On the Kabbalah. On Esoteric “Secrets.” A Luciferian Perspective. On the Prophet of the New Aeon

Originally posted by no1smootha

Originally posted by Lucifer777
Similarly with Lodges like the O.T.O., which was started by the Freemason Theodor Reuss and whose rituals were later modified by Aleister Crowley. Just as Freemasons claim to represent an ancient legacy, that of the medieval Knight's Templars, so too did Reuss's O.T.O., claim to represent the revival of a more ancient legacy, that of the 18th century Bavarian Illuminati, and I think that this may in part be where the modern "Illuminati" conspiracy theory derives from; however just like many of the new modern Masonic cults and esoteric societies formed in last century or so, the the O.T.O. had relatively recent origins.

Most contemporary Freemasons don't to make claims of an ancient lineage from the Knights Templar.

I am entirely aware that Freemasonry is a cult of bizarre conspiracy theorists who simply dress up in pantomime fancy dress costumes with silly uniforms and hats and in ridiculous parodies of medieval Knight's Templars' costumes. As previously stated, the modern Freemasons were allegedly founded by a few drunks in a pub in the 18th century. Nevertheless there are a number of titles written by pseudo-historians and tin-foil hat conspiracy theorists who are Masonic authors themselves such as Michael Baigent, Richard Lomas and Stephen Knight who try to make the case that their cult has an ancient legacy. This is entirely common; many Christian cults, irrespective of whether they were formed centuries ago or a few days ago claim to represent the legacy of ancient religious fanatics, and Freemasonry is no different.

It was certainly in vogue in the past to make such fantastic claims, to the Templars, to Noah, to the builders of the pyramids and ziggurats. or even to Adam. However, most modern Freemasons acknowledge these are mythological and allegorical origin stories not grounded in fact.

I am not sure how you can assess the views of "most" modern Freemasons in such a way, since the most widely published aformentioned Masonic authors who are in the professional conspiracy theory business seem to take a very different view; I would not assume that most Freemasons have an academic understanding of the term "historicity," since the most widely published conspiracy theorists who are Masons appear to be rather popular with the Masons themselves, and this is unsurprising for a cult of silly old fools who believe that stuffing whipped cream and strawberries in the underwear of initiates of advanced degrees and making them perform simulated oral sex on a hot dog is some ancient and holy rite which transforms them into "nobles (aristocrats);" but then again almost half the US population seem to believe that Jesus will return to save them, and the world of cult religion is essentially a world of "stupidity" irrationality and bizarre conspiracy theoryism.

Originally posted by Lucifer777Crowley, for example, referred to American Scottish Rite Masons as "so many pieces of rather nasty dirt," and wrote that " even our eighth degree wipes its arse with the thirty third. As you and I need toilet paper, they can give us or sell us their dirty sheep skin." This kind of rivalry between various esoteric cults, is rather like the rivalry between the various sects of the multi-billion dollar "Jesus" business, each claiming to have a better salvation product, or a more established "older" product; it is simply the lunatic ramblings of religious fanatics, though certainly I consider the O.T.O., which is essentially an Aleister Crowley fan club to be among the more progressive of such societies.

Crowley was naively trying to get a seat on the Supreme Council of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite in the Northern Jurisdiction in the USA by suggesting the Memphis and Misraim degree system was superior to the AASR.

"My point about our 33rd is this, that we cannot admit that any one soever is higher in Masonry than ourselves ... My idea is to hele the breach with Memphis and Mizraim; these rites, though messy, keep going. Now I am Patriarch Grand Administrator General, and can be S.G.M.G. at the election, which, by the way is overdue. Now I propose that the Scottish Rite absorb M. and M., conferring all its degrees formally upon their 32nds. Our price for this is seats on the S.C. of the Scottish in America. Otherwise, we use our energy to run every rite, Scottish and the rest, on our own ... Remember, we don't admit that their rite is any good until it has our O.K. Theirs is a forged charter."

Yes that is a good example of where one esoteric society slags off a competing esoteric society and considers them to have a "forged" charter because it is not approved of by them. From the perspective of the academic study of religious cultism, there is no such a thing as "true" Masonry and "fake Masonry" or a "genuine" or "forged" charter, since religion is simply a human construct and as religions grow they tend to become sectarian (to branch off into competing sects) and compete in the multi-billion dollar cult religion marketplace, each cult claiming to have a better religious product to sell. It is all rather Monty-Pythonesque



Above: "splitters"



Above: Militant Messianic fanaticism


His Imperial Satanic Majesty

Lucifer

Originally posted by Lucifer777I am entirely aware that Freemasonry is a cult of bizarre conspiracy theorists who simply dress up in pantomime fancy dress costumes with silly uniforms and hats. As previously stated, the modern Freemasons were allegedly founded by a few drunks in a pub in the 18th century. Nevertheless there are a number of titles written by pseudo-historians and tin-foil hat conspiracy theorists who are Masonic authors themselves such as Michael Baigent, Richard Lomas and Stephen Knight who try to make the case that their cult has an ancient legacy. This is entirely common; many Christian cults, irrespective of whether they were formed centuries ago or a few days ago claim to represent the legacy of ancient religious fanatics, and Freemasonry is no different.

I am not sure how you can assess the views of "most" modern Freemasons in such a way, since the most widely published aformentioned Masonic authors who are in the professional conspiracy theory business seem to take a very different view

They may not be as popular or as widely read by the general public as Baigent, Knight or Lomas, but I am basing my assessment on the number of Masonic scholars often published by Scottish Rite Research Society in Heredom, and other similar Fraternal publications who think that Freemasonry is not of ancient origin not on the number of books sold in popular presses.

"There shall in that time be rumors of things going astray, erm, and there shall be a great confusion as to where things really are, and nobody will really know where lieth those little things with the sort of raffia-work base, that has an attachment. At that time, a friend shall lose his friend's hammer, and the young shall not know where lieth the things possessed by their fathers that their fathers put there only just the night before, about eight o'clock."

Originally posted by no1smootha

Originally posted by Lucifer777I am entirely aware that Freemasonry is a cult of bizarre conspiracy theorists who simply dress up in pantomime fancy dress costumes with silly uniforms and hats. As previously stated, the modern Freemasons were allegedly founded by a few drunks in a pub in the 18th century. Nevertheless there are a number of titles written by pseudo-historians and tin-foil hat conspiracy theorists who are Masonic authors themselves such as Michael Baigent, Richard Lomas and Stephen Knight who try to make the case that their cult has an ancient legacy. This is entirely common; many Christian cults, irrespective of whether they were formed centuries ago or a few days ago claim to represent the legacy of ancient religious fanatics, and Freemasonry is no different.

I am not sure how you can assess the views of "most" modern Freemasons in such a way, since the most widely published aformentioned Masonic authors who are in the professional conspiracy theory business seem to take a very different view

They may not be as popular or as widely read by the general public as Baigent, Knight or Lomas, but I am basing my assessment on the number of Masonic scholars often published by Scottish Rite Research Society in Heredom, and other similar Fraternal publications who think that Freemasonry is not of ancient origin not on the number of books sold in popular presses.

"There shall in that time be rumors of things going astray, erm, and there shall be a great confusion as to where things really are, and nobody will really know where lieth those little things with the sort of raffia-work base, that has an attachment. At that time, a friend shall lose his friend's hammer, and the young shall not know where lieth the things possessed by their fathers that their fathers put there only just the night before, about eight o'clock."

edit on 9-5-2011 by no1smootha because: (no reason given)

Almost every political or religious cult has it's apologists who represent an "intelligensia" who are often highly educated. Even the racist far Right "British National Party" is led by a person whose a Cambrige degree in Law and is a member of the European Parliament; however he is not representative of the BNP since they are mostly thugs and football hooligans.

Similarly, while there may be a highly educated "intelligensia" of Masons, many of them appear to military grunts, drunks, conspiracy theorists, gangster Capitalists and the kind of people who would probably consider stuffing whipped cream and strawberries down the underwear of initiates to be a sacred and holy rite. My impression of the Freemasons on the Internet who are Masonic apologists has generally been very poor; they generally act like hooligans in debates, and deception, cult denilaism and obfuscation seems to be their standard debating strategy.

I did attend a lecture at London's Canonbury Masonic Research Centre ( www.canonbury.ac.uk... ) where the professional Masonic conspiracy theorist Michael Baigent was also in attendance; Canonbury seems to consider itself to be the "intelligensia" of British Masonry, but I was rather dissapointed and sat through a two hour lecture by a young lawyer and conspiracy theorist on how wonderful the Knight's Templar were and how wonderful their loan sharking scam was. When I later challenged him on the diabolical nature of loan sharking and Third World debt slavery and the untold suffering it causes for the profits of a tiny minority of bankers, he transformed into a humanitarian and claimed that he believed that all Third World debt should be cancelled; however such views are most certainly not representative of his economic masters and the bankers, gangster Capitalists and British Imperialists of the City of London; I don't think that he would get very far with the Masonic Lloyd's of London if he mentioned such heresy in an interview. It is unsurprising that a cult consisting of 21st century loan sharks, imperialistic military grunts and gangster Capitalists would rever a cult of medieval loan sharks, and militant, genocidal, imperialistic holy warriors and religoius fanatics.

Holy holy.

HIs Imperial Satanic Majesty.

Lucifer [b/]

Originally posted by no1smootha

Originally posted by Lucifer777I am entirely aware that Freemasonry is a cult of bizarre conspiracy theorists who simply dress up in pantomime fancy dress costumes with silly uniforms and hats. As previously stated, the modern Freemasons were allegedly founded by a few drunks in a pub in the 18th century. Nevertheless there are a number of titles written by pseudo-historians and tin-foil hat conspiracy theorists who are Masonic authors themselves such as Michael Baigent, Richard Lomas and Stephen Knight who try to make the case that their cult has an ancient legacy. This is entirely common; many Christian cults, irrespective of whether they were formed centuries ago or a few days ago claim to represent the legacy of ancient religious fanatics, and Freemasonry is no different.

I am not sure how you can assess the views of "most" modern Freemasons in such a way, since the most widely published aformentioned Masonic authors who are in the professional conspiracy theory business seem to take a very different view

They may not be as popular or as widely read by the general public as Baigent, Knight or Lomas, but I am basing my assessment on the number of Masonic scholars often published by Scottish Rite Research Society in Heredom, and other similar Fraternal publications who think that Freemasonry is not of ancient origin not on the number of books sold in popular presses.

"There shall in that time be rumors of things going astray, erm, and there shall be a great confusion as to where things really are, and nobody will really know where lieth those little things with the sort of raffia-work base, that has an attachment. At that time, a friend shall lose his friend's hammer, and the young shall not know where lieth the things possessed by their fathers that their fathers put there only just the night before, about eight o'clock."

edit on 9-5-2011 by no1smootha because: (no reason given)

Almost every political or religious cult has it's apologists who represent an "intelligensia," who are often highly educated. Even the racist far Right "British National Party" is led by a person who has a Cambrige degree in Law and is a member of the European Parliament; however he is not representative of the BNP since they are mostly thugs and football hooligans.

Similarly, while there may be a highly educated "intelligensia" of Masonic cultists, they don't appear to bne representative of Masonicn cultists in general; many of whom appear to be an assortment of military grunts, drunks, conspiracy theorists, gangster Capitalists and the kind of people who would probably consider stuffing whipped cream and strawberries down the underwear of initiates to be a sacred and holy rite and Michael Baigent's professional conspiracy theoryism to be "history books." My impression of the Freemasons on the Internet who are Masonic apologists has generally been very poor; they generally act like hooligans in debates, and deception, cult denilaism and obfuscation seems to be their standard debating strategy.

I did attend a lecture at London's Canonbury Masonic Research Centre ( www.canonbury.ac.uk... ) where the professional Masonic conspiracy theorist Michael Baigent was also in attendance; Canonbury seems to consider itself to be the "intelligensia" of British Masonry, but I was rather dissapointed and sat through a rather dull two hour lecture by a young lawyer and conspiracy theorist on how wonderful the Knight's Templar were and how wonderful their loan sharking scam was, followed by an open invitation to the audience to consider applying for cult membership in the Masons; so much for the "Masons don't recruit" myth. When I later challenged him on the diabolical nature of loan sharking and Third World debt slavery and the untold suffering it causes for benefit of the profits of a tiny minority of bankers, he transformed into a humanitarian and claimed that he believed that all Third World debt should be cancelled; however such views are most certainly not representative of his economic masters and the bankers, gangster Capitalists and British Imperialists of the City of London; I don't think that he would get very far with the Masonic Lloyd's of London if he mentioned such heresy in an interview.

It is unsurprising that a cult consisting of 21st century loan sharks, imperialistic military grunts and gangster Capitalists would rever a cult of medieval loan sharks, and militant, genocidal, imperialistic holy warriors and religious fanatics.

Holy holy.

HIs Imperial Satanic Majesty.

Lucifer [b/]

edit on 9-5-2011 by Lucifer777 because: Formatting

Lucy, I'm curious to where you got that picture of the three men in costume?

Why would we hold amity with someone who doesn't follow by the same rules and traditions we do, and is in many cases the opposite of what we do.

Whoever authored that piece that says the Scottish Rite is a better Templar body is misleading nor do they remember their history that the Scottish Rite was founded in America by 11 York Rite Masons. This though is also the OPINION of one Mason.

I like how you omitted this one piece:

I have to advise you that in the Scottish Rite you get more degrees and more "bang for your buck." But, both are wonderful and neither should be avoided.

You should also not confuse Freemasons from Scotland and the Scottish Rite (which degrees such as the Lodge of Perfection actually originated in France). And the assurances of you mean nothing.

Yes very interesting OP post as I have been on the path of the Zelator for sometime now. But what I hold important is the idea of not make a judgment based on what this world has taught me but on my Internal Guidance system, which invariably makes one listen to other peoples understandings in a neutral way. As I understand everything in this reality is neutral until one prescribes a projected definition on to it.
Lucifer777 you might be interested in this link if you already done know about it which I know you probably do if you have studied up an Aleister Crowley A.'.A.'.

Originally posted by KSigMason
reply to post by Lucifer777

 

You are a vortex of academic compromise.

I love this statement!!!!

Originally posted by CIAGypsy

Originally posted by KSigMason
reply to post by Lucifer777

 

You are a vortex of academic compromise.

I love this statement!!!!

You don't have to agree with everyone but you made a mochery of this thread.
It's what I call trolling judging by your commenting.

You are a vortex of academic compromise.

Same for this guy, what a bunch of off topic crap.

The Kaballah was given to us by the fallen angel Raziel, that goes to show you why the Zionist Illuminati love their Kaballistic magic so much. Stop being picky with your spirituality. You don't want regular coffee, you want iced coffee with whipped topping and chocolate shavings and cream and chocolate syrup. Same with the way people seek spirituality, they go in all kinds of ridiculous directions and lose their path to the truth. God is love, god wants you to live a humble human life and not worry about spirituality, but good deeds and good values, just like he wants you to worry about being polite more than being able to get that "high".

Originally posted by MonarchSlave
The Kaballah was given to us by the fallen angel Raziel, that goes to show you why the Zionist Illuminati love their Kaballistic magic so much.

It's true the kabalah came from the fallen ones, they left it. It's the snake in the garden story.
It is the knowlege of god but without god's permission, further more I find them to be extremists.
All the roiality is hiding behind the occult, they are "SAT"-"AN" ists, very soon they are going to have to answer for what they have done, it's soon, once you know what you are doing you are responsible for your deeds.

reply to post by Lucifer777


just le me ask a question: if god is our creator, and we rebel against him, thing aren't going to be... er... sketchy?

Originally posted by mutante
reply to post by Lucifer777

 

just le me ask a question: if god is our creator, and we rebel against him, thing aren't going to be... er... sketchy?

As Richard Dawkins has argued, the question of whether the universe has creators or a creator or not, is a scientific question and thus far no scientist has produced any evidence of these creators or creator.

Thus with regards to "rebellion" against "God" I am not referring to the scientific question of whether the universe has creators or a creator; I am merly referring to the anthropomorphic defintions of a creator which have been proposed by religious fanatics over the aeons; much of which seem to be just the lunatic ramblings of religious schizophrenics.

Since this is predominately an American forum and the Americans are predominately "Biblical" religious fanatics, the American god is usually the primitive and savage Bronze Age tribal of the Biblical god who is a militant, genocidal, human hating, tyrannical and bigoted lunatic. I am not suggesting in any way that this ancient defintion of a tribal deity has anything in common with the hypothetical creator or creators of the universe; similarly with the Islamic and Vedic definitions of deities. When a Muslim suggests that "there is only one God" or a Christan suggests that there are only three gods, or a Hindu suggests that there are many gods, these statements may or may not be scientifically true, but it does not necessarily follow that the gods can be defined as the ancient religious fanatics who authored such texts defined them. If a Christian for example, wishes to present the argument that the Creator of the universe is the primitive, genocidal war god of the Bible, such an argument is based on absolutely no evidence whatseover; similarly with the ramblings of all other religious fanatics.

The argument for the existence of the various definitions of the gods based on "religious hypnosis and indoctrination" is probably the strongest argument for the existence of the gods; the gods exist in the minds of the believer, simply because they were often indoctrinated and hypnotised since birth to believe in such defintions of deities. If a person believes that the gods are genocidal, blood sacrifice cult bigots, such as the biblical deity, then that concept becomes "existant" in the mind of the believer, but it is purely subjective, in the same way that a child's "imaginary friend" or Santa Claus exists as a concept in their minds.

Lux

___________

Originally posted by pepsi78

It's true the kabalah came from the fallen ones, they left it. It's the snake in the garden story.

I refer you to the OP with regards to the identity of the serpent. The modern Kabbalah has developed over many centuries and there are numerous Kabbalistic metaphysicians, cultists and religious fantics with varying interpretations; the OP is purely presented from a Crowleyist perspective, which is a rather modern perspective and it is considered to be an entirely heretical and diabolical interpretation by many Judaic religious fanatics who have their own interpretation, however what is "diabolical and heretical" to a religious fanatic makes no difference to me.

With regards to the "fallen ones" we cannot speak about this scientifically and with absolute certainty, however there is a mass array of literature such as Erich von Däniken writings which offer argument and evidence that it is "we" human beings who are the aliens here and that we "fell to earth from heaven." Some" of the claims in Von Daniken's writings have been shown to be false, and he is generally ridiculed by academics and historians, however I don't think that the baby can be thrown out with the bathwater; I beleive that the position that we arrived here from somewhere else in the universe, and that we are a genetic experiment gone wrong, has some merit. If there is intelligent life in the universe, I suspect that they would probably consider us to be vile savages and barbarians.

Lux

reply to post by Lucifer777

Regarding about the kabalah and the fallen angels, aliens or call them whatever you wish it's accurate.
There are just too many stories that match, in the bible, the book of enoch, the Summerian culture and other similar interesting books that connect the same story.
The knowlege of the tree of life was broth by them. Humanity was something else, and did not fall from anywhere. At best humanity is a mix of them and god's nature. It is the anunnaki and the god AN, maybe they predate summerian culture and the summerians just tell the story, one thing is for sure the knowlege of the kabalah comes from them.There are drawings on clay from the summerians depicting the very same tree of life, identical to the kabalah tree.

Satan was and is a representation of the Annunaki, Satan was put in charge of the earth but went wrong, by teaching and showing people how to do advanced things that they were suppose to learn on their own.
As a result people learned things in a wrong way and got corrupted and fell from god's grace, along with the
"AN"gels that were "AN"unnaki if the name is not suggestive enough for you.


The Annunaki is a representation of the Roman Empire, it is the enlighten ones that were put in charge to take care of humanity but they messed up. The Annunaki or the Light side (male), etc, the red pillar. (not to call all the creatures of light bad, just a part of them who chose to) Who chose to game people, to make a game out of everything.

Simply put Satan is the one who sits on the throne and runs earth, it is the Roman Empire but also others that are not part of the roman empire, Asiatic in nature.

It's all regarded to the god AN from the Summeri"AN" culture, Sat"AN" (he who sits on the throne and rules)
The very ones you hate so much(part of the Rom"AN" empire) are in fact Sat"AN" ists, masonry included.

If you consider your self a satanist then why bash your own ?
The Rom"AN" empire is a Satanist institution.

All the knowlege humanity has regarding the occult was left by Satan.

But not to worry when they unite it will all collapse (god kicks some ass)
Frankly I don't know what is taking so long for them to unite and to form this new word order. Greedy bastards.

I'm sorry lucifer but there is a god, it's the force, it does not interfere until the glass is full, it let's it's creation do what it wants within a set of limit. Additionaly it puts creatures such as you call angles to do it's job and teach things, so there is order to it's creation and that there is learning the proper way and evolution is respected so it's creation does not grow up to be bastards that don't care at all.


Just maybe there will be grace and all is forgotten but I doubt it, just look what humanity have become, you have to wonder who thought them this way, I think this is the roman system, order by brute force, desire, treason and asasination and don't forget "pride". Humanity is lost and they are trying to fix it "The roman way" making even a bigger monster. I think tho people may wake up in the end and notice the mess they are in.
If there is any way to salvage humanity I would.

You seem like a nice guy, but you are miss guided, I pity you, you don;t know on what side of the fence you are.

Originally posted by pepsi78
The very ones you hate so much(part of the Rom"AN" empire) are in fact Sat"AN" ists, masonry included.

A convenient statement that does not take into account people who do not believe in the fairy tale of Satan.

A convenient statement that does not take into account people who do not believe in the fairy tale of Satan.

You have your opinion, frankly I don't care what you beilive.

Sat-An.
Sat word meaning
verb: Past tense and past participle of sit.

All part of the Rom-"AN" way, Sat-"AN" sits on the throne.

Let's get to siting on the earth and on the throne, commander and chief as they say in the roman empire.

I can see why you are offended by looking at your avatar.

Originally posted by pepsi78

A convenient statement that does not take into account people who do not believe in the fairy tale of Satan.

You have your opinion, frankly I don't care what you beilive.

Sat-An.

Sat word meaning.

verb
Past tense and past participle of sit.

All part of the Rom-"AN" way, Sat-"AN" sits on the throne.

Let's get to siting on the earth and on the throne.

I can see why you are offended by your avatar.

Saturnalius was just one of many Roman Deities, and a planetary archetype, and Christians celebrate Saturnalius on Christmas day, and believe that their religious fanatic of a Saviour was born while the Sun was in Capitcorn, and Capricorn is ruled by Saturn.

The astrological archetype of Saturn, just like all astrological archetypes, has both malevolent and benevolent qualities, just as all persons who were born while the sun was in Capricorn cannot be considered to be either "evil" or philosophical Satanists.

Saturn is also portrayed as "Death" or the "Grim Reaper," separating the wheat from the chaff and is a symbol of judgement which the Christians have adopted for their fictional Messiah and which I have adopted also since I feel morally obliged to sit in judgement on the Christian fanatics and to seek to incite their global eradication.

Originally posted by pepsi78
reply to post by Lucifer777

 

Regarding about the kabalah and the fallen angels, aliens or call them whatever you wish it's accurate.
There are just too many stories that match, in the bible, the book of enoch, the Summerian culture and other similar interesting books that connect the same story.
The knowlege of the tree of life was broth by them.

Well this is just a presentation of bizarre conspiracy theories as if fact.


Lucifer
The Grim Reaper.

Well this is just a presentation of bizarre conspiracy theories as if fact.

No it's not a conspiracy theory it's a fact.

From the Sumeri"AN" culture.

The astrological archetype of Saturn

The assesment of Saturn is Saturday, the Sabath before being changed to sunday as the 7th day.
The 7th day where you take a break and "sit" or "rest" is regarded to "sat"urn.
Saturn, Saturday, Sabath, number SEVEN.

Satan is the crown or better put I'm sorry "was" the crown and put by god on the earth to do the job. The 7th is the commander the crown.

So it's "SAT-AN"

You do know who wears a crown don't you ? It's a king or a queen.
But Satan messed up and did not do the job god asked to do, because of too much "PRIDE"
Shortly put Satan messed up.


I don't know since you are a satanist maybe you should join them.

I stand correct when saying.

Sat-An.
Sat word meaning.
verb
Past tense and past participle of sit.
All part of the Rom-"AN" way, Sat-"AN" sits on the throne.
Let's get to siting on the earth and on the throne.

Originally posted by pepsi78
You have your opinion, frankly I don't care what you beilive.

That is fairly obvious from all the disjointed ramblings you have made over the years.

Sat-An.
Sat word meaning
verb: Past tense and past participle of sit.

All part of the Rom-"AN" way, Sat-"AN" sits on the throne.

More revisionist nonesense, that is not the root word(s) of the name Satan.

Let's get to siting on the earth and on the throne, commander and chief as they say in the roman empire.

It would actually be Principii or Emperator (hence the word empire, duh). They spoke Latin, not English.

I can see why you are offended by looking at your avatar.

Hardly. My avatar does not make pointless and historically inaccurate statements.