It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by fordrew
Originally posted by 13th Zodiac
You seem to be very selective in your replys Lucifer777.
it is because he is a troll. Trolls tend to do that.
Originally posted by Tamahu
We obviously disagree on many things, which is fine. Although let me just say that the Gnostic Movement distances itself from the Roman Catholic church, even if you think there are similarities (well, there are some similarities, only because the Roman Catholic church decided to keep from the Gnostic doctrine what fit their agenda, and discarded the rest; kind of like Aleister Crowley did).
, Samael Aun Weor did not get the Gnostic motto of Thelema from "Aleister Crowley".
In this moment, Francois Rabelais and Huiracocha (Arnold Krumm-Heller), and Matthew, Luke, Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Saint Augustine, and ..Dr. Peithmann (Basilides) all come to mind.
Originally posted by Tamahu
Also, Samael Aun Weor did not get the Gnostic motto of Thelema from "Aleister Crowley".
Samael Aun Weor on the Demiurge
Sacraments of the Gnostic Church
Originally posted by Tamahu
I'm well aware of the many criticisms of the teachings of Samael Aun Weor (he never said that Samael Aun Weor is merely a pen name he chose. He said that Samael is the actual name of his Inner Being).
Nevertheless, in my studies and experience, the views and practices of Samael Aun Weor, Huiracocha (Arnold Krumm-Heller), and H.H. the Dalai Lama are in agreement with the teachings of the Great White Brotherhood, also known as the White Lodge; and are therefore in agreement with the teachings of Eliphas Levi, Dion Fortune, Manly P. Hall 33°, Swami Sivananda, S.L. MacGregor Mathers, Rudolf Steiner, Franz Hartmann, H.P. Blavatsky, etc.
As can be seen at the Sacred-Sex.org website already mentioned, the Gnostic Teachings of Huiracocha (Arnold Krumm-Heller) and the Sexual Tantra teachings (Karmamudra) of H.H. the Dalai Lama, are in full agreement with the Tantric teachings of Samael Aun Weor.
The many pseudo-occult schools of mediums/channelers, and also the teachings of Papus, Aleister Crowley, and Spencer Lewis, would lead the neophyte into staying trapped in desire and the nine spheres of Klipoth.
The mentioned "Ecclesia Gnostica" is less concerned with Gnosis and is more concerned with Gnosticism. Whereas actual Gnosis is about practice, direct experience, and comprehension of the Tree of Knowledge (Daath related to what in Buddhism is called Jnana (Yeshe), Prajna (Sherab), Vidya (Rigpa), etc.); not just reading and believing in the Nag Hammadi or Dead Sea Scrolls, doing a few rituals, and then calling ourselves "Gnostic".
Originally posted by Masonic Light
Crowley was ordained a bishop in apostolic succession through the Papus lineage. His holy order therefore appears to be valid, although of course Crowley was not himself a Christian, and anyone claiming orders through his line are therefore doubtful.
Originally posted by Masonic Light
I would argue that absolutely none of these persons taught the doctrines and practices of Rodriguez.
The website is a pro-Weor one, so naturally in order to propagate its doctrines, it will attempt to link them with those of others who are better known and well-respected.
Actually, there seems to be much more danger in following the teachings of Rodriguez (a/k/a Samael Aun Weor). For example, see here.
Gnosis is the spirit that illuminates Gnosticism, and its very root. Teachings foreign to it are not "Gnostic", regardless of what any self-claimed leader or "Gnostic" may say.
Originally posted by beebs
reply to post by 13th Zodiac
WTF are you guys talking about?!
His behavior is opposite of troll behavior. Trolls only stop in for one or two line posts with ad hominem type attacks, they never carefully compose lengthy posts with a plethora of information for discussion.
And, this is his thread...
Originally posted by beebs
reply to post by 13th Zodiac
WTF are you guys talking about?!
His behavior is opposite of troll behavior. Trolls only stop in for one or two line posts with ad hominem type attacks, they never carefully compose lengthy posts with a plethora of information for discussion.
And, this is his thread...
Originally posted by Masonic Light
Victor Rodriguez (pen name "Samael Aun Weor") and Aleister Crowley shared at least one major thing in common: Both appropriated the term "Gnostic" (and started their own "Gnostic" groups) without either of them actually being one.
Crowley was ordained a bishop in apostolic succession through the Papus lineage. His holy order therefore appears to be valid, although of course Crowley was not himself a Christian, and anyone claiming orders through his line are therefore doubtful.
I am not aware of Rodriguez ever having been ordained in apostolic succession with Gnostic authority.
Originally posted by Lucifer777
Just as Babalon replaces the old Aeon archetype of the sexually repressed High Priestess, so too does the Beast (i.e., Aleister Crowley) replace Old Aeon archetype of the desexualised High Priest or “prophet.” The new archetype is the antithesis of the celibate or monogamous male; he is essentially a highly sexualised priest for whom nothing is forbidden, and rather than being a submissive and possessed priest, he is rather a “Master” of the magickal arts and seeks dominion over the daemons he summons. This is not a priest who bows down and grovels, but he who takes control, who makes demands and who seeks to insert his will into history and to direct and change history in accordance with his will. He is the esoteric form of the “ubermensch (superior man),” rather than a grovelling, whining, praying slave in fear of phantoms, and he is the ultimate and fearless enemy of the psychopathic God of the religionists.
Originally posted by OnTheLevel213
Esoteric Christian organizations seem to have made a trend of this, especially the SRIA. Any idea why?
Originally posted by 13th Zodiac
You seem to be very selective in your replys Lucifer777.
Originally posted by 13th Zodiac
Friend I could debate you the right and wrongs of your post forever but it is not my place .I like the analogy of the bull and the ox , sexual (clinical term only) energy is indeed the life force as life springs from it .But of what quality ? Everything has to do with intent .Such as Christianity and witchcraft which are regarded as oppersites , however one prays and one incants .Yet these are the exact same act's , the utterance of mantra's.It is all about intentions .
To me by definition Sex has dual meaning , there is sex as in the clinical definition of the act and sex (lust) as in selfish ,self gratify hatred of self and others ( lack of respect for others energy [parasiting from the host's energies ] ) . Then there is emotional love that is mutually forfilling and giving (equal and balanced ) shared through the same physical act ( clinical expression) . Do you see the dualality here ? It is all about intent .You can have quality relations or pointless ones . The womb is sacred friend and is to be respected .If you disagree then you would have no problem with every male parasite feeding from the womb of your mother,sister or daughter , NO?
Originally posted by Lucifer777
On Polyamory (many lovers), the Sin of Monogamy and the "sins of restriction"
I should point out that I take the position that polyamory is the natural human state. This should not be confused with rampant promiscuity; there is absolutely nothing wrong with casual sex and it is entirely natural, but the international polyamory movement is not about rampant promiscuity; it is about having long time or even lifelong loving relationships with more than one person, and this I believe to be our natural state which would produce the New Heaven.
We are not merely creatures of lust but also of love, and especially the female of the species is incurably romantic; this is her nature; she wishes to be loved, desired and worshipped; we are all designed to be addicted to love; we are complex creatures of emotion. There is a great deal of difference between the kind of loving and erotic relationships in polyamorous communities such as the OSHO community and the goings on with sex slaves in a Turkish brothel; the former is a Tantric polyamorous, spiritualist community of consensal love; the later is an unspeakable abomination against exploited women and brute male savagery; it is essentially "rape" and sex slavery. A man or a woman who make a free will decision to take a person as a lover, whether temporarily or permanently, devoid of any economic motives is not a slave, but rather merely following their nature.
....More on: www.polyamorysociety.org...
schooloftantra.net...
Quality relationships produces quality offspring raised balanced by male/female - mother/father.
Poor relations produce poor children typically raised by only one sex or the other or even strangers when unwanted and dumped .These children are normally ,hurt,angry and disfunctional in their own relationships if they can hold one .
Now for the reason I actually intended to reply to this post. You speak of nature and natural instincts for sex, saying that monogimist relations are a unatural burden of God and religion .What abought all the wild species of animals that are said to have no concept of God or religion yet have monogimist relationships for life ?Can you explain this ?
.... but can you see that you too are trapped by your own ideology ?
Originally posted by Lucifer777
This obsession with the fictional Jesus is just infuriating; the fictional Jesus is portrayed as a fake healer and fake miracle worker who promoted strict adherence to the primitive Bronze age laws of Moses. He was an archetypal primitive religious fanatic and the tribal deity god he revered and claimed to love was a genocidal human hating psychopath. Same old; same old.
Lux
Blasphemy, Heresy etc.
21Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgement: 22But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgement:
27Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: 28But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.
31It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement: 32But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.
38Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: 39But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
43Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. 44But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;