Christianity is heavily influenced by Talmudism (which goes by the misleading name of Judaism). It is also a reverence to the fact that Christianity is not based on the Bible which is concealed with the idea that the Bible cannot be understood outside the church.

              The church/Christianity has been standing in the way of understanding the Bible from the beginning.

              The Talmudic influence is noticeable in this idea because it is similar to the lie that the Talmud is an explanation of the Torah where in reality, as also can be read in the article, it is a rewrite of Babylonian regulations that differ greatly from the Mosaic regulations in the Torah. The full title of this book is Babylonian Talmud for a reason.

              I myself am not religious and express my hope that JRS develops the ability to think for himself, how does that make me a follower of a Rabbi?


              1. Teachers are also influenced by Talmudism they are forcing students to follow their teaching they don’t allow students to invent their own math.

                Talmud is anti-Bible.
                Mosaism had priest and Judaism has rabbi – layman.
                Talmud is all against Lord Jesus and Christianity.
                Catholicism is against Judaism.
                Christianity/Catholicism is based on Apostolic Tradition and the Bible.

                There was catholic priest fr prof. Michael Poradowski (Talmud or Bible) who make distinction between Mosaism and Judaism
                Also catolic fr prof. Justinas Pranaitis who was murder after trial of ritual murder.
                The Talmud Unmasked

                fr denis fahey
                Money Manipulation and the Social Order (1944)

                There woudn’t be anticatholic Vatican Council 2 1965, anticatholic “pope” Francis, banning of catholic latin mass replacing with protestant/anglican Cranmer / Henry VIII “mass”, ecumenism etc
                if Christianity was “influenced” by Talmud.

                fr. JOAQUIN SAENZ Y ARRIAGA
                anticatholic “pope” Paul VI = Montini

                “pope” Francis and rabbi Skorka


                1. You are right, the Talmud is indeed anti Bible there is no doubt about that.

                  The term Mosaism is new to me but I can relate to it, as well as the difference between Mosaism and Judaism.

                  But in the article I think I have shown that Judaism/Talmudism has had a great influence on Catholicism and therefore on all of Christianity and also on Islam.

                  Most of the article shows that Biblical themes are embedded in very un-Biblical teachings and practices and that the Bible is not a religious book.

                  Christianity is anything but based on the Bible or Apostolic tradition.

                  The very name of the Virgo Sacrata site that you have posted a link to should make it clear to you that Christianity is deeply unbiblical. Maria veneration and sanctification are a direct reference to the Pagan origins of Christianity


  5. The trouble with ideologies, like institutional religious doctrines, are the derogatory terms believers throw at non-tithers: heathen, infidel, goyim, witches etc. And the way pagan is used implies superstitious morons. Yet the evidence suggests highly intelligent people amongst the ‘pagan’ populations doing highly intelligent things. Architecture being the most obvious example.
    The same happens nowadays with the derogations: climate denier, anti-vaxxer, germ theory denier etc. Yet such heretics are generally more widely read and researched, and open minded and aware than the television watchers who recite the media installed aspersions.
    That is not to say religion has no purpose. It’s maybe an essential first step in the gaining of consciousness. Religions and secret societies all seem to follow initiatory steps of the exoteric followed by the esoteric in seeking Christ Consciousness.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. @Michael

      I believe the word “Christ consciousness” is a term invented to perpetuate the idea that Christianity began with Christ and that the Bible or the message of the Christ as portrayed in the Bible has anything to do with a system of enlightenment, an idea that is elaborated upon in the Rosicrucian movement.

      Where the Biblical Christ teaches faith, Luciferianism (to give it a name) teaches a do it yourself system of enlightenment.

      I hope you understand that I have used pagan not as a derogatory but as a distinctive term.


  6. These are salvation technologies, where the degree of piety is based on the degree an act of self flagellation is Witnessed; a sort of ritual Neilsen rating. A solitary act of same cannot elevate to sanctity, as it is deemed crazy. The assignation of dirty predisposes a never ending cleansing, some might call a fetish or addiction. The pleasure of relief then becomes yet another penance due, like a mobius \stripper…


    1. @B1

      Religion and a constant repetition of guilt and atonement can indeed be addictive. Opium of the people…

      This constant navigating between guilt and penance and confession as is common in Christianity is at odds with the Biblical idea that the debt that would be inherent in sin has been paid off for us.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Yes. A polarity used by whomever is in charge(no pun intended).
        Today, we can view the climate scam as arguably the new world religion’s revival of original sin, mankind born tainted and a scourge to the planet. Abstaining from meat and cars are current tokens of a rolling penance toward an always provisionary absolution; offered up to please the matriarchy of nature. The most ardent public self deniers, the most pure.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Indeed, I never thought about it like that. From that perspective, GW is embedded in thousands of years of religious indoctrination and conditioning.


  7. It is a complex subject, LaRouche does an excellent piece here:


    stating all religions including Judaism, are manufactured in dealing with the masses living at the inferior levels, and so it was deemed necessary to deal with them on the terms of mythological beliefs. Dionysian cults & myths, yesterday and today: throughout the centuries are a basic form of antihumanist social control technique

    Liked by 1 person

  8. Very informative. I’ve come across many of the details you mention here and there, but you’ve organized them all into a cohesive picture. Some miscellaneous thoughts and questions –

    Throughout the piece, you seem to place a high value on the Bible and to disdain the way it’s misconstrued by churches and others. Is it your contention then that the Bible proper is a “pure” text of some sort – that its authors were legitimate authorities, or genuine dissidents, or sages, or..? Perhaps they were trying to break the yoke of Babylonian paganism, with some success, before it was co-opted and subverted by the Pharisees? Or am I misunderstanding?

    (As a practical matter, prior to the printing press it’s hard to imagine books having much subversive impact – given the enormous cost and labor of copying even one book by hand. Maybe as a matter of spreading ideas among the priestly class, who then spread them orally. It’s such an alien landscape, I really can’t fathom it. And then, is it possible the Bible was written at a later date, and back dated?)

    Talking about Christmas and its esoteric significance, in amid talk of strange occult orders, it brought to mind Kubrick’s Eyes Wide Shut, which is set at Christmas time and depicts weird ritual orgies of course. It would be interesting to get your take – how literal do you think Kubrick was being? What esoteric significance are we missing if we haven’t much of a clue about theology, let alone occult theology? (Actually I may be more familiar with the latter than the former, myself… Still not deeply versed in either.)

    What’s your take on Eastern Orthodox Christianity? Jay Dyer used to be on about that all the time, but it was too much scholarly minutiae for me, at least at a glance. Maybe he was trying to recover some sort of ideal early form of the Catholic Church? If so, I’m guessing that would not be to your taste.

    On a lighter note, you really have to feel for these Masons that stall out somewhere in the 00’s, 10’s, or 20’s degrees… You really can’t put “24th degree Freemason” on your CV, the way you can 32nd or 33rd…

    Liked by 1 person

    1. About the Bible; what what puzzles me is why there is so much effort to get the most accurate translation possible on the one hand and to adapt the text to religious teachings on the other and then to fit individual pieces of text and themes into teachings that have nothing to do with the Bible. Why go to all the trouble of hiding this collection of books in public and even discrediting it under false pretenses? What is the elites beef with the Bible?

      The kind of party and debauchery in “eyes wide shut” is reminiscent of the practices during the Saturnalia. The word orgy comes from the Greek word orgion or the plural orgia which refers to an ecstatic form of worship.

      “What’s your take on Eastern Orthodox Christianity?”

      I think orthodoxy is by definition not biblical. Very strict and detailed religious regulations can be seen especially in Talmudic Judaism and, by extension, also in Orthodox Christianity and Islam. I even suspect that we are dealing here with practices from the occult sciences. These things really drain the live force out of people.

      According to the Old Testament, the strict regulation for the Jews was to keep that nation pure until the Messiah was born from among them and were the prescribed sacrifices a foreshadowing of the final sacrifice made by that Messiah.

      After the atoning sacrifice, as can be read in the New Testament, these regulations had served their purpose and were therefore no longer in effect. In his own words, this Messiah had only one message and that was to love God above all else and your neighbor as yourself. Crushing people under the weight of orthodoxy doesn’t seem very loving to me.


      1. “What is the elites beef with the Bible?” I am baffled by this too. I wonder if it has something to do with rules. The Pharisees were rule driven, which I suspect was because where there are rules, there are loopholes, and if there was one thing that the Pharisees loved more than rules, it was finding a way to bend the rules (i.e. loopholes) so as to benefit themselves. So maybe they think that doing all that work of translation will let them off the hook somehow. Or it could be about hiding the truth in plain sight.


        1. I think it has more to do with the Bible’s stance against usury. Since the ruling class are driven by commerce as well as power, usury fits in with their economic framework as it makes them more money, which in turn buys them plenty of influence.

          Otherwise, they don’t mind the Scriptures and often use it to their own advantage when convenient. Politicians like Trump and Pelosi are good examples of this kind of manipulation, and they’re of the Families.

          And since they like to stage fake animosity with each other, I suggest the same is true for their ‘beef’ with the Bible. Otherwise, how can you explain its huge popularity (assuming the numbers are accurate, of course), knowing that they only give significant publicity to their ilk and their projects (e.g., spook J. K. Rowling and her “Harry Potter” book series)? After all, we have the KJV, whose creation was overseen by the English Stuarts, the same spook dynasty that helped establish colonies in North America (Virginia Co. of London, which later became the “Thirteen Colonies”/U.S.A.). It is considered by many to be the most accurate rendition of the “Word of God”, but we all know how ‘accurate’ the controllers’ version of events are.


  9. Since the author has invited us to a pot luck, here’s my potato salad:

    XS is one of the codes for Jesus in the earliest New Testament copies- Codex Sinaticus and Vaticanus being the earliest documents that read like the New Testament. Their dating is in dispute but probably no earlier than the fourth century AD. The full name of Jesus doesn’t appear in print until the 9th century when a British scribe, Alcuin of York, was commissioned by Charlemagne to put together a coherent history of the ancient world. This occurred at St. Albans monastery in Switzerland, c. 800. What Alcuin’s sources were is unknown. His version of events, found in the St. Albans library, are the foundations of the ancient world narrative we know today.

    During the Renaissance, several ancient manuscripts were “found” and the popes paid handsome rewards for these discoveries. The possibility that the popes paid handsomely for outright forgeries to further the fiction of the ancient world was probably closer to the mark. (I’m not implying the chronology if off, just stating that recorded history has been reworked on a regular basis for political expedience)

    Marcus Junius Silanus Torquatus is probably a name few are familiar with. According to Charles N Pope (no relation to the above) this prince Torquatus was the template for Jesus who appears in the revised and de-historicized gospels of later centuries.

    Torquatus, if memory serves, was the oldest son of Caesarian, who did not die at the hand of Augustus, but simply retired his Roman persona. Caesarian was not only the son of Caesar and Cleopatra, but one of the few princes of his day who was fertile. The problem with inbreeding was that it left the males largely firing blanks and any son who could hit the mark immediately went to the front of the dynastic line.

    (Most famously, Alexander the Great was a fifth son but outshot his elder sibs and became the “Great” because of his mastery in the bedroom.)

    So what was this ‘template’ for Jesus? Torquatus was typecast as the sacrificial redeemer, a role that goes back at least to Osiris. Julius Caesar had essayed the role with his staged sacrifice. JFK did an impressive spin on the role as well.

    ‘Natch, none of these royal in-breds actually die, but their personas are retired as they move on to another role. Returning to Alexander, he left Greece behind with a premature ‘death’ and moved on to India to unite the royal properties under the name Chandra Gupta.

    Like Bobby Fuller to Bill O’Reilly, the show never stops. Just the costumes and sets change to fit the manufactured taste of the polloi.

    At least that’s the version I heard.


    1. It is relatively pointless to delve into the myriads of different claims made about the Bible without knowing the Bible itself.

      Anyone familiar with this collection of books knows that they tell one coherent story from Genesis to Revelation. That makes the idea that the New Testament, which consists of 27 scriptures, of which only the first 4 are about Jesus, would have been written as some kind of afterthought very unlikely.

      The four gospels were written between 70 and 90 AD. The name Jesus can be found there in the original Koinè Greek from the very beginning.

      As early as the second century, parts of the Bible were translated into other languages, beginning in Latin (the Vetus Latina) and Syriac, a dialect of Aramaic. Old manuscripts are also available in Coptic (from the third century), Armenian (from the fifth century), Georgian (from Syriac, from the seventh century from Greek), Gothic (from the fourth century, probably from Latin; the manuscript dating from the sixth century) and Old Church Slavonic (ninth century). There were also translations into Arabic, Nubian, Persian, Anglo-Saxon and Old German.

      There are 3 branches from the original New Testament manuscripts. The original manuscripts are no longer in existence.

      The branch that led to the King James of 1611 began with lost translations of the traditional text that are practically identical to the original text, there is a Syrian version of the 2nd century, a Gothic of the 4th century, the Codex M (the book of Matthew) from the 4th or 5th century a Codex A (all four Gospels) from the 5th century. And the vast majority of the surviving manuscripts of the New Testament. That is a total of 1900 manuscripts from which the King James has been distilled and most of the other translations except the Catholic and the Jesuit translations.

      From another branch arose the Douay version from 1582 which you could call the Jesuit Bible written during the Counter Reformation. This version evolved from the old 2nd century Latin version via the 4th century Latin Vulgate, the 5th or 6th century Codex D2, the 6th century Codex D2, and the 7th century Codex E2.

      And then there is the branch which is the ancestor of the Alexandrian family and through Papyrus 75 from c. 200AD, Papyrus 66 from c. 200AD, Codex B from 4th century and Codex Aleph led to the Revised Version of 1881, the American Standard Version from 1901, the Revised Standard Version from 1946 and the New English Bible from 1961.
      The first branch accumulates to literally thousands of translations in almost every language in the world. This offers the possibility of comparing many different translations and seeing which of the translations of a text fragment is the most similar. This is how serious translators try to stay as close to the original text as possible.

      Another factor is knowledge of the contents of the Bible that allows for a reasonably accurate assessment of whether a segment of text or a claim about the origin of the stories in the Bible is original or correct.

      As far as I know the Bible by now, the idea that the story of Jesus was added later or based on older Mythologies is a fabrication. Also, to change or add something to the Bible, you would have to change or add it to all translations beginning with those from the second century.

      The fact that there are more stories about saviors does not automatically mean that there is a connection and in light of the biblical narrative it seems very unlikely to me that the story of Jesus is a reinterpretation of an older mythology.

      Liked by 1 person

    2. XS are the initials of the pseudonym under which I opened a Facebook account because at the time I thought I could escape spying that way. I deliberately chose names that yield the initials XS as a reference to the fact that I am only 5’7″. That’s extra small in the Netherlands.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. oh mr XS will you be my master? May i come sit at your feet and breathe in your aura of Godliness; allow me to wash your feet and solicit the name of your cult to the ends of the earth. Finally i have heard the truth and the truth will prevail…

        but of course since you have a cult mentality you will be highly pleased with my opposition; that is what feeds the cult members fire…

        I could actually like your tone of absolute certainty if you were speaking from the heart, from something you understood first hand and not from the articles you read and the bible which you do not understand…just as you seem to not even understand what revelation is

        and here you are on this blog and admit to the way the whole past has been rewritten by the victors and yet, you take one take on the history of the bible and Christianity and Judaism and Islam and stand on your soap box and…and really sound like a complete moron.
        no response wanted….


        1. mark sorry for the name calling but i think it is appropriate in this case…erase me if you think it best


        2. and while i am on my OWN little soapbox perhaps the following will close up this thread for good: XS will claim that he is not taking any take on the history of the bible or anything else but is just reading it; over and over you have made this point: you are just reading the bible and when someone says they wish to get to the root meaning, the non literal meaning of the bible you accuse them of wanting to dig beneath and AWAY from the bible!!
          as if one could read the bible , and as if you yourself just read the bible without the help of any commentary, in order to understand it!


  10. Alright, let me add my 2 agurots. :p

    As far as my research goes, Rome never existed (Caesar = Kaiser, which is German for emperor and its Sacrum Imperium Romanum Nationis Germaniae, which really existed from about 1000 on), Latin is a completely synthetic and made up language, just like Esperanto, the chosenites made it up to fit their usual narrative of persecution (they keep switching between Edom, Amalek and multiple other fictional entities, whatever they need at the moment, it’s really hard to keep up with the bs) when they created the Catholic church (again, as their persecutor, they keep doing this, they loved and possibly created Hitler as well, watch this: pay attention to him throwing the horns (Mano Cornuto) multiple times, I believe that it means scapegoat, that’s why all the supposed gentile (but in reality partial chosenite) leaders love to use it so often, they’re playing the role of the Erev Rav, the evil mixed bloods, who fell from the faith and run all the evil empires, just to do good in the end; Goethe describes this phenomenon through Mephistopheles in Faust (evil that creates good), he was one of the Erev Rav and painted with the same hand sign as Hitler, Luther, Loyola, Torquemada and so many others who also played the role of their persecutors; you can see it here: So Reb Peter, after the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem that didn’t exist by a chosenite (according to them:, was sent to Rome to establish the Catholic church (some rabbis are boasting about it at this point: But there were no Romans (the term itself is highly controversial, according to the NT it means ‘from Rome’, there is some evidence, though, that it was just a generic Greek term for soldier or army man, I can’t find it right now, maybe someone else can help out; thus it might have referred to the largely Celtic and Germanic tribes (there were a great number of them) that later got duped into incorporating as said Holy Roman Empire of German Nations), but rather Greeks/chosenites (hardly possible to see them as two separate entities, as their elites were pretty much merged with the chosenites, also see Hebrew is Greek by Reb Joseph Yahuda) in the South and in the North the various Celtic/Germanic tribes.

    Charlemagne was completely made up as well, they needed a heroic figurehead. There’s ample evidence the Catholic church deleted 300 years of history and rewrote/wrote everything else, which is why you really can’t trust anything of our supposed history, you have to look into the various mystical disciplines, look for clues and motivations for certain narratives and in the end try to intuitively piece together something half-coherent. Which for me is: as others have suspected above, it’s all bunk, all narrative, all religions are lies and concocted for obvious reasons of control, albeit with different degrees of malfeasance. It’s an absolute mess and whoever looks for answers in books is lost, this is my set-in-stone opinion at this point. I mean take Judaism for instance (which imho has always been THE dominating faction in all of this, with all its reforms and syncretism): the most central doctrines (mitzvot 1 to 10) all revolve around accepting the existence of your ONE god, to fear him, yada yada (even though in reality, as pretty much all religions, it is trinitarian, cuz well, this stuff all got made up by mystery school adherents and they are the controllers and so have to remain in the shadows, since, well, we can all see this now, they are all transhumanists and this isn’t so popular among non-zombie people). Now this anti-idolatry stance is awfully convenient, cuz, well you get to control god and no one else. If everyone put up a statue of their god it would be blatantly obvious that there’s a lot of gods around, so you better a) state that there is no god but god (Allah, Yahweh, Jesus, blessed be their I don’t know what) or b) that that god you’re worshipping is really an aspect of that ONE god and that (as long you’re not mighty and can’t just behead the idolaters) you better make sure to remedy that barbarity, so you can maaayybee later be redeemed. And what do they do themselves? They worship books and words and letters, which are (for every one who can think straight) not natural, but human inventions, so, guess what, they’re idolaters themselves by their own crooked standards. And us? We keep arguing about these little idiosyncrasies when we’re not watching their movies, waiting for deliveries from their stores, traveling to their holy sites to hear about their holy stories and so on. I strongly advise you to read Marcus Eli Ravage’s “A Real Case Against the Jews”, it illustrates all this painstakingly well. And without honest Jews like him, we would probably not know any of this stuff. The problem is and they’re probably largely unaware of this themselves, that at this point they wanna get rid of Judaism as well, because their Luciferian/Theosophist/Thelemic/Illuminist/UN offshoots (!) (they were largely the ones who spread these Neo-Platonic/kabbalist teachings all over the world) are all about transhumanism and the eradication of all tribalism and diversity, so it’s my take that a lot of the simple Zionist/t3rror1st types aren’t even aware of this, since they were just in it for simple world domination. This is why Zionism and Israel are so massively scapegoated at this point in time, because they have large amounts of tribalist/segregationist sentiment left, which are in no way NWO-compatible. And with the absolute AI-control that will be present, there is no more need for a large controlling caste. Remember Kissinger’s remark back then: “In 10 years, there will be no more Israel”. They’re definitely late, but I actually think that that’s also due to infighting between Zionist and UN institutions.

    Just think about it. Even if I haven’t provided you with evidence for every single of my assumptions, I’ve put a lot of thought into this for over 10 years and I’ve only recently reached the conclusion that this might be about what’s going on.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. great write-up thanks, and this is a good point:

      “large amounts of tribalist/segregationist sentiment left, which are in no way NWO-compatible.”


      1. Thanks Merc!

        Most people are too dogmatic in their thinking, this is largely “their” doing as well, they know exactly how to utilize dualism. Instead of just taking from them what is good for nurturing a tribe and leaving the rest, people instead buy into the whole Synagogue of Satan, Reptiloid, Alien, Fallen Angel or whatever other narrative they’ve concocted. People love to go from one extreme to the other and for the real controllers this is all just a game of chess, they don’t see themselves as evil or good, they just act according to their beliefs and ambitions. At least this is what I think. Yet they put out and control countless of these dualistic narratives: Ex-Satanist/Freemason/Rapist found Jesus/Allah/Spaghetti-Monster, Kabbalists found to be evil monsters who corrupted the sacred knowledge of Pythagoras/Plato/The Ingenious Ancient Greeks, which we now have to recapture; and so on.

        Why can’t people just be humble and strive for a close-knit and sane community with healthy families, healthy segregationism and healthy intolerance and skepticism towards everything (!) unfamiliar from the outside. We need small, strong units, the more centralization, the more complexity involved, the more control is needed to handle the ever more unnatural situations. There is no evil in nature, no centralization apart from the sun. The nuclear family was the greatest enemy of all that is going on today and boy oh boy did they get rid of that. Nature is indifferent towards you and that is great, because it will never judge you and you can always prosper in it, if you know the rules and work hard. No mysticism involved. Really, for most of my life, definitely after stopping being a spoilt little kid, I never understood what people were doing around me, with all their hobbies, countless acquaintances, great professional aspirations (when they couldn’t even do simple jobs properly with the right amount of attention), their never-ending arrogance induced by the highly dubious institutions they were worshipping while being completely clueless. And they all came to the conclusion that it was a great idea to leave their families, because their psychologists and other useful idiots had told them so. If that isn’t the epitome of being lost, I don’t know what is.

        Liked by 2 people

        1. “Vanity, vanity, all on earth is vanity.” Attributed to Bossuet, last I read. This is a fantastic post/conversation for me and so far I align most with your comments b/c I find myself the last few years really considering what life was like before the printing press. And it’s ironic b/c I love reading and the exchange of ideas. The printing press made that more difficult perhaps, trapping folks in narrative boxes that became more and more defined. And especially, what is it about human nature, or ‘civilized’ human nature that welcomes these mind prisons so gratefully?


          1. Thanks Ken!

            I totally get you, but I think we’re doing this out of necessity, since we were born into a sick world, trying to be us and with it not really working intuitively, we went looking for answers, for an outlet of our frustrations due to not being able to live intuitively. And it’s especially hard if everyone around you has lost track of what’s important, yet still more and more people come to the same conclusion independently. I was lucky enough, though, to have had a father that was able and willing to convey the essentials to me and he was the only authority I ever really accepted (even though it took me a while as well, I was quite rebellious as a kid and first had to understand where his (and the world’s) shortcomings were coming from). So, I never wanted to belong to any group or call myself something I was not, because it all didn’t feel right to me. If you don’t have a role model like that, I can only imagine how hard it must be and people will just get lost and be enthusiastic about pretty much any Ersatz-Cult.
            And even if we’re enthusiastic about these kinds of artsy, elegant pursuits, we still understand them as vanity, isn’t that incredible?

            There is one book that illustrates so very well what we’re going through and why we’re going through it, I can only recommend you give it a read, it’s very short. I got it from a recommendation by Sofia Smallstorm and it’s called “The Continuum Concept” by Jean Liedloff. It was a very peculiar read for me, because I didn’t even have to read it, I just went by, line after line: “ah, yes, of course, I know that already, why did no one ever tell me it’s like this before?” I had already intuitively unlocked all these eternal wisdoms before, with a lot (lot lot lot) of reflecting, though, mind you. I would start doing something, learning something and if it had enough complexity, I would stick with it for a while, but in the end I would always conclude that it’s not for eternity and thus not really worth spending your life on. In nature everything is a continuum, so this is what we all need, anything else will never really satisfy us. All manners of perverted behaviors have to be seen from this position, which is why no psychologist will ever really be able to help anyone.

            Liked by 1 person

          2. @KENSOHOMESTEAD

            I think the “mudflood/total rewrite of history” is a psyop along the lines of FE, Mandela effect and tranny’s. This theory itself is a rewrite of history.

            Historiography is too complex to be thrown overboard and rewritten in one go. Over thousands of years, countless people have documented things from just as many perspectives. Unless you can time travel, all that cannot just simply be erased.

            I realize that this documentation has not always been truthful, but that is not the same as replacing the entire history with a lie.

            Since the printing press, media and especially the internet, it is possible to create recent history and blur older history.

            The internet has brought many truths to light, but it is also used very consciously and purposefully to undermine the sense of reality of this worlds population. That’s something to be constantly aware of with internet-based research.


              1. You’r right, my bad. This was in response to BARBM’s message if I remember correctly.

                If I’m not mistaking KENZO showed interest in the subject on an other tread.


            1. I wonder what is the nature/purpose of the psy-op, and how far back does it go. In these parts the majority of Christians will tell you God wrote the Bible. If you ask them which version of it He wrote and which men had a hand in it, you get a blank stare, usually. Some will say that it was not God, himself, who wrote it, but learned men who were his intermediaries on Earth. If you suggest that these men must have been ‘channeling’ God, you move into New Age territory, which is not allowed.

              Since we do not know those who wrote the Bible, what their motives truly were, or what exactly happened when it left these original ‘adepts’ hands, I have a lot of questions. In the textbooks of colonized countries in modern times, for those lucky enough to be ‘selected’ into schooling, the first line for children will be something like, “Our ancestors, the Gauls.” Taught to the children of francophone black Africa in the 50s. Then when the narrative changes, the texts change. Orwell was not describing in the future in his classic ‘Animal Farm’, he was describing all of written history.

              It’s the publishers who are and always have been the gatekeepers at this level, along with the regulators installed into every conceivable industry. Why would the Bible be any different?


              1. According to the Bible itself, God inspired and dictated the writers. I don’t remember if it was Moses (OT) or Paul (NY) who said he didn’t understand what he wrote.

                I’m not sure what you mean by which version of the Bible. What are the different versions you are referring to?


                1. Don’t we call that ‘channeling’ today?
                  By versions I meant the King James that is used today rather than those published previously. As well as the various translations, translating of course being a very messy process. I have a Masonic Bible, are those the same as the King James? I once tried to compare 3 different Bibles I had at home and they were not the same.
                  “A Course in Miracles” —dubbed the ‘New Age Bible’— is also supposed to have been channeled. Have you read that? I believe Mary Baker Eddy who is credited for writing the Christian Science ‘Bible’ (Science & Health with keys to the scriptures) also said she was channeling God. My copy has the crown and cross emblem you mention stamped on it with the words around it saying: “Heal the sick; Raise the dead; Cleanse the lepers; Cast out demons”.
                  Let me ask a very basic question, please. What do you consider to be the purpose of writing the Bible?


                  1. According to the Bible itself, the books of the Bible are inspired by God, I don’t think that compares to channeling. Channeling is a term from the New Age/enlightenment culture that claims to offer a personal path to enlightenment where in the Bible Christ is called the light of this world that comes back to enlighten the world. These two things are diametrically opposed.

                    A Course In Miracles talks about qualitative forgiveness which amounts to no longer distinguishing between good and evil. According to the Bible, the light of Christ will gradually shine stronger in this world, making the distinction between good and evil clearer. The message that this course was channeled by Jesus himself is questionable to say the least.

                    According to the Bible itself, it is a collection of books about a God who began creation because he wanted a loving and harmonious family, how there was a hitch that got in the way of that plan, and what the solution was/is.

                    The Masonic presentation Bible has one cover but actually contains 2 books, the first is a book called Freemasonry & the Bible by HL Haywood and the second is the normal King James V version of the Old and New Testament.

                    Which book is in the reception hall of a lodge depends on which religion is dominant in the area where the lodge is located. Depending on that, there is a Hebrew Tennach, a Bible or a Koran.

                    In response to Tyrone McCloskey’s first post in this thread, I gave a brief history of the origins of the three main strands from which the various Bible translations come.

                    Liked by 1 person

                    1. One more question, please! And in advance, thank you, again. I just re-read your article and a large number of your replies and some of the other posts and I’m impressed with your level of knowledge and how clear it is you’ve deeply considered this topic. For me it is the first time I’ve heard these arguments and I have until now dismissed the Bible as having any real value, potentially because I have so much distaste for religion. I am not a New Ager either, it’s just that I’ve had a lot of experience with this worldview.

                      So that said, and I don’t think this has been asked yet, but what are your thoughts on Astro-theology? Is this among the out-of-context analysis you are talking about?


                    2. Astro-theology is among the out-of-context analysis I am talking about.

                      I saw a meme by Michael Tsarion on your site. For a period of time I was interested in his astro theology. This approach took a sledgehammer to the religious indoctrination of my youth, something I needed very badly at that time. Eventually I decided to investigate for myself what the Bible is all about.

                      What is often even more confusing with astro theology is that Christian teachings are falsely presented as biblical and then fit into astro theology as for example the idea that Christ was born on December 25 where it is clear from the biblical story that this must have been sometime in the spring, given its coincidence with a census known in written history and because the shepherds in this story were sleeping outside.


                    3. @STEPHERS,

                      The Bible tells a complete and coherent story from Genesis to Revelation. Just as the meaning of words is directly related to the context in which those words are found, the narrative about Jesus is directly related to the biblical story.

                      To take this narrative out of the original context of the Bible and then take details out of it and even change them and force them into a context that is completely foreign both to the overarching context of the Bible and the context of the story of Jesus itself is, to say the least, a peculiar way of examining what a text is about.

                      The mere fact that the article you linked assumes that Jesus was born in a stable on December 25 where the Bible is clear that it must have been sometime in the spring and Christ was not born in a stable should say enough. In this article, a Christian narrative is incorrectly presented as a Biblical one.

                      This is where it goes wrong: the Christ of Christianity is based on Mithras. His story is indeed an allegory based on the sun. The Biblical story about Jesus is twisted into the story of Mithras to then proclaim that the original Biblical story has something to do with the sun and the zodiac. It doesn’t.


                    4. XS,

                      Ok. I am still attempting to understand . . . Let us take the Book of Revelation, for example. Do you perceive the text/content of Revelation to be literal, or is there any room for a symbolic/metaphorical/esoteric/astrotheological/astronomical interpretation, or any combination thereof, as is presented here: (25 minutes long)?

                      Do you consider the Book of Revelation to be prophetic? Interestingly, if one was to perceive Revelation in the context of esotericism/astrotheology, does it actually lend credence to it being prophetic (AKA predictive), as the movement/alignment of celestial bodies is cyclical (and may be predicted)? Personally, if I were to consider Revelation to be inherently predictive – again, based on astrotheological and/or astronomical interpretation – then I may consider Revelation to be a form of predictive programming technology, so to speak.

                      Please forgive my ignorance here . . . Is the Bible – on its own (without any Mithraic/Christian/Judaic/Talmudic religion attached) messianic? Accordingly, do you believe in a messianic figure (if so, whom?) and/or the notion of the end times – in a very literal sense?

                      In a seemingly irrelevant vein, have you seen the recent story about the Mona Lisa at the Louvre being desecrated with cake smearing? I sense some esoteric/alchemical workings coded in the story – hinting at the Bible, perhaps . . .

             (right off the bat, I saw the “Luke” and the “Sun”)
             (occult significance of the Mona Lisa)


                    5. @STEPHERS,

                      I’ll post my responses at the bottom of the thread. It gets a little narrow here. There are 4 in total. Depending on possible moderation, I’ll post them after translation immediately after each other.


                    6. XS,

                      I sincerely appreciate you taking the time to reply in detail. I am still learning here, and I still admit to a disconnect. Things are still not adding up for me. I have questions . . . so many questions . . . And, like a young child, I do not have many filters. So, forgive me if I am overstepping boundaries or offending. This is not my intention.

                      To borrow/paraphrase from Tim Callahan in his Secret Origins of the Bible . . . If we are to accept the tales in the Bible as literally true, without probing beneath the surface to extract potential secret meanings, then we may be contributing to the repression of human beings.

                      In this vein, I am very curious about what can be gleaned from de-coding/de-occulting the Biblical texts (or any other religious/traditional text) that can propel humanity out of repression, oppression, and servitude (which has existed for millennia). It would seem to me – although I could be very wrong – that the Bible (whether “Christian” or “Hebrew”) has not served to enrich our core understanding of our true (“Divine”?) nature, and the nature of the cosmos/universe. Intuitively speaking, it seems to me that it obscures (if interpreted in the literal sense) our true power that arises from something much much greater than an anthropomorphic God in the heaven – that is external to us.

                      Does the Bible explain how powerful human beings are, and how to access our inner might and our capabilities – without an authority figure, or does the Bible explain that we need an external authority figure to lead us to truth and harmony? As I said, I am still confused and conflicted, as I have not dug deep enough into the text directly. I have been unable to find a copy of the Bible in my house, so I will have to purchase one in order to dig deeper on my own – without external guidance – and simply allow my intuition to guide me through it. Homework for the summer, perhaps.

                      On a very personal note (and to be brief, although it would require much more backstory to grasp my perspective), my experience with both the consciousness referred to as “Jesus” (expressed directly to me as “Emmanuel”) and the consciousness referred to as “God” (as in the God in the Bible) has led me to consider that both may be some type of tricksters that dwell deep within my individual consciousness as archetypes. Neither provided to me (again, this is my own experience – separate from the Bible and from any religion) any solutions to personal empowerment. The energy felt very co-dependent and unhealthy. I will leave it at that for now. That said, I have many more questions than answers when it comes to “holy” texts and religious spin-offs.

                      It took me many years to de-program from being indoctrinated by my family into Judaism; and then, subsequently, to de-program from indoctrination (self-induced) into New Age ideology (including notions of “Christ Consciousness”). I am not embarrassed nor ashamed to be vulnerable and transparent about my personal experience, as it has helped me to evolve, and reach deep within myself to harness capabilities and truths that reside in my core knowing (my inner temple, so to speak) – hidden from me due to layers upon layers of rituals and belief systems.

                      Liked by 1 person

                    7. Repression, oppression, servitude and the oppression of human beings are a product of religion not of the Bible. Tim Callahan equals these things to a face value approach of the Bible because Christianity presents itself that way.

                      Anything written based on the idea that Christianity is a Bible-based religion immediately puts you on the wrong track. Realizing that Christianity is a lie, but not realizing that it is not the Bible-based religion it pretends to be, is a perfect set-up to fall for next level Bible cloaking like astro-theology.

                      The main biblical message that the Christian and Judaic religion suppresses is that we are potentially Gods and that our earthly existence is nothing more than a very minimal beginning in which we learn to understand a few very basic things, trial and error style, before we can live up to our full and eternal potential.

                      The Biblical message goes way beyond accessing inner might and capabilities, it speaks of a potential to become like the Elohim spoken of in the Bible leaving our mortal coil behind. The path of development towards it is one of loving harmony with a creator who grants us all freedom as a parent grants his or her children.

                      If you think guiding is the same as exercising authority then there will be an authority figure involved. Wanting to realize some of our potential in advance, still in the beginning of our existence and without loving guidance, has made this world the sinister mess it is.

                      “probing beneath the surface to extract potential secret meanings” hidden in Biblical texts started with the development of the Talmud and Judaism by the Pharisees, I think you should be very weary of these kind of phrases, they are used from the very beginning to deceive.

                      Trying to de-code/de-occult the biblical texts is by far the very best way to never understand what the Bible is really about. How are you going to understand a text that you pass by by digging under it?

                      There is a reason Christianity is being exposed as the lie it is by the same powers that developed it. It is the most successful attack on the Biblical message but certainly not the last.


                    8. XS,

                      Your reply reminded me of something that my brother continually (and frustratingly) asked me when we were young, “Stephie, why do you always have to over-analyze everything?” It is my inner nature to question everything and dig beneath the surface – whether reading a book, or watching a TV show, or film, etc. I cannot even imagine not doing this. I certainly would not be a contributing writer here at POM if I was not intensely curious and analytical (even overly so). Admittedly, I am voraciously curious and naturally skeptical, and yes, sometimes to a fault. It can be a double-edged sword. Thus, if I were to read the Bible – or the Koran, or the Rig Veda – I would habitually dig beneath the literal text, considering there may be some hidden meaning (whether metaphysical, allegorical, predictive, or otherwise) – going beyond the standard Biblical hermeneutics and Biblical exegesis forms of scholarly analysis.

                      Soooooo, I have more questions . . .

                      Is it possible for one to deify a book, as in this case, the Old Testament (Scripture)?
                      If so, could this process of deifying Scripture be considered its own form of evangelism or fundamentalist religion (separate from Christianity or Judaism)?
                      Can bible literalism be a form of dogma?
                      Is it possible for a trance state to be induced while reading the Bible – or at the very least, certain excerpts?
                      If so, could this be intentional, or simply inherent in the nature of the text (not for some nefarious purpose)?
                      Can Elohim translate into “shining ones?”
                      If so, could this be a hint at the ELohim being some type of ELectrical entities – not fully human/physical (and not necessarily aliens/ETs, but perhaps interdimensional?); and could the same be extrapolated to the angELs, as in MichaEL, RafaEL, UriEL, etc etc etc? After all, it does seem that the theme (or meme?) of electricity may feature heavily in the Bible:
                      Have you spent time doing any comparative analyses among various holy texts (for example, comparing what each asserts with respect to the beginning of time, or noticing the similarity among the names of individuals/characters


                    9. If you really feel that the message of my answers to your questions is the same as your brother’s, you have not understood them. I am afraid that your religious upbringing and apparently deeply religious brother are getting in the way of you understanding what I mean, even make me a focal point for the negative emotions that remained from it.

                      My point is not that you over analyze but that you do not analyze at all by ignoring the literal text of the Bible and focusing on teachings that claim to be based on the Bible, a claim that cannot be verified if you are not familiar with the text of the Bible as a whole.

                      To cite the same examples again: the idea that the story of Christ is an allegory about the sun is based on the Christian, but very unbiblical, teaching that Christ was born on December 25. The book of revelation is very clear about the fact that the beasts mentioned in the visions are world powers and kingdoms and the seas and rivers represent populations. How is it going to help you understand this book if you ignore that and make it out to be celestial bodies. Changing a text is not the same as analyzing it. It’s rather quite a deceitful trick to sell the idea that there is a deeper layer of meaning to be found in the Bible.

                      You draw a comparison with esoteric disciplines which the literal text of the Bible opposes and even disapproves of. That is just as improper as comparing the Bible with religious texts, the Bible is not a religious book, the Christian religion is not based on the Bible, religions are based on the solar cult. That is why astro-theology is applicable to Christian teachings but not to the Bible. The lies and distortions of the original Biblical text by Christianity are a bridge to astro-theology, which is something to think about. Again: anything written based on the idea that Christianity is a Bible-based religion immediately puts you on the wrong track.

                      What I have tried to point out is that the Bible’s message about what we are capable of developing in to reduces esoteric disciplines to rummaging in the margins and that what the Bible says it takes to fulfill our full potential is at odds with how it is talked about in those esoteric disciplines.

                      What I think I observe is not over-analysis, but blind faith in a deeper layer of meaning in a book whose literal text and meaning you seem to almost studiously avoid. You give the impression of preferring to bury the Bible rather than to understand it.

                      What astro-theology is just as successful at as Christianity is in preventing you from reading the Bible for yourself and determining for yourself what the message is. What surprises me is that I think I know you to be a critical thinker, but when it comes to the Bible, you blindly trust what others say about it, while you do not even own a Bible, let alone read it yourself.

                      That is an attitude that has also been mine for a long time because I thought that with it I could escape the coercion and dogma of a Christian upbringing but in the end it backfired. I could only really get rid of the coercion and dogma by studying the Bible myself and drawing my own conclusions about it.

                      What astro-theology does is to rip things out of context and add un-Biblical teachings as if they were derived from the Bible and then present that as an explanation of the Biblical message. That is not analyzing but demolishing in order to build something completely different from the debris.


                    10. XS,

                      To be very clear – no, my brother detested religion from a very early age. I certainly never implied that he was “deeply religious.” He went kicking and screaming to Sunday school (Hebrew school on Sundays), and if one could “flunk” a bar mitzvah, he would be that student. To this day, he resists all religion.


                    11. To answer your questions:

                      No, a book can not be Deified. And if you could you can not deify the Old Testament without the New. These two parts form a coherent whole, they are meaningless without each other unless you are still waiting for the coming of the Messiah that is prophesied about in the Old Testament.

                      The Bible itself teaches to be taken literally and to be self-explanatory. Understanding which parts of the text relate to other parts of the text is an important discipline to understand the Bible and that takes serious study. The Bible also recommends meditating on text of the Bible.

                      The word Elohim in the Bible, judging from the context, means Gods or Sons of God.

                      Angels is an English translation of the Greek Angélous with which the word Elohim is translated in the Septuagint.

                      El is the Hebrew word for God. The names in which the word El is found speak of the kind of relationship these individuals have with the God of Israel. For example the name Israel, the new name given to Jacob when he was given the role of forefather, means “prince of God.”

                      Except for the texts about thunder and lightning there is no reason to assume that the texts in the linked page are about electricity, you could have figured that out yourself. Here again texts are taken out of context and then haphazardly assigned a meaning that is nonsensical within the original context.

                      Comparing names between different texts written in different languages in different parts of the world in different times just because they look somewhat alike, without first delving into the original context to deduce who the persons behind these names are is highly illogical.

                      It’s a mystery to me how you think you can identify who a certain person was by taking the name from a context that is unknown to you and then comparing it with a name in a completely different context that you do delve into.

                      How many times do I have to remind you of the importance of knowing context? Freewheeling with pieces of text, themes and names taken out of context and then claiming that this is how to interpret what a text you have never read is about is a highly peculiar way of doing things.

                      Are you sure you want to know what the Bible is about or are you looking to be free to make up your own meaning?


                    12. XS,

                      Despite my Hebrew being very rusty, I can still read it a bit. So, I have an Old Testament Bible on its way to me with the Hebrew and English translation. I will certainly dig into it in the coming weeks (as I implied in a previous comment), so that I can (attempt to) grasp the text directly. That said, I do not think any other book in the world has ever been examined as much as the Bible, with seemingly infinite and varying interpretations. It seems apparent that each individual will subjectively pull from it his/her own meaning. I doubt there is only one way to interpret the text.


                    13. XS,

                      Since you linked to Michael Heiser, do you recommend seeking out his scholarly study (quite prolific) on this subject?

                      One of my best friends attends a weekly Bible study group; so, at the very least, I will be asking her some questions as I proceed through the book. She is well aware of my feelings on this subject. On that note, you are not wrong when you sense my reluctance (visceral, actually) to read the Bible (which I will attempt to do anyway). From the numerous times – as an adult – that I have spent in synagogues, churches, and mosques, the one thing that has triggered me most has been reading the texts, or having the texts been read to me (by the rabbi, priest, or imam), with their respective interpretation/spin. Not once have I ever gotten a warm and fuzzy feeling, nor the sense that I was unconditionally loved by the God or Allah in the text. But perhaps that can change if I sit with the book and read it in sequential order, and not “out of context,” as you say. I will also order a Koran while I am at it.


                    14. I am going to make a fresh attempt as well, in English. I have tried to get through it several times in the past and could not seem to draw myself into the story in any meaningful way. I looked for the potential esoteric meanings because to me it reads like a text that has deeper meaning. That’s why I initially asked about the purpose of the authors/publishers in crafting it. I also find it off-putting that without the Abrahamic religions I wonder how/if/why the Bible would carry forward to modern times at all. Who would be reading it, I really wonder? Because as just a straight-forward story with no sub-text to consider it’s just not that interesting. Isn’t that why most folks, even religious folks, don’t bother reading it themselves? Of course some do, very closely, and study groups are all over the place in the South. But they are of a Christian nature, so I guess that slant would not be good if I’m trying to understand it outside Christianity. So, some light summer reading then?! 🙂

                      I have really appreciated this post and following the comments. Lots of food for thought!

                      Liked by 1 person

                    15. My apologies for misinterpreting your brother’s remark.

                      I don’t have the impression Michael Heiser is always reliable but from what he has written about the word Elohim and how it is used in the Bible there is some useful information to be gleaned. It also seems only logical to me that sons of a God are also gods and children of a God as people are called in the Bible eventually become adult gods as well.

                      The Old Testament is pretty tough. It deals mainly with the history of the people from whom Christ was born and what it took to preserve that people and keep them pure at a time when wars, gangs of robbers and the extermination of whole nations were commonplace.

                      The central theme of the Bible is the atoning sacrifice and what that does for our relationship with the creator. You find that in the New Testament. The Old Testament begins with an account of how that relationship has been disrupted and how suffering, disease and death have come into the world and why we have to work so hard to sustain ourselves. The New Testament applies to the times in which we live today.

                      The Qur’an is not a rewriting of the Bible but a corruption of it in order to present Old Testament regulations for the people of Israel as still current and intended for all and to elaborate on them in detail as is done in Judaism. The messiah prophesied about in the Old Testament and who appears in the New Testament is reduced in the Qur’an to no more than a prophet. It is with this simple trick that the central theme of the Bible has been erased from the Qur’an.

                      I hope the very short outline in the posts at the bottom of this thread is of some use to you and Kensho.


          3. Just going through your blog, Kensho, it’s awesome, thanks for sharing! You’re growing incredible food. And I finally get why I love goats so much: they are warriors! 😀

            Liked by 1 person

    2. Just have to add a little something, just listening to Apollonian Germ’s latest interview (he’s the only “truther figure” I really trust, because he’s an authentic guy, I can feel it) and he mentions that Septimius Severus, a Roman emperor before Constantine, was of Phoenician descent. Interestingly enough they don’t mention this on Wikipedia, you have to look elsewhere.

      On that same page it says this: “Many Roman emperors came from Phoenician origin. Emperor Septimius Severus (193 – 211 AD), for example, descended from early Phoenician settlers and spoke with a Phoenician accent. His sister spoke Latin so badly that she embarrassed him enough to send her back home. During his reign one third of the Senate was of Phoenician descent.”

      Also, if you look at Constantine’s hexagonal (!) gold pendant, he looks strangely different than in his other, later depictions. He looks very Semitic with the usual nosage. So, in my book it just isn’t a large stretch to imagine that Rome didn’t exist as a separate entity (as the usual scapegoat you here them go on about time and time again), but was largely made up of Greek/Phoenician/Jewish factions, which to me, again are pretty much one and the same. There’s just too much of a lap-over, also see the Minoans (this is where the Minotaur comes from, which is also one of their more important symbols and no doubt has to do with the bull/Baal). Again, no references on Wikipedia, I’ll cite a little passage from Sanford Holst’s “Phoenician Secrets – Exploring the Ancient Mediterranean” instead:

      “Whatever trepidations the first generation of Phoenicians might
      have had in making this transition to living on acres of land, their
      children and grandchildren took to it quite readily. This presaged a
      soft division among the Phoenician people, which would come to the
      surface to greater or lesser degree over the years and eventually
      would lead to a social eruption and major change of direction. But
      that was still many years in the future. For now, they stood at the
      balcony of their villas and looked out over the vineyards, the tilled
      fields and hillsides covered with lush growth. In the distance, on a
      high hill rising above the treetops, the imposing trading house
      stood – the center of their community and their new life.
      In this way the Minoan empire was born, The local people of
      Crete, and the Phoenicians who arrived by ship, merged into a new
      society that had not existed before. Many elements were drawn from
      the old Cretan society, but the majority of its principles and rules
      came from the Phoenicians. It grew into a unique and beautiful

      It doesn’t make any sense to me that a force like this would just evaporate and why would a supposed Roman emperor, over 2000 years later, claim Phoenician descent, if it had been a non-entity? Check out Astana, Kazakhstan btw, with all it’s Phoenix symbolism. I think this might become the real capital of the NWO and not Israel. I’m sure there will be a Greater Eurasia, they’ve planned this multipolarity way back, there’s references in the Rockefeller’s (also tribesmen, if you weren’t aware already) “Prospect For America – The Rockefeller Panel Reports”. All this Putin-Ukraine business is a farce, I know that Merkel e. g. is very much pro-Putin, even if she acted like she wasn’t.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Apollonian Germ just dropped another bomb in the interview, I have to add this:

        Another Roman emperor, Elagabalus (notice that the name contains both El and B(a)al, both referencing the Phoenician/Canaanite/Hebrew gods) was a transgender debauchery-enthusiast (I kid you not)!

        And then they act like it’s a phenomenon that started with Shabbetai (means Saturn btw) Tzvi (means wolf, hello Adolf) and Frankism, bit laughable.


        1. El is not a Hebrew God but is the Hebrew word for God.

          The only worshipable God of the Hebrews was YHWH, although they were regularly tempted to worship the gods of surrounding nations, especially Baal.

          After the division of Judah and Benjamin and the ten Northern tribes, a Temple to YHWH called Bethel and a Temple to Baal were built for the Northern Empire to facilitate the dual worship of these Gods.

          According to the Old Testament, the Israelites were subjected to severe punishments from JHWH, the God of the Bible, because of this.

          It is striking that Jehovah’s witnesses call their national headquarters Bethel because it means house of God. They are not the only self-proclaimed Christian organization to use this name.


          1. @XS

            On El: my bad, in a way it’s all the same to me as per my “gobbling up everything” position in my other post, so my statements might not always be the most accurate, I see myself more as an aggregator. But that’s what we’re here together for, teamwork, right? 😀


        1. If it were up to Miles Mathis, the first thing to come walking out of the premordial soup was a Phoenician….


    3. I’d like to amend a little something:

      I added Theosophy to the schools of thought I considered to be responsible for transhumanism and that’s more than just a little bit sloppy. I had gotten most of my information from a website ( that critically reports on the New Age phenomenon from the position of a Zionist Jewess. I still think it’s largely honest, but it’s not very well researched in many aspects. She pretty much treats Theosophy as something monolithic, which it definitely isn’t as I’ve just found out. There were multiple very suspicious movements who used the term shortly after Blavatsky, but she makes it pretty clear that for her it’s just the “knowledge of the divine”. I can’t just read that I’d like to amend a little something:

      I added Theosophy to the schools of thought I considered to be responsible for transhumanism and that’s more than just a little bit sloppy. I had gotten most of my information from a website ( that critically reports on the New Age phenomenon from the position of a Zionist Jewess. I still think it’s largely honest, but it’s not very well researched in many aspects. She pretty much treats Theosophy as something monolithic, which it definitely isn’t as I’ve just found out. There were multiple very suspicious movements who used the term shortly after Blavatsky, but she makes it pretty clear that for her it’s just the “knowledge of the divine”. I can’t just read that 2700 page Secret Doctrine and I don’t know if I even want to, but to lump her in with people like Leadbeater, Besant and Bailey just doesn’t seem fair to me. From what I could gather in my short review, Blavatsky might not have been the bs artist many people claim her to be. Insights from others are very much welcome. 😀


      1. Excuse the parts above that are duplicate, I’ve had technical difficulties on the first try posting and then messed up with the copy/paste.


  11. I’m still stuck with the world’s fairs and the idea of a mud flood some 200 years ago. I’m pretty sure all the history we all learned in schools around the world is a fairy tale rewritten to us not so long ago. Since all “research” is based on reading old books, we can’t know any different, can we? What if there was no Roman Empire at all not to mention all the other events. Sounds crazy, right? Were this Toga wearing people able to build a Coliseum? Were middle age people able to build all the fantastic churches we still can see here and there? The few photographs from the 19-th century often show city architecture with big houses with lots of towers, pillars,roof domes, lots of details which appear everywhere in the world. Houses like the White House. Could the people from the 18-th or 19-th century build something like that just with some hammers, not having any modern tools?

    I didn’t found anything useful about the fairs in old encyclopedias. There is a short mention of some main exhibitions in a 1908 edition of the German Brockhaus I have, In a more recent edition from 1985 there is only a mention of an institution which decides about the exhibitions. Nothing at all about it in Encyclopedia Britannica. Weird? To me the official history makes not much sense anymore. I’ve seen basement windows in old houses almost completely under ground. This windows were once in the open when the houses were first build. What happened that covered houses around the world in new layers of ground? Look at Dunedin in NZ

    Who builds a hose like this?
    As I said, the official history makes no sense to my anymore and it also includes all religions. I am convinced the old and the new bible and also the Quran were written by the same people that control us, just adapted for different kind of readers. What if some 200 or maybe 300 years ago this didn’t even exist and we are just told it goes back 2000 years or more. We wouldn’t know, right?

    Liked by 1 person

      1. I’ve just found a site with some interesting rock ruins, located in Montana. This kind of architecture and stone shaping capabilities pre-dates most of ruins that can be found on the Earth’s surface, including the so-called mud-flood type of buildings.

        Julie Ryder


    1. Since the mudflood cannot be contained and could indeed be seen as an extension of religious obfuscation, this discussion can also be held here. Excuse my initial knee jerk response.

      The internet has exposed a lot of hidden history and a lot of lies. I have the strong impression that the mudflood/total rewrite of the history meme is a PSYOP to counteract that development.

      Small basement windows just above or below street level are a common way of getting daylight into basements. This is still done in new buildings. It doesn’t indicate a mudflood or bricked up windows.

      When it comes to footprint, you don’t have much choice in a city when reusing a plot. Building new buildings on old foundations is a common form of reuse. That has nothing to do with hiding something as claimed in the mud flood community.


  12. This comment was originally posted by MindTheCybernetics under the wrong post.

    I’ll have to keep digging a bit more, it’s a complicated situation with Rosslyn chapel. The founder was William Sinclair, 1st Earl of Caithness (interesting “coincidence” btw, Katniss Everdeen (Aberdeen is 100 or so miles north of Rosslyn Chapel), Hunger Games, quite the world we have to expect, isn’t it)? The chapel is one of the most important masonic/kabbalistic buildings of all times, I’d reckon, has anyone been there? They deny the connections on Wikipedia, but that’s of course ridiculous, you could probably write 10 books about its esoterica. I did find this little website here that got purged, it gives at least a half-decent overview.

    Interestingly enough, it connects the Sinclairs to Rollo the Viking, I’ve picked up the theory from Mathis that the Vikings were actually Phoenicians and not actually Norse, those were just simple farmers in those times. I mean, why would Hollywood push this Viking stuff so hard if it wasn’t part of their heritage? They don’t do that. Just compare the supposed Viking boats to Phoenician boats, they look exactly the same, with the exception that the Phoenician version had a horse as a figurehead, while the Vikings had a dragon. Well, a dragon/serpent isn’t very Norse now, is it? Also, they are depicted with horned helmets, which also is a Phoenician trait. Here is a comment from a website of a creepy Gnostic:

    “The horned helmet was known to the sea people as well as the horse, the lion, the serpent, the bull, the owl and the phoenix. Known for red hats more accurate crimson and the purple die.
    They are the Canaanites known well as the Phoenicians who occupied the coastal line since the dawn of time long before the tale of Israel was written.”

    Quite interesting, isn’t it? So, I personally believe that the original European faiths didn’t have any gods/paganism, just nature religion. They got these from the Phoenicians from the North and later through the Greeks from the South, which, according to my theory is pretty much the same anyways.

    Also, I’ve read a bit in “When Scotland Was Jewish” by Hirschman et al and considered the expulsion of tribesmen from England in 1290, so from that you might have a considerable number of cryptos in the Catholic Church ((I’m no fan of the CC, no worries, but apparently they have to keep re-infiltrating it (see Jesuits and so on), so it has probably developed quite a dynamic of its own) in Scotland, which superficially the Rosslyn Chapel belongs to. Also interesting is the fact that it was finished in 1446. The supposed exodus from Egypt was in 1446 BCE. I’ll keep digging and will report back.


    1. KATHY
      1.0 out of 5 starsVerified Purchase
      Nice work of fiction with some truth sprinkled in
      Reviewed in the United States on October 24, 2020
      I jumped right in and stopped numerous times to research items that didn’t quite ring as factual. Then my last name was listed in a cemetery so I got on the telly and was told untrue… But the final straw was information listed as truth by prince of albany, michael stewart… The fraud and phoney with criminal charges pending… Yes this is a nice work of fiction with some truth sprinkled in.


        1. Muslims too in Scotland??

          Oh boy, this is fantastic! I read it in a book authored by Goldstein, so it must be true!!

          I’ve always wondered why Scott’s loved them some bagels and camel meat!!!


          1. BBC ran a campaign not long ago with Africans in Elizabethan garb…you know, felt crimson robes, etc.

            The slogan? “We were ALWAYS here”!

            Maybe our UK friends recall?

            So not only was Scotland full of Hebs, they too were full of African negros…because “they were ALWAYS here”!! Not from Kenya and Uganda and the lower civilizations, but native to higher civilizations!! Hell, they designed and built Big Ben!!

            I’ve looked for that campaign again and cannot find it. Anyone have a link showing the Negros in English Royal Garb, please?


  13. This comment was originally posted by MindtheCybernetics under the wrong post.

    Yes, “When Scotland Was Jewish” is an absolute gold mine, it shows exactly who’s behind the stuff today. Little correction: they started building in 1446. In the 1200s the Knights Templar, which first were just Christian crusaders got richer and richer, opened up to Muslim and Jewish members and turned into an ugly clusterf. The St. Clairs got influenced by them. So this doesn’t have much to do with Catholicism really, I’d suggest the Jesuits had the exact same role as the Knights Templar before. Let me cite:

    [Chapter 8]
    “[…]The French Templar treasure, loaded upon 18 galleys, made its
    way to Scotland, reportedly to the Isle of Mull. From here, the
    Templars and their treasure took refuge with the St. Clair
    family at Rosslyn Castle. Nearby Rosslyn Chapel, built in the
    1400s, was, and is, an edifice filled with images and icons
    drawn from three faiths—Christianity, Judaism and Islam. It
    contains ample testimony to the “sacred geometry” of the
    Jewish Cabala, as well as architectural reflections of the St. Clair
    family’s travels and trade throughout the world, including
    images of a kangaroo, pineapple, maize, tobacco and other
    Of course, by the time the Templars arrived, additional
    Jewish immigrants had already made their way to Scotland.
    Recall that in 1290 C.E., King Edward I had ordered all
    Jews to leave England, causing many to flee across the
    border to Scotland and overseas to France and the Low
    Countries. Others went underground in England and became
    Crypto-Jews. It is likely that the subsequent expulsion and
    proscription of Jews in the French kingdom (1306) caused
    families with hidden Jewish roots to become even more
    secretive, if they remained, or else to flee in advance of
    exposure, as occurred in Nazi Germany. The important
    Jewish community in Normandy, still an English possession
    and not yet part of France, must have been in a particularly
    stressful position. At this point, many English and French
    Jews doubtless joined relatives already in Scotland. The
    émigrés could not fail to have included those schooled in the
    mystical strain of Judaism known as the Cabala, which had
    been flourishing in Narbonne since the 1100s. As Jews were
    harried from one country to the next, Scotland emerged as
    one of the few safe-havens. Thus, by the early 1300s,
    Templars, Jews and Muslims had likely all sought refuge in

    “St. Bernard [a Cistercian monk] had been appointed Patron
    and Protector of the Knights Templars at the French
    “Council of Troyes” in 1128. At that time, he had drawn up
    the Order’s Constitution and had since translated the Sacred
    Geometry of the [Jewish[addition by me: the Phoenicians actually built the temple, so here’s the link!] masons who built King Solomon’s
    Jerusalem Temple…. Also in 1128, Saint Bernard’s cousin,
    Hughes de Payens, founder and Grand Master of the
    Templars, met with King David I in Scotland, and the Order
    established a seat on the South Esk…. Both David and his
    sister mere maritally attached to the Flemish House of
    Boulogne, so there were direct family ties between David,
    Hugues de Payens, and the Crusader Kings of Jerusalem….

    [The Templars’] Jerusalem excavations had … led to other
    important discoveries, including some ancient documentation
    which enabled them to challenge certain Roman Church
    doctrines and New Testament interpretation…. Their
    documentary discoveries were substantial, including numerous
    books from the East, many of which had been salvaged
    from the burned library of Alexandria [Egypt]. There were
    ancient Essene works predating Jesus Christ and volumes
    from Arabian and Greek philosophers, all of which were
    destined to be condemned by the Church. There were also
    countless works concerning numerology, geometry,
    architecture and music, along with manuscripts pertaining to
    metals and alloys. In all, the Templars returned to Europe
    with the combined knowledge of thousands of years of study.

    Thus, by the early 1100s a substantial amount of Middle
    Eastern knowledge, learning and mysticism had been transferred
    to Scotland. It was little surprise, then, that the Knights
    Templar, Jews, and Muslims would have chosen to cooperate in
    seeking refuge in Scotland, once they were exiled from Christian
    countries. Stewart (p. 33) also writes:
    Scotland was the perfect haven for the Knights Templar of
    Jerusalem. The Stewart kings, the Setons, and the Sinclairs
    were all hereditary Knights Templar, and Scottish Rite
    Freemasonry was later created as a sub-structure of the
    organization. The hereditary right of the Stewarts came by
    virtue of Robert the Bruce having granted the Knights
    asylum in Scotland. The Sinclairs gained their privilege
    because they had afforded half the Templar Fleet safe
    anchorage at Orkney, and the Setons had given valuable
    financial assistance during the Order’s hour of need.

    Stewart also traces the origins of the St. Clair/Sinclair family
    from France to Scotland, specifically mentioning their role in the
    Templar Order (p. 102):
    One of Scotland’s most prominent families of the early
    Stewart era was the old Norman family of St. Clair, who had
    arrived in the 11th century, sometime before the Norman
    Conquest of England. In 1057, they had received the Barony
    of Roslin, south of Edinburgh, from Malcolm III Canmore….
    William Sinclair, [St. Clair] Earl of Caithness and Grand
    Admiral of Scotland, was appointed Hereditary Patron and
    Protector of the Scottish Masons by King James in 1441….
    The masons of William Sinclair were not the speculative
    freemasons that we know today, but operative stonemasons
    privy to the Sacred Geometry held by the Knights Templar.
    Because of this, William was enabled to build the now
    famous Rosslyn Chapel; the overall work, with its abundance
    of intricate carvings, was begun in about 1446. In 1475 a
    Charter … was ratified, and Rosslyn became known as
    “Lodge Number One” in Edinburgh. The magnificent
    Chapel—still used by Knights Templar of the Scottish Grand
    Priory, and by the Scottish Episcopal Church—stands above
    the Esk Valley, near the original Templar center at
    Ballantradoch (House of the Warrior).
    Stewart (p. 117) continues:
    In respect of the Masonic patronage granted to Sir William
    Sinclair in 1475, … there were trade and craft Guilds in
    Scotland at that time…. King James III had granted
    numerous Charters in Edinburgh that year, as did his
    successors thereafter: […]

    From the ranks of the newly created, operative Guilds, the
    Knights Templars selected certain members who were keen
    to extend their minds to matters of science, geometry, history
    and philosophy, as detailed in the ancient manuscripts which
    the original Order had brought out of Jerusalem and the
    Holy Land…. Scotland became a beacon of enlightenment.
    The new brotherhood of “Free” Masons supported their less
    fortunate neighbours, and their respective Guilds set money
    aside for the poorer members of society, thereby beginning
    the establishment of charitable organizations in Britain [my remark: here starts the bs charity scam].
    9 King
    James VI became a speculative Freemason at the Lodge of
    Perth and Scone in 1601, and on becoming James I of
    England two years later, he introduced the concept south of
    the Border.
    Stewart further reports that the Scottish Guilds were given
    access to the Templar banking system, which enabled them to
    construct and maintain their international trade network.
    Aberdeen [my remark: here’s Aberdeen!], with its very broad-based trade channels, founded
    Freemason Guilds on the French model in 1361, according to
    Stewart (p. 117–118):

    [Further,] quite apart from the Guilds, the Knights also
    received lay-people into their allied confraternities and, for a
    small annual subscription of a few pence, men and women
    alike were afforded numerous privileges by way of personal
    and family support in times of need. This was, in fact, the
    beginning of the insurance and life assurance industry [my remark: and here more of this insanity], and it
    is the reason why so many of today’s leading British
    underwriting institutions emanated from Scotland.

    The Cabala
    We will close this chapter with a section designed to segue
    between what has been presented about the Templars and
    what will be covered in chapter 9, on Aberdeen and northeast
    Scotland. This has to do with a branch of Judaism termed the
    Cabala. The Cabala originated in the Holy Land around 70 C.E.
    and incorporated Judaic religious ideas together with geometric
    principles developed much earlier, very likely at the time of the
    building of the pyramids of Egypt. The same architectural and
    mathematical principles were applied to the construction of the
    Temple of Solomon in Israel.

    As we shall see, the theorems behind both the pyramids and
    the First Temple are based on the discovery of pi, phi [my remark: the Menorah and multiple other aspects of their religion have Pi encoded, they’re quite obsessed with the number, watch Aronofsky’s movie “Pi”] , a
    number of Pythagorean theorems, and other geometric
    principles emanating from Eastern learning. They are not
    magical or mystical, per se. Yet, to the human minds capable
    of grasping them, they must have seemed God-given and
    divinely-inspired. Their perfection, symmetry and consistency
    would have produced awe and amazement among those gifted
    enough to comprehend and use them. This same set of
    mathematical principles also had enormous pragmatic utility in
    fields as diverse as astronomy, architecture, navigation and land
    measurement. Because of the precious intellectual capital they
    represented, these geometric theorems were closely guarded,
    shared only among a select group of Middle Eastern

    The Templars embraced this body of knowledge eagerly, more
    particularly since it had been the subject of earlier philosophical,
    scientific and religious speculation in Greece, Rome and Moorish
    Spain, and it became one of the spoils of conquest when they
    seized control of the ancient civilizations of the East. In
    medieval Palestine, the principles had been combined with a
    mystical numerical system which assigned each letter in the
    Hebrew alphabet to a number or digit. By recasting Torah
    texts as numerical sequences, the Jews created elaborate
    mathematical metaphors that were used to give additional levels
    of meaning and correspondences to their sacred scripture. In
    the Diaspora after 100 C.E., these notions were elaborated and
    embroidered in Cabalistic centers of learning, first in Provence
    in southern France, then in Spain, and by the 1500s, cycling
    back to the Holy Land and other Levantine centers such as
    Alexandria, Istanbul and Salonica.

    As Benbassa (1999, p. 38) notes, the spread of Cabalistic
    doctrines occurred within the larger context of the
    cross-translation of important philosophical and scientific treatises
    in the Mediterranean area:

    The [French-Jewish] Kimhi and Ibn Tibbon families
    distinguished themselves in the domain of translation. In the
    one, Joseph Kimhi (1105–70) and his son David
    (1160?–1235), and in the other, Judah ibn Tibbon (1120–90)
    and his son Samuel (1150–1230), translated the great classics
    of Judeo-Arabic thought from Arabic into Hebrew, including
    the works of Saadya Gaon (882–942), Ibn Gabiron
    (1020?–1057?), Judah Halevi (before 1075–1141), and Bahya
    ibn Pakuda (second half of the eleventh century)…. They also
    devoted themselves to the translation of Greek and Arabic
    scientific works, particularly in medicine. The texts of the
    Muslim physician, philosopher, and mystic Avicenna
    (980–1037) and, especially, of the philosopher Averroes
    (1126–98) were translated from Arabic into Hebrew.10
    Spanish Jews trained in their homeland in Arabic astronomy
    brought it with them to Provence; some invented
    astronomical instruments, others translated works from
    Latin…. Samuel ibn Tibbon produced a translation of
    Maimonides’ Guide for the Perplexed (1200) that appeared
    before the author’s death in 1204…. Indeed, Provence was
    also the homeland of Levi ben Gershom, commonly known
    as Gersonides (1288–1344)…. At once a philosopher and
    theologian, commentator on Averroes and biblical exegete,
    talmudist, mathematician and logician, he was also the
    inventor of an astronomical instrument….

    Provence, land of philosophy, was also a land of mysticism. It
    is there that the Sefer-ha-Bahir (Book of Brightness), the
    first document of theosophic kabbalism, was compiled on the
    basis of oriental sources between 1150 and 1200…. Abrah
    ben Isaac, president of the rabbinical court of Narbonne (d.
    1180), and especially Isaac the Blind (1160?–1235)—grandson
    of Abraham ben Isaac … developed a contemplative
    mysticism. Born in Provence and along the coast of
    Languedoc, the kabbalah was rapidly transplanted to
    Catalonia, which maintained close political and cultural ties
    with these regions.

    The earliest known mention of the Cabala comes from the first
    century of the Common Era, in Judea. Here, four of the
    classical texts were written: (1) Heikalot Books, (2) Sepher
    Yetzirah (Book of Formation), (3) the Zohar (Book of
    Splendor), and (4) the Bahir (Book of Brilliance) (Bernstein
    1984). The Heikalot Books are based on the biblical Book of
    Ezekial, which uses the Throne of Glory and the Heavenly
    Chariot (Merkabah) [my remark: this corresponds with the Mormon transhumanist symbol] as central symbolic devices. The Book of
    Ezekial and the Book of Genesis both were popular religious
    texts within Judea from 538 B.C.E. to 70 C.E., that is, during
    the Second Temple period. Commonly, the wheels of the
    heavenly chariot are drawn to incorporate the Pythagorean
    theorem; metaphorically, this means that mathematical wisdom
    could raise mankind to a perfected state (Bernstein 1984).

    The Sepher Yetzirah (Book of Formation) is the oldest
    non–Biblical treatise of Judaism, having been written down in
    the second century (Bernstein 1984). This book develops the
    theme of the ten Sephiroth or primordial numbers and the 22
    letters of the Hebrew alphabet. Some of its main images are
    the ladder of wisdom, with each step leading to a higher level
    of knowledge, and the tree of life, which combines aspects of
    the ladder going upward from Earth to Heaven with the
    additional symbolism of “above ground tree, below ground
    roots,” or, “As Above, So Below.”
    11 The tree metaphor posits
    that activities on Earth are reflections of actions in Heaven. An
    important theme throughout is the perfectibility of the world
    through human endeavor, often expressed in Judaic tradition as
    Tikkun Olam (“perfecting the universe”).

    The Zohar (Book of Splendor) is a collection of many different
    writings on various religious topics. Possibly authored by Rabbi
    Simeon ben Yohai (160 C.E.), it is the most influential of the
    Cabalistic writings. It was first published in its entirety by Rabbi
    Moses de Leon of Guadalajara, Spain, around 1290 C.E.
    (Bernstein 1984). Rabbi Simeon was known as “the Sacred
    Light,” and we see this name carried forward to the Saint
    Clair/Sinclair/Sanctus Clarus family of France and Scotland.
    Further, we will find in Aberdeen many persons having the
    surname of Norrie/Noory/Nory/Norris, which is Arabic for
    “light” or “illumination.” The Zohar proposes that the Torah is
    actually a series of numerical codes that reveal a much deeper
    level of divine meaning than the “surface” letters, words and

    The Bahir (Book of Brilliance) was also produced in the early
    Talmudic period (ca. 100 C.E.) and almost lost as a text, only
    to reappear in Provence, France, during the 1200s. The Bahir
    introduces metaphors of reincarnation and the
    masculine-feminine nature of God [my remark: here’s the transhumanism] again. The Jewish scholar most
    closely associated with the tradition of the Bahir is Rabbi Isaac
    Luria, known as the Ari, who led the Safed school of Cabala in
    the Holy Land, 1534–1572. Luria was the descendant of
    Sephardic Jews who had been expelled from Spain in 1492.
    Prominent in the symbolism of the Bahir is the iconography of
    Light and Darkness. Within Moorish Spain were two other
    major figures of Cabalism: Rabbi Abraham Abulafia (flourished
    1240 C.E.) and one of his students, Rabbi Joseph Gikatilla of

    Mathematics of the Cabala

    We turn now to a discussion of the mathematics of the Cabala.
    The ancient Hebrews used anagrams, termed Temura, and
    Gematria, a system whereby each letter of the alphabet was
    assigned a number or digit, creating secret codes and
    metaphors. Under Cabalism, these codes and metaphors
    became very highly refined and were communicated only to
    those initiated into the traditions. Similarly, within the Templar
    Order, the same set of codes and metaphors was used and it
    was relayed only to initiates into the order. To represent God,
    the Cabalists used, at various times, an Aleph ( A ), a Yod ( J
    ) or a Shin ( Z ); sometimes God would be represented by a
    point within a circle or a triangle. Hence the intersecting
    triangles of the Star of David, standing for God’s heavenly and
    earthly presence (above and below).

    The Cabala also developed a series of images and calculations
    based on what is termed “sacred geometry”: the principles of
    Pi ( p ), Phi ( f ), ½ (the base of natural logarithms), and i (
    -1). It is very likely that the Jews of ancient Judea originally
    acquired this knowledge from the Greeks when they were
    conquered by Alexander the Great in the 4th century B.C.E.,
    though some may have been acquired from the Egyptians.
    After the Greek conquest and during the rule of the
    Antiochene successors to Alexander’s empire, many Jews
    became Hellenized, even adopting Greek names, customs,
    language and literary conventions (Biale 2002, pp. 77–134).

    Also incorporated within the Cabala were Fibonacci numbers,
    the geometric progressions that govern the natural growth of
    populations, for instance, cell division. The Cabala also featured
    geometric figures such as the pentagram, pentagon, and
    “golden” isosceles triangles, which make use of phi mathematics.
    The decagon, or ten-sided figure, also adhered to the phi
    principle. Further, the Pythagorean theorem, the Golden Mean
    and the Golden Right Triangle of Phi were well known by the
    Cabalists and favored in their designs. From these were
    developed what are perhaps the most profound Cabalistic
    symbols: the Pyramid/Tree of Life and the Sephirotic Tree.
    These symbols were enlarged to incorporate the Star of David
    equilateral triangles.

    If you will refer to chapter 7 on Glasgow and environs and
    re-examine the images in the photographs of Cowane’s Hospital
    and cemetery in Stirling, you will see that some of this
    symbolism appears in them. In the next chapter we will find
    several more examples of Cabalistic emblems and designs,
    including the ceiling at Fyvie Castle outside Aberdeen.

    Chapter 9

    The Judaic Colony at Aberdeen

    We propose that Aberdeen’s phenomenal growth as a trading
    center and financial capital was due to the fact that it was a
    Crypto-Jewish burgh. It is very likely that all the dominant
    families in the city, from 1100 to the 1800s, were of Jewish
    descent, originating early on from southern France, then from
    England after the 1290 expulsion, and finally, 1492 onward,
    from the Iberian peninsula and shifting safe-havens of the
    Sephardic Diaspora. The DNA results from prominent Aberdeen
    families discussed in chapter 2 already support this proposition,
    but we will now develop a different line of evidence, one based
    on religious practices, marriage patterns and burial customs.
    This evidence, we believe, will document conclusively that
    Aberdeen and its environs were solidly Judaic in culture.”

    Absolutely unbelievable, this is the jackpot! I’ll have to digest this. Excuse the long post, I just had to put this in here, I’d still suggest you grab the book.


    1. “…the Knights Templar, which first were just Christian crusaders…”

      The Knights Templar were crypto Talmudists (like Christianity is a crypto solar cult) who developed banking with the occult knowledge they inherited from their predecessors who gained it in Babylon. That’s how they got rich.


      1. I don’t believe they were, I think they were, at first, largely “genuine believing Christians” trying to regain Palestine from the Muslims and were not aware of the real purpose of Christianity (a 2000 year rule in the age of Pisces that would thereafter be dismantled in the Aquarian age for the rule of Lucifer/intellect/AI as dictated through astrotheological/kabbalist beliefs). This is described in “When Scotland Was Jewish”:

        Prominent French, Scottish and English knights, as well as
        several of their princes and kings, fought in the Crusades and
        established fiefdoms throughout the lands we think of as the
        Levant, or Middle East, stretching from Sicily, Tripoli and Malta
        to Cypress, Rhodes, Antioch, Tyre and Macedonia. Called
        Outremer (“Beyond the Sea”), the Norman-French-Scottish
        domain was ruled by free-standing noblemen and controlled
        militarily by distinctive “Christian” fighting forces that included
        the Knights of the Temple of Solomon, or Templars, and the
        Knights of the Hospital of St. John, or Hospitalers. Although
        both these military orders began as Christian-soldiered militias,
        they soon evolved into enormous, profit-making enterprises that
        owned vast tracts of land, castles, priories, burgs, mills and
        manufactories, banks, and shipping lanes throughout Europe
        and the Middle East (Selwood 1999). The persons who
        managed the vast wealth from this trading empire were not
        themselves knights, but rather seneschals (retainers), and
        though the individual knights themselves may have taken
        Christian vows of chastity or poverty, no such requirements
        were placed upon the majority of those associated with the
        order—its estate managers, clerical employees and
        [I]t should not be imagined that armored warriors, largely
        illiterate, spent their odd hours decoding messages or in the
        countinghouse maintaining ledgers and checking inventory or
        out in the barn supervising the annual sheepshearings…. In
        the Order of the Temple, they were the officer class, and
        they had as their principal training and occupation direct
        participation on the battlefield; the army of administrators,
        native troops, and employees behind them outnumbered
        them by as much as fifty to one [emphasis added]…. The
        Templar clerics were the literate faction, and far more likely
        to be assigned duties of a managerial or accounting nature,
        including the drafting of letters in code. Other administrators,
        supervisors, and scribes were simply employees, and in later
        years a number were Arabic-speaking [Robinson 1989, pp.


        1. There were many warriors who fought alongside the Knight Templars, and for that reason also carried that title, who were devout Christians but this club was founded by a group of predominantly Talmudic Jews who understood very well what the Catholic religion really is.

          As Robinson states these military orders began as Christian-soldiered militias bud they were not founded by Christians.

          In the article from which this thread follows, I explained in detail who the Knight Templar really were and what Catholicism really is. It seems you entered this thread without reading the article. Understanding who the Knight Templar were and who the banking and trading elite are begins with understanding what Talmudism is, other than what it pretends to be.

          If you would be so polite as to read this article first before engaging in conversation with me you would spare me having to repeat myself and yourself to explain what already is understood.


          1. Your right, XS, I’m sorry. My replies above weren’t even meant to go under your essay here, I wrote them under Stephers’ article about Cybernetic Conception, but Mark moved them. I did read your whole article right after you had posted it, but as I wrote in my first reply quite a way up (which I started before having finished the whole article, that was my bad of course), I was skeptical towards the notion that there is a Judaism without the Talmud. And personally and from my research I don’t even think that the Jesus character was real, nor that the Bible is organic in any meaningful way, I consider it a mixture of a lot of different authors and, even if not as fraudulent as the New Testament, which I’m pretty sure is a complete psyop (Wilhelm Kammeier wrote a couple of great books on these subjects, which are only available in German unfortunately, though, if I’m correct), has still been created/compiled for certain disingenuous reasons. Which of course doesn’t mean that they don’t contain truth, they certainly do.

            In the end it’s all hair-splitting, I doubt we’re far apart in terms of our views towards what they’ve sold us as history and I do very much appreciate your efforts in putting this together, I know how laborious this must have been.


            1. “I was skeptical towards the notion that there is a Judaism without the Talmud”

              You should. There is no Judaism without the Talmud like there never was an Old Testament Judaism on which modern-day Judaism is said to be based.

              Patrick Omlor distinguishes in his post between Mosaism and Judaism. I can relate to that.


    2. Hey Mark!

      These were directly related to the subject of Cybernetic Conception and illustrate the origins of these beliefs and the connected supposed “sacred knowledge”. I was going after the Whodunnit of the linked Academia writeup about Dolly the cloned sheep, which is very helpful in understanding what’s going on right now.

      Here’s the original post (under this blog entry: that goes above these two:

      Excellently put together, thanks so much, Stephers! Now if this isn’t a comprehensive picture…

      And it’s quite obvious who’s behind this with all these names of the involved. I shall remind everyone that Dolly = Ylod = Newborn.


      1. MTC,

        Uh-oh. That was actually my bad. I offer my apologies. I asked Mark to transplant your comments to this post on deception, as I was not perceiving the direct connection to my post on conception. It seemed directly aligned to this comments thread. I had replied to you to ascertain if you had intended your two comments to be on the deception comments thread; but when I did not hear back from you , I requested that Mark move them. In any case, I will reply to your “Dolly” link on the conception thread, as I did notice a curious connection to my research.


    3. And the Negros were wandering the halls of Cambridge. They were not out looting Targets and popping a cap into some old cracker…smiling ear to ear with their gold teeth.

      They were native to Scotland, Ireland and England.

      Uh huh, you got it all wrong. They were studying Shakespeare…not hanging outside 7-11 speaking Ebonics and garbage as I listen this very moment with my window open.

      They were ALWAYS HERE!


  14. I was thinking about this article last night and I have a couple of questions:

    1) What about the Herods? Do you think they managed to continue to wield influence throughout history or were they just puppets of the Pharisees?

    2) What’s your view of people like Tyndale, Jan Hus and Servetus? Were they part of the deception too?

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I am not familiar with these names. I’m going to look into it.

      Judging by a Wikipedia article about him, Tyndale seems like an odd man out. Jan Hus was admittedly critical of the Catholic Church, but was faithful to it. It is difficult to say whether Individuals are aware of what the organization they are a part of really is, as with Freemasonry.

      Tyndale and Servetus’ interest in humanism makes them somewhat suspicious. Humanism began as an intellectual, literary and scientific movement from the fourteenth to the sixteenth century, which sought to base all knowledge on the literature and culture of classical antiquity, not on the Bible.

      Tyrone is familiar with who the Herods were and still are. I will continue below his post about a possible connection with the Pharisees.


      1. John Hus of Prague wasn’t faithful to Catholic Church.
        John Hus followed the british heresy of John Wycliffe so they were protestant attempts before Martin Luder

        John Hus of Prague was against Emperor Sigismund, king of Czech ( Bohemia) so probably that was talmudist guerilla war against Catholic Emperor Sigismund of Luxembourg, Holy Roman Emperor
        There are also Husitian Wars I assume proxy talmudist (Imperial State of Venice?) war.


  15. Butting in- The Herods were the same as the Julio-Claudians, the Pisos, the Antonines, the courts of Parthia/Persia and every other kingdom within reach (Including India since the time of Alexander). One big interlocking dynasty. One senior member of this “family” might simultaneously occupy multiple thrones. Mark Antony* was also Herod the Great, ie. So, yes, under different guises and branches, you could say the “Herods” still wield influence. Most of all, in the financial sector these days.

    *Just look at the architectural scale in which Herod built his legacy. Only a Roman could pull that off.


    1. I guess it’s plausible that Herod was Mark Antony, his building works and trips to Rome certainly fit with that idea, and also his ruthlessness comes to mind.


    2. I guess it’s plausible that Herod was Mark Antony, his building works and trips to Rome certainly fit with that idea, and also his ruthlessness comes to mind.


    3. @ Tyrone,

      The financial world seems to be under the auspices of Talmudic Jews. Do you see a connection there with the Herods?


      1. @XS

        Most of the Roman elite were connected to Phoenicia or the Hellenes, which for me is enough, but I looked for a couple more references. Remember that the Temple of Solomon was built by Hiram Abiff, a Phoenician, who is also a central figure in Freemasonry. Of course there’s the possibility that the Phoenicians were really White and that their heritage got co-opted like some Brits for example say (see especially the works of L.A. Waddell, and then there’s the whole Atlantis tangent that goes back to Plato, but that line doesn’t feel right to me. We do have to consider that a lot of Sumerian/Egyptian mummies had blue eyes, red hair and so on, but I find it more plausible that the Phoenicians/Hebrews got that from the Scottish Picts, who were supposedly Scythians originally. But I wouldn’t know, I’m always open to new points of view. You can rest assured, though, that at least the British royalty is obsessed about Jerusalem and their supposed lineage directly back to King David. I find it more likely that the Heebs went in there, mixed with the local elite and implanted their little stories. It sure is a mess to research, though, due to the strong noise, that I’m sure is also largely created by our little tribe. (here, among other things, the Punic wars are described and how Rome supposedly destroyed Phoenicia. I find it more plausible, that, just like today, these wars are less all-out berserkness and more large-scale restructuring due to let’s say “cooperative” elites and endless meddling and infiltration in the background; just like with the reform or rather genesis of what is called Judaism today in Persia, at least this is what Michael D Magee suggests, who has written extensively on it at I asked him back then whether he was involved with military intelligence and he nicely answered to me that he wasn’t :D)

        You could also just take the fact as per his Wiki page, that he was born in Idumea, which is Hasmonean Judea (this is very likely where the eagle as am emblem comes from btw, I’ve also read that Solomon’s temple originally had one; here also be aware of the connections between the eagle and the phoenix, which are often used interchangeably or rather a phoenix cryptically gets depicted by an eagle).
        In addition to this, one of his sisters was called Salome, an arch-Jewish name (from Shalom) and there’s this remark about her on Wikipedia:

        -> Like her more famous great-granddaughter (and grandniece) Herodias, she divorced her husband in contravention of what Josephus (Jewish Antiquities 15.7.10) says were Jewish laws at the time:

        “But some time afterward, when Salome happened to quarrel with Costobarus, she sent him a bill of divorce and dissolved her marriage with him, though this was not according to the Jewish laws; for with us it is lawful for a husband to do so; but a wife, if she departs from her husband, cannot of herself be married to another, unless her former husband put her away. However, Salome chose to follow not the law of her country, but the law of her authority, and so renounced her wedlock…” <-

        I mean, c’mon, it’s all one and the same, these dynasties can’t be distinguished from one another. They just roam the earth and gobble up everything and rearrange it for their purposes, for me it’s blatantly obvious at this point.


        1. According to the Bible, King Hiram provided much of the material for the construction of Solomon’s Temple, but he was not its builder or architect. The name Hiram Abbif does not appear anywhere in the Bible, but is a character from a Masonic story loosely based on a Biblical story.

          The Hebrews, or rather the Israelites, who represent only a small portion of the Hebrews, did not come to live in Canaan until later. They are not the same people as the Cananites/Phoenicians

          The merchants and pirates who lived in the coastal cities of Canaan were called Phoenicians by the Romans but knew themselves only as cooperating trade organizations and raiding gangs not as a people.

          The Pharisees who developed Talmudism went around the world to convert people to their religion from the very beginning. Even the Bible mentions that the Pharisees sailed along with trading ships for this purpose. The piracy of the Knights Templars can be linked to the Canaanite/Phoenician pirates, especially from the city of Sidon and the Knights Templar themselves to Talmudism and the Pharisees.

          In the fact that the slave trade continued in Sidon after the fall of slavery everywhere else I think I see the influence of Talmudism. According to the Talmud, slaves are equal to cattle and Talmudists who believe themselves to be Jews have a God given right to regard non-Jews as cattle.

          “I find it more likely that the Heebs went in there, mixed with the local elite and implanted their little stories.”

          Talmudists are often confused with Hebrews/Israelites/Judeans even by themselves. If you replace Heebs with high-ranking Talmudists, I wholeheartedly agree.

          Solomon’s temple as described in the Bible, which is very detailed, had no eagle in it an emblem, not even an emblem at all.

          “…it’s all one and the same, these dynasties can’t be distinguished from one another. They just roam the earth and gobble up everything and rearrange it for their purposes…”

          Nail on the head.


          1. Thanks, XS, I appreciate your insights, I’ll try to see things a bit more differentiatedly from now on in terms of Bible vs. Christianity, it really shows that you’ve spent a lot of time with the Bible. I tried reading both NT and OT multiple times, but I didn’t make it very far. I’m just too much of a chaotic, intuitive and stubborn being to accept anything that I haven’t gotten from my father or through experience, so I can get a bit snarky if someone wants to teach me morals. Maybe you understand where I come from?


            1. I do understand were you come from although I have the impression that teaching morality is primarily a Christian pursuit. The Bible is more of an explanation than a rule book.

              The laws in the Old Testament are abolished in the New if that’s what you mean by teaching morality. At the bottom of this thread, I have posted a couple of responses to Stephers in which I elaborate on this.

              I hope you want to ad Jews vs. Talmudists to Bible vs. Christianity.

              It was a subversive group within the Israelites of whom it remains to be seen whether they themselves were Israelites who developed Talmudism.

              When it comes to influence on the world stage, we are dealing with Pharisees/Talmudists who call themselves Jews but are not, according to the Bible. It is not clear to me whether this is meant metaphorically or literally.


      2. The “Herods” are just another construct by these bloodlines. Their names and personas and religions change at will. Yes, they do control the financial system, but not as “Herods”. Lately the Rothchilds have behaved this way, but that brand is so tainted now they probably run several other aliases. ‘Talmudic Jew’ is just another mask. They are also Christian and Muslim and whatever is happening on the other side of the planet. Personally, I wouldn’t put too much faith in any religion revealing anything useful. They all seem like an emotional misdirect.


        1. “I wouldn’t put too much faith in any religion revealing anything useful.”

          I wholeheartedly agree but I do believe the Talmud is like a blueprint for world domination pretending to be a religious work. The religions of this world are one of many expressions in matter of that blueprint.

          I do believe that the Talmud and the reliance on the principles described in it is the unifying factor of the Elite of this world. They are aware that this is not a religious work but something with a lot more weight.

          The Jewishness of a crypto Jew pretending to be a Christian or something similar is ultimately a mask under a mask.


  16. As for execution by immolation, these characters were certainly controlled opposition, created to then be “executed” as examples to quell any real unrest. Head down, mouth shut becomes the only viable option. Self-policing is the most effective measure of control.


  17. Since I’m here, Miles Mathis recent take down of Henry VIII and Elizabeth I is filtered through very modern lenses and seems rather simplistic. No children equals gay. And in Elizabeth’s case- Tranny!
    Can’t buy it. Modern notions of “gay genes” aside, no king stays in power long without some sort of issue. The main job of royals is to produce heirs. If a king has multiple children and his cousin king somewhere doesn’t, then a royal child is simply transferred to the childless king to keep his end of the dynasty going.
    Henry wasn’t gay. He may have been a switch hitter, but he “divorced/executed” multiple wives because the couplings were for show. In my view, Henry was loaning out children to the Hapsburg end of the tree because the inbreeding there was threatening succession.
    As for Elizabeth, she mirrors the empress Maria of Austria, and Charles Pope suggests she had as many as 16 children via various kings and princes. Maria began as the daughter of Henry loaned out to Ferdinand and Isabelle of Portugal.
    Through marriage, she then settles in as Maria of Austria via being Maria of Spain and finally appearing as Elizabeth. In her English persona, she refuses all suitors. And this is where the tranny angle might work. At the end of Elizabeth/Maria’s fertility, she may have taken a closer hand in one of her eastern personas, even reining as a dowager in China. With her far afield, the tranny would suffice as a double and the polloi were non the wiser.
    Again, at that level, one’s tastes in the bedroom were overridden by their duty to produce the next generation of royal ghouls.


    1. So what happens to all these Royal offspring that do not get recognized? I assume they are given some sort of inherentence and live a somewhat luxurious easy life.


    2. I don’t trust Mathis at all, he has very strange views on many things. He keeps going on about his muses and now his supposed guest posters are starting with that as well. There’s a lot of these goddess worshippers around, Mark Passio also and I’m very skeptical of it. Mathis pushed, time and time again, that the anti Second Amendment stuff is just to keep people afraid and obsessing about guns, which is not misinformed but extremely shilly, if you ask me. The US citizens were pretty much the last people on Earth able to defend themselves properly and this should of course be the absolute top priority in the kind of world we’re living in. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if he was a Fed, there to keep people docile and inactive.

      I also believe, that there’s a lot more rogue stuff going on than what Mathis proposes. Napoleon and Hitler come to mind, I’m kinda biased there, since Kubrick got me into the search for truth and he was obsessed with both. He might just have been misleading people, sending them into the rabbit hole, but I can’t help it, I’ve just always liked him. Even though he possibly believed in progress and technocracy, at least that’s what his only public interview suggests: ““I’ve never been certain whether the moral of the Icarus story should only be, as is generally accepted, ‘don’t try to fly too high,’ or whether it might also be thought of as ‘forget the wax and feathers, and do a better job on the wings.” It’s too vague to really decide, though.

      Also, I know for a fact that quite a few of the European monarchs were not on board with a lot of the stuff that was going on. Prussia grew to be quite strong and independent, before it got sold out by Bismarck (who was half Jewish and deeply involved with their high finance) and some of the monarchy. Quite a few of the Hohenzollerns, though, at first were against freemasonry and the church. King Frederick William I decreed that all lawyers had to wear long woolen black robes, so that “you can identify the scoundrels from afar”. His son, Frederick the Great, joined a lodge against his father’s recommendations, but later regretted it, took quite a clear position against freemasonry and blatantly mocked them, which nowadays no official would dare. Still, the freemasons acted like he was one of the greatest masons, protector of masonry and stuff like that. They don’t just tell you that anywhere, though, you have to dig for it. There’s a great book on this, “Die europäischen Dynastien in ihrem Verhältnis zur Freimaurerei” by Hans Riegelmann (European dynasties in relation to freemasonry). So I would imagine that one of Mathis’ roles is to discourage people, cuz “they run everything anyways”. I don’t believe in karmic debt and original sin, everyone can change their mind at any time and act differently, it just gets less likely that it’s going to happen the more brainwashed one is.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. I hadn’t read Miles’ piece on Henry VIII at the time of my answer, it seems very plausible to me, Elizabeth just always looked so weird to me, only makes sense that she was a man after all.


    3. tyrone , try to stop biting that hand that feeds you…that does not mean i defend MMs every point; i do not but you feel like and sound just like a very subtle dis-information type of guy, and siding with the likes of a charles pope and his groups pretty much gives you away……i have taken note of all your recent asides about MM and you do not fool me even if everyone else around here is fooled..


    4. Some have also suggested that Elizabeth I was Catherine de Medici. Both were powerful red-haired women who oversaw empires on opposite sides of the English channel. Both also were acquainted with Mary Stuart, who was “executed” in 1587 for high treason against Elizabeth’s government. Through the Stuarts, the Medicis are related to British royalty.

      Fun Fact: As you may know, history has it that Anne Boleyn spent time in France before returning to England and joining Henry VIII’s court. If Elizabeth and Catherine were the same person, Anne’s stay in the French Kingdom may be a hint to the Tudor/Medici connection.


  18. MTC… You wrote: “I know for a fact that quite a few European monarchs….”
    well that sentence alone disqualifies anything else you may say since you do not even know what a fact is. A sincere man would say* I have read from sources that i deeply trust….” or at least say: “From my research, logic tells me that…”
    you know for a fact?! were you there?
    you’re out!


    1. Godfly, I’m not obsessed about picking the most neutral and accurate terms to describe my beliefs and conclusions, I don’t have to, I’m honest to myself and others and revise my views on a daily basis where indicated. I still stand by my statement, although sure, change it to “I know for my fact”, then it’s more precise. People aren’t either black or white and with knowledge of yourself and a constant openness to impressions from all sides, you can learn a lot, you should try it some time!


  19. “….describe my beliefs and conclusions…”
    exactly; they are just your conclusions based on your beliefs, but were we not talking about “facts”?
    “I know from my fact”? that is so sloppy it is not even funny
    Im sorry; i am still trying to figure out how people who think they are so in the know about the way things REALLY are, those people with all the alternative and radical viewpoints, are still such sloppy thinkers; how do people like you and XS , kenshohomestead barbm124 and a host of others get here, by reading a few things and then parroting; why not try to speak from first hand experience?


    1. It’s called intuitive thinking and has to do with empathy among other things, which you seem to lack, judging by how you address people.


    2. Parroting? Really? Have you ever read an article before about how Christianity was never based on the Bible from the very beginning? I think I am pretty well versed in the subject I wrote an article about and my opinions are my own.

      You have a lot of criticism of other people’s opinions and posts for someone who rarely gives his own.


      1. to answer your question, yes i have but not just an “article” from some modern knuckleheads; start with Ludwig Feuerbach and Bruno Bauer and for good measure read Max stirners take on Christianity before moving onto Nietzsche. but if you plan to run to those authors and seek to answer your one question that Christianity was not based on the bible, you will be disappointed; the idea is there but it is imbedded; in any case, you are young and so your certainty is forgiven; just remember that old truism that states that a man who believes he knows everything will not learn any more; you will say that you do not think you know everything but if you could read all your comments objectively…you seem to have an answer for everything…so yes, you are parroting your ariticles….


  20. and if not from first hand experience and knowledge then AT LEAST do your own research.
    Doing your own research does not mean reading other researchers as a primary source


  21. Barb’s ok, she’s ok..
    Leave her out of this.

    Right, Barb?? 🙂

    We need to go after the heavy hitters, right? Those with rotten souls. That does not apply to Barb and others on this site…for the most part.

    There’s an English “Miles Mathis” named “Jeremy James”…boy, they love their alliteration, yes?


  22. @STEPHERS response 1,

    My personal belief is irrelevant. Both the article and the comments are written from the Bible knowledge that I have gathered so far. That’s still not much, but enough to understand that disciplines such as astro-theology take bits and pieces of the Bible out of context and put them in another context that has nothing to do with the Biblical message and completely ignore how the bible explains itself. That can only be convincing to someone who does not know the Bible itself.

    This kind of deception is a direct extension of what was started by Christianity. There, too, you find multitudes of people who think they know the Bible because they are familiar with Christian-religious narratives but not with the Bible itself. According to the Bible, the only reference work you need to understand the Bible is the Bible itself.

    The God of the Bible, as described in the Bible and speaking through messengers (angels, prophets and Christ) is very strongly against astrology, calculating the scriptures (numerology, kabbalah) and sorcery. That alone makes it highly unlikely that the Bible would contain astro-theological parables.

    The books of the Bible tell a coherent story. Extracting passages from it and fitting them into a context that has nothing to do with the original story will never lead to an understanding of what the Bible is really talking about, quite the contrary. If you want to know the Bible, you have to study the Bible itself.

    It is striking how many people who take this kind of sideways approach to the Bible really think they know the Bible without ever having studied this collection of books itself.


  23. @STEPHERS response 2,

    As for the astro-theological explanation of the story about Christ, it only works with the Christian narrative, not the Biblical one. The Christ as presented in the Bible was not born on December 25, nor in a stable, nor is this Christ his own father. The Christ in Christianity is the father and the son at the same time, the Christ in the Gospels only the son.

    Understanding where I stand starts with understanding that what is presented as an explanation of the Bible is often an explanation of a Christian, non-Biblical narrative that, like an astro-theological explanation, cannot be fitted in the biblical narrative.

    The story of Christ is about a man who was born in Bethlehem after which his parents fled the country with him because the then reigning Roman Emperor wanted to kill him. This Christ debated with scribes from a very young age, worked as a carpenter with the man who took care of him as his father until he was about 30, then emerged as a teacher with a message of the coming kingdom of his Father after the reign of Lucifer ends and what it takes to be a subject of that kingdom.

    During this period, he was regularly targeted by the Pharisees who tried to get him to make statements that would undermine the Roman ruler’s authority or statements that went against Jewish law and who turned the Jewish people against him which ultimately cost him his life.

    And then there are descriptions of all the miracles he is said to have performed, the sick he healed and the dead he raised.

    How can the astro-theological explanation fit into this story? And this is only a very succinct and incomplete version of that story, and this narration is just a part of the overarching narration of the entire Bible.


  24. @STEPHERS response 3,

    The Bible itself tells a story about a God who desired a family and started His creation for that reason. The first man he created sinned against the only commandment he issued. This was factored in to learn from and allow the preservation of free will. This is also the reason that for the time being we only inhabit this one small planet in an immeasurably large and ever expanding universe. According to the Bible, we are still children who, until we reach adulthood, would do better to obey our creator and father.

    As God’s sons are recognized in the Bible as Gods, I gather from the Biblical narrative that people, who are called children of God, are meant to grow into Gods themselves and this is only possible in harmony with God and his plan. The hierarchical and not in the least harmonious way of self-deification has, other than it seems, no other purpose than to keep us small and bowed at the feet of Lucifer which we would be able to evolve beyond on the path of development originally intended for us.

    Most of the Old Testament deals with a plan for atonement after the first sin and the Israelites who would play a crucial role in it and that would be accomplished through the self-sacrifice of a sinless man who appears on the scene in the New Testament. This man would be born of a people that God has set apart for himself in a world currently ruled by Lucifer.

    The bulk of the Old Testament is about the perils of this people and their struggles with God and their place in His plan that they barely, if at all, understand.

    It is Lucifer who incited the first man to disobedience and questioned God’s exclusive right to rule. It is for this reason that he was given 6000 years to prove himself as world ruler after which for a thousand years (in the Bible that means an indefinite but very long period) Christ, who has been crowned king since his atoning sacrifice, is assigned the throne of God.

    It is at the end of Christ’s reign that all who were unaware of the choice there is to make are given a resurrection from what the Bible calls the first death in order to be able to make an informed and thoughtful choice between living eternally in harmony with God’s plan (an absolute harmony that gives real and absolute freedom somewhat similar to being able to fly because there is air traffic control) or a second, eternal death.

    The question again is how the astro-theological explanation fits into the story of a man without sin who ultimately sacrifices himself to make reconciliation and harmony with our creator and his plan possible and the overarching story of which this is a part.


  25. STEPHERS response 4,

    The Old Testament concerns the First or Old Covenant as made with the people of Israel and the New or Second Testament concerns the fulfillment of the First Covenant and therefore its end including the law contained therein, and the making of a New Covenant with all mankind. The laws that are often presented in Christianity as biblical and for everyone and all times are no longer in effect according to the Bible itself.

    The visions and dreams in the book of Revelation are indeed an esoteric representation. According to Revelation itself, it is about things that will take place on this earth and the world powers and kingdoms involved, prior to the unveiling or revelation that will take place before Christ takes his place on the world throne. As explained in the book of Revelation itself the world powers and kingdoms are represented as beasts, and the peoples they rule or from which they arise are represented as seas and rivers.

    All the layers of deception that make the world a dark place, according to Revelation, will be pulled away and all that is done in the dark will come to light. Apocalypse is the Greek word for unveiling.

    The visions and dreams in Revelation in the New Testament are directly related to those in the Old Testament book of Daniel. Perhaps nice to know is that the various scrolls of the book of Daniel that had gotten out of order were brought back to their original chronological order based on correspondence from Nebuchadnezzar.

    Likewise, the creation story is mostly esoteric but concrete enough to provide grip for a brain designed to navigate time, space and form.


  26. XS

    I tried to post this comment yesterday but it disappeared, possibly because I included a link. I’ll try again with gaps in the link address.

    I don’t know if you have ever watched Nicholson 1968. If you have the time & inclination to watch this

    https:// www. hashsymbol tab2 The website won’t let me post the precise video, which is freemasons,fallenangels&nasalies

    I wonder what you think of Nicholson’s Biblical references, whether you think they are taken out of context? He observes imagery in media – advertising, music videos, movies & though you (or I) may not agree with everything he says, he makes interesting comments about the subliminal programming & revelation of method in visual media.


    Between the 49-50 minute time stamp he does a face split of Lady Gaga & Bowie which might interest you. An aside, looking at images of LG online I wonder if she is more than one person. Perhaps that might interest you too.

    Off topic – the website won’t let me access Gaga for Winehouse properly. I get a horizontal line across the face split of JJ & AG. Please could you have a look at it if convenient. Thank you both.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s