A 37-year-old Montreal historian, David Livingstone has written a stunning book that casts modern civilization in a new and troubling light.In The Dying God, The Hidden History of Western Civilization, Livingstone shows that modern secular culture is really the product of an occult tradition that can be traced back to ancient Babylon through Freemasons, Rosicrucians, Templars, Plato and the Cabalists.
Essentially, this tradition adopted Lucifer as symbol of mankind's rebellion against God. It enshrined human reason, appetite and will as the ultimate standard of goodness and truth.
It usually defined freedom in terms of destroying the moral and social order. Freedom means dissipation not uplift and empowerment.
The occult's real aim is to empower the elite. Livingstone, who is not "religious" explains:
"The basic principle of most religions is to behave unto others as we wish to be treated....a principle of justice...[In contrast] the occultist...is lured by his vanity to seek a type of knowledge that sets him apart from others, maintaining that it is the preserve of the elite."
5 comments:
David Livingstone: Yes, "occult" means hidden. It can be used in that sense, or it can be used to refer to the lore and tradition of magicians and secret societies. And this is very precise. We can clearly define what it refers to, and its basis is the Kabbalah.
But the Kabbalah in turn represents the rationalization of ancient paganism into an "interpretation" of Judaism. This pagan tradition begins with the worship of a dying-god, who, as the Sun, was believed to die and resurrect every spring. As he was believed to journey to the Underworld during his supposed death, he was said to rule over the spirits who lived there, the jinn, and therefore was believed to be a ruler of evil.
So from the beginning, going back some several thousand years, whoship of him involved evil sacrifices, the most common being the slaughter of a child, to appease him. This was accompanied by the playing of loud music and the ingesting of some kind of drug, either acohol or some other narcotic. The music was both to drown out the cries of the child, but also, in combination with the drugs, but induce the worshipper into a trance state of possession by the "god".
The Israelites first adopted this practice in the incident of the Golden Calf, and then after they entered Palestine, by imitating their subjects, the Canaanites. They Canaanites, in turn, according to a careful reading of the Bible, were descendants of the Anakim, or the hybrid race of the pre-Flood era, with whom the Israelites also extensively intermarried with.
These practiced were denounced by the Bible and numerous prophets who were sent to reform the Israelites. However, following a warning issued in the Bible, they were finally taken into captivity, first by the Assyrians, who scattered the 10 tribes of the kingdom of Israel, who hence became "lost", and finally the Babylonians, who captured remaining Judah, and relocated them to Babylon, in the sixth century BC.
It was at this time, instead of repenting for their paganism, that an "interpretation" was created, which instead assimilated the worship of the dying-god, or Lucifer, in addition to incorporating astrology and Babylonian magic.
Along with the Livingstone you excerpted for the post, do you believe all of Livingston'e assertions to be true?
Staying focused on these historical assertions and interpretations, i.e., the vast period preceding the French Revolution, are you satisfied with Livingstone's descriptive and explanatory detail?
Does he prove what he contends to your full and complete satisfaction?
"Along with the Livingstone you excerpted for the post, do you believe all of Livingston'e assertions to be true?" CNu
Ahhh.
Oh. That's what you are talking about.
OK.
1) I don't "believe" anything.
2) I simply accept the best available explanations. When I encounter a more plausible explanation, I'm all ears.
3) I find value in many of Livingstone's assertions.
Do I find Livingstone's interpretation of the term "occult" exhaustive and all consuming? No.
Do I think Livingstone is an accomplished scholar and thinker? Yes.
For example, his scholarship and intellectual courage displayed in his assertions regarding the nefarious purposes of the Wahhabis of Saudi Arabia deserves applause.
His assertion that the Saudi royal family are really crypto-Jews, placed on the throne by British Intelligence to serve Western interests and to undermine Islam, is quite compelling.
If you are aware of a more worthy explanation to the historical roots of Wahhabism ... drop a link.
"Staying focused on these historical assertions and interpretations, i.e., the vast period preceding the French Revolution, are you satisfied with Livingstone's descriptive and explanatory detail?" CNu
I find Livingstone's assertions that the movers and shakers of the blood bath known as The French Revolution adopted symbolism and language of occult secret societies quite plausible.
"Does he prove what he contends to your full and complete satisfaction?"
No.
No one ever has.
Except God.
quoth Livingstone;The Israelites first adopted this practice in the incident of the Golden Calf, and then after they entered Palestine, by imitating their subjects, the Canaanites. They Canaanites, in turn, according to a careful reading of the Bible, were descendants of the Anakim, or the hybrid race of the pre-Flood era, with whom the Israelites also extensively intermarried with.
Ironically, there is a current thread on the AEL (ancient egyptian language) discussion list called Maa-kheru - in which a Greek scholar Dimitrios Trimijopulos - is eating some plantation egyptologists alive. In particular, he's taking apart some old and corny Wallace Budge interpretations of "m(w)t" - "enemies of the gods"/"giants". In so many mythologies there are giants, gods, and men but although there are gods and so many types of men in the funerary texts, the giants are missing? The giants who are the "enemies of the gods". Chapter 30 of the The Book of Coming [or Going] Forth By Day (wrongly known as the "Book of the Dead") describes the enemies of the gods (literally the enemies of the priests) either being devoured by Amenta, or, being exiled to the west.
In the Hebrew tradition the name of the giants, Nephilim, means "the fallen ones."
It was not aliens, watchers, angels - none of that purely contrived fiction that Livingstone perpetuates in his Dying God mythos - who were intermarrying in the 6th century BC, rather, it was exhiled Egyptians who had gotten at political cross-purposes with the theocracy and survived by exiting egypt to its western colony in Canaan.
2) I simply accept the best available explanations. When I encounter a more plausible explanation, I'm all ears.
If you want to know about the history of the Jews, there is no better and no better documented source material than Freke and Gandy - who take it all to pieces.
Not only will you leave Freke and Gandy's books with a fully revised understanding of the Dying God mythos, you will also leave with a fully revised understanding of imitative primitives who called themselves Hebrews and who manufactured their "history" out of whole clothe so as not to seem like the backward goatherders they truly were.
That said, Freke and Gandy fall fully and completely down with their corny interpretation of what transpired in the Mysteries. While I believe they know better than what they write about the Mysteries, I am convinced that they're afraid to cross that line into truthful explication of what their scholarship has disclosed. Very, very few are willing to cross the line into that still remarkably controversial territory.
It remains the plantation's strictest taboo...,
Post a Comment