Are secret society members also religious extremists?

gilius

Active Member
In his book Caesar's Messiah, Joseph Atwill showed that Christians have unknowingly been worshiping the head of the church (and state) instead of a divine being. This is the case because the Bible turned out to be Roman propaganda, so that "God" and "Jesus" refer specifically to mortal men within the Church as opposed to any divine supernatural beings described by the surface level narration. Also, it's hard to distinguish between the two since some mortal men may consider themselves to be supernatural and divine when technically they are made of human flesh like us - or potentially half AI even (save that possibility for another thread!).

According to Josephus insiders working for the imperial court were already referring to the pontiffs as God and Jesus - just like Christians (unknowingly) - but with the additional insider knowledge of their true earthly identity; for example, at one time Vespasian and his son Titus, held the titles God and Jesus Christ, respectively.

Since the Roman Empire rules today and there's no reason to believe the Vatican (and other spawned Secret Societies) ever lost their power or titles, could the same system still be in place today: insiders fanatically referring to mortal men as God and Jesus Christ without ever revealing they know their identity to be as such, i.e. the heads of the church now represented by the white, grey and black popes?

And if there are 2 x Gods and Jesus Christs at present - with one perception being of earthly figures as per the ancient Flavian court - then does it follow that Allah and/or Mohammad could also refer to the same Popes as heading all world religions (and potentially all states)? Since the Vatican may have created Islam too in a similar way to how they created Christianity?

Lastly, since Islam has been described as comprising Muslim extremists - could the same not be said about the holy warriors representing the Vatican and connected secret societies - in particular the western army (often photographed with a cross)? Would it then be unfair to just label Islam as having such religious extremists when in fact it could be evenly spread across the world under different guises in order to protect those at the top of the pyramid?
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
I just happened to have this link below open on my browser. Of course, one can find much more like this, e.g. the USA funding the founding of the Taliban, its deep and bushy associations with the Bin Ladins and Al Qaeda. Layers and layers insulating the Vatican and more importantly, the families which control it.

https://thefifthcolumnnews.com/2015/03/canadian-intelligence-caught-clandestinely-backing-islamic-state/

were already referring to the pontiffs as God and Jesus
"referring" or 'inferring'?

In any case, I think the extremists that you ask about are more likely either "true believers' or pure mercenaries, rather than members of secret societies that are likely amongst those who incite or 'provoke' the former.
 

gilius

Active Member
Hi Richard, I'm pretty certain that many secret society members are masquerading as Christians! However, when I ask them to confirm exactly who their God is - I receive only vague and deliberately confusing answers. Surely there's a better way for them to communicate their position or the fact they are under oath and cannot reveal their God to be a current reigning Pope?
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
Psychologically, I think it would be very challenging for a "religious extremist" to also belong to a covert secret society. That is, a true "religious extremist" is one who is deeply convinced of the factual validity of the historical narrative and doctrines of his or her fundamentalist sect. The overt fundamentalist religions all take positions that are contradictory to the beliefs of secret societies such as the freemasons, as well as propounding ethical standards that are not compatible with covert secret society operations.

However -- secret society members can pretend to be religious fundamentalists! They can even become leaders of fundamentalist organizations, without actually believing a single jot or tittle of the fundamentalist rhetoric of their institution. Indeed, it is probably possible to be far more effective as a "religious extremist" if one's motivations are Machiavellian and opportunistic, rather than truly fundamentalist.

My impression FWIW of the religious teachings of secret societies such as the Freemasons, is that their beliefs tend to be flexible and symbolic, rather than dogmatic or "extremist". That is, I don't think they really worship Satan or Lucifer in the same way that fundamentalists might worship God, Jesus or Allah. He's more like an avatar for their own bad character.
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
We should also remember that the core 'secret societies' function more as esoteric 'inner churches' to the exoteric Church(es). Such forms an effective control hierarchy that is more veiled the higher it goes. Various members of such as a masonic lodge can serve considerably different roles based upon their respective 'profiles' and what they bring to the table. Therefore, the organization can quietly reach down vertically into the exoteric church, as a typical 'elder' or 'deacon' role, or it may extend its tentacles more vertically into practically all aspects of secular society separately from the Church.

Via such a pervasive reach, it can set the tone for otherwise independent members of institutions where Eric Weinstein has coined the Distributed Information Suppression Complex (DISC) which is the flip side of the same 'coin', aka Kontrol of Internalized Neural Expression (KOINE), via the corporate mass media's Distributed Information Expression Tissue (DIET).
 

windhorse

Member
Hi, I'm new here. To contribute to the post title's question, my mother's family were all Masons. All were atheist. Her father was a Bohemian Grove member, 180 IQ, pedophile, psychopath, a real humdinger POS. His God was money.

I perceive all major religions, i.e. cults - with the partial exception of Taoism - as infantile narcissistic masturbations. I'd call that extremist and fundamentalist. I also consider money to be nothing more than a mother substitute (about as fundamentalist as it gets).

And on that note, there's a blog called "masongoddess" on blogspot.com, that ties in well with my hunch that obsession with money - a male-invented construct - is just a piss-poorly hidden state of parasitism, of infantile narcissism. Money = mommy = God/me.

It's religion. Under a mask called money.
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
Hi windhorse, welcome to the forum.

How does money act as a 'mother substitute'? In any case, we Americans like to put "In God We Trust" on it. Maybe that's why it's only worth about 1% of what it was originally valued at? :( And that's without considering the Socialist concept that wages are theft.
 

windhorse

Member
Hi Richard,

I'll start with language: money's language. Currency, liquidity, association with water which is archetypically female in human history. "Securities."

Historically: cattle and women were the first money.

Science: see articles by leading geneticists Steve Jones, Brian Sykes, David Haig and Jennifer Marshall Graves to name a few. The X chromosome is the primary source of nearly all genetic material on Earth; the Y chromosome is secondary and is in fact a rapidly disintegrating genetic parasite with now only 2-3% of its genetic material left. There are hotly debated arguments about this, of course, but if one looks for facts and sticks to real evidence those arguments are quite weak and very pitiful to read.

With Postflavian dedication to historical facts, the above realities of genetics would no doubt be easily appreciated.

Money's origin and inherent meaning are, imo, based on a host/parasite paradigm which is the "religion" behind all religions. The ultimate heresy, as well as the only door out of the hall of mirrors.

Hi windhorse, welcome to the forum.

How does money act as a 'mother substitute'? In any case, we Americans like to put "In God We Trust" on it. Maybe that's why it's only worth about 1% of what it was originally valued at? :( And that's without considering the Socialist concept that wages are theft.
 

Richard Stanley

Well-Known Member
Maybe money is like a baby, lounging in some bad bath water? If money's primary purpose was to facilitate trade of various sundry goods beyond the limitations of barter, then we have had little means to mitigate hoarding of the bath water. The very first kings and their priestly kin discovered the utility of rent and tithing and soon came the understanding of leveraging the imbalances that were created. On another thread I have made a poor attempt to start exploring possible means to discourage hoarding and speed the velocity of 'money' to the benefit of the wider society.

We had one means, the progressive income tax, which Reagan and Clinton virtually demolished. And as this former libertarian was shocked to discover, it was remnants of Euro-royalty, via the Mont Pelerin Society, who put all that Free Market 'anarchy' in motion. To help get this thread back on track, the MPS is much like a secret society IMHO.

The X chromosome is the primary source of nearly all genetic material on Earth; the Y chromosome is secondary and is in fact a rapidly disintegrating genetic parasite with now only 2-3% of its genetic material left.
Are you saying we're heading for parthenogenesis? Despite all the historical and present problems this sounds a bit boring to me.
Money's origin and inherent meaning are, imo, based on a host/parasite paradigm which is the "religion" behind all religions. The ultimate heresy, as well as the only door out of the hall of mirrors.
What's your alternative?

In any case, Freemasonry, claims not to be a religion, while they claim to enforce that every member believe in some higher being, which I was surprised by your saying that your mothers' 'Masons' were all atheists. Was your mother in the Order of the Eastern Star?

Of course, it is impossible to get inside anyone's head (though some are claiming otherwise today) and there are plenty of churchgoers that are atheists. Many masons are members of churches, synagogues and mosques, as it seems clear to me that Masonry and related are esoteric 'inner churches' inside of exoteric religions. This practice seems to go way back.
 

windhorse

Member
With regard to money as a dirty baby/dirty bath water, aka Freud's money-as-shit theory, his theory ties in nicely with all black and white fascist projections of God/Devil, that must be lodged in some primitive area of the human brain. Even Freud was stuck on it.

I've been digging for understanding through both science and mythology/metaphor of this puzzle of what money is, and as you mentioned its invention appeared to facilitate trade. A conveyance.

Here's an interesting example of conveyance from the matriarchal Mosuo culture in China. Males are the conveyers of genetic material between female clans. This is genetically how Nature in fact operates, and the Mosuo don't know beans about genetics, they just do this intuitively. Males are therefore "genetic or biological money." Patriarchy reverses Nature.

Parthenogenesis isn't making a comeback, it's not possible. But Nature's been making a males in recently discovered rodent species... without any Y chromosomes. Mystery. Males as conveyers of genes between females are absolutely necessary for evolution, apparently, but it's being done without the Y somehow.

So money as facilitator/conveyance of trade/exchange is by Nature a male function, not female.

Patriarchal reversal of females as conveyance tool of exchange is a typical 180 reversal. The host is a commodity for parasitic short term gains at host expense.
Earth and all its "products" are commodities, and most women are nothing but handmaidens of this fundamental brainwashing, thousands of years old.

Alternative? I would say that the Earth as host and its health should be human priority. I am a big fan of Viktor Schauberger, I have all his books, which unfortunately were translated and edited by Theosophist Callum Coats, but if you ignore Coats' Theosophical BS the work is very good.

Freemasonry is just another cult. I see no difference between cults and religions.

My mother didn't want to join the Order of the Eastern Star when she was growing up, but tried to push it on me. I instinctively recoiled, thankfully.

Can you link me to your thread where you're exploring alternatives to the hoarding problem?
 

windhorse

Member
Erc, the links you posted about money and misogyny I think are on target (I've read the first two links but skipped over much of the symbolic stuff), but then I went to the home page, and I see cabalistic BS a la freemasonry, with some Xtian BS thrown in.
Oh, the familiar repulsive stench.

The articles about money/misogyny are a total contradiction. That's always a sign to depart asap. The BS meter is overheating lol.
 

Jerry Russell

Administrator
Staff member
History from the Visigothic perspective:
The Angelfire links have absolutely nothing to do with a Visigothic perspective. It seems to be an anti-Semitic rant from an anonymous eccentric Fundamentalist Christian author. It consists of one controversial historical assertion after another, all completely unsourced.

I'd actually like to converse with people who possess thoughts and experiences of their own here, rather than try to send me to other people's thoughts.
There's another site policy about that:

3 - Appropriate quoting, and respect of copyright
If you wish to share content from another website or other source, please summarize it in your own words, quote it as briefly as possible to make your point, and provide a hyper-link or other bibliographical information.
I don't want to discourage participation, and I'm sure ERC posted the links with the intent to provide interesting information. But, it would be more helpful if the links were accompanied by some discussion.
 
Top