tMoA

~ The only Home on the Web You'll ever need ~


    Archangelic Queens of Heaven and the United States of the Solar System

    Share
    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7704
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: Archangelic Queens of Heaven and the United States of the Solar System

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Thu Mar 28, 2013 12:27 am

    magamud wrote:God is coming in his glory and people are burning. But the time is shortened for our sake. He is coming quickly...One is taken and one is left...
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=7Ll4qS4anGo[/youtube]
    I don't like the 'people are burning' part. Religion is so bloody and brutal -- but God is Love!! What's Wrong With This Picture??? The Old Testament, the Book of Revelation, the Crusades, the Inquisition, and the World Wars have a helluva lot in common. What's Wrong With This Picture?? If God didn't scare the hell out of people -- I wonder how many of them would go to church?? Humanity might be Exterminated by Divinity -- and a lot of religious people seem to think that would be a good thing!! What's Wrong With This Picture??


    Killer-Asteroids Piloted by Devil-Babies!! What's Wrong With This Picture??


    Last edited by orthodoxymoron on Fri Mar 29, 2013 7:58 pm; edited 5 times in total
    avatar
    magamud

    Posts : 1280
    Join date : 2012-06-17

    Re: Archangelic Queens of Heaven and the United States of the Solar System

    Post  magamud on Thu Mar 28, 2013 12:35 am

    Is that a sperm and a ovum?




    You are very obtuse Ortho...
    I do not think its easy, but the convenience of your dispositions lay in contradictions. Not that I want to move into your sandbox here. And what ground will you stand on? Its very convenient to stand on all grounds, but when the weight of the world falls on you where will you stand? This is the meaning of judgment. And how the players of the field use judgement when its in their favor. How indeed...
    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7704
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: Archangelic Queens of Heaven and the United States of the Solar System

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Thu Mar 28, 2013 1:30 pm

    magamud wrote: You are very obtuse Ortho...I do not think its easy, but the convenience of your dispositions lay in contradictions. Not that I want to move into your sandbox here. And what ground will you stand on? Its very convenient to stand on all grounds, but when the weight of the world falls on you where will you stand? This is the meaning of judgment. And how the players of the field use judgement when its in their favor. How indeed...
    I'd like to think that I would stand on the Principles and Concepts (the Spirit -- but not necessarily the Letter) found in the book Desire of Ages. I'd like to think that I'd do The Responsible Thing rather than Joseph Fletcher's version of The Loving Thing. I'd like to think that Responsible-Delegation to Responsible-Individuals (ten-thousand of them?) would occur in an Orderly-Manner (the United States of the Solar System?). I'd like to think that Law and Order would be First and Foremost (with a proper integration of Psychology, Ethics, Politics, Religion, Business, Law, Law-Enforcement, and the Military). But really -- who knows what the reality would be?! Perhaps Bad-People must be managed by Bad-Gods. Think long and hard about what I just said. I continue to suspect that EVERYONE'S Predicament might be worse than ANYONE thinks. I'd seriously prepare for the worst. I keep wondering if we might be dealing with Anna-Marcus v Erica-Chad -- as Two Archangels (with male and female aspects) in conflict with each other -- regarding the fate of Earth and Humanity?! What if Lucifer is a Non-Existent Straw-Man?? Lucifer: The Devil Who Never Was??!! I'm NOT saying this is the case -- but God, Jesus, Lucifer, Satan, et al -- might be VERY different than we think. This thing might be VERY complex and deceptive (on one level) -- but VERY simple and straightforward (on another level)!! I swear that when I met with the Ancient Egyptian Deity, I often felt as if I were dealing with Anna-Marcus. I often felt as if I were Erica-Chad. It was VERY strange and unsettling -- especially when discussing They Live at midnight, in a large, dark room -- and touching upon The Bottomless-Pit (while watching 'smoke' rise from water mixed with dry-ice)!! I'm being completely honest. What if we are dealing with Alien Dracs and Greys v Native Reptilians and Humans?? I have NO idea if this might be the case -- but it's something to think about -- and keep you awake at night!! http://www.themistsofavalon.net/t3240p870-archangelic-queens-of-heaven-and-the-united-states-of-the-solar-system (Read Reptilian Interview)

    Question: Have you a tail like normal reptiles?

    Answer: Do you see one? No, we have no visible tail. If you look at our skeleton, there is only a small rounded bone at the end of our spine behind the pelvis. This is a useless rudiment of the tail of our ancestors, but it is not visible from the outside. Oh, our embryos have tails during the first months of development, but these tails disappear before they are born. A tail makes only sense for a primitive species which tries to walk on two legs and must hold the balance with the tail, but our skeleton has changed during evolution and our spine is nearly the same shape as yours, so we need no tail to stay on two feet.

    Question: You said that you were born in a different way to us. Do you lay eggs?

    Answer: Yes, but not like your birds or primitive reptiles. Actually, the embryo grows in a protein liquid inside the mothers womb, but there is also an egg-shaped but very thin chalk hull around it, that fills the whole womb. The embryo inside this hull is completely autark from the mother's body and it has every substance it needs to develop inside this chalk hull. There is also a cord like your navel cord which is connected to a point hidden behind the backplates.

    Note by Stephanie Relfe: It is interesting that she says they have a cord like our umbilical cord, when everone 'knows' that all reptiles are born in an egg. This is probably true. We believe that draconians and reptilians are different species. (And there may be many different species of reptilians and draconians). The baby 'dragon' in a bottle which you can see towards the bottom of www.metatech.org has an umbilical cord attached to the front of its body. This baby is not from her species.

    When the baby is going to be born, the whole egg is pressed through the vagina covered in a slimy protein substance and the baby came out of this soft egg after some minutes. These two horns on our middle fingers were instinctively used from babies to break through the chalk hull to take their first breath. Our young are not so large as your babies when they were born, they are between 30 and 35 of your centimetres tall, the egg is around 40 centimetres tall (this is because our vagina is smaller then a human one) but we grow to a normal size of 1,60 to 1,80 metres.


    Notice who the "US" and "THEM" are depicted as being in the image shown below!! Again, I'd frankly be prepared for just about anything!! Don't EVER think that you've got this thing all figured-out. I KNOW that I do NOT have this madness all figured-out!! I continue to wonder about the Secret-Agent-Type who discussed the latest "V" Series with me (before it aired) -- Thanked Me in a Very Animated and Formal Manner (for I know not what) -- and then Spoke in a Very Hostile Manner About the "BITCHES". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nDN4kkIXAc It was VERY strange. I saw them a few months later -- and they seemed to be very quiet and unhappy. I didn't ask any questions. Through this whole thing -- I have attempted to be 'NEUTRAL' -- and this was long before I heard Townsend (Martin Sheen) tell Jesse Marcel to be 'NEUTRAL' when dealing with the subjects of Aliens and UFOs (in Roswell @ 01:10:00 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzLptiNfqoY ). What if Titan will be a Workers-Purgatory Prison-Planet?? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CSEMc1ZCads What if Earth will be Heaven on Earth?? What if NO Hell will exist in this Solar System?? ("Hell?? NO!! Not in My Solar System!!") What if a Proper Solar System Administrator should exhibit the Best Aspects of Anna -- with None of the Worst Characteristics?? I continue to desire a constructive relationship with the entire universe. A State of Harmony should exist (however strained this might be) -- rather than Star Wars in Perpetuity. Think long and hard about what I just said. But once again -- I have NO idea what the True State of Affairs Are Throughout the Universe. The Reality Would be Determinitive Relative to Policy and Practice. In the Near-Term I Suspect That Things Will Go to Hell -- No Matter Who Rules and No Matter What We Do. In the Long-Term I Have NO Idea.

    Remember in that old episode of Dr. Who -- The Five Doctors -- When the High-Council gives Dr. Who Supreme Authority over 'Something or Other' he immediately turns the authority over to the Queen of Gallifrey (or whoever she was) and goes on yet another mission to save 'Something or Other' or 'Someone or Other'. What if the New-Dude made a few reforms -- and basically retained most of the Old-Guard?? Continuity and Evolutionary-Change are Somewhat Important (are they not?) -- but what the hell do I know?? Taking the Next Best Steps seems to be much more important than Executing the Old-Guard. It seems to me, that at the highest levels of governance, things can go very wrong -- very easily and very quickly. There might be no clean and neat way to run a solar system -- especially one which is inhabited by fickle, dissatisfied, disloyal, and disobedient people. Again, I have NO idea what's really going on -- and this thread is simply a gigantic mind-game to model some very strange theories. Theories of Satanic-Origin Originating from Howell Mountain?? What Would George McCready Price Say?? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_McReady_Price All I know is that my plans are to continue doing what I'm doing -- no matter what happens -- no matter who I really am -- no matter what role I play -- and no matter where I live. Expect more of the same -- only different -- in perpetuity. Namaste -- Find Your Own Way -- Be Nice -- and Make Good Choices. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ut9g477VepM

    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7704
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: Archangelic Queens of Heaven and the United States of the Solar System

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Fri Mar 29, 2013 2:35 pm

    I am becoming more and more frightened by my pseudointellectual-quest. I don't even want to think about how scared I'd be if I were seriously researching the insanity -- and I truly mean what I just said. I know many direct paths to the 'truth' -- yet I choose to travel a much less revealing path. Throughout my life -- I have actually worked very hard to NOT know about a lot of the creepy stuff. I'm really ready to quit permanently. I've really just been talking to myself and wasting my time for much too long. People won't seriously deal with this subject until the New World Order really kicks in with a vengeance - but then they will probably just play the blame game without fixing anything. Talking to people in a calm and rational manner, with the best of intentions, is a lost cause. Edward Bernays and Sigmund Freud were right. (Even though I dislike both of them) Seeking Fame, Fortune, Power, and Pleasure really makes the world go 'round - which is why 'It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World'. If we save the world - the next generation probably won't appreciate it - and they'll just get into more messes. The corrupt will continue to rule the stupid. The human race will continue to live by the Golden Rule (He or She Who Has the Gold - RULES!). Perhaps I should focus upon the RESPONSIBLE PURSUIT OF FAME, FORTUNE, POWER, AND PLEASURE - WHERE RESPONSIBILITY IS REWARDED AND IRRESPONSIBILITY IS PUNISHED. I am more disgusted with the human race than I can even begin to describe. I'm not sure whether I am more disgusted by the corrupt - or by the stupid. I'm almost ready to go back to sleep, go back to church, watch the mainstream media, believe every word, get chipped, get vaccinated, and drink my kool-aid like a good zombie.

    In the Pre-Human Universe, was the archangelic pecking-order 1. Michael? 2. Gabriel? 3. Lucifer? After the Creation of the Human-Being, was the archangelic pecking-order 1. Gabriel? 2. Lucifer? 3. Michael? Has this hypothetical pecking-order changed since the hypothetical rebellion and overthrow of Michael?? Are all archangels created equal?? Are all archangels created?? Is one or more archangel a Creator-God?? What if Earth-Humanity really are the bad-guys and bad-gals?? What if certain Reptilians are Gods -- and certain Reptilians are Devils?? What is the True and Pure Religion and Government of Archangel Michael?? At this point, does Michael even know?? I am BIG on the Law of God -- but does Deuteronomy properly outline the Law of God in Context?? Is this Law of the Lord really perfect?? Read Genesis and Revelation. Did God Change?? How does Matthew compare with Genesis and Revelation?? I don't think we're being told the WHOLE STORY. If we were -- the Bible might make a helluva lot more sense than it seems to presently. Again, this thing might be much more complex and confusing than even the insiders think. In a sense, I'm really probably mostly talking to insiders in this thread -- but they probably have just assigned a couple of NSA Intern-Jesuits to keep track of me!! I continue to encounter 'real-life' evidence that some people know a helluva lot more about me than they should. You guys and gals are SO obvious!! Those 'Official-Briefings' must make you feel SO important!! Just wait until you find out who's REALLY behind those 'Secret-Agent Meetings'!! A lot of you are laughing and mocking now -- but you won't be later -- and I don't think you'll have long to wait!! It won't be long now. What do YOU think?? Do you think?? Come-On!! THINK!!!

    What if NOBODY knows what to do(?) -- the good-guys -- the bad-guys -- the ETs -- the Gods -- the Archangels -- et al???!!! Who will accept responsibility??? Lmao That's a good one!! Lmfao Huh??!! Lolerz What if a Changing of the Guard will be timed to coincide with the Worst Crisis in World History??? What if the Current PTB are desperately looking for a Fall-Guy or Fall-Gal?? What if the PTB just wanna bail-out of this Flaming-Plane(t)?? Would YOU wish to take the reigns right now??? What if the PTB are more sick of the bullshit than we are??? What if there's no heaven or hell to go to when we die -- just reincarnation back into the madness?? Even if we created Heaven on Earth -- would anyone really appreciate it?? Would everyone try to rule paradise -- and turn it right back into purgatory and/or hell?? People don't want a police-state -- but what if we are fundamentally a bunch of outlaws?? As I keep saying -- I think I'm just going to keep doing what I'm doing -- no matter how bad (or good) things get. I think things have been kept from getting too bad -- with lots and lots of lies, smoke, and mirrors -- but now people are being faced with a brutal gang of facts -- with the advent of the internet. I tend to think that the PTB didn't really see this coming -- and now a lot of them are getting caught with their pants down. But I'm skeptical that a new-crew will be able to make everything better. Thinking about a United States of the Solar System scares the hell out of me 24/7. Even though it might be intended as a Road to Utopia -- I fear that it might still result in Hell on Earth -- due in no small part to infiltration and subversion by the same nefarious humans and other-than-humans who have been screwing things up for thousands of years. Some things never change -- which is why I've decided to keep modeling paradise -- while know full-well that purgatory is the preferred business and governance model of the really powerful PTB from who-knows-where?!

    Could someone out there please look at this link to my threads - in light of this particular thread on Archangels and Governance - and do a thorough analysis - positive or negative? http://www.themistsofavalon.net/universal-lounge-f8/orthodoxymoron-threads-t876.htm#15423 I included them here because they are really an ongoing research project. I'm trying to change myself - and I am trying to encourage others to think in unconventional yet productive ways. This is a unique approach - which may make it of some value to someone somewhere or somewhen. These threads are an experiment based mostly on videos. I'm not particularly bright or noteworthy...but the videos which I have viewed...especially when viewed as a group...are earth shattering to me. The threads are a healthy mixture of problems and solutions. If you have the time...which is doubtful...please look at all of these threads...and look for commonalities. There is a bit of a theological slant...but certainly not an orthodox or Bible thumping slant. Prepare to be shocked...to cry...to get mad...to be enlightened...and to experience the Eureka Phenomenon!

    I would love to read a twenty page critique of all of these threads - written by a Jesuit or a CIA analyst - complete with a psychological evaluation, etc. I'm very serious. I don't need to be right. I just don't feel as though anyone has seriously considered these threads. They were designed to make people think - and then to arrive at their own conclusions - but I don't think that happened at all. I honestly feel as though Gabriel, Michael, Lucifer, and a couple of alphabet agents and Jesuits are the only ones who looked at this material with a penetrating gaze. Even if I was very close to the mark - I wasn't a threat (I didn't try to be) - because no one seemed to pay much attention to any of it. I had hoped for some very detailed and passionate debating. The 'Amen Ra' thread seemed to generate the most interest (13,200 views and counting) - but I have no idea what the reactions were and are now that AV1 is closed to posting. I feel very empty and lost in all of this. I feel as though I wasted my time and energy - accomplishing nothing. I am making a renewed call for help - into the vast regions of space and cyberspace - to seriously look at this material as a group - and tell me what you think - positive or negative. Where are the scholars? Is there any intelligent life out there that isn't so high and mighty that they can't take a few hours to make a proper evaluation of all of this? Come down out of your ivory tower - I dare you! The water's warm. Come-on in! I'm waiting - but I'm not holding my breath. You important people with your degrees and badges have more important things to do - don't you? Like getting us into even more trouble than we're already in? As far as I can tell - top people with top clearances have gotten us into one helluva lot of trouble - and that these same top people with top clearances are trying to save the world. I'm sorry - but I have completely lost confidence in the top people with top clearances. Is this inaccurate or unfair? Prove me wrong. Don't take what I just said too seriously. I don't know what top people really have to deal with. I'm just trying to get their attention. Is it possible to be a truly free-thinking top person? I'm just trying to spice-up my insignificant and ineffective life - and take my dissatisfaction with life out on top-people with top-clearances.

    Consider this debate between Dr. Walter Martin and Father Mitchell Pacwa (Jesuit) regarding the Roman Catholic view of Mary. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tClS31hNmII This has relevance to this thread because of my suggestion that there may be some substance to Lucifer = Lilith = Hathor = Isis = Mary and that the current manifestion of this goddess hypothesis could be similar to that which is represented by Anna in the 'V' series. Once again - I'm not trying to be mean - I'm just trying to understand. The Roman Catholic treatment of Mary may be based upon something more than a fable devised by corrupt men in the Vatican. There may, in fact, be an actual Mary figure, who rules the church - and thus the world. I'm not an insider - and I don't know insiders - so I don't really know. I don't shout this sort of thing from the mountain-tops. I just whisper and mumble on the internet. Please watch the following video from start to finish - and relate it to what I have written in this thread. Warning: this is very disturbing. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rx8PdvOELvY

    Once again - I just want to wish Satan, Lucifer, Gods, Goddesses, Angels, Demons, Archangels, Illuminati, Megalomaniacs, Reptilians, Greys, Top People with Top Clearances, et al - a terrific day. I really think we can work this thing out - without enslavement, extermination, Star Wars, or Masters of the Universe. Imagine 10,000 very competent humans engaging in Global and Solar System Governance - with advisors which might include all of the above. The absolute power corrupting thing seems to be the big problem. When I ask questions - especially regarding fringe topics which are especially controversial - I'm really asking 'Am I sane?' It drives me crazy when answers are not forthcoming. I really just want something in place which facilitates unity and freedom for all races - and which is based upon truth rather than lies. I'm only poking and prodding because things are so screwed-up, and because they seem to have been screwed-up for thousands of years. I fear that things will continue to be screwed-up for thousands of years - if we even survive.

    Unrelatedly, I sat down today, and read from my Holy Bible, Book of Common Prayer, and Church Hymnal. Last night, I spoke with some friends who attend a church which I used to attend. They invited me to church. How should I properly deal with this, in light of all the blasphemous postings I've made? Should I continue to speculate regarding the possible Luciferian origins of theology, mythology, architecture, sacred music, and sacred texts? Or should I just shut up? Have I more than made my point? Do I need to learn to know when to stop? Have I worn out my welcome? Even if I'm right - or even partially right - is this subject too hot to handle? Is it a threat to national security? Is all of the following ultimately from the Pen of Lucifer? Are all of us actors on a stage? Is Lucifer the script-writer? Has this been going on for a long, long time? Could this entire world be one big Colosseum Event - a Galactic Theater of the Universe? Is it time for WE THE PEOPLE OF EARTH to close the curtain - and START WRITING OUR OWN SCRIPT? Just wondering. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvSDeUWo1Vs

    ARCHANGELS + HYBRIDIZATION + REINCARNATION = GODS AND GODDESSES?? I just listen to as many people as possible - and TRY to connect the dots. I'm also trying to think in terms of a male version of Anna - who is not creepy, corrupt, or cruel - with all of the positives, and none of the negatives. Consider the following carefully:

    NIBIRUAN / SUMERIAN GODS = HINDU GODS = GREEK GODS AND SOME VATICAN, BUDDHIST, JEWISH AND SOUTH AMERICAN GODS AS WELL !!!http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1019723/pg3

    SEKHMET = DURGA = ARTEMIS = MUT = ATHENA = WHITE JAGUAR LADY = WHITE BUFFALO CALF WOMAN = VAISHNO DEVI

    ALCYONE = SATYANARAYANA = APOLLO = PTAH = VISHNU = RAMA
    AMUN RA = KRISHNA

    ANAT = ERESHKIGAL = KALI = BLACK MADONNA = BLACK TARA

    ASTARTE = PARVATI = WHITE TARA = MADONNA = SHEKINAH = UMA = NAMMA
    MAIA = SATI = DAKSHAYANI = DAMKINA = GODDESS OF THE MOUNTAINS

    ENKI = SHIVA = HOLY SPIRIT = ZEUS = CHAKRASAMVARA = AVALOKITESHWARA = CHENREZIG = LUCIFER = EA = ADONAI = HADAD = BA'AL = RUDRA = KAAL BHAIRAVA

    AN = ANU = PARA BRAHMA = YAHVEH = ALLAH

    THE GREAT RA = AMEN RA = PRAKASH BRAHMA = HIGHER ASPECT OF YAHVEH = FATHER OF THE GODS

    ANSAR = ABZU = ABBA = APSU = KASHYAPA = ADITYA = SURYA = SUN GOD = SHAMASH = DUAS PITA = SATYAVAT MANU = SWAYAMBHU = VYWAMUS

    DHARMA DEV = YAMA

    INDRA = PAN = VAJRAPANI

    GAIA = ADITI = BHU = BHOOMI DEVI = KOUMUDHI = KAMADHENU = NINHURSAG = KI = URAS = EARTH GODDESS

    ENLIL = GARBHODAKASAYANI = JEHOVAH

    NINLIL = LAKSHMI = GODDESS OF GRAIN

    MOON GOD = CHANDRA DEV = NANNA

    INANNA = LILITH = SELENE = MOHINI

    DUMUZI = ADAMU = ADAM = DAMU

    EVE = KHEBA = NINTI

    NERGAL = NARAKASURA

    TIAMAT = TARAKA

    TYPHON = PULOMAN

    THOTH = GANESHA = HERMES

    MARDUK = MURUGAN = KARTHIKEYA = NIMROD = MARS

    HORUS = OSIRIUS = SANAT KUMARA = EROS = DIONYSUS = ANCIENT OF DAYS = TAMMUZ = MIN = KAMDEV = PRADYUMNA

    ISIS = MARY = MARIAMMA = KOUMARI = VENUS = APHRODITE = ISHTAR = SEMIRAMIS = HATHOR = MAYAVATI = KANYAKUMARI = TRIPURA SUNDARI = RATI = 16 YEAR OLD GODDESS

    JESUS = SANANDA KUMARA

    MARY MAGDALENE = LADY NADA

    HADES = SHANI = SATAN = WRATHFUL TIBETAN DEITY

    7 ARCHANGELS = 7 SAPTARISHIS = COUNCIL OF SEVEN

    ATLAS = HIMAVAN = DAKSHA = EL

    PLEIONE = MENAKA

    APEP = KALASURA

    7 PLAIEDES' SISTERS = 7 KRITTIKAS = 7 SAPTA MATRIKAS

    PARASURAM = GILGAMESH; NOAH = VIVASVAT MANU; NOAH'S ARC = MALAYAN HILLS.

    WILD COW GODDESS = NINSUN = NININSINA = RENUKA

    HUMBABA = TRISHANKU = KALMASHAPADA

    SARASWATI = SESHAT

    HERACLES = HERCULES = ARJUNA

    ENOCH = METATRON

    HERA = INDRANI

    AURORA = USHA

    EOS = SAVITA

    VARUNA = POSEIDON

    MITHRA = ZOROASTRA

    TVASTRI = HAPHAESTOS = BUNENE

    HOLY GRAIL = AMRITAM = SOMA = LIFE ELIXIR = NECTAR OF IMMORTALITY

    THE LIST IS ENDLESS!

    THE NIBIRUAN GODS ( NIBIRU = NEBADON = VULCAN = PLANET X = WORMWOOD FROM SIRIUS B ) HAD THEIR BASES EVERYWHERE.

    ALL THE RELIGIONS HAVE THE SAME SOURCE !
    ( BIBLE -> BY-BAL -> BY BA'AL( ENKI))
    ( QURAN -> QUR-AN / ANU )


    MANY OF THE COMPARED CHARACTERS/ INCIDENTS MIGHT HAVE HAPPENED AT ONE PLACE AND THEN IMPLANTED INTO ANOTHER CULTURE FOR THEIR BENEFIT.

    The bottom-line of all of this madness is to 1. Determine who the major players have been in this solar system going back thousands of years. 2. Determine the governmental systems in this solar system going back thousands of years. 3. Determine the true history of the human race and this solar system. 4. To establish the best possible governmental system in this solar system - with the best long-term chances of facilitating responsible freedom. It seems that all has not been well in this solar system for many thousands of years. It seems that there have been systematic and purposeful efforts to hide and misrepresent the truth. The historical carnage is horrifying. The current corruption is unfathomable and reprehensible. The supernatural phenomenon appears to be very creepy and deceptive. It seems that the human race is in huge trouble - yet the extent and nature of this trouble seems to be carefully hidden. The current explosion of forbidden knowledge provides humanity with both the opportunity to learn the truth, and fix the problems. Unfortunately, if humanity can't handle the truth - we could face enslavement and extermination of a most horrifying nature. The window of opportunity may be very small and fleeting. I have tried to irreverently deal with the subject of Lucifer - so as to possibly break the ice - and get Lucifer (or equivalent) to come out of the closet - so to speak - and reason with us in a calm and rational manner. I have suggested retirement (rather than retribution, bottomless pits, torment and annilhilation). I seek the restoration of Lucifer (or equivalent) to a 'pre-fall' state of character, ethics, and spirituality. Obviously, I don't know if this is possible or even desireable (if I knew the complete story). As with almost every subject I have addressed in the last couple of years on the internet - I AM FLYING BLIND. I DON'T REALLY KNOW WHAT'S REALLY GOING ON. This thread has been yet another feeble attempt to find out.

    The Origin of Evil - from 'The Great Controversy' by Ellen White http://www.whiteestate.org/books/gc/gc29.html
    TO many minds the origin of sin and the reason for its existence are a source of great perplexity. They see the work of evil, with its terrible results of woe and desolation, and they question how all this can exist under the sovereignty of One who is infinite in wisdom, in power, and in love. Here is a mystery of which they find no explanation. And in their uncertainty and doubt they are blinded to truths plainly revealed in God's word and essential to salvation. There are those who, in their inquiries concerning the existence of sin, endeavor to search into that which God has never revealed; hence they find no solution of their difficulties; and such as are actuated by a disposition to doubt and cavil seize upon this as an excuse for rejecting the words of Holy Writ. Others, however, fail of a satisfactory understanding of the great problem of evil, from the fact that tradition and misinterpretation have obscured the teaching of the Bible concerning the character of God, the nature of His government, and the principles of His dealing with sin.

    It is impossible to explain the origin of sin so as to give a reason for its existence. Yet enough may be understood concerning both the origin and the final disposition of sin to make fully manifest the justice and benevolence of God in all His dealings with evil. Nothing is more plainly taught in Scripture than that God was in no wise responsible for the entrance of sin; that there was no arbitrary withdrawal of divine grace, no deficiency in the divine government, that gave occasion for the uprising of rebellion. Sin is an intruder, for whose presence no reason can be given. It is mysterious, unaccountable; to excuse it is to defend it. Could excuse for it be found, or cause be shown for its existence, it would cease to be sin. Our only definition of sin is that given in the word of God; it is "the transgression of the law;" it is the outworking of a principle at war with the great law of love which is the foundation of the divine government.

    Before the entrance of evil there was peace and joy throughout the universe. All was in perfect harmony with the Creator's will. Love for God was supreme, love for one another impartial. Christ the Word, the Only Begotten of God, was one with the eternal Father,--one in nature, in character, and in purpose,--the only being in all the universe that could enter into all the counsels and purposes of God. By Christ the Father wrought in the creation of all heavenly beings. "By Him were all things created, that are in heaven, . . . whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers" (Colossians 1:16); and to Christ, equally with the Father, all heaven gave allegiance.

    The law of love being the foundation of the government of God, the happiness of all created beings depended upon their perfect accord with its great principles of righteousness. God desires from all His creatures the service of love--homage that springs from an intelligent appreciation of His character. He takes no pleasure in a forced allegiance, and to all He grants freedom of will, that they may render Him voluntary service.

    But there was one that chose to pervert this freedom. Sin originated with him who, next to Christ, had been most honored of God and who stood highest in power and glory among the inhabitants of heaven. Before his fall, Lucifer was first of the covering cherubs, holy and undefiled. "Thus saith the Lord God; Thou sealest up the sum, full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty. Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering. . . .Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire. Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee." Ezekiel 28:12-15.

    Lucifer might have remained in favor with God, beloved and honored by all the angelic host, exercising his noble powers to bless others and to glorify his Maker. But, says the prophet, "Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness." Verse 17. Little by little, Lucifer came to indulge a desire for self-exaltation. "Thou hast set thine heart as the heart of God." "Thou hast said, . . . I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation....I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the Most High." Verse 6; Isaiah 14:13, 14. Instead of seeking to make God supreme in the affections and allegiance of His creatures, it was Lucifer's endeavor to win their service and homage to himself. And coveting the honor which the infinite Father had bestowed upon His Son, this prince of angels aspired to power which it was the prerogative of Christ alone to wield.

    All heaven had rejoiced to reflect the Creator's glory and to show forth His praise. And while God was thus honored, all had been peace and gladness. But a note of discord now marred the celestial harmonies. The service and exaltation of self, contrary to the Creator's plan, awakened forebodings of evil in minds to whom God's glory was supreme. The heavenly councils pleaded with Lucifer. The Son of God presented before him the greatness, the goodness, and the justice of the Creator, and the sacred, unchanging nature of His law. God Himself had established the order of heaven; and in departing from it, Lucifer would dishonor his Maker, and bring ruin upon himself. But the warning, given in infinite love and mercy, only aroused a spirit of resistance. Lucifer allowed jealousy of Christ to prevail, and he became the more determined.

    Pride in his own glory nourished the desire for supremacy. The high honors conferred upon Lucifer were not appreciated as the gift of God and called forth no gratitude to the Creator. He gloried in his brightness and exaltation, and aspired to be equal with God. He was beloved and reverenced by the heavenly host. Angels delighted to execute his commands, and he was clothed with wisdom and glory above them all. Yet the Son of God was the acknowledged Sovereign of heaven, one in power and authority with the Father. In all the councils of God, Christ was a participant, while Lucifer was not permitted thus to enter into the divine purposes. "Why," questioned this mighty angel, "should Christ have the supremacy? Why is He thus honored above Lucifer?"

    Leaving his place in the immediate presence of God, Lucifer went forth to diffuse the spirit of discontent among the angels. Working with mysterious secrecy, and for a time concealing his real purpose under an appearance of reverence for God, he endeavored to excite dissatisfaction concerning the laws that governed heavenly beings, intimating that they imposed an unnecessary restraint. Since their natures were holy, he urged that the angels should obey the dictates of their own will. He sought to create sympathy for himself by representing that God had dealt unjustly with him in bestowing supreme honor upon Christ. He claimed that in aspiring to greater power and honor he was not aiming at self-exaltation, but was seeking to secure liberty for all the inhabitants of heaven, that by this means they might attain to a higher state of existence.

    God in His great mercy bore long with Lucifer. He was not immediately degraded from his exalted station when he first indulged the spirit of discontent, nor even when he began to present his false claims before the loyal angels. Long was he retained in heaven. Again and again he was offered pardon on condition of repentance and submission. Such efforts as only infinite love and wisdom could devise were made to convince him of his error. The spirit of discontent had never before been known in heaven. Lucifer himself did not at first see whither he was drifting; he did not understand the real nature of his feelings. But as his dissatisfaction was proved to be without cause, Lucifer was convinced that he was in the wrong, that the divine claims were just, and that he ought to acknowledge them as such before all heaven. Had he done this, he might have saved himself and many angels. He had not at this time fully cast off his allegiance to God. Though he had forsaken his position as covering cherub, yet if he had been willing to return to God, acknowledging the Creator's wisdom, and satisfied to fill the place appointed him in God's great plan, he would have been reinstated in his office. But pride forbade him to submit. He persistently defended his own course, maintained that he had no need of repentance, and fully committed himself, in the great controversy, against his Maker.

    All the powers of his master mind were now bent to the work of deception, to secure the sympathy of the angels that had been under his command. Even the fact that Christ had warned and counseled him was perverted to serve his traitorous designs. To those whose loving trust bound them most closely to him, Satan had represented that he was wrongly judged, that his position was not respected, and that his liberty was to be abridged. From misrepresentation of the words of Christ he passed to prevarication and direct falsehood, accusing the Son of God of a design to humiliate him before the inhabitants of heaven. He sought also to make a false issue between himself and the loyal angels. All whom he could not subvert and bring fully to his side he accused of indifference to the interests of heavenly beings. The very work which he himself was doing he charged upon those who remained true to God. And to sustain his charge of God's injustice toward him, he resorted to misrepresentation of the words and acts of the Creator. It was his policy to perplex the angels with subtle arguments concerning the purposes of God. Everything that was simple he shrouded in mystery, and by artful perversion cast doubt upon the plainest statements of Jehovah. His high position, in such close connection with the divine administration, gave greater force to his representations, and many were induced to unite with him in rebellion against Heaven's authority.

    God in His wisdom permitted Satan to carry forward his work, until the spirit of disaffection ripened into active revolt. It was necessary for his plans to be fully developed, that their true nature and tendency might be seen by all. Lucifer, as the anointed cherub, had been highly exalted; he was greatly loved by the heavenly beings, and his influence over them was strong. God's government included not only the inhabitants of heaven, but of all the worlds that He had created; and Satan thought that if he could carry the angels of heaven with him in rebellion, he could carry also the other worlds. He had artfully presented his side of the question, employing sophistry and fraud to secure his objects. His power to deceive was very great, and by disguising himself in a cloak of falsehood he had gained an advantage. Even the loyal angels could not fully discern his character or see to what his work was leading.

    Satan had been so highly honored, and all his acts were so clothed with mystery, that it was difficult to disclose to the angels the true nature of his work. Until fully developed, sin would not appear the evil thing it was. Heretofore it had had no place in the universe of God, and holy beings had no conception of its nature and malignity. They could not discern the terrible consequences that would result from setting aside the divine law. Satan had, at first, concealed his work under a specious profession of loyalty to God. He claimed to be seeking to promote the honor of God, the stability of His government, and the good of all the inhabitants of heaven. While instilling discontent into the minds of the angels under him, he had artfully made it appear that he was seeking to remove dissatisfaction. When he urged that changes be made in the order and laws of God's government, it was under the pretense that these were necessary in order to preserve harmony in heaven.

    In His dealing with sin, God could employ only righteousness and truth. Satan could use what God could not-- flattery and deceit. He had sought to falsify the word of God and had misrepresented His plan of government before the angels, claiming that God was not just in laying laws and rules upon the inhabitants of heaven; that in requiring submission and obedience from His creatures, He was seeking merely the exaltation of Himself. Therefore it must be demonstrated before the inhabitants of heaven, as well as of all the worlds, that God's government was just, His law perfect. Satan had made it appear that he himself was seeking to promote the good of the universe. The true character of the usurper, and his real object, must be understood by all. He must have time to manifest himself by his wicked works.

    The discord which his own course had caused in heaven, Satan charged upon the law and government of God. All evil he declared to be the result of the divine administration. He claimed that it was his own object to improve upon the statutes of Jehovah. Therefore it was necessary that he should demonstrate the nature of his claims, and show the working out of his proposed changes in the divine law. His own work must condemn him. Satan had claimed from the first that he was not in rebellion. The whole universe must see the deceiver unmasked.

    Even when it was decided that he could no longer remain in heaven, Infinite Wisdom did not destroy Satan. Since the service of love can alone be acceptable to God, the allegiance of His creatures must rest upon a conviction of His justice and benevolence. The inhabitants of heaven and of other worlds, being unprepared to comprehend the nature or consequences of sin, could not then have seen the justice and mercy of God in the destruction of Satan. Had he been immediately blotted from existence, they would have served God from fear rather than from love. The influence of the deceiver would not have been fully destroyed, nor would the spirit of rebellion have been utterly eradicated. Evil must be permitted to come to maturity. For the good of the entire universe through ceaseless ages Satan must more fully develop his principles, that his charges against the divine government might be seen in their true light by all created beings, that the justice and mercy of God and the immutability of His law might forever be placed beyond all question.

    Satan's rebellion was to be a lesson to the universe through all coming ages, a perpetual testimony to the nature and terrible results of sin. The working out of Satan's rule, its effects upon both men and angels, would show what must be the fruit of setting aside the divine authority. It would testify that with the existence of God's government and His law is bound up the well-being of all the creatures He has made. Thus the history of this terrible experiment of rebellion was to be perpetual safeguard to all holy intelligences, to prevent them from being deceived as to the nature of transgression, to save them from committing sin and suffering its punishments.

    To the very close of the controversy in heaven the great usurper continued to justify himself. When it was announced that with all his sympathizers he must be expelled from the abodes of bliss, then the rebel leader boldly avowed his contempt for the Creator's law. He reiterated his claim that angels needed no control, but should be left to follow their own will, which would ever guide them right. He denounced the divine statutes as a restriction of their liberty and declared that it was his purpose to secure the abolition of law; that, freed from this restraint, the hosts of heaven might enter upon a more exalted, more glorious state of existence.

    With one accord, Satan and his host threw the blame of their rebellion wholly upon Christ, declaring that if they had not been reproved, they would never have rebelled. Thus stubborn and defiant in their disloyalty, seeking vainly to overthrow the government of God, yet blasphemously claiming to be themselves the innocent victims of oppressive power, the archrebel and all his sympathizers were at last banished from heaven.

    The same spirit that prompted rebellion in heaven still inspires rebellion on earth. Satan has continued with men the same policy which he pursued with the angels. His spirit now reigns in the children of disobedience. Like him they seek to break down the restraints of the law of God and promise men liberty through transgression of its precepts. Reproof of sin still arouses the spirit of hatred and resistance. When God's messages of warning are brought home to the conscience, Satan leads men to justify themselves and to seek the sympathy of others in their course of sin. Instead of correcting their errors, they excite indignation against the reprover, as if he were the sole cause of difficulty. From the days of righteous Abel to our own time such is the spirit which has been displayed toward those who dare to condemn sin.

    By the same misrepresentation of the character of God as he had practiced in heaven, causing Him to be regarded as severe and tyrannical, Satan induced man to sin. And having succeeded thus far, he declared that God's unjust restrictions had led to man's fall, as they had led to his own rebellion.

    But the Eternal One Himself proclaims His character: "The Lord God, merciful and gracious, long-suffering, and abundant in goodness and truth, keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty." Exodus 34:6, 7.

    In the banishment of Satan from heaven, God declared His justice and maintained the honor of His throne. But when man had sinned through yielding to the deceptions of this apostate spirit, God gave an evidence of His love by yielding up His only-begotten Son to die for the fallen race. In the atonement the character of God is revealed. The mighty argument of the cross demonstrates to the whole universe that the course of sin which Lucifer had chosen was in no wise chargeable upon the government of God.

    In the contest between Christ and Satan, during the Saviour's earthly ministry, the character of the great deceiver was unmasked. Nothing could so effectually have uprooted Satan from the affections of the heavenly angels and the whole loyal universe as did his cruel warfare upon the world's Redeemer. The daring blasphemy of his demand that Christ should pay him homage, his presumptuous boldness in bearing Him to the mountain summit and the pinnacle of the temple, the malicious intent betrayed in urging Him to cast Himself down from the dizzy height, the unsleeping malice that hunted Him from place to place, inspiring the hearts of priests and people to reject His love, and at the last to cry, "Crucify Him! crucify Him!--all this excited the amazement and indignation of the universe.

    It was Satan that prompted the world's rejection of Christ. The prince of evil exerted all his power and cunning to destroy Jesus; for he saw that the Saviour's mercy and love, His compassion and pitying tenderness, were representing to the world the character of God. Satan contested every claim put forth by the Son of God and employed men as his agents to fill the Saviour's life with suffering and sorrow. The sophistry and falsehood by which he had sought to hinder the work of Jesus, the hatred manifested through the children of disobedience, his cruel accusations against Him whose life was one of unexampled goodness, all sprang from deep-seated revenge. The pent-up fires of envy and malice, hatred and revenge, burst forth on Calvary against the Son of God, while all heaven gazed upon the scene in silent horror.

    When the great sacrifice had been consummated, Christ ascended on high, refusing the adoration of angels until He had presented the request: "I will that they also, whom Thou hast given Me, be with Me where I am." John 17:24. Then with inexpressible love and power came forth the answer from the Father's throne: "Let all the angels of God worship Him." Hebrews 1:6. Not a stain rested upon Jesus. His humiliation ended, His sacrifice completed, there was given unto Him a name that is above every name.

    Now the guilt of Satan stood forth without excuse. He had revealed his true character as a liar and a murderer. It was seen that the very same spirit with which he ruled the children of men, who were under his power, he would have manifested had he been permitted to control the inhabitants of heaven. He had claimed that the transgression of God's law would bring liberty and exaltation; but it was seen to result in bondage and degradation.

    Satan's lying charges against the divine character and government appeared in their true light. He had accused God of seeking merely the exaltation of Himself in requiring submission and obedience from His creatures, and had declared that, while the Creator exacted self-denial from all others, He Himself practiced no self-denial and made no sacrifice. Now it was seen that for the salvation of a fallen and sinful race, the Ruler of the universe had made the greatest sacrifice which love could make; for "God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself." 2 Corinthians 5:19. It was seen, also, that while Lucifer had opened the door for the entrance of sin by his desire for honor and supremacy, Christ had, in order to destroy sin, humbled Himself and become obedient unto death.

    God had manifested His abhorrence of the principles of rebellion. All heaven saw His justice revealed, both in the condemnation of Satan and in the redemption of man. Lucifer had declared that if the law of God was changeless, and its penalty could not be remitted, every transgressor must be forever debarred from the Creator's favor. He had claimed that the sinful race were placed beyond redemption and were therefore his rightful prey. But the death of Christ was an argument in man's behalf that could not be overthrown. The penalty of the law fell upon Him who was equal with God, and man was free to accept the righteousness of Christ and by a life of penitence and humiliation to triumph, as the Son of God had triumphed, over the power of Satan. Thus God is just and yet the justifier of all who believe in Jesus.

    But it was not merely to accomplish the redemption of man that Christ came to the earth to suffer and to die. He came to "magnify the law" and to "make it honorable." Not alone that the inhabitants of this world might regard the law as it should be regarded; but it was to demonstrate to all the worlds of the universe that God's law is unchangeable. Could its claims have been set aside, then the Son of God need not have yielded up His life to atone for its transgression. The death of Christ proves it immutable. And the sacrifice to which infinite love impelled the Father and the Son, that sinners might be redeemed, demonstrates to all the universe--what nothing less than this plan of atonement could have sufficed to do--that justice and mercy are the foundation of the law and government of God.

    In the final execution of the judgment it will be seen that no cause for sin exists. When the Judge of all the earth shall demand of Satan, "Why hast thou rebelled against Me, and robbed Me of the subjects of My kingdom?" the originator of evil can render no excuse. Every mouth will be stopped, and all the hosts of rebellion will be speechless.

    The cross of Calvary, while it declares the law immutable, proclaims to the universe that the wages of sin is death. In the Saviour's expiring cry, "It is finished," the death knell of Satan was rung. The great controversy which had been so long in progress was then decided, and the final eradication of evil was made certain. The Son of God passed through the portals of the tomb, that "through death He might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil." Hebrews 2:14. Lucifer's desire for self-exaltation had led him to say: "I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: . . . I will be like the Most High." God declares: "I will bring thee to ashes upon the earth, . . . and never shalt thou be any more." Isaiah 14:13, 14; Ezekiel 28:18, 19. When "the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven;. . . .all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the Lord of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch." Malachi 4:1.

    The whole universe will have become witnesses to the nature and results of sin. And its utter extermination, which in the beginning would have brought fear to angels and dishonor to God, will now vindicate His love and establish His honor before the universe of beings who delight to do His will, and in whose heart is His law. Never will evil again be manifest. Says the word of God: "Affliction shall not rise up the second time." Nahum 1:9. The law of God, which Satan has reproached as the yoke of bondage, will be honored as the law of liberty. A tested and proved creation will never again be turned from allegiance to Him whose character has been fully manifested before them as fathomless love and infinite wisdom.

    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7704
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: Archangelic Queens of Heaven and the United States of the Solar System

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Fri Mar 29, 2013 8:19 pm

    Perhaps one should seek the truth for themselves -- and then use this truth to maximize the bottom-line -- rather than trying to educate the general-public -- especially when they do not wish to be educated. I agree with Jesus about the love of money being the root of all evil -- yet the bottom-line always seems to be the bottom-line -- as much as I HATE to admit it. Perhaps people HAVE to learn things the HARD-WAY. Soon, I will start another thread (based on this one) with the reverse-title The United States of the Solar System and Archangelic Queens of Heaven. It will begin where I started my recent editing and expansion project. I'm simply running out of posting room on this thread. I'll just keep editing, condensing, commenting, and adding images -- probably for the rest of my life -- as fatalistic as that sounds. If I somehow became a Deep Underground Insider -- I'd probably just keep doing the same thing -- on a Cray Supercomputer. I'd visit a few cool locations, meet some interesting people and other-than-people, sit-in on some interesting lectures, read some interesting 'eyes-only' documents -- but I'd mostly keep doing exactly what I'm doing right now. It might be better -- or it might be worse. I suspect that all hell is going to break-loose sometime soon -- so I doubt that things will be fun for anyone -- anywhere. I suspect that there's really no place to hide. Anyway, here is a continuation of my Multidisciplinary Study of Life, the Universe, and Everything. Consider Informal Logic. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logic-informal/

    Informal Logic (First published Mon Nov 25, 1996; substantive revision Mon Nov 28, 2011)

    Informal logic is an attempt to develop a logic that can assess and analyze the arguments that occur in natural language (“everyday,” “ordinary language”) discourse. Discussions in the field may address instances of scientific, legal, and other technical forms of reasoning (and notions like the distinction between science and pseudo-science), but the overriding aim has been a comprehensive account of argument that can explain and evaluate the arguments found in discussion, debate and disagreement as they manifest themselves in daily life — in social and political commentary; in news reports and editorials in the mass media (in newspapers, magazines, television, the World Wide Web, twitter, etc.); in advertising and corporate and governmental communications; and in personal exchange.

    In developing its account of argument, informal logic combines logic's traditional emphasis on inference with the study of a broad range of topics relevant to informal reasoning. The latter include, to take only a few examples, competing definitions of “argument”; argument identification; burden of proof; the empirical study of argument; diagramming; cognitive bias; the history of argument analysis; methods of argumentative investigation; the role of emotion in argument; and the implicit rules that characterize argumentative exchange in different social contexts. Hansen 2011 provides a good survey of some of the core methods of informal logic. He emphasizes the study of informal inference. Other discussions in the field range across a broader territory. In doing so, they frequently intersect with, borrow from, and contribute to the attempts to understand and/or model natural language reasoning found in formal logic, cognitive psychology, rhetoric, dialectics, computational modeling, and a range of other fields. The interdisciplinary study of informal reasoning that the amalgam of these approaches has given rise to is often called “argumentation theory.”

    In its origins and continued evolution, informal logic has often been allied with educational goals, with the aim of developing ways of analyzing everyday reasoning that can inform, and possibly be the foundation for, general education. In North America and other English speaking countries, such ideals have been associated with the “Critical Thinking Movement,” which aims to inform and improve public reasoning and debate by promoting models of education which emphasize the critical examination of beliefs and decisions, and the development of the skills that this requires. In this and other regards, informal logic has significant affinities with the “pragamatic logic” movement one finds within the Polish logical tradition (see Koszowy 2010).

    Especially in its early formulations, informal logic was sometimes understood as a theoretical alternative to formal logic. This characterization reflects early battles in philosophy departments which debated where (or whether) informal logic fit within the study of “real” logic. Today, the field enjoys a more conciliatory relationship with formal logic. While its attempt to understand informal reasoning is usually couched in natural language, research may employ formal methods and the question whether the accounts of argument which characterize informal logic can in principle be formalized is a source of active investigation. It is in this regard significant that recent work in computational modeling attempts to implement informal logic models of natural-language reasoning. It suggests that defeasible (non-monotonic) logic, probability theory, and other non-classical formal frameworks may be suited to this task.

    •1. History
    •2. What is argument/ation?
    •3. An Example: Visual Argument
    •4. NLD and Beyond
    •5. Fallacy Theory
    •6. An Example: Ad Hominem
    •7. Rhetoric
    •8. Dialectics
    •9. Dialogue Theory
    •10. The Components of Informal Logic
    •11. New Horizons
    •12. Informal Logic and Philosophy
    •Bibliography
    •Academic Tools
    •Other Internet Resources
    •Related Entries

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    1. History

    Though informal logic has a number of historical precedents, its origins are found in North America in the 1970s. It comes into being as an offshoot of classical logic and might be described as a child of the 1960s, a time when social and political movements pushed for an education which was “relevant” to the issues of the day. In logic, and especially in the teaching of logic at North American universities, this fostered an interest in the logic of everyday arguments. The study of such arguments this gave rise to began with an attempt to replace artificial examples of good and bad argument that characterized early introductory logic texts (examples like: “All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. So Socrates is mortal.”) with instances of reasoning, argument, and debate taken from the social commentary and debate one finds in newspapers, the mass media, advertisements, and political campaigns. Kahane 1971 is an early example of this trend (one might contrast Copi 1957).

    Though the theoretical interests that this focus on real life examples produced are anticipated in Hamblin's Fallacies (1970) and Toulmin's The Uses of Argument (1958), informal logic proper began with the work of Johnson and Blair at the University of Windsor. Their textbook, Logical Self-Defense (1977), was an early attempt to teach the logic of informal reasoning. The Informal Logic Newsletter they conceived and edited (now the journal Informal Logic) successfully established the discipline as a field for theoretical discussion, development and research. Forty years later, the result is a recognized body of literature that informs discussions within informal logic, and a standard (but evolving) set of topics, problems, and issues that define the field. The latter include fallacies; argument schemes; the rhetorical features of argument; dialectical obligations; dialogue theory; kinds of argument (deductive, inductive, conductive); the role of images and diagrams in argument; empirical studies of argument; communication in argumentative contexts; and the history of argument analysis.

    Scholarly journals that have played a significant role in the rise of informal logic include Informal Logic, Argumentation, Philosophy and Rhetoric, Argumentation and Advocacy (formerly the Journal of the American Forensic Association), Teaching Philosophy, Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines and, more recently, Cogency and Argument and Computation. The journals ProtoSociology (1999) and Studies in Logic, Grammar, and Rhetoric (2009) have published important special issues on the field. In 2002 Philosophica devoted a special issue to the implications of Hilary Putnam's philosophy for informal logic.

    One early catalyst for work in informal logic was the Critical Thinking Movement (see Siegel 1988, Ennis 2011). It argued that education should be reworked to make the critical scrutiny of our beliefs and assumptions a fundamental goal of education. While the movement's implications have sometimes been interpreted in a very broad way (which may incorporate problem solving in a very generic sense, so called “lateral thinking”, and information literacy), a key theme is the importance of argument and argument assessment in educational curricula. One government decision that promoted the development of informal logic was a 1980 California State University Executive Order that mandated that post secondary education in the state include formal instruction in critical thinking. According to the order: “Instruction in critical thinking is to be designed to achieve an understanding of the relationship of language to logic, which should lead to the ability to analyze, criticize, and advocate ideas, to reason inductively and deductively and to reach factual or judgmental conclusions based on sound inferences drawn from unambiguous statements of knowledge or belief” (Dumke 1980, Executive Order 338).

    In keeping with educational interests of this sort, the development of informal logic has been intertwined with pedagogical discussions of the ways in which students can best be taught to reason well. These discussions are reflected in hundreds (perhaps thousands) of textbooks which have been used to teach informal logic to university and college students in Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, and a growing number of other countries. Texts currently in use take a variety of approaches to the subject. In some cases they are notable for their theoretical as well as their pedagogical innovations. Current texts include: Woods, Irvine & Walton 2004; Govier 2006; Groarke & Tindale 2012; Browne & Keeley 2010; Fisher 2004; Seay & Nuccetelli 2012; Fisher 2004; Battersby 2009; and Hughes, Lavery & Doran 2010.

    Historical precedents for the pedagogical and research interests that characterize informal logic include Aristotle's rhetorical and logical works, which have been a touchstone for much discussion. One already finds a significant analogue of today's approaches to informal reasoning in nineteenth century texts which aim to raise general standards of reasoning through public education in logic. Whatley 1830 and 1844 are notable in this regard. More recently, the informal logic movement has been compared to a Polish tradition in “pragmatic logic”, which promotes the notion that the tools of logic can be used to educate people to (i) think more clearly and consistently, (ii) express their thoughts precisely and systematically, and (ii) justify their claims with proper inferences (see Koszowy 2010 and Ajdukiewicz, K. 1974).

    Today, the continued development of informal logic increasingly incorporates approaches to discourse and argumentation found in cognate disciplines and fields like Speech Communication, Rhetoric, Linguistics, Artificial Intelligence, Cognitive Psychology, and Computational Modeling. Considered from this perspective, informal logic has become an integral aspect of a much broader multi-disciplinary attempt to develop an “argumentation theory” that can provide a comprehensive account of informal reasoning.

    In the course of their development, informal logic and argumentation theory have been highlighted and nurtured at a number of conferences. The most notable are nine biannual University of Windsor conferences hosted by the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA), and six multi-disciplinary Amsterdam conferences hosted at four-year intervals by the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (ISSA), beginning in 1986. A tenth OSSA conference and a seventh Amsterdam conference are already planned. Other significant initiatives include four Tokyo Conferences on Argumentation hosted by the Japanese Debate Association in 2000, 2004, 2008 and 2012; a series of “ArgDiaP” workshops (dealing with argumentation, critical thinking, dialogue and persuasion) held in Poland; and the “Symposium on Argument and Computation” held in Perthshire, Scotland in 2000.

    2.What is argument/ation?

    Like classical logic, most work in informal logic has understood an argument as an attempt to present evidence for a conclusion. It does so by providing premises (“propositions” or claims or some sort) that support the conclusion. Hitchcock 2006 provides a precise account of this conception, defining an argument as “a claim-reason complex” consisting of (i) an act of concluding, (ii) one or more acts of premising (which assert propositions in favour of the conclusion), and (iii) a stated or implicit inference word that indicates that the conclusion follows from the premises.

    A simple example that can illustrate this notion is the following excerpt from an opinion article in the Western Courier (25/10/08), which criticized conservative groups unwilling to support any kind of embryonic research.

    EXAMPLE 1: This [opposition to embryonic research] is shortsighted and stubborn. The fact is, fetuses are being aborted whether conservatives like it or not. Post-abortion, the embryos are literally being thrown away when they could be used in lifesaving medical research. It has become a matter of religious and personal beliefs, and misguided ones at that. Lives could be saved and vastly improved if only scientists were allowed to use embryos that are otherwise being tossed in the garbage.

    We may summarize this argument as the following claim-reason complex.

    Premise: Fetuses are being aborted anyway and lives could be saved and vastly improved if only scientists were allowed to use embryos that are otherwise being tossed in the garbage.
    Inference Indicator (implicit, unstated): (...hence...)
    Conclusion: The conservative position is shortsighted and stubborn.

    This is an argument that might be analyzed and assessed in a number of ways, in terms of general criteria for good argument or as an instance of a particular scheme of argument (in this case the scheme “two wrongs reasoning” or “argument from waste”).

    In some significant ways, Hitchcock's account of argument is purposely broad. It allows premises and conclusions to be any speech acts which assert the truth of a proposition (including acts like suggesting, hypothesizing, boasting, and deducing), and recognizes that arguments in natural language frequently occur without an explicit inference indicator like “since” or “therefore”. In addition, his account recognizes that arguments can incorporate drawings in a geometric proof, diagrams or pictures (as Hitchcock puts it: “a poster with a giant photograph of a starving emaciated child and the words ‘make poverty history’ can reasonably be construed as an argument”).

    When images are employed in these and many other contexts of dispute, they are clearly argumentative, both in the sense that a potential difference of opinion is addressed, and in the sense that some sort of evidence is provided for some conclusion. The evidence in question may be conveyed by the different lengths of the bars on a graph, shown via a step by step demonstration, or communicated through an image that evokes some moral judgment. The use of images in argumentative contexts is increasingly prevalent as technology makes the production and reproduction of images easier.

    This use of images challenges the account of argument first assumed by informal logic, which understood arguments as collections of sentences and did not recognize arguments expressed in non-verbal ways. “Visual” arguments have been defined as arguments which are conveyed, at least in part, through non-verbal visual images. The latter may include graphs, photographic evidence (used in courts, for example), documentary films, art, cartoons, and architecture. In a manner that might be compared to the attempt to expand formal logic to allow for non-verbal visual deductions (see Barwise and Etchemendy 1998), informal logicians have proposed that we analyze and assess visual arguments in a manner similar to the way in which we understand and assess verbal arguments (see Birdsell and Groarke 1996 and 2007, Blair 1996, Collins and Schmid 1999, Lunsford, Ruszkiewicz and Walters 2001, Groarke 2002, Shelley 2003, Feteris et. al. 2011, Dove 2012).

    Argument-1 and Argument-2

    Recognizing visual (and other kinds of non-verbal) arguments significantly broadens the scope of informal argument, but does so in a manner that is motivated by the same desire that has motivated its development in the first place: the desire to have some theoretical means for understanding and assessing informal arguments (which are replete with images). For the same reason, many informal logicians now distinguish between two senses of “argument” which are commonly designated “argument-1” and “argument-2”.

    Argument-1 is argument in the traditional premise and conclusion sense. Argument-2 is argument understood as the disagreement and/or exchange in which argument-1 is typically embedded. Sometimes the difference between these two kinds of argument is expressed by describing argument-2 as process or transaction, and argument-1 as the product that results from it (see Goodwin 2001). In natural language, the word “argument” can be used in either sense. We may say that “The arguments outlined for the new legislation on immigration are not convincing,” meaning that the premises offered do not successfully establish the conclusion, or that “Sarah and Sami had a heated argument,” meaning no more than they vehemently disagreed. In the first case, we are speaking of argument-1, in the second of argument-2.

    Informal logic has paid increasing attention to argument-2 as discussions in the field have evolved, for the simple reason that the assessment and analysis of argument-1 often requires an understanding of argument in this broader sense. In judging the reasonableness of a particular example of argument-1, and the extent to which it is appropriate or convincing, we must frequently consider the argument-2 that gives rise to it. A convincing argument in personal exchange may not meet the standards required to resolve a disagreement in parliament, and one that meets these standards may not meet others required by the law of torts.

    The significance of argument-2 need not deflect one from a focus on argument-1 (on arguments in the premise-and-conclusion sense), but it does mean that one must pay close attention, in the course of analyzing and assessing instances of argument-1, to “argumentation” understood in the argument-2 sense. Among other things, this suggests that the comprehensive account of informal reasoning which is its goal should include an account of a variety of speech acts that play a key role in argumentation (including questions and commands), the dynamics of disagreement, and contexts of argument. This broadening of the horizons of informal logic is in keeping with the intuition that they too can be judged against standards of rationality.

    Argument and Persuasion

    A more difficult question for informal logic is the relationship between argument and persuasion. In his discussion, Hitchcock cites Aristotle's account of persuasion in the Rhetoric. It distinguishes three aspects of persuasion: character, emotion, and argument (ethos, pathos, and logos). Like many other commentators, Hitchcock only counts the third of these as argument. As he puts it: “Presentation of oneself as having a certain character may enhance the credibility of what one says, but it is not an argument in the sense defined in the present chapter, since it lacks a premise conclusion structure. For the same reason, stirring up the emotions of one's audience is not in itself an argument, even though it may be more effective than argument at moving them, and even though it can be combined with argument.”

    The distinction between argument and persuasion has some historical significance insofar as it is the basis of the distinction between logic and rhetoric as they are traditionally understood — logic choosing argument as its focus, rhetoric choosing persuasion. This being said, the distinction between persuasion and argument remains an elusive one when one considers the arguments one finds in informal discourse. Certainly it must be said that appeals to emotion and character play a significant role in ordinary arguments that occur in social, moral and political contexts. In an argument about nuclear policy, for example, it would be artificial to remove the emotion inherent in a description of the consequences of nuclear war (say, the dropping of the bomb on Hiroshima), especially as this emotion is likely to play a key role in the argument. In the case of character, why not interpret a segment of a speech in which a politician outlines their accomplishments and their record as an ethotic argument which seeks to establish the conclusion that they are of strong and honest character (and should, therefore, be supported in an election campaign)?

    Endorsing the argument-2 conception of argument, Gilbert 1997 (cf. Carozza 2007) proposes a radical move in this direction, understanding argumentation as an attempt to overcome disagreement, propounding a corresponding theory of “coalescent argument.” According to this account, arguments manifest clusters of attitudes, beliefs, feelings and intuitions associated with the arguers. Argumentative exchange is then viewed as an attempt to identify the points of agreement that can characterize different (and possibly opposed) arguers, fostering the “coalescence” of their points of view.

    On the basis of this account, Gilbert expands the scope of argument to include whatever can be used to bring about the coalescence which is its aim. This means that the substance of argument can be, not only reasons in the traditional sense, but also emotional or physical means of coalescence. Sometimes, the latter are the more effective than premises as they have been traditionally understood. While he recognizes the traditional “logical” mode of argument, this means that Gilbert adds other modes, proposing that there can be “emotional,” intuitive (“kisceral”), and physical (“visceral”) modes of argument. According to this account, a hug, a forlorn look, or tears may count as argument.

    Certainly Gilbert's examples show that actions and expressions of emotion often function as a way to convince an audience of a particular point of view. This suggests that informal argument must be understood in a way that allows for this. It is less clear that this requires the radical re-conception of argument he proposes. One might instead attempt to account for the non-logical arguments he identifies as instances of argument-1 that use non-verbal means of communicating propositions which function as premises in a relatively standard sense. When a student (to take one of Gilbert's examples) cries in a professor's office in order to convey the importance he attaches to an A grade in a course, this might, for example, be understood as a non-verbal enthymeme which forwards the argument “I will be devastated if I do not receive an A in this course; you should act in a way that doesn't leave me devastated upset; so you should award me an A grade.” As Gilbert proposes, this is an emotional argument, but not necessarily one that requires fundamentally different criteria of assessment than arguments traditionally conceived. Once the argument has been recognized, one might instead proceed in the standard way, by judging whether the premises are plausible or not, and whether they entail or make probable the conclusion.

    3. An Example: Visual Argument

    Examples can best illustrate some of the ways in which informal logic has extended the scope of argument it began with. The advertisement below is an instance of visual argument that can be used to show how informal logic's analysis of argument can be applied to visual images. Under the title “Just Add Vodka” it features a bottle of vodka spilling its contents onto a village below. The time of day (dusk), the inactivity and the darkness suggest a sleepy hamlet where there is nothing to do at night. In the image, this contrasts sharply with the bustling cityscape that has sprung to life where the vodka splashes to the ground — a cityscape that boasts a nightlife among the skyscrapers, nightclubs, bars, and restaurants.

    EXAMPLE 2:



    If we attempt to understand it literally, the image makes little sense — bottles of vodka are not so absurdly large, do not pour vodka on sleepy villages, and would not create a Manhattan streetscape if they did. In view of these incongruities (and the fundamental principles that guide us in the interpretation of speech acts), we do not naturally interpret the image as a literal depiction of some event, but as a visual metaphor. In this case, the metaphor propounds a message of transformation to the viewer, the vodka functioning as the catalyst for the change. One might roughly summarize this message verbally, as the message that: “Vodka can transform your sleepy life into one full of cosmopolitan excitement.”

    A detailed analysis of the image might analyse its use of colours, its aesthetic qualities, its relationship to other images, its sexual connotations, and so on. In the context of argumentation, the key point is that the ad is intended as a way to convince us that we should add vodka to our lives (and in a real advertisement, a particular brand of vodka). In view of this, we might express the message as a visual argument, which can be paraphrased as follows:

    Premise: If you add vodka to your life, your sleepy nights will be transformed into nights of cosmopolitan excitement.
    Conclusion: You should add vodka to your life (i.e., purchase vodka).

    One might fill out this analysis by noting that the move from the premise to the conclusion depends on an implicit premise/assumption which we might summarize as the proposition that “A life of cosmopolitan excitement is highly desirable.”

    Once the image is recognized as an argument, we can assess it in the way that informal logic assesses verbal arguments. The great advantage of this approach is that it invites a critical assessment of the argument it forwards. To that end, it can be said that the premise of the argument is obviously questionable, for it is not clear that the consumption of vodka is a likely way to transform one's life into an exciting cosmopolitan life (rather than one beset by, for example, alcohol-related problems).

    Once we recognize the argumentative structure of the advertisement, we can go further, and consider whether it should be understood as an instance of an argument scheme (a standard pattern of argument). In this case, it can be classified as an instance of a variant of the fallacy “affirming the consequent,” albeit a normative variant which does not allow one to infer that “X is desirable” from the premises that “If X then Y” and “Y is desirable.” The unacceptability of the inferences that make up such arguments can be demonstrated with examples, as with the argument, “If all sex acts were eliminated, we would eliminate sexually transmitted diseases. The elimination of sexually transmitted disease is desirable. Therefore the elimination of all sex acts is desirable.”

    The key point is that image in question can be recognized as an act of communication with an implicit premise and conclusion structure. Understanding it in this way — as an instance of visual argument — allows us to analyze and evaluate it with the tools of analysis and assessment that informal logic has developed (whether additional tools are needed to assess such arguments remains an open question). In this way, the evaluation of argumentative images can be made a matter of systematic examination and critical inquiry which goes beyond aesthetic assessment. In the present case, this allows one to describe the image as an impressive accomplishment from an artistic or aesthetic point of view (which it surely is), but still criticize it as an image which conveys a fallacious argument with questionable premises and debatable assumptions.

    4. NLD and Beyond

    One impetus for the development of informal logic has been the view that natural language arguments do not fit the deductive framework emphasized in traditional logic. The extent to which informal arguments can be understood as deductive arguments has, therefore, been a source of significant debate within informal logic. “Natural Language Deductivism” (NLD) is the view that all informal arguments should be interpreted as attempts to create deductively valid inferences.

    If the premises of a deductively valid argument are true, its conclusion must be true (i.e., cannot be false). Deductive arguments have traditionally been associated with logical and mathematical reasoning thought to produce certain or necessary conclusions, but good deductive arguments in informal contexts typically yield conclusions that are reasonable or plausible — because they rely on premises which are reasonable or plausible (rather than certain). In such cases, a conclusion is as certain as the premises of an argument, but this does not mean that it is certain. In the valid inference:

    EXAMPLE 3: The population of the world will grow from 6 to 9 billion from in the next fifteen years so we will, if we are to provide sufficient food for everyone, need a way to provide for an additional 3 billion people.

    the premise of the argument is not, for example, certain, but reasonable (on the basis of other reasoning that extrapolates from current population trends). It follows that the conclusion of the argument is reasonable rather than certain.

    The goal of natural language deductivism is an approach to informal arguments which allows one to effectively and efficiently assess the support they provide for their conclusions. It suggests that one should do so by:

    (i) interpreting an argument as an attempt to construct a deductively valid inference; and then
    (ii) assessing the credibility of the premises of the argument.

    Because the conclusion of a deductively valid argument is as certain as its premises, (ii) provides a gauge of the strength of the evidence an argument provides in favour of its conclusion. In the case of EXAMPLE 3 above, step (i) in NLD assessment is straightforward (because the argument is obviously valid). Step (ii) is the judgment that the premise of the argument is a reasonable conjecture. On the basis of (ii), we have already noted that the argument establishes its conclusion as a reasonable conjecture.

    The major challenge for natural language deductivism is its account of informal arguments that are not explicitly deductive. In circumstances of this sort, NLD assigns arguments implicit premises which, once recognized, render such arguments deductively valid. Govier 1987 therefore describes NLD as a theory of “reconstructive” deductivism). The general approach to argument ‘reconstruction’ it proposes can be illustrated with an example. Consider the following inductive generalization, which would usually be understood as a paradigm example of an argument which is not deductively valid:

    EXAMPLE 4: The French are fastidious about their appearance. I have met many of them in the course of my work there and this was true of all of them.

    Here the claim that “The many French I have met in the course of my work there were all fastidious about their appearance” acts as a premise for the conclusion that “The French are fastidious about their appearance.” Natural language deductivism suggests that we should treat this as an attempt to construct a deductive inference by understanding it as an argument with an implicit premise. It may, for example, assign the argument the implicit premise that “The French have the same attitude to their appearance that I have witnessed in the many French I have met in the course of my work there.” So understood, the argument can be seen as a deductively valid inference.

    According to NLD, we can always assign some implicit premise that will serve the purposes of deductivist reconstruction. In doing so, the deductivist may note that implicit premises are a generally accepted feature of natural language arguments, and invoke standard ways of identifying implicit premises. The pragma-dialectical account of indirect speech acts (Eemeren and Grootendorst 2002) is, for example, well suited to deductivist reconstruction.

    In favour of natural language deductivism, it has been argued that it is an attractive theory of informal argument because it proposes a theory that analyzes and assesses all arguments as instances of one well understood form of inference; eliminates difficult distinctions between deductive, inductive, conductive, abductive, etc. arguments (which are not clearly distinguished in natural language argumentation); and recognizes implicit premises in a way that usefully propels dialectical exchange in ordinary argument (see Groarke 1999). Aristotle has been proposed as a key historical figure who adopts the deductivist approach (Groarke 2009). Those who reject deductivism argue that it is an artificial theory which forces informal arguments to adhere to an overly restrictive model of argument that is too narrow to account for the richness of ordinary reasoning (Johnson 2000 and Godden 2004).

    Alternative accounts of informal argument grant that deductive reasoning is one component of informal reasoning, but maintain that many informal arguments do not fit this model of reasoning. Many accounts of informal logic categorize arguments in terms of the traditional distinction between “deductive” and “inductive” arguments, a distinction which Govier 1987 dubs “the great divide,” emphasizing the latter over the former. If the premises of an “inductively valid” argument are true, the conclusion is only probable or plausible, leaving open the possibility that the premises are true and the conclusion false.

    In classifying the basic forms of inference that characterize natural language arguments, some countenance other kinds of inferences that are said to be unique: notably “conductive” and “abductive” arguments.

    Conductive arguments are instances of argument that provide an accumulation of non-decisive reasons in favour of a conclusion (see Zenker and Fischer 2010, Other Internet Resources). Different pieces of evidence may each suggest (but not conclusively prove) that a defendant charged with murder is guilty. Taken summatively (the witness said he pulled the trigger, the ballistics report shows that the bullet came from a gun he owned, he was overheard saying he would “get” the victim, etc.) these different reasons may provide a strong (but not conclusive) conductive argument for this conclusion.

    Abductive arguments are “inferences to the best explanation.” They typically recognize some facts, point out that it is entailed by a certain hypothesis, and conclude that the hypothesis is true. Taken at face value, abductive arguments appear to be instances of the fallacy “affirming the consequent,” and might on these grounds be dismissed, though they play a central role in medical, scientific and legal reasoning (see Walton 2004).

    Gilbert 1997 proposes a more radical recategorization of arguments which would recognize “emotional arguments” as a fundamental category which demands its own treatment and assessment. “Visual” and “non-verbal” arguments are other categories that are common. The extent to which these different categories need to be recognized as distinct forms of inference (rather than special instances or distinct expressions of more basic categories) remains a matter of debate.

    5. Fallacy Theory

    Early work in informal logic favoured fallacies as a way of assessing informal arguments. Traditional accounts define a fallacy as a pattern of poor reasoning which appears to be (and in this sense mimics) a pattern of good reasoning (see Hansen 2002). Such accounts are a problematic basis for a general account of fallacies insofar as what appears to be good reasoning to one person may not appear so to another. In assessing ordinary arguments, these issues can be avoided by understanding fallacies more simply, as common patterns of faulty reasoning which can usefully be identified in the evaluation of informal arguments.

    In its treatment of fallacies, informal logic revives a tradition which can be traced to Aristotle. In the history of logic and philosophy, its significance is reflected in the writings of figures like Locke, Whately, and Mill. Today, this tradition manifests itself in textbooks and websites which attempt to teach good informal reasoning by teaching students how to detect the standard fallacies.

    Theoretical discussions of fallacies have not produced an agreed-upon taxonomy, but there is a common set of fallacies which are typically used in the analysis of informal arguments. They include formal fallacies like affirming the consequent and denying the antecedent; and informal fallacies like ad hominem (“against the person”), slippery slope, ad bacculum (“appeal to force”), ad misericordiam (“appeal to pity”), “hasty generalization,” and “two wrongs” (as in “two wrongs don't make a right”). In textbooks, authors may devise their own nomenclature to highlight the properties of particular kinds of fallacious arguments (“misleading vividness” thus designates the misuse of vivid anecdotal evidence, and so on.)

    In the research literature, Woods and Walton have discussed the definition, analysis and assessment of a variety of fallacies in a series of articles and books, first as co-authors and then individually (see, e.g., Woods and Walton 1989, Walton 1989, Woods 1995, Walton 1992, Walton 2000). Van Eemeren and Grootendorst 1992 have proposed a “pragma-dialectical” theory which analyses fallacies as violations of the rules of critical discussion (discussion which aims to critically resolve a difference of opinion). A good representative collection of classical and contemporary essays on the fallacies is found in Hansen and Pinto 1995.

    Some research in informal logic continues to focus on fallacies, and on the appropriate understanding of particular fallacies, but the field has evolved in different directions which place less emphasis on the fallacy approach. In some cases this has been because fallacies can be subsumed by more general accounts of argument. If one adopts a dialogical approach to argument, for example, then the crux of one's theory of argument is the implicit rules that govern various kinds of dialogical exchange. One can then see fallacies, not as a theoretically distinct notion, but as deviations from these rules. This approach leaves room for fallacies but makes an account of dialogical exchange, not fallacies, the basis of one's account of argument.

    In other contexts, many have criticized fallacy theory on the grounds that traditional fallacies are imprecise tools for understanding argument, and because a focus on them inevitably emphasizes poor reasoning rather than good argument. Hitchcock (1995, 324) has, for example, written that the claim that we should teach good reasoning by fallacies is “like saying that the best way to teach somebody to play tennis without making the common mistakes … is to demonstrate these faults in action and get him to label and respond to them.”

    The problems with fallacy theory have been compounded by research which has identified many instances of traditional fallacies which appear to be reasonable patterns of inference in day-to-day contexts of argument. In such discussions, commentators point to examples like the following:


    EXAMPLE 5: Martin Luther King Jr., influenced by Gandhi, argued that we can justifiably break laws in a democratic country if our goal is change which has been unjustly obstructed. Such arguments play a central role in the American civil rights movement. They are not obviously fallacious, though they are a case of “two wrongs make a right” suggesting, as they do, that we can justifiably do something wrong (break a law) if we are responding to another wrong (i.e., some law, decision or policy that unjustly obstructs change).

    EXAMPLE 6: The argument that “The attempt to use military might to put an end to terrorism is wrong because it will take us down a slippery slope that will end in improper interference in the affairs of independent states” cannot be dismissed as a bad argument simply by saying that it is an instance of the fallacy slippery slope. If such a slippery slope is plausible, then the argument has some merit.

    EXAMPLE 7: The argument “No one with a history of heart disease should take up running, for running is a strenuous form of exercise, and no one with a history of heart disease should engage in strenuous exercise” is, like many informal arguments, deductively valid. In such cases, it is impossible for the conclusion of the argument to be false if the premises are true. Sometimes this relationship is described by saying that the premises of the argument already contain the conclusion; but this suggests that all deductive arguments commit the fallacy begging the question, which occurs when an argument assumes what it attempts to prove.

    EXAMPLE 8: The argument that we should not listen to the metaphysical arguments of someone who has accosted us, on the grounds that he is psychotically disturbed and doesn't know what he is taking about, is an instance of ad hominem, but it is not fallacious. Assuming these premises true, this is eminently reasonable practical advice.

    In the wake of many examples and discussions of this sort, contemporary accounts of fallacies widely recognize there are arguments which have the form of traditional fallacies, but cannot be rejected as fallacious. While the field of informal logic still recognizes key fallacies (e.g., equivocation and false dilemma) in pedagogical and theoretical discussion, the problems with fallacy theory have convinced many that theories of informal logic should focus, not on fallacies, but on general criteria for good reasoning (premise acceptability and relevance, etc.). The latter is often manifest in the study of structures for good inference (“argument schemes”) which set standards for particular kinds of good reasoning.

    Grennan 1997 has proposed an approach to informal reasoning which proposes logical adequacy and pragmatic adequacy as the key criteria for judging and evaluating everyday inferences. He attempts to build an account of informal logic that extends beyond fallacies and deductive forms of reasoning by identifying good patterns of reasoning used in successful everyday contexts. Groarke & Tindale 2012 use traditional fallacies as a basis for the definition of positive argument schemes, by treating ad hominem, guilt by association, appeals to ignorance, two wrongs reasoning, etc. as legitimate schemes of argument — and by treating fallacious instances of them as deviations from an (inherently correct) norm.

    Other authors do not go this far, but informal logic has, since its inception, evolved in a way that places less emphasis on the traditional fallacies, and more on the identification of cogent appeals to authority, arguments by analogy, and other schemes or argument, and on the general issues that arise in the construction of good arguments.

    6. An Example: Ad Hominem

    Different approaches to fallacies can be illustrated with the fallacy ad hominem. Consider as a first example a remark adapted from a Danish television debate over the question whether the Danish church should be separated from the Danish state (Jorgensen 1995, 369).

    EXAMPLE 9: You should not listen to my opponent. He wants to sever the Danish church from the state for his own personal sake.

    This remark attempts to cast doubt on the proposal that the Danish church and state be seperated by casting doubt on the motivation behind the proposal — by alleging that it is motivated by its proponent's own personal interests (which the speaker goes on to elaborate). Here we have an attempt to provide a reason (and hence an argument) for the conclusion that one should not listen to the proposal to separate the Danish church and state.

    Looked at from the point of view of fallacy theory, this is a classic case of ad hominem. Kahane 1995 (p. 65), for example, describes it as a fallacy that occurs when an arguer is guilty “of attacking his opponent rather than his opponent's evidence and arguments.” In the case at hand, this means that the debater constructs an argument which attacks the motivation and the character of the person promoting the separation of the Danish church and state, instead of showing what is wrong with the arguments he has provided for his proposal. On these grounds, the argument can be dismissed as an instance of the fallacy ad hominem.

    Consider a second example from Velonews: The Journal of Competitive Cycling. In the wake of an article on the retirement of Lance Armstrong, the seven-time winner of the Tour de France (17/02/2011), its website featured an exchange between its readers. In response to a contributer who argued that Armstrong was a great athlete and that everyone should be happy for Armstrong and celebrate his accomplishments, one commentator wrote:

    He's not a great athlete, he's a fraud, a cheat and a liar. That's why not everybody is “happy for Lance.”

    Here the explanation why not everyone is “happy for Lance” forwards a reason why one shouldn't celebrate his career: i.e., because he is a cheater and a liar (because he allegedly violated doping regulations). In answer to this retort, the initial arguer responded with the comment:

    EXAMPLE 10: Jealousy is a bummer.

    Here we have another paradigm example of ad hominem. As in EXAMPLE 9, the arguer dismisses an argument they oppose, not on the grounds that the premises or inferences it incorporates are problematic, but by discrediting (and in this and many other cases, insulting) the arguer who proposes it.

    Dialogical approaches to argument have a different theoretical structure than fallacy theory, but they invite a very similar analysis of these examples. According to Van Eemeren and Grootendorst 1992, an instance of ad hominem is a violation of the first rule for critical discussion, which maintains that “Parties [to a dispute] must not prevent each other from advancing standpoints or casting doubts on arguments.” Different kinds of ad hominem (abusive, tu quoque, and circumstantial ad hominem) are different violations of this rule. In this case, it suffices to say that the debater's attack on his opponent can be seen as an illegitimate attempt to deny him his right to make a case for his position.

    Other approaches to informal arguments are critical of the fallacy approach, proposing a more sympathetic approach to ad hominem. As they point out, there are circumstances where criticisms of the person are legitimate grounds for doubting or rejecting their point of view. If we can demonstrate that a politican has millions of dollars to gain from the passage of a particular motion, this is a reason to be sceptical of their point of view. If an arguer has repeatedly shown poor judgment or lacks the requisite knowledge to make reasonable judgments about some issue, then this may be a good reason to dismiss their point of view. This is especially true in informal contexts, in which arguers may be inundated with many more arguments and positions than they can possibly investigate, forcing them to decide which arguments merit their attention. In such contexts, ad (or pro) hominem considerations may be the most reasonable way to make these decisions.

    Rhetorical approaches to argument invite this approach to ad hominem, which can be understood in terms of Aristotle's suggestion that the ethos of a speaker plays a crucial role in determining whether an argument is persuasive or not. In keeping with this, an ad hominem argument may be understood as an attack on the ethos of an arguer which is in principle acceptable. This does not mean that every ad hominem is acceptable, but only those which convincingly undermine the credibility of the arguer who is criticized. In the extreme cases, where ad hominem attacks tend to be ad hoc insults (as in EXAMPLE 10 above), the intemperate and arbitrary nature of such attacks is likely to undermine, not the ethos of the person attacked, but the ethos of the arguer who launches the attack.

    One may enshrine the notion that ad hominem moves can be acceptable in different ways within a theory of informal argument. If one understands ad hominem as a pattern of argument (providing reasons for the conclusion that one should dismiss or be sceptical of someone's point of view), then one must find a method for distinguishing between instances of this pattern which are and are not acceptable. If one analyzes ad hominem as a particular kind of move in dialectical exchange, then one may develop rules of dialogue which distinguish circumstances in which such moves are and are not acceptable. Nevetheless, many of the ad hominem arguments that appear in everyday discourse remain problematic, notwithstanding such attempts to accommodate them. What is right about the traditional view that ad hominem arguments are fallacious can still be captured in the observation that such arguments cannot definitively show that there are flaws in the arguments offered for the position they dismiss. In order to demonstrate the latter, one must deal directly with these arguments — and not merely the arguers who propound them.

    7. Rhetoric

    Especially when one considers non-fallacy approaches to informal argument, one might compare informal logic to classical formal logic. In both cases one finds an attempt to identify general criteria for good reasoning and argument schemes that incorporate specific forms of reasoning. In the latter case, this is reflected in a focus on validity and soundness, and on deductive argument schemes encapsulated in rules of inference like modus ponens (“Affirming the Antecedent”), double negation, modus tollens (“Denying the Consequent”), etc. In the case of informal logic, the standard criteria for good argument can be reduced to (i) premise acceptability and (ii) a conclusion that follows from the premises. This second criterion is typically understood in terms of relevance and sufficiency, making a good argument an argument with premises that are relevant to the conclusion and sufficient to establish it as (at least) acceptable. Within informal logic, the key argument schemes discussed include arguments from authority, causal reasoning, arguments by analogy, and various forms of moral argument.

    In other ways, informal logic might be contrasted with formal logic insofar as it aims to understand the dynamics of arguments which operate in complex varied social interactions which serve many different purposes. In a particular circumstance, this may mean that the success or failure of an argument needs to be understood and assessed in ways that extend beyond the notions that define classical logic. The latter evaluates arguments in terms of “soundness,” defining a sound argument as a deductively valid inference with true premises that establishes the truth of its conclusion. This is a conception of good argument which can be applied to many instances of ordinary argument, but there are many situations in which the success and failure of arguments may be measured in other ways.

    Different informal contexts may be characterized by different levels of uncertainty (sometimes extreme uncertainty); by deep and fundamentally different worldviews; by ethical and aesthetic judgments which are not easily categorized as true or false (or correct and incorrect); and by variable social contexts with different aims, in which which particular assumptions may be accepted, rejected, or reversed (in arguments about international affairs, in the court room, in alternative dispute mediation, in commentary on the arts, in the formation of science policy, and so on). Pinto 2001 suggests that the aim of many arguments does not appear to be assent to the truth of a proposition but the withholding of assent (or full assent) or a particular attitude. An argument may, for example, function as a means of instilling fear or hope or disapprobation. In order to leave room for these kinds of examples, he defines an argument as “an invitation to inference” (68–69) which is not limited to the aim of establishing the truth of some proposition.

    In looking for ways to account for the features of argument that are not captured by traditional logical conceptions, informal logicians have turned to rhetorical traditions. Insofar as it takes persuasion to be the goal of argument, it recognizes its social function and the role this must play in understanding successful argument. Looked at from this point of view, soundness is not sufficient for successful argument, for there is no guarantee that a (deductively) valid argument with true premises will convince an audience of its conclusion (or instill in them the attitude an arguer intends). At the very least, a successful argument must offer premises they accept (and, ideally, embrace). As successful arguers have always known, this means that the construction of a successful argument requires, not only a search for true premises, but an understanding of the members of one's audience (their beliefs, attitudes and values) and the premises that will consequently ‘speak’ to them.

    Those aspects of argument which play a key role in their success as vehicles of persuasion are the three components of argument which are the foundation for Aristotelean rhetoric: pathos (the convictions of the audience to whom an argument is addressed), logos (the logic of the argument), and ethos (the character of the arguer). Ethos plays a role in persuasion because we are, as Aristotle suggests, more likely to be convinced by an arguer we believe to be credible and trustworthy. It is this which explains why arguers who indulge in frequent insult, exaggeration and other questionable tactics frequently undermine their own use of argument. The relevance of rhetorical analysis to informal logic is emphasized by Tindale (1999, 2004, 2010), who advocates an approach to informal logic that incorporates traditional rhetoric.

    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7704
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: Archangelic Queens of Heaven and the United States of the Solar System

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Fri Mar 29, 2013 8:59 pm

    Informal Logic http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logic-informal/ continued:

    8. Dialectics

    Other aspects of ordinary argument which extend the scope of informal logic are dialectical. Dialectics understands argument as a kind of exchange — what can roughly be described as the exchange of positions (theses) and counter-positions. The dialectical approach places argument within the broader scope of dispute and debate. In contemporary discussions of argument, the most influential dialectical approach is pragma-dialectics, an approach developed by Van Eemeren and Grootendorst 1992 (sometimes known as “the Amsterdam School”). It sees argumentation as a means of resolving differences of opinion which must operate within particular rules for critical discussion.

    The pragma-dialectical approach incorporates many of the standard features of argument analysis. Fallacies can, for example, be understood as violations of the rules for critical discussion, and the development of such discussion incorporates the use of schemes of argument. Rhetorical influences are incorporated as a form of “strategic maneouvring,” understood as the attempt to rhetorically influence the outcome of a dispute (see Tindale 2004, ch. 1 Eemeren & Houtlosser 2002, and Feteris et al. 2011). In understanding strategic maneouvring, rhetorical considerations are brought to bear in three ways: (i) through topical potential (the way the topic is framed and presented); (ii) by addressing audience demands (by “communion” with the audience); and (iii)through presentational devices (by choosing the best figure or scheme to achieve one's ends).

    Within informal logic, the dialectical aspects of argument have given rise to the notion that arguers have “dialectical obligations” which are a key component of proper argument (see Johnson 2000). As arguers our key dialectical obligation is an obligation to respond to (and anticipate) objections that might be raised by our opponents in the dispute in which we are engaged. To emphasize this point, Johnson distinguishes between the “illative” core of an argument and its “dialectical” tier. The illative core is the set of premises offered in support of the conclusion; the dialectical tier consists of alternative points of view, likely objections to the conclusion, and the premises and whatever assumptions characterize debate about the conclusion. This raises the question whether logic as it has been traditionally conceived pays too much attention to the illative core of arguments, i.e., not recognizing that a rational arguer must pay as much attention to their dialectical tier.

    According to Johnson, all genuine arguments are dialectical and must discharge dialectical obligations. This suggests that the paradigm example of argument in the history of logic — a giving of reasons for some conclusion can, without elaboration, be classified only as a “proto-argument.” Most authors (e.g., Govier 1999 and Hitchcock 2002) have rejected the suggestion that we should broaden our definitions to make dialectical obligations a necessary component of an argument, but now grant that some accounting of the dialectical aspects of argumentative exchange must be an integral part of any comprehensive understanding of ordinary argument.

    9. Dialogue Theory

    Dialectical approaches to argument have highlighted the extent to which argumentation is a dialogue between (real or imagined) interlocutors who argue for different points of view. In view of this, the structure of the dialogues in which arguments are embedded has become a major area of research in informal logic. Pragma-dialectics take critical discussion as a model, distinguishing different stages of such dialogue (confrontation, opening, argumentation, and closing) and the rules that apply at each stage. Others distinguish different types of dialogues that are characterized by different goals and structures.

    The intuitive basis for the distinction between different types of dialogue is evident if one compares the norms of argument in different kinds of contexts. In an inquiry, arguments are used as tools in an attempt to establish what is true. So understood, arguments must adhere to strict standards that determine what counts as evidence and counter-evidence for some point of view. In collective bargaining, a form of negotiation dialogue, arguments function in a very different way. Not as a means for establishing what is true, but as tools in an attempt to find a negotiated settlement between two parties which have conflicting interests (an employer and their employees in a union). Rigourous rules govern such exchange (prohibiting “bargaining in bad faith” and so on), but they are different rules than those that govern a dialogue which functions as a search for truth. Collective bargaining is, for example, a kind of dialogue in which the use of threats (to strike or lock employees out) are a key part of the process. In contrast, threats have no clear role in critical inquiry, where they would ordinarily be classed as instances of the fallacy ad bacculum.

    Walton 2007 has emerged as one of the most significant proponents of a dialogue approach. He understands a dialogue as an exchange made up of an opening stage, an argumentation stage, and a closing stage. In the opening stage, the arguers in the dialogue agree to participate. The rules for the dialogue define what types of moves are allowed. What kinds of questions are permitted, for example, and how they can be responded to.

    Walton distinguishes seven basic types of dialogue which can be summarized as follows.

    1. Persuasion -- Conflict of Opinion -- Persuade Other Party -- Resolve Issue.

    2. Inquiry -- Need to Have Proof -- Verify Evidence -- Prove Hypothesis.

    3. Discovery -- Need for Explanation -- Find a Hypothesis -- Support Hypothesis.

    4. Negotiation -- Conflict of Interests -- Secure Interests -- Settle Issue.

    5. Information -- Need Information -- Acquire Information -- Exchange Information.

    6. Deliberation -- Practical Choice -- Fit Goals and Actions -- Decide What to Do.

    7. Eristic -- Personal Conflict -- Attack an Opponent -- Reveal Deep Conflict.

    The dialogue approach provides a clear way to recognize the different norms and expectations tied to different argumentative context. It raises the question whether the proposed accounts of particular dialogues are adequate, whether the kinds of dialogues that have been identified are adequate (or necessary) to explain the different kinds of argumentation that characterize ordinary discourse, and whether there are types of dialogues that have not yet been identified (or whether there are kinds of argumentation that resist categorizations of this sort).

    10. The Components of Informal Logic

    As a field of study and research, informal logic has evolved into a complex attempt to understand the nature and assessment of informal arguments. Though any list of informal logic issues cannot be definitive, the current state of the field suggests that a complete theory of informal logic would have to include:
    1.an account of the principles of communication which argumentative exchange depends upon;
    2.a distinction between different kinds of dialogue in which argument may occur, and the ways in which they determine appropriate and inappropriate moves in argumentation (e.g., the difference between scientific discussion and negotiation);
    3.an account of logical consequence, which explains when it can be said (and what it means to say) that some claim (or attitude) is a logical consequence of another;
    4.a typology of argument which provides a framework of argument and analysis by indentifying the basic types of argument that need to be distinguished (deductivism is monistic, hence one of the simplest typologies; others will distinguish between fundamentally different kinds of argument);
    5.an account of good argument which specifies general criteria for deductive, inductive, and conductive arguments;
    6.definitions of positive argument schema which define good patterns of reasoning (reasonable appeals to authority, reasonable attacks against the person; etc.);
    7.some theoretical account of fallacies and the role they can (and cannot) play in understanding and assessing informal arguments;
    8.an account of the role that audience (pathos) and ethos and other rhetorical notions should play in analysing and assessing argument;
    9.an explanation of the dialectical obligations that attach to arguments in particular kinds of contexts.

    Each of these components subsumes more specific issues and questions that would have to be addressed in a full account of argument. A complete account of the principles of communication that argumentation depends on must, for example, incorporate principles that can account for the meaning of images (photographs, graphs, diagrams, illustrations, videos, specimens, etc.) and other non-verbal elements of argument. In developing a general account of good argument, a full theory would include an account of the extent to which the criteria for good argument can be formalized and the best ways of doing so. In the course of the latter, one might ask whether the account of argument that emerges from informal logic can provide a basis for computational modeling and attempts to use computers to assist with, or engage in, the kinds of reasoning that characterize informal contexts (see, e.g., Reed & Norman 2004).

    11. New Horizons

    Informal logic continues to extend its scope as it evolves. One area of development combines the theory of informal argument and computational modeling. Informal logic models of argument have informed the attempt to model interactions between agents in multi-agent systems, and the attempt to mimic or assist human reasoning. Computational applications include systems that involve the development of large-scale webs of inter-connected arguments, reasoning about medical decisions, legal decision making, chemical properties and other complex systems, and general models of argument (see, e.g., Rahwana et al. 2007, Carbogim et al. 2000, Prakken and Vreeswijk 2001, Reed 1997, Reed and Long 1998, and Prakken 2011). Verheij 1999 has developed systems of automated argument assistance which function as computational aids that can assist in the generation of an argument (a link to his Automated Argument Assistance web site is included in Other Internet Resources below). Reed and Norman 2003 have published a pioneering collection of essays which attempt to look at “argument machines” and the ways they might be conceptualized and developed.

    Insofar as informal logic remains an attempt to develop a logic that is accessible to the everyday reasoner, it and computational modeling will remain separate theoretical endeavours. That said, both depend on a theoretical understanding of the way in which informal reasoning works and should be assessed. In the long run, the formal modeling this inspires may reestablish stronger links between formal and informal logic (links that will depend on logics which are more sensitive to the different facets of ordinary reasoning than classical logic). The results may foster the development of informal logic within a more integrated logic (or argumentation theory) that recognizes the differences between formal and informal logic, but recognizes an overarching model of reasoning that can explain both endeavours.

    As informal logic has extended its scope, some researchers have looked for empirical ways to test it. To this end, they have looked for evidence that can show that the teaching of informal logic improves (or does not improve) informal reasoning skills. Questions about the efficacy of informal logic in the classroom are, however, inherently complex. Among other things, a careful attempt to test its effects would have to distinguish between very different approaches to the teaching of informal reasoning. One cannot assume that approaches which emphasize fallacies will, for example, have the same results as those which emphasize argument schemes or rules of dialogue. Ideally, the collection of the empirical evidence would, if it could be collected on the basis of a convincing testing regime, help settle continuing disputes about the relative efficacy of theoretically distinct approaches to teaching.

    Empirical testing has been complicated by debates about the adequacy of the tests that have been used to measure informal reasoning skills. Creating a valid test is a complex endeavor because good informal reasoning is an inherently complex phenomenon which subsumes many specific skills. While some of these are not difficult to measure — e.g., the ability of students to make straightforward deductions and distinguish between necessary and sufficient conditions — it is not clear that these are the most important skills in reasoning that requires that one adeptly weave one's way through the enormous web of debate and discussion that characterizes ordinary discourse (in, to take one example, global debates about what should be done about government debts and deficits).

    What counts as good reasoning or, “critical thinking” (or, even more so, creative thinking), tends to be open ended and unpredictable, dialectical, and influenced by pragmatic and contextual considerations which are not easily assessed using the standard means of large scale testing, i.e., multiple choice tests. Instruments like the California Critical Thinking Test have therefore been criticized (see Groarke 2007 and Sobocan et al. 2007). This does not mean that good testing is in principle impossible, but it does suggest that the discussion and development of methods of assessment needs to be one aspect of the future development of informal logic.

    The assumptions of informal logic are being tested in another way by commentators who study argument “corpora” — large collections of argument drawn from natural language discourse. Jorgenson, Kock and Rorbech 1991 studied a series of 37 one-hour televised debates from Danish public TV which featured well-known public figures arguing for and against current policy proposal. A representative audience of 100 voters voted before and after the debate, in an attempt to statistically establish what moves and properties are likely to win votes in a representative audience. These conclusions were then compared with commonly held notions about “proper” or “valid” argumentation. Other studies are considering corpora made up of large databases of selected written texts (see, e.g., Goodwin & Cortes 2010, and Mochales & Ieven 2009). In principle, corpora made up of whole libraries are possible in the future.

    12. Informal Logic and Philosophy

    Philosophy's association with theories of argument is already evident in ancient times. The relationship flows both ways, philosophy requiring an account of argument as it assembles evidence for particular philosophical perspectives, the theory of argument raising fundamental questions about the nature of reason, rationality and what counts as evidence. In keeping with this association, philosophy and philosophers have played, and continue to play, the defining role in the evolution of informal logic, though work in the field often overlaps with developments in cognate disciplines such as Communication Studies, Rhetoric, and Artificial Intelligence.

    Within informal logic, one finds two distinct attitudes to philosophical considerations. The work of some sees philosophy as the core element of informal logic. The paradigm example of such a view is found in Johnson 2000, who argues that a comprehensive account of argument must be built upon a philosophical account of rationality. An alternative view suggests that informal logic's relationship to philosophy is more comparable to the relationship that exists between the latter and formal logic, and that developments in the means of analyzing and assessing ordinary argument can (at least in many instances) take place independently of a consideration of the philosophical questions which may be raised about its ultimate justification and its philosophical implications. Such a view suggests that we might distinguish between informal logic and the philosophy of informal logic — i.e., between the development of our understanding of day-to-day reasoning and the attempt to provide a philosophical account of it. Even on this view, these two endeavours are closely related and likely to cross-fertilize each other.

    However one understands the role of philosophy within informal logic, its investigation of standards of argument and reason has obvious ties to a variety of philosophical concerns about truth, justification and knowledge. The natural connections between informal logic and epistemology are evident in Goldman 1999, who attempts to defend an account of knowledge and the acquisition of knowledge which situates knowledge within social interactions that take place within interpersonal exchange and knowledge institutions. This allows him to evaluate social practices in terms of their veritistic value (i.e., their tendency to produce states like knowledge, error and ignorance). In the process, his account devotes considerable attention to the practice of argumentation, and the constraints which make it a practice which is to be valued because it produces positive veritistic results. In doing so, he draws on work in informal logic and reflects its interest in both monological and dialogical argumentation, and in a broad understanding of argument that incorporates rhetorical and dialectical responsibilities.

    In this and other ways, informal logic's attempt to model reasoning reflects, and has important implications for, philosophical concerns about the nature of rationality, the nature of the mind and its processes, the standards of good reasoning, the value of logic and rhetoric, and the social, political and epistemological role of reasoning and argument. In many ways, the discussion of informal logic's ties to philosophy of mind, ethics and epistemology has just begun. A more extensive exploration of these ties is likely to be one significant aspect of discussion in the future.

    Bibliography
    Ajdukiewicz, K., 1974. Pragmatic Logic, O. Wojtasiewicz, trans., Dordrecht/Boston/Warsaw: D. Reidel Publishing Company & PWN – Polish Scientific Publishers. (English translation of Logika pragmatyczna, originally published 1965.).
    Barwise, Jon and John Etchemendy, 1998. “Computers, Visualization, and the Nature of Reasoning,” in T. W. Bynum and James H. Moor (eds.), The Digital Phoenix: How Computers are Changing Philosophy, London: Blackwell.
    Battersby, Mark, 2009. Is That a Fact? A Field Guide for Evaluating Statistical and Scientific Information, Peterborough: Broadview Press.
    Birdsell, David and Leo Groarke (eds.), 2007. Argumentation and Advocacy: The Journal of the American Forensic Association (2nd Special Issue on Visual Argumentation), 34(3).
    ––– (eds.), 1996. Argumentation and Advocacy: The Journal of the American Forensic Association (Special Double Issue on Visual Argumentation), 33(1,2).
    Blair, J. Anthony, 2012. Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation: Selected Papers of J. Anthony Blair, Dordrecht: Springer.
    –––, 1996. “The Possibility and Actuality of Visual Arguments,” Argument and Advocacy, 33(1).
    Brinton, Alan and Douglas Walton, 1997. Historical Foundations of Informal Logic, Aldershot, England: Ashgate Publishing.
    Browne, M. Neil and Stuart M. Keeley, 2010. Asking the Right Questions: A Guide to Critical Thinking , 10th Edition. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
    Burke, Michael B., 1994. “Denying the Antecedent: A Common Fallacy?” Informal Logic, 16(1): 23–30.
    Carbogim, D.V., D.S. Robertson and J.R. Lee, 2000. “Argument-Based Applications to Knowledge Engineering,” The Knowledge Engineering Review, 15(2): 119–149.
    Carozza, L. (2007). “Dissent in the midst of emotional territory,” Informal Logic, 27(2): 197–210.
    Collins, Catherine A., and Jill Schmid 1999. “The Power and Perceived Truthfulness of Visual Arguments in Campaign Biofilms,” in van Eemeren,Frans H., Rob Grootendorst, J. Anthony Blair, & Charles A. Willard (eds.), Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation, Amsterdam: SicSat, pp. 95–100.
    Copi, Irving, 1957. Introduction to Logic, New York: Macmillan.
    Crosswhite, James, 1996. The Rhetoric of Reason: Writing and the Attractions of Argument, Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
    Dove, Ian, 2012. “Image, Evidence, Argument,” in van F.H. Eemeren, B. Garssen, D. Godden and G. Mitchell (eds.), Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Argumentation (CD), Amsterdam: ISSA.
    Dumke, G., 1980. Chancellor's Executive Order 338, Chancellor's Office, Long Beach: California State University.
    Eemeren, F. H. van, & Houtlosser, P., 2002. “Strategic maneuvering: Maintaining a delicate balance,” in F. H. van Eemeren & P. Houtlosser (eds.), Dialectic and rhetoric: The warp and woof of argumentation analysis, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 131–59.
    Eemeren, Frans H. van (ed.), 2002. Advances In Pragma-Dialectics, Amsterdam: SicSat.
    Eemeren, Frans H. van and Rob Grootendorst, 1992. Argumentation, Communication, and Fallacies: A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    Eemeren, Frans H. van, R. Grootendorst, F. S. Henkemans, J. A. Blair, R. H. Johnson, E. C. W. Krabbe, C. Plantin, D. N. Walton, C. A. Willard, J. Woods, and D. Zarefsky, 1996. Fundamentals of Argumentation Theory: A Handbook of Historical Backgrounds and Contemporary Developments, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    Ennis, R. H., 2011. “Critical Thinking: Reflection and Perspective” (Part I), Inquiry, 26(1): 4–18.
    Feteris, Eveline, Bart Garssen and Francisca Snoeck Henkemans, 2011. Keeping in Touch with Pragma-Dialectics, Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    Feteris, Eveline, Leo Groarke, and Jose Plug, 2011. “Strategic Maneuvering with visual arguments in political cartoons: A pragma-dialectical analysis of the use of topoi that are based on common cultural heritage,” in Feteris, Garssen, and Henkemans 2011.
    Fisher, Alec, 2004. The Logic of Real Arguments, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Gilbert, Michael, 2001. How to Win an Argument, New York: MJF Books.
    –––, 1997. Coalescent Argumentation, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    Godden, David, 2005. “Deductivism as an Interpretive Strategy: A Reply to Groarke's Recent Defense of Reconstructive Deductivism,” Argumentation and Advocacy, 41(3): 168–83.
    Goldman, Alvin I., 1999. Knowledge in a Social World, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
    Goodwin, Jean and Viviana Cortes, 2010. “Theorists' and practitioners' spatial metaphors for argumentation: A corpus-based approach,” Verbum, 23: 163–78.
    Goodwin, Jean, 2001. “Henry Johnstone, Jr.'s Still-Unacknowledged Contributions to Contemporary Argumentation Theory,” Informal Logic, 21(1): 41–50.
    Govier, Trudy, 2006. A Practical Study of Argument, 6th edition, Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
    –––, 1999. The Philosophy of Argument, Newport News: Vale Press.
    Govier, Trudy, 1987. Problems in Argument Analysis and Evaluation, Amsterdam: Mouton de Gruyter/Foris.
    Grennan, Wayne, 1997. Informal Logic: Issues and Techniques: A proposal for a new system of argument evaluation, Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.
    Groarke, Leo, 2007. “What's Wrong With the California Critical Thinking Test?” in Sobocan & Groarke (eds.) 2007.
    –––, 2002. “The Pragma-Dialectics of Visual Argument,” in van Eemeren 2002.
    –––, 1999. “Deductivism Within Pragma-Dialectics,” Argumentation, 13: 1–16.
    Groarke, Leo and Christopher Tindale, 2012. Good Reasoning Matters! (5th edition), Toronto: Oxford University Press.
    Groarke, Louis, 2009. An Aristotelian Account of Induction: Creating Something From Nothing, Montreal, Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press.
    Hamblin, Charles Leonard, 1970. Fallacies, London: Methuen.
    Hansen, Hans V. 2011. “Are there methods of informal logic?” in F. Zenker (ed.), Argumentation: Community and Cognition, Proceedings of the 9th Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation, Windsor: CRRAR.
    –––, 2002. “The Straw Thing of Fallacy Theory: The Standard Definition of ‘Fallacy’,” Argumentation, 16(2): 133–155.
    Hansen, Hans V. and Robert C. Pinto (eds.), 1995. Fallacies: Classical and Contemporary Readings, University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press.
    Hitchcock, David, 2006. “Informal logic and the concept of argument,” 101–129 in Dale Jacquette (ed.), Philosophy of Logic (Volume 5, Handbook of the Philosophy of Science), Amsterdam: Elsevier.
    –––, 2002. “The Practice of Argumentative Discussion,” Argumentation, 16(3): 287–298.
    –––, 1995. “Do Fallacies Have a Place in the Teaching of Reasoning Skills or Critical Thinking?” in Hans V. Hansen and Robert C. Pinto (eds.), Fallacies: Classical and Contemporary Readings, University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press.
    Hughes, William, Jonathan Lavery & Katheryn Doran, 2010. Critical Thinking: An Introduction to the Basic Skills, 6th edition, Peterborough: Broadview.
    Johnson, Ralph H., 2011. “Informal Logic and Deductivism,” Studies in Logic, 4(1): 17–37.
    –––, 2007. “Making Sense of ‘Informal Logic’,” Informal Logic, 26(3): 231–58.
    –––, 2000. Manifest Rationality: A Pragmatic Theory of Argument, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    –––, 1996. The Rise of Informal Logic, Newport News, VA: Vale Press.
    Johnson, Ralph H. and J. Anthony Blair, 1994. “Informal Logic: Past and Present,” in Ralph H. Johnson and J. Anthony Blair (eds.), New Essays in Informal Logic, Windsor: Informal Logic, 1–19.
    –––, 1977, 1994. Logical Self-Defense, 1st edition, 3rd edition, Toronto: McGraw Hill-Ryerson.
    Jørgensen, Charlotte, Christian Kock and Lone Rørbech, 1995. “Hostility in Public Debate,” in Eemeren, Frans H. van, Rob Grootendorst, J. Anthony Blair and Charles Willard (eds.), Special Fields and Case Studies, Vol. IV, Proceedings of the Third ISSA Conference on Argumentation. Amsterdam: International Centre for the Study of Argumentation.
    –––, 1991. “Rhetoric That Shifts Votes: A Large-Scale Exploratory Study of Persuasion in Issue-Oriented Public Debates,” Political Communication, 15: 283–299.
    Kahane, Howard, 1971, 1995. Logic and Contemporary Rhetoric: The Use of Reason in Everyday Life, 1st edition, 7th edition, Belmont: Wadsworth.
    Kahane, Howard and Nancy M. Cavender, 2002. Logic and Contemporary Rhetoric: The Use of Reason in Everyday Life, 9th Edition, Belmont: Wadsworth.
    Koszowy, Marcin. 2010. “Pragmatic Logic and the Study of Argumentation,” Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric, 22(35): 29–44.
    Lazere, Donald, 1987. “Critical Thinking in College English Studies,” ERIC Digest, ED284275.
    Lunsford, Andrea, John J. Ruszkiewicz, and Keith Walters, 2001. Everything's an Argument, 2nd Edition, Boston: Bedford/St. Martin.
    Mans, Dieter and Gerhard Preyer (eds.), 1999. Reasoning and Argumentation, Special Issue, Protosociology, 13.
    Mochales, Raquel and Aagje Ieven, 2009. “Creating an Argumentation Corpus: Do Theories Apply to Real Arguments? A Case Study on the Legal Argumentation,” Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, ACM: New York.
    Pinto, Robert C., 2001. Argument, Inference and Dialectic: Collected Papers on Informal Logic, Dordrecht: Kluwer.
    Prakken, H. 2010. “An abstract framework for argumentation with structured arguments,” Argument and Computation, 1: 93–124.
    Prakken, H. and G. Vreeswijk, 2001. “Logical Systems for Defeasible Argumentation,” in D. Gabbay and F. Guenthner (eds.), Handbook of Philosophical Logic (Volume 4), 2nd edition, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
    Rahwana, Iyad, Fouad Zablitha, and Chris Reed, 2007. “Laying the foundations for a World Wide Argument Web,” Artificial Intelligence, 171 (July-October): 897–921.
    Reed, C.A. and T.J. Norman, 2004. Argumentation Machines: New Frontiers in Argument and Computation, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
    Reed, C.A. and D.N. Walton, 2002. “Applications of Argumentation Schemes” in Hansen, H.V., C. W. Tindale, J.A. Blair, and R.H. Johnson (eds.), Argumentation and Its Applications: Proceedings of the 4th Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argument, (CD) Windsor: Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation.
    Reed, C.A. and D.P. Long, 1998. “Generating the Structure of Argument” 1091–1097, in W. Hoeppner (ed.), Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Computational Linguistics and 36th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Montreal: COLING-ACL98.
    Reed, C.A., 1997. “Representing and Applying Knowledge for Argumentation in a Social Context,” AI and Society, 11(3–4): 138–154.
    Seay, Gary and Susana Nuccetelli 2012. How to Think Logically, 2nd edition, Boston: Pearson.
    Siegel, Harvey, 1988. Educating reason: rationality, critical thinking, and education, New York: Routledge.
    Shelley, Cameron, 2003. “Aspects of visual argument: A study of the ‘March of Progress’,” Informal Logic, 21(2): 92–112.
    Shelley, Cameron, 1996. “Rhetorical and Demonstrative Modes of Visual Argument: Looking at Images of Human Evolution,” Argumentation and Advocacy, 33 (4): 53–68.
    Sobocan, Jan and Leo Groarke (eds.) (with Ralph H. Johnson and Fred S. Ellett, Jr.), 2007. Critical Thinking, Education and Assessment: Can Critical Thinking Be Tested?, London, Ontario: Althouse Press, University of Western Ontario.
    Tindale, Christopher, 2010. Reason's Dark Champions: Constructive Strategies of Sophistic Argument, Columbia: South Carolina Press.
    –––, 2004. Rhetorical Argumentation: Principles of Theory and Practice, Cornell, NY: Sage Publications.
    –––, 1999. Acts of Arguing: A Rhetorical Model of Argument, Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
    Toulmin, Stephen, 1958/2003. The Uses of Argument, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, updated edition 2003.
    Verheij, Bart, 1999. “Automated Argument Assistance for Lawyers,” Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, 43–52. New York: ACM.
    Walton, Douglas N., 2007. Dialog Theory for Critical Argumentation, Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
    –––, 2004. Abductive Reasoning, Tuscaloosa, University of Alabama Press.
    –––, 2000. Scare Tactics: Arguments that Appeal to Fear and Threats (Argumentation Library: Vol. 3), Berlin: Springer.
    –––, 1997. “Judging How Heavily A Question is Loaded: A Pragmatic Method,” Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines, 17(2): 53–71.
    –––, 1992. Slippery Slope Arguments, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    –––, 1989. Informal Logic: A Handbook for Critical Argumentation, New York: Cambridge University Press.
    Whately, Richard, 1844. Elements of logic, 9th edition, London: B. Fellowes.
    –––, 1830. Elements of rhetoric. 3rd edition, Oxford: W. Baxter.
    Woods, John, 1995. “Appeal to Force,” in Hansen and Pinto 1995.
    Woods, John, Andrew Irvine, and Douglas Walton, 2004. Argument: Critical Thinking, Logic and the Fallacies, Toronto: Prentice Hall.
    Woods, John and Douglas Walton, 1989. Fallacies: Selected Papers 1972–1982, Dordrecht/Providence: Foris.
    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7704
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: Archangelic Queens of Heaven and the United States of the Solar System

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Sat Mar 30, 2013 10:12 am

    I've been really passive with this solar system governance thing -- but I haven't seen other models of solar system governance (except for maybe one) -- but I'm sure they're out there. Someone who should know, told me that negotiations occur on a daily basis -- and that's all I'm gonna say. I think it should be noted that in most science-fiction which involves 'aliens' there is a significant attempt (especially on the human side) to 'make friends and play nice'. Often this hospitality degenerates into open warfare -- but at least they tried. Once again, I suspect that I might be some sort of an Ancient Warrior (and perhaps not so ancient). But in this incarnation, I don't even like to swat a fly -- and I'm a lifelong vegetarian and pacifist. On the other hand, I've lately been moving in a more police and military direction -- but only for purposes of maintaining law and order -- rather than wars of conquest and retribution. I don't necessarily like what David Rockefeller and Henry Kissinger have been involved in throughout the years -- yet I would love to have a 'fireside-chat' with both of them. Incidentally, they both have aged rather well. You don't suppose they have access to exotic anti-aging technology or cloning or ???? I keep craving a certain type of political and theological conversation -- which never materializes. I have to depend upon my imagination to generate internal-debate. I think I would've liked to have had extensive discussions with Bill Cooper and Alex Collier -- regardless of their accuracy or lack thereof. They are simply very interesting to listen to. Please watch and listen to everything you can find by these two men -- but take their material with a sea of salt.

    1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNREw4KmLIY
    2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ku7eJj_jdzA
    3. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtT5mWtSmkk
    4. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9SouPQnxLtM
    5. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZegXpXm4bug
    6. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JyFSbThtXc
    7. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxC0fiSvlGU
    8. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8-KsExCSQY
    9. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0dTv9w8YGM

    I suspect a mixture of fact and fiction in just about every 'disclosure' individual. I think the decision to disclose was made at the highest levels of governance -- especially when the PTB realized that they'd been 'had'. I suspect this rude awakening occurred in the late 1970's -- but it might've been much earlier than this. All I know is that the theologians and pastors I was around in the 1980's looked like they all had lost everything. But Robert H. Schuller seemed to be 'too happy' -- and that's all I'm gonna say about that. I still think that we can learn a helluva lot from the Stargate movies -- and from Stargate SG-1. I realize that it's just fiction -- yet I think the PTB have been trying to tell us the truth for quite some time -- believe it or not. I suspect that disclosure and the infowar will devastate this world at least through 2020 -- but I think this is an essential but painful process. I have no idea if the dangerous mixture of politics and religion in a United States of the Solar System would work or not. It would really depend on what the most powerful humans and other-than-humans did or didn't do. I poke and prod the Jesuits -- yet there is an aspect of that order which should probably be incorporated into solar system governance -- notably education, organization, discipline, sense of place, etc. Perhaps I should take a closer look at Georgetown and Fordham -- if you know what I mean. I have suggested the possibility of a system of schools called the University of Solar System Studies and Governance. I suspect that the Roman Catholic Church has more to do with how this solar system is run than most people think -- but I think most people would be shocked by who I think might issue orders to the universal church. I guess I'm trying to reform the church -- rather than destroy it. I would like to see the church emerge from this present madness Much Stronger that it is presently. But really, when it comes to politics and religion -- I try to be everyone's friend -- which makes me everyone's enemy. I will continue to attempt to be on everyone's side -- even if it completely destroys me -- which is why I like the idea of being a philosopher-observer rather than being some sort of an egotistical-general -- if you know what I mean. My 'walk on the wild-side' should NOT be interpreted as being a rejection of Biblical-Christianity -- but my conclusions and interpretations are VERY different than the 'official and approved version'. I simply think we need a Solar System View of Life, the Universe, and Everything -- rather than a Sterile and Isolated Biblical Worldview (which works well in church -- but not in the 'real' world).

    Check out this vintage sci-fi movie The Astronaut (1972)! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZHZsJ7wdvE (Government officials, not wanting to have the space program canceled, substitute a lookalike for an astronaut who died on a Mars mission. (IMDB)) You know, I don't even want to talk about this stuff in public (in the 'real-world'). It's just a science-fictional mind-game to me. Some of us need to do this sort of thing -- but not all of us. We probably need Believers, Atheists, Agnostics, and Completely Ignorant Fools. It takes all kinds. I guess I like the idea of researching all of the crazy and upsetting stuff -- and then saying and doing very little. I think we change things -- just by knowing. I communicate my feelings and perceptions online -- yet probably no more than a dozen humans and other-than-humans view my material on a regular basis -- and this is probably as it should be -- especially when my theories are so radical -- and my life is such a mess. I swear that if I felt better that I would be a 'model citizen' -- whatever the hell that really means. I also swear that if I were an 'insider' I'd spend 90% of my time in that Room Without a View -- mostly researching and writing -- publicly and privately. I have NO idea what I'm talking about or dealing with -- but it's sort of fun and sort of terrifying to try to figure things out -- and to attempt to make things better -- even if this tempest in a teapot accomplishes absolutely nothing. In the final analysis Greed, Fear, and the Bottom-Line will probably drive the evolution of Humanity and This Solar System into the distant future -- as harsh as that sounds. Some things never change. The Horror.




    Last edited by orthodoxymoron on Sat Mar 30, 2013 8:51 pm; edited 4 times in total
    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7704
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: Archangelic Queens of Heaven and the United States of the Solar System

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Sat Mar 30, 2013 10:50 am

    Here's yet another study-list (which is similar to those I've already posted):

    1. The Latin Mass.
    2. The 1928 Book of Common Prayer.
    3. Christ: The Experience of Jesus as Lord by Edward Schillabeeckx.
    4. Daniel (1978) by Desmond Ford.
    5. Sacred Classical Music.
    6. The Federalist Papers.

    This is intended as a mental and spiritual exercise -- and should NOT be interpreted as favoritism or meddling. I don't wish to give-up or to circle-the-wagons. I continue to be interested in the concept of Christocentric and/or Archangelicentric Egyptology -- although I am making very little progress in these areas. I'm also interested in how the Latin Mass might relate to the Old Testamental Sacrificial System -- Ceremonies in Ancient Egypt -- and to Antedeluvian and/or Pre-Human Religious Ceremonies. Look for references in sacred scripture regarding 'Liturgy', 'Soteriology', and 'Law of God'. I don't really practice what I preach -- but I'm trying. One of these days I might get my act together -- but don't hold your breath. Just make sure that you have YOUR act together. Consider the following descriptions of Lucifer, Satan, Sin, Rebellion, and Conflict in Heaven. The Horror.

    Why was Sin Permitted? - from 'Patriarchs and Prophets' by Ellen White http://www.whiteestate.org/books/pp/pp1.html

    "GOD is love." 1 John 4:16. His nature, His law, is love. It ever has been; it ever will be. "The high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity," whose "ways are everlasting," changeth not. With Him "is no variableness, neither shadow of turning." Isaiah 57:15; Habakkuk 3:6; James 1:17.

    Every manifestation of creative power is an expression of infinite love. The sovereignty of God involves fullness of blessing to all created beings. The psalmist says:

    "Strong is Thy hand, and high is Thy right hand.
    Righteousness and judgment are the foundation of Thy throne:
    Mercy and truth go before Thy face.
    Blessed is the people that know the joyful sound:
    They walk, O Lord, in the light of Thy countenance.
    In Thy name do they rejoice all the day:
    And in Thy righteousness are they exalted.
    For Thou art the glory of their strength: . . .
    or our shield belongeth unto Jehovah,
    And our king to the Holy One."
    Psalm 89:13-18, R.V.

    The history of the great conflict between good and evil, from the time it first began in heaven to the final overthrow of rebellion and the total eradication of sin, is also a demonstration of God's unchanging love. The Sovereign of the universe was not alone in His work of beneficence. He had an associate--a co-worker who could appreciate His purposes, and could share His joy in giving happiness to created beings. "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God." John 1:1, 2. Christ, the Word, the only begotten of God, was one with the eternal Father--one in nature, in character, in purpose--the only being that could enter into all the counsels and purposes of God. "His name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace." Isaiah 9:6. His "goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting." Micah 5:2. And the Son of God declares concerning Himself: "The Lord possessed Me in the beginning of His way, before His works of old. I was set up from everlasting. . . . When He appointed the foundations of the earth: then I was by Him, as one brought up with Him: and I was daily His delight, rejoicing always before Him." Proverbs 8:22-30.

    The Father wrought by His Son in the creation of all heavenly beings. "By Him were all things created, . . . whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by Him, and for Him." Colossians 1:16. Angels are God's ministers, radiant with the light ever flowing from His presence and speeding on rapid wing to execute His will. But the Son, the anointed of God, the "express image of His person," "the brightness of His glory," "upholding all things by the word of His power," holds supremacy over them all. Hebrews 1:3. "A glorious high throne from the beginning," was the place of His sanctuary (Jeremiah 17:12); "a scepter of righteousness," the scepter of His kingdom. Hebrews 1:8. "Honor and majesty are before Him: strength and beauty are in His sanctuary." Psalm 96:6. Mercy and truth go before His face. Psalm 89:14.

    The law of love being the foundation of the government of God, the happiness of all intelligent beings depends upon their perfect accord with its great principles of righteousness. God desires from all His creatures the service of love--service that springs from an appreciation of His character. He takes no pleasure in a forced obedience; and to all He grants freedom of will, that they may render Him voluntary service. So long as all created beings acknowledged the allegiance of love, there was perfect harmony throughout the universe of God. It was the joy of the heavenly host to fulfill the purpose of their Creator. They delighted in reflecting His glory and showing forth His praise. And while love to God was supreme, love for one another was confiding and unselfish. There was no note of discord to mar the celestial harmonies. But a change came over this happy state. There was one who perverted the freedom that God had granted to His creatures. Sin originated with him who, next to Christ, had been most honored of God and was highest in power and glory among the inhabitants of heaven. Lucifer, "son of the morning," was first of the covering cherubs, holy and undefiled. He stood in the presence of the great Creator, and the ceaseless beams of glory enshrouding the eternal God rested upon him. "Thus saith the Lord God; Thou sealest up the sum, full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty. Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering. . . . Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire. Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee." Ezekiel 28:12-15.

    Little by little Lucifer came to indulge the desire for self-exaltation. The Scripture says, "Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness." Ezekiel 28:17. "Thou hast said in thine heart, . . . I will exalt my throne above the stars of God. . . . I will be like the Most High." Isaiah 14:13, 14. Though all his glory was from God, this mighty angel came to regard it as pertaining to himself. Not content with his position, though honored above the heavenly host, he ventured to covet homage due alone to the Creator. Instead of seeking to make God supreme in the affections and allegiance of all created beings, it was his endeavor to secure their service and loyalty to himself. And coveting the glory with which the infinite Father had invested His Son, this prince of angels aspired to power that was the prerogative of Christ alone.

    Now the perfect harmony of heaven was broken. Lucifer's disposition to serve himself instead of his Creator aroused a feeling of apprehension when observed by those who considered that the glory of God should be supreme. In heavenly council the angels pleaded with Lucifer. The Son of God presented before him the greatness, the goodness, and the justice of the Creator, and the sacred, unchanging nature of His law. God Himself had established the order of heaven; and in departing from it, Lucifer would dishonor his Maker and bring ruin upon himself. But the warning, given in infinite love and mercy, only aroused a spirit of resistance. Lucifer allowed his jealousy of Christ to prevail, and became the more determined.

    To dispute the supremacy of the Son of God, thus impeaching the wisdom and love of the Creator, had become the purpose of this prince of angels. To this object he was about to bend the energies of that master mind, which, next to Christ's, was first among the hosts of God. But He who would have the will of all His creatures free, left none unguarded to the bewildering sophistry by which rebellion would seek to justify itself. Before the great contest should open, all were to have a clear presentation of His will, whose wisdom and goodness were the spring of all their joy.

    The King of the universe summoned the heavenly hosts before Him, that in their presence He might set forth the true position of His Son and show the relation He sustained to all created beings. The Son of God shared the Father's throne, and the glory of the eternal, self-existent One encircled both. About the throne gathered the holy angels, a vast, unnumbered throng--"ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands" (Revelation 5:11.), the most exalted angels, as ministers and subjects, rejoicing in the light that fell upon them from the presence of the Deity. Before the assembled inhabitants of heaven the King declared that none but Christ, the Only Begotten of God, could fully enter into His purposes, and to Him it was committed to execute the mighty counsels of His will. The Son of God had wrought the Father's will in the creation of all the hosts of heaven; and to Him, as well as to God, their homage and allegiance were due. Christ was still to exercise divine power, in the creation of the earth and its inhabitants. But in all this He would not seek power or exaltation for Himself contrary to God's plan, but would exalt the Father's glory and execute His purposes of beneficence and love.

    The angels joyfully acknowledged the supremacy of Christ, and prostrating themselves before Him, poured out their love and adoration. Lucifer bowed with them, but in his heart there was a strange, fierce conflict. Truth, justice, and loyalty were struggling against envy and jealousy. The influence of the holy angels seemed for a time to carry him with them. As songs of praise ascended in melodious strains, swelled by thousands of glad voices, the spirit of evil seemed vanquished; unutterable love thrilled his entire being; his soul went out, in harmony with the sinless worshippers, in love to the Father and the Son. But again he was filled with pride in his own glory. His desire for supremacy returned, and envy of Christ was once more indulged. The high honors conferred upon Lucifer were not appreciated as God's special gift, and therefore, called forth no gratitude to his Creator. He glorified in his brightness and exaltation and aspired to be equal with God. He was beloved and reverenced by the heavenly host, angels delighted to execute his commands, and he was clothed with wisdom and glory above them all. Yet the Son of God was exalted above him, as one in power and authority with the Father. He shared the Father's counsels, while Lucifer did not thus enter into the purposes of God. "Why," questioned this mighty angel, "should Christ have the supremacy? Why is He honored above Lucifer?"

    Leaving his place in the immediate presence of the Father, Lucifer went forth to diffuse the spirit of discontent among the angels. He worked with mysterious secrecy, and for a time concealed his real purpose under an appearance of reverence for God. He began to insinuate doubts concerning the laws that governed heavenly beings, intimating that though laws might be necessary for the inhabitants of the worlds, angels, being more exalted, needed no such restraint, for their own wisdom was a sufficient guide. They were not beings that could bring dishonor to God; all their thoughts were holy; it was no more possible for them than for God Himself to err. The exaltation of the Son of God as equal with the Father was represented as an injustice to Lucifer, who, it was claimed, was also entitled to reverence and honor. If this prince of angels could but attain to his true, exalted position, great good would accrue to the entire host of heaven; for it was his object to secure freedom for all. But now even the liberty which they had hitherto enjoyed was at an end; for an absolute Ruler had been appointed them, and to His authority all must pay homage. Such were the subtle deceptions that through the wiles of Lucifer were fast obtaining in the heavenly courts.

    There had been no change in the position or authority of Christ. Lucifer's envy and misrepresentation and his claims to equality with Christ had made necessary a statement of the true position of the Son of God; but this had been the same from the beginning. Many of the angels were, however, blinded by Lucifer's deceptions.

    Taking advantage of the loving, loyal trust reposed in him by the holy beings under his command, he had so artfully instilled into their minds his own distrust and discontent that his agency was not discerned. Lucifer had presented the purposes of God in a false light--misconstruing and distorting them to excite dissent and dissatisfaction. He cunningly drew his hearers on to give utterance to their feelings; then these expressions were repeated by him when it would serve his purpose, as evidence that the angels were not fully in harmony with the government of God. While claiming for himself perfect loyalty to God, he urged that changes in the order and laws of heaven were necessary for the stability of the divine government. Thus while working to excite opposition to the law of God and to instill his own discontent into the minds of the angels under him, he was ostensibly seeking to remove dissatisfaction and to reconcile disaffected angels to the order of heaven. While secretly fomenting discord and rebellion, he with consummate craft caused it to appear as his sole purpose to promote loyalty and to preserve harmony and peace.

    The spirit of dissatisfaction thus kindled was doing its baleful work. While there was no open outbreak, division of feeling imperceptibly grew up among the angels. There were some who looked with favor upon Lucifer's insinuations against the government of God. Although they had heretofore been in perfect harmony with the order which God had established, they were now discontented and unhappy because they could not penetrate His unsearchable counsels; they were dissatisfied with His purpose in exalting Christ. These stood ready to second Lucifer's demand for equal authority with the Son of God. But angels who were loyal and true maintained the wisdom and justice of he divine decree and endeavored to reconcile this disaffected being to the will of God. Christ was the Son of God; He had been one with Him before the angels were called into existence. He had ever stood at the right hand of the Father; His supremacy, so full of blessing to all who came under its benignant control, had not heretofore been questioned. The harmony of heaven had never been interrupted; wherefore should there now be discord? The loyal angels could see only terrible consequences from this dissension, and with earnest entreaty they counseled the disaffected ones to renounce their purpose and prove themselves loyal to God by fidelity to His government.

    In great mercy, according to His divine character, God bore long with Lucifer. The spirit of discontent and disaffection had never before been known in heaven. It was a new element, strange, mysterious, unaccountable. Lucifer himself had not at first been acquainted with the real nature of his feelings; for a time he had feared to express the workings and imaginings of his mind; yet he did not dismiss them. He did not see whither he was drifting. But such efforts as infinite love and wisdom only could devise, were made to convince him of his error. His disaffection was proved to be without cause, and he was made to see what would be the result of persisting in revolt. Lucifer was convinced that he was in the wrong. He saw that "the Lord is righteous in all His ways, and holy in all His works" (Psalm 145:17); that the divine statutes are just, and that he ought to acknowledge them as such before all heaven. Had he done this, he might have saved himself and many angels. He had not at that time fully cast off his allegiance to God. Though he had left his position as covering cherub, yet if he had been willing to return to God, acknowledging the Creator's wisdom, and satisfied to fill the place appointed him in God's great plan, he would have been reinstated in his office. The time had come for a final decision; he must fully yield to the divine sovereignty or place himself in open rebellion. He nearly reached the decision to return, but pride forbade him. It was too great a sacrifice for one who had been so highly honored to confess that he had been in error, that his imaginings were false, and to yield to the authority which he had been working to prove unjust.

    A compassionate Creator, in yearning pity for Lucifer and his followers, was seeking to draw them back from the abyss of ruin into which they were about to plunge. But His mercy was misinterpreted. Lucifer pointed to the long-suffering of God as an evidence of his own superiority, an indication that the King of the universe would yet accede to his terms. If the angels would stand firmly with him, he declared, they could yet gain all that they desired. He persistently defended his own course, and fully committed himself to the great controversy against his Maker. Thus it was that Lucifer, "the light bearer," the sharer of God's glory, the attendant of His throne, by transgression became Satan, "the adversary" of God and holy beings and the destroyer of those whom Heaven had committed to his guidance and guardianship.

    Rejecting with disdain the arguments and entreaties of the loyal angels, he denounced them as deluded slaves. The preference shown to Christ he declared an act of injustice both to himself and to all the heavenly host, and announced that he would no longer submit to this invasion of his rights and theirs. He would never again acknowledge the supremacy of Christ. He had determined to claim the honor which should have been given him, and take command of all who would become his followers; and he promised those would enter his ranks a new and better government, under which all would enjoy freedom. Great numbers of the angels signified their purpose to accept him as their leader. Flattered by the favor with which his advances were received, he hoped to win all the angels to his side, to become equal with God Himself, and to be obeyed by the entire host of heaven.

    Still the loyal angels urged him and his sympathizers to submit to God; and they set before them the inevitable result should they refuse: He who had created them could overthrow their power and signally punish their rebellious daring. No angel could successfully oppose the law of God, which was as sacred as Himself. They warned all to close their ears against Lucifer's deceptive reasoning, and urged him and his followers to seek the presence of God without delay and confess the error of questioning His wisdom and authority.

    Many were disposed to heed this counsel, to repent of their disaffection, and seek to be again received into favor with the Father and His Son. But Lucifer had another deception ready. The mighty revolter now declared that the angels who had united with him had gone too far to return; that he was acquainted with the divine law, and knew that God would not forgive. He declared that all who should submit to the authority of Heaven would be stripped of their honor, degraded from their position. For himself, he was determined never again to acknowledge the authority of Christ. The only course remaining for him and his followers, he said, was to assert their liberty, and gain by force the rights which had not been willingly accorded them.

    So far as Satan himself was concerned, it was true that he had now gone too far to return. But not so with those who had been blinded by his deceptions. To them the counsel and entreaties of the loyal angels opened a door of hope; and had they heeded the warning, they might have broken away from the snare of Satan. But pride, love for their leader, and the desire for unrestricted freedom were permitted to bear sway, and the pleadings of divine love and mercy were finally rejected.

    God permitted Satan to carry forward his work until the spirit of disaffection ripened into active revolt. It was necessary for his plans to be fully developed, that their true nature and tendency might be seen by all. Lucifer, as the anointed cherub, had been highly exalted; he was greatly loved by the heavenly beings, and his influence over them was strong. God's government included not only the inhabitants of heaven, but of all the worlds that He had created; and Lucifer had concluded that if he could carry the angels of heaven with him in rebellion, he could carry also all the worlds. He had artfully presented his side of the question, employing sophistry and fraud to secure his objects. His power to deceive was very great. By disguising himself in a cloak of falsehood, he had gained an advantage. All his acts were so clothed with mystery that it was difficult to disclose to the angels the true nature of his work. Until fully developed, it could not be made to appear the evil thing it was; his disaffection would not be seen to be rebellion. Even the loyal angels could not fully discern his character or see to what his work was leading.

    Lucifer had at first so conducted his temptations that he himself stood uncommitted. The angels whom he could not bring fully to his side, he accused of indifference to the interests of heavenly beings. The very work which he himself was doing, he charged upon the loyal angels. It was his policy to perplex with subtle arguments concerning the purposes of God. Everything that was simple he shrouded in mystery, and by artful perversion cast doubt upon the plainest statements of Jehovah. And his high position, so closely connected with the divine government, gave greater force to his representations.

    God could employ only such means as were consistent with truth and righteousness. Satan could use what God could not-- flattery and deceit. He had sought to falsify the word of God and had misrepresented His plan of government, claiming that God was not just in imposing laws upon the angels; that in requiring submission and obedience from His creatures, He was seeking merely the exaltation of Himself. It was therefore necessary to demonstrate before the inhabitants of heaven, and of all the worlds, that God's government is just, His law perfect. Satan had made it appear that he himself was seeking to promote the good of the universe. The true character of the usurper and his real object must be understood by all. He must have time to manifest himself by his wicked works.

    The discord which his own course had caused in heaven, Satan charged upon the government of God. All evil he declared to be the result of the divine administration. He claimed that it was his own object to improve upon the statutes of Jehovah. Therefore God permitted him to demonstrate the nature of his claims, to show the working out of his proposed changes in the divine law. His own work must condemn him. Satan had claimed from the first that he was not in rebellion. The whole universe must see deceiver unmasked.

    Even when he was cast out of heaven. Infinite Wisdom did not destroy Satan. Since only the service of love can be acceptable to God, the allegiance of His creatures must rest upon a conviction of His justice and benevolence. The inhabitants of heaven and of the worlds, being unprepared to comprehend the nature or consequences of sin, could not then have seen the justice of God in the destruction of Satan. Had he been immediately blotted out of existence, some would have served God from fear rather than from love. The influence of the deceiver would not have been fully destroyed, nor would be the spirit of rebellion have been utterly eradicated. For the good of the entire universe through ceaseless ages, he must more fully developed his principles, that his charges against the divine government might be seen in their true light by all created beings, and that the justice and mercy of God and the immutability of His law might be forever placed beyond all question.

    Satan's rebellion was to be a lesson to the universe through all coming ages--a perpetual testimony to the nature of sin and its terrible results. The working out of Satan's rule, its effects upon both men and angels, would show what must be the fruit of setting aside the divine authority. It would testify that with the existence of God's government is bound up the well-being of all the creatures He has made. Thus the history of this terrible experiment of rebellion was to be a perpetual safeguard to all holy beings, to prevent them from being deceived as to the nature of transgression, to save them from committing sin, and suffering its penalty.

    He that ruleth in the heavens is the one who sees the end from the beginning--the one before whom the mysteries of the past and the future are alike outspread, and who, beyond the woe and darkness and ruin that sin has wrought, beholds the accomplishment of His own purposes of love and blessing. Though "clouds and darkness are round about Him: righteousness and judgment are the foundation of His throne." Psalm 97:2, R.V. And this the inhabitants of the universe, both loyal and disloyal, will one day understand. "His work is perfect: for all His ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is He." Deuteronomy 32:4.

    PAPER 53: THE LUCIFER REBELLION - from The Urantia Book http://www.urantia.org/en/urantia-book-standardized/paper-53-lucifer-rebellion

    53:0.1 Lucifer was a brilliant primary Lanonandek Son of Nebadon. He had experienced service in many systems, had been a high counselor of his group, and was distinguished for wisdom, sagacity, and efficiency. Lucifer was number 37 of his order, and when commissioned by the Melchizedeks, he was designated as one of the one hundred most able and brilliant personalities in more than seven hundred thousand of his kind. From such a magnificent beginning, through evil and error, he embraced sin and now is numbered as one of three System Sovereigns in Nebadon who have succumbed to the urge of self and surrendered to the sophistry of spurious personal liberty—rejection of universe allegiance and disregard of fraternal obligations, blindness to cosmic relationships.
    53:0.2 In the universe of Nebadon, the domain of Christ Michael, there are ten thousand systems of inhabited worlds. In all the history of Lanonandek Sons, in all their work throughout these thousands of systems and at the universe headquarters, only three System Sovereigns have ever been found in contempt of the government of the Creator Son.
    053:1 THE LEADERS OF REBELLION
    53:1.1 Lucifer was not an ascendant being; he was a created Son of the local universe, and of him it was said: " You were perfect in all your ways from the day you were created till unrighteousness was found in you. " Many times had he been in counsel with the Most Highs of Edentia. And Lucifer reigned " upon the holy mountain of God, " the administrative mount of Jerusem, for he was the chief executive of a great system of 607 inhabited worlds.
    53:1.2 Lucifer was a magnificent being, a brilliant personality; he stood next to the Most High Fathers of the constellations in the direct line of universe authority. Notwithstanding Lucifer's transgression, subordinate intelligences refrained from showing him disrespect and disdain prior to Michael's bestowal on Urantia. Even the archangel of Michael, at the time of Moses' resurrection, " did not bring against him an accusing judgment but simply said, `the Judge rebuke you.' " Judgment in such matters belongs to the Ancients of Days, the rulers of the superuniverse.
    53:1.3 Lucifer is now the fallen and deposed Sovereign of Satania. Self-contemplation is most disastrous, even to the exalted personalities of the celestial world. Of Lucifer it was said: " Your heart was lifted up because of your beauty; you corrupted your wisdom because of your brightness. " Your olden prophet saw his sad estate when he wrote: " How are you fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! How are you cast down, you who dared to confuse the worlds! "
    53:1.4 Very little was heard of Lucifer on Urantia owing to the fact that he assigned his first lieutenant, Satan, to advocate his cause on your planet. Satan was a member of the same primary group of Lanonandeks but had never functioned as a System Sovereign; he entered fully into the Lucifer insurrection. The " devil " is none other than Caligastia, the deposed Planetary Prince of Urantia and a Son of the secondary order of Lanonandeks. At the time Michael was on Urantia in the flesh, Lucifer, Satan, and Caligastia were leagued together to effect the miscarriage of his bestowal mission. But they signally failed.
    53:1.5 Abaddon was the chief of the staff of Caligastia. He followed his master into rebellion and has ever since acted as chief executive of the Urantia rebels. Beelzebub was the leader of the disloyal midway creatures who allied themselves with the forces of the traitorous Caligastia.
    53:1.6 The dragon eventually became the symbolic representation of all these evil personages. Upon the triumph of Michael, " Gabriel came down from Salvington and bound the dragon (all the rebel leaders) for an age. " Of the Jerusem seraphic rebels it is written: " And the angels who kept not their first estate but left their own habitation, he has reserved in sure chains of darkness to the judgment of the great day. "

    53:2 THE CAUSES OF REBELLION
    53:2.1 Lucifer and his first assistant, Satan, had reigned on Jerusem for more than five hundred thousand years when in their hearts they began to array themselves against the Universal Father and his then vicegerent Son, Michael.
    53:2.2 There were no peculiar or special conditions in the system of Satania which suggested or favored rebellion. It is our belief that the idea took origin and form in Lucifer's mind, and that he might have instigated such a rebellion no matter where he might have been stationed. Lucifer first announced his plans to Satan, but it required several months to corrupt the mind of his able and brilliant associate. However, when once converted to the rebel theories, he became a bold and earnest advocate of " self-assertion and liberty. "
    53:2.3 No one ever suggested rebellion to Lucifer. The idea of self-assertion in opposition to the will of Michael and to the plans of the Universal Father, as they are represented in Michael, had its origin in his own mind. His relations with the Creator Son had been intimate and always cordial. At no time prior to the exaltation of his own mind did Lucifer openly express dissatisfaction about the universe administration. Notwithstanding his silence, for more than one hundred years of standard time the Union of Days on Salvington had been reflectivating to Uversa that all was not at peace in Lucifer's mind. This information was also communicated to the Creator Son and the Constellation Fathers of Norlatiadek.
    53:2.4 Throughout this period Lucifer became increasingly critical of the entire plan of universe administration but always professed wholehearted loyalty to the Supreme Rulers. His first outspoken disloyalty was manifested on the occasion of a visit of Gabriel to Jerusem just a few days before the open proclamation of the Lucifer Declaration of Liberty. Gabriel was so profoundly impressed with the certainty of the impending outbreak that he went direct to Edentia to confer with the Constellation Fathers regarding the measures to be employed in case of open rebellion.
    53:2.5 It is very difficult to point out the exact cause or causes which finally culminated in the Lucifer rebellion. We are certain of only one thing, and that is: Whatever these first beginnings were, they had their origin in Lucifer's mind. There must have been a pride of self that nourished itself to the point of self-deception, so that Lucifer for a time really persuaded himself that his contemplation of rebellion was actually for the good of the system, if not of the universe. By the time his plans had developed to the point of disillusionment, no doubt he had gone too far for his original and mischief-making pride to permit him to stop. At some point in this experience he became insincere, and evil evolved into deliberate and willful sin. That this happened is proved by the subsequent conduct of this brilliant executive. He was long offered opportunity for repentance, but only some of his subordinates ever accepted the proffered mercy. The Faithful of Days of Edentia, on the request of the Constellation Fathers, in person presented the plan of Michael for the saving of these flagrant rebels, but always was the mercy of the Creator Son rejected and rejected with increasing contempt and disdain.
    Bible References

    53:3 THE LUCIFER MANIFESTO
    53:3.1 Whatever the early origins of trouble in the hearts of Lucifer and Satan, the final outbreak took form as the Lucifer Declaration of Liberty. The cause of the rebels was stated under three heads:
    53:3.2 1. The reality of the Universal Father. Lucifer charged that the Universal Father did not really exist, that physical gravity and space-energy were inherent in the universe, and that the Father was a myth invented by the Paradise Sons to enable them to maintain the rule of the universes in the Father's name. He denied that personality was a gift of the Universal Father. He even intimated that the finaliters were in collusion with the Paradise Sons to foist fraud upon all creation since they never brought back a very clear-cut idea of the Father's actual personality as it is discernible on Paradise. He traded on reverence as ignorance. The charge was sweeping, terrible, and blasphemous. It was this veiled attack upon the finaliters that no doubt influenced the ascendant citizens then on Jerusem to stand firm and remain steadfast in resistance to all the rebel's proposals.
    53:3.3 2. The universe government of the Creator Son—Michael. Lucifer contended that the local systems should be autonomous. He protested against the right of Michael, the Creator Son, to assume sovereignty of Nebadon in the name of a hypothetical Paradise Father and require all personalities to acknowledge allegiance to this unseen Father. He asserted that the whole plan of worship was a clever scheme to aggrandize the Paradise Sons. He was willing to acknowledge Michael as his Creator-father but not as his God and rightful ruler.
    53:3.4 Most bitterly did he attack the right of the Ancients of Days—" foreign potentates "—to interfere in the affairs of the local systems and universes. These rulers he denounced as tyrants and usurpers. He exhorted his followers to believe that none of these rulers could do aught to interfere with the operation of complete home rule if men and angels only had the courage to assert themselves and boldly claim their rights.
    53:3.5 He contended that the executioners of the Ancients of Days could be debarred from functioning in the local systems if the native beings would only assert their independence. He maintained that immortality was inherent in the system personalities, that resurrection was natural and automatic, and that all beings would live eternally except for the arbitrary and unjust acts of the executioners of the Ancients of Days.
    53:3.6 3. The attack upon the universal plan of ascendant mortal training. Lucifer maintained that far too much time and energy were expended upon the scheme of so thoroughly training ascending mortals in the principles of universe administration, principles which he alleged were unethical and unsound. He protested against the agelong program for preparing the mortals of space for some unknown destiny and pointed to the presence of the finaliter corps on Jerusem as proof that these mortals had spent ages of preparation for some destiny of pure fiction. With derision he pointed out that the finaliters had encountered a destiny no more glorious than to be returned to humble spheres similar to those of their origin. He intimated that they had been debauched by overmuch discipline and prolonged training, and that they were in reality traitors to their mortal fellows since they were now co-operating with the scheme of enslaving all creation to the fictions of a mythical eternal destiny for ascending mortals. He advocated that ascenders should enjoy the liberty of individual self-determination. He challenged and condemned the entire plan of mortal ascension as sponsored by the Paradise Sons of God and supported by the Infinite Spirit.
    53:3.7 And it was with such a Declaration of Liberty that Lucifer launched his orgy of darkness and death.
    Bible References

    53:4 OUTBREAK OF THE REBELLION
    53:4.1 The Lucifer manifesto was issued at the annual conclave of Satania on the sea of glass, in the presence of the assembled hosts of Jerusem, on the last day of the year, about two hundred thousand years ago, Urantia time. Satan proclaimed that worship could be accorded the universal forces—physical, intellectual, and spiritual—but that allegiance could be acknowledged only to the actual and present ruler, Lucifer, the " friend of men and angels " and the " God of liberty. "
    53:4.2 Self-assertion was the battle cry of the Lucifer rebellion. One of his chief arguments was that, if self-government was good and right for the Melchizedeks and other groups, it was equally good for all orders of intelligence. He was bold and persistent in the advocacy of the " equality of mind " and " the brotherhood of intelligence. " He maintained that all government should be limited to the local planets and their voluntary confederation into the local systems. All other supervision he disallowed. He promised the Planetary Princes that they should rule the worlds as supreme executives. He denounced the location of legislative activities on the constellation headquarters and the conduct of judicial affairs on the universe capital. He contended that all these functions of government should be concentrated on the system capitals and proceeded to set up his own legislative assembly and organized his own tribunals under the jurisdiction of Satan. And he directed that the princes on the apostate worlds do the same.
    53:4.3 The entire administrative cabinet of Lucifer went over in a body and were sworn in publicly as the officers of the administration of the new head of " the liberated worlds and systems. "
    53:4.4 While there had been two previous rebellions in Nebadon, they were in distant constellations. Lucifer held that these insurrections were unsuccessful because the majority of the intelligences failed to follow their leaders. He contended that " majorities rule, " that " mind is infallible. " The freedom allowed him by the universe rulers apparently sustained many of his nefarious contentions. He defied all his superiors; yet they apparently took no note of his doings. He was given a free hand to prosecute his seductive plan without let or hindrance.
    53:4.5 All the merciful delays of justice Lucifer pointed to as evidence of the inability of the government of the Paradise Sons to stop the rebellion. He would openly defy and arrogantly challenge Michael, Immanuel, and the Ancients of Days and then point to the fact that no action ensued as positive evidence of the impotency of the universe and the superuniverse governments.
    53:4.6 Gabriel was personally present throughout all these disloyal proceedings and only announced that he would, in due time, speak for Michael, and that all beings would be left free and unmolested in their choice; that the " government of the Sons for the Father desired only that loyalty and devotion which was voluntary, wholehearted, and sophistry-proof. "
    53:4.7 Lucifer was permitted fully to establish and thoroughly to organize his rebel government before Gabriel made any effort to contest the right of secession or to counterwork the rebel propaganda. But the Constellation Fathers immediately confined the action of these disloyal personalities to the system of Satania. Nevertheless, this period of delay was a time of great trial and testing to the loyal beings of all Satania. All was chaotic for a few years, and there was great confusion on the mansion worlds.
    Bible References

    53:5 NATURE OF THE CONFLICT
    53:5.1 Upon the outbreak of the Satania rebellion, Michael took counsel of his Paradise brother, Immanuel. Following this momentous conference, Michael announced that he would pursue the same policy which had characterized his dealings with similar upheavals in the past, an attitude of noninterference.
    53:5.2 At the time of this rebellion and the two which preceded it there was no absolute and personal sovereign authority in the universe of Nebadon. Michael ruled by divine right, as vicegerent of the Universal Father, but not yet in his own personal right. He had not completed his bestowal career; he had not yet been vested with " all power in heaven and on earth. "
    53:5.3 From the outbreak of rebellion to the day of his enthronement as sovereign ruler of Nebadon, Michael never interfered with the rebel forces of Lucifer; they were allowed to run a free course for almost two hundred thousand years of Urantia time. Christ Michael now has ample power and authority to deal promptly, even summarily, with such outbreaks of disloyalty, but we doubt that this sovereign authority would lead him to act differently if another such upheaval should occur.
    53:5.4 Since Michael elected to remain aloof from the actual warfare of the Lucifer rebellion, Gabriel called his personal staff together on Edentia and, in counsel with the Most Highs, elected to assume command of the loyal hosts of Satania. Michael remained on Salvington while Gabriel proceeded to Jerusem, and establishing himself on the sphere dedicated to the Father—the same Universal Father whose personality Lucifer and Satan had questioned—in the presence of the forgathered hosts of loyal personalities, he displayed the banner of Michael, the material emblem of the Trinity government of all creation, the three azure blue concentric circles on a white background.
    53:5.5 The Lucifer emblem was a banner of white with one red circle, in the center of which a black solid circle appeared.
    53:5.6 " There was war in heaven; Michael's commander and his angels fought against the dragon (Lucifer, Satan, and the apostate princes); and the dragon and his rebellious angels fought but prevailed not. " This " war in heaven " was not a physical battle as such a conflict might be conceived on Urantia. In the early days of the struggle Lucifer held forth continuously in the planetary amphitheater. Gabriel conducted an unceasing exposure of the rebel sophistries from his headquarters taken up near at hand. The various personalities present on the sphere who were in doubt as to their attitude would journey back and forth between these discussions until they arrived at a final decision.
    53:5.7 But this war in heaven was very terrible and very real. While displaying none of the barbarities so characteristic of physical warfare on the immature worlds, this conflict was far more deadly; material life is in jeopardy in material combat, but the war in heaven was fought in terms of life eternal.
    Bible References

    53:6 A LOYAL SERAPHIC COMMANDER
    53:6.1 There were many noble and inspiring acts of devotion and loyalty which were performed by numerous personalities during the interim between the outbreak of hostilities and the arrival of the new system ruler and his staff. But the most thrilling of all these daring feats of devotion was the courageous conduct of Manotia, the second in command of the Satania headquarters' seraphim.
    53:6.2 At the outbreak of rebellion on Jerusem the head of the seraphic hosts joined the Lucifer cause. This no doubt explains why such a large number of the fourth order, the system administrator seraphim, went astray. The seraphic leader was spiritually blinded by the brilliant personality of Lucifer; his charming ways fascinated the lower orders of celestial beings. They simply could not comprehend that it was possible for such a dazzling personality to go wrong.
    53:6.3 Not long since, in describing the experiences associated with the onset of the Lucifer rebellion, Manotia said: " But my most exhilarating moment was the thrilling adventure connected with the Lucifer rebellion when, as second seraphic commander, I refused to participate in the projected insult to Michael; and the powerful rebels sought my destruction by means of the liaison forces they had arranged. There was a tremendous upheaval on Jerusem, but not a single loyal seraphim was harmed.
    53:6.4 " Upon the default of my immediate superior it devolved upon me to assume command of the angelic hosts of Jerusem as the titular director of the confused seraphic affairs of the system. I was morally upheld by the Melchizedeks, ably assisted by a majority of the Material Sons, deserted by a tremendous group of my own order, but magnificently supported by the ascendant mortals on Jerusem.
    53:6.5 " Having been automatically thrown out of the constellation circuits by the secession of Lucifer, we were dependent on the loyalty of our intelligence corps, who forwarded calls for help to Edentia from the near-by system of Rantulia; and we found that the kingdom of order, the intellect of loyalty, and the spirit of truth were inherently triumphant over rebellion, self-assertion, and so-called personal liberty; we were able to carry on until the arrival of the new System Sovereign, the worthy successor of Lucifer. And immediately thereafter I was assigned to the corps of the Melchizedek receivership of Urantia, assuming jurisdiction over the loyal seraphic orders on the world of the traitorous Caligastia, who had proclaimed his sphere a member of the newly projected system of `liberated worlds and emancipated personalities' proposed in the infamous Declaration of Liberty issued by Lucifer in his call to the `liberty-loving, free-thinking, and forward-looking intelligences of the misruled and maladministered worlds of Satania.' "
    53:6.6 This angel is still in service on Urantia, functioning as associate chief of seraphim.

    53:7 HISTORY OF THE REBELLION
    53:7.1 The Lucifer rebellion was system wide. Thirty-seven seceding Planetary Princes swung their world administrations largely to the side of the archrebel. Only on Panoptia did the Planetary Prince fail to carry his people with him. On this world, under the guidance of the Melchizedeks, the people rallied to the support of Michael. Ellanora, a young woman of that mortal realm, grasped the leadership of the human races, and not a single soul on that strife-torn world enlisted under the Lucifer banner. And ever since have these loyal Panoptians served on the seventh Jerusem transition world as the caretakers and builders on the Father's sphere and its surrounding seven detention worlds. The Panoptians not only act as the literal custodians of these worlds, but they also execute the personal orders of Michael for the embellishment of these spheres for some future and unknown use. They do this work as they tarry en route to Edentia.
    53:7.2 Throughout this period Caligastia was advocating the cause of Lucifer on Urantia. The Melchizedeks ably opposed the apostate Planetary Prince, but the sophistries of unbridled liberty and the delusions of self-assertion had every opportunity for deceiving the primitive peoples of a young and undeveloped world.
    53:7.3 All secession propaganda had to be carried on by personal effort because the broadcast service and all other avenues of interplanetary communication were suspended by the action of the system circuit supervisors. Upon the actual outbreak of the insurrection the entire system of Satania was isolated in both the constellation and the universe circuits. During this time all incoming and outgoing messages were dispatched by seraphic agents and Solitary Messengers. The circuits to the fallen worlds were also cut off, so that Lucifer could not utilize this avenue for the furtherance of his nefarious scheme. And these circuits will not be restored so long as the archrebel lives within the confines of Satania.
    53:7.4 This was a Lanonandek rebellion. The higher orders of local universe sonship did not join the Lucifer secession, although a few of the Life Carriers stationed on the rebel planets were somewhat influenced by the rebellion of the disloyal princes. None of the Trinitized Sons went astray. The Melchizedeks, archangels, and the Brilliant Evening Stars were all loyal to Michael and, with Gabriel, valiantly contended for the Father's will and the Son's rule.
    53:7.5 No beings of Paradise origin were involved in disloyalty. Together with the Solitary Messengers they took up headquarters on the world of the Spirit and remained under the leadership of the Faithful of Days of Edentia. None of the conciliators apostatized, nor did a single one of the Celestial Recorders go astray. But a heavy toll was taken of the Morontia Companions and the Mansion World Teachers.
    53:7.6 Of the supreme order of seraphim, not an angel was lost, but a considerable group of the next order, the superior, were deceived and ensnared. Likewise a few of the third or supervisor order of angels were misled. But the terrible breakdown came in the fourth group, the administrator angels, those seraphim who are normally assigned to the duties of the system capitals. Manotia saved almost two thirds of them, but slightly over one third followed their chief into the rebel ranks. One third of all the Jerusem cherubim attached to the administrator angels were lost with their disloyal seraphim.
    53:7.7 Of the planetary angelic helpers, those assigned to the Material Sons, about one third were deceived, and almost ten per cent of the transition ministers were ensnared. In symbol John saw this when he wrote of the great red dragon, saying: " And his tail drew a third part of the stars of heaven and cast them down in darkness. "
    53:7.8 The greatest loss occurred in the angelic ranks, but most of the lower orders of intelligence were involved in disloyalty. Of the 681,227 Material Sons lost in Satania, ninety-five per cent were casualties of the Lucifer rebellion. Large numbers of midway creatures were lost on those individual planets whose Planetary Princes joined the Lucifer cause.
    53:7.9 In many respects this rebellion was the most widespread and disastrous of all such occurrences in Nebadon. More personalities were involved in this insurrection than in both of the others. And it is to their everlasting dishonor that the emissaries of Lucifer and Satan spared not the infant-training schools on the finaliter cultural planet but rather sought to corrupt these developing minds in mercy salvaged from the evolutionary worlds.
    53:7.10 The ascending mortals were vulnerable, but they withstood the sophistries of rebellion better than the lower spirits. While many on the lower mansion worlds, those who had not attained final fusion with their Adjusters, fell, it is recorded to the glory of the wisdom of the ascension scheme that not a single member of the Satania ascendant citizenship resident on Jerusem participated in the Lucifer rebellion.
    53:7.11 Hour by hour and day by day the broadcast stations of all Nebadon were thronged by the anxious watchers of every imaginable class of celestial intelligence, who intently perused the bulletins of the Satania rebellion and rejoiced as the reports continuously narrated the unswerving loyalty of the ascending mortals who, under their Melchizedek leadership, successfully withstood the combined and protracted efforts of all the subtle evil forces which so swiftly gathered around the banners of secession and sin.
    53:7.12 It was over two years of system time from the beginning of the " war in heaven " until the installation of Lucifer's successor. But at last the new Sovereign came, landing on the sea of glass with his staff. I was among the reserves mobilized on Edentia by Gabriel, and I well remember the first message of Lanaforge to the Constellation Father of Norlatiadek. It read: " Not a single Jerusem citizen was lost. Every ascendant mortal survived the fiery trial and emerged from the crucial test triumphant and altogether victorious. " And on to Salvington, Uversa, and Paradise went this message of assurance that the survival experience of mortal ascension is the greatest security against rebellion and the surest safeguard against sin. This noble Jerusem band of faithful mortals numbered just 187,432,811.
    53:7.13 With the arrival of Lanaforge the archrebels were dethroned and shorn of all governing powers, though they were permitted freely to go about Jerusem, the morontia spheres, and even to the individual inhabited worlds. They continued their deceptive and seductive efforts to confuse and mislead the minds of men and angels. But as concerned their work on the administrative mount of Jerusem, " their place was found no more. "
    53:7.14 While Lucifer was deprived of all administrative authority in Satania, there then existed no local universe power nor tribunal which could detain or destroy this wicked rebel; at that time Michael was not a sovereign ruler. The Ancients of Days sustained the Constellation Fathers in their seizure of the system government, but they have never handed down any subsequent decisions in the many appeals still pending with regard to the present status and future disposition of Lucifer, Satan, and their associates.
    53:7.15 Thus were these archrebels allowed to roam the entire system to seek further penetration for their doctrines of discontent and self-assertion. But in almost two hundred thousand Urantia years they have been unable to deceive another world. No Satania worlds have been lost since the fall of the thirty-seven, not even those younger worlds peopled since that day of rebellion.
    Bible References

    53:8 THE SON OF MAN ON URANTIA
    53:8.1 Lucifer and Satan freely roamed the Satania system until the completion of the bestowal mission of Michael on Urantia. They were last on your world together during the time of their combined assault upon the Son of Man.
    53:8.2 Formerly, when the Planetary Princes, the " Sons of God, " were periodically assembled, " Satan came also, " claiming that he represented all of the isolated worlds of the fallen Planetary Princes. But he has not been accorded such liberty on Jerusem since Michael's terminal bestowal. Subsequent to their effort to corrupt Michael when in the bestowal flesh, all sympathy for Lucifer and Satan has perished throughout all Satania, that is, outside the isolated worlds of sin.
    53:8.3 The bestowal of Michael terminated the Lucifer rebellion in all Satania aside from the planets of the apostate Planetary Princes. And this was the significance of Jesus' personal experience, just before his death in the flesh, when he one day exclaimed to his disciples, " And I beheld Satan fall as lightning from heaven. " He had come with Lucifer to Urantia for the last crucial struggle.
    53:8.4 The Son of Man was confident of success, and he knew that his triumph on your world would forever settle the status of his agelong enemies, not only in Satania but also in the other two systems where sin had entered. There was survival for mortals and security for angels when your Master, in reply to the Lucifer proposals, calmly and with divine assurance replied, " Get you behind me, Satan. " That was, in principle, the real end of the Lucifer rebellion. True, the Uversa tribunals have not yet rendered the executive decision regarding the appeal of Gabriel praying for the destruction of the rebels, but such a decree will, no doubt, be forthcoming in the fullness of time since the first step in the hearing of this case has already been taken.
    53:8.5 Caligastia was recognized by the Son of Man as the technical Prince of Urantia up to near the time of his death. Said Jesus: " Now is the judgment of this world; now shall the prince of this world be cast down. " And then still nearer the completion of his lifework he announced, " The prince of this world is judged. " And it is this same dethroned and discredited Prince who was once termed " God of Urantia. "
    53:8.6 The last act of Michael before leaving Urantia was to offer mercy to Caligastia and Daligastia, but they spurned his tender proffer. Caligastia, your apostate Planetary Prince, is still free on Urantia to prosecute his nefarious designs, but he has absolutely no power to enter the minds of men, neither can he draw near to their souls to tempt or corrupt them unless they really desire to be cursed with his wicked presence.
    53:8.7 Before the bestowal of Michael these rulers of darkness sought to maintain their authority on Urantia, and they persistently withstood the minor and subordinate celestial personalities. But since the day of Pentecost this traitorous Caligastia and his equally contemptible associate, Daligastia, are servile before the divine majesty of the Paradise Thought Adjusters and the protective Spirit of Truth, the spirit of Michael, which has been poured out upon all flesh.
    53:8.8 But even so, no fallen spirit ever did have the power to invade the minds or to harass the souls of the children of God. Neither Satan nor Caligastia could ever touch or approach the faith sons of God; faith is an effective armor against sin and iniquity. It is true: " He who is born of God keeps himself, and the wicked one touches him not. "
    53:8.9 In general, when weak and dissolute mortals are supposed to be under the influence of devils and demons, they are merely being dominated by their own inherent and debased tendencies, being led away by their own natural propensities. The devil has been given a great deal of credit for evil which does not belong to him. Caligastia has been comparatively impotent since the cross of Christ.
    Bible References

    53:9 PRESENT STATUS OF THE REBELLION
    53:9.1 Early in the days of the Lucifer rebellion, salvation was offered all rebels by Michael. To all who would show proof of sincere repentance, he offered, upon his attainment of complete universe sovereignty, forgiveness and reinstatement in some form of universe service. None of the leaders accepted this merciful proffer. But thousands of the angels and the lower orders of celestial beings, including hundreds of the Material Sons and Daughters, accepted the mercy proclaimed by the Panoptians and were given rehabilitation at the time of Jesus' resurrection nineteen hundred years ago. These beings have since been transferred to the Father's world of Jerusem, where they must be held, technically, until the Uversa courts hand down a decision in the matter of Gabriel vs. Lucifer. But no one doubts that, when the annihilation verdict is issued, these repentant and salvaged personalities will be exempted from the decree of extinction. These probationary souls now labor with the Panoptians in the work of caring for the Father's world.
    53:9.2 The archdeceiver has never been on Urantia since the days when he sought to turn back Michael from the purpose to complete the bestowal and to establish himself finally and securely as the unqualified ruler of Nebadon. Upon Michael's becoming the settled head of the universe of Nebadon, Lucifer was taken into custody by the agents of the Uversa Ancients of Days and has since been a prisoner on satellite number one of the Father's group of the transition spheres of Jerusem. And here the rulers of other worlds and systems behold the end of the unfaithful Sovereign of Satania. Paul knew of the status of these rebellious leaders following Michael's bestowal, for he wrote of Caligastia' s chiefs as " spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places. "
    53:9.3 Michael, upon assuming the supreme sovereignty of Nebadon, petitioned the Ancients of Days for authority to intern all personalities concerned in the Lucifer rebellion pending the rulings of the superuniverse tribunals in the case of Gabriel vs. Lucifer, placed on the records of the Uversa supreme court almost two hundred thousand years ago, as you reckon time. Concerning the system capital group, the Ancients of Days granted the Michael petition with but a single exception: Satan was allowed to make periodic visits to the apostate princes on the fallen worlds until another Son of God should be accepted by such apostate worlds, or until such time as the courts of Uversa should begin the adjudication of the case of Gabriel vs. Lucifer.
    53:9.4 Satan could come to Urantia because you had no Son of standing in residence—neither Planetary Prince nor Material Son. Machiventa Melchizedek has since been proclaimed vicegerent Planetary Prince of Urantia, and the opening of the case of Gabriel vs. Lucifer has signalized the inauguration of temporary planetary regimes on all the isolated worlds. It is true that Satan did periodically visit Caligastia and others of the fallen princes right up to the time of the presentation of these revelations, when there occurred the first hearing of Gabriel's plea for the annihilation of the archrebels. Satan is now unqualifiedly detained on the Jerusem prison worlds.
    53:9.5 Since Michael's final bestowal no one in all Satania has desired to go to the prison worlds to minister to the interned rebels. And no more beings have been won to the deceiver's cause. For nineteen hundred years the status has been unchanged.
    53:9.6 We do not look for a removal of the present Satania restrictions until the Ancients of Days make final disposition of the archrebels. The system circuits will not be reinstated so long as Lucifer lives. Meantime, he is wholly inactive.
    53:9.7 The rebellion has ended on Jerusem. It ends on the fallen worlds as fast as divine Sons arrive. We believe that all rebels who will ever accept mercy have done so. We await the flashing broadcast that will deprive these traitors of personality existence. We anticipate the verdict of Uversa will be announced by the executionary broadcast which will effect the annihilation of these interned rebels. Then will you look for their places, but they shall not be found. " And they who know you among the worlds will be astonished at you; you have been a terror, but never shall you be any more. " And thus shall all of these unworthy traitors " become as though they had not been. " All await the Uversa decree.
    53:9.8 But for ages the seven prison worlds of spiritual darkness in Satania have constituted a solemn warning to all Nebadon, eloquently and effectively proclaiming the great truth " that the way of the transgressor is hard "; " that within every sin is concealed the seed of its own destruction "; that " the wages of sin is death."


    Last edited by orthodoxymoron on Sun Mar 31, 2013 2:17 pm; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7704
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: Archangelic Queens of Heaven and the United States of the Solar System

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Sun Mar 31, 2013 8:22 am

    I wish to emphasize that I do NOT believe (or approve of) everything I post. This thread is intended as a mental and spiritual workout. I feel very uncomfortable with a lot of what I post. I had hoped that there would be a lot of discussion -- but there has been relatively little. In fact, in many cases, there seems to be sort of a boycott. I sometimes feel as if I've been blackballed. Once, when I joked "Thou Shalt NOT Talk to orthodoxymoron" everyone seemed to line-up to post something (seemingly in defiance of what I said). It was probably just a case of Joke v Joke -- but it still seemed a bit creepy to me. We seem to be in a Cold-War in Heaven -- but will we soon be in the middle of yet another Open and Hot War in Heaven?? I really wonder. I do NOT want this to happen -- and perhaps I have been too open, honest, and conciliatory. I frankly don't know which way to jump. Those in the know -- don't seem to want me to know -- or so it seems. I applied for an NSA FoIA over half a year ago -- with no response. Perhaps I should apply to each and every agency -- and write my representatives -- to learn what's been going on behind my back -- and who I really am. I get the feeling that neither the good-guys or the bad-guys -- the humans or the other than humans -- want me to know the truth about me. Anyway, I will continue to be interested in Archangelic Intrigue -- Real and Imagined.

    PAPER 54: PROBLEMS OF THE LUCIFER REBELLION - from the Urantia Book http://www.urantia.org/en/urantia-book-standardized/paper-54-problems-lucifer-rebellion

    54:0.1 Evolutionary man finds it difficult fully to comprehend the significance and to grasp the meanings of evil, error, sin, and iniquity. Man is slow to perceive that contrastive perfection and imperfection produce potential evil; that conflicting truth and falsehood create confusing error; that the divine endowment of freewill choice eventuates in the divergent realms of sin and righteousness; that the persistent pursuit of divinity leads to the kingdom of God as contrasted with its continuous rejection, which leads to the domains of iniquity.
    54:0.2 The Gods neither create evil nor permit sin and rebellion. Potential evil is time-existent in a universe embracing differential levels of perfection meanings and values. Sin is potential in all realms where imperfect beings are endowed with the ability to choose between good and evil. The very conflicting presence of truth and untruth, fact and falsehood, constitutes the potentiality of error. The deliberate choice of evil constitutes sin; the willful rejection of truth is error; the persistent pursuit of sin and error is iniquity.

    54:1 TRUE AND FALSE LIBERTY
    54:1.1 Of all the perplexing problems growing out of the Lucifer rebellion, none has occasioned more difficulty than the failure of immature evolutionary mortals to distinguish between true and false liberty.
    54:1.2 True liberty is the quest of the ages and the reward of evolutionary progress. False liberty is the subtle deception of the error of time and the evil of space. Enduring liberty is predicated on the reality of justice—intelligence, maturity, fraternity, and equity.
    54:1.3 Liberty is a self-destroying technique of cosmic existence when its motivation is unintelligent, unconditioned, and uncontrolled. True liberty is progressively related to reality and is ever regardful of social equity, cosmic fairness, universe fraternity, and divine obligations.
    54:1.4 Liberty is suicidal when divorced from material justice, intellectual fairness, social forbearance, moral duty, and spiritual values. Liberty is nonexistent apart from cosmic reality, and all personality reality is proportional to its divinity relationships.
    54:1.5 Unbridled self-will and unregulated self-expression equal unmitigated selfishness, the acme of ungodliness. Liberty without the associated and ever-increasing conquest of self is a figment of egoistic mortal imagination. Self-motivated liberty is a conceptual illusion, a cruel deception. License masquerading in the garments of liberty is the forerunner of abject bondage.
    54:1.6 True liberty is the associate of genuine self-respect; false liberty is the consort of self-admiration. True liberty is the fruit of self-control; false liberty, the assumption of self-assertion. Self-control leads to altruistic service; self-admiration tends towards the exploitation of others for the selfish aggrandizement of such a mistaken individual as is willing to sacrifice righteous attainment for the sake of possessing unjust power over his fellow beings.
    54:1.7 Even wisdom is divine and safe only when it is cosmic in scope and spiritual in motivation.
    54:1.8 There is no error greater than that species of self-deception which leads intelligent beings to crave the exercise of power over other beings for the purpose of depriving these persons of their natural liberties. The golden rule of human fairness cries out against all such fraud, unfairness, selfishness, and unrighteousness. Only true and genuine liberty is compatible with the reign of love and the ministry of mercy.
    54:1.9 How dare the self-willed creature encroach upon the rights of his fellows in the name of personal liberty when the Supreme Rulers of the universe stand back in merciful respect for these prerogatives of will and potentials of personality! No being, in the exercise of his supposed personal liberty, has a right to deprive any other being of those privileges of existence conferred by the Creators and duly respected by all their loyal associates, subordinates, and subjects.
    54:1.10 Evolutionary man may have to contend for his material liberties with tyrants and oppressors on a world of sin and iniquity or during the early times of a primitive evolving sphere, but not so on the morontia worlds or on the spirit spheres. War is the heritage of early evolutionary man, but on worlds of normal advancing civilization physical combat as a technique of adjusting racial misunderstandings has long since fallen into disrepute.

    54:2 THE THEFT OF LIBERTY
    54:2.1 With the Son and in the Spirit did God project eternal Havona, and ever since has there obtained the eternal pattern of co-ordinate participation in creation—sharing. This pattern of sharing is the master design for every one of the Sons and Daughters of God who go out into space to engage in the attempt to duplicate in time the central universe of eternal perfection.
    54:2.2 Every creature of every evolving universe who aspires to do the Father's will is destined to become the partner of the time-space Creators in this magnificent adventure of experiential perfection attainment. Were this not true, the Father would have hardly endowed such creatures with creative free will, neither would he indwell them, actually go into partnership with them by means of his own spirit.
    54:2.3 Lucifer' s folly was the attempt to do the nondoable, to short-circuit time in an experiential universe. Lucifer's crime was the attempted creative disenfranchisement of every personality in Satania, the unrecognized abridgment of the creature's personal participation—freewill participation—in the long evolutionary struggle to attain the status of light and life both individually and collectively. In so doing, this onetime Sovereign of your system set the temporal purpose of his own will directly athwart the eternal purpose of God's will as it is revealed in the bestowal of free will upon all personal creatures. The Lucifer rebellion thus threatened the maximum possible infringement of the freewill choice of the ascenders and servers of the system of Satania—a threat forevermore to deprive every one of these beings of the thrilling experience of contributing something personal and unique to the slowly erecting monument to experiential wisdom which will sometime exist as the perfected system of Satania. Thus does the Lucifer manifesto, masquerading in the habiliments of liberty, stand forth in the clear light of reason as a monumental threat to consummate the theft of personal liberty and to do it on a scale that has been approached only twice in all the history of Nebadon.
    54:2.4 In short, what God had given men and angels Lucifer would have taken away from them, that is, the divine privilege of participating in the creation of their own destinies and of the destiny of this local system of inhabited worlds.
    54:2.5 No being in all the universe has the rightful liberty to deprive any other being of true liberty, the right to love and be loved, the privilege of worshiping God and of serving his fellows.
    54:3 THE TIME LAG OF JUSTICE
    Audio Version
    54:3.1 The moral will creatures of the evolutionary worlds are always bothered with the unthinking question as to why the all-wise Creators permit evil and sin. They fail to comprehend that both are inevitable if the creature is to be truly free. The free will of evolving man or exquisite angel is not a mere philosophic concept, a symbolic ideal. Man's ability to choose good or evil is a universe reality. This liberty to choose for oneself is an endowment of the Supreme Rulers, and they will not permit any being or group of beings to deprive a single personality in the wide universe of this divinely bestowed liberty—not even to satisfy such misguided and ignorant beings in the enjoyment of this misnamed personal liberty.
    54:3.2 Although conscious and wholehearted identification with evil (sin) is the equivalent of nonexistence (annihilation), there must always intervene between the time of such personal identification with sin and the execution of the penalty—the automatic result of such a willful embrace of evil—a period of time of sufficient length to allow for such an adjudication of such an individual's universe status as will prove entirely satisfactory to all related universe personalities, and which will be so fair and just as to win the approval of the sinner himself.
    54:3.3 But if this universe rebel against the reality of truth and goodness refuses to approve the verdict, and if the guilty one knows in his heart the justice of his condemnation but refuses to make such confession, then must the execution of sentence be delayed in accordance with the discretion of the Ancients of Days. And the Ancients of Days refuse to annihilate any being until all moral values and all spiritual realities are extinct, both in the evildoer and in all related supporters and possible sympathizers.

    54:4 THE MERCY TIME LAG
    54:4.1 Another problem somewhat difficult of explanation in the constellation of Norlatiadek pertains to the reasons for permitting Lucifer, Satan, and the fallen princes to work mischief so long before being apprehended, interned, and adjudicated.
    54:4.2 Parents, those who have borne and reared children, are better able to understand why Michael, a Creator-father, might be slow to condemn and destroy his own Sons. Jesus' story of the prodigal son well illustrates how a loving father can long wait for the repentance of an erring child.
    54:4.3 The very fact that an evil-doing creature can actually choose to do wrong—commit sin—establishes the fact of free-willness and fully justifies any length delay in the execution of justice provided the extended mercy might conduce to repentance and rehabilitation.
    54:4.4 Most of the liberties which Lucifer sought he already had; others he was to receive in the future. All these precious endowments were lost by giving way to impatience and yielding to a desire to possess what one craves now and to possess it in defiance of all obligation to respect the rights and liberties of all other beings composing the universe of universes. Ethical obligations are innate, divine, and universal.
    54:4.5 There are many reasons known to us why the Supreme Rulers did not immediately destroy or intern the leaders of the Lucifer rebellion. There are no doubt still other and possibly better reasons unknown to us. The mercy features of this delay in the execution of justice were extended personally by Michael of Nebadon. Except for the affection of this Creator-father for his erring Sons, the supreme justice of the superuniverse would have acted. If such an episode as the Lucifer rebellion had occurred in Nebadon while Michael was incarnated on Urantia, the instigators of such evil might have been instantly and absolutely annihilated.
    54:4.6 Supreme justice can act instantly when not restrained by divine mercy. But the ministry of mercy to the children of time and space always provides for this time lag, this saving interval between seedtime and harvest. If the seed sowing is good, this interval provides for the testing and upbuilding of character; if the seed sowing is evil, this merciful delay provides time for repentance and rectification. This time delay in the adjudication and execution of evildoers is inherent in the mercy ministry of the seven superuniverses. This restraint of justice by mercy proves that God is love, and that such a God of love dominates the universes and in mercy controls the fate and judgment of all his creatures.
    54:4.7 The mercy delays of time are by the mandate of the free will of the Creators. There is good to be derived in the universe from this technique of patience in dealing with sinful rebels. While it is all too true that good cannot come of evil to the one who contemplates and performs evil, it is equally true that all things (including evil, potential and manifest) work together for good to all beings who know God, love to do his will, and are ascending Paradiseward according to his eternal plan and divine purpose.
    54:4.8 But these mercy delays are not interminable. Notwithstanding the long delay (as time is reckoned on Urantia) in adjudicating the Lucifer rebellion, we may record that, during the time of effecting this revelation, the first hearing in the pending case of Gabriel vs. Lucifer was held on Uversa, and soon thereafter there issued the mandate of the Ancients of Days directing that Satan be henceforth confined to the prison world with Lucifer. This ends the ability of Satan to pay further visits to any of the fallen worlds of Satania. Justice in a mercy-dominated universe may be slow, but it is certain.
    Bible References

    54:5 THE WISDOM OF DELAY
    54:5.1 Of the many reasons known to me as to why Lucifer and his confederates were not sooner interned or adjudicated, I am permitted to recite the following:
    54:5.2 Mercy requires that every wrongdoer have sufficient time in which to formulate a deliberate and fully chosen attitude regarding his evil thoughts and sinful acts.
    54:5.3 Supreme justice is dominated by a Father's love; therefore will justice never destroy that which mercy can save. Time to accept salvation is vouchsafed every evildoer.
    54:5.4 No affectionate father is ever precipitate in visiting punishment upon an erring member of his family. Patience cannot function independently of time.
    54:5.5 While wrongdoing is always deleterious to a family, wisdom and love admonish the upright children to bear with an erring brother during the time granted by the affectionate father in which the sinner may see the error of his way and embrace salvation.
    54:5.6 Regardless of Michael's attitude toward Lucifer, notwithstanding his being Lucifer's Creator-father, it was not in the province of the Creator Son to exercise summary jurisdiction over the apostate System Sovereign because he had not then completed his bestowal career, thereby attaining unqualified sovereignty of Nebadon.
    54:5.7 The Ancients of Days could have immediately annihilated these rebels, but they seldom execute wrongdoers without a full hearing. In this instance they refused to overrule the Michael decisions.
    54:5.8 It is evident that Immanuel counseled Michael to remain aloof from the rebels and allow rebellion to pursue a natural course of self-obliteration. And the wisdom of the Union of Days is the time reflection of the united wisdom of the Paradise Trinity.
    54:5.9 The Faithful of Days on Edentia advised the Constellation Fathers to allow the rebels free course to the end that all sympathy for these evildoers should be the sooner uprooted in the hearts of every present and future citizen of Norlatiadek—every mortal, morontia, or spirit creature.
    54:5.10 On Jerusem the personal representative of the Supreme Executive of Orvonton counseled Gabriel to foster full opportunity for every living creature to mature a deliberate choice in those matters involved in the Lucifer Declaration of Liberty. The issues of rebellion having been raised, the Paradise emergency adviser of Gabriel portrayed that, if such full and free opportunity were not given all Norlatiadek creatures, then would the Paradise quarantine against all such possible halfhearted or doubt-stricken creatures be extended in self-protection against the entire constellation. To keep open the Paradise doors of ascension to the beings of Norlatiadek, it was necessary to provide for the full development of rebellion and to insure the complete determination of attitude on the part of all beings in any way concerned therewith.
    54:5.11 The Divine Minister of Salvington issued as her third independent proclamation a mandate directing that nothing be done to half cure, cowardly suppress, or otherwise hide the hideous visage of rebels and rebellion. The angelic hosts were directed to work for full disclosure and unlimited opportunity for sin-expression as the quickest technique of achieving the perfect and final cure of the plague of evil and sin.
    54:5.12 An emergency council of ex-mortals consisting of Mighty Messengers, glorified mortals who had had personal experience with like situations, together with their colleagues, was organized on Jerusem. They advised Gabriel that at least three times the number of beings would be led astray if arbitrary or summary methods of suppression were attempted. The entire Uversa corps of counselors concurred in advising Gabriel to permit the rebellion to take its full and natural course, even if it should require a million years to wind up the consequences.
    54:5.13 Time, even in a universe of time, is relative: If a Urantia mortal of average length of life should commit a crime which precipitated world-wide pandemonium, and if he were apprehended, tried, and executed within two or three days of the commission of the crime, would it seem a long time to you? And yet that would be nearer a comparison with the length of Lucifer's life even if his adjudication, now begun, should not be completed for a hundred thousand Urantia years. The relative lapse of time from the viewpoint of Uversa, where the litigation is pending, could be indicated by saying that the crime of Lucifer was being brought to trial within two and a half seconds of its commission. From the Paradise viewpoint the adjudication is simultaneous with the enactment.
    54:5.14 There are an equal number of reasons for not arbitrarily stopping the Lucifer rebellion which would be partially comprehensible to you, but which I am not permitted to narrate. I may inform you that on Uversa we teach forty-eight reasons for permitting evil to run the full course of its own moral bankruptcy and spiritual extinction. I doubt not that there are just as many additional reasons not known to me.

    54:6 THE TRIUMPH OF LOVE
    54:6.1 Whatever the difficulties evolutionary mortals may encounter in their efforts to understand the Lucifer rebellion, it should be clear to all reflective thinkers that the technique of dealing with the rebels is a vindication of divine love. The loving mercy extended to the rebels does seem to have involved many innocent beings in trials and tribulations, but all these distraught personalities may securely depend upon the all-wise Judges to adjudicate their destinies in mercy as well as justice.
    54:6.2 In all their dealings with intelligent beings, both the Creator Son and his Paradise Father are love dominated. It is impossible to comprehend many phases of the attitude of the universe rulers toward rebels and rebellion—sin and sinners—unless it be remembered that God as a Father takes precedence over all other phases of Deity manifestation in all the dealings of divinity with humanity. It should also be recalled that the Paradise Creator Sons are all mercy motivated.
    54:6.3 If an affectionate father of a large family chooses to show mercy to one of his children guilty of grievous wrongdoing, it may well be that the extension of mercy to this misbehaving child will work a temporary hardship upon all the other and well-behaved children. Such eventualities are inevitable; such a risk is inseparable from the reality situation of having a loving parent and of being a member of a family group. Each member of a family profits by the righteous conduct of every other member; likewise must each member suffer the immediate time-consequences of the misconduct of every other member. Families, groups, nations, races, worlds, systems, constellations, and universes are relationships of association which possess individuality; and therefore does every member of any such group, large or small, reap the benefits and suffer the consequences of the rightdoing and the wrongdoing of all other members of the group concerned.
    54:6.4 But one thing should be made clear: If you are made to suffer the evil consequences of the sin of some member of your family, some fellow citizen or fellow mortal, even rebellion in the system or elsewhere—no matter what you may have to endure because of the wrongdoing of your associates, fellows, or superiors—you may rest secure in the eternal assurance that such tribulations are transient afflictions. None of these fraternal consequences of misbehavior in the group can ever jeopardize your eternal prospects or in the least degree deprive you of your divine right of Paradise ascension and God attainment.
    54:6.5 And there is compensation for these trials, delays, and disappointments which invariably accompany the sin of rebellion. Of the many valuable repercussions of the Lucifer rebellion which might be named, I will only call attention to the enhanced careers of those mortal ascenders, the Jerusem citizens, who, by withstanding the sophistries of sin, placed themselves in line for becoming future Mighty Messengers, fellows of my own order. Every being who stood the test of that evil episode thereby immediately advanced his administrative status and enhanced his spiritual worth.
    54:6.6 At first the Lucifer upheaval appeared to be an unmitigated calamity to the system and to the universe. Gradually benefits began to accrue. With the passing of twenty-five thousand years of system time (twenty thousand years of Urantia time), the Melchizedeks began to teach that the good resulting from Lucifer's folly had come to equal the evil incurred. The sum of evil had by that time become almost stationary, continuing to increase only on certain isolated worlds, while the beneficial repercussions continued to multiply and extend out through the universe and superuniverse, even to Havona. The Melchizedeks now teach that the good resulting from the Satania rebellion is more than a thousand times the sum of all the evil.
    54:6.7 But such an extraordinary and beneficent harvest of wrongdoing could only be brought about by the wise, divine, and merciful attitude of all of Lucifer's superiors, extending from the Constellation Fathers on Edentia to the Universal Father on Paradise. The passing of time has enhanced the consequential good to be derived from the Lucifer folly; and since the evil to be penalized was quite fully developed within a comparatively short time, it is apparent that the all-wise and farseeing universe rulers would be certain to extend the time in which to reap increasingly beneficial results. Regardless of the many additional reasons for delaying the apprehension and adjudication of the Satania rebels, this one gain would have been enough to explain why these sinners were not sooner interned, and why they have not been adjudicated and destroyed.
    54:6.8 Shortsighted and time-bound mortal minds should be slow to criticize the time delays of the farseeing and all-wise administrators of universe affairs.
    54:6.9 One error of human thinking respecting these problems consists in the idea that all evolutionary mortals on an evolving planet would choose to enter upon the Paradise career if sin had not cursed their world. The ability to decline survival does not date from the times of the Lucifer rebellion. Mortal man has always possessed the endowment of freewill choice regarding the Paradise career.
    54:6.10 As you ascend in the survival experience, you will broaden your universe concepts and extend your horizon of meanings and values; and thus will you be able the better to understand why such beings as Lucifer and Satan are permitted to continue in rebellion. You will also better comprehend how ultimate (if not immediate) good can be derived from time-limited evil. After you attain Paradise, you will really be enlightened and comforted when you listen to the superaphic philosophers discuss and explain these profound problems of universe adjustment. But even then, I doubt that you will be fully satisfied in your own minds. At least I was not even when I had thus attained the acme of universe philosophy. I did not achieve a full comprehension of these complexities until after I had been assigned to administrative duties in the superuniverse, where by actual experience I have acquired conceptual capacity adequate for the comprehension of such many-sided problems in cosmic equity and spiritual philosophy. As you ascend Paradiseward, you will increasingly learn that many problematic features of universe administration can only be comprehended subsequent to the acquirement of increased experiential capacity and to the achievement of enhanced spiritual insight. Cosmic wisdom is essential to the understanding of cosmic situations.


    I'm just trying to get at the essence of the politics, religion, architecture, art, music, etc. through all of history - and to then incorporate the best of this into a new paradigm (with the help of George Green!). The theory is that there is a central source of most of this which is not the Creator God of the Universe - yet which is not the Human Race As We Know It. There seems to be an In Between Source of Most of This which is a combination of Superhuman Genius and Cruel Inhuman Insanity. I was just looking at a tourists picture book of Rome. The art and architecture in Rome is beyond comprehension. The artrocities and deceptions perpetrated in Rome are unmentionable and unfathomable. But was their source the same? Does this source rule the world through the City States today? I'm leaning strongly in that direction. How do we throw out the bathwater without throwing out the baby? What do you think Lucifer? Have you placed a poison-pill in the middle of all of this? If so - would you please remove it - retire - and serve as an advisor from a distance? Sometimes I think you're the only one who pays much attention to these threads. On the other hand - if people really got deeply involved in all of this - they probably couldn't handle it. I guess I just want a critical mass of beings in this solar system (human, hybrid, and otherwise) to really do the right thing at this point in time. I'm not really sure what that is - but I am damn sure that it's not business as usual - as seen throughout history. We need to clean this mess up NOW. RIGHT NOW.


    The Controversy Ended - from 'The Great Controversy' by Ellen White http://www.whiteestate.org/books/gc/gc42.html

    At the close of the thousand years, Christ again returns to the earth. He is accompanied by the host of the redeemed and attended by a retinue of angels. As He descends in terrific majesty He bids the wicked dead arise to receive their doom. They come forth, a mighty host, numberless as the sands of the sea. What a contrast to those who were raised at the first resurrection! The righteous were clothed with immortal youth and beauty. The wicked bear the traces of disease and death.

    Every eye in that vast multitude is turned to behold the glory of the Son of God. With one voice the wicked hosts exclaim: "Blessed is He that cometh in the name of the Lord!" It is not love to Jesus that inspires this utterance. The force of truth urges the words from unwilling lips. As the wicked went into their graves, so they come forth with the same enmity to Christ and the same spirit of rebellion. They are to have no new probation in which to remedy the defects of their past lives. Nothing would be gained by this. A lifetime of transgression has not softened their hearts. A second probation, were it given them, would be occupied as was the first in evading the requirements of God and exciting rebellion against Him.

    Christ descends upon the Mount of Olives, whence, after His resurrection, He ascended, and where angels repeated the promise of His return. Says the prophet: "The Lord my God shall come, and all the saints with Thee." "And His feet shall stand in that day upon the Mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east, and the Mount of Olives shall cleave in the midst thereof, . . . and there shall be a very great valley." "And the Lord shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one Lord, and His name one." Zechariah 14:5, 4, 9. As the New Jerusalem, in its dazzling splendor, comes down out of heaven, it rests upon the place purified and made ready to receive it, and Christ, with His people and the angels, enters the Holy City.

    Now Satan prepares for a last mighty struggle for the supremacy. While deprived of his power and cut off from his work of deception, the prince of evil was miserable and dejected; but as the wicked dead are raised and he sees the vast multitudes upon his side, his hopes revive, and he determines not to yield the great controversy. He will marshal all the armies of the lost under his banner and through them endeavor to execute his plans. The wicked are Satan's captives. In rejecting Christ they have accepted the rule of the rebel leader. They are ready to receive his suggestions and to do his bidding. Yet, true to his early cunning, he does not acknowledge himself to be Satan. He claims to be the prince who is the rightful owner of the world and whose inheritance has been unlawfully wrested from him. He represents himself to his deluded subjects as a redeemer, assuring them that his power has brought them forth from their graves and that he is about to rescue them from the most cruel tyranny. The presence of Christ having been removed, Satan works wonders to support his claims. He makes the weak strong and inspires all with his own spirit and energy. He proposes to lead them against the camp of the saints and to take possession of the City of God. With fiendish exultation he points to the unnumbered millions who have been raised from the dead and declares that as their leader he is well able to overthrow the city and regain his throne and his kingdom.

    In that vast throng are multitudes of the long-lived race that existed before the Flood; men of lofty stature and giant intellect, who, yielding to the control of fallen angels, devoted all their skill and knowledge to the exaltation of themselves; men whose wonderful works of art led the world to idolize their genius, but whose cruelty and evil inventions, defiling the earth and defacing the image of God, caused Him to blot them from the face of His creation. There are kings and generals who conquered nations, valiant men who never lost a battle, proud, ambitious warriors whose approach made kingdoms tremble. In death these experienced no change. As they come up from the grave, they resume the current of their thoughts just where it ceased. They are actuated by the same desire to conquer that ruled them when they fell.

    Satan consults with his angels, and then with these kings and conquerors and mighty men. They look upon the strength and numbers on their side, and declare that the army within the city is small in comparison with theirs, and that it can be overcome. They lay their plans to take possession of the riches and glory of the New Jerusalem. All immediately begin to prepare for battle. Skillful artisans construct implements of war. Military leaders, famed for their success, marshal the throngs of warlike men into companies and divisions.

    At last the order to advance is given, and the countless host moves on--an army such as was never summoned by earthly conquerors, such as the combined forces of all ages since war began on earth could never equal. Satan, the mightiest of warriors, leads the van, and his angels unite their forces for this final struggle. Kings and warriors are in his train, and the multitudes follow in vast companies, each under its appointed leader. With military precision the serried ranks advance over the earth's broken and uneven surface to the City of God. By command of Jesus, the gates of the New Jerusalem are closed, and the armies of Satan surround the city and make ready for the onset.

    Now Christ again appears to the view of His enemies. Far above the city, upon a foundation of burnished gold, is a throne, high and lifted up. Upon this throne sits the Son of God, and around Him are the subjects of His kingdom. The power and majesty of Christ no language can describe, no pen portray. The glory of the Eternal Father is enshrouding His Son. The brightness of His presence fills the City of God, and flows out beyond the gates, flooding the whole earth with its radiance.

    Nearest the throne are those who were once zealous in the cause of Satan, but who, plucked as brands from the burning, have followed their Saviour with deep, intense devotion. Next are those who perfected Christian characters in the midst of falsehood and infidelity, those who honored the law of God when the Christian world declared it void, and the millions, of all ages, who were martyred for their faith. And beyond is the "great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, . . . before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands." Revelation 7:9. Their warfare is ended, their victory won. They have run the race and reached the prize. The palm branch in their hands is a symbol of their triumph, the white robe an emblem of the spotless righteousness of Christ which now is theirs.

    The redeemed raise a song of praise that echoes and re-echoes through the vaults of heaven: "Salvation to our God which sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb." Verse 10. And angel and seraph unite their voices in adoration. As the redeemed have beheld the power and malignity of Satan, they have seen, as never before, that no power but that of Christ could have made them conquerors. In all that shining throng there are none to ascribe salvation to themselves, as if they had prevailed by their own power and goodness. Nothing is said of what they have done or suffered; but the burden of every song, the keynote of every anthem, is: Salvation to our God and unto the Lamb.

    In the presence of the assembled inhabitants of earth and heaven the final coronation of the Son of God takes place. And now, invested with supreme majesty and power, the King of kings pronounces sentence upon the rebels against His government and executes justice upon those who have transgressed His law and oppressed His people. Says the prophet of God: "I saw a great white throne, and Him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them. And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works." Revelation 20:11, 12.

    As soon as the books of record are opened, and the eye of Jesus looks upon the wicked, they are conscious of every sin which they have ever committed. They see just where their feet diverged from the path of purity and holiness, just how far pride and rebellion have carried them in the violation of the law of God. The seductive temptations which they encouraged by indulgence in sin, the blessings perverted, the messengers of God despised, the warnings rejected, the waves of mercy beaten back by the stubborn, unrepentant heart--all appear as if written in letters of fire.

    Above the throne is revealed the cross; and like a panoramic view appear the scenes of Adam's temptation and fall, and the successive steps in the great plan of redemption. The Saviour's lowly birth; His early life of simplicity and obedience; His baptism in Jordan; the fast and temptation in the wilderness; His public ministry, unfolding to men heaven's most precious blessings; the days crowded with deeds of love and mercy, the nights of prayer and watching in the solitude of the mountains; the plottings of envy, hate, and malice which repaid His benefits; the awful, mysterious agony in Gethsemane beneath the crushing weight of the sins of the whole world; His betrayal into the hands of the murderous mob; the fearful events of that night of horror--the unresisting prisoner, forsaken by His best-loved disciples, rudely hurried through the streets of Jerusalem; the Son of God exultingly displayed before Annas, arraigned in the high priest's palace, in the judgment hall of Pilate, before the cowardly and cruel Herod, mocked, insulted, tortured, and condemned to die--all are vividly portrayed.

    And now before the swaying multitude are revealed the final scenes--the patient Sufferer treading the path to Calvary; the Prince of heaven hanging upon the cross; the haughty priests and the jeering rabble deriding His expiring agony; the supernatural darkness; the heaving earth, the rent rocks, the open graves, marking the moment when the world's Redeemer yielded up His life.

    The awful spectacle appears just as it was. Satan, his angels, and his subjects have no power to turn from the picture of their own work. Each actor recalls the part which he performed. Herod, who slew the innocent children of Bethlehem that he might destroy the King of Israel; the base Herodias, upon whose guilty soul rests the blood of John the Baptist; the weak, timeserving Pilate; the mocking soldiers; the priests and rulers and the maddened throng who cried, "His blood be on us, and on our children!"--all behold the enormity of their guilt. They vainly seek to hide from the divine majesty of His countenance, outshining the glory of the sun, while the redeemed cast their crowns at the Saviour's feet, exclaiming: "He died for me!"

    Amid the ransomed throng are the apostles of Christ, the heroic Paul, the ardent Peter, the loved and loving John, and their truehearted brethren, and with them the vast host of martyrs; while outside the walls, with every vile and abominable thing, are those by whom they were persecuted, imprisoned, and slain. There is Nero, that monster of cruelty and vice, beholding the joy and exaltation of those whom he once tortured, and in whose extremest anguish he found satanic delight. His mother is there to witness the result of her own work; to see how the evil stamp of character transmitted to her son, the passions encouraged and developed by her influence and example, have borne fruit in crimes that caused the world to shudder.

    There are papist priests and prelates, who claimed to be Christ's ambassadors, yet employed the rack, the dungeon, and the stake to control the consciences of His people. There are the proud pontiffs who exalted themselves above God and presumed to change the law of the Most High. Those pretended fathers of the church have an account to render to God from which they would fain be excused. Too late they are made to see that the Omniscient One is jealous of His law and that He will in no wise clear the guilty. They learn now that Christ identifies His interest with that of His suffering people; and they feel the force of His own words: "Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these My brethren, ye have done it unto Me." Matthew 25:40.

    The whole wicked world stand arraigned at the bar of God on the charge of high treason against the government of heaven. They have none to plead their cause; they are without excuse; and the sentence of eternal death is pronounced against them.

    It is now evident to all that the wages of sin is not noble independence and eternal life, but slavery, ruin, and death. The wicked see what they have forfeited by their life of rebellion. The far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory was despised when offered them; but how desirable it now appears. "All this," cries the lost soul, "I might have had; but I chose to put these things far from me. Oh, strange infatuation! I have exchanged peace, happiness, and honor for wretchedness, infamy, and despair." All see that their exclusion from heaven is just. By their lives they have declared: "We will not have this Man [Jesus] to reign over us."

    As if entranced, the wicked have looked upon the coronation of the Son of God. They see in His hands the tables of the divine law, the statutes which they have despised and transgressed. They witness the outburst of wonder, rapture, and adoration from the saved; and as the wave of melody sweeps over the multitudes without the city, all with one voice exclaim, "Great and marvelous are Thy works, Lord God Almighty; just and true are Thy ways, Thou King of saints" (Revelation 15:3); and, falling prostrate, they worship the Prince of life.

    Satan seems paralyzed as he beholds the glory and majesty of Christ. He who was once a covering cherub remembers whence he has fallen. A shining seraph, "son of the morning;" how changed, how degraded! From the council where once he was honored, he is forever excluded. He sees another now standing near to the Father, veiling His glory. He has seen the crown placed upon the head of Christ by an angel of lofty stature and majestic presence, and he knows that the exalted position of this angel might have been his.

    Memory recalls the home of his innocence and purity, the peace and content that were his until he indulged in murmuring against God, and envy of Christ. His accusations, his rebellion, his deceptions to gain the sympathy and support of the angels, his stubborn persistence in making no effort for self-recovery when God would have granted him forgiveness --all come vividly before him. He reviews his work among men and its results--the enmity of man toward his fellow man, the terrible destruction of life, the rise and fall of kingdoms, the overturning of thrones, the long succession of tumults, conflicts, and revolutions. He recalls his constant efforts to oppose the work of Christ and to sink man lower and lower. He sees that his hellish plots have been powerless to destroy those who have put their trust in Jesus. As Satan looks upon his kingdom, the fruit of his toil, he sees only failure and ruin. He has led the multitudes to believe that the City of God would be an easy prey; but he knows that this is false. Again and again, in the progress of the great controversy, he has been defeated and compelled to yield. He knows too well the power and majesty of the Eternal.

    The aim of the great rebel has ever been to justify himself and to prove the divine government responsible for the rebellion. To this end he has bent all the power of his giant intellect. He has worked deliberately and systematically, and with marvelous success, leading vast multitudes to accept his version of the great controversy which has been so long in progress. For thousands of years this chief of conspiracy has palmed off falsehood for truth. But the time has now come when the rebellion is to be finally defeated and the history and character of Satan disclosed. In his last great effort to dethrone Christ, destroy His people, and take possession of the City of God, the archdeceiver has been fully unmasked. Those who have united with him see the total failure of his cause. Christ's followers and the loyal angels behold the full extent of his machinations against the government of God. He is the object of universal abhorrence.

    Satan sees that his voluntary rebellion has unfitted him for heaven. He has trained his powers to war against God; the purity, peace, and harmony of heaven would be to him supreme torture. His accusations against the mercy and justice of God are now silenced. The reproach which he has endeavored to cast upon Jehovah rests wholly upon himself. And now Satan bows down and confesses the justice of his sentence.

    "Who shall not fear Thee, O Lord, and glorify Thy name? for Thou only art holy: for all nations shall come and worship before Thee; for Thy judgments are made manifest." Verse 4. Every question of truth and error in the long-standing controversy has now been made plain. The results of rebellion, the fruits of setting aside the divine statutes, have been laid open to the view of all created intelligences. The working out of Satan's rule in contrast with the government of God has been presented to the whole universe. Satan's own works have condemned him. God's wisdom, His justice, and His goodness stand fully vindicated. It is seen that all His dealings in the great controversy have been conducted with respect to the eternal good of His people and the good of all the worlds that He has created. "All Thy works shall praise Thee, O Lord; and Thy saints shall bless Thee." Psalm 145:10. The history of sin will stand to all eternity as a witness that with the existence of God's law is bound up the happiness of all the beings He has created. With all the facts of the great controversy in view, the whole universe, both loyal and rebellious, with one accord declare: "Just and true are Thy ways, Thou King of saints."

    Before the universe has been clearly presented the great sacrifice made by the Father and the Son in man's behalf. The hour has come when Christ occupies His rightful position and is glorified above principalities and powers and every name that is named. It was for the joy that was set before Him--that He might bring many sons unto glory--that He endured the cross and despised the shame. And inconceivably great as was the sorrow and the shame, yet greater is the joy and the glory. He looks upon the redeemed, renewed in His own image, every heart bearing the perfect impress of the divine, every face reflecting the likeness of their King. He beholds in them the result of the travail of His soul, and He is satisfied. Then, in a voice that reaches the assembled multitudes of the righteous and the wicked, He declares: "Behold the purchase of My blood! For these I suffered, for these I died, that they might dwell in My presence throughout eternal ages." And the song of praise ascends from the white-robed ones about the throne: "Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honor, and glory, and blessing." Revelation 5:12.

    Notwithstanding that Satan has been constrained to acknowledge God's justice and to bow to the supremacy of Christ, his character remains unchanged. The spirit of rebellion, like a mighty torrent, again bursts forth. Filled with frenzy, he determines not to yield the great controversy. The time has come for a last desperate struggle against the King of heaven. He rushes into the midst of his subjects and endeavors to inspire them with his own fury and arouse them to instant battle. But of all the countless millions whom he has allured into rebellion, there are none now to acknowledge his supremacy. His power is at an end. The wicked are filled with the same hatred of God that inspires Satan; but they see that their case is hopeless, that they cannot prevail against Jehovah. Their rage is kindled against Satan and those who have been his agents in deception, and with the fury of demons they turn upon them.

    Saith the Lord: "Because thou hast set thine heart as the heart of God; behold, therefore I will bring strangers upon thee, the terrible of the nations: and they shall draw their swords against the beauty of thy wisdom, and they shall defile thy brightness. They shall bring thee down to the pit." "I will destroy thee, O covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire. . . . I will cast thee to the ground, I will lay thee before kings, that they may behold thee. . . . I will bring thee to ashes upon the earth in the sight of all them that behold thee. . . . Thou shalt be a terror, and never shalt thou be any more." Ezekiel 28:6-8, 16-19.

    "Every battle of the warrior is with confused noise, and garments rolled in blood; but this shall be with burning and fuel of fire." "The indignation of the Lord is upon all nations, and His fury upon all their armies: He hath utterly destroyed them, He hath delivered them to the slaughter." "Upon the wicked He shall rain quick burning coals, fire and brimstone and an horrible tempest: this shall be the portion of their cup." Isaiah 9:5; 34:2; Psalm 11:6, margin. Fire comes down from God out of heaven. The earth is broken up. The weapons concealed in its depths are drawn forth. Devouring flames burst from every yawning chasm. The very rocks are on fire. The day has come that shall burn as an oven. The elements melt with fervent heat, the earth also, and the works that are therein are burned up. Malachi 4:1; 2 Peter 3:10. The earth's surface seems one molten mass--a vast, seething lake of fire. It is the time of the judgment and perdition of ungodly men--"the day of the Lord's vengeance, and the year of recompenses for the controversy of Zion." Isaiah 34:8.

    The wicked receive their recompense in the earth. Proverbs 11:31. They "shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the Lord of hosts." Malachi 4:1. Some are destroyed as in a moment, while others suffer many days. All are punished "according to their deeds." The sins of the righteous having been transferred to Satan, he is made to suffer not only for his own rebellion, but for all the sins which he has caused God's people to commit. His punishment is to be far greater than that of those whom he has deceived. After all have perished who fell by his deceptions, he is still to live and suffer on. In the cleansing flames the wicked are at last destroyed, root and branch--Satan the root, his followers the branches. The full penalty of the law has been visited; the demands of justice have been met; and heaven and earth, beholding, declare the righteousness of Jehovah.

    Satan's work of ruin is forever ended. For six thousand years he has wrought his will, filling the earth with woe and causing grief throughout the universe. The whole creation has groaned and travailed together in pain. Now God's creatures are forever delivered from his presence and temptations. "The whole earth is at rest, and is quiet: they [the righteous] break forth into singing." Isaiah 14:7. And a shout of praise and triumph ascends from the whole loyal universe. "The voice of a great multitude," "as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of mighty thunderings," is heard, saying: "Alleluia: for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth." Revelation 19:6.

    While the earth was wrapped in the fire of destruction, the righteous abode safely in the Holy City. Upon those that had part in the first resurrection, the second death has no power. While God is to the wicked a consuming fire, He is to His people both a sun and a shield. Revelation 20:6; Psalm 84:11.

    "I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away." Revelation 21:1. The fire that consumes the wicked purifies the earth. Every trace of the curse is swept away. No eternally burning hell will keep before the ransomed the fearful consequences of sin.

    One reminder alone remains: Our Redeemer will ever bear the marks of His crucifixion. Upon His wounded head, upon His side, His hands and feet, are the only traces of the cruel work that sin has wrought. Says the prophet, beholding Christ in His glory: "He had bright beams coming out of His side: and there was the hiding of His power." Habakkuk 3:4, margin. That pierced side whence flowed the crimson stream that reconciled man to God--there is the Saviour's glory, there "the hiding of His power." "Mighty to save," through the sacrifice of redemption, He was therefore strong to execute justice upon them that despised God's mercy. And the tokens of His humiliation are His highest honor; through the eternal ages the wounds of Calvary will show forth His praise and declare His power.

    "O Tower of the flock, the stronghold of the daughter of Zion, unto Thee shall it come, even the first dominion." Micah 4:8. The time has come to which holy men have looked with longing since the flaming sword barred the first pair from Eden, the time for "the redemption of the purchased possession." Ephesians 1:14. The earth originally given to man as his kingdom, betrayed by him into the hands of Satan, and so long held by the mighty foe, has been brought back by the great plan of redemption. All that was lost by sin has been restored. "Thus saith the Lord . . . that formed the earth and made it; He hath established it, He created it not in vain, He formed it to be inhabited." Isaiah 45:18. God's original purpose in the creation of the earth is fulfilled as it is made the eternal abode of the redeemed. "The righteous shall inherit the land, and dwell therein forever." Psalm 37:29.

    A fear of making the future inheritance seem too material has led many to spiritualize away the very truths which lead us to look upon it as our home. Christ assured His disciples that He went to prepare mansions for them in the Father's house. Those who accept the teachings of God's word will not be wholly ignorant concerning the heavenly abode. And yet, "eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love Him." 1 Corinthians 2:9. Human language is inadequate to describe the reward of the righteous. It will be known only to those who behold it. No finite mind can comprehend the glory of the Paradise of God.

    In the Bible the inheritance of the saved is called "a country." Hebrews 11:14-16. There the heavenly Shepherd leads His flock to fountains of living waters. The tree of life yields its fruit every month, and the leaves of the tree are for the service of the nations. There are ever-flowing streams, clear as crystal, and beside them waving trees cast their shadows upon the paths prepared for the ransomed of the Lord. There the wide-spreading plains swell into hills of beauty, and the mountains of God rear their lofty summits. On those peaceful plains, beside those living streams, God's people, so long pilgrims and wanderers, shall find a home.

    "My people shall dwell in a peaceable habitation, and in sure dwellings, and in quiet resting places." "Violence shall no more be heard in thy land, wasting nor destruction within thy borders; but thou shalt call thy walls Salvation, and thy gates Praise." "They shall build houses, and inhabit them; and they shall plant vineyards, and eat the fruit of them. They shall not build, and another inhabit; they shall not plant, and another eat: . . . Mine elect shall long enjoy the work of their hands." Isaiah 32:18; 60:18; 65:21, 22.

    There, "the wilderness and the solitary place shall be glad for them; and the desert shall rejoice, and blossom as the rose." "Instead of the thorn shall come up the fir tree, and instead of the brier shall come up the myrtle tree." "The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; . . . and a little child shall lead them." "They shall not hurt nor destroy in all My holy mountain," saith the Lord. Isaiah 35:1; 55:13; 11:6, 9.

    Pain cannot exist in the atmosphere of heaven. There will be no more tears, no funeral trains, no badges of mourning. "There shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying: . . . for the former things are passed away." "The inhabitant shall not say, I am sick: the people that dwell therein shall be forgiven their iniquity." Revelation 21:4; Isaiah 33:24.

    There is the New Jerusalem, the metropolis of the glorified new earth, "a crown of glory in the hand of the Lord, and a royal diadem in the hand of thy God." "Her light was like unto a stone most precious, even like a jasper stone, clear as crystal." "The nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honor into it." Saith the Lord: "I will rejoice in Jerusalem, and joy in My people." "The tabernacle of God is with men, and He will dwell with them, and they shall be His people, and God Himself shall be with them, and be their God." Isaiah 62:3; Revelation 21:11, 24; Isaiah 65:19; Revelation 21:3.

    In the City of God "there shall be no night." None will need or desire repose. There will be no weariness in doing the will of God and offering praise to His name. We shall ever feel the freshness of the morning and shall ever be far from its close. "And they need no candle, neither light of the sun; for the Lord God giveth them light." Revelation 22:5. The light of the sun will be superseded by a radiance which is not painfully dazzling, yet which immeasurably surpasses the brightness of our noontide. The glory of God and the Lamb floods the Holy City with unfading light. The redeemed walk in the sunless glory of perpetual day.

    "I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it." Revelation 21:22. The people of God are privileged to hold open communion with the Father and the Son. "Now we see through a glass, darkly." 1 Corinthians 13:12. We behold the image of God reflected, as in a mirror, in the works of nature and in His dealings with men; but then we shall see Him face to face, without a dimming veil between. We shall stand in His presence and behold the glory of His countenance.

    There the redeemed shall know, even as also they are known. The loves and sympathies which God Himself has planted in the soul shall there find truest and sweetest exercise. The pure communion with holy beings, the harmonious social life with the blessed angels and with the faithful ones of all ages who have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb, the sacred ties that bind together "the whole family in heaven and earth" (Ephesians 3:15)--these help to constitute the happiness of the redeemed.

    There, immortal minds will contemplate with never-failing delight the wonders of creative power, the mysteries of redeeming love. There will be no cruel, deceiving foe to tempt to forgetfulness of God. Every faculty will be developed, every capacity increased. The acquirement of knowledge will not weary the mind or exhaust the energies. There the grandest enterprises may be carried forward, the loftiest aspirations reached, the highest ambitions realized; and still there will arise new heights to surmount, new wonders to admire, new truths to comprehend, fresh objects to call forth the powers of mind and soul and body.

    All the treasures of the universe will be open to the study of God's redeemed. Unfettered by mortality, they wing their tireless flight to worlds afar--worlds that thrilled with sorrow at the spectacle of human woe and rang with songs of gladness at the tidings of a ransomed soul. With unutterable delight the children of earth enter into the joy and the wisdom of unfallen beings. They share the treasures of knowledge and understanding gained through ages upon ages in contemplation of God's handiwork. With undimmed vision they gaze upon the glory of creation--suns and stars and systems, all in their appointed order circling the throne of Deity. Upon all things, from the least to the greatest, the Creator's name is written, and in all are the riches of His power displayed.

    And the years of eternity, as they roll, will bring richer and still more glorious revelations of God and of Christ. As knowledge is progressive, so will love, reverence, and happiness increase. The more men learn of God, the greater will be their admiration of His character. As Jesus opens before them the riches of redemption and the amazing achievements in the great controversy with Satan, the hearts of the ransomed thrill with more fervent devotion, and with more rapturous joy they sweep the harps of gold; and ten thousand times ten thousand and thousands of thousands of voices unite to swell the mighty chorus of praise.

    "And every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I saying, Blessing, and honor, and glory, and power, be unto Him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever." Revelation 5:13.

    The great controversy is ended. Sin and sinners are no more. The entire universe is clean. One pulse of harmony and gladness beats through the vast creation. From Him who created all, flow life and light and gladness, throughout the realms of illimitable space. From the minutest atom to the greatest world, all things, animate and inanimate, in their unshadowed beauty and perfect joy, declare that God is love.

    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7704
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: Archangelic Queens of Heaven and the United States of the Solar System

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Sun Mar 31, 2013 12:48 pm

    I've been conflicted about Christianity for a very long time -- for a very long list of reasons. My research and posting on this website is part of my attempt to achieve conflict-resolution. One major problem with anything historical -- is verification -- and this goes for all history -- not just the Greatest Story Ever Told. Another problem is interpretation -- and this applies to everything -- not just to Christianity. Also, there is significant difficulty in transplanting someone and something from antiquity -- directly into modernity. I don't attend church anymore -- and I didn't attend Easter services this morning -- but when I sang in the choir at the Crystal Cathedral, we sang for three or four Easter services -- one right after another! One Easter season, I was a 'body' in the Glory of Easter -- complete with flying angels and live animals! Sunrise Services at the Hollywood Bowl were always a treat! But I've read scholarly books and entertained doubts about the Historical Jesus and the theological problems associated with Judeo-Christianity. I've also been attracted to Clean-Sheet of Paper approaches to Philosophy and Theology. Why did Jesus have to die?? Why was the Friday Jesus was murdered on considered to be 'Good'?? Was Jesus a Human-Sacrifice?? Does the Mass involve Human-Sacrifice and Cannibalism?? Is Christianity interlaced with Astrotheology and Paganism?? If Jesus hadn't lived a perfect life -- hadn't been beaten and murdered -- hadn't been resurrected from the dead -- hadn't ascended into Heaven -- and hadn't interceded on our behalf before God the Father for the past 2,000 years -- would we all be doomed to burn forever in the Flames of Hell?? Another thing -- despite the Substitutionary-Atonement of Jesus Christ -- there are literally dozens of New Testament Texts which link Salvation to Behavior (rather than simply a simple belief in and/or acceptance of Christ's death on the cross in our behalf. Could God NOT save us in Old Testament times??

    I'm strangely attracted to the Whole Bible -- yet I am VERY troubled with the details. Something seems to be VERY wrong -- and Robert H. Schuller didn't exactly clear things up for me -- even though he seemed to offer a New and Living Way into the Holy Place (the Crystal Cathedral)!! Some of us used to call Dr. Schuller the Holy One of Garden Grove!! Theology has been One Big Nightmare for me -- rather than bringing me peace and joy. I often wonder how many people would attend church if they REALLY read the Bible from cover to cover -- and were HONEST regarding its contents??!! What Would John Shelby Spong Say?? How many people would attend church if God didn't scare the hell out of them?? Would my Kinder and Gentler Version of Christianity be Bad for Business?? I suspect that it would. I suspect that this solar system is one big Galactic Business -- where the bottom-line is the bottom-line -- and perhaps this is the way things HAVE to be -- as harsh as that sounds. Perhaps I will have to ultimately make my peace with that which I find to be Utterly-Reprehensible. Would a Solar System Administrator be expected to maximize the bottom-line -- regardless of human-suffering, murder, and mayhem?? My vision for this Solar System involves Politics and Religion which actually make sense -- and where War and Environmental-Destruction are Completely Off the Table. But is this a manifestation of Galactic-Insubordination to the Way Things Are in This Universe?? Is Humanity doomed to the Infliction of Punishment and the Extraction of Payment in Perpetuity?? Is Humanity Owned by a Galactic Star War-Lord?? Would a Regime-Change Replace One War-Lord with Another (Who Might be Meaner Than the First)?? One Last Thing. Easter 2013 is the last Easter in the Easter-Table in the Book of Common Prayer -- and this table starts in 1786 (I think)!! What Would the Pope Emeritus and Petras Romanus Say??

    The following is a post by Antonia on the old Project Avalon which I thought should be included in this thread. Thank-you Antonia. I trust that I have not used your post in vain. I see a light at the end of the tunnel...but things can be pretty dark at times. Hang on tight...this is a tough read. They don't usually include these texts in the lectionary. How would you like to preach on the following texts? These references are enough to cause a lot of people to run out of the church...sobbing. This is some of the worst material in the Bible. We need to face reality. All of it. I continue to enjoy studying theology - but I think the real truth of the matter is rather obscure and esoteric - and this takes a lot of work and speculation. I think the agnostics may have had it right all along. We just have to keep searching - regardless of how difficult the journey becomes. Did Lucifer have anything to do with the madness documented below - or did Lucifer fight this sort of thing? I'm presently thinking that most all of the mythologies and theologies have a common origin - and that they reveal various aspects of a central small-case deity - and that this might be Satan and/or Lucifer. The large-case Creator God of the Universe seems to be strangely absent in all of this earthly madness. Think human, and think solar system for the gods, goddesses, angels, demons, aliens, souls, interdimensional reptilians, et al. Think Occam's Razor. As you lose your faith - create another one. Never give up. Never stop. Namaste.

    Ritual Human Sacrifice

    "At that time the Spirit of the LORD came upon Jephthah, and he went throughout the land of Gilead and Manasseh, including Mizpah in Gilead, and led an army against the Ammonites. And Jephthah made a vow to the LORD. He said, "If you give me victory over the Ammonites, I will give to the LORD the first thing coming out of my house to greet me when I return in triumph. I will sacrifice it as a burnt offering."

    "So Jephthah led his army against the Ammonites, and the LORD gave him victory. He thoroughly defeated the Ammonites from Aroer to an area near Minnith - twenty towns - and as far away as Abel-keramim. Thus Israel subdued the Ammonites. When Jephthah returned home to Mizpah, his daughter - his only child - ran out to meet him, playing on a tambourine and dancing for joy. When he saw her, he tore his clothes in anguish. "My daughter!" he cried out. "My heart is breaking! What a tragedy that you came out to greet me. For I have made a vow to the LORD and cannot take it back." And she said, "Father, you have made a promise to the LORD. You must do to me what you have promised, for the LORD has given you a great victory over your enemies, the Ammonites. But first let me go up and roam in the hills and weep with my friends for two months, because I will die a virgin." "You may go," Jephthah said. And he let her go away for two months. She and her friends went into the hills and wept because she would never have children. When she returned home, her father kept his vow, and she died a virgin. So it has become a custom in Israel for young Israelite women to go away for four days each year to lament the fate of Jephthah's daughter." Judges 11:29-40

    Rules of genocide...

    Suppose you hear in one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you that some worthless rabble among you have led their fellow citizens astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods. In such cases, you must examine the facts carefully. If you find it is true and can prove that such a detestable act has occurred among you, you must attack that town and completely destroy all its inhabitants, as well as all the livestock. Then you must pile all the plunder in the middle of the street and burn it. Put the entire town to the torch as a burnt offering to the LORD your God. That town must remain a ruin forever; it may never be rebuilt. Keep none of the plunder that has been set apart for destruction. Then the LORD will turn from his fierce anger and be merciful to you. He will have compassion on you and make you a great nation, just as he solemnly promised your ancestors. "The LORD your God will be merciful only if you obey him and keep all the commands I am giving you today, doing what is pleasing to him." (Deuteronomy 13:13-19 NLT)

    Gods blood lust…Baby Killing

    "The glory of Israel will fly away like a bird, for your children will die at birth or perish in the womb or never even be conceived. Even if your children do survive to grow up, I will take them from you. It will be a terrible day when I turn away and leave you alone. I have watched Israel become as beautiful and pleasant as Tyre. But now Israel will bring out her children to be slaughtered." O LORD, what should I request for your people? I will ask for wombs that don't give birth and breasts that give no milk. The LORD says, "All their wickedness began at Gilgal; there I began to hate them. I will drive them from my land because of their evil actions. I will love them no more because all their leaders are rebels. The people of Israel are stricken. Their roots are dried up; they will bear no more fruit. And if they give birth, I will slaughter their beloved children." (Hosea 9:11-16 NLT)

    God kills the Good Samaritan

    "The ark of God was placed on a new cart and taken away from the house of Abinadab on the hill. Uzzah and Ahio, sons of Abinadab guided the cart, with Ahio walking before it, while David and all the Israelites made merry before the Lord with all their strength, with singing and with citharas, harps, tambourines, sistrums, and cymbals." "When they came to the threshing floor of Nodan, Uzzah reached out his hand to the ark of God to steady it, for the oxen were making it tip. But the Lord was angry with Uzzah; God struck him on that spot, and he died there before God." (2 Samuel 6:3-7 NAB)

    Baby Bashing

    "Happy those who seize your children and smash them against a rock." Psalms 137:9 NAB

    Child Beating

    "He who spares the rod hates his son, but he who loves him takes care to chastise him" (Proverbs 13:24 NAB)

    "Chastise your son, for in this there is hope, but do not desire his death. The man of violent temper pays the penalty; even if you rescue him, you will have to do it again." (Proverbs 19:18-19 NAB)

    God tells his people to Kill Followers of Other Religions

    "If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kill him. Your hand shall be the first raised to slay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to death, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slavery. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such evil as this in your midst." (Deuteronomy 13:7-12 NAB)

    God demands Murder, Rape, and Pillage at Jabesh-gilead

    "So they sent twelve thousand warriors to Jabesh-gilead with orders to kill everyone there, including women and children. "This is what you are to do," they said. "Completely destroy all the males and every woman who is not a virgin." Among the residents of Jabesh-gilead they found four hundred young virgins who had never slept with a man, and they brought them to the camp at Shiloh in the land of Canaan."

    "The Israelite assembly sent a peace delegation to the little remnant of Benjamin who were living at the rock of Rimmon. Then the men of Benjamin returned to their homes, and the four hundred women of Jabesh-gilead who were spared were given to them as wives. But there were not enough women for all of them. The people felt sorry for Benjamin because the LORD had left this gap in the tribes of Israel. So the Israelite leaders asked, "How can we find wives for the few who remain, since all the women of the tribe of Benjamin are dead? There must be heirs for the survivors so that an entire tribe of Israel will not be lost forever. But we cannot give them our own daughters in marriage because we have sworn with a solemn oath that anyone who does this will fall under God's curse."

    "Then they thought of the annual festival of the LORD held in Shiloh, between Lebonah and Bethel, along the east side of the road that goes from Bethel to Shechem. They told the men of Benjamin who still needed wives, "Go and hide in the vineyards. When the women of Shiloh come out for their dances, rush out from the vineyards, and each of you can take one of them home to be your wife! And when their fathers and brothers come to us in protest, we will tell them, 'Please be understanding. Let them have your daughters, for we didn't find enough wives for them when we destroyed Jabesh-gilead. And you are not guilty of breaking the vow since you did not give your daughters in marriage to them.'" So the men of Benjamin did as they were told. They kidnapped the women who took part in the celebration and carried them off to the land of their own inheritance. Then they rebuilt their towns and lived in them. So the assembly of Israel departed by tribes and families, and they returned to their own homes." (Judges 21:10-24 NLT)

    David's Punishment More rape, murder and baby killing demanded by God

    "Thus says the Lord: 'I will bring evil upon you out of your own house. I will take your wives (plural) while you live to see it, and will give them to your neighbor. He shall lie with your wives in broad daylight. You have done this deed in secret, but I will bring it about in the presence of all Israel, and with the sun looking down.'"
    Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord." Nathan answered David: "The Lord on his part has forgiven your sin: you shall not die. But since you have utterly spurned the Lord by this deed, the child born to you must surely die." (The child dies seven days later.) 2 Samuel 12:11-14 NAB

    Slave Beating

    "When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property." Exodus 21:20-21 NAB

    Sampson and the Spirit of the Lord

    "The spirit of the Lord came upon him (Sampson), and he went down to Ashkelon, where he killed thirty of their men and despoiled them; he gave their garments to those who had answered his riddle." (Sampson used the garments to pay off a bet he lost.) Judges 14:19 NAB

    Bloody Sabbath God demands death of man for gathering wood.

    "While the Israelites were in the desert, a man was discovered gathering wood on the Sabbath day. Those who caught him at it brought him to Moses and Aaron and the whole assembly. But they kept him in custody, for there was no clear decision as to what should be done with him. Then the Lord said to Moses, "This man shall be put to death; let the whole community stone him outside the camp." So the whole community led him outside the camp and stoned him to death as the Lord had commanded Moses." Numbers 15:32-36 NAB

    Murder, Rape, Pillage, and Plunder

    "As you approach a town to attack it, first offer its people terms for peace. If they accept your terms and open the gates to you, then all the people inside will serve you in forced labor. But if they refuse to make peace and prepare to fight, you must attack the town. When the LORD your God hands it over to you, kill every man in the town. But you may keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plunder. You may enjoy the spoils of your enemies that the LORD your God has given you. But these instructions apply only to distant towns, not to the towns of nations nearby. "As for the towns of the nations the LORD your God is giving you as a special possession, destroy every living thing in them. You must completely destroy the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites, just as the LORD your God has commanded you. This will keep the people of the land from teaching you their detestable customs in the worship of their gods, which would cause you to sin deeply against the LORD your God." Deuteronomy 20:10-18 NLT

    Murder, rape and pillage of the Midianites

    "They attacked Midian just as the LORD had commanded Moses, and they killed all the men. All five of the Midianite kings - Evi, Rekem, Zur, Hur, and Reba - died in the battle. They also killed Balaam son of Beor with the sword. Then the Israelite army captured the Midianite women and children and seized their cattle and flocks and all their wealth as plunder. They burned all the towns and villages where the Midianites had lived. After they had gathered the plunder and captives, both people and animals, they brought them all to Moses and Eleazar the priest, and to the whole community of Israel, which was camped on the plains of Moab beside the Jordan River, across from Jericho."

    "Moses, Eleazar the priest, and all the leaders of the people went to meet them outside the camp. But Moses was furious with all the military commanders who had returned from the battle. "Why have you let all the women live?" he demanded. "These are the very ones who followed Balaam's advice and caused the people of Israel to rebel against the LORD at Mount Peor. They are the ones who caused the plague to strike the LORD's people. Now kill all the boys and all the women who have slept with a man. Only the young girls who are virgins may live; you may keep them for yourselves." Numbers 31:7-18 NLT

    Burning of temple at Baal (There's nothing like a good church barbeque.)

    "Then Jehu called a meeting of all the people of the city and said to them, "Ahab hardly worshiped Baal at all compared to the way I will worship him! Summon all the prophets and worshipers of Baal, and call together all his priests. See to it that every one of them comes, for I am going to offer a great sacrifice to Baal. Any of Baal's worshipers who fail to come will be put to death." But Jehu's plan was to destroy all the worshipers of Baal. Then Jehu ordered, "Prepare a solemn assembly to worship Baal!" So they did. He sent messengers throughout all Israel summoning those who worshiped Baal. They all came and filled the temple of Baal from one end to the other. And Jehu instructed the keeper of the wardrobe, "Be sure that every worshiper of Baal wears one of these robes." So robes were given to them"

    "Then Jehu went into the temple of Baal with Jehonadab son of Recab. Jehu said to the worshipers of Baal, "Make sure that only those who worship Baal are here. Don't let anyone in who worships the LORD!" So they were all inside the temple to offer sacrifices and burnt offerings. Now Jehu had surrounded the building with eighty of his men and had warned them, "If you let anyone escape, you will pay for it with your own life."

    "As soon as Jehu had finished sacrificing the burnt offering, he commanded his guards and officers, "Go in and kill all of them. Don't let a single one escape!" So they killed them all with their swords, and the guards and officers dragged their bodies outside. Then Jehu's men went into the fortress of the temple of Baal. They dragged out the sacred pillar used in the worship of Baal and destroyed it. They broke down the sacred pillar of Baal and wrecked the temple of Baal, converting it into a public toilet. That is what it is used for to this day." 2 Kings 10:18-27 NLT

    Saul’s Kindness???

    Saul sent this message to the Kenites: "Move away from where the Amalekites live or else you will die with them. For you were kind to the people of Israel when they came up from Egypt." So the Kenites packed up and left. Then Saul slaughtered the Amalekites from Havilah all the way to Shur, east of Egypt. (1 Samuel 15:6-7 NLT)

    Genocide

    During this period, Joshua destroyed all the descendants of Anak, who lived in the hill country of Hebron, Debir, Anab, and the entire hill country of Judah and Israel. He killed them all and completely destroyed their towns. Not one was left in all the land of Israel, though some still remained in Gaza, Gath, and Ashdod. So Joshua took control of the entire land, just as the LORD had instructed Moses. He gave it to the people of Israel as their special possession, dividing the land among the tribes. So the land finally had rest from war. (Joshua 11:21-23 NLT)

    God hardens hearts and makes people fight the Israelites only to be slaughterd..

    So Joshua conquered the entire region – the hill country, the Negev, the land of Goshen, the western foothills, the Jordan Valley, and the mountains and lowlands of Israel. The Israelite territory now extended all the way from Mount Halak, which leads up to Seir, to Baal-gad at the foot of Mount Hermon in the valley of Lebanon. Joshua killed all the kings of those territories, waging war for a long time to accomplish this. No one in this region made peace with the Israelites except the Hivites of Gibeon. All the others were defeated. For the LORD hardened their hearts and caused them to fight the Israelites instead of asking for peace. So they were completely and mercilessly destroyed, as the LORD had commanded Moses. (Joshua 11:16-20 NLT)

    Whole Towns Murdered at the bequest of God

    The Canaanite king of Arad, who lived in the Negev, heard that the Israelites were approaching on the road to Atharim. So he attacked the Israelites and took some of them as prisoners. Then the people of Israel made this vow to the LORD: "If you will help us conquer these people, we will completely destroy all their towns." The LORD heard their request and gave them victory over the Canaanites. The Israelites completely destroyed them and their towns, and the place has been called Hormah ever since. (Numbers 21:1-3 NLT)

    God’s psychotic Wrath

    Weep and moan, you evil shepherds! Roll in the dust, you leaders of the flock! The time of your slaughter has arrived; you will fall and shatter like fragile pottery. You will find no place to hide; there will be no way to escape. Listen to the frantic cries of the shepherds, to the leaders of the flock shouting in despair, for the LORD is spoiling their pastures. Peaceful meadows will be turned into a wasteland by the LORD's fierce anger. He has left his den like a lion seeking its prey, and their land will be made desolate by the sword of the enemy and the LORD's fierce anger. (Jeremiah 25:34-38 NLT)

    God Slaughters countless people

    In that day those the LORD has slaughtered will fill the earth from one end to the other. No one will mourn for them or gather up their bodies to bury them. They will be scattered like dung on the ground. (Jeremiah 25:33 NLT)

    The Cup of Anger God incites hate and anger

    Then the LORD, the God of Israel, said to me, "Take from my hand this cup filled to the brim with my anger, and make all the nations to whom I send you drink from it. When they drink from it, they will stagger, crazed by the warfare I will send against them." (Jeremiah 25:15-16 NLT)

    Complete Destruction

    And now the LORD Almighty says: Because you have not listened to me, I will gather together all the armies of the north under King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon, whom I have appointed as my deputy. I will bring them all against this land and its people and against the other nations near you. I will completely destroy you and make you an object of horror and contempt and a ruin forever. I will take away your happy singing and laughter. The joyful voices of bridegrooms and brides will no longer be heard. Your businesses will fail, and all your homes will stand silent and dark. This entire land will become a desolate wasteland. (Jeremiah 25:8-11 NLT

    Has anyone taken a very, very close look at the architecture and art of churches, mosques, synagogues, and government buildings throughout the world? Are there commonalities? Look at the domes. Look at the gods and goddesses. What's going on here? I desire a unified and peaceful world which is genuinely responsibly free. A combined church and state wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't run by the same humans and non-humans who brought us the Crusades and the Inquisition. A minimalist humanist namaste constitutional responsible freedom theocracy might actually work. I just worry that highly disfunctional gods and goddesses would screw everything up - resulting in billions of corpses throughout the world. Would the Latin Mass, the Teachings of Jesus, and the U.S. Constitution be a good place to start? I'd like to know what the Pope and Jesuit General really think about in their most private moments regarding psychology, ethics, governance, science, technology, secrecy, history, spirituality, etc. It might be very, very different than what they present in public. I sometimes imagine their thoughts as they stand before the faithful. Might they be thinking 'if you people only knew what's really going on in this world!' Many people seem to be jumping out of the church frying pan, and into the new age fire. Look at the 'Infiltration of the New Age' thread in MOA. The information presented should be considered very carefully. Is there a Spiritual Switzerland somewhere between the Traditional Church and the New Age?

    I'm not going to keep commenting on my own threads to try to generate interest. The ball is in your court. There are some other threads I wish to follow - but I think I'm done with my threads for the foreseeable future. This does not imply a lack of interest or a change of heart. I just don't wish to play the part of the crusader. I might try to visit the United Nations, Washington D.C., the City of London, and the Vatican once again (I visited them many years ago). I will continue to fantasize about being a part of a Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom Solar System which includes the U.N., Washington D.C., the City of London, the Vatican, the Underground Bases, and the Secret Space Program - except that in my dreamworld there is no secrecy or corruption. Once again - I don't wish to fight the New World Order - I wish to HIJACK IT!! 'Take me to Nirvana!!' I'd love to put the dream into practice - but I'm not going to push it right now. If someone wants to pick me up in a UFO, and take me to the Darkside of the Moon to meet with Lucifer - I'll be ready to go at a moments notice. What am I saying?

    Are Satan, Lucifer, the Rothschilds, the Rockefellers, the Royal Family, and the Vatican the biggest seed-money rock stars on the planet - who are doing the most to make the world a better place? Trickle down theory voodoo economics? Where are the Billionaire Ghandi's? Jesus was pretty tough on rich people. Are billionaires the most socially responsible people on the planet? Did they gain their money through socially responsible activities? Can wealth become anticompetitive at some point? Should those with the most money have the greatest political clout? Should those with the gold - RULE? One of the greatest tragedies of history is the non compassionate use of accumulated wealth. I know that a lot of contactees and gurus are opposed to money - but I disagree. Money and private property are expressions of freedom. The problem with money is the irresponsible pursuit and use of money. Perhaps the billionaires should be placed under the scanning electron microscope to look for illegality and irresponsibility. Blood Money, Drug Money, and Destructive Money of All Kinds - should be repaid to society - with interest and penalties. I'm also not a big fan of ET Mentoring. Have the Gods, Goddesses, Angels, Archangels, ET's, and Ascended Masters been promoting Responsibility, Freedom, and Human Sovereignty (other than the Andromedans)? Boy - I sure got a lot out of my system - and I didn't even feel hostile. It must've been something I ate - or maybe the devil made me do it.

    Having said all of the above - I'm getting tired of being an internet warrior. It seems to be a monumental waste of time. Remember what Jesus said about pearls and such? Money Talks and BS Walks. The Bottom Line is the Bottom Line. Winning Isn't Everything. It's the Only Thing. Perhaps the secret is to be a Humanitarian on the Surface - and a Shrewd and Ruthless SOB Below the Radar. Could the Worship of Fame, Fortune, and Power - rather than the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit - help to explain why the Corrupt Rule the Stupid? Is Greed Good?

    I need to go for a long walk with my dog - and then perhaps I need to create a ten-year business plan. Who knows - in ten years I might have to change my tune and eat my words...

    OK...I'm back from my walk...and I decided that the Corrupt Will Always Rule the Stupid - because both the Corrupt and the Stupid are happy with the arrangement - despite all outward appearances. Additionally - Both the Corrupt and the Stupid are Threatened by Non-Corrupt Highly Intelligent People - and will Fight Them Vigorously. Think about THAT... Perhaps this is why no one has REALLY followed the Red Letter Teachings of Jesus for 2,000 years - and why they probably never will... Narrow is the way. Read Revelation 20:12. Is December 21, 2012 really Judgement Day?

    I'm on the verge of pusuing a business plan which is neither corrupt or stupid - and which will be executed in a manner which threatens neither the corrupt or the stupid. I may simply live a life of quiet decadence...and leave the corrupt and the stupid to their own devices. Actually - I'm too stupid to be corrupt - and that's the truth. I can't believe that I am able to put together semi-intelligent posts and threads. I am very discouraged at this point. I really feel like I'm not from around here. Nothing works. A Mason just invited me to a meeting. I'd love to talk to them - but I know that one thing would lead to another - and soon I would be in the middle of some very creepy stuff - and I'd find myself in a real jam. I worry about who really gives the top Masons their marching orders. Could it be Lucifer? Or is it Satan? How many Masons does it take to change a light-bulb? It's a secret.

    If the underground bases, the secret space program, and the secret government are in the best interest of the human race - then wonderful. But I have a very sinking and sick feeling that, in their present form, they are NOT in our best interest. I welcome grand plans for Humanity, Earth, and the Solar System - which are non-corrupt and are not evil. I don't have the answers to everything. I can't even run my own damn life, so how could I do anything of significance? 'You can't even run your own life - and I'll be damned if you'll run mine!' Perhaps trying to wake everyone up is a big mistake. Could this really be creating mass hysteria? I have mostly asked questions in contexts where people are already being exposed to all of the controversial, conspiratorial, and fringe stuff. I'm really trying to find compromises and a middle-ground which is still intellectually satisfying, and which is likely to stand the test of time. I don't hate the Masons, Nazis, and Magicians who Richard Hoagland says are at the heart of NASA. I don't hate the Catholics, the Muslims, the Blacks, or the Jews. The history of power in this solar system is probably stranger and sadder than even I can imagine. I just want to help resolve this damned mess. But I seem to be getting absolutely nowhere - and I'm getting older, dumber, and more miserable - each and every day. So - what's the point?

    Is just going with the flow - and not asking too many questions - really the way to go? Just get a degree? Make lots of money? Get a model spouse? Have charming children? And go along with the BS? If one really starts poking and prodding - do they end up on dozens of lists - get targeted by dozens of unsavory unseen entities - and end up losing their jobs, spouses, and minds? I was interested in the medical profession and the ministry - but I came to the conclusion that they were both as corrupt as hell - so I lost my way and got absolutely nowhere. I wanted things to make sense - and they never did. They still don't. And very few people will even talk to me. I wanted to help save the world - but is the world really worth saving? The people I meet every day make me question the prospects of making things truly work out well. The more people I meet - the more I like my dog. Oh I know that's not politically correct - but I'm not trying to impress anyone. I really want to stop posting. This isn't working. I hate the history of the world. I hate the direction of the world presently. I feel like Starbuck, laying on the floor, shouting 'we're going the wrong way!' I've tried. I've failed. And now I'm washing my hands of all of this. Good luck everyone.

    I washed my hands of all of this madness - but now my hands are dirtier than ever. I am presently taking a look at Tibet, Kali, and the Triinity Goddess. http://www.themistsofavalon.net/universal-lounge-f8/tibet-kali-and-the-trinity-goddess-t1019.htm Is this getting very close to the heart of Lucifer? In a sense - the names don't really matter. It's the power structure in this solar system - going back thousands or millions or years - that I'm really interested in. A central individual or group could write all kinds of texts, documents, and books - which are nothing more than cunningly devised fables - yet which could reveal volumes about the author. Could Lucifer be Lilith - Hathor - Isis - Ishtar - Mary - the Rich Young Ruler - the Prodigal Son - Mary of Magdala - the Whore of Babylon - or All of the Above? This could be one big shell-game or guessing-game. It could be a giant real-life game of Monopoly.

    Consider going through all of the Stargate SG-1 episodes on hulu.com - focusing on the theological and political issues which I have been raising lately. I'm just groping in the dark - but I think I may be covering some subjects in a manner in which few others are presently doing - which may shed light on the subject of disclosure. Are most of us looking in the wrong places - for the wrong reasons. What would Philip Corso, Jr. say? Speaking of which - his father - Philip Corso - spent a significant period of time in London and Rome - before Roswell. Perhaps someone should write a book titled 'The Day Before Roswell'. Was Roswell a staged event - using Secret Government UFO's and PGLF's or Hybrids? Was Muroc 1954 the same damn thing? What would Bishop McIntyre say? What would Bill Cooper say - if he were alive today? Could Bill still be alive today? What would Commander X say? Nuff said...

    If one was in a perfect Garden of Eden or a Harmonious Heaven - with a Kind and Loving God in charge - what more could one want? But what if one wished to exercise their creativity, curiosity, and ambition - in forbidden ways? Something has been bothering me a lot for a long time. It has to do with why we seem to be killing ourselves with industrialization, high-technology surveillance and warfare, designer diseases, massive pollution, bitter science vs religion battles, acute-care drugs and surgery medicine instead of prevention, and running around like chickens with our heads cut off instead of smelling the roses and savoring the creation. There's a lot more to it than what I just said - and I will try to elaborate on this in subsequent posts. I'm really trying to get at why Lucifer rebelled against God (assuming that this actually did occur in some way, shape, or form). I seem to be enamored with Lucifer - to an unhealthy degree. My speculations are causing me a significant amount of mental anguish - but I'm beginning to think that a Lucifer-Centered Search for Truth - might yield the clearest view of the way things really are. I have no particular animosity toward Lucifer (assuming that Lucifer actually exists) - and I simply want to try to figure things out - and eventually try to find some peace of mind. I have very little presently - and I feel a bit like Elvis Presley - who wished for a single day of peace. Sometimes I wonder if I might even be Lucifer with amnesia - or a potential Lucifer of the future. Thinking about Lucifer related subjects and issues is scaring the hell out of me. I love it in one way - but I seem to keep sliding down the slippery slope - into I know not what. The horror.

    If you can - get DVD's of 'Contact' and 'Avatar' - and watch them several times - noting especially the philosophical and theological aspects. Watch 'The Lucifer Effect - MIT Lecture'. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xpsVlY3QQc This is just a start. I continue to think that unconventional and heretical theological pursuits will provide many solutions - possibly even disclosure. I continue to contemplate a harmonization of the Teachings of Jesus, the U.S. Constitution, and the Latin Mass. This may be a dead-end, and we may need to move way beyond such a historical approach, but I think there is merit in exploring this possibility - as a mental and spiritual exercise - if nothing else. I'm just rambling now. I'm concerned that society may be on the verge of getting a lot meaner and nastier. If half of what I have speculated about is true - this could cause a lot of societal problems - some of them possibly violent. Waking people up could backfire - if we're not very careful. Are we creating mass-hysteria? Should maybe 10% of the key people of the world be properly woken-up? I think I might be trying to do this in my various postings and threads. I wonder who really reads them? I do not wish to yell 'FIRE!!!' in a crowded theater. I continue to seek a top-down non-revolution - to make the world and solar system a better place. I'm too lazy, stupid, and squeamish to run in the streets with torches and pitchforks. I much prefer armchair blogging. Born to blog. The incredible blog.

    Has technology and industrialization made us better and happier people? Have any wars in the history of the universe really done anyone any real good? Why do we compete with each other? What if we stopped competing with each other? Would we have a greater or lesser chance of survival? Would the breed improve if we ceased to compete? Was it John D. Rockefeller who said 'Competition is a sin'? Why do we need jets, trains, busses, nukes, cities, cathedrals, mansions, space-travel, etc, etc? Why can't we live in teepees or grass huts? We seem to be killing ourselves in very sophisticated and clever ways. If we destroy ourselves - then what? What do you think, Lucifer?

    Try thinking about galactic issues in the context of the art, architecture, ceremony, symbology, history, and music of the Roman Catholic Church. All roads lead to Rome - but where did the most important roads begin? Sometimes I wish that I could travel through Tibet, China, India, Iraq (Babylon), Egypt, the Holy Land, Greece, Rome (and all of Europe) - with a good Jesuit 'deep-throat' (a good Jesuit is hard to find!) - who would lead me through the strange and brutal history of the world, solar system, galaxy, and universe. But then I would know too much - and we all know what that would mean! I think I may re-read 'Murder in the Vatican' by Lucien Gregoire. I have 'Keys of This Blood' by Malachi Martin somewhere - but I can't find it. I may even re-watch 'The Brides of Christ'. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQgHCQh2sJE&feature=related Frankly - I got tired of Catholic-bashing (listening to it, that is) - and I moved on. But now I'm taking a second look - from what I hope is an objective perspective - noting both the good and the bad - and then imagining what an ideal church would look like and act like. A female pope? No more requirement of a celebate and male priesthood? No more crowns and crucifixes? An Ecumenical Namaste Latin 'Mass' based upon the Sermon on the Mount - sung alternatum - without communion - and with a native-tongue homily in the middle (expository preaching of the Teachings of Jesus)? No more Cannon Law or Holy Office? A church completely in harmony with the Teachings of Jesus and the U.S. Constitution? A retired Mary? I'd better start running...but I fear that there is no place to hide. The church can be a real mother........

    I don't view women as evil or potentially evil. I am simply looking at the evidence regarding who runs the show in this solar system - and I am leaning toward a young, pretty, pigmented, female or hermaphroditic, and very possibly human/reptile hybrid - such as is represented in the 1983-85 and 2009-10 versions of 'V'. I do think that the male and female roles and mindsets are highly disfunctional (throughout history) - but this does not mean that either male or female human beings are evil. In a sense - I don't even think the Queen of Heaven is evil - just out of touch, and possibly insane - and in dire need of retirement (and a hot date perhaps). That's all.

    Thank-you again TRANCOSO. We might be surprised if we knew how deeply into the occult the leaders in science, religion, politics, literature, etc. really have been and are. I have my theories - but very little evidence - and very few believers. Oh ye of little faith! Perhaps I should tell people that they'll go to hell if they don't agree with me - and give me lots and lots of money!!!!! I hate to say this over and over - but those who say that the masses must be ruled by deception and manipulation may be correct - as unethical and reprehensible as this may be. I have been attempting to use calm and fair reasoning for a couple of years now - and it's not working. The subjects and editorial positions have been controversial - but my approach has been very low key. This approach does not seem to work. If I had tried to whip people up into a frenzy of fear or anger - with lots of conflict and fighting - the view counts would likely be a dozen times what they are presently. I am very capable of the theatrics necessary to accomplish this - but I continue to think that this is wrong, very wrong, and wrong to the nth degree. I don't wish to be a crusader either. I just wish to attempt to make sense, and to get people to think for themselves - even though this approach seems doomed to failure. I think we really may be heading into a New World Order scenario - via Anarchy. Things may go to hell - and then the PTB will undoubtedly deal with the situation swiftly and firmly to restore order and further consolidate power.

    Sometimes I feel like starting a non tax-exempt church - based upon a Modified Latin Mass (sung alternatim, based upon the Sermon on the Mount, and without communion), the Teachings of Jesus, and the U.S. Constitution. Sermons would center on world and solar system governance. I don't doubt that such a hypothetical church would be quickly shut down or destroyed - but it is fun to think about. I really think I'll have to walk alone, as I have throughout my life.

    I wish I were a focused individual who illuminated minds. Perhaps there is no legitimate and ethical way to do theology and to do church. I have some architectural and procedural concepts which I think would knock the socks off of anything in existence - in this solar system at least - but I have a sinking feeling that no matter how we attempt to put things together - it will always ultimately be wrong - and enough to drive a god or goddess insane.

    I want to make this perfectly clear - I do not wish misery, harm, or death to come to anyone - including Reptilians, Greys, Hybrids, Nephilim, Angels, Demons, Illuminati, Satan, Lucifer, Shiva, Kali, KRLLL, The Logos, The King or Queen of Whatever, The God or Goddess of Whatever, et al.

    I JUST WANT THE BS TO STOP!!! PEACE!!! BE STILL!!!

    If anyone hasn't watched this video series - PLEASE DO SO!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-AfhUiq8-Q&list=PL75486E058747DE51 It brings so many things together in an understandable manner. Stop the video - and read the fine-print. I think this video series is extremely important!

    At some point - I might like to work with all of those listed above - once I got used to them! What about that debate-date, Kali??? You must REALLY hate me...

    OK...a lot of people hate me. I have been blocked by several YouTube channels - including the poster of the video series mentioned above. ufohypothesis (Rick Keefe - who interviews Alex Collier) has blocked me. Another one - which is critical of the Roman Catholic Church - has blocked me. This is very, very odd - since I am mostly editorially on-board with the blockers!!! None of them told me a damn thing - so I have no idea why I have been blocked. Two of my websites have been taken over by someone I have never heard of - and one has been removed from the internet - even though I am paid-up for several years. I am very paranoid - and they probably really are out to get me. Strange world we live in.

    What's odd - is that I really and truly have no animosity toward anyone. Period. Although - to be honest - I am annoyed by just about everyone - especially myself. But I have no seething agenda or fecal list. I really and truly am seeking a big-tent solution - rather than something which is narrow and exclusive. It's an equal-opportunity big-tent for males, females, hermaphrodites, and all races - including aliens and hybrids! I think I'm probably way too accomodating and easy-going.

    Imagine Kali designing the churches. Imagine Kali composing the music. Imagine Kali as being Anna (Ashayana? Annunaki? Ashtar Commander?). Imagine Kali playing the music. 1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFrKUk5lwmE&feature=related 2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_SakzT9nhM 3. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQW0rVPUXw0

    Sometimes I wonder about the true source of a lot of French Romantic Music. Does this music have something in common with William Shakespeare, Charles Darwin, and Albert Einstein? Who was the architect of Chartres Cathedral? Does anyone have any idea of what I am talking about? Anyone?

    I'm not going to be too specific - but if one looks at French Romantic Organ Music as a whole - what personality lurks within the music? Is it the Creator God of the Universe? Is it Jesus Christ? Is it Lucifer? Is it Mary? The individual composers? The complexity and abstractness is overwhelming. The level of genius in the design and construction of pyramids, temples, and cathedrals is likewise overwhelming. Yet something dark and troubled seems to lurk within. Could this be representative of the 'good-side' of Kali? If I'm right about all of this - do I at least get a Cracker-Jack Prize?

    I guess I'm passively pursuing a 'Pinky and the Brain - Raiders of the Lost Ark - Lucifer/Shiva/Kali/Mary - and the Temple of Doom' Hypothesis - which includes a good/genius side - and a bad/insane side. What did Spielberg know - and when did he know it? I find myself strangely attracted to the good side - and utterly disgusted and horrified by the bad side. I tend to think that if Lucifer/Shiva/Kali/Mary retired - that the bad side would go away - and that they could serve as an advisor rather than a dictator. You'd have to actually be me to understand where I'm coming from, and to see that which I visualize. I couldn't possibly put it into words.

    I just finished reading 'The Gospel of Mary of Magdala' by Karen King. The cover features a painting of a young-woman with a very dark complexion - dressed in scarlet - with a sun-disk around her head - pointing to an egg in her hand. Could this be Kali? Karen King thinks the Gospel of Mary might have been written in Egypt or Syria, with an authorship date of between 32 and 325 CE. Could Kali be the writer of most sacred texts - including the Bible and the Quran? Ralph Ellis claims that Jesus Christ and Mary Magdalene were of a high class. Nicolas Notovich claims that Jesus travelled to Tibet. Alex Collier claims that our creator (or genetic engineer) is more female than male (not sure which lecture - possibly 2002). He also claims that the Andromedans consider blacks to be genetically superior (I hope I got that one right! Not sure which lecture). In a 2002 lecture - Alex hints at a deliberate removal of the Pa Taal (spelling?).

    I think I'm going to give this thing a rest. I don't really wish to convince anyone of anything. This has mostly been a research project - in a very passive and informal sense. The Jesuits, Alphabet Agents, and World Leaders know exactly what's going on - and they obviously are not stumbling over each other to get to the microphone first - to tell all of us goyim the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. In a sense - I have mostly wished to communicate with Lucifer/Shiva/Kali/Mary and his/her willing and unwilling servants. I continue to desire a top-down reformation of how business is conducted in this solar system. Hope springs eternal - but I'm not holding my breath. Namaste.

    I really don't know who I am. I mused that I was from Pleon in the Pleiades - before I knew there was a star in the Pleiades named Pleione. Is my soul really shapeshifting interdimensional reptilian in nature? Is that really the biggest secret? How old is my soul? Will my soul live forever? Am I on the Stairway to Heaven - or the Highway to Hell? Is it the unpardonable sin to wonder if Lucifer is Kali is Mary - and to wonder if they wrote the Bible (By Ba'al?) - and to wonder if they rule the church and the solar system? I'm climbing the mountains of Tibet - and I really don't like the view. Regardless of who Lucifer really is or isn't - I think they have a terrible job. I'm really not trying to torment or agitate them. I'm trying to understand them, and to possibly help defuse a ticking time-bomb. I really don't think that I encompass all things. I am NOT I AM! I use very little religious or new age language. I am truly adrift in very rough seas - and I am being beat to a pulp on the rocks of infidelity. I really don't know my reincarnational history - and I don't really want to know it. My soul could really be bad@$$! I feel as though the human race is serving a thousands of years long torture sentence - leading up to a final judgement and execution. I am feeling absolutely NO LOVE from the Galactic Powers That Be. I feel as though we have been left to our own devices - and to the devices of some very dark beings - while those who could help - refuse to do so. I cannot feel the love tonight. I am on the verge of going underground in more ways than one. Mary! Mary! Quite contrary! How does your Garden of Ea - Den grow? Am l a lab-rat, or just a worm? World without end or meaning? Namaste? Really?

    My point was that it feels as though we are in more trouble than we can imagine - and that help is not on the way - and that we may be very lucky to survive, and to emerge from this present darkness with some sort of peaceful and rational self-rule. I'm going to overdose on Branton, Bill Cooper, Commander X (could they be the same people?), Alex Collier, Joseph Farrell, Jordan Maxwell, Alex Jones, Ellen White, Robert H. Schuller, the Federalist Papers, the Anti-Federalist Papers, Science Fiction, All of My Threads (AV1 & MOA), Astronomy, Astrophysics, Biochemistry, Genetics, the Four Gospels, Comparative Religion, Lyra>Aldebaran>Sirius>Tibet>Lemuria>Atlantis>Babylon>Egypt>Greece>Pagan Rome>Ancient Israel>Papal Rome>Nazi Party>New World Order, the Classical Sacred Music Literature, and the Latin Mass.

    I'm not going to spend much time trying to convince anyone of anything - but I will continue to attempt to think Lucifer's/Lilith's/Hathor's/Shiva's/Kali's/Ishtar's/Astarte's/Isis's/Mary's/Inanna's/Anna's/The Whore of Babylon's Thoughts After Her (historically and presently) - Without Aspiration, Veneration, or Condemnation. I doubt that anything much will result from this tempest in a teapot. I'm too far gone - and the world seems to be too far gone. I was serious about going underground - in more ways than one. I've been looking at old missile silos which have been converted into homes - but really even these bunkers may provide little protection from what may be coming. There is probably no place to hide. Siriusly.

    So - Lucifer - are you male or female? Who are you - really? Where do you spend most of your time? What the hell are you doing? Or - do you even exist? Is there really just a Council of Ten - or something like that - which rules the solar system? I keep talking about 10,000 representatives - of all nations and races - from throughout the solar system - as an ideal number - for a non-corrupt and organized-decentralized solar system government. But is this too many? What is the ideal method of solar system governance? Perhaps I have not carefully considered ALL of the possibilities, before arriving at my present biases and conclusions. Perhaps I should contemplate the general subject of solar system governance - rather than focusing on a particular type of solar system governance. Or - should I just shut-up, and not even think about it? Is 'One Nation Under Satan' the way things have always been - and always will be? Is everything else simply an illusion, and wishful thinking? Is the whole damn thing set in concrete? We're supposed to take 'baby-steps' - but if we can't see the big-picture - how are we supposed to know which direction to take these 'baby-steps'? This whole thing seems like a sick nightmare of a joke. Mumbo-Jumbo and BS are everywhere. So - when do we get the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Or - is the truth so bad - that we would all commit suicide? I think there is genuine evil - which should not be pursued under any circumstances. We seem to live in a moral cesspool. I'm not sure that I'm buying the 'space-dust' terminology. We are souls + bodies, and we seem to be stuck in this solar system, whether we like it or not - regardless of how fast or how slow we are vibrating. I expect this to continue for a very long time. We make our bed - and sleep in it. Our planet is how we plan it. World without end. Amen.

    Freedom is key - and the key to freedom is responsibility. These two words should be studied endlessly. A constitution which maximizes freedom and responsibility should be sought - and Comparative Constitutions should also be an ongoing and relentless study. There probably is some sort of a dictatorial Council of Ten - with a ten-foot tall Drac serving as chairman of the board - because We the People are too irresponsible to govern ourselves. I'm pi$$ed-off at everyone - especially myself. I think we can all do a helluva lot better. This is probably the crazy-stage - where people are being hit with all sorts of controversial and conflicting information and concepts - of which probably 20% is actually true or constructive. If we survive this stage - then perhaps we can put together a more rational solar system view, and solar system governance. If I really spoke with Lucifer - they would probably point out how stupid and gullible we are - and why we are being ruled by secrecy, deception, manipulation, force, violence, etc. Lucifer might be a Devil - but we probably have what we deserve. Hopefully things will change for the better, sometime soon. Namaste.

    I think we are too easy AND too harsh on ourselves. We treat ourselves and each other inappropriately. I think we are where we are by both choice and circumstance. I think we have been lied to and manipulated - but that we have allowed ourselves to be led around by the hooks in our noses. The past may have passed - but we need to study the past endlessly - or we will keep making the same stupid mistakes over and over again. It matters what we think AND what others think. Our thinking affects and effects others. People suffer the consequences of our actions all the time. We are all interrelated - whether we like it, or not.

    Perhaps Lucifer is the Hermaphrodite/Hybrid/Reptile/Human/Nephilim/Interdimensional/Physical/God/Goddess of This World (and the Solar System?). Is Lucifer both Amen Ra and Hathor? Did Lucifer create all of the mythologies, theologies, gods, and goddesses - including Jesus and Mary? Did Lucifer create the Dracs and Greys? Is there really only one faction of Annunaki - under the command of Lucifer? Is Nibiru ruled by Lucifer? Is Lucifer the Ashtar Commander? Are we all Fallen Angels - who followed Lucifer to Earth? Have we been left to our own devices by the rest of the universe? Is Lucifer script-writer, director, and actor/actress? Are NASA's Nazis, Masons, and Magicians - all Luciferian? Does Lucifer rule the United Nations, the United States, the City of London, and the Vatican? Were they all infiltrated from day-one? Are the three stars (upside-down or rightside-up) in the Republican logo (and Washington DC) representative of the three City-States? What would you say to Lucifer if you met him/her? I might tell you a story someday. 1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6z7O7UZxipM 2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3A6_blpqpU

    I'm not a meditating sort of person. I don't need to empty my mind. It's already empty. I try to cram information into my head - but it just seems to go in one ear, and out the other. I will be a walking warzone for the rest of my life. There Will Be No Peace! John May Lives! Long Live the Fifth Column!

    I would/will/have befriend(ed) Lucifer - but I will not give an inch. I wish for peace - but I will not be a sucker for peace at any price. I'm really sort of neutral about the whole thing. I don't love or hate Lucifer. I really wish for Lucifer to completely embrace Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom and The United States of the Solar System. I think this will ultimately be in Lucifer's best interest - and in the best interest of the human race (and any other race) - even though it might not seem like it right now. This thread (and all of my internet posting) probably makes Lucifer absolutely furious - and I don't blame him/her! I'd be livid too! Once again - I realize this is playing with very, very hot fire. I really just wish for things to work out well for all concerned - including Lucifer. But really - I'm continuing to treat this whole thing as though it were just a science fiction novel. I don't know what's true - and what's pure, unmitigated popycock. This is just one big nightmare. I'm so numb - I almost don't care anymore. I'm in a mood. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7VQWAILSbY&feature=related What if Lucifer wrote the scripts and played the parts of ALL the Gods and Goddesses? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tpl6ncyxLGw Think about it. Krampus looks a lot like the Indian goddess 'Kali'. See my thread on 'Kali'. Einstein stuck his tongue out like that. So did Gene Simmons of 'Kiss'. I believe Mick Jagger is another example of this (who was very familiar with 'Kali'). I'm thinking that all of the gods and goddesses, theologies and mythologies have a common source - Lucifer. But there is a glorious spiritual reality once one gets past all of the BS. Just an afterthought - could Merry = Mary? Could 'Merry Christmas' = 'Mary's Victory Over Christ' or 'Mary's Dismissal of Christ' or 'Mary Sacrificing Christ'? Look at the Mary and Jesus representations and symbolism within Roman Catholicism. How about Christmas Tree = Pyramid (with the star Sirius at the top)? How about the 'All Seeing Eye' of Santa (Satan)? Better not pout! Do I have to tell you why? I know that's a stretch - but nothing would surprise me, at this point. I'm getting really desensitized and cynical. The world economy and markets are at critical levels -- which might've been nefariously manipulated by bankster-bailout money (and who knows what?) -- and now an "Event" might crash the world economy and markets to lower-levels than the last "Economic 9/11". Just my speculation. I fear that we might be at the mercy of those love-less beings at the top of the pyramid -- in all areas of our lives -- including economically. Things can easily be manipulated from the shadows -- to maximize the bottom-line for those in the know -- who hob-nob with the gods. Profuse Excuses and Myths of Innocence Will No Doubt Abound...



    Last edited by orthodoxymoron on Mon Apr 01, 2013 5:24 pm; edited 2 times in total
    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7704
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: Archangelic Queens of Heaven and the United States of the Solar System

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Mon Apr 01, 2013 8:54 am

    What if there were a church which used the latest and best University Astronomy Textbook as its Holy-Book??!! Think this through very carefully before you stone me to death!! One thing I know for sure is that I can't place all of this madness in a box -- and proudly declare "Problem Solved!!" Many years ago, Dr. Bruce Larson (of University Prebyterian Church and the Crystal Cathedral) asked me how we might properly process the huge amount of information we are bombarded with in modernity (or something to that effect) -- and I didn't have a satisfying answer. I still don't. It seems as if some of us have to exist half-way between sanity and insanity as we attempt to make sense out of non-sense while we search for a useable-future. I guess this is why I just wish to observe, research, comment, and conceptualize -- without throwing my weight around -- regardless of whether I'm an insider or an outsider -- if you know what I mean. I continue to be extremely apprehensive concerning my last couple of incarnations. I keep fearing the worst -- but please keep the concept of situation-ethics clearly in mind. I once spoke with Joseph Fletcher about Christianity. He told me it was BS (or something to that effect). Was that the Loving-Thing to say?! What Would James Pike Say?? I'd say that Dynamic-Neutrality, Humble-Homeostasis, and Positive Response Ability are worthy goals IMHO. I wish to keep repeating that I am NOT seeking a fight. I will continue to attempt to be on everyone's side -- as naive and impossible as that is!! Namaste and Have a Nice Day!!

    The Flying Saucer (1950): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DEQ-a0C7U0
    Flight to Mars (1951): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7c51HqmqGc
    Killers from Space (1954): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtMeG8_XzGI
    Kronos (1957): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rm3kfCER8m8
    The Monolith Monsters (1957): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fICNRu3Vdqk
    Project Moonbase (1958): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fODYWzkeC5A
    First Spaceship on Venus (1960): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PjvRHMXFHxA
    Battle of the Worlds (1961): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bqehq82cDEY
    Journey to the Seventh Planet (1962): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RyETpuhiyA0 Notice especially the introduction!!
    Monster from a Prehistoric Planet (1967?): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rm3kfCER8m8
    The Astronaut (1972): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZHZsJ7wdvE
    The UFO Incident (1975): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EH5YRtcgzQ4
    Chariots of the Gods: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ztdl2p4ODOw
    Starship Invasions aka Project Genocide (1977): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqpZpuNqZEo
    The Alien Factor (1978): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=chOKdLyUPXQ
    Starcrash (1979): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VR-SSpuwjzk
    The Philadelphia Experiment (1984): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Rlvm8SfYy8
    War of the Worlds: The Resurrection (1988): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJo1MNtejX4
    Communion (1989): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtUWzGBpKLc
    Bill Cooper (1989): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNREw4KmLIY
    Roswell (1994): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzLptiNfqoY
    Alex Collier (1994): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9SouPQnxLtM
    Alex Collier (1995): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZegXpXm4bug
    Alex Collier (1996): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDZ2BWXqzCg
    Alex Collier (Earth History): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BefNcBsUIW4
    Star Trek: Odyssey 3.01: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-WQs-fxqg8
    The Astronaut's Wife (1999): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDol78HGy9g
    Ring of Power: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GX0PHt1HDQI
    Battlestar Galactica: The Promised Land: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pX7VNiBoXQY
    What Happened on the Moon? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sKainIQiaKA
    Project Serpo (Coast to Coast): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pg-FiVGWPik
    Origins of the Secret Space Program (Peter Levenda): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cj2qrl6Q2rk
    Hell (2011): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Rwm_aVqLn0

    Oliver Latry in Concert: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bntEvGmmD0M

    Here are a couple of my favorite organ-symphonies -- the Fifth and Sixth Symphonies of Charles Marie Widor -- played by Ben van Oosten at St. Ouen!! It doesn't get much better than this!!

    Fifth Symphony: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l6ZchYJX404
    Sixth Symphony: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6DeNq3f-rZs

    I'm also a fan of Louis Vierne!! What Would Angela Craft Cross Say?? http://www.angelakraftcross.com/ It's Not How You Look -- It's How You See -- and How You Help People to See!! What Would Saint Mary Say?? What Would Monseigneur Bowe Say??

    First Symphony: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ckLjodoI1PA
    Second Symphony: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OVCDDnjdHTk
    Third Symphony: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7yJkAeUGHc
    Fourth Symphony: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMxvIjLnVyw
    Fifth Symphony: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-cTv_5aKfk
    Sixth Symphony: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GX6YXFRvSAE
    Missa Solemnis: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zjlRHP0tjk

    I realize that everything I post -- can, will, and already has been used against me -- but I will continue this experiment in irreverence, openness, and honesty. In one sense, I am very sensitive and tactful -- yet in another sense, I continue to venture far out on a broken limb -- where angels and demons won't go. If I had put similar time and effort into business or law -- I might have become wealthy by now. But I have gained absolutely nothing -- and possibly lost everything -- by trying to do the right thing. If and when I discover what has been going on behind my back -- the consequences might be rather harsh and severe. The longer this thing goes on -- the more suspicious and paranoid I become. What if 95% of humanity ends-up on that hypothetical New Workers-Purgatory Prison-Planet Titan?? If this occurred, would they be lucky that they were not eternally lost?? Would this be a kinder and gentler way to deal with sin?? Someone please converse with me on this topic. Someone might wish to try the following study combination (without attending church) resulting in becoming a Happy-Clappy Unchurched Protestant-Catholic. I'm actually VERY serious about this list!! You should take what I post both seriously and non-seriously. There's more to this list than you might think. I might be a mess in real-life -- but I think that a lot of what I've posted on this thread is quite profound. Fulton Sheen appeared repeatedly on The Hour of Power with Robert Schuller -- yet he was quite down to earth on his television shows -- which were really minimalist and simple -- yet quite profound and entertaining. Ellen White seems to come alive when one studies her writings privately -- without having them crammed down one's throat in a sometimes harsh and arbitrary church. I believe that ALL churches are controlled by the same people and other-than-people. Perhaps they are The Spirit Behind the Church. What Would Mark Martin Say?? I used to discuss theology with Mark when we attended the same college. He was a big fan of Dr. Desmond Ford. I couldn't agree with a lot of what Mark and Des said -- yet I knew they were identifying and illuminating some serious and pressing issues which could NOT be ignored. Anyway, PLEASE give this list some serious attention and quality time:

    1. Fulton Sheen.
    2. Robert H. Schuller.
    3. Ellen G. White.
    4. Sacred Classical Music.
    5. Nature and Exercise.

    Even though I have been trying to identify with Archangels in general -- and Michael in particular -- I have NO idea who I am on a reincarnational-basis. I keep thinking that I've been a lot tougher in previous lives -- and the longer I try to get at the truth in a nice way -- the more this seems to be a lost-cause. I make myself a target -- and then the resulting trauma makes me look like a fool. The harder I try to figure things out, and come up with solutions for humanity -- the more miserable and incapacitated I become. I don't think any of you have any idea of what I'm really talking about. Again, I am explaining more than I'm complaining. Think of the lifestyle of Michaelangelo. He stunk!! Remember The Agony and the Ecstasy? Better to concentrate on Appearances and the Bottom-Line. Right??? Perhaps I should stop fighting for humanity -- and start fighting for myself?! Realistically, I think I'll internalize this thread in preparation for my next incarnation, where I might be back to my old-self -- which might not be very nice. I am beginning to see how this thing works -- or perhaps I am beginning to remember how things work. Perhaps this incarnation was an experiment to see if a kinder and gentler approach might work. Well, as far as I can tell, this incarnation is a complete failure. It's a disaster, which I hope I NEVER EVER repeat.

    I was pretty tough on God in my last post -- but I really wonder how tough this universe might be?! God might HAVE to be bad@ss and reprehensible just to survive. What if we are dealing with Star War-Lords in conflict with each other?? What if the Greatest Story Ever Told was a literary-creation by one of these Star War-Lords -- to try to make things better?? What if the Jesus of the Gospels would not have survived for three days (let alone three years) if He had crossed the Roman and Jewish Powers That Were (as described in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John). I believe in spiritual and theological realities -- yet I also believe we should be VERY wary of historical sources (including the Bible). The Bible might've been written in secrecy -- under the harshest circumstances imaginable. I think we need to be HONEST concerning what we read in the Bible -- instead of making it say what we want it to say. How many preachers would keep their jobs if they were STRICTLY honest about what is REALLY in the Bible?? Probably not very many. There's a reason why these guys lie. We WANT them to lie -- even though most of us are not conscious of this harsh fact. Consider reading:

    1. The First Five Books of the Old Testament.
    2. The Book of Enoch.
    3. The Last Five Books of the New Testament.

    Then, ask yourself what kind of a universe we live in?? What kind of a God rules this universe?? What if the method of salvation described in these sources?? Would Robert Schuller and Joel Osteen teach this stuff???!!! I have no idea how close to the mark I've come in this thread -- yet I think that the territory I've covered, and the questions I've asked, are absolutely essential for gaining a PROPER understanding of what is REALLY going on in this universe. I think the Jesuits know -- yet I think they are under strict orders to remain silent about a lot of this madness -- and perhaps for some legitimate reasons. However, I still think that the PTB (at the highest levels) decided to at least try to tell the public how much trouble they're really in. If the Jesuits weren't working for the wrong boss -- I think a lot of them might be excellent United States of the Solar System Representatives. Consider the possibility of the University of Solar System Studies and Governance at Georgetown!!! I simply think that there has been something rotten at the core of this solar system for a very long time -- yet I have no idea if this is something which can be properly corrected. I speculate and conceptualize -- yet I do not KNOW.

    There seems to be a system of prisoner-transport and prison-camps -- with a massive enforcement capability -- but I keep wondering about the possible other-than-human factor in this madness (as enforcers OR as prisoners). I continue to wonder about the theological and archangelic aspects of our solar system predicament. I think the insiders see things VERY clearly -- yet it might be nearly impossible for us commoners to figure-out and understand what's really going on. I'm trying to understand and communicate various solar system possibilities -- in a very tentative and nice manner -- even though I think the realities might be VERY harsh and upsetting. I won't get mad -- and I won't run. I'll just keep doing what I'm doing right now -- no matter what happens. It's going to be interesting to see whether the General Public simply accepts the ever-increasing abuse -- or if they become more and more aware and upset as the screws are tightened. I have a feeling that most people will just go with the flow -- do as they're told -- believe what they're told -- and not make waves. We might have to go through what the Jews endured during World War II before we finally get it. I'm numb because I'm drowning in an ocean of bs. Should I keep fighting - or should I just go with the flow?

    Lucifer was the creme de al creme in Heaven - and was at the head of the music program in Heaven. Even though Lucifer is corrupt as hell and has a mothership-full of negative karmic-debt - I believe that they still retain some of their original refinement, wisdom, etc. After Lucifer retires (voluntarily or otherwise) and engages in a program of reasonable punishment, education, reformation, and restitution - that they could conceivably be of benefit to this solar system - and as such, should be treated with dignity and respect (Jesus was polite to Satan). I am already best friends with Jesus, as revealed in the Teachings of Jesus, the Divinity Within Humanity, the Majesty of Nature, and Supernaturally. On the 'Jesuit' thread - I said that perhaps we need to be wise as Jesuits, and harmless as doves. Perhaps we need to approach the intellectual level of top-level Jesuits, Masons (and Nazis?) who meet secretly in Antarctica or the Darkside of the Moon - while not getting caught-up in the corruption, arrogance, exclusivity, harshness, vindictiveness, etc. What would it be like to discuss solar system affairs with Lucifer? They probably have an astronomical IQ - and could probably run circles around all of us - in discussing any topic. They are probably very charming and cunning. They probably have a youthful and pleasing appearance. But they are probably deceptive, heartless, and cruel - among other things. And I am quite certain that they would not appreciate being cross-examined or told what to do. Finally - they would despise being exposed. I think I may have angered Lucifer by poking, prodding, speculating - and venturing where angels fear to tread. I guess I wish for Lucifer to be exposed and deposed - without being hurt or killed. Lucifer is probably laughing his/her @$$ off right now! Right, Lucifer???

    I sort of like the idea of a 'modified monastery' lifestyle - where people would live in simple yet elegant surroundings - and engage in organized spiritual pursuits and discussions - while still working at regular jobs. I would be just fine with living in a 600 sq. ft. apartment, with minimal possessions, in a country or mountain monastery. I would wish to retain a computer with fast-internet - but why would a person need much more than this? Self-Degradation is Bad. Self-Exaltation is Bad. Self-Centerdness is Bad. Competent Confidence is Good. Constructive Competition is Good. Destructive Competition is Bad. Responsible Freedom is Good. Irresponsible Freedom is Bad. There are many ways to get it right. There are many ways to get it wrong. Balance seems to be extremely important. One can do the right-thing in the wrong-way. One can do the wrong-thing in the right-way. The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Right, Lucifer?

    I have a car, I don't have a renter, and I have a menial job (which is rather quiet - and allows me to think - or at least try to think). I'm not happy with the situation - because of lack of funds, lack of socializing, lack of accomplishing anything tangible, and seemingly experiencing a lifelong nervous-breakdown (I'm a lone-nut)! I'd still like to have a house with a Stargate SG-1 style bunker/basement (perhaps an old missile silo), complete with an old Cray Supercomputer! I fantasize about being a composite of Palmer, Ellie, Rachael, and Mr. Haddon - in the movie 'Contact'. I'm not sure exactly why. The imagination is a wonderful thing - but it can also be a dangerous thing. Sometimes I think I venture too far. Sometimes I don't think I venture far enough. What do you think about the following speculating and questioning?

    What if the Asteroid Belt, the Kuiper Belt, and the Oort Cloud are mostly spaceships? What if most of the planets and moons in this solar system are spaceships (including Earth and its Moon)? I continue to lean toward the practice of multidisciplinary research, accompanied by classical sacred music, lots of exercise in nature, lots of rest and sleep, interaction with other researchers, and lots of independent thinking and speculation. I am wary of being-assisted far journeys - in whatever state or dimension. I really wish to convert the whole damn universe to the concept of Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom. I wish for it to be implemented here - but if there are really b@d@$$ beings (who scare the stuffings out of the Dracs) who are on their way to beat us into reverent submission - then we may need the assistance of other benevolent beings throughout the universe - to decisively deal with those who would do us harm. What if the Annunaki, the Greys, and the Dracs are Human/Reptile Hybrid Supersoldiers created by Lucifer in Underground Base Genetics Laboratories throughout the solar system? What if the really b@d@$$ incoming bunch originated in these same labs - and are travelling throughout the universe - engaging in heartless and cruel conquest? What if this solar system is a staging area for universal conquest - establishing a truly Universal Church Theocracy? I hope I didn't spoil anyone's day - but shouldn't we consider all of the possibilities? What would Lucifer say? I might not have to wait very long for an answer. Lucifer - can we cut the crap - and get to the point? I know I'm just a "commoner" - but I do have valid questions - which continue to go unanswered...

    Perhaps the nutters need to be more like the normal people - and the normal people need to be more like the nutters. The commoners need to be more like the elites - and the elites need to be more like the commoners. The secular must become sacred - and the sacred must become secular. Combining opposites is a valid concept - which I learned from Shirley Maclaine - but I don't think that she's god. I think that ideals are essential. I think we should strive for the highest ethical, intellectual, spiritual, scientific, and artistic achievements. I think we should study theology - but I think the first and last commandment should be 'THOU SHALT HAVE NO GODS AND GODDESSES' - hence NAMASTE. The traditional definition of 'God' involves infallibility, supreme power - and requiring reverential worship and unquestioning obedience. Also - the problem is that absolute power corrupts absolutely. I think it may lead to insanity and atrocity. If a truly eternal and perfect God of the Universe arrived in this solar system - and proved me wrong - I would respectfully and reverently admit my grievous sin - and repent. I'm just not seeing such a being ruling this solar system - going back thousands of years - and I have completely lost my faith in the Bible (other than the red-letter words of Jesus) - and in the religions of the world - old and new. Frankly - I'm seeing vengeful deities flying around this solar system in ufo's. What would Daniel Jackson say? What would William Bramley say? What would Gabriel say? What would Lucifer say? What would Michael say?

    I just want to repeat that I envision a perfected humanity living in a perfected solar system - WITHOUT ANY ARMAGEDDON OR EXTERMINATION OF ANY KIND. I think there may be malevolent forces in this universe who want us dead - or at least suffering - and wishing we were dead. I want to repeat also that if any of you (human or otherwise) are not here to help the human race achieve SUSTAINABLE RESPONSIBLE FREEDOM - then please leave this solar system now - without harming anyone or anything. I'm serious about a SOLAR SYSTEM EXORCISM. I'm serious about establishing a NAMASTE CONSTITUTIONAL RESPONSIBLE FREEDOM SOLAR SYSTEM AKA THE UNITED STATES OF THE SOLAR SYSTEM - BASED UPON RESPONSIBILITY AND THE U.S. CONSTITUTION. If any of you are waiting for me to change my mind - it isn't going to happen. I doubt that I have much clout - but I will continue to pretend that I do. What's funny about all of this - is that I'll probably be long-gone by the time this becomes a reality. This concept will probably rise from the ashes (phoenix-like) of a failed New World Order - so please prepare to rebuild this world - the right way.

    I've been reading 'The Gods of Eden' by William Bramley. Please, please read this book! It's amazing! Alex Collier was right to recommend it! My question is, 'am I a friend or a foe of the Gods of Eden?' Perhaps I am both friend and foe - their worst enemy and their best buddy. I really think that Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom is the wave of the future - even for the Gods of Eden - and even for Lucifer. I truly wish for things to work out well for ALL CONCERNED. If I owned a herd of cattle - why would I want them to be fighting with each other and exterminating themselves? Even if we are essentially cattle, why wouldn't our owners be better-off instituting a proper solar system government - with highly competent self-rule? Even if our masters are 1,000 times as intelligent as us - shouldn't we have a cordial and proper relationship? I don't really know where we are in the universal food-chain - but a Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom Solar System would work well - whether we are at the bottom, middle, or top of the galactic pecking order. CAN COOLER HEADS PLEASE PREVAIL??!!

    Check out 'The God's of Eden' by William Bramley. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqXqG5WlXJs It's not exactly an inspiring book - but it does shed a lot of light on your last post. This thing might be more complex - and simpler - than we think. What would Occam say? That slasher! What would Lucifer say? That devil! What would Oedipus say? That mother! What would Pavlov say? That dog! Seriously - if you were talking to Lucifer - what would you say to them? What would you expect them to say to you? Would it be better to not talk to them? My thought is that most of us are too easily corrupted and confused to profitably talk to them. I don't think we should love them or hate them - but that we should be pretty much neutral toward them. Some say that Lucifer no longer exists - but I doubt this. They might present themselves as any number of humans, gods, goddesses, et's, et al. I keep thinking that Lucifer can be helped, reformed, and restored. Just speculation. Ever heard of Anton Lavey and the Church of Satan? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8m3hHYtdegw Here is something from Anton Lavey's 'Satanic Bible'. I'm not endorsing this, by any means, but I thought that it was relevant to this thread. Are Lucifer and Satan the same beings? What would Lucifer say?

    1. Satan represents indulgence instead of abstinence!
    2. Satan represents vital existence instead of spiritual pipe dreams!
    3. Satan represents undefiled wisdom instead of hypocritical self-deceit!
    4. Satan represents kindness to those who deserve it instead of love wasted on ingrates!
    5. Satan represents vengeance instead of turning the other cheek!
    6. Satan represents responsibility to the responsible instead of concern for psychic vampires!
    7. Satan represents man as just another animal, sometimes better, more often worse than those that walk on all-fours, who, because of his “divine spiritual and intellectual development,” has become the most vicious animal of all!
    8. Satan represents all of the so-called sins, as they all lead to physical, mental, or emotional gratification!
    9. Satan has been the best friend the Church has ever had, as He has kept it in business all these years!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AF9dWUyU3GA&feature=related What if Lucifer perfectly possesses a dolphin? What if the damn ruler of us all is a damn dolphin??!! There may be more to the Christian fish-symbol than we think! Something fishy is going on in this solar system. I think we should get to the point where we can constructively converse with Aliens, Spirits, Lucifer, Gabriel, Michael, Satan, Jesus, God, Gods, Goddesses, Thubans, PTB, et al. I don't attempt any contact with all of the above - other than my rambling on the internet - and swearing at them around the house! If I ever did speak to any of them - face to face - it would just be another day at the office. I wouldn't be disrespectful - but I wouldn't bow-down and worship them either. I like the way the Stargate SG-1 team handled all of the above. Speaking of which - run the following two videos at the same time - but turn the Stargate video's sound off - and use the 'Kryptonite' sound - while watching the Stargate video. Start the Stargate video first, for proper coordination. Do this a couple of times - and see what you think. I know I'm strange - but they say it takes all kinds...

    1. Stargate (turn sound off - start first - watch) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3A6_blpqpU
    2. Kryptonite: (keep sound on - don't watch) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tpl6ncyxLGw

    One thing which continues to bother me regarding the God or Goddess of This World - is why do they seem to hate us so much? Why do they seem to work in the shadows to screw things up? Why do they seem to lie so much? What the hell is going on? Even if someone were a renegade rebel against the Creator God of the Universe - wouldn't you expect them to try to create Heaven on Earth - and rule openly and justly? Why would they rule secretly - and create Hell on Earth? Again - what the hell is going on? I suspect an ancient race-war - and I'm not sure which races. Or perhaps it was both a race-war and a sex-war. I just want this thing to be properly resolved presently. But once again - I don't know what went on historically - and I don't know what is going on presently - so how in the hell can I know how to properly proceed? This whole thing is completely insane. Can someone please bring common sense and reason to the predicament of the human race and this solar system? Why do we have to endure lie after lie after lie after lie - and war after war after war after war - and atrocity after atrocity after atrocity after atrocity? What the hell is going on? What was the Original Sin? What is the Continuing Sin? We seem to have been subjected to thousands of years of torture - leading to a final judgment - and an extermination. What the hell is going on? Lucifer??? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b9mFn9EhgU4

    So - who rules the Secret Government? Is the Secret Government good? Is there a Secret Government? Are the Old Testament Atrocities commanded by God, just and righteous judgments against the wicked? Same for the book of Revelation? Really do read 'The Gods of Eden'. Is it just the stupid goyim who are screwing things up? At the highest levels of solar system and global government - is everything essentially fine? I really want a truly good God in charge - but I'm just not seeing this historically or presently. And I am seeing a power, which is superior to humanity - working in the shadows in a malevolent manner. I don't care who this is - I just want them to cease and desist immediately - but I don't wish for them to be hurt or killed. There is no @#*&% reason why this solar system can't be turned into a paradise - without extermination, coercion, and cruelty. Why is this so #$^%& hard????? Lucifer???? So - the victims of the Crusades, the Inquisition, the Civil War, Joseph Stalin, the World Wars, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, Pol Pot, Idi Amin, the Iraq Wars, Waco, Oklahoma City, 9/11, and Pedophilia chose to be victims - and the universe granted their wishes? I choose a Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom Solar System - and I want it right now. Will the universe grant my wish? Lucifer???

    Law and Order will be restored in this solar system. Justice will be served. Guilty parties will be punished. Restitution will be provided. Rehabilitation and Restoration will occur. The righteous will forgive - but they will never forget. A Perfected Humanity in a Perfected Solar System will emerge from the chaos and madness. When one observes torture and cruelty occurring - and does nothing to stop it - is this not a crime - even if one is observing from a distant planet, solar sytem, or galaxy? As of this moment - I am pi$$ed-off at everyone in the universe - given my limited knowledge - and given the fact that no one seems to really want to open-up about what the hell is really going on. I think this whole solar system mess has been horribly mishandled. I don't think this had to happen this way at all. I'm mad at the good guys and gals - and the bad guys and gals. Everything is insane! I want this BS to stop NOW. Does anyone with any clout and compassion read any of these threads? Somebody who is somebody (or at least thinks they are somebody) better get something going around here. Can you hear me now? Once again - I don't know the whole story - but why have thousands of years of suffering and death (including women and children) been tolerated by the supposedly highly advanced beings of the universe? Sometimes I doubt that there really are truly advanced and ethical beings throughout the universe. In any case - I am suspecting that all is not well - throughout the whole damn universe.

    I want this solar system to get it's act together - and then maybe we can accurately figure out what's really going on throughout the rest of the universe. Why is a reasonable system of law and order - responsibility and freedom - psychology and ethics - so damn hard to implement? Why all of the lies and bs? The 'Word of God' turns out to be the word of someone who does not seem to have much genuine love for the human race. The Teachings of Jesus are the rare exception. This solar system should be a paradise for all benevolent beings. But here again - I don't know the full story regarding universe, solar system, and Earth history. It's all a great big secret. Madness Without End. I really and truly desire a happy existence for EVERYONE - including you, Lucifer. I hereby invite everyone - human and otherwise - to unite around a Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom Solar System - but you need to really mean it - and back it up with action. I'm only saying this because I'm scared - not because I'm rebellious. I'm not shaking my fist at God. I'm just shaking. The Nazis and Masons are the two major players in this solar system - aren't they? What would it take for most of them to embrace a Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom Solar System? I'm calling for defectors on both sides. This damn thing just needs to be defused. We can use all of the bases and fancy technology for constructive purposes - instead of the extermination of the human race. I think both sides have been used, misused, and abused - and that tens or hundreds of millions of innocent human beings have been collateral damage. I'm sure both sides have their justifications and horror stories - and we can deal with all of this - in an orderly and peaceful manner. I can see myself embracing both Nazis and Masons. I might even embrace Dracs and Greys. I just want the suffering, death, and bs in this solar system to end. I'm not sure I understand who is REALLY behind the Nazis and Masons - but this thing needs to be resolved NOW. We can argue and fight on the internet for centuries - if we want to - but this madness needs to transition into a cold-infowar. How about it, Lucifer? Namaste.

    I have speculated that there was already a pre-existing problem at the time of the Luciferian Rebellion and subsequent War in Heaven - but two wrongs don't make a right. Not even three or four do. I really don't wish to play the blame-game - but I think that it is important to understand history - with just the facts, and no BS. Something has been very wrong for a very long time - and this needs to be corrected - without extermination or enslavement. Some seem to be rather gleeful regarding an anticipated extermination. I have spoken with a couple of deity-types who seemed hell-bent on some sort of an extermination-mission. I don't know if they were delusional, or the real-deal - but I tried to talk them out of it. I think some human-beings and other-beings may need to be incarcerated and re-educated - but I don't think anyone should be exterminated - physically or spiritually - temporarily or permanently. But what the hell do I know? If I had the chance - I would like to help bring Lucifer back to the Father...

    Don't get bogged-down on anything in particular - and remember that we are in a spiritual-war. I'm actually looking forward to getting better acquainted with Lucifer - but not in connection with any rituals, or selling my soul to you know who. I sense a changing of the guard in this solar system - but I don't know the details. Hopefully, things will work out well for ALL CONCERNED. I don't know who to trust - so I trust no one - not even myself. I don't know who the good and bad players really are. Most are probably a mixture of good and evil - in varying proportions. I'm really trying to focus on principles and concepts - rather than organizations and personalities. I suspect the historical and contemporary existence of a God and/or Goddess of This World - and that they are a mixture of good and evil. But when one is at that level - it's probably very easy for things to spiral way out of control - and then it's probably next to impossible to return to an uncorrupted and sane place of being - which is why I lean toward the organized decentralism of responsible freedom. If Lucifer really does exist - I would like to hear their full unedited story - going back thousands, millions, or even billions of years. Unfortunately, this story might drive me completely insane. I think history might be that bad.

    So - who are Gabriel, Lucifer, and Michael - historically and presently? Amen Ra, Hathor/Isis, Horus? Are Gabriel and Lucifer really Annunaki? Is Horus representative of Humanity? What if Promethius stole fire from Humanity - and gave it to the Gods? What if Humans created the Annunaki to be a slave-race - rather than the other way around? Regardless of what occurred historically - what should we do presently? Is this all just a fabricated bunch of bs? I'm going to keep passively considering a Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom Solar System aka The United States of the Solar System - based upon Responsibility and the U.S. Constitution - and just see what develops. And yes - I am stuck on this subject - because it really seems to be central to solving most of the major problems facing this solar system. Without knowing the whole story - my bias is that all truly benevolent beings - human or otherwise - should be able to stay here - and live peacefully. What is the proper relationship between justice and mercy? How do we really determine what the true state of affairs is - here on Earth, throughout the Solar System, and throughout the Universe? The BS seems to be bottomless and endless. Please read 'The God's of Eden' by William Bramley - 'Rule by Secrecy' by Jim Marrs - 'Behold a Pale Horse' by Bill Cooper - and 'The Great Controversy' by Ellen White. I'm having a difficult time thinking clearly regarding all of the above - and I'm fearing that the stakes may be very high in this most dangerous game. We seem to be on some sort of a precipice. I don't even want to think about how far we might fall, if we get things wrong. I really don't know who is good or bad. I don't know if I'm good or bad. I'm just sick of the cat and mouse game. How do we avoid making horrible mistakes regarding our predicament? I hope someone is giving this some very serious thought. I wish to be friendly and kind - but could this be a fatal mistake? My bias presently, is to be neutral in all of this - because without proper and solid information, there is no way to make proper decisions about much of anything. I am sold on the concept of Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom as a modus operandi for this Solar System - but I'm not really sure how to achieve this seemingly noble goal. I really need some help with all of this.

    I will continue to distrust everyone and everything - including my inner teacher. I'm a walking warzone - and there are many points of view fighting for the supremacy - within my soul. I think the secret is to just keep asking questions - and to keep listening for the answers. The answers, my friend, are blowing in the wind. I think that doing a lot of reading is a good thing - and I'm trying to do more of that. I'm reading 'The God's of Eden' by William Bramley - and I'm finding it to be both fascinating and terrifying. I want to re-read 'Rule by Secrecy' by Jim Marrs. I'm re-reading parts of 'The Great Controversy' by Ellen White. I've also been listening to, and reading, a lot of Bill Cooper's material. A multi-source, multi-disciplinary modality is optimal - but it does create tremendous internal conflict. I'm really not looking for peace. I'm just looking for truth and solutions. If one spoke with Lucifer - what should they say? Should they politely enter into a conversation - or should they confront Lucifer with Bible texts in the name of Jesus? I'm thinking that non-committal neutrality is probably a good thing. Lucifer probably knows the Bible better than any theologian. Lucifer might have written most of the Bible. I think I might try to befriend them - without being too friendly. I'd love to convert Lucifer to my Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom point of view - and get the green light for The United States of the Solar System. What would Lucifer say? World Without End. Almond Raw. I'm trying to have an open yet critical mind. Should I have 'Sympathy for the Devil'? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLddJ1WceHQ&feature=related

    Please allow me to introduce myself
    I'm a man of wealth and taste
    I've been around for a long, long year
    Stole many a man's soul and faith

    And I was 'round when Jesus Christ
    Had his moment of doubt and pain
    Made damn sure that Pilate
    Washed his hands and sealed his fate

    Pleased to meet you
    Hope you guess my name
    But what's puzzling you
    Is the nature of my game

    I stuck around St. Petersburg
    When I saw it was a time for a change
    Killed the Czar and his ministers
    Anastasia screamed in vain

    I rode a tank
    in the general's rank
    When the Blitzkrieg raged
    And the bodies stank

    Pleased to meet you
    Hope you guess my name, oh yeah
    Ah, what's puzzling you
    Is the nature of my game, oh yeah
    (woo woo, woo woo)

    I watched with glee
    While your kings and queens
    Fought for ten decades
    For the gods they made
    (woo woo, woo woo)

    I shouted out,
    "Who killed the Kennedys?"
    When after all
    It was you and me
    (who who, who who)

    Let me please introduce myself
    I'm a man of wealth and taste
    And I laid traps for troubadours
    Who get killed before they reached Bombay
    (woo woo, who who)

    Pleased to meet you
    Hope you guessed my name, oh yeah
    (who who)
    But what's puzzling you
    Is the nature of my game, oh yeah, get down, baby
    (who who, who who)

    Pleased to meet you
    Hope you guessed my name, oh yeah
    But what's confusing you
    Is just the nature of my game
    (woo woo, who who)

    Just as every cop is a criminal
    And all the sinners saints
    As heads is tails
    Just call me Lucifer
    'Cause I'm in need of some restraint
    (who who, who who)

    So if you meet me
    Have some courtesy
    Have some sympathy, have some taste
    (woo woo)
    Use all your well-learned politesse
    Or I'll lay your soul to waste, mmm yeah
    (woo woo, woo woo)

    Pleased to meet you
    Hope you guessed my name, mmm yeah
    (who who)
    But what's puzzling you
    Is the nature of my game, mmm mean it, get down
    (woo woo, woo woo)

    Woo, who
    Oh yeah, get on down
    Oh yeah
    Oh yeah!
    (woo woo)

    Tell me baby, what's my name
    Tell me honey, can ya guess my name
    Tell me baby, what's my name
    I tell you one time, you're to blame

    Oh, who
    woo, woo
    Woo, who
    Woo, woo
    Woo, who, who
    Woo, who, who
    Oh, yeah

    What's my name
    Tell me, baby, what's my name
    Tell me, sweetie, what's my name

    Woo, who, who
    Woo, who, who
    Woo, who, who
    Woo, who, who
    Woo, who, who
    Woo, who, who
    Oh, yeah
    Woo woo
    Woo woo

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tpl6ncyxLGw What should happen to Lucifer? Is there a possible positive future for Lucifer here in this Solar System? Should Lucifer be permanently removed from this Solar System? Or - should Lucifer be utterly and permanently destroyed - body and soul? Is Lucifer past the point of no return? What would it take to reform them? If they were completely removed - would someone worse take their place? Could Lucifer be useful in fighting future abuses of power? Does it take a Devil to fight a Devil? Would a well-meaning and pure Christ-like figure - who was relatively naive and powerless - be able to properly manage this solar system? I like the statement of Jesus regarding being Wise as Serpents - and Harmless as Doves. Should we be Wise as Lucifer - and Harmless as Christ? Is this blasphemous talk? Is a Christ-like Lucifer a possibility? Why do we have to make everything so damn hard and impossible? I tend to think that Lucifer might possibly be useful as an advisor of sorts - with very little power. They might have to do this in some sort of an exile situation. There is also the difficult issue of punishment for any crimes against humanity - and these may be unimaginable. I don't really know the true facts of the matter. I'm just considering various possibilities - outloud. I tend to think that any Solar System Administrator should have limited power - and share responsibility in a constitutional manner - in a Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom Solar System - with 10,000 representatives - to avoid corruption and even insanity. Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely. There may be very few exceptions - if any - to this rule. I would expect Lucifer to fight bitterly to the bitter end. I would also expect them to be very, very deceptive - and to possibly stage their own demise. Even though I am not an insider, in any way, shape, or form - I will continue to assume that Lucifer is alive and well - and living somewhere in this solar system - possibly in a variety of bodies - male and female. I will continue my little crusade to unite all factions around what seems to be a noble cause - namely a Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom Solar System - even though this could be a very bad idea - or an exercise in futility. I will continue to test the notion in a variety of contexts. As crazy as it sounds - I will continue to seek the genuine conversion of Lucifer - and all of his/her willing and unwilling followers. I really and truly wish to see the entire universe be a genuine paradise - with no Star Wars or Masters of the Universe power-struggles. I continue to fly-blind - and I don't really know what the hell is going on. I trust nothing and no one - and I like very few - even though I love everyone - whether they are good or evil. Namaste.

    I am particularly interested in ancient hybridization and advanced technology programs. I tend to think that this would explain a lot of things. The classic spiritual versions of the Mystery of Iniquity, the Luciferian Rebellion, War in Heaven, Eschatological Solutions, etc. are becoming increasingly unsatisfactory to me. Are we really dealing with two factions of humans who are engaged in an ongoing ancient Civil War? Are hybridization, technology, theology, conquest, retribution, etc. - really at the center of the Lucifer phenomenon - and the delemma we find ourselves in? Ancient Egypt and Early Roman Catholicism are of particular interest to me presently. What really went on under the Gizeh Plateau, and under the Seven-Hills of Rome? What would the Whore of Babylon say? That mother!
    I continue to thrash around the internet - looking here and there - and I'm not even sure what I'm looking for. If I am ever flippant or sarcastic - please don't take it personally. I am just a very frustrated and fearful human being - who thinks things are going to continue to be bad - for a very long time.

    I'm just trying to find more sane ways to manage the insanity. Mad 1 Nuke Nutbar Luke Luke

    I'm not very friendly, and I'm not very smart - and I have huge issues and problems - so don't expect too much from me. I have a pathological interest in the hidden things of the universe - which is frankly unbalanced. But having said that - all of this is still extremely important - and some of the most incapable and incompetent people on the planet may get stuck with trying to figure out a lot of very complicated and upsetting material. The best and the brightest may be too busy being rich, famous, and powerful.
    I keep facing myself - and thinking, and thinking, and thinking... Blowdup

    I have done a lot of speculating and questioning. I don't feel confident about any of it. I would fall flat on my face in a debate. But still I continue. I keep trying to stop. I found a video series which confirms so much of my earlier conjecturings - and which has left me stunned. I think there is a sweet-spot between traditional religion and the new age. I don't go to church anymore - and I don't go to new age seminars or Whole Life Expos - but I think we should study theology and new age topics - very thoroughly and carefully. Please give this video series your undivided attention. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-AfhUiq8-Q&list=PL75486E058747DE51 Kali is the Sirius Star of this series!

    Lucifer Images: http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=lucifer+images&qpvt=lucifer+images&FORM=IGRE

    Kali Images: http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=kali+images&qpvt=kali+images&FORM=IGRE

    Semiramis Images: http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=semiramis+images&qpvt=semiramis+images&FORM=IGRE

    Persephone Images: http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=persephone+images&qpvt=persephone+images&FORM=IGRE

    Lilith Images: http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=lilith+images&qpvt=lilith+images&FORM=IGRE

    Ishtar Images: http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=ishtar+images&qpvt=ishtar+images&FORM=IGRE

    Hathor Images: http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=hathor+images&qpvt=hathor+images&FORM=IGRE

    Isis Images: http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=isis+images&qpvt=isis+images&FORM=IGRE

    Queen of Heaven Images: http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=queen+of+heaven+images&qpvt=queen+of+heaven+images&FORM=IGRE

    I think we should study the esoteric subjects exhaustively - but I think this is a very, very dangerous pursuit - and one should use extreme caution. We are not as smart as we think we are - and we are easily confused and deceived. Try reading the Four Gospels over and over again - while researching the esoteric - to maintain a central frame of reference - a sort of a refuge. In the current infowar - I think a lot of people are going to lose their faiths - and their minds. Hang in there!

    I'd really like to know the full and true story of Promethius (Lucifer?) stealing fire from the gods. I'm sensing a very sad and violent history of the universe. I'm sensing that we are in the middle of a continuing War in Heaven. I'm also sensing that we are in one helluva lot of trouble. We need to exhaustively understand the proper relationship between freedom and responsibility. I think we need a Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom Solar System. Hope springs eternal.

    Enter 'Rise of the Fourth Reich' in the YouTube search field. Also enter 'Teutonic Zionism'. Notice the ancient Babylonian, Egyptian, Grecian, and Roman themes in the art, architecture, and symbology of the Nazi Party. Consider the possible role of a Secret Government, Secret Space Program, and Underground Bases in the Rise of the Third Reich. How did the Germans get so much money, technology, and power so quickly? Google 'omega files' and 'Branton'. Watch 'The Secret Underground Lectures of Commander X' on Google.

    Lucifer = Lilith = Hathor = Kali = Isis = Mary = Inanna = Anna (in the TV series 'V') = Whore of Babylon ruling Babylon aka the Secret Government, United Nations, Washington DC, City of London, Vatican, Jesuits, Alphabet Agents, Royal Family, Zionism, Teutonic Zionism, Secret Space Program, and Underground Bases? How much trouble are we in? We need a Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom Solar System aka United States of the Solar System based on the US Constitution and Responsibility.

    I have no animosity toward anyone, including the individuals and institutions listed above. All of this is speculation (for me anyway). We need to get informed without getting mad or going mad. This should be a high-ground infowar. There should be no angry finger-pointing. I keep envisioning an ideal and open Solar System Government - which includes the UN, Washington DC, City of London, Vatican, Underground Bases, and Secret Space Program - based on the US Constitution and Responsibility.

    Protestantism is really Reformed Catholicism. They never ventured too far away from Mother Church. I think this applies to SDA's as well. I continue to read from Ellen White books on an almost daily basis - but I think that Adventism is a mixture of truth and error. I think I understand some understandable reasons for this. I think that just about everyone on the planet is in for a rude awakening about a lot of things - and this includes SDA's. We are in a huge spiritual war.

    The Roman Catholic Church seems to be a continuation of Ancient Babylonian Egyptian Grecian Roman Luciferianism. The problem is compounded by the observation that it seems that Protestantism is more dependent on Catholicism than they would like to admit. What if Lucifer plays the parts of both God and Satan? What if Lucifer essentially wrote the Bible and the Quran? I continue to reverence the Red Letter Teachings of Jesus.

    How about basing the Solar System on the U.S. Constitution and Responsibility. The First and Last Commandment should be 'Thou Shalt Have No Gods'. I think the Creator God of the Universe would agree. Oh - I know that sounds like an orthodoxymoron - but I really don't think that the real God is on any sort of an ego-trip - and I do think that they would condemn any type of self-exaltation, rulership, exploitation, or enslavement. I think we have false gods and goddesses in this neck of the woods.

    "In that vast throng are multitudes of the long-lived race that existed before the Flood; men of lofty stature and giant intellect, who, yielding to the control of fallen angels, devoted all their skill and knowledge to the exaltation of themselves; men whose wonderful works of art led the world to idolize their genius, but whose cruelty and evil inventions, defiling the earth and defacing the image of God, caused Him to blot them from the face of His creation."- Great Controversy by Ellen White.

    What if the Holy Bible, the Quran, and most of the ancient mythologies and theologies were essentially authored by Lucifer? If this is true, or partially true, might this be a mixture of good and evil, truth and error? We should consider all of the possibilities, shouldn't we? Is the Father of Lies a Real Mother - namely Kali? Or Hathor on a bad day? Do we have a Sirius-Centered Babylonian, Egyptian, Grecian, Roman Theocracy - founded in Tibet - and ruled by an Apostolic Succession of Goddesses?

    Did the Whore of Babylon sell-out to Satan - or did/does she serve as a Mediatrix between Satan and Humanity? Is Kali a human/reptile hybrid (who appears to be completely human)? Is Satan a human/reptile hybrid (who appears as a Draconian Reptilian 'Alien')? I keep thinking that Lucifer/Lilith/Hathor/Kali/Isi­s/Mary is the Whore of Babylon who has ruled the world for a long, long time. I keep trying to get her to go out with me on a debate date to discuss galactic issues and transition of power!

    Is there a way to harmonize the Latin Mass, the Teachings of Jesus, and the U.S. Constitution? Would this be a Spiritual Switzerland or a Heretical Hell? The ultimate goal would be a Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom Solar System aka The United States of the Solar System. It seems that Roman Catholicism would be opposed to such a concept. It further seems that Roman Catholicism is really Babylonian, Egyptian, Grecian Romanism - rather than an outworking of the Teachings of Jesus.

    It seems as though we may be dealing with a worldwide network of Underground Bases and Cities (connected by mach II magneto-leviton trains?) - inhabited by Nephilim (or by beings who are not completely human - as we know human to be) - who rule the world by secrecy and deception. The Deep Underground Military Bases (such as Dulce) seem to be an integral part of all of this. It further seems as though they are smarter than us - expect reverential worship - and can be very cruel.

    Watch 'Hathor' and 'Powers That Be'. Then watch all of the 'V' video clips on YouTube. Do they tie into this series? A reliable source told me that a priest once asked 'What if God is a Black Woman?' Watch the movie 'Avatar' and read between the lines. Google 'Morena Baccarin - Stargate SG1' and watch all of the episodes in which she appears. Does Kali possess technology beyond our wildest dreams? Could this be ancient human technology? We need to know the truth even if it hurts.

    Please consider this video series and my comments very carefully. This could all be very important. I have chosen to ask a lot of questions and make a lot of speculations on the internet in appropriate settings - such as in this video series. This subject could be very, very upsetting to a lot of people - and extreme caution should be exercised in discussing it. I'm hoping for a happy ending to all of this - but I suspect that things may get a lot worse before they get better. Hang on!

    Watch 'Stargate - Devil Came to Me' and 'Leo Zagami - 2012 Armageddon' on YouTube. Watch them several times. Watch the Stargate clip with the sound off - and use the sound from the Zagami clip. Is there a match? Is this a representation of Kali? Is Kali ultimately responsible for 9/11? Watch 'Lone Gunman - 9/11' and notice the young woman at the computer.

    Watch 'UFO's and the Secret Government' by Bill Cooper - Alex Collier videos - and Alex Jones videos - on Google Video or YouTube - and place Kali and the Nephilim at the center of things. Are we Prisoners of War on a Prison Planet with Grey Guards, a Human/Reptile Hybrid Warden, and a Draconian Reptilian God of This World? Also - get the book 'Soldiers of Reason' regarding the Rand Corporation. All of this seems to be interconnected - and may require a huge amount of research to figure everything out.

    Notice the last paragraph at 9:55 in part 14. Is this getting at the heart of the matter? There is a Stargate SG-1 episode called 'Fire and Water' which contains key phrases which relate to this paragraph. Watch 'Riddles in Stone' to get some insight into who Nicholas Roerich was, and the importance of the Dog Star Sirius. What if the Trinity (triple) Goddess consists of Gabriel, Michael, and Lucifer? The Creator God of the Universe seems to be strangely absent throughout history. I'm fearing the worst.

    I'm really trying to educate and condition myself to be completely objective and detached - without much emotion - so that I could easily interact with everyone - including Illuminati, Popes, Presidents, Jesuits, Alphabet Agents, Generals, Professors, Greys, Reptilians, Hybrids, Angels, Demons, Archangels - Satan and Kali. Basically I'm a nobody imagining what it might be like to be a somebody - without selling my soul to you know who. It's a nasty job - but someone's gotta do it! Right Lucifer?

    I try to be neutral toward Sherry Shriner -- and I use her show to help create a frame of mind -- which might help me to figure out various galactic puzzles. Anyway, this weeks (04-01) show seems particularly relevant to this thread. Go to the blogtalk section near the top-left of this site. http://www.sherrytalkradio.com/

    There is another individual who is presently of interest to me. I first met her over a decade ago. She was very smart and attractive -- and at one point, we discussed my view of the future of computing relative to mainframes, pc's, wearable computers, etc -- in comparison to the views of Bill Gates. She seemed to have an insiders perspective on this. We spoke of theology and idealism. She was hot -- but I was perhaps too moralistic. I've thought about her a lot over the years -- especially recently. In fact, I think I might've seen her several times -- and even spoken to her (or someone like her) -- yet we didn't speak of our past experience together. I could be completely in error on this one -- but I just thought I'd place my thoughts on the record, in an informal manner. What Would Saint Mary Say?? What Would Ralph Nader Say??



    Last edited by orthodoxymoron on Tue Apr 02, 2013 4:26 pm; edited 5 times in total
    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7704
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: Archangelic Queens of Heaven and the United States of the Solar System

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Mon Apr 01, 2013 10:43 pm

    Could St. Germain have been a representative or manifestation of Lucifer? I get the distinct impression that Lucifer gets around - a lot. There are a couple of people I knew in the distant past who are of interest to me presently. One of them looked a bit like the image below (they shouted at me -- decades ago -- when I said something about the Final Judgment -- and we were just children) -- and the other one I don't wish to say anything about -- other than that they make me think of Inigo Loyola. Enough said about that. I continue to be very wary of supernatural-experiences. I'll keep an open-mind -- but I do not seek supernatural-experiences. I just speculate about my reincarnational-past and talk to Ancient Egyptian Deities. Check this out. http://www.thejinn.net/ascended_master.htm



    The "Ascended Master" Types and My Encounter With St. Germain
    St. Germain doesn't claim to be a saint. He claims to be an "Ascended Master", but the name is typical of jinn obfuscation. He appears to enjoy being venerated like a saint.

    The Comte de St. Germain was well known to the court of King Louis XV of France as an alchemist, a linguist, and a man of great wealth, memory, age and adventure. He is an actual historical figure credited with various alchemical feats and with writing an alchemical manuscript entitled "La Tres Sainte Trino Sophie" which is contained in the Bibliotheque de Troyes.

    In 1930, Guy Ballard, having studied theosophical and occult teachings, traveled to Mt. Shasta to investigate rumors that strange occult events occurred there. While hiking the mountain, Ballard claims that the Ascended Master Saint Germain, offered him a magical drink which renewed his body. Ballard founded the "I AM" cult to spread the teachings of the Ascended Masters and Saint Germain. This cult degenerated to the point where members were told to kill their pets and shun family members who wouldn't join the cult. It caused fanatical believers to "decree" for long hours during the day and part of the night, with such intensity and emotionalism that a number of them had nervous breakdowns, or were confined to psychopathic wards and insane asylums.

    In legends and history there have always existed magical men who possess the hidden knowledge. They elude precise description because they seem primarily fictional but are associated with various historical records and documents. They are archetypal and stimulate the imagination. Of those who have actually lived among us, I think that some are human and some are jinn, and most involve partnerships between humans and jinns. They include characters such as: Paracelsus, Koot Hoomi, Master Morya, "Thrice greatest Hermes", Don Juan (in the books by Carlos Castaneda), Sai Baba, Merlin, Ashtar, and St. Germain. Alchemy seems to be their strong suit and the thing that they have in common. I want to tell you about my encounter with so-called Ascended Master St. Germain. Most people won't quite believe it, of course, but that's okay. I tell about it for the benefit of those who do, or who will some day, because entities like this can be really bad news for your spiritual health. I've noticed that folks who come under the influence of the so-called Ascended Masters, Great White Brotherhood, Trans-Himalayan Brotherhood or Galactic Federation seem to display a steady erosion in personal brilliance, character, aptitude and worthwhile effectiveness. There can be a general downgrading that at its worst can result in the likes of Godfrey Ray King making his followers kill their pets. Those who come under the shadow of Ashtar can be reduced to waiting for "global evacuation" when his chosen people will be beamed up to motherships to await their return to the promised land on earth.

    The jinn are masters of alchemy. Maybe we got our teachings about it from them. I encountered St Germain as a result of my interest in alchemy. "Alchemy" describes various arcane areas of knowledge such as the search for longevity and eternal youth, the quest for the Holy Grail and Shambala, the transmutation of base metals into gold and the spiritual transformation which all these symbolize. Alchemy occurs on the physical, spiritual, mental and emotional planes of existence. It is supposed to have been the precursor of chemistry, so modern science is obliged to give it a cursory nod of recognition. Alchemy is real magic and metaphysical technology. It's about transmutations utilizing the etheric plane or about kundalini and transforming the subtle anatomy. It's also about the electromagnetic forces that control the world of form and connect it with the spiritual worlds.

    I never intended to "dabble in the occult". I was attracted to alchemical symbolism at a very young age. I started trying to understand the images of the Rider-Waite Tarot when I was 11. I also read much about psychology then, so it was natural that I would be drawn to CG Jung's work and dream interpretation in my teens. Jung's theories about adult spiritual development, which he called the process of "individuation", were gleaned from his study and understanding of ancient alchemical manuscripts which he read in the original Latin. These cryptic manuscripts were designed to hide the truths they contained, and it is probably proof of Jung's genius that he was able to glean so much from them. I revered Jung at the time and wanted to learn more about alchemy.

    The Temperance card from the Rider-Waite Tarot is mostly about Alchemy. Notice the triangle in the square on the winged entity's chest. Triangles figure prominently in many UFO experiences. Whitley Strieber devoted a whole section to the meaning of the triangle symbol in his book "Communion". On pg. 283 Strieber writes "I came to realize that the Tarot is much more than a deck of fortune-telling cards; it is a sort of philosophical machine that presents its ideas in the form of pictures rather than words." Hey, come to think of it, the whole UFO phenomenon itself could be "a sort of philosophical machine that presents its ideas in the form of pictures rather than words." -- ! Yes, those Jinn-- those ancient mythmakers -- are shaping our consciousness with images of spaceships and extraterrestrials. Whether or not we actually "believe" in them, our collective consciousness is affected by these images in ways we may not yet understand. It was the cover of "Communion" that made the book an overnight sensation. Somehow it struck a very deep chord....

    With the passage of years I also learned about quantum physics and the astral and etheric planes. I had kundalini and near death experiences. I experimented with the intelligences of nature in my garden and made flower essences. I meditated, and continued to study the writings of Jung, as well as Swedenborg, Gopi Krishna, Barbara Ann Brennan, Robert Monroe, and many others….I had NO interest in witchcraft or "spiritualism". I never intended to "dabble in the occult", but it now appears that that's exactly what I was getting myself into. "Occult" simply means "hidden". The word has probably become associated with evil influences because of the inherent risk of attracting bad jinn when the hidden worlds are looked into. Whether or not one wants to attract this kind of attention, it can be rather easily aroused. We attract more of whatever we put our conscious awareness into.

    I'd reached a small degree of understanding about how physical reality manifests and is connected to the enduring spiritual planes. Then a friend gave me a book which claimed to channel the wisdom of St. Germain. The alchemical concepts in this new age book were an extension of what I'd been discovering about the electromagnetic spectrum and its connection to the subtle planes, so I readily accepted them. Later that night I awoke to a surprising astral visit from someone claiming to be St. Germain. He told me that my ability to grasp these ideas meant that I'd achieved the level of an initiate and that he would be willing to be my teacher. He outlined some of the wondrous learning which I could potentially master. So there he was in my bedroom, flattering me and making what seemed to be a wonderful offer. What should I do? I told him I didn't yet know how I felt about this, and he said he'd return for my answer.

    Well, fortunately for me, I prayed very hard about what to do in response to his offer. I felt guided to read and meditate upon the "Tablet of the Holy Mariner" written by Bahá'u'lláh, the prophet-founder of the Baha'i Faith. I spent hours prayerfully meditating on the meaning of it it. I finally concluded that it tells the story of a person who acquires the knowledge of all that is "hidden behind the veil''. This person then comes before the throne of God, but is dissatisfied with their station of servitude to the Divine, wanting MORE. (Presumably wanting to be more of a god themselves.) Being thus devoid of sanctity, even in the presence of the All-Loving, the All-Wise, they were "cast down into their abode below".

    The same old story of Lucifer: This is very similar to the story of Lucifer and the never-ending plight of humanity. So this was my St. Germain? Just another perpetrator of the Luciferian drama? Could it become me? YIKES! I took another look at his portrait in the book and was horrified by how debauched he suddenly now looked. That night he returned for my answer. I said: "St. Germain, leave me alone", and he vanished.

    The whole thing seemed so fantastic that I questioned it. Apparitions can share both a real and dreamlike quality. The very next day, however, I had a lunch date with a new friend. I steered our conversation towards the esoteric, hoping to somehow talk about this incredible experience, but it just felt too weird to talk about. Well, it was no mere coincidence that we were having lunch. He suddenly amazed me by mentioning his own relationship with St. Germain! He was entirely nonchalant about it. This guy is a seemingly moderate, level-headed sort of person who had been entrusted with important military positions. My friend thought his relationship with St. Germain was, well-- dandy-- and he wasn't open to other points of view so there wasn't much more to talk about. Outside validation like this went beyond coincidence. I concluded that the St. Germain contact was real.

    Most people think something like this is crazy, which helps protect them from involvement. However, those who have "pulled back the veil" need to be forewarned: Things are probably not what they appear to be if you're dealing with a jinn. There are many types of jinn, but there seems to be almost universal agreement that those who meddle with humans are mischievous or demonic. Humans can be demonic, too. The good/bad continuum is a necessary for the exercise of free-will. Spiritual protection is available for any who ask for help in the Name of God. In Islam, Satan (or Lucifer) is called "Iblis", and is identified as being from the jinn.

    Will the real St. Germain please stand up? Is my "St. Germain" the same as Guy Ballard's or Louis XV's? Probably not. I question whether he's even the same entity who was hanging with my friend. I've had lots of unusual experiences in my life, but they were especially weird during this particular three year period. I've begun to reevaluate these experiences since assimilating the jinn concept into my understanding. I thought I had encountered many different entities, but now I'm wondering if the same entity was wearing several different hats!

    For example, it seems that an entity consistently made the bell on my old fashioned phone make a short "ding!" sound whenever I had particular thoughts. I had been studying the writings of Emmanuel Swedenborg and was consequently given to frequently thinking about his concept of the association of negative spirits with certain activities. Every time I wondered if something had a correspondence with evil the phone would go "ding!". Judging by my phone's responses to my thoughts, evil spirits were lurking just about everywhere!

    One night I was terrorized by this. The minute I began to drift off to sleep the phone went "ding!" This was so alarming that adrenaline pumped into my bloodstream. A strong association had been built up for weeks between this "ding!" sound and my wondering if evil spirits were potentially present, encouraging human negativity and perhaps feeding off of it. The phone would "ding!" the very moment I finally started drifting off to sleep again. The more this happened, the more afraid I became. I was being terrorized! This trick tormented me for hours until I finally overcame my fear of it, at which point it ceased. Probably because it was no longer fun for the jinni if it couldn't make me frightened. At the time I chalked this episode up to being another good learning experience. I'd overcome fear itself, to some extent, and I no longer speculate about evil spirits. If you look for them, they'll be there. Who wants that in their life? Not me-- I'm grateful my home is now so peaceful and safe feeling. I no longer wonder if any entities are around because I can feel that there aren't any--- my current home feels so much different!

    My friend felt he connected with St. Germain because he loved the books by Godfre Ray King who was also known as Guy Ballard. Guy Ballard founded the "I AM" cult to spread the teachings of the Ascended Masters and Saint Germain. This cult degenerated to the point where members were told to kill their pets and shun family members who wouldn't join the cult. Despite their horrible history, cults of "I AM" and the various "Ascended Masters" are still very much alive.

    From Psychic Dictatorship in America: the I AM Movement by Gerald B. Bryan

    One such case is quoted in the letter below written in November, 1937. it is only one of many cases where fanatical I AM-ers have killed their animal pets. We quote: "The phone rang this morning and an I AM-er called and told me that another of Mrs._____'s 100% class was put in a sanitarium last week. It seems that she owned a lovely dog and that they were told there were to be no more dogs. She had the dog electrocuted. Her family resented it so they had her taken to a psychiatrist who analyzed her and of course she did not know when to speak and of what to speak, and started in on the books, and when she was asked why she did not give the dog to __________ , she said, it was just as bad for him to have it as it was for her. Well, they pronounced her insane and put her away last week. God pity them all."

    Some additional results of the Ballard doctrines may be summed up in a few short sentences. It has taught credulous followers to forget everything else but the "Mighty I AM," tending to hold its people in moronic ignorance of what is going on in the world. It has caused fanatical students to "decree" long hours during the day and part of the night, with such intensity and emotionalism that a number of them have had nervous breakdowns, or have been confined to psychopathic wards and insane asylums. It has produced untold mental suffering from fears of cataclysms, entities, black magicians, destructive decrees, and other fear-inspiring bogeys. It has caused students to worship at the shrines of an endless number of mythological gods and heathenish "Masters," instead of teaching a devotion to the One and True God, the Creator of the Universe, of whose grandeur, love, and wisdom there is no end.
    http://www.the7thfire.com/education/IAM-.htm

    I will continue to passively pursue this topic - but sometimes I wonder if I am either too-easy or too-hard on Lucifer. I think they should be questioned in both respectful and irreverent ways. I mean no harm to anyone - but I think we can do better in this solar system - and this includes me - not just the PTB. If Lucifer decided to do the right thing - and become a good devil - what would they do for fun? It's gotta be a rush - to rush around stirring up all kinds of trouble!

    Perhaps we need some bad good-guys and some good bad-guys - but I don't think we need any bad bad-guys whatsoever. I like good good-guys - but how good is too good? I'm trying to be a good-guy with some rough edges. I like the James Bond and Obi wan Kenobi characters. Perhaps we need to be wise as Lucifer - and harmless as Christ. Sorry if that offends anyone. I really do like the word 'Namaste'. Namaste is one of a small list of Sanskrit words commonly recognized by Non-Hindi speakers. Namaskār (Devnagari/Hindi: नमस्कार) literally means "I bow to [your] form". "I honor the Spirit in you which is also in me." -- attributed to but not claimed by author Deepak Chopra. "I honor the place in you in which the entire Universe dwells, I honor the place in you which is of Love, of Integrity, of Wisdom and of Peace. When you are in that place in you, and I am in that place in me, we are One." "That which is of God in me greets that which is of God in you." "The Divinity within me perceives and adores the Divinity within you." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namaste 'Namaste' gives 'Constitutional Responsible Freedom' an ecumenical spiritual and/or religious twist.

    Lucifer, why don't you just be a James Bond type of being? That would be almost as much fun as raising hell - wouldn't it? James never gets flustered - even in the worst circumstances imaginable - and he never gets his hair messed-up or his fingernails dirty! Lucifer, I suspect that you have changed bodies like most people change clothes - and that you have inhabited prominent male and female bodies - throughout history - with complete reincarnational recall. You have probably moved from adult body to adult body - for thousands of years. You probably haven't had to sleep one wink - for thousands of years. This is all speculation - but this is my story - and I'm sticking to it - for now.
    Lucifer, we need to talk. Toast You know what I'm talking about.

    I know that my computer is hopelessly infiltrated and subverted - but I take no steps to do anything about it. I really wish to communicate with everyone - including the Jesuits and various Alphabet Agencies. At least those people understand all of this crazy stuff!! I'd almost rather deal with Lucifer, face to face, and try to convert them (The Last Temptation of Satan!!) - rather than deal with people who don't know and don't care. That's a really sad and pathetic statement, isn't it? I'm really trying to be on everyone's side - good and evil - even though this is hopelessly naive - and probably the epitome of stupidity. Hope springs eternal. Would any of you buy a used car from any of these men??
    Lucifer, we still need to talk... Fighters ...about that pesky Great Controversy thing.

    Consider this debate between Dr. Walter Martin and Father Mitchell Pacwa (Jesuit) regarding the Roman Catholic view of Mary. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tClS31hNmII This has relevance to this thread because of my suggestion that there may be some substance to Lucifer = Lilith = Hathor = Kali = Isis = Mary and that the current manifestion of this goddess hypothesis could be similar to that which is represented by Anna in the 'V' series. Once again - I'm not trying to be mean - I'm just trying to understand. The Roman Catholic treatment of Mary may be based upon something more than a fable devised by corrupt men in the Vatican. There may, in fact, be an actual Mary figure, who rules the church - and thus the world. I'm not an insider - and I don't know insiders - so I don't really know. I don't shout this sort of thing from the mountain-tops. I just whisper and mumble on the internet. Please watch the following video from start to finish - and relate it to what I have written in this thread. Warning: this is very disturbing. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rx8PdvOELvY Was Kali really in charge of the Crusades and the Inquisition?

    Has anyone really looked closely at the 'V' television series (1983-85 and 2009-10) in connection with this video and the female (or hermaphroditic) human/reptile hybrid concept of Lucifer? Consider the Nephilim, Pre-Deluge Giants, Fallen Angels, Gods, Goddesses, et al. The absence of Satan, the Devil, and Lucifer in the Bible (especially the Old Testament) is mystifying and somewhat suspicious. Could Lucifer be a mixture of good & evil, genius & insanity? Research this subject exhaustively.

    This is going to sound delusional - and it is - but here it is anyway. I think Lucifer (or equivalent) has ruled the solar system for a very long time. I'm engaging in a mental and spiritual exercise which involves attempting to replace Lucifer (voluntary retirement) - and then turning the governance of the solar system over to 10,000 highly wise and competent people under the U.S. Constitution - and serving as a facilitator and ambassador throughout the solar system. How 'bout it Lucifer? Or should I say 'How 'bout it Kali?'

    I think EVERYONE should contemplate Solar System Governance. We need a Solar System View rather than a World View. Spend some quality time thinking about the United Nations, Washington D.C., the City of London, the Vatican, the Secret Government, the Secret Space Program, and the Underground Bases. Consider the pros and cons of all of the above, and how they might fit into a legitimate and non-tyrannical Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom Solar System. This includes you Lucifer and/or Kali. Consider this as a mental and spiritual exercise to help you to arrive at your own answers. I'm having a very difficult time getting anyone to seriously consider the subjects of Lucifer and Solar System Governance. I don't have the answers - but I think the subjects are extremely important - and will require the attention of millions of people.

    Could it be that what Lucifer and/or Kali envisioned in Heaven was quite noble and virtuous - but that the reality turned out to be a complete disaster? I'm thinking that in the history of the universe that the road to Hell has been paved with an infinite number of good intentions. What I envision for this world and solar system is quite spectacular - but I fear that even the most heroic efforts of the most capable people might not produce the desired results. We may be lucky to simply survive.

    Please research world governance, solar system governance, galactic governance, universe governance, leadership, power, freedom, responsibility, self-exaltation, self-degradation, self-centeredness, self-deification, pride, humility, corruptibility, cruelty, justice, mercy, jurisprudence, God, Satan, Jesus, Lucifer, Kali, Angels, Archangels, Humans, Reptilians, Greys, enslavement, extermination, truth, deception, heaven, hell. It's about politics and religion. It's a matter of life and death.

    Consider reading the Four Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John - in the New King James Version of the Bible - over and over. Consider reading the 'Federalist Papers' and the 'Anti-Federalist Papers' over and over. Consider doing this while listening to classical sacred music or a latin mass. I'm very serious about this. I think we may all be in purgatory - and that we may all be on the verge of heaven or hell - and our level of spiritual preparation may determine which way we go.

    Google 'Walter Veith' and watch all of his lectures on Google Video and YouTube. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjJ14TLXiag I don't agree with him on a lot of things - but he presents a huge amount of fascinating information which is relevant to this video. In a sense - I don't care what conclusions you arrive at - but think that studying this subject is hugely important. Don't you agree Lucifer and/or Kali? I know you wish to rule by secrecy - but isn't it time to come out of the confessional?

    Watch 'Lucifer: Venus, Kali, Capella' http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhdH7mtUtxU for a presentation which is supportive of the female version of Lucifer. I keep seeing a lot of knee-jerk posting under this video, rather than more mature reflection on what could be a very central subject. The angry name calling on YouTube is something to behold. I once spoke with a YouTube employee who screened posts, and they just shook their head and told me what a mess it was, and how upset people got. I felt sorry for them.

    It's very strange. I believe in the possibility (or even probability) of a literal Lucifer - so in a sense I'm more of a Luciferian than a particular Satanist I was having a 'discussion' with (even though I'm not Luciferian) - because they seemed to not believe in a literal Lucifer being. This is even more strange - because they believe that Jesus actually existed. I reverence the Teachings of Jesus - but I'm considering the blasphemous possibility that Lucifer wrote much of the Bible. By Ba'al?

    Quotations from well known source materials can be quite revealing. The video series I mentioned contains endless quotations and words from the horse's mouth. Of course - this doesn't necessarily establish irrefutable truth - but it does begin to place flesh on hypothetical skeletal constructs. My hunches, theories, and speculations are gaining momentum like a mach II magneto-leviton train travelling from one underground base to another. 'Next stop - Washington D.C.' I really just want people to investigate this subject very carefully - without getting involved in spooky and bloody rituals. We must transcend belief and unbelief - and become lifelong researchers - who remain mostly placid and detached.

    What if Lucifer and/or Kali wrote the Bible? What if Lucifer and/or Kali is the Whore of Babylon? What if the Woman in Scarlet created Jesus to be a Red Herring? Again - I find the Bible to be a mixture of good and evil, truth and error. I love reading the Four Gospels, and I adore the Teachings of Jesus - but I am not seeing the Creator God of the Universe at work in any of this. What if all of us are fallen angels who followed Lucifer to Planet Earth? You wouldn't believe what I think about and imagine...

    Why can't we just base the Solar System on something very similar to the U.S. Constitution - and then work out all of the old conflicts in a rational and peaceful manner? I am very afraid of deliberately inflicted wars and earth-changes - and all manner of tyranny and atrocities. I just want a dignified and rational system of reasonable law and order in this Solar System - which facilitates Responsible Freedom. I have no idea what's really going on - so I continue my little guessing game.

    I keep talking about a possible similarity between Lucifer and Anna (in 'V'). Now none of the episodes are available anywhere on the internet. For a long time, the first few episodes were not available, and only the last five were. I don't see anything about any fall 'V' shows - even though the show was renewed. What's going on here? Was too much truth revealed? I liked the best aspects of Anna and the V's, but I despised the worst aspects. Who really rules the Solar System? Could it be Lucifer and/or Kali?

    Usually the Whore of Babylon is equated with the Roman Catholic Church. I think this is incorrect. I think the Whore of Babylon may give orders to the Black Pope. I suspect it - but I can't prove it. I sometimes think of being in the Sistine Chapel with the Black Pope, the Top-Ranking Jesuits, the Whore of Babylon, and a Nine Foot Tall Drac (Head Pimp and Chairman of the Board) - listening to a debate regarding forbidden knowledge. This might send me sobbing uncontrollably into the night.

    We don't know everything about everything. We don't know everything about anything. Everything is related to everything else - so we must know everything about everything - to know everything about anything - including the True Form of Lucifer (Kali?). It would be cool if Lucifer (Kali?) would post here - be completely open and honest - and not play deceptive mind-games. Talk to me Lucifer (Kali?). What the hell is going on? How much trouble are we in? How can we fix it? What about that debate date at Mork & Ork's?

    Lucifer (Kali?) could be a more complex character than we can imagine. I'm imagining a very conflicted character, with extremes of good and evil, good intentions, unfathomable corruption, and very possibly bouts of insanity. I keep saying that Lucifer (Kali?) should retire, and be an advisor, not a dictator. We need a Solar System Exorcism to remove the really hardcore nasties, human and otherwise. The Solar System should be based upon Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom. World Without End. Amen Ra. (not an invocation)

    Spouses and children involve responsibility - and most people are frightened of responsibility. If spouses weren't sexy and children weren't cute - we wouldn't have to worry about over-population. Take a break from the razzmatazz and listen to 'cochereau improvization st thomas church 4' http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rig6b-jogg&p=D39FA662CE465587&playnext=1&index=30 I have a 1928 Book of Common Prayer from St. Thomas Church. Don't ask me how I got it. All I know is that it's better than the new one.

    Could Hermaphroditic Reptilian Humanoids have been genetically engineered from male and female human beings combined with dinosaur-like reptiles in the ancient pre-deluge world? Could they be the Nephilim and so called Reptilian Aliens? Could Lucifer (Kali?) be one of them? Are they alive and well, and living in underground bases throughout the solar system? I'd like to meet them - as long as they agreed not to eat me. I might not agree with them...

    Is the following - fact or fiction? What they taught you in Sunday school is BS. Lucifer is the most beautiful woman you have ever seen in your life. She runs this solar system - and answers only to Satan. Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned - and I have scorned the woman most closely connected with hell. Lucifer's IQ is 532. She has the equivalent of 87 PhD's. She is NOT the forgive and forget type. If you cross her - you're dead-meat - and I've crossed her BIG TIME!

    Was the first hermaphroditic 'man' really Lilith (or equivalent)? Was the separation experiment a failure? Genesis states that God (Lucifer/Lilith?) was sorry that he (he/she?) made man. Was the separated man created to be a slave-race? Is 'woman's liberation' really the liberation of men? I'm sensing a lot of genetic experimentation going on in the Garden of Eden (Ea - Den?). Human/Reptile/Hybrid, Male/Female/Hermaphroditic, Black/White/Brown, and all manner of combinations? Hmmmmmmm

    True honor comes from being responsible - which is not self exalting or self centered. God's plan worries me - because it doesn't seem that we are dealing with the Creator God of the Universe - but rather with disfunctional gods and goddesses. The historical landscape is littered with millions of corpses and billions of suffering souls. This does not inspire confidence regarding the future. Has ANYONE seriously promoted RESPONSIBILITY in the history of the world? Is it in the Bible?

    "What is one to do when, in order to rule men, it is necessary to deceive them?" — 'The Secret Doctrine' by Helena Blavatsky The elite consider most people to be mere sheep who must be kept from discovering "the black cauldron of dirty secrets". The dirtiest secret found inside that black cauldron is that the unknown "God" worshipped by the Masons and called the Great Architect of the Universe and by codenames such as Abaddon, Mahabone, and Jahbuhlun, is actually none other than Satan, or Lucifer.

    I recently decided that the corrupt rule the stupid - and that the corrupt will always rule the stupid - because both are quite satisfied with the arrangement - despite all outward appearances - and that both are threatened by those who are non-corrupt and highly intelligent. This is why the Teachings of Jesus are ignored. I've decided to pursue a business plan which is neither corrupt or stupid, and which threatens neither the corrupt or stupid - leaving both to their own devices...

    "Most people do not really want freedom, because freedom involves responsibility, and most people are frightened of responsibility." -- Sigmund Freud 

    "Like it or not, eveything is changing. The result will be the most wonderful experience in the history of man...or the most horrible enslavement that you can imagine. Be active, or abdicate...the future is in your hands." -- William Cooper

    Google 'Alex Collier' for some very strange and interesting information. I share a lot of Alex's editorial views (Andromedan?) regarding politics and religion - and I am very indebted to him (and the Andromedans?). The Andromedan Perspective Regarding the Future of Humanity is "Responsible Freedom of Self Determination...Becoming Truly Self Confident and Free...to Unconditionally be Responsible for Oneself...Without Being Coerced to Accept Some Higher Authority." -- related by Alex Collier

    We the People of Earth have before us the opportunity to forge for ourselves, and for future generations...a True World Order. A world where Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom...not the Old World Disorder Demonic Theocracy...governs the conduct of nations. When we are successful...and we will be...we have a real chance at this True World Order...an order in which a credible United Nations can use Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom to fulfill the promise and vision of All Races.

    The following is a potpourri of sorts - where the irrelevant parts provide a context for the relevant parts:

    orthodoxymoron guidestone: 1. Base this Solar System on Responsibility and the U.S. Constitution. 2. Maintain an Earth population of 4 billion (2 billion surface and 2 billion sub-surface) with 4 billion throughout the rest of the Solar System (mostly sub-surface). 3. Go to electric everything. 4. Use magneto-leviton trains for most global transportation. 5. Completely restore and maintain the environment in pristine condition. 6. Base healthcare (mental, physical, and spiritual) on prevention.

    Self exaltation is self centered! Self degradation is also self centered! The religion contained in the Teachings of Jesus is a Religion of Responsibility! To be responsible is to face reality - formulate a responsible course of action - and then to implement this plan. It is duty centered. The focus is external rather than internal! When someone lives responsibly, the byproduct is appropriate positive AND negative thinking, and an appropriate self image!

    We the People of Earth need to be the New Elites. Don't fight the New World Order or the Powers That Be - Transcend Them! WE ALL NEED TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR SOLAR SYSTEM GOVERNANCE. Watch 'The Great Dictator Speech' by Charlie Chaplin on YouTube. Watch a lot of science fiction - with the posts on this page clearly in mind. I almost feel as though I am trying to partner with completely reformed gods and goddesses - which would probably include Lucifer. What's the verdict Lucifer (Kali?)?

    For a couple of years now - I have been making post after post on the internet - with very little interest or response being generated. My questions and comments are not complex - but I think many of them are helpful - and a few are even profound. But it all seems to be a waste of time. In a sense - I can see why the masses are manipulated rather than reasoned with - but it's still wrong. I guess I'm trying to become a non-corrupt Illuminati type of person - but this is just a mind game. I've never felt more drained in my life - when I've been researching and posting on the subject of Lucifer and other esoteric topics. It's almost as if one gets double and triple teamed by demonic entities when one tries to uncover and expose what's really going on in this solar system. Just a feeling. I'm trying to understand what the solar system powers that be, human and otherwise, have to deal with. I don't envy them. I feel a responsibility to properly deal with solar system governance. I think that just about everyone is deluded - including Atheists, Satanists, and Christians. I went insane without the help of anyone else - demonic or otherwise. I love Jesus. Jesus loves me. But everyone else thinks I'm a jerk.

    What we all really want is fame, fortune, power, and pleasure - and we will pursue all of these things in the most irresponsible ways - which will continue to push us toward the abyss and oblivion. I'm getting very tired of my little exercise in futility - and I fear that the human race will continue to go through war after war - and believe lie after lie...

    The Father of Lies might be a Real Mother - or Hermaphroditic. The lie is different at every level. I don't know what the True Form of Lucifer really is - but I am passively exploring the possibility that Satan and Lucifer (Kali?) are two separate beings - and that Satan is decidedly male - and Lucifer decidedly female. The evidence is thin and circumstantial - and I am not a scholar, psychic, or insider - so I don't really know. The goddess topic should be studied exhaustively.

    I think that the Creator God of the Universe set things up in a most excellent way - and then things got screwed-up in a most horrible manner. I'm not sure who was/is responsible - but justice needs to be served - and law and order needs to be restored in this solar system. I believe that a Solar System Exorcism and a Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom Solar System would remedy most of the most pressing ills we face. But what the hell do I know.

    I leave you with this: 'Pierre Cochereau at Mass - Part 1 of 3 - Introit and Offertoire' (listen to all 3 parts). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QaDmU4Uay_w Is this appropriate music to listen to while considering the subject of 'Lucifer (Kali?)'? I still want to share some fine French wine with you Lucifer (Kali?) - and listen to you improvise at St. Ouen, St. Sulpice, or Notre Dame de Paris. I feel as though I am your best friend and worst enemy. Come - let us reason together. Is it time to reprogram and reboot this solar system?

    I want to wish Satan, Lucifer, Kali, Gods, Goddesses, Angels, Demons, Archangels, Illuminati, Megalomaniacs, Reptilians, Greys, et al a terrific rest of the century. I think we can clean up this mess - without enslavement, extermination, Star Wars, or Masters of the Universe. Imagine 10,000 very competent humans engaging in Constitutional Global and Solar System Governance, with advisors which might include all of the above. I continue to attempt to think Lucifer's (Kali's?) thoughts after her. See you at Mork and Ork's Grey Bar.

    sabina wrote:hallo oxy,
    first it`s nice you post again I like to read your postings. I never posted in your threads why ?
    I don`t know maybe time maybe my english is not perfect etc.but I will tell you even if you don`t have an answer to your writings you have readers.
    second what is SDA?

    About Kali I will tell you the storry how it is told to the children today in India
    Parvati Durga Kali is the wife of shiva as the wife she has the same tools, weapons and power.
    parvati the young woman
    durga the mother
    kali the old wise woman

    there was a very powerfull asura(demon) no god could kill him even together vishnu bhrama shiva with all their weapons were not strong enough because the spell was this: no god can kill this asura
    now all the gods came together to think about what to do and they got the idea
    we will give all our weapons and power to shivas wife now with all this power she went to the asura
    and she killed him. the spell was no god can kill but she was a godness.

    I hope you enjoy this origin storry about kali of course there is more she is the godess of Kalcutta
    the poorest city in India.

    All the best and please continue your postings
    Sabina
    Thank-you Sabina. Perfect English is not required. You don't even have to agree with me. SDA = Seventh-day Adventist (a fairly conservative Protestant church (founded in 1863) which conducts services on Saturday (Sabbath), and utilizes the writings of Ellen G. White as an inspired interpreter of the Holy Bible. SDA's consider themselves to be the heirs of the Reformation. I used to be one - and I still may be on the books - but when I do attend services, it is usually at a liberal Episcopal church. I long for a completely reformed Roman Catholic Church - which is centered in the Teachings of Jesus and the U.S. Constitution - in the context of the Latin Mass (preferably without communion and crucifixes). What would Pat Buchanan say? What would Pope John Paul I say? What would the sedavacantists say?

    Regarding a Non-Penetential, Non-Sacrificial, Humanistic, Christocentric, Ecumenical Namaste Latin Mass...Celebrating the Divinity Within Humanity...I'm once again looking for common ground to legitimately unite people in a non-coercive manner. I love the architecture, art, music, robes, incense, and ceremony of the Roman Catholic Church...yet I am aware of a dark-side and problematic-side as well. Latin is sort of obscure...so a Mass could be conducted in Latin world-wide...and people would feel right at home as they traveled throughout the world...or watched on television or the internet. Also...this would be all about being elevated by the atmosphere of reverence and awe...without being troubled by theological jargon and mumbo-jumbo which careful thinking might reject. It would be a Spiritual Switzerland. I prefer the glory, grandeur, reverence, and awe of the traditional service...rather than the 'Jesus is my buddy, show-up in shorts and a t-shirt, praise-song, hippie reefer-madness'.

    In a sense...I desire a Minimalist Humanistic Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom Theocracy. The United Nations and the City States need to be purified and reformed if we are to achieve a Perfected Solar System Inhabited by Perfected Human Beings...without eugenics or coercion. I want a Solar System Exorcism...to rid this Solar System of the worst Human and Non-Human malevolent beings...without harming them. Some of these beings...I fear...are Playing God...and Using God's Name in Vain. But what do I know?

    What you said about Kali is fascinating! I keep encountering the concept of a goddess killing a god - and then ruling Earth. I recently spoke online with someone who is into some very heavy spiritual stuff (not recommended) - who thinks that in a previous life that she was there when such a killing occurred - and she thinks she might be the one who did the killing. I tried to convince her otherwise. She had a very elaborate creation vision which is quite different than the Genesis story. What if Earth had a Crazy God - and Kali came to Tibet - from Sirius - killed the Crazy God - and has ruled Earth ever since? But what if Kali went crazy too? What fate Omoroca? Absolute power corrupts absolutely - and probably drives one crazy. This is why I think the first and last commandment should be 'Thou Shalt Have No Gods'. A facilitator or administrator of sorts is probably a good idea - but no one should be reverentially worshipped and unquestioningly obeyed. Parvati, Durga, Kali = Trinity Goddess = Lucifer, Michael, Gabriel? That's a stretch, isn't it?
    I have really been trying to snap Lucifer or Kali out of their madness - believe it or not. Perhaps it takes a crazy person to deal with a crazy goddess. Razz geek

    I just started rewatching the Alex Collier presentation at 'Awake and Aware' - and his opening remarks hit me like ten tons of bricks - in light of this current thread. Alex said that he didn't think the U.S. would disclose - and that disclosure might come from INDIA or CHINA!!!!!!!! Where is TIBET?????? My heart almost stopped. Now my heart is pounding!!!! Please, please, please watch all parts of the video series linked in the first post of this thread!!! Excuse me while I get my heart restarted!! CLEAR!!!! Hello Kali! Well Hello Kali!! You Devil You!!

    Also - look at bravodawson - on YouTube - the one who posted 'The True Form of Lucifer' - which depicts Lucifer as being female. bravodawson is from INDIA!!! The video was posted on December 21, 2007 - exactly five years before the infamous December 21, 2012!!! Is this just a coincidence??? This is the only video bravodawson has posted on YouTube - and they have posted no comments under this video (that I have noticed) - and they haven't visited their channel for a couple of years. Isn't this strange? Here is a comment/question I posted on bravodawson's channel one month ago:

    "I never see you commenting on your Lucifer video. Or do you comment with another name? Living in India - have you considered the possibility of a connection between Kali - Lucifer - and the Black Madonna? What do people in India generally think about Lucifer? I believe in some sort of reincarnation - but I don't embrace Hinduism or the New Age. Which direction is India moving regarding politics and religion? What if all of us are right - and all of us are wrong? I endlessly speculate - but I know very little for certain. I ask this respectfully - 'Are you Lucifer?' Just thought I'd ask." No reply.

    Here is a comment I posted on bravodawson's channel four months ago:

    "I think you are on the right track...but I also think that Lucifer is a mixture of good and evil...a sort of a Dr. Jeckyll and Mr. Hyde. Watch 'V' on abc(dot)com if you can in India. I tend to think that Anna could be similar to the modern manifestation of Lucifer. Also consider that Lucifer is the Whore of Babylon (Deep Underground Military Bases?) and is in charge of the DUMB's, the Secret Government, and the Secret Space Program throughout the Solar System." No reply.

    Is it just a coincidence that China owns so much U.S. debt? Is it any coincidence that India bought so much gold? But if illegal drug money, blood money, and tax dollars have been paying for a lot of the hypothetical Underground Empire - then who really owes who?

    Does Kali - or a representative of Kali - appear prominently in the movie 'Contact'? Does Satan - or a representative of Satan - appear prominently in the movie 'Contact'? Does Jesus - or a representative of Jesus - appear prominently in the movie 'Contact'? Were there ET's (or equivalent) right in the White House in the movie 'Contact'? Has 'Contact' been ongoing - for thousands of years? Believe it or not - I think I may have seen Kali - or a representative of Kali - in a cathedral (I won't say which one!) - but it's probably a Hail Mary conjecture! Nuff said!

    One more thing. I am pro-money. It is an expression of freedom - and an opportunity to reward responsibility - as well as providing the game-playing and fun of good old-fashioned competition. Responsible Greed is Good! It clarifies. Competition improves the breed. I am not in favor of socialism or communism. I am a born-again responsible capitalist. End the Fed!

    One more thing. I am pro-physicality. I am addicted to orgasms! The human body is a miraculous creation - and I do not intend to leave my physicality - except between incarnations. Perhaps our genetics needs to be restored to it's original state - so that we live longer and use 100% of our brain capacities. Obviously there needs to be a harmonization of the physical and the spiritual.

    One more thing. Haven't the ET's been mentoring us for thousands of years? Hasn't that been a big part of the problem?? Haven't the ET's been ruling the world for thousands of years? So why have things been so bad? Have they been teaching us RESPONSIBILITY? Have they been ruling us with RESPONSIBILITY?

    One more thing. I am not anti-ET. I am not anti-hybrid. I am not even anti-Drac!! I even want to go out on a date with Lucifer (Kali?)!!!! I just want a Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom Solar System aka The United States of the Solar System - based upon Responsibility and the U.S. Constitution. I have no problem with interacting with ET's and Hybrids - but they are not our gods and saviors - at least they shouldn't be. I want Lucifer (Kali?) to retire - and advise (not dictate) from a distance. Imagine Lucifer attending a U.N. meeting??!! "Lucifer!! The power of Christ compels you to sit down and shut up!!" Just kidding Lucifer! Or is it Kali? Only her exorcist knows for sure!

    Thank-you Carol and TRANCOSO. It is important to carefully examine the foundations and presuppositions. Just because someone says something - or just because something is written in a book - doesn't mean that it's true - even if most people believe that it's true. I am considering the possibility that a Lucifer or Kali has been at the center of things for thousands of years - and that a lot of what we believe or disbelieve has been a direct or indirect result of the influence of a Lucifer or Kali. I'm asking a lot of 'what if?' questions. What if most everything philosophical and theological is essentially Luciferian - and a mixture of good and evil? I am attempting to work outward from the word 'RESPONSIBILITY' to see where this leads, and what it exposes. I am also trying to think Lucifer's or Kali's thoughts after her - to get an insight into what it might have been like to be them - century after century. Even if I am completely wrong - this is a very interesting way to look at the past, present, and future. It's also probably very dangerous - so don't try this at home kiddies. Remember the abraxasinas fiasco?

    Here I go again - with yet another brainstorm (brain-fart?): What if we are dealing with a Hermaphroditic (Hermes + Aphrodite?) Human/Reptile God/Godess Nephilim from Sirius named Lucifer/Shiva/Kali (the Prince/Princess of Sirius and God/Goddess of This World) who came to Earth at least 10,000 years ago, killed the existing Earth God in a Solar System Wide Star War in Heaven, and set up an underground base of operations in Tibet (which included advanced technology such as UFO's, nukes, computers, holograms, genetic hybridization, mind control, etc. -- possibly stolen fire from the slain God)? Are goddesses possessed by Lucifer/Shiva/Kali? Could this explain why goddesses say 'We'? Consider this thread about the Nephilim: http://www.themistsofavalon.net/et-biokinds-and-their-characteristics-f23/the-real-nature-of-the-nephilim-t716.htm#17829 Could Lucifer/Shiva/Kali play the parts of both God and Satan? Could Lucifer/Shiva/Kali have created most mythologies, theologies, religions, and sacred texts? Did Lucifer/Shiva/Kali say 'Let us make man in our image?' Was the creation of male and female humans really the separation of the male and female aspects of hermaphroditic humans? Was this 'trial separation' a failure in the eyes of Lucifer/Shiva/Kali? Genesis reads that God was sorry that he created man. Did Lucifer/Shiva/Kali experience 'separation anxiety' or 'creator's remorse'? Were male humans created to be a slave race? Is 'women's liberation' really 'men's liberation'? The original 'V' series (1983-85) portrayed the visitors as being from Sirius - and that they recognized the U.N. Charter rather than the U.S. Constitution. Hmmmmmmm...I really hope I'm full of you-know-what. Please set me straight. I don't expect a lot of this to be correct. That's one small step for orthodoxymoron. One even smaller step for mankind. It's gonna be a long night...

    I'm presently on part 16 of this very interesting series. I had my eye on Kali - even before I knew her name - but now she has my undivided attention. At 'Awake and Aware' Alex Collier stated that disclosure might come from China or India!! What is between China and India?? TIBET!!! Look at the last minute (9:55) of part 14 - at the bottom of the page - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-AfhUiq8-Q&list=PL75486E058747DE51 - and notice especially the part about Nicholas Roerich travelling to Tibet - and speaking of ET's (Sovereign Queen of the Air) from Sirius setting up shop in Tibet - and conducting hybridization experiments!! He spoke of seeing STRANGE GREY PEOPLE!!!!! Didn't Nicolas Notovich write about Jesus travelling to Tibet?

    Sovereign Queen of the Air = Queen of Heaven = Queen Mary = Anna in 'V' = Whore of Babylon = Ruler of the City States = Ruler of Us All?

    SIRIUS > TIBET > BABYLON > EGYPT > GREECE > ROME > ROMAN CATHOLICISM > NAZI PARTY > NEW WORLD ORDER?

    Were the Bible and Quran created to obscure the Sirius, Tibet, Babylon, Egypt, Greece, and Rome connection? Was Jewish history superimposed upon the real history? I think Ralph Ellis and Jordan Maxwell might agree. My surmisings remind me of an old political cartoon showing the White House with a big "NIXXON" sign over it - and a caption reading "The Name Has Changed - But It's Still the Same Old Gas!" Is the New World Order really the "Same Old Gas"?

    I'm continuing to consider the idea that the esoteric should become exoteric - and that a Modified Latin Mass, the Teachings of Jesus, and the U.S. Constitution should be harmonized - and become an integral part of a Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom Solar System aka The United States of the Solar System. The art and architecture of the ancient world should be cherished - as should the literature and music most closely connected with it - but the modus operandi of a Brave New Solar System must be built upon a New Foundation. Throwing out the bathwater without throwing out the baby will require the wisdom of Solomon. How readest thou, Lucifer/Shiva/Kali?

    One of my dreams is to travel throughout Europe in a Ferrari - visiting all of the old churches, cathedrals, art museums, government buildings, universities, libraries, and other historical sites - and attend concerts, lectures, masses, and religious services. Of course - the Autobahn and the Nurburgring would absorb a disproportionate amount of time and energy!

    Tibet Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tibet

    Tibet Images: http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=tibet+images&qpvt=tibet+images&FORM=IGRE

    I continue to toy with the theory that a very real Queen of Heaven has secretly and deceptively ruled Planet Earth for thousands of years - and could directly control all nuclear weapons and ufo's worldwide - and that activation or deactivation of nuclear missiles might be initiated by an underground base in Tibet - and that UFO activity in the vicinity of missile silos might be a red-herring - to make it appear that Mork from Ork was trying to send us earthlings a message. I think the Vatican and Washington D.C. know exactly what's going on - but that they may be powerless to do a damn thing about it. They may just be along for the ride. We might all be along for a very wild ride. Fasten your seatbelts. I often wish I had gotten better acquainted with Dr. Carol Rosin. I often wish Kali would go out on a date with me - but she'd probably bite my head off. Tangentially - take a look at the faces of Charles Darwin, Helena Blavatsky, Aleister Crowley, and Albert Einstein (consider the picture of Einstein sticking out his tongue. Was he trying to tell us something?). Did they all have face to face encounters with Kali? "Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds." (from the HINDU scripture - the Bhagavad Gita) Trinity Site = Trinity Goddess Site? Is the Secret Doctrine really that Isis Unveiled Reveals Kali the Queen of Heaven and Queen of Us All? "What is one to do, when in order to rule men, it is necessary to deceive them?" Alex Collier stated in 2009 that disclosure might likely come from China or India (regarding Tibet and Kali?). Damn! I forgot to take my medicine again...

    I won't itemize what I read between the script lines. It is really necessary to view the episodes and movie. I saw the god dying - and goddess ruling theme in the episodes of Stargate SG-1. In the Stargate movie, I saw Ra as actually being a Hathor or Isis goddess figure. I see the goddess theme in the spiritual leader of the Navi in 'Avatar'. I saw a human soul controlling a hybrid being - as I suspect the grey and reptilian phenomenon to be. Hathor created all of the gods. Hathor was pictured as being alive and well in modernity. Hathor was a hybrid (possessed by a Goa'uld) - yet very human.

    The thread on 'The Infiltration of the New Age' should make it clear how dangerous the alternative scene can be. Again - I don't go to church, and I don't go to initiations, programmings, new age seminars - or join enlightened groups who follow a guru. I do think we are in the middle of a spiritual war - and there are way too many people walking around like they're at a sunday-school picnic - while the bullets are flying past their heads. Some people are expecting to ascend, or to get taken away from Earth by saviors in ufo's. People are channeling ascended masters, being regressed into past-lives, going out of body, remote viewing, communicating with dead relatives, conjuring-up ufo's, playing with Ouija Boards, etc., etc. - and I think they may be dealing with some very unsavory entities. Some people who are involved in the Patriot Movement are gearing up for a Holy War Against the New World Order. Many people are bitterly leaving the churches they grew up in. The theological battles are endless.

    I may add to this response when I'm not so tired. I really just wish to go through all of my threads (including the videos) - and start to internalize the best of that which I have examined. We are very, very smart - yet we all seem to come to different conclusions - and the world continues to be a mess. The most immoral and irresponsible people continue to be at the top of the heap. It's a rat race - and the rats are winning. But that golden age is just around the corner. Christians have expected the immanent second coming of Christ for 2,000 years. At this point, I hope we can survive - kick the nasties out of the solar system - and rule ourselves in a Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom Solar System aka The United States of the Solar System - based upon Responsibility and the U.S. Constitution. I expect an intensifying infowar, with the very real possibility of worldwide civil unrest - as the truth regarding our true state of affairs becomes more and more visible to the people of the world. Things may have to get worse before they get better. A lot of things have been hidden, and have been festering under the surface. I'm just looking for more sane ways to manage the insanity. I obviously do not give people what they want - or tell them that which they wish to hear. Perhaps we do have to be lied to - and led down the primrose path by the hooks in our noses. Kali might agree. Atlas might shrug.
    Carol wrote:I honestly don't know how the female fits in here as much of what is going on is the imbalance of male energy and lack of female energy.

    However with respect to the second coming I just don't see it playing out as described in the Bible. I see it as an internal experience and Christ appears to those who built the bridge for him to cross over on... meaning it is the inner desire to be reunited with the divine that creates the doorway for Christ to cross through and that this happens on an individual level when each individual is ready for such an experience.
    Carol, you may be right - and I may be completely wrong. My speculations are just that - speculations. I smell smoke - and I'm looking for the fire. I don't know if anyone else in the world is going down the road I am. I am not sure of myself at all - which is why I don't lecture, make videos, or write books. I mostly ask questions. This is all a big experiment.

    It is probably easier to create male leaders and lead them this way and that. Once one gets past size and brute strength - females are superior to males. I do think that female empowerment is a huge part of the solution - and that males need to become more like females - without being gay. I will continue to pursue a Queen of Heaven hypothesis regarding the rulership of Earth - but I will also continue to speculate that this hypothetical goddess takes orders from a very male Satan of sorts. Male Satan > Female Lucifer > Human Race? Damned if I know - but we really do need to figure out EXACTLY what the power structure of this solar system REALLY is.

    I once received a YouTube comment from someone who referred to Their Goddesses. I wish I could locate this comment - and I wished that I had pursued a discussion with them.

    I continue to pursue an unorthodox Christology - and what you have described sounds very reasonable to me. I continue to wonder who really wrote the Bible. Who was taking notes as Jesus spoke? Was Jesus following a script - as an actor on a stage - in the greatest story ever told? I reverence the Teachings of Jesus - but I am very skeptical of Christian Theology - starting with the Apostle (apostate?) Paul. Did Paul teach what Jesus taught? Or did Paul create a New Theology which kept a coherence with the Old Testamental Sacrificial System - and even some aspects of ancient Egypt? Have you taken a close look at the Canonization Process? Why was the Book of Enoch not included? Have you read the Gospel of Mary? I am currently reading 'The Gospel of Mary of Magdala' by Karen King - and 'The Unknown Life of Jesus' by Nicolas Notovitch. 'The Complete Gospels' by Polebridge Press - 'The Quest of the Historical Jesus' by Albert Schweitzer - and 'A Myth of Innocence' are interesting scholarly works regarding Jesus. One can spend a lot of time - and even waste a lot of time - on this subject.
    devakas wrote:
    orthodoxymoron wrote:I presently seem to be on the side of humanity -- but who knows what my editorial slant has been in previous incarnations?? What if:

    Father = Prime Representative of Other Than Human Physicality??
    Son = Prime Representative of Human Physicality??
    Holy Spirit = The Souls Animating Human Physicality and Other Than Human Physicality??

    I continue to hypothesize that Human Physicality is a Recent Renegade Development in an Ancient Other Than Human Universe -- and that the Universal Immune System is determined to eliminate Human Physicality -- so as to Purify the Universe. I so hope that I'm wrong. What are the implications and ramifications of 'Namaste'???

    It is more like personal determination, karma ... instead of somebody's else.
    Purify the Universe or pURIFY yourSELF, this is the question.

    self gratification is a condition being not related to God.

    there are 3 modes of matter (8 energies of matter) and incarnated humans are in those 3 types. Goodness, Passion and Ignorance.
    Those in ignorance worship demons, spirits, ghosts. Those in passion worship demoniac power, control, materialists, scientists, lies, celebrities, polititians. In goodness worship the Highest Creator.

    goodness is the highest state of conditioned soul, namaste is wishing one for the purest state in this material world.

    Namaste
    Devakas
    Consider spending some quality-time looking at the possible relationship between the New World Order -- Science Fiction -- The Kingdom of God -- and the Universal Church. Please look at this in positive and negative ways. The more I look at the state of the world -- the claims of the whistleblowers and conspiracy-theorists -- Sacred Scripture -- etc and et al -- I am impressed and depressed by the brutal gangs of fact and fiction that just about everyone and everything is a mixture of good and bad -- truth and error -- sanity and insanity. Everyone and Everything Seems to be a Real Zoo -- or even a Theater of the Absurd. Once again, I am a mixture of Incurable-Optimism and Unyielding-Despair. This is the Best of Times -- and the Worst of Times. As a race -- we seem to Live in Purgatory -- with the Threat of Hell and the Promise of Heaven. Consider Conditional Prophecy and the Openness of God as you search for a Useable Future. Make Good Choices and Do the Responsible Thing. Namaste and Have a Nice Day.
    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7704
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: Archangelic Queens of Heaven and the United States of the Solar System

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Wed Apr 03, 2013 2:07 am

    I've been thinking about positive-possibilities for this solar system -- if and only if -- the Book of Revelation does not play-out as written. I have a high-view regarding ethics and law -- yet the historical and contemporary political and religious realities seem quite unethical and lawless. I keep thinking there is an antediluvian governance and religious system which we are not aware of. The basics of the Decalogue are actually quite good -- yet the specific wording and immediate context are most troubling to me in modernity. There must be huge chunks of the story which we are not being told. I think they know about these historical gaps in London, Rome, and the Darkside of the Moon -- but We the Peons are not deemed worthy enough to know the rest of the story. I am strangely attracted to the Desire of Ages and the Federalist Papers -- yet I know this is just scratching the surface of how things ought to be in this neck of the woods. The conditions which existed just prior to the Creation -- just prior to the Flood -- and just prior to the Tower of Babel incident might be very important for us to completely understand. This understanding might include potential conflicts between a Written Law of God -- the Spoken Word of God -- and a Libertine Race of Beings. The concept of Star-War-Lords in conflict with each other might give us insights into why things have been so harsh and violent throughout history. The hypothetical Reptilian v Human problems might have a lot to do with explaining the way things were and are. I suspect that neither the Human or Other-Than-Human Powers That Be really want the Whole Truth to emerge -- for a variety of reasons -- legitimate and illegitimate.

    I continue to get the sinking feeling that we are on the verge of a nasty Solar System Star War -- World War III -- the Battle of Armageddon -- the Apocalypse -- the Seven Last Plagues -- the Extermination of the Human Race -- etc, etc, etc. I sense that there is a Solar System Cold War which very few people know anything about. I'm fighting internal battles which most people have no idea about. I think that if we survive the next couple of decades, that technology might make most human labor obsolete -- to the point where we might wish we had been exterminated. Perhaps that's too severe -- but I'm not sure that the technology of the next couple of decades will save humanity. It might do just the opposite. Something really, really bad happened in antiquity -- and I don't know what it was. They keep me guessing. They keep all of us guessing. I keep wondering about the possibility of Michael being overthrown by Gabriel and Lucifer -- with Michael and Humanity becoming essentially Hostages to the Devil (from our perspective). Yet, from the other hypothetical side's perspective Gabriel and Lucifer might be doing God's Work -- to reign-in and re-train a Rebellious Race living on a Prison Planet in Rebellion. Once again, there are probably very, very few people who will take the time and trouble to REALLY think through these sorts of questions and issues. They take a helluva lot of time, pain, strain, and conflict to properly examine and reflect-upon. I'm sorry if I got the Gabriel and Lucifer parts of this puzzle wrong. I truly mean no harm -- yet there seems to be a helluva lot of deception and manipulation going on in this world. Something seems to be very wrong. Something seems to have been very wrong for a very long time. On the other hand -- if humanity does not want me and what I might have to offer -- I'll leave -- never to return -- even if there's no place to go. What if the original plan for this planet and humanity got implemented somewhere else -- after being rejected here?? What if the PK-47s or Future Humans are from these hypothetical places?? Was the original plan the best plan?? Is it still the best plan?? If so, who should implement it?? What Would Magoo Do??

    Mr. Magoo Meets Frankenstein! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V41EIFxJ37s

    Mr. Magoo and Noah's Ark 1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxhR412hvVY 2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ww2KSHjboE 3. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e24l-Oa-OnI

    I want to make this perfectly clear - I do not wish misery, harm, or death to come to anyone - including Reptilians, Greys, Hybrids, Nephilim, Angels, Demons, Illuminati, Satan, Lucifer, Shiva, Kali, KRLLL, The Logos, The King or Queen of Whatever, The God or Goddess of Whatever, et al. At some point - I might like to work with all of those listed above - once I got used to them! What about that debate-date, Kali??? You must REALLY hate me...

    OK...a lot of people hate me. I have been blocked by several YouTube channels - including the poster of the video series upon which this thread is mostly based. ufohypothesis (Rick Keefe - who interviews Alex Collier) has blocked me. Another one - which is critical of the Roman Catholic Church - has blocked me. This is very, very odd - since I am mostly editorially on-board with the blockers!!! None of them told me a damn thing - so I have no idea why I have been blocked. Two of my websites have been taken over by someone I have never heard of - and one has been removed from the internet - even though I am paid-up for several years. I am very paranoid - and they probably really are out to get me. Strange world we live in.

    What's odd - is that I really and truly have no animosity toward anyone. Period. Although - to be honest - I am annoyed by just about everyone - especially myself. But I have no seething agenda or fecal list. I really and truly am seeking a big-tent solution - rather than something which is narrow and exclusive. It's an equal-opportunity big-tent for males, females, hermaphrodites, and all races - including aliens and hybrids! I think I'm probably way too accomodating and easy-going.

    I'll watch videos about NDE, OBE, and Regression -- but I won't seek this sort of thing. It's just the way I was brought up. I think I'm playing a dangerous-enough game as it is. Thus far -- and no farther.

    I get the impression that most of those who constitute the Top One-Percent belong to some sort of a Secret Club (which might have several names -- but one ultimate boss -- who might not be on the side of humanity -- for whatever reasons). Sometimes I wonder about the true source of a lot of French Romantic Music. Does this music have something in common with William Shakespeare, Charles Darwin, and Albert Einstein? Who was the architect of Chartres Cathedral? Does anyone have any idea of what I am talking about? Anyone?

    I'm not going to be too specific - but if one looks at French Romantic Organ Music as a whole - what personality lurks within the music? Is it the Creator God of the Universe? Is it Jesus Christ? Is it Lucifer? Is it Mary? The individual composers? The complexity and abstractness is overwhelming. The level of genius in the design and construction of pyramids, temples, and cathedrals is likewise overwhelming. Yet something dark and troubled seems to lurk within. Could this be representative of the 'good-side' of Kali? If I'm right about all of this - do I at least get a Cracker-Jack Prize?

    I guess I'm passively pursuing a 'Pinky and the Brain - Raiders of the Lost Ark - Lucifer/Shiva/Kali/Mary - and the Temple of Doom' Hypothesis - which includes a good/genius side - and a bad/insane side. What did Spielberg know - and when did he know it? I find myself strangely attracted to the good side - and utterly disgusted and horrified by the bad side. I tend to think that if Lucifer/Shiva/Kali/Mary retired - that the bad side would go away - and that they could serve as an advisor rather than a dictator. You'd have to actually be me to understand where I'm coming from, and to see that which I visualize. I couldn't possibly put it into words.

    I just finished reading 'The Gospel of Mary of Magdala' by Karen King. The cover features a painting of a young-woman with a very dark complexion - dressed in scarlet - with a sun-disk around her head - pointing to an egg in her hand. Could this be Kali? Karen King thinks the Gospel of Mary might have been written in Egypt or Syria, with an authorship date of between 32 and 325 CE. Could Kali be the writer of most sacred texts - including the Bible and the Quran? Ralph Ellis claims that Jesus Christ and Mary Magdalene were of a high class. Nicolas Notovich claims that Jesus travelled to Tibet. Alex Collier claims that our creator (or genetic engineer) is more female than male (not sure which lecture - possibly 2002). He also claims that the Andromedans consider blacks to be genetically superior (I hope I got that one right! Not sure which lecture). In a 2002 lecture - Alex hints at a deliberate removal of the Pa Taal (spelling?).

    I think I'm going to give this thing a rest. I don't really wish to convince anyone of anything. This has mostly been a research project - in a very passive and informal sense. The Jesuits, Alphabet Agents, and World Leaders know exactly what's going on - and they obviously are not stumbling over each other to get to the microphone first - to tell all of us goyim the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. In a sense - I have mostly wished to communicate with Lucifer/Shiva/Kali/Mary and his/her willing and unwilling servants. I continue to desire a top-down reformation of how business is conducted in this solar system. Hope springs eternal - but I'm not holding my breath. Namaste.

    Try thinking through the history of Earth from a Hathorian Perspective (HP) or a Kali Perspective (KP)...based upon this thread combined with your own extrapolation and imagination. Should this hypothetical Hathor or Kali figure be an object of aspiration rather than veneration?

    I don't know if I have had a close encounter with truth...or not. I invite everyone to go through all of my threads with a fine-tooth comb. See what your conclusions are. I've simply been scratching the surface of the truth...on a road less traveled. But that could make all the difference...on your investigative journey. Amen.

    Is there anyone in the solar system who openly thinks like I do? I like to think - and I hate to think. It usually hurts when I think. Efforts to figure things out, solve problems, and save the world - seem to go largely unrewarded, and are often punished. Perhaps it really is better to give people what they want - and tell them that which they wish to hear. I often think that I might hit it off better with Lucifer/Shiva/Kali/Mary/Anna (if they really do exist - as I have speculated) than with just about anyone else - even though we would probably fight like hungry feral cats. At least there might be somewhat of a common understanding of things - even though our conclusions and courses of action would probably be diametrically opposed. I continue to desire some sort of an interaction with whoever is really and truly at the top of the pyramid - without mind-games or mumbo-jumbo. Just the facts ma'am. But just tending to business is looking more and more attractive. Thinking the unthinkable - and trying to know the unknowable - has taken it's toll. Then - trying to communicate with others about these things has been sort of like trying to reinvent the wheel.

    Positive thinking is a double-edged sword which can lift one higher - or be a deluded detour down the primrose path. I am simply trying to face reality - in a very unconventional sense. I think I've found a lot of my answers - and I don't necessarily like them. The search has been somewhat destabilizing - and I fear what may happen to the general public when they really start getting exposed to a lot of what I have uncovered - assuming that at least some of it is true.

    BROOK has supplied SO MUCH valuable information on AV1 and MOA. A thread titled 'Amen Ra' on AV1 contains a lot of BROOK's hard work and research. http://projectavalon.net/forum/showthread.php?t=18223 Even though AV1 is closed to posting - the view count on this thread seems to rise by about 1,000 per month. That thread on the 'Infiltration of the New Age Movement' which starninja has contributed so much to - is a must view for all truth seekers and curiosity seekers. What you don't know - can hurt you.

    Balance is an important part of all of this - and I have been losing my balance - little by little - which is why I'm really trying to stop - at least for a while. Bill Cooper had alcohol and temper issues - and I think it may have had a lot to do with all of the upsetting information he was dealing with. I really think that the Powers That Be have made the decision to inform the public about what's really been going on - in a gradual and unofficial manner. How responsibly we deal with this information - will determine how quickly and smoothly disclosure occurs. Take a closer look at China, India, Tibet, and Kali. Just a hunch...

    I've been wondering a lot about the true nature of the soul - and wondering about the true extent of any hybridization programs - historically and presently. What if the human soul is a shapeshifting interdimensional reptilian? Could this be why we have a reptilian part of our brains? Could this really be the biggest secret? Are all of us hybrids - in one way or another? Are Dracs really human/reptile hybrids - with an exceptionally high percentage of reptile genetics? Are everyday humans really human/reptile hybrids - with a very low percentage of reptile genetics? I once knew an ivy league graduate who told me that they were a talking snake. Some of my best friends have turned out to be snakes.

    It seems reasonable to me to at least begin with the view that this solar system is our home (regardless of ancient star wars and battles for control of this and that) - and that we just keep reincarnating (as we require new bodies) back into this solar system - and that this solar system may be as good as it gets - anywhere. I'm considering any extermination events (natural or inflicted) and mass evacuations (by UFO's, the Second Coming of Christ, etc.) to be bad things. Bringing reason and peace to this solar system seems reasonable to me. Has the Queen of Heaven been trying to do this for thousands of years? OR - has the Queen of Heaven been misusing and abusing this solar system and it's inhabitants for thousands of years? I keep seeing corruption and insanity as being unavoidably connected with absolute power - despite the best of intentions - which is why I wish for this hypothetical Queen of Heaven to retire - and serve as an advisor rather than a ruler. Sorry for being repetitious - but I will continue to test this hypothesis in different settings. I think we are all in Purgatory - and that it is up to us whether we progress into Heaven - or digress into Hell. We make our bed - and sleep in it. Our planet is how we plan it. World without end.

    "Semiramis became known as the "queen of heaven," and was the prototype from which all other pagan goddesses came."--World Religions by David Terrell

    George Kavassilas said that Jesus had to be annointed by Mary Magdalene - and get permission from her - to be able to do his work. He also said that Mary Magdalene was an incarnation of the Divine Mother. He further said that in cathedrals - one must go through the mother to get to the Christ energy. Finally, he said that the rock who Jesus intended to build his church upon - was Mary Magdalene.

    I have speculated that the Queen of Heaven aka Whore of Babylon aka Mary Magdalene aka Woman in Scarlet - created the Historical Jesus - to be a Red Herring. Having said that - I continue to reverence the Teachings of Jesus - even if my blasphemous speculations are true. All of this probably has a 5% chance of being true - but I will continue to climb further and further out on a very thin limb. Did the Woman in Scarlet write the Red Letters? I'd better stop.

    George warns of ET's who claim to be here to help - and speak of love - as being deceptive enemies. Could these be some of the ET's who Alex Collier says we need to be mentored by? I am very skeptical regarding mentoring. Early Collier interviews stated that all the ET's should leave - and just leave us alone - and stop interfering with us, and stop manipulating us. Which ET's are promoting Responsibility and Human Sovereignty? Have any of them done so over the past several thousand years? Does the Bible do so? Why is Responsibility and the U.S. Constitution not the preferred foundation for this solar system? I keep sensing that Steven Greer and even Alex Collier are being strong-armed by ET's to promote their agenda. I sense that a lot of people are joining them - because they feel that we cannot beat them. I can't prove this - but I feel very ill regarding all of this.

    Starninja to Orthodoxymoron: I couldn’t say it better. Why would we want to be mentored? scratch We gave our power away to governments, falsely believing that they would act in our best interest. Why would we want to give our power away to ET’s? Some claim that ET’s are highly evolved. By which standards……..theirs? We don’t know them and we can’t make any judgment if they are more evolved than we are. We don’t trust people we don’t know. And it takes time to build trust. ET's haven't earned our trust! Hm...why would I want to trust Alex Collier? Because he said so? Bleh Not good enough for me. Secondly, TPTB worked hard for ages to convince us that we powerless and insecure. Well, they can’t control people who are secure within themselves. I see it as a big problem for those who don’t trust themselves, eager to give up responsibility and personal power away.

    Reply: Thank-you starninja. I don't wish to slam Alex Collier, Steven Greer, or the ET's (Human/Reptile Hybrids?). I just wish to work toward a minimalist solar system government - which avoids the absurdities and atrocities of the past. The human race obviously has HUGE ethical and psychological problems which need to be remedied - but if the Secret Government, the United Nations, the Vatican, the City of London, Washington D.C., the Alphabet Agencies Worldwide, the Underground Bases, the Secret Space Program, the Secret Societies, and the Royal Family, et al - were truly governed by Responsibility and the U.S. Constitution - with 10,000 representatives from throughout the solar system - I have a feeling that things would improve - after a rough and rocky transition period. I tend to think that all of us are products and victims of our circumstances - and I have absolutely no animosity or ill-will toward any of the organizations or individuals mentioned above. I'm just trying to visualize what the best next step should be. I suspect really, really nasty ancient wars in this solar system (and elsewhere) - which may not be resolved - even at this late date. If reincarnation is a reality - we may have all been a part of unspeakable horrors. I don't know the whole story. I probably don't even know 1% of the whole story - so all of my presuppositions, speculations, and proposed solutions - might be complete BS. But somehow, We the Goyim - must begin to attempt to think everything though - and not just leave it up to the ET's and the Secret Societies.

    Carol wrote:I personally know Alex Collier and much about him. He has not had contact for years although he would like to have contact and puts up a false front about having recent contact. And one of the things I've personally heard him say repeatedly is that humans are right up there with everyone else (maybe not technologically and maybe some alien races are more spiritually evolved but we should never become slaves to anyone.}

    His experience was real yet his life a bit of a mess. Collier isn't being strong armed by anyone. As for Greer, he is his own man with his own agenda and is involved with ET contact via group meditation. I've read these men's unpublished and published interviews and they are close to Paola Harris who is a close personal friend of mine.

    It would be liberating if the general public had some type of concrete clue as to how many types of ETs the US government have treaties with. There are 114 different alien races that we know about and in my personal opinion, the US military FIRST chose to go with the ones who were at the bottom of the barrel (greys, reptilians and demons). Heaven help us.
    Thank-you Carol. I always feel humbled when I read your posts. You have obviously done a huge amount of research - you are an experiencer - and you know key people personally. I'm just an armchair blogger - and I am propelled forward (backward?) by my insecurities.

    I like Alex Collier a lot - and I listen to him more than just about anyone else. But I sense a lot of internal conflict. I also sense that he knows a lot more than he reveals publicly. He probably gets into a huge amount of trouble for what he does reveal. Strong arming can occur in a lot of different ways. Perhaps that was too strong of a term. I just detect a sense of resignation in people like Jordan Maxwell, Steven Greer, and Alex Collier. Jordan has been open about this. Steven stated at a 2005 X-Con (I think) that the ET agenda was going to be implemented whether the governments of the world like it or not. Alex has changed over the years. Watch his lectures and interviews in the 90's - and then watch the lectures and interviews from the last couple of years. I sometimes wonder if his information comes from both benevolent and malevolent beings - combined with his own research and thinking. Sort of a composite. The 'benevolent' beings could turn out to be deceptive SOB's. Could this be a possible reason for an absence of recent contact? This whole thing could be a lot nastier and messier than we can imagine. I'm not studying this stuff to be happy. I'm studying it because I'm scared.

    The figure of 114 alien races floored me. However - I'm still looking at the possibility that the 'ET's' are really Human/Reptile Hybrids - created right here in this solar system. Nicholas Roerich (the Russian mystic) traveled to Tibet - and learned of a 'Sovereign Queen of the Air' from Sirius - who conducted (and conducts?) a Hybridization Program. Nicholas spoke of seeing Strange Grey People in Tibet. Could this be the source of most of these 114 alien races? If you haven't already - watch the entire series linked in the first post of this thread. Notice especially Part 14 at around nine or ten minutes - to view the Roerich information. I think the deception, corruption, and cruelty is unimaginable and unfathomable. I obviously don't know the details. I continue to fly blind (and stupid). But I continue to fly. God help us.

    I'm rather lost, at this point. I really think that the infowar will go on for a long, long time - if not forever. No matter how all the king's horses and all the king's men try to put together an ideal politcal/religious system - it will always probably seem to be wrong - and we will continue to fight about how to do things the right way. The Holy Father and the Queen of Heaven must get very, very tired of all of the razzmatazz...

    Here is a Protestant view regarding the 'Woman Who Rides the Beast' aka the 'Whore of Babylon'. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5Ke7Tn3uOU&NR=1 I am not endorsing this video. I include it only to provide another perspective. Obviously - I have been considering the possibility that the 'Whore of Babylon' may be the 'Queen of Heaven' rather than being a particular location or church. Again - I have no animosity. I'm just trying to figure out what has been going on throughout history. I have a feeling that most of us are deluded - including me. Does anyone know how much the Whore of Babylon charges? Fifty Cities? Why is she called the 'Whore of Babylon'? Because she babbles on and on and on and on and I'd better stop...

    What if most of us came to Earth from Sirius on a UFO called Battlestar Moon - around 12,000 years ago - led by the Queen of Heaven? What if our souls are interdimensional reptilian in nature - and what if all of us are human/reptile hybrids (with a very small reptile percentage)? What if Reptilians and Greys are human/reptile hybrids (with a very large reptile percentage)? What if the Queen of Heaven conducted a spirituality, technology, architecture, art, music, conquest, and genetic hybridization program - which got out of control? What if our true history is unbearable? Would the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth - unite the solar system - or drive us into yet another star war? These are not rhetorical questions. Here's something a bit more pleasant to contemplate:
    1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-J3L4a5RtmM&feature=channel 2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKyNIY9oMnw 3. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTONKvpU5UI&feature=related 4. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8ZT8TPlG3w

    I feel like I'm being mugged and raped by a brutal gang of facts, theories, and entities. When the Jesuits catch up with me - there probably won't be much left...

    Reconsider the first page of the AV1 Thuban Q&A (noting especially the X-rated story!) - and consider the possibility that abraxasinas - or one close to abraxasinas - looks like my avatar - and might really be Kali aka The Queen of Heaven aka The Whore of Babylon. http://projectavalon.net/forum/showthread.php?t=18900&highlight=orthodoxymoron+threads All of the avatars have been removed from AV1 (why?) - but remember the avatar which abraxasinas used? It showed a Hathor-like goddess figure with a dog (Anubis or Sirius?) standing in front of a pyramid. I continue to think that the whole abraxasinas/Thuban fiasco was sort of a test or a mind-game - which nonetheless revealed information and concepts relevant to our quest. A word of warning - some found the Thuban material to be very disorienting - and some claimed that they were supernaturally attacked in connection with it. I could only bring myself to read selected parts of it - over a period of weeks and months. I had my first (and only) ufo sighting shortly before the Thuban thread and AV1 were closed. Researcher beware. Stay out of Thuban! Abandon all sanity - ye who enter Thuban - and cross over into a femtotechnically truncated bifurcation of an interdimensional hypotenuse of a trinity godess space-time singularity!

    The names Mercuriel and Hadriel are quite interesting - and may indicate sovereignty - but I really don't think I'm a sovereign (whatever that really means). I do think that I am one of many billions of beings who have a right to be here in this solar system (despite all previous conflicts and star wars). I do think that negative entities can mess with me big time - and I think they have done so throughout my life - and that they continue to do so. I'm not free at all - and I don't think that uttering prayers or incantations is the solution. Benevolent entities are probably keeping me alive - but they seem to not be doing much else that I can tell - but who knows? Someone claiming to be God showed up where I work - and was worried that someone was going to kill me - and they were very concerned about me - and protective toward me. I didn't even know this person - and they had no knowledge of my internet activities (that I know of). They told me they were going to destroy the world - and I tried to convince them not to! Honestly! I've had other very strange encounters with various people (who might not have been people?) throughout the years.

    I don't think I'm a sovereign - and your confirmation of my belief comes as a relief. I am trying to think through the power structure of this solar system - going back thousands, or even millions, of years - and I am trying to think Kali's thoughts after her - but I think there are too many sovereigns or wannabe sovereigns running (flying?) around this neck of the woods. Too many chiefs!! But having said that - I do think that We the People of Earth need to be the New Elites in a Brave New Solar System.

    Just a personal note to Lucifer, Shiva, Kali, Mary, Anna, Queen of Heaven - or to whom it may concern - I apologize if I have been unfair or unkind. I'm hurt, scared, insecure, and a bit curious - and I have been attempting to get a response from you without engaging in blood rituals and soul selling. If I ever meet you - I will be very respectful - but I might ask some hard questions - and I might not appear to be very friendly or responsive. Chad Decker would be a push-over compared to me. If things went my way (editorially) - I wouldn't jump up and down, and be triumphalistic. It would just be another day at the office. I would like to hear your musical capabilities - and I think they are probably unmatched in the history of the world. Credit should be given where credit is due. Justice should be served regarding any past wrongs - but I am not in favor of the death penalty, or cruel and unusual punishment. You might be sentenced to 1,000 years as the U.N. Representative from Phobos ("I was arrested last night in Tibet - and taken to a very nice prison on Phobos")! Don't be afraid. I mean no harm. I am of peace. Namaste.

    Here is a thread (not mine) from AV1 which might be relevant to this thread. I remember that it was a good thread - but that I didn't follow it too closely. Perhaps it's time to take another look at "Remote Viewing Tibetan Monks See Extra Terrestrial Powers Saving the World". http://projectavalon.net/forum/showthread.php?t=12449&highlight=orthodoxymoron+threads What did the Tibetan Monks know - and when did they know it???? Also - in the movie '2012' - the arks were located in China - and the most unaffected continent was Africa. In light of my speculations - is this significant? Remember - Alex Collier recently stated that disclosure might very likely come from India or China. Is something brewing? Hmmmmmmmmm. Here is the first post of the thread by Adarajones:

    Remote viewing is nothing new in Tibetan monasteries. For thousands of years remote viewing in the middle of other spiritual activities have dominated Tibetan culture. What some Indian tourists came to learn from a few Tibetan monasteries under the current Chinese rule is extremely alarming and fascinating.

    According to these tourists remote viewers are seeing world powers in the course of self-destruction. They also see that the world will not be destroyed. Between now and 2012 the world super powers will continue to engage in regional wars. Terrorism and covert war will be the main problem. In world politics something will happen in and around 2010. At that time the world powers will threaten to destroy each other.

    Between 2010 and 2012, the whole world will get polarized and prepare for the ultimate dooms day. Heavy political maneuvers and negotiations will take place with little progress.

    In 2012, the world will start plunging into a total destructive nuclear war.

    And at that time something remarkable will happen, says, Buddhist monk of Tibet. Supernatural divine powers will intervene. The destiny of the world is not to self-destruct at this time.

    Scientific interpretation of the monks’ statements makes it evident that the Extra Terrestrial powers are watching us every step of the way. They will intervene in 2012 and save the world from self-destruction.

    When asked about recent UFO sightings in India and China, the monks smiled and said the divine powers are watching us all. Mankind cannot and will not be allowed to alter the future to that great extent.

    Every human being though their current acts in life called “Karma” can alter the future lives to some extent, but changing the destiny in that large extent will not be allowed to that great an extent.

    Monks also mentioned that beyond 2012 our current civilization would understand that the final frontier of science and technology is in area of spirituality and not material physics and chemistry. Beyond 2012, out technologies will take a different direction. People will learn the essence of spirituality, the relation between body and the soul, the reincarnation and the fact we are connected with each other are all part of “God”.

    In India and China UFO sightings have increased in many folds. Many say the Chinese and Indian Governments are being contacted by the Extra Terrestrials.

    In recent days most UFO activities have been seen in those countries who have indigenously developed Nuke capabilities.

    When asked if these extra-terrestrials will show up in reality in 2012, the answers remote viewers are giving is: they will reveal themselves in such a way that none of us scared. They will reveal themselves only if they have to. As our science and technology progresses, we are destined to see them and interact with them any way.

    According to the remote viewers, our earth is blessed and is being saved continuously from all kinds of hazards all the time that we are not even aware of. As our technologies progress we will realize how external forces saved us.

    It sounds as though we deal with the visible PTB (who we love and hate), who take orders from the bloodline elites, who take orders from mysterious and nepharious entities, who take orders from who knows who? I keep feeling as though we are prisoners of an ancient star war - and that we are serving some type of a sentence. What troubles me, is that even if we do become responsible (or try to be responsible) - we are destined to remain in jail. The law of the universe seems to be that the Human Race on Planet Earth cannot and will not be allowed to succeed - and that they will not be allowed to become responsibly free - no matter what. Perhaps the Original Sin was the Unpardonable Sin. This seems to be all about being beat into reverential submission by the chastenings of the lord - as sinners in the hands of an angry god. Did Promethius steal fire from this god? Did we all go along with Promethius? Is that why we are here - and why we are in so much trouble?

    Promethius = Lucifer = Kali = Mary = Anna (in "V")? What if the gods were problematic and disfunctional? What if Promethius/Lucifer/Kali/Mary/Anna was/were/are/is problematic and disfunctional? Is there a solution to the madness? Regardless of what really happened, and regardless of what is happening presently, why is there so much secrecy, deception, corruption, violence, and insanity? Why are legitimate and well-meaning attempts at understanding and reform, met with such coldness and even hostility?

    Allow me to introduce to you, a pretty lady named TREEE. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCcOCZeWnko Some might say that she is simply a drug addicted former prostitute - but she seems to know a helluva lot about some very creepy supernatural phenomenon. Might TREEE give us some clues as to what a modern incarnation of the Whore of Babylon would be like? Ironically, TREEE lives in Las Vegas - which is sometimes called 'Babylon'. One never knows...

    At this point - I feel like a lost little boy who has wandered onto the battlefield - just before the Battle of the Bulge. I don't want to be a part of any of this - but I have made myself a part of the mess - with all of my internet comments and speculation. Might we be dealing with Amen Ra Annunaki vs Hathor Annunaki? Gabriel Annunaki vs Lucifer Annunaki? Could Michael be the legitimate leader of the Human Race (us and those who we encounter every day)? Awesome Gods and Goddesses? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b365_qJEpDg Could Adria approximate the Queen of Heaven who anciently came to Tibet from Sirius - to conduct a hybridization program (to create us?) - after stealing fire from the gods? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7lAagZA-H4&NR=1

    This is pretty much a goddess thread - and I just wish to communicate to all goddesses who might be reading this thread - that I mean no disrespect or injury - but I do wish for the madness in this solar system to end quickly. This has gone on long enough. I am once again inviting all factions to unite around a Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom Solar System aka The United States of the Solar System. I wish to retain all of the best which presently exists - and I wish to eliminate all of the worst which presently exists. However - each and every soul should be treated with kindness, dignity, and respect. I wish no misery, pain, or death on anyone - even upon the worst of the worst. Imprisonment and eventual restoration - probably. Extermination - probably not. How quickly destruction travels from one group to the next. If one group is insecure - all of us are insecure. Proceed wisely. I am of peace. Namaste.

    Are we dealing with Father (incoming) / Daughter (local) Annunaki? Are they Sirius A, Nibiru-Inhabiting, Hybrid, and Black? Gabriel and Lucifer? Are we also dealing with Aldebaran, Sirius B, Moon-Inhabiting, White Nazis - led by ?????? Who is the Hypothetical Jesus Faction - who is trying to break-up the Star War? Was the Annunaki Faction here first? Is Earth their planet? Did the Moon show up 12,000 years ago - and attempt to take over Earth? If so - what might be a reasonable resolution? What really troubles me is that we don't know the whole story. I hate this damn guessing game - and waiting game. Annunaki vs Nazi? Masons vs Nazis? Pigmented vs Non-Pigmented? Is the Jesus Faction really good and right - but relatively powerless? I continue to send my invitation into the vast regions of space and cyberspace - to unite all factions and all beings around a Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom Solar System aka The United States of the Solar System - based upon Responsibility and the U.S. Constitution. This is probably an exercise in futility - but one never knows who reads these threads - and who comments on them.

    Could the chief administrator of the Roman Catholic Church be similar to my avatar? Could this be the 'Whore of Babylon' - rather than the RCC? See - I'm thinking that the RCC might have to deal with more secret and hidden problems than we can possibly imagine. I just watched 'Stargate Continuum' - and the scene where Ba'al and Katesh aka Vala are in their spaceship - and are preparing to attack and enslave Earth - particularly impressed me. Might the RCC have had to deal with something like this? Could there be a real-life Katesh (Vala) aka Queen of Heaven - who controls us by controlling the Roman Catholic Church? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3A6_blpqpU Please don't consider this post to be hateful on my part. I'm just trying to understand. BTW - are there any Jesuits out there who can point me to a book or website - from the Roman Catholic perspective - which analyzes 'The Great Contoversy' - from cover to cover? I know all about the Plagiarism and Investigative Judgment problems. I also know that most Jesuits have read this book from cover to cover - and have it in their libraries. I'm a real Pain in Uranus - aren't I?

    This post should probably be the beginning of a new thread - but I'm going to attempt to tie it into this thread. The subject is Persia. I just viewed a video which claims that Persians are the true Aryans. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJbdGvjnSpQ&feature=related The Nazis were into the Aryan thing. I recently heard that Bohemian Grove is run by Persians. I also heard that Obama is Persian. This is unconfirmed - and I know nothing about this subject - so please help me out. The Persian Gulf. The Medo-Persian Empire (following the Babylonian Empire). Most people in Iran are Persian. Why do I keep hearing rumors regarding nuking Iran? Why are we REALLY in Afghanistan and Iraq? Could we be involved in some sort of an Aryan War? Could all of this be somehow related to Tibet, Kali, the Trinity Goddess, the Queen of Heaven, and Disclosure? Here is a link to the wikipedia entry for Persia (which contains lots of links)> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persian Bahai is Persian in origin - I believe. Isn't Steven Greer - Bahai? Help me out, folks! Is that Helena Blavatsky at 5:55? Could a Persian connection be the missing link in all of this? Try thinking in terms of Sirius/Tibet/Iran/Germany. I really don't think the German people came up with the Nazi phenomenon on their own. In fact - I don't think they knew what the hell they were getting involved in - even at the highest levels. Just more speculation. I have no idea where this might lead - but give it some thought.

    Has anyone done a study of 'The King of Heaven (Father/Gabriel/ Amen Ra?) and Queen of Heaven (Mother/ Hathor/Isis/Mary/Lucifer/ Holy Spirit?) - and the Heir to the Throne (Horus/Michael/Jesus?)' concept? I just thought of that! This could be applied in so many situations - terrestrial, extraterrestrial, mythological, theological, astrological, dynastic, etc. - with a high likelihood of overlap. I reread those abraxasinas posts - and I still think of abraxasinas - or the spirit behind abraxasinas - as being more feminine than masculine. I keep thinking of Adria or Quitesh in Stargate SG-1.

    I'm sorry for saying the same things over and over -- in different ways -- but I will probably continue doing so -- just to represent a contrarian alternative viewpoint in this forum. Anyway, I continue to be interested in the Archangels Gabriel, Michael, and Lucifer -- in the context of an Ancient and Ongoing Star War in Heaven. Are Archangels really Solar System Lords aka Sun Gods??? Once again, I am NOT a Bible-Thumper -- but still -- take a close look at Genesis, the Book of Enoch, and Revelation. This is anything but a fun study. I am highly idealistic -- yet what if the universe is anything but idealistic??? I keep wondering how good or how bad the souls in this solar system really are -- regardless of present physicality?? I like the theory of Human Physicality and Responsible Freedom -- but what if the souls that inhabit human bodies are really bad to the bone?? What if the horrors of history were inflicted for legitimate reasons?? What if the horrors of the future will be inflicted for legitimate reasons?? If one were briefed by the best and brightest on the Dark-Side of the Moon -- what would they think about the madness then?? Again, I am using this website and 'my' threads as a home-base. This site really isn't where I feel most comfortable -- but I continue to think that I need the challenge it presents me with. Current events might have EVERYTHING to do with all of the above. A Regime-Change might simply be the exchange of one Star War Lord for another. Who knows, I might be an Ancient Star War Lord with Amnesia. How should this universe define and deal-with sin?? Is Sin the Transgression of the Written Law of God?? Is Sin Insubordination to the Spoken Commandments of God?? What if False-Gods rule this world, solar system, and galaxy?? What if the Best God is too nice and too weak to defeat the Nasty False-Gods?? Does it take one to beat one?? Does Might Make Right?? What if Gabriel rules Sirius and This Solar System from Battlestar Nibiru?? What if Lucifer is the God of This World (Subservient to Gabriel)?? What if Gabriel = Mary?? What if Lucifer = Jesus?? Before you stone me to death -- remember that I'm a big fan of the Red-Letter Teachings of Jesus -- but who really created them?? Anyway, it might be necessary to think through all of this esoteric-theology to properly understand what might be happening with North Korea...
    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7704
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: Archangelic Queens of Heaven and the United States of the Solar System

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Wed Apr 03, 2013 6:12 pm

    One of my theories is that all honest theologians (of whatever pursuasion) eventually come to a severe crisis of faith. I love theologians -- yet I often hate theology (of all varieties). We often gravitate to either "God is Good -- and On Our Side" or to "There is No God -- That I Know of". But what if "God is NOT One of Us -- and is NOT On Our Side"?! If the other two positions make people angry -- the last one makes them livid -- or so it seems to me. The last view is MOST upsetting -- yet what does History and Sacred Scripture reveal to us?? Again, what if False-Gods overthrew the One-True-God in an Ancient Star-War in Heaven??!! I sometimes think that people become atheists and agnostics because the theological realities are much too dark -- and not because they don't believe that God actually exists. Consider Yeshayahu Leibowitz. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/leibowitz-yeshayahu/

    Yeshayahu Leibowitz

    First published Tue Mar 29, 2011

    Yeshayahu Leibowitz (1903–1994) was one of the most outspoken and controversial twentieth century Jewish thinkers and Israeli public intellectuals. Once termed “the conscience of Israel”[1] by his childhood contemporary from Riga, Sir Isaiah Berlin, Leibowitz's thought is founded on a far-reaching theocentrism that allows him to combine a commitment to Orthodox Jewish practice with a stripped-down definition of Jewish faith that yields a radically naturalistic theology—if, indeed, what is left can bear the burden of the term “theology” at all. But the influence of this theocentric commitment spreads far beyond the confines of his views on religious faith. It is the ultimate source of his unyielding criticism of the rabbinic establishment in Israel, and what—“in the face of so much pressure to be sensible, to be realistic, not to let the side down” as Berlin (1983, 18) put it—was seen at the time as a highly controversial stance regarding Israeli policy towards the territories captured during the Six Day war.

    •1. Life and Works◦1.1 Works
    ◦1.2 Methodology

    •2. God and Theology
    •3. Interpreting Scripture
    •4. Jewish Faith and Jewish Law
    •5. Worship Lishmah and the Meaning of Mitzvoth◦5.1 Ethics and Religion
    ◦5.2 Meta-Halakhah and the Status of Women

    •6. Religion, State, and Israel
    •Bibliography◦Primary Literature
    ◦Selected Secondary Literature and Works Cited

    •Academic Tools
    •Other Internet Resources
    •Related Entries

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    1. Life and Works

    Born to an observant Jewish family in Riga in 1903, Leibowitz gained his education at the Gymnasium, with concurrent home-schooling for his Jewish studies, before the family fled Russia in 1919 for Berlin. At the University of Berlin, Leibowitz studied chemistry and philosophy, receiving his doctorate in the former in 1924. After studying at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute from 1926–1928, Leibowitz went onto study medicine in Koln and Heidelberg, though with the Nazis gaining power he would gain his formal medical degree in Basel. In 1935 he moved to Palestine, initially as professor of biochemistry at the Hebrew University, going on to be appointed as head of biological and organic chemistry and professor of neurophysiology at the Medical School, as well as lecturing on the history and philosophy of science. Yet these formal academic appointments formed but one side of his work, and far from the most public, for in addition Leibowitz taught Jewish thought, whether in an academic context, in small study groups, or on television and radio, with a number of these broadcasts and study-group notes having since been published. But aside from these activities and his being editor in chief of several volumes of the Encyclopedia Hebraica, it was for his political interventions that Leibowitz would gain most notoriety on the Israeli public scene, whether in his criticism of the religious parties as the “kept mistress” (Judaism, 115) of the Israeli government, his argument as early as 1968 that Israel should withdraw from the newly-conquered West Bank and Gaza strip, or his public call for conscientious objectors from the time of the Lebanon war of 1982 and subsequently in the Palestinian territories. Leibowitz's ability to stir up public controversy was in evidence as late as 1993, the year before he died, in a speech to the Israel Council for Israeli-Palestinian Peace, where he reiterated his call on soldiers to refuse to serve in the Territories, using, not for the first time, highly provocative language comparing special units of the Israeli army to the SS. The speech followed the announcement that he was to receive the Israel prize—the country's most prestigious civilian award—in recognition of his life's work, a move that precipitated an appeal to the Supreme Court, and a threat to boycott the ceremony by Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin. Leibowitz, however, saved everyone further embarrassment by declining the award.

    1.1 Works

    Leibowitz's philosophy found expression in numerous essays that first appeared in Hebrew periodicals and were subsequently collated, with some overlap, into a handful of volumes published at irregular intervals, most significantly Torah u-Mitzvot ba-Zeman ha-Zeh [Torah and Commandments in Our Time] (1954); Yahadut, Am Yehudi u-Medinat Yisrael [Judaism, Jewish People, and the State of Israel] (1975); and Emunah, Historiah, va-Arakhim [Faith, History, and Values] (1982). 1982 also saw the publication of the transcripts of his study-group on Maimonides' Shemoneh Perakim—the section of Maimonides' Commentary to the Mishnah that serves as an introduction to Tractate Avot (generally known in English as the Ethics of the Fathers). A number of his contributions to Israeli television and radio also appeared in print—including series on the philosophy of Maimonides and on the weekly Torah reading—and continue to do so posthumously, along with transcripts of further study-group discussions. Though far better known in Israel than in the English-speaking world, the publication in English translation of a collection of his writings in 1992—Judaism, Human Values, and the Jewish State—opened the way to a growing critical engagement with his thought beyond those oft disputed borders. One now finds a broadening of Leibowitz scholarship beyond exclusively Jewish concerns and the Kantian comparisons that were the staple of early critical work, to a clutch of recent attempts to place his work in proximity to that of Emmanuel Levinas, whose work Leibowitz held in high regard.[2] His radio broadcasts on Maimonides and on the weekly Torah reading of 1985–1986 are now also available in English.

    1.2 Methodology

    In the 1953 piece “Mitzvot Ma'asiyot” (a later version of which was translated as “Religious Praxis,” in Judaism), at once the most succinct statement of his philosophy and his most expansive essay that foreshadows much of what he would go on to write throughout his career, Leibowitz tells us that he is not concerned to “elaborate a philosophic justification or rationale for the Mitzvoth [commandments],” but instead to expand on “their meaning for Jewish religion as we live it” (Judaism, 4). Indeed, while some of Leibowitz's ideas are certainly drawn from (and relevant to) the philosophy of religion more generally, his writings are very specifically directed to giving a philosophical exposition of Judaism, and in particular of the mitzvoth that are at its heart. “Exposition” may, however, appear to be a misleading term to use given that the earliest published Hebrew version of this piece opens with some introductory methodological remarks “designed to guide the argument,” in which he states that argument “and not exposition—should be the main point of our discussion,” (Torah u-Mitzvot, 9).[3] Leibowitz's mixed signals here—talk of expanding on “meaning” suggests a more hermeneutical and expository approach, and yet he wishes to eschew “exposition” for argument—indicate important limits on what Leibowitz sets out to achieve. While he is certainly concerned with a correct understanding or description of the meaning of Jewish practice, he does nonetheless argue for his view. His construal of what constitutes argument, however, needs be understood rather narrowly and “scientifically.”

    Given his scientific training, Leibowitz “argues” on the basis of empirical (most often historical) evidence for his conclusions regarding, for example, the centrality of mitzvoth in Judaism to the exclusion of mysticism, philosophy, or dogma. Yet, on the very same positivistic grounds, he is not willing to launch parallel “arguments” in order to justify specific practices or indeed Jewish practice as a whole. Thus, if one is expecting to find an argument justifying the halakhic way of life through syllogistic reasoning from foundational principles in the manner of the great medieval Jewish philosopher Moses Maimonides, one is likely to be disappointed. What we do find, in line with much contemporary Jewish philosophy, is an insider's account of the meaning of faith in Judaism as understood from within that tradition, albeit with implications beyond those boundaries. But in contrast to some of the best-known twentieth century Jewish philosophers, Leibowitz insists that the only reliable tool that we can use in order to investigate the meaning of faith is discursive reasoning. Thus we find Leibowitz arguing not only historically, but also in the sense of using the tools of rational philosophical discourse to trace the implications of certain positions to their logical conclusions.

    Rather than setting out his philosophy comprehensively in the form of a system based on foundational premises, Leibowitz generally wrote short articles devoted to specific topics. It is nonetheless fair to say that there is a single axis around which his thought revolves and to which many of his views can ultimately be traced—the radical transcendence of God. In what follows we will begin with Leibowitz's understanding of God's transcendence, which will enable us to proceed to his conceptions of theology, Scripture, Jewish faith, ethics, and briefly politics, all of which ultimately wend their way back to that fundamental idea. While occasionally developments and changes in his thought will be noted, particularly in the political section, on the whole we will be dealing with his mature views since, as Hannah Kasher has argued, in the 1992 English translations to which most readers of this will have access, even the earlier essays have been translated in a manner that often reflects the later views (Kasher, 2000, 54).

    2. God and Theology

    According to Leibowitz, the central idea of Jewish monotheism is the radical transcendence of God, a view that has previously been given its starkest exposition by his philosophical hero, Maimonides. Postponing discussion of its precise logical status for Leibowitz, and provisionally accepting that “God is radically transcendent” is a cognitive statement, a rough first formulation of its meaning would be that God is an existent entity that is absolutely incomparable to any other form of reality that we can possibly encounter.

    Following Maimonides' negative theology, Leibowitz claims that we are unable to make any meaningful statements that purport to describe God. Any attempt to speak of God's properties or characteristics transcend the limits of human thought and language. In good Kantian, or even positivist fashion, human categories of thought only get any purchase in the human context within which they are formulated. They cannot be assumed to retain their meaning when applied beyond the boundaries of possible human experience. Of course, this depends on the further assertion that God is not a possible object of such human experience, a point to which Leibowitz swiftly proceeds. For a thoroughgoing commitment to the idea of the radical transcendence of God yields a number of important ontological conclusions that go beyond the semantic point made thus far. For Leibowitz, the idea of radical transcendence, if taken seriously, implies that God cannot be “contained” within any reality that we encounter. Nature is nature, history is history—and if God is truly transcendent neither are God or are related to God in any direct sense. Thus, in a self-aware, if not self-deprecating moment, Leibowitz sets out his “heresy” (his description, not mine) thus: “God did not reveal himself in nature or in history.” (Yahadut, 240) Were things otherwise, then nature and history would be “Godly”—and thus would be perfect and worthy of worship themselves. There would be “no room for ‘the holy God’ who transcends natural reality, since then reality itself is divine and man himself is God” (Judaism, 25).

    For Leibowitz, the only alternative to this view is a form of pantheism—the attribution of divinity in some sense to natural objects—an idea that he admits finds “echoes … in Jewish mysticism,” which to that extent is therefore “incompatible with halakhic Judaism” (Judaism, 26). The idea that any material object can be holy is something that, in Leibowitz's eyes, is the ultimate definition of idolatry, potentially leading to the worship of people, objects, or—significantly for his brand of Zionism—land. In contrast, though it might seem ironic at first glance given his view of pantheism, Leibowitz here takes up an almost Spinozan approach to nature. For Leibowitz, taking God's transcendence seriously entails the elimination of superstitious beliefs in holy entities with supernatural endowments, and thus a Spinozan demythologization of the natural world.[4] But while Spinoza is willing to speak of “God or nature,” for Leibowitz, the natural world must be purified of any trace of divinity; divinity—or holiness—is a notion that Leibowitz retains as a term to be used in connection with the God who radically transcends nature, with no remainder.

    Denuding the world of divinity does not stop for Leibowitz at the natural world. History, as the story of humankind in the natural world, can no more carry divine significance than can a material object. The idea that there is some divine purpose in history, that God exerts some form of providence over humankind, would similarly contradict the idea of God's transcendence and is thus a baseless notion for Leibowitz for whom “an unbiased examination of the history of humankind and of the Jews as related in the Bible will not reveal in the entire process … any design or definite direction, or gradual approach to a specific goal” (Judaism, 102).

    On the basis of these remarks, one immediately sees that Leibowitz's thought will be devoid of much that passes for traditional Jewish or general theology. Faith cannot be formulated around propositions that speak of God and his providential relationship to the universe. Holiness is confined to God and cannot be predicated of anything that exists in the world (which also, incidentally, explains his opposition to any ethnocentric interpretation of the idea of Chosen-ness based on some intrinsic “property” of holiness that Jews inherit). Any attribution of holiness to objects that might be found in Jewish texts is to be understood as attributing functional rather than essential holiness to the object in question.[5]

    Leibowitz's God is not a providential God; history has no teleology; and we find no attempts at theodicy in Leibowitz. In contrast to many contemporary Jewish philosophers, the holocaust merits barely a mention in his philosophical writings, other than to dismiss it from theological discussion. A thoroughgoing commitment to transcendence cannot allow for a God who is involved in human affairs. Those who would question, indeed those who lost their faith in God as a result of Auschwitz “never believed in God but in God's help… [for] one who believes in God … does not relate this to belief in God's help” (Accepting the Yoke, 21).

    For Leibowitz, this is a direct result of taking one's commitment to the radical transcendence of God to its logical conclusion. It is one thing, Leibowitz might say, to pay lip service to the idea of God's transcendence. But if God is to be truly transcendent, then we cannot associate our reality at any level with that of God. The one statement that we can make regarding God—that he is radically transcendent—can only be fleshed out further by clarifying how God is not anything that we can encounter in ordinary, or for that matter extraordinary, human experience. That Leibowitz here goes beyond even Maimonides is clear inasmuch as for Maimonides, though we cannot speak of God's intrinsic properties, we can speak of his “actions,” which is to speak of the course of nature, of which God is the first cause. And yet for Leibowitz, even this would transgress the limits to which the notion of radical transcendence binds us. To say that nature reflects God's actions renders God immanent in nature, and thus no longer transcendent. From both a semantic and ontological perspective, therefore, Leibowitz takes the notion of God's transcendence further than even his own philosophical “idol.” (See Statman 2005)

    3. Interpreting Scripture

    Leibowitz begins with a definition of God and draws out its implications for how we are to conceive of the world from a Jewish perspective. But where does he find this starting point? Textually speaking, one might claim to find grounding for the radical transcendence of God in various biblical verses and statements drawn from the Jewish tradition more generally, but no less than one can find quotes to question this account of God's relationship with nature and with history—as Leibowitz himself often acknowledges.[6] Indeed, any plain reading of Jewish Scripture would seem to suggest a God very closely involved with history and nature. Leibowitz's reading of Jewish Scripture is therefore based on a very particular hermeneutic approach to the Tanakh (the acronym used to refer to Jewish Scripture, based on the three works of which is composed—Torah, (lit. instruction), Nevi'im (Prophets), and Ketuvim (Writings)).

    Leibowitz's definition of the Tanakh as Holy Scripture would appear atypically to place him in uncontroversial territory. But, what, for Leibowitz, does it mean to accord it this status and how is it to be interpreted? For simplicity's sake, we will focus in what follows on the Torah, the founding constitution of Judaism and the most authoritative part of the Tanakh. Traditionally, it was believed that: 1) The Torah is the word of God as dictated to Moses; and 2) it contains both the history of ancient Israel and the eternally valid laws that bind the Jewish people—the mitzvoth. Though both claims are contested in contemporary denominations of Judaism, Leibowitz is highly critical of such denominations, identifying himself with Orthodox Judaism within which these would usually remain fundamental tenets. Yet his view of Scripture is some distance from the traditional picture.

    While many traditionalists would read the Torah as containing the prehistory of Judaism—if not of the world—and thus as being full of factual statements teaching such information, Leibowitz cannot accept this to be the case. Beginning with a basic epistemological point, Leibowitz's scientific training and vocation led him to take a positivistic approach to knowledge claims. Thus he writes that “our source of information is science. To the extent that we possess any real knowledge it is by way of scientific cognition” (Judaism, 136). But, given God's transcendence, there can be nothing holy about history or nature, or the information it provides. So were the Torah a history book or a scientific tract detailing the science of the universe—and it is of course often read as at least giving an account of the origins of the universe—“it would be difficult to see where [its] sacredness resided” (Judaism, 140). The Torah cannot be a holy book if it is teaching us information that is by (Leibowitz's) definition profane.[7]

    But this means that the prima facie factual assertions that we encounter must be read as nothing of the sort. The Torah is not a work of fact containing truths that we can obtain through standard epistemic procedures. It is rather, a sacred work, a work that is concerned with the realm of the religious. Not for Leibowitz therefore the time-honoured medieval conundrum regarding faith and reason. While for his medieval Jewish forbears reason and revelation were competing for the same territory—raising the question of the relevance of the latter for those enamoured of the former—Leibowitz is happy to give reason its due without worrying about its encroachment into the territory of revelation, and vice versa. The Torah as a sacred work is dealing in the realm of the sacred and is not supposed to be a repository of the propositional truths of history or science. What it provides instead is “the demand made of man to worship God” (Judaism, 136). The Torah is the source of the commandments—the mitzvoth—which are the manner in which Jews are to serve God.

    In one sense, this hermeneutic serves Leibowitz well, allowing him to bypass textual objections to his anti-providential reading of the Torah by claiming that the apparent references to God's role in nature or history are no longer to be understood factually, but rather as expressing something about the nature of our obligation to God. Similarly, stories of individuals are not to be mined for their historical content but for what they teach regarding the nature of religious obligation. At the same time, it demands a far from intuitive reading of much of Scripture, especially the stories of individuals that are certainly presented as if they are in some sense historical, and that in the later books of the Prophets that are also part of Holy Scripture are surely historical in part. Yet Leibowitz insists that in attempting the impossible—speaking of God—the Torah necessarily uses various literary forms amenable to human comprehension, but that nonetheless “from the standpoint of religious faith, the Torah and the entirety of Holy Scripture must be conceived as a demand which transcends the range of human cognition … a demand conveyed in various forms of human expression: prescriptions, vision, poetry, prayer, thought, and narrative” (Judaism, 140).

    This does not rule out in principle the possibility of the narratives happening to contain historical information in part. Scripture's narratives could at times coincide with historical facts, though whether or not this is the case would be subject to independent verification of these purported historical facts by standard epistemic criteria. But even allowing for this possibility, the historical meaning would be merely accidental. Such facts would not take on any sacred meaning in virtue of that facticity, but rather on account of imparting an ahistorical sacred message. The Torah, qua Holy Scripture, cannot be read as a repository of historical fact. To read it “from the standpoint of religious faith,” is to read it for the demands it places upon us.

    Nonetheless, given Leibowitz's views on God's transcendence, it is clear that the sacred and historical interpretations of the text are mutually exclusive when it comes to references to God's “intervention” in history or nature. And Leibowitz's particular hermeneutic allows him to deny that the Torah teaches us anything about God's actual intervention in nature or his directing of history, since apparently factual statements to this end in the Torah are not to be construed as such, but rather in terms of the normative messages that they carry. Here, the priority that Leibowitz gives to his understanding of God's transcendence appears forcefully, constraining him to take this hermeneutic stance. It does, however, raise the question of Leibowitz's understanding of the divine status of the Torah. For, if we cannot speak of it being revealed by God in any historical sense, whence its divinity? Leibowitz, fully aware of the problem, maintains that it is the Oral Torah that establishes the divine status of the Written Torah.

    Traditional Jewish teaching maintained that at the same time as he transmitted the Written Torah, God transmitted an oral teaching to Moses that was not to be written down. This Oral teaching developed into the multi-layered work that was eventually written down as the Talmud by the end of the sixth century and that was the source of the complex practical system of law—halakhah—that governed Jewish life until the nineteenth century and continues to structure the life of contemporary Orthodox Jews. Leibowitz maintains that “religiously and from a logical and causal standpoint the Oral Law, the Halakhah, is prior to the Written Teaching” (Judaism, 12), and thus it is the Oral Torah that grants divine status to the Written Torah:


    “The decision about which books to accept as Scripture was not made behind the veil of mythology or pre-history, but took place in the full light of history and in the course of halakhic negotiation… . Scripture is one of the institutions of the religion of Israel” (Judaism, 12).

    This, Leibowitz admits, yields an inescapably circular account whereby the divinity of the Written Torah is established by the Oral Torah, which only gains its own authority on the basis of the Written Torah that it is being used to support. More significantly Leibowitz emphasizes time and again that the Oral Torah is a human product. Thus we end up with human beings stipulating that the Written Torah is divine, a stipulation, however, that only has authority based upon the Written Torah's own statements to the effect that one must follow the words of the human sages.[8] Reinforcing the circularity, this reading of the relevant verses in the Torah is itself an interpretation of the sages.

    Leibowitz maintains, then, that we can say one thing about God—that he is radically transcendent, a statement the content of which is exhausted in the denial of divinity to any other reality. Allowing for this denial of any positive theology that would relate God to history or nature, we still find one thing to which we can attach divinity, and that is Scripture. However, the most basic question regarding whether or not God revealed the Torah in any historical sense must be answered negatively by Leibowitz, as noted in Statman 2005 (60) and Sagi 1997a (213), leaving him with an account of the divinity of Scripture that is circular, and that ultimately seems unable to escape its reliance on human decision.

    4. Jewish Faith and Jewish Law

    The “top-down” approach to Leibowitz's theology taken so far places extreme limits on what one can say or know about God but does not yield a constructive account of the nature of Jewish faith. His positive formulation therefore proceeds from an altogether different direction. Taking a more “bottom-up” approach methodologically speaking, Leibowitz utilizes a historical argument in defining Jewish faith, arguing that throughout history, at least until the emancipation of European Jewry beginning at the end of the eighteenth century, Judaism was defined through adherence to Jewish practice, to the commandments of the Torah itself, and the subsequent development of these commandments into the all encompassing system of Jewish law, or Halakhah. Any definition of Jewish faith must therefore centre upon Jewish practice, on the mitzvoth that governed the everyday life of Jews until modern times. Moreover, Leibowitz's concept of faith makes no allowances for any theological accretions, be they mystical or philosophical, which would purport to define it. Jewish theology through the ages has always adapted itself to prevailing philosophical or mystical winds, and is seen by Leibowitz as “episodic and fleeting” (Judaism, Cool. Whether the conceptual scaffolding was kabbalah or rationalist philosophy, Judaism “was never dependent upon some specific philosophy, ethic, world view, or theology” (Judaism, 8–9), though it is mysticism and not rationalism which, along with Reform Judaism, he classifies one of “the two great distortions of Jewish faith” (Judaism, 111).

    This historical account also melds with Leibowitz's theological starting point. Given God's transcendence, we know that the realm of natural or historical fact cannot be holy. Faith cannot therefore be “a conclusion a person may come to after pondering certain facts about the world,” and instead is “an evaluative decision that one makes, and, like all evaluations, it does not result from any information one has acquired, but is a commitment to which one binds himself.” (Judaism, 37, emphasis added). Jewish faith, therefore, rather than consisting of propositional beliefs concerning God upon which foundation halakhic observance is based, is instead founded upon the evaluative decision to commit to that very system of observance. For Leibowitz it is the mitzvoth themselves “which demarcate the realm of the sacred … [and] anything outside that realm lacks sanctity and is unworthy of religious adoration” (Judaism, 25).

    This assertion of the primacy of practice is not unique to Leibowitz, having recently been resurrected by scholars such as Menachem Kellner (2006) and Kenneth Seeskin (1990). Steven Schwarzschild memorably termed this “the Jewish twist” (Schwarzschild 1977, 139) that in his view Jewish thinkers had applied since time immemorial to the systems of thought with which they grappled in order to partially assimilate them into a Jewish philosophical context. But Leibowitz gives this idea its most extreme formulation.

    Ordinarily one might assume that the commitment to the practice of the halakhic way of life is an independently specifiable mental act and certain statements that Leibowitz makes in his earlier writings, vestiges of which remain in some less careful later formulations, might appear to suggest this.[9] Yet for Leibowitz, faith is not an independently specifiable psychological state. Indeed he castigates those who “wish to distinguish a specific psychological-conceptual content of the religious consciousness from its concrete institutionalized embodiment” (Judaism, 38). Leibowitz will not allow us to pinpoint a particular psychological state that constitutes this commitment, and correlatively is highly critical of mystical approaches to Judaism that revolve around putative religious experiences. A religion devoted to halakhic practice “does not depend upon the incidence of religious experience” (Judaism, 13), which is a mere “embellishment” to halakhic practice. Indeed, “the aim of proximity to God is unattainable” (Judaism, 16).

    Clearly for Leibowitz, the problem with specifying some psychological basis for this commitment is defining what the content of this mental act would be. To what am I committed? The natural answer is that we are committed to worshipping God. But any attempt to unpack that statement further will lead us to transgress the boundaries of human cognition according to Leibowitz. The proposition “I am committed to God” is not open to further elaboration if God is beyond our categories of language and thought. Belief in God for Leibowitz, which cannot be formulated propositionally, can only then be embodied in a commitment to a particular way of life, which can only be expressed by subordination to the actual practical regime of halakhic practice. Thus, we are thrust back to the mere practice itself as the content of our faith rather than the symptom of some independently specifiable psychological commitment. It turns out then that, “[Jewish] faith is nothing but its system of mitzvoth, which was the embodiment of Judaism” (Judaism, 38, emphasis added). Jewish faith is equivalent to the observance of mitzvoth with no remainder; the concept is exhausted by the performance of Mitzvoth.

    This contraction of faith to a behavioural definition means that halakhic observance itself constitutes a faith which cannot be identified independently of this practice, which Leibowitz concedes might create the appearance of paradox:

    “Halakhah is founded on faith, yet at the same time constitutes this faith. In other words, Judaism as a living religion creates the faith upon which it is founded. This is a logical paradox but not a religious paradox” (Judaism, 11).

    Asa Kasher, a neo-Leibowitzian, has argued that Leibowitz here does not present a paradox at all, but instead a form of the circle discussed in section 2 (A. Kasher 1976). Leibowitz in response concedes that there is no paradox, but stresses that no matter how many times one goes around the circle, the ultimate commitment to the life of mitzvoth must come from beyond the circle, from the conative — rather than cognitive — commitment that is beyond reason (see “Responses,” 277–278). The claim here ultimately for Leibowitz—that the practice of halakhah constitutes faith, while faith is the basis for practice – can be broken down into the following two claims:

    Claim 1: Faith is defined as, or constituted by halakhic practiceClaim 2: Faith, defined as halakhic practice, is the basis of faith in the practice.
    Claim 1 is simply the empirical/theological claim discussed above. In Claim 2, Leibowitz's point appears to be that while one may wish to argue that one's practice is founded on some independently specifiable faith such as the belief that God gave these commandments to the Jewish people, in fact immersion in the halakhic practice precedes any reflective version of such a belief, such that one's commitment is not based on that belief in any meaningful sense. At the point at which we are beings who are able to reflect thoughtfully about our commitment to our practices, we are already implicated in and formed by them.

    As a justificatory argument for engaging in the practice, this might indeed create an impression of circularity—though circular arguments are neither formally invalid, nor paradoxical, but “merely” unpersuasive. Leibowitz, however, emphasizes time and again that he is not attempting to “justify” the commandments. Medieval Jewish thinkers believed that it was possible to “justify” Judaism by appeal to universal standards. Thus, to take Maimonides for example, if truth is the standard, then Judaism is clearly the most rational religion since it is a superior exemplar of, or means to attaining the truth, relative to the other monotheistic alternatives. If one were to begin from a neutral perspective, a rational being insofar as he is rational, could, in principle, be convinced of the superiority of Judaism. But this idea of a neutral starting point from which we can assess all the rational alternatives is one that Leibowitz rejects. The fiction that as fully formed rational beings we cast our eye without prejudice over the various modes of practical existence and decide in favor of the most rational is dismissed by Leibowitz. When it comes to faith, in Leibowitz's words:


    “I know of no ways to faith other than faith itself… . [It] cannot be taught. One can only present it in all its might and power” (Judaism, 37).

    This is where Leibowitz admits the limits of rationalism when it is understood as the metaphysical thesis that the world is intelligible “all the way down.” The world and our commitments within it are not rational all the way down. But once we have certain commitments, as every person does at the time at which he begins to reflect on them, our rational faculties are the only tools for exploring them, though not in the expectation that such reflection can be expected to produce meanings that will convince all rational beings to commit themselves to such a practice. And if we are to ask why commit, we are asking the question too late and assuming the theoretical stance towards faith that Leibowitz contends is questioned by Judaism.

    Thus Leibowitz's contention that faith is based on halakhic practice and at the same time constituted by halakhic practice appears to be more a phenomenology of Jewish faith than a justification for faith, as one might expect from his methodological pronouncements. Much as Aristotle believed that virtuous action precedes the acquisition of the virtues, our commitment to the mitzvoth—or at least the conscious commitment that we make as reflective beings—is similarly preceded by participation in those very halakhic practices.[10] And just as for Aristotle it is only once we have acquired the virtues that those same acts becomes truly virtuous, in the same way halakhic actions only latterly become understood as acts of religious faith, in which one is conscious of a religious commitment to them. From this perspective, one might even argue that the circle becomes a virtuous circle, for the practice that is the basis of faith and yet ultimately constitutes that faith does indeed reinforce that faith—the practical circle is persuasive in a way that the circle of logical justification is not.

    There is a sense in which this renders any commitment to a value system an expression of faith, rather than a result of rational reflection. But what then marks it out as specifically religious? What marks this out as Jewish faith is simply that it is the Jewish form of life, one that derives from specifically Jewish sources and has a specifically Jewish history. But for it to be religious requires that Leibowitz, in contrast to a secular ethicist, at least retain an ontological commitment to there being an entity that we can call God, to whom halakhic practices are directed. At this point therefore, one would wish to maintain that “God is radically transcendent” remains a cognitive statement. The mitzvoth are only “holy” inasmuch as they constitute holiness through being God's commands. It is in this way that this practice can constitute faith.

    Yet as noted previously, Leibowitz cannot construe statements in the Torah regarding the event of revelation at Sinai as historical statements. So the problem remains of how a people could have been commanded and what exactly was “recognized” there if it is not the case that at some point in history the commandments were revealed by God. The problem for Leibowitz's account is that the mitzvoth are indeed enacted by human beings and thus play a role in the natural world. As a result, they must have a history. At the very least we can say that at some point they made their incursion into history. But how? If not through some miraculous revelatory event—a possibility that Leibowitz excludes[11]—then it must have been through some form of human initiative. Thus, in parallel to the attribution of divinity to Scripture, as Sagi notes, “the system is made religiously meaningful by the believers' perception of it as concerned with the worship of God,” while God collapses into a formal requirement of the system, “the supreme concept, uniting the system and endowing it with religious significance.” (Sagi 1997a, 213) Though it is not clear that this would concern Leibowitz, one ought to note that the mere institutional decision to categorize the mitzvoth as holy is not a firm basis for recovering their divinity in any sense that would pacify the religious adherents the nature of whose faith he is attempting to delineate.

    Leibowitz's attempt to exclude God from history thus leaves him apparently unable to account for the divinity of the commandments in a manner that would render their performance acts of commitment to God in the ordinary sense. Indeed, when asked directly whether the statement “I believe in God” is meaningful, Leibowitz's response was: “I do not understand these words if they are divorced from the obligations that derive from them … faith in God is not what I know about God, but what I know about my obligations to God” (Sihot, 97). Talk of divinity should not be understood cognitively but in terms of the normative demands it imposes. Even talk of the revelation at Sinai is to be construed along these lines—“The meaning of the revelation at Sinai is the recognition of the command that we have been commanded” (Emunah, 154). But the truth in this for Leibowitz, phenomenologically speaking, is that the commitment to the practice is not based on an initial belief in God. Talk of God supervenes on the commitment to the practice rather than being a justification for it. Indeed, one generally only sincerely formulates the very idea that one is serving God subsequent to practice. Thus for Leibowitz, while it seems the term must have a referent, we use it without understanding it, and without needing to. In homage to Wittgenstein, Leibowitz writes: “That which cannot be said, is said by the religion of the Torah and the Mitzvoth,” (Yahadut, 343)—or at least by a commitment to them that cannot be given a specification independent of their practice. For Leibowitz, the realization that dawns with the rise of this commitment reveals that God cannot be spoken of as an entity who can be located in history or nature and that gives commandments over to a people in any conventional sense. Indeed, “the purpose of the mitzvoth is to educate man to recognize that knowing God and cleaving to him consist in the practice of these very precepts” (Judaism, 27). Thus, when the question is posed as to whether this leaves us with a robust enough idea to ground religious commitment, Leibowitz would claim that once those within the practice ask these questions, they will already be chasing their own tails. It is only subsequent to being committed to the practice that we reflect, analyse, and even formulate the very idea that we are practicing out of a commitment to God. Leibowitz seems to end up with a “leap of faith” type theology where the leap is taken retrospectively, by which time whatever independent specification one attempts to give of this notion ends up either transgressing boundaries that Leibowitzian transcendence sets on language and thought, or collapsing back into talk of commitment to the practice. The only way one can characterize Jewish faith is through the continued commitment to the practice itself, which thus constitutes that faith.



    Last edited by orthodoxymoron on Wed Apr 03, 2013 6:44 pm; edited 2 times in total
    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7704
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: Archangelic Queens of Heaven and the United States of the Solar System

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Wed Apr 03, 2013 6:16 pm

    What if the God of the Roman Catholic Church is the God of Israel?? The Jewish people were, and are, looking for the coming of the Messiah -- yet they rejected the Historical Jesus -- and Catholicism often seems to be based upon something other than the Teachings of Jesus. Who has REALLY been running Judeo-Christianity for the past 2,000 years?? What if the "Messiah" is the One-True-God who created the Human Race -- but who was subsequently defeated (and captured?) in an Ancient Star War in Heaven?? What if the Messiah is a Prisoner of War -- and Hostage to the Devil -- who might not know who they really are?? What if nearly all religions worship and obey the God(s) who won this hypothetical war?? Would history be trustworthy?? What if the Whole World is in the process of rejecting their One-True-God One-Last-Time?? If the Messiah appeared -- would the People and the Messiah be submissive and obedient to the historical and contemporary God of This World?? How might Gabriel, Michael, Lucifer -- Isis, Horus, and Set -- fit into this theological picture?? I continue to think that all of you should study theology -- even if you don't believe in God. But don't expect this study to make you happy. If you wish to be happy -- go to a Happy-Clappy Church -- or Smoke Medical Marijuana. Yeshayahu Leibowitz continued. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/leibowitz-yeshayahu/

    5. Worship Lishmah and the Meaning of Mitzvoth

    Leibowitz cannot make sense of the divinity of the mitzvoth by claiming that God is their source in any straightforward sense. But he would not be the first Jewish philosopher to understand the divinity of the commandments as a function of their content rather than their historical source—according to many scholars, Maimonides also based his understanding of the divinity of the commandments on their being means to human perfection rather than on any direct historical experience of God.[12] Having reduced all meaningful discourse about God and faith to halakhic practice, one might thus look to the meaning of the practice for some such mark of divinity, and indeed Leibowitz has much to say about the nature of the mitzvoth, particularly as they relate to human values, and based on a basic Talmudic distinction between two forms of religious worship—worship that is “lishmah,” or “for its own sake,” and worship that is “Not-lishmah,” or “not for its own sake.”

    Worship that is “Not-lishmah” Leibowitz characterizes in teleological terms. It begins with a set of human values and beliefs, and understands religion as the instrument for the realization of these values. Thus religious acts will be derived from this set of values, being those that best express them. These values, therefore, are prior to the religious act, much in the way utilitarian ethical theory prioritizes a definition of the good and defines right action in terms of what maximizes that good. Religious action then is at base motivated by human needs and the problem with such worship for Leibowitz is that it renders God the servant of man. It is what he terms “an endowing religion—a means of satisfying man's spiritual needs and of assuaging his mental conflicts. Its end is man, and God offers his services to man.” (Judaism, 14).

    Reflecting an ambivalence that runs through statements in the Jewish tradition regarding such worship, Leibowitz vacillates between recognizing worship “Not-lishmah” as a genuine if flawed form of worship and as not seeing it as worship at all—indeed, seeing it as idolatrous in its reduction of worship of God to worship of man, thus implying that man is holy.[13] Philosophically speaking, his negative attitude can again be traced back to his strictly scientific approach to the world and his views concerning God's transcendence. Regarding the former, Leibowitz dismisses the idea that human beings exist at some supra-natural level. As creatures of flesh and blood, we are governed by the same natural laws as the rest of nature. Human beings have no special endowment that transcends their physical nature. Given that this is the case, human needs cannot be sacred, and thus the service of human need cannot be the purpose of the mitzvoth. Coming from the opposite direction, given that God is transcendent and cannot be related to any form of concrete reality, including human reality, how could the service of our own needs, which are a function of our humanity, constitute worship of God? God must be the exclusive locus of religious value, to the exclusion of human values. Man, in comparison, is but human, and a part of nature. Thus, while Medieval Jewish philosophers usually take the statement at Genesis 1:27 that man was created “in the image of God” as placing man on a pedestal by somehow comparing him to God, Leibowitz takes the term “image” in its more prosaic, if not pejorative Platonic sense (Judaism, 90).

    In marked contrast to all of this, Leibowitz presents the idea of worship “lishmah,” which is the mark of a demanding religion. Here, the religious act is prior to any set of human needs or values. It is characterized by acts of worship demanded by God, where the demands made, and the motivations for serving, are simply that—they are Gods' demands. Here man is “an instrument for the realization of an end which transcends man … [who] serves his God lishmah—because He is worthy of worship” (Judaism, 14). Essentially, Judaism is a religion that demands the service of God, not man. Mitzvoth, for Leibowitz, are not therefore based on human needs and desires since that would subordinate God's values to human values, rendering God a slave to humanity, and placing humanity at the pinnacle of all value. Most mitzvoth for Leibowitz must therefore “be meaningless except as expressions of worship. They have no utility in terms of satisfaction of human needs” (Judaism, 16). Thus he sees much of halakhah as constitutive of religious “reality” rather than as regulating pre-existing profane reality. The dietary laws, to take an obvious example, are not there to regulate some form of pre-existing “spiritual” reality. Reality is equivalent to physical reality and the dietary laws are nothing more (nor less) than requirements of worship constituting a halakhic “reality,” which is a reality that has no referent beyond itself.

    This sui generis understanding of halakhah is important if we are to understand Leibowitz's retreat from facts to values in the realm of faith. We have seen that to speak of any factual reality as divine impugns God's transcendence for Leibowitz. But one might ask why speaking of God as a source of values within our world is any less of an intrusion upon his transcendence. Leibowitz's point is that God is not a source of values within our world, since halakhah is not a function of any human values, indeed not a function of any set of values to which we have any independent access. In this way Leibowitz retains the transcendence of God in the evaluative realm of faith commitments in a way that is not possible in the realm of facts. And if we wish then to base the divinity of the mitzvoth on their content as opposed to any historical event of revelation, the content of the mitzvoth that marks them out as divine is their very “contentless-ness.”

    5.1 Ethics and Religion

    Leibowitz's view of mitzvoth clearly has important implications for the relationship between ethics and religion in general and more specifically for the relationship between ethics and halakhah. Religious values cannot be subordinated to ethical values which, since dictated by human interests for Leibowitz, are profane by definition, and therefore he draws a sharp distinction between mitzvoth and the realm of the ethical:

    “The Torah does not recognize moral imperatives stemming from knowledge of natural reality or from awareness of man's duty to his fellow man. All it recognizes are Mitzvot, divine imperatives” (Judaism, 18).

    Leibowitz does not deny that there is a genuine realm of ethical value, writing that both the theocentric (religious) and anthropocentric (Kantian) conceptions of value are “legitimate” (Judaism, 208). But he sees ethical values as distinct from the realm of religious value and stresses the importance of not confusing the one with the other. Much like Kierkegaard, Leibowitz argues that religious values are ultimate and if one is to serve God, all other values, including ethical values, must be subordinated to serving God, as exemplified by the biblical story of Abraham's (non) sacrifice of Isaac.[14] Ethics, as he notes, is the “atheistic category par excellence” (Judaism, 18), placing man at the apex of our values in place of God.

    Much has been made of the formal similarities between Leibowitz's approach to mitzvoth and Kantian ethics, given the categorical nature of both the ethical and halakhic imperative, neither of which can be instrumental means to ends beyond the respective duties themselves. Both stress “worship lishmah”—it is just that Kantian ethics “worships” man “lishmah,” or as an end in himself, while religion worships God. Moreover, as with Kantian moral imperatives, the upshot of acting on religious imperatives for Leibowitz is autonomy. But while ethical action is autonomous for Kant inasmuch as it is a deliverance of our own practical reason, that very fact means that for Leibowitz ethical action is not an expression of human autonomy, but of our enslavement to our own nature. Recalling that for Leibowitz man is simply a part of nature like any other, when acting in accordance with that nature, man is “in effect, nothing but a robot activated by the forces of nature, just like the cattle grazing in the pasture, which are also ‘free from the Torah and Mitzvoth’; that is, from any law externally imposed” (Judaism, 21).

    Though perhaps his rhetoric gets the better of him in comparing man acting on his own nature to an animal acting on its own nature, Leibowitz's central incompatibilist point is that freedom cannot be a function of acting according to one's own nature if man's nature “is only the last link in a causal chain of the forces of inorganic and organic nature which act upon him and within him” (ibid.). If this is the case, then the ethical dictates of human reason no more render man autonomous than do the ‘acts’ of his digestive system. Man is only “free from the bondage of nature because he lives a life that is contrary to nature,” and thus “emancipation from the bondage of nature can only be brought about by the religion of the Mitzvoth” (Judaism, 22).

    Yet this apparently clear contrast with Kant actually betrays a deeper similarity. Kant sees ethical action as the route to autonomy precisely because it is through practical reason that we transcend our own nature and make contact with the noumenal realm. In effect therefore, and despite Kant's wish to keep religion and ethics apart from a motivational perspective, Kant and Leibowitz are in agreement that human autonomy requires that man transcend his phenomenal nature. The difference is that while for Kant ethics is, in a certain sense, transcendent—at least transcending man's empirical if not his rational nature—for Leibowitz ethics is nonetheless a function of human nature and therefore mired in the “phenomenal” realm destined never to escape. Leibowitz's view of autonomy appears to depend again on his thoroughgoing “naturalism” in regard to the physical and human world. Only the realm of mitzvoth can effect the sort of limited Leibowitzian transcendence that yields autonomy, which through its foundation in a primordial heteronomy—the imposition of mitzvoth by God—yields one of the fertile areas of comparison to Levinas in Fagenblat 2004, though as Fagenblat notes, for Levinas the realm of the ethical itself is a realm of transcendence beyond discursive human rationality. Unlike Leibowitz and closer again to Kant, for Levinas we need not go as far as mitzvoth to find the realm of transcendence.

    Despite all of this, it is not clear that mitzvoth could not carry some sort of ethical valence. Much as Kant does for moral value, Leibowitz locates the religious value of our acts in our intentions. Holiness, he tells us, “is nothing but halakhic observance; the specific intentional acts dedicated to the service of God” (Judaism, 24, emphasis added). Presumably then the mitzvoth could be performed for the sake of worshipping God and yet have incidental benefit to us. As long as the motivation is the worship of God, any incidental benefits would surely be legitimate, or at least not rule out the act as religiously worthy. What matters here is the hierarchy of values—observance of mitzvoth cannot be subordinated to ethical values. Yet Leibowitz's intentionalism dictates that such acts, even if they incidentally satisfy certain human needs, would still not be ethical acts given their religious motivation.

    At this point, Leibowitz's description of the religious and halakhic realms, even if disputable, appears to be consistent. Judaism is for him a deontological system of divine duties, rather than a teleological system designed to promote any form of human “good.” From a human perspective, the mitzvoth might indeed be meaningless; if they do end up promoting some form of human good, this would be accidental and not part of the essential nature of mitzvoth. But while this conception of mitzvoth works well for most ritual commandments, it comes under pressure in relation to what would ordinarily be termed ethical mitzvoth—were it not for the fact that this is now an oxymoron for Leibowitz—such that even “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” is to be regarded as a mitzvah, not as an ethical precept. The key phrase in the verse containing this commandment for Leibowitz is that which follows immediately to end the verse: “I am God.” It is a duty towards one's neighbor that is based on man's position before God, not his position before his fellow man.

    One of Leibowitz's concerns seems to be that for the imperatives to be truly categorical, they must draw their authority from something other than human needs and values, which are too weak a foundation to ground categorical imperatives. One can always excuse oneself with the claim that other people's needs are not overriding in any given situation. There is no escape, however, from the authority of a divine demand, thus locating ethical imperatives within a religious system gives them the necessary foundation. Their position as commandments transform them from “mere good counsel, a noble aspiration, or a sublime ideal,” and instead gives them “the reality of law, something one is compelled to take seriously as one must take a police ordinance seriously” (Judaism, 19). But more than that, for Leibowitz this deprives them of their ethical character. Acting for noble ideals, while legitimate, would still render acts ethical, not religious. Thus an important distinction remains, and it is not clear that it is a distinction that can do justice to the ethical prescriptions of the Torah qua ethical prescriptions. Ought I to act justly towards my neighbor out of my concern for him, or out of concern for God? While it seems clear that Leibowitz could only see the latter as a religious act, it is not clear that this sits comfortably with our ethical intuitions—though presumably Leibowitz would simply retort that this is precisely what it means to subordinate human interest to the ultimate value that is the worship of God. While a Levinasian squaring of the circle would allow that our ethical concern for the other is itself a mark of transcendence, for Leibowitz, a religious act, even if it may serve one's fellow man incidentally, can neither be motivated by such a goal, nor allow such goals to play a role in our understanding of it as a mitzvah, since this would render God the slave of human interests.

    Nonetheless, Leibowitz recognizes that beyond the realm of halakhah “flourish many good deeds and events of grandeur and sublimity” (Judaism, 25). Generally for Leibowitz, halakhah is not all-encompassing and does not govern all behavior, as he makes explicit in his interviews with Michael Shashar where he asks rhetorically whether Judaism has a perspective on the decision whether to build a bridge over a particular river (Sihot, 91). For Leibowitz then, there are clearly other aspects of human life that are necessary, indeed valuable, and that need not be dedicated to the worship of God. Religion must be the highest value for Leibowitz to which all others are subordinated in times of conflict; it need not be the only value. But in acting for the sake of one's fellow man, one must recognize that this is the performance of a noble ethical act, not a holy religious act. The question that arises, however, is whether in the case of ethically motivated acts that coincide with mitzvoth, a Jew ought to have instead performed the act for religious reasons—a position that would not leave much room for a religious person to perform an ethical action. Indeed, it would seem that if one wishes to perform the mitzvah of, for example, “loving one's neighbor,” one ought not to be acting based on ethical motives. As such, it is not clear what becomes of the legitimacy of the ethical realm for a religious Jew, since every ethically motivated act constitutes a missed opportunity for the worship of God. Each act ought to be religiously rather than ethically motivated, even when the mere act itself would be the same. While it is not as if one who is ethically motivated can sincerely transform that ethical motivation into a religious one, it seems as if becoming the type of person who naturally acts religiously in such cases would have to be the ultimate aim for Leibowitz. This would not deny all value to ethically motivated acts, but it certainly seems to render those that coincide with specific mitzvoth problematic for Jews.

    5.2 Meta-Halakhah and the Status of Women

    Leibowitz's account of halakhah is not uni-dimensional. His claim that most of the mitzvoth are meaningless according to human conceptions of value leaves an important gap that he exploits elsewhere in his writings, particularly in a short late piece on the status of women in Judaism, where he distinguishes between two types of mitzvoth in a manner that renders the picture considerably more complex.

    Thus on the one hand, we have the ritual commandments required of men and not required of women. These mitzvoth are indeed “meaningless,” having no intrinsic value beyond their status as mitzvoth that God requires in his service by men and not women. They do not reflect any exalted status for men or yield access to some sort of religious experience beyond the mere burden of performance. Given this, the desire of women to take on such practices in the name of equality reflects a fundamental misunderstanding—or at least a non-Leibowitzian understanding—of the nature of these commandments. And yet, when it comes to the highest level study of Torah and access to public office, both of which had traditionally been halakhically forbidden to women, Leibowitz takes a very different view. Barring women access to the study of Torah “is not to exempt them from a duty … but is to deprive them of a basic Jewish right … [that] renders their Jewishness inferior to that of men” (Judaism, 129). The original restriction, as well as that regarding attaining public office, reflected the prevailing socio-cultural norms of the surrounding society rather than any essential halakhic determinations. Thus Leibowitz wishes to distinguish between


    “absolute demands reflecting acceptance of the ‘yoke of the kingdom of heaven’ that are not amenable to adjustment to natural or social factors, [and] practices which reflect given circumstances and the views shaped by them; in other words, between unconditional prescriptions and proscriptions and norms reflecting a given sociocultural milieu and its prejudices” (Judaism, 131).

    We find, therefore, a realm of mitzvoth that do appear to be subservient to human values and societal change. That Leibowitz believes in such a category, independently of the highly charged gender question, is clear from the following:


    “Consider the proscription of ploughing with an ox and an ass yoked together. Does this imply a duty to base agriculture on animal power and to create the opportunity for fulfilling the prohibition? Reversing the terms, is mechanized agriculture, which obviates the use of animals as a source of energy forbidden because it removes all opportunity for observing this mitzvah? Or is it permissible to assume a hypothetical imperative: in the event that animals are used, avoid ploughing with an ox and an ass yoked together?” (Judaism, 149).

    The Torah clearly contains laws or commandments that react to political and social institutions already in place—hence laws concerning slavery for example. Thus it turns out that there are two categories of mitzvoth for Leibowitz: type1 acts without intrinsic meaning that are constitutive of a halakhic reality and not amenable to change; and type2 acts where the halakhic community has responsibility for regulating a pre-existing reality. These halakhic acts can change depending on the general sociocultural norms governing that particular aspect of reality, be it agriculture, or gender equality. Indeed, Leibowitz often notes explicitly that Judaism is not to be identified with the specific laws with which it began, but with the “recognition of a system of precepts as binding, even if their specifics were often only determined with time” (Judaism, 4)

    What is one to make of this concession? While there might be strong arguments for drawing such a distinction on both textual and common sense grounds, the question is whether Leibowitz can consistently allow such external concerns to intrude upon religion without usurping it. The meta-halakhic issue, as Leibowitz terms it, regarding the status of women in the Jewish community, drives specific halakhic changes. And ultimately what appears to be driving these changes is an ethical assumption regarding unjustified gender inequalities. But if one is allowing religious norms to be subordinated to human values, then by Leibowitz's standards one is serving man rather than God—if the motivation here is ethical or more broadly social, then surely by his intentional definition of mitzvoth, they cease to be religious acts.

    In the particular case of gender equality, however, there are broader concerns that come into play—the survival of Judaism. While this is not explicit in everything that Leibowitz writes, he makes precisely this claim regarding the gender issue in an interview with Michael Shashar—“the future of Judaism depends on it” (Sihot, 110). One might argue therefore that our being responsive to the ethical concerns presented in these cases has religious significance since it is subsumed under the overriding religious concern to maintain the existence of Judaism. Thus these acts would retain their religious significance given the more general religious motivation for the changes. It is very difficult, however, to escape the feeling that Leibowitz is driven here by his ethical impulses, and more significantly it is clear that all manner of halakhic decisions are motivated by explicit consideration of ethical principles such as “the ways of pleasantness” or “doing the right and the good.” Unless he is going to allow ethical motivation for certain mitzvoth and problematize his system then, it appears as if these areas of decision and action cannot be deemed religious in the strict sense. Leibowitz certainly recognizes that halakhic decisions are “grounded either in the Halakhah itself or in the conditions necessary for halakhic observance” (Judaism, 4), and thus it may be that these ethical halakhic decisions are “enablers” rather than direct loci of religious worship. By contracting the religious sphere in this way, Leibowitz could maintain some indirect religious value for the ethically motivated acts of a religious Jew. But the contraction that such a move necessitates would relegate enormous tracts of the Talmud to this lesser status, which seems problematic. The possible counter that all of those decisions were taken by the sages with the general motivation of “serving God,” would make it difficult to retain any form of distinction between religion and ethics of the form that Leibowitz clearly wishes to maintain. Of course many of these problems (including those discussed at the end of section 5.1) hang on the thread of Leibowitz's concept of intention—one that assumes that intentions can be clearly and exclusively identified as “ethical” or “religious.” Melzer (1976, 261), however, has argued that Leibowitz's concept of intention is impoverished.

    Setting aside the problems just identified, Leibowitz's distinction remains problematic in the context of his overall system. He explicitly categorizes the realm of synagogue ritual to type1 acts. Yet in much of contemporary orthodoxy, this is one of the most fought over issues, and one in which the inequalities for women are understood by some as tantamount to the denial of “a basic Jewish right … [that] renders their Jewishness inferior to that of men.” Should women feel so marginalized by this particular inequality that it threatens the future of Judaism, leading to sanctioning the participation of women in certain rituals, Leibowitz's type1 mitzvoth would have to be recategorized as type2 mitzvoth and we would have to conclude that the categories are fluid and that commandments can move between categories. But then the question of how we categorize the commandments seems to become dependent on human perception and values, which would be problematic for Leibowitz.

    Ultimately then, Leibowitz struggles to maintain God's radical transcendence in its most pristine form. Neither history, nor nature, including human nature, are sources of religious value. God's prescriptions alone are holy and Jewish worship, indeed Jewish faith, is simply the commitment to this behavioral regime. But while he begins with a tidy definition of religious acts as absolute commands performed with the intention of serving God, as acts that cannot be motivated by human concerns or interests, the fact that life involves other given civil and social settings requires that we deal with such interests. This yields type2 acts, with resulting questions regarding whether or not certain mitzvoth can be unequivocally placed into one or other of the categories, and whether indeed there can be movement between the categories without Leibowitz's theocentrism folding into a form of anthropocentrism. The distinction necessary to prevent this amongst halakhic decisors—that between the intention of “realizing the Torah” and the intention to “adapt Halakhah to a variety of human needs” (Judaism, 4)—is not always easy to discern, and, one imagines, could very easily fall victim to self-deception.

    6. Religion, State, and Israel

    Leibowitz was an unabashed Zionist. However, Zionism for Leibowitz was defined simply as “the endeavor to liberate Jews from being ruled by the Gentiles” (Judaism, 214), an endeavor that the state of Israel “completely satisfies.” Thus, despite being a religious Jew, Leibowitz's Zionism is avowedly secular, and his secular version of Zionism flows directly from the central tenets of his philosophy. Firstly, it is dictated by his intentional approach to religious action—the motivation for setting up the state was political and nationalistic rather than religious. Indeed, Zionism was initially a secular Jewish revolution, a political movement with nationalist aspirations. Secondly, it is directly implied by his view that the service of human needs and interests cannot be equated with the service of God. For Leibowitz, the state serves a perfectly noble political purpose, serving human needs. But again this should not be confused with its having religious value in itself:


    “Counterfeit religion identifies national interests with the service of God and imputes to the state—which is only an instrument serving human needs—supreme value from a religious standpoint” (Judaism, 226–227).

    Thus, it would seem as if religion and state cannot possibly be linked, and this indeed was a position that Leibowitz would take. Here though, it seems as if Leibowitz's thought, or at least his attitude towards what constitutes meaningful discourse, underwent significant development.

    In his earlier writings, Leibowitz challenged the religious rabbinic establishment to take the courageous steps necessary to provide a vision for a “halakhic state,” a state that could run according to Jewish law; that could accommodate, for example, the needs of a country to have a fully working police force and electrical system on the Sabbath without being parasitic on Jews who do not observe the laws forbidding such action on the Sabbath. Thus “a specific and detailed halakhic code for administering the full panoply of state functions is called for … [to give] a clear picture of how the religious parties would run the state if and when they came to power” (Judaism, 170–171).

    This would have necessitated a halakhic revolution, utilizing innovative and creative techniques of Jewish legal interpretation and application. But instead, in Leibowitz's eyes the religious parties prostituted themselves to the state to protect their own brand of religious sectarianism, subordinating religion to the machinery of the secular government. Just seven years later in recognition of this reality, Leibowitz changed his tune, presenting a call for the separation of religion and state as the only program “that would be in the religious interest in the existing situation” (Judaism, 175). Still, at this point, though reality has bitten, there is no statement that in principle religion and state must remain separate. A decade later, however, Leibowitz comes close to espousing such a view, stating that “no state whatsoever, in the past, present, or any foreseeable future, in any society, in any era, in any culture, including the Jewish culture, ever was or will ever be anything but a secular institution” (Judaism, 215–216).

    On the one hand, this should come as no surprise given that politics is concerned with human institutions that serve human needs, and Leibowitz cannot allow for acts of religious worship that are directed towards human needs. Yet, on the other hand, in noting that the state “sets the ground for the struggle for religion, which is by its very nature an eternal struggle that will never end in victory” (Judaism, 215–216), he does appear to open up the possibility of political action having religious import. Indeed, he goes on to say that the reason that Israel has no religious significance is precisely “because no such struggle is being conducted in it” (ibid.), which appears to imply the possibility of a state having such significance were it to provide for such a struggle. As mentioned earlier, Leibowitz speaks of “conditions necessary for halakhic observance” (Judaism, 4), essential conditions for individuals to worship God that would include human social and political organization. Judaism does not present any specific form of political organization as the right one, since political acts are not themselves halakhic acts. It is merely the scaffolding without which individuals would not have the capacity to engage in their individual “religious struggles,” which presumably yields this lesser category of “religious significance” to the political state that enables it. Given his intentionalism though, mere political organization can have no religious significance in itself; it can only have such significance if the political action is driven by the intention that the state be an enabling condition for religious worship. But clearly this is not the case for the current Israeli government, and the religious authorities have no jurisdiction over such political matters.

    It seems that later in his career, Leibowitz's positivistic leanings prevent him from being willing to engage in what is ultimately utopian speculation concerning a halakhic vision for the state. The earlier program is a mere pipedream when the state is catering for a nation that has no interest in Jewish observance. Were the entire population unanimously in favor of such observance, Leibowitz might once again take up the cause. But Leibowitz is unwilling to engage in such idealistic guesswork, which he dismisses as meaningless, claiming fundamentally not to understand how one is to relate seriously to such ideals (Sihot, 92). The possibility that a state might have religious significance “in principle” is not a discussion that can have any political purchase. Political action cannot be religious action in the contemporary world. In reality then—and present reality is the only reality he is willing to recognize by this point—Leibowitz wishes to keep political questions separate from religion, which in the contemporary state contracts itself to the private sphere.

    None of this is to say that religion cannot be relevant to the state in any way, even today. Though he does not wish to speak of how religion can serve the state, since this inverts the correct hierarchical relationship between the two, religion can nonetheless have a “function” within the state for Leibowitz as a “critical friend” that can “check the influence of political values and … restrain the patriotism and nationalistic enthusiasm” (Judaism, 209–210). Thus “if religion has a function, it is to place man's limited values in a true perspective” (Judaism, 210–211). Indeed, the mistaken religious significance that people do impute either to the land or to the state is nothing short of scandalous for Leibowitz, both religiously and morally.

    Religiously speaking, a physical land simply cannot be holy for Leibowitz: “The idea that a specific country or location has an intrinsic ”holiness“ is an indubitably idolatrous idea.” (Judaism, 226–227). Thus, claims that a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian problem cannot be countenanced because the land is holy to Jews are absurd in Leibowitz's eyes. Moreover, given his hermeneutic of Scripture, attempts to base the Jewish “right” to the land on the basis of historical claims in the Torah are just as baseless. Indeed, without quite using the term “nonsense on stilts” Leibowitz nonetheless evinces a Benthamite scepticism to the notion that any nation has a legal right to a land—“talk of rights is pure nonsense. No nation has a right to any land” (Judaism, 241). Rights to land for Leibowitz are a matter of historical consciousness. And the problem for Israel and the Palestinians is that both tell a story that stakes a claim on this basis such that “in consequence of centuries of history, members of each feel passionately that this is their land” (Judaism, 241).

    Moreover, imputing religious significance to the state (as opposed to the land) is no less a form of “idolatry.” It yields violence and injustice in the name of religion that is in truth the sheer willingness to commit moral atrocities in the name of the state, hiding behind an illusory cloak of religious piety.

    Leibowitz's moral critique of the actions of the state and the Israeli army, which rose to a new pitch subsequent to the Lebanon War of 1982, gives a clear indication of the significance of morality qua morality for Leibowitz in a manner that is entirely consistent with the view discussed earlier that morality must be subordinated to religion and not vice versa. It is precisely because people mistakenly impute religious value to objects or institutions that they commit moral atrocities in the name of religion for Leibowitz. And it is precisely the understanding of the state as a secular institution that for Leibowitz would prevent such actions, since we will then judge these actions correctly—i.e., morally, not religiously. And by ethical standards, Leibowitz clearly believes that they cannot be justified. Yet again, it is the ascription of holiness to profane things, to the natural world and our human needs and interests within it, that is at the root of all that he decries in religion and that has dire political and moral consequences in the contemporary political sphere. While one might disagree with his political assessment on political grounds, he would argue that it is only on such grounds that one can disagree, and that is a dispute for a political forum.

    Bibliography

    Primary Literature

    Cited Works of Leibowitz
    Torah u-Mitzvot ba-Zeman ha-Zeh [Torah and Commandments in Our Time], Tel Aviv: Schocken, 1954. Cited as Torah u-Mitzvot.
    Yahadut, Am Yehudi u-Medinat Yisrael [Judaism, the Jewish People, and the State of Israel], Tel Aviv: Schocken, 1975. Cited as Yahadut.
    Emunah, Historiah, ve-Arakhim [Faith, History, and Values], Jerusalem: Academon, 1982. Cited as Emunah.
    Judaism, Human Values, and the Jewish State, Eliezer Goldman (ed.), Eliezer Goldman, Yoram Navon, Zvi Jacobson, Gershon Levi, and Raphael Levy (trans.), Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995. Cited as Judaism. [This is a selection of articles from the above Hebrew collections, translated into English.]
    Yeshayahu Leibowitz al Olam u-Melo'o, Sihot im Michael Shashar [Yeshayahu Leibowitz On Just About Everything: Talks with Michael Shashar], Jerusalem: Keter Publishing House, 1988. Cited as Sihot
    Accepting the Yoke of Heaven: Commentary on the Weekly Torah Portion, Shmuel Himelstein (trans.), New York: Urim Publications, 2002. Cited as Accepting the Yoke. [This is a translation of radio broadcasts originally published as He'arot le-Parshiyot ha-Shavua (Notes to the Weekly Torah Reading), Jerusalem: Academon, 1988.]
    “Responses,” [Hebrew], Iyyun 26 (1976), 265–81. [Leibowitz's responses to a set of articles about his thought published in this issue of the journal Iyyun.] Cited as “Responses”

    Further Selected Publications of Leibowitz

    Study-Group Discussions
    Sihot al Pirke Avot ve-al ha-Rambam [Discourses on the Ethics of the Fathers and on Maimonides], Jerusalem: Schocken, 1979.
    Sihot al Shemoneh Perakim la-Rambam [Conversations on Maimonides' Eight Chapters], Jerusalem: Keter, 1986.
    Sihot al Mesilat Yesharim la-Ramchal [Conversations on The Paths of the Righteous of Rabbi Moses Hayyim Luzzato], Jerusalem: Greta Leibowitz, 1995.
    Sihot al Torat ha-Nevu'ah shel ha-Rambam [Conversations on Prophecy in Maimonides], Jerusalem: Greta Leibowitz, 1997.
    Sihot al Mivchar Pirkei ha-Hashgachah mitokh “Moreh Nevukhim” shel ha-Rambam [Conversations on Providence in Maimonides' Guide of the Perplexed], Jerusalem: Mira Ofran, 2003.
    Sihot al Pirkei ta'amei ha-Mitzvot mitokh “Moreh Nevukhim” shel ha-Rambam [Conversations on the Reasons for the Commandments in Maimonides' Guide of the Perplexed], Jerusalem: Mira Ofran, 2003.

    Published Broadcasts, Interviews, and Correspondence
    Guf va-Nefesh: Habe'ayah ha-Psikho-Physit [Body and Mind: The Psycho-Physical Problem], Tel Aviv: Misrad ha-Bitahon Publications, 1984.
    Emunato shel ha-Rambam [The Faith of Maimonides], Tel Aviv: Misrad ha-Bitahon Publications, 1985. Translated as The Faith of Maimonides, John Glucker (trans.), New York: Adama Books, 1989.
    Hamisha Sifrei Emunah [Five Books of Faith], Mira Ofran (ed.), Jerusalem: Keter, 1995.
    Sihot al Hagei Yisrael u-Moadav, [Discourses on the Jewish Holidays], Jerusalem: Greta Lebowitz, 1999.
    Sheva Shanim shel Sihot al Parashat ha-Shavua [Seven Years of Discourses on the Weekly Torah Reading], Jerusalem: Greta Leibowitz, 2000.
    Mah She-lema'lah u-mah she-lemattah: Dialogim im Toni Lavi [What is Above and What is Below: Dialogues with Toni Lavi], Or Yehuda: Maariv Book Guild, 1997.
    Ratziti lish'ol otcha, Professor Leibowitz: Michtavim el Yeshayahu Leibowitz u-mimenu [I Wanted to Ask You Professor Leibowitz: Letters To and From Yeshayahu Leibowitz], Jerusalem: Keter, 1999.

    Selected Secondary Literature and Works Cited
    Berlin, Isaiah, 1983. “The Conscience of Israel” [Hebrew], Ha'aretz, 4 March: 18.
    Fagenblat, Michael, 2004. “Lacking All Interest: Levinas, Leibowitz, and the Pure Practice of Religion”, Harvard Theological Review, 97: 1–32.
    Hartman, David, 1990. Conflicting Visions, New York: Schocken Books.
    Kasher, Asa, 1976. “Paradox—Question Mark” [Hebrew], Iyyun, 26: 236–41.
    Kasher, Asa and Levinger, Jacob (eds.), 1977. The Yeshayahu Leibowitz Book [Hebrew], Tel Aviv: Agudat ha-Studentim.
    Kasher, Hannah, 2000. “On Yeshayahu Leibowitz's Use of Religious Terminology”, The Journal of Jewish Thought and Philosophy, 10: 27–55.
    Kasher, Naomi, 1976. “Kant's Ethics and Leibowitz's View of Religion” [Hebrew], Iyyun, 26: 242–55.
    Kellner, Menachem, 2006. Must A Jew Believe Anything, 2nd edition, Oxford: Littman Library of Jewish Civilization.
    Maimonides, Moses. Guide of the Perplexed, trans. S. Pines. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1963.
    Marantz, Haim, 1997. “Bearing witness: morality and religion in the thought of Yeshayahu Leibowitz”, Judaism, 46: 35–45.
    Melzer, Yehuda, 1976. “Ethics and Halakha Once Again” [Hebrew], Iyyun, 26: 256–64.
    Nadler, Steven, 2006. Spinoza's Ethics: An Introduction, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Newton, Adam Zachary, 2000. The Fence and the Neighbour, Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
    Ravitzky, Avi (ed.), 2007. Yeshayahu Leibowitz: Between Conservatism and Radicalism, Jerusalem, Hakibbutz Hameuchad Publishing House.
    Sagi, Avi, 1992. “Rabbi Soloveitchik and Professor Leibowitz as Theoreticians of the Halakhah”, Da'at, 19: 131–48.
    –––, (ed.), 1995. Yeshayahu Leibowitz: His World and Philosophy [Hebrew]. Jerusalem: Keter.
    –––, 1997. “Contending with Modernity: Scripture in the Thought of Yeshayahu Leibowitz and Joseph Soloveitchik”, The Journal of Religion, 77: 421–441.
    –––, 1997a. “Yeshayahu Leibowitz—A Breakthrough in Jewish Philosophy: Religion Without Metaphysics”, Religious Studies, 33: 203–216.
    –––, 2009. Jewish Religion After Theology, Boston: Academic Studies Press.
    Schwarzschild, Steven, 1977. “Moral Radicalism and ‘Middlingness’ in the Ethics of Maimonides,” in The Pursuit of the Ideal: Jewish Writings of Steven Schwarzschild, Menachem Kellner (ed.), Albany: SUNY Press, 1990, 137–160.
    Seeskin, Kenneth, 1990. Jewish Philosophy in a Secular Age, Albany NY: SUNY Press.
    Statman, Daniel, 2005. “Negative Theology and the Meaning of the Commandments in Modern Orthodoxy”, Tradition, 39/1: 55–68.


    "What Shall We Talk About??"
    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7704
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: Archangelic Queens of Heaven and the United States of the Solar System

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Thu Apr 04, 2013 2:27 pm

    There seems to be someone at work in this world -- who is quite strange and mean -- yet who doesn't cover their tracks very well. Why couldn't an advanced civilization rule, punish, and exploit this solar system in complete secrecy?? Why couldn't a 9/11 event be planned and executed which would have absolutely no loose-ends (in contrast to all of the inconsistencies with the official story seen in 9/11)?? Whoever these people or aliens are -- they don't seem to be as concerned about secrecy as I would probably be if I were in their shoes. I sometimes wonder if someone had a grand plan for humanity which got hijacked by a Brutal Gang of Dracs (or something like that)?! I remember a preacher (Morris Venden -- who died recently) saying that Lucifer (or the Devil -- I don't remember which name he used) seemed to be out of control -- rather than being cold, calculating, and precise (or something to that effect). I had a chemistry professor who pointed out something similar to this regarding the history of the Roman Catholic Church.

    Morris Venden also told a story called "Building Under Construction" which was a parable describing the building of a church -- where the builders argued and fought over how to build the church -- while they prepared for the coming of the enemy (Antichrist, Satan, et al) -- but what no one seemed to realize was that the Enemy Had Already Come. I keep wondering if Gabriel is the Queen of Nibiru -- and if Lucifer is the God of This World?! I keep wondering if Lucifer has been out of control for a very long time -- but that things have been getting progressively worse?! Finally, I keep wondering if Nibiru and Gabriel are back -- to clean-up the mess created by Lucifer -- and to crack-down on a Humanity which seems to be waking-up and escaping their enslavement?! I get the feeling that Gabriel might be nastier toward humanity than Lucifer. I continue to get the feeling that Michael got dethroned, defanged, and declawed in antiquity -- and has been a hostage, front-man, and who knows what else -- for a very long time??!! This is just more contrarian speculation to try to understand why a Wonderful Human Race, and a Beautiful Planet Earth, have been so screwed-up for thousands of years.

    I mean no harm toward any angels or archangels. Not at this point. I hope that I would be fair if there were a trial at some point in the future. Who knows?? I might be in a helluva lot more trouble than I think Gabriel and/or Lucifer might be. There simply is not enough reliable information available in order to make proper judgments and determinations. However, I still think that it is important to consider as many possibilities as possible -- especially regarding the most important subjects imaginable. Modeling contrarian theological theories shouldn't be considered a sin, now should it??? BTW -- Val is a Man from Venus with no Navel -- but what about a __________!!!! There was a Man from Nantucket -- with a Navel so big you could __________!!!! Sorry, but I'm so overwhelmed with crazy information, that I find it difficult not to be silly. Psychologists and Psychiatrists say that's a bad sign...

    I recently suggested placing the United States Air Force Academy at the center of my ongoing online political and theological science-fiction. I further suggested that I might like to live 700 feet beneath the Cadet Chapel -- in something similar to the Resistance Base in Earth: Final Conflict. Might I suggest imagining the Taelon Mothership as being the Moon -- with Zo'or and Da'an dealing with Earth from the Dark-Side of the Moon?! I also suggested imagining the Stargate Command Underground Base as being beneath the U.S. Air Force Academy. I indicated that I liked technology, military-discipline, military-parades, war-games, and church-services -- but that I HATED War. I wondered if the USAFA http://www.usafa.af.mil/ might be an appropriate location for the Headquarters of the United States of the Solar System AND the University of Solar System Studies and Governance?! I suggested that the BEST aspects of Georgetown and the Jesuits http://www.georgetown.edu/ might become a part of all of the above?! Does anyone understand what I am attempting to conceptualize??

    I have suggested that someone had an excellent Grand-Plan for Planet Earth and Earth Humanity -- but that they got defeated and demoted -- and that this hypothetical plan got hijacked by a Mean and Nasty Gang Who Couldn't Shoot Straight -- but that this Grand-Plan might need to be reclaimed by the original Planner(s) and run in a proper manner which benefits all concerned. I don't know if this is possible -- or even desirable. I don't know if anything I have speculated about might actually be true -- but I think it might be worth checking-out by those who have a helluva lot more brains and resources than I do. Consider Georgetown University. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgetown_University I find it highly interesting that Georgetown University was founded in 1789 (the same date that St. Michael's Church was founded -- in Earth: Final Conflict ) -- and is not a Pontifical University. Also, note this same date in the introduction to the Book of Common Prayer -- as well as the publication date of the Federalist Papers (1788-89). Washington D.C. is a City-State -- and is evidentally not part of the United States (as Vatican City is not part of Italy -- and the City of London is not part of England). Is there a United States of the Solar System -- University of Solar System Studies and Governance parallel with the United States of America -- and Georgetown University??!! I keep seeing both good and evil connected with the Jesuits and America. Some say that America is Latter-Day Babylon. I continue to think that the truth regarding how things REALLY work would drive a lot of us insane. I mean well -- but I am certainly NOT up to speed with the PTB -- and I'm not sure I really wish to be -- if you know what I mean...

    Georgetown University is a private research university in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1789, it is the oldest Jesuit and Catholic university in the United States. Georgetown's main campus, located in Washington's Georgetown neighborhood, is noted for Healy Hall, a National Historic Landmark in the Romanesque revival style. Georgetown operates a law center on Capitol Hill and auxiliary campuses in Italy, Turkey, and Qatar.

    Georgetown's founding by John Carroll, America's first Catholic bishop, realized efforts to establish a Roman Catholic college in the province of Maryland that were repeatedly thwarted by religious persecution. The university expanded after the American Civil War under the leadership of Patrick Francis Healy, who came to be known as Georgetown's "second founder" despite having been born a slave. Jesuits have participated in the university's administration since 1805, a heritage Georgetown celebrates, but the university has always been governed independently of the Society of Jesus and of church authorities.

    The university has around 7,000 undergraduate and over 8,000 post-graduate students from a wide variety of religious, ethnic, and geographic backgrounds, including 130 foreign countries.[5][8] The university's most notable alumni are prominent in public life in the United States and abroad. Among them are former U.S. President Bill Clinton, U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonin Scalia, dozens of U.S. governors and members of Congress, heads of state or government of more than a dozen countries, royalty and diplomats.

    Campus organizations include the country's largest student-run business. Georgetown's athletic teams, called the Hoyas, include a men's basketball team that has won a record-tying seven Big East championships, appeared in five Final Fours, and won a national championship in 1984.

    Jesuit settlers from England founded the Province of Maryland in 1634.[9] However, the 1646 defeat of the Royalists in the English Civil War led to stringent laws against Roman Catholic education and the extradition of known Jesuits from the colony, including Andrew White, and the destruction of their school at Calverton Manor.[1] During most of the remainder of Maryland's colonial period, Jesuits conducted Catholic schools clandestinely. It was not until after the end of the American Revolution that plans to establish a permanent Catholic institution for education in the United States were realized.[10]

    John Carroll published his proposals for a school at Georgetown in 1787, after the American Revolution allowed for the free practice of religion. Because of Benjamin Franklin's recommendation, Pope Pius VI appointed former Jesuit John Carroll as the first head of the Roman Catholic Church in America, even though the papal suppression of the Jesuit order was still in effect. Carroll began meetings of local clergy in 1783 near Annapolis, Maryland, where they orchestrated the development of a new university.[11] On January 23, 1789, Carroll finalized the purchase of the property on which Dahlgren Quadrangle was later built.[12] Future Congressman William Gaston was enrolled as the school's first student on November 22, 1791, and instruction began on January 2, 1792.[11]

    During its early years, Georgetown College suffered from considerable financial strain, relying on private sources of funding and the limited profits from local lands owned by ex-Jesuits.[13] The Maryland Society of Jesus began its restoration in 1805, and Jesuit affiliation, in the form of teachers and administrators, bolstered confidence in the college.[14] The United States Congress issued Georgetown the first federal university charter in 1815, which allowed it to confer degrees, and the first Bachelor degrees were awarded two years later.[15] In 1844, the school received a corporate charter, under the name "The President and Directors of Georgetown College", affording the growing school additional legal rights. In response to the demand for a local option for Roman Catholic students, the Medical School was founded in 1851.[16]

    The U.S. Civil War greatly affected Georgetown as 1,141 students and alumni enlisted in one army or the other, and the Union Army commandeered university buildings.[10] By the time of President Abraham Lincoln's May 1861 visit to campus, 1,400 troops were living in temporary quarters there. Due to the number of lives lost, enrollment levels remained low until well after the war was over. Only seven students graduated in 1869, down from over 300 in the previous decade.[17] Lincoln assassination conspirator David Herold attended Georgetown from 1855 through 1858 and received a certificate in pharmacology in 1860. At its founding in 1876, the Georgetown College Boat Club, the school's rowing team, adopted blue, used for Union uniforms, and gray, used for Confederate uniforms, as its colors to signify the peaceful unity among students.[18] Subsequently, the school adopted these as its official colors.

    Enrollment did not recover from the war until the presidency of Patrick Francis Healy from 1873 to 1881. Born a slave by law, Healy was the first acknowledged head of a predominantly white American university with African heritage. He is credited with reforming the undergraduate curriculum, lengthening the medical and law programs, and creating the Alumni Association. One of his largest undertakings was the construction of a major new building, subsequently named Healy Hall in his honor. For his work, Healy is known as the school's "second founder."[19]

    After the founding of the Law Department in 1870, Healy and his successors hoped to bind the professional schools into a university, and focus on higher education.[14] The School of Medicine added a dental school in 1901 and the undergraduate School of Nursing in 1903.[20] Georgetown Preparatory School relocated from campus in 1919 and fully separated from the University in 1927.[21] The School of Foreign Service (SFS) was founded in 1919 by Edmund A. Walsh, to prepare students for leadership in foreign commerce and diplomacy.[14] The School of Business was created out of the SFS in 1957, and in 1998 was renamed the McDonough School of Business in honor of alumnus Robert E. McDonough.[22]

    Besides expansion of the University, Georgetown also aimed to expand its resources and student body. The School of Nursing has admitted female students since its founding, and most of the university was made available on a limited basis by 1952.[23] With the College of Arts and Sciences welcoming its first female students in the 1969–1970 academic year, Georgetown became fully coeducational.[24] Georgetown ended its bicentennial year of 1989 by electing Leo J. O'Donovan as president. He subsequently launched the Third Century Campaign to build the school's endowment.[25] In December 2003, Georgetown completed the campaign after raising over $1 billion for financial aid, academic chair endowment, and new capital projects.[26] John J. DeGioia, Georgetown's first lay president, has led the school since 2001, and has continued its financial modernization and sought to "expand opportunities for intercultural and interreligious dialogue", such as by opening a campus in Qatar.[27]

    Georgetown University was founded by former Jesuits in the tradition of Ignatius of Loyola and is a member of the Association of Jesuit Colleges and Universities.[12][28] Georgetown is not a pontifical university, though six Jesuits serve on the thirty-six member Board of Directors, the school's highest governance.[29] Fifty-two members of the Society of Jesus live on campus, and are mostly employed by Georgetown as professors or administrators.[30] Jesuit Heritage Week has been held every year since 2001 to celebrate the contributions of Jesuits to the Georgetown tradition.[31]

    The role that Georgetown's Catholic heritage has played in its policies has been controversial at times, even as its influence is relatively limited.[32] Stores in University-owned buildings are not allowed to sell or distribute birth control products.[33] Georgetown University Medical Center and Georgetown University Hospital, operated by MedStar Health, are prohibited from performing abortions.[34] As recently as 2004, the hospital did perform research using embryonic stem cells.[35] Georgetown has drawn criticism from religious groups such as the Cardinal Newman Society for hosting speeches from prominent pro-choice politicians, including John Kerry and Barack Obama,[36][37] and from Washington's Archbishop, Donald Wuerl, for inviting Kathleen Sebelius to be a commencement speaker.[38] The university does host the Cardinal O'Connor Conference on Life every January to discuss the pro-life movement.[39]

    Between 1996 and 1999, crucifixes were added to many classroom walls, attracting national attention.[40] Before 1996, crucifixes had hung only in hospital rooms and historic classrooms.[41] Some of these crucifixes are historic works of art, and are noted as such.[42] According to Imam Yahya Hendi, the school's on-campus Muslim cleric, pressure to remove the crucifixes comes from within the Catholic community, while he and other campus faith leaders have defended their placement.[43] The Intercultural Center is an exception to this controversy, rotating displays of various faith and culture symbols in the lobby.[44]

    As of 2010, the University has 7,553 undergraduate students, and 5,832 graduate students.[5] Bachelor's programs are offered through Georgetown College, the School of Nursing and Health Studies, the Robert Emmett McDonough School of Business, the School of Continuing Studies, and the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service, which includes the Qatar campus. Some high school students from Georgetown Visitation are permitted to attend classes for Advanced Placement credit.[45]

    Georgetown University offers undergraduate degrees in forty-eight majors in the four undergraduate schools, as well as the opportunity for students to design their own individualized courses of study.[46] All majors in the College are open as minors to students in the College, the School of Nursing and Health Studies, and the School of Business. Students in the School of Foreign Service cannot receive minors, but can complete certificates instead. All courses are on a credit hour system.[14] Georgetown offers many opportunities to study abroad, and 58.7% of the undergraduate student body spends time at an institution overseas.[dated info][47]

    Master's and doctoral programs are offered through the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, the Law Center, the School of Medicine, and the School of Continuing Studies. The McDonough School of Business and the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service both offer masters programs. The Center for Contemporary Arab Studies and the Public Policy Institute are both research centers which also offer masters degrees. Masters students occasionally share some advanced seminars with undergraduates, and most undergraduate schools offer abbreviated bachelors and masters programs following completion of the undergraduate degree.

    Each graduate school offers at least one double degree with another graduate school.[48] Additionally, the Law Center offers a joint degree with the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.[49] The School of Continuing Studies includes the Center for Continuing and Professional Education, and operates four types of degree programs, over thirty professional certificates and non-degree courses, undergraduate and graduate degrees in Liberal Studies, as well as summer courses for graduates, undergraduates, and high school students.[50]

    As of 2011, Georgetown University employed 1,291 full-time and 882 part-time faculty members across its three Washington, D.C. campuses,[3] with additional staff at SFS-Qatar.[51] The faculty comprises leading academics and notable political and business leaders, and are predominantly male by a two-to-one margin.[52] Politically, Georgetown University's faculty members give more support to liberal candidates, and while their donation patterns are generally consistent with those of other American university faculties, they gave more than average to Barack Obama's presidential campaign.[53][54]

    The current faculty includes scholars such as the former President of the American Philological Association James J. O'Donnell, theologian John Haught, social activists Sam Marullo and Chai Feldblum, and preeminent hip-hop scholar Michael Eric Dyson.[55][56] Many former politicians choose to teach at Georgetown, including the former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, U.S. Agency for International Development administrator Andrew Natsios, National Security Advisor Anthony Lake, and CIA director George Tenet. Internationally, the school attracts numerous former ambassadors and heads of state, such as Saudi Ambassador Prince Turki bin Faisal Al Saud, Prime Minister of Spain José María Aznar, and President of Colombia Álvaro Uribe.[57][58][59]

    Georgetown University is a self-described "student-centered research university"[60] considered by the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education to have "very high research activity."[61] As of 2002, Georgetown's libraries held 2,778,526 printed items and 73,496 serials in seven buildings, with most in Lauinger Library.[62] The Blommer Science Library, located in the Reiss Science Building on campus, houses most of the Science collection. Additionally, the Law School campus includes the nation's fifth largest law library.[63] Georgetown faculty conduct research in hundreds of subjects, but have priorities in the fields of religion, ethics, science, public policy, and cancer medicine.[64] Cross-institutional research is performed with Columbia University and Virginia Tech.

    In 2008, Georgetown spent $143 million on research, ranking it 111th nationwide.[65] In 2007, it received about $14.8 million in federal funds for research, with 64% from the National Science Foundation, National Institutes of Health, the United States Department of Energy, and the Department of Defense.[66] In 2010, the school received $5.6 million from the Department of Education to fund fellowships in several international studies fields.[67] Georgetown University Medical Center received an additional $118.4 million from these and other government sources.[66] Georgetown's Vincent Lombardi Cancer Center is one of 41 research-intensive comprehensive cancer centers in the United States, and developed the breakthrough HPV vaccine for cervical cancer in 2006.[68]

    Centers which conduct and sponsor research at Georgetown include the Berkley Center for Religion, Peace, and World Affairs, the Prince Alwaleed Center for Muslim–Christian Understanding and the Woodstock Theological Center. Regular publications include the Georgetown Journal on Poverty Law and Policy, the Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal, the Georgetown Law Journal, the Georgetown Journal of International Affairs, and the Georgetown Public Policy Review.

    Admission to Georgetown is highly selective; In 2012, the university received over 20,100 applications [c] and admitted 16%, a record low in the university's history.[76] The Fiske Guide to Colleges states that "only Stanford and a handful of Ivy League schools are tougher to get into than Georgetown."[77] As of 2011, Georgetown's graduate schools have acceptance rates of 3.6% to the School of Medicine,[78] 19% to the Law Center,[79] 25% to the MSFS,[80] and 34.9% to the MBA program.[81] In 2004, a National Bureau of Economic Research study on revealed preference of U.S. colleges showed that Georgetown was the 16th most-preferred choice.[dated info][82]

    The undergraduate schools maintain a restrictive Early Action admissions program, as students who have applied through an Early Decision process at another school are not permitted to apply early to Georgetown.[83] 94% of students accepted for the class of 2014 were in the top 10% of their class and had SAT scores ranging from 660–760 in Critical Reading, and 670–770 in Math.[84] Georgetown accepts both the SAT and ACT, though does not consider the writing portion of either.[85] Over 55% of undergraduates receive financial aid, and the university meets 100% of demonstrated need, with an average financial aid package of $23,500 and about 70% of aid distributed in the forms of grants or scholarships.[86]

    Georgetown University has three campuses in Washington, D.C.: the undergraduate campus, the Medical Center, and the Law Center. The undergraduate campus and Medical Center are together in the Georgetown neighborhood and form the main campus. Other centers are located around Washington, D.C., including the Center for Continuing and Professional Education at Clarendon in Arlington, Virginia. Transit between these locations and the Washington Metro is supplied by a system of shuttles, known as GUTS buses.[87] Georgetown also operates a facility in Doha, Qatar, and villas in Alanya, Turkey and Fiesole, Italy. In their campus layout, Georgetown's administrators consistently used the traditional quadrangle design.[88]

    Georgetown University's undergraduate campus and medical school campus are situated on an elevated site above the Potomac River, overlooking Northern Virginia. The main gates, known as the Healy Gates, are located at the intersection of 37th and O Streets, NW. The main campus is just over 104 acres (0.4 km2) in area and includes fifty-four buildings, student residences capable of accommodating 80% of undergraduates, and various athletic facilities.[89] Most buildings employ collegiate Gothic architecture and Georgian brick architecture. Campus green areas include fountains, a cemetery, large clusters of flowers, groves of trees, and open quadrangles.[90] Georgetown received a B grade on the 2011 College Sustainability Report Card, and new buildings and major renovations are required to meet LEED Sliver criteria.[91]

    The main campus has traditionally centered on Dahlgren Quadrangle, although Red Square has replaced it as the focus of student life.[92] Healy Hall, built in Flemish Romanesque style from 1877 to 1879, is the architectural gem of Georgetown's campus, and is a National Historic Landmark.[93] Both Healy Hall and the Georgetown University Astronomical Observatory, built in 1844, are listed on the National Register of Historic Places.[94] The medical school is on the northwestern part of the main campus on Reservoir Road, and is integrated with Georgetown University Hospital.[95] The school uses many of the townhouses in the Georgetown neighborhood east of the main campus for upperclassmen housing, institutions, and alumni facilities. Additionally, the Walsh School of Foreign Service and the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences both have classroom buildings in this area.[95] Georgetown Visitation, a private Roman Catholic girls high school, is northeast of campus, on land adjoining the undergraduate campus.[96]

    In late 2003, the university completed the Southwest Quadrangle Project, and brought a new 907-bed student dorm, an expansive dining hall, an underground parking facility, and new Jesuit Residence to the campus.[97] The school's first performing arts center, named for Royden B. Davis, was completed in November 2005, and the new business school building, named for Rafik Hariri, opened in Fall 2009.[98] Future construction plans include a unified sciences center and expanded athletic facilities.[99] As a location, Georgetown is ranked nationally as the second best college town by the Princeton Review.[100] Despite this, main campus "town and gown" relations are often strained by facilities construction, enlargement of the student body, as well as noise and alcohol violations.[101] Crime is also a persistent issue, with campus security responding to 257 crimes in 2008.[102]

    The Law Center campus is located in the Capitol Hill neighborhood on New Jersey Avenue, near Union Station and consists of five buildings. First-year students at the Law Center can live in the single on-campus dormitory, the Gewirz Student Center.[103] Most second- and third-year students, as well as some first-year students, live off-campus. As there is little housing near the Law Center, most are spread throughout the Washington metropolitan area.[104] The "Campus Completion Project", finished in 2005, saw the addition of the Hotung International Building and the Sport and Fitness Center. G Street and F Street are closed off between 1st and 2nd Streets to create open lawns flanking McDonough Hall, the main building on the campus.[105]

    In December 1979, the Marquesa Margaret Rockefeller de Larrain, granddaughter of John D. Rockefeller, gave the Villa Le Balze to Georgetown University.[106] The Villa is in Fiesole, Italy, on a hill above the city of Florence. The Villa is used year-round for study abroad programs focused on specialized interdisciplinary study of Italian culture and civilization.[107] The main facility for the McGhee Center for Eastern Mediterranean Studies was donated to Georgetown in 1989 by alumnus and former United States Ambassador to Turkey George C. McGhee.[108] The school is in the town of Alanya, Turkey within the Seljuq-era Alanya Castle, on the Mediterranean. The Center operates study abroad programs one semester each year, concentrating on Turkish language, architectural history, and Islamic studies.[109]

    In 2002, the Qatar Foundation for Education, Science and Community Development presented the School of Foreign Service with the resources and space to open a facility in the new Education City in Doha, Qatar.[110] SFS-Qatar opened in 2005 as a liberal arts and international affairs undergraduate school for regional students.[111] In December 2007, Georgetown opened a liaison office in Shanghai, China to coordinate with Fudan University and others.[112] In 2008, the Georgetown University Law Center in conjunction with an international consortium of law schools established the Center for Transnational Legal Studies in London, England.[113]

    The Georgetown undergraduate student body, at 7,590 as of 2012,[5] is composed primarily of students from outside the District of Columbia area, with 34% of new 2010 students coming from Mid-Atlantic states, 11% being international students and the remainder coming from other areas of the US.[114] The student body also represented 129 different countries, with 9% being international,[62] including over 330 undergraduate and 1,050 graduate students who chose to come to Georgetown as a study abroad destination in 2009–10.[115] As of that year, the racial diversity of the undergraduate student body was 62.3% white, 8.8% Asian, 6.3% black, and 5.9% Hispanic; Additionally, 55.2% of undergraduates are female.[62]

    Although it is a Jesuit university, only 41% of the student body identify as Roman Catholic, while 22% identify as Protestant as of 2009.[116] Georgetown employs a full-time rabbi, as 6.5% of undergraduates are Jewish.[116] It was the first U.S. college to have a full-time imam, to serve the over four-hundred Muslims on campus.[117] Georgetown also sponsors student groups for Bahá'i, Buddhist, Hindu, and Mormon traditions.[118] The student body consists of both religious and irreligious students, and more than four-hundred freshmen and transfer students attend a nonreligious Ignatian retreat annually, called ESCAPE.[119][120]

    A 2007 survey of undergraduates also suggests that 62.8% are sexually active, while 6.2% identify as LGBTQ.[116][121] Discrimination can be an issue on campus, and three-fourths of a 2009 survey considered homophobia a campus problem.[122] Newsweek, however, rated Georgetown among its top "Gay-Friendly Schools" in 2010.[123] In 2011, College Magazine ranked Georgetown as the tenth most hipster U.S. college,[124] while People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals considered it the third most vegan friendly small U.S. school.[125]

    Almost all undergraduates attend full-time.[126] A majority of undergraduates, 76%, live on-campus in several dormitories and apartment complexes, including all underclassmen.[127] As of 2011, 1255 undergraduates and 339 graduate students live off-campus, mostly in the Georgetown, Glover Park, Burleith, and Foxhall neighborhoods.[128] Although many of the University's hall directors and area coordinators attend graduate level courses, on-campus housing is not available for main campus graduate students.[129] The school hopes to build such housing by 2020.[130] All students in the Medical School live off-campus, most in the surrounding neighborhoods, with some in Northern Virginia and elsewhere through the region.[131]

    As of 2012, 92.89% of Georgetown University undergraduates are involved in at least one of the 179 registered student organizations which cover a variety of interests: student government, club sports, media and publications, performing arts, religion, and volunteer and service.[132] Students also operate campus stores, banks, and medical services. Students often find their interests at the Student Activities Commission Club Fair, where both official and unofficial organizations set up tables.[133] The Georgetown University Student Association is the student government organization for undergraduates. There are also student representatives within the schools, to the Board of Directors, and, since 1996, to the Georgetown Advisory Neighborhood Commission.[134]

    Georgetown's student organizations include one of the nation's oldest debating clubs, the Philodemic Society, founded in 1830,[135] and the oldest university theater group, the Mask and Bauble Dramatic Society.[136] Nomadic Theatre, founded in 1982 as an alternative troupe without an on-campus home, produces "plays which educate and challenge all members of the university community through thought-provoking theatre."[137] The Georgetown Improv Association, founded in 1995, performs monthly long-form improvisational shows on-campus at Bulldog Alley in addition to hosting "Improvfest", one of the oldest improv festivals in the country.[138]

    There are a total of seven a cappella groups on campus, including The Georgetown Chimes, the Phantoms, Superfood, The GraceNotes, the Chamber Singers, Essence, Harmony, the service-oriented Saxatones, and the all-male Capitol G's.[139] These groups perform annually at the "D.C. A Cappella Festival", held since 1991, and the "Cherry Tree Massacre" concert series, held since 1974.[140][141] The Georgetown University Band is composed of the Georgetown Pep Band and the Georgetown Wind Ensemble, and performs on campus, in Washington, D.C., and at post-season basketball tournaments.[142]

    In addition to student organizations and clubs, Georgetown University is home to the nation's largest entirely student-owned and -operated corporation, Students of Georgetown, Inc. Founded in 1972, "The Corp" operates three coffee shops and two grocery stores, and runs storage and airport shuttles for students.[143] The business has annual revenues of over $1.3 million, which are directly re-invested into the Georgetown student body through Corp Philanthropy, which gave out over $50,000 in scholarships and donations to Georgetown groups in 2010–11.[144] Georgetown University Alumni & Student Federal Credit Union is the oldest and largest all student-run financial institution, with over $16 million in assets and 12,000 members.[145] The Georgetown University Student Investment Fund is one of a few undergraduate-run investment funds in the United States, and hosted CNBC's Jim Cramer to tape Mad Money in September 2006.[146]

    Another student-run group, the Georgetown Emergency Response Medical Service, "GERMS", is an all-volunteer ambulance service founded in 1982 that serves campus and the surrounding communities. Georgetown's Army Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) unit, the Hoya Battalion, is the oldest military unit native to the District of Columbia,[147] and was awarded the top ranking among ROTC programs in 2012.[148] The proportion of ROTC students at Georgetown was the 79th highest among universities in the United States as of 2010.[149] GUGS, the Georgetown University Grilling Society, has been a Georgetown tradition since 2002, selling half-pound hamburgers in Red Square on most Fridays.[150]


    Last edited by orthodoxymoron on Fri Apr 05, 2013 12:51 am; edited 8 times in total
    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7704
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: Archangelic Queens of Heaven and the United States of the Solar System

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Thu Apr 04, 2013 3:29 pm

    I continue to be HIGHLY Conflicted regarding the relationship between Human Freedom and the Sovereignty of God. What about Man's Law v God's Law?? What Would Georgetown Law Say?? Do Gabriel and Lucifer lay down the law?? Remember that creepy episode in the second season of 'V' (Unholy Alliance) when Anna lays down the law to Vatican officials?? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msks5unfQyw Remember the scene where Anna, Chad, and Marcus (Isis, Horus, Set?? Gabriel, Michael, Lucifer??) stand in the door of the shuttle-craft before the faithful?? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3dTbTemgWE I'm sure that episode REALLY angered a lot of Catholics -- and I can understand why. On the other hand, I suspect some real-life similarities to that particular episode. Did the Jesuit Order force Benedict out?? I suspect they did. I don't even wish to think much about how Vatican politics REALLY work. I continue to be VERY conflicted regarding how things should work in this solar system. Please do not call my speculative internet activities "hate-speech". I am simply trying to understand -- and possibly assist a few others in understanding. I don't make a big-deal about this sort of thing -- and I never will -- unless it becomes absolutely necessary at a much later date -- which is highly unlikely IMHO.

    Georgetown University continued. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgetown_University Georgetown University student organizations include a diverse array of groups focused on social justice issues, including organizations run through both Student Affairs and the Center for Social Justice. Oriented against gender violence, Take Back the Night coordinates an annual rally and march to protest against rape and other forms of violence against women.[151] Georgetown Solidarity Committee is a workers' rights organization whose successes include ending use of sweatshops in producing Georgetown-logoed apparel, and garnering pay raises for both university cleaning staff and police.[152] Georgetown Students for Fair Trade successfully advocated for all coffee in campus cafeterias to be Fair Trade Certified.[153]

    Georgetown has many additional groups representing national, ethnic, and linguistic interests. Georgetown's has the second most politically active student body in the United States according to the Princeton Review.[100] Groups based on local, national, and international issues are popular, and political speech is protected on campus. Student political organizations are active on campus and engage their many members in local and national politics. The Georgetown University College Republicans represent their party, while the Georgetown University College Democrats, the largest student organization on campus in 2008, represent theirs.[154]

    The reproductive rights organization H*yas for Choice is not officially recognized by the University as its positions on abortion are in opposition to University policy, prompting the asterisk in "Hoyas."[155] While not financially supported by the school, the organization is permitted to meet and table in university spaces.[156] The issue contributes to Georgetown's 'red light' status on free speech under the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education rating system.[157] In 2010, the "Plan A: Hoyas for Reproductive Justice" campaign led several protests against the school policy against the sale of birth control on campus,[158] and in 2007, Georgetown University Law Center students protested the University's decision to cease funding for a student's internship at Planned Parenthood's litigation department despite funding it previous years.[159] Law Center student Sandra Fluke petitioned the university to change its health insurance policy to include coverage for contraception for three years prior to addressing the issue before the House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee in 2012. Though the remarks Rush Limbaugh subsequently directed at Fluke were criticized by Georgetown administrators as both misogynist and vitriolic,[160] the school remains opposed to the coverage of contraception.[161]

    Media

    Georgetown University has several student-run newspapers. The Hoya is the University's oldest newspaper. It has been in print since 1920, and since 1987, has been published twice weekly.[162] The Georgetown Voice, known for its weekly cover stories, is a newsmagazine that was founded in March 1969 to focus more attention on citywide and national issues.[163] The Georgetown Independent is a monthly journal of news, commentary and the arts.[164] Founded in 1966, the Georgetown Law Weekly is the student-run paper on the Law Center campus, and is a three time winner of the American Bar Association's Best Newspaper award.[165] The Hoya and The Georgetown Voice both run online blogs, and there are other popular blogs written about the school and its sports teams.

    The Georgetown Academy, restarted in 2008 after a hiatus, targets traditionalist Catholic readers, and the Georgetown Federalist, founded in 2006, purports to bring a conservative and libertarian viewpoint to campus.[166][167] Other political publications include the Georgetown Progressive, an online publication run by the Georgetown University College Democrats, and Counterpoint Magazine, a liberal monthly founded in the spring of 2011.[168] The Fire This Time is Georgetown's minority newssource.[169] The Georgetown Heckler is a humor magazine founded on the Internet in 2003 by Georgetown students, releasing its first print issue in 2007.[170] The Gonzo was a former student humor magazine, published from 1993 to 1998.

    The University has a campus-wide television station, GUTV, which began broadcasting in 1999. The station hosts an annual student film festival in April for campus filmmakers.[171] WGTB, Georgetown's radio station, is available as a webcast and on 92.3 FM in certain dormitories. The station was founded in 1946, and broadcast on 90.1 FM from 1960 to 1979, when university president Timothy S. Healy gave away the frequency and broadcast capabilities to the University of the District of Columbia because of WGTB's far left political orientation.[172]

    Greek life

    Although Jesuit schools are not obliged to disassociate from Greek systems, many do, and Georgetown University officially recognizes and funds only one of the many Greek organizations on campus, Alpha Phi Omega, the national co-ed community service fraternity. Despite this, other Greek organizations also persist on campus, although none requires members to live in fraternal housing.[173] Additionally, Georgetown University students are affiliated, in some cases, with fraternities at other nearby universities and colleges.[174]

    Active fraternities at Georgetown include Delta Phi Epsilon, a professional foreign service fraternity and sorority; Alpha Kappa Psi, a professional co-ed business fraternity; Alpha Phi Omega, a national co-ed community service fraternity; Alpha Epsilon Pi, a Jewish social fraternity; and social fraternities Sigma Phi Epsilon, Zeta Psi, Sigma Alpha Epsilon, and Zeta Beta Tau. Delta Phi Epsilon was founded at Georgetown in 1920, and members of their Alpha Chapter include Jesuits and several deans of the School of Foreign Service.[175] The Delta Phi Epsilon foreign service sorority, founded in 1973, is the only sorority active at Georgetown.[176] Georgetown's chapter of Alpha Epsilon Pi, affiliated with the campus Hillel, was established in 2002.[177] Sigma Phi Epsilon chartered its chapter as a general social fraternity in 2007.[178] The Omega Lambda chapter of professional business fraternity Alpha Kappa Psi replaced Delta Sigma Pi, which lost its charter in 2006.[179] The Zeta Psi chapter, named Gamma Epsilon, was chartered in March 2009 after a year as a colony.[180]

    Events

    Annual events on campus celebrate Georgetown traditions, culture, alumni, sports, and politics. In late April, Georgetown University celebrates Georgetown Day.[181] Besides the full-day carnival, the day rewards the best professor of the year with the Dorothy Brown Award, as voted by students. Halloween is celebrated with public viewings of alumnus William Peter Blatty's film The Exorcist, which takes place in the neighborhood surrounding the university.[182]

    Homecoming coincides with a home football game, and festivities such as tailgating and a formal dance are sponsored by the Alumni Association to draw past graduates back to campus.[183] The largest planned sports related celebration is the first basketball practice of the season. Dubbed Midnight Madness, this event introduces the men's and women's basketball teams shortly after midnight on the first day the teams are allowed by NCAA rules to formally practice together.[184] In 2013, Georgetown will again host the east regional finals round of the NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament.[185]

    Georgetown University hosts notable speakers each year, largely because of the success of the Georgetown Lecture Fund and the Office of Communications.[186] These are frequently important heads of state who visit Georgetown while in the capital, as well as scholars, authors, U.S. politicians, and religious leaders. The Office of the President hosts numerous symposia on religious topics, such as Nostra Ætate, Pacem in Terris, and the Building Bridges Seminar.[187]

    Athletics

    Basketball stars like Roy Hibbert have led the Hoyas to seven Big East championships.
    Georgetown fields 23 varsity teams and the Club Sports Board supports an additional 23 club teams. The varsity teams participate in the NCAA's Division I. The school generally competes in the Big East Conference, although the football team competes in the Division I FCS Patriot League, the sailing team in Middle Atlantic Intercollegiate Sailing Association, and the rowing teams in the Eastern Association of Rowing Colleges. U.S. News & World Report listed Georgetown's athletics program among the 20 best in the nation.[188] Georgetown's student athletes have a 94% graduation success rate,[189] and over one-hundred have gone on to play professionally.[190]

    The school's teams are called "Hoyas", a name whose origin is uncertain. Sometime before 1893, students well versed in classical languages invented the mixed Greek and Latin chant of "Hoya Saxa", translating roughly as "what (or such) rocks." The school's baseball team, then called the Stonewalls, began in 1870, and football in 1874, and the chant likely refers to one of these teams.[191] By the 1920s, the term "Hoyas" was used to describe groups on campus, and by 1928, campus sports writers started using it instead of the older team name, the "Hilltoppers."[192][193] The name was picked up in the local publications, and became official shortly after. Jack the Bulldog has been the mascot of Georgetown athletics programs since 1962, and the school fight song is There Goes Old Georgetown.

    The men's basketball team is particularly noteworthy as it won the NCAA championship in 1984 under coach John Thompson. The current coach is his son, John Thompson III, who coached the team to the Final Four in the 2007 NCAA tournament. The team is tied for the most Big East conference tournament titles with seven, and has made twenty-seven NCAA tournament appearances.[194][195] Well-known team alumni include Sleepy Floyd, Patrick Ewing, Dikembe Mutombo, Alonzo Mourning, Allen Iverson, Jeff Green, and Roy Hibbert.[196] Georgetown's NBA alumni are collectively among the highest earners from a single program.[197]

    Besides basketball, Georgetown has been nationally successful in both cross country and track and field,[198] and in 2011, the women's cross country team won Georgetown's only other NCAA Championship.[199] The sailing teams have also won eight Intercollegiate Sailing Association national championships since 2001,[200] while the rowing teams are perennial contenders.[201] The men's and women's lacrosse teams have both been ranked in the top ten nationally,[202][203] as have both soccer teams, with the men making the national championship game in 2012,[204] and the women making the national quarterfinals in 2010.[205] The rugby club team also made it to the Division II Final Four in 2005 and 2009.[206]

    Alumni

    Georgetown graduates have found success in a wide variety of fields, and have served at the heads of diverse institutions both in the public and private sector. Immediately after graduation, around 54–61% of undergraduates enter the workforce, while others go on to additional education.[207] Georgetown graduates have been recipients of 23 Rhodes Scholarships, 19 Marshall Scholarships, and 24 Truman Scholarships. Georgetown is also one of the top-ten yearly producers of Peace Corps volunteers as of 2010,[208] with 35 active and 866 total volunteers since 1961.[209] Georgetown alumni have a median starting salary of $55,000 with a median mid-career salary of $110,000.[207] NNDB, the Notable Names Database, lists 364 notable alumni as of 2013.[210]

    Twelve current or former heads of state are alumni. Former President of the United States Bill Clinton is a 1968 graduate of the School of Foreign Service, and others include Laura Chinchilla, current President of Costa Rica, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, former President of the Philippines, Saad Hariri, former Prime Minister of Lebanon, and Alfredo Cristiani former President of El Salvador.[211][212][213] Six alumni serve in the United States Senate, and thirteen in the House of Representatives. Current congressional alumni include Dick Durbin, Senate majority whip, and Steny Hoyer, House minority whip.[214] Governors include Pat Quinn of Illinois, John Lynch of New Hampshire, and Luis Fortuño, of Puerto Rico.[215] On the U.S. Supreme Court, alumni include current Associate Justice Antonin Scalia and former Chief Justice Edward Douglass White.[210]

    Prince Guillaume of Luxembourg, Don Felipe de Borbón, Prince of Asturias (Crown Prince of Spain), King Abdullah II of Jordan, Prince Turki bin Faisal Al Saud of the Saudi Arabia royal family, and Prince Philippos of Greece and Denmark are among the royals who attended Georgetown. Besides numerous members of the senior diplomatic corps, graduates have also headed military organizations on both the domestic and international level, such as former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and former National Security Advisor General James L. Jones.[216] Notable alumni in business include Patricia Russo, former Alcatel-Lucent CEO, William J. Doyle of the Potash Corporation of Saskatchewan, and Ted Leonsis, owner of the Washington Capitals, Wizards, and Mystics franchises and former America Online executive.[217][218] Leonsis is among four other undergraduate alumni who own professional sports teams, making Georgetown the most popular undergraduate university for major North American sports franchise owners.[219] Actor Bradley Cooper, People Magazine's Sexiest Man Alive 2011, is also a Georgetown graduate.[220]

    Notes

    a Utraque Unum is Latin from Paul's Epistle to the Ephesians 2:14. See official explanation. Other translations available.

    b While Patrick Francis Healy inherited African ancestry from his mother and was consequently classified as racially black according to the "one-drop rule" of 19th century American society, he self-identified racially as white and ethnically as Irish American.

    c The undergraduate class of 2016 are students who begin school in August 2012, as the expected matriculation is four years.

    References

    1.^ a b Nevils 1934, pp. 1–25
    2.^ As of June 30, 2012. "U.S. and Canadian Institutions Listed by Fiscal Year 2012 Endowment Market Value and Percentage Change in Endowment Market Value from FY 2011 to FY 2012" (PDF). 2012 NACUBO-Commonfund Study of Endowments. National Association of College and University Business Officers.
    3.^ a b "Georgetown Key Facts". Georgetown University. Retrieved 2012-07-12.
    4.^ "Services and Administration". Georgetown University. 2009. Retrieved February 15, 2009.
    5.^ a b c d "College Search - Georgetown University". College Board. 2012. Retrieved December 9, 2012.
    6.^ "Georgetown Facts". Office of Communications. Georgetown University. 2009. Retrieved August 24, 2009.
    7.^ "Georgetown University Sports".
    8.^ "International Students, Faculty, and Researchers". Office of International Programs. Georgetown University. 2012. Retrieved December 9, 2012.
    9.^ Fitzpatrick, Edward A.; Nevils, William Coleman (January 1936). "Miniatures of Georgetown, 1634 to 1934". The Journal of Higher Education (Ohio State University Press) 7 (1): 56–57. doi:10.2307/1974310. JSTOR 1974310.
    10.^ a b Devitt, E.I. (1909). "Georgetown University". Catholic Encyclopedia. Robert Appleton Company. Retrieved July 10, 2007.
    11.^ a b Curran 1993, pp. 33–34
    12.^ a b "Georgetown's Catholic and Jesuit Identity". Georgetown University. February 15, 2008. Retrieved March 24, 2009.
    13.^ O'Neill & Williams 2003, p. 12
    14.^ a b c d Curran, Robert Emmett (July 7, 2007). "Georgetown: A Brief History". Undergraduate Bulletin. Georgetown University. Retrieved August 27, 2007.
    15.^ "The Federal Charter". About Georgetown. Archived from the original on January 3, 2008. Retrieved March 6, 2007.
    16.^ "History" (PDF). Georgetown University School of Medicine. March 23, 2008. Retrieved March 24, 2009.
    17.^ O'Neill & Williams 2003, pp. 36–39
    18.^ "Georgetown Traditions: The Blue & Gray". HoyaSaxa.com. August 17, 2005. Retrieved April 26, 2007.
    19.^ "Patrick Francis Healy Inaugurated". Library of Congress American Memory. July 31, 2006. Retrieved July 9, 2007.
    20.^ Spindle, Lindsey (July 30, 2003). "Georgetown University School of Nursing and Health Studies Appoints New Director of Development". Office of Communications (Georgetown University). Retrieved April 26, 2007.
    21.^ "Third Grammar Class, Second Section, on the steps of Healy Hall at Georgetown University". Loyola Notre Dame Library. Retrieved September 6, 2007.
    22.^ Lyons, Emily (October 9, 1998). "GSB Takes New Name". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    23.^ "Georgetown University history: Co-Ed". About Georgetown. Archived from the original on January 3, 2008. Retrieved July 17, 2007.
    24.^ Timiraos, Nick (April 1, 2003). "Areen Outlines Women's Role". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    25.^ Sullivan, Tim (February 16, 2001). "DeGioia Named Next GU President". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    26.^ Timiraos, Nick (September 12, 2003). "Capital Campaign Close to $1 Billion". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    27.^ "Biography". Office of the President. Georgetown University. February 2005. Retrieved August 12, 2008.
    28.^ "Jesuit Ideals Drive Daily Life at Georgetown". Blue & Gray. November 5, 2007. Retrieved November 7, 2007.
    29.^ "Board of Directors". Georgetown University. July 2, 2009. Retrieved January 3, 2013.
    30.^ "Jesuit Community Members". Jesuit Community. Georgetown University. 2012. Retrieved December 9, 2012.
    31.^ Fasoranti, Oluseyi (February 2, 2010). "GU Celebrates Jesuit Heritage Week". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    32.^ Wildes, Kevin (February 13, 2004). "Shades of Gray Define Catholic Complexities". The Hoya. Retrieved August 15, 2011.
    33.^ "Chains Effective for Georgetown Protesters". NBC Washington. March 29, 2010. Retrieved June 20, 2011.
    34.^ Haggerty, Tim (February 25, 2000). "University, MedStar Agree to Hospital Sale". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    35.^ Argetsinger, Amy and Avram Goldstein (January 30, 2004). "GU to Continue Controversial Research". The Washington Post. Retrieved September 17, 2012.
    36.^ Murugesan, Vidhya (September 9, 2005). "Catholic Group Criticizes GU Profs". The Hoya. Retrieved 2011-04-26.
    37.^ Sahrmann, Marie (April 14, 2009). "Protests Come to Campus Alongside Obama". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    38.^ Boorstein, Michelle (May 15, 2012). "Washington's Catholic archbishop, Georgetown president spar over graduation invitation to Kathleen Sebelius". The Washington Post. Retrieved May 16, 2012.
    39.^ Kaplan, Sarah (January 25, 2011). "Anti-Abortion Summit at GU". The Hoya. Retrieved April 13, 2012.>
    40.^ Burke, Heather (October 8, 1999). "The Catholic Question". The Hoya. Archived from the original on October 24, 2007. Retrieved August 15, 2007.
    41.^ Fuchs, Marek (June 12, 2004). "At One Catholic College, Crucifixes Make a Comeback". The New York Times. Retrieved August 19, 2007.
    42.^ Fiore, Liz; Jim Rowan, Jon Soucy (April 20, 1999). "Crucifix Leaders Angry at University". The Hoya. Archived from the original on May 6, 2004. Retrieved August 19, 2007.
    43.^ Allen Jr., John L (May 14, 2004). "Muslim chaplain sees value in crucifixes". National Catholic Reporter. Archived from the original on November 9, 2007. Retrieved August 15, 2007.
    44.^ "Crucifixes and Religious Symbolism". Georgetown's Catholic and Jesuit Identity. Georgetown University. June 16, 2005. Retrieved August 15, 2007.
    45.^ "Application Checklist". Admissions. Georgetown Visitation Preparatory School. 2007. Retrieved October 7, 2007.
    46.^ "Undergraduate Bulletin". Georgetown University. 2006–2007. Retrieved July 3, 2007.
    47.^ Brienza, Laura (February 23, 2007). "Yearlong Study Abroad Enrollment Declines". The Hoya. Archived from the original on September 26, 2007. Retrieved July 8, 2007.
    48.^ "Listing of Joint / Dual Degrees Offered". Georgetown University Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. 2007. Archived from the original on August 14, 2007. Retrieved September 20, 2007.
    49.^ Castronuovo, Jenny (December 1, 2000). "Joint Public Health Center Launched". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    50.^ "About SCS". The School of Continuing Studies. Georgetown University. June 11, 2007. Retrieved July 26, 2007.
    51.^ Blazey, Elizabeth (October 3, 2008). "Student Life Begins to Boom in SFS-Q's Infant Years". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    52.^ Sahrmann, Marie (October 17, 2008). "Faculty Gender Ratio Favors Males". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    53.^ Heberle, Robert (September 21, 2004). "Faculty Funds Favor Kerry". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    54.^ Hu, Dawn (November 21, 2008). "GU Faculty Among Highest Donors to Obama Campaign". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    55.^ "List all faculty experts". Faculty Experts. Georgetown University. 2007. Retrieved July 14, 2007.
    56.^ "Faculty and Administration". Georgetown University Law Center. 2009. Retrieved November 23, 2009.
    57.^ "Colombia Reports". September 8, 2010. Retrieved September 8, 2010.
    58.^ Sarubbi, Andrea E. (March 7, 2006). "Former President of Poland Joins Georgetown Faculty as Distinguished Scholar". Georgetown University Department of Communications. Retrieved February 15, 2009.
    59.^ Heller, Chris (August 11, 2010). "Former Colombian President to teach at Georgetown". The Georgetown Voice. Retrieved August 11, 2010.
    60.^ "University Mission Statement". Office of the President. Georgetown University. Retrieved July 24, 2007.
    61.^ "Georgetown University". The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. 2010. Retrieved September 17, 2012.
    62.^ a b c "Characteristics". National Center for Education Statistics. 2009. Retrieved February 20, 2012.
    63.^ "Library Resident Program". Georgetown Law Library. 2007. Retrieved July 9, 2007.
    64.^ "Research centers, institutes and programs". Research & Scholarship. Georgetown University. 2007. Retrieved July 13, 2007.
    65.^ de Vise, Daniel (October 16, 2009). "Hopkins Still Top School For Research Spending". The Washington Post. Retrieved October 16, 2009.
    66.^ a b Ponder, Meredith; Anna Cheimets (February 27, 2008). "Science at Georgetown: Research and the Real World". The Georgetown Independent. Retrieved December 13, 2010.
    67.^ Weber, Lauren (September 10, 2010). "Georgetown Receives $5.6 Million Department of Education Grant". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    68.^ "Georgetown Research Leads To First Cancer Vaccine". Science Daily. June 9, 2006. Retrieved August 18, 2007.
    69.^ "Academic Ranking of World Universities: National". Institute of Higher Education, Shanghai Jiao Tong University. 2012. Retrieved August 15, 2012.
    70.^ "America's Best Colleges". Forbes. 2012. Retrieved August 29, 2012.
    71.^ "National Universities Rankings". U.S. News & World Report. September 13, 2011. Retrieved September 25, 2011.
    72.^ "The Washington Monthly National University Rankings". The Washington Monthly. 2012. Retrieved November 11, 2012.
    73.^ "Academic Ranking of World Universities: Global". Institute of Higher Education, Shanghai Jiao Tong University. 2012. Retrieved August 15, 2012.
    74.^ "QS World University Rankings". QS Quacquarelli Symonds Limited. 2012. Retrieved September 11, 2012.
    75.^ "World University Rankings 2012-2013". The Times Higher Education. 2012. Retrieved October 11, 2012.
    76.^ "Undergraduate Applications Largest in Georgetown History". Georgetown University. April 2, 2012. Retrieved April 13, 2012.
    77.^ Fiske 2010, p. 66
    78.^ "10 Medical Schools With Lowest Acceptance Rates". USNWR. April 5, 2011. Retrieved 2011-06-22.
    79.^ "ABA Law School Data". American Bar Association. Retrieved 2011-06-19.
    80.^ "Statistical Profiles of Admitted Students 2007–2010 – MSFS". Georgetown University. Retrieved 2011-06-21.
    81.^ "Full-Time MBA Profile". McDonough School of Business. 2008. Retrieved June 22, 2011.
    82.^ Avery, Christopher, Glickman, Mark E., Hoxby, Caroline Minter and Metrick, Andrew (December 2005). "A Revealed Preference Ranking of U.S. Colleges and Universities" (PDF). Retrieved May 14, 2007.
    83.^ "College Search Georgetown University". College Board. 2008. Retrieved October 10, 2008.
    84.^ "First Year Accepted Students' Profile". Georgetown University. 2010. Retrieved March 6, 2011.
    85.^ "Preparation Process for First Year Applicants". Georgetown University. 2011. Retrieved September 20, 2011.
    86.^ "Undergraduate Financial Aid". Georgetown Facts. Georgetown University. August 31, 2009. Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    87.^ "Georgetown University Transportation Shuttle (GUTS)". Georgetown University. 2011. Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    88.^ Bachman, Jessica (May 1, 2007). "Years After Blueprint Ditched, Some Lament Missed Chance". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    89.^ "Georgetown Key Facts". Georgetown University. 2011. Retrieved February 7, 2011.
    90.^ "Georgetown Goes Greener". Blue & Gray. July 5, 2007. Retrieved July 18, 2007.
    91.^ "Georgetown University". College Sustainability Report Card. 2011. Retrieved January 5, 2012.
    92.^ Simpao, Bernadette. "Red Square". The Hoya. Archived from the original on April 1, 2004. Retrieved July 24, 2007.
    93.^ George, Hardy (October 1972). "Georgetown University's Healy Building". The Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians (Society of Architectural Historians) 31 (3): 208. doi:10.2307/988766. JSTOR 988766.
    94.^ "District of Columbia Inventory of Historic Sites" (PDF). District of Columbia: Office of Planning. September 28, 2009. Retrieved December 13, 2010.
    95.^ a b "Georgetown Map Directory". Georgetown University. 2011. Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    96.^ "About Visitation: Map & Directions". Georgetown Visitation. Retrieved March 28, 2007.
    97.^ Timiraos, Nick (August 22, 2003). "From Hole to Home, Southwest Quad Completed". The Hoya. Archived from the original on October 24, 2007. Retrieved May 7, 2007.
    98.^ "$20 Million Gift to Benefit New MSB Building". Office of Communications (Georgetown University). July 10, 2009. Retrieved July 10, 2009.
    99.^ Timiraos, Nick (October 14, 2005). "Building The Hilltop's Future". The Hoya. Retrieved April 26, 2011.
    100.^ a b Bellmore, Ryan (August 2, 2011). "Princeton Review justifies its existence, ranks colleges". The Georgetown Voice. Retrieved August 2, 2011.
    101.^ Cho, Ah-Hyun (February 21, 2008). "Not Always a Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood". The Hoya. Archived from the original on March 1, 2008. Retrieved August 12, 2008.
    102.^ Burke, Brian (October 7, 2009). "Campus Crime Rose 7% in 2008, DPS Report Says". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    103.^ "Frequently Asked Questions". On-Campus Housing. Georgetown University Law Center. January 10, 2007. Retrieved August 2, 2007.
    104.^ "Washington Neighborhoods". Office of Housing and Residential Life. Georgetown University. May 3, 2007. Retrieved August 2, 2007.
    105.^ Mlyniec, Wally (October 26, 2004). "Construction Notes". Campus Completion Project. Georgetown University. Retrieved July 8, 2007.
    106.^ "Welcome to the Villa". Villa le Balze. Georgetown University. April 23, 2008. Retrieved July 26, 2007.
    107.^ "Study Abroad in Italy". Villa le Balze. Georgetown University. April 23, 2008. Retrieved August 12, 2008.
    108.^ "About". McGhee Center for Eastern Mediterranean Studies. Georgetown University. December 18, 2007. Retrieved April 26, 2008.
    109.^ "Fall 2008: Semester Abroad". McGhee Center for Eastern Mediterranean Studies. Georgetown University. February 22, 2008. Retrieved April 26, 2008.
    110.^ Heberle, Robert (May 20, 2005). "SFS to Establish Qatar Campus". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    111.^ "Studying International Affairs". Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar. Retrieved July 26, 2007.
    112.^ "乔治敦大学联络办公室 Georgetown University Liaison Office". Georgetown University Office of the Provost. 2009. Retrieved February 4, 2009.
    113.^ Parks, Ann W. (November 3, 2008). "The Center for Transnational Legal Studies Kicks off in London". Georgetown University Law Center. Retrieved July 12, 2009.
    114.^ "Student Profile — Class of 2015". Office of Undergraduate Admissions. Georgetown University. 2010. Retrieved September 20, 2011.
    115.^ "Statistics on Georgetown's International Community". Office of International Programs. Georgetown University. June 30, 2010. Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    116.^ a b c "Final Report and Recommendations". Student Commission for Unity. Georgetown University. January 2009. Retrieved December 2, 2009.
    117.^ Heneghan, Tom (July 9, 2007). "U.S. imam questions if "American" Islam exists". Reuters. Retrieved July 24, 2007.
    118.^ "Other Traditions". Campus Ministry. Georgetown University. Retrieved August 2, 2010.
    119.^ "Volunteerism and Service at Georgetown". Georgetown Facts. June 16, 2005. Archived from the original on February 14, 2008. Retrieved July 24, 2007.
    120.^ "Georgetown's Great Escape". Georgetown Magazine. February 27, 2006. Archived from the original on August 25, 2007. Retrieved July 24, 2007.
    121.^ Norton, Chris (April 26, 2007). "Suggestive figures, Grading on curves, Georgetown gets down". The Georgetown Voice. Retrieved July 24, 2007.
    122.^ Salinas, Anna (January 30, 2009). "SCU Report Prescribes Change, Inclusion". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    123.^ Heller, Chris (September 16, 2010). "Newsweek ranks Georgetown among the nation's most diverse and LGBTQ-friendly schools". The Georgetown Voice. Retrieved September 16, 2010.
    124.^ Farra, Emily (December 8, 2011). "The 10 Most Hipster Campuses". College Magazine. Retrieved December 12, 2011.
    125.^ "Most Vegan-Friendly College Contest 2011". December 2011. Retrieved December 12, 2011.
    126.^ "COOL: College Opportunities Online Locator". National Center for Education Statistics. 2005. Retrieved July 11, 2007.
    127.^ Marush, Gabrielle (June 13, 2011). "Neighbors ask Georgetown to house all students on campus". The GW Hatchet. Retrieved October 3, 2011.
    128.^ Koester, Anne Y. (June 13, 2011). "Spring 2011 Semester Report" (PDF). Off Campus Student Life. Georgetown University. Retrieved October 3, 2011.
    129.^ "Frequently Asked Questions". Prospective Students. Georgetown University. Archived from the original on July 2, 2007. Retrieved July 25, 2007.
    130.^ Mac Neal, Caitlin (November 13, 2009). "2010–2020 Campus Plan Drafted". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    131.^ "Student Life". Georgetown University School of Medicine. 2009. Retrieved July 15, 2009.
    132.^ "Student Life Report 2012" (PDF). Georgetown University Student Association. February 24, 2012. Retrieved March 1, 2012.
    133.^ Palko, Ian (September 21, 1999). "SAC Fair Is Opportunity for Most, Exclusion for Some". The Hoya. Archived from the original on October 24, 2007. Retrieved July 27, 2007.
    134.^ Giblin, Adam (October 1, 2002). "Support Your Neighborhood, Vote in D.C.". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    135.^ "Philodemic Society". Georgetown University. March 19, 2007. Retrieved May 3, 2007.
    136.^ "Poulton Hall Stage 3". The Washington Post. 2008. Retrieved September 15, 2012.
    137.^ "About Us". Nomadic Theatre. Georgetown University. 2008. Retrieved April 26, 2008.
    138.^ "About". The Georgetown Improv Association. Georgetown University. 2010. Retrieved June 20, 2010.
    139.^ "Collegiate-Acappella Directory of College A Cappella Groups A-G". Collegiate-acappella.com. Retrieved 2011-03-20.
    140.^ Bayer, Michael (November 5, 2003). "A capella abounds at DCAF". The Georgetown Independent. Archived from the original on September 27, 2007. Retrieved August 19, 2007.
    141.^ "History of The Chimes". Georgetown Chimes. August 5, 2008. Archived from the original on May 15, 2008. Retrieved August 12, 2008.
    142.^ "Pep Band Homepage". Georgetown University. 2008. Retrieved February 24, 2008.
    143.^ "About The Corp". The Corp. April 29, 2007. Archived from the original on 2007-06-29. Retrieved July 9, 2007.
    144.^ Hu, Dawn (April 27, 2011). "Profits Take Hit as The Corp Gives Back". The Hoya. Retrieved May 25, 2011.
    145.^ Heller, Chris (September 8, 2010). "GUASFCU manages more than $16 million in assets". The Georgetown Voice. Retrieved September 8, 2010.
    146.^ Swan, John (October 3, 2006). "GU Goes 'Mad' for Financial Advice". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    147.^ "Battalion History". The HOYA Battalion. August 4, 2010. Retrieved December 13, 2010.
    148.^ Goldberg, Roxanne (February 27, 2012). "ROTC ranked nation's best". GW Hatchet. Retrieved February 27, 2012.
    149.^ "National University Rankings 2010". Washington Monthly. 2010. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    150.^ "Georgetown University Grilling Society (GUGS): About". Studentorgs.georgetown.edu. 2003-02-20. Retrieved 2011-05-01.
    151.^ Baldwin, Leslie (November 8, 2001). "Events educate GU on violence against women". The Georgetown Voice. Retrieved July 10, 2007.
    152.^ Amend, Andy (February 9, 1999). "Compromise Reached". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    153.^ Somers, Bailey (March 6, 2003). "Cafeterias to offer only Fair Trade coffee". The Georgetown Voice. Retrieved July 10, 2007.
    154.^ Toporek, Bryan (May 2008). "Georgetown Students Struggle to Endorse Candidates". Georgetown Journalism. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University. Retrieved April 18, 2012.
    155.^ Walters, Anne K. (May 12, 2006). "Gimme an 'O'!". The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved December 13, 2010.
    156.^ Johnson, Andrew (November 6, 2003). "Jesuit colleges lack pro-choice groups". Marquette Tribune. Retrieved April 25, 2007.
    157.^ Rosier, Kevin (September 14, 2002). "FIRE group gives GU 'red light'". The Georgetown Voice. Retrieved July 17, 2007.
    158.^ "Chains Effective for Georgetown Protesters". WRC-TV. March 29, 2010. Retrieved April 13, 2010.
    159.^ Harbourt, Sam (April 13, 2007). "Law Center Divided Over Denial Of Funds for Abortion Rights". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    160.^ Viator, Margaret (March 1, 2012). "Law Student Mired in Birth Control Debate". The Hoya. Retrieved March 13, 2012.
    161.^ Waddell, Justin (April 19, 2012). "Sandra Fluke, 780 law students to Georgetown: comply with contraception mandate in 2012". Georgetown Law Weekly. Retrieved April 24, 2012.
    162.^ "The Hoya: A Brief History". Digital Georgetown. Retrieved March 25, 2010.
    163.^ Zumbrun, Josh (January 14, 2005). "How Georgetown Found a Different Voice". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    164.^ "About The Georgetown Independent". November 10, 2008. Retrieved March 25, 2010.
    165.^ Free, Elissa (October 21, 2004). "Georgetown Law Weekly Wins ABA's Best Newspaper Award Three Years Running". Georgetown University Law Center. Retrieved November 25, 2009.
    166.^ Redden, Molly (October 23, 2008). "Controversial Catholics...and the third coming of The Georgetown Academy". The Georgetown Voice. Retrieved October 27, 2008.
    167.^ Santulli, Stephen (November 7, 2006). "The Right's Fight to Write". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    168.^ "Students start progressive political magazine". Georgetown Voice. March 30, 2011. Retrieved June 27, 2011.
    169.^ "The Fire This Time". Georgetown University. Retrieved April 21, 2012.
    170.^ "The Georgetown Heckler". January 23, 2007. Retrieved April 19, 2007.
    171.^ Cho, Ah-Hyun (January 27, 2006). "The Revolution Will Be Televised". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    172.^ Dillon, Liam (October 17, 2002). "Finding a Place for Campus Radio". The Georgetown Voice. Retrieved August 19, 2007.
    173.^ Singh, Suma (September 19, 2000). "Greek Life: Alive and Well At Georgetown". The Hoya. Archived from the original on November 22, 2005. Retrieved March 10, 2007.
    174.^ Boyle, Terrence (December 2, 2007). "The Other Georgetown Fraternities". Delta Phi Epsilon. Retrieved December 2, 2007.
    175.^ "Frequently Asked Questions". Delta Phi Epsilon. November 22, 2006. Retrieved August 16, 2007.
    176.^ "Sorority". Delta Phi Epsilon. April 16, 2007. Retrieved August 16, 2007.
    177.^ Glick, Michael (October 29, 2002). "AEPi Fosters Greek and Jewish Life". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    178.^ Haviland, Erica (April 27, 2007). "SigEp Receives National Charter". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    179.^ Washington, Vanessa (April 21, 2006). "Weakly Greek". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    180.^ Johnson, Lindsay (March 26, 2009). "Life of a Frat on a Greek-Free Campus". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    181.^ "Schedule of Events". Georgetown Day. Retrieved October 8, 2009.
    182.^ Skeehan, Patrick (October 31, 2003). "Exorcist Showings, Pumpkin Carving Highlight Activities". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    183.^ Mellott, Sarah (October 25, 2005). "Parties, Pageantry Mark Homecoming". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    184.^ Tarnow, George (October 21, 2004). "Clock strikes midnight, basketball stars come out". The Georgetown Voice. Retrieved July 27, 2007.
    185.^ Bonesteel, Matt (May 16, 2012). "Verizon Center to host 2013 NCAA tournament East Regional". The Washington Post. Retrieved May 16, 2012.
    186.^ Alolod, Gerard P. (May 3, 2005). "Lecture Fund Brings Diversity to Georgetown". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    187.^ "Initiatives, projects and lecture series". Office of the President. Georgetown University. 2008. Retrieved August 12, 2008.
    188.^ Witkin, Gordon and Jodi Schneider (March 10, 2002). "Why they're not just about winning and losing anymore". U.S. News and World Report. Retrieved July 26, 2007.
    189.^ "Graduation Rates Report" (PDF). NCAA. October 21, 2011. Retrieved February 10, 2012.
    190.^ Shoup-Mendizabal, Jon (January 23, 2004). "Glory Days". The Hoya. Archived from the original on March 14, 2007. Retrieved August 27, 2007.
    191.^ O'Neill & Williams 2003, pp. 54, 62–63
    192.^ "What's A Hoya?". HoyaSaxa.com. August 17, 2005. Retrieved April 30, 2007.
    193.^ Reynolds, Jon K. (September–October 1983). "The Dogs of Georgetown". Georgetown Magazine. Georgetown University Library. Retrieved June 30, 2008.
    194.^ "Hoyas claim their 1st Big East tourney title since 1989". ESPN.com. Associated Press. Retrieved July 10, 2007.
    195.^ "Rams hope to charge past Hoyas in Southwest Regional clash". 9news. The Sports Network. March 18, 2011. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    196.^ Goode, Harlan and Brenna McGee (February 13, 2007). "Former Greats Celebrate Hoops at 100 Years Gala". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    197.^ Diamond, Jared (February 8, 2012). "Basketball's Alumni Loot Index". Wall Street Journal. Retrieved February 7, 2012.
    198.^ Jammet, Nicolas (November 23, 2004). "Georgetown's Track Program Quietly Dominates". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    199.^ Owings, Matt (November 21, 2011). "Wisconsin men, Georgetown women earn cross country titles". USA Today. Retrieved February 10, 2012.
    200.^ Hollander, Evan (June 14, 2012). "Hoyas Win Eighth National Title". The Hoya. Retrieved June 15, 2012.
    201.^ Mendoza, Moises (May 20, 2005). "Experience, Leadership and Vision Propel Hoya Crew to National Prominence". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    202.^ "Georgetown Men's Lacrosse Moves Up to No. 4 in National Rankings". Georgetown University Official Athletic Site. April 24, 2007. Retrieved April 26, 2007.
    203.^ Bohbot, Samantha (April 21, 2009). "Ford, Hubschmann Lead GU to Big East Crown". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    204.^ Goff, Steven (December 9, 2012). "Indiana soccer defeats Georgetown in College Cup final". The Washington Post. Retrieved January 10, 2013.
    205.^ El-Bashir, Tarik (November 26, 2010). "Georgetown women's soccer has reached new heights". The Washington Post. Retrieved January 10, 2013.
    206.^ Finn, Dave (November 17, 2009). "Hoyas Finish Off Undefeated Season". The Hoya. Retrieved February 10, 2012.
    207.^ a b Chiang, Jessie (November 20, 2008). "Georgetown Grads Earn Top Salaries". The Hoya. Retrieved May 1, 2011.
    208.^ "Peace Corp Top Colleges 2011" (PDF). Peace Corps News Releases. September 30, 2010. Retrieved February 7, 2012.
    209.^ Westergaard, Lily (February 3, 2012). "GU Ranked 10th Among Peace Corps Volunteers". The Hoya. Retrieved February 7, 2012.
    210.^ a b "Georgetown University". NNDB. 2013. Retrieved January 10, 2013.
    211.^ "Profile: Gloria Arroyo". BBC News. February 24, 2006. Retrieved March 24, 2009.
    212.^ Yazbeck, Natacha (June 28, 2009). "Lebanon's new PM pledges unity". Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved June 27, 2009.
    213.^ Long, Chrissie; Llana, Sara Miller (February 8, 2010). "Costa Rica elects first woman president, inspiring the region". The Christian Science Monitor. Retrieved May 11, 2010.
    214.^ "Hoyas Serving the Nation". Office of Federal Relations. Georgetown University. 2010. Retrieved August 23, 2011.
    215.^ "Prominent SFS Alumni". Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service. 2011. Retrieved August 23, 2011.
    216.^ "Civic Engagement and National Service". Quarterly Reports. Georgetown University. Spring 2009. Retrieved August 23, 2011.
    217.^ "Alcatel-Lucent (ALUA): Executive Profile". BusinessWeek. 2007. Retrieved December 3, 2007.
    218.^ Wilson, Craig (January 18, 2008). "AOL exec and Capitals owner Leonsis' estate isn't just for show". USA Today. Retrieved October 27, 2009.
    219.^ Diamond, Jared (December 13, 2011). "Where the People in Charge Went to School". The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved February 1, 2012.
    220.^ "Bradley Cooper, Sexiest Man Alive?". The Boston Globe. November 17, 2011. Retrieved December 7, 2011.

    Bibliography

    Curran, Robert Emmett (1993). The Bicentennial History of Georgetown University. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press. ISBN 0-87840-485-6.
    Fiske, Edward B. (2010). Fiske Guide to Getting Into the Right College. Sourcebooks, Inc. ISBN 1-4022-4309-X.
    Nevils, William Coleman (1934). Miniatures of Georgetown: Tercentennial Causeries. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press. OCLC 8224468.
    O'Neill, Paul R.; Williams, Paul K. (2003). Georgetown University. Charleston, South Carolina: Arcadia Publishing. ISBN 0-7385-1509-4.


    Last edited by orthodoxymoron on Wed Apr 17, 2013 12:16 pm; edited 8 times in total
    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7704
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: Archangelic Queens of Heaven and the United States of the Solar System

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Thu Apr 04, 2013 5:16 pm

    Take a look at this very cool watch advertisement!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctj-RDbTBMU Perhaps I should go into an Accentuate the Positive Mode (APM) after dealing with so much speculation and negativitiy?! At some point, the struggle must climax in an Orgasmic Eureka Phenomenon (OEP)!!! But it must always be remembered that the Agony must precede the Ecstasy!! The more I examine the madness -- the less I wish to discuss it. In some respects -- Everything is Fine!! In other respects -- Everything Sucks!! As I have asked previously -- "is there really a neat and clean way to run a solar system?" Perhaps it has been absolutely necessary for this world to go through hell on its way to heaven. I continue to think that if I were briefed by the best and the brightest (human and otherwise) on the Dark-Side of the Moon -- that my editorial slant might be completely different. In retrospect, I might've been much better-off if I had researched silently by reading books from used-book stores -- with no credit-cards, no phone-calls, no internet-forums, no controversial-videos, no messy-house, etc, etc, etc. I really don't know if we're on the verge of heaven or hell. We seem to be in purgatory presently. I still think the elites were promised goods which were never intended to be delivered. I still like the theory of human-physicality and responsible-freedom -- yet the reality seems to fall way-short of the intended-ideal. In many ways, I don't know if the Archangels are good or bad. I suspect they are BOTH. If someone else had been running the show in this solar system over the last few thousand years -- things might've turned-out a lot worse than they did. I don't know. I simply wish for us to make the next steps the right ones -- as we seem to be entering a galactic minefield of sorts. Anyway, here's some more reposting of vintage orthodoxymoron.

    Here is another what if. What if it's Gabriel vs Lucifer + Michael - with Gabriel and Lucifer being the big-guns - and Michael being highly pure, but relatively powerless compared with the other two? Might Lucifer and Michael be co-mediators between Gabriel and Humanity? Might Gabriel be God/Satan? Might Lucifer be Mary/Holy Spirit? Might Michael be Jesus? Once again - don't get mad at me - this is just more speculation. My goal is to make you face yourselves - and think. Could Gabriel have been disfunctional in Heaven (Orion?)? Could Lucifer and Michael have rebelled against Gabriel? Did Humanity aka Fallen Angels aka Nephilim aka Us - follow (fall) Lucifer and Michael to Earth? Did we steal Fire (advanced technology, hybridization genetics, and spiritual wisdom) from Gabriel? Was this the Original Sin? Are Lucifer and Michael at odds regarding how to deal with Gabriel? Is Gabriel the leader of the Incoming Annunaki? Is Lucifer the leader of the Local Annunaki? Is Michael the leader of Humanity (as we know humans to be)? I keep feeling incredible tension and looming fate - as I comtemplate our situation. Earth really does seem to be a Planet in Rebellion - and it feels as though the rebellion is about to be put down - once and for all. But what if ALL parties are wrong? What if an innovative solution needs to be pursued? I keep mentioning a Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom Solar System aka The United States of the Solar System. I like the concept - but I am clueless regarding the details and implementation aspects. I'll just keep passively pursuing this line of reasoning - and hope that the Big Gun Gods and Goddesses call off Armageddon, Retribution, Annihilation, Damnation, Utter Destruction, etc. - and declare some sort of a conditional truce - to work things out in a reasonable, rational, and peaceful manner. Hope springs eternal - but don't hold your breath - hoping for hell to freeze over...

    Here is another piece of evidence which seems to place ancient Aryans in India - right next door to Tibet. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NPQ9dEVcHRk&feature=related If a Sovereign Queen of the Air from Sirius (Lucifer?) was Aldebaran/Sirius/Aryan - and came to Tibet 12,000 to 14,000 years ago in the Moon - to conduct a hybridization program on Earth - this would be highly interesting - wouldn't it? Is it possible for Aryans to be pigmented? Again - I don't know a damn thing about this subject. All roads may lead to Rome - but the most important roads might originate in Tibet. What if Earth became Nazified thousands of years ago? What if Babylon, Medo-Persia, Egypt, Greece, and Rome - were essentially Nazi in nature? Please don't stone me - this was just a random thought. What if Gizeh Intelligence has been running Earth for thousands of years? What if Gizeh Intelligence continues to run Earth? Are we dealing with Annunaki Masons (Gabriel) vs Annunaki Nazis (Lucifer) vs Human Magicians (Michael)? Or - are they the same? We are all one? Three sides of the same pyramid? Trilateral Commission? Trinity? Godhead? If someone has been in charge for thousands of years - they could genetically engineer all manner of races - human, grey, and reptilian - and create all manner of mythologies, theologies, religions, empires, and nations. Do we all come from the goddess? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WoVNveJFTig Rewatch Alex Collier's 1994 interview http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9SouPQnxLtM - and his 1995 lecture http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZegXpXm4bug - with this thread in mind.

    Many years ago - there was a TV show called 'Queen for a Day' - and my grandmother was on it. Can you imagine being 'Queen of Heaven for a Day?' I keep getting the image of someone looking a lot like my avatar (for special occasions anyway) - travelling around the world on magneto-leviton trains - and interacting with most of the political, religious, scientific, business, and financial leaders of the world - each and every day. But it is unclear to me whether Earth is completely their show - or whether they are an administrator for - or are in conflict with - an even more powerful being, or group of beings. This, of course, is merely speculation. If I could prove this - I would cease to exist. I wouldn't have to wait for the rocks to fall on me...

    I would love to shadow the key players in this solar system as sort of a neutral observer. Is this sort of thinking a form of mental illness - or is it the proper way to think about solar system issues? Should I get all wrapped-up in the local political mudslinging - or should I mostly think of responsible principles and concepts relative to the politics, religion, psychology, and ethics of doing business in this solar system? I'm beginning to think in terms of competing with an Anna or Katesh version of the Queen of Heaven - who I think might be the chief administrator of this solar system. Again - is this a form of mental illness - or is this a reasonable modality of getting a handle on what's really going on? Is there a legitimate place for a Solar System Administrator? Would things be even more chaotic if none existed? I'm thinking that a Solar System Observer (or Observers) - who had access to everyone and everything - with no authority - might be a good thing - but I don't really know. Thinking about all of this makes me shaky. Is anyone else thinking in this manner? I'm sure there is - but who are they? Where are they? What are they doing?

    I keep thinking that all proposed solutions and attempted implementations will be highly problematic. No matter how we attempt to put the puzzle together - it will always be wrong. There will always be discord and conflict. However - we really should seek more sane ways to manage the insanity. All of this should probably proceed in an evolutionary rather than a revolutionary manner. Top-down would probably be better than bottom-up - but both would be optimal. Talking softly and carrying a big stick would be splendiferous!

    In light of this thread - and current events - might it be wise to take a closer look at India, Tibet, China, Iran, and the Medo-Persian Empire? I'm sensing a hugely destructive looming fate in our immediate future - which needs to be defused. The problem is - I don't really know what the threat is - or how to defuse it. Perhaps this is why I am seeking a Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom Solar System aka The United States of the Solar System - based upon Responsibility and the U.S. Constitution (in broad and general terms) - so as to give all factions a fair shake. War is Hell - with very little compassion or reason. I don't expect things to be really happy in this solar system - for a long, long time. However - I would like to see everyone survive - and to continue to evolve ethically and spiritually. I'm presently watching 'Battlestar Galactica - The Plan' - and I'm finding it to be quite depressing. What really bothers me about all of this - is that We the Goyim don't really know what the hell is going on. I mean well - but I'm clueless and powerless - and it seems that the real ptb in this solar system would like all of us to stay that way. I guess I'm really trying to get up to speed with the ptb - without getting involved in the corruption and nastiness. Someone please give my threads a careful study. I don't claim to have the answers or inside knowledge - but I do think that the areas I have covered, and the questions I have raised, really need to be closely examined and answered. I feel like I am operating at about 20% of the 10% of my brain capacity. All is not well emotionally, spiritually, and intellectually - which is why I am not doing anything more than posting random thoughts on the internet. But I predict that someone will be reading these thoughts 100 years from now - and asking themselves why these thoughts were not taken seriously.

    BTW - what is the Kali Rama Step Back - which Ashayana Deane speaks of at 08:00 of the Camelot interview? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dK2vWZE8noU&feature=channel I find this third and final part of the interview to be quite interesting. I find Ashayana to be quite interesting - even though I think I believe about 20% of what she says. I think she knows a helluva lot - but that she speaks in riddles - and only reveals bits and pieces of what she really knows. Her manner of speaking and body language is fascinating. Her name is even interesting. Ashayana = Ash Anna = Black Anna? Think of Ashtar Command. Ash Tar = Black. Come to think of it - what color is a Raven? Sometimes I think I need a good shrink. One who has worked in Underground Bases and Secret Mental Institutions. Don't laugh. Those people may know more than just about anyone else - because they have worked with people who knew so much that it drove them insane. I tend to think that the people who know the most about the creepy and esoteric subjects are those who are in the process of going insane - and who can't handle the truth about what has been going on - and what is currently going on - with all of the disturbing implications and ramifications. I wish I were kidding - but I think the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth - will drive most people insane. I so hope that I'm wrong. I'm just saying this as a precautionary warning to those who are happily and naively searching for the truth - and the happiness which they expect will accompany the truth. I am simultaneously optimistic and pessimistic. My threads are designed to lead one on a journey which is revealing - yet which does not lead one down the primrose path to destruction.

    The fact that the Unholy Trinity of Power, Sex, and Money is a reality - leads me to believe that we need to transcend this trinity - rather than resisting it. We need to engage in the Responsible Pursuit of Power, Sex, and Money. Why should the bad boys and girls have all the good times - and rule the world???? Think about THAT!!!! What if Truly Responsible Businessmen and Businesswomen starting kicking the XXXX out of the Irresponsible Businessmen and Businesswomen???? Then the good guys and good gals would have a monopoly on Power, Sex, and Money - and the world would improve exponentially. I'm just on the verge of stopping this posting. I'm running out of pearls. I have not been tending to business - and my lifestyle makes this obvious. I'm about to pursue business with a vengeance - but in a highly ethical and responsible manner. I'm tired of wading through all of the bs. OK - now I'm going to finish watching the BSG DVD. The horror!!! Then I might try to finish the Courtney Brown books - which scared the hell out of me...

    I think that the Brown books reveal something of substance - but I'm not sure that it is the absolute truth. It could be a mixture of truth and deception. I assume that nearly everything we discussed on AV1 - and currently discuss on MOA - is a mixture of truth, error, and outright deception. I trust nothing and no one. I found out the hard way that I couldn't trust God - so now I don't even trust myself - let alone Courtney Brown. His RVing experiences could be manipulated or contrived supernaturally by nepharious entities. He could have hidden agendas. But I do find the books to be highly interesting - and reveal possibilities which I had never considered. However - I am truly a New Age Agnostic (a new label I have given myself). Sorry to be so blunt - but I'm in sort of a mood...

    I'm in less of a mood today. The Brown material was quite compelling - and the lack of a sales-pitch - gave it the ring of truth - which is probably what scared me. It quite literally blew me away. I will take another look at it later today. But still - I've gotten very paranoid and wary. My speculations have been quite wild - but also quite vivid, to me at least - so I really don't know which way to jump. Is this a sign of instability - or is it simply due dilligence? What do you think about all of this goddess, Kali, Tibet, China, India, Persia, Queen of Heaven stuff? I really feel as though this is playing with fire - but I'm hoping that considering all of the possibilities will help to unite all factions in the solar system - in a constructive manner, which does not involve peace at any price, or any Trojan Horse scenarios.

    Here is some more Queen of Heaven material. http://www.discerningtheworld.com/2010/09/25/mary-queen-of-heaven-whore-of-babylon/

    Mary has appeared under many names over the centuries, here are but a few:

    Mary, Queen of Heaven (Rome)
    Arianrhod (Welsh) Goddess of fertility
    Aprodite (Greek) Goddess of fertility
    Ashteroth (Phoenicians and Canaanites) Goddess of fertility
    Astarte (Eastern Mediterranean/Bronze Age) Goddess of fertility
    Anahita (Persian) Goddess of fertility
    Anu (Celtic) Goddess of fertility
    Aveta (Gaulish) Goddess of fertility
    Brigit (Irish) Goddess of fertility
    Ceres (Rome) Goddess of fertility
    Corn Mother (Native American) Earth Goddess/Goddess of fertility
    Cybele (Rome) Goddess of fertility
    Demeter (Greek) Goddess of fertility
    Freya (Scandinavian) Goddess of fertility
    Frigg (Scandinavian) Goddess of fertility
    Gaia (Greek) Mother goddess
    Hathor (Egyptian) Goddess of fertility
    Haumea (Hawaiian) Mother goddess
    Inanna (Sumerian) Goddess of fertility
    Ishtar (Babylonian/Assyrian) Goddess of fertility
    Isis (Egyptian) Goddess of fertility
    Juno (Rome) Goddess of fertility
    Kali (Indian) – Black earth mother/Goddess of fertility
    Kostroma (Slavic) Goddess of fertility
    Mylitta (Sumerian) Goddess of fertility
    Oshun (Afro/Cuban) Goddess of fertility
    Rainbow Snake (Aborigine) – Earth Goddess/Goddess of fertility
    Rhea (Greek) Mother goddess
    Tlalteutli (Aztec) Goddess of creation
    Venus (Rome) Goddess of fertility
    Vasudhara (Tibetan) Goddess of fertility

    One Nation Under Satan? In Goddess We Trust? Might M-42, Aldebaran, and Sirius be 'home' for most of us? Are we really the 'Orion Group' which Alex Collier refers to? Are our souls interdimensional reptilian in nature? Are all of us human/reptile hybrids with varying percentage differentials? Do most of us have a very low reptile percentage (reptilian brain + reptilian soul) - greys an intermediate percentage - and reptilians a high percentage? Please don't laugh - this is just a wild theory. I tend to think that the Queen of Heaven has been conducting a hybridization program on Earth for thousands of years - starting in Tibet. Some of this is based upon a visit to Tibet by Nicholas Roerich - where he saw strange grey people, and learned of a 'Sovereign Queen of the Air' who had come to Tibet from Sirius to conduct hybridization experiments. Lucis Creator? I am obviously a fan of an organized decentralism solar system government. I'm thinking that a one world government or one solar system government has existed for thousands of years - and that whoever is in power (The Queen of Heaven?) wishes to remain in power - rather than gaining power. I do think that numerous states are an essential ingredient in a world government or solar system government which maximizes responsible freedom over an extended time period.

    I've said this before, but I'm going to say it in a slightly different way - what if we are dealing with a 3 way family feud - namely God/Satan/Father/Gabriel/Amen Ra/Annunaki vs Holy Spirit/Mother/Lucifer/Lilith/Hathor/Isis/Mary/Annunaki vs Son/Michael/Horus/Jesus/Human - fighting over the Human Race? What if we need a little bit of each faction, to make this solar system operate properly? How does Gizeh Intelligence fit into all of this? What would Oedipus say? That mother!! Is anybody out there??

    Why exactly is Obama in India - to the tune of $200,000,000/day? Is this visit significant - especially in light of this particular thread? Does Kali have anything to do with this visit? I have speculated - with others - that the United States is experiencing the first stages of a controlled demolition. I have also speculated - with others - that India, Tibet, and China may be at the center of disclosure. India recently bought a huge amount of gold. China seems to own the U.S. What the hell is going on? http://michellemalkin.com/2010/11/02/india/ I really hate to say this - but I think I'm going to start listening to Alex Jones again. I never really listened to him much - and then I stopped - but I think we may be in for a VERY long, hard winter. (that sounds kinda sexy!) - and I'd sort of like to hear a blow by blow report on the madness - before the wall of water hits - or before the greys take me to a FEMA camp. Could we be in for a perfect storm of NWO ALIEN BS??? Some think so. I don't know.

    Thank-you Carol. Part of your comment piqued my curiosity: "However, I strongly suspect that the male forces are going to undergo major changes as the Queen of Heaven is going to show her hand sooner then later. Why? Because the earth changes are ramping up and will continue for the next 4 years. Two before the crossing and two after the crossing." I will check out the links after I finish listening to Alex Jones. I just want to add that I don't have a problem with highly spiritual, ethical, and powerful women. In fact - I think they may be the way of the future. I'm just worried about the possibility of an unethical and cruel shadowy underworld of black projects, hybridization genetics, tyrannical rule, oppressive religions, compromised and controlled religious and political leaders, etc and et al - with a Queen of Heaven administrator. Once again - I don't know if any of this is true. I'm just trying to make sense out of the chaos and confusion. I'm too passive - which is why I probably need to move in the direction of Alex Jones. I don't wish to end up where he is - but maybe halfway between where I am and where he is. I'm just too burned-out to take off the gloves - just yet. I really don't wish to do anything. I just wish for this solar system to be run properly. I don't know the details of history. I don't know the details of what is presently going on. But I do know that history is a mess - and that the world is a mess presently. I simply wish for the mess to get cleaned up - and there is no better time to do this than right now.

    I'd still like to meet the Queen of Heaven - if she exists - and I would be quite polite - but I wouldn't kneel - kiss her ring - and say 'My Queen'. I might ask her the sort of questions I have asked on AV1 and MOA. Gods and Goddesses don't impress me much...even if they have 500 IQ's...and I don't know that they do...but it wouldn't surprise me. Please get DVD's of the old and new 'V' series - and watch them carefully - reading between the script-lines, in light of AV1 and MOA. That goes for 'Star Wars', 'Battlestar Galactica', and 'Stargate'. I wish to keep everything good, and eliminate everything bad - without hurting or killing anyone - treating everyone and everysoul, with dignity and respect. I stand by everything I have posted on AV1 and MOA - especially regarding a Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom Solar System aka The United States of the Solar System. The Queen of Heaven might even approve - once she gets used to the idea. I have hinted at it before - but I am actually trying to emulate the best aspects of Anna ('V') - in a male sort of way. But actually - the Anna in my mind's eye - is quite different than the one in the series. The series is just the starting point. It's only the beginning of a bright new day! Do you see my point? It sounds strange - and I am mad - but I do have a method. Queen of Heaven = Anna from Heaven. Who knows - she might actually like me. I continue to think that 'earth-changes' will be deliberately inflicted - and that an 'alien-invasion' or a 'second-coming' will be staged with hybrids and advanced technology - coming out of sub-surface bases throughout the solar system. I so hope that I'm wrong. BTW - the links rock - especially Cliff High on the Veritas Show! Here are a couple of links to a story about Shakira playing Kali in an Indian movie. 1. http://voteupindia.com/shakira-as-goddess-kali-in-indian-film/ 2. http://www.masala.com/25104-meet-kali---the-warrior Why on Earth are they making a Bollywood movie on the Warrior Goddess Kali - at this particular time? Is this simply a coincidence? In light of this thread - I tend to think not. But what do I know?

    Don't be frightened. I mean no harm. Thank-you Carol and Raven. I'm hearing somewhat of an acknowledgement regarding some of my Queen of Heaven theorizing. This part of the first link from you, Raven, particularly interested me. "When the Universe was born in Archetypes, then it was LILITH, the Dark Queen of Heaven, also known as Inanna and the Screech Owl and Isis and Mary; who PRECEDED EVE as the 'First Wife' for ADAM and NOT being made from one of Adam's Ribs." What if disclosure will occur during Obama's India trip? What if Obama is going to go down into an underground base in India (under the Taj Mahal?), Tibet, or China - and do a disclosure press conference with Kali aka The Queen of Heaven? Could this be an official announcement of the New World Order? Could this announce or trigger a worldwide financial collapse? Could Obama end up remaining in India, Tibet, or China? Just wondering. This post is more wild than most of my other wild posts. Also - the 'V' series will be resuming in the next couple of months. Might this series contain a lot of follow-up disclosure information? Sorry if I spoiled the surprise - but no one seems to listen to me anyway. Probably nothing will happen - but just in case, you might wish to buy some extra food. I don't do the gun thing - but I do have some extra food. Lastly - and oppositely - what if the India trip signals the end of the corrupt NWO and PTB? Now that the bright-lights are being turned-on - are the rats starting to run away? Just more wild speculation and random thoughts.

    Once again - I simply wish for things to work out well for everyone - including the bad guys and gals. I think that a lot of us good guys and gals might be bad guys and gals - if we had the opportunity. Think long and hard about That! You know what I'm talking about - don't you Lucifer??!! I bet you wish that I would just shut-up!! I still want to share some fine French wine with you Lucifer (Kali?) - and listen to you improvise at St. Ouen, St. Sulpice, or Notre Dame de Paris. I feel as though I am your best friend and worst enemy. Come - let us reason together. Is it time to reprogram and reboot this solar system? I want to wish Satan, Lucifer, Kali, Gods, Goddesses, Angels, Demons, Archangels, Illuminati, Megalomaniacs, Reptilians, Greys, et al a terrific rest of the century. I think we can clean up this mess - without enslavement, extermination, Star Wars, or Masters of the Universe. Imagine 10,000 very competent humans engaging in Constitutional Global and Solar System Governance, with advisors which might include all of the above. I continue to attempt to think Lucifer's (Kali's?) thoughts after her. See you at Mork and Ork's Grey Bar, Kali! Well - now I'm going to re-watch another episode of 'V'. I am of peace. Always.

    The following is six years old - but it's still relevant to this thread: India to annouce UFO's are REAL - India Daily News http://ancientx.com/nm/anmviewer.asp?a=66&z=1

    New Delhi is in the middle of a big secret internal debate. On one side the largest democracy of the world is eager to explain to its citizens and to the world about the ongoing contacts with the UFOs and extra-terrestrials. On the other hand there are invisible untold international protocols that prohibit doing anything that may cause worldwide fear and panic.

    It is well accepted between the UFO and extra-terrestrial experts that all the five nuclear powers are in contact with the beings from other stars for quite some time. Recently India has seen enormous news on UFO contacts and secret UFO bases in Himalayas near the Chinese bases. In Ladak, for example the locals clearly point out the everyday phenomenon of large triangular spacecrafts coming out below the ground and Indian security forces protecting them. Military officials and politicians have confessed the fact that India has been contacted. India has been told the rules of the Universe.

    The current debate is on whether to keep it secret like other countries are doing or in tradition of a total transparent society come out and tell the truth. India is so open and democratic; it is very difficult to keep a secret for long. The biggest concern of the Government today is that unlike in other countries, it will be very difficult to keep it secret for long. If the information comes out through unofficial channels first and then the authorities are pressed against the wall to confess, two bad things can happen. First, it can really cause a panic in the country as well as the world. Second, the way the Indian politics is run, the ruling party will be thrown out of power in no time i it is ever found that the Government withheld such information from the public.

    The recent rush of world leaders to India is remarkable. Starting from Russian President Putin to major Senators from America have visited or are planning to visit India. European Union is in deep discussion with India on cooperation. All sanctions against India’s nuclear programs and Indian Space Research Organization are in the process of being lifted. India is cooperating with Europeans and the Americans in space explorations and technology research program. India is also part of World Trade Organization. India is receiving major outsourcing contracts in IT and call-center service work from America and Europe. India’s Forex reserve is at a level never imagined before because of international direct investments from Western nations, Japan, Korea and others. Interestingly, China the arc rival of India changed its posture in the last few years to make India’s friendship and trade a priority. India is slowly getting to the point when it is accepted as a permanent member of the Security Council. All the five Security Council members China, America, Russia, France and UK support India’s inclusion.

    When all these factors are added together and analyzed, it seems like India is being told by the world to abide by the hidden protocols and in exchange be recognized as a major emerging superpower. The debate the country is facing internally is whether to abide by the laws of the world and the Universe to be recognized as a superpower or be truthful to its citizens and the world. According to sources close to the Government, the UFO contacts is known by quite a few politicians in the opposition and of course by those who are in power. The military has legitimate concern of not letting the secrets out either.

    Recently, India’s foreign affairs minister Mr. Natwar Singh came out and said that for India it was not necessary to become a nuclear power. He is a strong supporter of Mrs. Indira Gandhi, India’s former Prime Minister who initiated the nuclear program in the mid sixties. India first exploded a nuclear device in Pokhran in early seventies. The whole country including people from his own party questioned Mr. Singh for such an irresponsible statement. But on analyzing his statements, it is evident, that based on what he knows now, being a nuclear power really does not matter much because the technologies controlled by the extra-terrestrials are so advanced that all our technologies mean really nothing. But importantly he may be irritated with this controversial ongoing secret debate and what he really meant was that if India was not a nuclear power, the debate on UFO and extra-terrestrials will never be there in India.

    Take a look at these images of the Nagas: http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=nagas+images&qpvt=nagas+images&FORM=IGRE

    Take a look at these images of Kali: http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=kali+images&qpvt=kali+images&FORM=IGRE

    What is the reality behind the mythology?

    Kala = Chronos = Time? Should the Goddess of Destruction be glorified? Are the killing, blood, severed heads, and severed hands really good things? What if the god of this world - or the administrator of this world - is a black (or pigmented) woman - who is a mixture of good and evil - genius and insanity? Has anyone seen the current cover of Newsweek magazine - with President Obama portrayed as Kali? Could there be an Obama - Kali connection? Just more speculation. I'm just scratching the surface of this whole goddess thing. It really is new to me - but so far, I think there is a good side and a bad side to it. Once again - I recommend buying the DVD's of the first twelve episodes of the 2009-10 version of 'V'. Go carefully through my 'Lucifer' and 'Kali' threads before watching it. Then, please tell me what you think. I'm still in limbo on this subject - but if you go through the material which I just posted on orthodoxymoron threads - you'll get a pretty good idea of where I'm coming from. As I try to solve my problems - I keep creating more perplexities. I don't think I have the answers - but I really wish to discuss this (and other) subjects - on an ongoing basis - as an ongoing research project. Namaste.

    I can relate to the best aspects of Anna in 'V' - and to the smart and pretty Rachael (White House lady in charge) in 'Contact' - as well as to the spiritual leader of the Navi in 'Avatar'. I can scarcely imagine what it might have been like to meet Nefertiti. http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=nefertiti+images&qpvt=nefertiti+images&FORM=IGRE Unfortunately - what I am faced with, is attempting to understand the wreckage of human history on Planet Earth. It's not a pretty picture. I'm really trying to accentuate the positive - but I'm also attempting to uncover the negative - and I don't really care about Mr. In Between. I'm simply trying to make my research more interesting - by placing it in the context of science fiction. Are there huge anti-gravity spaceships, or not? Are there human/reptile hybrids, or not? Is there a New World Order, which involves beings who are not altogether human (as we know human to be)? Who really runs this solar system? Which science fiction movies or tv series is the closest to the truth? And back to Pilate's question to Jesus, 'What is Truth?' I'm still interested in 'V' particularly - because I think it might be revealing some of what's really going on - in an entertainment format. I have qualified my recommendation to watch it - by suggesting that people bring what they have learned in AV1 and MOA into the context of that particular sci-fi show.

    Take this post with two boatloads of salt. This sounds way beyond belief. Has anyone heard anything about a ritual on November 8 involving President Obama (being incarnated by Amen Ra)? I hesitated to ask the question - because of who was allegedly involved. But the question fits in with this thread - and the presidential trip to India and Asia. Look for a Daniel Ott - Sherry Shriner - Greg Rinchich interview (half-way down the page) of this linked website: http://www.sherrytalkradio.com/ Skip to 01:20:00 for the relevant portion. This is one of the most bizarre interviews/debates I have ever heard in my life! I don't doubt that there is intense spiritual warfare - but how much of this is reality - and how much is just more deception? But really - is there a connection between Obama, Akhenaten, and Kali? Just wondering...

    Incidentally, in 'V' - did anyone notice the older priest praying to the Black Madonna (shortly after Jack gets stabbed)? Is this coincidental - or is this a hidden message? Is Anna really the Black Madonna? I risk sounding racist in this thread - but I truly am not. I find strong, black, female royalty to be quite irresistable - but I continue to be wary of too much power in too few hands - whether those hands are black, white, male, or female.
    Raven wrote:
    Kali The Dark Mother




    Awesome Symbols!

    Kali's fierce form is strewed with awesome symbols. Her black complexion symbolizes her all-embracing and transcendental nature. Says the Mahanirvana Tantra: "Just as all colors disappear in black, so all names and forms disappear in her". Her nudity is primeval, fundamental, and transparent like Nature — the earth, sea, and sky. Kali is free from the illusory covering, for she is beyond the all maya or "false consciousness." Kali's garland of fifty human heads that stands for the fifty letters in the Sanskrit alphabet, symbolizes infinite knowledge.

    Her girdle of severed human hands signifies work and liberation from the cycle of karma. Her white teeth show her inner purity, and her red lolling tongue indicates her omnivorous nature — "her indiscriminate enjoyment of all the world's 'flavors'." Her sword is the destroyer of false consciousness and the eight bonds that bind us.Her three eyes represent past, present, and future, — the three modes of time — an attribute that lies in the very name Kali ('Kala' in Sanskrit means time). The eminent translator of Tantrik texts, Sir John Woodroffe in Garland of Letters, writes, "Kali is so called because She devours Kala (Time) and then resumes Her own dark formlessness."

    Kali's proximity to cremation grounds where the five elements or "Pancha Mahabhuta" come together, and all worldly attachments are absolved, again point to the cycle of birth and death. The reclined Shiva lying prostrate under the feet of Kali suggests that without the power of Kali (Shakti), Shiva is inert.

    http://hinduism.about.com/od/hindugoddesses/a/makali.htm
    Well Raven! Things were just starting to get interesting! I really enjoyed our conversation - including the post where you cussed me out! I think I deserved a lot of that - and I took what you said seriously. I actually miss you. You obviously know a helluva lot. I sensed some dark spirituality - but that may go with the territory. I sometimes wondered if you might be the modern incarnation of Kali - or at least a goddess-type of person with some sort of connection to Kali, Mary, the Goddess of This World, or the Queen of Heaven. I'm not a scholar or an experiencer - so I don't really know. I really and truly am an ignoramus. My egotistical posting style is really a cover for my rather substantial insecurities. Sounds kinda sexy - doesn't it?! I actually liked the porno part of all of this! I am more repressed than you can imagine - but I do like to joke around - and I am not easily offended - especially online! In person - things would be entirely different. I suspect that the real Queen of Heaven is highly intelligent and highly refined - yet very, very tough, decisive, harsh, reprobate - and able to swear like a trooper! You'd be amazed at the mental picture I have of the Queen of Heaven! But this is merely a hypothesis and a figment of my diseased imagination. I will probably continue to work with this subject for years - or at least until disclosure occurs. Anyway - regardless of who you really are, Raven - it's been a pleasure. Perhaps we can share a bottle of fine French wine someday! Namaste.

    Disclaimer time. I ran across something on the internet which seems to fit with this thread. I don't wish to mention where I found it, for fear of endorsing a site which seems sort of hokey. But anyway, President Obama supposedly carries (or carried) four charms - an American Eagle, a Poker-Chip, the Madonna, and the Hindu Monkey God 'Hanuman'. This may be complete BS. I am looking for the primary source, which is supposedly 'The Chicago Tribune' of August 20, 2008. But could this point in the direction of Kali - in a round about way? Darned if I know. I just brainstorm and speculate - but I freely admit that this is exactly what I'm doing. I mostly ask questions - and this post is a question. Has anyone heard anything which could add to this subject? This is all the more interesting when considering the recent presidential trip to India and Asia. Please rewatch the video series upon which this thread is based. If nothing else - this is an interesting and entertaining journey. As many of you know - I am trying to treat most of what we discuss as being nothing more than science-fiction and entertainment. I am doing my best to not take any of this fringe research too seriously. I really do think that at least 80% of it is BS. Enjoy.

    Check this out. I have a strange fascination with black female royalty. This is a recent attraction. There is so much information to wade through - but this subject should not be neglected - especially regarding Kemet. Unfortunately, it's hard to deal with this subject without it becoming a racial issue of sorts. We are so programmed to fight with each other - rather than trying to understand and appreciate each other.

    1. http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=queen+of+sheba+images&qpvt=queen+of+sheba+images&FORM=IGRE

    2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MHoCCaUnho0&feature=related

    I tend to just want to know the truth - while embracing all races (including hybrids and et's) - and then sorting things out, without anger or prejudice. It just seems as though things are purposely kept hidden, and things are deliberately kept in a destructive turmoil - with no resolution desired. I want resolution. Kali, Kemet, Anunnaki, Gizeh Intelligence, North Africa, Tibet, and Sirius - all seem to be near the top of my interest list - but not my fecal list. I don't have a fecal list - not yet, anyway. There always seems to be reprehensible activities transpiring in high places -- with the general public always behaving like a bunch of lunatics (on the evening-news anyway). Might this be by design?? Again, I am speculating that ALL factions (including the corrupt-politicians and the lunatic-fringe Have the SAME BOSS -- even if they don't know it. But once again, perhaps this is the way things need to be. I keep getting the sinking-feeling that after we expose each and every evil-deed (throughout history) that we'll discover that things have been the way they've had to be -- and that the future will be more of the same -- only different. Perhaps we are stuck with Living in Purgatory (While We Live in Sin) -- with the Promise of Heaven -- and the Threat of Hell -- to Keep We the Peons in Line.

    If All of Us Were Hermaphrodites (Chicks with Dicks aka Dixie Chicks) -- None of Us Would Need a Man!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBsEF7Qx09o If We Are All Reptilian-Human Hybrids (With Various Percentage Differentials) -- What is the Ultimate Reptilian to Human Ratio?? Why Are Females SO Much Better-Looking Than Males?? Why Have Males Ended Up Doing the Nastiest Tasks Imaginable Throughout History?? Why Can Females Usually Out-Talk Males?? Why Are Good-Girls Better Than Good-Boys?? Why Are Bad-Girls Badder Than Bad-Boys?? I'm Sorry for Being So Blunt and Non-PC -- But Some of Us Must Consider ALL of the Possibilites -- and Ask ALL of the Hard Questions. BTW -- Fredrick Wilhelm Nietzsche said "The Role of Man is Warrior -- and the Role of Woman is Recreation for the Warrior" -- but Fred couldn't stand the sight of blood. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tFKZd7RaNN4

    If Someone Created Heaven on Earth -- What Would We Do for Excitement?? How Good is Too Good?? Was the Garden of Eden Too Good?? Was Our Creator-God Too Good?? If There Were No Crime or War or Lawsuits or Medical-Emergencies or Constitutional-Crisis or Bankster-Bailouts or Nuclear-Threats or False-Flags or Killer-Asteroids or Genocide or Extinction-Level Events or Acts of God or False-Gods or Angry-Aliens or Stupid-Humans or Corrupt-Politicians or Pornography or Prostitution or Gambling or Crystal-Meth or Alex Jones or Rush Limbaugh or Completely Ignorant Fools -- How Much Fun Would THAT Be????? If the True and Living God Actually Came to Earth -- We Might Hate Them More Than We Can Possibly Imagine. They Might NOT Be Satisfactory. They Might NOT Do Things OUR WAY. Appearances are Everything -- and the Bottom-Line is the Bottom-Line. Right?! Have We Chosen Gods Who Think Like We Do?? Have We Been Paying the Price for Thousands of Years?? Will We Continue to Pay the Price for Thousands of Years?? This is Enough to Drive a Man to Drink. What Would Bill Cooper Say?? What Would the Friends of Bill Say??

    Here are some of my favorite goddesses! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yc5OyXmHD0w&feature=related


    Last edited by orthodoxymoron on Tue Apr 09, 2013 2:50 pm; edited 3 times in total
    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7704
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: Archangelic Queens of Heaven and the United States of the Solar System

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Fri Apr 05, 2013 4:42 pm

    What if the Military-Industrial Complex morphed into the International and Interplanetary Transportation and Security Complex -- complete with International and Interplanetary War-Games -- but NO MORE WAR?? Consider Boeing. Refuse Toulouse. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing BTW -- Was S.R. Hadden's Jet really a Space-Craft?? He rarely landed for anyone -- remember?? Has a real-life S.R. Hadden been milking Earth-Humanity for thousands of years?? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-SbKE_U4b7U

    The Boeing Company (pronounced /ˈboʊ.ɪŋ/ BOH-ing) (NYSE: BA) is an American multinational aerospace and defense corporation. Founded in 1916 by William E. Boeing in Seattle, Washington, the company has expanded over the years, and merged with McDonnell Douglas in 1997. Boeing moved its corporate headquarters from Seattle to Chicago, Illinois, in 2001.[2] Boeing is made up of multiple business units, which are Boeing Commercial Airplanes (BCA); Boeing Defense, Space & Security (BDS); Engineering, Operations & Technology; Boeing Capital; and Boeing Shared Services Group.

    Boeing is among the largest global aircraft manufacturers, and the second largest aerospace and defense contractor in the world based on defense-related revenue from 2011.[3] The company is the largest exporter by value in the U.S.,[4] and its stock is a component of the Dow Jones Industrial Average.

    In March 1910, William E. Boeing bought Heath's shipyard in Seattle on the Duwamish River, which later became his first airplane factory.[5] Boeing was incorporated in Seattle by William Boeing, on July 15, 1916, as "Pacific Aero Products Co.". Boeing, who studied at Yale University, worked initially in the timber industry, where he became wealthy and learned about wooden structures. This knowledge would prove invaluable in his subsequent design and assembly of airplanes. The company stayed in Seattle to take advantage of the local supply of Spruce wood.[6]

    William Boeing founded his company a few months after the June 15 maiden flight of one of the two "B&W" seaplanes built with the assistance of George Conrad Westervelt, a U.S. Navy engineer. Boeing and Westervelt decided to build the B&W seaplane after having flown in a Curtiss aircraft. Boeing bought a Glenn Martin "Flying Birdcage" seaplane (so called because of all the guy-wires holding it together) and was taught to fly by Glenn Martin himself. Boeing soon crashed the Birdcage and when Martin informed Boeing that replacement parts would not become available for months, Boeing realized he could build his own plane in that amount of time. He and his friend Cdr. G.C. Westervelt agreed to build a better airplane and soon produced the B&W Seaplane.[7] This first Boeing airplane was assembled in a lakeside hangar located on the northeast shore of Seattle's Lake Union. Many of Boeing's early planes were seaplanes.

    On May 9, 1917, the company became the "Boeing Airplane Company". In late 1917, the U.S. entered World War I and Boeing knew that the U.S. Navy needed seaplanes for training. So Boeing shipped two new Model Cs to Pensacola, Florida where the planes were flown for the Navy. The Navy liked the Model C so much that they ordered fifty more.[8] The company moved its operations to a larger former shipbuilding facility known as Boeing Plant 1, located on the lower Duwamish River.

    When World War I ended in 1918, a large surplus of cheap, used military planes flooded the commercial airplane market, and this prevented aircraft companies like Boeing from selling any new airplanes. Because of this, many airplane companies went out of business, but other companies, including Boeing, started selling other products. Boeing built dressers, counters, and furniture, along with flat-bottom boats called Sea Sleds.[8]

    In 1919 the Boeing B-1 made its first flight. It was a flying boat that accommodated one pilot and two passengers and mail. Over the course of eight years, it made international airmail flights from Seattle to Victoria, British Columbia.[9] On May 24, 1920, the Boeing Model 8 made its first flight. It was the first plane to fly over Mount Rainier.[10]

    In 1923, Boeing began a competition against Curtiss for a contract to develop a pursuit fighter for the U.S. Army Air Service. Although Curtiss finished its design first and was awarded the contract, Boeing continued to develop its PW-9 fighter. That plane, along with the Boeing P-12/ F4B fighter,[11] made Boeing a leading manufacturer of fighters over the course of the next decade.

    In 1925, Boeing built its Model 40 mail plane for the U.S. government to use on airmail routes. In 1927, an improved version of this plane was built, the Model 40A. The 40A won the U.S. Post Office's contract to deliver mail between San Francisco and Chicago. The 40A also had a passenger cabin that accommodated two passengers.[12]

    That same year, Boeing created an airline named Boeing Air Transport, which merged a year later with Pacific Air Transport and the Boeing Airplane Company. The first airmail flight for the airline was on July 1, 1927.[12] The company changed its name to United Aircraft and Transport Corporation in 1929 and acquired Pratt & Whitney, Hamilton Standard Propeller Company, and Chance Vought. United Aircraft then purchased National Air Transport in 1930.

    On July 27, 1929, the 12-passenger Boeing 80 biplane made its first flight. With three engines, it was Boeing's first plane built with the sole intention of being a passenger transport. An upgraded version, the 80A, carrying eighteen passengers, made its first flight in September 1929.[12]

    In 1930, the Monomail, a low-wing monoplane that carried mail, was built. Built entirely out of metal, it was very fast and aerodynamic, and it also had retractable landing gear. In fact, its design was so revolutionary that the engines and propellers of the time could not handle the plane. By the time controllable pitch propellers were developed, Boeing was building its Model 247 airliner. Two Monomails were built. The second one, the Model 221, had a 6-passenger cabin.[13][14]

    In 1933 the Boeing 247 was introduced, the first truly modern airliner. The 247 was an all-metal low-wing monoplane that was much faster, safer, and easier to fly than other passenger aircraft. For example, it was the first twin engine passenger aircraft that could fly on one engine. In an era of unreliable engines, this vastly improved flight safety. Boeing built the first sixty aircraft exclusively for its own United Airlines subsidiary's operations. This badly hurt competing airlines, and was typical of the anti-competitive corporate behavior that the U.S. government sought to prohibit at the time.

    The Air Mail Act of 1934 prohibited airlines and manufacturers from being under the same corporate umbrella, so the company split into three smaller companies – Boeing Airplane Company, United Airlines, and United Aircraft Corporation, the precursor to United Technologies. As a result, William Boeing sold off his shares and left Boeing. Claire Egtvedt, who had become Boeing's president in 1933, became the chairman as well. He believed the company's future was in building bigger planes.[15] Work began in 1936 on Boeing Plant 2 to accommodate the production of larger modern aircraft.

    Shortly after, an agreement with Pan American World Airways (Pan Am) was reached, to develop and build a commercial flying boat able to carry passengers on transoceanic routes. The first flight of the Boeing 314 Clipper was in June 1938. It was the largest civil aircraft of its time, with a capacity of 90 passengers on day flights, and of 40 passengers on night flights. One year later, the first regular passenger service from the U.S. to the UK was inaugurated. Subsequently other routes were opened, so that soon Pan Am flew with the Boeing 314 to destinations all over the world.

    In 1938, Boeing completed work on its Model 307 Stratoliner. This was the world's first pressurized-cabin transport aircraft, and it was capable of cruising at an altitude of 20,000 feet (6,100 m) – above most weather disturbances. It was based on the B-17, using the same wings, tail and engines.

    During World War II, Boeing built a large number of B-17 and B-29 bombers. Many of the workers were women whose husbands had gone to war. In the beginning of March 1944, production had been scaled up in such a manner that over 350 planes were built each month. To prevent an attack from the air, the manufacturing plants had been covered with greenery and farmland items. During these years of war the leading aircraft companies of the U.S. cooperated. The Boeing-designed B-17 bomber was assembled also by Lockheed Aircraft Corp. and Douglas Aircraft Co., while the B-29 was assembled also by Bell Aircraft Co. and by Glenn L. Martin Company.

    After the war, most orders of bombers were canceled and 70,000 people lost their jobs at Boeing.[citation needed] The company aimed to recover quickly by selling its Stratocruiser (the Model 377), a luxurious four-engine commercial airliner developed from the B-29. However, sales of this model were not as expected and Boeing had to seek other opportunities to overcome the situation.[citation needed] The company successfully sold military derivatives of the Stratocruiser, such as the C-97 adapted for troop transportation and the KC-97 for aerial refueling.[citation needed]

    Boeing developed military jets such as the B-47 Stratojet and B-52 Stratofortress bombers in the late-1940s and into the 1950s. During the early 1950s, Boeing used company funds to develop the 367–80 jet airliner demonstrator that led to the KC-135 Stratotanker and Boeing 707 jetliner.

    In the mid-1950s technology had advanced significantly, which gave Boeing the opportunity to develop and manufacture new products. One of the first was the guided short-range missile used to intercept enemy aircraft. By that time the Cold War had become a fact of life, and Boeing used its short-range missile technology to develop and build an intercontinental missile.

    In 1958, Boeing began delivery of its 707, the United States' first commercial jet airliner, in response to the British De Havilland Comet, French Sud Aviation Caravelle and Soviet Tupolev Tu-104, which were the world's first generation of commercial jet aircraft. With the 707, a four-engine, 156-passenger airliner, the U.S. became a leader in commercial jet manufacture. A few years later, Boeing added a second version of this aircraft, the 720, which was slightly faster and had a shorter range.

    Boeing was a major producer of small turbine engines during the 1950s and 1960s. The engines represented one of the company's major efforts to expand its product base beyond military aircraft after World War II. Development on the gasoline turbine engine started in 1943 and Boeing's gas turbines were designated models 502, 520, 540, 551 and 553. Boeing built 2,461 engines before production ceased in April 1968. Many applications of the Boeing gas turbine engines were considered to be firsts, including the first turbine-powered helicopter and boat.[16]

    The 707 and 747 formed the backbone of many major airline fleets through the end of the 1970s. Vertol Aircraft Corporation was acquired by Boeing in 1960,[17] and was reorganized as Boeing's Vertol division. The twin-rotor CH-47 Chinook, produced by Vertol, took its first flight in 1961. This heavy-lift helicopter remains a work-horse vehicle up to the present day. In 1964, Vertol also began production of the CH-46 Sea Knight.

    In December 1960, Boeing announced the model 727 jetliner, which went into commercial service about three years later. Different passenger, freight and convertible freighter variants were developed for the 727. The 727 was the first commercial jetliner to reach 1,000 sales, and a few years later the 1,500 mark was reached.[citation needed]

    Boeing won a contract in 1961 to manufacture the S-IC stage of the Saturn V rocket, manufactured at the Michoud Assembly Facility in New Orleans, Louisiana.

    In 1966, Boeing president William M. Allen asked Malcolm T. Stamper to spearhead production of the new 747 airliner on which the company's future was riding. This was a monumental engineering and management challenge, and included construction of the world's biggest factory in which to build the 747 at Everett, Washington, a plant which is the size of 40 football fields.[18]

    In 1967, Boeing introduced another short- and medium-range airliner, the twin-engine 737. It has become since then the best-selling commercial jet aircraft in aviation history.[citation needed] The 737 is being produced as of 2013, and continuous improvements are made. Several versions have been developed, mainly to increase seating capacity and range.

    The roll-out ceremonies for the first 747–100 took place in 1968, at the massive new factory in Everett, about an hour's drive from Boeing's Seattle home. The aircraft made its first flight a year later. The first commercial flight occurred in 1970. The 747 has an intercontinental range and a larger seating capacity than Boeing's previous aircraft.

    Boeing also developed hydrofoils in the 1960s. The screw-driven USS High Point (PCH-1) was an experimental submarine hunter. The patrol hydrofoil USS Tucumcari (PGH-2) was more successful. Only one was built, but it saw service in Vietnam and Europe before running aground in 1972. Its innovative waterjet[citation needed] and fully submersed flying foils were the model for the later Pegasus-class patrol hydrofoils and the model 929 Jetfoil ferries in the 1980s. The Tucumcari and later boats were produced in Renton. While the Navy hydrofoils were withdrawn from service by the end of the 1980s, the swift and smooth Boeing Jetfoils are still in service in Asia.

    In the early 1970s Boeing suffered from the simultaneous decline in Vietnam War military spending, the slowing of the space program as Project Apollo neared completion, the recession of 1969-1970,[19]:291 and the company's $2 billion in debt as it built the new 747 airliner.[19]:303 Boeing did not receive any orders for more than a year. Its bet for the future, the 747, was delayed in production by three months because of problems with its Pratt & Whitney engines. Another problem was that in 1971, the U.S. Congress decided to stop the financial support for the development of the supersonic 2707, Boeing's answer to the British-French Concorde, forcing the company to discontinue the project.

    Commercial Airplane Group, by far the largest unit of Boeing, went from 83,700 employees in 1968 to 20,750 in 1971. Each unemployed Boeing employee cost at least one other job, and unemployment rose to 14 percent, the highest in the United States.[citation needed] Housing vacancy rates rose to 16 percent from 1 percent in 1967.[citation needed] U-Haul dealerships ran out of trailers because so many people moved out. A billboard appeared near the airport:[19]:303-304

    In January 1970, the first 747, a four-engine long-range airliner, flew its first commercial flight with Pan American World Airways. The 747 would change the airline industry, providing much larger seating capacity than any other airliner in production. The company has delivered nearly 1,400 Boeing 747s. The 747 has undergone continuous improvements to keep it technologically up-to-date. Larger versions have also been developed by stretching the upper deck. The 747 is production as of 2013, with its newest version 747-8.

    Boeing launched three Jetfoil 929-100 hydrofoils that were acquired in 1975 for service in the Hawaiian Islands. When the service ended in 1979 the three hydrofoils were acquired by Far East Hydrofoil for service between Hong Kong and Macau.[20]

    During the 1970s, Boeing also developed the US Standard Light Rail Vehicle which was used in San Francisco, Boston and Morgantown, WV.

    In 1983, the economic situation began to improve. Boeing assembled its 1,000th 737 passenger aircraft. During the following years, commercial aircraft and their military versions became the basic equipment of airlines and air forces. As passenger air traffic increased, competition was harder, mainly from Airbus, a European newcomer in commercial airliner manufacturing. Boeing had to offer new aircraft, and developed the single-aisle 757, the larger, twin-aisle 767, and upgraded versions of the 737. An important project of these years was the Space Shuttle, to which Boeing contributed with its experience in space rockets acquired during the Apollo era. Boeing participated also with other products in the space program, and was the first contractor for the International Space Station program.

    During the decade several military projects went into production, including Boeing support of the stealth B-2 bomber. As part of an industry team led by Northrop, Boeing built the outboard portion of the B-2 stealth bomber wing, the aft center fuselage section, landing gears, fuel system and weapons delivery system. At its peak in 1991, the B-2 was the largest military program at Boeing, employing about 10,000 people. The same year, the National Aeronautic Association of the USA awarded the B-2 design team the Collier Trophy for the greatest achievement in aerospace in America. The first B-2 rolled out of the bomber's final assembly facility in Palmdale, California, in November 1988 and it flew for the first time on July 17, 1989.[21]

    The Avenger air defense system and a new generation of short-range missiles also went into production. During these years, Boeing was very active in upgrading existing military equipment and developing new ones. Boeing also contributed to wind power development with the experimental MOD-2 Wind Turbines for NASA and the United States Department of Energy, and the MOD-5B for Hawaii.[22]

    Boeing was one of seven competing companies that bid for the Advanced Tactical Fighter. Boeing agreed to team with General Dynamics and Lockheed, so that all three companies would participate in the development if one of the three companies design was selected. The Lockheed design was eventually selected and developed into the F-22 Raptor.[23]

    In April 1994, Boeing introduced the most modern commercial jet aircraft at the time, the twin-engine 777, with a seating capacity of approximately 300 to 370 passengers in a typical three-class layout, in between the 767 and the 747. The longest range twin-engined aircraft in the world, the 777 was the first Boeing airliner to feature a "fly-by-wire" system and was conceived partly in response to the inroads being made by the European Airbus into Boeing's traditional market. This aircraft reached an important milestone by being the first airliner to be designed entirely by using computer-aided design (CAD) techniques.[24] The 777 was also the first airplane to be certified for 180 minute ETOPS at entry into service by the FAA.[25] Also in the mid-1990s, the company developed the revamped version of the 737, known as the 737 "Next-Generation", or 737NG. It has since become the fastest-selling version of the 737 in history, and on April 20, 2006 sales passed those of the "Classic 737", with a follow-up order for 79 aircraft from Southwest Airlines.

    In 1995 Boeing announced that the headquarters complex on East Marginal Way South would be demolished instead of being upgraded to match new seismic standards. Boeing scheduled demolition of the facility in 1996 and moved the headquarters to an adjacent building.[26] In 1997 Boeing's headquarter was located on East Marginal Way South, by King County Airport, in Seattle.[27]

    In 1996, Boeing acquired Rockwell's aerospace and defense units. The Rockwell business units became a subsidiary of Boeing, named Boeing North American, Inc. In August 1997, Boeing merged with McDonnell Douglas in a US$13 billion stock swap under the name The Boeing Company. However this name had actually been Boeing's official name previously adopted on May 21, 1961.[28] Following the merger, the McDonnell Douglas MD-95 was renamed the Boeing 717, and the production of the MD-11 was limited to the freighter version. Boeing introduced a new corporate identity with completion of the merger, incorporating the Boeing logo type and a stylized version of the McDonnell Douglas symbol, which was derived from the Douglas Aircraft logo from the 1970s.

    Scott Hamilton heavily criticized the CEO and his deputy, Philip M. Condit and Harry Stonecipher, for thinking of their personal benefit first, and with it causing the problems hitting Boeing many years later. Instead of investing the huge cash reserve to build new airplanes, they initiated a program to buy back own stock for more than US$10 billion.[29][importance?]

    In September 2001, Boeing moved its corporate headquarters from Seattle to Chicago. Chicago, Dallas and Denver – vying to become the new home of the world's largest aerospace concern – all had offered packages of multimillion-dollar tax breaks.[30] Its offices are located in the Fulton River District, Chicago just outside the Loop, Chicago.[2]

    On October 10, 2001, Boeing lost to its rival Lockheed Martin in the fierce competition for the multi-billion dollar Joint Strike Fighter contract. Boeing's entry, the X-32, was rejected in favor of Lockheed's X-35 entrant. Boeing continues to serve as the prime contractor on the International Space Station and has built several of the major components.

    After several decades of success, Boeing lost ground to Airbus and subsequently lost its lead in the airliner market in 2003. Multiple Boeing projects were pursued and then canceled, notably the Sonic Cruiser, a proposed jetliner that would travel just under the speed of sound, cutting intercontinental travel times by as much as 20 percent. It was launched in 2001 along with a new advertising campaign to promote the company's new motto, "Forever New Frontiers", and to rehabilitate its image. However, the plane's fate was sealed by the changes in the commercial aviation market following the September 11 attacks and the subsequent weak economy and increase in fuel prices.

    Subsequently, Boeing streamlined its production and turned its attention to a new model, the Boeing 787 Dreamliner, using much of the technology developed for the Sonic Cruiser, but in a more conventional aircraft designed for maximum efficiency. The company also launched new variants of its successful 737 and 777 models. The 787 proved to be highly popular choice with airlines, and won a record number of pre-launch orders. With delays to Airbus' A380 program several airlines threatened to switch their A380 orders to Boeing's new 747 version, the 747-8.[31] Airbus's response to the 787, the A350, received a lukewarm response at first when it was announced as an improved version of the A330, and then gained significant orders when Airbus promised an entirely new design. The 787 has encountered delays in coming to production, with the first flight not occurring until late 2009, more than two years late. Production will be increased to 10 Boeing 787s per month by 2013.[32]

    In 2004, Boeing ended production of the 757 after 1,050 aircraft were produced. More advanced, stretched versions of the 737 were beginning to compete against the 757, and the new 787-3 filled much of the top end of the 757 market. Also that year, Boeing announced that the 717, the last civil aircraft to be designed by McDonnell Douglas, would cease production in 2006. The 767 was in danger of cancellation as well, with the 787 replacing it, but orders for the freighter version extended the program.

    In May 2005, Boeing announced its intent to form a joint venture, United Launch Alliance with its competitor Lockheed Martin. The new venture will be the largest provider of rocket launch services to the U.S. government. The joint venture gained regulatory approval and completed the formation on December 1, 2006.[33]

    On August 2, 2005, Boeing sold its Rocketdyne rocket engine division to Pratt & Whitney. On May 1, 2006, Boeing announced that it had reached a definitive agreement to purchase Dallas, Texas-based Aviall, Inc. for $1.7 billion and retain $350 million in debt. Aviall, Inc. and its subsidiaries, Aviall Services, Inc. and ILS formed a wholly owned subsidiary of Boeing Commercial Aviation Services (BCAS).[34]

    On August 18, 2007, NASA announced that Boeing would be the manufacturing contractor for the liquid-fueled upper stage of the Ares I rocket.[citation needed] The stage, based on both Apollo-Saturn and Space Shuttle technologies, was to be constructed at NASA's Michoud Assembly Facility near New Orleans; Boeing constructed the S-IC stage of the Saturn V rocket at this site in the 1960s.

    In May 2003, the U.S. Air Force announced it would lease 100 KC-767 tankers to replace the oldest 136 of its KC-135s. In November 2003, responding to critics who argued that the lease was more expensive than an outright purchase, the DoD announced a revised lease of 20 aircraft and purchase of 80. In December 2003, the Pentagon announced the project was to be frozen while an investigation of allegations of corruption by one of its former procurement staffers, Darleen Druyun (who began employment at Boeing in January) was begun. The fallout of this resulted in the resignation of Boeing CEO Philip M. Condit and the termination of CFO Michael M. Sears.[35] Harry Stonecipher, former McDonnell Douglas CEO and Boeing COO, replaced Condit on an interim basis. Druyun pleaded guilty to inflating the price of the contract to favor her future employer and to passing information on the competing Airbus A330 MRTT bid. In October 2004, she received a jail sentence for corruption.[citation needed]

    In March 2005, the Boeing board forced President and CEO Harry Stonecipher to resign. Boeing said an internal investigation revealed a "consensual" relationship between Stonecipher and a female executive that was "inconsistent with Boeing's Code of Conduct" and "would impair his ability to lead the company".[36] James A. Bell served as interim CEO (in addition to his normal duties as Boeing's CFO) until the appointment of Jim McNerney as the new Chairman, President, and CEO on June 30, 2005.

    In June 2003, Lockheed Martin sued Boeing, alleging that the company had resorted to industrial espionage in 1998 to win the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) competition. Lockheed Martin claimed that the former employee Kenneth Branch, who went to work for McDonnell Douglas and Boeing, passed nearly 30,000 pages of proprietary documents to his new employers. Lockheed Martin argued that these documents allowed Boeing to win 19 of the 28 tendered military satellite launches.[37][38]

    In July 2003, Boeing was penalized, with the Pentagon stripping seven launches away from the company and awarding them to Lockheed Martin.[37] Furthermore, the company was forbidden to bid for rocket contracts for a twenty-month period, which expired in March 2005.[38] In early September 2005, it was reported that Boeing was negotiating a settlement with the U.S. Department of Justice in which it would pay up to $500 million to cover this and the Darleen Druyun scandal.[39]

    Until the late 1970s the U.S. had a near monopoly in the Large Civil Aircraft (LCA) sector.[40] The Airbus consortium (created in 1969) started competing effectively in the 1980s. At that stage the U.S. became concerned about the European competition and the alleged subsidies paid by the European governments for the developments of the early models of the Airbus family. This became a major issue of contention, as the European side was equally concerned by subsidies accruing to U.S. LCA manufacturers through NASA and Defense programs.

    The EU and the U.S. started bilateral negotiations for the limitation of government subsidies to the LCA sector in the late 1980s. Negotiations were concluded in 1992 with the signature of the EC-US Agreement on Trade in Large Civil Aircraft which imposes disciplines on government support on both sides of the Atlantic which are significantly stricter than the relevant World Trade Organization (WTO) rules: Notably, the Agreement regulates in detail the forms and limits of government support, prescribes transparency obligations and commits the parties to avoiding trade disputes.[41]

    In 2004 the EU and the U.S. agreed to discuss a possible revision of the 1992 EU-US Agreement provided that this would cover all forms of subsidies including those used in the U.S., and in particular the subsidies for the Boeing 787; the first new aircraft to be launched by Boeing for 14 years. October 2004, the U.S. began legal proceedings at the WTO by requesting WTO consultations on European launch investment to Airbus. The U.S. also unilaterally withdrew from the 1992 EU-US Agreement.[42]

    In October 2004, Boeing filed a complaint at the WTO, claiming that Airbus had violated a 1992 bilateral accord when it received what Boeing deems as "unfair" subsidies from several European governments. Airbus retaliated by filing another complaint, contesting that Boeing had also violated the accord when it received tax breaks from the U.S. Government. Moreover, the EU also complained that the investment subsidies from Japanese airlines violated the accord.

    On January 11, 2005, Boeing and Airbus agreed that they would attempt to find a solution to the dispute outside of the WTO. However, in June 2005, Boeing and the United States government reopened the trade dispute with the WTO, claiming that Airbus had received illegal subsidies from European governments. Airbus has also retaliated against Boeing, reopening the dispute and also accusing Boeing of receiving subsidies from the U.S. government.[43]

    On September 15, 2010, the WTO ruled that Boeing had received billions of dollars in illegal government subsidies.[44] Boeing responded that the ruling was a fraction of the size of the ruling against Airbus and would require few changes in its operations.[45]

    On November 17, 2011, it was reported that Lion Air has committed to ordering 201 Boeing 737MAX and 29 737-900ER airliners. This order, when finalized is worth $21.7 billion at list prices. This would be larger than any of Boeing's previous commercial aircraft sales. The deal includes options for a further 150 airliners.[46][47]

    On January 5, 2012, Boeing announced plans to close its facilities in Wichita, Kansas with 2,160 workers before 2014, more than 80 years after it was established. Boeing had employed as many as 40,000 people there.[48][49]

    President Obama visited Boeing's factory in Everett, Washington on February 17, 2012 to deliver a speech on his economic policy.

    Boeing has achieved several consecutive launches, beginning with the formal launch of the 787 for initial delivery to All Nippon Airways. Rollout of the first 787 occurred on July 8, 2007, with the first flight taking place on December 15, 2009.

    Boeing also received the launch contract from the U.S. Navy for the P-8 Poseidon Multimission Maritime Aircraft, an anti-submarine warfare patrol aircraft. It has also received some orders for the 737 AEW&C "Wedgetail" aircraft.

    Boeing launched the 777 Freighter in May 2005 with an order from Air France. The freighter variant is based on the −200LR. Other customers include FedEx and Emirates. Boeing has achieved above projected orders for its 787 Dreamliner, outselling the rival Airbus A350.

    Boeing officially announced in November 2005 that it would produce a larger variant of the 747, the 747-8, in two models, commencing with the Freighter model for two cargo carriers with firm orders for the aircraft. The second model, dubbed the Intercontinental, would be produced for passenger airlines that Boeing expected would place orders in the near future. Both models of the 747-8 would feature a lengthened fuselage, new, advanced engines and wings, and the incorporation of other technologies developed for the 787.

    Boeing has also introduced new extended range versions of the 737. These include the 737-700ER and 737-900ER. The 737-900ER is the latest and will extend the range of the 737–900 to a similar range as the successful 737–800 with the capability to fly more passengers, due to the addition of two extra emergency exits.

    The 777-200LR Worldliner embarked on a well-received global demonstration tour in the second half of 2005, showing off its capacity to fly farther than any other commercial aircraft. On November 10, 2005, the 777-200LR set a world record for the longest non-stop flight. The plane, which departed from Hong Kong traveling to London, took a longer route, which included flying over the U.S. It flew 11,664 nautical miles (21,601 km) during its 22-hour 42-minute flight. It was flown by Pakistan International Airlines pilots and PIA was the first airline to fly the 777-200LR Worldliner.

    On August 11, 2006, Boeing announced an agreement to form a joint-venture with the large Russian titanium producer, VSMPO-Avisma for the machining of titanium forgings. The forgings will be used on 787 program.[50] On December 27, 2007 Boeing and VSMPO-Avisma created a joint venture Ural Boeing Manufacturing and signed a contract on titanium products deliveries until 2015, with Boeing planning to invest $27 billion in Russia over the next 30 years.[51]

    Realizing that increasing numbers of passengers have become reliant on their computers to stay in touch, Boeing introduced Connexion by Boeing, a satellite based Internet connectivity service that promised air travelers unprecedented access to the World Wide Web. The company debuted the product to journalists in 2005, receiving generally favorable reviews. However, facing competition from cheaper options, such as cellular networks, it proved too difficult to sell to most airlines. In August 2006, after a short and unsuccessful search for a buyer for the business, Boeing chose to discontinue the service.[52][53]

    Boeing also developed the KC-767 aerial refueling tanker. Italy ordered four KC-767s in December 2002, with the first one scheduled to be delivered in November 2008. Boeing and Italy are negotiating on the penalty for the late deliveries. Boeing stated the delay is due to such factors as design changes, expanded U.S. flight testing, greater-than-expected challenges to software integration, and the complexity of getting the tanker ready for certification by the Federal Aviation Administration.[54] Boeing's late delivery of a tanker to Japan in 2007 incurred a penalty "well under $5 million" according to Boeing.[54] Boeing delivered the third aircraft to Japan in March 2009 and the last aircraft was delivered in January 2010.[55][56]

    In February 2011, Boeing received a contract for 179 KC-46 U.S. Air Force tankers at a value of $35 billion.[57] The KC-46 tankers are based on the KC-767.

    Boeing jointly with Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), were the prime contractors in the U.S. military's Future Combat Systems program.[58] The FCS program was canceled in June 2009 with all remaining systems swept into the BCT Modernization program.[59] Boeing works jointly with SAIC in the BCT Modernization program like the FCS program but the U.S. Army will play a greater role in creating baseline vehicles and will only contract others for accessories.

    Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates' shift in defense spending to, "make tough choices about specific systems and defense priorities based solely on the national interest and then stick to those decisions over time"[60] hit Boeing especially hard, because of their heavy involvement with canceled Air Force projects.[61]

    In 2010, Boeing completed its acquisition of Argon ST Inc. Argon ST, based in Fairfax, Va., develops C4ISR (Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance) and combat systems. Boeing on June 30, 2010 announced its intent to acquire Argon ST as part of the company's strategy to expand its capabilities to address the C4ISR, cyber and intelligence markets.[62]

    In May 2006, four concept designs being examined by Boeing were outlined in The Seattle Times based on corporate internal documents. The research aims in two directions: low-cost airplanes, and environmental-friendly planes. Codenamed after the well-known Muppets, a design team known as the Green Team concentrated primarily on reducing fuel usage. All four designs illustrated rear-engine layouts.[63]

    "Fozzie" employs open rotors and would offer a lower cruising speed.[63]
    "Beaker" has very thin, long wings, with the ability to partially fold-up to facilitate easier taxiing.
    "Kermit Kruiser" has forward swept wings over which are positioned its engines, with the aim of lowering noise below due to the reflection of the exhaust signature upward.[63]
    "Honeydew" with its delta wing design, resembles a marriage of the flying wing concept and the traditional tube fuselage.[63]

    As with most concepts, these designs are only in the exploratory stage, intended to help Boeing evaluate the potentials of such radical technologies.[63]

    Researchers at the University of Massachusetts Amherst had listed Boeing as the thirteenth-largest corporate producer of air pollution in the United States based on 2002 data,[64] although data from 2008 shows that they have dropped off the list.[65] According to the Center for Public Integrity, the United States Environmental Protection Agency has linked Boeing to more than twenty Superfund toxic waste sites.[66]

    In 2006, the UCLA Center for Environmental Risk Reduction released a study showing that Boeing's Santa Susana Field Laboratory, in the Simi Hills of eastern Ventura County in Southern California, had been contaminated with toxic and radioactive waste. The study found that air, soil, groundwater, and surface water at the site all contained radionuclides, toxic metals, and dioxins; air and water additionally contained perchlorate, TCE, and hydrazines, while water showed the presence of PCBs as well.[67] Clean up studies and lawsuits are in progress.[68][69]

    The airline industry is responsible for about 11 percent of greenhouse gases emitted by the U.S. transportation sector.[70] Aviation's share of the greenhouse gas emissions is poised to grow, as air travel increases and ground vehicles use more alternative fuels like ethanol and biodiesel.[70] Boeing estimates that biofuels could reduce flight-related greenhouse-gas emissions by 60 to 80 percent.[70] The solution would be blending algae fuels with existing jet fuel.[70]

    Boeing executives said the company is informally collaborating with leading Brazilian biofuels maker Tecbio, Aquaflow Bionomic of New Zealand and other fuel developers around the world. So far, Boeing has tested six fuels from these companies, and will probably have gone through 20 fuels "by the time we're done evaluating them."[70] Boeing is joining[when?] other aviation-related members in the Algal Biomass Organization (ABO).[71]

    Air New Zealand and Boeing are researching the jatropha plant to see if it is a sustainable alternative to conventional fuel.[72] A two-hour test flight using a 50–50 mixture of the new biofuel with Jet A-1 in the number one position Rolls Royce RB-211 engine of 747–400 ZK-NBS, was successfully completed on December 30, 2008. The engine was then removed to be scrutinised and studied to identify any differences between the Jatropha blend and regular Jet A1. No effects to performances were found.

    On August 31, 2010, Boeing worked with the U.S. Air Force to test the Boeing C-17 running on 50 percent JP-8, 25 percent Hydro-treated Renewable Jet fuel and 25 percent of a Fischer–Tropsch fuel with successful results.[73]

    For NASA's N+3 future airliner program, Boeing has determined that hybrid electric engine technology is by far the best choice for its subsonic design. Hybrid electric propulsion has the potential to shorten takeoff distance and reduce noise.[74]

    In both 2009 and 2008 Boeing was second on the list of Top 100 US Federal Contractors, with contracts totalling $22 billion and $23 billion respectively.[75][76] Since 1995, the company has agreed to pay $1.6 billion to settle 39 instances of misconduct, including $615 million in 2006 in relation to illegal hiring of government officials and improper use of proprietary information.[77][78]

    Boeing's 2010 lobbying expenditure by the third quarter was $13.2 million (2009 total: $16.9 million).[79][80] In the 2008 presidential election, Barack Obama "was by far the biggest recipient of campaign contributions from Boeing employees and executives, hauling in $197,000 – five times as much as John McCain, and more than the top eight Republicans combined."[81]

    Boeing has a corporate citizenship program centered on charitable contributions in five areas: education, health and human services, environment, the arts and culture, and civic engagement.[82][better source needed] In 2011, Boeing spent $147.3 million in these areas through charitable grants and business sponsorships.[83] In February 2012, Boeing Global Corporate Citizenship partnered with the Insight Labs to develop a new model for foundations to more effectively lead the sector they serve.[84][better source needed]

    The company is a member of the U.S. Global Leadership Coalition, a Washington D.C.-based coalition of over 400 major companies and NGOs that advocates for a larger International Affairs Budget, which funds American diplomatic and development efforts abroad.[85] A series of U.S. diplomatic cables show how U.S. diplomats and senior politicians intervene on behalf of Boeing to help boost the company's sales.[86]

    In 2007 and 2008 the company benefited from over $10 billion of long-term loan guarantees, helping finance the purchase of their commercial aircraft in countries including Brazil, Canada, Ireland and the United Arab Emirates, from the Export-Import Bank of the United States, some 65 percent of the total loan guarantees the bank made in the period.[87]

    In December 2011, the non-partisan organization Public Campaign criticized Boeing for spending $52.29 million on lobbying and not paying taxes during 2008–2010, instead getting $178 million in tax rebates, despite making a profit of $9.7 billion, laying off 14,862 workers since 2008, and increasing executive pay by 31 percent to $41.9 million in 2010 for its top five executives.[88]

    The two largest divisions are Boeing Commercial Airplanes and Boeing Defense, Space & Security (BDS).[89]
    Boeing Capital
    Boeing Commercial Airplanes
    Boeing Defense, Space & Security Phantom Works

    Engineering, Operations & Technology Boeing Research & Technology
    Boeing Test & Evaluation
    Intellectual Property Management
    Information Technology
    Environment, Health, and Safety[89]

    Boeing Shared Services Group Boeing Realty
    Boeing Travel Management Company
    Boeing Supplier Management

    Approximately 1.5 percent of Boeing employees are in the Technical Fellowship program, a program through which Boeing's top engineers and scientists set technical direction for the company.[91] The average salary at Boeing is $76,784, reported by former employees.[92] On January 4, 2012 Boeing announced plans to close its Wichita, Kansas plant by 2013.[93]

    Board of directors
    W. James McNerney, Jr. – Chairman, President & CEO
    Admiral Edmund P. Giambastiani, Jr., U.S. Navy (ret)
    Arthur D. Collins, Jr.
    Linwood M. Coburn
    Linda Cook
    Kenneth M. Duberstein
    John Bryson
    John H. Biggs
    John McDonnell
    Mike S. Zafirovski
    Susan C. Schwab
    William M. Daley

    References

    1.^ a b c d e f "2012 annual report, The Boeing Company". Boeing. Retrieved May 24, 2012.
    2.^ a b "Contact Us." Boeing. Retrieved on May 12, 2009.
    3.^ "Defense News Top 100 for 2011". Defense News, June 21, 2012.
    4.^ "Boeing says it's flying high despite recession". USA Today, March 27, 2009.
    5.^ "Boeing History". Boeing.com. Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    6.^ Howe, Sam (October 2, 2010). "The tale of Boeing's high-risk flight into the jet age". The Seattle Times. Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    7.^ Boeing History Narrative – Beginnings – Biplanes by the Sea, Retrieved November 4, 2010.
    8.^ a b "Boeing History: Beginnings – World War I". Boeing. Retrieved November 4, 2010.
    9.^ Boeing History – Products – Boeing B-1 Seaplane, Retrieved November 5, 2010.
    10.^ "Boeing History-- Beginnings...Growing Pains". Retrieved November 5, 2010.
    11.^ Boeing P-12/ F4B Fighter, Retrieved November 5, 2010.
    12.^ a b c Boeing History—Beginnings... Mail and Boa abroad Retrieved November 5, 2010.
    13.^ "Boeing History-Early Years...Metal Monomail". Boeing. August 5, 2005. Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    14.^ "Boeing History-Products- Monomail". Boeing. May 6, 1930. Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    15.^ "Boeing History". Boeing.
    16.^ Boeing History: Model 502 Gas Turbine Engine. Retrieved June 13, 2011.
    17.^ "Boeing History 1957–1970". Boeing. Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    18.^ Boyer, Tom (June 17, 2005). "Boeing legend Malcolm Stamper dies". The Seattle Times.
    19.^ a b c d Heppenheimer, T.A. (1998). The Space Shuttle Decision. NASA.
    20.^ "Classic Fast Ferries" (PDF). Retrieved August 14, 2010.
    21.^ "History – Products – B-2 Spirit". Boeing. Retrieved August 14, 2010.
    22.^ "MOD-2/MOD-5B Wind Turbines". Boeing. Retrieved June 30, 2009.
    23.^ Miller, Jay. Lockheed Martin F/A-22 Raptor, Stealth Fighter. Aerofax, 2005. ISBN 1-85780-158-X.
    24.^ Norris, Guy and Mark Wagner. Boeing 777: The Technological Marvel. Minneapolis, Minnesota: Zenith Imprint, 2001. ISBN 0-7603-0890-X.
    25.^ Pandey, Mohan (2010). How Boeing Defied the Airbus Challenge. Createspace. p. 86. ISBN 978-1-4505-0113-2. Retrieved July 1, 2011.
    26.^ "Boeing to Raze Company Headquarters Building; Will Relocate to Adjacent Building." Boeing. August 4, 1995. Retrieved on May 13, 2009.
    27.^ "Revises meeting arrangements and map for the Executive committee Meeting". Gas Industry Standards Board. April 30, 1999. Retrieved May 13, 2009.
    28.^ "The Boeing Log Book", various volumes, published by Boeing Historical Archives.
    29.^ MISSMANAGEMENT: Himmel, hilf!, DIE ZEIT, 2011-09-20 (de). Means: mismanagement, heaven help!
    30.^ Pae, Peter (May 10, 2001). "Boeing Expected to Reveal New Home". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved February 9, 2009.
    31.^ Robertson, David (October 4, 2006). "Airbus will lose €4.8bn because of A380 delays". London: The Times Business News.
    32.^ "Boeing 787 first flight announced". BBC News Online, August 27, 2009.
    33.^ "Boeing and Lockheed Martin Complete United Launch Alliance Transaction (news release)". The Boeing Company. December 1, 2006. Retrieved January 28, 2007.
    34.^ "Concludes Purchase of Aviall, Inc". Boeing. Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    35.^ "Ex-Boeing CFO Pleads Guilty in Druyun Case", The Washington Post, November 16, 2004.
    36.^ "Boeing CEO Stonecipher Resigns press release". Comspacewatch.com. Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    37.^ a b Fleischauer, Eric (23 JANUARY 2005). "Anatomy of a corporate espionage scandal". The Decatur Daily (Decatur, Alabama). Retrieved March 31, 2013.
    38.^ a b Bowermaster, David (9 January 2005). "Boeing probe intensifies over secret Lockheed papers". The Seattle Times (Seattle). Retrieved March 31, 2013.
    39.^ "Boeing, DOJ may reach settlement". St. Louis Business Journal (Bizjournals.com). September 9, 2005. Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    40.^ Newquist, Don E. "Global Competitiveness of U.S. Advanced-Technology Manufacturing Industries: Large Civil Aircraft". U.S. International Trade Commission. Retrieved 16 January 2013.
    41.^ "Top margin 1" (PDF). Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    42.^ [dead link]Commissioner Mandelson
    43.^ "Industrial Subsidies and the Politics of World Trade: The Case of the Boeing 7e7" (PDF). Canada-United States Trade Center. p. 17. Retrieved July 1, 2011.
    44.^ "Illinois tax breaks in WTO ruling against Boeing". Chicagobreakingbusiness.com. September 15, 2010. Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    45.^ "Boeing Response to Public Reports Regarding the WTO's Interim Decision in DS 353" (Press release). Boeing. September 15, 2010. Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    46.^ Ostrower, Jon (November 17, 2011). "Lion Air commits to up to 380 Boeing 737s". Flight International.
    47.^ "Indonesia's Lion Air to Buy 230 New Boeing 737s in $21.7b Deal". Jakarta Globe. November 17, 2011.
    48.^ "Boeing Betrayal Stirs Wichita After City Helped Win Tanker Bid, Mayor Says". Bloomberg. January 5, 2012. Retrieved January 6, 2012.
    49.^ Peterson, Kyle (January 4, 2012). "Boeing to close Wichita plant, cites defense cuts". Reuters. Retrieved February 3, 2012.
    50.^ "Boeing and VSMPO-AVISMA Announce Titanium Agreement", Boeing, August 11, 2006.
    51.^ (Russian) Корпорация ВСМПО-АВИСМА
    52.^ "Boeing exits in-flight broadband". BBC News Online. August 17, 2006. Retrieved January 28, 2007.
    53.^ "Boeing to Discontinue Connexion by Boeing Service (news release)". The Boeing Company. August 17, 2006. Retrieved January 28, 2007.
    54.^ a b Capaccio, Tony, and Toko Sekiguchi, "Boeing Delay On Italy, Japan Tankers May Harm Bid For U.S. Work", Bloomberg, August 12, 2008.
    55.^ "Boeing KC-767J Aerial Refueling Tankers Join Active Air Wing in Japan". Boeing, May 26, 2009.
    56.^ "Boeing Delivers 4th KC-767 Tanker to Japan Ministry of Defense". Boeing, January 12, 2010.
    57.^ Donna Cassata, Lolita C. Baldor (February 24, 2011). "Boeing gets $35 billion Air Force tanker order". Associated Press. Retrieved February 26, 2011.
    58.^ Klein, Alec (December 7, 2007). "The Army's $200 billion Makeover". The Washington Post. Retrieved April 26, 2010.
    59.^ "Future Combat System (FCS) Program to Army Brigade Combat Team Modernization". U.S. DoD, June 23, 2009.
    60.^ Drew, Christopher (April 6, 2009). "Military Budget Reflects a Shift in U.S. Strategy". The New York Times. Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    61.^ "Pentagon budget cuts slam Boeing, raise stakes on tanker win". Blog.seattlepi.com. April 8, 2009. Retrieved June 7, 2011.
    62.^ "Boeing: Boeing Successfully Completes Acquisition of Argon ST" (Press release). Boeing. August 5, 2010. Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    63.^ a b c d e Dominic Gates (May 18, 2006). "Clean engines, wings that fold: Boeing dreams of futuristic jets". The Seattle Times.
    64.^ "Top Corporate Air Polluters in the United States". Political Economy Research Institute. 2002. Retrieved July 1, 2011.
    65.^ "Top Corporate Air Polluters in the United States". Political Economy Research Institute. 2010. Retrieved July 1, 2011.
    66.^ Center for Public Integrity[dead link]
    67.^ "Center for Environmental Risk Reduction, UCLA". Ph.ucla.edu. February 2, 2006. Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    68.^ "SSFL". Acmela.org. Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    69.^ "State DTSC-SSFL info website". Dtsc-ssfl.com. Retrieved October 28, 2011.
    70.^ a b c d e Ángel González (August 30, 2007). "To go green in jet fuel, Boeing looks at algae". The Seattle Times. Retrieved January 27, 2009.
    71.^ First Airlines and UOP Join Algal Biomass Organization, Green Car Congress, June 19, 2008.
    72.^ Air NZ sees biofuel salvation in jatropha.
    73.^ "C-17 uses biofuel for flight tests". Edwards.af.mil. August 31, 2010. Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    74.^ "Boeing Feature Story: Envisioning tomorrow's aircraft". Boeing. August 16, 2010. Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    75.^ "Top 100 Contractors Report – Fiscal Year 2009". fpds.gov. Retrieved January 4, 2011.
    76.^ "Top 100 Contractors Report – Fiscal Year 2008". fpds.gov. Retrieved January 4, 2011.
    77.^ "Contractor Case – Boeing Company". Project on Government Oversight. Retrieved January 5, 2011.
    78.^ "Federal Contractor Misconduct Database". Project on Government Oversight. Retrieved January 5, 2011.
    79.^ "Boeing Co Lobbying Expenditure". Center for Responsive Politics. Retrieved January 5, 2011.
    80.^ "Lobbying Disclosure Act Database". United States Senate. Retrieved January 5, 2011.
    81.^ Carney, Timothy (2011-04-24) Boeing lives by big government, dies by big government, Washington Examiner
    82.^ "Boeing Corporate Citizenship Report 2011". Boeing. Retrieved 19 September 2012.
    83.^ "Boeing Corporate Citizenship Report 2011". Retrieved September 19, 2012.
    84.^ "Blessed are the Grantmakers". Insight Labs. February 3, 2012. Retrieved September 19, 2012.
    85.^ "U.S. Global Leadership Coalition, Global Trust members". Usglc.org. Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    86.^ Lipton, Eric; Clark, Nicola; Lehren, Andrew W. (January 2, 2011). "Diplomats Help Push Sales of Jetliners on the Global Market". The New York Times. Retrieved January 5, 2011.
    87.^ "Pew Analysis Shows More than 60 percent of Export-Import Bank Loan Guarantees Benefitted Singe Company". The Pew Charitable Trusts. Retrieved January 5, 2011.
    88.^ Portero, Ashley. "30 Major U.S. Corporations Paid More to Lobby Congress Than Income Taxes, 2008–2010". International Business Times. Retrieved December 26, 2011.
    89.^ a b "Boeing in Brief". Boeing. Retrieved January 16, 2011.
    90.^ a b As of Apr. 28, 2011 from Boeing Employment Numbers page
    91.^ "Go To Gang Boeing Frontiers Magazine" (PDF). Retrieved May 21, 2011.
    92.^ "Top 10 Best Companies for U.S. Veterans: Boeing". Retrieved June 14, 2011.
    93.^ "Wichita facility's closing will affect 2,160 Boeing workers". Kansas.com.
    94.^ Clairmont L. Egtvedt biography, Boeing.
    95.^ Frank Shrontz biography, Boeing.
    96.^ Edgar N. Gott biography, Boeing.

    Further reading
    Cloud, Dana L. We Are the Union: Democratic Unionism and Dissent at Boeing. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press, 2011.
    Greider, William. One World, Ready or Not: The Manic Logic of Global Capitalism. London: Penguin Press, 1997.












    Carol wrote:

    Falcon Hypersonic Test Vehicle 2
    THE SECRET AND EXPERIMENTAL MILITARY AIRCRAFT OF THE PAST AND PRESENT
    Let’s start this story off with the fastest aircraft ever developed by the American military. The Falcon Hypersonic Test Vehicle 2 is an experimental rocket glider piloted by remote control that is designed to push the envelope of faster-than-sound travel to the tune of Mach 22. The idea is to create a craft that can reach any target in the world and deliver an explosive strike within a single hour, and to do so DARPA has developed a tough, lightweight glider.
    read more: http://www.tested.com/tech/454420-secret-and-experimental-military-planes-around-world/item/falcon-hypersonic-test-vehicle-2/#gallery?icid=maing-grid7%7Cnetscape%7Cdl8%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D295126


    Last edited by orthodoxymoron on Mon Apr 08, 2013 11:10 pm; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7704
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: Archangelic Queens of Heaven and the United States of the Solar System

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Fri Apr 05, 2013 6:02 pm

    Consider the Stock Market (aka Equity Market). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stock_market Is the Stock Market the World's Biggest Casino?? Does the Stock Market Benefit Humanity?? Is the Stock Market Rigged?? Is Insider Trading Rampant?? Can Black-Boxes Out-Trade Hong Kong Day-Traders?? Would We be Better-Off Without a Stock Market?? Who REALLY Wins with the Stock Market?? How might my Five-Percent Point of Sale Taxation Proposal (instead of tax-forms) impact the Stock Market?? Does Satan Have an Office at Goldman-Sachs?? What Would George Soros Say?? Do Aliens Participate in the Stock Market?? Ever Heard of Grey-Traders Using Grey-Supercomputers on the Dark-Side of the Moon????? How Much Earth Stock Market Money Ends-Up in the Bank of Sirius???? What Would S.R. Hadden Say?? What Would St. Germain Say?? What if St. Germain is NO Saint?? What Would the Rothschilds Say?? Does China Own America?? Will China Claim America Through Eminent-Domain?? Are Chinese Soldiers in American Deep Underground Military Bases?? What Would Sherry Shriner Say?? Who is Sherry Shriner?? Really?? You'd be Shocked at Who I Think She Might Be -- but I'm NOT Talking. I have said repeatedly that I think we are fundamentally actors, actresses, game-players, and risk-takers. This might be our strength -- and our undoing. We seem to lack the discipline and responsibility to properly manage these traits. Do we psychologically need things such as the Stock-Market -- whether it helps or hurts us?? Are the Dracs and Greys taking advantage of Human Greed and Fear?? I Don't Know -- But Whatever the Real Truth Is -- I Suspect That It Will Drive Many of Us Insane. I Keep Saying This Over and Over.

    1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OD0lx9MKp7Q
    2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zal-ToCjLQM
    3. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLWIPyQXcRE
    4. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6ciY8u04Kk
    5. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ML4ObTeYLhg
    6. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWkzAvE5aQQ
    7. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tCcxr-fyF4Q
    8. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWtrbGWixRQ
    9. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LZozsLYHD4
    10. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kE8RtL3azDg
    11. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=suZb9Z0b05I
    12. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdxFmvuZnrI
    13. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmlX3fLQrEc
    14. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0qhNBfkMljo
    15. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_exchange-traded_funds

    A stock market or equity market is a public entity (a loose network of economic transactions, not a physical facility or discrete entity) for the trading of company stock (shares) and derivatives at an agreed price; these are securities listed on a stock exchange as well as those only traded privately.

    The size of the world stock market was estimated at about $36.6 trillion at the beginning of October 2008.[1] The total world derivatives market has been estimated at about $791 trillion face or nominal value,[2] 11 times the size of the entire world economy.[3] The value of the derivatives market, because it is stated in terms of notional values, cannot be directly compared to a stock or a fixed income security, which traditionally refers to an actual value. Moreover, the vast majority of derivatives 'cancel' each other out (i.e., a derivative 'bet' on an event occurring is offset by a comparable derivative 'bet' on the event not occurring). Many such relatively illiquid securities are valued as marked to model, rather than an actual market price.

    The stocks are listed and traded on stock exchanges which are entities of a corporation or mutual organization specialized in the business of bringing buyers and sellers of the organizations to a listing of stocks and securities together. The largest stock market in the United States, by market capitalization, is the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE). In Canada, the largest stock market is the Toronto Stock Exchange. Major European examples of stock exchanges include the Amsterdam Stock Exchange, London Stock Exchange, Paris Bourse, and the Deutsche Börse (Frankfurt Stock Exchange). In Africa, examples include Nigerian Stock Exchange, JSE Limited, etc. Asian examples include the Singapore Exchange, the Tokyo Stock Exchange, the Hong Kong Stock Exchange, the Shanghai Stock Exchange, and the Bombay Stock Exchange. In Latin America, there are such exchanges as the BM&F Bovespa and the BMV. Australia has a national stock exchange, the Australian Securities Exchange, due to the size of its population.

    Market participants include individual retail investors, institutional investors such as mutual funds, banks, insurance companies and hedge funds, and also publicly traded corporations trading in their own shares. Some studies have suggested that institutional investors and corporations trading in their own shares generally receive higher risk-adjusted returns than retail investors.[4]

    Participants in the stock market range from small individual stock investors to large hedge fund traders, who can be based anywhere in the world. Their orders usually end up with a professional at a stock exchange, who executes the order of buying or selling.

    Some exchanges are physical locations where transactions are carried out on a trading floor, by a method known as open outcry. This type of auction is used in stock exchanges and commodity exchanges where traders may enter "verbal" bids and offers simultaneously. The other type of stock exchange is a virtual kind, composed of a network of computers where trades are made electronically via traders.

    Actual trades are based on an auction market model where a potential buyer bids a specific price for a stock and a potential seller asks a specific price for the stock. (Buying or selling at market means you will accept any ask price or bid price for the stock, respectively.) When the bid and ask prices match, a sale takes place, on a first-come-first-served basis if there are multiple bidders or askers at a given price.

    The purpose of a stock exchange is to facilitate the exchange of securities between buyers and sellers, thus providing a marketplace (virtual or real). The exchanges provide real-time trading information on the listed securities, facilitating price discovery.

    The New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) is a physical exchange, also referred to as a listed exchange – only stocks listed with the exchange may be traded, with a hybrid market for placing orders both electronically and manually on the trading floor. Orders executed on the trading floor enter by way of exchange members and flow down to a floor broker, who goes to the floor trading post specialist for that stock to trade the order. The specialist's job is to match buy and sell orders using open outcry. If a spread exists, no trade immediately takes place—in this case the specialist should use his/her own resources (money or stock) to close the difference after his/her judged time. Once a trade has been made the details are reported on the "tape" and sent back to the brokerage firm, which then notifies the investor who placed the order. Although there is a significant amount of human contact in this process, computers play an important role, especially for so-called "program trading".

    The NASDAQ is a virtual listed exchange, where all of the trading is done over a computer network. The process is similar to the New York Stock Exchange. However, buyers and sellers are electronically matched. One or more NASDAQ market makers will always provide a bid and ask price at which they will always purchase or sell 'their' stock.[5]

    The Paris Bourse, now part of Euronext, is an order-driven, electronic stock exchange. It was automated in the late 1980s. Prior to the 1980s, it consisted of an open outcry exchange. Stockbrokers met on the trading floor or the Palais Brongniart. In 1986, the CATS trading system was introduced, and the order matching process was fully automated.

    From time to time, active trading (especially in large blocks of securities) have moved away from the 'active' exchanges. Securities firms, led by UBS AG, Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Credit Suisse Group, already steer 12 percent of U.S. security trades away from the exchanges to their internal systems. That share probably will increase to 18 percent by 2010 as more investment banks bypass the NYSE and NASDAQ and pair buyers and sellers of securities themselves, according to data compiled by Boston-based Aite Group LLC, a brokerage-industry consultant.[6]

    Now that computers have eliminated the need for trading floors like the Big Board's, the balance of power in equity markets is shifting. By bringing more orders in-house, where clients can move big blocks of stock anonymously, brokers pay the exchanges less in fees and capture a bigger share of the $11 billion a year that institutional investors pay in trading commissions.

    Market participants include individual retail investors, institutional investors such as mutual funds, banks, insurance companies and hedge funds, and also publicly traded corporations trading in their own shares. Some studies have suggested that institutional investors and corporations trading in their own shares generally receive higher risk-adjusted returns than retail investors.[4]

    A few decades ago, worldwide, buyers and sellers were individual investors, such as wealthy businessmen, usually with long family histories to particular corporations. Over time, markets have become more "institutionalized"; buyers and sellers are largely institutions (e.g., pension funds, insurance companies, mutual funds, index funds, exchange-traded funds, hedge funds, investor groups, banks and various other financial institutions).

    The rise of the institutional investor has brought with it some improvements in market operations. There has been a gradual tendency for "fixed" (and exorbitant) fees being reduced for all investors, partly from falling administration costs but also assisted by large institutions challenging brokers' oligopolistic approach to setting standardised fees.

    In 12th century France the courretiers de change were concerned with managing and regulating the debts of agricultural communities on behalf of the banks. Because these men also traded with debts, they could be called the first brokers. A common misbelief is that in late 13th century Bruges commodity traders gathered inside the house of a man called Van der Beurze, and in 1309 they became the "Brugse Beurse", institutionalizing what had been, until then, an informal meeting, but actually, the family Van der Beurze had a building in Antwerp where those gatherings occurred;[7] the Van der Beurze had Antwerp, as most of the merchants of that period, as their primary place for trading. The idea quickly spread around Flanders and neighboring counties and "Beurzen" soon opened in Ghent and Rotterdam.

    In the middle of the 13th century, Venetian bankers began to trade in government securities. In 1351 the Venetian government outlawed spreading rumors intended to lower the price of government funds. Bankers in Pisa, Verona, Genoa and Florence also began trading in government securities during the 14th century. This was only possible because these were independent city states not ruled by a duke but a council of influential citizens. Italian companies were also the first to issue shares. Companies in England and the Low Countries followed in the 16th century.

    The Dutch East India Company (founded in 1602) was the first joint-stock company to get a fixed capital stock and as a result, continuous trade in company stock occurred on the Amsterdam Exchange. Soon thereafter, a lively trade in various derivatives, among which options and repos, emerged on the Amsterdam market. Dutch traders also pioneered short selling - a practice which was banned by the Dutch authorities as early as 1610.[8]

    There are now stock markets in virtually every developed and most developing economies, with the world's largest markets being in the United States, United Kingdom, Japan, India, China, Canada, Germany (Frankfurt Stock Exchange), France, South Korea and the Netherlands.[9]

    The stock market is one of the most important sources for companies to raise money. This allows businesses to be publicly traded, or raise additional financial capital for expansion by selling shares of ownership of the company in a public market. The liquidity that an exchange affords the investors gives them the ability to quickly and easily sell securities. This is an attractive feature of investing in stocks, compared to other less liquid investments. Some companies actively increase liquidity by trading in their own shares.[10][11]

    History has shown that the price of shares and other assets is an important part of the dynamics of economic activity, and can influence or be an indicator of social mood. An economy where the stock market is on the rise is considered to be an up-and-coming economy. In fact, the stock market is often considered the primary indicator of a country's economic strength and development.[citation needed]

    Rising share prices, for instance, tend to be associated with increased business investment and vice versa. Share prices also affect the wealth of households and their consumption. Therefore, central banks tend to keep an eye on the control and behavior of the stock market and, in general, on the smooth operation of financial system functions. Financial stability is the raison d'être of central banks.[citation needed]

    Exchanges also act as the clearinghouse for each transaction, meaning that they collect and deliver the shares, and guarantee payment to the seller of a security. This eliminates the risk to an individual buyer or seller that the counterparty could default on the transaction.[citation needed]

    The smooth functioning of all these activities facilitates economic growth in that lower costs and enterprise risks promote the production of goods and services as well as possibly employment. In this way the financial system is assumed to contribute to increased prosperity.[citation needed]

    The financial system in most western countries has undergone a remarkable transformation. One feature of this development is disintermediation. A portion of the funds involved in saving and financing, flows directly to the financial markets instead of being routed via the traditional bank lending and deposit operations. The general public interest in investing in the stock market, either directly or through mutual funds, has been an important component of this process.

    Statistics show that in recent decades shares have made up an increasingly large proportion of households' financial assets in many countries. In the 1970s, in Sweden, deposit accounts and other very liquid assets with little risk made up almost 60 percent of households' financial wealth, compared to less than 20 percent in the 2000s. The major part of this adjustment is that financial portfolios have gone directly to shares but a good deal now takes the form of various kinds of institutional investment for groups of individuals, e.g., pension funds, mutual funds, hedge funds, insurance investment of premiums, etc.

    The trend towards forms of saving with a higher risk has been accentuated by new rules for most funds and insurance, permitting a higher proportion of shares to bonds. Similar tendencies are to be found in other industrialized countries. In all developed economic systems, such as the European Union, the United States, Japan and other developed nations, the trend has been the same: saving has moved away from traditional (government insured) bank deposits to more risky securities of one sort or another.

    From experience it is known that investors may 'temporarily' move financial prices away from their long term aggregate price 'trends'. (Positive or up trends are referred to as bull markets; negative or down trends are referred to as bear markets). Over-reactions may occur—so that excessive optimism (euphoria) may drive prices unduly high or excessive pessimism may drive prices unduly low. Economists continue to debate whether financial markets are 'generally' efficient.

    According to one interpretation of the efficient-market hypothesis (EMH), only changes in fundamental factors, such as the outlook for margins, profits or dividends, ought to affect share prices beyond the short term, where random 'noise' in the system may prevail. (But this largely theoretic academic viewpoint—known as 'hard' EMH—also predicts that little or no trading should take place, contrary to fact, since prices are already at or near equilibrium, having priced in all public knowledge.) The 'hard' efficient-market hypothesis is sorely tested and does not explain the cause of events such as the stock market crash in 1987, when the Dow Jones index plummeted 22.6 percent—the largest-ever one-day fall in the United States.[13]

    This event demonstrated that share prices can fall dramatically even though, to this day, it is impossible to fix a generally agreed upon definite cause: a thorough search failed to detect any 'reasonable' development that might have accounted for the crash. (But note that such events are predicted to occur strictly by chance, although very rarely.) It seems also to be the case more generally that many price movements (beyond that which are predicted to occur 'randomly') are not occasioned by new information; a study of the fifty largest one-day share price movements in the United States in the post-war period seems to confirm this.[13]

    , a 'soft' EMH has emerged which does not require that prices remain at or near equilibrium, but only that market participants not be able to systematically profit from any momentary market 'inefficiencies'. Moreover, while EMH predicts that all price movement (in the absence of change in fundamental information) is random (i.e., non-trending), many studies have shown a marked tendency for the stock market to trend over time periods of weeks or longer. Various explanations for such large and apparently non-random price movements have been promulgated. For instance, some research has shown that changes in estimated risk, and the use of certain strategies, such as stop-loss limits and Value at Risk limits, theoretically could cause financial markets to overreact. But the best explanation seems to be that the distribution of stock market prices is non-Gaussian (in which case EMH, in any of its current forms, would not be strictly applicable).[14][15]

    Other research has shown that psychological factors may result in exaggerated (statistically anomalous) stock price movements (contrary to EMH which assumes such behaviors 'cancel out'). Psychological research has demonstrated that people are predisposed to 'seeing' patterns, and often will perceive a pattern in what is, in fact, just noise. (Something like seeing familiar shapes in clouds or ink blots.) In the present context this means that a succession of good news items about a company may lead investors to overreact positively (unjustifiably driving the price up). A period of good returns also boosts the investor's self-confidence, reducing his (psychological) risk threshold.[16]

    Another phenomenon—also from psychology—that works against an objective assessment is group thinking. As social animals, it is not easy to stick to an opinion that differs markedly from that of a majority of the group. An example with which one may be familiar is the reluctance to enter a restaurant that is empty; people generally prefer to have their opinion validated by those of others in the group.

    In one paper the authors draw an analogy with gambling.[17] In normal times the market behaves like a game of roulette; the probabilities are known and largely independent of the investment decisions of the different players. In times of market stress, however, the game becomes more like poker (herding behavior takes over). The players now must give heavy weight to the psychology of other investors and how they are likely to react psychologically.

    The stock market, as with any other business, is quite unforgiving of amateurs. Inexperienced investors rarely get the assistance and support they need. In the period running up to the 1987 crash, less than 1 percent of the analyst's recommendations had been to sell (and even during the 2000–2002 bear market, the average did not rise above 5%). In the run up to 2000, the media amplified the general euphoria, with reports of rapidly rising share prices and the notion that large sums of money could be quickly earned in the so-called new economy stock market. (And later amplified the gloom which descended during the 2000–2002 bear market, so that by summer of 2002, predictions of a DOW average below 5000 were quite common.)

    Sometimes, the market seems to react irrationally to economic or financial news, even if that news is likely to have no real effect on the fundamental value of securities itself. But, this may be more apparent than real, since often such news has been anticipated, and a counterreaction may occur if the news is better (or worse) than expected. Therefore, the stock market may be swayed in either direction by press releases, rumors, euphoria and mass panic; but generally only briefly, as more experienced investors (especially the hedge funds) quickly rally to take advantage of even the slightest, momentary hysteria.

    Over the short-term, stocks and other securities can be battered or buoyed by any number of fast market-changing events, making the stock market behavior difficult to predict. Emotions can drive prices up and down, people are generally not as rational as they think, and the reasons for buying and selling are generally obscure. Behaviorists argue that investors often behave 'irrationally' when making investment decisions thereby incorrectly pricing securities, which causes market inefficiencies, which, in turn, are opportunities to make money.[18] However, the whole notion of EMH is that these non-rational reactions to information cancel out, leaving the prices of stocks rationally determined.

    Robert Shiller's plot of the S&P Composite Real Price Index, Earnings, Dividends, and Interest Rates, from Irrational Exuberance, 2d ed.[20] In the preface to this edition, Shiller warns, "The stock market has not come down to historical levels: the price-earnings ratio as I define it in this book is still, at this writing [2005], in the mid-20s, far higher than the historical average... People still place too much confidence in the markets and have too strong a belief that paying attention to the gyrations in their investments will someday make them rich, and so they do not make conservative preparations for possible bad outcomes."

    Price-Earnings ratios as a predictor of twenty-year returns based upon the plot by Robert Shiller (Figure 10.1,[20] source). The horizontal axis shows the real price-earnings ratio of the S&P Composite Stock Price Index as computed in Irrational Exuberance (inflation adjusted price divided by the prior ten-year mean of inflation-adjusted earnings). The vertical axis shows the geometric average real annual return on investing in the S&P Composite Stock Price Index, reinvesting dividends, and selling twenty years later. Data from different twenty-year periods is color-coded as shown in the key. See also ten-year returns. Shiller states that this plot "confirms that long-term investors—investors who commit their money to an investment for ten full years—did do well when prices were low relative to earnings at the beginning of the ten years. Long-term investors would be well advised, individually, to lower their exposure to the stock market when it is high, as it has been recently, and get into the market when it is low."[20] A stock market crash is often defined as a sharp dip in share prices of equities listed on the stock exchanges. In parallel with various economic factors, a reason for stock market crashes is also due to panic and investing public's loss of confidence. Often, stock market crashes end speculative economic bubbles.

    There have been famous stock market crashes that have ended in the loss of billions of dollars and wealth destruction on a massive scale. An increasing number of people are involved in the stock market, especially since the social security and retirement plans are being increasingly privatized and linked to stocks and bonds and other elements of the market. There have been a number of famous stock market crashes like the Wall Street Crash of 1929, the stock market crash of 1973–4, the Black Monday of 1987, the Dot-com bubble of 2000, and the Stock Market Crash of 2008.

    One of the most famous stock market crashes started October 24, 1929 on Black Thursday. The Dow Jones Industrial lost 50% during this stock market crash. It was the beginning of the Great Depression. Another famous crash took place on October 19, 1987 – Black Monday. The crash began in Hong Kong and quickly spread around the world.

    By the end of October, stock markets in Hong Kong had fallen 45.5%, Australia 41.8%, Spain 31%, the United Kingdom 26.4%, the United States 22.68%, and Canada 22.5%. Black Monday itself was the largest one-day percentage decline in stock market history – the Dow Jones fell by 22.6% in a day. The names "Black Monday" and "Black Tuesday" are also used for October 28–29, 1929, which followed Terrible Thursday—the starting day of the stock market crash in 1929.

    The crash in 1987 raised some puzzles-–main news and events did not predict the catastrophe and visible reasons for the collapse were not identified. This event raised questions about many important assumptions of modern economics, namely, the theory of rational human conduct, the theory of market equilibrium and the efficient-market hypothesis. For some time after the crash, trading in stock exchanges worldwide was halted, since the exchange computers did not perform well owing to enormous quantity of trades being received at one time. This halt in trading allowed the Federal Reserve system and central banks of other countries to take measures to control the spreading of worldwide financial crisis. In the United States the SEC introduced several new measures of control into the stock market in an attempt to prevent a re-occurrence of the events of Black Monday.

    Since the early 1990s, many of the largest exchanges have adopted electronic 'matching engines' to bring together buyers and sellers, replacing the open outcry system. Electronic trading now accounts for the majority of trading in many developed countries. Computer systems were upgraded in the stock exchanges to handle larger trading volumes in a more accurate and controlled manner. The SEC modified the margin requirements in an attempt to lower the volatility of common stocks, stock options and the futures market. The New York Stock Exchange and the Chicago Mercantile Exchange introduced the concept of a circuit breaker. The circuit breaker halts trading if the Dow declines a prescribed number of points for a prescribed amount of time. In February 2012, the Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada (IIROC) introduced single-stock circuit breakers.[21]

    The movements of the prices in a market or section of a market are captured in price indices called stock market indices, of which there are many, e.g., the S&P, the FTSE and the Euronext indices. Such indices are usually market capitalization weighted, with the weights reflecting the contribution of the stock to the index. The constituents of the index are reviewed frequently to include/exclude stocks in order to reflect the changing business environment.

    Financial innovation has brought many new financial instruments whose pay-offs or values depend on the prices of stocks. Some examples are exchange-traded funds (ETFs), stock index and stock options, equity swaps, single-stock futures, and stock index futures. These last two may be traded on futures exchanges (which are distinct from stock exchanges—their history traces back to commodities futures exchanges), or traded over-the-counter. As all of these products are only derived from stocks, they are sometimes considered to be traded in a (hypothetical) derivatives market, rather than the (hypothetical) stock market.

    Stock that a trader does not actually own may be traded using short selling; margin buying may be used to purchase stock with borrowed funds; or, derivatives may be used to control large blocks of stocks for a much smaller amount of money than would be required by outright purchase or sales.

    In short selling, the trader borrows stock (usually from his brokerage which holds its clients' shares or its own shares on account to lend to short sellers) then sells it on the market, hoping for the price to fall. The trader eventually buys back the stock, making money if the price fell in the meantime and losing money if it rose. Exiting a short position by buying back the stock is called "covering." This strategy may also be used by unscrupulous traders in illiquid or thinly traded markets to artificially lower the price of a stock. Hence most markets either prevent short selling or place restrictions on when and how a short sale can occur. The practice of naked shorting is illegal in most (but not all) stock markets.

    In margin buying, the trader borrows money (at interest) to buy a stock and hopes for it to rise. Most industrialized countries have regulations that require that if the borrowing is based on collateral from other stocks the trader owns outright, it can be a maximum of a certain percentage of those other stocks' value. In the United States, the margin requirements have been 50% for many years (that is, if you want to make a $1000 investment, you need to put up $500, and there is often a maintenance margin below the $500).

    A margin call is made if the total value of the investor's account cannot support the loss of the trade. (Upon a decline in the value of the margined securities additional funds may be required to maintain the account's equity, and with or without notice the margined security or any others within the account may be sold by the brokerage to protect its loan position. The investor is responsible for any shortfall following such forced sales.)

    Regulation of margin requirements (by the Federal Reserve) was implemented after the Crash of 1929. Before that, speculators typically only needed to put up as little as 10 percent (or even less) of the total investment represented by the stocks purchased. Other rules may include the prohibition of free-riding: putting in an order to buy stocks without paying initially (there is normally a three-day grace period for delivery of the stock), but then selling them (before the three-days are up) and using part of the proceeds to make the original payment (assuming that the value of the stocks has not declined in the interim).

    Global issuance of equity and equity-related instruments totaled $505 billion in 2004, a 29.8% increase over the $389 billion raised in 2003. Initial public offerings (IPOs) by US issuers increased 221% with 233 offerings that raised $45 billion, and IPOs in Europe, Middle East and Africa (EMEA) increased by 333%, from $ 9 billion to $39 billion.

    One of the many things people always want to know about the stock market is, "How do I make money investing?" There are many different approaches; two basic methods are classified by either fundamental analysis or technical analysis. Fundamental analysis refers to analyzing companies by their financial statements found in SEC Filings, business trends, general economic conditions, etc. Technical analysis studies price actions in markets through the use of charts and quantitative techniques to attempt to forecast price trends regardless of the company's financial prospects. One example of a technical strategy is the Trend following method, used by John W. Henry and Ed Seykota, which uses price patterns, utilizes strict money management and is also rooted in risk control and diversification.

    Additionally, many choose to invest via the index method. In this method, one holds a weighted or unweighted portfolio consisting of the entire stock market or some segment of the stock market (such as the S&P 500 or Wilshire 5000). The principal aim of this strategy is to maximize diversification, minimize taxes from too frequent trading, and ride the general trend of the stock market (which, in the U.S., has averaged nearly 10% per year, compounded annually, since World War II).

    According to much national or state legislation, a large array of fiscal obligations are taxed for capital gains. Taxes are charged by the state over the transactions, dividends and capital gains on the stock market, in particular in the stock exchanges. However, these fiscal obligations may vary from jurisdictions to jurisdictions because, among other reasons, it could be assumed that taxation is already incorporated into the stock price through the different taxes companies pay to the state, or that tax free stock market operations are useful to boost economic growth.[citation needed]

    References

    1.^ "World Equity Market Declines: -$25.9 Trillion". Seeking Alpha. Retrieved 2011-05-31.
    2.^ "Quarterly Review Statistical Annex – December 2008". Bis.org. September 7, 2008. Retrieved March 5, 2010.
    3.^ "Central Intelligence Agency". Cia.gov. Retrieved 2011-05-31.
    4.^ a b Amedeo De Cesari, Susanne Espenlaub, Arif Khurshed, and Michael Simkovic, The Effects of Ownership and Stock Liquidity on the Timing of Repurchase Transactions (October 2010). Paolo Baffi Centre Research Paper No. 2011-100.
    5.^ "What's the difference between a Nasdaq market maker and a NYSE specialist?". Investopedia.com. Retrieved March 5, 2010.
    6.^ Ortega, Edgar (2006-12-04). "UBS, Goldman Threaten NYSE, Nasdaq With Rival Stock Markets". Bloomberg.com. Retrieved 2011-05-31.
    7.^ "16de eeuwse traditionele bak- en zandsteenarchitectuur [[Oude Beurs (Antwerpen)|Oude Beurs Antwerpen]] 1 (centrum) / Antwerp foto". Belgiumview.com. Retrieved March 5, 2010.
    8.^ "PhD thesis 'The world's first stock exchange'". Retrieved 2011-10-01.
    9.^ "World Federation of Exchanges Monthly YTD Data". World-exchanges.org. Retrieved 2011-05-31.
    10.^ Cesari, Amedeo De; Espenlaub, Susanne; Khurshed, Arif; Simkovic, Michael (2010). "The Effects of Ownership and Stock Liquidity on the Timing of Repurchase Transactions". Paolo Baffi Centre Research Paper No. 2011-100. SSRN 1884171.
    11.^ Simkovic, Michael (2009). "The Effect of Enhanced Disclosure on Open Market Stock Repurchases". Berkeley Business Law Journal 6 (1). SSRN 1117303.
    12.^ "No. HS-38. Stock Prices and Yields: 1900 to 2002" (PDF). Retrieved 2011-05-31.
    13.^ a b Cutler, D. Poterba, J. & Summers, L. (1991). "Speculative dynamics". Review of Economic Studies 58: 520–546.
    14.^ Mandelbrot, Benoit & Hudson, Richard L. (2006). The Misbehavior of Markets: A Fractal View of Financial Turbulence, annot. ed. Basic Books. ISBN 0-465-04357-7.
    15.^ Taleb, Nassim Nicholas (2008). Fooled by Randomness: The Hidden Role of Chance in Life and in the Markets, 2nd ed. Random House. ISBN 1-4000-6793-6.
    16.^ Tversky, A. & Kahneman, D. (1974). "Judgement under uncertainty: heuristics and biases". Science 185 (4157): 1124–1131. doi:10.1126/science.185.4157.1124. PMID 17835457.
    17.^ Morris, Stephen; Shin, Hyun Song (1999). "Risk management with interdependent choice". Oxford Review of Economic Policy 15 (3): 52–62. doi:10.1093/oxrep/15.3.52.
    18.^ Sergey Perminov, Trendocracy and Stock Market Manipulations (2008, ISBN 978-1-4357-5244-3).
    19.^ "News Headlines". Cnbc.com. October 13, 2008. Retrieved March 5, 2010.
    20.^ a b c Shiller, Robert (2005). Irrational Exuberance (2d ed.). Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-12335-7.
    21.^ Completing the Circuit: Canadian Regulation, FIXGlobal, February 2012
    22.^ Chris Farrell. "Where are the circuit breakers". Retrieved October 16, 2008.

    Further reading

    Hamilton, W. P. (1922). The Stock Market Baraometer. New York: John Wiley & Sons Inc (1998 reprint). ISBN 0-471-24764-2.
    Preda, Alex (2009). Framing Finance: The Boundaries of Markets and Modern Capitalism. University of Chicago Press. ISBN 978-0-226-67932-7.






    Carol wrote:
    NEIL KEENAN UPDATE: GLOBAL FINANCIAL ALERT – RACE AGAINST TIME
    TO PREVENT BANKSTERS’ PLAN TO TRIGGER MELTDOWN
    – FEAR OF KEENAN DRIVING CABAL PANIC

    http://jhaines6.wordpress.com/2013/04/06/neil-keenan-update-global-financial-alert-race-against-time-to-prevent-banksters-plan-to-trigger-meltdown-fear-of-keenan-driving-cabal-panic/
    Central bankers secretly stockpiling gold through third parties in anticipation of euro collapse
    · Greek assets – even whole islands – being secretly sold off to pay troika
    · Check for $300 million signed by CEO of major bank is used to defraud global gold reserves
    · United Bank of Switzerland selling US dollars at 20% discount in preparation for collapse,
    while UBS bonds are discounted more than 30% in global trade, as banksters try to dump fast for cash now
    · Cyprus theft of savings accounts was test run, coming soon to a bank near you
    · How Neil Keenan and the Alliance intend to prevent oligarchy’s plan for financial chaos
    by Michael Henry Dunn - JAKARTA, April 5, 2013: Word has reached Neil Keenan here that the banking cabal’s fear and desperation are now moving into what may be a final phase. They tried triggering World War III and that didn’t work. They thought they could depopulate the planet through designer diseases, and that didn’t work. They thought they could escape to vast underground cities, and (thanks to off-planet allies) that can no longer work. Facing exposure, humiliation, and prison (if they are lucky) they are now down to their last desperate throw: to create financial chaos by collapsing world currencies and pulling off a vast Cyprus-style theft of middle-class savings in the U.S. As global forces line up behind Neil Keenan, the Alliance, the Qing Dynasty, and the imminent “Changing of the Guard” to reclaim control over the Global Collateral Accounts, the oligarchs are desperately stockpiling gold in the hope that they can once more dominate an impoverished humanity by surviving the chaos that they themselves plan to trigger.

    Not going to happen – they made the mistake of stealing from Neil Keenan.

    Clearly, there’s more to it than that, and this fight for freedom has been secretly waged by thousands of men and women for decades. But it may well be that historians will look back at the moment when the hapless Daniele Del Bosco absconded with $144.4 billion in bonds entrusted to Keenan by the Dragon Family as the turning point that set the final wheels in motion to bring down Financial Tyranny. As Del Bosco attempted to launder the bonds through the Italian government, the U.N., the World Economic Forum, and the so-called Office of International Treasury Control, Keenan relentlessly pursued the unfolding evidence that led to the Trillion-Dollar Lawsuit and the creation of the Monaco Accords, which are now supported by more than 160 nations. Information continues to flow into Keenan on a daily basis from multiple sources, as witnessed first-hand by this writer.

    Forces are now in motion to prevent this final dark plan from succeeding. The cabal’s desperation is palpable. It’s every man for himself, as the once monolithic Illuminati becomes merely a pack of vicious thieves – which is all they ever were in fact – fleeing from the justice they thought they would never face. Meanwhile, the pressure on them increases daily as the avenues of escape are closed off one by one. And military, militia, and intelligence cooperation is poised to make the long-awaited final sweep of the cabal power structure.

    The cabal’s strategy down through the ages has always been the same: “out of chaos, order.” They create the chaos, and then impose an ever more oppressive “order,” in order to degrade free human beings into debt slaves. They lived by their twisted version of The Golden Rule: ”he who has the gold makes the rules.” They amassed the gold reserves now known as The Global Collateral Accounts on the pretext of removing the cause of war (while slaughtering millions in a series of gold-theft wars). In a century-long struggle, they succeeded in subverting their greatest enemy – a free American republic – into the bankster-controlled U.S.A., Inc., via their secret ownership of the Federal Reserve System. They triggered the Great Depression so they could buy America for a song while outlawing private ownership of gold. The final phase of their grand strategy called for their rulership over a post-Armageddon remnant of mankind. These plans have now fallen apart, and their grand goal of ultimate dominion has been reduced to a desperate struggle for survival.
    Carol wrote:

    Money, religion, politics: The shifting landscape of the New World Order and the approaching cashless society
    http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article39790.html
    Unholy alliance: The Bible warns of an unholy alliance between religion, finance, and political powers at the end of time that will usher in a new age of global conformity. “And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.” Revelation 13:17

    April 8, 2013 – ECONOMY – The same could potentially be said for Bitcoin as over the past months its popularity has grown so much that “anarcho-capitalist…Libertarian…Freedom Fighter against mankind’s two biggest enemies, the State and Central Banks,” Dollar Vigilante Chief Editor, Jeff Berwick, has been on CNBC, CNN, Fox News, and BBC, and other mainstream outlets. What brought on this sudden attention? No, not our anarcho-capitalism, but our announcement of the world’s first BitcoinATM. So, is Jeff just a patsy so that the New World Order can bring in a digital currency? I began wondering this myself, and I came to what I think is a reasonable conclusion. What many skeptics fail to understand is that the so-called New World Order – with its global governance, fiat currencies, and so on – has already, for the most part, been implemented on a global scale. Especially economically. For instance, 95%+ of fiat money today is digital, and it’s all based on the Federal Reserve System, thus creating one worldwide currency with lots of different designs on the actual notes supposedly representing the various cultural backgrounds of nation-states. Despite nearly everything being digital already, there are mainstream technologies that go above-and-beyond, aiming to rule out the need for cash. One particular app for this cashless society, above-and-beyond credit and debit, is called Square, and was developed by Jack Dorsey, Twitter’s co-founder. According to CNN, “this is a telltale signs that the mobile-payments revolution has arrived.” CNN writes, as anyone who has studied American consumers know, “changing the way Americans pay for stuff is going to be really hard work.” But Bitcoin is turning out to be a force to be reckoned with. For instance, in comparison to long-time friends of the liberty movement, gold and silver, Bitcoin seems to have been the play to make over the past six months and beyond. For months, besides today’s drop from $150-$115, after running to $150 from $105, our charts over at Gold Silver Bitcoin have shown a bimetallic standard precipitously dropping relative to Bitcoin.

    The CNN article surmises that, “Paying by phone will be as transformative as the advent of the credit card in the 1950s. It will change the way we shop and bank. With powerful smartphones and tablets taking center stage on both sides of the checkout counter, it will reshape the relationship between buyer and seller. Not only will the phone or the tablet become a wallet for consumers, but it will also turn into a credit card reader and a register for merchants. Shoppers will use their mobile device as a coupon book, a comparison-shopping tool, and a repository of those unwieldy loyalty cards they carry from everyone from giant retail chains to the corner bakery. And your smartphones will serve as beacons that will alert a retailer when you walk into its store so that it can recommend products, show you reviews, or direct you to aisle five, where that beanbag chair you didn’t buy last week still beckons — and you can now have it for 10% off. You won’t even need a few singles to tip the valet or pay the dog walker, because they’ll take mobile payments too.” This basically explains the Bitcoin experience. One big difference? While CNN assumes a central authority, Bitcoin does not. With big players like AT&T, Verizon, Visa, Mastercard, Google, Microsoft, and eBay’s PayPal unit investing in billions in digital payment solutions, it is no surprise that the mainstream media is serving the idea to the public domain in kind and uncritical ways. One of their assumptions is a monopoly on the technology by some corporation friendly to compromising. While the mainstream press has been unable to ignore Bitcoin, it certainly has been critical of Bitcoin being prone to hackers. Sure, a great many people have lost bitcoins. But, imagine if the general population had to become their own banks. Most of them would get eaten right away by sharks in the economic waters. The CNN article champions the ease of digital transactions, and the time saved. Bitcoin is surely faster: “While this revolution will be powered by complex technology, its ultimate effect will be to greatly simplify things for consumers. Think about my experience at Grumpy. While I had to fiddle with my phone ahead of time — to upload my credit card to the Square app and to authorize it to talk to the Grumpy register — once there, the phone never left my pocket. All I had to do was order my cappuccino.” The article portends that “a cashless future is more real than many suspect.” According to the global head of mobile at Visa, “financial institutions are going to have a big role to play. We are, I think, on a precipice of some fundamental change in the way money is exchanged between consumers and businesses,” Rep. Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va., said as she opened the first of a string of hearings one year ago on cashless ways. The Federal Reserve found that 12 percent of cell phone users had already made a payment through their phones, and almost two-thirds of technology experts surveyed by the Pew Center on Internet and American Life said they expected mobile payments to eclipse cash and credit cards by 2020. –The Market Oracle


    Last edited by orthodoxymoron on Mon Apr 08, 2013 11:16 pm; edited 2 times in total
    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7704
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: Archangelic Queens of Heaven and the United States of the Solar System

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Sat Apr 06, 2013 9:49 am

    This madness isn't going to get any easier, is it?? I've honestly been trying to slow-down or stop for several years. I had no intention of starting. My sad experience has made me very wary of spreading the joy. I guess I'll just try to stay in this present 'holding-pattern'. Somehow, I think the industrial-revolution, the technological-revolution, the infowar, and the church-state issue -- could've been handled in a better way -- but I'm not sure how, exactly -- especially under the circumstances which I suspect exist. Why should I try to continue to be a 'wise-guy' when nothing positive seems to result from this?? I feel so empty and lost -- while everyone around me seems to be so happy and with-it. I think I'm supernaturally bombarded by both the good-guys and the bad-guys -- and I never know who's who. I continue to have no anger and no enemies -- yet I seem to be annoyed by divinity, humanity, everyone, and everything. I seem to be living in another-world -- with no fellow-travellers. I got along well with the Ancient Egyptian Deity -- yet I sensed that our loyalties and agendas were VERY different. I often felt as if they were testing me -- or setting me up for something. I sometimes sensed what seemed to be a deep and ancient hatred. I was told that 'they' had been watching me for a long time. The last I heard from them was when they wished me a Happy Easter -- one year ago -- even though they didn't really seem to wish to talk to me. They said they'd be talking to me soon -- but that hasn't happened. I continue to fear a solar system meltdown -- regardless of who does what -- and regardless of who's in bed with who. A helluva lot of chickens (and who knows what else) are coming home to roost (and do who knows what)...

    In most science-fiction shows, the standard greeting usually involves "Take Me To Your Leader". Well, in my case it would be "Show Me the Financial-Records for Orion, Aldebaran, Sirius A&B, Arcturus, Nibiru, and This (Earth) Solar System (Sol) -- Going Back One Million Years. The REAL Records -- Not the Cooked-Books. Then, Show Me the War and Treaty Records for the Same Locations and Time Period. Then, Take Me to Your Leader. The Leader of Your Secret Government, That Is." Remember the Resurrection episode (Season 7) in Stargate SG-1 with a shady character named Keffler or something like that?? He had Nazi ancestors, and he knew a lot about Egyptology and Forbidden-Genetics, etc. He smoked cigarettes, and held them in a peculiar manner. He spoke in sort of a tight and sarcastic way. He was very intelligent -- and very creepy. He reminded me of Kate in East of Eden -- Starbuck's Mom in Battlestar Galactica -- Dr. Mataros in Earth: Final Conflict -- and who I think might be the one who runs this solar system. I just tend to think that's the nature of the beast -- that it's so depressing, stressful, negative, etc. -- and the power and corruption so absolute -- that this type of behavior might be somewhat inevitable. I guess I've sort of tried to model this type of 'person' in this thread -- though on a more refined plane -- and on a higher moral ground. But still, I've been somewhat rude, irreverent, sarcastic, contrarian, arrogant, etc, etc. Once again, I'm not like this in real life -- but I suspect if I were closer to the center of things -- I would move in that direction. BTW -- the entire 7th Season of Stargate SG-1 is superb.

    Is it really wrong and evil to be interested in the "positive-aspects" of the Third Reich??? If one removed the mistreatment, torture, murder, theft, warfare, etc -- from the equation -- is what remains really THAT bad?? What if the Nazis had left the Jews, Gypsies, Gays, Misfits, et al alone -- and what if they hadn't gone to war?? What if they had just built all of those fancy buildings -- had their parades and speeches -- developed that fancy 'alien' technology -- and attempted to win the world over to their point of view by being a City on a Hill -- rather than blasting the hell out of everyone??? What if they had united Europe, the Anglican Communion, and the Roman Catholic Church into some sort of an alliance?? I have no idea what I'm talking about -- other than hearing someone say that the original plan was for Hitler to NOT go to war. What if the idealism of the Third-Reich got hijacked by something MUCH more sinister than what many of the key-players signed-up for??? I like reading the Joseph Farrell books about Nazi technology. It's very sad -- but in some ways -- it's very cool. Why can't we have the good side of this -- without the bad side?? For example, I liked the good aspects of Anna and the Visitors -- but I hated the bad aspects. Why can't we accentuate the positives of everything and everyone in history -- throughout the solar system?? What is the current state of the Nazi Phenomenon -- throughout the solar system??? We might be shocked. The horror.

    Consider a Solar System Command Space Fleet which would provide Transportation and Security for the Entire Solar System. There might be at least 100 large and highly-armed unconventional spacecraft (with many smaller internal shuttle-craft) -- spread throughout the solar system. Obsolete and/or Damaged Craft might be used in war-games. Then, consider a health-care system which was 50% conventional and 50% alternative -- with completely integrated healthcare-centers -- with conventional and alternative practitioners recieving the same pay. BTW -- Ministers of Music (with doctorates in theology and music) should receive at least the same level of pay as these health-care professionals IMHO. Free Insurance would cover both conventional and alternative services at 100% -- provided that people followed all directions, and used both the conventional and alternative treatments and preventive measures. Taxation for the United States of the Solar System might be Point of Sale at the rate of 5%. This would cover the goverance, university-system, health-care and transportation services, etc. Again, the University of Solar System Studies and Governance campuses would be an integral part of a United States of the Solar System -- sort of like Georgetown University assists (some say controls) Washington D.C. Anyway, here is another list variation:

    1. The Latin Mass.
    2. The 1928 Book of Common Prayer.
    3. Sacred Classical Music.
    4. The Desire of Ages.
    5. The Federalist Papers.
    6. Astronomy and Egyptology.
    7. Nature and Exercise.
    8. Science-Fiction.

    This is for study purposes only. I'm trying to create a frame of mind -- and a frame of reference -- from which to discover the real answers and solutions for this solar system. Very few of you pay any attention to this -- so why do I continue?? If I were a Bad@$$ Billionare you'd pay attention -- wouldn't you?? Come -- Let Us Reason Together?? What a Joke!! Do you want another Star War?? Would THAT get your attention?? If the current Solar System Administrator is a Bad@$$ there might be some legitimate reasons why this might be the case -- but I don't think things have to be that way. Please rewatch The Century of the Self http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7EwXmxpExw -- and The Ring of Power. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGfUKopOiKU Then connect the dots and join these two documentaries together. This stuff is both profound and sad. You seem to have zero inclination to work with me in this matter -- which makes me keep thinking that Edward Bernays and Jordan Maxwell were correct about people not wanting the truth -- and needing to be manipulated from the shadows. Once again, I am modeling a hypothesis that Archangel Michael was instrumental in the creation of the human being and responsible freedom -- but that this did not sit well with the Galactic PTB -- and that they sent Gabiel and/or Lucifer (in Battlestar Moon from Nibiru?) many thousands of years ago -- to reign-in, punish, and enslave Michael and Humanity. I suspect that Lucifer switched sides at least once or twice -- and MIGHT presently be fighting BOTH sides. Who knows?? I have no proof -- and this is simply a contrarian-hypothesis -- which I hope is NOT true. This stuff truly scares the hell out of me -- and I am HIGHLY traumatized (physically, mentally, spiritually, financially, etc, etc). I need to stop and sleep. It is pointless to continue. This is truly an exercise in futility. Hopefully, we do NOT have Hell to pay every day. Namaste and Have a Nice Day.






    The following is just more reposting of old posts (mostly unedited). My thinking might've changed -- but these posts are intended to make YOU think -- and not necessarily to tell you what I think. Most days, I don't know what I think -- and I'm quite easily confused -- and that's the truth. When I speak of wishing to be an Insider-Philosopher-Observer I mean to communicate that I'm probably at my best while just observing the REALLY bright and responsible people (and other than people) at work. I make no claims to genius or moral-perfection. Raven was, and is, right. I, orthodoxymoron, am a Completely Ignorant Fool -- and I'm not saying this to be a smart@ss (or a dumb@ss). It's frustrating that half of the old links no longer work. I'm not seeking new links for these old posts. I'm simply eliminating the dead-links.

    I was tranferring a couple of posts from the 'What is Gizeh Intelligence?' thread on AV1 - when it was apparently shut-down. It seemed as if someone pulled the plug. I joked that it was probably shut-down by a Tall, Long-Nosed Grey in an Underground Base - who was sick and tired of my nonsense! Could we be dealing with the Annunaki vs Gizeh Intelligence? Or - are we really dealing with only one Solar System Super Power? Could they have created all of the mythologies, theologies, hybrids, greys, reptilians, nukes, anti-gravity craft, etc and et al? Damned if I know. I just keep marching bravely and stupidly into the unknown - waiting to get shot down.

    Is there any truth to the following?

    ALDEBARAN -- Human militarists of a fascist slant who have traditionally sided with the Dracos and Greys. They collaborate within a large underground facility below Egypt, the base of a secret "Kamagol-II" cult which has connections to the Bavarian Thule Society and the Montauk time-space projects. This cult is also referred to as the Gizeh empire or Gizeh Intelligence, and they are working with secret societies on earth in an effort to dissolve all national sovereignties into a global religio-eco-political order. There are also Insectoid forces involved with Aldebaran. Apparently a neo-Nazi space force may have helped to colonize that system by sending time-space forces back into the distant past to inhabit the 4th dimensional realm of one or more of its planets. These forces from the past are currently involved with the New World Order scenario, attempting to carry out their dictatorial agenda on earth from their "base" within another time-space dimension of Aldebaran (source: Preston Nicholes, and others).

    Here is another reference:

    Alex Collier Video: 1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OW4wA55jII8. 2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ok0QDWj52mU&feature=related. Alex Collier Lecture ..A; 1995

    Interaction Between Gizeh Group and Nazi Germany: The Greys made contact with a world governmental body for the first time in 1931. This was in Germany. The Greys were however turned away by the German government, because it had already committed itself to involvement with the Gizeh Intelligence. Now, I don't know if you know who Gizeh intelligence is, but I will tell you that it is a renegade group of human extraterrestrials that were headquartered under the Gizeh plateau in Egypt. They were predominantly Pleiadians at the time. Ashtar was part of that group, Kamagol was part of that group. Even Jehovah was part of that group for some time. They did their own thing. They came down here and "played God" with us, and people worshipped them as "Gods" because they had this technology. They abused their power. The Germans were, in the 1930's, building rockets and starting a space program because of their contacts with extraterrestrials - the Gizeh Intelligence.

    Technology was developed and used to create weapons, because the German governmental bodies involved were concerned that there was going to be an alien invasion. The Gizeh intelligence told them that the Greys were here. However, there was not an actual invasion, per se, in progress. Weapons, such as sound devices, lasers, neutron bombs, particle beam weapons were created, although many of these were actualized later on in history. The Germans were given a lot of this technology by the Gizeh intelligence. These technologies also included free energy devices and anti-gravity technology. Tripartite Interaction: US, USSR and Britain. The United States was the first to open its doors to the alien race known as the Greys. I have been told of a contact in 1934, wherein the Greys made their presence known to the United States government in Washington State. It wasn't until 1947 that actual contact occurred with the aliens and United States officials, due to the shooting down of an alien craft in Roswell, New Mexico. This pressed the Greys into contact earlier than they had anticipated. After this crash at Roswell in 1947 the United States, the Soviet Union and the British, at the very highest levels of government, became "blood-brothers".

    Now, these governments did not know what Germany was really up to at that time in history. The Germans were very very secretive about their contact with Gizeh intelligences. What was going on in Germany and what was going on between these other countries were two separate issues. The Roswell incident created more of an urgency to develop a true space program in order to defend the Earth. Again, the United States government and the Soviets thought that there was a threat due to the technologically advanced state of the aliens they had encountered. The true space program as an "underground" development that we are just now beginning to hear about. It was originally financed by members of the Club of Rome. Now, you will need to do some homework to find out who those members are, and don't be surprised at who you see. We'll talk more about that when we discuss the moon. The Greys assisted the "black government" with the building of some of the first facilities on the moon and Mars.

    Here is one more:

    The observation leads to the conclusion that Al Gore is a top member of Gizeh intelligence. This was the reported occult backing of Adolf Hitler and his Nazi movement in Germany. Ethnically, the Mars connection of pyramid builders (Caucasian white race component of modern humanity via Atlantis, in their original form fitting the Nazi stereotype and extremely racist, the people described by contactee Elizabeth Klarer). The story is very old and very complex. In order to give a short intro, just take a look at this ancient Egyptian painting of Toth writing judgment: Toth, or Hermes Trismegistos, was born during the times of Atlantis and achieved personal immortality. A part of this was a shape-shifting ability. In the painting above, he is depicted with an animal head (ibis). Gizeh intelligence comprized around 8000 highly advanced people under the supreme leadership of shape-shifting Toth. They lived since ancient times in a network of underground cities, the main city being under Gizeh, Egypt, another site being under a location in the Grand Canyon, U.S.A. Other animal shapes reported from ancient times include a crocodile face, a lion face, etc. Toth is the fading embodiment of a fallen angel, Lucifer. In the 19th century, some of the 8000 started becoming active, such as through the Theosophical society of Madame Helena Petrovna Blavatsky. In the early 20th century, the Gizeh intelligence became active as a backer of Adolf Hitler in Germany and his Rothschild-Windsor sponsors in England. Today, all the 8000 have left their cities and are active among humanity. From this connection it is plausible that they are also the force behind the Jesuits in the Vatican and the Knights Templar before that. Reference: Books by Drunvalo Melchizedek. Contrary to myth, the Nazis won the second world war and took over the United States of America. See research by Mae Brussell, Webster G. Tarpley, Anton Chaitkin, David Emory and Greg Hallett. From this connection it is plausible that Gizeh intelligence is in control of America. My personal psychic experience is that Al Gore is a shape-shifting demonic entity from the very top of Gizeh intelligence with Assamite ability (one of the so-called „Ascended Masters” who are highly developed negative beings). The activation of the Gizeh intelligence over the past 150 years (since John D. Rockefeller, Sr.’s time) is to my mind an incidental part of the prophecy that is frequently discussed today under the caption of „2012”. The traditional Christian name for this is the Apocalypse (after the Book of Revelation, the last book of the Bible). Here is the link: http://www.cloakanddagger.de/home%20page%20items/Al_Gore_Evil.htm.

    In light of the above information, please watch the following: 1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJfc63rCnWE. 2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTe2tUW2LS8&feature=related. Do you see a pattern...or is it just me? Tell me I'm not crazy! Pretty please!! Help! I'm finding very little information on 'Gizeh Intelligence'. The above description seems to place 'them' at the center of our troubles. The views expressed above are not necessarily mine...but they seem intriquing. What is going on here?

    Correct! Which is why I am looking for a plurality of sources regarding 'Gizeh Intelligence'. Collier says they are gone...but I doubt this. If they existed here historically...I would expect that they are still here. Could Gizeh Intelligence be the group wherein Lucifer resides? Are they the 'fallen angels'? Do they compose the present day Illuminati? Is David Icke speaking of Gizeh Intelligence? Has he ever mentioned this term? Did they create the greys...as well as a mythology to go along with their creation? Are they creating an army and air-force of aliens in the Deep Underground Military Base genetics labs? Will we end up fighting these creations...which we have helped to develop? Are we building the UFO's which they fly? Is most of ufology utter bs...invented mostly by Gizeh Intelligence? Do they live on the inside of our hollow earth(if it is indeed hollow) ...and come through their tunnel system in the earth's crust...to raise heck with us? Are Pleiadians the only aliens here on earth? Are we all Pleiadians? Are the Gizeh Intelligence Pleiadian Aliens those who at some point in history, mated with reptillians? So...might there be Reptillian Pleiadians and Non-Reptillian Pleiadians...and nothing more? Are the reptillians the real bad-guys(demons)? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWR6WE4z20g&feature=related Are the off-world Pleiadians the real good-guys(angels)? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-9xai73_n8&feature=related Are we the wild card in-between guys? It's the real nice guys who get you! I think I just became a heretic! I recant!! What? You don't believe me?! Oh, come on! I'll be good! What are you doing with that torch?

    So...who the heck is Gizeh Intelligence? Do they have a Central Giza Intelligence Agency? Or how about the GIA (Gizeh Intelligence Agency)? Or might it be the CIA (Central-earth Intelligence Agency)? I actually prefer Compassion In Action! Hi guys! Is MI6...Middle-earth Intelligence 6? Is no one interested in this topic? Can someone direct me to where people might be interested in this topic? Sometimes I feel like I'm from another planet...and I wish I were kidding. Please consider all the information available so far on this thread...and give me some feed-back. If these guys are in charge...and no one knows or cares...they have been very, very sucessful. Our greed, fear, and stupidity makes it very, very easy for the bad-guys. Did Billy Meier ever mention 'Gizeh Intelligence'? There seems to be very little information available on this subject. Are the Pleiadians he interacted with...'off-world'...in other words, not residing here on earth, or interveining in human affairs, other than providing warning, inspiration, and advice? Could Gizeh Intelligence be Pleiadians who are in cahoots with reptillians and greys? Do they live in the crust of the earth...and possibly in the allegedly hollow earth? Have they interbred with the reptillians? Is this the basis of the Illuminati, and are the Illuminati actually Pleiadian/Reptillian hybrids? Are the Illuminati and Greys actually subservient pawns to the Draconian Reptillians? Are all of the above the foundation of the New World Order? Could this righly be called the Old World Disorder Alien-Theocracy? Is this really old, rather than new...and possibly thousands of years old? Are we humans...all Pleiadians?

    Thank-you Karen. It's difficult for me to distill the truth from the bs. The Hyperborean reference reminded me of a passage in Frederick Nietzsche's book 'The Anti-Christ' which reads 'We are Hyperboreans'. It's been years since I read this, but that phrase stuck. I'm guessing he was referring to the Germanic people, but I don't really know for sure. The thesis of Jim Marrs' book 'Rise of the Fourth Reich' is that Nazi Fascism is alive and well in the good 'ol US of A. Seperately, the Alex Collier allegation that Gizeh Intelligence was behind Hitler and the Third Reich, would suggest that the same forces are at work today, if in fact, there is a Fourth Reich on the rise presently. Why would Gizeh Intelligence be removed without the other rascals being 86'd? The US/Gray treaties? What about the Reptilians? The whole concept of the earth's crust being laced with bases, tunnels, cities, and aliens is a very unsettling hypothesis. If there is a hollow earth with a central sun...the plot thickens, to say the least! Mind you, I don't know if any of this is true. I have been jilted in the area of traditional religion...and I believe that it is possible to be jilted in the area of ufology and conspiracy research. It's hard to simply say 'could be...but then again...might not be'. Was it Carl Sagan who said 'I don't want to believe. I want to know'? I want to know, as well. Yet I am tending to be very detached...and I have a chronic case of commitment-phobia. I tend to change my mind on a daily basis. The upside is that it's harder to hit a moving target! :

    The man behind the curtain must just about die laughing at us...that sob! Perhaps it would be interesting to study the previous decade in light of the current decade. This would provide some perspective and some critique and potential validation or debunking. The current decade may be too close to focus upon...and going back futher than the previous decade may be too far. I don't know. Maybe comparing everything with everything...without latching on to anything in particular...is a good approach. But the emotional and spiritual trauma may be too much for many people. I started a thread recently titled '1990's Prophets Vindicated or Debunked?' where I looked at Bill Cooper, Alex Collier, and Bill Still. The response was pretty minimal, and focused only on Bill Cooper. The constant asking and answering of questions may be a good approach. I keep getting the feeling that no matter which way we turn we are going to encounter trouble. There seems to be no simple, easy road to utopia. If you are ignorant and guillible, you get taken. If you know too much, they're out to get you! If you're at the bottom, you're a slave. If you're at the top, you might not like the view! I don't have the answer. I'm not even sure what the question is...:sad:

    I'm going to try this one more time. The response to this thread has been almost non-existant. Could the tall, long-nosed greys, who supposedly met Eisenhower...and who our government supposedly signed treaties with...have been Gizeh Intelligence, with some plastic surgery perhaps? Please, someone shoot this thread down, provide some additional sources, or substantiate and expand on this initial hypothesis. Do benevolent aliens have the green light to remove malevolent aliens...as is alleged to have occured with Gizeh Intelligence in 1978? I thought benevolent aliens were non-interventionist. We supposedly signed treaties with the tall greys...not the short greys...right? Well...do people report seeing tall greys? I'm sensing that there may be a lot of 'local' aliens with human 'help' really screwing the human race. Isn't this an important topic? You can vibrate as fast as you want...but the details of who really controls our planet...and why so many people have died in the past 100 years...may determine the destiny of the human race. If we don't get our house in order...we may be stuck in enslavement/extinction...instead of going into 4th or 5th densities. Do we have our heads stuck in the clouds...and are we too sure that we are going to 'graduate' from all the trouble here on earth? We may be in for a big surprise...

    Thank-you for your responses. Gizeh Intelligence may go by other names...but the descriptions in my first post seem to fit what is going on in our world. Go through the whole first post a couple of times...including the video clips...and see if you can see a startling pattern emerging. The whole Nazi/Hitler/Illuminati/Military Industrial Complex/New World Order/Fascist/Enslavement/Extermination/International Banking thing really has me spooked...as it seems to be a global phenomenon which can convincingly be traced for nearly 100 years...right up to 2009. Everything we have seen and experienced thus far may just be practice for the main event. I don't even want to think about what that might be. Check out EVERYTHING on YouTube or Google Video on Jim Marrs, Joseph Ferrell, and Bill Cooper ...for starters. The dots should start connecting...with a very disturbing picture emerging. Please give this some serious thought. The truth may set us free...but it's sure scaring the heck out of me!

    I don't have anything in particular against Forrest Gore...but life is like a Google search...you never know what you're gonna get! However, it might be wise to look closely at the Vice Presidents of the past 60 years...and how they were selected. Were they who the President really wanted? I'm simply interested in how corruptible the top jobs in our country are. Is our political system a glorified 'The Price is Right' show? Who's the host? Who's the parasite? Are we the suckers?

    Dr. Earlyne Chaney, in an article titled 'ODYSSEY INTO EGYPT', in her occult-oriented magazine VOICE OF ASTARA (May, 1982) tells of a discovery she and researcher Bill Cox was shown in Egypt. These were two tunnels, neither of which had been fully explored. One was in the temple of Edfu between Luxor and Cairo in the ruins of El Tuna Gabel; and the other near Zozer's Step Pyramid at Cairo near Memphis-Saqqarah, within the tomb of the Bull, called "Serapium". The Egyptian government sealed both tunnels because of fears of certain archaeologists who alleged that they "lead too deeply down into the depths of the earth," and because they found the earth to be "honeycombed with passages leading off into other depths," and the possibility of explorers becoming lost. If such labyrinths do exist, then it may explain one story which alleged that men dressed like "ancient Egyptians" have been seen deep in unexplored tunnels near Cairo, as well as possible confirmation of the story which appeared in Nevada Aerial Research's 'LEADING EDGE' Publication to the effect that the U.S.(?) Government secretly maintains a huge base within a cavern of tremendous size (several miles in diameter) beneath the desert sands of Egypt. Could this tie in with the vaque references to a subterranean society(s) referred to by certain people 'in the know' which is/are known as the 'Phoenix Empire' and/or the 'Gizeh People'?

    How many factions of humans/aliens are there in this solar system? I think that it is important to know who all of the major players are throughout the solar system...what their track records are...and what their intentions for the future are. Ignorance may be bliss...but it could also be deadly. To me...there should be no secrets regarding all of the above.

    If Hitler was interacting with Giza Intelligence (is it Giza or Gizeh?)...this is something which should be examined very carefully. Why is there so little information on this subject? Supposedly they broke off interaction with Hitler in 1941 and were driven off planet in 1979. Does this have something to do with the Dulce Wars? Is this when the military industrial complex and the secret human government really lost control of the alien situation...or were they never in control? Did Giza Intelligence simply move voluntarily to the Dark Side of the Moon? Is this the Capitol of the Solar System? Is there a Vatican Connection? Is Lucifer the head of Giza Intelligence? Do they still have a presence in North Africa?

    The Secret Space Program. The Deep Underground Military Bases. The City-States. The Reptilians and Greys. Lucifer. Who Owns and Operates the Solar System? These are the key words and phrases. All of the secrecy should end...and the Solar System should be based upon Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom with an uncorrupted form of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights, which is adapted to incorporate 100's of states throughout the Solar System.

    Gizeh Intelligence may be at the center of all of the above. What do you think?

    I know that dealing with this subject is playing with fire. I don't know what the stakes really are. If I did...I'd probably just play video games. I just don't want malevolent humans or aliens to play god in this part of the universe...and engage in genocide, atrocity, or enslavement. Bad-guys need secrecy a lot more than good-guys.

    Perhaps I could return to the subject of the thread by saying that all of this stuff is interconnected. Compartmentalizing what we discuss may be a mistake. Thinking about the Secret Space Program while watching a motorcycle race may unlock new insights. I'm not kidding. I call this Contextual Superimposition...and related to the Eureka Phenomenon. The military industrial complex has a huge presence in Southern California. Just ask John Lear. California...in general...is hugely important regarding the subject of aliens and ufo's. I guess that North Africa and the Southwestern United States are two of the most interesting areas to me...at this time...other than the Dark Side of the Moon.

    Richard Hoagland states that the three main factions within NASA are 1. The Masons 2. The NAZI's 3. The Magicians (Occultists?). My question is...which of these three factions is most closely associated with Giza Intelligence? Or are all of the seemingly different factions simply different facets of the same diamond? There has to be a supreme council headed by a supreme leader...which oversees all of the madness. I suspect that this leader is Lucifer. Again...did Giza Intelligence move their headquarters from North Africa to the Dark Side of the Moon in 1979 (or shortly thereafter)?

    Actually...I think the underground bases, leviton trains, secret space program, etc...is kinda cool...but all of this should not be secret...and should not be under malevolent reptilian control. We the People of Earth should control all of this very, very expensive activity. We're paying for it...aren't we? We the People should be invited to the party. It should be 'Our Party'...so to speak.

    Again...I don't know if any of this is true. I'm simply exploring different lines of possibility and probability. The Vatican, the Pentagon, the NSA, the CIA, etc, etc...all keep forgetting to brief me on what's REALLY going on! I am NOT a potted-plant!

    Thank-you James. The links were fascinating. I will have to start following your posts more closely. I haven't been...and I don't know why. No reason at all. I guess I just got in a rut.

    Thank-you Tango. A remote viewer brought 'The Roswell Conception' idea to me a few weeks ago.

    Was (is?) Omnipotent Highness KRLLL really Lucifer?
    Could Giza Intelligence be a relatively benevolent faction of humans, greys, and reptilians? Are they fighting more malevolent factions of humans, greys, and reptilians? I'm sensing a very dark and complex power struggle...with lots of collateral damage. Are the various factions really different shades of black? Disclosure could be unbelievably complex. Are there good Masons? Are there good NAZI's? Are there good Occultists? Are there good Popes? Are there good Illuminati? Are there good Zionists? Are there good Reptilians? Are there good Greys? What were the World Wars REALLY all about? Did WWII really end? Is it still raging (over our heads, beneath our feet, and invisibly all around us...and even in us)?

    I'm sensing that we are discussing the tip of the iceberg. We may be picking a scab which covers a very ugly and grotesque wound. We may not like what we see when 'Disclosure' fully occurs. I'm thinking that we may have to become very unhappy and disillusioned before we can really begin to build a better world and solar system. Keep digging...but don't be surprised if you don't like what you find. Abandon all hope ye who enter Avalon. Just kidding...or am I?

    What if Earth (and the Solar System) was colonized millions of years ago by Humans (rather than having evolved here on Earth, at least)...who brought all of the fancy technology with them (including antigravity, nuclear weapons, holographic, free energy, etc). Could we Earth Humans really be Humans from Sirius? Sirius is the All Seeing Eye at the Top of the Pyramid. Sirius is at the center of EVERYTHING.

    What if we Humans can exist both physically and spiritually...and simply get recycled here on Earth (and the Solar System)? What if a faction of Humans hoarded the technology, dumbed the rest of the Humans down genetically and educationally. What if all of the religions are manmade? What if all of the alien races are either made up...or have been genetically created by Humans? What if a faction of Human Beings is behind all of this? Could this be Gizeh (Giza) Intelligence? I've asked this sort of thing before...and I live in perpetual uncertainty. This uncertainty is taking a toll. I'm just asking at least some of you to think through what a completely Human Earth scenario would look like. Imagine being part of a faction of Humans...living throughout the Solar System...and deceiving 99% of the other Humans. How would you pull it off...century after century? We have to consider all possibilities...don't we?

    I know Humans exist. I know Spirits exist. I know UFO's are real. I know we are in HUGE trouble. Beyond that...I don't really know a damn thing. I'm getting everything second, third, fourth, and fifth hand. Many of us have open minds regarding Aliens, UFO's, time-travel, etc, etc...but what about being open-minded about the possibility that all of this phenomenon is Human? Could the supposed Roswell future Humans really be the elite underground Humans called Giza Intelligence? Bill Cooper was perplexed by the 'Alien Presence' and wondered if it could be a completely homegrown phenomenon.

    I just noticed the view-count of this thread. It's over 3,000...yet there aren't very many comments. What's going on here? Somebody help me out here. I'm feeling very small, stupid, and helpless. I'm in way over my head thinking about this stuff. I need to stop. Could the superimposed parallel universes simply be 1. The elite members of Giza Intelligence (1% of the Human Race?). 2. The rest of us peons (99% of the Human Race?). Who knows? Oh...I forgot...the Shadow Government knows. Gotta go. Someone's pounding on my front-door...

    A special note to Gizeh Intelligence: If what I have said in the previous post is correct...all I ask at this point...is that all extermination and enslavement scenarios be conclusively terminated. Just join the rest of the human race. I request that all factions throughout the solar system reconcile and join together under the authority of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights. This sad chapter of universal history can have a happy ending...and a new beginning. Namaste.

    I'm feeling really close to the truth...yet really far away. I'm thinking that Sirius is at the center of everything...yet I'm not sure exactly how. Could it be that the God of This World is a Draconian-possessed androgynous black human alien from Sirius who heads Giza Intelligence, the Secret Space Program, and the Deep Underground Military Bases...and who is the real Black Pope? Could the Ark of the Covenant be the UFO which brought us here from Sirius along with technology obtained from Draconian-demons in exchange for allowing the Draconians to possess the elite-humans? Is this solar system really part of the Siran solar system? Is our sun really Sirius C? Is the ancient depiction of three suns really Sirius A, Sirius B, and Sirius C? Are the tall greys from Sirius, really just human beings? Did we all come from Sirius? Is there a stargate between this solar system and Sirius? Is all of the cr@p we have been in for millions of years really a Sirian civil war? Are we all different factions of Sirians? Would my pet project of The United States of the Solar System really have to apply to Sirius as well? Is Sirius the All Seeing Eye at the top of the pyramid? Is Sunday really Sun God Day? Is this sun really Sirius? Is the Roman Catholic Church all about Sirius? Are the Masons all about Sirius? Are the occultists all about Sirius? Is the layout of Washington D.C. all about Sirius? Is the Sirian Theocratic System really the Universal Church aka The Holy Roman Empire aka the New World Order?

    How answerest thou...SaLuSa?

    I tend to agree TRANCOSO. I just wonder if it's possible to remove the Draco part of the unholy trinity you mentioned? Are the Draconians really demons who are usually invisible...but who can manifest themselves in reptilian/grey form? Are the Sirians we are dealing with really human beings? When the Vatican referred to extraterrestrials as our brothers...perhaps they meant this literally. Are the Nazis, Masons, Vatican, City of London...and most of the people we love to hate...really pawns? Would an exorcism of the Sirius system as well as our solar system be necessary to rid us of most of our problems? If so...what would make this possible? Is it even possible? Has a significant faction of humanity been dealing with the devil? How expensive would this divorce be?

    I have no hatred in asking these questions. I'm treating this like a science fiction mystery novel. I realize that if even 5% of it is true that we are in very deep trouble. I'm thinking that Sirius A, B, and C need to be completely divorced from Draco...and that Sirius A, B, and C need to completely reconcile under the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights...and completely expose all of the dark secrets, horrific wars, and deals with the devil. I just want the BS to stop. Hope springs eternal. Conduit closing.

    I completely agree TRANCOSO. They have to use Secrecy and Deception to pull-off their agenda. That is Not a good sign. I think we have a chance to properly handle this BS...but that the window of opportunity is very small. The consequences of getting this wrong are enormous...I think. We seem to be like an abused spouse who believes the promise that it will be different this time. How many times do we have to get beat-up before we wake-up and get a cosmic divorce and a universal restraining order? If we keep going back for more...there is probably very little the benevolent forces throughout the universe can do for us.

    I keep wondering about the distinction between supposed 'native' reptilians and the alleged 'Draconian' reptilians. Perhaps the 'native' reptilians are not really a huge problem. They seem to be more physical than supernatural. Perhaps greys are a type of 'native' reptilian. I don't know. But it does seem that there are 'non-native' reptilians which seem to be more supernatural than physical. These Draconian reptilians seem to be very evil, smart, and dangerous. Perhaps these Draconians can manifest as reptilians or hijack the native reptilians (and greys?) to do their bidding...or at least blame them for all the trouble. The greys with two brains (one which is computerized?) seem to just be robots. Do the Draconians sometimes (or always?) possess these greys? The Draconians seem to need physicality. Why is this? Why do they possess people?

    We are told that we need to ascend beyond physicality. I don't buy this at all. We are also told that we will be taken to better places with spaceships and stargates. Are we sure we would really go to 'better' places? It sounds like they want our bodies and our planet. It sounds like they want to rule over us as Gods. I want to keep my body. I want to keep my planet. I want Constitutional Responsible Freedom. I want the Draconians to go to hell...and leave us alone.

    Giza Intelligence is supposedly connected with Aldebaran...but I am considering the possibility that they are connected with Sirius. I haven't decided if they are with the Draconians...or against them. It sounds like they are with them...and even possessed by them. I really don't know. It just sounds like our solar system and the Sirian solar system are linked...and that we are dealing with a human phenomenon(Sirian humans and Earth humans)...with the exception of the Draconians...and perhaps some native reptilians and greys(native to both Sirius and Earth). Again...I don't know. Help somebody.

    I'm simply suspecting huge doses of BS everywhere...especially from ET's who are oh so superior to us stupid mortals...and are here to help us evolve...by abducting us, experimenting on us, terrorizing us, and dictating to us...whether we like it or not. BS!!!!!

    !!!!!!!!!!!! BETTER DEAD THAN REP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SOLAR SYSTEM EXORCISM!!!!!!!!!!!

    Here is something of interest regarding Aldebaran from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aldebaran Notice especially the section on the Gnostic Neo-Nazis.

    Ancient cultures
    The name Aldebaran comes from the Arabic (الدبران al-dabarān) meaning "the follower" and refers to the way the star follows the Pleiades star cluster in its nightly journey across the sky. In Persia it was known as Sadvis and Kugard.[7] The Romans called it Palilicium, and it is known as 畢宿五 (Bìxiùwŭ, the Fifth Star of the Net) in Chinese. Aldebaran is identified as the lunar mansion Rohini in Hindu astronomy and as one of the twenty-seven daughters of Daksha and the wife of the god Chandra.

    Gnostic Neo-Nazis
    An esoteric neo-Nazi sect headquartered in Vienna, Austria called the Tempelhofgesellschaft, founded in the early 1990s, teaches a form of Gnosticism called Marcionism[citation needed]. They distribute pamphlets claiming that the Aryan race originally came to Atlantis from the star Aldebaran (this information is supposedly based on "ancient Sumerian manuscripts"). They maintain that the Aryans from Aldebaran derive their power from the vril energy of the Black Sun. They teach that since the Aryan race is of extraterrestrial origin it has a divine mission to dominate all the other races. It is believed by adherents of this religion that an enormous space fleet is on its way to Earth from Aldebaran which, when it arrives, will join forces with the Nazi Flying Saucers from Antarctica to establish the Western Imperium. [8]

    Inuit culture
    In Inuit astronomy, Aldebaran is called "Spirit of a Polar Bear".

    Italian witchcraft
    In the religion of Stregheria, Aldebaran is a fallen angel and quarter guardian of the eastern gate.

    Literature
    Aldebaran is referred to in Edmund Spenser's The Faerie Queene (1590), book one, canto three, stanza 16:

    Now when Aldeboran was mounted hye
    Aboue the shinie Cassiopeia chaire (I.III.16.1-2)
    In American horror writer H. P. Lovecraft's Cthulhu Mythos, Hastur resides in the Hyades cluster, and is signified by Aldebaran being above the horizon. When Aldebaran is visible, Hastur's eye is said to be upon all it oversees.

    Mexican culture
    For the Seris of northwestern Mexico, this star is providing light for the seven women giving birth (Pleiades). It has three different names: Hant Caalajc Ipápjö, Queeto, and Azoj Yeen oo Caap ("star that goes ahead"). The lunar month corresponding to October is called Queeto yaao "Aldebaran's path".[9]

    Native American culture
    For the Dakotas (a branch of the Native American Sioux tribe), Aldebaran took on a heroic aspect. The young star was the child of the sun and the lady Blue Star. One day, he desired to hunt the white buffalo (the Pleiades). After he pulled up a sapling to make a spear, a hole was made in the ground and he could see all the people of Earth down below. The white buffalo took this chance to push him through. He was found by an old woman and was to be known as Old Woman's Grandson. On Earth, he killed many strange monsters that had been troubling the Native Americans; one monster of which was a serpent that caused drought. The young hero killed the serpent, releasing a great stream of water that became the Mississippi River. In time, Old Woman's Grandson remembered the white buffalo and returned to hunting him in the sky to fulfill his destiny.

    Music
    Reference to Aldebaran appears in the The Rolling Stones song "2000 light years from home" from the 1967 psychedelic rock album Their Satanic Majesties Request. The Welsh-born Dark Ambient musician Brian Williams (Lustmord) has a track entitled Aldebaran of the Hyades on his 1994 album The Place where the Black Stars Hang. Enya included a song named Alderbaran on her first album, Enya (later re-released as The Celts). Austrian musician B. Fleischmann includes a song called "Aldebaran Waltz" in his 2006 album, The Humbucking Coil.

    Aldebaran is also the title of a song by Essra Mohawk, and is included on her album "Revelations Of The Secret Diva".

    Thank-you no caste. I did see the other post. What if what we are really dealing with is Draconian Demon Possessed or Controlled Humans vs Pleiadian Angelic Assisted Humans? What if all of the physical ET's who are here are really Human Beings? Would this violate the non-intervention rule? Are native Reptilians and Greys being forced to do the bidding of the Draconians? Are the Greys who are doing the abductions, etc...really clones, robots, or PLF's? Will the native Reptilians and Greys be used as scapegoats by the Draconian Cabal?

    I'm presently seeing Draco > Aldebaran > Sirius B > Earth (Giza Intelligence, Vatican, Nazis, Masons, Illuminati, Occultists, City of London, United Nations, Washington D.C., Deep Underground Military Bases, Secret Space Program) = Military/Industrial/Financial/Draconian Theocracy. This is not exactly a happy-go-lucky, live and let live, group of humans and extraterrestrials (in spirit form?)...to say the least! I suspect that this is where all the drug money...tax money...war blood money...bankster bail-out money...missing trillions from the defense budget, etc...really goes. Negative Karma to the nth degree is being generated daily. Judgement Day will not be pretty or pleasant. Crime does not pay on Judgement Day. Getting nervous guys? It won't be long now. The Horror.

    The fun never ends...does it?

    That figure at the 1984 Olympics looks like one of our Draconian Masters...looking down on us stupid mortals...like a Gargoyle on a Cathedral.

    Here is something relevant to this thread that I posted on another thread:

    The Aldebarans are supposedly renegade Pleiadians. Did they thumb their noses at the Pleiadian Powers That Be...and make deals with the Devil aka Draconians...to obtain Technology and Spiritual Power? Was the Pleiades really Heaven? Was the Person In Charge really God. Was Lucifer a Pleiadian who tried to get a better deal by dealing with the Dracs? Did this result in the famous War in Heaven? Did Lucifer drag one third of the Pleiadians to Aldebaran...then to Sirius...and finally to Earth? Are we all Fallen Angels? Is this why Lucifer is the God of This World? Some say Lucifer is no more...but I doubt this. Is Aldebaran still renegade Pleiadian presently? Is Sirius A and Arcturus completely unfallen Pleiadian presently? Is Sirius B and Earth in Sirius trouble? Is a final battle brewing to settle this thing once and for all?

    Or...is the whole Universe under Draconian control...including the Pleiades? Did the God in the Pleiades keep this a secret to make a bad situation seem like Heaven? Did Lucifer smell a rat...and try to fight fire with fire...hoping to get technology and spirituality from the Dracs...and then turn on them? Could the final phase of this be happening presently? Is that what's brewing? Is this 'The Great Work'? Are Sirius B and Earth engaged in a rebellion against the Dracs which must be crushed? Will the Empire strike back? Does Sirius B and our Sun contain Planets in Rebellion? Do they threaten the Draconian Universal Church Theocracy? Did Lucifer mean well...but did he or she bite off more than they could chew...and go insane? I keep thinking that Lucifer is like Colonel Kurz in 'Apocalypse Now'. If Constitutional Responsible Freedom really catches fire...will this be the end of Draconian Universal Domination? I really and truly don't know. All of the above could be complete BS. I don't know who the good-guys and who the bad-guys are anymore. Do you?

    Take another look at the details of my previous couple of posts. If the whole universe was Drac-controlled...and this was being hidden from you...but you figured it out. How would you fight the tyranny being effected through your beloved leader? Would you confront your leader publicly while privately dealing with the Dracs to try to get their technology and spirituality? You'd end up fighting both your beloved leader and his loyal (and clueless?) followers...plus when you double-crossed the Dracs...you'd have to fight them as well. Did Lucifer and his(her?) followers get kicked out of Heaven...and then get involved in a horrific fight with the Dracs? Was this the 600,000 year Gaian-Orion War? Supposedly no one won...they just stopped killing each other. Did a sort of 'cold-war' follow? Is this the situation we find ourselves in presently? Is this why everything is so $crewed-up? Is the New World Order a Draconian attempt to completely regain domination over humanity? Is this how much trouble we are really in...or is it much worse? I suspect that it is. Is Lucifer insane because of the hopelessness of the situation? Are all of us Renegade Pleiadians?

    I continue to believe that Constitutional Responsible Freedom would be in everyone's best interest...including the Pleiadians and Dracs. The God thing really doesn't work. I suspect that Lucifer found this out the hard way. Humanity is waking up to this very harsh reality as well. If what I am thinking is true...the Pleiadian God was wrong. Lucifer was wrong. And the Draconians were (and are) wrong. Two new commandments I give unto all of you: I. Thou Shalt Have No Gods. Period. II. Thou Shalt Not Be An @sshole. Period. I really don't want to fight with the Dracs. I can't believe that there is no possibility of them warming to the idea of Responsible Freedom. I don't know what made them so mean...but perhaps there is a legitimate reason. Regardless...why not base the Universe on the best principles...rather than on brute-force? Why is this so hard? Lord Draco...we need to talk. Soon. In the meantime...you're a warrior Lord Draco...so you might like this video. But really...Lord Draco...isn't war and killing really, really stupid? Isn't this video insane? I think it is. We can do better than this...can't we Lord Draco? Here is a bit of a restatement of questions which I have previously asked:

    Are we really dealing with the following? Draconian-Pleiadian-Annunaki Theocracy vs Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom?? How would Giza Intelligence fit in with the above? Is Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom a grave threat to the Universal Church? Is Earth a Planet in Rebellion against the Draconian-Pleiadian-Annunaki Theocracy aka Universal Church? Will the Empire Strike Back to crush this rebellion? Does might trump right? We might not have to wait long to find out. Something seems to be brewing. Hmmmmmm.

    I continue to be mystified by the 4,000+ views of this thread...combined with very few comments (other than my own). Does this indicate that Giza Intelligence is key to all of the mysteries we discuss on this site? I just want all of us to get informed about who we really are...and what's really going on...without becoming angry or going crazy. Obviously...I want a sovereign and free humanity...especially in this solar system. I certainly hope this is a possible possibility. I'm leaning toward a hypothesis that the original creation is a mystery...which is probably a combination of evolution and intelligent design. I see evidence of this everywhere. What I don't see is an All Powerful, All Knowing, All Loving, and All Present Creator God of the Universe running this solar system. I'm seeing something quite sinister. I don't think the Annunaki, Pleiadians, or Dracs created us. They may have done some genetic engineering (mostly dumbing us down to control us).

    I'm seeing a cabal of Annunaki, Pleiadians, and Dracs playing god. Could this have been what Lucifer rebelled against in the Pleiades? Did war in heaven result? Did Lucifer and a third of the Pleiadians get kicked out of heaven? Did Lucifer then try to play god in Aldebaran with a third of the angels? Did this apostasy spread to Sirius and Earth...among other places? Are we all part of the third of the angels? Did Lucifer try to fight a wrong with a wrong? We know that two wrongs don't make a right. Did Lucifer go insane? Is the whole concept of theocracy the real root problem? Should the Ten Commandments be replaced by the Two Commandments?

    I. Thou Shalt Have No Gods.
    II. Thou Shalt Not Be An @$$hole.

    I think so.

    I really don't wish to demonize or destroy anyone. I just want the bs to stop.

    Here is a comment which I posted on another thread which is relevant to this thread:

    I have a fascination regarding cathedrals and pipe-organs. The whole temple and worship concept goes way back into antiquity. Lucifer was supposedly the chief musician in 'heaven'. If 'heaven' is really the Pleiades...perhaps there were cathedrals and pipe organs in the Pleiades...and Lucifer brought the whole theological concept...including temples, cathedrals, pipe-organs, and worship...from the Pleiades to Aldebaran...then to Sirius...and finally to Earth. As above...so below. I guess I'm seeing two rival 'gods' leading a civil war. Are the Annunaki and Dracs mercenary interdimensional warriors and laborers? Was the Pleiadian 'god' instrumental in the destruction of Atlantis? Did the Luciferian 'god' take the Atlantian civilization underground? Is this Giza Intelligence? Are there underground mansions, cathedrals, libraries, and museums...combined with military bases and stargate temples? Does Lucifer (or equivalent) possess the ability to end most life on Earth through 'Earth Changes'? Is alien technology really ancient Pleiadian technology? I'm beginning to think so. The exact composition and motivations of the various secret factions are obviously unknown. My guess is that there may be three major factions...two theocratic (one Pleiadian and one Aldebaran Luciferian)...and one namaste constitutional responsible freedom faction.

    Hitler may very well have been a regular visitor to this underground or inner Earth realm. This may also be true for the Popes. I don't know. This is all just wild speculation. But studying the Nazi phenomenon may be the real window into what is going on.

    When Henry Kissenger was learning about the 'alien presence' he worked night and day...and wouldn't communicate with anyone...not even his wife. What he was learning must have been devastating. It couldn't have been good. Notice that certain key people, such as Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski (both Jason Scholar study directors)...who presumably know the complete story...quietly direct the Presidents...administration after administration. The Presidents presumably do not know the complete story...with the possible exception of George H.W. Bush.

    Once again...I just want the secrecy to end...I want all hard core regressive beings (human and non-human) to leave this solar system...and I want the solar system to be based upon namaste constitutional responsible freedom. That should correct most of the major ills...regardless of who is presently running things or which et's are good or bad. If this works...other star systems might try doing this as well. Is this too much to ask?



    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7704
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: Archangelic Queens of Heaven and the United States of the Solar System

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Sun Apr 07, 2013 8:31 am

    Here is a real tear-jerking video from 1975. I'm not going to tell you anything about it. I don't wish to spoil it for you. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vgLZlZYNtUY I continue to identify most closely with Christianity -- yet I am highly unorthodox and non-practicing (or something like that). I know that a lot of non-members visit this forum, and view this thread -- yet remain completely silent -- day after day -- week after week -- month after month -- year after year. Don't claim ignorance. Don't say that nobody told you. I KNOW that you know better. Onward Christian Lawyers!! You know what I'm talking about -- don't you??!! I'm both a friend and enemy of Roman Catholicism (which probably makes me an enemy in their view) -- yet I certainly don't relish the thought of Trench-Warfare with the Jesuit-General!!! That could get ugly!!! But Siriusly -- Does Reality Require an Iron-Lady at the Center of Roman Catholicism??? I might get crucified for saying this -- but I think the Right-Iron-Lady Should be at the Center of Roman Catholicism. A Highly-Righteous -- Highly-Ethical -- Very-Tough -- Very-Decisive -- Traditional yet Progressive Iron-Lady. This is just a conceptual exercise -- without inside knowledge or specifics. I continue to imagine Gabriel and Lucifer sitting in the Pilot and Co-Pilot Thrones -- with Michael in the Dungeon of a Deep-Underground Reptilian-Monastery (or something like that)!! What Would Malachi Martin Say?? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malachi_Martin What Would Eric Jon Phelps Say?? http://deletionpedia.dbatley.com/w/index.php?title=Eric_Jon_Phelps_%28deleted_06_Sep_2008_at_05:22%29 What Would Charles Chiniquy Say?? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Chiniquy Perhaps I should write my memoirs (as recently suggested to me) -- and call it Fifty Years as a Completely Ignorant Fool. I should stop -- before someone starts pounding on my door!! Malachi Martin appeals to me because he was conservative, intelligent, articulate, and outspoken. I don't have enough background to know how accurate he was in his books and interviews -- but a Roman Catholic Priest told me that The Jesuits was quite accurate (as verified by a Jesuit). Please remember that this thread is mostly speculative, fictional, and investigative. I am NOT an authority on anything. I really am a completely ignorant fool. Guilty as charged. Anyway, consider Malachi Martin. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malachi_Martin

    Malachi Brendan Martin (July 23, 1921 – July 27, 1999) was an Irish Catholic priest and writer on the Catholic Church. Originally ordained as a Jesuit priest, he became Professor of Palaeontology at the Vatican's Pontifical Biblical Institute, and from 1958 Martin also served as a theological adviser to Cardinal Augustin Bea during preparations for the Second Vatican Council.[1] Disillusioned by reforms he renounced his vows in 1964 and moved to New York. His 17 novels and non-fiction books were frequently critical of the Catholic Church, which he believed had failed to act on the third prophecy supposedly revealed by the Virgin Mary at Fatima.[2] Among his most significant works were The Scribal Character Of The Dead Sea Scrolls (1958) and Hostage To The Devil (1976) which dealt with satanism, demonic possession, and exorcism.[1] The Final Conclave (1978) was a warning against alleged Soviet spies in the Vatican.

    Martin was born prematurely in the village of Ballylongford, County Kerry, Ireland to a middle-class family[3] in which the children were raised speaking Irish at the dinner table and Catholic belief and practice were central—his three brothers also became priests, two of them academics.[4] He received his secondary education at Belvedere College in Dublin, and became a Jesuit novice on September 6, 1939, at the age of eighteen. Due to the Second World War and the inherent risks involved with travel during this time, Martin remained in Ireland and studied at the National University of Ireland where he received a bachelor's degree in Semitic languages and oriental studies while carrying out concurrent study in Assyriology at Trinity College, Dublin.[4]

    Upon completion of his degree in Dublin, Martin was sent to the Catholic University of Louvain in Belgium to continue his education. During the four year stay in Leuven he completed masters degrees in philosophy and theology and doctorates in Semitic languages, archeology and Oriental history. On August 15, 1954, the Feast of the Assumption, Martin was ordained a Jesuit priest at the age of thirty-three.[4]

    Martin started postgraduate studies at both the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and at Oxford University, specializing in intertestamentary studies and knowledge of Jesus Christ and of Hebrew and Arabic manuscripts. He undertook additional study in rational psychology, experimental psychology, physics and anthropology.[5]

    Martin took part in the research of the Dead Sea Scrolls and published twenty four articles on Semitic paleography in various journals.[6][7] He did archeological research and worked extensively on the Byblos syllabary in Byblos,[8] in Tyre,[9] both in Lebanon, and in the Sinai Peninsula. Martin assisted in his first exorcism while staying in Egypt for archeological research. It was upon a Muslim.[4] He published a work in two volumes, The Scribal Character of the Dead Sea Scrolls, in 1958.[10]

    He was summoned to Rome to work at the Holy See as a private secretary for Cardinal Augustin Bea S.J. from 1958 until 1964. This brought him into contact with Pope John XXIII. His years in Rome coincided with the start of the Second Vatican Council (1962–65), all of which sessions he attended[4] and which was to transform the Catholic Church in a way that the initially-liberal Martin began to find distressing.[3] He became friends with Msgr. George Higgins and Fr. John Courtney Murray S.J.[3]

    While in Rome, he became a professor at the Pontifical Biblical Institute of the Vatican, where he taught Aramaic, paleography, Hebrew and Sacred Scripture.[4] He during that time also taught theology, part-time, at Loyola University of Chicago's John Felice Rome Center.[3] During that period his living quarters were in the Vatican, outside the papal quarters of John XXIII.[4] He worked for the Orthodox Churches and ancient Oriental Churches division of the Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity under Cardinal Bea, as a translator. As a result of this, Martin became well acquainted with prominent Jewish leaders, such as Rabbi Abraham Heschel, during 1961 and 1962.[11] Martin also accompanied Paul VI in his pilgrimage to the Holy Land in January 1964.[12] Martin resigned his position at the Pontifical Institute in June 1964.[3]

    Disillusioned by the reforms taking place among the Jesuits, the Church's largest male religious order,[citation needed] Martin requested special dispensation in February 1965.[3] He received a provisional release in May 1965[3] and a definite release from his vows of poverty and obedience on June 30, 1965,[3] after 25 years as a Jesuit religious, and left Rome suddenly in July.[13] He was not released from his vow of chastity and remained an ordained but secular priest. Paul VI gave him a general commission for exercising an apostolate in the media and communications.[4]

    He moved permanently to New York City in 1966, where he first had to work as a dishwasher, a waiter and taxi driver[3] before being able to make his living by writing.[4] He co-founded an antiques firm and was active in communications and media for the rest of his life.[5]

    After his arrival in New York, Cardinal Terence Cooke gave him written permission to exercise his secular priestly faculties.

    In 1964, Martin, under the pseudonym Michael Serafian, wrote The Pilgrim: Pope Paul VI, The Council and The Church in a time of decision, an apologia for the Jews, which, among other things, told the story of the Jewish question and the Second Vatican Council.

    In 1967, Martin received his first Guggenheim fellowship.[14] In 1969 he got his first breakthrough with his book The Encounter: Religion in Crisis as a result of his expertise in Judaism, Christianity and Islam and with which he won the Choice Book Award of the American Library Association.[15] Afterwards came other liberally oriented books like Three Popes and the Cardinal: The Church of Pius, John and Paul in its Encounter with Human History (1972) and Jesus Now: How Jesus has no Past, Will not come Again and in loving actions is Dissolving the Molds of Our Spent Society (1973).[citation needed] Martin became an American citizen in 1970.

    He received a second Guggenheim fellowship in 1969, which enabled him to write his first of four bestsellers,[16] Hostage to the Devil: The Possession and Exorcism of Five Living Americans. With this book, published in 1975, Martin references his experience as an exorcist.[citation needed] According to the book he assisted in several exorcisms. In 1996, he spoke of having performed thousands of minor exorcisms, and participated[4] in a few hundred major exorcisms during his lifetime.[17]

    During that decade, Martin also served as religion editor for National Review[18][19][20] from 1972 to 1978, when he was succeeded by Michael Novak. He was interviewed twice by William F. Buckley, Jr. for Firing Line on PBS.[21] He also was an editor for the Encyclopædia Britannica.[22] His literary agent was Lila Karpf.[23]

    Martin published several books in quick succession the following years: The Final Conclave (1978), King of Kings: a Novel of the Life of David (1980) and Vatican: A Novel (1986) were factional novels. The Decline and Fall of the Roman Church (1981), The New Castle: Reaching for the Ultimate (1982), Rich Church, Poor Church: The Catholic Church and its Money (1984) and There is Still Love: Five Parables of God's Love That Will Change Your Life (1984) were non-fiction works.

    His bestselling[16] 1987 non-fiction book The Jesuits: The Society of Jesus and the Betrayal of the Roman Catholic Church was very critical of his previous ecclesiastical order. The book accused them of systematically undermining church teachings and replacing them with communist doctrines.[24]

    Psychiatrist M. Scott Peck, author of The Road Less Traveled and People of the Lie, developed a friendship with Martin and was strongly influenced by him in the development of his theories of evil and exorcism.[25]

    Belfast based Causeway Pictures (www.causewaypictures.com) are producing a feature documentary based on his works and writings, the project is titled "The Popes Exorcist" and is due for release in 2013.

    His book The Keys of This Blood: The Struggle for World Dominion between Pope John Paul II, Mikhail Gorbachev, and the Capitalist West was published in 1990 and was followed in 1996 by Windswept House: A Vatican Novel. Martin worked closely with the paranormal researchers Dave Considine and John Zaffis on several of their independent cases.[citation needed]

    Martin continued to offer daily the traditional Latin mass privately, and vigorously exercised his priestly ministry all the way up until his death. He was strongly supported by some traditional Catholic sources and severely criticized by other, less traditional sources, such as the National Catholic Reporter.[26][27][28]

    Martin served as a guest commentator for CNN during the live coverage of the pastoral visit of John Paul II to the United States October 4–8, 1995.

    He was a periodic guest on Art Bell's radio program, Coast to Coast AM, between 1995 and 1998 and a guest of Michael Corbin's radio program on Paranet Continuum radio.

    In the last three years of his life, Martin had forged a close friendship with the traditional Catholic philosopher, Fr. Rama Coomaraswamy.[29]

    In the final years before his death, Martin was received in a private audience by Pope John Paul II.[12] Afterwards, he started working on a book with the working title Primacy: How the Institutional Roman Catholic Church became a Creature of the New World Order.[13] This book which promised to be his most controversial and detailed work ever was never completed.[citation needed]

    Martin died of brain hemorrhage after a fall in his apartment in Manhattan, New York, in 1999.[12] His funeral wake took place in St. Anthony of Padua Roman Catholic Chapel of West Orange, New Jersey, before the burial within the Gate of Heaven Cemetery, in Hawthorne, New York.

    Martin produced numerous best-selling fictional and non-fictional literary works, which became widely read throughout the world. His fictional works gave detailed insider accounts of Church history during the reigns of Popes Pius XII, John XXIII, Paul VI (The Pilgrim, Three Popes and the Cardinal, Vatican: A Novel[16]), John Paul I (The Final Conclave[16]) and John Paul II (The Keys of This Blood, Windswept House).

    His non-fictional writings cover a range of Catholic topics, such as demonic exorcisms (Hostage to the Devil), satanism, Liberation Theology, the Second Vatican Council (The Pilgrim), the Tridentine liturgy, Catholic dogma, modernism (Three Popes and the Cardinal; The Jesuits), the financial history of the Church (Rich Church, Poor Church; The Decline and Fall of the Roman Church), the New World Order and the geopolitical importance of the Pope (The Keys of This Blood).

    His books, both fictional and non-fictional, frequently present a dark view of the present state of the world, exposing dark spirits, conspiracy, betrayal, heresy, widespread sexual perversion, self-advancement, and demonic possession, each being asserted as rife throughout the Catholic Church, from its lowest levels up to its highest.

    He spoke and wrote often about the three secrets of Fatima and was an ardent supporter of Fr. Nicholas Gruner: "Father Gruner is fulfilling a desperately needed function in the ongoing perception of Mary's role in the salvation of our imperilled world. Father Gruner is absolutely correct that the consecration of Russia as—Our Lady desired, has not been executed".[30]

    Martin said concerning the three secrets of the Virgin Mary as Queen of Heaven in Fatima in 1917, she mandated the pope of 1960 to consecrate Russia to her Immaculate Heart. The Russian orthodox church would then convert back. If the mandate were not followed, devastating war in the world and destruction inside the church (The Great Apostasy) would follow. He said that he stood outside the papal living quarters in 1960 whilst Pope John XXIII and Cardinal Bea and others were reading the document containing the third secret, and that, in order to assure Russian cooperation at the approaching Second Vatican Council, the Pope decided against the mandate. Later Paul VI and John Paul II also decided against it for various reasons.[4]

    He was an outspoken opponent of the alleged apparitions of the Virgin Mary at Bayside in the United States[12] and Međugorje in former Yugoslavia.[31] Martin regretted writing the foreword of The Thunder of Justice: The Warning, the Miracle, the Chastisement, the Era of Peace, a 1993 book by Ted and Maureen Flynn[32] defending, among others, the apparitions in Međugorje, stating that false pretences were used in obtaining his recommendation.[33] Concerning the Garabandal apparitions, he remained open-minded.[34]

    Martin believed the ordinations of several sedevacantist bishops by the former Archbishop of Huế, Vietnam, Pierre Martin Ngô Đình Thục, although not allowed, were sacramentally valid.[35]

    In March 1997 Martin said on Radio Liberty's Steel on Steel, hosted by John Loefller, that two popes were murdered during the Twentieth century:

    Pope Pius XI was murdered on the orders of Benito Mussolini, because of his 1931 encyclical, Non Abbiamo Bisogno, which was critical of the Italian fascist state.

    Pope John Paul I was murdered[35][36] according to Malachi's book, Vatican: A Novel, by Jean-Marie Villot, later the Cardinal Secretary of State under Pope Paul VI, under orders from the U.S.S.R..[15]

    Martin also partially gave credence to the Siri Thesis, saying that Cardinal Giuseppe Siri was twice elected pope in papal conclaves, but declined his election after being pressured by worldly forces acting through cardinals present at the conclaves. Martin called this the little brutality. On the one hand, Martin says that Siri was intimidated: on the other hand he says that Siri did indicate that his decision not to accept was made freely.[35][37]

    The first occasion, according to him, was the Papal conclave, 1963. Martin mentions the possibility of a nuclear threat which involved "the very existence of the Vatican state" during this conclave on pages 600 to 610 of his book The Keys of this Blood, which deals primarily with Siri and the 1963 conclave.

    The second time was the Papal conclave, October 1978. Martin said on Radio Liberty's programme Steel on Steel, hosted by John Loefller, in March 1997 that Siri received a written note after his initial election threatening him and his family with death should he accept.[36]

    Martin, who spoke many languages, was present at both conclaves as a translator.[citation needed]

    Martin claimed that Popes John XXIII and Paul VI were freemasons during a certain period and that photographs and other detailed documents proving this were in the possession of the Vatican State Secretariat.[35] He also allegorically mentioned these supposed facts in his 1986 novel Vatican: A Novel, where he related the masonic adherence of Popes Giovanni Angelica and Giovanni De Brescia.[15] He also said that Archbishop Annibale Bugnini C.M. was a freemason and that Agostino Casaroli, long-time Cardinal Secretary of State, was an atheist.[35]

    In his book The Jesuits, published in 1987, Martin claims to prove the existence of a diplomatic agreement between the Vatican and the U.S.S.R. called the Metz Accord. The Vatican allegedly promised a non condemnation of communism in exchange for participation of Russian-Orthodox prelates as observers at the Second Vatican Council.

    In his book The Final Conclave, published on 1 August 1978,[38] the month of the 1978 conclave that resulted in the 28 August election of Albino Luciani, Malachi Martin wrote of the unexpected election of a Cardinal Angelico, a figure that has been interpreted as corresponding to Luciani.[39]

    Martin stated that, along with diabolic possession, angelic possession also exists and that angels could have use of preternatural powers in certain circumstances.[4][17]

    Martin was convinced that the antichrist described in the Book of Revelation was a literal historical figure, and was alive in 1996.[17]

    There were three allegations made against Martin of having affairs with women:

    Martin was criticized most notably in the book Clerical Error: A True Story by Robert Blair Kaiser, Time Magazine's former Vatican correspondent. Kaiser, a former Jesuit, accused Martin of having carried on an extramarital affair with his wife during 1964 in Rome,[3] and claimed that Martin fled to the United States as a renegade from the priesthood. Throughout the book, Martin is presented as a liar and fantasist.[40] A friend of Martin's, William H. Kennedy, published an article in the journal Seattle Catholic to dispute Kaiser's allegation and other claims made about Martin after his death.[41] Kennedy points out that Kaiser admits in his book that he was diagnosed as having paranoid schizophrenia,[42] and cites passages from Kaiser's book which he believes show that Kaiser was writing from a distorted and delusional perspective due to his mental illness. With regard to being a renegade from the priesthood, evidence is cited that suggests that Martin received a special dispensation in order to become a writer, while retaining his status as a priest with limited faculties.[43][44]

    In her 2008 book Queen of the Oil Club: The Intrepid Wanda Jablonski and the Power of Information, Anna Rubino wrote that Martin had a love affair with oil journalist Wanda Jablonski on a visit to Beirut, Lebanon in the 1950s.[45] The book was published long after the deaths of both Jablonski (1992) and Martin (1999).

    In a book called Disguised as a Man: Malachi Martin and Me (2012) author Sally Hawthorne claims to have had a sexual affair with Martin. However, "Sally Hawthorne" is a pen name for an unknown person thus making her claims impossible to verify and consequently suspect.[citation needed]

    In 2004, Father Vincent O'Keefe S.J., former Vicar General of the Society of Jesus and a past President of Fordham University, stated that Martin had never been laicized. O'Keefe stated that Martin had been released as a religious from all his vows—poverty and obedience—save the vow of chastity.[46] Martin no longer was a Jesuit but remained a (secular) priest during the rest of his life.

    The Vatican, on the other hand, has a different view. In a letter from the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, the following is stated:

    "In 1965, Mr. Martin received a dispensation from all privileges and obligations deriving from his vows as a Jesuit and from priestly ordination." [Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, 25 June 1997, Prot. N. 04300/65].[47]

    According to the Vatican, it seems Martin was not only released from religious vows but also his vows from "priestly ordination" (which means laicisation).[48]

    It is claimed that attacks were mounted on Martin in retaliation for his book The Jesuits, which is hostile to the Jesuit order of which he had formerly been a member.[46] In the book, he accuses the Jesuits of deviating from their original character and mission by embracing Liberation Theology.[49]

    During a videotaped memorial entitled Malachi Martin Weeps For His Church, Rama Coomaraswamy, a sedevacantist cleric, claimed that Martin had told him that he had been secretly ordained a bishop during the reign of Pius XII in order to travel behind the Iron Curtain ordaining priests and bishops for the underground churches of Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union. Coomaraswamy died in 2006.[12][50][51][52]

    The book The Pilgrim: Pope Paul VI, The Council and The Church in a time of decision was written by Martin under the pseudonym Michael Serafian. This was confirmed by Martin himself and corroborated independently by Hans Küng.[53] Martin related that his choice of surname, Serafian, is due to meeting a carpet dealer in Jerusalem with that name, during the pilgrimage of Paul VI to the Holy Land in January 1964.[12]

    The anonymously-written book Complaints against God by One of His Creatures was not written by Martin but by Fr. Andrew Greeley, a liberal priest.[54]

    The pseudonym of Xavier Rynne, used to write more than 20 books on Vatican II, is not that of Martin but of Fr. Francis X. Murphy C.Ss.R..[55][56]

    The 1966 article Laures et ermitages du désert d'Egypte published in Mélanges de l'Université Saint-Joseph by the hand of "M. Martin" was written by Maurice Martin, and not Malachi Martin.[57]

    Journalist Joseph Roddy alleged—in a 1966 Look Magazine article about the debate on the Jewish question during the Second Vatican Council[58]—that one and the same person under three different pseudonyms had written or acted on behalf of Jewish interest groups, such as the American Jewish Committee, to influence the outcome of the debates. Roddy wrote that two timely and remunerated 1965 articles were penned under the pseudonym of F.E. Cartus, one for Harper's Magazine[59] and one for the American Jewish Committee’s influential intellectual periodical Commentary Magazine.[60][61] Roddy further stated that tidbits of information were leaked to the New York press that detailed Council failings vis a vis the Jews under the pseudonym of Pushkin. Roddy also stated that these two unidentified persons were one and the same person—a young cleric-turned-journalist and a Jesuit of Irish descent working for Cardinal Bea and who was active in the Biblical Institute—he figuratively named as Timothy O'Boyle-Fitzharris S.J. in order not to reveal the true identity of his source. Roddy also mentions The Pilgrim in a footnote to his article.

    In his 2007 book Spiritual Radical: Abraham Joshua Heschel in America, Edward K. Kaplan confirmed that Martin cooperated with the American Jewish Committee during the Council for a mixture of motives, both lofty and ignoble. He primarily advised the committee on theological issues, but he also provided logistical intelligence and copies of restricted documents. It is confirmed in the book that Martin used the pseudonyms Forest and Pushkin.[11] Kaplan further acknowledges that the kiss and tell book about the internal workings of the Council, The Pilgrim by Michael Serafian, was requested from Martin by Abraham J. Heschel, who also arranged the book to be published by Roger W. Straus, Jr.'s Farrar, Straus and Giroux printing company. It was published in the hope that it would influence the deliberations in the council.[11] Once that Martin's identity as author was revealed, it led to protests and the book had to be removed from circulation at considerable financial loss to the publisher. This led to the end of friendly relations between Martin and Heschel and Straus.[11] Kaplan lastly states that Malachi Martin was the primary source of information for Joseph Roddy in writing his 1966 article for Look Magazine, and that Fr. Timothy O'Boyle-Fitzharris S.J. was in fact Martin. Kaplan judges the Roddy article as dangerously misleading because of the credence it gives to the claim that without organised Jewish pressure the council declaration on the Jews would not have been accepted.[11]

    Martin explicitly denied he was a spy, along with denying other rumors. Michael Cuneo, in his book American Exorcism writes that, "Martin told me that he was perplexed, and more than a little annoyed, by the swirl of rumors surrounding his personal life." He quotes Martin as saying:

    Look, I've had three heart operations, recently open-heart surgery, and I'm at the point where I'd like to put some of these stories to rest," he said. "I've been accused of everything; speculation on my life is a veritable cottage industry. I'm a lecher, a wife-stealer, and a spy; I'm secretly married with children; I've sexually abused little girls— it's all nothing but fancy.[3]

    Rumors appearing on various Catholic or sedevacantist websites[62] and magazines[63] alleged that Malachi Martin had Jewish ancestry on account of ancestral descent from Iberian Jews migrating to Ireland and Great Britain in the 15th century, and alleged him being an Israeli spy[4] because of his first name, Malachi, after a Hebrew prophet and his extensive travels in the Levant. These allegations were rebutted by William H. Kennedy in his article In Defense of Father Malachi Martin.[64] After having made genealogical inquiries with surviving relatives of Martin in Ireland, Kennedy concluded that Martin's father was an Englishman who moved to Ireland and his mother was fully Irish. Fr. Rama Coomasrawamy confirmed this independently.[12] The Irish language name Maelsechlainn is usually anglicised as Malachy.

    Claims that Martin features as a curial monsignor in full regalia on a prominent photograph next to Pope John Paul I and his assistant Diego Lorenzi appeared on the Internet.[65] The photograph, published in David Yallop's In God's Name: An Investigation into the Murder of Pope John Paul I as number 28 between pages 120 and 121, shows a 'Monsignor Martin', visibly different from Malachi Martin.[66] This is a case of mistaken identity. The cleric in the photograph was Jacques-Paul Martin, Prefect of the Casa Pontificia between 1969–86.[67][68]

    Bibliography

    Books
    The Scribal Character of the Dead Sea Scrolls, Vol. 1, Bibliothèque du Muséon 44, Publications Universitaires, Louvain, 1958
    The Scribal Character of the Dead Sea Scrolls, Vol. 2, Bibliothèque du Muséon 45, Publications Universitaires, Louvain, 1958
    The Pilgrim: Pope Paul VI, The Council and The Church in a time of decision, Farrar, Straus, New York, 1964 (written under the pseudonym of Michael Serafian)
    The Encounter: Religion in Crisis, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York, 1969 ISBN 0-374-14816-3 (in collaboration with Henry Allen Moe)
    Three Popes and the Cardinal: The Church of Pius, John and Paul in its Encounter with Human History, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York, 1972 ISBN 0-374-27675-7
    Jesus Now: How Jesus has no Past, Will not come Again and in loving actions is Dissolving the Molds of Our Spent Society, E. P. Dutton, New York, 1973 ISBN 0-525-13675-4
    Hostage to the Devil: The Possession and Exorcism of Five Living Americans, 1st edition, Readers Digest, New York, 1976 ISBN 0-06-065337-X; 2nd edition with a new preface by the author, HarperSanFrancisco, San Francisco, 1992 ISBN 0-06-065337-X
    The Final Conclave, Stein and Day Publishers, New York, 1978 ISBN 0-8128-2434-2
    King of Kings: a Novel of the Life of David, Simon and Schuster, New York, 1980 ISBN 0-671-24707-7
    The Decline and Fall of the Roman Church, G. P. Putnam's Sons, New York, 1981 ISBN 0-399-12665-1
    The New Castle: Reaching for the Ultimate, E.P. Dutton, New York, 1984 ISBN 0-525-16553-3
    Rich Church, Poor Church: The Catholic Church and its Money, G. P. Putnam's Sons, New York, 1984 ISBN 0-399-12906-5
    There is Still Love: Five Parables of God's Love That Will Change Your Life, Macmillan, New York, 1984 ISBN 0-02-580440-5
    Vatican: A Novel, Harper & Row, New York, 1986 ISBN 0-06-015478-0
    The Marian Year of His Holiness, Pope John Paul II, Saint Paul, Remnant Press, 1987
    The Jesuits: The Society of Jesus and the Betrayal of the Roman Catholic Church, Simon & Schuster, New York, 1987 ISBN 0-671-54505-1
    God's Chosen People: The Relationship between Christian and Jews, Remnant Press, Saint Paul, 1988
    Apostasy Within: The Demonic in the (Catholic) American Church, Christopher Publishing House, Hanover, 1989 ISBN 0-8158-0447-4 (in collaboration with Paul Trinchard S.T.D.)
    The Keys of This Blood: The Struggle for World Dominion between Pope John Paul II, Mikhail Gorbachev, and the Capitalist West, Simon and Schuster, New York, 1990 ISBN 0-671-69174-0
    The Thunder of Justice: The Warning, the Miracle, the Chastisement, the Era of Peace, MaxKol Communications, Sterling, 1993 ISBN 0-9634307-0-X (in collaboration with Ted Flynn and Maureen Flynn)
    Windswept House: A Vatican Novel, Doubleday, New York, 1996 ISBN 0-385-48408-9
    In the Murky Waters of Vatican II, MAETA, Metairie, 1997 ISBN 1-889168-06-8 (in collaboration with Atila Sinke Guimarães)
    Fatima Priest: The Story of Father Nicolas Grüner, Gods Counsel Publishing, Pound Ridge, 1997 ISBN 0-9663046-2-4 (in collaboration with Francis Alban and Christopher A. Ferrara)

    Articles
    Revision and reclassification of the Proto-Byblian signs, in Acta Orientalia, No. 31, 1962
    The Balu'a Stele: A New Transcription with Paleographic and Historical Notes, Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan, 1964, 8–9 (in collaboration with Ward William)
    The Dialogue is Over, in Worldview Magazine, Vol. 17 No. 1 Jewish Christian Ceasefire, Council on Religion and International Affairs, New York, January 1974 OCLC 5856776 (in collaboration with James A. Rudin and David R. Hunter) [1]
    The Scientist as Shaman, in Harper's Magazine, Vol. 244 No. 1462, March 1972 [2]
    Death at Sunset, in National Review, November 22, 1974
    The Scientist as Shaman, in Clarke, Robin, Notes for the future: an alternative history of the past decade, Universe Books, New York, 1975 ISBN 0-87663-929-5
    On Toying with Desecration, in National Review, October 10, 1975
    On Human Love, in National Review, September 2, 1977
    Test-Tube Morality, in National Review, October 13, 1978
    Footsteps of Abraham, in The New York Times, March 13, 1983 [3]

    Related books and articles
    Nicholas Hagger's The Secret History of the West and The Syndicate
    Kennedy, William H. (2004). Lucifer's lodge : satanic ritual abuse in the Catholic Church (1st ed.). Hillsdale, NY: Sophia Perennis. ISBN 978-0-900588-06-8.
    Luigi Marinelli's Shroud of Secrecy: The Story of Corruption Within the Vatican
    I Millenari's Fumo di Satana in Vaticano
    Charles Upton's The System of Antichrist
    Ralph M. Wiltgen's The Rhine Flows into the Tiber

    See also
    List of Jesuits
    Franz König
    Alfred Kunz
    Marcel Lefebvre
    Emmanuel Milingo
    Leo Joseph Suenens
    Rama Coomaraswamy

    References

    1.^ a b Galati, Eric (10 August 1999). "Malachi Martin". The Guardian (London). Retrieved 4 October 2012.
    2.^ The Independent, 6 August 1999
    3.^ a b c d e f g h i j k Cuneo, Michael W., American Exorcism: Expelling Demons in the Land of Plenty, Doubleday, New York, 2001 ISBN 0-385-50176-5
    4.^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m Doran, Brian (2001). Malachi Martin: God's Messenger - In the Words of Those Who Knew Him Best (cassette). Monrovia: Catholic Treasures. ISBN 1-885692-08-0
    5.^ a b Corley, Felix, "Obituary: Malachi Martin", The Independent, August 6, 1999.
    6.^ Martin, Malachi, Revision and reclassification of the Proto-Byblian signs, Acta Orientalia, 31, 1962
    7.^ Ward, William and Martin, Malachi, The Balu'a Stele: A New Transcription with Paleographic and Historical Notes, Annual of the Department of Antiquities of Jordan, 1964, 8–9
    8.^ Martin, Malachi, Laures et ermitages du désert d'Egypte, Imprimerie Catholique, Beyrouth, 1966 OCLC 418237964
    9.^ Martin, Malachi King of Kings: a Novel of the Life of David, Simon and Schuster, New York, 1980 ISBN 0-671-24707-7
    10.^ Martin, Malachi, The Scribal Character of the Dead Sea Scrolls, 2 volumes, Bibliothèque du Muséon 4445, Publications Universitaires, Louvain, 1958
    11.^ a b c d e Kaplan, Edward R., Spiritual Radical: Abraham Joshua Heschel in America 1940-1972, Yale University Press, New Haven, 2007 ISBN 0-300-11540-7
    12.^ a b c d e f g Coomaraswamy, Rama, Malachi Martin Weeps For His Church, Catholic Counterpoint, Broomall, 1999 OCLC 54977738
    13.^ a b Dougherty, Jon E., Malachi Martin: Dispelling the Myths, WorldNetDaily, August 2, 1999
    14.^ Martin, Malachi, The Encounter: Religion in Crisis, The Dial Press, New York, 1983 ISBN 0-385-27904-3
    15.^ a b c Martin, Malachi, Vatican: A Novel, Harper & Row Publishers, New York, 1986 ISBN 0-06-015478-0
    16.^ a b c d New York Times Bestseller List
    17.^ a b c Bell, Art, Interview with Malachi Martin, Coast to Coast AM, October 18, 1996
    18.^ Martin, Malachi, On Human Love, National Review, September 2, 1977
    19.^ Martin, Malachi, On Toying with Desecration, National Review, October 10, 1975
    20.^ Martin, Malachi, Death at Sunset, National Review, November 22, 1974
    21.^ Buckley, William F. Jr., The Jesus Movement: Interview with Malachi Martin, Firing Line, PBS, December 23, 1973
    22.^ Martin, Malachi, There is Still Love: Five Parables of God's Love That Will Change Your Life, Macmillan, New York, 1984, ISBN 0-02-580440-5
    23.^ Lila Karpf Literary Management
    24.^ Martin, Malachi, The Jesuits: The Society of Jesus and the Betrayal of the Roman Catholic Church, Simon & Schuster, New York, 1987 ISBN 0-671-54505-1
    25.^ Jones, Arthur. (2007). The Road He Travelled: The Revealing Biography of M. Scott Peck. Rider.
    26.^ Woodward, Kenneth L., Looking for sanctity in all the wrong places, National Catholic Reporter, 8 October 2004
    27.^ Editiorial, Right and righteous who run with Ralph Reed, National Catholic Reporter, 27 December 1996/3 January 1997
    28.^ Greeley, Andrew, Farrell’s Hugo would be a papal Gorbachev, National Catholic Reporter, 22 May 1998
    29.^ Galati, Eric, Malachi Martin: A renowned biblical scholar, he clashed with the hierarchy on the role of the Roman Catholic church, The Guardian, August 10 1999
    30.^ U.S. News & World Report, Plotting World Order in Rome. Vatican expert Malachi Martin tries to scope out papal succession, June 10, 1996
    31.^ www.geocities.com
    32.^ Flynn, Ted and Flynn, Maureen, The Thunder of Justice: The Warning, the Miracle, the Chastisement, the Era of Peace, MaxKol Communications, Sterling, 1993 ISBN 0-9634307-0-X
    33.^ Sabalto, Rich, Mystery Cloaks Father Malachi Martin’s Death, Unity Publishing's Weekly Newsletter, ..., 1999
    34.^ Janzen, Bernard, The External War: Interview with Malachi Martin (1991), Toronto, Triumph Communications, 2004, ISBN 0-9732148-1-3
    35.^ a b c d e Les Amis du Christ-Roi, L'Eglise Eclipsée? Réalisation du complot maçonnique contre l'Eglise. Témoignage inédit du père Malachi Martin, présent en qualité d'intreprète aux derniers Conclaves., Editions Delacroix, Dinard, 1997 ISBN 2-9511087-0-2
    36.^ a b Loeffler, John, The Wisdom of Malachi Martin, Radio Liberty, Soquel, March 1997
    37.^ Derksen, Mario, Eclipse of the Church: 1958 and Beyond, part 2, Daily Catholic, Vol. 15 No. 186, November 18–20, 2004
    38.^ www.amazon.com
    39.^ The Final Conclave, Stein and Day Publishers, New York, 1978 ISBN 0-8128-2434-2
    40.^ Jones, Arhur, A wicked priest and a shattered marriage, National Catholic Reporter, 8 March 2002
    41.^ Kennedy, William H., Occult History, 2008 pages 129–157
    42.^ Kaiser, Robert, Clerical Error: A True Story, Continuum, New York, 2002, ISBN 0-8264-1384-6, page 261
    43.^ Dougherty, Jon E., Catholic novelist Malachi Martin dies: Complications from stroke, fall cited, WorldNetDaily, July 29 1999
    44.^ Fr. Malachi Martin Again, Greenspun
    45.^ Rubino, Anna, Queen of the Oil Club: The Intrepid Wanda Jablonski and the Power of Information, Beacon Press, Boston, 2008 ISBN 0-8070-7277-X
    46.^ a b Cain, Michael, A Reputation Recouped!: The 'Fly on the Wall' is Freed at Last!, The Daily Catholic, Vol. 15 No. 104 14 April 2004
    47.^ Malachi Martin, accessed July 23, 2010
    48.^ [cf. CIC 701, 291–292]
    49.^ Kennedy, William H. & Widner S.J., Tom, High Ranking Jesuit Confirms Malachi Martin’s Status as Life Long Priest, WilliamHKennedy, April 2004
    50.^ Anthony Cekada: Untrained and Un-Tridentine: Holy Orders and the Canonically Unfit
    51.^ Coomaraswamy, Rama, On the Validity of My Ordination, CoomaraswamyCatholicWritings
    52.^ Ekelberg, Mary Ellen, The Underground Church of Pius XII, Catholic Counterpoint, Broomall, ...
    53.^ Küng, Hans, My Struggle for Freedom: Memoirs, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand Rapids, 2003, ISBN 0-8028-2659-8
    54.^ Kotre, John N., The Best of Times, The Worst of Times: Andrew Greeley and American Catholicism 1959-1975, Nelson-Hall Company, Chicago, 1978 ISBN 0-88229-380-X
    55.^ Hells Bibliophiles
    56.^ Brennan, Michael, Malachi Martin Is Dead at 78; Author of Books on the Church, The New York Times, July 30 1999
    57.^ Martin, Maurice, Laures et ermitages du désert d'Egypte, Mélanges de l'Université Saint-Joseph 42, Imprimerie Catholique, Beyrouth, 1966
    58.^ Roddy, Joseph, How the Jews Changed Catholic Thinking, Look Magazine, Volume 30 No. 2, January 25, 1966
    59.^ Cartus, F.E., The Vatican Council Ends: Reform on borrowed Time?, Harper's Magazine, September 1965
    60.^ Cartus, F.E., Vatican II & The Jews, Commentary, January 1965
    61.^ Cartus, F.E., Vatican II & The Jews, Commentary, January 1965 (Letters)
    62.^ Today's Catholic World, Daily News for the Church in Eclipse, December 2005
    63.^ Serviam, January 12 2009
    64.^ Kennedy, William H., In Defense of Father Malachi Martin, Seattle Catholic, July 2002
    65.^ www.puritans.net
    66.^ Yallop, David, In God's Name: An Investigation into the Murder of Pope John Paul I, Constable & Robinson, London, 2007, ISBN 978-1-84529-496-0
    67.^ www.albino-luciani.com
    68.^ Martin, Jacques, Mes Six Papes: Souvenirs Romains du cardinal Jacques Martin, Editions Mame, Paris, 1993





    Last edited by orthodoxymoron on Sun Apr 07, 2013 10:03 pm; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7704
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: Archangelic Queens of Heaven and the United States of the Solar System

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Sun Apr 07, 2013 8:34 pm

    I continue to 'enjoy' listening to Alex Collier -- but he loses me with dimensional-talk, ET-mentoring, no-money, spaceships which are bigger on the inside than they are on the outside, etc. I presently view 'leaving third-dimension' as being the extermination of humanity -- and the souls of humanity incarnating back into reptilian-physicality -- or whatever we were before we were human. I presently think that the Book of Revelation might be a bad-thing for humanity. Still, I think Alex knows a helluva lot -- and that he only tells us a portion of what he really knows. For example, he recently did NOT wish to talk about Angels -- and I think I know why. Alex is someone I'd like to have an all-night discussion with -- although I'd probably become suicidal by breakfast-time. I think things might be THAT bad. I try to have fun on this website -- but I strongly suspect that the galactic-realities are NOT pleasant -- and that very few individuals are prepared to properly process the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth -- about life, the universe, and everything. Knowing -- and Thinking We Know -- are two VERY different things. I KNOW that I don't know -- and I'm not sure I really wish to know. I might not be able to handle the truth. Me knowing the truth might create more problems than I can possibly imagine. What Would the NSA Say?? The Horror.

    I guess I'll just continue my very passive exoteric and esoteric quest. I continue to wonder if Archangel Michael is the Jewish Messiah -- rather than the Historical Jesus?! What if Archangel Michael is somehow responsible for the Teachings Attributed to Jesus -- and that these teachings were taken from a much larger collection of unpublished and unknown writings??!! There's something very fishy about the whole Archangel-Thing -- and my innermost thoughts are scaring the hell out of me. Perhaps this might have something to do with why Alex Collier didn't wish to discuss Angels. For the record -- I think Jewish Scholars know a helluva lot -- but that they are very guarded regarding what they say -- especially to the Goyim and Gentiles!! I continue to wonder how much of the Old Testament applies to Non-Jews -- especially in modernity?! I am troubled by BOTH the Old and New Testaments -- yet I am strangely attracted to the Whole Bible -- but I particularly appreciate the Teachings Attributed to Jesus Christ -- which seem to be very different than most of the rest of the Bible. Might there be a Garden of Eden Version of the Teachings of Archangel Michael??!! I'm beginning to think so. Consider the Talmud. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talmud

    The Talmud (Hebrew: תַּלְמוּד talmūd "instruction, learning", from a root lmd "teach, study") is a central text of Rabbinic Judaism, considered second to the Torah. It is also traditionally referred to as Shas (ש״ס), a Hebrew abbreviation of shisha sedarim, the "six orders" of the Oral Law of Judaism. The Talmud has two components: the Mishnah (Hebrew: משנה, c. 200 CE), the first written compendium of Judaism's Oral Law, and the Gemara (c. 500 CE), an elucidation of the Mishnah and related Tannaitic writings that often ventures onto other subjects and expounds broadly on the Hebrew Bible. The terms Talmud and Gemara are often used interchangeably.

    The whole Talmud consists of 63 tractates, and in standard print is over 6,200 pages long. It is written in Tannaitic Hebrew and Aramaic. The Talmud contains the opinions of thousands of rabbis on a variety of subjects, including law, ethics, philosophy, customs, history, theology, lore and many other topics. The Talmud is the basis for all codes of rabbinic law and is much quoted in other rabbinic literature.

    Originally, Jewish scholarship was oral. Rabbis expounded and debated the law (the written law expressed in the Hebrew Bible) and discussed the Tanakh without the benefit of written works (other than the Biblical books themselves), though some may have made private notes (megillot setarim), for example of court decisions. However, this situation changed drastically, mainly as the result of the destruction of the Jewish commonwealth and the Second Temple in the year 70 CE and the consequent upheaval of Jewish social and legal norms. As the Rabbis were required to face a new reality—mainly Judaism without a Temple (to serve as the center of teaching and study) and Judea without at least partial autonomy—there was a flurry of legal discourse and the old system of oral scholarship could not be maintained. It is during this period that Rabbinic discourse began to be recorded in writing.[1][2] The earliest recorded oral law may have been of the midrashic form, in which halakhic discussion is structured as exegetical commentary on the Pentateuch. But an alternative form, organized by subject matter instead of by biblical verse, became dominant about the year 200 CE, when Rabbi Judah haNasi redacted the Mishnah (משנה).[citation needed]

    The Oral Law was far from monolithic; rather, it varied among various schools. The most famous two were the School of Shammai and the School of Hillel. In general, all valid opinions, even the non-normative ones, were recorded in the Talmud.[citation needed]

    The six orders (sedarim; singular: seder) of general subject matter in the Talmud are divided into 60 or 63 tractates (masekhtot; singular: masekhet) of more focused subject compilations. Each tractate is divided into chapters (perakim; singular: perek), 517 in total, that are both numbered according to the Hebrew alphabet and given names, usually using the first one or two words in the first mishnah. A perek may continue over several (up to tens of) pages.[3] Each perek will contain several mishnayot[4] with their accompanying exchanges that form the "building-blocks" of the Gemara; the name for a passage of gemara is a sugya (סוגיא; plural sugyot). A sugya, including baraita or tosefta, will typically comprise a detailed proof-based elaboration of a Mishnaic statement, whether halakhic or aggadic. A sugya may, and often does, range widely off the subject of the mishnah. The sugya is not punctuated in the conventional sense used in the English language, but by using specific expressions that help to divide the sugya into components, usually including a statement, a question on the statement, an answer, a proof for the answer or a refutation of the answer with its own proof.[citation needed]

    In a given sugya, scriptural, Tannaic and Amoraic statements are cited to support the various opinions. In so doing, the Gemara will highlight semantic disagreements between Tannaim and Amoraim (often ascribing a view to an earlier authority as to how he may have answered a question), and compare the Mishnaic views with passages from the Baraita. Rarely are debates formally closed; in some instances, the final word determines the practical law, but in many instances the issue is left unresolved. There is a whole literature on the procedural principles to be used in settling the practical law when disagreements exist: see under #Logic and methodology below.

    The Mishnah is a compilation of legal opinions and debates. Statements in the Mishnah are typically terse, recording brief opinions of the rabbis debating a subject; or recording only an unattributed ruling, apparently representing a consensus view. The rabbis recorded in the Mishnah are known as Tannaim.[1]

    Since it sequences its laws by subject matter instead of by biblical context, the Mishnah discusses individual subjects more thoroughly than the Midrash, and it includes a much broader selection of halakhic subjects than the Midrash. The Mishnah's topical organization thus became the framework of the Talmud as a whole. But not every tractate in the Mishnah has a corresponding talmud. Also, the order of the tractates in the Talmud differs in some cases from that in the Mishnah.

    In addition to the Mishnah, other tannaitic teachings were current at about the same time or shortly thereafter. The Gemara frequently refers to these tannaitic statements in order to compare them to those contained in the Mishnah and to support or refute the propositions of Amoraim. All such non-Mishnaic tannaitic sources are termed baraitot (lit. outside material, "Works external to the Mishnah"; sing. baraita ברייתא).

    The baraitot cited in the Gemara are often quotations from the Tosefta (a tannaitic compendium of halakha parallel to the Mishnah) and the Halakhic Midrashim (specifically Mekhilta, Sifra and Sifre). Some baraitot, however, are known only through traditions cited in the Gemara, and are not part of any other collection.[citation needed]

    In the three centuries following the redaction of the Mishnah, rabbis throughout Palestine and Babylonia analyzed, debated, and discussed that work. These discussions form the Gemara (גמרא). Gemara means “completion” (from the Hebrew gamar גמר: "to complete") or "learning" ( from the Aramaic: "to study"). The Gemara mainly focuses on elucidating and elaborating the opinions of the Tannaim. The rabbis of the Gemara are known as Amoraim (sing. Amora אמורא).[citation needed]

    Much of the Gemara consists of legal analysis. The starting point for the analysis is usually a legal statement found in a Mishnah. The statement is then analyzed and compared with other statements used in different approaches to Biblical exegesis in rabbinic Judaism (or - simpler - interpretation of text in Torah study) exchanges between two (frequently anonymous and sometimes metaphorical) disputants, termed the makshan (questioner) and tartzan (answerer). Another important function of Gemara is to identify the correct Biblical basis for a given law presented in the Mishnah and the logical process connecting one with the other: this activity was known as talmud long before the existence of the "Talmud" as a text.[5]

    The Talmud is a wide-ranging document that touches on a great many subjects. Traditionally Talmudic statements are classified into two broad categories, halakhic and aggadic statements. Halakhic statements directly relate to questions of Jewish law and practice (halakha). Aggadic statements are not legally related, but rather are exegetical, homiletical, ethical, or historical in nature.

    In addition to the six Orders, the Talmud contains a series of short treatises of a later date, usually printed at the end of Seder Nezikin. These are not divided into Mishnah and Gemara.

    The process of "Gemara" proceeded in what were then the two major centers of Jewish scholarship, the Land of Israel and Babylonia. Correspondingly, two bodies of analysis developed, and two works of Talmud were created. The older compilation is called the Jerusalem Talmud or the Talmud Yerushalmi. It was compiled in the fourth century in Israel. The Babylonian Talmud was compiled about the year 500 CE, although it continued to be edited later. The word "Talmud", when used without qualification, usually refers to the Babylonian Talmud.

    While the editors of Jerusalem Talmud and Babylonian Talmud each mention the other community, most scholars believe these documents were written independently; Louis Jacobs writes, "If the editors of either had had access to an actual text of the other, it is inconceivable that they would not have mentioned this. Here the argument from silence is very convincing."[6]

    The Jerusalem Talmud was one of the two compilations of Jewish religious teachings and commentary that was transmitted orally for centuries prior to its compilation by Jewish scholars in Israel.[7] It is a compilation of teachings of the schools of Tiberias, Sepphoris and Caesarea. It is written largely in a western Aramaic dialect that differs from its Babylonian counterpart.[citation needed]

    This Talmud is a synopsis of the analysis of the Mishnah that was developed over the course of nearly 200 years by the Academies in Israel (principally those of Tiberias and Caesarea.) Because of their location, the sages of these Academies devoted considerable attention to analysis of the agricultural laws of the Land of Israel. Traditionally, this Talmud was thought to have been redacted in about the year 350 CE by Rav Muna and Rav Yossi in the Land of Israel. It is traditionally known as the Talmud Yerushalmi ("Jerusalem Talmud"), but the name is a misnomer, as it was not prepared in Jerusalem. It has more accurately been called "The Talmud of the Land of Israel".[8]

    Its final redaction probably belongs to the end of the fourth century, but the individual scholars who brought it to its present form cannot be fixed with assurance. By this time Christianity had become the state religion of the Roman Empire and Jerusalem the holy city of Christendom. In 325 CE Constantine, the first Christian emperor, said "let us then have nothing in common with the detestable Jewish crowd."[9] This policy made a Jew an outcast and pauper. The compilers of the Jerusalem Talmud consequently lacked the time to produce a work of the quality they had intended. The text is evidently incomplete and is not easy to follow. The apparent cessation of work on the Jerusalem Talmud in the fifth century has been associated with the decision of Theodosius II in 425 CE to suppress the Patriarchate and put an end to the practice of formal scholarly ordination. Some modern scholars have questioned this connection: for more detail see Jerusalem Talmud: Place and date of composition.

    Despite its incomplete state, the Jerusalem Talmud remains an indispensable source of knowledge of the development of the Jewish Law in Israel. It was also an important resource in the study of the Babylonian Talmud by the Kairouan school of Hananel ben Hushiel and Nissim Gaon, with the result that opinions ultimately based on the Jerusalem Talmud found their way into both the Tosafot and the Mishneh Torah of Maimonides.

    There are traditions that hold that in the Messianic Age the Jerusalem Talmud will have priority over the Babylonian. This may be interpreted as meaning that, following the restoration of the Sanhedrin and the line of ordained scholars, the work will be completed and "out of Zion shall go the Law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem". Accordingly, following the formation of the modern State of Israel there is some interest in restoring Eretz Yisrael traditions. For example, Rabbi David Bar-Hayim of the Makhon Shilo institute has issued a siddur reflecting Eretz Yisrael practice as found in the Jerusalem Talmud and other sources.

    The Talmud Bavli consists of documents compiled over the period of Late Antiquity (3rd to 5th centuries).[10] During this time the most important of the Jewish centres in Mesopotamia, later known as Iraq, were Nehardea, Nisibis, Mahoza (just to the south of what is now Baghdad), Pumbeditha (a town more famous in our times as Fallujah), and the Sura Academy.

    Talmud Bavli (the "Babylonian Talmud") comprises the Mishnah and the Babylonian Gemara, the latter representing the culmination of more than 300 years of analysis of the Mishnah in the Babylonian Academies. The foundations of this process of analysis were laid by Rab, a disciple of Rabbi Judah ha-Nasi. Tradition ascribes the compilation of the Babylonian Talmud in its present form to two Babylonian sages, Rav Ashi and Ravina. Rav Ashi was president of the Sura Academy from 375 to 427 CE. The work begun by Rav Ashi was completed by Ravina, who is traditionally regarded as the final Amoraic expounder. Accordingly, traditionalists argue that Ravina’s death in 499 CE is the latest possible date for the completion of the redaction of the Talmud. However, even on the most traditional view a few passages are regarded as the work of a group of rabbis who edited the Talmud after the end of the Amoraic period, known as the Saboraim or Rabbanan Savora'e (meaning "reasoners" or "considerers").

    The question as to when the Gemara was finally put into its present form is not settled among modern scholars. Some, like Louis Jacobs, argue that the main body of the Gemara is not simple reportage of conversations, as it purports to be, but a highly elaborate structure contrived by the Saboraim, who must therefore be regarded as the real authors. On this view the text did not reach its final form until around 700. Some modern scholars use the term Stammaim (from the Hebrew Stam, meaning "closed", "vague" or "unattributed") for the authors of unattributed statements in the Gemara. (See eras within Jewish law.)

    There are significant differences between the two Talmud compilations. The language of the Jerusalem Talmud is a western Aramaic dialect, which differs from the form of Aramaic in the Babylonian Talmud. The Talmud Yerushalmi is often fragmentary and difficult to read, even for experienced Talmudists. The redaction of the Talmud Bavli, on the other hand, is more careful and precise. The law as laid down in the two compilations is basically similar, except in emphasis and in minor details. The Jerusalem Talmud has not received much attention from commentators, and such traditional commentaries as exist are mostly concerned with comparing its teachings to those of the Talmud Bavli.

    Neither the Jerusalem nor the Babylonian Talmud covers the entire Mishnah: for example, a Babylonian Gemara exists only for 37 out of the 63 tractates of the Mishnah. In particular:

    The Jerusalem Talmud covers all the tractates of Zeraim, while the Babylonian Talmud covers only tractate Berachot. The reason might be that most laws from the Orders Zeraim (agricultural laws limited to the land of Israel) had little practical relevance in Babylonia and were therefore not included.[11] The Jerusalem Talmud has a greater focus on the Land of Israel and the Torah's agricultural laws pertaining to the land because it was written in the Land of Israel where the laws applied.

    The Jerusalem Talmud does not cover the Mishnaic order of Kodashim, which deals with sacrificial rites and laws pertaining to the Temple, while the Babylonian Talmud does cover it. It is not clear why this is, as the laws were not directly applicable in either country following the Temple's 70 CE destruction.

    In both Talmuds, only one tractate of Tehorot (ritual purity laws) is examined, that of the menstrual laws, Niddah.

    The Babylonian Talmud records the opinions of the rabbis of Israel as well as of those of Babylonia, while the Jerusalem Talmud only seldom cites the Babylonian rabbis. The Babylonian version also contains the opinions of more generations because of its later date of completion. For both these reasons it is regarded as a more comprehensive collection of the opinions available. On the other hand, because of the centuries of redaction between the composition of the Jerusalem and the Babylonian Talmud, the opinions of early amoraim might be closer to their original form in the Jerusalem Talmud.

    The influence of the Babylonian Talmud has been far greater than that of the Yerushalmi. In the main, this is because the influence and prestige of the Jewish community of Israel steadily declined in contrast with the Babylonian community in the years after the re