tMoA

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


    The United States of the Solar System, A.D. 2133 (Book Three)

    Share
    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7368
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The United States of the Solar System, A.D. 2133 (Book Three)

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Wed Apr 26, 2017 1:54 pm

    Carol wrote:

    New computers could delete thoughts without your knowledge, experts warn
    Full article: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/delete-thoughts-read-your-mind-without-your-knowledge-neurotechnology-new-human-rights-laws-a7701661.html

    New human rights laws are required to protect sensitive information in a person’s mind from 'unauthorised collection, storage, use or even deletion',” wrote the playwright John Milton in 1634.

    But, nearly 400 years later, technological advances in machines that can read our thoughts mean the privacy of our brain is under threat. Now two biomedical ethicists are calling for the creation of new human rights laws to ensure people are protected, including “the right to cognitive liberty” and “the right to mental integrity”.

    Scientists have already developed devices capable of telling whether people are politically right-wing or left-wing. In one experiment, researchers were able to read people’s minds to tell with 70 per cent accuracy whether they planned to add or subtract two numbers.

    Facebook also recently revealed it had been secretly working on technology to read people’s minds so they could type by just thinking.

    And medical researchers have managed to connect part of a paralysed man’s brain to a computer to allow him to stimulate muscles in his arm so he could move it and feed himself.

    The ethicists, writing in a paper in the journal Life Sciences, Society and Policy, stressed the “unprecedented opportunities” that would result from the “ubiquitous distribution of cheaper, scalable and easy-to-use neuro-applications” that would make neurotechnology “intricately embedded in our everyday life”.

    Mind-reading breakthrough lets scientists ‘talk’ to locked-in patients. However, such devices are open to abuse on a frightening degree, as the academics made clear. They warned that “malicious brain-hacking” and “hazardous uses of medical neurotechnology” could require a redefinition of the idea of mental integrity.

    “We suggest that in response to emerging neurotechnology possibilities, the right to mental integrity should not exclusively guarantee protection from mental illness or traumatic injury but also from unauthorised intrusions into a person’s mental wellbeing performed through the use of neurotechnology, especially if such intrusions result in physical or mental harm to the neurotechnology user,” the ethicists wrote.

    “The right to mental privacy is a neuro-specific privacy right which protects private or sensitive information in a person’s mind from unauthorised collection, storage, use, or even deletion in digital form or otherwise.”

    And they warned that the techniques were so sophisticated that people’s minds might be being read or interfered with without their knowledge.

    “Illicit intrusions into a person’s mental privacy may not necessarily involve coercion, as they could be performed under the threshold of a persons’ conscious experience,” they wrote in the paper.

    “The same goes for actions involving harm to a person’s mental life or unauthorised modifications of a person’s psychological continuity, which are also facilitated by the ability of emerging neurotechnologies to intervene into a person’s neural processing in absence of the person’s awareness.”

    They proposed four new human rights laws: the right to cognitive liberty, the right to mental privacy, the right to mental integrity and the right to psychological continuity.

    Professor Roberto Andorno, an academic at Zurich University’s law school and a co-author of the paper, said: “Brain imaging technology has already reached a point where there is discussion over its legitimacy in criminal court, for example as a tool for assessing criminal responsibility or even the risk of re-offending.

    “Consumer companies are using brain imaging for 'neuromarketing' to understand consumer behaviour and elicit desired responses from customers.

    “There are also tools such as 'brain decoders' which can turn brain imaging data into images, text or sound.

    “All of these could pose a threat to personal freedom which we sought to address with the development of four new human rights laws.”
    orthodoxymoron wrote:I keep getting the sinking-feeling that the computers "took-over" a long time ago, and we're just finding-out about it now. Would you wish to have your consciousness downloaded into a super-computer when your body dies of natural (or unnatural) causes?? What if someone pressed the wrong button, and eliminated "YOU" for all-eternity?? I keep joking about living and working in a 600 square-foot office-apartment with a supercomputer, but is this really a stupid and farfetched idea?? What if one carried on telepathic-conversations with their supercomputer?? What if one became corrupted and brainwashed by their own computer?? Will ALL of US be thinking and speaking like computers in the near-future?? Is fast-thinking, fast-walking, and fast-talking the way of the future?? Should I wish to be a Mainframe-Linked Globo-Cop Bankster-Warrior in my next "incarnation"?? What sort of a Technological-Hell are we descending into?? What if at least some Reptilians and Greys are simply Ex Machina Creations wearing Special-Suits?? What Would Nathan Say?? "What is Reality??" might be an impossible question to answer!! What Would "Sweetie" Say?? Around the year 2000, I spoke with a sexy former Microsoft employee about Wearable-Computers (as I drove her to her waterfront-home). I thought they were the way of the future, but she said (with a smile) "Bill doesn't think so!!" What if she was Bill's Boss?? What Would Seymour Cray Say?? What Would Mr. Edgars Say?? I continue to think that wars and rumors of wars are scripted. I found it interesting that Josh from World Alternative Media mentioned that we might've been in WWIII since 9/11/2001. Catherine Austin Fitts recently spoke of WWIII extending from 2001 to 2025. I find the 2025 date interesting, in light of a short video clip from the Babylon 5 Series (below). Notice all of the dates mentioned. I keep wondering if they're significant?! Babylon 5 was made from 1993 to 1998. Notice also that December 21, 2012 is right in the middle of 2001 to 2025!! What if WWIII is a battle for the control of the REALLY Nasty Ancient-Weapons of Mass-Destruction??!!


    Pris wrote:
    orthodoxymoron wrote:Pris, I've been to a couple of The Offspring concerts (a long time ago)!! I stayed away from the "mosh-pit"!! Too much "blue-smoke" and "crowd-surfing"!! The Offspring is an old Punk-Rock group from Orange County!! "Noodles" is sort of the "Elder-Statesman" of the group. Noodles, the guitarist for The Offspring, was the janitor for the school the band went to. He was allowed into the band because he was old enough to buy the band alcohol. My parents sold a building to Seals and Crofts (to be used for rehearsing) but they didn't let me join the group!! BTW, that's Noodles standing next to Homer Simpson!!
    Okay! Very Happy  I had no idea so thanks for clarifying, Oxy.  That's hilarious about the alcohol thing and cool that you have something of a connection to all of this! I've not been much into the punk rock scene but it always fascinated me growing up.  I enjoyed music from The Sex Pistols and The Stranglers because my sister was into that stuff and she gave me those albums.  I used to practice Anarchy In The UK on my accordion. Laugh
    .
    .
    orthodoxymoron wrote:Thank-you Pris. I once attended a Myron Floren accordion performance, and tried to get credit for my college Music-Appreciation class, but my Doctor of Music teacher didn't consider a Lawrence Welk accordionist to be a real-musician playing real-music!! Can't we all just get along?? I am MUCH More Restrained than Alex Jones and Larken Rose, but I enjoy listening to these types of people (but not all the time). I enjoy listening to The Offspring and Myron Floren (but not all the time). BTW, I love that title "Anarchy in the UK"!! What Would MI5, MI6, and OO7 Say and Do?? It's a Secret!! One more thing. A genuine-insider told me that Lawrence Welk was a jerk!! What Would The Lennon Sisters Sing??




    Pris wrote: Huh... your music teacher didn't consider a Lawrence Welk accordionist to be a real musician playing real music...  That's a rather anal personal opinion, isn't it lol!  What one considers to be 'music' is rather subjective and everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but that bias should NOT have been foisted upon you to affect your grade, Oxy.  

    Accordions are obviously pretty cool musical instruments.  And, you've got to be pretty cool to play one (my accordion was a 120 bass just like what Dizzy Fingers was playing... WOW, he's good!). Cool Very Happy

    It wouldn't surprise me if Lawrence Welk was a jerk... though being someone's opinion (genuine insider or not), who knows what that means.

    I can appreciate most things in small doses, too.

    .
    .
    Pris wrote: Another awesome video. Here's some words from Larken I felt quoting:

    The Cult of Statism
    ...authoritarianism IS the problem.  The problem is not and has never been 'who's on the throne'.  The Problem is, and has always been and will always be -- until people wake up -- that there is a throne there to be on. As long as the argument is 'what government should do', 'who should run it', 'what form it should take', you're just tinkering with the details and completely ignoring the heart of the problem which is the belief in government and authoritarianism.

    This is the only issue that matters:  Do you own yourself or are you the property of a ruling class? I don't care if it's a limited ruling class.  I don't care if it's a democratic ruling class.  I don't care if it's a republican ruling class.  I don't care if it's a constitutional ruling class.  If there's some beast that has the right to take your money and boss you around, it owns you.  You're not free, you don't own yourself.  And, if you actually believe that, why do you ever imagine you'll achieve freedom?  You're not even free inside your own head.

    And, so when people say, "Well, these little differences..."  This is not a 'little difference'.  Either you think there can be someone with the right to rule you, or you understand that there can be no such thing or you understand the concepts of self-ownership and the non-aggression principle and what those logically lead to... which is legitimate government is a logical impossibility.  It cannot exist.  Not just 'it's really hard to maintain' -- it's theoretically and conceptually insane to think there can be a moral and righteous gang of thugs and thieves who bosses people around, takes their money.  It just doesn't work philosophically or morally or logically.

    Just to add here, as you may know, I'm also opposed to (the use of, implementation of) money, barter, and trade... but that's another topic (more or less). Wink
    .
    .
    B.B.Baghor wrote: ortho's words: "I try to provide a wide variety of posts -- despite accusations that I just keep saying the same things over and over again. On the other hand, if I were inconsistent, I would be accused of being confused and unstable. I frankly don't care what anyone thinks. I simply want everyone to think. Period".

    Comment in the tubby with the grizzly bears catching salmon, in your post "For every salmon that is caught, hundreds make it past the bears......."

    Once upon a time -- I had a digital voice-recorder which worked perfectly -- expect when recording one particular individual. A normal-sounding voice became a hideous gravely (almost demonic) voice when played-back on that particular digital-recorder!! This occurred repeatedly (without exception). I mentioned this to the Ancient Egyptian Deity -- to which they replied "Some Slip Through". Honest.

    Honestly, ortho, comments on your saying the same things over and over, to me that's not an accusation. When I share that opinion, it's a comment on how it's perceived by me. For some reason you seem to be fixed on that judgment, of being accused, so that you feel compelled to repeat your message, in order to prove you're right or to make clear what it is you're after. That's a possible checkmate position, to me.

    So -- is this a King and Queen War-Game?? I often feel like a Completely Ignorant Pawn!! Please remember that I am honestly modeling concepts and personalities which do NOT reflect who I am in "real-life". I might share some of the inclinations and biases -- but I don't behave like this in everyday life. What scares me is that the ease with which I model on this thread leads me to wonder if I might've been somewhat like this in previous lives. I'm honestly NOT channeling some nefarious entity. I don't do anything even remotely creepy. I might be channeling myself. Was it Lionhawk who spoke of channeling themselves?? I can't quite remember -- but I know it was someone on this forum who is no longer posting. Each of my posts are the same -- only different -- reflecting the concept of "Theme and Variations". I honestly keep feeling as though I was somehow set-up in this incarnation -- where every behavior and editorial-slant would be somehow used against me -- with the general theme of Build Them Up -- and Knock Them Down.

    It's your reaction, to feel an accusation and you seem stuck in it. You're as much trying to live up to expectations of your audience as dictating your rules how the audience should listen. I think that you're in one of the most patient and kind forum here, with many members, including me, communicating with you in an open-minded way and with good intentions.

    I can't dictate Rules of Listening. What Would Julian Treasure Say?? I can't even get others to listen. Period. I got bored of Aliens and UFO's -- so I wrote the following drivel (relative to a listening-class): It is probably necessary to superimpose each component of Receive-Appreciate-Summarize-Ask (RASA) -- one on top of the other -- in order to properly apply Step 5 of "Julian's Five Steps" (from a TED lecture). One might Ask to Receive the desired data -- which must then be processed by Appreciating-Summarizing and Asking clarifying and inquisitive Questions. At various stages of this process -- the order of RASA might change -- and at times be all occurring at the same time -- with an equal emphasis. RASA somewhat mirrors the Scientific-Method -- wherein one Proposes a Hypothesis -- which simultaneously Asks and Answers a Question. Data is then gathered through Asking and Answering further questions -- which are pertinent to the Original Question and Answer. Ultimately, the Gathered Data is Summarized -- Conclusions are Reached -- and the Original Question and Answer is Verified or Nullified. The overall appearance and impression one observes in others -- and which one presents to others -- which might include facial-expression -- body-language -- clothing -- walking speed and style -- are Integral-Aspects of Non-Verbal Communication. Ideally -- one might Look-Sharp -- Act-Sharp -- and Be-Sharp -- with deviations from this Norm telling various stories. Experience would be determinative regarding this methodology -- and Contextual-Superimposition might play a significant role in the evaluation of a spectrum of non-verbal communication. This is a highly tolerant forum -- but I often feel as if I am silently being fed enough rope to hang myself (which I seem to be effectively and efficiently doing each and every day). I seem to be somehow protected -- while I continue to destroy myself. I guess I keep thinking that if I am never built-up -- it is more difficult to knock me down. This whole thing is frankly a Most Dangerous Game to me. It's so sad -- that it's almost funny...



    I don't choose to belittle you or your thread, or display a smiling face, at the same time shaking my head inside. Some may do that here, to sort of please you. That's not helping, does it? Many of those who read your thread, have shown you they appreciate your presence here and (maybe with some difficulty) also your thread. You are not your thread, see? That's where the sting is present, or so it seems. I feel a sameness in your trying hard and my trying hard, in a way.

    Forgive me for repeating this -- but you often remind me of "Angela" in that 1978 movie "The Word" (which sends chills up and down my spine). That's actually a compliment. I honestly feel like a sci-fi script-writer. Decades ago, I spoke with a very famous Hollywood-Director's Stepmother about wishing for "someone" to create a High-Tech Science-Fictional "Life of Christ" Based Upon The Desire of Ages by Ellen White. Honest. She spoke of her stepson being fearful. Now I think I understand why -- based upon which movies were being made at that time -- and what I know now.


    There's an obstacle between people's minds present here, reading your thread and yours presenting food for thought in it. So far, you don't receive what you're aiming at, that's made clear by you. To me, it seems that somewhere there's an opinion put on ice. My efforts to clarify or understand, may prove that "never the twain shall meet." That opinion on ice, or a prefixed idea, may be in the mind of the readers, in my mind also, for I truly find it hard to follow, where your mind goes, or is, ortho.

    I have repeatedly stated that this thread merely scratches the surface. I could make this MUCH more complex and graphic. I've been around highly-educated English and Australian Theologians and Preachers -- and it's quite humbling -- and even a bit creepy. Some of you know what I'm talking about. This thread is sort of Gizeh-Intelligence for the Rest of Us!!

    Can we meet halfway? That could work maybe....... I think  Wink  I'm honestly thinking out loud, to myself mainly, sharing it here with a purpose, if you can get that. Is making sense done by thinking? Is humour a way to bypass the trap of absolute truth and perfection? When is an answer given that is also received as an answer?

    Perhaps. I'm honestly attempting to understand what Genuine Fundamentalist Biblical Theology in the Context of Ancient and Modern Science-Fiction really looks like. My starting-point is that Everyone is Right -- and Everyone is Wrong -- which makes everyone angry and indignant. Irreverent-Humor seems to be destroying me -- little by little -- yet it seems to serve a utilitarian-purpose presently -- so I shall continue to crucify myself. We all have our crosses to bear -- don't we?? Orthodoxymoron or Wave of the Future?? Time Will Tell -- as it always does...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhGuXCuDb1U

    Tim Minchin's Storm the Animated Movie

    To me, this is a delicious merging of instinctual view and overview. Those 2 views are meant to be made aware in one moment, as I see it, in a positive "the twain shall meet".

    I learned "Combining-Opposites" from Shirley Maclaine. I knew a Hollywood-Insider who told me that Shirley seemed to be lost in deep-thought when not on stage. Once -- while inside a major television-studio -- as I watched a rehearsal -- I noticed one particular individual who sat motionless and transfixed in front of the stage -- watching intently and silently -- with total-concentration. That made a deep impression on me. I honestly aspire to be that sort of person (regarding life, the universe, and everything). BTW -- I recently encountered an Individual of Interest who seemed to NOT like me one little bit -- and I think I might know why...




    "The mind…  can make a heaven of hell, a hell of heaven" ? John Milton

    Some of us seem to be "Making Heaven Into Hell" while others of us seem to be "Making Hell Into Heaven". What if CERN will somehow merge Heaven and Hell into some sort of an Eschatological Final-Jihad?? The Horror. I equate "Mind" with "Character" -- which we apparently take with us when we die. Who says "You Can't Take It With You"??

    "Oxy -- You Need to Learn Your Place in the Grand Scheme of Things..."


    Last edited by orthodoxymoron on Sun Apr 30, 2017 9:18 pm; edited 5 times in total
    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7368
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The United States of the Solar System, A.D. 2133 (Book Three)

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Thu Apr 27, 2017 11:56 am






    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen_Victoria Victoria (Alexandrina Victoria; 24 May 1819 – 22 January 1901) was Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland from 20 June 1837 until her death. From 1 May 1876, she adopted the additional title of Empress of India. Victoria was the daughter of Prince Edward, Duke of Kent and Strathearn, the fourth son of King George III. Both the Duke of Kent and King George III died in 1820, and Victoria was raised under close supervision by her German-born mother Princess Victoria of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld. She inherited the throne aged 18, after her father's three elder brothers had all died, leaving no surviving legitimate children. The United Kingdom was already an established constitutional monarchy, in which the sovereign held relatively little direct political power. Privately, Victoria attempted to influence government policy and ministerial appointments; publicly, she became a national icon who was identified with strict standards of personal morality. Victoria married her first cousin, Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, in 1840. Their nine children married into royal and noble families across the continent, tying them together and earning her the sobriquet "the grandmother of Europe". After Albert's death in 1861, Victoria plunged into deep mourning and avoided public appearances. As a result of her seclusion, republicanism temporarily gained strength, but in the latter half of her reign her popularity recovered. Her Golden and Diamond Jubilees were times of public celebration. Her reign of 63 years and seven months is known as the Victorian era. It was a period of industrial, cultural, political, scientific, and military change within the United Kingdom, and was marked by a great expansion of the British Empire. She was the last British monarch of the House of Hanover. Her son and successor, Edward VII, belonged to the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, the line of his father.

    Victoria's father was Prince Edward, Duke of Kent and Strathearn, the fourth son of the reigning King of the United Kingdom, George III. Until 1817, Edward's niece, Princess Charlotte of Wales, was the only legitimate grandchild of George III. Her death in 1817 precipitated a succession crisis that brought pressure on the Duke of Kent and his unmarried brothers to marry and have children. In 1818 he married Princess Victoria of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld, a widowed German princess with two children—Carl (1804–1856) and Feodora (1807–1872)—by her first marriage to the Prince of Leiningen. Her brother Leopold was Princess Charlotte's widower. The Duke and Duchess of Kent's only child, Victoria, was born at 4.15 a.m. on 24 May 1819 at Kensington Palace in London.[1]

    Victoria was christened privately by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Charles Manners-Sutton, on 24 June 1819 in the Cupola Room at Kensington Palace.[2] She was baptised Alexandrina, after one of her godparents, Emperor Alexander I of Russia, and Victoria, after her mother. Additional names proposed by her parents—Georgina (or Georgiana), Charlotte, and Augusta—were dropped on the instructions of the Duke's eldest brother, George, the Prince Regent.[3]

    At birth, Victoria was fifth in the line of succession after the four eldest sons of George III: George, the Prince Regent (later George IV); Frederick, the Duke of York; William, the Duke of Clarence (later William IV); and Victoria's father, Edward, the Duke of Kent.[4] The Prince Regent had no surviving children, and the Duke of York had no children; further, both were estranged from their wives, who were both past child-bearing age, so the two eldest brothers were unlikely to have any further children. The Duke of Clarence and the Duke of Kent married on the same day in 1818, but both of Clarence's daughters (born in 1819 and 1820) died as infants. Victoria's father died in January 1820, when Victoria was less than a year old. A week later her grandfather died and was succeeded by his eldest son, George IV. The Duke of York died in 1827. When George IV died in 1830, he was succeeded by his next surviving brother, William IV, and Victoria became heir presumptive. The Regency Act 1830 made special provision for the Duchess of Kent (Victoria's mother) to act as regent in case William died while Victoria was still a minor.[5] King William distrusted the Duchess's capacity to be regent, and in 1836 he declared in her presence that he wanted to live until Victoria's 18th birthday, so that a regency could be avoided.[6]

    Victoria later described her childhood as "rather melancholy".[7] Her mother was extremely protective, and Victoria was raised largely isolated from other children under the so-called "Kensington System", an elaborate set of rules and protocols devised by the Duchess and her ambitious and domineering comptroller, Sir John Conroy, who was rumoured to be the Duchess's lover.[8] The system prevented the princess from meeting people whom her mother and Conroy deemed undesirable (including most of her father's family), and was designed to render her weak and dependent upon them.[9] The Duchess avoided the court because she was scandalised by the presence of King William's illegitimate children,[10] and perhaps prompted the emergence of Victorian morality by insisting that her daughter avoid any appearance of sexual impropriety.[11] Victoria shared a bedroom with her mother every night, studied with private tutors to a regular timetable, and spent her play-hours with her dolls and her King Charles spaniel, Dash.[12] Her lessons included French, German, Italian, and Latin,[13] but she spoke only English at home.[14]

    In 1830, the Duchess of Kent and Conroy took Victoria across the centre of England to visit the Malvern Hills, stopping at towns and great country houses along the way.[15] Similar journeys to other parts of England and Wales were taken in 1832, 1833, 1834 and 1835. To the King's annoyance, Victoria was enthusiastically welcomed in each of the stops.[16] William compared the journeys to royal progresses and was concerned that they portrayed Victoria as his rival rather than his heir presumptive.[17] Victoria disliked the trips; the constant round of public appearances made her tired and ill, and there was little time for her to rest.[18] She objected on the grounds of the King's disapproval, but her mother dismissed his complaints as motivated by jealousy, and forced Victoria to continue the tours.[19] At Ramsgate in October 1835, Victoria contracted a severe fever, which Conroy initially dismissed as a childish pretence.[20] While Victoria was ill, Conroy and the Duchess unsuccessfully badgered her to make Conroy her private secretary.[21] As a teenager, Victoria resisted persistent attempts by her mother and Conroy to appoint him to her staff.[22] Once queen, she banned him from her presence, but he remained in her mother's household.[23]

    By 1836, the Duchess's brother, Leopold, who had been King of the Belgians since 1831, hoped to marry his niece to his nephew, Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha.[24] Leopold, Victoria's mother, and Albert's father (Ernest I, Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha) were siblings. Leopold arranged for Victoria's mother to invite her Coburg relatives to visit her in May 1836, with the purpose of introducing Victoria to Albert.[25] William IV, however, disapproved of any match with the Coburgs, and instead favoured the suit of Prince Alexander of the Netherlands, second son of the Prince of Orange.[26] Victoria was aware of the various matrimonial plans and critically appraised a parade of eligible princes.[27] According to her diary, she enjoyed Albert's company from the beginning. After the visit she wrote, "[Albert] is extremely handsome; his hair is about the same colour as mine; his eyes are large and blue, and he has a beautiful nose and a very sweet mouth with fine teeth; but the charm of his countenance is his expression, which is most delightful."[28] Alexander, on the other hand, was "very plain".[29]

    Victoria wrote to her uncle Leopold, whom Victoria considered her "best and kindest adviser",[30] to thank him "for the prospect of great happiness you have contributed to give me, in the person of dear Albert ... He possesses every quality that could be desired to render me perfectly happy. He is so sensible, so kind, and so good, and so amiable too. He has besides the most pleasing and delightful exterior and appearance you can possibly see."[31] However at 17, Victoria, though interested in Albert, was not yet ready to marry. The parties did not undertake a formal engagement, but assumed that the match would take place in due time.[32]

    Victoria turned 18 on 24 May 1837, and a regency was avoided. Less than a month later, on 20 June 1837, William IV died at the age of 71, and Victoria became Queen of the United Kingdom.[33] In her diary she wrote, "I was awoke at 6 o'clock by Mamma, who told me the Archbishop of Canterbury and Lord Conyngham were here and wished to see me. I got out of bed and went into my sitting-room (only in my dressing gown) and alone, and saw them. Lord Conyngham then acquainted me that my poor Uncle, the King, was no more, and had expired at 12 minutes past 2 this morning, and consequently that I am Queen."[34] Official documents prepared on the first day of her reign described her as Alexandrina Victoria, but the first name was withdrawn at her own wish and not used again.[35]

    Since 1714, Britain had shared a monarch with Hanover in Germany, but under Salic law women were excluded from the Hanoverian succession. While Victoria inherited all the British dominions, Hanover passed instead to her father's younger brother, her unpopular uncle the Duke of Cumberland and Teviotdale, who became King Ernest Augustus I of Hanover. He was her heir presumptive until she married and had a child.[36]

    At the time of her accession, the government was led by the Whig prime minister Lord Melbourne, who at once became a powerful influence on the politically inexperienced Queen, who relied on him for advice.[37] Charles Greville supposed that the widowed and childless Melbourne was "passionately fond of her as he might be of his daughter if he had one", and Victoria probably saw him as a father figure.[38] Her coronation took place on 28 June 1838 at Westminster Abbey. Over 400,000 visitors came to London for the celebrations.[39] She became the first sovereign to take up residence at Buckingham Palace[40] and inherited the revenues of the duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall as well as being granted a civil list allowance of £385,000 per year. Financially prudent, she paid off her father's debts.[41]

    At the start of her reign Victoria was popular,[42] but her reputation suffered in an 1839 court intrigue when one of her mother's ladies-in-waiting, Lady Flora Hastings, developed an abdominal growth that was widely rumoured to be an out-of-wedlock pregnancy by Sir John Conroy.[43] Victoria believed the rumours.[44] She hated Conroy, and despised "that odious Lady Flora",[45] because she had conspired with Conroy and the Duchess of Kent in the Kensington System.[46] At first, Lady Flora refused to submit to a naked medical examination, until in mid-February she eventually agreed, and was found to be a virgin.[47] Conroy, the Hastings family and the opposition Tories organised a press campaign implicating the Queen in the spreading of false rumours about Lady Flora.[48] When Lady Flora died in July, the post-mortem revealed a large tumour on her liver that had distended her abdomen.[49] At public appearances, Victoria was hissed and jeered as "Mrs. Melbourne".[50]

    In 1839, Melbourne resigned after Radicals and Tories (both of whom Victoria detested) voted against a bill to suspend the constitution of Jamaica. The bill removed political power from plantation owners who were resisting measures associated with the abolition of slavery.[51] The Queen commissioned a Tory, Sir Robert Peel, to form a new ministry. At the time, it was customary for the prime minister to appoint members of the Royal Household, who were usually his political allies and their spouses. Many of the Queen's ladies of the bedchamber were wives of Whigs, and Peel expected to replace them with wives of Tories. In what became known as the bedchamber crisis, Victoria, advised by Melbourne, objected to their removal. Peel refused to govern under the restrictions imposed by the Queen, and consequently resigned his commission, allowing Melbourne to return to office.[52]

    Though Victoria was now queen, as an unmarried young woman she was required by social convention to live with her mother, despite their differences over the Kensington System and her mother's continued reliance on Conroy.[53] Her mother was consigned to a remote apartment in Buckingham Palace, and Victoria often refused to see her.[54] When Victoria complained to Melbourne that her mother's close proximity promised "torment for many years", Melbourne sympathised but said it could be avoided by marriage, which Victoria called a "schocking [sic] alternative".[55] She showed interest in Albert's education for the future role he would have to play as her husband, but she resisted attempts to rush her into wedlock.[56]
    Victoria continued to praise Albert following his second visit in October 1839. Albert and Victoria felt mutual affection and the Queen proposed to him on 15 October 1839, just five days after he had arrived at Windsor.[57] They were married on 10 February 1840, in the Chapel Royal of St James's Palace, London. Victoria was besotted. She spent the evening after their wedding lying down with a headache, but wrote ecstatically in her diary:

    I NEVER, NEVER spent such an evening!!! MY DEAREST DEAREST DEAR Albert ... his excessive love & affection gave me feelings of heavenly love & happiness I never could have hoped to have felt before! He clasped me in his arms, & we kissed each other again & again! His beauty, his sweetness & gentleness – really how can I ever be thankful enough to have such a Husband! ... to be called by names of tenderness, I have never yet heard used to me before – was bliss beyond belief! Oh! This was the happiest day of my life![58]

    Albert became an important political adviser as well as the Queen's companion, replacing Lord Melbourne as the dominant, influential figure in the first half of her life.[59] Victoria's mother was evicted from the palace, to Ingestre House in Belgrave Square. After the death of Princess Augusta in 1840, Victoria's mother was given both Clarence and Frogmore Houses.[60] Through Albert's mediation, relations between mother and daughter slowly improved.[61]

    During Victoria's first pregnancy in 1840, in the first few months of the marriage, 18-year-old Edward Oxford attempted to assassinate her while she was riding in a carriage with Prince Albert on her way to visit her mother. Oxford fired twice, but either both bullets missed or, as he later claimed, the guns had no shot.[62] He was tried for high treason, found not guilty on the grounds of insanity, and committed to an insane asylum indefinitely.[63] In the immediate aftermath of the attack, Victoria's popularity soared, mitigating residual discontent over the Hastings affair and the bedchamber crisis.[64] Her daughter, also named Victoria, was born on 21 November 1840. The Queen hated being pregnant,[65] viewed breast-feeding with disgust,[66] and thought newborn babies were ugly.[67] Nevertheless, over the following seventeen years, she and Albert had a further eight children: Albert Edward, Prince of Wales (b. 1841), Alice (b. 1843), Alfred (b. 1844), Helena (b. 1846), Louise (b. 1848), Arthur (b. 1850), Leopold (b. 1853) and Beatrice (b. 1857).

    Victoria's household was largely run by her childhood governess, Baroness Louise Lehzen from Hanover. Lehzen had been a formative influence on Victoria,[68] and had supported her against the Kensington System.[69] Albert, however, thought Lehzen was incompetent, and that her mismanagement threatened his daughter's health. After a furious row between Victoria and Albert over the issue, Lehzen was pensioned off, and Victoria's close relationship with her ended.[70]

    On 29 May 1842, Victoria was riding in a carriage along The Mall, London, when John Francis aimed a pistol at her but the gun did not fire; he escaped. The following day, Victoria drove the same route, though faster and with a greater escort, in a deliberate attempt to provoke Francis to take a second aim and catch him in the act. As expected, Francis shot at her, but he was seized by plain-clothes policemen, and convicted of high treason. On 3 July, two days after Francis's death sentence was commuted to transportation for life, John William Bean also tried to fire a pistol at the Queen, but it was loaded only with paper and tobacco and had too little charge.[71] Edward Oxford felt that the attempts were encouraged by his acquittal in 1840. Bean was sentenced to 18 months in jail.[72] In a similar attack in 1849, unemployed Irishman William Hamilton fired a powder-filled pistol at Victoria's carriage as it passed along Constitution Hill, London.[73] In 1850, the Queen did sustain injury when she was assaulted by a possibly insane ex-army officer, Robert Pate. As Victoria was riding in a carriage, Pate struck her with his cane, crushing her bonnet and bruising her forehead. Both Hamilton and Pate were sentenced to seven years' transportation.[74] Melbourne's support in the House of Commons weakened through the early years of Victoria's reign, and in the 1841 general election the Whigs were defeated. Peel became prime minister, and the ladies of the bedchamber most associated with the Whigs were replaced.[75]

    In 1845, Ireland was hit by a potato blight.[77] In the next four years over a million Irish people died and another million emigrated in what became known as the Great Famine.[78] In Ireland, Victoria was labelled "The Famine Queen".[79][80] She personally donated £2,000 to the British Relief Association, more than any other individual famine relief donor,[81] and also supported the Maynooth Grant to a Roman Catholic seminary in Ireland, despite Protestant opposition.[82] The story that she donated only £5 in aid to the Irish, and on the same day gave the same amount to Battersea Dogs Home, was a myth generated towards the end of the 19th century.[83]

    By 1846, Peel's ministry faced a crisis involving the repeal of the Corn Laws. Many Tories—by then known also as Conservatives—were opposed to the repeal, but Peel, some Tories (the "Peelites"), most Whigs and Victoria supported it. Peel resigned in 1846, after the repeal narrowly passed, and was replaced by Lord John Russell.[84]

    Internationally, Victoria took a keen interest in the improvement of relations between France and Britain.[85] She made and hosted several visits between the British royal family and the House of Orleans, who were related by marriage through the Coburgs. In 1843 and 1845, she and Albert stayed with King Louis Philippe I at château d'Eu in Normandy; she was the first British or English monarch to visit a French one since the meeting of Henry VIII of England and Francis I of France on the Field of the Cloth of Gold in 1520.[86] When Louis Philippe made a reciprocal trip in 1844, he became the first French king to visit a British sovereign.[87] Louis Philippe was deposed in the revolutions of 1848, and fled to exile in England.[88] At the height of a revolutionary scare in the United Kingdom in April 1848, Victoria and her family left London for the greater safety of Osborne House,[89] a private estate on the Isle of Wight that they had purchased in 1845 and redeveloped.[90] Demonstrations by Chartists and Irish nationalists failed to attract widespread support, and the scare died down without any major disturbances.[91] Victoria's first visit to Ireland in 1849 was a public relations success, but it had no lasting impact or effect on the growth of Irish nationalism.[92]

    Russell's ministry, though Whig, was not favoured by the Queen.[93] She found particularly offensive the Foreign Secretary, Lord Palmerston, who often acted without consulting the Cabinet, the Prime Minister, or the Queen.[94] Victoria complained to Russell that Palmerston sent official dispatches to foreign leaders without her knowledge, but Palmerston was retained in office and continued to act on his own initiative, despite her repeated remonstrances. It was only in 1851 that Palmerston was removed after he announced the British government's approval of President Louis-Napoleon Bonaparte's coup in France without consulting the Prime Minister.[95] The following year, President Bonaparte was declared Emperor Napoleon III, by which time Russell's administration had been replaced by a short-lived minority government led by Lord Derby.

    In 1853, Victoria gave birth to her eighth child, Leopold, with the aid of the new anaesthetic, chloroform. Victoria was so impressed by the relief it gave from the pain of childbirth that she used it again in 1857 at the birth of her ninth and final child, Beatrice, despite opposition from members of the clergy, who considered it against biblical teaching, and members of the medical profession, who thought it dangerous.[96] Victoria may have suffered from postnatal depression after many of her pregnancies.[97] Letters from Albert to Victoria intermittently complain of her loss of self-control. For example, about a month after Leopold's birth Albert complained in a letter to Victoria about her "continuance of hysterics" over a "miserable trifle".[98]
    In early 1855, the government of Lord Aberdeen, who had replaced Derby, fell amidst recriminations over the poor management of British troops in the Crimean War. Victoria approached both Derby and Russell to form a ministry, but neither had sufficient support, and Victoria was forced to appoint Palmerston as prime minister.[99]

    Napoleon III, since the Crimean War Britain's closest ally,[97] visited London in April 1855, and from 17 to 28 August the same year Victoria and Albert returned the visit.[100] Napoleon III met the couple at Boulogne and accompanied them to Paris.[101] They visited the Exposition Universelle (a successor to Albert's 1851 brainchild the Great Exhibition) and Napoleon I's tomb at Les Invalides (to which his remains had only been returned in 1840), and were guests of honour at a 1,200-guest ball at the Palace of Versailles.[102]

    On 14 January 1858, an Italian refugee from Britain called Felice Orsini attempted to assassinate Napoleon III with a bomb made in England.[103] The ensuing diplomatic crisis destabilised the government, and Palmerston resigned. Derby was reinstated as prime minister.[104] Victoria and Albert attended the opening of a new basin at the French military port of Cherbourg on 5 August 1858, in an attempt by Napoleon III to reassure Britain that his military preparations were directed elsewhere. On her return Victoria wrote to Derby reprimanding him for the poor state of the Royal Navy in comparison to the French one.[105] Derby's ministry did not last long, and in June 1859 Victoria recalled Palmerston to office.[106]

    Eleven days after Orsini's assassination attempt in France, Victoria's eldest daughter married Prince Frederick William of Prussia in London. They had been betrothed since September 1855, when Princess Victoria was 14 years old; the marriage was delayed by the Queen and Prince Albert until the bride was 17.[107] The Queen and Albert hoped that their daughter and son-in-law would be a liberalising influence in the enlarging Prussian state.[108] Victoria felt "sick at heart" to see her daughter leave England for Germany; "It really makes me shudder", she wrote to Princess Victoria in one of her frequent letters, "when I look round to all your sweet, happy, unconscious sisters, and think I must give them up too – one by one."[109] Almost exactly a year later, Princess Victoria gave birth to the Queen's first grandchild, Wilhelm, who would become the last German Kaiser.

    In March 1861, Victoria's mother died, with Victoria at her side. Through reading her mother's papers, Victoria discovered that her mother had loved her deeply;[110] she was heart-broken, and blamed Conroy and Lehzen for "wickedly" estranging her from her mother.[111] To relieve his wife during her intense and deep grief,[112] Albert took on most of her duties, despite being ill himself with chronic stomach trouble.[113] In August, Victoria and Albert visited their son, the Prince of Wales, who was attending army manoeuvres near Dublin, and spent a few days holidaying in Killarney. In November, Albert was made aware of gossip that his son had slept with an actress in Ireland.[114] Appalled, Albert travelled to Cambridge, where his son was studying, to confront him.[115] By the beginning of December, Albert was very unwell.[116] He was diagnosed with typhoid fever by William Jenner, and died on 14 December 1861. Victoria was devastated.[117] She blamed her husband's death on worry over the Prince of Wales's philandering. He had been "killed by that dreadful business", she said.[118] She entered a state of mourning and wore black for the remainder of her life. She avoided public appearances, and rarely set foot in London in the following years.[119] Her seclusion earned her the nickname "widow of Windsor".[120]

    Victoria's self-imposed isolation from the public diminished the popularity of the monarchy, and encouraged the growth of the republican movement.[121] She did undertake her official government duties, yet chose to remain secluded in her royal residences—Windsor Castle, Osborne House, and the private estate in Scotland that she and Albert had acquired in 1847, Balmoral Castle. In March 1864, a protester stuck a notice on the railings of Buckingham Palace that announced "these commanding premises to be let or sold in consequence of the late occupant's declining business".[122] Her uncle Leopold wrote to her advising her to appear in public. She agreed to visit the gardens of the Royal Horticultural Society at Kensington and take a drive through London in an open carriage.[123]

    Through the 1860s, Victoria relied increasingly on a manservant from Scotland, John Brown.[124] Slanderous rumours of a romantic connection and even a secret marriage appeared in print, and the Queen was referred to as "Mrs. Brown".[125] The story of their relationship was the subject of the 1997 movie Mrs. Brown. A painting by Sir Edwin Henry Landseer depicting the Queen with Brown was exhibited at the Royal Academy, and Victoria published a book, Leaves from the Journal of Our Life in the Highlands, which featured Brown prominently and in which the Queen praised him highly.[126]

    Palmerston died in 1865, and after a brief ministry led by Russell, Derby returned to power. In 1866, Victoria attended the State Opening of Parliament for the first time since Albert's death.[127] The following year she supported the passing of the Reform Act 1867 which doubled the electorate by extending the franchise to many urban working men,[128] though she was not in favour of votes for women.[129] Derby resigned in 1868, to be replaced by Benjamin Disraeli, who charmed Victoria. "Everyone likes flattery," he said, "and when you come to royalty you should lay it on with a trowel."[130] With the phrase "we authors, Ma'am", he complimented her.[131] Disraeli's ministry only lasted a matter of months, and at the end of the year his Liberal rival, William Ewart Gladstone, was appointed prime minister. Victoria found Gladstone's demeanour far less appealing; he spoke to her, she is thought to have complained, as though she were "a public meeting rather than a woman".[132]

    In 1870, republican sentiment in Britain, fed by the Queen's seclusion, was boosted after the establishment of the Third French Republic.[133] A republican rally in Trafalgar Square demanded Victoria's removal, and Radical MPs spoke against her.[134] In August and September 1871, she was seriously ill with an abscess in her arm, which Joseph Lister successfully lanced and treated with his new antiseptic carbolic acid spray.[135] In late November 1871, at the height of the republican movement, the Prince of Wales contracted typhoid fever, the disease that was believed to have killed his father, and Victoria was fearful her son would die.[136] As the tenth anniversary of her husband's death approached, her son's condition grew no better, and Victoria's distress continued.[137] To general rejoicing, he pulled through.[138] Mother and son attended a public parade through London and a grand service of thanksgiving in St Paul's Cathedral on 27 February 1872, and republican feeling subsided.[139]

    On the last day of February 1872, two days after the thanksgiving service, 17-year-old Arthur O'Connor (great-nephew of Irish MP Feargus O'Connor) waved an unloaded pistol at Victoria's open carriage just after she had arrived at Buckingham Palace. Brown, who was attending the Queen, grabbed him and O'Connor was later sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment.[140] As a result of the incident, Victoria's popularity recovered further.[141]

    After the Indian Rebellion of 1857, the British East India Company, which had ruled much of India, was dissolved, and Britain's possessions and protectorates on the Indian subcontinent were formally incorporated into the British Empire. The Queen had a relatively balanced view of the conflict, and condemned atrocities on both sides.[142] She wrote of "her feelings of horror and regret at the result of this bloody civil war",[143] and insisted, urged on by Albert, that an official proclamation announcing the transfer of power from the company to the state "should breathe feelings of generosity, benevolence and religious toleration".[144] At her behest, a reference threatening the "undermining of native religions and customs" was replaced by a passage guaranteeing religious freedom.[144]

    In the 1874 general election, Disraeli was returned to power. He passed the Public Worship Regulation Act 1874, which removed Catholic rituals from the Anglican liturgy and which Victoria strongly supported.[146] She preferred short, simple services, and personally considered herself more aligned with the presbyterian Church of Scotland than the episcopal Church of England.[147] He also pushed the Royal Titles Act 1876 through Parliament, so that Victoria took the title "Empress of India" from 1 May 1876.[148] The new title was proclaimed at the Delhi Durbar of 1 January 1877.[149]

    On 14 December 1878, the anniversary of Albert's death, Victoria's second daughter Alice, who had married Louis of Hesse, died of diphtheria in Darmstadt. Victoria noted the coincidence of the dates as "almost incredible and most mysterious".[150] In May 1879, she became a great-grandmother (on the birth of Princess Feodora of Saxe-Meiningen) and passed her "poor old 60th birthday". She felt "aged" by "the loss of my beloved child".[151]

    Between April 1877 and February 1878, she threatened five times to abdicate while pressuring Disraeli to act against Russia during the Russo-Turkish War, but her threats had no impact on the events or their conclusion with the Congress of Berlin.[152] Disraeli's expansionist foreign policy, which Victoria endorsed, led to conflicts such as the Anglo-Zulu War and the Second Anglo-Afghan War. "If we are to maintain our position as a first-rate Power", she wrote, "we must ... be Prepared for attacks and wars, somewhere or other, CONTINUALLY."[153] Victoria saw the expansion of the British Empire as civilising and benign, protecting native peoples from more aggressive powers or cruel rulers: "It is not in our custom to annexe countries", she said, "unless we are obliged & forced to do so."[154] To Victoria's dismay, Disraeli lost the 1880 general election, and Gladstone returned as prime minister.[155] When Disraeli died the following year, she was blinded by "fast falling tears",[156] and erected a memorial tablet "placed by his grateful Sovereign and Friend, Victoria R.I."[157]

    On 2 March 1882, Roderick Maclean, a disgruntled poet apparently offended by Victoria's refusal to accept one of his poems,[158] shot at the Queen as her carriage left Windsor railway station. Two schoolboys from Eton College struck him with their umbrellas, until he was hustled away by a policeman.[159] Victoria was outraged when he was found not guilty by reason of insanity,[160] but was so pleased by the many expressions of loyalty after the attack that she said it was "worth being shot at—to see how much one is loved".[161]

    On 17 March 1883, she fell down some stairs at Windsor, which left her lame until July; she never fully recovered and was plagued with rheumatism thereafter.[162] Brown died 10 days after her accident, and to the consternation of her private secretary, Sir Henry Ponsonby, Victoria began work on a eulogistic biography of Brown.[163] Ponsonby and Randall Davidson, Dean of Windsor, who had both seen early drafts, advised Victoria against publication, on the grounds that it would stoke the rumours of a love affair.[164] The manuscript was destroyed.[165] In early 1884, Victoria did publish More Leaves from a Journal of a Life in the Highlands, a sequel to her earlier book, which she dedicated to her "devoted personal attendant and faithful friend John Brown".[166] On the day after the first anniversary of Brown's death, Victoria was informed by telegram that her youngest son, Leopold, had died in Cannes. He was "the dearest of my dear sons", she lamented.[167] The following month, Victoria's youngest child, Beatrice, met and fell in love with Prince Henry of Battenberg at the wedding of Victoria's granddaughter Princess Victoria of Hesse and by Rhine to Henry's brother Prince Louis of Battenberg. Beatrice and Henry planned to marry, but Victoria opposed the match at first, wishing to keep Beatrice at home to act as her companion. After a year, she was won around to the marriage by Henry and Beatrice's promise to remain living with and attending her.[168]

    Victoria was pleased when Gladstone resigned in 1885 after his budget was defeated.[169] She thought his government was "the worst I have ever had", and blamed him for the death of General Gordon at Khartoum.[170] Gladstone was replaced by Lord Salisbury. Salisbury's government only lasted a few months, however, and Victoria was forced to recall Gladstone, whom she referred to as a "half crazy & really in many ways ridiculous old man".[171] Gladstone attempted to pass a bill granting Ireland home rule, but to Victoria's glee it was defeated.[172] In the ensuing election, Gladstone's party lost to Salisbury's and the government switched hands again.

    In 1887, the British Empire celebrated Victoria's Golden Jubilee. Victoria marked the fiftieth anniversary of her accession on 20 June with a banquet to which 50 kings and princes were invited. The following day, she participated in a procession and attended a thanksgiving service in Westminster Abbey.[173] By this time, Victoria was once again extremely popular.[174] Two days later on 23 June,[175] she engaged two Indian Muslims as waiters, one of whom was Abdul Karim. He was soon promoted to "Munshi": teaching her Hindustani, and acting as a clerk.[176] Her family and retainers were appalled, and accused Abdul Karim of spying for the Muslim Patriotic League, and biasing the Queen against the Hindus.[177] Equerry Frederick Ponsonby (the son of Sir Henry) discovered that the Munshi had lied about his parentage, and reported to Lord Elgin, Viceroy of India, "the Munshi occupies very much the same position as John Brown used to do."[178] Victoria dismissed their complaints as racial prejudice.[179] Abdul Karim remained in her service until he returned to India with a pension on her death.[180]

    Victoria's eldest daughter became Empress consort of Germany in 1888, but she was widowed within the year, and Victoria's grandchild Wilhelm became German Emperor as Wilhelm II. Under Wilhelm, Victoria and Albert's hopes of a liberal Germany were not fulfilled. He believed in autocracy. Victoria thought he had "little heart or Zartgefühl [tact] – and ... his conscience & intelligence have been completely wharped [sic]".[181] Gladstone returned to power after the 1892 general election; he was 82 years old. Victoria objected when Gladstone proposed appointing the Radical MP Henry Labouchere to the Cabinet, so Gladstone agreed not to appoint him.[182] In 1894, Gladstone retired and, without consulting the outgoing prime minister, Victoria appointed Lord Rosebery as prime minister.[183] His government was weak, and the following year Lord Salisbury replaced him. Salisbury remained prime minister for the remainder of Victoria's reign.[184]

    On 23 September 1896, Victoria surpassed her grandfather George III as the longest-reigning monarch in English, Scottish, and British history. The Queen requested that any special celebrations be delayed until 1897, to coincide with her Diamond Jubilee,[185] which was made a festival of the British Empire at the suggestion of Colonial Secretary Joseph Chamberlain.[186] The prime ministers of all the self-governing dominions were invited to London for the festivities.[187] One reason for including the prime ministers of the dominions and excluding foreign heads of state was to avoid having to invite Victoria's grandson, Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany who, it was feared, might cause trouble at the event.[188]

    The Queen's Diamond Jubilee procession on 22 June 1897 followed a route six miles long through London and included troops from all over the empire. The procession paused for an open-air service of thanksgiving held outside St Paul's Cathedral, throughout which Victoria sat in her open carriage, to avoid her having to climb the steps to enter the building. The celebration was marked by vast crowds of spectators and great outpourings of affection for the 78-year-old Queen.[189]

    Victoria visited mainland Europe regularly for holidays. In 1889, during a stay in Biarritz, she became the first reigning monarch from Britain to set foot in Spain when she crossed the border for a brief visit.[190] By April 1900, the Boer War was so unpopular in mainland Europe that her annual trip to France seemed inadvisable. Instead, the Queen went to Ireland for the first time since 1861, in part to acknowledge the contribution of Irish regiments to the South African war.[191] In July, her second son Alfred ("Affie") died; "Oh, God! My poor darling Affie gone too", she wrote in her journal. "It is a horrible year, nothing but sadness & horrors of one kind & another."[192]

    Following a custom she maintained throughout her widowhood, Victoria spent the Christmas of 1900 at Osborne House on the Isle of Wight. Rheumatism in her legs had rendered her lame, and her eyesight was clouded by cataracts.[193] Through early January, she felt "weak and unwell",[194] and by mid-January she was "drowsy ... dazed, [and] confused".[195] She died on Tuesday, 22 January 1901, at half past six in the evening, at the age of 81.[196] Her son and successor King Edward VII, and her eldest grandson, Emperor Wilhelm II of Germany, were at her deathbed.[197] Her favourite pet Pomeranian, Turi, was laid upon her deathbed as a last request.[198]

    In 1897, Victoria had written instructions for her funeral, which was to be military as befitting a soldier's daughter and the head of the army,[97] and white instead of black.[199] On 25 January, Edward VII, the Kaiser and Prince Arthur, Duke of Connaught, helped lift her body into the coffin.[200] She was dressed in a white dress and her wedding veil.[201] An array of mementos commemorating her extended family, friends and servants were laid in the coffin with her, at her request, by her doctor and dressers. One of Albert's dressing gowns was placed by her side, with a plaster cast of his hand, while a lock of John Brown's hair, along with a picture of him, was placed in her left hand concealed from the view of the family by a carefully positioned bunch of flowers.[97][202] Items of jewellery placed on Victoria included the wedding ring of John Brown's mother, given to her by Brown in 1883.[97] Her funeral was held on Saturday, 2 February, in St George's Chapel, Windsor Castle, and after two days of lying-in-state, she was interred beside Prince Albert in Frogmore Mausoleum at Windsor Great Park.[203]

    With a reign of 63 years, seven months and two days, Victoria was the longest-reigning British monarch and the longest-reigning queen regnant in world history until her great-great-granddaughter Elizabeth II surpassed her on 9 September 2015.[204] She was the last monarch of Britain from the House of Hanover. Her son and successor Edward VII belonged to her husband's House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha.

    The remark "We are not amused" is attributed to her but there is no direct evidence that she ever said it,[97][206] and she denied doing so.[207] According to one of her biographers, Giles St Aubyn, Victoria wrote an average of 2,500 words a day during her adult life.[208] From July 1832 until just before her death, she kept a detailed journal, which eventually encompassed 122 volumes.[209] After Victoria's death, her youngest daughter, Princess Beatrice, was appointed her literary executor. Beatrice transcribed and edited the diaries covering Victoria's accession onwards, and burned the originals in the process.[210] Despite this destruction, much of the diaries still exist. In addition to Beatrice's edited copy, Lord Esher transcribed the volumes from 1832 to 1861 before Beatrice destroyed them.[211] Part of Victoria's extensive correspondence has been published in volumes edited by A. C. Benson, Hector Bolitho, George Earle Buckle, Lord Esher, Roger Fulford, and Richard Hough among others.[212]

    Victoria was physically unprepossessing—she was stout, dowdy and no more than five feet tall—but she succeeded in projecting a grand image.[213] She experienced unpopularity during the first years of her widowhood, but was well liked during the 1880s and 1890s, when she embodied the empire as a benevolent matriarchal figure.[214] Only after the release of her diary and letters did the extent of her political influence become known to the wider public.[97][215] Biographies of Victoria written before much of the primary material became available, such as Lytton Strachey's Queen Victoria of 1921, are now considered out of date.[216] The biographies written by Elizabeth Longford and Cecil Woodham-Smith, in 1964 and 1972 respectively, are still widely admired.[217] They, and others, conclude that as a person Victoria was emotional, obstinate, honest, and straight-talking.[218]

    Through Victoria's reign, the gradual establishment of a modern constitutional monarchy in Britain continued. Reforms of the voting system increased the power of the House of Commons at the expense of the House of Lords and the monarch.[219] In 1867, Walter Bagehot wrote that the monarch only retained "the right to be consulted, the right to encourage, and the right to warn".[220] As Victoria's monarchy became more symbolic than political, it placed a strong emphasis on morality and family values, in contrast to the sexual, financial and personal scandals that had been associated with previous members of the House of Hanover and which had discredited the monarchy. The concept of the "family monarchy", with which the burgeoning middle classes could identify, was solidified.[221]

    Victoria's links with Europe's royal families earned her the nickname "the grandmother of Europe".[222] Victoria and Albert had 42 grandchildren, of whom 34 survived to adulthood. Their descendants include Elizabeth II, Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, Harald V of Norway, Carl XVI Gustaf of Sweden, Margrethe II of Denmark, and Felipe VI of Spain. Victoria's youngest son, Leopold, was affected by the blood-clotting disease haemophilia B and two of her five daughters, Alice and Beatrice, were carriers. Royal haemophiliacs descended from Victoria included her great-grandsons, Tsarevich Alexei of Russia, Alfonso, Prince of Asturias, and Infante Gonzalo of Spain.[223] The presence of the disease in Victoria's descendants, but not in her ancestors, led to modern speculation that her true father was not the Duke of Kent but a haemophiliac.[224] There is no documentary evidence of a haemophiliac in connection with Victoria's mother, and as male carriers always suffer the disease, even if such a man had existed he would have been seriously ill.[225] It is more likely that the mutation arose spontaneously because Victoria's father was over 50 at the time of her conception and haemophilia arises more frequently in the children of older fathers.[226] Spontaneous mutations account for about a third of cases.[227]
    Around the world, places and memorials are dedicated to her, especially in the Commonwealth nations. Places named after her include Africa's largest lake, Victoria Falls, the capitals of British Columbia (Victoria) and Saskatchewan (Regina), and two Australian states (Victoria and Queensland).

    The Victoria Cross was introduced in 1856 to reward acts of valour during the Crimean War, and it remains the highest British, Canadian, Australian, and New Zealander award for bravery. Victoria Day is a Canadian statutory holiday and a local public holiday in parts of Scotland celebrated on the last Monday before or on 24 May (Queen Victoria's birthday).

    Titles and styles

    24 May 1819 – 20 June 1837: Her Royal Highness Princess Alexandrina Victoria of Kent
    20 June 1837 – 22 January 1901: Her Majesty The Queen
    At the end of her reign, the Queen's full style and title were: "Her Majesty Victoria, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland Queen, Defender of the Faith, Empress of India."[228]

    Arms

    As Sovereign, Victoria used the royal coat of arms of the United Kingdom. Before her accession, she received no grant of arms. As she could not succeed to the throne of Hanover, her arms did not carry the Hanoverian symbols that were used by her immediate predecessors. Her arms have been borne by all of her successors on the throne. Outside Scotland, the blazon for the shield—also used on the Royal Standard—is: Quarterly: I and IV, Gules, three lions passant guardant in pale Or (for England); II, Or, a lion rampant within a double tressure flory-counter-flory Gules (for Scotland); III, Azure, a harp Or stringed Argent (for Ireland). In Scotland, the first and fourth quarters are occupied by the Scottish lion, and the second by the English lions. The crests, mottoes, and supporters also differ in and outside Scotland.[229]

    Bibliography

    Charles, Barrie (2012) Kill the Queen! The Eight Assassination Attempts on Queen Victoria, Stroud: Amberley Publishing, ISBN 978-1-4456-0457-2
    Hibbert, Christopher (2000) Queen Victoria: A Personal History, London: HarperCollins, ISBN 0-00-638843-4
    Longford, Elizabeth (1964) Victoria R.I., London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, ISBN 0-297-17001-5
    Marshall, Dorothy (1972) The Life and Times of Queen Victoria, London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, ISBN 0-297-83166-6 [1992 reprint]
    Packard, Jerrold M. (1998) Victoria's Daughters, New York: St. Martin's Press, ISBN 0-312-24496-7
    Potts, D. M.; Potts, W. T. W. (1995) Queen Victoria's Gene: Haemophilia and the Royal Family, Stroud: Alan Sutton, ISBN 0-7509-1199-9
    St Aubyn, Giles (1991) Queen Victoria: A Portrait, London: Sinclair-Stevenson, ISBN 1-85619-086-2
    Strachey, Lytton (1921) Queen Victoria, London: Chatto and Windus online edition
    Waller, Maureen (2006) Sovereign Ladies: The Six Reigning Queens of England, London: John Murray, ISBN 0-7195-6628-2
    Weintraub, Stanley (1997) Albert: Uncrowned King, London: John Murray, ISBN 0-7195-5756-9
    Woodham-Smith, Cecil (1972) Queen Victoria: Her Life and Times 1819–1861, London: Hamish Hamilton, ISBN 0-241-02200-2
    Published primary sources
    Benson, A.C.; Esher, Viscount (editors, 1907) The Letters of Queen Victoria: A Selection of Her Majesty's Correspondence Between the Years 1837 and 1861, London: John Murray
    Bolitho, Hector (editor, 1938) Letters of Queen Victoria from the Archives of the House of Brandenburg-Prussia, London: Thornton Butterworth
    Buckle, George Earle (editor, 1926) The Letters of Queen Victoria, 2nd Series 1862–1885, London: John Murray
    Buckle, George Earle (editor, 1930) The Letters of Queen Victoria, 3rd Series 1886–1901, London: John Murray
    Connell, Brian (1962) Regina v. Palmerston: The Correspondence between Queen Victoria and her Foreign and Prime Minister, 1837–1865, London: Evans Brothers
    Duff, David (editor, 1968) Victoria in the Highlands: The Personal Journal of Her Majesty Queen Victoria, London: Muller
    Dyson, Hope; Tennyson, Charles (editors, 1969) Dear and Honoured Lady: The Correspondence between Queen Victoria and Alfred Tennyson, London: Macmillan
    Esher, Viscount (editor, 1912) The Girlhood of Queen Victoria: A Selection from Her Majesty's Diaries, 1832–40, London: John Murray
    Fulford, Roger (editor, 1964) Dearest Child: Letters Between Queen Victoria and the Princess Royal, 1858–61, London: Evans Brothers
    Fulford, Roger (editor, 1968) Dearest Mama: Letters Between Queen Victoria and the Crown Princess of Prussia, 1861–64, London: Evans Brothers
    Fulford, Roger (editor, 1971) Beloved Mama: Private Correspondence of Queen Victoria and the German Crown Princess, 1878–85, London: Evans Brothers
    Fulford, Roger (editor, 1971) Your Dear Letter: Private Correspondence of Queen Victoria and the Crown Princess of Prussia, 1863–71, London: Evans Brothers
    Fulford, Roger (editor, 1976) Darling Child: Private Correspondence of Queen Victoria and the German Crown Princess of Prussia, 1871–78, London: Evans Brothers
    Hibbert, Christopher (editor, 1984) Queen Victoria in Her Letters and Journals, London: John Murray, ISBN 0-7195-4107-7
    Hough, Richard (editor, 1975) Advice to a Grand-daughter: Letters from Queen Victoria to Princess Victoria of Hesse, London: Heinemann, ISBN 0-434-34861-9
    Jagow, Kurt (editor, 1938) Letters of the Prince Consort 1831–61, London: John Murray
    Mortimer, Raymond (editor, 1961) Queen Victoria: Leaves from a Journal, New York: Farrar, Straus & Cudahy
    Ponsonby, Sir Frederick (editor, 1930) Letters of the Empress Frederick, London: Macmillan
    Ramm, Agatha (editor, 1990) Beloved and Darling Child: Last Letters between Queen Victoria and Her Eldest Daughter, 1886–1901, Stroud: Sutton Publishing, ISBN 978-0-86299-880-6
    Victoria, Queen (1868) Leaves from the Journal of Our Life in the Highlands from 1848 to 1861, London: Smith, Elder
    Victoria, Queen (1884) More Leaves from the Journal of Our Life in the Highlands from 1862 to 1882, London: Smith, Elder

    Further reading

    Arnstein, Walter L. (2003) Queen Victoria, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, ISBN 978-0-333-63806-4
    Gardiner, Juliet (1997) Queen Victoria, London: Collins and Brown, ISBN 978-1-85585-469-7
    Lyden, Anne M. (2014) A Royal Passion: Queen Victoria and Photography, Los Angeles: Getty Publications, ISBN 978-1-60606-155-8
    Weintraub, Stanley (1987) Victoria: Biography of a Queen, London: HarperCollins, ISBN 978-0-04-923084-2
    Wilson, A. N. (2014) Victoria: A Life, London: Atlantic Books, ISBN 978-1-84887-956-0



















    Last edited by orthodoxymoron on Thu Apr 27, 2017 10:44 pm; edited 4 times in total
    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7368
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The United States of the Solar System, A.D. 2133 (Book Three)

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Thu Apr 27, 2017 3:28 pm






    RedEzra wrote:GOD said from the beginning that every soul who sins shall die and since GOD is not a liar so every soul who sins shall die. So basically a lot of us are f*cked ! We will die and end up in hell with the fallen angels and demons. And there is no ascension escaping this ethereal nightmare except... What ?! Is it possible for a sinnerman not to go to hell ?? YES ! Stop sinning ! But but who will make reparations for our crimes against each other ? GOD said from the beginning that only the spilling of blood can atone for sins so who's blood can cover a whole world of crimes ? That would be GOD's blood ! So will GOD pay the price for our sins and spill His blood for us ? He already did friend he already did.

    RedEzra wrote:Also science must conform to the Party program... a truth therefore which does not fit into the program or ideological agenda will be silenced censored or made to look like a lie. The Party is not about truth but control ! Control over you me and everybody else who is not an inner member or on top of the hierarchy. The Party is all about staying in power! Who would you be ? Master or slave ? So you see it is only self preservation in the minds of the masters or Party tops !
    orthodoxymoron wrote:I continue to be interested in what Job to Malachi REALLY Teaches. Does it support Genesis to Esther?? Does it support Matthew to Revelation?? Is the Bible the Solution and/or the Problem?? Are there other legitimate and preferable options?? Are we locked-in to arguing and fighting about Biblical-Theology?? Can the Bible be made to say whatever we want it to say?? Theology often seems to be a Nightmare. Why??
    Carol wrote: in response to Orthodoxymoron

    Hoping you are in good health and happiness.

    Thank-you Evisnam. What Do You Think About This Post?? I Can't Seem to Get Answers From Anyone. I've tried to be exact regarding quoting RA. Here are some examples:

    1. "You're Lucky to be Alive!!"
    2. "I'm Tired of Keeping You Alive!!"
    3. "Do You Think You Might be the One Hanging On the Cross in a Crucifix??"
    4. "Serqet Has a Lot to Do With Explaining Our Relationship."
    5. "I AM RA!!"
    6. "You Can't Connect Anything Back to Me."
    7. "I Can't Talk About the NSA."
    8. "You Should Make a Freedom of Information Act Request."
    9. "In Twenty Years You'll be Working for Us."
    10. "It's Going to be Dark Where You're Going".
    11. "I Built Las Vegas with Bugsy."
    12. "I'm Rich!!"
    13. "I Like the Taste of Blood!!"
    14. "I've Always Remained One Step Ahead of Humanity."
    15. RA called me "Michael" in Wal*Mart!!
    16. RA called me a "Commoner" when I made a benign comment about Tall Long-Nosed Greys!!
    17. RA asked me "Are You Ready to Run Things??"
    18. RA said "I Like Genesis."
    19. RA said "9/11 Was Done to Prevent Something Much Worse From Happening."
    20. RA said "I'm Sorry We Couldn't Work Together. Too Much Water Has Gone Under the Bridge." This was said three days prior to Fukushima.
    21. RA said "I Could Snap My Fingers, and You'd be Dead!!"
    22. RA said "You'll Never Figure This Out."
    23. RA repeatedly said "You Know I Can't Tell You That!!"
    24. RA said "You Did It With YouTube!!"

    I could continue, but this provides several clues regarding the nature of my "contact" with a very-different sort of individual. I've tried to be open, yet discrete, in discussing what happened to me. RA looked very similar to the individual who is supposed to be Ben Affleck ("Bartleby") in a "Dogma" movie poster!! That's NOT Ben in the poster!! Before this madness began, I was walking my dog, when Bartleby and Loki pulled-up beside me in their car, and looked at me for about 20 seconds, before driving away!! Honest!! An Ivy-League Divinity-School Graduate told me I was dealing with a demon!! I repeatedly discussed Sirius-Issues with RA at Starbucks!! I usually bought the coffee, and I always drove!! What Would Alan Rickman Say??

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Hello Orthodoximoron, regarding your question and information can I ask you some questions?

    Thank-you, Evisnam, for your response. Questions are welcome.

    When you try to connect with RA are you clean of spirit ? i.e. under the influence of any drugs which can range from caffeine to other readily available substances. I say this purely because there is a range of drugs that can " amplify " an experience or connection but very few are amplifiers of " pure " connections. The use of some drugs can amplify openings to lower astral beings and from what i can see here you may have some "toying " with you by the type of responses you are getting. Generally speaking you will only be able to connect with good intended beings if you are clean of spirit i.e.. clean from drugs and alcohol ( unless you know how to use them ).

    I didn't "conjure-up" an entity. I didn't "connect" with the one who said "I Am Ra". They came to me (uninvited) possibly because of a thread I created on the old closed Project Avalon site (in 2009 and 2010) titled "Amen Ra". http://projectavalon.net/forum/showthread.php?t=18223&highlight=orthodoxymoron+threads That might've been the "Invitation". That was probably a Mistake. I also half-seriously wrote about having a "Debate-Date" with Lucifer!! That was probably my Big-Mistake!! I've never had a drink in my life. I've never smoked a cigarette or a joint in my life. I've never taken any illegal drugs in my life. I drink coffee (probably too much). I've spoken with Terrance McKenna (a notorious drug-taking intellectual-philosopher) but I've never been a "follower". I've spoken with Dr. Timothy Leary (about Jesus) but I've never taken LSD!!

    Clear of any fears and I mean ANY FEARS, if you harbor fear or judgement you will not be able to connect with beings of good intention. The photo that you use to describe the appearance of the being is usually what lower astral beings like to depict themselves as. Most times they appear as a good looking mediterranean man well dressed in a suit, very tall, deep voice, etc.. This is part or a sect of 6th dimensional beings which are reportedly part of the hidden hand or LUCIFER sect. When I say 6th dimension it’s not really a 6th dimension but a level of density that they gravitate to, I use the words 6th Dimension merely to try to assimilate what we are used to. When I went into my second fire it took me at least 3 months of cleansing, abstinence and celibacy to even reach a proper connection.

    I think I'm probably overly-concerned about Nuclear-War, Chemical and Biological Weapons, Financial-Meltdowns, Civil-War, Demonic-Manifestations, St. Peter Telling Me to "Go to Hell", etc.

    Question, when the entity spoke to you did it always start with the words " I Am Ra " if not then you may be speaking with, what I call, a " naughty angel " and there are plenty of those out there.

    The very-physical individual of interest only once said "I Am Ra". They weren't an ethereal-entity.

    Ask yourself the question, do the responses you get amplify fear in you ? then it is most probably a " naughty angel."

    I was more annoyed than fearful. I pretty-much took the whole-thing in stride. It was often somewhat humorous!!

    May I reiterate that the better beings of good intention hardly if ever speak audibly, they hardly even use words because they are offensive to them. Words in their realms are hugely powerful and are rarely if ever used. This is because of the clean state of their density, this is the energy matrix of which they reside. Because of its makeup only thought waves are used to communicate. Most beings in these realms cannot stand the sound of voices because they carry so much power in them. SO thought, or rather sans thought, is their preferred method of communication. Mind you, pictograms are widely used because they do not carry audible waves but rather they are a pure form of communication capable of relaying so much more than words. They also prefer you to have a metaphoric leeway with your communications, this allows the individual to have freedom within its own matrix to create its own reality by deciphering the message with its own influence. Words are way too definitive like that, hence why thy are not used.

    I seemed to have learned a lot by what was unsaid. I sensed that "Ra" (or whoever they really were) was a mixture of Good and Evil. They could've been an Angel. They could've been a Demon. They could've been an Alphabet-Agent. They could've been a Tall Long-Nosed Grey Alien. Damned if I knew or know. I've NEVER done anything Creepy. I've NEVER joined a strange group or organization. I've speculated that I might be a Target because of who I might be on a "Soul-Basis". But I'm pretty-much done trying to figure-out "This Present Madness". I'll leave that up to those with Degrees and Badges. It's easier that way.

    i look forward to your response.

    Thank-you for your time and experience, Evisnam.
    Notice that I both support and undermine Ellen White and "her" writings. Here is something for you to read regarding Ellen White (which is not complementary). http://www.academia.edu/10196605/Ellen_G._White_And_Her_Ghost_Writer_Book_Shop_Basic_Version  I try to be honest and fair. I'm presently thinking in terms of studying Ellen White and Queen Victoria (side by side)!! Ellen White's writings are Royal-Model and Somewhat-English!! Ellen White had a third-grade education (because of being hit in the head with a rock at the age of nine)!! How did she "author" such eloquent books?? I've narrowed my focus to the first three Conflict of the Ages Series books, namely Patriarchs and Prophets, Prophets and Kings, and Desire of Ages. This pretty-much covers the Whole-Bible, while admittedly performing a lot of "adding and subtracting"!! These writings seem to have been written by a queen (or at least written in a palace)!! I've tried to incorporate these select EGW books into a Science-Fictional context!! Try combining the Babylon 5 Series with the Conflict of the Ages Series, and the Life and Writings of Queen Victoria!! What Would M.L. Andreasen Say?? I'm not capable of properly researching what I just suggested!! It sounds as though I might have some sort of a rare neurological-problem. I've suspected such a thing throughout my adult-life (off and on), and I actually went to a neurologist in my early-twenties, with no luck. But the recent heart-surgery (with major doses of anesthesia) might've revealed some organic-aspects of my previously "all in his head" difficulties, but I remain highly pessimistic that things will change for the better. I expect just the opposite. The organic-misery has probably caused me to think about things nobody else does, which probably resulted in mental and spiritual complications. That's just my own theory.

    What if the Solar System were One Big Business with One Big CEO, with No Church and No State?? Everyone Would Be An Employee!! I'm oversimplifying the concept, but I think there is something significant to extensively considering Business, Church, and State relative to the American-Dream!! This thing probably isn't just about what we want, or what might be a nice way to live. Ancient Star Wars, and Current Factional Conflicts might have a lot to do with why things are as they are!! Where one is in life probably has a lot to do with how we think things should be. People want what they want, regardless of whether it makes sense or not. I'm reading The Final Jihad by Martin Keating, and I can't put it down!! It's a well-written "HORRIBLE" Book!! I've had it for several-years, but I couldn't get into it, until I learned that one must read for hours at a time for it to make sense!! I continue to suspect that the Real PTB want some sort of a Holy-War. I SO Hope I'm Wrong. I tend to think that most everyone has been "set-up" for "something-bad". When I asked the Ancient Egyptian Deity if he were setting me up for something bad, he retorted "Are You Kidding!! I Could Snap My Fingers, and You'd Be DEAD!!" I could feel the love. On another occasion, the AED said "You're Lucky to Be Alive!!" Another time, the AED said "I'm Tired of Keeping You Alive!!" They said it in an angry and agitated manner. Once, I made a rather-benign comment concerning "Tall Long-Nosed Greys" and RA called me a "Commoner"!! When Raven chewed me out on this website, the next-day RA told me that wouldn't happen again!! What if RA and RAVEN were the same-soul?? Imagine Elizabeth Taylor as Cleopatra (1963) teaching what I'm posting!! Imagine her saying the exact words of this thread (or an Ellen White book) in the context of an Egyptian Palace!! Do We Have a Match?? In that movie, Cleopatra exclaims "I AM ISIS!!" What if she really was?? How might Gabriel and Michael relate to All of the Above?? Whose Throne Does the Queen Sit Upon?? What If the Original Throne-Owner is Alive and Well, and Living On Planet Earth?? What If They Want It Back?? What a Revolting Development THAT Might Be!! Would THAT Constitute an "Isis-Crisis"??!! The Horror!!

    I made a speculative post regarding this matter, a few days prior to Fukushima, and the AED said "You Found Out Something About Yourself" (but they weren't specific). During this same conversation, they said they were sorry we couldn't work together -- because too much water had gone under the bridge. What does all of this mean?? That post mostly examined the hypothetical relationship between RA, the Queen, and the Pope. Talk about a Can of Worms!! OMG!! That was three-days prior to Fukushima!! Was there a connection?? A couple of months prior to this, the AED spoke ominously of something being prepared and ready (but they didn't elaborate). What were they referring to?? What does all of this mean?? What are the implications and ramifications?? What Would Monseigneur Bowe Say?? I never met him, but I heard about him from someone who worked with him at St. Mary's Cathedral in San Francisco!! If I told you any more, you'd know too much!!

    I got to thinking about the Queen of England, the Pope of Rome, and the God of This World. They're a pretty exclusive trio - with extreme power - aren't they? They don't get elected by the general public, do they? Should they? I really don't know. I'm really conflicted about this sort of thing. How does a civilization make sure that they have the very best individuals in those roles? I've been trying to combine the best aspects of theocracy and democracy - and the best of the royal and servant models of leadership and authority. The whole damn thing is a slippery-slope. I've had a lot to say regarding a hypothetical Queen of Heaven ruling Earth as the Goddess of This World. I've imagined having conversations and debates with such a being - and I have really mixed-feelings about the whole thing. Extreme intelligence, economy of words, elegance, straight-forwardness, and beauty - might all be on the plus side. But harshness, cruelty, causing atrocities, committing mass-murder, corruption, deception, treachery, moral-ambiguity, and demonic-possession - might be on the negative side. But I don't know the true state of affairs. They might be human. They might be reptilian. They might be hybrid. They might be male. They might be female. They might be hermaphrodite. They might have a wardrobe of bodies. They might be able to shapeshift into any form and anyone they choose. Could a being be a God or Goddess of This World for any length of time - without becoming corrupt and insane?

    Are the Pope of Rome and the Queen of England - really the modern-day equivalents of the King and Queen of Egypt - serving the Hidden God Amen Ra? Are all three ruling in place of Christ? I have speculated quite a bit about this in the past. I am concerned about this, because these three seem to have control over pretty much the whole world. Is this power legitimate or illegitimate? Is this power being used benevolently and wisely? Are they doing that which is in everyone's best interest? Could the throne of this world have been stolen in antiquity? Could this hypothetical theft be ongoing? Did someone steal fire from the gods? I really and truly don't know - but I am becoming increasingly suspicious. What effect would a Michael/Horus/Jesus (or some other name-combination) administered Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom United States of the Solar System have on these three? What would Michael/Horus/Jesus say? What Would Other Individuals of Interest Say?? Somebody please talk to me about this. Please think long and hard about these three jobs. They don't give out job-applications - do they? This is VERY tricky territory - to say the least. I deeply appreciate the Divine Feminine as an integral part of the Divinity Within Humanity - but I am deeply suspicious of a hypothetical Reptilian/Human Hybrid, Hermaphrodite Queen of Heaven / God of This World - being at the core of monotheism - ruling a Controlled Patriarchy - and presiding over a Subjugation of Women - to control and enslave the human race - complete with the 'Chastenings of the Lord' in the form of wars, persecutions, tortures, the Crusades, the Inquisition, terrorist events, etc, etc. Who REALLY controls the Monarchy and the Papacy?
     

    Once again, I am being absolutely honest BUT I have no idea how to interpret and/or apply All of the Above. I merely include this sort of thing in my ongoing (reformative rather than normative) Religious and Political Science-Fiction. It's easier that way. One More Thing. Consider the contrast between Good-Queen, Mean-Queen, and Mixture of Good and Mean Queen!! This basic concept might apply to numerous contexts and scenarios. What if these possibilities are descriptive of Gabriel, Michael, and Lucifer (but not necessarily in that order)?? What if the Hybrid-Queen met with the Mean-Queen in one throne-room -- then met with the Good-Queen in another throne-room -- and then sat down upon her own-throne in yet another throne-room -- utilizing the best of both perspectives??!! What if a Single Multiple-Personality Queen Had Three Throne-Rooms, and Played the Parts of All Three Queens??!! We Three Queens??!! We Are All One??!! Interesting, eh??



    http://whiteestate.org/books/pk/pk49.html Under the favor shown them by Cyrus, nearly fifty thousand of the children of the captivity had taken advantage of the decree permitting their return. These, however, in comparison with the hundreds of thousands scattered throughout the provinces of Medo-Persia, were but a mere remnant. The great majority of the Israelites had chosen to remain in the land of their exile rather than undergo the hardships of the return journey and the re-establishment of their desolated cities and homes.

    A score or more of years passed by, when a second decree, quite as favorable as the first, was issued by Darius Hystaspes, the monarch then ruling. Thus did God in mercy provide another opportunity for the Jews in the Medo-Persian realm to return to the land of their fathers. The Lord foresaw the troublous times that were to follow during the reign of Xerxes,--the Ahasuerus of the book of Esther,--and He not only wrought a change of feeling in the hearts of men in authority, but also inspired Zechariah to plead with the exiles to return.

    "Ho, ho, come forth, and flee from the land of the north," was the message given the scattered tribes of Israel who had become settled in many lands far from their former home. "I have spread you abroad as the four winds of the heaven, saith the Lord. Deliver thyself, O Zion, that dwellest with the daughter of Babylon. For thus saith the Lord of hosts; After the glory hath He sent me unto the nations which spoiled you: for he that toucheth you toucheth the apple of His eye. For, behold, I will shake mine hand upon them, and they shall be a spoil to their servants: and ye shall know that the Lord of hosts hath sent me." Zechariah 2:6-9.

    It was still the Lord's purpose, as it have been from the beginning, that His people should be a praise in the earth, to the glory of His name. During the long years of their exile He had given them many opportunities to return to their allegiance to Him. Some had chosen to listen and to learn; some had found salvation in the midst of affliction. Many of these were to be numbered among the remnant that should return. They were likened by Inspiration to "the highest branch of the high cedar," which was to be planted "upon an high mountain and eminent: in the mountain of the height of Israel." Ezekiel 17:22, 23.

    It was those "whose spirit God had raised" (Ezra 1:5) who had returned under the decree of Cyrus. But God ceased not to plead with those who voluntarily remained in the land of their exile, and through manifold agencies He made it possible for them also to return. The large number, however, of those who failed to respond to the decree of Cyrus, remained unimpressible to later influences; and even when Zechariah warned them to flee from Babylon without further delay, they did not heed the invitation.

    Meanwhile conditions in the Medo-Persian realm were rapidly changing. Darius Hystaspes, under whose reign the Jews had been shown marked favor, was succeeded by Xerxes the Great. It was during his reign that those of the Jews who had failed of heeding the message to flee were called upon to face a terrible crisis. Having refused to take advantage of the way of escape God had provided, now they were brought face to face with death.

    Through Haman the Agagite, an unscrupulous man high in authority in Medo-Persia, Satan worked at this time to counterwork the purposes of God. Haman cherished bitter malice against Mordecai, a Jew. Mordecai had done Haman no harm, but had simply refused to show him worshipful reverence. Scorning to "lay hands on Mordecai alone," Haman plotted "to destroy all the Jews that were throughout the whole kingdom of Ahasuerus, even the people of Mordecai." Esther 3:6.

    Misled by the false statements of Haman, Xerxes was induced to issue a decree providing for the massacre of all the Jews "scattered abroad and dispersed among the people in all the provinces" of the Medo-Persian kingdom. Verse 8. A certain day was appointed on which the Jews were to be destroyed and their property confiscated. Little did the king realize the far-reaching results that would have accompanied the complete carrying out of this decree. Satan himself, the hidden instigator of the scheme, was trying to rid the earth of those who preserved the knowledge of the true God.

    "In every province, whithersoever the king's commandment and his decree came, there was great mourning among the Jews, and fasting, and weeping, and wailing; and many lay in sackcloth and ashes." Esther 4:3. The decree of the Medes and Persians could not be revoked; apparently there was no hope; all the Israelites were doomed to destruction.

    But the plots of the enemy were defeated by a Power that reigns among the children of men. In the providence of God, Esther, a Jewess who feared the Most High, had been made queen of the Medo-Persian kingdom. Mordecai was a near relative of hers. In their extremity they decided to appeal to Xerxes in behalf of their people. Esther was to venture into his presence as an intercessor. "Who knoweth," said Mordecai, "whether thou art come to the kingdom for such a time as this?" Verse 14.

    The crisis that Esther faced demanded quick, earnest action; but both she and Mordecai realized that unless God should work mightily in their behalf, their own efforts would be unavailing. So Esther took time for communion with God, the source of her strength. "Go," she directed Mordecai, "gather together all the Jews that are present in Shushan, and fast ye for me, and neither eat nor drink three days, night or day: I also and my maidens will fast likewise; and so will I go in unto the king, which is not according to the law: and if I perish, I perish." Verse 16.

    The events that followed in rapid succession,--the appearance of Esther before the king, the marked favor shown her, the banquets of the king and queen with Haman as the only guest, the troubled sleep of the king, the public honor shown Mordecai, and the humiliation and fall of Haman upon the discovery of his wicked plot,--all these are parts of a familiar story. God wrought marvelously for His penitent people; and a counter decree issued by the king, allowing them to fight for their lives, was rapidly communicated to every part of the realm by mounted couriers, who were "hastened and pressed on by the king's commandment." "And in every province, and in every city, whithersoever the king's commandment and his decree came, the Jews had joy and gladness, a feast and a good day. And many of the people of the land became Jews; for the fear of the Jews fell upon them." Esther 8:14, 17.

    On the day appointed for their destruction, "the Jews gathered themselves together in their cities throughout all the provinces of the king Ahasuerus, to lay hand on such as sought their hurt: and no man could withstand them; for the fear of them fell upon all people." Angels that excel in strength had been commissioned by God to protect His people while they "stood for their lives." Esther 9:2, 16.

    Mordecai was given the position of honor formerly occupied by Haman. He "was next unto King Ahasuerus, and great among the Jews, and accepted of the multitude of his brethren" (Esther 10:3); and he sought to promote the welfare of Israel. Thus did God bring His chosen people once more into favor at the Medo-Persian court, making possible the carrying out of His purpose to restore them to their own land. But it was not until several years later, in the seventh year of Artaxerxes I, the successor of Xerxes the Great, that any considerable number returned to Jerusalem, under Ezra.

    The trying experiences that came to God's people in the days of Esther were not peculiar to that age alone. The revelator, looking down the ages to the close of time, has declared, "The dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ." Revelation 12:17. Some who today are living on the earth will see these words fulfilled. The same spirit that in ages past led men to persecute the true church, will in the future lead to the pursuance of a similar course toward those who maintain their loyalty to God. Even now preparations are being made for this last great conflict.

    The decree that will finally go forth against the remnant people of God will be very similar to that issued by Ahasuerus against the Jews. Today the enemies of the true church see in the little company keeping the Sabbath commandment, a Mordecai at the gate. The reverence of God's people for His law is a constant rebuke to those who have cast off the fear of the Lord and are trampling on His Sabbath.

    Satan will arouse indignation against the minority who refuse to accept popular customs and traditions. Men of position and reputation will join with the lawless and the vile to take counsel against the people of God. Wealth, genius, education, will combine to cover them with contempt.

    Persecuting rulers, ministers, and church members will conspire against them. With voice and pen, by boasts, threats, and ridicule, they will seek to overthrow their faith. By false representations and angry appeals, men will stir up the passions of the people. Not having a "Thus saith the Scriptures" to bring against the advocates of the Bible Sabbath, they will resort to oppressive enactments to supply the lack. To secure popularity and patronage, legislators will yield to the demand for Sunday laws. But those who fear God, cannot accept an institution that violates a precept of the Decalogue. On this battlefield will be fought the last great conflict in the controversy between truth and error. And we are not left in doubt as to the issue. Today, as in the days of Esther and Mordecai, the Lord will vindicate His truth and His people.



    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7368
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The United States of the Solar System, A.D. 2133 (Book Three)

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Sun Apr 30, 2017 9:49 pm

    Carol wrote:
    Sunday   April 30, 2017
    Geopolitical Financial Warfare Escalates
    by Tom Heneghan, International Intelligence Expert

    The order to hack came from former CIA Director rogue neo-Nazi John Brennan.

    The Wanta-Reagan-Mitterrand Protocol funds represent 27.5 trillion dollars of STOLEN U.S. Treasury funds illegally embezzled by the Bush-Clinton-Obama-CIA crooked banking cartel.

    P.S. At this hour the CIA Wells Fargo, Bank of America and HSBC Asian based secret trading accounts have been frozen by U.S. Treasury officials with a warrant issued for daddy Bush’s arrest (George Herbert Walker Bush).

    We can also divulge that Wikileaks will soon release spread sheets that will expose the CIA corporate-controlled media filth as enabling a 30-year scripted Bush-Clinton ponzi scheme designed to wreck the U.S. Republic, destroy the U.S. Constitution and LOOT the U.S. Treasury.

    FOX News left-right box ponzi scheme will be totally exposed involving CIA asset aka “Mocking Bird” Bill O’Reilly, Roger Ailes, their attorney Israeli Mossad agent and lesbian loser Hillary “CIA” Clinton stooge Susan Estrich, arch-feminist and John Kerry Cohen CIA stooge Mary Anne Marsh, the late Tony Snow and Bush Crime Family cousin former Fox News employee John Prescott Ellis.
    http://www.tomheneghanbriefings.com/
    orthodoxymoron wrote:If even 10% of this stuff were true, it would still be Earth-Shattering!! I continue to include some of this material in my Religious and Political Science-Fiction, and I treat it as Science-Fiction!! I have no way of verifying 90% of what I speculate-about and post!! I guess I take it seriously, without taking it seriously!!
    Consider comparing and contrasting the following three KJV Lists:

    1. Genesis.
    2. Exodus.
    3. Leviticus.
    4. Numbers.
    5. Deuteronomy.
    6. Joshua.

    1. Job.
    2. Psalms.
    3. Proverbs.
    4. Ecclesiastes.
    5. Song of Songs.
    6. Isaiah.

    1. Matthew.
    2. Mark.
    3. Luke.
    4. John.
    5. Acts.
    6. Romans.

    The first group doesn't seem very "Christ-Like" but I don't think we know the real circumstances associated with these six books. The second and third groups are very "Christ-Like" but in very different ways. Is one "Christ" and the other "In Place of Christ"?? Again -- I don't think we know the real circumstances associated with these two-groups of six-books. Then -- when "Jesus" gets marketed like "Soap" -- things sort of get out of control. I think the PTB have a Dragon by the Tail -- and are afraid to let go. "Just let it go..." Just kidding -- or am  I?? BTW -- I'd still like to know if "Q" consists of 37 books??!!




    Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.  4 Blessed are they that mourn : for they shall be comforted .  5 Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.  6 Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled .  7 Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy .  8 Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.  9 Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.  10 Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.  11 Blessed are ye , when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil  against you falsely , for my sake .  12 Rejoice , and be exceeding glad : for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.  13 Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour , wherewith shall it be salted ? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men.  14 Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot  be hid .  15 Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house.  16 Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.  17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy , but to fulfil .  18 For verily I say unto you, Till  heaven and earth pass , one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till  all be fulfilled .  19 Whosoever  therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.  20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed  the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.  21 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill ; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:  22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say , Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.  23 Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee;  24 Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way ; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift.  25 Agree  with thine adversary quickly, whiles thou art in the way with him; lest at any time the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison.  26 Verily I say unto thee, Thou shalt by no means come out thence, till thou hast paid the uttermost farthing.  27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery :  28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.  29 And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out , and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish , and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.  30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off , and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish , and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.  31 It hath been said  , Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement:  32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery : and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery .  33 Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself , but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths:  34 But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne:  35 Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool  : neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King.  36 Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black.  37 But let your communication be , Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.  38 Ye have heard that it hath been said , An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:  39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.  40 And if any man will sue thee at the law , and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke also.  41 And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain.  42 Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away .  43 Ye have heard that it hath been said , Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.  44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;  45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.  46 For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye ? do not even the publicans the same?  47 And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so?  48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

    Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen  of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven.  2 Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.  3 But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth :  4 That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly .  5 And when thou prayest , thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you , They have their reward.  6 But thou, when thou prayest , enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly .  7 But when ye pray , use not vain repetitions , as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.  8 Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him.  9 After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.  10 Thy kingdom come . Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.  11 Give us this day our daily bread.  12 And forgive us our debts, as  we forgive our debtors.  13 And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.  14 For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you:  15 But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.  16 Moreover when ye fast , be not, as the hypocrites, of a sad countenance: for they disfigure their faces, that they may appear unto men to fast . Verily I say unto you , They have their reward.  17 But thou, when thou fastest , anoint thine head, and wash thy face;  18 That thou appear not unto men to fast , but unto thy Father which is in secret: and thy Father, which seeth in secret, shall reward thee openly .  19 Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt , and where thieves break through and steal :  20 But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt , and where thieves do not break through nor steal :  21 For where your treasure is , there will your heart be also.  22 The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light.  23 But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness!  24 No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot  serve God and mammon.  25 Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat , or what ye shall drink ; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on . Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment?  26 Behold  the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap , nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they?  27 Which of you by taking thought can add one cubit unto his stature?  28 And why take ye thought for raiment? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow ; they toil not, neither do they spin :  29 And yet I say unto you, That even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these.  30 Wherefore, if God so clothe the grass of the field, which to day is , and to morrow is cast into the oven, shall he not much more clothe you, O ye of little faith?  31 Therefore take no thought , saying , What shall we eat ? or, What shall we drink ? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed ?  32 (For after all these things do the Gentiles seek :) for your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things.  33 But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.  34 Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.

    Judge not, that ye be not judged .  2 For with what judgment ye judge , ye shall be judged : and with what measure ye mete , it shall be measured to you again .  3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?  4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold , a beam is in thine own eye?  5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.  6 Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.  7 Ask , and it shall be given you; seek , and ye shall find ; knock , and it shall be opened unto you:  8 For every one that asketh receiveth ; and he that seeketh findeth ; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened .  9 Or what man is there of you, whom if his son ask bread, will he give  him a stone?  10 Or if he ask a fish, will he give  him a serpent?  11 If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him?  12 Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.  13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat  :  14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.  15 Beware  of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.  16 Ye shall know them by their fruits . Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?  17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.  18 A good tree cannot  bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.  19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down , and cast into the fire.  20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.  21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.  22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?  23 And then will I profess unto them , I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.  24 Therefore whosoever  heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:  25 And the rain descended , and the floods came , and the winds blew , and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.  26 And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand:  27 And the rain descended , and the floods came , and the winds blew , and beat upon that house; and it fell : and great was the fall of it

    The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat:  3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe , that observe and do ; but do not ye after their works: for they say , and do not.  4 For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.  5 But all their works they do for to be seen of men  : they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments,  6 And love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues,  7 And greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi.  8 But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren.  9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.  10 Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ.  11 But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant.  12 And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased ; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted .  13 But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in .  14 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayer : therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation.  15 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made , ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.  16 Woe unto you, ye blind guides, which say , Whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the temple, he is a debtor !  17 Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gold, or the temple that sanctifieth the gold?  18 And, Whosoever shall swear by the altar, it is nothing; but whosoever  sweareth by the gift that is upon it, he is guilty .  19 Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gift, or the altar that sanctifieth the gift?  20 Whoso therefore shall swear by the altar, sweareth by it, and by all things thereon .  21 And whoso shall swear by the temple, sweareth by it, and by him that dwelleth therein.  22 And he that shall swear by heaven, sweareth by the throne of God, and by him that sitteth thereon .  23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment , mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done , and not to leave the other undone .  24 Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.  25 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess.  26 Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also.  27 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness.  28 Even so ye also  outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.  29 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous,  30 And say , If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.  31 Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets.  32 Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers.  33 Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?  34 Wherefore , behold , I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify ; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:  35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.  36 Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.  37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy  children together , even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!  38 Behold , your house is left unto you desolate.  39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth , till ye shall say , Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.

    See ye the temple? Verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down. Take heed that no man deceive you.  5 For many shall come in my name, saying , I am Christ; and shall deceive many.  6 And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled : for all these things must come to pass , but the end is not yet.  7 For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places.  8 All  these are the beginning of sorrows.  9 Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake.  10 And then shall many be offended , and shall betray one another, and shall hate one another.  11 And many false prophets shall rise , and shall deceive many.  12 And because iniquity shall abound , the love of many shall wax cold .  13 But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved .  14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come .  15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth , let him understand :)  16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:  17 Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house:  18 Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes.  19 And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days!  20 But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:  21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be .  22 And except those days should be shortened , there should no flesh be saved : but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened .  23 Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo , here is Christ, or there; believe it not.  24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.  25 Behold , I have told you before .  26 Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold , he is in the desert; go not forth : behold , he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.  27 For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be .  28 For wheresoever the carcase is , there will the eagles be gathered together .  29 Immediately  after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened , and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken :  30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn , and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.  31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other .  32 Now learn a parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh:  33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.  34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass , till  all these things be fulfilled .  35 Heaven and earth shall pass away , but my words shall not pass away .  36 But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.  37 But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be .  38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking , marrying and giving in marriage , until the day that Noe entered into the ark,  39 And knew not until the flood came , and took them all away ; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be .  40 Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken , and the other left .  41 Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken , and the other left .  42 Watch therefore: for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come .  43 But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come , he would have watched , and would not have suffered his house to be broken up .  44 Therefore  be ye also ready: for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh .  45 Who then is a faithful and wise servant, whom his lord hath made ruler over his household, to give them meat in due season?  46 Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing .  47 Verily I say unto you, That he shall make him ruler over all his goods .  48 But and if that evil servant shall say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming ;  49 And shall begin to smite his fellowservants, and to eat and drink with the drunken ;  50 The lord of that servant shall come in a day when he looketh not for him, and in an hour that he is not aware of ,  51 And shall cut him asunder , and appoint him his portion with the hypocrites: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

    Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins, which took their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom.  2 And five of them were wise, and five were foolish.  3 They that were foolish took their  lamps, and took no oil with them:  4 But the wise took oil in their vessels with their lamps.  5 While the bridegroom tarried , they all slumbered and slept .  6 And at midnight there was a cry made , Behold , the bridegroom cometh ; go ye out to meet him.  7 Then all those virgins arose , and trimmed their lamps.  8 And the foolish said unto the wise, Give us of your oil; for our lamps are gone out .  9 But the wise answered , saying , Not so; lest there be not enough for us and you: but go ye rather to them that sell , and buy for yourselves.  10 And while they went to buy , the bridegroom came ; and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage: and the door was shut .  11 Afterward  came also the other virgins, saying , Lord, Lord, open to us.  12 But he answered and said , Verily I say unto you, I know you not.  13 Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh .  14 For the kingdom of heaven is as a man travelling into a far country , who called his own servants, and delivered unto them his goods .  15 And unto one he gave five talents , to another two, and to another one; to every man according to his several ability; and straightway took his journey .  16 Then he that had received the five talents went and traded with the same, and made them other five talents.  17 And likewise he that had received two, he also gained other two.  18 But he that had received one went and digged in the earth, and hid his lord's money.  19 After a long time the lord of those servants cometh , and reckoneth  with them.  20 And so he that had received five talents came and brought other five talents, saying , Lord, thou deliveredst unto me five talents: behold, I have gained beside them five talents more.  21 His lord said unto him, Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.  22 He also that had received two talents came and said , Lord, thou deliveredst unto me two talents: behold, I have gained two other talents beside them.  23 His lord said unto him, Well done, good and faithful servant; thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.  24 Then he which had received the one talent came and said , Lord, I knew thee that thou art an hard man, reaping where thou hast not sown , and gathering where thou hast not strawed :  25 And I was afraid , and went and hid thy talent in the earth: lo, there thou hast that is thine.  26 His lord answered and said unto him, Thou wicked and slothful servant, thou knewest that I reap where I sowed not, and gather where I have not strawed :  27 Thou oughtest therefore to have put my money to the exchangers, and then at my coming I should have received mine own with usury.  28 Take therefore the talent from him, and give it unto him which hath ten talents.  29 For unto every one that hath shall be given , and he shall have abundance : but from him that hath not shall be taken away  even that which he hath .  30 And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.  31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:  32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:  33 And he shall set  the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.  34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come , ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:  35 For I was an hungred , and ye gave me meat : I was thirsty , and ye gave me drink : I was a stranger, and ye took me in :  36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick , and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.  37 Then shall the righteous answer him, saying , Lord, when saw we thee an hungred , and fed thee? or thirsty , and gave thee drink ?  38 When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in ? or naked, and clothed thee?  39 Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?  40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.  41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed , into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:  42 For I was an hungred , and ye gave me no meat : I was thirsty , and ye gave me no drink :  43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in : naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.  44 Then shall they also answer him, saying , Lord, when saw we thee an hungred , or athirst , or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?  45 Then shall he answer them, saying , Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.  46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.  



    "You Can't Outrun or Outgun God!!"

    Beware of Nuns with Guns!! BTW -- has anyone seen Late Nite Catechism?? I saw it in Seattle!! It was frighteningly-funny!! How much crime might there be if Nuns Ran the Prisons??!! It might be the End of Crime As We Know It!! Here is a rather sad and disillusioning link. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_dates_predicted_for_apocalyptic_events I'm finding the book The End of the World, A.D. 2133. (Silvestre) to be MOST Interesting!! You might need to go to the Library of Congress to read a copy. I have a duplicate-copy from the Library of Congress. Please consider a strict grammatical-historical interpretation of Job through Daniel. Then -- give the results of this study a science-fictional context. You might wish to re-watch the Babylon 5 movies and series to get started with this ambitious project. Consider Kitesh relative to Vala Mal Doran in Stargate SG-1. Consider the Pre-Human Delenn relative to the Human Delenn in Babylon 5. Imagine Delenn and Vala running the Vatican!! Consider the concept of Reincarnating Gods and Goddesses -- complete with a Name Shell-Game. Some of you REALLY need to get Sirius about researching the areas I've touched upon within this thread. I have the questions. You need to find the answers. This project might be tougher and nastier than you can possibly imagine. I'm trying to take a break from posting -- but I plan to study eschatology in the context of science-fiction -- and I might keep most of the results of this study to myself. This stuff is mostly too painful and disillusioning for me to talk about. I've hinted-at a lot of things -- but I haven't spelled-out the details. This sort of thing isn't for everyone -- to say the least. So many people have gone through hell thinking about the End of the World -- for hundreds and thousands of years. Many people have experienced a "Time of Trouble" before the "Time of Trouble". Eschatology is NOT a particularly pastoral subject -- and I think it has screwed-up millions (and even billions) of people -- perhaps by design. Here is an interesting video. I've heard other versions of this sort of thing. I stopped attending the SDA church -- in part because I smelled a rat (or was it a dead church-mouse?)! I think EVERYTHING (of any significance) is infiltrated and subverted -- and that most EVERYONE (of any prominence) is controlled and scripted. Perhaps it has to be this way. Damned if I know. I simply know that I am EXTREMELY disillusioned and despondent.




    This is the sort of post which makes my stomach churn. I could've just made a nice post with the Nun-Pictures -- but no -- I had to post some really divisive and inflammatory material. Why?? Because this is a Moot Spiritual War which is intended to deal with the most controversial material in a somewhat constructive manner. My posts tend to make everyone angry -- rather than just one side, or the other. Please remember that this thread is only the beginning. I wish to state (one more time) that I am everyone's friend -- and no one's friend. I have spoken of listening (in person) to a Black Jesuit from San Francisco giving a presentation to the Association of Adventist Forums at Pacific Union College -- and enjoying that presentation. I have spoken of wishing to spend some quality time with the Jesuits on Mt. Graham -- with their big binocular-telescope. I have spoken of attending literally dozens of Masses (including a Latin Mass) in various Catholic churches and cathedrals -- and enjoying them. But the Ancient Egyptian Deity told me that the Jesuits didn't like me -- and that "they" liked me on Phobos!! Honest!! I have posted materials within this thread which could be construed as being critical of Catholicism (in general) and the Jesuits (in particular). I have somewhat jokingly spoken of imagining myself as being a Renegade French Jesuit Organist!! I do NOT hate Catholics!! I simply think that this world is run in a harsh and sinister manner -- and that Roman Catholicism is at the center of a very-real War in Heaven and Earth. I have even grouped the Nazis, Masons, and Jesuits into basically one-group working for the same boss (but I have no idea if this is really the way things work). I am honestly mostly neutral in all of this -- and I simply wish to understand -- and positively-reinforce that which presently exists. Unfortunately, this seems to make me everyone's-enemy -- but I frankly don't give a damn. Once again -- I am on everyone's side -- and on no one's side. I mostly wish to just quietly research and reflect -- without making a great-big deal about anything. I've done a lot of modeling -- some of it borderline-blasphemous -- but I simply desire understanding and illumination. I am NOT seeking to win some sort of a superficial popularity contest -- or any contest, for that matter. I desire the truth -- and I wish to benefit all-concerned -- regardless of whether anyone likes it, or not.




    The Ruler of This World
    Will Get You In The End...
    orthodoxymoron wrote:The Old-Testament ends around 400 BC -- with approximately 400 years of Biblical-Silence. I've been wondering if the New-Testament is somehow a corrupted version of Suppressed Intertestamental Messianic Writings (which might resemble the writings found in Job through Daniel -- or at least commentaries and applications of those books)?! I realize this is heresy -- and I have little evidence to back-up this radical idea. I have suggested a very careful study of Job through Daniel -- prior to studying other parts of the Bible -- using these ten-books as an interpretive-key. What if the time extending from Alexander the Great (356-323 BC) -- right up to the present -- should be viewed with extreme-suspicion -- especially regarding how this world has been run?! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_the_Great What if all the religions which came into existence during this time-period were invented and promoted by the Same Hidden PTB?! This might hypothetically include Christianity (as we know it) -- Catholicism -- Islam -- Protestantism (in all of its forms) -- and virtually every religion and sect -- as franchises of One Big Business!! If true -- this would be upsetting and revolting to everyone -- wouldn't it?! Try reading Luke and James -- straight-through -- over and over -- comparing this study with the rest of the New-Testament. Then compare that same study with Job through Daniel. As I previously noted -- only Acts -- James -- and 3 John -- do NOT end with "Amen." Was someone trying to tell us something?? Further -- consider that Luke-Acts is really one book by the same author. Likewise -- one might consider First, Second, and Third John as being one book by the same author. If there is any validity to what I just said -- what would a study of the following books yield??

    1. Job.
    2. Psalms.
    3. Proverbs.
    4. Ecclesiastes.
    5. Song of Songs.
    6. Isaiah.
    7. Jeremiah.
    8. Lamentations.
    9. Ezekiel.
    10. Daniel.
    11. Luke.
    12. Acts.
    13. James.
    14. 1 John.
    15. 2 John.
    16. 3 John.

    Are these books consistent with the rest of the Bible?? If one studied these 16 books -- what doctrinal-framework might emerge?? Should a doctrinal-framework even be constructed?? Should these books simply be read (straight-through -- over and over)?? I am Not a Bible-Scholar. Not even close. I simply wonder as I wander. Once again -- I simply wish to research and reflect -- without getting angry and disruptive. I think we're in the process of finding-out some extremely upsetting and potentially-disruptive information. Being triumphalist in any of this would be a grave-error. Some say that the Catholic Church and the Pope are the Root of All Evil -- but I am suggesting the possibility of another layer of power, which even Rome is subservient to!! Groot is the Root of All Evil. Or perhaps the Mandrake is the Root of All Evil. What REALLY scares me is the possibility that the historical-madness and often ruthless and corrupt governance -- might've somehow been necessary and/or unavoidable (as insane as that sounds)!! Perhaps it has been somehow necessary for the Bad-Guys to run Earth, Inc. for thousands of years -- as revolting as that sounds!! Please consider ALL Possibilities before throwing stones!! Whenever I speculate about Solar System Governance -- I feel dirty and sick!! Perhaps there is No Good Way to Run a Solar System!! This thing might be tougher and nastier than we can possibly imagine!! Once again -- I have no idea what's true or false. I just take everything in -- and quietly move-on. What if one formulated a Mental and Spiritual Conceptualization of the Messiah based upon the following??

    1. Job through Daniel (KJV).
    2. The Bach B-minor Mass.

    This wouldn't be Judaism or Christianity -- would it?? What would it be?? Just know that during my break I will be spending a lot of quality time with those two sources -- but, once again, this is simply an area of study, rather than being a line in the sand. What if Job through Daniel were given a completely universal-interpretation -- rather than being biased toward Judaism (ancient or modern)? What if the Bach B-Minor Mass were given a completely universal-interpretation -- rather than being biased toward Christianity or Catholicism?? Would these two sources make an effective Ecumenical Book of Common Prayer?? I often have NO Idea what people want and need. But whatever it is -- it probably has to be THEIR Idea!! Everyone seems to wish to rule (whether they admit it, or not). Can you even begin to imagine what would happen if the world were ruled by Jerusalem -- with absolute-obedience expected from everyone?? What if the Torah were the Law of the World?? Can you imagine the rioting and warfare??!! I still think that Someone-Significant REALLY wants the Battle of Armageddon!! Can't we all just get along?? Take a look at this!!


    After all of the madness I've considered -- you'd think I would've made up my mind by now -- wouldn't you?? However -- I feel as if I need to start over -- each and every day!! I will continue with the Modeling Modus Operandi I've been pursuing -- but this doesn't mean that I think I'm right -- and that everyone else is wrong. I am simply pursuing one particular approach to the madness. I'm not promoting this stuff -- nor do I intend to ever get on my "high-horse" and "take the show on the road". Just the opposite. The more I expose myself to the craziness -- the more I wish to become invisible and/or go underground -- and just disappear. I am highly embarrassed by this thread -- but I still think someone needed to do this sort of thing -- regardless of whether it benefitted anyone, or not. It hasn't made me a better person. Just the opposite. It has badly hamstrung me -- and horribly disillusioned and upset me. This thread is intended for Sirius-Researchers only. Unfortunately -- many in my local community seem to have been "alerted to my madness" by seemingly sinister and nefarious entities and agencies -- and this is MOST Unfortunate. I don't know if I am fundamentally good or bad -- on a soul-basis -- going way, way, way back -- but I seem to be mostly neutral and benign this time around. Who knows what I'll be like next-time (if there is a next-time)?! I frankly don't think we know much at all -- and I don't think we've seen anything yet. I'll simply continue to consider all the madness as being science-fiction. On the other hand -- I have NEVER lied about my personal experiences -- but I might've sometimes been mistaken -- or I might've exaggerated a bit. I have simply tried to model certain concepts and personalities -- which might've come perilously close to the dark-side, at times. I've tried to maintain neutrality and fairness -- toward the best of the best -- and the worst of the worst -- for better or worse -- I know not. Take a look at this!! It sort of makes you wonder -- doesn't it??!!



    Real or Fake??
    enemyofNWO wrote:
    orthodoxymoron wrote:I'm pretty much in a state of despair. No matter who the "Real Bad Guys" are -- if they are removed -- there are undoubtedly some "Really Bad Guys" waiting to take-over. "Real Nice Guys" might not survive for five-minutes at the "Top of the Pyramid". Traditional-Religions might often be bottomless-pits of corruption and confusion -- but atheism, agnosticism, psychology, philosophy, politics, business, law, entertainment, etc. are simply different bottomless-pits of corruption and confusion. What if no one is genuinely good?? If powerless "Good-Guys" are placed in positions of power -- they might quickly turn into "Bad-Guys". We might be screwed -- no matter what we do (or don't do). We might've gotten our butts kicked in an Ancient Star War -- with the Victors ruling Humanity from the Shadows for Thousands of Years. Who Knows?? How can we REALLY know anything regarding history and how things really work?? I'll "Fight the Good Fight" -- but I'm not expecting "Paradise or Utopia" anytime soon...
    Remember that " Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely " . There are no check and balances to keep in line the ones at the very top .  In a previous post your wrote : quote "with approximately 400 years of Biblical-Silence. I've been wondering if the New-Testament is somehow a corrupted version of Suppressed Intertestamental Messianic Writings". I bet that corruption, misinterpretation and false translations are  inbuilt in any translated ancient text. How could you otherwise explain that an important rabbi threatened DR Strange about the revelations of the Dead Sea scrolls  ( see above videos ) ?  The biggest secret kept from the " believers " is the " flying saucers "  and alien interventions in human affairs .  The Flying saucer became " the holy Spirit " and the  Elohim became a singular entity instead of referring to a group of people . Because the church had control of the translations , then who didn't translate in an approved way ( nothing to do with the truth and accuracy ) got the marching orders .  The ancient text were used as property not of humanity but of a private  group of people that had in mind to enslave the world . The search for total control of the population is still going on .  
    orthodoxymoron wrote:I tend to agree. As I irreverently suggested before -- what if the Holy-Spirit might be the Queen of Heaven in a Flying-Saucer?? I don't mean to be mean. I'm just trying to make the insane make-sense...
    B.B.Baghor wrote:
    Are you familiar with the story of the 2 monks?

    "Two monks were on a pilgrimage and one day, came to the shore of a river, finding a woman in search
    for a way to cross the water. The monks weren't allowed, by their superiors, to touch a woman. One of
    the monks, being of a scholarly nature and helpful, chose to sort of set this rule aside and obey to the
    rule of his superiors and their belief, to be of service. He offered her, to carry her across on his back.
    She agreed with joy.

    Once on the other side, after having left the woman behind, on the shore, the two monks continued their
    journey. After about 3 hours, the monk who carried the woman, said to his companion. "You know, I wasn't
    supposed to do that" "What do you mean?" asked his companion. "Well" answered the other monk "The rules
    forbid me to touch a woman. I'm troubled by having done it". His companion answered "Oh, now I know what
    you mean, I've already completely forgotten about that woman and the incident. You still carry her on your back
    and make yourself suffer from it".
    enemyofNWO wrote: Thanks for the parable . I imagine that  it is taken from a chapter of the bible not published  yet. I hope your writing is proceeding OK .  Are you defensive about your religion? Does it upset you, perhaps  that ,in a discussion,   we revealed facts about  the Sacred COW called  Christianity ?  Please don't take personally discussions in a forum . I can assure you also that I don't carry anyone on my back and I don't have dead weight to expel . I am who I am and I accept it . Do you do anything to screw the system that oppresses us all ? I do , for dozens of years we have had the secret services of Europe and Australia on our back ..... they have spent millions of dollars , performed incredible number of operations and Psy -ops with no result . So we have something to be proud off . If only there were more people like us who work to screw the system and try to open the eyes of the ones that keep theirs wide shut , the system would collapse sooner .....

    Please don't be upset ,   we ,not always , read pleasant material . Unfortunately the world is not a pleasant place , it is a mine field ! who am I ?  I am one of millions that realized that the catholic religion is a fraud ,  after over 60 years since I woke up about it  I am still discovering despicable acts perpetrated by that criminal organization . I live in catholic country where the malefic presence of catholicism is omnipresent so i might  be rabid when dealing with the subject . I see also the pervasive influence of this cancerous religion on the politics and the society . There seem to be no end to the criminality of the church . They have the brass face to send missionary to regions  of the third world to try to convert who doesn't need to be . I don't think that the discussions with Otho are futile ,this subject is very interesting  and I think there is  some chance that  some of the discussion might influence, in a positive way,  some readers with an open mind .  Ortho ,as the rest of us , is on a personal journey and every person has his/her own interpretation of  what is searching and what is looking for .    Did you like the videos linked in post No 2   and 3 ? They are  eyes opener don't you agree ? Be well !
    orthodoxymoron wrote:In "The Exercise of Vital Powers" from the 4th season of Babylon 5 (which is depicted as being in the year 2261 A.D.) -- the statement was made that "Russia [had transitions of power] in 1917 and 2013". Mind you -- this episode was made in 1997. The Pope resigned in 2013 -- and a Jesuit became the new Pope. In "The Keys of This Blood" Malachi Martin writes about a three-way battle for control of the New World Order -- between Russia, the Vatican, and the United States. The book was published in 1990. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Keys_of_This_Blood What if Russia had a lot to do with the changing of the guard in Rome?? Supposedly -- the US and Russia might be headed for some sort of conflict. That same episode of Babylon 5 speaks of the French coming to power in 2112 A.D. I have a rare book titled The End of the World, A.D. 2133. Pope Benedict seemed a bit bitter when he spoke of "God Sleeping". I have irreverently joked that "God was just tired of all the bullshit!" All of this might not be significant -- but I find it somewhat interesting.


    enemyofNWO wrote:Thanks Ortho for the links ! I  just watched the video of Malachi Martin  posted above . There is a lot of information that is very relevant   even today .  But Martin ideas that the Pope John Paul would  unite the world on moral and ethical grounds  did not happen and it is very unlikely it will in the future ,John Paul died and things got worse . Since then the church is now associated universally with pedofilia and corruption. According to Martin already  in1990 the church had to pay 95 million dollars in compensation to children victims of sexual abuse . Martin said that the Church has the most efficient secret services in the world   . How do they do it ? The confession !  of course ! Just as a test try to confess that you know of a fictitious person that wants to bump off the pope ……… See how long it takes for the police to knock at you door ? Malachi said that the church has been penetrated by the Masons.   This happened a long time ago . The picture below is of Trieste where I live  near the palace of the Questore ( the chief of Police ) there is a church and above the door there is a date in roman numerals . The picture below is taken from my e-book chapter 19 .
    orthodoxymoron wrote:I've been thinking of the whole solar system as being one big business (in good and bad ways). The Catholic Church might be near the top of the pyramid -- but I keep thinking there's at least one or two layers of power beyond Rome (and probably not in good ways). But really -- the universe might have literally billions of star-wars occurring simultaneously -- from antiquity to modernity. How things are out-there probably has a lot to do with why things are the way they are on Earth. Most of this is speculation -- but there is some substance to it -- and it frankly scares the hell out of me. Without hearing anyone say it -- one day I thought about the possibility of bugged-confessionals -- and it freaked me out!! I just assume that ANYTHING I say is somehow recorded. That might be overly paranoid -- but this is reflective of Christian-Theology (and even Santa-Claus coming to town)!! I assume that all agencies are somehow interconnected (for better or worse). A lot of this is speculation -- but I keep hearing stories...
    orthodoxymoron wrote:What is the relationship (if any) between Dragons -- Draconian-Reptilians -- Generic-Reptilians -- Tall Long-Nosed Greys -- Small-Greys -- Generic-Hybrids -- Dragonized-Humans -- Nephilim -- Human-Giants -- Hybrid-Giants -- Reptilian-Giants -- Normal-Humans -- Angels -- Demons -- God -- Satan -- Demigods -- et al?? I might've added a couple of non-existent categories (or I might've missed someone) -- but you probably get my question. This whole-thing always seems to be an illusive shell-game. "Top" People probably get clear and concise briefings and documents -- but "We the Peons" must wade through "Endless Bullshit". I still don't know if most of the above really exist -- so I just play a stupid science-fiction game -- to attempt to understand a phenomenon which might not even exist. Strange-Beings could originate from Distant-Galaxies -- or they could be Renegade-Creations aka Forbidden-Abominations -- from Secret-Laboratories within this solar system. Who Knows?? How might Gabriel, Michael, and Lucifer relate to all of this?? Does Lucifer really exist -- or is Lucifer simply the dark-side of Gabriel and/or Michael?? Also -- is Azazel an actual Angel and/or Demon -- or is Azazel simply a Historical and Eschatological Scapegoat?? Is the Creator of Humanity considered to be "Azazel"?? Once again -- I have a very difficult time getting into the Thuban material. I'm presently taking a closer look at Biblical-Prophecy in the context of Science-Fiction. I am very-wary of Prophecy -- but I've recently felt the need to understand Job through Daniel - relative to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John -- with unconventional approaches. I always feel as if I'm playing with burning-magnesium when I consider this madness -- and a lot of it really does seem to be madness (on purpose, in many ways). What do you think about the 2300 days-years of Daniel 8:14 originating around 168 BC -- and terminating around 2133 AD?? Does Humanity have a future "As-Is" -- or will we be terminated and/or turned into various sorts of hybrids (which might not resemble humanity as we know it)?? Was the Historical Jesus Christ really the Messiah of the Psalms and Isaiah -- or is there a Hidden Historical Messiah?? This sort of thing is nearly impossible to really know about with any certainty. I'm almost to the point of completely walking away from ALL of the stuff contained within this website -- and just go back to watching television. I might even start drinking-beer and going to football-games and baseball-games. Perhaps I should forget about ethics and truth -- and live a life of skirt-chasing and riotous-living. I actually think I might rejoin the "Rat-Race" because the Rats are Winning...






    "LA! LA! LA! LA! LA! LA! WE CAN'T HEAR YOU!!!!! LA!! LA!! LA!! LA!! LA!!"
    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7368
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The United States of the Solar System, A.D. 2133 (Book Three)

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Mon May 01, 2017 11:20 am

    RedEzra wrote:It is probably impossible for a human being to comprehend the complete nature of GOD... for example what is GOD made of ? It is not bones and blood like human beings but still GOD is so... what is it ? What stuff is GOD made of ? In the bible it states that GOD is spirit... but what is that ? Or perhaps that is a wrong question as GOD is not what... but who. Maybe it simply is that GOD is spirit and spirit is GOD. Makes sense ?

    So what can spirit do ? In the bible GOD can do absolutely anything... even the impossible at any time. So why so much misery on earth you say ? In the bible GOD gave human beings free will... to do whatever we want. Yes even blow someone's brains out... GOD is not going to stop us from making the earth a big killing field. We got free will get it ?

    We got choice ! Nobody is born this or that... although genetic traits and talents are passed down the bloodline we still got the will to choose. Not what... but who we will be. When we cannot dissociate ourselves from ourselves... then it is not correct to use a word like what about ourselves. Suppose same goes for GOD. Makes sense ? Not what but who !

    Not what is GOD... but who is GOD ! Is it not so ?

    Who is GOD ? No you don't get to make GOD in your image ! So why are we even saying anything about GOD ? Why do some sit and explain their particular image of GOD to other people ? Because it is big business ! People may pay a lot of money to hear about GOD... yes it is true !

    Now how would GOD tell His story to humanity ? Through the mouth of a woman or man ? Or through a book that would stand the test of time ?

    You may shrug shoulders and say "meh i just stick to make GOD in my image"... because that is what you do friend whenever your thoughts about GOD is not found in His book.

    You do not get the truth about GOD through the mouth of another man or woman !! Come on you get that... don't you ?
    RedEzra wrote:
    It is reasonable to assume that the bible is GOD's book because of the amount of prophecies which were written down and foretold before they happened !

    One from the book of Daniel for example who lived in the 6th century BC at the time of the Babylonian empire. In chapter 8 of this book is written down the rise of the Medo-Persian empire and its subsequent fall to the Greek empire which would split into four kingdoms where from one an archetypal antichrist (Antiochus IV Epiphanes) would arise and persecute the Jews.

    This is old history now but it was written down and foretold centuries before it happened. So who can do that ? Who can know the future from the past ?


    "I declare the end from the beginning, and from long ago what is not yet done, saying: My plan will take place, and I will do all My will." - Isaiah 46:10
    orthodoxymoron wrote:People seem to use the Bible to further THEIR Agendas, rather than HONESTLY analyzing and communicating who wrote the Bible, who they wrote it to, what the context was, etc. Religion and the Bible ALWAYS seem to involve Power-Struggling and Lawyer-Like Posturing. It ALWAYS seems to be some sort of a Battlefield. When one is honest, and admits problems, they are viewed as being WEAK. FAITH often seems to equal LYING or BELIEVING LIES. I tend to think that the REAL GOD will judge this Solar System in ways we can't even begin to comprehend. I honestly think that MOST (if not ALL) of Us are in HUGE TROUBLE. The more I honestly study, the more troubled I become. Let me repeat that I am especially interested in what Job through Malachi REALLY Teaches. Can YOU Tell Me???
    I continue to think that I'm in way over my head -- and that I don't know what I'm talking about. Consider my threads on this website to merely be study-guides -- or as a Galactic Boot-Camp. Enter this Crazy-Domain at your own risk. I try to be light-hearted (and light-headed??) -- but don't take the subjects addressed lightly. Also -- assume that all of your activities (including researching this website) are known and recorded. I assume that most of us have very little real privacy. I have very mixed feelings regarding the Surveillance-State in a Dangerous-World. We seem to be SO screwed in SO many ways -- but I SO hope that I'm wrong. What if a Pandora's Box has been opened -- which will need to be closed -- once the house-cleaning is completed?? Think long and hard about what I just said...

    Once again, note my use of Contextual Superimposition and Comprehensive Concentration. Note several ideas within one paragraph. Each post is the same -- only different. This isn't done to gain your approval -- or to entertain you. It is done to make you think -- but don't strain yourselves. I always seem to have a difficult time listening to David Wilcock. He is obviously quite intelligent - but I have problems with a lot of what he says. I won't itemize them - and I would probably lose if I debated him - but I always seem to get a bad case of the 'willies' when I watch and listen to him. The spontaneous genetic upgrade is an example. I am very wary of the 'upgrade'. Does this involve retaining male and female human physicality - or does it involve becoming reptilian hermaphrodites, who worship a reptilian queen? Sorry if that was off the wall - but there is some substance to that question (but not much - just about as much substance as 'transubstantiation'). I think we have a very poor understanding of who Jesus was, and is. I just have to read the Four Gospels, in light of all the esoteric stuff - and then think and do what makes sense to me. I highly recommend studying the Red-Letter Teachings of Jesus, as a mental and spiritual exercise - even for those who are atheists or agnostics. Hell - a Satanist could benefit from reading them. I don't think they're perfect - but they are a theological milestone, rather than simply being a historical necessity. I have personally witnessed several supernatural events - including the invisible manipulation of physical objects - but I don't play supernatural games. For all I know - a demonic spirit named 'Chi' might be providing the unseen force on the 'other side'. I stick to halfhearted pseudointellectual research, and long walks with my dog. If I witness a UFO, strange occurrence, or other than human being - I just think 'sonofabitch' - and move on. What would happen if the people in the videos started talking about Jesus - and asked the Chi to identify themselves. Just a thought.

    Please remember that this thread is mostly an act. This isn't the real me. I've told you parts of why I'm doing this -- but there's a lot I haven't told you. I continue to be primarily interested in who owns and operates this solar system. I want to know who's here - and why. I wish to know exactly what is going on. I wish to know who has been screwing up this solar system for thousands of years. I wish to know what is going on throughout the universe - as it relates to that which is transpiring in this solar system. I wish for this solar system to be based upon the word 'RESPONSIBILITY'. I have suggested possible attractive transitional structures to place upon the foundation of 'RESPONSIBILITY' - but obviously, the details will be debated throughout all eternity. Infowar Without End - orthodoxymoron.

    Perhaps I need to start living in the year 2112 - and imagine an up and running Vatican-Based Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom United States of the Solar System. This might be quite difficult - but I think I'll give it a bloody go! I'm not sure if I should document my experiences and insights - here in the mists. Perhaps the less said - the better - at this point. Perhaps I have said enough already. Perhaps I need to go over and over and over what I have already placed in this thread - in the context of 2112. Would someone like to join me? I didn't think so - but hope springs eternal. Perhaps I'll just be my own little secret society of one! Secrecy is no problem, when it's only you! Perhaps I should leave what I'm thinking to the imagination of anyone who actually gives a r@ats @ss about the contents of this thread - and about the contents of my diseased imagination. I really don't wish to beg. Some of you know who I am - and where I live. I doubt that you'll ever wish to talk to me - but if you do - I'm not going anywhere - until the wall of water hits me - or until the greys take me away. I think things are really, really bad - but no one really seems to want to talk to me. Perhaps that will change - after all hell literally breaks loose. But on Christ the Solid Rock I Stand - and the Gates of Hell Shall Not Prevail Against the True and Living Jesus Christ. Namaste and Godspeed.

    wingmanof light wrote:I never felt so dang insulted !!!!!

    For all I know - a demonic spirit named 'Chi'. Chi is energy you moron!!!! Its not a person or any entity!!!!

    I now understand why Jesus decided to do the Shepperd thing . Because to many are to stuck in sheep mode .help help me help me. i have to leave this is to restarted.
    every thing is evil you make stain proud. I take my leave of this forum your not worthy of my info.

    really grow up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    sheep sheep. everything is evil you will be hear for ever thinking that way.

    I do forgive you you do not know what you do...... Jesus said that I now understand.

    You were so nice at first - but now you're getting nasty! My apologies wingmanofwhatever. Should I have taken off my shoes and knelt - instead of telling a joke? Lately, I've been thinking of Jesus in Archangelic or Pharonic terms - rather than as a Simple Shepherd or as the Crucified Christ. I think it's fair game to ask what's behind the 'energy'. I certainly don't know what I'm doing - but I am doing the best I can - and I am heartbroken to learn that I am not worthy to be a humble student in the presence of a great teacher. Don't cast your pearls before the swine. They'll turn on you every time...

    I want to make it clear that I don't necessarily have a problem dealing with scales and tails or hybrid beings - but I have huge problems with enslavement, extermination, torture, manipulation, terrorisim, deception, etc, etc, etc. I've joked about visiting a Deep Underground Reptilian Monastery - but I think such a thing might really exist - and I really would visit one - if and only if - I would be treated with dignity and respect - and not be harmed in any way. I just want the evil and violence to flee this solar system. I realize that evil might very well be an abstract human construct - but I do think it is real and hideous.

    Anyway, I like the idea of a Latin Service which integrates the Music of Charles Marie Widor and the Teachings of Jesus into the Art Form of the Latin Mass - but without crucifixes, communion, or collections. I realize that's a lot to sacrifice. I have huge problems with the theology and history of the Roman Catholic Church - but I adore the art, architecture, music, pomp, circumstance, reverence, and awe. I just wish to see the whole operation cleaned-up and streamlined. I would like to see ecumenism on a grand scale - and at least a doubling of church attendance. I might even go back to church! I grew up SDA - but I have huge problems with the SDA church. I have huge problems with all churches. I realize they are all doing the best they can - but my idealism and esoteric research have led me astray - and not necessarily in a good way. I don't recommend leaving any church. Just keep researching, while you keep attending. I don't think attendance is redeeming in any way - but I think it is a useful spiritual and social discipline. I've simply decided to try to keep thinking of what an Ideal Roman Catholic Church would look like. I can't really attend presently - but I might in the future. I just worry that the Jesuits would figure me out real quick - and then go to work on me - in ways unique to that venerable order! I'll have to observe and criticize from a distance. It's easier that way! I don't have a problem with individual Roman Catholics - but I really have a bee in my bonnet to change this theocratic and heirarchical institution - especially regarding who I think gives orders to the orders - if you know what I mean...

    In a sense, I have a certain appreciation of the challenges facing the ruler of this world - because humanity does seem to be inherently problematic, especially regarding how I think we might've come into existence, and how we might've arrived at where we are today. But I have HUGE problems with the persecution, torture, war, terrorism, horrible doctrines, reprehensible political manipulation and corruption, etc, etc, etc. I just think we need to completely change the way business is done in this solar system. I haven't called in a Divine Strike of Fire and Brimstone - and I don't believe in Capital Retribution and Utter Destruction - but I do believe in Incarceration and Instruction. I really could be Bad-@$$ in a Non-Violent Manner. Nuff Said.


    wingmanof light wrote: From where I sit you called chi demonic is the same as calling me demonic. I try to walk the center so I can be both nice or not. I chose to be nice the demonic is a button i like to take out. Not worthy???
    Or call chi the light of god.

    Yes we all are Worthy that's the problem. We had our DNA altered to make us as we are. Put negative influences and the self little doubting voice call Ego. We are Worthy we all are we been lied to born into bondage as you can find a all over . watch lots of stuff you will find the same thing.
    No the truth is coming and it be end of 2012 or before.

    Unless the creator is powerless to taker the negative out or he is leaving it Hear. Its one other the other.
    I didn't say that chi was demonic - but rather that supernatural occurrences should be closely examined and questioned - regarding their true source and nature. I do think there is a power struggle between good and evil - and that the human race seems to be prisoners of war. It doesn't seem as if the good side or the evil side are all-powerful - but the evil side seems to be in the driver's seat presently. I'm hoping that will change soon - but at what price??? I've talked a lot about Lucifer, the Queen of Heaven, and the God of This World - but are they all the same being - and do they act alone - or are they merely agents of the Universal Powers That Be? If it's US against the Local Opportunistic Evil Renegades - that's one thing. But if it's US against the Universe - we may be in more trouble than even the gods and goddesses can imagine. I have repeatedly called for the Universal Powers That Be to support a Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom United States of the Solar System - regardless of any Negative Human Karmic Debt or Original and Continuing Sin. I wish for Responsible Freedom to survive and thrive in this solar system - and that any universal concerns and grievances be reasonably and rationally dealt with in a non-violent manner. I don't think the sins of the past should be swept under the galactic rug - but I don't think the universe should involve itself in never-ending star wars and mass murder.

    A current theory of mine, is that Michael/Horus/Jesus was involved in the genetic experiment known as the creation of male and female human physicality - 600,000 years ago - and that this was in direct disobedience to the Universal Powers That Be - and that this resulted in the 600,000 year Gaian/Orion Star War in Heaven - between Reptilian Humanoids and Mammalian Humanoids - and that the Mammalian Humanoids (us) are being secretly ruled by the Reptilian Humanoids - and that we might be facing extermination, or a more severe enslavement than we are already under. In other words - we might've lost the war - and that we presently live in occupied territory as prisoners of war. That's what it feels like to me. My goal is for everyone to exist under Responsible Freedom - but this might be an unacceptable challenge to the sovereignty and authority of the Universal Powers That Be - so that even if it's a good idea, it might not be allowed to occur - and we might not be allowed to survive - at least in Human form. Jesus might be a Hostage/POW/Sacrifice of sorts - as the Archangelic Head of the Human Race - but that Michael/Horus/Jesus might be mostly disempowered, at this point. Jesus might be at the top of the Universal Fecal List - which might be why graven images of His crucified and bloody body are hanging on the walls of thousands of churches throughout the world - as a symbol of the defeat of the human race. Does the following video reveal what we were before we were human? Does it reveal what we have been  struggling with for 600,000 years? Does it reveal what we will be after we are no longer human? Just speculation, mind you. I so hope that I'm wrong...



    wingmanof light wrote: I don't believe in kings or queens. I think they are evil to say one is more powerful just because of a blood line. But really our sol is pure pure energy what ever it is that's what it is. the physical body is an illusion and this world.

    I believe in combining the royal and servant models in a merit-based (rather than bloodline-based) responsible constitutional representative republic - which might include Presidents, Popes, Kings, and Queens - and which maximizes responsible freedom.

    The thought this world is obsessed with the fiscal body. it keeps popping in there like its not real if nothing its real then that puts us like a starseed that came to help. go to the link So many of them talk the same its just not one meaning something is terribly wrong. I think most all you posted is pointing out all that is linked to the  half truths.

    Human physicality is an amazing combination of evolution and creation - but it is often used in an irresponsible and ungrateful manner. I don't subscribe to 'nothing is real - nothing to get hung-up about - strawberry fields forever'.

    I believe this time In the now their is some bug guns in this world the creator sent hear to change this.I think believing in sin is an illusion all together. because if we are only pure energy and everything is manifested all this is put hear the veil to make us forget who we are to trap us . TO make us not feel worthy.

    I think there are a lot of terrestrials and extraterrestrials who are trying to save the world. I am very appreciative of their heroic and relentless efforts. I think sin is very real and destructive. We should feel good about ourselves - yet we should feel genuine sorrow for our irresponsible and destructive thoughts and behavior - sometimes known as 'sin'.

    Was watching a video and it mentioned atlantions was hear in the beginning their ship was shot down so they got stranded and built the pyramids to raise the vibration to get off. Dolores mentioned this and also a few others it mentioned more then once. so the listing to it its a common theme. All the big giants are nothing more then other civilizations tried to help and shot down to.

    Interesting theory. I think we might be a renegade civilization, fighting for survival and legitimacy - for at least 600,000 years. I don't think we have had a peaceful and happy history.

    Now hears the test. listen and read this whats your hart chakra say????? I get this often every time is why i belie it true. mine feels like sadden and if I think its time to set it right it fires right up.

    I haven't gotten into the whole chakra thing - and so I don't know much about it. Whatever works for you.

    Debating if government is actually doing the right thing.. You mentioned it to about might be in trouble. Ok what if their is a rule the creator has so they cant come hear?? if we suppress us for the reason if we are not advanced then no one would mess with us.

    It feels like the really big guns in the universe are mostly watching. I still think they might not like us - but since we are possibly relatives at the soul level - they are exercising restraint - rather than just exterminating us. I get the feeling that a lot of them would like to get rid of us - once and for all. Just more speculation.

    But what if that's what area 51 is about. keep the believe that's the story. Now I 100% sure we can manifest i done it to some degree a few time thoughts and such. If they tell us the worst case and we believe it we can actually make it worse. Like the radiation. If we believe its not hear we could actually make it go away. If we are human nothing more believe in how things are now then yes you may be right that we are in trouble.

    I think Area 51, Dulce, Pine Gap, etc. might be under non-human control - by beings who don't particularly like humans. Research 'Gizeh Intelligence'. There's not a lot out there in cyberspace - but I think these two words might be at the center of a lot of things. Again - it feels as though humanity is in the hot-seat, rather than the driver's-seat. More speculation.

    Now listen to the hart chakra and read this whats it do listen feel it ???? What if the option #3 is at play hear. God/creator the first of what ever you call him/her can and could and I think has done something. Jesus said it we can do greater things then he. and listening within I bet if we are as he said. In gods Image yes energetically look alike all sols energy bodies .the only hing different is the Body the shell the avatar body. Now you been doing it I been doing it every thing fits together all of it. I hitting the energy side and every thing attached. You traced a lot of info pointing to a one blood line keeping truth hidden.

    Michael/Horus/Jesus doesn't seem to be a bossy divinity on an ego trip. They seem to be very down to earth - and a combination of royalty/divinity/servanthood. I like your use of the word 'avatar' - and I love the movie 'Avatar'. Watch it again - and read between the lines. I think a lot of it applies to our predicament. What did James Cameron know - and when did he know it?

    I said it before. god has not helped us or has but not in the way we all like.  Because once we get out of sheep mode and know what we actually are we can turn thing thing around on it head very fast. If the creator wanted to test us had leave us hear say tough love so if we get it then and only then we are worthy get get his gift to be just like him. We are created as is for a reason.

    If Michael/Horus/Jesus was deeply involved in the genetic engineering project aka 'The Creation' - and Micael became human - 600,000 years ago - rather than 2,000 years ago - Michael/Horus/Jesus might be in just as much (or more) trouble than the rest of us. I think we should consider ourselves to be gods and goddesses - with very small-case "g's". We should exhibit humble and dignified confidence - and kick @$$!

    If they wanted a race to be all the same and think all one way would they not have created robots to think all the same to do manual labor??? Or evil has enslaved us or tried to get back at the creator because they are just that evil.

    Perhaps the freedom exhibited by human beings is an innovation in this universe. Perhaps freedom is considered to be rebellion by the universal powers that be. Again, I request that the Universal Powers That Be support a Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom United States of the Solar System - on a trial-basis - and that all grievances be dealt with in a reasonable, rational, and non-violent manner. I have no idea what's really been going on over that past several million years. It could be really bad. I tend to think that it's been unthinkable.


    http://www.starseeds.net/

    http://www.starseeds.net/forum/topics/the-girl-who-says-all?id=2312030%3ATopic%3A720752&page=2#comments

    http://www.starseeds.net/forum/topics/helpful-convo-between-me-and
    If I could have anything I wanted - I'd probably choose to just keep doing what I'm doing - with perhaps some reasonable access to individuals and information. But I'd probably be happy to live in a room with a Cray - and live a very simple life - even if I could live high on the hog - so to speak. Once again, I need to just keep reviewing this thread. I really don't know that much about my own thread! When I review it, it's like reading it for the first time! Preparing me for a press-conference would be like reinventing the wheel. I got that line from the book 'Caveat' by Alexander Haig - regarding Ronald Reagan! I'm a much better thinker and communicator on the internet, than I am in real-life. But I do think that I could deliver a reasonably polished speech - with the help of a teleprompter and a microchip! When a Vatican-Based Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom United States of the Solar System becomes a reality - I'll just keep researching and posting on the internet. Just give me a Room with a Cray and a View. I really think that some of you might find a huge level of enlightenment from a repeated reading of this thread - including watching all of the linked material. Try it - and let me know how it goes. I'm going to spend less time posting, and more time reviewing and memorizing. Again - this thread is a multidisciplinary workout - which is the first step to becoming a DSSS (Doctor of Solar System Studies) - which is vastly superior to being a DDS (Double Dumb-$hit)! Listen to the sacred classical music links I have posted on the last few pages - while you research this thread. This is really a necessary combination. It won't really work if you don't do this. Please - somebody do this! Has anybody done this? I'd still like to know what you guys know about me. What do the secret-files say about me? Would FOIA information be of any use to me? My reincarnation-history is what really interests me - and I won't do regression hypnosis. I just keep feeling that I might be a combination of the best and the worst - in thousands of incarnations - but who knows? You guys do - don't you? What did you know - when did you know it - and what did you do about it?

    I had heard that Bin Laden was killed in the Tora Bora Campaign many years ago. Do we have conclusive proof that we killed Bin Laden yesterday? What if Bin Laden has been hiding out in an underground base? Just thought I'd ask! I think I need to examine my 'little list' in the context of Solar System Studies. I really like the term 'Solar System Studies'. This implies a multidisciplinary, big-picture approach to knowledge, which doesn't get bogged-down in politics, religion, conspiracy research, or esoteric studies. This might be a more balanced approach to what I have been attempting to deal with in a somewhat single-minded manner. What frustrates me in all of this is a lack of attention or compensation for something which must take years off one's life - because it is so abstract, hypothetical, controversial, and stressful.

    Should all of this be somehow turned into a business model - rather than being so high-minded and idealistic? Money talks - right? Is that why Lucifer has been so successful for so many thousands of years? But the human race has paid a very high price for sleeping with the Whore of Babylon. Was the fling really worth it? Sorry for being so direct - but I'm feeling as though the human race might not be ready to take the high road - and that redirecting efforts might be a waste of time. Someone please take issue with me on this point, and prove me wrong. Will the drive for fame, fortune, power, and pleasure always trump idealism? Will the corrupt always rule the stupid? The silence and even hostility on this thread have not been encouraging at all. Perhaps I should internalize my 'little list' and use it as my little business advantage - rather than trying to be some sort of a religious-nut evangelist for a minimalist church/state union which maximizes responsible freedom. I like what I have presented in this thread - but I am pessimistic regarding simply reasoning with both the elites and the general public. Perhaps I need to make my idealism a lot more pragmatic. I keep feeling hated - and I'm not sure exactly why. Perhaps I am too sensitive - and I feel that which I think others are feeling toward me. Actually, I don't think very many people (or other than people) know about or care about what I think or do. How do I take this thing to a more effective level? The bad-guys still seem to be the big winners.

    Should I start going to Mason meetings - and learn how to play the game? I've turned down a couple of invitations. But once again, how good is too good, in this irresponsible and corrupt world? Should I start a secret society based upon my 'little list'? Should I encourage the founding of a new order within the Roman Catholic Church - based upon this 'little list'? I'm a very strange kind of Protestant. I simultaneously attack and promote the Roman Catholic Church - and I'm not even a member! Should I start a church, based upon the 'little list'? Now that church would be highly infiltrated and subverted! Tax exemption would be an interesting struggle, wouldn't it? Some of you out there in cyberspace might wish to consider starting your own groups and organizations - based upon the 'little list'. I think this general concept is going to take a lot of time and effort to properly refine and apply. I so wish that Malachi Martin were still alive, so I could try to get his take on a synopsis of my ramblings. I tend to think that he would've rejected my proposed tampering with traditional theology, liturgy, and governance. I simply do not relish engaging in trench-warfare with the Roman Catholic Church. It doesn't really matter if I'm right or wrong. It would be so much easier to have the hierarchy onboard - right from the beginning. Fat chance - right?

    I'm also frustrated because I don't know what the important players in this solar system - really think. All of this continues to be a big guessing game. I think my posting is more brash and sarcastic than it would be if I weren't so frustrated and miserable. I really don't wish to be a reprobate pain in the @$$ - but when no one seems to listen or care - how am I supposed to feel, and what am I supposed to do? There really doesn't seem to be much of a future in saving the solar system. Tell me what you think. Pretty please. Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to listen to Alex Jones, and try to get all riled-up!

    OK, I got slightly agitated. The playing of the Birth-Certificate and Bin Laden Cards seem to have been done in such a sloppy manner that I fear desperation at the White House. I think the City States and the Underlying Invisible Powers That Be are becoming so exposed that I wouldn't be surprised at anything. I've been afraid for years - but I am really afraid now. This might be a good time for a lot of bad guys to switch sides - and avert Armageddon. I don't mean to be alarmist - but I think we might be on the brink of extinction. I wouldn't say this anywhere but on a small battle-hardened forum like this one...




    So, are Planet Earth and it's inhabitants in better shape now than they were in the Ancient Garden of Eden?? Who faired better -- those who were loyal, or rebellious, toward God?? What have each of you endured and inflicted -- lifetime after lifetime after lifetime??? What will each of you endure and inflict -- lifetime after lifetime after lifetime??? Is your plan going as well as you had expected??? Should God leave this solar system -- never to return??? Is that what you all want?? Do you each wish to be your own god???

    What if my 'little list' were made even smaller?

    1. U.S. Constitution.

    2. Classical Music.

    3. Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom United States of the Solar System.


    Would the St. Mary's Cathedral or Crystal Cathedral potential locations - combined with the smaller list - provide enough substance to facilitate a non-religious, yet spiritual, foundation for solar system governance? Does anyone see what I'm trying to think through? I'm trying to think out-loud, which is always a dangerous thing to do. The cathedral-setting combined with the inspiring music and ceremony (to be devised) would provide a grand and glorious context to conduct solar system discussions. I don't wish to exclude 'God' - but I certainly do not wish to end up with a harsh and persecutory theocratic dictatorship which is ruled by beings who hate human beings. Is the Mass too theologically problematic? Are there too many hard sayings in the Teachings of Jesus? I am so up-tight about this whole thing, that I can hardly stand it. The fact that no one will discuss any of this with me really angers me - and I'm not talking about the regulars on this forum. I'm talking about those who monitor this forum, and who are very capable of conversing with me on this subject. There is a brick wall of silence - and I get a strong feeling of scorn and condescension coming from the other side of that wall. Perhaps church should mostly consist of people entering the church whenever they choose - on any or all days of the week - and simply meditating or praying privately - sometimes with sacred music and counseling provided by musicians and clergy. I much prefer that environment anyway. I used to love to practice the pipe-organ and sing - in an empty church. That was always better than the formal services - for me anyway. If people wish to read the Words of Christ - so be it. I'm almost beginning to wish that I had never started to try and help in this regard. It really doesn't seem to be worth it. I suspect that we'll exterminate ourselves, and then we won't have to fight with each other any more.

    I still maintain that the governance issues connected with Roman Catholicism will need to be properly resolved, in order for Responsible Freedom to flourish in this solar system. It still feels as if we are prisoners of war, on death-row - and that the City States are controlled by forces which are not friendly toward humanity. I didn't think I'd ever be thinking like this - and I hate it - but I don't know what else to do. Governance without elegance and spirituality will be disastrous - but Theocratic Governance will be even worse. I think I'm going to have to work with the simplified list - in a non-Vatican setting - even though I can't think of a more grand setting to receive galactic dignitaries - than the Vatican. There's just too much baggage connected with this institution. But again, I don't wish to be in conflict with the Vatican. That would be a VERY unpleasant experience, to say the least. Good luck to you BIG SHOTS who wish to throw your weight around. I'll hold your coats - and clean up the mess. I don't mean to be shrill - but we don't seem to be civilized enough to engage in calm and rational discussion of the most important subjects. I leave you with the possibility of listening to all types of classical music - as you contemplate every conceivable possibility connected with a Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom United States of the Solar System. I'm going to abandon thinking about the Vatican - for now anyway. I doubt that they want me to think about them anyway. Actually, I doubt that they even know I exist. This fantasy-land is sort of fun - but sooner or later, you have to wake-up. The funny thing is that everyone wants to take over - so everyone cancels each other out! What a stupid mess this is! What morons we are! How the universe must laugh! This is so sad - that it's funny. I may or may not be back...

    The 'Jesus' topic is most fascinating - and for me anyway, it is the place to begin and end philosophical, ethical, psychological, exoteric, and esoteric research. But it might be quite difficult to properly impose historical texts upon contemporary society in a manner which maximizes responsible freedom. We have nearly seven billion problematic people living in a problematic world - and we have technology which can exterminate everyone in a matter of minutes. We have a HUGE problem - and we need to attempt to defuse this ticking time-bomb. This thread is my attempt to help do this. But I'm feeling really discouraged about the whole thing.

    Perhaps I should just keep working with the words Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom United States of the Solar System - in a general sense - without becoming too detailed, specific, or dogmatic. What if the Vatican eventually became very similar to Washington D.C. - but with much more glory, grandeur, reverence, awe, and magnificence? Do you see my point? There would be soul-craft applied to the Washington D.C. model. In essence, Washington D.C. would be transplanted into Vatican City. Perhaps we don't need liturgical services at all - and that we should simply combine Classical Music with Brilliant Oratory - and call it 'good'.

    Perhaps I should consider a Vatican-Based Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom United States of the Solar System - based upon the U.S. Constitution - but enlightened by the great philosophy, theology, art, architecture, music, science, literature, etc. of the world. Do you see my point? Toes are going to be stepped on - and people are going to be angry and confused - no matter what we do. I really don't think there is an easy way to deal with our problems. The idea is to have the Secret Government, the United Nations, the United States, and the Vatican - under one roof - and subject to the U.S. Constitution - in a completely open and non-corrupt Solar System Government - which is highly competent - with lots of pomp, circumstance, reverence and awe. Is this sort of thing possible? Wouldn't this just make everyone scream bloody murder - at least at first? Would such an arrangement have to be theocratic-implementation? Would this defeat the intended purpose? Problems, problems, problems, and more problems...If the Vatican were based upon the U.S. Constitution - should politics and religion be discussed and voted on by the Congress and Senate? Imagine all of the nations of the solar system, all the races of the solar system, and all of the religions of the solar system - represented in a Vatican-Based United States of the Solar System!!!!! Should that be the ultimate goal???? But can you imagine the weeping, wailing, and gnashing of teeth which would occur if this plan were announced in a press conference!!!!!! OMG!!!!!!!! Imagine an up and running Vatican-Based United States of the Solar System in the year 2112!!!!!!  

    It would be interesting to see if any science fiction is based upon the idea of various alien civilizations or futuristic human civilizations being based upon the U.S. Constitution. This sort of thing should be modeled to death. In a sense, I am really modelling this idea here in the mists. It pays to really think things through, before doing a damn thing. It's easier that way. I'm going to conceptually transplant Washington D.C. into the confines of Vatican City - and call it 'The United States of the Solar System'. I'm sorry if this makes anyone angry - but I need to think this through - in public - despite the problems inherent in doing so. Please think this through with me. I'm really not trying to be a 'know it all'. I'm really trying to regain faith in my future, and in the future of this solar system. Once again - this is a test. This is only a test. Go back to your homes - and remain inside - until further notice. There is nothing to worry about. Everything is under control. Nothing can go wrong, go wrong, go wrong, go wrong, go wrong go wr#$%...





    What if the U.S. Constitution and the Idealistic Vision of the Founders were treated as sort of a religion? What if there were a church based upon the U.S. Constitution? Both Church and State must be addressed when considering Solar System Governance. I like the idea of combining Solar System Studies with Solar System Governance to achieve a Solar System View, as opposed to a World View. This would be Solar System Multi-Disciplinariansim combined with Organized-Decentralism. Should the City States be controlled by a Secret Government headed by the Queen of Heaven and God of This World (one being or two?)? Do we simply need to replace a Questionable Secret Ruler with a Completely Uncorrupted Ruler? Should there be Two Secret Rulers (Christ and Satan?) and an Objective Mediatorial Referee? Are we really incapable of ruling ourselves? Is there a good side to the Secret Government? Who is really taking an objective look at all of this, without getting angry, and without trying to make other people angry or scared? I continue to simply wish to discuss all of this with others, rather than just talking to myself. On the other hand, I might be getting a mental and spiritual workout, which is second to none, by playing the part of the Lone Solar System Ranger or Solar System Super Man! It's a nasty job, but someone's gotta do it! This is more about being able to properly discuss SSG, than it is about simply choosing the right methodology, by accident or design. This is a HUGE subject, and I'm just scratching the surface. I am merely a rank amateur and a completely ignorant fool. There really needs to be a university department of Solar System Studies and Governance. Imagine having a PhD in Solar System Studies and Governance from Harvard or Yale! Perhaps ALL 10,000 representatives of the United States of the Solar System should have Doctorates in Solar System Studies and Governance. I think they should. They shouldn't just be a bunch of stupid nitwits with money and connections - who have sold their souls to you know who. This thread is part of my feeble attempt to move in the direction of University Level Solar System Studies and Governance. I haven't arrived. I've only just begun. My goal is to replace the New World Order with the New Solar System. Solar System Without End. Namaste.

    Once again, consider the integration of 1. The Teachings of Jesus. 2. The Gregorian Chant. 3. The Music of Charles Marie Widor. 4. The Traditional Latin Mass.  Then, consider dropping most of the excess-baggage, astrological-theology, paganism, stupid laws and rules, etc. - you know what I'm talking about. If there were a church which did Items 1-4 Seven Days a Week - with nothing beyond this - wouldn't this be sort of cool?! Wouldn't this be Minimalist Traditionalist? Would this be a Protestant or a Catholic church? I'm not a big fan of the various parts of the Liturgical Year - including Lent, Easter, and Christmas. Why have them at all? Why not simply have Items 1-4 Year Round - and nothing more than that? Weddings and Funerals could obviously be accommodated within Items 1-4. Once again - the fighting which would occur in connection with this proposal would be something to behold!! I love thinking about the Ideal Church - but the strife connected with actually trying to do this sort of thing would really test one's faith! Imagine Items 1-4 being implemented in a Roman Catholic Crystal Cathedral!!! Can you picture THAT!!! Imagine this sort of thing at St. Mary's Cathedral, San Francisco!!!! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YiHWKKBHP28 More trouble and fighting!!!!! Could this sort of thing occur under the same roof with the United States of the Solar System? A whole helluva lot of trouble and fighting!!!!! Does the Substitutionary Atonement, the Sacrifice of the Mass, Sunday Sacredness, and Apostolic Succession really have a theological leg to stand on - especially when adhering strictly to the Teachings of Jesus? Really. Do some research with a Strong's Concordance - and see what you come up with. Now I've started WWIII!!! Will Vatican III = World War III???? I should stop.

    What if ALL of the music of Charles Marie Widor were choral music? What if SATB choir parts were written for all movements of the Widor Symphonies? If this hasn't already been done - it should be done. I love other composers - but regarding harmonizing with the Gregorian Chant and the Latin Mass - in the context of the cathedral - the music of Widor really seems to fit. I remember sitting behind the organ console at Grace Cathedral, listening to Lynne Davis (an American organist, living in Paris, at the time) play the Allegro Movement of Widor's Symphonie Number 6 - and being absolutely spellbound. I can only play the first couple of pages of this difficult work! There is a lot of organ literature which doesn't fit liturgically - but which works quite well in a concert setting. I even spoke with Lynne Davis regarding hymn improvisation. When improvisation is properly performed - it ROCKS!!! Hearing Pierre Cochereau improvise at Grace Cathedral was unbelievable. Attending a Marie-Claire Alain Master Class was a pinnacle musical experience - and now it is my supreme pleasure to introduce to you, from Paris, France - the Mademoiselle Marie-Claire Alain. I don't know why I didn't really pursue organ performance. (Probably a lack of talent, lack of ambition, and nerves.) I love to improvise - but I'm not very good at it!







    How do we rid the world of poverty, disease, war, and starvation? I tend to think that proper solar system governance is the answer to everything. If one picks away at individual problems without addressing the overall, big-picture problems - it's all for nought. Well not ALL - but mostly. I feel as though I am in a dark place - and that I am trying to break through into the light. I really think that the principles enunciated in this thread are that which will liberate the human race - in every conceivable way - which includes freedom from poverty, disease, war, and starvation. Perhaps this is a bit of an overstatement - but maybe not. Should we solve the solar system's problems in somewhat of a cold and calculating manner - without a lot of drama? Is the good side of Anna in 'V' a good model of leadership demeanor. I tend to think so. I just wish that I hadn't seen the bad and creepy side of Anna! The same goes for Kitesh aka Vala Mal Doran, and her daughter Adria - in Stargate SG-1. Even Amen Ra - in Stargate - has some leadership qualities which should be considered carefully. I am really torn regarding gods, goddesses, angels, archangels, authority, governance, etc. Perhaps I'm a dormant power-hungry, back-stabbing sonofabitch! It's a nasty job - but somebody's gotta do it!!! I continue to be fascinated by Ancient Reptilian and/or Hybrid Queens - and with what the modern manifestation of this phenomenon might be. Could very many of us really relate to a truly brilliant micro-deity who could converse on any topic in great detail - and be excruciatingly trenchant and to the point? Could we deal with thrones and flowing robes? Frankly - when I see Presidents and Popes - I'm not seeing People in Charge. I'm seeing Minions - plain and simple. I just wish I had the whole story about everything. I continue to fly blind - as I try to conceptualize how to fix this solar system. This is akin to a blind man performing neurosurgery. The problem is, if I were on the inside, I would probably either become corrupt or insane. Is the concept of a Solar System Divinity - who is powerful - but not all powerful - something which should be considered exhaustively? I continue to say that politics cannot be properly understood without understanding theology - and visa versa. We always sanctimoniously speak of the separation of church and state - but is this really possible - or even desirable? Do we simply need to achieve a proper church/state relationship which is completely non-corrupt and highly-competent? If one combines a crappy church with a crappy state - Well Guess What? It's not going to work - and people are going to be persecuted, tortured, and murdered. We need to simultaneously reform both church and state - and contemplate the role of both church and state in solar system governance. This is why I keep talking about the United States and the Vatican - and the possibility of an Idealized United States Model Operating Within the Vatican - but with the style and panache of the princes of the church - if you know what I mean. I have proposed a Minimalist Traditionalist Model of Theology and Liturgy. I have proposed that Governance be U.S. Constitutionally Based. I obviously don't have the details worked out - and this would be a helluva lot easier if SOMEONE WOULD TALK TO ME!!!

    What would YOU do regarding these very sad images if YOU were the CEO of Purgatory Incorporated?? How would one transform Purgatory Incorporated into Paradise Incorporated?? I guess I've tried to imagine the United States of the Solar System as being Paradise Incorporated. My theory is that when one is 'Above It All' for too long -- they get cold and hard. I guess that's why I'm envisioning 5,000 Solar System Supreme Court Justices spread throughout the solar system -- guided by 1,000 of the very best laws presently in existence throughout the solar system. What if there were 5,000 Supreme Courthouses throughout the solar system?? What if the 5,000 Justices handled the cases within their districts PLUS voted via the InterPlaNet on major cases concerning the entire solar system?? This would be the most stable part of a United States of the Solar System. The 5,000 Solar System Representatives might be Senators, Congresspersons, and UN Representatives in a Solar System which combined the very best aspects of the United Nations and the United States. Finally, there might be artistic and ceremonial aspects derived from the Anglican and Catholic Traditions. I don't know how all of this might fit together. I have merely been giving all of you something to think about. I will truly go silent by the end of August. I wish for the right type of Liberty and Justice to exist throughout the Solar System. This might involve properly dealing with who REALLY owns the Solar System -- and where All of the Technology Originated -- and whether proper compensation has been distributed.

    Was North Africa destroyed by Piloted Asteroids in Antiquity?? Is that when the takeover occurred?? Did Nibiru have something to do with that?? Did the Moon have something to do with that?? Did Mars, Deimos, and Phobos have something to do with that?? Did an Idealistic Babylonian-Egyptian-Roman Empire become a Harsh and Corrupted Babylonian-Egyptian-Roman Empire thousands of years ago?? Have we ALL been enslaved by that empire for thousands of years?? Be very careful to arrive at the correct conclusions regarding all of the above. Don't be pressured into quick decisions. I continue to think that the Ancient Egyptian Deity I encountered was either the Real-Deal or a Representative of the Real-Deal. I have encountered other individuals who were seemingly more than human (whatever that means). I think these individuals knew the whole story -- but they didn't tell me a lot. I offer no proof -- but then I'm not trying to prove anything. I am merely offering my perceptions and impressions. I didn't 'play-ball' with any of them -- but I conversed politely with them. Once again, I think there is a Very Real Theological Reality which underlies the Conflicting Theologies and Philosophies of the World. I've been somewhat irreverent to try to break the ice and stir things up -- so as to achieve convincing and lasting solutions to our Solar System Crisis. I continue to think we are on the Brink of Extinction (by accident or design). Try combining Bible-Study with Science and Science-Fiction -- but be warned -- you might have to lose your faith and build a new faith -- repeatedly.

    I truly think there should be a website, television-series, magazine, newspaper, etc. devoted to a side by side examination of the Top One-Percent and the Bottom One-Percent -- and regarding how they might constructively interact with each other. What if the Top One-Percent Reincarnated as the Bottom One-Percent -- and the Bottom One-Percent Reincarnated as the Top One-Percent?? Things might even-out -- don't you think??? "The First Shall be Last -- and the Last Shall be First".



    "Never Mess with a Solar System
    Supreme Court Justice!!!"

    What's really happening on the Moon today? Who is really living on the Moon? Nazis? Dracs? Greys? Masons? Jesuits? Gizeh Intelligence? Ashtar Command? Pleiadians? World Government? Solar System Government? Annunaki? Forum Members??!! What would it be like to live on the Moon? What would one think of Earth if one lived on the Moon? Would I like to have my Room with a View and a Cray - on the Moon? Transportation and Rent would undoubtedly be prohibitively expensive - but I could place flat-screen computer monitors on the windows of my Messy Terrestrial Room Without a View or a Cray - to simulate living just about anywhere! When one is a nobody, who won't join the Masons - all you can do is engage in illusions of grandeur and adventure! I haven't thought about the USSS Namaste aka Phobos much lately - but perhaps I should continue that little adventure. I wouldn't mind interacting with all of those named above - but I have huge problems with the way business is being conducted on Earth - and probably throughout the solar system. One really can't get this sort of fantasy from reading or watching science fiction. It's really better to create your own science fiction - and mostly limit it to this solar system. I'm still liking the idea of Ivy League Doctoral Programs in Solar System Studies and Governance - as a prerequisite for participation in Solar System Governance. I would love to view the Prime Classified Volumes or Files Regarding the Most Important Solar System Information in Concise Form. You know what I mean. That sort of thing does exist. In the meantime, I have to read 'The Holy Tablets' and just wonder how much of it is true! I stalled in reading them - and I need to start again. Perhaps I'll do that today - while listening to Latin Masses https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqIl7IB3n4g Gregorian Chants 1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQGBMl_CGQI&feature=related 2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDhYGdK0KQg&NR=1 and the Music of Charles Marie Widor. You can laugh at me all you want - but I think I'm on the right track - in a very sloppy and shoddy manner. Is there a University of the Moon at Copernicus - with Undergraduate, Masters, and Doctoral Programs in Solar System Studies and Governance? If there isn't - there should be - and it should be open to all races and factions!!! How would you like to have a Draconian Reptilian Professor for your Reptilian Anatomy and Physiology class - using 'Grey's Anatomy'??!! I'm really not into all of the violence and creepiness in most science fiction. I would rather listen to people like Richard Hoagland and Joseph Farrell (and others) - and then extrapolate from their work into my own little Dream-Land - which could very well approximate reality. My thoughts are composites of fantasy and reality. I'm still very uncomfortable with this process. It does not have any financial compensation, and it is emotionally destabilizing. One certainly doesn't have anything to show for all of the emotional and spiritual disorientation and trauma. As I travel the solar system, I am going nowhere fast.

    I have repeatedly expressed disgust and dissatisfaction regarding the history of the world - and regarding the hidden governance which seems to be behind a lot of the trouble - but what would I have done if I had been in the shoes of the hidden governor(s) of the world and solar system? What if it turns out that I had a lot to do with the historical problems? I am really haunted by not knowing the real-deal. Could someone conceivably be BOTH the best AND the worst (on a past-life basis)? Could Jesus also be Hitler? Was Jesus as good as we think? Was Hitler as bad as we think? What if there is some overlap of the roles and deeds of Michael and Lucifer? What if they fought side by side, at some point in time? Sorry for the explosive questions - but I think we need to think through ALL possibilities. We're not very good at doing that sort of thing - are we? Could someone please slip me a 1,000 page classified file with the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth about the history of ALL of the beings within 1,000 light-years of Earth - over the past 1,000,000 Earth Years????? I think a lot of us are good, simply because we lack the opportunity to be bad. We might not be nearly as civilized as we think we are. Is there a legitimate reason why we seem to be living in a Prison Planet which sometimes seems like a Torture Chamber - and often feels like Death Row? I don't wish to be Rebellious Regarding Righteous Justice - but I also do not wish to be Submissive to Regressive and Demonic Tyranny and Enslavement. This might be an optimal time for the lies to stop - and for us to face the ugly truth, whether we like it, or not - and I'm frankly bracing for the worst. I have taken a non-committal, but very suspicious approach to the present Powers That Be - both visible and invisible. I continue to call for a changing of the guard in this solar system - but do I really understand what I'm asking for? They say to be careful what you ask for - because you just might get it. What if this world needs to be ruled by a hidden and ruthless dictator? Would a kind and loving supreme leader be the worst thing for this solar system? I tend to think that whoever the 'next guy, gal, or guy/gal - human or otherwise' might be - that they will have to be a lot like their despised predecessor - but without all of the corruption and violence - which seems to have been sanctioned and implemented at the highest levels. I am more torn-up about all of this than I could possibly describe. You have no idea what I think about - and fear. Might Azrael be somewhat like those who rule humanity? Might they have been authorized by those higher than themselves, to teach humanity (and the rest of the universe) a lesson? Just wondering. The horror. Viewer discretion highly advised for the following video clip from 'Dogma'. (Interesting points made with very poor taste.) Was Serendipity the Whore of Babylon? Who wrote the Bible? What did Azrael have to say about responsibility? The movie presented 'God' as being a funny and eccentric female - hidden in a male body - and not very talkative. You don't suppose? Sorry for the repetition. I think I've met 3 or 4 of the 'people' pictured below - but perhaps they were all one - merely figments of Serendipity's Musings. Serendipity really gave me something to think about...



    TOP-LEVEL SOLAR SYSTEM GOVERNANCE NEGOTIATIONS
    CONTINUE ON PHOBOS AKA USSS NAMASTE.
    Carol wrote:

    http://translogic.aolautos.com/2013/07/12/zero-to-4-000-miles-per-hour-in-3-minutes-hyperloop-travel-coul/?icid=maing-grid7%7Cnetscape%7Cdl29%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D344507
    Zero To 4,000 Miles Per Hour In 3 Minutes: Hyperloop Tubes Could Make It Possible

    Imagine a transport system that never crashes, is totally immune to weather and can get passengers from New York to China in two hours. For now, it's a theory. But if one billionaire has his way, it will soon be a reality. Hyperloop, is a "cross between a Concorde, a rail gun, and an air hockey table... Theoretically, Hyperloop tube travel would use magnets much like a bullet trains to take passengers from one destination to another at unheard of speeds. The difference is the enclosed tube, which would allow the capsule to travel without air resistance and very little friction. It is potentially safer, too, than a train that rides on a track with open sides.





    I am trying to balance my Utopian-Idealism with Apocalyptic-Prophecy. We could get all of our problems solved -- only to be vaporized by WMD's on Steroids. A hypothetical regime-change could hypothetically be the end of us all. If someone has been CEO of Purgatory Incorporated for thousands (or even millions) of years -- they probably wouldn't be too eager to be demoted or fired!!! "If I can't have them -- NOBODY CAN!!!" You wouldn't believe who I heard say that!! I'm not sure how they meant it, exactly -- but I connected it to the CEO of Purgatory Incorporated -- and I have encountered substantial evidence that this might very well be the case. I think we live in VERY dangerous times. Things could go unimaginably wrong in a matter of seconds. I think about this constantly -- which might explain why I'm such a mess. If you can remain sane in this insane situation -- you do NOT understand the situation. But seriously, when I finish this thread at the end of August -- I intend to morph into Positive-Reinforcement Mode. It will be sort of nice to not have to express my concerns on the internet on a daily basis. Been there. Done that. You don't like me. I don't like me. I'm an idiot -- and I've been left behind. Now it's time to move on...possibly to another solar system???
    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7368
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The United States of the Solar System, A.D. 2133 (Book Three)

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Mon May 01, 2017 9:27 pm



    evisnam wrote:Hello All ,  I Am Evisnam , so not to burden Carol with extra work i have been given an account so i can respond directly to you all. I would like to take this opportunity to thank Carol and all the members and staff of The Mists of Avalon for their support and indeed giving us this place to congregate and talk.

    My first response to Orthodoxymoron is an important one. Forgive me for not understanding your question properly, in reading a little on the thread you started on the old Project Avalon forum... in reading parts of this thread i can see how Dogma has influenced your opinions and prompted you to ask poignant questions. Some of which you have answered your self, in relation as to why this is happening to you. It seems to me you may have gotten the attention of some that may want to create a self fulfilling prophecy for you.

    We create our own demons and we create our own reality through the holo matrix of existance under the binary system. This system is goverend and manintained from the moon base. In our " apparent " realities what we create by magnitude of emotional input equates to a manifestation which interacts with the living charachters of your dogmatic beliefs. The dogma we attune to gives it life in proportion to our focus and in some circumstances brings to life enough energy to form a response in the physical.

    or it just could be some jokers following you.

    Either way when we speak of such things we must have some sort of respect imbed in our words , even the Lucifer sect has a distinct set of rules they must obide by. When we cross these lines of respect we ask for problems.

    May i ask you if you have a dual soul ?  you seem to me to have a dual soul , this is an even mix of male and female soul complex. If so then you should adhere to a more respectful dialogue and try not to indulge in so much Hyperbole. Let me explain what i mean by this.

    an example here

    " Could Lucifer be the Human God of This World? Could Satan be the Reptilian God of This World? Could Amen Ra be a combination of the two? A Pleiadian Human Being...Perfectly Possessed by a Draconian Interdimensional Reptilian? "

    ( quote from Amen Ra thread )  

    These words in print create a conjecture which is a type of judgement. Because it is symbolically written and interacted with by many, it has taken on a meaning to those who read it and in turn energise the words. It may have taken some time but i imagine their response happened some 2 - 3 years after you wrote your first lot of questions ?  

    I also sense a great deal of uncertainty in your mind and i would attribute it to a large intake of caffiene , the problem with caffiene ( in large doses ) is it starts inner dialogues which go off in unfinished tangents whch seem important at the time but in reality are not. If you were to abstain for a period of 2 weeks and purify your self you will find a lot of these questions will fall by the way side.

    An Important rule of thumb which can be adopted to any situation on this planet at this time in our history.

    Whenever the Lucifer sect wishes to create fear around a saviour they will paint them as Evil.  Examples of which are the assasinations of Muammar al-Qaddafi , Malcom X , Mahatma Ghandi , John Lennon and John F Kennedy ( to name a few )  all at some stage were being painted as Evil by the establishment. The rule of thumb here is by degree of propoganda instated is the degree of which they are actually of good charachter.

    The same can be said of most of the ET races that have been unceremoniously painted as Evil. If we indulge in un founded fear then we will be justly rewarded.
    orthodoxymoron wrote:Thank-you evisnam. The construction of that "Amen Ra" thread took probably half a year, and then "Ra" showed-up probably half a year later, and our "contact" lasted probably three-months, at which time we occasionally spoke on the phone for another three-months. Then we stopped talking to each-other. All of the Above should probably have never occurred, but it was sort of interesting, and it made me dig deeper than if it hadn't happened. I'll try to kick the coffee-habit, but it's my one vice in life. There's a lot more I could talk about, but I'm sort of trying to stop talking about this stuff. I've recently gained a few insights which have hit me hard, and I'm hesitant to continue my pseudo-intellectual quest. That male-female thing probably arises from modeling various science-fictional concepts and characters. I'm sort of an "unpaid script-writer". I honestly think I could've made a career out of that, but it's a little late now. I think I'm headed for the "poor-house" and/or the "nut-house"!! It's much too late to be another Orson Scott Card. Thanks again for your insights.
    RedEzra wrote:Another prophecy which was written down in the bible is the restoration of Judea to the Jews.

    After about 2000 years without a land the withered Jews returned in huge numbers and declared an independent Jewish state in 1948. Usually after such a long time people are assimilated into the culture of the host nation but for some reason the Jews continued the old customs for so long.

    One thing which is absolutely astounding is that the day after the Jews declared independence they were attacked by Egypt Iraq Syria Jordan and Lebanon... and won !

    Two more times in 1967 and 1973 did armies of neigbouring Arab states attack them... which again resulted in Israeli victory and a quadrupling of land. For example Egypt lost the enormous Sinai area which Israel later gave back in exchange for a peace agreement. Israel was also willing to give Golan back to Syria for peace but Syria was not interested.

    When it is written in the bible that the Jews will return to their land... then ought one not take the book serious ? Especially in face of the fact that a combined Arab army with Soviet help could not beat a comparative handful of holocaust survivors... in three tries !


    "In that day the Lord will reach out his hand a second time to bring back the remnant of his people. From Assyria, Egypt, Pathros, Cush, Elam, Shinar, Hamath, and from the islands of the sea.

    And He will lift up a standard for the nations and assemble the banished ones of Israel. And will gather the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth." - Isaiah 11:11-12



    I keep thinking about Victoria and Albert , and I could say a lot about it, and about what I'm thinking, but I'd REALLY get in a lot of trouble. Padme = Victoria = Jupiter?? Did Padme like dogs too?? Dr. Stockmar = Emperor Palpatine = Mr. Edgars?? Does "Stocky" have an office at Goldman Sachs?? That's All I'm Going to Say. What Would Ellen White Say?? What Would Saint Germain Say?? What Would Edgar Mitchell Say?? What Would Elizabeth Mitchell Say?? What Would Mitchell Say?? What Would Prince Albert Say?? What Would Ra Say?? What Would Brother Rich Say?? What Would Sister Angie Say?? What Would Delenn and Vala Say?? What if Brexit has something to do with All of the Above?? I've said too much, and now you know too much. You know what that means...


















    "I Love Dogs!!"
    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7368
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The United States of the Solar System, A.D. 2133 (Book Three)

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Tue May 02, 2017 5:06 pm




    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brexit Brexit is a commonly used term for the United Kingdom's planned withdrawal from the European Union.[1] Following the 2016 referendum vote to leave, the UK government started the withdrawal process on 29 March 2017, putting the UK on course to leave by April 2019.[2] The terms of withdrawal have not yet been negotiated and the UK remains a full member of the European Union.[3] Theresa May, the British Prime Minister, has announced 12 negotiating objectives and confirmed that the UK government would not seek permanent single market membership.[4] She has promised a Great Repeal Bill to repeal the European Communities Act and incorporate existing EU laws into UK domestic law.[5] The UK joined the European Communities (EC), the EU's predecessor, in 1973, confirming its membership in a 1975 referendum. In the 1970s and 1980s, withdrawal from the European Economic Community (EEC) was advocated mainly by Labour Party and trade union figures. From the 1990s, withdrawal from the EU was advocated mainly by the newly founded Referendum Party, the UK Independence Party (UKIP) and by an increasing number of Conservatives.

    Brexit (like its early variant, Brixit)[6] is a portmanteau of "British" and "exit". It was derived by analogy from Grexit, referring to a hypothetical withdrawal of Greece from the eurozone (and possibly also the EU).[7] The term Brexit may have first been used in reference to a possible UK withdrawal from the EU by Peter Wilding in a Euractiv blog post on 15 May 2012.[8][9] The terms "hard Brexit" and "soft Brexit" are much used unofficially,[10] and are understood to describe the prospective relationship between the UK and the EU after withdrawal, ranging from hard, that could involve the UK trading with the EU like any other non-EU-member country under World Trade Organization rules but with no obligation to accept free movement of people, to soft, that might involve retaining membership of the EU single market for goods and services and at least some free movement of people, according to European Economic Area rules.[11]

    Since 1977 both pro- and anti-European views have had majority support, with dramatic swings between the two camps.[12] In the United Kingdom European Communities membership referendum of 1975, two-thirds of British voters favoured continued membership. The highest ever rejection of membership was in 1980, the first full year of Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher's term of office, with 65% opposed to and 26% in favour of membership.[12] After Thatcher had negotiated a rebate of British membership payments in 1984, those favouring the EC maintained a lead in the opinion polls, except during 2000, as Prime Minister Tony Blair aimed for closer EU integration including adoption of the euro currency, and around 2011, as immigration into the United Kingdom became increasingly noticeable.[12] As late as December 2015 there was, according to ComRes, a clear majority in favour of remaining in the EU, albeit with a warning that voter intentions would be considerably influenced by the outcome of Prime Minister David Cameron's ongoing EU reform negotiations, especially with regards to the two issues of "safeguards for non-Eurozone member states" and "immigration".[13] The following events are relevant.

    The UK was not a signatory to the Treaty of Rome which created the then European Communities, including the European Economic Community (EEC), in 1957 and the UK's applications in 1963 and 1967 were vetoed by the President of France, Charles de Gaulle, who said that "a number of aspects of Britain's economy, from working practices to agriculture" had "made Britain incompatible with Europe" and that Britain harboured a "deep-seated hostility" to any pan-European project.[14] Once de Gaulle had relinquished the French presidency in 1969, the UK made a third and successful application for membership. The question of sovereignty had been discussed at the time in an official Foreign and Commonwealth Office document (FCO 30/1048) that became open to the public in January 2002 under the rules for availability after thirty years. It listed among "Areas of policy in which parliamentary freedom to legislate will be affected by entry into the European Communities": Customs duties, Agriculture, Free movement of labour, services and capital, Transport, and Social Security for migrant workers. The document concluded (paragraph 26) that it was advisable to put the considerations of influence and power before those of formal sovereignty.[15] The Treaty of Accession was signed in January 1972 by the prime minister Edward Heath, leader of the Conservative party.[16] Parliament's European Communities Act 1972 was enacted on 17 October and the UK's instrument of ratification was deposited the next day (18 October),[17] letting the United Kingdom's membership of the EEC, or "Common Market", come into effect on 1 January 1973.[18]

    In 1975, the United Kingdom held its first ever national referendum on whether the UK should remain in the European Communities. The opposition Labour Party, led by Harold Wilson, contested the October 1974 general election with a commitment to renegotiate Britain's terms of membership of the EEC and then hold a referendum on whether to remain in the EEC on the new terms.[19] All of the major political parties and mainstream press supported continuing membership of the EC. However, there were significant divides within the ruling Labour party, with a 1974 one-day party conference voting 2:1 in favour of withdrawal and seven of 23 cabinet ministers opposed to EC membership,[20] with Harold Wilson suspending the constitutional convention of Cabinet collective responsibility to allow those ministers to publicly campaign against the government.

    On 5 June 1975, the electorate were asked to vote yes or no on the question: "Do you think the UK should stay in the European Community (Common Market)?" Every administrative county and region in the UK returned majority "Yes" votes, apart from the Shetland Islands and the Outer Hebrides. With a turnout of just under 65%, the outcome of the vote was 67.2% in favour of staying in, and the United Kingdom remained a member of the EC.[21] Support for the UK to leave the EC in 1975, in the data, appears unrelated to the support for Leave in the 2016 referendum.[22]

    In 1979 the United Kingdom opted out of the newly formed European Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM) which was the precursor to the creation of the euro. The opposition Labour Party campaigned in the 1983 general election on a commitment to withdraw from the EEC without a referendum.[23] It was heavily defeated as the Conservative government of Margaret Thatcher was re-elected. The Labour Party subsequently changed its policy.[23] In 1985 the United Kingdom ratified the Single European Act, the first major revision to the Treaty of Rome without a referendum with the full support HM Government of Margaret Thatcher. In October 1990 – despite the deep reservations of Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher but under pressure from her senior ministers – the United Kingdom joined the ERM with the pound sterling pegged to the deutschmark.

    In November 1990 Thatcher resigned as Prime Minister amid internal divisions within the Conservative Party arising partly from her increasingly Eurosceptic views. In September 1992 the United Kingdom was forced to withdraw from the ERM after the pound sterling came under pressure from currency speculators (an episode known as Black Wednesday). The resulting cost to UK taxpayers was estimated to be in excess of £3 billion.[24][25] As a result of the Maastricht Treaty, the European Communities became the European Union on 1 November 1993.[26] The new name reflected the evolution of the organisation from an economic union into a political union.[27] As a result of the Lisbon Treaty, which entered into force on 1 December 2009, the Maastricht Treaty is now known, in updated form as, the Treaty on European Union (2007) or TEU, and the Treaty of Rome is now known, in updated form, as the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (2007) or TFEU. The Referendum Party was formed in 1994 by Sir James Goldsmith to contest the 1997 general election on a platform of providing a referendum on the UK's membership of the EU.[28] It fielded candidates in 547 constituencies at that election and won 810,860 votes, 2.6% of total votes cast.[29] It failed to win a single parliamentary seat as its vote was spread out across the country, losing its deposit (funded by Goldsmith) in 505 constituencies.[29]

    The UK Independence Party (UKIP), a Eurosceptic political party, was also formed, in 1993. It achieved third place in the UK during the 2004 European elections, second place in the 2009 European elections and first place in the 2014 European elections, with 27.5% of the total vote. This was the first time since the 1910 general election that any party other than the Labour or Conservative parties had taken the largest share of the vote in a nationwide election.[30] UKIP's electoral success in the 2014 European election has been documented as the strongest correlate of the support for the leave campaign in the 2016 referendum.[31] In 2014, UKIP won two by-elections, triggered when the sitting Conservative MPs defected to UKIP and then resigned. These were their first elected MPs. At the 2015 general election UKIP took 12.6% of the total vote and held one of the two seats won in 2014.[32]

    In a statistical analysis published in April 2016, Professor John Curtice (Strathclyde University), has defined Euroscepticism as the wish to sever or reduce the powers of the EU, and conversely Europhilia as the desire to preserve or increase the powers of the EU. According to this definition, the British Social Attitudes (BSA) surveys show an increase in euroscepticism from 38% (1993) to 65% (2015). Euroscepticism should however not be confused with the wish to leave the EU: the BSA survey for the period July–November 2015 shows that 60% backed the option "continue as an EU member", and only 30% backed the option to "withdraw".[33]

    In 2012, Prime Minister David Cameron rejected calls for a referendum on the UK's EU membership, but suggested the possibility of a future referendum to gauge public support.[34][35] According to the BBC, "The prime minister acknowledged the need to ensure the UK's position within the European Union had 'the full-hearted support of the British people' but they needed to show 'tactical and strategic patience'."[36] Under pressure from many of his MPs and from the rise of UKIP, in January 2013, Cameron announced that a Conservative government would hold an in–out referendum on EU membership before the end of 2017, on a renegotiated package, if elected in 2015.[37] The Conservative Party unexpectedly won the 2015 general election with a majority. Soon afterwards the European Union Referendum Act 2015 was introduced into Parliament to enable the referendum. Cameron favoured remaining in a reformed European Union and sought to renegotiate on four key points: protection of the single market for non-eurozone countries, reduction of "red tape", exempting Britain from "ever-closer union", and restricting EU immigration.[38]

    The outcome of the renegotiations was announced in February 2016. Some limits to in-work benefits for new EU immigrants were agreed, but before they could be applied, a country such as the UK would have to get permission from the European Commission and then from the European Council.[39] In a speech to the House of Commons on 22 February 2016, Cameron announced a referendum date of 23 June 2016 and commented on the renegotiation settlement.[40] Cameron spoke of an intention to trigger the Article 50 process immediately following a leave vote and of the "two-year time period to negotiate the arrangements for exit."[41]

    The official campaign group for leaving the EU was Vote Leave[42] after a contest for the designation with Leave.EU.[43][44] A "Vote Leave" poster in Omagh saying "We send the EU £50 million every day. Let's spend it on our NHS instead." The official campaign to stay in the EU, chaired by Stuart Rose, was known as Britain Stronger in Europe, or informally as Remain. Other campaigns supporting remaining in the EU included Conservatives In,[45] Labour in for Britain,[46] #INtogether (Liberal Democrats),[47] Greens for a Better Europe,[48] Scientists for EU,[49] Environmentalists For Europe,[50] Universities for Europe[51] and Another Europe is Possible.[52]

    The result was announced on the morning of 24 June: 51.9% voted in favour of leaving the European Union and 48.1% voted in favour of remaining a member of the European Union.[53][54] Comprehensive results are available from the UK Electoral Commission Referendum Results site. A petition calling for a second referendum attracted more than four million signatures,[55][56] but was rejected by the government on 9 July.[57]

    After the result was declared, Cameron announced that he would resign by October.[59] He stood down on 13 July 2016, with Theresa May becoming Prime Minister after a leadership contest. George Osborne was replaced as Chancellor of the Exchequer by Philip Hammond, former Mayor of London Boris Johnson was appointed Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, and David Davis became Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union. Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn lost a vote of confidence among his parliamentary party and a leadership challenge was launched, while on 4 July, Nigel Farage announced his resignation as head of UKIP.[60]

    Outside the UK many Eurosceptic leaders celebrated and expected others to follow the UK example. The right-wing Dutch populist Geert Wilders said that the Netherlands should follow Britain's example and hold a referendum on whether the Netherlands should stay in the European Union.[61] However, opinion polls in the fortnight following the British referendum show that the immediate reaction in the Netherlands and other European countries was a decline in support for Eurosceptic movements.[62]

    A week after the referendum, Gordon Brown, a former Labour Prime Minister who had signed the Lisbon Treaty in 2007, warned of a danger that in the next decade the country would be refighting the referendum. He wrote that remainers were feeling they must be pessimists to prove that Brexit is unmanageable without catastrophe, while leavers optimistically claim economic risks are exaggerated.[63]

    The previous Labour Prime Minister, Tony Blair, in October 2016 called for a second referendum, a decision through parliament or a general election to decide finally if Britain should leave the EU.[64] Former leader of the Conservative Prime Minister John Major argued in November 2016 that parliament will have to ratify whatever deal is negotiated and then, depending on the deal there could be a case for a second referendum.[65]

    Withdrawal from the European Union is governed by Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union. Under the Article 50 invocation procedure a member notifies the European Council and there is a negotiation period of up to two years, after which the treaties cease to apply – although a leaving agreement may be agreed,[66] although aspects such as trade may be difficult to negotiate until the UK has left the EU.[67]

    Although the 2016 referendum act did not expressly require Article 50 to be invoked,[68] the UK government stated that they would expect a leave vote to be followed by withdrawal[69][70] despite government refusal to make contingency plans.[71] Following the referendum result Cameron resigned and said that it would be for the incoming Prime Minister to invoke Article 50.[72][73]

    The Supreme Court ruled in the Miller case in January 2017 that the government needed parliamentary approval to trigger Article 50.[74][75] After the House of Commons overwhelmingly voted, on 1 February 2017, for the government's bill authorising the prime minister to invoke Article 50,[76] the bill passed into law as the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017. Theresa May signed the letter invoking Article 50 on 28 March 2017, which was delivered on 29 March by Tim Barrow, the UK's ambassador to the EU, to Donald Tusk.[77][78][79]

    In October 2016, Theresa May promised a "Great Repeal Bill", which would repeal the European Communities Act 1972 and restate in UK law all enactments previously in force under EU law. This bill will be introduced in the May 2017 parliamentary session and enacted before or during the Article 50 negotiations; it would not come into force until the date of exit. It would smooth the transition by ensuring that all laws remain in force until specifically repealed.[80] Such a bill could raise constitutional issues regarding the devolution settlements with the UK nations, particularly in Scotland.[81]

    A report published in March 2017 by the Institute for Government commented that, in addition to the Great Repeal Bill, primary and secondary legislation will be needed to cover the gaps in policy areas such as customs, immigration and agriculture.[82] The report also commented that the role of the devolved legislatures was unclear, and could cause problems, and as many as fifteen new additional Brexit Bills may be required, which would involve strict prioritisation and limiting Parliamentary time for in-depth examination of new legislation.[83] The House of Lords continued to publish a series of reports on Brexit related subjects including:

    Brexit: the options for trade
    Brexit: UK-Irish relations
    Brexit: future UK-EU security and police cooperation
    Brexit: fisheries
    Brexit: environment and climate change
    Brexit: the Crown Dependencies
    Brexit: justice for families, individuals and businesses?
    Brexit: trade in non- financial services

    Replying to questions at a parliamentary committee about Parliament's involvement in voting on the outcome of the negotiations with the EU, the Prime Minister said that "delivering on the vote of the British people to leave the European Union" was her priority. The opposition shadow Brexit secretary, Keir Starmer, commented that the government did not want a vote at the beginning of the process, to trigger Article 50, nor a vote at the end.[84] The period for negotiation began on 29 March 2017 when the letter notifying withdrawal, signed by the United Kingdom's prime minister at 10 Downing Street, Westminster, was handed to the president of the European Council in Brussels. Following the United Kingdom's notification under Article 50, draft guidelines for the negotiations were sent to EU delegations (of the 27 other member states) (EU27). The draft was prepared by the President of the European Council. It states that the guidelines define the framework for negotiations under Article 50 and set out the overall positions and principles that the Union will pursue throughout the negotiation. It states that in the negotiations the Union's overall objective will be to preserve its interests, those of its Member States, its citizens and its businesses, and that, in the best interest of both sides, the Union will be constructive throughout and strive to find an agreement. As part of the withdrawal negotiation there could be a proposal by EU27 for the UK to pay a "divorce bill", reportedly of up to £52bn, although a report of the European Union Committee of the House of Lords published on 4 March 2017 states that if there is no post-Brexit deal at the end of the two-year negotiating period, the UK could withdraw without payment.[85] Negotiations are likely to be delayed until after the United Kingdom general election which takes place on 8 June 2017.

    Immigration was cited as the second most important reason for those voting to Leave. However, forecasts indicate that immigration flows to the UK will remain relatively high after Brexit.[86] Theresa May believes that if immigration stops there will be no negotiation between the UK and the EU.[clarification needed][87] Several thousand British citizens resident in other EU countries have after the referendum applied for citizenship where they live, since they fear losing the right to work there.[88]

    During the referendum, the economic arguments were a major area of debate. Remainers, including the UK treasury, argued that being in the EU has a strong positive effect on trade and as a result the UK's trade would be worse off if it left the EU.[89][90] Supporters of withdrawal from the EU have argued that the cessation of net contributions to the EU would allow for some cuts to taxes or increases in government spending.[91]

    After the referendum the Institute for Fiscal Studies published a report funded by the Economic and Social Research Council which warned that Britain would lose up to £70 billion in reduced economic growth if it didn't retain Single Market membership with new trade deals unable to make up the difference.[92] One of these areas is financial services, which are helped by EU-wide "passporting" for financial products, which the Financial Times estimates indirectly accounts for up to 71,000 jobs and 10 billion pounds of tax annually[93] and there are concerns that banks may relocate outside the UK.[94]

    On 5 January 2017, Andy Haldane, the Chief Economist and the Executive Director of Monetary Analysis and Statistics at the Bank of England, admitted that forecasts predicting an economic downturn due to the referendum were inaccurate and noted strong market performance after the referendum,[95][96][97] although some have pointed to prices rising faster than wages.[98]

    The UK received more from the EU for research than it contributed[99] with universities getting a large proportion of their research income from the EU.[100] All funding for net beneficiaries from the EU, including universities, was guaranteed by the government in August 2016.[101] Before the funding announcement, a newspaper investigation reported that research projects were reluctant to employ British researchers due to uncertainties over funding.[102] Currently the UK is part of the European Research Area and the UK is likely to wish to remain an associated member.[103]

    Before the referendum, leading figures with a range of opinions regarding Scottish independence suggested that in the event the UK as a whole voted to leave the EU but Scotland as a whole voted to remain, a second Scottish independence referendum might be precipitated.[104][105][106] In response to the result, on 24 June 2016, the Scottish Government said officials would begin planning for a second independence referendum.[107] On 28 March 2017, the Scottish Parliament voted 69–59 on Motion S5M-04710, in favour of holding a second referendum on Scottish independence. [108]

    The UK's post Brexit relationship with the remaining EU members could take several forms. A research paper presented to the UK Parliament in July 2013 proposed a number of alternatives to membership which would continue to allow access to the EU internal market. These include remaining in the European Economic Area,[109] negotiating deep bilateral agreements on the Swiss model[110] or exit from the EU without EEA membership or a trade agreement under the WTO Option. There may be an interim deal between the time the UK leaves the EU and when the final relationship comes in force.

    The Republic of Ireland, Northern Ireland and the United Kingdom as a whole share, since the 1920s, a Common Travel Area without border controls. According to statements by Theresa May and Enda Kenny, it is intended to maintain this arrangement.[111] After Brexit, in order to prevent illegal migration across the open Northern Irish border into the United Kingdom, the Irish and British governments suggested in October 2016 a plan whereby British border controls would be applied to Irish ports and airports. This would prevent a "hard border" arising between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland.[112] However, this agreement was never official and was met by opposition from political parties in the Republic of Ireland[113] and there is still great uncertainty in relation to a 'hard border' between the Republic and Northern Ireland.[114] On 23 March 2017 it was confirmed British Immigration officials would not be allowed to use Irish ports and airports in order to combat immigration concerns following Brexit.[115] A referendum for the reunification of Ireland was suggested by Sinn Féin leader Martin McGuinness immediately after the UK EU referendum results were announced.[116] Creating a border control system between Ireland and Northern Ireland could jeopardise the Good Friday Agreement established in 1998.[117] In April 2017 the European Council agreed that, in the event of Irish reunification, Northern Ireland would rejoin the EU.[118]

    The President of the Regional Council of Hauts-de-France, Xavier Bertrand, stated in February 2016 that "If Britain leaves Europe, right away the border will leave Calais and go to Dover. We will not continue to guard the border for Britain if it's no longer in the European Union," indicating that the juxtaposed controls would end with a leave vote. French Finance Minister Emmanuel Macron also suggested the agreement would be "threatened" by a leave vote.[119] These claims have been disputed, as the Le Touquet 2003 treaty enabling juxtaposed controls was not an EU treaty, and would not be legally void upon leaving.[120]

    After the Brexit vote, Xavier Bertrand asked François Hollande to renegotiate the Touquet agreement,[121] which can be terminated by either party with two years' notice.[122] Hollande rejected the suggestion, and said: "Calling into question the Touquet deal on the pretext that Britain has voted for Brexit and will have to start negotiations to leave the Union doesn't make sense." Bernard Cazeneuve, the French Interior Minister, confirmed there would be "no changes to the accord". He said: "The border at Calais is closed and will remain so."[123]

    During the campaign leading up to the referendum[124] the Chief Minister of Gibraltar warned that Brexit posed a threat to Gibraltar's safety.[125] Gibraltar overwhelmingly voted to remain in the EU. After the result Spain's Foreign Minister renewed calls for joint Spanish–British control of the peninsula.[126] These calls were strongly rebuffed by Gibraltar's Chief Minister[127] and questions were raised over the future of free-flowing traffic at the Gibraltar–Spain border.[128] The British government states it will only negotiate on the sovereignty of Gibraltar with the consent of its people.[129]

    Shortly after the referendum, the German parliament published an analysis on the consequences of a Brexit on the EU and specifically on the economic and political situation of Germany.[130] According to this, Britain is, after the United States and France, the third most important export market for German products. In total Germany exports goods and services to Britain worth about €120 billion annually, which is about 8% of German exports, with Germany achieving a trade surplus with Britain worth €36.3 billion (2014). Should there be a "hard Brexit", exports would be subject to WTO customs and tariffs. The trade weighted average tariff is 2.4%, but the tariff on automobiles, for instance, is 9.7%, so trade in automobiles would be particularly affected; this would also affect German automobile manufacturers with production plants in the United Kingdom. In total, 750,000 jobs in Germany depend upon export to Britain, while on the British side about three million jobs depend on export to the EU. The study emphasises however that the predictions on the economic effects of a Brexit are subject to significant uncertainty. According to the Lisbon Treaty (2009), EU Council decisions made by qualified majority voting can only be blocked if at least 4 members of the Council form a blocking minority. This rule was originally developed to prevent the three most populous members (Germany, France, Britain) from dominating the EU Council.[131] However, after a Brexit of the economically liberal British, the Germans and like-minded northern European countries (the Dutch, Scandinavians and Balts) would lose an ally and therefore also their blocking minority.[132] Without this blocking minority, other EU states could overrule Germany and its allies in questions of EU budget discipline or the recruitment of German banks to guarantee deposits in troubled southern European banks.[133]

    With Brexit the EU would lose its second-largest economy, the country with the third-largest population and the financial centre of the world.[134] Furthermore, the EU would lose its second-largest net contributor to the EU budget (2015: Germany €14.3 billion, United Kingdom €11.5 billion, France €5.5 billion).[135] Thus, the departure of Britain would result in an additional financial burden for the remaining net contributors unless the budget is reduced accordingly: Germany for example would have to pay an additional €4.5 billion for 2019 and again for 2020.[citation needed] In addition the UK would no longer be a shareholder in the European Investment Bank, in which only EU members can participate. Britain's share amounts to 16%, €39.2 billion (2013), which Britain would withdraw unless there is an EU treaty change.[136] After a Brexit, the EU would lose its strongest military power,[137][138] one of its two members that possess nuclear weapons and are permanent members of the United Nations Security Council.

    A report by Tim Oliver of the German Institute for International and Security Affairs expanded analysis of what a British withdrawal could mean for the EU: the report argues a UK withdrawal "has the potential to fundamentally change the EU and European integration. On the one hand, a withdrawal could tip the EU towards protectionism, exacerbate existing divisions, or unleash centrifugal forces leading to the EU's unravelling. Alternatively, the EU could free itself of its most awkward member, making the EU easier to lead and more effective."[139] Some authors also highlight the qualitative change in the nature of the EU membership after Brexit: "What the UK case has clearly shown in our view is that for the Union to be sustainable, membership needs to entail constant caretaking as far as individual members' contributions to the common good are concerned, with both rights and obligations."[140]

    As of 15 November 2016 the President of the European Parliament is considering moves to exclude British MEPs from key committee positions ahead of the exit talks. The President has written to the head of the conference of committee chairs asking him to gather information on how Britain's imminent departure will impact various EU documents passing through the parliament's committees. Among the issues that should be considered, the letter states, are the possible impact of the British departure on the legislative files currently under discussion in various committees, the impact if the files are not concluded before Britain leaves, and whether any of the files are likely to feature in the EU-UK withdrawal agreement.[141]

    Various EU leaders have said that they will not start any negotiation before the UK formally invokes Article 50. Jean-Claude Juncker ordered all members of the EU Commission not to engage in any kind of contact with UK parties regarding Brexit.[142] In October 2016, he stated that he was agitated that the British had not developed a sense of community with Europeans during 40 years of membership; Juncker denied that Brexit was a warning for the EU, envisaged developing an EU defence policy without the British after Brexit, and rejected a suggestion that the EC should negotiate in such a way that Britain would be able to hold a second referendum.[143] On 5 November 2016, Juncker reacted to reports of some European businesses seeking to make agreements with the British government, and warned: "I am telling them [companies] that they should not interfere in the debate, as they will find that I will block their path."[144] Juncker stated in February 2017 that the UK would be expected to pay outstanding commitments to EU projects and pensions as part of the withdrawal process, suggesting such bills would be "very hefty."[145] On 29 June, European Council president Donald Tusk told the UK that they would not be allowed access to the European Single Market unless they accepted its four freedoms of movement for goods, capital, services, and people.[146]

    German foreign secretary Frank-Walter Steinmeier met Britain's foreign secretary Boris Johnson on 4 November 2016; Johnson stressed the importance of British-German relationships, whereas Steinmeier responded that the German view was that the UK should have voted to stay in the EU and that the German priority now was to preserve the remaining union of 27 members. There could be no negotiations before the UK formally gives notice. A long delay before beginning negotiations would be detrimental. Britain could not keep the advantages of the common market but at the same time cancel the "less pleasant rules".[147] The First Minister of Scotland, Nicola Sturgeon, stated that Scotland might refuse consent for legislation required to leave the EU,[148] though some lawyers argue that Scotland cannot block Brexit.[149]

    Newly appointed prime minister Theresa May made clear that negotiations with the EU required a "UK-wide approach". On 15 July 2016, she said: "I have already said that I won't be triggering article 50 until I think that we have a UK approach and objectives for negotiations – I think it is important that we establish that before we trigger article 50."[150] According to The Daily Telegraph, the Department for Exiting the European Union spent over £250,000 on legal advice from top Government lawyers in two months and has plans to recruit more people. Nick Clegg said the figures showed the Civil Service was unprepared for the very complex negotiations ahead.[151]

    In the wake of the United Kingdom's vote to leave the European Union, the Department for International Trade (DIT) for striking and extending trade agreements between the UK and non-EU states was created by Prime Minister Theresa May, shortly after she took office on 13 July 2016.[152] It employs about 200 trade negotiators[153] and is overseen by the Secretary of State for International Trade, currently Liam Fox.

    On 17 January 2017, Prime Minister Theresa May, announced a series of 12 negotiating objectives in a speech at Lancaster House. These consist of an end to European Court of Justice jurisdiction, withdrawal from the single market with a "comprehensive free-trade agreement" replacing this, a new customs agreement excluding the common external tariff and common commercial policy, an end to free movement of people, co-operation in crime and terrorism, collaboration in areas of science and technology, engagement with devolved administrations, maintaining the Common Travel Area with Ireland, and preserving existing workers' rights.[154]

    The Government has stated its intention to "secure the specific interests of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, as well as those of all parts of England". Through the Joint Ministerial Committee on EU Negotiations (JMC(EN)), the Government intends to involve the views of the Scottish Parliament, the Welsh Assembly and the Northern Ireland Assembly in the process of negotiating the UK's exit from the EU. For instance, at the January 2017 meeting of the JMC(EN), the Scottish Government's proposal to remain in the European Economic Area was considered.[155]

    Nicola Sturgeon on behalf of the Scottish National Party made increasing calls during March 2017 for a second Scottish independence referendum to be held in 2018 whilst Opinion polling on Scottish independence indicated a majority did not want independence, stating that an independent Scotland would seek full membership of the European Union.[156] EU negotiator Guy Verhofstadt, the European parliament's chief negotiator has said that: "All British citizens today have also EU citizenship. That means a number of things: the possibility to participate in the European elections, the freedom of travel without problem inside the union. We need to have an arrangement in which this arrangement can continue for those citizens who on an individual basis are requesting it." The suggestion being an “associate citizenship”.[157]

    An EU meeting to discuss Brexit has been called for 29 April, Donald Tusk stating that the "priority would be giving "clarity" to EU residents, business and member states about the talks ahead". Michel Barnier, European Chief Negotiator for Brexit, has called for talks to be completed by October 2018 to give time for any agreement to be ratified before the UK leaves in March 2019.[158]

    Sinn Féin has called for a referendum to create a united Ireland following the Northern Ireland majority decision (56% to 44%) to vote no to Brexit and 2 March election for the Northern Ireland Assembly where Sinn Féin increased the number of their seats.[159]







    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7368
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The United States of the Solar System, A.D. 2133 (Book Three)

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Tue May 02, 2017 6:24 pm

    It's going to be nice to go silent -- after making a completely ignorant fool out of myself on the internet. I'm going to attempt to finish my re-posting project without adding much commentary (or additional material) to the original posts. Silence is Golden. Consider an interdisciplinary study of the following subjects:

    1. Math.
    2. Physics.
    3. Biology.
    4. Chemistry.
    5. Astronomy.
    6. Business.
    7. Law.
    8. Medicine.
    9. History.
    10. Theology.
    11. Music.
    12. Psychology.
    13. Ethics.
    14. Computer-Science.

    Consider the following approach to Biblical-Theological Studies:

    1. Israel and the Nations -- F.F. Bruce.
    2. Deuteronomy.
    3. 1928 Book of Common Prayer (which includes the Psalms).
    4. Proverbs.
    5. Desire of Ages -- Ellen White.
    6. Matthew.
    7. Mark.
    8. Luke.
    9. John.
    10. Life of Christ -- Fulton Sheen.
    11. Acts.
    12. Romans.
    13. Hebrews.

    Consider using the King James Version of the Holy Bible -- and listening to Sacred Classical Music. Consider studying all of the above -- over and over and over again. Consider attending church -- or at least attending Sacred Classical Music Concerts. I'm NOT digging in my heels against the Atheists, Agnostics, New-Agers, Various-Pagans, Mega-Churches, or the Non-Christian Religions. I am simply suggesting areas of research which might've been misunderstood and/or neglected. Consider studying all of the above in the context of this thread. Once again, I'm NOT claiming to "HAVE" the "TRUTH". I am merely suggesting that Sirius-Researchers should NOT neglect what I've suggested and presented. I'm really winding this thread down. I'm planning on keeping quite busy reposting and editing during May, June, and July -- and then I plan to do very little with this thread during the month of August. I plan to go completely incognito on September 1 of 2017. Then, you might wish to look for a Completely Ignorant Fool -- Wearing Armani Suit-Jackets, Dress-Shirts, New Blue-Jeans, and Birkenstock Shoes -- Carrying a Briefcase Containing a State of the Art Laptop-Computer (with Access to Everyone and Everything) -- and Various Classified Items (Including a Phaser-Weapon and a Playboy Magazine) -- Attending Major Meetings and Events Throughout the Solar System!! Just Kidding!! When I stop posting -- I plan to start spending a lot of time on this thread!! http://www.themistsofavalon.net/t608p435-full-length-documentaries-and-movies-for-reflection#94699 I also plan on spending a lot of time on this thread!! http://www.themistsofavalon.net/t791-egyptian-folklore-and-the-red-pill-part-1?highlight=red+pill I've made  my research bed -- and now I intend to sleep in it. Do NOT Disturb!! I might NEVER talk about any of this. I intend to be a Mostly-Silent and Completely-Ignorant Fool with a Poker-Face. Siriusly -- I'm going to spend a lot of time on the Project Avalon and The Mists of Avalon sites.

    Is there anyone out there who thinks that there is a possibility that male and female human beings were created 600,000 years ago by interdimensional reptilian beings (Archangels or Reptilian Queens?) - so that one third of the interdimensional reptilian souls (Fallen Angels?) could incarnate into these bodies (fall into 3D physicality - born into sin?) - and that this constituted rebellion against a reptilian theocracy - and that 'The Creation' was considered to be the Original and Unpardonable Sin - resulting in the 600,000 Year Gaian/Orion Star War in Heaven - which humanity ultimately lost - resulting in the punishment and enslavement of the human race - and which will possibly culminate in a Final Judgment and Extermination - terminating male and female human physicality - and resulting in humanity's return to hermaphrodite reptilian existence - worshipping a reptilian queen as the head of a universal reptilian theocracy? Is this why Human Sacrifice (including the Crucifixion of Christ?) is so common throughout the world and throughout recorded history? Sinful Flesh? Did this sad story begin in Orion? Will it end in Orion? Is Orion heaven or hell? Do Draconian Reptilians and Greys have souls which are identical to our souls? Are we all the Orion Group? Reptile-Based Reptilian-Humanoids vs Mammal-Based Reptilian-Humanoids? Was the 600,000 Year Human vs Reptilian War a Civil War Between Relatives? A lot of things seem to fall into place when this hypothesis is applied - but I start to fall apart when I think about this too much. I really go nuts when no one will talk to me. If this theory is even partially correct - I would think that neither the Reptilian or Human Powers That Be would want the General Public to find out about 'The Biggest Secret'. But take all of this with a Sea of Salt. This is merely conjecture - but I am attempting to approximate reality. This is not just off the wall story telling, to try to get a laugh. To me, this is no laughing matter. I continue to request that the Universal Powers That Be support a Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom United States of the Solar System - which would be administered by Michael/Horus/Jesus and 10,000 Human Beings. But, really, since I don't know the real story, this is really just my feeble attempt to solve a problem which I know very little about. It seems as though there is plenty of guilt and karmic-debt for all concerned. I continue to fly-blind, and this really bothers me. Why can't we speak plainly about all of this madness? I truly desire that things work out well for all concerned - and I still don't have a fecal-list - but if things don't get resolved rather quickly - I think I might become increasingly shrill - whether that would do any good, or not. Namaste to the Beings of the Universe.




    For the next couple of weeks I'm going to try to overdose on 1. The Four Gospels (KJV). 2. Gregorian Chants. 3. Charles Marie Widor. 4. Latin Masses. 5. The U.S. Constitution. I realize this is somewhat repetitious - but I suppose I'm trying to talk myself into this. Again, this is basically 'Minimalist Traditionalist'. I'm not saying 'my way or the highway'. I'm just looking for a reasonable church and state modus operandi which maximizes responsible freedom, with excellence and elegance. I really wish to attempt to intertwine these five items. I would love to participate in an experimental church, where this was being tried. This is not my final answer. This is just one more test. This is a mental and spiritual exercise. I'm actually more interested to  see and hear what people would do and say, after living with this concept for a couple of years. Everything gets old - but confusion and deterioration results when the trumpet fails to speak with a certain sound. Vatican II seems to have been problematic. It probably needed to happen - but following the Second Vatican Council, the trumpet failed to speak with a certain sound, according to many loyal Roman Catholics. I'm trying to remove Protestant, Atheist, Agnostic, New Age, Jewish, Muslim, et al objections to Roman Catholicism - and to remove the tension between United States Freedom and Roman Catholic Theocracy. I'm really seeking a Political and Spiritual Switzerland - at least as it pertains to Solar System Governance. I obviously support religious and political freedom within all of the United States of the Solar System - but there must be a strong central pillar - to support responsible freedom for all concerned. This is very tricky territory, to say the least, and again, I am just scratching the surface, and I am not a 'know it all', even though I sometimes act like one - at least on the internet! Namaste and Have a Nice Day!

    We need to fix the Secret Government, the United Nations, Washington DC, the City of London, and the Vatican - AS A GROUP. I haven't talked about a lot of the nations and religions, because I think that once all of the above are reasonably fixed - everything else will fall into place. My ramblings have merely been speculation and suggestion, and I would obviously have to be much closer to the major players, to know what's REALLY going on. Unfortunately, if I were that close, I wouldn't be able to post as freely as I do on this thread! It's a problem, isn't it? Once again, I have merely been thinking out-loud on a very small forum. This has been sort of an informal fireside chat. I keep trying to stop posting, but I can never seem to do it. Nothing ever really resolves - but I am committed to facing a future of challenges with a combination of incurable optimism and unyielding despair. If that's not upbeat enough for you positive-thinkers, I am sorry - but I am committed to facing reality - not with positive-thinking - but with Positive Response Ability - which is an important distinction. Lastly, I am sad. Too sad to continue posting, for now anyway. I have some dreams, but I just can't get any traction. I keep thinking that I don't belong here. Perhaps I don't belong anywhere. This is sad. Idealism and the truth are so overrated. I could just keep talking to myself - and hope that somebody is getting some sort of benefit - but why keep doing something that's not working? I REALLY wanted to help solve the world's problems - but no one will even take the time to talk to me. Perhaps I should do something useful - like pursue fame, fortune, power, and pleasure - by telling people what they want to hear - and giving them what they want - regardless of whether it helps them or hurts them. I'll clean my house, mow my lawn, and learn to balance my checkbook - and delude myself into thinking everything is fine - and I might be more appreciated and respected - for NOT trying to save the world. I might even learn some self-governance if I'm not spending all of my waking hours contemplating solar system governance. Besides, Megalomaniacs Anonymous Hates Competition. Competition is a Sin! Why do we behave as though ignorance were a virtue - and as though common-sense were a threat to national security? Come to think of it, I might even learn to love Big Brother.  




    Here are some cool space videos. I'm going to pretend that I'm the last person alive in the solar system - and that I'm making this thread just in case intelligent life from another solar system happens across this cyber-record of madness. Who knows? I might even have a thousand years to do this. The next step in my evolution is to learn to not give a $hi+ if no one gives a $hi+! I don't mean to be shrill. Wait a minute. Yes I do! Boy! Will the space-travellers be in for a disappointment when they see this! "Mork!!! Damn!!! All that way through space for this bs??? FOR THIS???!!! NOOOOOOOOoooooooooooo!!!!!! And those poor bastards thought they were going to be happy and free." I continue to protest the secrecy, lies, and lack of straight-forward communication regarding the most important subjects. Humanity might be highly problematic - and we might've committed the Original, Continuing, and Unpardonable Sins - but the secret rule, manipulation, enslavement, torture, and mass-murder have been reprehensible. But who knows how much blood I might have on my hands? Again, everything is a mass of lies and confusion. We're ridiculed when we don't try to solve the world's problems. We're ridiculed when we do try to solve the world's problems. It truly seems that we will not be allowed to succeed, even if it were possible for us to do so. This little quest has made me somewhat bitter. I always resisted digging too deeply over the years. A minister told me not to dealve too deeply into theology. From the onset of puberty, I knew that things were screwed-up and that we were being lied to - but I tried unsuccessfully to rationalize the insanity. It bothered me so much, that I couldn't really concentrate on much of anything. I could never just look the other way. It always hurt too much. The internet has forced me to really dig deeper - and I don't like what I've found. But when I've tried to make things better - the silence and scorn have been deafening. Humanity really does seem to be considered to be a Fluke of the Universe. And whether we have a right to be here, or not, the Universe seems to be poised to commit Mass Murder one more time. I really want to believe in a Kind and Loving God - but where is the evidence? I'm sensing Vengeful Deities. And nobody will talk to me. This whole thing is sick and stupid. We could've had some wonderful conversations - but no - that would've made sense. If anyone wishes to talk to me - you know where I live and work - and what I've done for millions of years. At this point, I feel as though I could've sung a helluva howling duet with Rudolph Hess, in Spandau Prison. I'm that frustrated and despondant. Over and Out.

    1. The Asteroid That Flattened Mars http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FlXuUxFTcLs&feature=fvsr

    2. Attack of the Sun http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMUHkz5nx8g

    3. When Will Time End? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5OFThORmR-s&feature=relmfu

    4. The Incredible Journey of Apollo 12 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FBhIDjWaByg

    5. Super Massive Black Hole in the Milky Way Galaxy http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KCADH3x56eE&feature=related

    6. The Search for Earth-Like Planets http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3Kcw0UrIFI&feature=relmfu

    7. Voyage to Pandora: The First Intersteller Space Flight http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPjXxKpM4DM&feature=related

    8. Venus: Death of a Planet https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TR-IWhZZDJY

    9. Crashing into the Moon http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8OLcbxZ0cA&feature=relmfu

    10. The Pulse of Alien Life http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ieKdvNJ20HE&feature=relmfu

    11. Exploding Stars http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qfRiqwQBegQ&feature=relmfu

    12. To the Edge of Time http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_IiiEF4rGw&feature=relmfu

    13. UC Berkley Lecture in Astronomy: Dr. Steven Beckwith http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x22o8TUdOuw&feature=related

    14. UC Berkley Lecture in Astronomy: Angels and Demons http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_sqYh8puZ-I&feature=relmfu

    15. UC Berkley Lecture in Astronomy: How Did the Universe Begin? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_4bMIqmV9U&feature=relmfu

    16. Disclosure: The Truth About 2012 and Extraterrestrials http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3u810PTA5Tc&feature=relmfu

    17. Is the Universe Infinite? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dG1JpC5jels&feature=related

    18. The Other Side of a Black Hole https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhx5HAgVD_o

    19. Cold Sparks and Black Holes http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lTbQ4nPFjg&feature=related

    20. Hubble Space-Shattering Discoveries http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--X9zfgZtS0&feature=related

    21. Carl Sagan: The Universe Was Not Made for Us https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qfm0GCvsIVA

    22. Blast Into Space and Spectacular Fall to Earth http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPQvTgD2quQ&feature=relmfu


    I just spoke with a Roman Catholic, who doesn't like Latin, and who said that their kids don't like it either. I recently heard a sermon in an Episcopal church, where the preacher asked 'Jesus, what were you thinking?' regarding one of the 'Hard Sayings of Jesus'. I have spoken with people who don't like organ music. I have spoken with people who think that expensive churches and organs are contrary to the example of Jesus. There are people who think that the church is a disgrace. I recently heard of a church which removed 'Christ' from their name. Should all of the churches crucify Christ again - bury him once and for all time - and follow the latest and greatest televangelist - at least until they have an affair or go bankrupt? So what should I think and do? I don't go to church anymore, but I still think about it a lot, and I have been listening to a lot of Latin lately. I like listening to the Latin in Gregorian Chants and Latin Masses, while I read books and view a variety of internet content. It makes good background music. But, really, in the context of a liturgical service, a lot of people might not like it one little bit. I am merely attempting to regain my spiritual bearings, after having my faith shattered into little pieces. I am trying to be as ecumenical as possible, by taking a closer look at the biggest game in town, namely the Roman Catholic Church. But, really, I am a fish out of water. I'm presently a passive researcher on a road less travelled. Please don't take anything I say too seriously. I think I might have some helpful insights from time to time, but it's an entirely different situation, when one is dealing with thousands and millions of church members, who don't appreciate being jerked around, especially regarding how they pray. I appreciate and respect that.

    Perhaps the megachurches have the right idea. I don't know. I participated in a megachurch for years, and I have visited a wide variety of churches. But, at this point, I am a somewhat unorthodox and critical researcher, rather than a faith-builder. I know how to 'just praise the Lord', but I am presently asking 'the Lord' some hard questions. I don't think any church would embrace me. I don't really know what to do. I want to help, but I really don't know how. I thought that the Teachings of Jesus, the Latin Mass, and the U.S. Constitution might be a good place to begin a search for an uncompromising common ground, but I really don't know where this quest should legitimately end up. Perhaps I shouldn't be more specific than recommending a Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom United States of the Solar System - and let everyone fill in the blanks on their own. I continue to think that there is great merit in the combination of these few definitive, qualifying, and enhancing words. Once again, I am suggesting that this thread is a mental and spiritual gymnasium, rather than being some sort of an excathedra pontifical encyclical. I frankly don't know which way to jump. I tend to think that a lot of other people are in the same boat - especially those who are REALLY trying to think things through, in light of all of the conflicting information available in books, and on the internet. It's a real zoo out there, and I think just about everyone is in trouble, whether they realize it, or not. Please, just study this thread, in your own time and way, and then make up your own mind, but only after researching a lot of other sources. I'm not a genius, psychic, scholar, or even a gentleman.




    Last edited by orthodoxymoron on Wed May 03, 2017 4:44 pm; edited 2 times in total
    avatar
    Vidya Moksha

    Posts : 470
    Join date : 2010-04-17
    Location : on the road again :)

    Re: The United States of the Solar System, A.D. 2133 (Book Three)

    Post  Vidya Moksha on Tue May 02, 2017 7:07 pm

    Hey oxy

    have you read this:
    https://krystallnacht.com/lib/Magick%202/Lon%20Milo%20Ducette/The%20Key%20to%20Solomon%27s%20Key.pdf

    The key to solomons key.. By Lon Milo DuQuette

    Basically, solomon never existed and this was the knight templars secret..

    fascinating read, but what do you make of it, is he onto something?

    full pdf at above link!
    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7368
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The United States of the Solar System, A.D. 2133 (Book Three)

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Tue May 02, 2017 8:29 pm

    evisnam wrote:
    thank you my dear Orthodoxymoron.

    You have a talent for writing , i can see that. Ask your self ,

    what would it feel like to be clear and finish a work from start to finish ?  

    In that would be the answers to all im sure.

    never give up on the dream.

    “Now I know what a ghost is. Unfinished business, that's what.”

         Salman Rushhdie
    Vidya Moksha wrote:Hey oxy have you read this: https://krystallnacht.com/lib/Magick%202/Lon%20Milo%20Ducette/The%20Key%20to%20Solomon%27s%20Key.pdf The key to solomons key.. By Lon Milo DuQuette Basically, solomon never existed and this was the knight templars secret.. fascinating read, but what do you make of it, is he onto something? full pdf at above link!  
    Thank-you Vidya. I'll read the pdf. I think I've seen it before, but I don't think I read it straight-through. I'm considering most of the Biblical-History as being Historical-Fiction, because of what various scholars have said, and because it's so difficult to verify history. I knew a scholar who worked at the Huntington Library. I used to drive her to the airport quite often. Anyway, she said that two of the most difficult words are "PROVE IT!!" I think Humanity is in the process of being RUDELY AWAKENED AND DISILLUSIONED. I'll try to keep up, but I don't think I can. I have too many physical, mental, and spiritual problems. I've established a certain arbitrary modus operandi in my United States of the Solar System, A.D. 2133 threads, and I'll probably continue this thankless and fruitless quest for the rest of my life, but I've sort of given up on life. I don't know if I'm from here, or somewhere else, but I don't want to go through this sort of life again, even if that means not having a life. I think the top-level Masons know a hell of a lot, but I think they work for Lucifer (the God of This World), so I won't join, even though I've been invited twice (possibly by the God of This World)!! I'll read stuff by Masons (preferably former Masons) but I don't want to get too close to these guys. I assume that very-real gods and goddesses created very-fake gods and goddesses. I think there are better Gods and Goddesses, but we seem to be stuck with the Bad@$$ gods and goddesses (for who knows what reasons?)!! God exists, but seemingly NOT in this solar system!! Both Theists and Atheists are probably correct (but in different ways). I listen to both. That's probably a major reason why I'm so screwed-up!!
    RedEzra wrote:Another prophecy which was written down in the bible is the restoration of Judea to the Jews.

    After about 2000 years without a land the withered Jews returned in huge numbers and declared an independent Jewish state in 1948. Usually after such a long time people are assimilated into the culture of the host nation but for some reason the Jews continued the old customs for so long.

    One thing which is absolutely astounding is that the day after the Jews declared independence they were attacked by Egypt Iraq Syria Jordan and Lebanon... and won !

    Two more times in 1967 and 1973 did armies of neigbouring Arab states attack them... which again resulted in Israeli victory and a quadrupling of land. For example Egypt lost the enormous Sinai area which Israel later gave back in exchange for a peace agreement. Israel was also willing to give Golan back to Syria for peace but Syria was not interested.

    When it is written in the bible that the Jews will return to their land... then ought one not take the book serious ? Especially in face of the fact that a combined Arab army with Soviet help could not beat a comparative handful of holocaust survivors... in three tries !


    "In that day the Lord will reach out his hand a second time to bring back the remnant of his people. From Assyria, Egypt, Pathros, Cush, Elam, Shinar, Hamath, and from the islands of the sea.

    And He will lift up a standard for the nations and assemble the banished ones of Israel. And will gather the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth." - Isaiah 11:11-12
    RedEzra wrote:The last book in the bible is an apocalypse or in english revelation of the future. So GOD has already foretold what will happen and here the events are uncovered for all to read. GOD is seen opening seven seals on a scroll and corresponding events are uncovered...

    The first four seals are popularly known as the four horsemen of the apocalypse. Those four riders represent antichristianity war famine and death. The fifth seal uncovers persecution of christians and the sixth seal reveals a global catastrophe which is the beginning of GOD's wrath on a wicked world. From here on in until the end GOD executes judgements upon the earth. This is the time of terrible tribulation foretold to last 3.5 years before GOD returns in Person.

    In the beginning of those 3.5 years of great trouble after the catastrophe a new world order will arise from the ashes of the old world from more or less secret bases around the world complete with high tech toys like nazi ufos. This new order will implement implantable chips which will seem like a great idea after such a global catastrophe.

    But the bible warns us to not be a part of this new system and not take the chip... as this new system is nazism on steroids. And just as you would not be a nazi so you would not be a nazi on steroids... am i right ?


    "And I heard a voice from heaven saying 'Write this down:
    Blessed are those who die in the Lord from now on.
    Yes says the Spirit for they will rest from their labors and their works will follow them.'"

    - Revelation 14:3 -
    RedEzra wrote:When will you come to your senses ? When will tens of thousands of testimonies from people who have met Jesus move you ? When will you crave evidence for what you believe ? When will you stand firm on facts before you form an important opinion ?  When will you say hearsay does not cut it anymore ? When will all fulfilled fortelling in the bible convince you ? When will GOD convict you ?

    Pray the grace of GOD may open our eyes to the simple truth that He is Jesus Christ and there is no other !


    "I Am the Way and the Truth and the Life !" - John 14:16
    RedEzra wrote:What shall you say that day when you stand before Jesus to give an account of the life He gave you ? What will you talk about ?

    Will you tell Him how you did it your way ? How much you loved your idols and your vain imagination and maybe even felt a little offended by Him who laid down His life for you ? What shall you say to one whom you may spend eternity with ?

    The truthfulness of what is written in the bible is utterly proven. And if you don't see that by now then GOD help you !
    Is your head too big for heaven ? Is that why you don't see it ?
    orthodoxymoron wrote:Please explain what I've posted in Red in the previous post. That's Matthew 5-7, 23-25. I NEVER get honest and complete answers to my theological questions. Why??? The Liars and Mealy-Mouthed Shall Inherit the Earth?? Is that what the text says, or did I get it wrong??
    RedEzra wrote:What is your point oxy ? You often dump long copypaste posts and make my thread heavy with what look like spam to me. Perhaps that is your purpose to bury what i write between a heap of crap... is it not so oxy ?
    RedEzra wrote:A lot of christians perhaps most are born into a culture of christianity where the tradition is to go to church once a week... and that's about it. Men and women with a christian label who live like the world as christianity is just a custom for them.

    The sad fact is that christianity has given CHRIST a bad name. People posing as christians have shamed the name of GOD. So when christianity is corrupt it may not be so easy to believe in CHRIST.

    As history often repeats itself the exact same thing happened in ancient Israel which was why GOD kicked the Jews out of the land. There is equal opportunity to get grace or curse from GOD... it doesn't matter if we are called by HIS name or not. When we don't behave then we will get a correction from the Father.

    That's just the way it is and always has been.


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_Scotland The Church of Scotland (Scots: The Scots Kirk, Scottish Gaelic: Eaglais na h-Alba), known informally by its Scots language name, the Kirk, is the national church of Scotland.[4] Protestant and Presbyterian, its longstanding decision to respect "liberty of opinion in points which do not enter into the substance of the Faith"[5] means it is relatively tolerant of a variety of theological positions, including those who would term themselves conservative and liberal in their doctrine, ethics and interpretation of Scripture. The Church of Scotland traces its roots back to the beginnings of Christianity in Scotland, but its identity is principally shaped by the Reformation of 1560. As of December 2013, its pledged membership is 398,389,[6] or about 7.5% of the total population – though according to the 2014 Scottish Annual Household Survey, a significantly higher 27.8% of the Scottish population, or 1.5 million adherents, claimed some form of allegiance to it and in the 2011 census 32.4% claimed allegiance to the church. (see Religion in Scotland).[7]

    While the Church of Scotland traces its roots back to the earliest Christians in Scotland, its identity was principally shaped by the Scottish Reformation of 1560. At that point, many in the then church in Scotland broke with Rome, in a process of Protestant reform led, among others, by John Knox. It reformed its doctrines and government, drawing on the principles of John Calvin which Knox had been exposed to while living in Geneva, Switzerland. In 1560, an assembly of some nobles, lairds and burgesses, as well as several churchmen, claiming in defiance of the Queen to be a Scottish Parliament, abolished papal jurisdiction and approved the Scots Confession, but did not accept many of the principles laid out in Knox's First Book of Discipline, which argued, among other things, that all of the assets of the old church should pass to the new. The 1560 Reformation Settlement was not ratified by the crown, as the monarch, Mary, Queen of Scots, a Catholic, refused to do so, and the question of church government also remained unresolved. In 1572 the acts of 1560 were finally approved by the young King James VI, the son of Queen Mary, but the Concordat of Leith also allowed the crown to appoint bishops with the church's approval. John Knox himself had no clear views on the office of bishop, preferring to see them renamed as 'superintendents'; but in response to the new Concordat a Presbyterian party emerged headed by Andrew Melville, the author of the Second Book of Discipline. Melville and his supporters enjoyed some temporary successes—most notably in the Golden Act of 1592, which gave parliamentary approval to Presbyterian courts. James VI, who succeeded to the English throne in 1603 as James I, believed that Presbyterianism was incompatible with monarchy, declaring "No bishop, no king"[8] and by skillful manipulation of both church and state, steadily reintroduced parliamentary and then diocesan episcopacy. By the time he died in 1625, the Church of Scotland had a full panel of bishops and archbishops. General Assemblies met only at times and places approved by the Crown.

    Charles I inherited a settlement in Scotland based on a balanced compromise between Calvinist doctrine and episcopal practice. Lacking the political judgement of his father, he began to upset this by moving into more dangerous areas. Disapproving of the 'plainness' of the Scottish service he, together with his Archbishop of Canterbury, William Laud, sought to introduce the kind of liturgical practice in use in England. The centrepiece of this new strategy was the Prayer Book of 1637, a slightly modified version of the Anglican Book of Common Prayer. Although this was devised by a panel of Scottish bishops, Charles' insistence that it be drawn up in secret and adopted sight-unseen led to widespread discontent. When the Prayer Book was finally introduced at St Giles Cathedral in Edinburgh in mid-1637 it caused an outbreak of rioting, which spread across Scotland. In early 1638 the National Covenant was signed by large numbers of Scots, protesting at the introduction of the Prayer Book and other liturgical innovations that had not first been tested and approved by free Parliaments and General Assemblies of the Church. In November 1638, the General Assembly in Glasgow, the first to meet for twenty years, not only declared the Prayer Book unlawful, but went on to abolish the office of bishop itself. The Church of Scotland was then established on a Presbyterian basis. Charles' attempt at resistance to these developments led to the outbreak of the Bishops' Wars. In the ensuing civil wars, the Scots Covenanters at one point made common cause with the English parliamentarians—resulting in the Westminster Confession of Faith being agreed by both. This document remains the subordinate standard of the Church of Scotland, but was replaced in England after the Restoration.

    Episcopacy was reintroduced to Scotland after the Restoration, the cause of considerable discontent, especially in the south-west of the country, where the Presbyterian tradition was strongest. The modern situation largely dates from 1690, when after the Glorious Revolution the majority of Scottish bishops were non-jurors, that is, they believed they could not swear allegiance to William II while James VII lived. To reduce their influence the Scots Parliament guaranteed Presbyterian governance of the Church by law, excluding what became the Scottish Episcopal Church. Most of the remaining Covenanters, disagreeing with the Restoration Settlement on various political and theological grounds, most notably because the Settlement did not acknowledge the National Covenant and Solemn League and Covenant, also did not join the Church of Scotland, instead forming the Reformed Presbyterian Church of Scotland in 1690.
    Controversy still surrounded the relationship between the Church of Scotland's independence and the civil law of Scotland. The interference of civil courts with Church decisions, particularly over the appointment of ministers, following the Church Patronage Act of 1711, which gave landowners, or patrons, the right to appoint ministers to vacant pulpits, would lead to several splits. This began with the secession of 1733 and culminated in the Disruption of 1843, when a large portion of the Church broke away to form the Free Church of Scotland. The seceding groups tended to divide and reunite among themselves—leading to a proliferation of Presbyterian denominations in Scotland.

    The British Parliament passed the Church of Scotland Act 1921, finally recognising the full independence of the Church in matters spiritual, and as a result of this, and passage of the Church of Scotland (Property and Endowments) Act, 1925, the Kirk was able to unite with the United Free Church of Scotland in 1929. The United Free Church of Scotland was itself the product of the union of the former United Presbyterian Church of Scotland and the majority of the Free Church of Scotland in 1900. Some independent Scottish Presbyterian denominations still remain. These include the Free Church of Scotland—sometimes called 'The Wee Frees'—(originally formed of those congregations which refused to unite with the United Presbyterian Church in 1900), the United Free Church of Scotland (formed of congregations which refused to unite with the Church of Scotland in 1929), the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland (which broke from the Free Church of Scotland in 1893), the Associated Presbyterian Churches (which emerged as a result of a split in the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland in the 1980s) and the Free Church of Scotland (Continuing) (which emerged from a split in the Free Church of Scotland in 2000).

    The motto of the Church of Scotland is nec tamen consumebatur (Latin)—'Yet it was not consumed', an allusion to Exodus 3:2 and the Burning Bush. The basis of faith for the Church of Scotland is the Word of God, which it views as being 'contained in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament'. Its principal subordinate standard is The Westminster Confession of Faith (1647), although here liberty of opinion is granted on those matters 'which do not enter into the substance of the faith' (Art. 2 and 5). The Church of Scotland has no compulsory prayer book, although it does have a hymn book (the 4th edition was published in 2005). Its Book of Common Order contains recommendations for public worship, which are usually followed fairly closely in the case of sacraments and ordinances. Preaching is the central focus of most services. Traditionally, Scots worship centred on the singing of metrical psalms and paraphrases, but for generations these have been supplemented with Christian music of all types. The typical Church of Scotland service lasts about an hour, and has been characterised jokingly as a hymn-prayer sandwich, in which everything leads up to a climax in a 15-minute sermon near the end. There is normally no sung or responsive liturgy, but worship is the responsibility of the minister in each parish, and the style of worship can vary and be quite experimental. In recent years, a variety of modern song books have been widely used to appeal more to contemporary trends in music, and elements from alternative liturgies including those of the Iona Community are incorporated in some congregations. Although traditionally worship is conducted by the parish minister, participation and leadership by members who are not ministers in services is becoming more frequent, especially in the Highlands and the Borders.

    In common with other Protestant denominations, the Church recognises two sacraments: Baptism and Holy Communion (the Lord's Supper). The Church baptises both believing adults and the children of Christian families. Communion in the Church of Scotland today is open to Christians of whatever denomination, without precondition. Communion services are usually taken fairly seriously in the Church; traditionally, a congregation held only three or four per year, although practice now greatly varies between congregations. In some congregations communion is celebrated once a month. Theologically, the Church of Scotland is Reformed (ultimately in the Calvinist tradition) and is a member of the World Alliance of Reformed Churches. Its longstanding decision to respect "liberty of opinion on matters not affecting the substance of the faith"[this quote needs a citation] means it is relatively tolerant of a variety of theological positions, including those who would term themselves conservative and liberal in their doctrine, ethics and interpretation of Scripture. (The 19th century Scottish distinction was between 'evangelicals' and 'moderates'.)

    The Church of Scotland is a member of ACTS (Action of Churches Together in Scotland) and, through its Committee on Ecumenical Relations, works closely with other denominations in Scotland. The present inter-denominational co-operation marks a distinct change from attitudes in certain quarters of the Church in the early twentieth century and before, when opposition to Irish Roman Catholic immigration was vocal (see Catholicism in Scotland). The Church of Scotland is a member of the World Council of Churches, the Conference of European Churches, the Community of Protestant Churches in Europe, and the World Communion of Reformed Churches. The Church of Scotland is a member of Churches Together in Britain and Ireland and, through its Presbytery of England, is a member of Churches Together in England. The Church of Scotland continues to foster relationships with other Presbyterian denominations in Scotland even where agreement is difficult.[citation needed] In May 2016 the Church of Scotland ratified the Columba Agreement (approved by the Church of England's General Synod in February 2016), calling for the two churches to work more closely together on matters of common interest.

    While the Bible is the basis of faith of the Church of Scotland, and the Westminster Confession of Faith is the subordinate standard,[9][10] a request was presented to a General Assembly of the Church of Scotland for a statement explaining the historic Christian faith in jargon-free non-theological language. "God's Invitation" was prepared to fulfil that request. The full statement reads:[11]

    God made the world and all its creatures with men and women made in His image.
    By breaking His laws people have broken contact with God, and damaged His good world. This we see and sense in the world and in ourselves.
    The Bible tells us the Good News that God still loves us and has shown His love uniquely in His Son, Jesus Christ. He lived among us and died on the cross to save us from our sin. But God raised Him from the dead!
    In His love, this living Jesus invites us to turn from our sins and enter by faith into a restored relationship with God Who gives true life before and beyond death.
    Then, with the power of the Holy Spirit remaking us like Jesus, we—with all Christians—worship God, enjoy His friendship and are available for Him to use in sharing and showing His love, justice, and peace locally and globally until Jesus returns!
    In Jesus' name we gladly share with you God's message for all people—You matter to God!
    It was approved for use by the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland in May 1992.[12]

    The Church of Scotland faces many current difficulties. Between 1966 and 2006, numbers of communicants fell from over 1,230,000 to 504,000,[13] reducing further to 446,000 in 2010 and 352,912 by yearend 2015.[6] In April 2016 the Scottish Social Attitudes survey showed just 20% claiming to belong to the Church of Scotland; down from 35% in 1999.[14] The church faces a £5.7 million deficit, and the costly upkeep of many older ecclesiastical buildings. In response the church has decided to 'prune to grow', reducing ministry provision plans from 1,234 to 1,000 funded posts (1,075 established FTE posts, of which 75 will be vacant at any one time) supported by a variety of voluntary and part-time ministries. At the same time the number of candidates accepted for full-time ministry has reduced from 24 (2005) to 8 (2009),[15] threatening viability of the Kirk's theological training colleges.[16] This rose to 17 and 12 over the following two years,[17] and was up to at least 19 by 2015.[18] At the 2016 General Assembly the Moderator pointed to issues such as: 25% of charges without a minister; all but 2 ministers over the age of 30; falling clergy numbers over the coming six years (anticipated that for each newly recruited minister there will be four retirements).[19]

    Since 1968, all ministries and offices in the church have been open to women and men on an equal basis. In 2004, Alison Elliot was chosen to be Moderator of the General Assembly, the first woman in the post and the first non-minister to be chosen since George Buchanan, four centuries before. In May 2007 the Rev Sheilagh M. Kesting became the first female minister to be Moderator. There are currently 218 serving female ministers, with 677 male ministers.

    There is a division in the Church of Scotland on how the issues surrounding LGBT sexuality should be addressed. Currently, the Kirk allows pastors to enter in same-sex marriages and civil partnerships while also defining marriage as between a man and a woman.[20] While the church has traditionally adopted a "hate the sin but love the sinner" approach[citation needed], in recent years some within the church, including official bodies and congregations, have pushed for LGBT people to be fully welcomed and affirmed. This division of approach is illustrated by opposition to an attempt to install as minister an openly homosexual man who intends to live with his partner once appointed to his post.[21] In a landmark decision, the General Assembly (GA) voted on 23 May 2009 by 326 to 267 to ratify the appointment of the Reverend Scott Rennie, the Kirk's first openly "practising" homosexual minister. The decision was reached on the basis the presbytery had followed the correct procedure. Rennie had won the overwhelming support of his prospective church members at Queen's Cross, Aberdeen, but his appointment was in some doubt until extensive debate and this vote by the commissioners to the assembly. The GA later agreed upon a moratorium on the appointment of further "practising" homosexuals until after a special commission has reported on the matter.[22] (See: LGBT clergy in Christianity)

    As a result of these developments, a new grouping of congregations within the church was begun "to declare their clear commitment to historic Christian orthodoxy", known as the Fellowship of Confessing Churches.[23] In May 2011, the GA of the Church of Scotland voted to appoint a theological commission, with a view to fully investigating the matter, reporting to the General Assembly of 2013. Meanwhile, openly homosexual ministers ordained before 2009 would be allowed to keep their posts without fear of sanction.[24] On 20 May 2013, the GA voted in favour of a proposal that allows liberal parishes to opt out of the church's policy on homosexuality.[25] It was reported that seceding congregations had a combined annual income of £1 million.[26] Since 2008, 25 out of 808 (3%) ministers had left over the issue.[27]

    The church opposed proposals for same-sex marriage, stating that "The government's proposal fundamentally changes marriage as it is understood in our country and our culture – that it is a relationship between one man and one woman."[28] However, in 2015, the Church of Scotland's GA voted in favour of recommending that gay ministers be able to enter into same-sex marriages.[29][30] On May 21, 2016, the GA voted in favour of the approval for gay and lesbian ministers to enter into same-sex marriages.[31] In 2017, it was announced that there is a "report to be debated at the Kirk's General Assembly in May [that] proposes having a church committee research allowing nominated ministers and deacons to carry out the ceremonies, but wants to retain the ability for 'contentious refusal' from those opposed to same-sex marriage."[32] Regarding transgender issues, many congregations and clergy within the denomination affirm the full inclusion of transgender and other LGBTI people within the church through Affirmation Scotland.[33][34]

    In April 2013, the church published a report entitled "The Inheritance of Abraham: A Report on the 'Promised' Land" which included a discussion of Israeli and Jewish claims to the Land of Israel. The report said "there has been a widespread assumption by many Christians as well as many Jewish people that the Bible supports an essentially Jewish state of Israel. This raises an increasing number of difficulties and current Israeli policies regarding the Palestinians have sharpened this questioning," and that "promises about the Land of Israel were never intended to be taken literally." The church responded to criticism by saying that "The Church has never and is not now denying Israel's right to exist; on the contrary, it is questioning the policies that continue to keep peace a dream in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory. This report is against the injustices levelled against the Palestinian people and how land is shared. It is also a reflection of the use or misuse of scripture to claim divine right to land by any group" and says it must "refute claims that scripture offers any peoples a privileged claim for possession of a particular territory".[35]

    The Scottish Council of Jewish Communities sharply criticised the report,[36] describing it as follows: "It reads like an Inquisition-era polemic against Jews and Judaism. It is biased, weak on sources, and contradictory. The picture it paints of both Judaism and Israel is barely even a caricature. The arrogance of telling the Jewish people how to interpret Jewish texts and Jewish theology is breathtaking."[37] The report was also criticised by the Anti-Defamation League and the Israeli envoy to the United Kingdom.[38][39][40][41][42]

    Reverend Sally Foster-Fulton, who served as the Convener of the Church and Society Council, defended the report, stating that: "This is primarily a report highlighting the continued occupation by the state of Israel and the injustices faced by the Palestinian people as a consequence. It is not a report criticising the Jewish people. Opposing the unjust policies of the state of Israel cannot be equated to anti-Semitism." In an interview with Iran's Press TV, Reverend Stephen Sizer expressed support for the document, stating that "it's news that the Israelis don't want because they want to maintain the idea that they have the Church in their pocket."[43]

    Bruce Bawer sharply criticised the Church for publishing the document. Bawer acknowledged that the report was "a fair enough representation of the Christian understanding of the New Testament" but argued that "as a statement about Israel and Jews in the twenty-first century, it's beyond offensive", describing it as "a supercilious application of Christian theology to a contemporary Jewish situation."[44]

    Dennis Prager also criticized the church, writing that the document was "profoundly anti-Semitic" and "an act of theological forgery; it makes a mockery of the Bible as a coherent document and it renders Christianity inherently anti-Semitic" by "invalidating the Jewish people and invalidating the Jews' historically incontestable claims to the land upon which the only independent states that ever existed were Jewish."[45]

    In response to criticism, the church quickly replaced the original version with a modified one, stating that criticism of Israel's policies toward the Palestinians "should not be misunderstood as questioning the right of the State of Israel to exist."[46]

    The Church of Scotland is pro-life on abortion, stating that it should be allowed "only on grounds that the continuance of the pregnancy would involve serious risk to the life or grave injury to the health, whether physical or mental, of the pregnant woman."[47]

    The Church of Scotland also opposes euthanasia: "The General Assembly has consistently stated that: 'the Christian recognises no right to dispose of his own life even although he may regard those who commit or may attempt to commit suicide with compassion and understanding rather than condemnation'. The Church has frequently stressed its opposition to various attempts to introduce legislation to permit euthanasia, even under strictly controlled circumstances as incompatible with Christianity." The church is associated with the Care Not Killing organisation in "Promoting more and better palliative care./ Ensuring that existing laws against euthanasia and assisted suicide are not weakened or repealed during the lifetime of the current Parliament./ Influencing the balance of public opinion further against any weakening of the law."[48]

    Historically, the Church of Scotland supported the death penalty; the General Assembly once called for the "vigorous execution" of Thomas Aikenhead, who was found guilty of blasphemy in 1696.[49] Nowadays, the Kirk strongly disapproves of the death penalty: "The Church of Scotland affirms that capital punishment is always and wholly unacceptable and does not provide an answer even to the most heinous of crimes. It commits itself to working with other churches and agencies to advance this understanding, oppose death sentences and executions and promote the cause of abolition of the death penalty worldwide."[50]

    The Church of Scotland does not consider marriage to be a sacrament, and thus not binding forever, and has no moral objection to the remarriage of divorced persons. The minister who is asked to perform a ceremony for someone who has a prior spouse living may inquire for the purpose of ensuring that the problems which led to the divorce do not recur.[51]

    At the time of the 2001 census the number of respondents who gave their religion as Church of Scotland was 2,146,251 which amounted to 42.4% of the population of Scotland.[52] In 2008 the Church of Scotland had around 995 active ministers, 1,118 congregations, and its official membership at 398,389 comprised about 7.5% of the population of Scotland. Official membership is down some 66.5% from its peak in 1957 of 1.32 million.[53] In the 2011 national census, 32% of Scots identified their religion as "Church of Scotland", more than any other faith group, but falling behind the total of those without religion for the first time.[52] However, by 2013 only 18% of Scots self-identified as Church of Scotland.[54] The Church of Scotland Guild, the Kirk's historical women's movement and open to men and women since 1997, is still the largest voluntary organisation in Scotland.

    Although it is the national church,[55] the Kirk is not a state church;[56][57] this and other regards makes it dissimilar to the Church of England (the established church in England).[55] Under its constitution (recognised by the 1921 act of the British Parliament), the Kirk enjoys complete independence from the state in spiritual matters.[55] When in Scotland, the British monarch simply attends church, as opposed to her role in the English Church as Supreme Governor.[55] The monarch's accession oath includes a promise to "maintain and preserve the Protestant Religion and Presbyterian Church Government".[55] She is formally represented at the annual General Assembly by a Lord High Commissioner[citation needed] unless she chooses to attend in person; the role is purely formal, and the monarch has no right to take part in deliberations.[55]

    The Kirk is committed to its 'distinctive call and duty to bring the ordinances of religion to the people in every parish of Scotland through a territorial ministry' (Article 3 of its Articles Declaratory). This means the Kirk in practice maintains a presence in every community in Scotland, and exists to serve not only its members but all Scots (most funerals in Scotland are presided by its ministers). The Kirk also pools its resources to ensure continuation of this presence. The Kirk played a leading role in providing universal education in Scotland (the first such provision in the modern world), largely due to its teaching that all should be able to read the Bible. Today it does not operate schools, as these were transferred to the state in the latter half of the 19th century. The Church of Scotland is Presbyterian in polity and Reformed in theology. The most recent articulation of its legal position, the Articles Declaratory (1921), spells out the key concepts.

    As a Presbyterian church, the Kirk has no bishops, but is rather governed by elders and ministers (collectively called presbyters) sitting in a series of courts. Each congregation is led by a Kirk Session. The Kirk Sessions in turn are answerable to regional presbyteries (of which the Kirk currently has over 40). The supreme body is the annual General Assembly, which meets each May in Edinburgh.

    Each court is convened by the 'moderator'—at the local level of the Kirk Session normally the parish minister who is ex officio member and Moderator of the Session. Congregations where there is no minister, or where the minister is incapacitated may be moderated by a specially trained elder. Presbyteries and the General Assembly elect a moderator each year. The Moderator of the General Assembly serves for the year as the public representative of the Church—but beyond that enjoys no special powers or privileges and is in no sense the leader or official spokesperson of the Kirk. At all levels, moderators may be either elders or ministers. Only Moderators of Kirk Sessions are obliged to be trained for the role. At a national level, the work of the Church of Scotland is chiefly carried out by "Councils", each supported by full-time staff mostly based at the Church of Scotland Offices in Edinburgh. The Councils are:

    Council of Assembly
    Church and Society Council
    Ministries Council
    Mission and Discipleship Council
    Social Care Council (based at Charis House, Edinburgh)
    World Mission Council

    The Church of Scotland's Social Care Council (known as CrossReach) is the largest provider of social care in Scotland today, running projects for various disadvantaged and vulnerable groups: including care for the elderly; help with alcoholism, drug, and mental health problems; and assistance for the homeless. The national Church has never shied from involvement in Scottish politics. In 1919, the General Assembly created a Church and Nation Committee, which in 2005 became the Church and Society Council. The Church of Scotland was (and is) a firm opponent of nuclear weaponry. Supporting devolution, it was one of the parties involved in the Scottish Constitutional Convention, which resulted in the setting up of the Scottish Parliament in 1997. Indeed, from 1999–2004 the Parliament met in the Kirk's Assembly Hall in Edinburgh, while its own building was being constructed. The Church of Scotland actively supports the work of the Scottish Churches Parliamentary Office in Edinburgh. Other Church agencies include:

    Assembly Arrangements Committee
    Committee on Chaplains to HM Forces
    Church of Scotland Guild
    Committee on Church Art and Architecture (part of the Mission and Discipleship Council)
    Ecumenical Relations Committee
    Stewardship and Finance Department
    General Trustees (responsible for church buildings)
    Legal Questions Committee
    Panel on Review and Reform
    Department of the General Assembly
    Safeguarding Service (protection of children and vulnerable adults)

    The Church of Scotland Offices are located at 121 George Street, Edinburgh. These imposing buildings—popularly known in Church circles as "one-two-one"—were designed in a Scandinavian-influenced style by the architect Sydney Mitchell and built in 1909–1911 for the United Free Church of Scotland. Following the union of the churches in 1929 a matching extension was built in the 1930s. The offices of the Moderator, Principal Clerk, General Treasurer, Law Department and all the Church councils are located at 121 George Street, with the exception of the Social Care Council (CrossReach). The Principal Clerk to the General Assembly is the Very Rev. John Chalmers. Each Council has its own Council Secretary who sit as a senior management team led by the Secretary to the Council of Assembly, currently the Rev Dr Martin Scott.

    The following publications are useful sources of information about the Church of Scotland.

    Life and Work – the monthly magazine of the Church of Scotland.
    Church of Scotland Yearbook (known as "the red book") – published annually with statistical data on every parish and contact information for every minister.
    Reports to the General Assembly (known as "the blue book") – published annually with reports on the work of the church's departments.
    The Constitution and Laws of the Church of Scotland (known as "the green book") edited by the Very Rev Dr James L. Weatherhead, published 1997 by the Church of Scotland, ISBN 0-86153-246-5
    and which has now replaced the venerable
    Practice and Procedure in The Church of Scotland edited by Rev. James Taylor Cox, D.D. published by The Committee on General Administration, The Church of Scotland, 1976 (sixth edition) ISBN 0-7152-0326-6
    Fasti Ecclesiae Scoticanae – published irregularly since 1866, contains biographies of ministers.
    The First and Second Books of Discipline of 1560 and 1578.
    The Book of Common Order latest version of 1994.

    Bodies to which the Church of Scotland is affiliated

    Action of Churches Together in Scotland
    Churches Together in Britain and Ireland
    Conference of European Churches
    Community of Protestant Churches in Europe (Leuenberg Church Fellowship)
    World Council of Churches
    World Communion of Reformed Churches

    Other bodies

    Iona Community
    Scottish Churches Parliamentary Office
    Society, Religion and Technology Project

    Legislation

    Protestant Religion and Presbyterian Church Act 1707
    Church of Scotland Act 1921

    References

    Jump up
    ^ "Church of Scotland" (PDF). churchofscotland.org.uk. Church of Scotland. Retrieved April 26, 2016.
    Jump up
    ^ "Church of Scotland creates new job for arts minister". www.heraldscotland.com. Herald & Times Group. Retrieved April 26, 2016.
    Jump up
    ^ "Survey indicates 1.5 million Scots identify with Church". churchofscotland.org.uk. Church of Scotland. Retrieved September 29, 2016.
    Jump up
    ^ Queen and the Church, royal.gov.uk. Retrieved 5 July 2015. Archived 7 July 2015 at the Wayback Machine.
    Jump up
    ^ "Articles Declaratory of the Constitution of the Church of Scotland". The Church of Scotland.
    ^
    Jump up to:
    a b "Church of Scotland 'struggling to stay alive'". scotsman.com.
    Jump up
    ^ "Survey indicates 1.5 million Scots identify with Church". www.churchofscotland.org.uk. Retrieved 2016-09-29.
    Jump up
    ^  Herbermann, Charles, ed. (1913). "Established Church of Scotland". Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company.
    Jump up
    ^ Ordinal and Service Book, OUP 1931
    Jump up
    ^ Westminster Confession of Faith Archived 22 October 2016 at the Wayback Machine. page at Church of Scotland website
    Jump up
    ^ God's Invitation Archived 28 December 2011 at the Wayback Machine. on the website of the Parish Church of Dull and Weem
    Jump up
    ^ Reports to the General Assembly 1992, Church of Scotland, Edinburgh 1992
    Jump up
    ^ Church of Scotland 2007–2008 Year Book, p. 350
    Jump up
    ^ http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-35953639
    Jump up
    ^ "Archived copy" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 4 March 2016. Retrieved 2012-02-21.
    Jump up
    ^ "Kirk's College of Divinity has so few students it is 'scarcely viable'". Herald Scotland.
    Jump up
    ^ "Archived copy" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 4 March 2016. Retrieved 2013-01-11.
    Jump up
    ^ http://churchofscotland.org.uk/news_and_events/news/archive/articles/church_welcomes_19_new_recruits_to_ministry
    Jump up
    ^ http://www.churchofscotland.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/21079/Friday_Afternooon_Reflection.pdf
    Jump up
    ^ Scotland, The Church of (2017-04-24). "General Assembly allows ministers and deacons in same-sex marriages". www.churchofscotland.org.uk. Retrieved 2017-04-24.
    Jump up
    ^ "BBC - Will & Testament: Presbyterians prepare for a theological battle". bbc.co.uk.
    Jump up
    ^ Church backs first openly gay minister – Herald Scotland Archived 27 May 2009 at the Wayback Machine.
    Jump up
    ^ Member Churches Archived 7 October 2011 at the Wayback Machine. confessingchurch.org.uk, accessed 7 July 2009
    Jump up
    ^ Severin Carrell. "Church of Scotland votes to allow gay and lesbian ministers". the Guardian.
    Jump up
    ^ "Church of Scotland General Assembly votes to allow gay ministers". BBC News.
    Jump up
    ^ "Kirk could lose £1m a year over gay ordination". Herald Scotland.
    Jump up
    ^ Gledhill, Ruth (21 May 2016). "Church of Scotland votes in favour of ministers in gay marriages". Christian Today. Retrieved 21 May 2016.
    Jump up
    ^ BBC News - Church of Scotland against gay marriage law change Archived 2 June 2013 at the Wayback Machine.. Bbc.co.uk (2011-12-01). Retrieved on 2013-08-12.
    Jump up
    ^ Scotl, Severin Carrell; correspondent (2015-05-21). "Church of Scotland opens door for appointment of married gay ministers". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 2016-04-12.
    Jump up
    ^ "Church of Scotland decision on married gay clergy delayed". www.yahoo.com. Retrieved 2016-05-21.
    Jump up
    ^ Association, Press (2016-05-21). "Church of Scotland votes to allow ministers to be in same-sex marriages". the Guardian. Retrieved 2016-05-21.
    Jump up
    ^ "Church of Scotland to debate allowing same-sex marriages - BelfastTelegraph.co.uk". BelfastTelegraph.co.uk. Retrieved 2017-04-24.
    Jump up
    ^ "Affirmation Scotland – seeking to create a more inclusive church". KaleidoScot. Retrieved 2016-05-18.
    Jump up
    ^ Church, Queen's Cross. "Affirmation! Scotland · Our Partners · Queen's Cross Church". www.queenscrosschurch.org.uk. Retrieved 2016-05-18.
    Jump up
    ^ "Israel condemns contentious Church of Scotland report". ynet.
    Jump up
    ^ "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 5 July 2014. Retrieved 2014-07-05. SCoJeC Rebukes Church of Scotland over General Assembly Report
    Jump up
    ^ Scottish Church denial of Jewish land rights stirs ire Archived 4 March 2016 at the Wayback Machine. by Jewish Telegraphic Agency, (reprinted in the Jerusalem Post), 5 May 2013.
    Jump up
    ^ "Church of Scotland to alter report denying Jews' claims to Israel". Haaretz. Jewish Telegraphic Agency. May 12, 2013. Retrieved 2016-02-27.
    Jump up
    ^ Atheist Stephen Hawking and Church of Scotland both determined to demonize Israel Archived 28 September 2014 at the Wayback Machine. by Rabbi Abraham Cooper, Fox News, 9 May 2013.
    Jump up
    ^ Scottish Church to debate Jewish right to land of Israel Archived 4 March 2016 at the Wayback Machine. by Marcus Dysch, The Jewish Chronicle, 2 May 2013.
    Jump up
    ^ Church of Scotland Insults Jews With Denial of Claim to Israel Archived 20 June 2013 at the Wayback Machine. by Liam Hoare, The Jewish Daily Forward, 10 May 2013.
    Jump up
    ^ Church of Scotland: Jews do not have a right to the land of Israel Archived 15 September 2015 at the Wayback Machine. by Anshel Pfeffer, Haaretz, May 3, 2013.
    Jump up
    ^ New report questions Israel's claim of "divine right" Archived 8 May 2013 at the Wayback Machine., Press TV, May 7, 2013.
    Jump up
    ^ The Church of Scotland Takes the Low Road Archived 31 December 2014 at the Wayback Machine. by Bruce Bawer, Frontpagemag, 14 May 2013.
    Jump up
    ^ The Church of Scotland's Scandal Archived 4 March 2016 at the Wayback Machine. by Dennis Prager, Townhall.com, May 14, 2013.
    Jump up
    ^ Church of Scotland Thinks Twice, Grants Israel the Right to Exist Archived 28 November 2014 at the Wayback Machine., The Jewish Press, 12 May 2013.
    Jump up
    ^ "Apologetics - Sanctity of Life - Abortion". christian.org.uk.
    Jump up
    ^ "End of life issues". churchofscotland.org.uk.
    Jump up
    ^ Andrew Hill Thomas Aikenhead Archived 1 October 2011 at the Wayback Machine. Dictionary of Unitarian and Universalist Biography monograph at website of Unitarian Universalist Association, c.1999
    Jump up
    ^ "Criminal justice". churchofscotland.org.uk.
    Jump up
    ^ "Archived copy" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 4 April 2016. Retrieved 2013-04-01.
    ^
    Jump up to:
    a b "Analysis of Religion in the 2001 Census". The Scottish Government. 17 May 2006. Archived from the original on 6 June 2011.
    Jump up
    ^ 'Kirk failing in its moral obligation to parishioners Archived 17 April 2016 at the Wayback Machine.' The Herald 12 May 2008
    Jump up
    ^ "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 24 April 2016. Retrieved 2016-03-31.
    ^
    Jump up to:
    a b c d e f "How we are organised. The Kirk and the State". Church of Scotland website. Church of Scotland. Retrieved 24 October 2016.
    Jump up
    ^ https://bothwellparishchurch.org.uk/welcome/the-church-of-scotland/
    Jump up
    ^ https://books.google.ie/books?id=0HqoVsg6gycC&pg=PA479&lpg=PA479&dq=%22A+national,+but+not+a+state,+church.%22&source=bl&ots=UEmDL2KC14&sig=Slrc-bsPcVXMtLB0FCCmKHw86p4&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi25JHE96rQAhVpAcAKHSWLDPwQ6AEIHDAA




    Last edited by orthodoxymoron on Wed May 03, 2017 4:38 pm; edited 10 times in total
    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7368
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The United States of the Solar System, A.D. 2133 (Book Three)

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Tue May 02, 2017 9:22 pm

    I've suddenly become interested in taking a closer look at the life and times of Pope Pius XII. I'm not sure exactly why, but this pontificate covers a VERY interesting span of history. Then there is the strange relationship between Pope Pius XII and Adolph Hitler. I don't seek the usual bashing and slamming. I suspect a deeper level to the historical record, which might be a strange battle between good and evil. What was REALLY going on in the Vatican between 1929 and 1939? What was REALLY going on with Adolph Hitler between 1929 and 1939? What was REALLY going on within Gizeh Intelligence between 1929 and 1939? I don't know, but I think I had better tread softly in this area of research. I have some ideas, but as usual, I have no proof. Perhaps I have some reincarnational connection to all of this - and I don't know why I just typed that! My motivation is really to pursue the good and noble aspects of all of the above - but to be careful to notice the evil aspects as well. I tend to think that all of this is very complex and illusory. The REAL story might be completely different than what we've been taught. I think we need to learn to research in a manner in which we are cool, calm, collected, and always fair. I don't know how to proceed, but I feel an overwhelming need to do so. I sure wish I knew who I really was in my previous incarnation. Some of you know - don't you? Penny for your thoughts! Pope Pius XII seems to be a link between the old church and the new church. Some sedevacantists declare that Pope Pius XII was the last legitimate pope, and that Vatican II contains heresy. I have no opinion on this particular aspect of the church and the papacy - although I have speculated regarding the possibility of the papacy being in a state of sedevacante ever since the time of Christ! This is not a common view, to say the least! And don't forget that Lt. Col. Philip Corso was stationed in Rome around the end of WWII - during the papacy of Pope Pius XII. Roswell, Muroc, Holloman, and Greada all occurred during his pontificate. Plus, after the Muroc event, Bishop McIntyre of Los Angeles, flew to Rome, to report on the UFO's and 'etherians' he witnessed in California. Think about the Marconi Antigravity Project in the 40's. And what about SIV? I'd better stop. What would Paola Harris say? What would Philip Corso Jr. say? Could a study of this period reveal interesting links between Sirius, Atlantis, Babylon, Egypt, Greece, Rome - and both the pre and post Vatican II church? I tend to think so. I'm not looking for dirt. I'm looking for the truth. But, as usual, I will pursue this in a rather passive and quiet manner - with no surprises. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Pius_XII

    The Venerable Pope Pius XII (Latin: Pius PP. XII; Italian: Pio XII), born Eugenio Maria Giuseppe Giovanni Pacelli (2 March 1876 – 9 October 1958), reigned as Pope, head of the Catholic Church and sovereign of Vatican City State, from 2 March 1939 until his death in 1958.

    Before election to the papacy, Pacelli served as secretary of the Department of Extraordinary Ecclesiastical Affairs, papal nuncio and Cardinal Secretary of State, in which capacity he worked to conclude treaties with European and Latin American nations, most notably the Reichskonkordat with Nazi Germany. His leadership of the Catholic Church during World War II remains the subject of continued historical controversy.

    After the war, Pius XII contributed to the rebuilding of Europe, and advocated peace and reconciliation, including lenient policies toward vanquished nations and the unification of Europe. The Church, flourishing in the West, experienced severe persecution and mass deportations of Catholic clergy in the East. In light of his protests, and his involvement in the Italian elections of 1948, he became known as a staunch opponent of communism.

    Pius XII explicitly invoked ex cathedra papal infallibility with the dogma of the Assumption of Mary in his 1950 Apostolic constitution Munificentissimus Deus. His magisterium includes almost 1,000 addresses and radio broadcasts. His forty-one encyclicals include Mystici Corporis, the Church as the Body of Christ; Mediator Dei on liturgy reform; Humani Generis on the Church's position on theology and evolution. He eliminated the Italian majority in the College of Cardinals in 1946.

    Eugenio Maria Giuseppe Giovanni Pacelli was born on 2 March 1876 in Rome into a deeply religious, aristocratic family with a history of ties to the papacy (the "Black Nobility"). His grandfather, Marcantonio Pacelli, was Under-Secretary in the Papal Ministry of Finances[1] and then Secretary of the Interior under Pope Pius IX from 1851 to 1870 and founded the Vatican's newspaper, L'Osservatore Romano in 1861;[2] his cousin, Ernesto Pacelli, was a key financial advisor to Pope Leo XIII; his father, Filippo Pacelli, a Franciscan Tertiary,[3] was the dean of the Sacra Rota Romana; and his brother, Francesco Pacelli, became a lay canon lawyer and the legal advisor to Pius XI, in which role he negotiated the Lateran Treaty in 1929, bringing an end to the Roman Question.

    Together with his brother Francesco and his two sisters, Giuseppina and Elisabetta, he grew up in the centre of Rome. At the age of 12, Eugenio announced his intentions to enter the priesthood instead of becoming a lawyer. After completing state primary schools, Pacelli received his secondary, classical education at the Visconti Institute,[4] which was dominated by an anti-Catholic atmosphere popular at that time[5] In 1894, at the age of 18, he entered the Collegio Capranica Seminary to begin study for the priesthood and enrolled at the Pontifical Gregorian University and the Apollinare Institute of Lateran University.[4] From 1895 to 1896, he studied philosophy at University of Rome La Sapienza.[4] In 1899, he received degrees in theology and in utroque iure (civil and canon law).[4] At the seminary, he received a special dispensation to live at home for health reasons.[4]

    He was ordained a priest on Easter Sunday, 2 April 1899 by Bishop Francesco di Paola Cassetta — the vice-regent of Rome and a family friend — and received his first assignment as a curate at Chiesa Nuova, where he had served as an altar boy.[6] In 1901, he entered the Congregation for Extraordinary Ecclesiastical Affairs, a sub-office of the Vatican Secretariat of State, where he became a minutante, at the recommendation of Cardinal Vincenzo Vannutelli, another family friend.[6]

    In 1904, Pacelli became a papal chamberlain and in 1905 a domestic prelate.[6] From 1904 until 1916, he assisted Cardinal Pietro Gasparri in his codification of canon law with the Department of Extraordinary Ecclesiastical Affairs.[7] He was also chosen in January 1901 by Pope Leo XIII to deliver condolences on behalf of the Vatican to Edward VII of the United Kingdom after the death of Queen Victoria.[8] In 1908, he served as a Vatican representative on the International Eucharistic Congress in London,[8] where he met Winston Churchill.[9] In 1911, he represented the Holy See at the coronation of King George V.[7]

    In 1908 and 1911, Pacelli turned down professorships in canon law at a Roman university and The Catholic University of America, respectively. Pacelli became the under-secretary in 1911, adjunct-secretary in 1912 (a position he received under Pope Pius X and retained under Pope Benedict XV) and secretary of the Department of Extraordinary Ecclesiastical Affairs in 1914—succeeding Gasparri, who was promoted to Cardinal Secretary of State.[7] As secretary, Pacelli concluded a concordat with Serbia four days before Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria was assassinated in Sarajevo.[10] During World War I, Pacelli maintained the Vatican's registry of prisoners of war. In 1915, he travelled to Vienna to assist Monsignor Raffaele Scapinelli — nuncio to Vienna — in his negotiations with Franz Joseph I of Austria regarding Italy.[11]

    Pope Benedict XV appointed Pacelli as nuncio to Bavaria on 23 April 1917, consecrating him as titular Bishop of Sardis and immediately elevating him to archbishop in the Sistine Chapel on 13 May 1917. After his consecration, Eugenio Pacelli left for Bavaria. As there was no nuncio to Prussia or Germany at the time, Pacelli was, for all practical purposes, the nuncio to all of the German Empire.

    Once in Munich, he conveyed the papal initiative to end the war to German authorities.[12] He met with King Ludwig III on 29 May and later with Kaiser Wilhelm II[13] and Chancellor Bethmann-Hollweg, who replied positively to the Papal initiative. However, Bethmann-Hollweg was forced to resign and the German High Command, hoping for a military victory, delayed the German reply until 20 September. For the remainder of the war, he concentrated on Benedict's humanitarian efforts.[14]

    Pacelli was appointed Apostolic Nuncio to Germany on 23 June 1920, and—after the completion of a Bavarian concordat—his nunciature was moved to Berlin in 1925. Many of Pacelli's Munich staff stayed with him for the rest of his life, including his advisor Robert Leiber and Pascalina Lehnert — housekeeper, friend, and adviser to Pacelli for 41 years. In Berlin, Pacelli was Dean of the Diplomatic Corps and active in diplomatic and many social activities. He worked with the German priest Ludwig Kaas, who was known for his expertise in Church-state relations and was politically active in the Catholic Centre Party.[15] While in Germany, he traveled to all regions as a pastor, attended Katholikentag (national gatherings of the faithful), and delivered some 50 sermons and speeches to the German people.[16]

    In post-war Germany, in the absence of a nuncio in Moscow, Pacelli worked also on diplomatic arrangements between the Vatican and the Soviet Union. He negotiated food shipments for Russia, where the Church was persecuted. He met with Soviet representatives including Foreign Minister Georgi Chicherin, who rejected any kind of religious education, the ordination of priests and bishops, but offered agreements without the points vital to the Vatican.[17] Despite Vatican pessimism and a lack of visible progress, Pacelli continued the secret negotiations, until Pope Pius XI ordered them to be discontinued in 1927.

    Pacelli supported the Weimar Coalition of Social Democrats and liberal parties. Although he had cordial relations with representatives of the Centre Party, he did not involve the Centre in his dealings with the German government.[18] Pacelli supported German diplomatic activity aimed at rejection of punitive measures from victorious former enemies. He blocked French attempts for an ecclesiastical separation of the Saar region, supported the appointment of a papal administrator for Danzig and aided the reintegration of priests expelled from Poland.[19]

    Pacelli was made a Cardinal-Priest of Santi Giovanni e Paolo on 16 December 1929 by Pope Pius XI, and within a few months, on 7 February 1930, Pius XI appointed him Cardinal Secretary of State. In 1935, Pacelli was named Camerlengo of the Holy Roman Church.

    As Cardinal Secretary of State, Pacelli signed concordats with a number of countries and states, including Baden (1932),[20] Austria (1933), Germany (1933), Yugoslavia (1935) and Portugal (1940). The Lateran treaties with Italy (1929) were concluded before Pacelli became secretary of state. Such concordats allowed the Catholic Church to organize youth groups, make ecclesiastical appointments, run schools, hospitals, and charities, or even conduct religious services. They also ensured that canon law would be recognized within some spheres (e.g., church decrees of nullity in the area of marriage).[21]

    He made many diplomatic visits throughout Europe and the Americas, including an extensive visit to the United States in 1936 where he met Franklin D. Roosevelt, who appointed a personal envoy — who did not require Senate confirmation — to the Holy See in December 1939, re-establishing a diplomatic tradition that had been broken since 1870 when the pope lost temporal power.[22]

    Pacelli presided as Papal Legate over the International Eucharistic Congress in Buenos Aires, Argentina on 10–14 October 1934, and in Budapest on 25–30 May 1938.[23] At this time, antisemitic laws were in the process of being formulated in Hungary. Pacelli made reference to the Jews "whose lips curse [Christ] and whose hearts reject him even today".[24] This traditional adversarial relationship with Judaism would be reversed in Nostra Aetate issued during the Second Vatican Council.[25] According to Joseph Bottum, Pacelli in 1937 "warned A. W. Klieforth, the American consul to Berlin, that Hitler was "an untrustworthy scoundrel and fundamentally wicked person"; Klieforth wrote that Pacelli "did not believe Hitler capable of moderation, and... fully supported the German bishops in their anti-Nazi stand". A report written by Pacelli the following year for President Franklin D. Roosevelt and filed with Ambassador Joseph Kennedy declared that the Church regarded compromise with the Third Reich as "out of the question".[26]

    Some historians have argued that Pacelli, as Cardinal Secretary of State, dissuaded Pope Pius XI — who was nearing death at the time[27] — from condemning the Kristallnacht in November 1938,[28] when he was informed of it by the papal nuncio in Berlin.[29] Likewise the draft encyclical Humani Generis Unitas ("On the Unity of the Human Race"), which was ready in September 1938 but, according to those responsible for an edition of the document[30] and other sources, it was not forwarded to the Holy See by the Jesuit General Wlodimir Ledochowski.[31][32] The draft encyclical contained an open and clear condemnation of colonialism, racism and antisemitism.[31][33][34] Some historians have argued that Pacelli learned about its existence only after the death of Pius XI and did not promulgate it as Pope.[35] He did however use parts of it in his inaugural encyclical Summi Pontificatus, which he titled "On the Unity of Human Society."[36]

    His various positions on Church and policy issues during his tenure as Cardinal Secretary of State were made public by the Holy See in 1939. Most noteworthy among the 50 speeches is his review of Church-State issues in Budapest in 1938.[37]

    The Reichskonkordat was an integral part of four concordats Pacelli concluded on behalf of the Vatican with German States. The state concordats were necessary because the German federalist Weimar constitution gave the German states authority in the area of education and culture and thus diminished the authority of the churches in these areas; this diminution of church authority was a primary concern of the Vatican. As Bavarian Nuncio, Pacelli negotiated successfully with the Bavarian authorities in 1925. He expected the concordat with Catholic Bavaria to be the model for the rest of Germany.[38] Prussia showed interest in negotiations only after the Bavarian concordat. However, Pacelli obtained less favorable conditions for the Church in the Prussian concordat of 1929, which excluded educational issues. A concordat with the German state of Baden was completed by Pacelli in 1932, after he had moved to Rome. There he also negotiated a concordat with Austria in 1933.[39] A total of 16 concordats and treaties with European states had been concluded in the ten year period 1922–1932.[40]

    The Reichskonkordat, signed on 20 July 1933, between Germany and the Holy See, while thus a part of an overall Vatican policy, was controversial from its beginning. It remains the most important of Pacelli's concordats. It is debated, not because of its content, which is still valid today, but because of its timing. A national concordat with Germany was one of Pacelli's main objectives as secretary of state, because he had hoped to strengthen the legal position of the Church. Pacelli, who knew German conditions well, emphasized in particular protection for Catholic associations (§31), freedom for education and Catholic schools, and freedom for publications.[41]

    As nuncio during the 1920s, he had made unsuccessful attempts to obtain German agreement for such a treaty, and between 1930 and 1933 he attempted to initiate negotiations with representatives of successive German governments, but the opposition of Protestant and Socialist parties, the instability of national governments and the care of the individual states to guard their autonomy thwarted this aim. In particular, the questions of denominational schools and pastoral work in the armed forces prevented any agreement on the national level, despite talks in the winter of 1932.[42][43]

    Adolf Hitler was appointed Chancellor on 30 January 1933 and sought to gain international respectability and to remove internal opposition by representatives of the Church and the Catholic Centre Party. He sent his vice chancellor Franz von Papen, a Catholic nobleman and member of the Centre Party, to Rome to offer negotiations about a Reichskonkordat.[44] On behalf of Pacelli, Prelate Ludwig Kaas, the outgoing chairman of the Centre Party, negotiated first drafts of the terms with Papen.[45] The concordat was finally signed, by Pacelli for the Vatican and von Papen for Germany, on 20 July and ratified on 10 September 1933.[46] Father Franziscus Stratman, senior Catholic chaplain at Berlin University wrote 'The souls of well-disposed people are in a turmoil as a result of the tyranny of the National Socialists, and I am merely stating a fact when I say that the authority of the bishops among innumerable Catholics and non-Catholics has been shaken by the quasi-approval of the National Socialist movement'.[47]

    Between 1933 and 1939, Pacelli issued 55 protests of violations of the Reichskonkordat. Most notably, early in 1937, Pacelli asked several German cardinals, including Cardinal Michael von Faulhaber to help him write a protest of Nazi violations of the Reichskonkordat; this was to become Pius XI's 1937 encyclical Mit brennender Sorge. The encyclical was written in German and not the usual Latin of official Roman Catholic Church documents. Secretly distributed by an army of motorcyclists and read from every German Catholic Church pulpit on Palm Sunday, it condemned the paganism of the National Socialism ideology.[48] Pope Pius XI credited its creation and writing to Pacelli.[49] It was the first official denunciation of Nazism made by any major organization and resulted in persecution of the Church by the infuriated Nazis who closed all the participating presses and "took numerous vindictive measures against the Church, including staging a long series of immorality trials of the Catholic clergy."[50]

    On 10 June 1941 he commented on the problems of the Reichskonkordat in a letter to the Bishop of Passau, in Bavaria: "The history of the Reichskonkordat shows, that the other side lacked the most basic prerequisites to accept minimal freedoms and rights of the Church, without which the Church simply cannot live and operate, formal agreements notwithstanding".[51]

    Pius XI died on 10 February 1939. Several historians have interpreted the conclave to choose his successor as facing a choice between a diplomatic or a spiritual candidate, and they view Pacelli's diplomatic experience, especially with Germany, as one of the deciding factors in his election on 2 March 1939, his 63rd birthday, after only one day of deliberation and three ballots.[53][54] He was the first cardinal secretary of state to be elected Pope since Clement IX in 1667.[55] He was also one of only two men known to have served as Camerlengo immediately prior to being elected as pope (the other being Pope Leo XIII). His coronation took place on 12 March 1939. Upon being elected pope he was also formally the Grand Master of the Equestrian Order of the Holy Sepulchre of Jerusalem, prefect of the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office, prefect of the Sacred Congregation for the Oriental Churches and prefect of the Sacred Consistorial Congregation. There was however a Cardinal-Secretary to run these bodies on a day-to-day basis.

    Pacelli took the same papal name as his predecessor, a title used exclusively by Italian Popes. He was quoted as saying, "I call myself Pius; my whole life was under Popes with this name, but especially as a sign of gratitude towards Pius XI."[56] On 15 December 1937, during his last consistory, Pius XI strongly hinted to the cardinals that he expected Pacelli to be his successor, saying "He is in your midst."[57][58] He had previously been quoted as saying: "When today the Pope dies, you’ll get another one tomorrow, because the Church continues. It would be a much bigger tragedy, if Cardinal Pacelli dies, because there is only one. I pray every day, God may send another one into one of our seminaries, but as of today, there is only one in this world."[59]

    Pascalina Lehnert, Pius XII's secretary and confidant since his time as nuncio to Germany, followed him to Rome.After his election, he made Luigi Maglione his successor as Cardinal Secretary of State. Cardinal Maglione, a seasoned Vatican diplomat, had reestablished diplomatic relations with Switzerland and was for many years nuncio in Paris. Yet, Maglione did not exercise the influence of his predecessor Pacelli, who as Pope continued his close relation with Monsignors Montini (later Pope Paul VI) and Domenico Tardini. After the death of Maglione in 1944, Pius left the position open and named Tardini head of its foreign section and Montini head of the internal section.[60] Tardini and Montini continued serving there until 1953, when Pius XII decided to appoint them cardinals,[61] an honor which both turned down.[62] They were then later appointed to be Pro-Secretary with the privilege to wear Episcopal Insignia.[63] Tardini continued to be a close co-worker of the Pope until the death of Pius XII, while Montini became archbishop of Milan, after the death of Alfredo Ildefonso Schuster.

    Pius XII slowly eroded the Italian monopoly on the Roman Curia; he employed German and Dutch Jesuit advisors, Robert Leiber, Augustin Bea, and Sebastian Tromp. He also supported the elevation of Americans such as Cardinal Francis Spellman from a minor to a major role in the Church.[64][65] After World War II, Pius XII appointed more non-Italians than any Pope before him. American appointees included Joseph P. Hurley as regent of the nunciature in Belgrade, Gerald P. O'Hara Nuncio to Romania and Monsignor Aloisius Joseph Muench as nuncio to Germany. For the first time, numerous young Europeans, Asians and "Americans were trained in various congregations and secretariats within the Vatican for eventual service throughout the world."[66]

    Only twice in his pontificate did Pius XII hold a consistory to create new cardinals, in contrast to Pius XI, who had done so 17 times in as many years. Pius XII chose not to name new cardinals during World War II, and the number of cardinals shrank to 38, with Dennis Joseph Dougherty of Philadelphia being the only living U.S. cardinal. The first occasion on 18 February 1946 — which has become known as the "Grand Consistory" — yielded the elevation of a record 32 new cardinals, almost 50 percent of the College of Cardinals and reaching the canonical limit of 70 cardinals.[67] In the 1946 consistory, Pius XII, while maintaining the maximum size of the College of Cardinals at 70, named cardinals from China, India, the Middle East and increased the number of Cardinals from the Americas, proportionally lessening the Italian influence.[68]

    In his second consistory on 12 January 1953, it was expected that his closest co-workers, Msgrs. Domenico Tardini and Giovanni Montini would be elevated[69] and Pius XII informed the assembled cardinals that both of them were originally on the top of his list,[70] but they had turned down the offer, and were rewarded instead with other promotions.[71] The two consistories of 1946 and 1953 brought an end to over five hundred years of Italians constituting a majority of the College of Cardinals.[72] With few exceptions, Italian prelates accepted the changes positively; there was no protest movement or open opposition to the internationalization efforts.[73]

    Earlier, in 1945, Pius XII had dispensed with the complicated papal conclave procedures which attempted to ensure secrecy while preventing Cardinals from voting for themselves, compensating for this change by raising the requisite majority from two-thirds to two thirds plus one.

    In his encyclical Mediator Dei, Pius XII links liturgy with the last will of Jesus Christ. “But it is His will, that the worship He instituted and practiced during His life on earth shall continue ever afterwards without intermission. For he has not left mankind an orphan. He still offers us the support of His powerful, unfailing intercession, acting as our "advocate with the Father." He aids us likewise through His Church, where He is present indefectibly as the ages run their course: through the Church which He constituted "the pillar of truth" and dispenser of grace, and which by His sacrifice on the cross, He founded, consecrated and confirmed forever.[74] ”

    The Church has, therefore, according to Pius XII, a common aim with Christ himself, teaching all men the truth, and, offering to God a pleasing and acceptable sacrifice. This way, the Church re-establishes the unity between the Creator and His creatures.[75] The sacrifice of the altar, being Christ's own actions, convey and dispense divine grace from Christ to the members of the Mystical Body.[76]

    The numerous Liturgy reforms of Pius XII show two characteristics. Renewal and the rediscovery of old liturgical traditions, such as the reintroduction of the Easter Vigil, and, a more structured atmosphere within the Church buildings. The use of vernacular language, favoured by Pius XII, was hotly debated at his time. He increased non-Latin services, especially in countries with expanding Catholic mission activities. The location of the Blessed Sacrament within the Church was to be always at the main altar in the centre of the Church.[77] The Church should display religious objects, but not be overloaded with secondary objects. Modern sacred art should be reverential and reflect the spirit of our time.[78] Priests are permitted to officiate marriages without Holy Mass. They may also officiate confirmations in certain instances.[79]

    Decentralised authority and increased independence of the Uniate Churches were aimed at in the Canon Law/Corpis Iuris Canonici (CIC) reform. In its new constitutions, Eastern Patriarchs were made almost independent from Rome (CIC Orientalis, 1957) Eastern marriage law (CIC Orientalis, 1949), civil law (CIC Orientalis, 1950), laws governing religious associations (CIC Orientalis, 1952) property law (CIC Orientalis, 1952) and other laws. These reforms and writings of Pius XII were intended to establish Eastern Orientals as equal parts of the mystical body of Christ, as explained in the encyclical Mystici Corporis.

    With the Apostolic constitution Sedis Sapientiae, Pius XII added social sciences, sociology, psychology and social psychology, to the pastoral training of future priests. Pius XII emphasised the need to systematically analyze the psychological condition of candidates to the priesthood to ensure that they are capable of a life of celibacy and service.[80] Pius XII added one year to the theological formation of future priests. He also included a "pastoral year", an introduction into the practice of Parish work.[81]

    The call to constant interior reform and Christian heroism is a central part of the message of Pius XII to all Religious. This means to be above average, to be a living example of Christian virtue. As the secular world has fallen back into Hedonism, the Catholic alternative is the sanctification especially of Priests and Religious. The strict norms governing their lives are meant to make them models of Christian perfection for lay people, he writes in Menti Nostrae.[82] Bishops are encouraged to look at model saints like Boniface, and Pope Pius X.[83] Priests were encouraged to be living examples of the love of Christ and his sacrifice.[84]

    Pius XII explained the Catholic faith in 41 encyclicals and almost 1000 messages and speeches during his long pontificate. Mediator Dei clarified membership and participation in the Church. The encyclical Divino Afflante Spiritu opened the doors for biblical research. His magisterium was far larger and is difficult to summarize. In numerous speeches Catholic teaching is related to various aspects of life, education, medicine, politics, war and peace, the life of saints, Mary, the mother of God, things eternal and contemporary. Theologically, Pius XII specified the nature of the teaching authority of the Church. He also gave a new freedom to engage in theological investigations.[85]

    The encyclical, Divino Afflante Spiritu, published in 1943[86] emphasized the role of the Bible. Pius XII freed biblical research from previous limitations. He encouraged Christian theologians to revisit original versions of the Bible in Greek and Hebrew. Noting improvements in archaeology, the encyclical reversed Pope Leo XIII's encyclical, which had only advocated going back to the original texts to resolve ambiguity in the Latin Vulgate. The encyclical demands a much better understanding of ancient Jewish history and traditions. It requires bishops throughout the Church to initiate biblical studies for lay people. The Pontiff also requests a reorientation of Catholic teaching and education, relying much more on sacred scriptures in sermons and religious instruction.[87]

    This theological investigative freedom does not, however, extend to all aspects of theology. According to Pius, theologians, employed by the Church, are assistants, to teach the official teachings of the Church and not their own private thoughts. They are free to engage in empirical research, which the Church generously supports, but in matters of morality and religion, they are subjected to the teaching office and authority of the Church, the Magisterium. "The most noble office of theology is to show how a doctrine defined by the Church is contained in the sources of revelation, … in that sense in which it has been defined by the Church."[88] The deposit of faith is authentically interpretated not to each of the faithful, not even to theologians, but only to the teaching authority of the Church.[89]

    On 1 November 1950, Pius XII defined the dogma of the assumption (Titian's Assunta (1516–18) pictured). As a young boy and in later life, Pacelli was an ardent follower of the Virgin Mary. He was consecrated as a bishop on 13 May 1917, the very first day of the appearances of Our Lady of Fatima. He consecrated the world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary in 1942, in accordance with the second "secret" of Our Lady of Fatima. His remains were to be buried in the crypt of Saint Peter's Basilica on the feast day of Our Lady of Fatima, 13 October 1958.

    On 1 November 1950, Pope Pius XII defined the dogma of the Assumption: “By the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and by our own authority, we pronounce, declare, and define it to be a divinely revealed dogma: that the Immaculate Mother of God, the ever Virgin Mary, having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory.[90] ”

    The dogma of the bodily assumption of the Virgin Mary is the crowning of the theology of Pius XII. It resolved a theological difficulty that the dogma of the Immaculate Conception had left open: if the soul of Mary had been created without the taint of sin, yet the Bible states that the wages of sin is death, should it be concluded that Mary, who by definition never sinned, therefore never died? The dogma of her assumption settles the problem by stating that she did not experience the ordinary human death, but was taken to Heaven as a divine gift.

    The dogma was preceded by the 1946 encyclical Deiparae Virginis Mariae, which requested all Catholic bishops to express their opinion on a possible dogmatization. On 8 September 1953, the encyclical Fulgens corona announced a Marian year for 1954, the centennial of the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception.[91] In the encyclical Ad caeli reginam he promulgated the feast, Queenship of Mary.[92] Mystici Corporis summarizes his mariology.[93]

    Pius XII delivered numerous speeches to medical professionals and researchers.[94] He addressed doctors, nurses, midwives, to detail all aspects of rights and dignity of patients, medical responsibilities, moral implications of psychological illnesses and the uses of psycho pharmaca. He also took on issues like the uses of medicine in terminally ill persons, medical lies in face of grave illness, and the rights of family members to make decisions against expert medical advice. Pope Pius XII often reconsidered previously accepted truth, thus he was first to determine that the use of pain medicine in terminally ill patients is justified, even if this may shorten the life of the patient, as long as life shortening is not the objective itself.[95]

    Pope Pius XII developed an extensive theology of the family, taking issue with family roles, sharing of household duties, education of children, conflict resolution, financial dilemmas, psychological problems, illness, taking care of older generations, unemployment, marital holiness and virtue, common prayer, religious discussions and more. Within the overall divine purpose of family life, he fully accepted the rhythm method as a moral form of family planning, although only limited circumstances, within the context of family.[96]

    To Pius XII, science and religion were heavenly sisters, different manifestations of divine exactness, who could not possibly contradict each other over the long term[97] Regarding their relation, his advisor Professor Robert Leiber wrote: "Pius XII was very careful not to close any doors prematurely. He was energetic on this point and regretted that in the case of Galileo."[98]

    In 1950, Pius XII promulgated Humani Generis which acknowledged that evolution might accurately describe the biological origins of human life, but at the same time criticized those who "imprudently and indiscreetly hold that evolution... explains the origin of all things". Catholics must believe that the human soul was created immediately by God. Since the soul is a spiritual substance it is not brought into being through transformation of matter, but directly by God, whence the special uniqueness of each person.."[99] Fifty years later, Pope John Paul II, stating that scientific evidence now seemed to favour the evolutionary theory, upheld the distinction of Pius XII regarding the human soul. "Even if the human body originates from pre-existent living matter, the spiritual soul is spontaneously created by God." [100]

    In 1939 Pius XII placed his pontificate under the maternal care of Our Lady of Good Counsel and composed a prayer to her.[101][102] This 19th century painting is by Pasquale Sarullo.Pius XII issued 41 encyclicals during his pontificate – more than all his successors in the past 50 years taken together – along with many other writings and speeches. The pontificate of Pius XII was the first in Vatican history, which published papal speeches and addresses in vernacular language on a systematic basis. Until then, papal documents were issued mainly in Latin in Acta Apostolicae Sedis since 1909. Because of the novelty of it all, and a feared occupation of the Vatican by the German Wehrmacht, not all documents exist today. In 1944, a number of papal documents were burned or "walled in",[103] to avoid detection by the advancing German army. Insisting that all publications must be reviewed by him on a prior basis to avoid any misunderstanding, several speeches by Pius XII, who did not find sufficient time, were never published or appeared only once issued in the Vatican daily, Osservatore Romano.

    Several encyclicals addressed the Oriental Churches. Orientalis Ecclesiae was issued in 1944 on the 15th centenary of the death of Cyril of Alexandria, a saint common to Orthodox and Latin Churches. Pius XII asks for prayer for better understanding and unification of the Churches. Orientales Omnes, issued in 1945 on the 350th anniversary of the reunion, is a call to continued unity of the Ruthenian Church, threatened in its very existence by the authorities of the Soviet Union. Sempiternus Rex was issued in 1951 on the 1500th anniversary of the Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon. It included a call to oriental communities adhering to monophysitism to return to the Catholic Church.

    Orientales Ecclesias was issued in 1952 and addressed to the Eastern Churches, protesting the continued Stalinist persecution of the Church. Several Apostolic Letters were sent to the bishops in the East. On 13 May 1956, Pope Pius addressed all bishops of the Eastern Rite. Mary, the mother of God was the subject of encyclical letters to the people of Russia in Fulgens Corona and a papal letter to the people of Russia.[104][105][106][107][108][109][110]

    In 1958, Pope Pius XII declared the Feast of the Holy Face of Jesus as Shrove Tuesday (the Tuesday before Ash Wednesday) for all Roman Catholics. The first medal of the Holy Face, produced by Sister Maria Pierina De Micheli based on the image on the Shroud of Turin had been offered to Pius XII who approved of the medal and the devotion based on it. The general devotion to the Holy Face of Jesus had been approved by Pope Leo XIII in 1885 before the image on the Turin Shroud had been photographed.[111][112]

    Pope Pius XII canonized numerous saints, including Pope Pius X and Maria Goretti. He beatified Pope Innocent XI. The first canonizations were two women, the founder of a female order, Mary Euphrasia Pelletier, and a young housekeeper said to have stigmata, Gemma Galgani. Pelletier had a reputation for opening new ways for Catholic charities, helping people in difficulties with the law, who had been neglected by the system and the Church. Galgani was a woman in her twenties whose virtue became model by her canonization.[113]

    As Cardinal Secretary of State, Pacelli signed a Concordat between Germany and the Vatican at a ceremony in Rome on 20 July 1933. His pontificate began on the eve of World War II. In the 1937 encyclical Mit brennender Sorge, drafted by Pope Pius XII when he was still a cardinal,[49] Pope Pius XI denounced Nazism and breaches of the Reichskonkordat. Read from the pulpits of all German Catholic churches, it has been described as the first official denunciation of Nazism made by any major organization.[50] Nazi persecution of the Church in Germany then began by "outright repression" and "staged prosecutions of monks for homosexuality, with the maximum of publicity."[114] When Dutch bishops protested against the deportation of Jews, the Nazis responded by deporting Jewish converts, including Edith Stein.[50]

    In Poland, the Nazis murdered over 2,500 monks and priests while even more were sent to concentration camps.[114] The Priester-Block (priests barracks) in the Dachau concentration camp lists 2,600 Roman Catholic priests.[48] Pius XII's refusal to censure the German invasion and annexation of Poland was regarded as a "betrayal" by many Polish Catholics and clergy, who saw his appointment of Hilarius Breitinger as apostolic administrator for the Wartheland in May 1942 as "implicit recognition" of the breakup of Poland; the opinions of the Volksdeutsche, mostly Catholic German minorities living in Poland, were more mixed.[115] Although Pius XII received frequent reports about atrocities committed by and/or against Catholics, his knowledge was not complete; for example, he wept after the war upon learning that Cardinal Hlond had banned German liturgical services in Poland.[116] Phayer argues that Pius XII — both before and during his papacy — consistently "deferred to Germany at the expense of Poland", and saw Germany — not Poland — as critical to "rebuilding a large Catholic presence in Central Europe".[117]

    During the war, the Pope followed a policy of public neutrality mirroring that of Pope Benedict XV during World War I. In 1939, Pius XII turned the Vatican into a centre of aid which he organized from various parts of the world [118] At the request of the Pope, an information office for prisoners of war and refugees operated in the Vatican under Giovanni Battista Montini, which in the years of its existence from 1939 until 1947 received almost 10 million (9,891,497) information requests and produced over 11 million (11,293,511) answers about missing persons.[119]

    In April 1939, after the submission of Charles Maurras and the intervention of the Carmel of Lisieux, Pius XII ended his predecessor's ban on Action Française, an organization described by some authors as virulently antisemitic and anti-Communist.[120][121]

    In 1939, the Pope employed Jewish cartographer Roberto Almagia to work on old maps in the Vatican library. Almagia had been at the University of Rome since 1915 but was dismissed after Benito Mussolini's anti-semitic legislation of 1938. The Pope's appointment of two Jews to the Vatican Academy of Science as well as the hiring of Almagia were reported by The New York Times in the editions of 11 November 1939, and 10 January 1940.[122]

    During the Soviet Union's acts of aggression against Finland, the Winter War, Pius XII condemned the Soviet attack on 26 December 1939 in a speech at the Vatican. Later he donated a signed and sealed prayer on behalf of Finland.[123]

    On 18 January 1940, after over 15,000 Polish civilians had been killed, Pius XII said in a radio broadcast, "The horror and inexcusable excesses committed on a helpless and a homeless people have been established by the unimpeachable testimony of eye-witnesses."[124]

    In his first encyclical Summi Pontificatus (20 October 1939), Pius XII publicly condemned the invasion, occupation and partition of Poland under the Nazi-Soviet Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact.

    “ The blood of countless human beings, even noncombatants, raises a piteous dirge over a nation such as Our dear Poland, which, for its fidelity to the Church, for its services in the defense of Christian civilization, written in indelible characters in the annals of history, has a right to the generous and brotherly sympathy of the whole world, while it awaits, relying on the powerful intercession of Mary, Help of Christians, the hour of a resurrection in harmony with the principles of justice and true peace.
    - Summi Pontificatus, 106. ”

    Time magazine reports that France and Britain were favourably surprised by the encyclical.[125]

    On March 11, 1940, The Pope had a personal meeting with German Minister of Foreign Affairs Joachim Ribbentrop, who was visiting Rome. During that meeting, The German Foreign Minister suggested to the Pope an overall settlement between the Vatican and the Reich government in exchange for the Pope instructing the German Bishops to refrain from political criticism of the German government, but no agreement was reached. The Vatican diplomatic record of the meeting describes what transpired as follows:

    He (Ribbentrop) answered that at the bottom it is a question of a revolution and that compared with other revolutions the National Socialist Revolution has not caused grave harm to the churches. To which the Pope replied that in reality there had been many injuries - and he continued to point out examples. Ribbentrop underlined that the State spends a great deal for the clergy and the Church. The Pope replied that a great deal has been taken away from the Church, houses, institutions of education - kicking out the legitimate owners malo modo in a few hours. The Holy Father insisted particularly on the schools.[126]

    After Germany invaded the Low Countries during 1940, Pius XII sent expressions of sympathy to the Queen of the Netherlands, the King of Belgium, and the Grand Duchess of Luxembourg. When Mussolini learned of the warnings and the telegrams of sympathy, he took them as a personal affront and had his ambassador to the Vatican file an official protest, charging that Pius XII had taken sides against Italy's ally Germany. Mussolini's foreign minister claimed that Pius XII was "ready to let himself be deported to a concentration camp, rather than do anything against his conscience."[127]

    In the spring of 1940, a group of German generals seeking to overthrow Hitler and make peace with the British approached Pope Pius XII, who acted as a negotiator between the British and the abortive plot.[128]

    Pius XII elevated Aloysius Stepinac — a Croatian archbishop convicted of collaborating with the Ustaša — to the cardinalate.[129]On June 13, 1940, while the battle of France was still raging, the Pope issued encyclical Saeculo Exeunte Octavo, which, though relating to Portugal, made an ambiguous statement about the general situation in the following words: "now, when more than a few European nations have been lost to the Church because of the changes in these calamitous times", which could have referred either to the German occupation or to Communism in Russia.[130]

    In April 1941, Pius XII granted a private audience to Ante Pavelic, the leader of the newly proclaimed Croatian state (rather than the diplomatic audience Pavelic had wanted).[131] Pius was criticised for his reception of Pavelic: an unattributed British Foreign Office memo on the subject described Pius as "the greatest moral coward of our age."[132] The Vatican did not officially recognise Pavelic's regime. Pius XII did not publicly condemn the expulsions and forced conversions to Catholicism perpetrated on Serbs by Pavelic;[133] however, the Holy See did expressly repudiate the forced conversions in a memorandum dated 25 January 1942, from the Vatican Secretiat of State to the Yugoslavian Legation.[134] Pius XII was well-informed of the involvement of Croatian Catholic clergy with the Ustaša regime, even possessing a list of clergymembers who had "joined in the slaughter", but decided against condemning the regime or taking action against the involved clergy, fearing that it would lead to schism in the Croatian church or undermine the formation of a future Croatian state.[135] Pius XII elevated Aloysius Stepinac—a Croatian archbishop convicted of collaborating with the Ustaša—to the cardinalate.[136] Although Phayer agrees in part with criticisms of Stepinac conviction as a "show trial", he states "the charge that he supported the Ustaša regime was, of course, true, as everyone knew",[129] and that "if Stepinac had responded to the charges against him, his defense would have inevitably unraveled, exposing the Vatican's support of the genocidal Pavelic".[137]

    In 1941, Pius XII interpreted Divini Redemptoris, an encyclical of Pope Pius XI, which forbade Catholics to help communists, as not applying to military assistance to the Soviet Union. This interpretation assuaged American Catholics who had previously opposed Lend-Lease arrangements with the Soviet Union.[138]

    In March 1942, Pius XII established diplomatic relations with the Japanese Empire and received ambassador Ken Harada, who remained in that position until the end of the war.[139] In May 1942, Kazimierz Papée, Polish ambassador to the Vatican, complained that Pius had failed to condemn the recent wave of atrocities in Poland; when Cardinal Secretary of State Maglione replied that the Vatican could not document individual atrocities, Papée declared, "when something becomes notorious, proof is not required."[140]

    In June 1942, diplomatic relations were established with the Nationalist government of China. This step was envisaged earlier, but delayed due to Japanese pressure to establish relations with the pro-Japanese Wang Jingwei government. The first Chinese Minister to the Vatican, Hsieh Shou-kang, was only able to arrive at the Vatican in January 1943, due to difficulties of travel resulting from the war.[141]

    Pius XII's 1942 Christmas address on the Vatican Radio remains a "lightning rod" in debates about Pius XII.[142] The majority of the speech spoke generally about human rights and civil society; at the very end of the speech, Pius XII mentioned "the hundreds of thousands of persons who, without any fault on their part, sometimes only because of their nationality or race, have been consigned to death or to a slow decline".[143] Reactions of contemporaries and scholars are divided, but the speech did denounce genocide (a term not coined until 1944), although "it is still not clear whose genocide or which genocide he was referring to".[144]

    Several authors have alleged a plot to kidnap Pius XII by the Nazis during their occupation of Rome in 1943 (Vatican City itself was not occupied); British historian Owen Chadwick and Jesuit ADSS editor Robert A. Graham concluded that such claims were the invention of British wartime propagandists.[145][146] However, subsequent to those accounts, Dan Kurzman in 2007 published a work which he maintains establishes the plot as fact.[147]

    As the war was approaching its end in 1945, Pius advocated a lenient policy by the Allied leaders in an effort to prevent what he perceived to be the mistakes made at the end of World War I.[148] In August 1944, he met British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, who was visiting Rome. At their meeting, the Pope expressed the hope that the planned war crimes trials shall not include Italian defendants, since he considered the Italians as victims of the Third Reich.[149]

    In 1939, the newly elected Pope Pius XII appointed several prominent Jewish scholars to posts at the Vatican after they had been dismissed from Italian universities under Fascist leader Benito Mussolini's racial laws.[150] Pius later engineered an agreement—formally approved on 23 June 1939—with Brazilian President Getúlio Vargas to issue 3,000 visas to "non-Aryan Catholics". However, over the next 18 months Brazil's Conselho de Imigração e Colonização (CIC) continued to tighten the restrictions on their issuance, including requiring a baptismal certificate dated before 1933, a substantial monetary transfer to the Banco do Brasil, and approval by the Brazilian Propaganda Office in Berlin. The program was cancelled 14 months later, after fewer than 1,000 visas had been issued, amid suspicions of "improper conduct" (i.e., continuing to practice Judaism) among those who had received visas.[29][151]

    Cardinal Secretary of State Luigi Maglione received a request from Chief Rabbi of Palestine Isaac Herzog in the Spring of 1940 to intercede on behalf of Lithuanian Jews about to be deported to Germany.[29] Pius called Ribbentrop on 11 March, repeatedly protesting against the treatment of Jews.[121] In his 1939 encyclical Summi Pontificatus, Pius rejected anti-semitism, stating that in the Catholic Church there is "neither Gentile nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision."[152] In 1940, Pius asked members of the clergy, on Vatican letterhead, to do whatever they could on behalf of interned Jews.[153]

    In 1941, Cardinal Theodor Innitzer of Vienna informed Pius of Jewish deportations in Vienna.[154] Later that year, when asked by French Marshal Philippe Pétain if the Vatican objected to antisemitic laws, Pius responded that the church condemned antisemitism, but would not comment on specific rules.[154] Similarly, when Philippe Pétain's regime adopted the "Jewish statutes", the Vichy ambassador to the Vatican, Léon Bérard (a French politician), was told that the legislation did not conflict with Catholic teachings.[155] Valerio Valeri, the nuncio to France was "embarrassed" when he learned of this publicly from Pétain[156] and personally checked the information with Cardinal Secretary of State Maglione[157] who confirmed the Vatican's position.[158] Yet in June 1942, Pius personally protested against the mass deportations of Jews from France, ordering the papal nuncio to protest to Pétain against "the inhuman arrests and deportations of Jews".[159] In September 1941, Pius objected to a Slovakian Jewish Code,[160] which, unlike the earlier Vichy codes, prohibited intermarriage between Jews and non-Jews.[161] In October 1941, Harold Tittman, a U.S. delegate to the Vatican, asked the pope to condemn the atrocities against Jews; Pius replied that the Vatican wished to remain "neutral,"[162] reiterating the neutrality policy which Pius invoked as early as September 1940.[155]

    In 1942, the Slovakian chargé d'affaires told Pius that Slovakian Jews were being sent to concentration camps.[154] On 11 March 1942, several days before the first transport was due to leave, the chargé d'affaires in Bratislava reported to the Vatican: "I have been assured that this atrocious plan is the handwork of ... Prime Minister (Tuka), who confirmed the plan ... he dared to tell me—he who makes such a show of his Catholicism—that he saw nothing inhuman or un-Christian in it ... the deportation of 80,000 persons to Poland, is equivalent to condemning a great number of them to certain death." The Vatican protested to the Slovak government that it "deplore(s) these... measures which gravely hurt the natural human rights of persons, merely because of their race."[163]

    On 18 September 1942, Pius received a letter from Monsignor Montini (future Pope Paul VI), saying, "the massacres of the Jews reach frightening proportions and forms."[154] Later that month, Myron Taylor, U.S. representative to the Vatican, warned Pius that the Vatican's "moral prestige" was being injured by silence on European atrocities, a warning which was echoed simultaneously by representatives from the United Kingdom, Brazil, Uruguay, Belgium, and Poland.[164] The Cardinal Secretary of State replied that the rumors about genocide could not be verified.[165] In December 1942, when Tittman asked Cardinal Secretary of State Maglione if Pius would issue a proclamation similar to the Allied declaration "German Policy of Extermination of the Jewish Race", Maglione replied that the Vatican was "unable to denounce publicly particular atrocities."[166] Pius XII directly explained to Tittman that he could not name the Nazis without at the same time mentioning the Bolsheviks.[167] Pius XII also never publicly condemned the Nazi massacre of 1,800,000–1,900,000 mainly Catholic Polish gentiles (including 2,935 members of the Catholic Clergy),[168][169] nor did he ever publicly condemn the Soviet Union for the deaths of 1,000,000 mainly Catholic Polish gentile citizens including an untold number of clergy.[170] In late 1942, Pius XII advised German and Hungarian bishops that speaking out against the massacres in the Eastern Front would be politically advantageous.[171] In his 1942 Christmas Eve message, he expressed strong concern for "those hundreds of thousands, who ... sometimes only by reason of their nationality or race, are marked down for death or progressive extinction.[172] On 7 April 1943, Msgr. Tardini, one of Pius’ closest advisors, told Pius that it would be politically advantageous after the war to take steps to help Slovakian Jews.[173]

    In January 1943, Pius declined to publicly denounce the Nazi discrimination against Jews, following requests to do so from Wladyslaw Raczkiewicz, president of the Polish government-in-exile, and Bishop Konrad von Preysing of Berlin.[174] On 26 September 1943, following the German occupation of northern Italy, Nazi officials gave Jewish leaders in Rome 36 hours to produce 50 kilograms of gold (or the equivalent) threatening to take 300 hostages. Then Chief Rabbi of Rome Israel Zolli recounts in his memoir that he was selected to go to the Vatican and seek help.[175] The Vatican offered to loan 15 kilos, but the offer proved unnecessary when the Jews received an extension.[176] Soon afterward, when deportations from Italy were imminent, 477 Jews were hidden in the Vatican itself and another 4,238 were protected in Roman monasteries and convents.[177] Eighty percent of Roman Jews were saved from deportation.[178] Phayer argues that the German diplomats in Rome were the "initiators of the effort to save the city's Jews", but holds that Pius XII "cooperated in this attempt at rescue", while agreeing with Zuccotti that the pope "did not give orders" for any Roman Catholic institution to hide Jews.[179]

    On 30 April 1943, Pius wrote to Bishop Graf von Preysing of Berlin to say: "We give to the pastors who are working on the local level the duty of determining if and to what degree the danger of reprisals and of various forms of oppression occasioned by episcopal declarations... ad maiora mala vitanda (to avoid worse)... seem to advise caution. Here lies one of the reasons, why We impose self-restraint on Ourselves in our speeches; the experience, that we made in 1942 with papal addresses, which We authorized to be forwarded to the Believers, justifies our opinion, as far as We see.... The Holy See has done whatever was in its power, with charitable, financial and moral assistance. To say nothing of the substantial sums which we spent in American money for the fares of immigrants."[180]

    On 28 October 1943, Ernst von Weizsäcker, the German Ambassador to the Vatican, telegrammed Berlin that "...the Pope has not yet let himself be persuaded to make an official condemnation of the deportation of the Roman Jews.... Since it is currently thought that the Germans will take no further steps against the Jews in Rome, the question of our relations with the Vatican may be considered closed."[181]

    In March 1944, through the papal nuncio in Budapest, Angelo Rotta, the pope urged the Hungarian government to moderate its treatment of the Jews.[182] The pope also ordered Rotta and other papal legates to hide and shelter Jews.[183] These protests, along with others from the King of Sweden, the International Red Cross, the United States, and Britain led to the cessation of deportations on 8 July 1944.[184] Also in 1944, Pius appealed to 13 Latin American governments to accept "emergency passports", although it also took the intervention of the U.S. State Department for those countries to honor the documents.[185]

    The Kaltenbrunner Report to Adolf Hitler dated November 29, 1944 on the background of the July 20, 1944 Plot to assassinate Hitler, states that the Pope was somehow a conspirator, specifically naming Eugenio Pacelli, Pope Pius XII, as being a party in the attempt.[186]

    After World War II Pope Pius XII focused on material aid to war-torn Europe, an internal internationalization of the Roman Catholic Church, and the development of its worldwide diplomatic relations. His encyclicals, Evangelii Praecones and Fidei Donum, issued on 2 June 1951 and 21 April 1957, respectively, increased the local decision-making of Catholic missions, many of which became independent dioceses. Pius XII demanded recognition of local cultures as fully equal to European culture.[187][188] Continuing the line of his predecessors, Pius XII supported the establishment of local administration in Church affairs: in 1950, the hierarchy of Western Africa became independent; in 1951, Southern Africa; and in 1953, British Eastern Africa. Finland, Burma and French Africa became independent dioceses in 1955.

    While the Church thrived in the West and most of the developing world, it faced most serious persecutions in the East. The Communist regimes in Albania, Bulgaria, and Romania practically eradicated the Roman Catholic Church in their countries.

    The difficult relations of the Vatican with the Soviet Union originated in the revolution in 1917 and continued through the pontificate of Pius XII, affecting the Orthodox Church and other non-Catholics as well. The Oriental Catholic churches were eliminated in most parts of the Soviet Union during the Stalinist era.

    The relations of the Holy See with China from 1939 to 1958 began hopefully with the long withheld recognition of Chinese rites by the Vatican in 1939, the elevation of the first Chinese cardinal in 1946, and the establishment of a local Chinese hierarchy. It ended with the persecution and virtual elimination of the Catholic Church in the early 1950s, and the establishment of a Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association in 1957

    In 2005, Corriere della Sera published a document dated 20 November 1946 on the subject of Jewish children baptized in war-time France. The document ordered that baptized children, if orphaned, should be kept in Catholic custody and stated that the decision "has been approved by the Holy Father". Nuncio Angelo Roncalli (who became Pope John XXIII, and was recognized by Yad Vashem as Righteous Among the Nations) ignored this directive.[189] Abe Foxman, the national director of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), who had himself been baptized as a child and had undergone a custody battle afterwards, called for an immediate freeze on Pius's beatification process until the relevant Vatican Secret Archives and baptismal records were opened.[190] Two Italian scholars, Matteo Luigi Napolitano and Andrea Tornielli, confirmed that the memorandum was genuine although the reporting by the Corriere della Sera was misleading, as the document had originated in the French Catholic Church archives rather than the Vatican archives and strictly concerned itself with children without living blood relatives that were supposed to be handed over to Jewish organizations.[191]

    The last years of the pontificate of Pius XII began in late 1954 with a long illness, during which he considered abdication. Afterwards, changes in his work habit became noticeable. The Pope avoided long ceremonies, canonizations and consistories and displayed hesitancy in personnel matters. During the last years of the pontificate, Pius XII procrastinated personnel decisions within his Vatican, and found it increasingly difficult to chastise subordinates and appointees such as Riccardo Galeazzi-Lisi, who, after numerous indiscretions was excluded from Papal service for the last years, but, keeping his title, was able to enter the papal apartments to make photos of the dying Pope, which he sold to French magazines.[192]

    Pius XII often elevated young priests as bishops, such as Julius Döpfner (35 years) and Karol Wojtyla (38 years), one of his last appointees in 1958. He took a firm stand against pastoral experiments, such as "worker-priests", who worked full time in factories and joined political parties and unions. He continued to defend the theological tradition of Thomism as worthy of continued reform, and as superior to modern trends such as phenomenology or existentialism.[193]

    Since his 1954 illness, Pope Pius addressed lay people and groups about an unprecedented range of topics. Frequently, he spoke to members of scientific congresses, explaining Christian teachings in light of most recent scientific results. Sometimes he answered specific moral questions, which were addressed to him. To professional associations he explained specific occupational ethics in light of Church teachings.[194] Pius granted the Honor of Being the "Catholic University of The Philippines" to the University of Santo Tomas in Manila, the oldest existing in Asia.

    Before 1955, Pius worked for many years with Giovanni Battista Montini. The Pope did not have a full time assistant. Robert Leiber helped him occasionally with his speeches and publications. Augustin Bea was his personal confessor. Madre Pascalina Lehnert was for forty years his housekeeper and assistant. Domenico Tardini was probably closest to him.




    avatar
    Vidya Moksha

    Posts : 470
    Join date : 2010-04-17
    Location : on the road again :)

    Re: The United States of the Solar System, A.D. 2133 (Book Three)

    Post  Vidya Moksha on Tue May 02, 2017 10:04 pm

    orthodoxymoron wrote: I'll read stuff by Masons (preferably former Masons) but I don't want to get too close to these guys.

    I quite agree! I stopped looking at the qabbalah for the same reasons, it became too dark.

    I found DuQuette as he translated Crowley's book of thoth into understandable english, something I couldnt do myself. (that is a book worth reading with duquettes translation to hand)

    i am not interested in his freemasonry or his magic, but specifically the idea that the temple of solomon never existed. i dont read much around these subjects and was genuinely interested if it might be true, and whether you had heard it said before.. hence my post..
    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7368
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The United States of the Solar System, A.D. 2133 (Book Three)

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Wed May 03, 2017 4:55 pm

    Vidya Moksha wrote:
    orthodoxymoron wrote: I'll read stuff by Masons (preferably former Masons) but I don't want to get too close to these guys.
    I quite agree! I stopped looking at the qabbalah for the same reasons, it became too dark.

    I found DuQuette as he translated Crowley's book of thoth into understandable english, something I couldnt do myself. (that is a book worth reading with duquettes translation to hand)

    i am not interested in his freemasonry or his magic, but specifically the idea that the temple of solomon never existed. i dont read much around these subjects and was genuinely interested if it might be true, and whether you had heard it said before.. hence my post..




    I'm almost to the point where I want to walk away from this stuff entirely. It's sort of similar to jumping into quicksand to save someone stuck in quicksand!! I'm almost to the point where I simply wish to read newspapers while listening to sacred classical music!! I swear that I am simply attempting to understand the history of the world -- with the presupposition that the Roman-Empire (Pagan and Papal) has a HUGE amount to do with why things are the way they have been (and are presently). I sometimes read Anti-Catholic literature which is rather nasty -- but I am honestly attempting neutrality (in an open and honest sense). What if there were an Alternative Catholic Church which consisted of nothing more than the Bach B-minor Mass?? What if there were services offered seven days a week?? I honestly have no idea what to do (or not do). If I were young, healthy, and wealthy, I think I might enjoy travelling throughout Europe in a Ferrari, visiting everything historical and artistic, writing Religious and Political Science-Fiction based-upon what I observed and experienced!! This would include a lot of Roman Catholic sights and sounds. Once I started publishing my work, I'd probably require a bodyguard with an UZI!! I actually spoke with the "Ancient Egyptian Deity" about something similar to this!! Not the writing part. Just the travelling in the Ferrari. The AED thought that was a great idea!! Ra spoke of unimaginable beauty beneath the Vatican!! Honest!! I'm REALLY stupid to tell you what happened to me!! But I'd still love to know if the Pope received the 400th Enzo Ferrari?! I actually asked a Ferrari representative, but he just smiled!! I should learn to shut-up!!

    More Pope Pius XII (continued from the previous post):

    Pius XII died on 9 October 1958 of acute heart failure brought on by a sudden myocardial infarction in Castel Gandolfo, the Papal summer residence. His doctor Gaspanini said afterwards: "The Holy Father did not die because of any specific illness. He was completely exhausted. He was overworked beyond limit. His heart was healthy, his lungs were good. He could have lived another 20 years, had he spared himself."[195]

    Pius XII's doctor, Riccardo Galeazzi-Lisi, reported that the Pontiff's body was embalmed in the room where he died using a novel process invented by Dr. Oreste Nuzzi.[196]

    Pope Pius XII did not want the vital organs removed from his body, demanding instead, that it be kept in the same condition, "in which God created it".[197] According to Galeazzi-Lisi, this was the reason why he and Professor Oreste Nuzzi, an embalmer from Naples, used a novel embalming approach invented by Nuzzi.[197]

    In a controversial press conference, Galeazzi-Lisi described in great detail the embalming the body of the late Pontiff. He claimed to have used the same system of oils and resins, with which the body of Jesus Christ was preserved.[198] Galeazzi-Lisi asserted that the new process would "preserve the body indefinitely in its natural state"[196] However, whatever chance the new embalming process of efficaciously preserving the body was obliterated by intense heat in Castel Gandolfo during the embalming process. As a result, the body decomposed rapidly and the viewing of the faithful had to be terminated abruptly.

    Galeazzi-Lisi reported that heat in the halls, where the body of the late Pope lay in state, caused chemical reactions which required it to be treated twice after the original preparation.[197] Swiss Guards stationed around Pius XII's body were reported to become ill during their vigil.[196]

    His funeral procession into Rome was the largest congregation of Romans as of that date. Romans mourned "their" Pope, who was born in their city, especially as hero in time of war.[199] Angelo Cardinal Roncalli (Pope John XXIII) wrote in his diary on 11 October that probably no Roman emperor had enjoyed such a triumph, which he viewed as a reflection of the spiritual majesty and religious dignity of Pius XII.[200]

    The Testament of Pope Pius XII was published immediately after his death. Pope Pius XII's cause of canonization was opened on 18 November 1965 by Pope Paul VI. In March 2007, the congregation recommended that Pius XII should be declared Venerable.[201] Pope Benedict XVI did so on 19 December 2009, simultaneously making the same declaration in regard to Pope John Paul II.[202]

    During the war, the pope was widely praised. For example, Time magazine credited Pius XII and the Catholic Church for "fighting totalitarianism more knowingly, devoutly, and authoritatively, and for a longer time, than any other organized power".[203] During the war he was also praised editorially by the New York Times for opposing Nazi anti-Semitism and aggression.[204] Some early works echoed these favorable sentiments, including Polish historian Oskar Halecki's Pius XII: Eugenio Pacelli: Pope of peace (1954) and Nazareno Padellaro's Portrait of Pius XII (1949).

    Many Jews publicly thanked the Pope for his help. For example, Pinchas Lapide, a Jewish theologian and Israeli diplomat to Milan in the 1960s, estimated controversially in Three Popes and the Jews that Pius "was instrumental in saving at least 700,000 but probably as many as 860,000 Jews from certain death at Nazi hands."[205] Some historians have questioned this oft-cited[206] number, which Lapide reached by "deducting all reasonable claims of rescue" by non-Catholics from the total number of European Jews surviving the Holocaust.[207] Catholic scholar Kevin Madigan interprets this and other praise from prominent Jewish leaders, including Golda Meir, as less than sincere, an attempt to secure Vatican recognition of the State of Israel.[208]

    When Pius XII died in October, 1958 many Jewish organizations and newspapers around the world paid tribute to his legacy. At the United Nations, Golda Meir, Israel's Foreign Minister, said, "When fearful martyrdom came to our people in the decade of Nazi terror, the voice of the Pope was raised for the victims. The life of our times was enriched by a voice speaking out on the great moral truths above the tumult of daily conflict."[209] The Jewish Chronicle in London stated on October 10 "Adherents of all creeds and parties will recall how Pius XII faced the responsibilities of his exalted office with courage and devotion. Before, during, and after the Second World War, he constantly preached the message of peace. Confronted by the monstrous cruelties of Nazism, Fascism, and Communism, he repeatedly proclaimed the virtues of humanity and compassion".[209] In the Canadian Jewish Chronicle (October 17), Rabbi J. Stern stated that Pius XII "made it possible for thousands of Jewish victims of Nazism and Fascism to be hidden away..."[209] In the November 6 edition of the Jewish Post in Winnipeg, William Zukerman, the former American Hebrew columnist, wrote that no other leader "did more to help the Jews in their hour of greatest tragedy, during the Nazi occupation of Europe, than the late Pope".[209] Other prominent Jewish figures, such as Albert Einstein, Israeli Prime Minister Moshe Sharett and Chief Rabbi Isaac Herzog expressed their public gratitude to Pius XII.[210]

    Pius was also criticized during his lifetime. For example, Leon Poliakov wrote five years after World War II that Pius had been a tacit supporter of Vichy France's anti-Semitic laws, calling him "less forthright" than Pope Pius XI either out of "Germanophilia" or the hope that Hitler would defeat communist Russia.[211] Bishop Carlos Duarte Costa, a long-time critic of Pius XII's policies during the war and an opponent of clerical celibacy and the use of Latin as language of the liturgy, was excommunicated by Pius XII on 2 July 1945.[212]

    On 21 September 1945, the general secretary of the World Jewish Council, Dr. Leon Kubowitzky, presented an amount of money to the pope, "in recognition of the work of the Holy See in rescuing Jews from Fascist and Nazi persecutions."[213]

    After the war, in the autumn of 1945, Harry Greenstein from Baltimore, a close friend of Chief Rabbi Herzog of Jerusalem, told Pius how grateful Jews were for all he had done for them. "My only regret", the pope replied, "is not to have been able to save a greater number of Jews."[214]

    In 1963, Rolf Hochhuth's controversial drama Der Stellvertreter. Ein christliches Trauerspiel (The Deputy, a Christian tragedy, released in English in 1964) portrayed Pope Pius XII as a hypocrite who remained silent about the Holocaust. Books such as Dr. Joseph Lichten's A Question of Judgment (1963), written in response to The Deputy, defended Pius XII's actions during the war. Lichten labelled any criticism of the pope's actions during World War II as "a stupefying paradox" and said, "no one who reads the record of Pius XII's actions on behalf of Jews can subscribe to Hochhuth's accusation."[215] Critical scholarly works like Guenter Lewy's The Catholic Church and Nazi Germany (1964) also followed the publication of The Deputy. Lewy's conclusion was that "the Pope and his advisers — influenced by the long tradition of moderate anti-Semitism so widely accepted in Vatican circles — did not view the plight of the Jews with a real sense of urgency and moral outrage. For this assertion no documentation is possible, but it is a conclusion difficult to avoid".[216] In 2002 the play was adapted into the film Amen.

    An article on La Civilità Cattolica in March 2009 indicated that the accusations that Hochhuth's play made widely known originated not among Jews but in the Communist bloc. It was Moscow Radio, on 2 June 1945, that first direct against Pius XII the accusation of refusing to speak out against the exterminations in Nazi concentration camps. It was also the first to call him "Hitler's Pope".[217]

    A former high-ranking KGB officer, Securitate General Ion Mihai Pacepa stated in 2007 that Hochhuth's play and numerous publications attacking Pius XII as a Nazi sympathizer were fabrications that were part of a KGB and Eastern bloc Marxist secret services disinformation campaign, named Seat 12, to discredit the moral authority of the Church and Christianity in the west.[218] Pacepa also indicated that he was involved in contacting east bloc agents close the Vatican in order to fabricate the story to be used for the attack against the wartime pope.[218]

    In the aftermath of the controversy surrounding The Deputy, in 1964 Pope Paul VI authorized Jesuit scholars to access the Vatican State Department Archives, which are normally not opened for seventy-five years. Actes et Documents du Saint Siège relatifs à la Seconde Guerre Mondiale, was published in 11 volumes between 1965 and 1981.The volumes were published by Angelo Martini, Burkhart Schneider, Robert A. Graham and Pierre Blet, the latter published a summary of the 11 volumes.[219] All four, most frequently Robert A. Graham published articles and books on the subject matter.

    In 1999, John Cornwell's Hitler's Pope criticized Pius for not doing enough, or speaking out enough, against the Holocaust. Cornwell argued that Pius' entire career as the nuncio to Germany, cardinal secretary of state, and pope was characterized by a desire to increase and centralize the power of the Papacy, and that he subordinated opposition to the Nazis to that goal. He further argued that Pius was anti-Semitic and that this stance prevented him from caring about the European Jews.[220]

    Cornwell's work was the first to have access to testimonies from Pius' beatification process as well as to many documents from Pacelli's nunciature which had just been opened under the 75-year rule by the Vatican State Secretary archives.[221] Cornwell's work has received much praise and criticism. Much praise of Cornwell centered around his disputed claim that he was a practising Catholic who had attempted to absolve Pius with his work.[222] While works such as Susan Zuccotti's Under His Very Windows: The Vatican and the Holocaust in Italy (2000) and Michael Phayer's The Catholic Church and the Holocaust, 1930–1965 (2000) are critical of both Cornwell and Pius XII, Ronald J. Rychlak's Hitler, the War and the Pope is critical as well but defends Pius XII in light of his access to most recent documents.[223] Cornwell's scholarship has been criticized. For example, Kenneth L. Woodward stated in his review in Newsweek that "errors of fact and ignorance of context appear on almost every page."[224] Five years after the publication of Hitler's Pope, Cornwell stated: "I would now argue, in the light of the debates and evidence following Hitler's Pope, that Pius XII had so little scope of action that it is impossible to judge the motives for his silence during the war, while Rome was under the heel of Mussolini and later occupied by Germany".[225][226][227]

    In his 2003 book A Moral Reckoning, Daniel Jonah Goldhagen asserts that Pius "chose again and again not to mention the Jews publicly.... [In] public statements by Pius XII . . . any mention of the Jews is conspicuously absent." In a review of Goldhagen's book, Mark Riebling counters that Pius used the word "Jew" in his first encyclical, Summi Pontificatus, published on October 20, 1939. "There Pius insisted that all human beings be treated charitably — for, as Paul had written to the Colossians, in God's eyes "there is neither Gentile nor Jew." In saying this, the Pope affirmed that Jews were full members of the human community — which is Goldhagen's own criterion for establishing 'dissent from the anti-Semitic creed.'"[228]

    Most recently, Rabbi David Dalin's The Myth of Hitler's Pope argues that critics of Pius are liberal Catholics and ex-Catholics who "exploit the tragedy of the Jewish people during the Holocaust to foster their own political agenda of forcing changes on the Catholic Church today" and that Pius XII was actually responsible for saving the lives of many thousands of Jews.[229]

    In 1999, in an attempt to address some of this controversy, the International Catholic-Jewish Historical Commission (Historical Commission), a group of three Catholic and three Jewish scholars was appointed, respectively, by the Holy See's Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews (Holy See's Commission) and the International Jewish Committee for Interreligious Consultations (IJCIC), to whom a preliminary report was issued in October 2000.[230]

    The Commission did not discover any documents, but had the agreed-upon task to review the existing Vatican volumes, that make up the Actes et Documents du Saint Siege (ADSS) [231] The Commission was internally divided over the question of access to additional documents from the Holy See, access to the news media by individual commission members, and, questions to be raised in the preliminary report. It was agreed to include all 47 individual questions by the six members, and use them as Preliminary Report.[232] In addition to the 47 questions, the commission issued no findings of its own. It stated that it was not their task to sit in judgment of the Pope and his advisors but to contribute to a more nuanced understanding of the papacy during the Holocaust.[233]

    The 47 questions by the six scholars were grouped into three parts: (a) 27 specific questions on existing documents,[234] mostly asking for background and additional information such as drafts of the encyclical Mit brennender Sorge, which was largely written by Eugenio Pacelli.[235] (b) Fourteen questions dealt with themes of individual volumes,[236] such as the question how Pius viewed the role of the Church during the war.[237] (c) Six general questions,[238] such as the absence of any anti-communist sentiments in the documents.[239] The disagreement between members over additional documents locked up up under the Holy See's 70 year rule resulted in a discontinuation of the Commission in 2001 on friendly terms.[232] Unsatisfied with the findings, Dr. Michael Marrus, one of the three Jewish members of the Commission, said the commission "ran up against a brick wall.... It would have been really helpful to have had support from the Holy See on this issue."[240]

    Phayer's Pius XII, The Holocaust, and the Cold War (2008) makes use of many documents that have recently come to light due to Bill Clinton's 1997 executive order declassifying wartime and postwar documents, many of which are currently at the US National Archives and Holocaust Memorial Museum. These documents include diplomatic correspondence, American espionage, and even decryptions of German communications. Relevant documents have also been released by the Argentine government and the British Foreign Office and other information sources have become available, including the diary of Bishop Joseph Patrick Hurley. These documents reveal new information about Pius XII's actions regarding the Ustaše regime, the genocides in Poland, the finances of the wartime church, the deportation of the Roman Jews, and the postwar "ratlines" for Nazis and fascists fleeing Europe.[241] According to Phayer, "the face of Pope Pius that we see in these documents is not the same face we see in the eleven volumes the Vatican published of World War II documents, a collection which, though valuable, is nonetheless critically flawed because of its many omissions".[242]

    A special conference of scholars on Pius XII on the 50th anniversary of his death was held in Rome on 15–17 September 2008, by Pave the Way Foundation, a nonsectarian organization founded by Gary Krupp, a Jewish American that promotes interfaith cooperation.[243] Pope Benedict XVI held on 19 September 2008 a reception for the conference participants, where he praised Pius XII as a pope who made every effort to save Jews during the war.[244] A second conference was held on 6–8 November 2008 by the Pontifical Academy of Life.[245]

    On 9 October 2008, the 50th anniversary of Pius XII's death, Benedict XVI celebrated pontifical mass in his memory. Shortly prior to, and after the mass, dialectics continued between the Jewish hierarchy and the Vatican as Rabbi Shear Yeshuv Cohen of Haifa addressed the Synod of Bishops and expressed his disappointment towards Pius XII's "silence" during the war.[246]

    On June 16, 2009, the Pave the Way Foundation announced that it would release of 2,300 pages of documents in Avellino, Italy, dating from 1940 to 1945, which the organization claims show that Pius XII "worked diligently to save Jews from Nazi tyranny"; the organization's founder, Gary Krupp, a Jew, accused historians of harboring "private agendas" and having "let down" the public.[247] The foundation's research led to the publication of the book Pope Pius XII and World War II: the documented truth, authored by Krupp; the book reproduces 225 pages of the new documents produced by the foundation's research. On 17 September 2009, Pave the Way Foundation nominated Pius XII to be listed as Righteous Among the Nations at the Yad Vashem Holocaust Memorial. The foundation's efforts produced some 3,000 original documents and photos on the life of Pius XII and his work to save Jews during World War II.[248]


    Was there a changing of the guard in this solar system - sometime between 1958 and 1963? Malachi Martin writes of an Enthronement of Lucifer in 1963 in 'Windswept House'. Could Pope Pius XII have been the last old-guard, non-Masonic pope? Are the Queen of Heaven and the God of This World one or two beings? Two souls in one physical hermaphrodite body? We? Might Isis and Amen Ra be two sides of the same deity? I don't know - but nothing would surprise me at this point. I am numb. Were Hitler and Pius XII attempting to end the rule of the Queen of Heaven? Were they attempting to defeat Gizeh Intelligence? Does the North African Crusade make more sense with this explanation? Archangel Gabriel = Queen of Heaven? Archangel Lucifer = God of This World? Archangel Michael = Horus/Jesus? Are all three Interdimensional Reptilian Queens? Is Michael/Horus/Jesus the only one of the three to become completely human (or as human as any average/normal human)? Has there been a changing of the guard recently - or is it just more murder and mayhem, corrupt business as usual? I continue to wonder if a Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom United States of the Solar System would require some sort of theocratic implementation and guidance - in order to make this system work on a long-term basis? Do we need a Care-Taker, Minimalist-Deity? Damned if I know. John F. Kennedy was supposedly the last genuine U.S. President. Pope Pius XII was supposedly the last genuine Pope. Does this perception coincide with an Archangelic Changing of the Guard? If this occurred - was it a change for the better? Or - was a perceived change merely the reverse-side of the same coin? Just more smoke, mirrors, lies, and deception? The Father of Lies Might Be a Real Mother! What has Michael/Horus/Jesus been doing throughout the centuries? Is Michael/Horus/Jesus spotless and undefiled - or is he/she just as bad as the others? Will the Second Coming of Christ really be an uneventful changing of the guard, which no one really knows about?

    Does this solar system need someone tougher than Jesus? Or is Jesus really a Bad@$$ and Sexy Archangel/Warrior/Pharaoh/Emperor/Pope/Artist/Architect/Musician/Scientist/Writer/Theologian - rather than a Crucified and Defeated, Sexually-Repressed, Kill-Joy Weakling? Might Jesus presently be an underachiever? Might we all be disappointed? Especially the Christians? I mean no disrespect - but I think we need to consider every conceivable possibility. A lot of the good guys and gals might turn out to be bad guys and gals - and visa versa. Reincarnation opens a can of worms for all of us - regarding who we might've been, and what we might've done - for thousands or millions of years. I'm almost frantic with worry - and I kid you not. The irrational misery I have experienced in this life, leads me to believe that I had one hell of a life in my last couple of incarnations. Something has been very wrong - but I have done nothing wrong - in this life. But who knows what I was exposed to, or what I might've done before incarnating into this present body? I am extremely apprehensive. I've recently been inexplicably interested in the Music of Widor, Gregorian Chant, Latin Masses, the Teachings of Jesus, and a Vatican-Based United States of the Solar System. Why might that be? Some sort of reincarnational connection? Kinda scary, isn't it? Once again, a VERY careful study of the life and times of Pope Pius XII might be EXTREMELY revealing. Just a hunch.

    Even if you completely disagree with everything I've posted - please keep conceptualizing what a perfected humanity, living in a perfected solar system, would be like. What would an ideal church be like? What would an ideal government be like? What would be an ideal church/state relationship? This is all very important. I continue to listen to Gregorian Chants and Charles Marie Widor, as I read the Teachings of Jesus, and contemplate a Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom United States of the Solar System. The Vatican and Latin Mass aspects of my consideration remain highly problematic. There is so much baggage and momentum to deal with. Unfortunately, if these items are not properly dealt with - all is lost. These things cannot simply be ignored. Again, I have HUGE problems with the history and theology - but I love the art, music, scholarship, organization, discipline, architecture, reverence, awe, panache, etc. Read 'The Wine of Roman Babylon' by Mary Walsh, and 'The Great Controversy' by Ellen White, for examples of things which need to be properly dealt with. I prefer reformation over rejection, at this point anyway. The pictures of Pacelli and the Nazis are chilling. They were probably quite idealistic and hopeful, when the pictures were taken. But think of the horrors which awaited them! What would you have done if you were Pacelli? Think this through, in detail. Particularly, think about this without the luxury of knowing what was about to be unleashed upon an unsuspecting world. Might we be at a similar crossroads today? What are we on the verge of? The road to hell gets paved with good intentions - over and over and over again. Imagine having private and candid fireside chats with Pope Benedict XVI, regarding Pope Pius XII!!! Think about it, while listening to this!!!

    What if Pope Pius XII was caught in the middle of a monumental power-struggle between the Queen of Heaven (Isis (Gabriel?) of Sirius A?) and the God of This World (Amen Ra (Lucifer?) of Sirius B?)? What if Amen Ra had been serving under Isis for thousands of years - and now wished to be Numero Uno? Perhaps a change was needed - but would this change be a change for the better? I wonder what Pacelli secretly desired for Planet Earth and the Human Race? What if he was the reincarnation of Michael/Horus/Jesus? What if Pope John Paul I wished to implement that which Pope Pius XII secretly desired - and paid with his life? I wonder if Pope Pius XII and Pope John Paul I would approve of this thread, in principle and concept? I doubt that they would approve of the joking and such - but who knows? Did they approve of the Teachings of Jesus? Did they approve of Gregorian Chant? Did they approve of the Latin Mass? Did they approve of the Music of Widor? Did they approve of the U.S. Constitution? I'm going to try to look at the historical and contemporary world through the eyes of Pope Pius XII, in the context of the Vatican. Do you see my point? This is a highly interesting individual, historical period, and physical location. Location, location, location. I am sorry if some of you are offended by my brashness and irreverence. I find this approach necessary to cut through the many layers of lies and deception. Sometimes we need shock-therapy! CLEAR!!!










    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7368
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The United States of the Solar System, A.D. 2133 (Book Three)

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Wed May 03, 2017 10:33 pm

    I must say that the following video from Saint Eustache, in Paris, France has got to be my favorite organ recording!! It's VERY Rare that everything is RIGHT!! Marco den Toom Got It RIGHT!! This is the Allegro movement from Charles Marie Widor's Sixth Symphonie. This is one of my favorite French-Romantic pieces!! I frankly think that J.S. Bach should be played the same way!! But this is Heresy!! I had a slight disagreement with the famous organist Peter Hurford over this issue (in the organ-loft of the First Congregational Church of Los Angeles)!! I'd love to hang-out at St. Eustache, and just read books, watch people, admire the architecture, and listen to the beautiful music!! I prefer this sort of thing over attending services!! I also prefer that most of the lights in the building be turned OFF!! Churches and Cathedrals look SO Much Better with most of the lights OFF!! Actually, I think I might prefer listening to Marco den Toom's music from the driver's-seat of this beautiful car (with that beautiful woman)!! One More Thing. That last video features a Stunning Electronic Organ, which would be a cool addition to a 600 square-foot office-apartment beneath the Dark-Side of the Moon!!











    avatar
    Vidya Moksha

    Posts : 470
    Join date : 2010-04-17
    Location : on the road again :)

    Re: The United States of the Solar System, A.D. 2133 (Book Three)

    Post  Vidya Moksha on Thu May 04, 2017 12:19 pm

    orthodoxymoron wrote:
    It's sort of similar to jumping into quicksand to save someone stuck in quicksand!!

    Can you help anyone? can you even help them to help themselves?


    orthodoxymoron wrote:
    I'm almost to the point where I simply wish to read newspapers while listening to sacred classical music!! I swear that I am simply attempting to understand the history of the world -- with the presupposition that the Roman-Empire (Pagan and Papal) has a HUGE amount to do with why things are the way they have been (and are presently).
    I was just passing curious. I am interested in history, i never studied it much and am only just catching up!

    I am curious by how things got here, but not overwhelmed by it. Science is mankind's attempt at describing something he didn't create, but its just a game. same with religion. I will carry my curiosity with me but I am more interested in living in what is here, rather than wondering why it is here.

    orthodoxymoron wrote:
    please keep conceptualizing what a perfected humanity, living in a perfected solar system, would be like. What would an ideal church be like?

    Oh man! at last, hey oxy, that is an oxymoron! well done lol

    I am away again now, will catch up maybe somewhen.
    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7368
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The United States of the Solar System, A.D. 2133 (Book Three)

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Thu May 04, 2017 1:31 pm

    Vidya Moksha wrote:
    orthodoxymoron wrote:
    It's sort of similar to jumping into quicksand to save someone stuck in quicksand!!
    Can you help anyone? can you even help them to help themselves?
    orthodoxymoron wrote:
    I'm almost to the point where I simply wish to read newspapers while listening to sacred classical music!! I swear that I am simply attempting to understand the history of the world -- with the presupposition that the Roman-Empire (Pagan and Papal) has a HUGE amount to do with why things are the way they have been (and are presently).
    I was just passing curious. I am interested in history, i never studied it much and am only just catching up!

    I am curious by how things got here, but not overwhelmed by it. Science is mankind's attempt at describing something he didn't create, but its just a game. same with religion. I will carry my curiosity with me but I am more interested in living in what is here, rather than wondering why it is here.


    orthodoxymoron wrote:
    please keep conceptualizing what a perfected humanity, living in a perfected solar system, would be like. What would an ideal church be like?
    Oh man! at last, hey oxy, that is an oxymoron! well done lol

    I am away again now, will catch up maybe somewhen.








    Vidya, thank-you for your interests and insights. I'm reading that pdf straight-through. Thank-you for the link. I am NOT on a Crusade. I am simply attempting to understand how this world really works -- and how this world should work. The worst of my activities are over (for this incarnation, anyway). Perhaps I should also take another look at Pope John Paul I - as I continue to research Pope Pius XII. Perhaps these two popes should be studied side by side. Was Pope Pius XII the Last Non-Masonic Pope or the First Masonic Pope? Both? Neither? Did he begin his pontificate under one secret ruler - and finish it under another? Was it merely coincidental that Pope John Paul I died (was assassinated?) after being pope for exactly 33 days? Was this a Masonic hit? Some think so. Read 'In God's Name' by David Yallop and 'Murder in the Vatican' by Lucien Gregoire. Bill Cooper said that the JFK Assassination was a Masonic hit. But who knows? Did World War II end when Amen Ra defeated Isis? Damned if I know. As usual, take everything I say with a sea of salt. Here is the wikipedia entry. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_John_Paul_I

    Pope John Paul I (Latin: Ioannes Paulus PP. I, Italian: Giovanni Paolo I), born Albino Luciani, (17 October 1912 – 28 September 1978), reigned as Pope of the Catholic Church and as Sovereign of Vatican City from 26 August 1978 until his death 33 days later. His reign is among the shortest in papal history, resulting in the most recent Year of Three Popes. John Paul I was the first Pope born in the 20th century.

    In Italy he is remembered with the appellatives of "Il Papa del Sorriso" (The Smiling Pope)[1] and "Il Sorriso di Dio" (The smile of God).[2] Time magazine and other publications referred to him as The September Pope.[3]

    Albino Luciani was born on 17 October 1912 in Forno di Canale (now Canale d'Agordo) in Belluno, a province of the Veneto region in Northern Italy. He was the son of Giovanni Luciani (1872?-1952), a bricklayer, and Bortola Tancon (1879?-1948). Albino was followed by two brothers, Federico (1915–1916) and Edoardo (1917–2008), and a sister, Antonia (1920–2009).

    Luciani entered the minor seminary of Feltre in 1923, where his teachers found him "too lively", and later went on to the major seminary of Belluno. During his stay at Belluno, he attempted to join the Jesuits but was denied by the seminary's rector, Bishop Giosuè Cattarossi. Ordained a priest on 7 July 1935, Luciani then served as a curate in his native Forno de Canale before becoming a professor and the vice-rector of the Belluno seminary in 1937. Among the different subjects, he taught dogmatic and moral theology, canon law and sacred art.

    In 1941, Luciani began to seek a doctorate in theology from the Pontifical Gregorian University, which required at least one year's attendance in Rome. However, the seminary's superiors wanted him to continue teaching during his doctoral studies; the situation was resolved by a special dispensation of Pope Pius XII himself, on 27 March 1941. His thesis (The origin of the human soul according to Antonio Rosmini) largely attacked Rosmini's theology, and earned him his doctorate magna cum laude.

    In 1947, he was named vicar general to Bishop Girolamo Bortignon, OFM Cap, of Belluno. Two years later, in 1949, he was placed in charge of diocesan catechetics.

    On 15 December 1958, Luciani was appointed Bishop of Vittorio Veneto by Pope John XXIII. He received his episcopal consecration on the following 27 December from Pope John himself, with Bishops Bortignon and Gioacchino Muccin serving as co-consecrators. As a bishop, he participated in all the sessions of the Second Vatican Council (1962–1965).

    On 15 December 1969, he was appointed Patriarch of Venice by Pope Paul VI and took possession of the archdiocese on 3 February 1970. Pope Paul created Luciani Cardinal-Priest of S. Marco in the consistory of 5 March 1973. Catholics were struck by his humility, a prime example being his embarrassment when Paul VI once removed his papal stole and put it on Patriarch Luciani. He recalls the occasion in his first Angelus thus:[4]

    "Pope Paul VI made me blush to the roots of my hair in the presence of 20,000 people, because he removed his stole and placed it on my shoulders. Never have I blushed so much!"

    Luciani was elected on the fourth ballot of the August 1978 papal conclave. Senior Cardinal Deacon Pericle Felici announced that the Cardinals had elected Venice patriarch Albino Luciani to be Pope John Paul I.[5] After considering calling himself Pius XIII, he chose the regnal name of John Paul, the first double name in the history of the papacy, explaining in his Angelus that he took it as a thankful honour to his two immediate predecessors: John XXIII, who had named him a bishop, and Paul VI, who had named him Patriarch of Venice and a cardinal.[6] He was also the first (and so far only) pope to use "the first" in his regnal name.[7]

    Observers have suggested that his selection was linked to the rumoured divisions between rival camps within the College of Cardinals:[6]

    Those who favoured a more liberal interpretation of Vatican II's reforms, and some Italian cardinals supporting Cardinal Giovanni Benelli, who was opposed because of his "autocratic" tendencies.
    Outside the Italians, who were experiencing diminished influence within the increasingly internationalist College of Cardinals, were figures like Cardinal Karol Wojtyla.[6] Over the days following the conclave, cardinals effectively declared that with general great joy they had elected "God's candidate".[6] Argentine Cardinal Eduardo Francisco Pironio stated that, "We were witnesses of a moral miracle."[6] And later, Mother Teresa commented: "He has been the greatest gift of God, a sunray of God's love shining in the darkness of the world."[6]

    Metropolitan Nikodim (Rotov) of Leningrad, who was present at his installation, collapsed and died during the ceremony, and the new Pope prayed over him.[8]

    After his election, John Paul quickly made several decisions that would "humanise" the office of pope, admitting publicly he had turned scarlet when Paul VI had named him the Patriarch of Venice. He was the first modern pope to speak in the singular form, using 'I' instead of the royal we, though the official records of his speeches were often rewritten in more formal style by traditionalist aides, who reinstated the royal we in press releases and in L'Osservatore Romano. He was the first to refuse the sedia gestatoria, until Vatican pressure convinced him of its need, in order to allow the faithful to see him.

    He was the first pope to choose an "investiture" to commence his papacy rather than the traditional papal coronation.

    One of his remarks, reported in the press, was that God "is our father; even more he is our mother,"[9][10] referring to Isaiah 49:14-15, which compares God to a mother who will never forget her child Zion. The comment appeared in his September 10 Angelus address, which urged prayer for the upcoming Camp David Accords.[9]

    John Paul I intended to prepare an encyclical in order to confirm the lines of the Second Vatican Council ("an extraordinary long-range historical event and of growth for the Church," he said) and to enforce the Church's discipline in the life of priests and the faithful. In discipline, he was a reformist, instead, and was the author of initiatives such as the devolution of one per cent of each church's entries for the poor churches in the Third World. The visit of Jorge Rafael Videla, president of the Argentine junta, to the Vatican caused considerable controversy, especially when the Pope reminded Videla about human rights violations taking place in Argentina during the so-called Dirty War.

    The moral theology of John Paul I has been openly debated due to his interpretation of Humanae Vitae. According to journalist John L. Allen "John Paul I would not have insisted upon the negative judgment in Humanae Vitae as aggressively and publicly as John Paul II, and probably would not have treated it as a quasi-infallible teaching"[11][12] However, others have argued, "Luciani was intransigent with his upholding of the teaching of the Church and severe with those, through intellectual pride and disobedience paid no attention to the Church's prohibition of contraception", though while not condoning the sin, he was tolerant of those who sincerely tried and failed to live up to the Church's teaching. The book also states that "...if some people think that his compassion and gentleness in this respect implies he was against Humane Vitae one can only infer it was wishful thinking on their part and an attempt to find an ally in favour of artificial contraception."[1]

    He was regarded[who?] as a skilled communicator and writer, and has left behind some writings. His book Illustrissimi, written while he was a Cardinal, is a series of letters to a wide collection of historical and fictional persons. Among those still available are his letters to Jesus Christ,[13] the Biblical King David,[14] Figaro the Barber,[15] Marie Theresa of Austria[16] and Pinocchio.[17] Others 'written to' included Mark Twain, Charles Dickens and Christopher Marlowe.

    John Paul impressed people with his personal warmth. There are reports that within the Vatican he was seen as an intellectual lightweight not up to the responsibilities of the papacy, although David Yallop ("In God's Name") says that this is the result of a whispering campaign by people in the Vatican who were opposed to Luciani's policies. In the words of John Cornwell, "they treated him with condescension"; one senior cleric discussing Luciani said "they have elected Peter Sellers."[18] Critics contrasted his sermons mentioning Pinocchio to the learned intellectual discourses of Pius XII or Paul VI. Visitors spoke of his isolation and loneliness, and the fact that he was the first pope in decades not to have had either a diplomatic role (like Pius XI and John XXIII) or Curial role (like Pius XII and Paul VI) in the Church.

    His personal impact, however, was twofold: his image as a warm, gentle, kind man captivated the world. This image was immediately formed when he was presented to the crowd in St. Peter's Square following his election. The warmth of his presence made him a much-loved figure before he even spoke a word. The media in particular fell under his spell. He was a skilled orator. Whereas Pope Paul VI spoke as if delivering a doctoral thesis, John Paul I produced warmth, laughter, a 'feel-good factor,' and plenty of media-friendly sound bites.

    John Paul was the first pope to admit that the prospect of the papacy had daunted him to the point that other cardinals had to encourage him to accept it. He strongly suggested to his aides and staff that he believed he was unfit to be pope.[citation needed] John Paul refused to have the millennium-old traditional Papal Coronation and wear the Papal Tiara.[19] He instead chose to have a simplified Papal Inauguration Mass. John Paul I used as his motto Humilitas. In his notable Angelus of 27 August delivered on the first day of his papacy, he impressed the world with his natural friendliness.[4]

    John Paul I was found dead sitting up in his bed shortly before dawn on 29 September 1978,[20] just 33 days into his papacy. The Vatican reported that the near-66-year-old Pope most likely died the previous night of a heart attack. It has been claimed that the Vatican altered some of the details of the discovery of the death to avoid possible unseemliness[21][22] in that he was discovered by Sister Vincenza, a nun.[23]

    An autopsy was not performed, as is customary. This, along with inconsistent statements made following the Pope's death, led to a number of conspiracy theories concerning it. These statements relate to who found the Pope's body, the time when he was found, and what papers were in his hand.

    Pope John Paul I was the first pope to abandon the Papal Coronation, and he was the first Pope to choose a double name (John Paul) for his papal name. This Legacy was so remarkable that his successor, Cardinal Karol Wojtyla, chose the same name.

    Initiation of canonization processThe process of canonisation formally began in 1990 with the petition by 226 Brazilian bishops, including four cardinals.

    On 26 August 2002, Bishop Vincenzo Savio announced the start of the preliminary phase to collect documents and testimonies necessary to start the process of canonisation. On 8 June 2003 the Congregation for the Causes of Saints gave its assent to the work. On 23 November, the process formally opened in the Cathedral Basilica of Belluno with Cardinal José Saraiva Martins in charge.[24][25]

    The Diocesan inquiry subsequently concluded on 11 November 2006 at Belluno. In June 2009, the Vatican began the "Roman" phase of the beatification process for John Paul I, drawing upon the testimony of Giuseppe Denora di Altamura who claimed to have been cured of cancer. An official investigation into the alleged miracle is now under way.[26] For Luciani to be beatified the investigators have to certify at least one miracle. For canonisation there must be two more.

    John Paul II on his predecessorCardinal Karol Wojtyla was elected to succeed John Paul I as Supreme Pontiff on Monday, 16 October 1978. The next day he celebrated Mass together with the College of Cardinals in the Sistine Chapel. After the Mass, he delivered his first Urbi et Orbi (a traditional blessing) message, broadcast worldwide via radio. In it he pledged fidelity to the Second Vatican Council and paid tribute to his predecessor:[27]

    What can we say of John Paul I? It seems to us that only yesterday he emerged from this assembly of ours to put on the papal robes—not a light weight. But what warmth of charity, nay, what 'an abundant outpouring of love'—which came forth from him in the few days of his ministry and which in his last Sunday address before the Angelus he desired should come upon the world. This is also confirmed by his wise instructions to the faithful who were present at his public audiences on faith, hope and love.
















    Last edited by orthodoxymoron on Fri May 05, 2017 1:31 pm; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7368
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The United States of the Solar System, A.D. 2133 (Book Three)

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Thu May 04, 2017 6:49 pm

    This Is a Re-Post, and Some of My
    Thinking Has Changed, But I'm Leaving It "As Is".


    "Resistance is Futile. You Have Been
    Assimilated Into the Orthodoxymoron Collective.
    You Will Receive Your Orders Telepathically.
    You Must Comply. Resistance is Futile."

    Somehow, I feel the need to concentrate my research on the twenty-second century -- but I'm uncertain regarding how to proceed. I'm watching the Dark Frontier episode of the fifth-season of Star Trek: Voyager -- and mention was made of an "economic-realignment of the world-order in the twenty-second century". A.D. 2133 is in the twenty-second century. Think About It. This Might be Sirius. Consider (one more time) the following study-list (in the following order -- read straight-through rapidly and repeated endlessly):

    1. Prophets and Kings (Ellen White).
    2. Job through Daniel (King James Version).
    3. The Desire of Ages (Ellen White).
    4. Job through Daniel (King James Version).
    5. Prophets and Kings (Ellen White).
    6. Job through Daniel (King James Version).
    7. The Desire of Ages (Ellen White).

    It might take several months (or years) to understand this approach. I'm not sure I understand. Once again -- this is NOT a line in the sand. I'm not sure what this approach ultimately yields. I doubt that it yields any existing religion or denomination (including the SDA church). I am aware of significant problems and issues related to these sources -- but I think this task needs to be done with enthusiasm and persistence -- as a place of beginning for possible "clean sheet of stone" contemporary theologies. I am NOT a "Reactionary-Traditionalist". This study is based upon experience -- research -- intuition -- perspiration -- and inspiration. BTW -- how does one improve upon perceived-perfection -- in the context of heaven?? Do curiosity and/or "better-ideas" equal "sin"?? Is evolutionary-change even an option?? Does any bottom-up change constitute "rebellion"?? Is "revolutionary-change" the only way to change things (for better or worse) in such a situation?? Does "trust and obey" equal "rust and obey"?? Does responsible-freedom facilitate intelligent absolute-obedience?? Is the Creator of Humanity considered to be the Author of Sin and Confusion?? Think long and hard about what I just said.

    Once again -- how do we REALLY know anything about anything -- especially regarding antiquity and the otherworldly?? Everyone and Everything Seems to be Shifting-Sand to Me. The Wisdom-Books in the Holy-Bible seem to be some of the Brightest-Lights of Antiquity. If One Adds the Major Prophets -- Why is the Rest of the Bible Really Necessary -- Especially When So Much of It Seems So Questionable and Problematic?? The Ethics and Eschatology are Horrible!! What If a Proper Commentary on Job Through Daniel Should be the New-Testament in Modernity?? I'm NOT Against Jesus -- But I Have HUGE Questions Regarding the Life and Teachings of Jesus as Recorded in the New-Testament. I Have Even Greater Questions Regarding Acts Through Revelation. Something is Very Wrong -- But If One Questions Anything -- They Are Branded As a Reprobate-Heretic. The Old-Testament Seems Exclusively and Excessively Biased Toward the Jews and Judaism. The New-Testament Seems Exclusively and Excessively Biased Against the Jews and Judaism. Is Job Through Daniel a Reasonable Middle-Way (Especially If Given a Modern-Universal Application)?? No One Seems to Give a Damn About Any of This. Why???


    I am presently reading Caesar's Messiah by Joe Atwill -- and I am shocked!! Please research this matter exhaustively!! Do Paul, Josephus, Jesus, Rome, Christianity, and Western-Civilization stand or fall together?? Is Protestantism more dependent upon Catholicism than they think??!! What about my current focus upon Job through Daniel?? Or what about Deuteronomy through Malachi?? You all need to really think this stuff through -- before it's too late (if it's not already too late). When you attack something -- make sure you understand what might come crashing down if you are successful. The price of victory might be exceedingly high. http://www.amazon.com/Caesars-Messiah-Conspiracy-Flavian-Signature/dp/1461096405/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1428619776&sr=8-1&keywords=caesars+messiah BTW -- might there be a reincarnational relationship between Caesar's Messiah and Hitler's Pope??!! Think about it!! I think there's a lot of theological and mythological BS -- but I think there are very real Other-Than-Human PTB working behind the scenes (in good-ways and bad-ways). Please remember that I am reposting old posts -- and mostly just making them look better -- with very little new material or editorial editing. I've changed my thinking and speculation -- while continuing to fly blind and stupid -- but I have left most everything in it's original form (warts and all). I continue to offer to make a correction and apology thread. I continue to remain mostly neutral -- and I have no animosity toward anyone -- even though I seem to be annoyed by just about everyone (including myself). I am quite uncomfortable and sometimes irritable. I have a hard-time having a good-time. Life often seems undesirable to me.

    Here is a totally off the wall thought. I haven't thought this through at all. What if 1913 were the beginning of an attempt in earnest by Amen Ra to overthrow Isis? The Federal Reserve might've been a major source of funding for Gizeh Intelligence. That, and looting Fort Knox gold. Gizeh Intelligence supposedly gave Hitler massive funding and uber-high technology (including nukes and ufo's). But Gizeh Intelligence supposedly pulled the plug on Hitler in 1941. Was this when Isis realized what was going on? Did Hitler double-cross Gizeh Intelligence, and attack them? Was the North African Crusade a big part of this? Did the end of World War II coincide with the victory of Ra over Isis? Then we got the Nazi Scientists. We got the United Nations. We got the Alphabet Agencies. We got Roswell. We got Nukes. We got UFO's. We got Muroc. We got Greada. We got the Military-Industrial Complex. We got Assassinations. We got Drugs. We got Vatican II. We got Undeclared and Ridiculous Wars. We got the United Nations Charter Superseding the United States Constitution. We got Waco. We got Oklahoma City. We got 9/11. We got Afghanistan and Iraq. We got MASSIVE debt. We got Katrina. We got Homeland Security. We got FEMA camps. We got TSA. We got the Gulf of Mexico Oil Fiasco. We got Fukushima. It goes on and on and on. Did the Powers That Be find out the hard way, in 1979, in connection with the Dulce Wars, that the New Secret Government was playing for keeps, and wanted the planet? Is the Secret Government Entirely Human? Have they threatened to exterminate the human race, if they don't get their way? Damned if I know. They never tell me anything. Hell, they don't even talk to me. I will continue to passively promote a Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom United States of the Solar System as a possible solution for All Concerned. My introduction of the topic of religion does not imply a desire, on my part, to have everyone be forced to participate in a particular religion - or else. I completely promote and support political and religious freedom - including Communism and Satanism. I'm simply trying to deal with the historical tension between church and state - and all of the horrors connected with horrible churches and unthinkable states - which became exponentially worse when they united their insanity. I simply desire a solid core for this solar system, which maximizes RESPONSIBLE FREEDOM - LONG TERM. Solar System Without End. Namaste.









    Re-watch the last half-hour of this Project Camelot interview with Jordan Maxwell. This highlights some of the reasons why I think that the Vatican cannot be ignored - and why it really needs to be purified and reformed - but I still think that it might be a good idea to positively reinforce the best aspects of the Vatican and Roman Catholicism. I remain schizophrenic regarding religion, Christianity, and the Vatican. I think we might be dealing with gods and goddesses, angels and demons, rather than God - at least in this solar system. I think theology is very important, as does Jordan Maxwell. I've recently become fascinated with the life and times of Pope Pius XII - for a variety of reasons. I'd still like to somehow hijack the Vatican with my little Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom United States of the Solar System - and mostly replace Canon Law with the Teachings of Jesus. I doubt the details of the Historical Jesus - even though it's a terrific story. But I do reverence the actual Teachings of Jesus - even though there are some perplexing 'hard-sayings' of Jesus. These teachings might not have been spoken by Christ 2,000 years ago, but regardless of their source, I find them to be inspiring and profound. What if the Vatican were based upon the Red-Letter Teachings of Jesus and the U.S. Constitution? I love the art, architecture, music, panache, etc. of the Vatican and the Roman Catholic Church, but the history and theology are hugely problematic - and the form of governance lends itself to evil and corruption. There seems to be too much power at the top, and too much secrecy. This is just my impression. The Vatican seems to be a huge part of the problem - and potentially a huge part of the solution. Hope springs eternal. I continue to be strangely fascinated by these pictures of Priests, Pope Pius XII, and the Nazis. I continue to wonder what I might've done if I had been in the shoes of Eugenio Pacelli. This is a sobering way to look at the first 58 years of the 20th century. (Eugenio was 24 years of age in 1900)

    I think that a lot of people should engage in this little mental exercise. Also consider rewatching these Jordan Maxwell videos which are relevant to a discussion of politics, religion, and the Vatican - especially as it might relate to a Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom United States of the Solar System. This is a VERY difficult subject to deal with in a proper and constructive manner. Please take your time with all of this.  Once again, I am a mixture of incurable optimism and unyielding despair. We are in a HUGE amount of trouble - but I remain hopeful regarding the future of the human race in this solar system. I really hope that things work out well for ALL CONCERNED - human and otherwise. REALLY. There is only so much of the bloody history that I can handle. I have to shield myself from a lot of it. I really am much too sensitive and idealistic. The same goes for nasty, faith-shattering harangues. I have to take that sort of thing in small doses. If one really wishes to become disillusioned, they can read 'Foxe's Book of Martyrs'. http://www.jesus.org.uk/vault/library/foxes_book_of_martyrs.pdf This world has been, and is, a Bloody Insane Asylum. It has so much potential - but I hate the reality. On the other hand, I used to love to practice the pipe-organ in a small Roman Catholic church - and watch people praying as I practiced. To me, this is church at it's best.

    I wish I could deal with the material in this thread in the same manner as Alex deals with all of the controversial material on his show. But I still think there is some sort of a creepy supernatural aspect to my sluggishness, which cannot be explained in any other way. I think there is a real spiritual war going on, in and around me, to the point that I feel like an overloaded computer, which is operating rather slowly (like my back-door infiltrated and subverted spyware-ridden computer). I might have a helluva lot more than a monkey on my back. The horror!

    Unrelatedly, consider the combination of Research and Music as being a Political and Religious Activity - regardless of the subjects researched, the music listened to, or one's affiliations and beliefs. I have no desire to have everyone think and act alike. I simply wish for everyone to be Responsible and Free. It really doesn't have to be too much more complicated than that. I have offered details and theories - mostly to stimulate thinking - but it truly is not 'my way, or the highway'. I guess I like Latin, because it doesn't cram religious ideas down people's throats. They can be elevated by the reverence and awe - while thinking about whatever the heck they want to think about - secular or sacred. Also, the Teachings of Jesus are the least problematic portions of scripture. I continue to search for a non-compromising and non-coercive form of ecumenism.

    Barack Obama made some interesting points in a 2006 speech. (Dead Link) I somewhat agree with him - and he makes my case for a focus upon the Teachings of Jesus. Our 'Defense' Department should probably be renamed the New World Order / United Nations Crusade Department. I support our troops and a strong military - but the Pentagon shouldn't be a Minion of the New World Order.

    I'm still interested in the concept of three reincarnating archangels - namely Gabriel, Lucifer, and Michael - as being central to what has been going on in this solar system - possibly for millions of years. I remain a follower of the Teachings of Jesus - but these teachings are not perfect - and they really only scratch the surface of what's really going on in this neck of the woods. Still, my recent interest in combining the Teachings of Jesus, the US Constitution, the Latin Mass, the Music of Widor, and Gregorian Chant - in the context of Solar System Governance - remains a compelling area of research, for me at least. Again, I am more interested in what this study might lead to, than with any attempt to implement these combined items, especially in an arbitrary and insensitive manner. I simply wish to get thoughtful people working on solutions to the horrible problems facing the solar system and the human race. We seem to be running on empty, and on borrowed time. It might be a helluva lot later than we think - and I am extremely apprehensive.

    Regarding the Mass - should we just start from scratch? Should we simply have a prelude (while praying privately), processional hymn, musical selection, gospel reading, homily, musical selection, recessional hymn, and postlude? Does it really have to be any more complex than that? I guess what really troubles me, is the subject of honesty. Don't we need to be completely honest about everything? Do we really have to whitewash anything? Do we have to keep doing something, simply because it is traditional? On the other hand, aren't continuity and evolutionary change really good things? I'm not a big fan of chaos and anarchy. So where is the happy medium? Is there a happy medium? I'm looking at some select historical sources, to try to figure out where we should go from here. Can society become so pluralistic and fragmented, that it self-destructs? Can the same thing happen if society is ruled by a harsh theocracy which demands unquestioning obedience to even the most ridiculous commandments? Will there be peace anytime soon? I tend to doubt it. No matter how we put things together, it will always be wrong. Conflict without end. Yippie!

    Herein lies the attraction toward theocracy - No Arguing! If the head of the theocracy is pure, honest, smart, reasonable, sensitive, etc. - this sort of thing is pretty attractive. But what if one is curious or disagrees? What if 'God' becomes irrationally stubborn or violently insane? What if one discovers corruption or horrible secrets? What if one is ambitious? What if one thinks they have a better idea? I guess I like the basic U.S. Constitutional Model - in the Context of the Dignity, Respect, Glory, Granduer, Pomp and Circumstance of Church at it's Best. If there is a distinctly reptilian race - in conflict with a distinctly mammalian race - does each race require a system of governance which is particularly suited to their unique nature? But if humanity originated in the context of a Reptilian Theocracy - were they Law Breakers right from the beginning? I keep thinking that the Creation of Male and Female Human Physicality was the Original and Unpardonable Sin. The mere existence and nature of humanity might be completely out of harmony with a very strict reptilian theocracy. Has Michael/Horus/Jesus been trying to save the human race for hundreds of thousands of years? Has this been a losing battle? Is Jesus really seated at the Right Hand of the Father - or is Jesus really Universal Enemy Number One? Things might be worse than we can possibly imagine. I worry and I cry. Game Over?


    This thread feels like some sort of a stand-off. Post after post after post is greeted with stone-cold deathly silence. My computer hardly functions, and the computer fan sounds like a Formula 1 Ferrari. I occasionally see moving points of light between me and the monitor. People know things about me that they shouldn't know. I meet 'Dogma' characters. I feel horrible all the time. My ears ring loudly and continually. I am uptight 24/7. I feel a strange sort of a low grade chill constantly. My troubling speculations seem to be getting all too real. I feel like I'm floating half the time. The other half of the time, I feel like Atlas. Should I shrug? I feel as though I am living in a science-fiction movie 24/7. I feel like I'm fighting all the time. I see legion moving points of light when I look at the sky - which seem to be alive. My eyes are full of floaters - to the point that I can't see properly. I've ground my teeth down. My house is a mess and my finances are problematic. I've been called 'Satan' on this thread. I can't talk about what I research with anyone who actually understands what the hell I'm talking about. I wish to help humanity - even though I'm finding people to be increasingly annoying. I really don't even like myself. Why can't simple conversation occur? Why is this so hard? This isn't multi-variable calculus. We're not discussing differential equations or organic chemical reaction pathways. Can someone point out the errors in this thread? Where did I get it wrong? Is it fun to just watch from a distance - and not get involved? Why should I do this? I don't get paid. Hardly anyone talks to me - and half of those who do are either off-topic or condescending. What's really going on here? Who the hell am I? What the hell am I supposed to be doing? I hate to say it, but I am finding a certain morbid enjoyment in listening to Alex Jones and Sherri Shriner - as well as old Bill Cooper, Jordan Maxwell, and Alex Collier videos. Trying to think things through and trying to help - really seems to be an uphill battle. Every step seems to be a monumental struggle. Why? O wretched man that I am. Who shall deliver me from this body of death? Or would this mean becoming a Reptilian Dixie Chick once more? 600,000 years of fighting - for what? Can someone please set me straight?! BTW - how much do you guys and gals get paid to read this tripe - and write the reports??? How many interns have gone insane reading this thread? Can I get a job at the NSA, even if I'm on the Red List? Sorry, I couldn't resist! But I should've...

    Thank-you Mercuriel. I will give this some thought - and make a detailed reply later today. I am not dogmatic in all of this. I am really terrified. The possibilities regarding the way things REALLY are - are staggering. I've known something was very, very wrong throughout my life - but I've been very passive - probably because I didn't have a clear picture of what was really wrong. It turns out that just about everyone was wrong - including me - and I'm still trying to sort things out. Anyway, I will research the contents of your post - and create the best reply possible. Actually, I'll be adding to this post as I get insights and ideas. I will probably just lay the groundwork for a refined answer, which I will include in a subsequent post. This is to help me think, more than anything else. Namaste.

    1co·or·di·nate adj
    \ko-'o?rd-n?t; -'o?r-d?-n?t, -d?-?nat\
    Definition of COORDINATE http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/coordinate
    1a : equal in rank, quality, or significance b : being of equal rank in a sentence <coordinate clauses>
    2: relating to or marked by coordination
    3a : being a university that awards degrees to men and women taught usually by the same faculty but attending separate classes often on separate campuses b : being one of the colleges and especially the women's branch of a coordinate university
    4: of, relating to, or being a system of indexing by two or more terms so that documents may be retrieved through the intersection of index terms
    — co·or·di·nate·ly adverb
    — co·or·di·nate·ness noun
    See coordinate defined for kids »
    Origin of COORDINATE
    probably back-formation from coordination
    First Known Use: 1641

    rep·re·sen·ta·tion noun \?re-pri-?zen-'ta-sh?n, -z?n-\
    Definition of REPRESENTATION http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/representation?show=0&t=1305217030
    1: one that represents: as a : an artistic likeness or image b (1) : a statement or account made to influence opinion or action (2) : an incidental or collateral statement of fact on the faith of which a contract is entered into c : a dramatic production or performance d (1) : a usually formal statement made against something or to effect a change (2) : a usually formal protest
    2: the act or action of representing : the state of being represented: as a : representationalism 2 b (1) : the action or fact of one person standing for another so as to have the rights and obligations of the person represented (2) : the substitution of an individual or class in place of a person (as a child for a deceased parent) c : the action of representing or the fact of being represented especially in a legislative body
    3: the body of persons representing a constituency
    — rep·re·sen·ta·tion·al \-shn?l, -sh?-n?l\ adjective
    — rep·re·sen·ta·tion·al·ly adverb
    See representation defined for English-language learners »
    See representation defined for kids »
    Examples of REPRESENTATION
    Each state has equal representation in the Senate.
    The letters of the alphabet are representations of sounds.
    First Known Use of REPRESENTATION
    15th century

    sov·er·eign·ty noun
    \-te\\'sä-v(?-)r?n-te, -v?rn-te also 's?-\
    plural sov·er·eign·ties
    Definition of SOVEREIGNTY http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/sovereignty
    1obsolete : supreme excellence or an example of it
    2a : supreme power especially over a body politic b : freedom from external control : autonomy c : controlling influence
    3: one that is sovereign; especially : an autonomous state
    See sovereignty defined for English-language learners »
    See sovereignty defined for kids »
    Variants of SOVEREIGNTY
    sov·er·eign·ty also sov·ran·ty  \-te\ \'sä-v(?-)r?n-te, -v?rn-te also 's?-\
    Examples of SOVEREIGNTY
    <upon leaving home she felt that she had achieved sovereignty for the first time in her life>
    <as parts of the same sovereignty, the states should not enact laws intended to harm one another economically> Nor was the sovereignty of the Native Hawaiian race recognized at the time Hawaii became a state. —Ramesh Ponnuru, National Review, 18 July 2005
    Cesaire's wrenching chant of self-affirmation announced a new era of intellectual and cultural sovereignty for black writers in French. —Lila Azam Zanganeh, New York Times Book Review, 12 June 2005
    The position plunged him into a supremely complicated religious and political game. Throughout Europe the old order of divinely sanctioned kingdoms was battling models of popular sovereignty and citizenship inspired by the Enlightenment, the French Revolution and the adolescent U.S. —David Van Biema, Time, 4 Sept. 2000
    [+]more[-]hide
    Origin of SOVEREIGNTY
    Middle English soverainte, from Anglo-French sovereinté, from soverein (see 2sovereign)
    First Known Use: 14th century
    Related to SOVEREIGNTY
    Synonyms: autonomy, independence, independency, liberty, self-determination, self-governance, self-government, freedom (also sovranty)
    Antonyms: dependence (also dependance), heteronomy, subjection, unfreedom
    Related Words: emancipation, enfranchisement, liberation, manumission, release
    Near Antonyms: captivity, enchainment, enslavement, immurement, imprisonment, incarceration, internment, subjugation
    see all synonyms and antonyms

    An initial thought regarding Coordinate Representation - is that we might be dealing with three primary parties:

    1. Reptilian Humanoids with Reptilian Souls - in This Solar System. (Part of the Orion Group?)

    2. Mammalian Humanoids with Reptilian Souls - in This Solar System. (Part of the Orion Group?)

    3. Reptilian Beings - Possibly from Orion. (Who the Orion Group rebelled against at the commencement of the War in Heaven?)

    The goal of Coordinate Representation might be to end all mischief and hostilities between both factions of the Orion Group - and for both factions of the Orion Group to reconcile with the Orion Powers That Be. If this is the case, I favor peace rather than war - but I do not favor Peace At Any Price. I still do not know what's REALLY been going on - and seeing the true state of affairs very clearly would be an essential prerequisite to any definitive and binding agreements. Philadelphia Dream Team Lawyers would need to examine any documents with a scanning electron microscope! In all of this - I think I might be attempting to be a combination of Teal'c, Daniel Jackson, Captain Carter, and Vala Mal Doran - from Stargate SG-1.

    Here is a composite of some of your relevant posts, Mercuriel, from Avalon 1 and the Mists of Avalon:


    OK - I have read the Bourdon Material as well as the Julien Material and It correclates with what I have been trying to get out...

    -//-

    Simply put - I've been trying to tell many that the whole Rebellion / Power Struggle Issue has been Their Issue...

    The Bible is Their Story - Not Ours. Did We fall with Them - Yep - But then You'll follow someone Whos never lied to you before won't You...

    We've learned the Discernment on that one - Late Yes - But learned It We have...

    Yeah its definately a three way power struggle but lets simplify It first - Then complicate it later...

    > One Being wishes for a Larger Agenda to be implemented - Universe Wide (Perhaps Prime Creator ?).

    > Another Being is in Charge by proxy of that Agenda (Perhaps the local System Sovereign - Nannar / Christ Michael ?).

    > The Third Being wishes for there to be a different Agenda and be in Control of It (Perhaps Marduk / Lucifer ?)...

    That said - Their Battle of Armegeddon will be between the Kasim (The Remnant Annunaki) and the Useanesda (The Incomers from the Homeworld).

    Now guess Who's inbetween 'em as this gets going ?

    Yep - Us...

    K - Well let Me set a premise...

    Their Plan is that the U.N. will be the One World Government under One Titular Head following which One Worldwide Religion ?

    Seriously - Find out which new Religion They are about to foist on Us and It will expose alot of what We and You have been talking about alot lately...

    Please post what You find and Yes - I have gone down this Path but find it will be useful to go about it this way to begin a more concise discussion of the Issue...

    Awesome and Their One World Religion will be based on the...

    Urantia Book.

    Their U.N. Theosophist was a student of Blavatsky's and Alice Bailey's Works. I'll have to find You His name...

    Hes like the U.N.'s Archbishop by Position even though there isn't a Position for It yet or so They tell Us.

    Ashtar Command - Gizeh Intelligence ring a bell ? Yep - All related...

    No Ashtar Command and the Gizeh Intelligence are not the same thing but as You have said - They are two factions of essentially the same Group.

    As I understand It - They are both Renegade Corps and are made up of Lyrans, Pleiadians, Sirians and such that do not fit into the Reptilian or Draconian Ranks...

    The Kasim (Remnant Annunaki / S.a.A.M.i.) have Their own Command for the Earth Mission of which Marduk is the Titular Head and shares power with a Council of Twelve. The Useaneshda (Incoming Annunaki / S.a.A.M.i.) are under S.a.A.M.e. Governance with Nannar as the Titular Head now taking over from Anu (Finally)...

    Yep - Theres alot of 'em and I'm only touching the surface here.

    The above said - The Ashtar Command was not always compromised as It is now but was taken over in a Mutiny led by the Renegades. When that Mutiny occurred I am not sure but it was a long time ago to be sure. Aeons likely...

    It will go back to Its rightful owner have no doubt of that. Just another Job in a long list of Jobs to do here before the Shift - LOL...

    You're not the only One that would like to tell Them where to go...

    You have It Oxy. We must be Sovereigns and Govern Ourselves...

    But how can One Govern Themselves if They are not Soveriegn ?

    Do You now see where I was going with this Idea of Sovereignty previously ?

    The Namaste Constitutionally Responsible and Free Solar System is an absolute impossibility WITHOUT Us being Sovereigns thereby ensuring It...

    Once We are Sovereign - The Model You've espoused will work very well.

    So with that said - We must learn to be Sovereign and through that as We Govern Ourselves in Unity and Harmony - We will make the Namaste Constitutionally Responsible and Free Solar System - A fact...

    What We must do is deserve a place at that Table by becoming Sovereign and this is in the ET's Words...

    Once We are of enough understanding - That place at the Table is waiting for Us...

    That said - Perhaps We now see why It is so important. If We don't become Sovereign as a Race on Our own by demanding and supporting the right kind of change not only in Our World - But in Ourselves - That place will not be forthcoming - And others will speak for Us by Proxy as has already been happening for Aeons...

    If We want that place at the Table - We must change Our ways and become Sovereign or Its a no-go - Period...

    So then one should say to Themselves at this Point - "Time to become Sovereign"...

    You are right in that it requires responsibility for Ones actions but moreso It is that the Individual Who is Sovereign seeks the Highest and Best Good of All Concerned in All Things before deciding on a course of action.

    In this respect it could be said that Christ Consciousness = Sovereignty - But that would be an oversimplification. What would better be said of this is that Sovereigns are Christ Conscious or hold the same understanding and responsibility as that.

    These Individuals by Governing Themselves responsibly - Are viewed as Sovereigns because They will not make a decision in which there is a loser and a winner. All will Win in effect by decisions that are made by Sovereigns. Now when I say All will win - This means that All will get what They focus on as it relates to a decision made by a Sovereign.

    Sovereigns will not violate the Free-will of another and are Integrated in that understanding. Sovereigns rule Themselves without the need of Rules or Governing by others as They know how to not Violate the Free-will of others not only by Their actions - But also by Their Mentalisms...

    Technically - We give up Our Sovereignty when We take on the Birth Certificate but that is Sophistry by Fallen Entities and truly - Act as a Sovereign and thou wilt be One...

    I will have to think on putting this into more of a Layman's understanding but I hope that the general thrust of My explanation here is adequate to begin the Discussion on It...

    Don't get caught up on Win-Win semantics or front-load It too much. Launguage is so limited but what is meant by a Win-Win SITU with a Sovereign is that Negatives may be expressed if that is what those specific Individuals have focus'ed on.

    For instance - If Dark Ones Focus on Power over Others - Sovereigns should then act to ensure that any Free-will that the Darks have violated - Receives release if that is what They seek whereas in relation to the Dark pushing the Program - They would then be left alone to Contol each other - Also getting what They have focus'ed on - IE - Where Their Minds are at...

    You have it essentially - Become Fully responsible in order to Govern Oneself and One will then be Sovereign...

    The Roman Catholic Church was taken over by Forces Loyal to the Fallen Ones on June 29th, 1963. It was then signified by the carrying from that point forward by the Pontiff Pope Peter the VI and all others since, of the Crooked or Bent Cross (Which is an Esoteric Symbol of the Antichrist).

    Pope John Paul the II and others have sat in a Chair with an Inverted Cross - Again the AntiChrist Symbol, and If You think that They've just missed that one while setting up the Area for His audiences - Then You haven't studied their Protocols in the right way. They miss nothing when setting up for a Papal audience and it's ALL on Purpose. Bank on that...

    EG.

    Fish Hat = Dagon or Poseidon Worship...

    INRI = Ishtar / Nimrod / Rah Marduk / Isis (Inner Doctrine for the Initiate)

    INRI = Acronym of the Latin inscription 'IESVS·NAZARENVS·REX·IVDÆORVM' (Jesus Nazarenus, Rex Iudaeorum), which translates to English as "Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews". (Outer Doctrine for the Profane)

    I could go on Ad Infinitum...

    Here is a composite of some other material within this thread - which is somewhat relevant to the subject at hand:

    Has anyone done a study of 'The King of Heaven (Father/Lucifer/Amen Ra?) and Queen of Heaven (Mother/ Hathor/Isis/Mary/Gabriel/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 Katesh in Stargate SG-1. This part caught my attention:

    Q: Who is the God or Goddess of This World?

    A: The Father and Mother, cosmically not biologically speaking of Jesus.

    Q: Has corruption and sanity been a problem for this being?

    A: Nope.

    Q: Are Satan and Lucifer two separate and distinct beings?

    A: Yes, Satan is the true manifestation of a fake image, called the Devil. Satan is the 'court prosecutor' of 'humanity' and Lucifer is the template for this collective humanity being prosecuted by Satan. Satan is the 'Kali' of Shakti as two sides of the one coin called God. Satan is God and you are Lucifer in individuality. You can either 'play' a Christ White Lucifer look LUCIFER=74=JESUS=MESSIAH=CROSS=...or you can play a Dark Lucifer as an absorber of the 'brought' light.

    Q: Is there...or has there ever been...a God who was higher than Gabriel, Michael, and Lucifer?

    A: Yes, this is the 1st Order of Abraxas aka Abrasax as the polarity unexpressed BUT contained within, like the Dark White Lucifers as One or as Satan God as One.

    Q: If so...was this God destroyed in the War in Heaven?

    A: No, this 1st Order is omniness and above such polarity issues as a war in heaven on earth or otherplace.

    Q: Is Satan one of these three?

    A: Satan is 1st Order, the archangels are 2nd order.

    Q: If so...which one? Did Lucifer instruct Charles Darwin?

    A: Ask Charles Darwin.

    Q: Would Human sovereignty in this Solar System be a good thing?

    A: Not yet, later perhaps.

    Q: Is a theocracy a good or a bad thing?

    A: Your polarity issue.

    Q: Is Responsible Freedom fundamentally rebellious in nature?

    A: No

    I'm beginning to think that I'm in trouble with BOTH the God of This World AND the Creator God of the Universe. Sort of like when a police officer tries to break up a domestic dispute - and gets pounded by both parties - even though he or she is trying to help both parties. I have a very bad and sick feeling regarding what might be going on in the entire universe. I so hope that I'm wrong. Is the following a harbinger of things to come?

    I received the following responses from posts I have made on the internet. They don't sound human.

    'Y'all love fantisizing over my ancestral decorations, places, spirituality that you don't get, the greatness you won't achieve, and the melanin you'll never have. This depiction of my ancestors is pathetic. Y'all always make them look just as degenerative and recessive as you. Anyway, play and have fun as much as you still can. Yes you are running out of time, and to be honest, there is absolutly nothing you can do about it. I have no mercy, you lie and mock and blaspheme all the way to hell.'

    abraxasinas: Very human egocentricity orthodoxus.

    On another website...I received this message:

    'You know this isn't funny! The Lord God will judge you for claiming God ship. Just because God showed you a little bit of His secrets you think you know everything. He will NOT have mercy on you!' [orthodoxymoron note: This was in connection with me fictionally using the name KRLLL - causing me to wonder if someone equated Godship with the name 'Omnipotent Highness KRLLL'?]

    abraxasinas: Very human ego mimicking the divine ego of God (who does not judge and is always full of 'mercy').

    I once heard a mocking, sing-song, high-pitched feminine sounding voice...emanating from a usually deep and masculine voiced televangelist...directed toward me...in public...almost shouting 'That was gooooooood!!!!'...in reaction to a polite, well intentioned, and well reasoned comment by me.

    abraxasinas: Even more so human ego-based, accentuating separation and not the natural unity of God.

    This was a short unedited internet exchange I had some time ago:

    ME: What if the aliens who have been here for thousands of years are the 'bad-guys'? What if we will need the help of good aliens from elsewhere to get rid of the demonic aliens who are already here? Could this be viewed as a hostile alien attack? I really don't know. I am just speculating.

    THEM: Try not to think in terms of good or bad. Understand this is not your planet. Then, understand nothing can be done to you that you don't do to yourself. Know that there are quadrillions of planets and they don't have a massive climate change every 26,000 years and violent deranged people like yourselves. Why on Earth would any race want to live here with you knowingly? The most intelligent life on the planet is not human.

    abraxasinas: This is basically true, but omits the 'inner human core' whch IS in fact the most intelligent cosmic lifeform (the planet belongs to All) - yet remains hidden in the superconsciousness ONLY accessible by the Individual Logos partnering the Cosmic Logos.

    ME: I'll try not to think of the Iraq War in terms of good or bad. I'll try to be morally ambiguous. I might even become CIA or a CEO. Hey, maybe violent and deranged is neither good nor bad...but thinking makes it so. The aliens who are here need us to not get our acts together. If that happens...they'll probably have to live on Nibiru...or worse. Sorry for being a smart-XXX. Wait...I'm not sorry...it's neither good nor bad. I couldn't resist. I mean well. Really.

    THEM: And your point was?...............

    ME: Who owns earth? Where do humans belong? What is the most intelligent life on earth? If they are so smart, and earth is so bad...why are they here? I may be deranged...but I'm not violent. You sound as though you are not human...are you an alien? If so...what kind...and from where? My point was that ethics are supremely important. I don't hurt, kill, terrorize, or abduct people...but some aliens apparently do(as do some humans). They should stop.

    orthodoxymoron wrote:

    "I was serious when I said that I hoped that this activity was being duly noted somewhere in the galaxy. I fear that we are headed down the wrong road, and that we will not turn back, regardless of the warnings, and regardless of the rantings and ravings of lunatics such as myself. I really wish that I had a shallow underground civilian base to go down into. At this point - I am ready to go down - and stay down - for a long, long time. I would really like to know if anyone has taken a close look at this thread - or any of the other threads I have posted."


    Raven wrote:

    "Indeed Oxy, duly noted it is. You will not be alone hiding under those rocks." - Rev.6 KJV

    [12] And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and, lo, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became as blood;
    [13] And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind.
    [14] And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places.
    [15] And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains;
    [16] And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb:
    [17] For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?


    Barely,as its full of nothing but egotestical puritanical rantings from a completely ignorant fool, who would rather spend hours typing endless bathering bullshit out of his incessant mouth, and listening to his own"higher" ego then the True higher ego of the Divine.

    No comment, but if one reads your bullshit enough,one gets an idea as to the degree and level of how deep your rabbit hole goes. Mostly the hole leads right up your XXX.

    Oh bullshit oxy, you LOVE this XXXX, its all you talk about and point people in the direction of it!! Get over yourself already. You are an incredibly ignornant Xxxxx hiding behind a false puritanical skirt, who needs to grow some balls and accept his own self responsibility. Law of attraction baby, what you dish out will be in kind served back to you. Your so called sincere search is nothing but your own whining out loud,hoping for some small platitude from anyone taking the time to read your vomit.

    Watch this very carefully Oxy. Infact watch it several times, maybe it will sink in. I keep offering you the Red Pill and you keep choosing the Blue one. I do not hate you, just the bull$hiT you stand for and allow to blind you to the Truth.

    Lionhawk wrote:

    I sense a storm brewing in this thread. Not because of anything that Mercuriel or ODM has posted. But once that Thuban ooze seeps into any place, nothing good comes from it. I've seen the exchanges on that one.

    Fact of the matter is that once you do the work within, you will embrace your sovereignty and won't need a philosophy that originated outside of yourself. So for someone to say to go within and still be preaching from a Thuban pedestal is just simply hypocritical.

    One shoe doesn't fit all here. Much of it depends on the individual. To take a paint brush and consider everyone to be the same is an insane perspective. If you have to be guided by a philosophy so you can function, means you have already been compromised.

    And if you quote Jesus and never even met him, just goes to show you how really connected you are. Operating from a second hand perspective is second hand no matter how you slice it.

    And if I had to choose between ODM's constitution and the Thubans rhetoric, I would go with ODMs' and would work my arce off to make it happen. At least he embraces and invites everyone to the table. Instead of you being served up at a Thuban table.

    I throw caution to the wind at this moment. And whoever is listening in the background, just know I am still breathing and my memory is like an elephant. The exchange will not go in your favor this time around. This is not a threat but a promise. Thanks for the convincing exchange you provided last time. You will reap the wrath that you have sown and I will gladly deliver it.


    othdodoxymoron wrote:

    If an extermination/enslavement is about to be inflicted upon the human race - this thread is a complete waste of time - right? Or - could the implementation of this thread prevent an extermination/enslavement from occurring? If there are ET's here in this solar system who are not here to help - I hereby request that you leave this solar system immediately. I may not be in a position to make such a request - but I'm making it anyway. I wish to help create a paradise in this solar system through non-violent and non-coercive means. If there are those who have a great karmic debt - I request that they be incarcerated, educated, and reformed - in a dignified and respectful manner - and that they be directed to make restitution in a reasonable manner. Obviously - I don't know the whole story of what is really going on in this solar system - so this request might be nullified by an overwhelming original and continuing sin. I might be the biggest historical s.o.b. of them all. I am very concerned that this might be the case. But really - is a violent solution ever really a solution? If an extermination occurs - I believe that it will not stop with the original target - but will continue - with the exterminators eventually exterminating themselves. Those who live by the sword - will die by the sword. I am a big-time pacifist - in this incarnation, anyway. I will continue to talk to myself on this thread. This is the most important subject imaginable, yet very few seem to wish to talk to me. I have even been cussed-out, and called an 'ignorant fool'. I declare War on War. War is a Sin. I am looking for a big-tent solution - and nothing seems to be coming of it.


    Just a note to the Powers That Be - Human or Otherwise - Terrestrial and Extraterrestrial:

    CONDUCT AN INFOWAR - IF YOU MUST - BUT DO NOT TURN
    THIS WORLD INTO A BURNT AND BLOODY MASS OF CORPSES.




    Last edited by orthodoxymoron on Mon Jun 19, 2017 10:17 pm; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7368
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The United States of the Solar System, A.D. 2133 (Book Three)

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Fri May 05, 2017 1:40 pm

    magamud wrote:
    The Aldebaran Mystery

    Thank-you magamud. I am somewhat haunted by Constantine. I truly think 'they' place bits and pieces of the truth in movies and television shows -- as well as whispering in the ears of talk-show hosts and conspiracy-theorists. What worries me is that One Nasty Faction might throw Another Nasty Faction under the bus -- not to make things better -- but simply to gain power. I keep wondering what it would be like to be on the "Inside" -- and I keep thinking it would be nearly impossible to remain "Good and Pure". I continue to think that the "Way Things Really Work" is really quite nasty, bitter, and hostile. It might be better for me to just keep doing what I'm doing as an "Outsider-Fool". I keep thinking I should conceptualize becoming an Intergalactic-Banker and Star-Warrior -- even though I'd rather just hold hands with everyone (human and otherwise) and sing Kumbaya. What if the way things really work is a Nazi-Masonic Dominated Vatican, London, Washington DC, and Darkside of the Moon??? What if things HAVE to be this way?? I love the Christian-Vision of Heaven with Jesus -- but what if that is a cruel deception -- to control us, keep us working hard, and (most importantly?)paying our tithes and taxes?? I truly do not mean to be unkind -- but how do we REALLY know what our predicament is?? How do we REALLY know ANYTHING?? I love studying the Bible -- but a lot of it doesn't make sense -- and a lot of it is quite nasty, violent, and immoral. I've tried to provide study-lists to help deal with these problems -- but I doubt that ANYONE has benefitted from this. At this point, I don't wish to join ANY group -- Atheist, Agnostic, Christian, Non-Christian, etc. Perhaps a combination of History (including the Bible and other Holy Books), Science, Science-Fiction, and Current-Events (official and unofficial versions) PLUS the Responsible Use of the Imagination -- is as close to the truth as an "Outsider" can get. We're ridiculed and exploited when we don't know -- followed and watched when we do know.

    What if Two Archangels ousted a Third Archangel in Antiquity -- and proceeded to go downhill in just about every way?? What if it is nearly impossible to Rule Humanity in a Kind, Loving, and Just Manner???? I've tried to build safeguards into a conceptualized United States of the Solar System -- but I suspect that, it too, would turn out to be a Corrupt and Violent Mess -- and that if I had anything significant to do with it -- that I too would go downhill in just about every way. Would a Strict-Idealistic Babylonian-Egyptian-Roman Empire approximate the effective form of a  Realistic United States of the Solar System?? Is an Idealistic Form of That Which Presently Exists as Good as We Can Expect Things to Get??? I continue to find Stargate Continuum to be VERY Interesting. I think that the whole Underground-Base, Secret-Government, Secret-Space Program, Military-Industrial-Financial Complex COULD be VERY Cool -- BUT I get the sinking feeling that it's anything but cool in it's present form. I have NO Idea who the good-guys and bad-guys are in the grand scheme of things. I am VERY disillusioned, disoriented, fatigued, and despondent. I'm NOT kidding about going completely silent by the end of August. I probably won't stop thinking about how things might be -- or how things should be -- but talking about it is much too draining -- especially when one is viewed as being some sort of a reprehensible threat to national-security and the way things are. I'm sure that Top-People and Top Other-Than-People have everything under control -- just as they have for thousands and thousands of years. THAT'S What Scares Me!!! Should I aspire to become an Executive in Purgatory Incorporated?? Should I aspire to become the CEO of Purgatory Incorporated?? What if the Top-People in Purgatory Incorporated are Fast Walking and Talking Goddesses -- Looking-Good and Making-Money???!!! 1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eM6zPikfOEs 2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MzbnwASIFKU 3. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PlQ8hVqcIAs 4. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EnKtlTXF2Rc 5. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYBKZvYPF-A






    Anyway -- Consider India. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India What Would Kali Say??? I think I met a notable Indian a while back -- but we didn't introduce each other. They seemed to be in somewhat of a distressed state. They looked at me a lot -- in a rather penetrating manner -- and they didn't seem to like me one little bit. It was quite strange and unsettling. I could say more -- but I won't. Most people don't seem to like me. Once again, if it's possible, perhaps I should leave this solar system -- rather than trying to save it. What if the inhabitants of this solar system do NOT wish to be saved?? So Be It??? What Would Devakas Say??

    India (Listeni/'?ndi?/), officially the Republic of India (Bharat Ganrajya)[c], is a country in South Asia. It is the seventh-largest country by area, the second-most populous country with over 1.2 billion people, and the most populous democracy in the world. Bounded by the Indian Ocean on the south, the Arabian Sea on the south-west, and the Bay of Bengal on the south-east, it shares land borders with Pakistan to the west;[d] China, Nepal, and Bhutan to the north-east; and Burma and Bangladesh to the east. In the Indian Ocean, India is in the vicinity of Sri Lanka and the Maldives; in addition, India's Andaman and Nicobar Islands share a maritime border with Thailand and Indonesia.

    Home to the ancient Indus Valley Civilisation and a region of historic trade routes and vast empires, the Indian subcontinent was identified with its commercial and cultural wealth for much of its long history.[12] Four world religions—Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, and Sikhism—originated here, whereas Zoroastrianism, Christianity, and Islam arrived in the 1st millennium CE and also helped shape the region's diverse culture. Gradually annexed by and brought under the administration of the British East India Company from the early 18th century and administered directly by the United Kingdom from the mid-19th century, India became an independent nation in 1947 after a struggle for independence that was marked by non-violent resistance led by Mahatma Gandhi.

    The Indian economy is the world's tenth-largest by nominal GDP and third-largest by purchasing power parity (PPP).[13] Following market-based economic reforms in 1991, India became one of the fastest-growing major economies; it is considered a newly industrialised country. However, it continues to face the challenges of poverty, corruption, malnutrition, inadequate public healthcare, and terrorism. A nuclear weapons state and a regional power, it has the third-largest standing army in the world and ranks seventh in military expenditure among nations. India is a federal constitutional republic governed under a parliamentary system consisting of 28 states and 7 union territories. India is a pluralistic, multilingual, and multi-ethnic society. It is also home to a diversity of wildlife in a variety of protected habitats.

    Names of India

    The name India is derived from Indus, which originates from the Old Persian word Hinduš. The latter term stems from the Sanskrit word Sindhu, which was the historical local appellation for the Indus River.[14] The ancient Greeks referred to the Indians as Indoi (??d??), which translates as "the people of the Indus".[15] The geographical term Bharat (pronounced ['b?a?r?t?] ( listen)), which is recognised by the Constitution of India as an official name for the country, is used by many Indian languages in its variations.[16] The eponym of Bharat is Bharata, a theological figure that Hindu scriptures describe as a legendary emperor of ancient India. Hindustan ([??nd??'st?a?n] ( listen)) was originally a Persian word that meant "Land of the Hindus"; prior to 1947, it referred to a region that encompassed northern India and Pakistan. It is occasionally used to solely denote India in its entirety.[17][18]

    Ancient India

    The earliest anatomically modern human remains found in South Asia date from approximately 30,000 years ago.[19] Nearly contemporaneous Mesolithic rock art sites have been found in many parts of the Indian subcontinent, including at the Bhimbetka rock shelters in Madhya Pradesh.[20] Around 7000 BCE, the first known Neolithic settlements appeared on the subcontinent in Mehrgarh and other sites in western Pakistan.[21] These gradually developed into the Indus Valley Civilisation,[22] the first urban culture in South Asia;[23] it flourished during 2500–1900 BCE in Pakistan and western India.[24] Centred around cities such as Mohenjo-daro, Harappa, Dholavira, and Kalibangan, and relying on varied forms of subsistence, the civilization engaged robustly in crafts production and wide-ranging trade.[23]

    During the period 2000–500 BCE, in terms of culture, many regions of the subcontinent transitioned from the Chalcolithic to the Iron Age.[25] The Vedas, the oldest scriptures of Hinduism,[26] were composed during this period,[27] and historians have analysed these to posit a Vedic culture in the Punjab region and the upper Gangetic Plain.[25] Most historians also consider this period to have encompassed several waves of Indo-Aryan migration into the subcontinent from the north-west.[28][26][29] The caste system, which created a hierarchy of priests, warriors, and free peasants, but which excluded indigenous peoples by labelling their occupations impure, arose during this period.[30] On the Deccan Plateau, archaeological evidence from this period suggests the existence of a chiefdom stage of political organisation.[25] In southern India, a progression to sedentary life is indicated by the large number of megalithic monuments dating from this period,[31] as well as by nearby traces of agriculture, irrigation tanks, and craft traditions.[31]

    In the late Vedic period, around the 5th century BCE, the small chiefdoms of the Ganges Plain and the north-western regions had consolidated into 16 major oligarchies and monarchies that were known as the mahajanapadas.[32][33] The emerging urbanisation and the orthodoxies of this age also created the religious reform movements of Buddhism and Jainism,[34] both of which became independent religions.[35] Buddhism, based on the teachings of Gautama Buddha attracted followers from all social classes excepting the middle class; chronicling the life of the Buddha was central to the beginnings of recorded history in India.[34][36][37] Jainism came into prominence around the same time during the life of its exemplar, Mahavira.[38] In an age of increasing urban wealth, both religions held up renunciation as an ideal,[39] and both established long-lasting monasteries.[32] Politically, by the 3rd century BCE, the kingdom of Magadha had annexed or reduced other states to emerge as the Mauryan Empire.[32] The empire was once thought to have controlled most of the subcontinent excepting the far south, but its core regions are now thought to have been separated by large autonomous areas.[40][41] The Mauryan kings are known as much for their empire-building and determined management of public life as for Ashoka's renunciation of militarism and far-flung advocacy of the Buddhist dhamma.[42][43]

    The Sangam literature of the Tamil language reveals that, between 200 BCE and 200 CE, the southern peninsula was being ruled by the Cheras, the Cholas, and the Pandyas, dynasties that traded extensively with the Roman Empire and with West and South-East Asia.[44][45] In North India, Hinduism asserted patriarchal control within the family, leading to increased subordination of women.[46][32] By the 4th and 5th centuries, the Gupta Empire had created in the greater Ganges Plain a complex system of administration and taxation that became a model for later Indian kingdoms.[47][48] Under the Guptas, a renewed Hinduism based on devotion rather than the management of ritual began to assert itself.[49] The renewal was reflected in a flowering of sculpture and architecture, which found patrons among an urban elite.[48] Classical Sanskrit literature flowered as well, and Indian science, astronomy, medicine, and mathematics made significant advances.[48]

    Medieval India

    The Indian early medieval age, 600 CE to 1200 CE, is defined by regional kingdoms and cultural diversity.[50] When Harsha of Kannauj, who ruled much of the Indo-Gangetic Plain from 606 to 647 CE, attempted to expand southwards, he was defeated by the Chalukya ruler of the Deccan.[51] When his successor attempted to expand eastwards, he was defeated by the Pala king of Bengal.[51] When the Chalukyas attempted to expand southwards, they were defeated by the Pallavas from farther south, who in turn were opposed by the Pandyas and the Cholas from still farther south.[51] No ruler of this period was able to create an empire and consistently control lands much beyond his core region.[50] During this time, pastoral peoples whose land had been cleared to make way for the growing agricultural economy were accommodated within caste society, as were new non-traditional ruling classes.[52] The caste system consequently began to show regional differences.[52]

    In the 6th and 7th centuries, the first devotional hymns were created in the Tamil language.[53] They were imitated all over India and led to both the resurgence of Hinduism and the development of all modern languages of the subcontinent.[53] Indian royalty, big and small, and the temples they patronised, drew citizens in great numbers to the capital cities, which became economic hubs as well.[54] Temple towns of various sizes began to appear everywhere as India underwent another urbanisation.[54] By the 8th and 9th centuries, the effects were felt in South-East Asia, as South Indian culture and political systems were exported to lands that became part of modern-day Myanmar, Thailand, Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam, Malaysia, and Java.[55] Indian merchants, scholars, and sometimes armies were involved in this transmission; South-East Asians took the initiative as well, with many sojourning in Indian seminaries and translating Buddhist and Hindu texts into their languages.[55]

    After the 10th century, Muslim Central Asian nomadic clans, using swift-horse cavalry and raising vast armies united by ethnicity and religion, repeatedly overran South Asia's north-western plains, leading eventually to the establishment of the Islamic Delhi Sultanate in 1206.[56] The sultanate was to control much of North India, and to make many forays into South India. Although at first disruptive for the Indian elites, the sultanate largely left its vast non-Muslim subject population to its own laws and customs.[57][58] By repeatedly repulsing Mongol raiders in the 13th century, the sultanate saved India from the devastation visited on West and Central Asia, setting the scene for centuries of migration of fleeing soldiers, learned men, mystics, traders, artists, and artisans from that region into the subcontinent, thereby creating a syncretic Indo-Islamic culture in the north.[59][60] The sultanate's raiding and weakening of the regional kingdoms of South India paved the way for the indigenous Vijayanagara Empire.[61] Embracing a strong Shaivite tradition and building upon the military technology of the sultanate, the empire came to control much of peninsular India,[62] and was to influence South Indian society for long afterwards.[61]

    Early modern India

    In the early 16th century, northern India, being then under mainly Muslim rulers,[63] fell again to the superior mobility and firepower of a new generation of Central Asian warriors.[64] The resulting Mughal Empire did not stamp out the local societies it came to rule, but rather balanced and pacified them through new administrative practices[65][66] and diverse and inclusive ruling elites,[67] leading to more systematic, centralised, and uniform rule.[68] Eschewing tribal bonds and Islamic identity, especially under Akbar, the Mughals united their far-flung realms through loyalty, expressed through a Persianised culture, to an emperor who had near-divine status.[67] The Mughal state's economic policies, deriving most revenues from agriculture[69] and mandating that taxes be paid in the well-regulated silver currency,[70] caused peasants and artisans to enter larger markets.[68] The relative peace maintained by the empire during much of the 17th century was a factor in India's economic expansion,[68] resulting in greater patronage of painting, literary forms, textiles, and architecture.[71] Newly coherent social groups in northern and western India, such as the Marathas, the Rajputs, and the Sikhs, gained military and governing ambitions during Mughal rule, which, through collaboration or adversity, gave them both recognition and military experience.[72] Expanding commerce during Mughal rule gave rise to new Indian commercial and political elites along the coasts of southern and eastern India.[72] As the empire disintegrated, many among these elites were able to seek and control their own affairs.[73]

    By the early 18th century, with the lines between commercial and political dominance being increasingly blurred, a number of European trading companies, including the English East India Company, had established coastal outposts.[74][75] The East India Company's control of the seas, greater resources, and more advanced military training and technology led it to increasingly flex its military muscle and caused it to become attractive to a portion of the Indian elite; both these factors were crucial in allowing the Company to gain control over the Bengal region by 1765 and sideline the other European companies.[76][74][77][78] Its further access to the riches of Bengal and the subsequent increased strength and size of its army enabled it to annex or subdue most of India by the 1820s.[79] India was now no longer exporting manufactured goods as it long had, but was instead supplying the British empire with raw materials, and many historians consider this to be the onset of India's colonial period.[74] By this time, with its economic power severely curtailed by the British parliament and itself effectively made an arm of British administration, the Company began to more consciously enter non-economic arenas such as education, social reform, and culture.[80]

    Modern India

    Historians consider India's modern age to have begun sometime between 1848 and 1885. The appointment in 1848 of Lord Dalhousie as Governor General of the East India Company set the stage for changes essential to a modern state. These included the consolidation and demarcation of sovereignty, the surveillance of the population, and the education of citizens. Technological changes—among them, railways, canals, and the telegraph—were introduced not long after their introduction in Europe.[81][82][83][84] However, disaffection with the Company also grew during this time, and set off the Indian Rebellion of 1857. Fed by diverse resentments and perceptions, including invasive British-style social reforms, harsh land taxes, and summary treatment of some rich landowners and princes, the rebellion rocked many regions of northern and central India and shook the foundations of Company rule.[85][86] Although the rebellion was suppressed by 1858, it led to the dissolution of the East India Company and to the direct administration of India by the British government. Proclaiming a unitary state and a gradual but limited British-style parliamentary system, the new rulers also protected princes and landed gentry as a feudal safeguard against future unrest.[87][88] In the decades following, public life gradually emerged all over India, leading eventually to the founding of the Indian National Congress in 1885.[89][90][91][92]

    The rush of technology and the commercialisation of agriculture in the second half of the 19th century was marked by economic setbacks—many small farmers became dependent on the whims of far-away markets.[93] There was an increase in the number of large-scale famines,[94] and, despite the risks of infrastructure development borne by Indian taxpayers, little industrial employment was generated for Indians.[95] There were also salutary effects: commercial cropping, especially in the newly canalled Punjab, led to increased food production for internal consumption.[96] The railway network provided critical famine relief,[97] notably reduced the cost of moving goods,[97] and helped nascent Indian-owned industry.[96] After World War I, in which some one million Indians served,[98] a new period began. It was marked by British reforms but also repressive legislation, by more strident Indian calls for self-rule, and by the beginnings of a non-violent movement of non-cooperation, of which Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi would become the leader and enduring symbol.[99] During the 1930s, slow legislative reform was enacted by the British; the Indian National Congress won victories in the resulting elections.[100] The next decade was beset with crises: Indian participation in World War II, the Congress's final push for non-cooperation, and an upsurge of Muslim nationalism. All were capped by the advent of independence in 1947, but tempered by the bloody partition of the subcontinent into two states: India and Pakistan.[101]

    Vital to India's self-image as an independent nation was its constitution, completed in 1950, which put in place a secular and democratic republic.[102] In the 60 years since, India has had a mixed record of successes and failures.[103] It has remained a democracy with civil liberties, an activist Supreme Court, and a largely independent press.[103] Economic liberalisation, which was begun in the 1990s, has created a large urban middle class, transformed India into one of the world's fastest-growing economies,[104] and increased its geopolitical clout. Indian movies, music, and spiritual teachings play an increasing role in global culture.[103] Yet, India has also been weighed down by seemingly unyielding poverty, both rural and urban;[103] by religious and caste-related violence;[105] by Maoist-inspired Naxalite insurgencies;[106] and by separatism in Jammu and Kashmir and in Northeast India.[107] It has unresolved territorial disputes with China, which escalated into the Sino-Indian War of 1962;[108] and with Pakistan, which flared into wars fought in 1947, 1965, 1971, and 1999.[108] The India–Pakistan nuclear rivalry came to a head in 1998.[109] India's sustained democratic freedoms are unique among the world's new nations; however, in spite of its recent economic successes, freedom from want for its disadvantaged population remains a goal yet to be achieved.[110]

    Geography

    India comprises the bulk of the Indian subcontinent and lies atop the minor Indian tectonic plate, which in turn belongs to the Indo-Australian Plate.[111] India's defining geological processes commenced 75 million years ago when the Indian subcontinent, then part of the southern supercontinent Gondwana, began a north-eastward drift across the then-unformed Indian Ocean that lasted fifty million years.[111] The subcontinent's subsequent collision with, and subduction under, the Eurasian Plate bore aloft the planet's highest mountains, the Himalayas. They abut India in the north and the north-east.[111] In the former seabed immediately south of the emerging Himalayas, plate movement created a vast trough that has gradually filled with river-borne sediment;[112] it now forms the Indo-Gangetic Plain.[113] To the west lies the Thar Desert, which is cut off by the Aravalli Range.[114]

    The original Indian plate survives as peninsular India, which is the oldest and geologically most stable part of India; it extends as far north as the Satpura and Vindhya ranges in central India. These parallel chains run from the Arabian Sea coast in Gujarat in the west to the coal-rich Chota Nagpur Plateau in Jharkhand in the east.[115] To the south, the remaining peninsular landmass, the Deccan Plateau, is flanked on the west and east by coastal ranges known as the Western and Eastern Ghats;[116] the plateau contains the nation's oldest rock formations, some of them over one billion years old. Constituted in such fashion, India lies to the north of the equator between 6° 44' and 35° 30' north latitude[e] and 68° 7' and 97° 25' east longitude.[117]

    India's coastline measures 7,517 kilometres (4,700 mi) in length; of this distance, 5,423 kilometres (3,400 mi) belong to peninsular India and 2,094 kilometres (1,300 mi) to the Andaman, Nicobar, and Lakshadweep island chains.[118] According to the Indian naval hydrographic charts, the mainland coastline consists of the following: 43% sandy beaches; 11% rocky shores, including cliffs; and 46% mudflats or marshy shores.[118]

    Major Himalayan-origin rivers that substantially flow through India include the Ganges and the Brahmaputra, both of which drain into the Bay of Bengal.[119] Important tributaries of the Ganges include the Yamuna and the Kosi; the latter's extremely low gradient often leads to severe floods and course changes.[120] Major peninsular rivers, whose steeper gradients prevent their waters from flooding, include the Godavari, the Mahanadi, the Kaveri, and the Krishna, which also drain into the Bay of Bengal;[121] and the Narmada and the Tapti, which drain into the Arabian Sea.[122] Coastal features include the marshy Rann of Kutch of western India and the alluvial Sundarbans delta of eastern India; the latter is shared with Bangladesh.[123] India has two archipelagos: the Lakshadweep, coral atolls off India's south-western coast; and the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, a volcanic chain in the Andaman Sea.[124]

    The Indian climate is strongly influenced by the Himalayas and the Thar Desert, both of which drive the economically and culturally pivotal summer and winter monsoons.[125] The Himalayas prevent cold Central Asian katabatic winds from blowing in, keeping the bulk of the Indian subcontinent warmer than most locations at similar latitudes.[126][127] The Thar Desert plays a crucial role in attracting the moisture-laden south-west summer monsoon winds that, between June and October, provide the majority of India's rainfall.[125] Four major climatic groupings predominate in India: tropical wet, tropical dry, subtropical humid, and montane.[128]

    Biodiversity

    India lies within the Indomalaya ecozone and contains three biodiversity hotspots.[129] One of 17 megadiverse countries, it hosts 8.6% of all mammalian, 13.7% of all avian, 7.9% of all reptilian, 6% of all amphibian, 12.2% of all piscine, and 6.0% of all flowering plant species.[130][131] Endemism is high among plants, 33%, and among ecoregions such as the shola forests.[132] Habitat ranges from the tropical rainforest of the Andaman Islands, Western Ghats, and North-East India to the coniferous forest of the Himalaya. Between these extremes lie the moist deciduous sal forest of eastern India; the dry deciduous teak forest of central and southern India; and the babul-dominated thorn forest of the central Deccan and western Gangetic plain.[133] Under 12% of India's landmass bears thick jungle.[134] The medicinal neem, widely used in rural Indian herbal remedies, is a key Indian tree. The luxuriant pipal fig tree, shown on the seals of Mohenjo-daro, shaded Gautama Buddha as he sought enlightenment.

    Many Indian species descend from taxa originating in Gondwana, from which the Indian plate separated more than 105 million years before present.[135] Peninsular India's subsequent movement towards and collision with the Laurasian landmass set off a mass exchange of species. Epochal volcanism and climatic changes 20 million years ago forced a mass extinction.[136] Mammals then entered India from Asia through two zoogeographical passes flanking the rising Himalaya.[133] Thus, while 45.8% of reptiles and 55.8% of amphibians are endemic, only 12.6% of mammals and 4.5% of birds are.[131] Among them are the Nilgiri leaf monkey and Beddome's toad of the Western Ghats. India contains 172 IUCN-designated threatened species, or 2.9% of endangered forms.[137] These include the Asiatic lion, the Bengal tiger, and the Indian white-rumped vulture, which, by ingesting the carrion of diclofenac-laced cattle, nearly went extinct.

    The pervasive and ecologically devastating human encroachment of recent decades has critically endangered Indian wildlife. In response the system of national parks and protected areas, first established in 1935, was substantially expanded. In 1972, India enacted the Wildlife Protection Act[138] and Project Tiger to safeguard crucial wilderness; the Forest Conservation Act was enacted in 1980 and amendments added in 1988.[139] India hosts more than five hundred wildlife sanctuaries and thirteen biosphere reserves,[140] four of which are part of the World Network of Biosphere Reserves; twenty-five wetlands are registered under the Ramsar Convention.[141]

    Politics

    India is the world's most populous democracy.[142] A parliamentary republic with a multi-party system,[143] it has six recognised national parties, including the Indian National Congress and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), and more than 40 regional parties.[144] The Congress is considered centre-left or "liberal" in Indian political culture, and the BJP centre-right or "conservative". For most of the period between 1950—when India first became a republic—and the late 1980s, the Congress held a majority in the parliament. Since then, however, it has increasingly shared the political stage with the BJP,[145] as well as with powerful regional parties which have often forced the creation of multi-party coalitions at the centre.[146]

    In the Republic of India's first three general elections, in 1951, 1957, and 1962, the Jawaharlal Nehru-led Congress won easy victories. On Nehru's death in 1964, Lal Bahadur Shastri briefly became prime minister; he was succeeded, after his own unexpected death in 1966, by Indira Gandhi, who went on to lead the Congress to election victories in 1967 and 1971. Following public discontent with the state of emergency she declared in 1975, the Congress was voted out of power in 1977; the then-new Janata Party, which had opposed the emergency, was voted in. Its government lasted just over three years. Voted back into power in 1980, the Congress saw a change in leadership in 1984, when Indira Gandhi was assassinated; she was succeeded by her son Rajiv Gandhi, who won an easy victory in the general elections later that year. The Congress was voted out again in 1989 when a National Front coalition, led by the newly formed Janata Dal in alliance with the Left Front, won the elections; that government too proved relatively short-lived: it lasted just under two years.[147] Elections were held again in 1991; no party won an absolute majority. But the Congress, as the largest single party, was able to form a minority government led by P. V. Narasimha Rao.[148]

    A two-year period of political turmoil followed the general election of 1996. Several short-lived alliances shared power at the centre. The BJP formed a government briefly in 1996; it was followed by two comparatively long-lasting United Front coalitions, which depended on external support. In 1998, the BJP was able to form a successful coalition, the National Democratic Alliance (NDA). Led by Atal Bihari Vajpayee, the NDA became the first non-Congress, coalition government to complete a five-year term.[149] In the 2004 Indian general elections, again no party won an absolute majority, but the Congress emerged as the largest single party, forming another successful coalition: the United Progressive Alliance (UPA). It had the support of left-leaning parties and MPs who opposed the BJP. The UPA returned to power in the 2009 general election with increased numbers, and it no longer required external support from India's communist parties.[150] That year, Manmohan Singh became the first prime minister since Jawaharlal Nehru in 1957 and 1962 to be re-elected to a consecutive five-year term.[151]

    Government

    India is a federation with a parliamentary system governed under the Constitution of India, which serves as the country's supreme legal document. It is a constitutional republic and representative democracy, in which "majority rule is tempered by minority rights protected by law". Federalism in India defines the power distribution between the federal government and the states. The government abides by constitutional checks and balances. The Constitution of India, which came into effect on 26 January 1950,[152] states in its preamble that India is a sovereign, socialist, secular, democratic republic.[153] India's form of government, traditionally described as "quasi-federal" with a strong centre and weak states,[154] has grown increasingly federal since the late 1990s as a result of political, economic, and social changes.[155][156]

    National symbols[1]

    Flag Tricolour
    Emblem Sarnath Lion Capital
    Anthem Jana Gana Mana
    Song Vande Mataram
    Calendar Saka
    Game Not declared[157]
    Flower Lotus
    Fruit Mango
    Tree Banyan
    Bird Indian Peafowl
    Land animal Royal Bengal Tiger
    Aquatic animal River Dolphin
    River Ganga (Ganges)

    The federal government comprises three branches:

    Executive: The President of India is the head of state[158] and is elected indirectly by a national electoral college[159] for a five-year term.[160] The Prime Minister of India is the head of government and exercises most executive power.[161] Appointed by the president,[162] the prime minister is by convention supported by the party or political alliance holding the majority of seats in the lower house of parliament.[161] The executive branch of the Indian government consists of the president, the vice-president, and the Council of Ministers—the cabinet being its executive committee—headed by the prime minister. Any minister holding a portfolio must be a member of one of the houses of parliament.[158] In the Indian parliamentary system, the executive is subordinate to the legislature; the prime minister and his council directly responsible to the lower house of the parliament.[163]

    Legislative: The legislature of India is the bicameral parliament. It operates under a Westminster-style parliamentary system and comprises the upper house called the Rajya Sabha ("Council of States") and the lower called the Lok Sabha ("House of the People").[164] The Rajya Sabha is a permanent body that has 245 members who serve in staggered six-year terms.[165] Most are elected indirectly by the state and territorial legislatures in numbers proportional to their state's share of the national population.[162] All but two of the Lok Sabha's 545 members are directly elected by popular vote; they represent individual constituencies via five-year terms.[166] The remaining two members are nominated by the president from among the Anglo-Indian community, in case the president decides that they are not adequately represented.[167]

    Judicial: India has a unitary three-tier independent judiciary[168] that comprises the Supreme Court, headed by the Chief Justice of India, 24 High Courts, and a large number of trial courts.[168] The Supreme Court has original jurisdiction over cases involving fundamental rights and over disputes between states and the centre; it has appellate jurisdiction over the High Courts.[169] It has the power both to declare the law and to strike down union or state laws which contravene the constitution.[170] The Supreme Court is also the ultimate interpreter of the constitution.[171]

    Administrative divisions of India

    India is a federation composed of 28 states and 7 union territories.[172] All states, as well as the union territories of Puducherry and the National Capital Territory of Delhi, have elected legislatures and governments, both patterned on the Westminster model. The remaining five union territories are directly ruled by the centre through appointed administrators. In 1956, under the States Reorganisation Act, states were reorganised on a linguistic basis.[173] Since then, their structure has remained largely unchanged. Each state or union territory is further divided into administrative districts. The districts in turn are further divided into tehsils and ultimately into villages.

    States

    1.Andhra Pradesh
    2.Arunachal Pradesh
    3.Assam
    4.Bihar
    5.Chhattisgarh
    6.Goa
    7.Gujarat
    8.Haryana
    9.Himachal Pradesh
    10.Jammu and Kashmir
    11.Jharkhand
    12.Karnataka
    13.Kerala
    14.Madhya Pradesh
    15.Maharashtra
    16.Manipur
    17.Meghalaya
    18.Mizoram
    19.Nagaland
    20.Odisha
    21.Punjab
    22.Rajasthan
    23.Sikkim
    24.Tamil Nadu
    25.Tripura
    26.Uttar Pradesh
    27.Uttarakhand
    28.West Bengal

    Union territories

    A. Andaman and Nicobar Islands
    B. Chandigarh
    C. Dadra and Nagar Haveli
    D. Daman and Diu
    E. Lakshadweep
    F. National Capital Territory of Delhi
    G. Puducherry

    Foreign relations and military

    Since its independence in 1947, India has maintained cordial relations with most nations. In the 1950s, it strongly supported decolonisation in Africa and Asia and played a lead role in the Non-Aligned Movement.[174] In the late 1980s, the Indian military twice intervened abroad at the invitation of neighbouring countries: a peace-keeping operation in Sri Lanka between 1987 and 1990; and an armed intervention to prevent a coup d'état attempt in Maldives. India has tense relations with neighbouring Pakistan; the two nations have gone to war four times: in 1947, 1965, 1971, and 1999. Three of these wars were fought over the disputed territory of Kashmir, while the fourth, the 1971 war, followed from India's support for the independence of Bangladesh.[175] After waging the 1962 Sino-Indian War and the 1965 war with Pakistan, India pursued close military and economic ties with the Soviet Union; by the late 1960s, the Soviet Union was its largest arms supplier.[176]

    Aside from ongoing strategic relations with Russia, India has wide-ranging defence relations with Israel and France. In recent years, it has played key roles in the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation and the World Trade Organisation. The nation has provided 100,000 military and police personnel to serve in 35 UN peacekeeping operations across four continents. It participates in the East Asia Summit, the G8+5, and other multilateral forums.[177] India has close economic ties with South America, Asia, and Africa; it pursues a "Look East" policy that seeks to strengthen partnerships with the ASEAN nations, Japan, and South Korea that revolve around many issues, but especially those involving economic investment and regional security.[178][179]

    The HAL Tejas is a light supersonic fighter developed by the Aeronautical Development Agency and manufactured by Hindustan Aeronautics in Bangalore.[180] China's nuclear test of 1964, as well as its repeated threats to intervene in support of Pakistan in the 1965 war, convinced India to develop nuclear weapons.[181] India conducted its first nuclear weapons test in 1974 and carried out further underground testing in 1998. Despite criticism and military sanctions, India has signed neither the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty nor the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, considering both to be flawed and discriminatory.[182] India maintains a "no first use" nuclear policy and is developing a nuclear triad capability as a part of its "minimum credible deterrence" doctrine.[183][184] It is developing a ballistic missile defence shield and, in collaboration with Russia, a fifth-generation fighter jet.[185] Other indigenous military projects involve the design and implementation of Vikrant-class aircraft carriers and Arihant-class nuclear submarines.[185]

    Since the end of the Cold War, India has increased its economic, strategic, and military cooperation with the United States and the European Union.[186] In 2008, a civilian nuclear agreement was signed between India and the United States. Although India possessed nuclear weapons at the time and was not party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, it received waivers from the International Atomic Energy Agency and the Nuclear Suppliers Group, ending earlier restrictions on India's nuclear technology and commerce. As a consequence, India became the sixth de facto nuclear weapons state.[187] India subsequently signed cooperation agreements involving civilian nuclear energy with Russia,[188] France,[189] the United Kingdom,[190] and Canada.[191]

    The President of India is the supreme commander of the nation's armed forces; with 1.6 million active troops, they compose the world's third-largest military.[192] It comprises the Indian Army, the Indian Navy, and the Indian Air Force; auxiliary organisations include the Strategic Forces Command and three paramilitary groups: the Assam Rifles, the Special Frontier Force, and the Indian Coast Guard.[193] The official Indian defence budget for 2011 was US$36.03 billion, or 1.83% of GDP.[194] For the fiscal year spanning 2012–2013, US$40.44 billion was budgeted.[195] According to a 2008 SIPRI report, India's annual military expenditure in terms of purchasing power stood at US$72.7 billion,[196] In 2011, the annual defence budget increased by 11.6%,[197] although this does not include funds that reach the military through other branches of government.[198] As of 2012, India is the world's largest arms importer; between 2007 and 2011, it accounted for 10% of funds spent on international arms purchases.[199] Much of the military expenditure was focused on defence against Pakistan and countering growing Chinese influence in the Indian Ocean.[197]

    Economy

    According to the World Bank, as of 2011, the Indian economy is nominally worth US$1.848 trillion;[13] it is the tenth-largest economy by market exchange rates, and is, at US$4.457 trillion, the third-largest by purchasing power parity, or PPP.[200] With its average annual GDP growth rate of 5.8% over the past two decades, and reaching 6.1% during 2011–12,[201] India is one of the world's fastest-growing economies.[202] However, the country ranks 140th in the world in nominal GDP per capita and 129th in GDP per capita at PPP.[200] Until 1991, all Indian governments followed protectionist policies that were influenced by socialist economics. Widespread state intervention and regulation largely walled the economy off from the outside world. An acute balance of payments crisis in 1991 forced the nation to liberalise its economy;[203] since then it has slowly moved towards a free-market system[204][205] by emphasising both foreign trade and direct investment inflows.[206] India's recent economic model is largely capitalist.[205] India has been a member of WTO since 1 January 1995.[207]

    The 487.6-million worker Indian labour force is the world's second-largest, as of 2011.[193] The service sector makes up 55.6% of GDP, the industrial sector 26.3% and the agricultural sector 18.1%. Major agricultural products include rice, wheat, oilseed, cotton, jute, tea, sugarcane, and potatoes.[172] Major industries include textiles, telecommunications, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, biotechnology, food processing, steel, transport equipment, cement, mining, petroleum, machinery, and software.[172] In 2006, the share of external trade in India's GDP stood at 24%, up from 6% in 1985.[204] In 2008, India's share of world trade was 1.68%;[208] In 2011, India was the world's tenth-largest importer and the nineteenth-largest exporter.[209] Major exports include petroleum products, textile goods, jewellery, software, engineering goods, chemicals, and leather manufactures.[172] Major imports include crude oil, machinery, gems, fertiliser, and chemicals.[172] Between 2001 and 2011, the contribution of petrochemical and engineering goods to total exports grew from 14% to 42%.[210]

    Averaging an economic growth rate of 7.5% for several years prior to 2007,[204] India has more than doubled its hourly wage rates during the first decade of the 21st century.[211] Some 431 million Indians have left poverty since 1985; India's middle classes are projected to number around 580 million by 2030.[212] Though ranking 51st in global competitiveness, India ranks 17th in financial market sophistication, 24th in the banking sector, 44th in business sophistication, and 39th in innovation, ahead of several advanced economies, as of 2010.[213] With 7 of the world's top 15 information technology outsourcing companies based in India, the country is viewed as the second-most favourable outsourcing destination after the United States, as of 2009.[214] India's consumer market, currently the world's eleventh-largest, is expected to become fifth-largest by 2030.[212]

    India's telecommunication industry, the world's fastest-growing, added 227 million subscribers during the period 2010–11,[215] and after the first quarter of 2013, India surpassed Japan to become the third largest smartphone market in the world after China and the U.S.[216]

    Its automotive industry, the world's second fastest growing, increased domestic sales by 26% during 2009–10,[217] and exports by 36% during 2008–09.[218] Power capacity is 250 gigawatts, of which 8% is renewable. The Pharmaceutical industry in India is among the significant emerging markets for global pharma industry. The Indian pharmaceutical market is expected to reach $48.5 billion by 2020. India's R & D spending constitutes 60% of Biopharmaceutical industry.[219][220] India is among the top 12 Biotech destinations of the world.[221] [222] At the end of 2011, Indian IT Industry employed 2.8 million professionals, generated revenues close to US$100 billion equaling 7.5% of Indian GDP and contributed 26% of India's merchandise exports.[223]

    Despite impressive economic growth during recent decades, India continues to face socio-economic challenges. India contains the largest concentration of people living below the World Bank's international poverty line of US$1.25 per day,[224] the proportion having decreased from 60% in 1981 to 42% in 2005.[225] Half of the children in India are underweight,[226] and 46% of children under the age of three suffer from malnutrition.[224] The Mid-Day Meal Scheme attempts to lower these rates.[227] Since 1991, economic inequality between India's states has consistently grown: the per-capita net state domestic product of the richest states in 2007 was 3.2 times that of the poorest.[228] Corruption in India is perceived to have increased significantly,[229] with one report estimating the illegal capital flows since independence to be US$462 billion.[230] Driven by growth, India's nominal GDP per capita has steadily increased from US$329 in 1991, when economic liberalisation began, to US$1,265 in 2010, and is estimated to increase to US$2,110 by 2016; however, it has always remained lower than those of other Asian developing countries such as Indonesia, Iran, Malaysia, Philippines, Sri Lanka, and Thailand, and is expected to remain so in the near future.[231]

    According to a 2011 PricewaterhouseCoopers report, India's GDP at purchasing power parity could overtake that of the United States by 2045.[232] During the next four decades, Indian GDP is expected to grow at an annualised average of 8%, making it potentially the world's fastest-growing major economy until 2050.[232] The report highlights key growth factors: a young and rapidly growing working-age population; growth in the manufacturing sector because of rising education and engineering skill levels; and sustained growth of the consumer market driven by a rapidly growing middle class.[232] The World Bank cautions that, for India to achieve its economic potential, it must continue to focus on public sector reform, transport infrastructure, agricultural and rural development, removal of labour regulations, education, energy security, and public health and nutrition.[233]

    Citing persistent inflation pressures, weak public finances, limited progress on fiscal consolidation and ineffectiveness of the government, rating agency Fitch revised India's Outlook to Negative from Stable on 18 June 2012.[234] Another credit rating agency S&P had warned previously that a slowing GDP growth and political roadblocks to economic policy-making could put India at the risk of losing its investment grade rating.[235] However, Moody did not revise its outlook on India keeping it stable,[236] but termed the national government as the "single biggest drag" on the business activity.[237]

    Demographics

    Map of India. High population density areas (above 1000 persons per square kilometre) centre on Kolkata along with other parts of the Ganges River Basin, Mumbai, Bangalore, the south-west coast, and the Lakshadweep Islands. Low density areas (below 100) include the western desert, eastern Kashmir, and the eastern frontier.

    With 1,210,193,422 residents reported in the 2011 provisional census,[6] India is the world's second-most populous country. Its population grew at 1.76% per annum during 2001–2011,[6] down from 2.13% per annum in the previous decade (1991–2001).[238] The human sex ratio, according to the 2011 census, is 940 females per 1,000 males.[6] The median age was 24.9 in the 2001 census.[193] The first post-colonial census, conducted in 1951, counted 361.1 million people.[239] Medical advances made in the last 50 years as well as increased agricultural productivity brought about by the "Green Revolution" have caused India's population to grow rapidly.[240] India continues to face several public health-related challenges.[241][242] According to the World Health Organisation, 900,000 Indians die each year from drinking contaminated water or breathing polluted air.[243] There are around 50 physicians per 100,000 Indians.[244] The number of Indians living in urban areas has grown by 31.2% between 1991 and 2001.[245] Yet, in 2001, over 70% lived in rural areas.[246][247] According to the 2001 census, there are 27 million-plus cities in India;[245] among them Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata, Chennai, Bangalore, Hyderabad and Ahmedabad are the most populous metropolitan areas. The literacy rate in 2011 was 74.04%: 65.46% among females and 82.14% among males.[6] Kerala is the most literate state;[248] Bihar the least.[249]

    India is home to two major language families: Indo-Aryan (spoken by about 74% of the population) and Dravidian (24%). Other languages spoken in India come from the Austroasiatic and Tibeto-Burman language families. India has no national language.[250] Hindi, with the largest number of speakers, is the official language of the government.[251][252] English is used extensively in business and administration and has the status of a "subsidiary official language";[253] it is important in education, especially as a medium of higher education. Each state and union territory has one or more official languages, and the constitution recognises in particular 21 "scheduled languages". The Constitution of India recognises 212 scheduled tribal groups which together constitute about 7.5% of the country's population.[254] The 2001 census reported that Hinduism, with over 800 million adherents (80.5% of the population), was the largest religion in India; it is followed by Islam (13.4%), Christianity (2.3%), Sikhism (1.9%), Buddhism (0.8%), Jainism (0.4%), Judaism, Zoroastrianism, and the Bahá'í Faith.[255] India has the world's largest Hindu, Sikh, Jain, Zoroastrian, and Bahá'í populations, and has the third-largest Muslim population and the largest Muslim population for a non-Muslim majority country.[256][257]

    Culture

    Indian cultural history spans more than 4,500 years.[258] During the Vedic period (c. 1700–500 BCE), the foundations of Hindu philosophy, mythology, and literature were laid, and many beliefs and practices which still exist today, such as dhárma, kárma, yóga, and mok?a, were established.[15] India is notable for its religious diversity, with Hinduism, Sikhism, Islam, Christianity, and Jainism among the nation's major religions.[259] The predominant religion, Hinduism, has been shaped by various historical schools of thought, including those of the Upanishads,[260] the Yoga Sutras, the Bhakti movement,[259] and by Buddhist philosophy.[261]

    Art and architecture

    Much of Indian architecture, including the Taj Mahal, other works of Mughal architecture, and South Indian architecture, blends ancient local traditions with imported styles.[262] Vernacular architecture is also highly regional in it flavours. Vastu shastra, literally "science of construction" or "architecture" and ascribed to Mamuni Mayan,[263] explores how the laws of nature affect human dwellings;[264] it employs precise geometry and directional alignments to reflect perceived cosmic constructs.[265] As applied in Hindu temple architecture, it is influenced by the Shilpa Shastras, a series of foundational texts whose basic mythological form is the Vastu-Purusha mandala, a square that embodied the "absolute".[266] The Taj Mahal, built in Agra between 1631 and 1648 by orders of Emperor Shah Jahan in memory of his wife, has been described in the UNESCO World Heritage List as "the jewel of Muslim art in India and one of the universally admired masterpieces of the world's heritage."[267] Indo-Saracenic Revival architecture, developed by the British in the late 19th century, drew on Indo-Islamic architecture.[268]

    Literature

    The earliest literary writings in India, composed between 1400 BCE and 1200 CE, were in the Sanskrit language.[269][270] Prominent works of this Sanskrit literature include epics such as the Mahabharata and the Ramayana, the dramas of Kalidasa such as the Abhijñanasakuntalam (The Recognition of Sakuntala), and poetry such as the Mahakavya.[271][272][273]Kamasutra, the famous book about sexual intercourse also originated in India. Developed between 600 BCE and 300 CE in South India, the Sangam literature, consisting of 2,381 poems, is regarded as a predecessor of Tamil literature.[274][275][276][277] From the 14th to the 18th centuries, India's literary traditions went through a period of drastic change because of the emergence of devotional poets such as Kabir, Tulsidas, and Guru Nanak. This period was characterised by a varied and wide spectrum of thought and expression; as a consequence, medieval Indian literary works differed significantly from classical traditions.[278] In the 19th century, Indian writers took a new interest in social questions and psychological descriptions. In the 20th century, Indian literature was influenced by the works of Bengali poet and novelist Rabindranath Tagore.[279]

    Performing Arts

    Indian music ranges over various traditions and regional styles. Classical music encompasses two genres and their various folk offshoots: the northern Hindustani and southern Carnatic schools.[280] Regionalised popular forms include filmi and folk music; the syncretic tradition of the bauls is a well-known form of the latter. Indian dance also features diverse folk and classical forms. Among the better-known folk dances are the bhangra of the Punjab, the bihu of Assam, the chhau of West Bengal and Jharkhand,Garba and Dandiya of Gujarat, sambalpuri of Odisha, ghoomar of Rajasthan, and the lavani of Maharashtra. Eight dance forms, many with narrative forms and mythological elements, have been accorded classical dance status by India's National Academy of Music, Dance, and Drama. These are: bharatanatyam of the state of Tamil Nadu, kathak of Uttar Pradesh, kathakali and mohiniyattam of Kerala, kuchipudi of Andhra Pradesh, manipuri of Manipur, odissi of Odisha, and the sattriya of Assam.[281] Theatre in India melds music, dance, and improvised or written dialogue.[282] Often based on Hindu mythology, but also borrowing from medieval romances or social and political events, Indian theatre includes the bhavai of Gujarat, the jatra of West Bengal, the nautanki and ramlila of North India, tamasha of Maharashtra, burrakatha of Andhra Pradesh, terukkuttu of Tamil Nadu, and the yakshagana of Karnataka.[283]

    Motion Pictures

    The Indian film industry produces the world's most-watched cinema.[284] Established regional cinematic traditions exist in the Assamese, Bengali, Hindi, Kannada, Malayalam, Gujarati, Marathi, Oriya, Tamil, and Telugu languages.[285] South Indian cinema attracts more than 75% of national film revenue.[286] Television broadcasting began in India in 1959 as a state-run medium of communication, and had slow expansion for more than two decades.[287] The state monopoly on television broadcast ended in 1990s and, since then, satellite channels have increasingly shaped popular culture of Indian society.[288] Today, television is the most penetrative media in India; industry estimates indicate that as of 2012 there are over 554 million TV consumers, 462 million with satellite and/or cable connections, compared to other forms of mass media such as press (350 million), radio (156 million) or internet (37 million).[289]

    Society

    Traditional Indian society is defined by social hierarchy. The Indian caste system embodies much of the social stratification and many of the social restrictions found in the Indian subcontinent. Social classes are defined by thousands of endogamous hereditary groups, often termed as jatis, or "castes".[290] India declared untouchability illegal in 1947 and has since enacted other anti-discriminatory laws and social welfare initiatives, albeit numerous reports suggest that many Dalits ("ex–Untouchables") and other low castes in rural areas continue to live in segregation and face persecution and discrimination.[291][292][293] At the workplace in urban India and in international or leading Indian companies, the caste system has pretty much lost its importance.[294][295] Family values are important in the Indian tradition, and multi-generational patriarchal joint families have been the norm in India, though nuclear families are becoming common in urban areas.[296] An overwhelming majority of Indians, with their consent, have their marriages arranged by their parents or other family members.[297] Marriage is thought to be for life,[297] and the divorce rate is extremely low.[298] Child marriages are common, especially in rural areas; many women in India wed before reaching 18, which is their legal marriageable age.[299] Many Indian festivals are religious in origin; among them are Diwali, Ganesh Chaturthi, Thai Pongal, Navratri, Makar Sankranti or Uttarayan, Holi, Durga Puja, Eid ul-Fitr, Bakr-Id, Christmas, and Vaisakhi. India has three national holidays which are observed in all states and union territories: Republic Day, Independence Day, and Gandhi Jayanti. Other sets of holidays, varying between nine and twelve, are officially observed in individual states.











    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7368
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The United States of the Solar System, A.D. 2133 (Book Three)

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Fri May 05, 2017 2:32 pm

    I've been wasting a lot of time thinking about Theoretical Politics and Religion in a Twenty-Second Century Context, but what if the Solar System were One Big Business, with Church and State incorporated into this One Big Business, with Two Co-CEO's doubling as King and Queen of the Solar System??!! How's THAT for the basis of some wild Science-Fiction??!! What if the Bottom-Line is the Bottom-Line throughout the Universe??!! The Church teaches "The Love of Money is the Root of All Evil" but they sure want your Money!! The State is supposed to work for US, but they sure want your Money!! The Nazi, Mason, and Jesuit Billionaires Shall Inherit the Earth?? What if the Entire-Universe is One HUGE Star-War??!! Now I'm going to calm-down and listen to another exciting-episode of The Sherry Shriner Show!! Sherry claims that Russia and China own and run the United States!! Did I get that right?? The Orgone-Warriors Shall Inherit the Earth?? What the Puck??

    magamud wrote:



    Thank-you for all of the cool videos, magamud. I watch all of them, but I often don't comment on them. You know, deep thinking is SO overrated -- especially concerning life, the universe, and everything. Often, trying to make things better seems to make things worse. Giving people what they want -- and telling them what they wish to hear -- seems to work MUCH better. We seem to WISH to be lied-to and exploited. We seem to NOT want the truth -- even though we often say that we do. "Tell Us the Truth" seems to mean "Tell Us What We Wish to Hear". Perhaps Purgatory Incorporated is the way things MUST be -- especially with high-technology, low-responsibility, and low-spirituality. I just think it might be sickening to be the CEO with a Conscience -- of Purgatory Incorporated. Perhaps a very-real "Anna" is the CEO -- and why it might be necessary to pass that "V Empathy Test" with flying-colors, to be able to successfully participate in Solar System Governance. I wish I were kidding. I keep thinking that people are good when they think they can't get away with being bad. I continue to think that we aren't as good as we often think we are. Is the heart of mankind desperately wicked?? Is it the soul, or the physicality, which is most problematic?? What if our souls are not advanced enough to responsibly incarnate our present physicality?? I think that when I REALLY understand my own thread -- I'll probably REALLY lose-it -- which is probably a major reason why I'm privatizing my research. If no one is following you when you go in the ditch -- no harm, no foul. It's easier and neater that way. Anyway, India continued. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India

    Clothing

    Cotton was domesticated in India by 4000 B.C.E. Traditional Indian dress varies in colour and style across regions and depends on various factors, including climate and faith. Popular styles of dress include draped garments such as the sari for women and the dhoti or lungi for men. Stitched clothes, such as the shalwar kameez for women and kurta–pyjama combinations or European-style trousers and shirts for men, are also popular.[300] Use of delicate jewellery, modelled on real flowers worn in ancient India, is part of a tradition dating back some 5,000 years; gemstones are also worn in India as talismans.[301]

    Cuisine

    Indian cuisine features an unsurpassed reliance on herbs and spices, with dishes often calling for the nuanced usage of a dozen or more condiments;[302] it is also known for its tandoori preparations. The tandoor, a clay oven used in India for almost 5,000 years, grills meats to an "uncommon succulence" and produces the puffy flatbread known as naan.[303] The staple foods are wheat (predominantly in the north),[304] rice (especially in the south and the east), and lentils.[305] Many spices that have worldwide appeal are native to the Indian subcontinent,[306] while chili pepper, native to the Americas and introduced by the Portuguese, is widely used by Indians.[307] Ayurveda, a system of traditional medicine, used six rasas and three gu?as to help describe comestibles.[308] Over time, as Vedic animal sacrifices were supplanted by the notion of sacred-cow inviolability, vegetarianism became associated with high religious status and grew increasingly popular,[309] a trend aided by the rise of Buddhist, Jain, and bhakti Hindu norms.[310] India has the world's highest concentration of vegetarians: a 2006 survey found that 31% of Indians were lacto vegetarian, and another 9% were ovo-lacto vegetarianism.[310] Common traditional eating customs include meals taken on or near the floor, caste and gender-segregated dining,[311][312] and a lack of cutlery in favour of the right hand or a piece of roti.

    Science and technology

    India has only 140 researchers per 1,000,000 population, compared to 4,651 in the United States.[313] India invested US$3.7 billion in science and technology in 2002–2003.[314] The ancient institutions of Taxila and Nalanda are sometimes considered the world's first universities.[315][316]

    In mathematics, the positional Hindu–Arabic numeral system was developed and the use of zero as a number was introduced. Brahmagupta discovered the rules of arithmetic governing negative numbers and zero.[317] In physics, theories about atoms date as early as the 5th century B.C.E.[318] Satyendra Nath Bose, after whom the class of particles Bosons are named after, provided the foundation for Bose–Einstein statistics and the Bose–Einstein condensate. Jagadish Chandra Bose worked on wireless communication and was named one of the fathers of radio science by the IEEE.[319] In biological sciences, variolation, a form of inoculation to produce immunity to disease, probably originated in India and reached Europe by the 18th century.[320] Vaccination, a safer form of inoculation, was used in crude form in India before the more advanced vaccination of Edward Jenner.[321] A team led by Yellapragada Subbarao synthesised methotrexate,[322] one of the earliest and most commonly used chemotherapy drug. Dilip Mahalanabis's Oral rehydration therapy (ORT) methods to treat diarrhea, the leading cause of infant mortality in developing countries before ORT, have been called, "the most important medical advance [of the 20th] century" by the Lancet.[323]

    Sport

    In India, several traditional indigenous sports remain fairly popular, among them kabaddi, kho kho, pehlwani and gilli-danda. Some of the earliest forms of Asian martial arts, such as kalarippayattu, musti yuddha, silambam, and marma adi, originated in India. The Rajiv Gandhi Khel Ratna and the Arjuna Award are the highest forms of government recognition for athletic achievement; the Dronacharya Award is awarded for excellence in coaching. Chess, commonly held to have originated in India as chatura?ga, is regaining widespread popularity with the rise in the number of Indian grandmasters.[324][325] Pachisi, from which parcheesi derives, was played on a giant marble court by Akbar.[326] The improved results garnered by the Indian Davis Cup team and other Indian tennis players in the early 2010s have made tennis increasingly popular in the country.[327] India has a comparatively strong presence in shooting sports, and has won several medals at the Olympics, the World Shooting Championships, and the Commonwealth Games.[328][329] Other sports in which Indians have succeeded internationally include badminton,[330] boxing,[331] and wrestling.[332] Football is popular in West Bengal, Goa, Tamil Nadu, Kerala, and the north-eastern states.[333]

    Field hockey in India is administered by Hockey India. The Indian national hockey team won the 1975 Hockey World Cup and have, as of 2012, taken eight gold, one silver, and two bronze Olympic medals, making it the sport's most successful team. India has also played a major role in popularising Cricket. Thus, cricket is, by far, the most popular sport of India. The Indian national cricket team won the 1983 and 2011 Cricket World Cup events, the 2007 ICC World Twenty20, shared the 2002 ICC Champions Trophy with Sri Lanka, and won 2013 ICC Champions Trophy. Cricket in India is administered by the Board of Control for Cricket in India, or BCCI; the Ranji Trophy, the Duleep Trophy, the Deodhar Trophy, the Irani Trophy, and the NKP Salve Challenger Trophy are domestic competitions. The BCCI conducts a Twenty20 competition known as the Indian Premier League. India has hosted or co-hosted several international sporting events: the 1951 and 1982 Asian Games; the 1987, 1996, and 2011 Cricket World Cup tournaments; the 2003 Afro-Asian Games; the 2006 ICC Champions Trophy; the 2010 Hockey World Cup; and the 2010 Commonwealth Games. Major international sporting events held annually in India include the Chennai Open, the Mumbai Marathon, the Delhi Half Marathon, and the Indian Masters. The first Indian Grand Prix featured in late 2011.[334] India has traditionally been the dominant country at the South Asian Games. An example of this dominance is the basketball competition where Team India won three out of four tournaments to date.[335]

    Notes

    a.^ "[...] Jana Gana Mana is the National Anthem of India, subject to such alterations in the words as the Government may authorise as occasion arises; and the song Vande Mataram, which has played a historic part in the struggle for Indian freedom, shall be honoured equally with Jana Gana Mana and shall have equal status with it." (Constituent Assembly of India 1950).
    b.^ "The country's exact size is subject to debate because some borders are disputed. The Indian government lists the total area as 3,287,260 km2 (1,269,220 sq mi) and the total land area as 3,060,500 km2 (1,181,700 sq mi); the United Nations lists the total area as 3,287,263 km2 (1,269,219 sq mi) and total land area as 2,973,190 km2 (1,147,960 sq mi)." (Library of Congress 2004).
    c.^ See also: Official names of India
    d.^ The Government of India regards Afghanistan as a bordering country, as it considers all of Kashmir to be part of India. However, this is disputed, and the region bordering Afghanistan is administered by Pakistan. Source: "Ministry of Home Affairs (Department of Border Management)" (DOC). Retrieved 1 September 2008..
    e.^ The northernmost point under Indian control is the disputed Siachen Glacier in Jammu and Kashmir; however, the Government of India regards the entire region of the former princely state of Jammu and Kashmir, including the Northern Areas administered by Pakistan, to be its territory. It therefore assigns the longitude 37° 6' to its northernmost point.

    Citations

    1.^ a b c d e National Informatics Centre 2005.
    2.^ Wolpert 2003, p. 1.
    3.^ a b "National Symbols | National Portal of India". India.gov.in. Retrieved 2013-07-06.
    4.^ "Eighth Schedule". Retrieved 1 July 2013.
    5.^ "Chief Justice of India & Sitting Hon'ble Judges". Supreme Court of India.
    6.^ a b c d e Ministry of Home Affairs 2011.
    7.^ a b c "Report for Selected Countries and Subjects". Imf.org. 14 September 2006. Retrieved 2013-03-08.
    8.^ "GDP (current US$) Data in 2012". IMF. Retrieved 4 March 2013.
    9.^ "Gini Index". World Bank. Retrieved 2 March 2011.
    10.^ United Nations 2012.
    11.^ http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/HDR2013_EN_Statistics.pdf
    12.^ Stein 1998, pp. 16–17.
    13.^ a b "GDP (current US$) Data in 2011". World Bank database. Retrieved 5 September 2012.
    14.^ Oxford English Dictionary.
    15.^ a b Kuiper 2010, p. 86.
    16.^ Ministry of Law and Justice 2008.
    17.^ Kaye 1997, pp. 639–640.
    18.^ Encyclopædia Britannica.
    19.^ Singh 2009, p. 64.
    20.^ Singh 2009, pp. 89–93.
    21.^ Possehl 2003, pp. 24–25.
    22.^ Kulke & Rothermund 2004, pp. 21–23.
    23.^ a b Singh 2009, p. 181.
    24.^ Possehl 2003, p. 2.
    25.^ a b c Singh 2009, p. 255.
    26.^ a b Singh 2009, pp. 186–187.
    27.^ Witzel 2003, pp. 68–69.
    28.^ Kulke & Rothermund 2004, p. 31.
    29.^ Stein 2010, p. 47.
    30.^ Kulke & Rothermund 2004, pp. 41–43.
    31.^ a b Singh 2009, pp. 250–251.
    32.^ a b c d Singh 2009, p. 319.
    33.^ Kulke & Rothermund 2004, pp. 53–54.
    34.^ a b Kulke & Rothermund 2004, pp. 54–56.
    35.^ Thapar 2003, p. 166.
    36.^ Stein 1998, p. 21.
    37.^ Stein 1998, pp. 67–68.
    38.^ Singh 2009, pp. 312–313.
    39.^ Singh 2009, p. 300.
    40.^ Stein 1998, pp. 78–79.
    41.^ Kulke & Rothermund 2004, p. 70.
    42.^ Singh 2009, p. 367.
    43.^ Kulke & Rothermund 2004, p. 63.
    44.^ Stein 1998, pp. 89–90.
    45.^ Singh 2009, pp. 408–415.
    46.^ Stein 1998, pp. 92–95.
    47.^ Kulke & Rothermund 2004, pp. 89–91.
    48.^ a b c Singh 2009, p. 545.
    49.^ Stein 1998, pp. 98–99.
    50.^ a b Stein 1998, p. 132.
    51.^ a b c Stein 1998, pp. 119–120.
    52.^ a b Stein 1998, pp. 121–122.
    53.^ a b Stein 1998, p. 123.
    54.^ a b Stein 1998, p. 124.
    55.^ a b Stein 1998, pp. 127–128.
    56.^ Ludden 2002, p. 68.
    57.^ Asher & Talbot 2008, p. 47.
    58.^ Metcalf & Metcalf 2006, p. 6.
    59.^ Ludden 2002, p. 67.
    60.^ Asher & Talbot 2008, pp. 50–51.
    61.^ a b Asher & Talbot 2008, p. 53.
    62.^ Metcalf & Metcalf 2006, p. 12.
    63.^ Robb 2001, p. 80.
    64.^ Stein 1998, p. 164.
    65.^ Asher & Talbot 2008, p. 115.
    66.^ Robb 2001, pp. 90–91.
    67.^ a b Metcalf & Metcalf 2006, p. 17.
    68.^ a b c Asher & Talbot 2008, p. 152.
    69.^ Asher & Talbot 2008, p. 158.
    70.^ Stein 1998, p. 169.
    71.^ Asher & Talbot 2008, p. 186.
    72.^ a b Metcalf & Metcalf 2006, pp. 23–24.
    73.^ Asher & Talbot 2008, p. 256.
    74.^ a b c Asher & Talbot 2008, p. 286.
    75.^ Metcalf & Metcalf 2006, pp. 44–49.
    76.^ Robb 2001, pp. 98–100.
    77.^ Ludden 2002, pp. 128–132.
    78.^ Metcalf & Metcalf 2006, pp. 51–55.
    79.^ Metcalf & Metcalf 2006, pp. 68–71.
    80.^ Asher & Talbot 2008, p. 289.
    81.^ Robb 2001, pp. 151–152.
    82.^ Metcalf & Metcalf 2006, pp. 94–99.
    83.^ Brown 1994, p. 83.
    84.^ Peers 2006, p. 50.
    85.^ Metcalf & Metcalf 2006, pp. 100–103.
    86.^ Brown 1994, pp. 85–86.
    87.^ Stein 1998, p. 239.
    88.^ Metcalf & Metcalf 2006, pp. 103–108.
    89.^ Robb 2001, p. 183.
    90.^ Sarkar 1983, pp. 1–4.
    91.^ Copland 2001, pp. ix–x.
    92.^ Metcalf & Metcalf 2006, p. 123.
    93.^ Stein 1998, p. 260.
    94.^ Bose & Jalal 2011, p. 117.
    95.^ Stein 1998, p. 258.
    96.^ a b Metcalf & Metcalf 2006, p. 126.
    97.^ a b Metcalf & Metcalf 2006, p. 97.
    98.^ Metcalf & Metcalf 2006, p. 163.
    99.^ Metcalf & Metcalf 2006, p. 167.
    100.^ Metcalf & Metcalf 2006, pp. 195–197.
    101.^ Metcalf & Metcalf 2006, p. 203.
    102.^ Metcalf & Metcalf 2006, p. 231.
    103.^ a b c d Metcalf & Metcalf 2006, pp. 265–266.
    104.^ United States Department of Agriculture.
    105.^ Metcalf & Metcalf 2006, pp. 266–270.
    106.^ Metcalf & Metcalf 2006, p. 253.
    107.^ Metcalf & Metcalf 2006, p. 274.
    108.^ a b Metcalf & Metcalf 2006, pp. 247–248.
    109.^ Metcalf & Metcalf 2006, pp. 293–295.
    110.^ Metcalf & Metcalf 2006, p. 304.
    111.^ a b c Ali & Aitchison 2005.
    112.^ Dikshit & Schwartzberg, p. 7.
    113.^ Prakash et al. 2000.
    114.^ Dikshit & Schwartzberg, p. 11.
    115.^ Dikshit & Schwartzberg, p. 8.
    116.^ Dikshit & Schwartzberg, pp. 9–10.
    117.^ Ministry of Information and Broadcasting 2007, p. 1.
    118.^ a b Kumar et al. 2006.
    119.^ Dikshit & Schwartzberg, p. 15.
    120.^ Duff 1993, p. 353.
    121.^ Dikshit & Schwartzberg, p. 16.
    122.^ Dikshit & Schwartzberg, p. 17.
    123.^ Dikshit & Schwartzberg, p. 12.
    124.^ Dikshit & Schwartzberg, p. 13.
    125.^ a b Chang 1967, pp. 391–394.
    126.^ Posey 1994, p. 118.
    127.^ Wolpert 2003, p. 4.
    128.^ Heitzman & Worden 1996, p. 97.
    129.^ Conservation International 2007.
    130.^ Zoological Survey of India 2012, p. 1.
    131.^ a b Puri.
    132.^ Basak 1983, p. 24.
    133.^ a b Tritsch 2001.
    134.^ Fisher 1995, p. 434.
    135.^ Crame & Owen 2002, p. 142.
    136.^ Karanth 2006.
    137.^ Mace 1994, p. 4.
    138.^ Ministry of Environments and Forests 1972.
    139.^ Department of Environment and Forests 1988.
    140.^ Ministry of Environment and Forests.
    141.^ Secretariat of the Convention on Wetlands.
    142.^ United Nations Population Division.
    143.^ Burnell & Calvert 1999, p. 125.
    144.^ Election Commission of India.
    145.^ Sarkar 2007, p. 84.
    146.^ Chander 2004, p. 117.
    147.^ Bhambhri 1992, pp. 118, 143.
    148.^ The Hindu 2008.
    149.^ Dunleavy, Diwakar & Dunleavy 2007.
    150.^ Kulke & Rothermund 2004, p. 384.
    151.^ Business Standard 2009.
    152.^ Pylee & 2003 a, p. 4.
    153.^ Dutt 1998, p. 421.
    154.^ Wheare 1980, p. 28.
    155.^ Echeverri-Gent 2002, pp. 19–20.
    156.^ Sinha 2004, p. 25.
    157.^ "In RTI reply, Centre says India has no national game". Retrieved 4 August 2012.
    158.^ a b Sharma 2007, p. 31.
    159.^ Sharma 2007, p. 138.
    160.^ Gledhill 1970, p. 112.
    161.^ a b Sharma 1950.
    162.^ a b Sharma 2007, p. 162.
    163.^ Mathew 2003, p. 524.
    164.^ Gledhill 1970, p. 127.
    165.^ Sharma 2007, p. 161.
    166.^ Sharma 2007, p. 143.
    167.^ Sharma 2007, p. 360.
    168.^ a b Neuborne 2003, p. 478.
    169.^ Sharma 2007, pp. 238, 255.
    170.^ Sripati 1998, pp. 423–424.
    171.^ Pylee & 2003 b, p. 314.
    172.^ a b c d e Library of Congress 2004.
    173.^ Sharma 2007, p. 49.
    174.^ Rothermund 2000, pp. 48, 227.
    175.^ Gilbert 2002, pp. 486–487.
    176.^ Sharma 1999, p. 56.
    177.^ Alford 2008.
    178.^ Ghosh 2009, pp. 282–289.
    179.^ Sisodia & Naidu 2005, pp. 1–8.
    180.^ Russian International News Agency 2011.
    181.^ Perkovich 2001, pp. 60–86, 106–125.
    182.^ Kumar 2010.
    183.^ Nair 2007.
    184.^ Pandit 2009.
    185.^ a b The Hindu 2011.
    186.^ Europa 2008.
    187.^ The Times of India 2008.
    188.^ British Broadcasting Corporation 2009.
    189.^ Rediff 2008 a.
    190.^ Reuters 2010.
    191.^ Curry 2010.
    192.^ Ripsman & Paul 2010, p. 130.
    193.^ a b c Central Intelligence Agency.
    194.^ Behera 2011.
    195.^ Behera 2012.
    196.^ Stockholm International Peace Research Institute 2008, p. 178.
    197.^ a b Miglani 2011.
    198.^ Shukla 2011.
    199.^ Stockholm International Peace Research Initiative 2012.
    200.^ a b International Monetary Fund.
    201.^ International Monetary Fund 2011, p. 2.
    202.^ Nayak, Goldar & Agrawal 2010, p. xxv.
    203.^ Wolpert 2003, p. xiv.
    204.^ a b c Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 2007.
    205.^ a b Gargan 1992.
    206.^ Alamgir 2008, pp. 23, 97.
    207.^ WTO 1995.
    208.^ The Times of India 2009.
    209.^ World Trade Organisation 2010.
    210.^ Economist 2011.
    211.^ Bonner 2010.
    212.^ a b Farrell & Beinhocker 2007.
    213.^ Schwab 2010.
    214.^ Sheth 2009.
    215.^ Telecom Regulatory Authority 2011.
    216.^ Natasha Lomas (26 June 2013). "India Passes Japan To Become Third Largest Global Smartphone Market, After China & U.S.". TechCrunch. AOL Inc. Retrieved 27 June 2013.
    217.^ Business Line 2010.
    218.^ Express India 2009.
    219.^ Vishal Dutta, ET Bureau 10 Jul 2012, 03.14PM IST (10 July 2012). "Indian biotech industry at critical juncture, global biotech stabilises: Report". Economic Times. Retrieved 31 October 2012.
    220.^ "Indian pharmaceutical industry—growth story to continue". Express Pharma. 2012-01-15. Retrieved 31 October 2012.
    221.^ Biotechnology and Pharmaceutical Sector in India: sector breifing by the UK Trade and Investment 2011, utki.gov.uk
    222.^ Yep 2011.
    223.^ Nasscom 2011–2012.
    224.^ a b World Bank 2006.
    225.^ World Bank a.
    226.^ World Bank b.
    227.^ Drèze & Goyal 2008, p. 46.
    228.^ Pal & Ghosh 2007.
    229.^ Transparency International 2010.
    230.^ British Broadcasting Corporation 2010 c.
    231.^ International Monetary Fund 2011.
    232.^ a b c PricewaterhouseCoopers 2011.
    233.^ World Bank 2010.
    234.^ "Fitch Revises India's Outlook to Negative; Affirms at 'BBB-'". 18 June 2012. Retrieved 19 June 2012.
    235.^ "S&P: India risks losing investment grade rating".
    236.^ "Moody's reaffirms India's stable outlook". 25 April 2012.
    237.^ "Moody's: Indian government single biggest factor weighing on outlook". 26 April 2012.
    238.^ Ministry of Home Affairs 2010–2011 b.
    239.^ "Census Population" (PDF). Census of India. Ministry of Finance India.
    240.^ Rorabacher 2010, pp. 35–39.
    241.^ World Health Organisation 2006.
    242.^ Boston Analytics 2009.
    243.^ Robinson 2008.
    244.^ Dev & Rao 2009, p. 329.
    245.^ a b Garg 2005.
    246.^ Dyson & Visaria 2005, pp. 115–129.
    247.^ Ratna 2007, pp. 271–272.
    248.^ Skolnik 2008, p. 36.
    249.^ Singh 2004, p. 106.
    250.^ Dharwadker 2010, pp. 168–194, 186.
    251.^ Ottenheimer 2008, p. 303.
    252.^ Mallikarjun 2004.
    253.^ Ministry of Home Affairs 1960.
    254.^ Bonner 1990, p. 81.
    255.^ Ministry of Home Affairs 2010–2011.
    256.^ Global Muslim population estimated at 1.57 billion. The Hindu (2009-10-08)
    257.^ India Chapter Summary 2012
    258.^ Kuiper 2010, p. 15.
    259.^ a b Heehs 2002, pp. 2–5.
    260.^ Deutsch 1969, pp. 3, 78.
    261.^ Nakamura 1999.
    262.^ Kuiper 2010, pp. 296–329.
    263.^ Silverman 2007, p. 20.
    264.^ Kumar 2000, p. 5.
    265.^ Roberts 2004, p. 73.
    266.^ Lang & Moleski 2010, pp. 151–152.
    267.^ United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organisation.
    268.^ Chopra 2011, p. 46.
    269.^ Hoiberg & Ramchandani 2000.
    270.^ Sarma 2009.
    271.^ Johnson 2008.
    272.^ MacDonell 2004, pp. 1–40.
    273.^ Kalidasa & Johnson 2001.
    274.^ Zvelebil 1997, p. 12.
    275.^ Hart 1975.
    276.^ Encyclopædia Britannica 2008.
    277.^ Ramanujan 1985, pp. ix–x.
    278.^ Das 2005.
    279.^ Datta 2006.
    280.^ Massey & Massey 1998.
    281.^ Encyclopædia Britannica b.
    282.^ Lal 2004, pp. 23, 30, 235.
    283.^ Karanth 2002, p. 26.
    284.^ Dissanayake & Gokulsing 2004.
    285.^ Rajadhyaksha & Willemen 1999, p. 652.
    286.^ The Economic Times.
    287.^ Kaminsky & Long 2011, pp. 684–692.
    288.^ Mehta 2008, pp. 1–10.
    289.^ Media Research Users Council 2012.
    290.^ Schwartzberg 2011.
    291.^ World Bank 2011.
    292.^ Rawat 2011, p. 3.
    293.^ Wolpert 2003, p. 126.
    294.^ Messner 2009, p. 51-53.
    295.^ Messner 2012, p. 27-28.
    296.^ Makar 2007.
    297.^ a b Medora 2003.
    298.^ Jones & Ramdas 2005, p. 111.
    299.^ Cullen-Dupont 2009, p. 96.
    300.^ Tarlo 1996, pp. xii, xii, 11, 15, 28, 46.
    301.^ Eraly 2008, p. 160.
    302.^ Bladholm 2000, p. 64–65.
    303.^ Raichlen 2011.
    304.^ Kiple & Ornelas 2000, pp. 1140–1151.
    305.^ Yadav, McNeil & Stevenson 2007.
    306.^ Raghavan 2006, p. 3.
    307.^ Sen 2006, p. 132.
    308.^ Wengell & Gabriel 2008, p. 158.
    309.^ Henderson 2002, p. 102.
    310.^ a b Puskar-Pasewicz 2010, p. 39.
    311.^ Schoenhals 2003, p. 119.
    312.^ Seymour 1999, p. 81.
    313.^ "India lagging behind in S&Tt: Govt".
    314.^ "India lagging in science and technology, says official". scidev.net. 29 August 2006.
    315.^ "India's ancient university returns to life". bbcnews.com. Retrieved June 17, 2013.
    316.^ "Really old school". nytimes.com. Retrieved June 17, 2013.
    317.^ "Brahmagupta". University of St Andrews. Retrieved June 10, 2013.
    318.^ "Early atomism". Indian Academy of Sciences. Retrieved June 10, 2013.
    319.^ Sen, A. K. (1997). "Sir J.C. Bose and radio science". Microwave Symposium Digest 2 (8–13): 557–560. doi:10.1109/MWSYM.1997.602854. ISBN 0-7803-3814-6.
    320.^ Lund, Ole; Nielsen, Morten Strunge and Lundegaard, Claus (2005). Immunological Bioinformatics. MIT Press. ISBN 0-262-12280-4
    321.^ "Economic and Social Developments under the Mughals". Columbia University. Retrieved May 27, 2013.
    322.^ "Anti-folics against Leukaemia come from Folics against Anaemia". Retrieved May 27, 2013.
    323.^ "Water with Sugar and Salt". The Lancet 312 (8084): 300–1. August 1978. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(78)91698-7.
    324.^ Wolpert 2003, p. 2.
    325.^ Rediff 2008 b.
    326.^ Binmore 2007, p. 98.
    327.^ The Wall Street Journal 2009.
    328.^ British Broadcasting Corporation 2010 b.
    329.^ The Times of India 2010.
    330.^ British Broadcasting Corporation 2010 a.
    331.^ Mint 2010.
    332.^ Xavier 2010.
    333.^ Majumdar & Bandyopadhyay 2006, pp. 1–5.
    334.^ Dehejia 2011.
    335.^ "Basketball team named for 11th South Asian Games". Nation.com.pk. 2010-01-02. Retrieved 2013-03-08.

    References

    Overview

    "India", The World Factbook (Central Intelligence Agency), retrieved 4 October 2011
    "Country Profile: India" (PDF), Library of Congress Country Studies (5th ed.) (Library of Congress Federal Research Division), December 2004, retrieved 30 September 2011
    Heitzman, J.; Worden, R. L. (August 1996), India: A Country Study, Area Handbook Series, Washington, D.C.: Library of Congress, ISBN 978-0-8444-0833-0
    India, International Monetary Fund, retrieved 14 October 2011
    "Provisional Population Totals – Census 2011", Office of the Registrar General and Census Commissioner (Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India), 2011, retrieved 29 March 2011
    "Constituent Assembly of India—Volume XII", Constituent Assembly of India: Debates (National Informatics Centre, Government of India), 24 January 1950, retrieved 17 July 2011
    There's No National Language in India: Gujarat High Court, The Times Of India, 6 January 2007, retrieved 17 July 2011
    "Table 1: Human Development Index and its Components" (PDF), Human Development Report 2011, United Nations, 2011

    Etymology

    Hindustan, Encyclopædia Britannica, retrieved 17 July 2011
    Kaye, A. S. (1 September 1997), Phonologies of Asia and Africa, Eisenbrauns, ISBN 978-1-57506-019-4
    Kuiper, K., ed. (July 2010), Culture of India, Rosen Publishing Group, ISBN 978-1-61530-203-1
    Constitution of India (PDF), Ministry of Law and Justice, 29 July 2008, retrieved 3 March 2012, "Article 1(1): "India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States.""
    "India", Oxford English Dictionary, Oxford University Press, retrieved 17 July 2011

    History

    Asher, C. B.; Talbot, C (1 January 2008), India Before Europe (1st ed.), Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-0-521-51750-8
    Bose, S.; Jalal, A. (11 March 2011), Modern South Asia: History, Culture, Political Economy (3rd ed.), Routledge, ISBN 978-0-415-77942-5
    Brown, J. M. (26 May 1994), Modern India: The Origins of an Asian Democracy, The Short Oxford History of the Modern World (2nd ed.), Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0-19-873113-9
    Copland, I. (8 October 2001), India 1885–1947: The Unmaking of an Empire (1st ed.), Longman, ISBN 978-0-582-38173-5
    Kulke, H.; Rothermund, D. (1 August 2004), A History of India, 4th, Routledge, ISBN 978-0-415-32920-0
    Ludden, D. (13 June 2002), India and South Asia: A Short History, One World, ISBN 978-1-85168-237-9
    Metcalf, B.; Metcalf, T. R. (9 October 2006), A Concise History of Modern India (2nd ed.), Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-0-521-68225-1
    Peers, D. M. (3 August 2006), India under Colonial Rule 1700–1885 (1st ed.), Pearson Longman, ISBN 978-0-582-31738-3
    Possehl, G. (January 2003), The Indus Civilization: A Contemporary Perspective, Rowman Altamira, ISBN 978-0-7591-0172-2
    Robb, P. (2001), A History of India, London: Palgrave, ISBN 978-0-333-69129-8
    Sarkar, S. (1983), Modern India: 1885–1947, Delhi: Macmillan India, ISBN 978-0-333-90425-1
    Singh, U. (2009), A History of Ancient and Medieval India: From the Stone Age to the 12th Century, Delhi: Longman, ISBN 978-81-317-1677-9
    Sripati, V. (1998), "Toward Fifty Years of Constitutionalism and Fundamental Rights in India: Looking Back to See Ahead (1950–2000)", American University International Law Review 14 (2): 413–496
    Stein, B. (16 June 1998), A History of India (1st ed.), Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, ISBN 978-0-631-20546-3
    Stein, B. (27 April 2010), Arnold, D., ed., A History of India (2nd ed.), Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, ISBN 978-1-4051-9509-6
    "Briefing Rooms: India", Economic Research Service (United States Department of Agriculture), 17 December 2009
    Thapar, Romila (2003), Penguin history of early India: from the origins to A.D.1300, Penguin Books, retrieved 13 February 2012
    Witzel, Michael (2003), "Vedas and Upani?ads", in Gavin D. Flood, The Blackwell companion to Hinduism, John Wiley & Sons, ISBN 978-0-631-21535-6, retrieved 15 March 2012
    Wolpert, S. (25 December 2003), A New History of India (7th ed.), Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0-19-516678-1

    Geography

    Ali, J. R.; Aitchison, J. C. (2005), "Greater India", Earth-Science Reviews 72 (3–4): 170–173, doi:10.1016/j.earscirev.2005.07.005
    Chang, J. H. (1967), "The Indian Summer Monsoon", Geographical Review 57 (3): 373–396, doi:10.2307/212640
    Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980 with Amendments Made in 1988 (PDF), Department of Environment and Forests, Government of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, 1988, retrieved 25 July 2011
    Dikshit, K. R.; Schwartzberg, Joseph E., Land, "India", Encyclopædia Britannica: 1–29
    Duff, D. (29 October 1993), Holmes Principles of Physical Geology (4th ed.), Routledge, ISBN 978-0-7487-4381-0
    Kumar, V. S.; Pathak, K. C.; Pednekar, P.; Raju, N. S. N. (2006), "Coastal processes along the Indian coastline" (PDF), Current Science 91 (4): 530–536
    India Yearbook 2007, New Delhi: Publications Division, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India, 2007, ISBN 978-81-230-1423-4
    Posey, C. A. (1 November 1994), The Living Earth Book of Wind and Weather, Reader's Digest, ISBN 978-0-89577-625-9
    Prakash, B.; Kumar, S.; Rao, M. S.; Giri, S. C. (2000), "Holocene Tectonic Movements and Stress Field in the Western Gangetic Plains" (PDF), Current Science 79 (4): 438–449

    Biodiversity

    Ali, S.; Ripley, S. D.; Dick, J. H. (15 August 1996), A Pictorial Guide to the Birds of the Indian Subcontinent (2nd ed.), Mumbai: Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0-19-563732-8
    Animal Discoveries 2011: New Species and New Records (PDF), Zoological Survey of India, 2012, retrieved 20 July 2012
    Basak, R. K. (1983), Botanical Survey of India: Account of Its Establishment, Development, and Activities, retrieved 20 July 2011
    "Hotspots by Region", Biodiversity Hotspots (Conservation International), 2007, retrieved 28 February 2011
    Crame, J. A.; Owen, A. W. (1 August 2002), Palaeobiogeography and Biodiversity Change: The Ordovician and Mesozoic–Cenozoic Radiations, Geological Society Special Publication (194), Geological Society of London, ISBN 978-1-86239-106-2, retrieved 8 December 2011
    Fisher, W. F. (January 1995), Toward Sustainable Development?: Struggling over India's Narmada River, Columbia University Seminars, M. E. Sharpe, ISBN 978-1-56324-341-7
    Griffiths, M. (6 July 2010), The Lotus Quest: In Search of the Sacred Flower, St. Martin's Press, ISBN 978-0-312-64148-1
    Karanth, K. P. (25 March 2006), "Out-of-India Gondwanan Origin of Some Tropical Asian Biota" (PDF), Current Science (Indian Academy of Sciences) 90 (6): 789–792, retrieved 18 May 2011
    Mace, G. M. (March 1994), "1994 IUCN Red List of Threatened Animals", World Conservation Monitoring Centre (International Union for Conservation of Nature), ISBN 978-2-8317-0194-3
    "Biosphere Reserves of India", C. P. R. Environment Education Centre (Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India), retrieved 17 July 2011
    Indian Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, Ministry of Environments and Forests, Government of India, 9 September 1972, retrieved 25 July 2011
    Puri, S. K., Biodiversity Profile of India, retrieved 20 June 2007
    The List of Wetlands of International Importance (PDF), The Secretariat of the Convention on Wetlands, 4 June 2007, p. 18, archived from the original on 21 June 2007, retrieved 20 June 2007
    Tritsch, M. F. (3 September 2001), Wildlife of India, London: HarperCollins, ISBN 978-0-00-711062-9

    Politics

    Bhambhri, C. P. (1 May 1992), Politics in India, 1991–1992, Shipra, ISBN 978-81-85402-17-8, retrieved 20 July 2011
    Burnell, P. J.; Calvert, P. (1 May 1999), The Resilience of Democracy: Persistent Practice, Durable Idea (1st ed.), Taylor & Francis, ISBN 978-0-7146-8026-2, retrieved 20 July 2011
    Second UPA Win, A Crowning Glory for Sonia's Ascendancy, Business Standard, 16 May 2009, retrieved 13 June 2009
    Chander, N. J. (1 January 2004), Coalition Politics: The Indian Experience, Concept Publishing Company, ISBN 978-81-8069-092-1, retrieved 20 July 2011
    Dunleavy, P.; Diwakar, R.; Dunleavy, C. (2007), The Effective Space of Party Competition (PDF) (5), London School of Economics and Political Science, retrieved 27 September 2011
    Dutt, S. (1998), "Identities and the Indian State: An Overview", Third World Quarterly 19 (3): 411–434, doi:10.1080/01436599814325
    Echeverri-Gent, J. (January 2002), "Politics in India's Decentred Polity", in Ayres, A.; Oldenburg, P., Quickening the Pace of Change, India Briefing, London: M. E. Sharpe, pp. 19–53, ISBN 978-0-7656-0812-3
    "Current Recognised Parties" (PDF), Election Commission of India, 14 March 2009, retrieved 5 July 2010
    Gledhill, A. (30 March 1970), The Republic of India: The Development of its Laws and Constitution, Greenwood, ISBN 978-0-8371-2813-9, retrieved 21 July 2011
    Narasimha Rao Passes Away, The Hindu, 24 December 2004, retrieved 2 November 2008
    Mathew, K. M. (1 January 2003), Manorama Yearbook, Malayala Manorama, ISBN 978-81-900461-8-3, retrieved 21 July 2011
    "National Symbols of India", Know India (National Informatics Centre, Government of India), retrieved 27 September 2009
    Neuborne, B. (2003), "The Supreme Court of India", International Journal of Constitutional Law 1 (1): 476–510, doi:10.1093/icon/1.3.476
    Pylee, M. V. (2003), "The Longest Constitutional Document", Constitutional Government in India (2nd ed.), S. Chand, ISBN 978-81-219-2203-6
    Pylee, M. V. (2003), "The Union Judiciary: The Supreme Court", Constitutional Government in India (2nd ed.), S. Chand, ISBN 978-81-219-2203-6, retrieved 2 November 2007
    Sarkar, N. I. (1 January 2007), Sonia Gandhi: Tryst with India, Atlantic, ISBN 978-81-269-0744-1, retrieved 20 July 2011
    Sharma, R. (1950), "Cabinet Government in India", Parliamentary Affairs 4 (1): 116–126
    Sharma, B. K. (August 2007), Introduction to the Constitution of India (4th ed.), Prentice Hall, ISBN 978-81-203-3246-1
    Sinha, A. (2004), "The Changing Political Economy of Federalism in India", India Review 3 (1): 25–63, doi:10.1080/14736480490443085
    World's Largest Democracy to Reach One Billion Persons on Independence Day, United Nations Population Division, retrieved 5 October 2011
    Wheare, K. C. (June 1980), Federal Government (4th ed.), Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0-313-22702-8

    Foreign relations and military

    Alford, P. (7 July 2008), G8 Plus 5 Equals Power Shift, The Australian, retrieved 21 November 2009
    Behera, L. K. (7 March 2011), Budgeting for India's Defence: An Analysis of Defence Budget 2011–2012, Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses, retrieved 4 April 2011
    Behera, L. K. (20 March 2012), India’s Defence Budget 2012–13, Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses, retrieved 26 March 2012
    "Russia Agrees India Nuclear Deal", BBC News (British Broadcasting Corporation), 11 February 2009, retrieved 22 August 2010
    Curry, B. (27 June 2010), Canada Signs Nuclear Deal with India, The Globe and Mail, retrieved 13 May 2011
    "India, Europe Strategic Relations", Europa: Summaries of EU Legislation (European Union), 8 April 2008, retrieved 14 January 2011
    Ghosh, A. (1 September 2009), India's Foreign Policy, Pearson, ISBN 978-81-317-1025-8
    Gilbert, M. (17 December 2002), A History of the Twentieth Century, William Morrow, ISBN 978-0-06-050594-3, retrieved 22 July 2011
    India, Russia Review Defence Ties, The Hindu, 5 October 2009, retrieved 8 October 2011
    Kumar, A. V. (1 May 2010), "Reforming the NPT to Include India", Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, retrieved 1 November 2010
    Miglani, S. (28 February 2011), With An Eye on China, India Steps Up Defence Spending, Reuters, retrieved 6 July 2011
    Nair, V. K. (2007), No More Ambiguity: India's Nuclear Policy (PDF), archived from the original on 27 September 2007, retrieved 7 June 2007
    Pandit, R. (27 July 2009), N-Submarine to Give India Crucial Third Leg of Nuke Triad, The Times of India, retrieved 10 March 2010
    Perkovich, G. (5 November 2001), India's Nuclear Bomb: The Impact on Global Proliferation, University of California Press, ISBN 978-0-520-23210-5, retrieved 22 July 2011
    India, France Agree on Civil Nuclear Cooperation, Rediff, 25 January 2008, retrieved 22 August 2010
    UK, India Sign Civil Nuclear Accord, Reuters, 13 February 2010, retrieved 22 August 2010
    Ripsman, N. M.; Paul, T. V. (18 March 2010), Globalization and the National Security State, Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0-19-539390-3, retrieved 22 July 2011
    Rothermund, D. (17 October 2000), The Routledge Companion to Decolonization, Routledge Companions to History (1st ed.), Routledge, ISBN 978-0-415-35632-9
    India Gets Its First Homegrown Fighter Jet, RIA Novosti, 10 January 2011, retrieved 1 April 2009
    Sharma, S. R. (1 January 1999), India–USSR Relations 1947–1971: From Ambivalence to Steadfastness 1, Discovery, ISBN 978-81-7141-486-4
    Shukla, A. (5 March 2011), China Matches India's Expansion in Military Spending, Business Standard, retrieved 6 July 2011
    Sisodia, N. S.; Naidu, G. V. C. (2005), Changing Security Dynamic in Eastern Asia: Focus on Japan, Promilla, ISBN 978-81-86019-52-8
    "SIPRI Yearbook 2008: Armaments, Disarmament, and International Security", Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (Oxford University Press), 8 August 2008, ISBN 978-0-19-954895-8, retrieved 22 July 2011
    "Rise in international arms transfers is driven by Asian demand, says SIPRI", Stockholm International Peace Research Initiative, 19 March 2012, retrieved 26 March 2012
    India, US Sign 123 Agreement, The Times of India, 11 October 2008, retrieved 21 July 2011

    Economy

    Alamgir, J. (24 December 2008), India's Open-Economy Policy: Globalism, Rivalry, Continuity, Taylor & Francis, ISBN 978-0-415-77684-4, retrieved 23 July 2011
    Bonner, B (20 March 2010), Make Way, World. India Is on the Move, Christian Science Monitor, retrieved 23 July 2011
    "India Lost $462bn in Illegal Capital Flows, Says Report", BBC News (British Broadcasting Corporation), 18 November 2010, retrieved 23 July 2011
    "India Second Fastest Growing Auto Market After China", Business Line, 9 April 2010, retrieved 23 July 2011
    India's Economy: Not Just Rubies and Polyester Shirts, The Economist, 8 October 2011, retrieved 9 October 2011
    "Indian Car Exports Surge 36%", Express India, 13 October 2009, retrieved 23 July 2011
    Report for Selected Countries and Subjects: India, Indonesia, Islamic Republic of Iran, Malaysia, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand, International Monetary Fund, April 2011, retrieved 23 July 2011
    Farrell, D.; Beinhocker, E. (19 May 2007), Next Big Spenders: India's Middle Class, McKinsey & Company, retrieved 17 September 2011
    Gargan, E. A. (15 August 1992), India Stumbles in Rush to a Free Market Economy, The New York Times, retrieved 22 July 2011
    World Economic Outlook Update (PDF), International Monetary Fund, June 2011, retrieved 22 July 2011
    Nayak, P. B.; Goldar, B.; Agrawal, P. (10 November 2010), India's Economy and Growth: Essays in Honour of V. K. R. V. Rao, SAGE Publications, ISBN 978-81-321-0452-0
    Olson, R. G. (21 December 2009), "Technology and Science in Ancient Civilizations", Praeger Series on the Ancient World (Praeger), ISBN 978-0-275-98936-1, retrieved 27 September 2011
    Economic Survey of India 2007: Policy Brief (PDF), Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, October 2007, retrieved 22 July 2011
    Pal, P.; Ghosh, J (July 2007), "Inequality in India: A Survey of Recent Trends" (PDF), Economic and Social Affairs: DESA Working Paper No. 45 (United Nations), retrieved 23 July 2011
    The World in 2050: The Accelerating Shift of Global Economic Power: Challenges and Opportunities (PDF), PricewaterhouseCoopers, January2011, retrieved 23 July 2011
    Schwab, K. (2010), The Global Competitiveness Report 2010–2011 (PDF), World Economic Forum, retrieved 10 May 2011
    Sheth, N. (28 May 2009), "Outlook for Outsourcing Spending Brightens", The Wall Street Journal, retrieved 3 October 2010
    Information Note to the Press (Press Release No.29 /2011) (PDF), Telecom Regulatory Authority of India, 6 April 2011, retrieved 23 July 2011
    Exporters Get Wider Market Reach, The Times of India, 28 August 2009, retrieved 23 July 2011
    Corruption Perception Index 2010—India Continues to be Corrupt (PDF), Transparency International, 26 October 2011, retrieved 23 July 2011
    New Global Poverty Estimates—What It Means for India, World Bank, retrieved 23 July 2011
    "India: Undernourished Children—A Call for Reform and Action", World Bank, retrieved 23 July 2011
    Inclusive Growth and Service Delivery: Building on India's Success (PDF), World Bank, 29 May 2006, retrieved 7 May 2009
    India Country Overview September 2010, World Bank, September 2010, retrieved 23 July 2011
    Trade to Expand by 9.5% in 2010 After a Dismal 2009, WTO Reports, World Trade Organisation, 26 March 2010, retrieved 23 July 2011
    Yep, E. (27 September 2011), ReNew Wind Power Gets $201 Million Goldman Investment, The Wall Street Journal, retrieved 27 September 2011
    Indian IT-BPO Industry, NASSCOM, 2011-2012, retrieved 22 June 2012
    UNDERSTANDING THE WTO: THE ORGANIZATION Members and Observers, WTO, 1995, retrieved 23 June 2012

    Demographics

    Bonner, A. (1990), Averting the Apocalypse: Social Movements in India Today, Duke University Press, ISBN 978-0-8223-1048-8, retrieved 24 July 2011
    Healthcare in India: Report Highlights (PDF), Boston Analytics, January 2009, retrieved 23 July 2011
    Dev, S. M.; Rao, N. C. (2009), India: Perspectives on Equitable Development, Academic Foundation, ISBN 978-81-7188-685-2
    Dharwadker, A. (28 October 2010), "Representing India's Pasts: Time, Culture, and Problems of Performance Historiography", in Canning, C. M.; Postlewait, T., Representing the Past: Essays in Performance Historiography, University of Iowa Press, ISBN 978-1-58729-905-6, retrieved 24 July 2011
    Drèze, J.; Goyal, A. (9 February 2009), "The Future of Mid-Day Meals", in Baru, R. V., School Health Services in India: The Social and Economic Contexts, SAGE Publications, ISBN 978-81-7829-873-3
    Dyson, T.; Visaria, P. (7 July 2005), "Migration and Urbanisation: Retrospect and Prospects", in Dyson, T.; Casses, R.; Visaria, L., Twenty-First Century India: Population, Economy, Human Development, and the Environment, Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0-19-928382-8
    Garg, S. C. (19 April 2005), Mobilizing Urban Infrastructure Finance in India (PDF), World Bank, retrieved 27 January 2010
    Mallikarjun, B (November 2004), "Fifty Years of Language Planning for Modern Hindi—The Official Language of India", Language in India 4 (11), ISSN 19302940, retrieved 24 July 2011
    Notification No. 2/8/60-O.L, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, 27 April 1960, retrieved 13 May 2011
    "Religious Composition", Office of the Registrar General and Census Commissioner (Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India), 2010–2011, retrieved 23 July 2011
    "Census Data 2001", Office of the Registrar General and Census Commissioner (Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India), 2010–2011, retrieved 22 July 2011
    Ottenheimer, H. J. (2008), The Anthropology of Language: An Introduction to Linguistic Anthropology, Cengage, ISBN 978-0-495-50884-7
    Ratna, U. (2007), "Interface Between Urban and Rural Development in India", in Dutt, A. K.; Thakur, B, City, Society, and Planning 1, Concept, ISBN 978-81-8069-459-2
    Robinson, S. (1 May 2008), "India's Medical Emergency", Time, retrieved 23 July 2011
    Rorabacher, J. A. (2010), Hunger and Poverty in South Asia, Gyan, ISBN 978-81-212-1027-0
    Singh, S. (2004), Library and Literacy Movement for National Development, Concept, ISBN 978-81-8069-065-5
    Skolnik, R. L. (2008), Essentials of Global Health, Jones & Bartlett Learning, ISBN 978-0-7637-3421-3
    Country Cooperation Strategy: India (PDF), World Health Organisation, November 2006, retrieved 23 July 2011

    Culture

    Binmore, K. G. (27 March 2007), Playing for Real: A Text on Game Theory, Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0-19-530057-4
    Bladholm, L. (12 August 2000), The Indian Grocery Store Demystified (1st ed.), Macmillan Publishers, ISBN 978-1-58063-143-3
    "Saina Nehwal: India's Badminton Star and "New Woman"", BBC News, 1 August 2010, retrieved 5 October 2010
    "Commonwealth Games 2010: India Dominate Shooting Medals", BBC News, 7 October 2010, retrieved 3 June 2011
    Chopra, P. (18 March 2011), A Joint Enterprise: Indian Elites and the Making of British Bombay, University of Minnesota Press, ISBN 978-0-8166-7037-6
    Cullen-Dupont, K. (July 2009), Human Trafficking (1st ed.), Infobase Publishing, ISBN 978-0-8160-7545-4
    Das, S. K. (1 January 2005), A History of Indian Literature, 500–1399: From Courtly to the Popular, Sahitya Akademi, ISBN 978-81-260-2171-0
    Datta, A. (2006), The Encyclopaedia of Indian Literature 2, Sahitya Akademi, ISBN 978-81-260-1194-0
    Dehejia, R. S. (7 November 2011), "Indian Grand Prix Vs. Encephalitis?", The Wall Street Journal, retrieved 20 December 2011
    Deutsch, E. (30 April 1969), Advaita Vedanta: A Philosophical Reconstruction, University of Hawaii Press, ISBN 978-0-8248-0271-4
    Dissanayake, W. K.; Gokulsing, M. (May 2004), Indian Popular Cinema: A Narrative of Cultural Change (2nd ed.), Trentham Books, ISBN 978-1-85856-329-9
    Southern Movies Account for over 75% of Film Revenues, The Economic Times, 18 November 2009, retrieved 18 June 2011
    Indian Dance, "South Asian Arts", Encyclopædia Britannica, retrieved 17 July 2011
    "Tamil Literature", Encyclopædia Britannica, 2008, retrieved 24 July 2011
    Eraly, A. (2008), India, Penguin Books, ISBN 978-0-7566-4952-4, retrieved 24 July 2011
    Hart, G. L. (August 1975), Poems of Ancient Tamil: Their Milieu and Their Sanskrit Counterparts (1st ed.), University of California Press, ISBN 978-0-520-02672-8
    Heehs, P., ed. (1 September 2002), Indian Religions: A Historical Reader of Spiritual Expression and Experience, New York University Press, ISBN 978-0-8147-3650-0, retrieved 24 July 2011
    Henderson, C. E. (2002), Culture and Customs of India, Greenwood Publishing Group, ISBN 978-0-313-30513-9
    Hoiberg, D.; Ramchandani, I. (2000), Students' Britannica India: Select Essays, Popular Prakashan, ISBN 978-0-85229-762-9
    Johnson, W. J., ed. (1 September 2008), The Sauptikaparvan of the Mahabharata: The Massacre at Night, Oxford World's Classics (2nd ed.), Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0-19-282361-8
    Jones, G.; Ramdas, K. (2005), (Un)tying the Knot: Ideal and Reality in Asian Marriage, National University of Singapore Press, ISBN 978-981-05-1428-0
    Kalidasa; Johnson, W. J. (15 November 2001), The Recognition of Sakuntala: A Play in Seven Acts, Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0-19-283911-4
    Kaminsky, Arnold P.; Long, Roger D. (30 September 2011), India Today: An Encyclopedia of Life in the Republic: An Encyclopedia of Life in the Republic, ABC-CLIO, ISBN 978-0-313-37462-3, retrieved 12 September 2012</ref>
    Karanth, S. K. (October 2002), Yak?agana, Abhinav Publications, ISBN 978-81-7017-357-1
    Kiple, K. F.; Ornelas, K. C., eds. (2000), The Cambridge World History of Food, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-0-521-40216-3
    Kuiper, K., ed. (1 July 2010), The Culture of India, Britannica Educational Publishing, ISBN 978-1-61530-203-1, retrieved 24 July 2011
    Kumar, V. (January 2000), Vastushastra, All You Wanted to Know About Series (2nd ed.), Sterling Publishing, ISBN 978-81-207-2199-9
    Lal, A. (2004), The Oxford Companion to Indian Theatre, Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0-19-564446-3, retrieved 24 July 2011
    Lang, J.; Moleski, W. (1 December 2010), Functionalism Revisited, Ashgate Publishing, ISBN 978-1-4094-0701-0
    MacDonell, A. A. (2004), A History of Sanskrit Literature, Kessinger Publishing, ISBN 978-1-4179-0619-2
    Majumdar, B.; Bandyopadhyay, K. (2006), A Social History of Indian Football: Striving To Score, Routledge, ISBN 978-0-415-34835-5
    Makar, E. M. (2007), An American's Guide to Doing Business in India, Adams, ISBN 978-1-59869-211-2
    Massey, R.; Massey, J (1998), The Music of India, Abhinav Publications, ISBN 978-81-7017-332-8
    Medora, N. (2003), "Mate Selection in Contemporary India: Love Marriages Versus Arranged Marriages", in Hamon, R. R.; Ingoldsby, B. B., Mate Selection Across Cultures, SAGE Publications, pp. 209–230, ISBN 978-0-7619-2592-7
    Messner, W. (2009), Working with India. The Softer Aspects of a Successful Collaboration with the Indian IT & BPO Industry, Springer, ISBN 978-3-540-89077-5
    Messner, W. (2012), Engaging with India. How to Manage the Softer Aspects of a Global Collaboration, Createspace, ISBN 978-1-466244900
    "Indian Readership Survey 2012 Q1 : Topline Findings" (PDF). Media Research Users Council. Growth: Literacy & Media Consumption. Retrieved 12 September 2012.
    Mehta, Nalin (30 July 2008), Television in India: Satellites, Politics and Cultural Change, Taylor & Francis US, ISBN 978-0-415-44759-1, retrieved 12 September 2012
    Is Boxing the New Cricket?, Mint, 24 September 2010, retrieved 5 October 2010
    Nakamura, H. (1 April 1999), Indian Buddhism: A Survey with Bibliographical Notes, Buddhist Tradition Series (12th ed.), Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-81-208-0272-8
    Puskar-Pasewicz, M. (16 September 2010), Cultural Encyclopedia of Vegetarianism, Greenwood Publishing Group, ISBN 978-0-313-37556-9
    Raghavan, S. (23 October 2006), Handbook of Spices, Seasonings, and Flavorings (2nd ed.), CRC Press, ISBN 978-0-8493-2842-8
    Raichlen, S. (10 May 2011), A Tandoor Oven Brings India's Heat to the Backyard, The New York Times, retrieved 14 June 2011
    Rajadhyaksha, A.; Willemen, P., eds. (22 January 1999), Encyclopaedia of Indian Cinema (2nd ed.), British Film Institute, ISBN 978-0-85170-669-6
    Ramanujan, A. K. (translator) (15 October 1985), Poems of Love and War: From the Eight Anthologies and the Ten Long Poems of Classical Tamil, New York: Columbia University Press, pp. ix–x, ISBN 978-0-231-05107-1
    Rawat, Ramnarayan S (23 March 2011), Reconsidering Untouchability: Chamars and Dalit History in North India, Indiana University Press, ISBN 978-0-253-22262-6
    Anand Crowned World Champion, Rediff, 29 October 2008, retrieved 29 October 2008
    Roberts, N. W. (12 July 2004), Building Type Basics for Places of Worship (1st ed.), John Wiley & Sons, ISBN 978-0-471-22568-3
    Sarma, S. (1 January 2009), A History of Indian Literature 1 (2nd ed.), Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-81-208-0264-3
    Schoenhals, M. (22 November 2003), Intimate Exclusion: Race and Caste Turned Inside Out, University Press of America, ISBN 978-0-7618-2697-2
    Schwartzberg, J. (2011), Caste, "India", Encyclopædia Britannica, retrieved 17 July 2011
    Sen, A. (5 September 2006), The Argumentative Indian: Writings on Indian History, Culture, and Identity (1st ed.), Picador, ISBN 978-0-312-42602-6
    Seymour, S.C. (28 January 1999), Women, Family, and Child Care in India: A World in Transition, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-0-521-59884-2
    Silverman, S. (10 October 2007), Vastu: Transcendental Home Design in Harmony with Nature, Gibbs Smith, ISBN 978-1-4236-0132-6
    Tarlo, E. (1 September 1996), Clothing Matters: Dress and Identity in India (1st ed.), University of Chicago Press, ISBN 978-0-226-78976-7, retrieved 24 July 2011
    Sawant Shoots Historic Gold at World Championships, The Times of India, 9 August 2010, retrieved 25 May 2011
    Taj Mahal, United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organisation, retrieved 3 March 2012
    India Aims for Center Court, The Wall Street Journal, 11 September 2009, retrieved 29 September 2010
    Wengell, D. L.; Gabriel, N. (1 September 2008), Educational Opportunities in Integrative Medicine: The A-to-Z Healing Arts Guide and Professional Resource Directory (1st ed.), The Hunter Press, ISBN 978-0-9776552-4-3
    "Intergenerational Mobility for Dalits Is Visible, Albeit Limited" (PDF). World Bank Report 2011. doi:10.1596/978-0-8213-8689-7. Retrieved 6 September 2012.
    Xavier, L. (12 September 2010), Sushil Kumar Wins Gold in World Wrestling Championship, The Times of India, retrieved 5 October 2010
    Yadav, S. S.; McNeil, D.; Stevenson, P. C. (23 October 2007), Lentil: An Ancient Crop for Modern Times, Springer, ISBN 978-1-4020-6312-1
    Zvelebil, K. V. (1 August 1997), Companion Studies to the History of Tamil Literature, Brill Publishers, ISBN 978-90-04-09365-2










    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7368
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The United States of the Solar System, A.D. 2133 (Book Three)

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Sat May 06, 2017 10:19 pm


    I've mentioned this several times, but that old 1963 comedy It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World seems to describe the History of the World!! Is there a Dr. Stockmar kind of guy in that movie?? What Would Victoria and Albert Say?? Does anyone know who and what I'm talking about?? The only ones who really get my posts are probably in 100 km long Bad@ssteroids orbiting Mars!! Ra said they like me on Phobos (but the Jesuits hate me)!! The CIA has just informed me that The St. Louis Jesuits are out to get me!! Can't we all just get along?? My father discussed this movie with the actor Terry-Thomas (the Englishman)!!






    RedEzra wrote:There you go again... that is spam. What's next ? Copypaste of the whole book of Revelation ? At least you didn't dump an insane amount of utube clips and pics this time.
    Pris wrote:
    orthodoxymoron wrote:I don't seem to be capable of properly studying much of anything these days, but I keep trying to give the rest of you some clues. Unfortunately, I KNOW No-One Gives a DAMN About What I Suggest.

    Lol yet another one of your cries for attention, Oxy?  Congratulations -- you caught mine. Wink  May I say there are a few of us here who actually do give a damn and you KNOW it.  Besides, as you must already know, giving a damn doesn't mean having to agree with someone, like them, or listen to everything they have to say. cheers
    .
    .
    Pris wrote:
    RedEzra wrote:
    Some think since the universe is so huge that GOD could not care about earth !? and that man like an ant upon it is insignificant in GOD's mind !? Some think GOD is some sort of impersonal substance !? Some think they are GOD !? and some more modest think they can become GOD !? Some don't think GOD exist !? Some think GOD wants them to kill those who don't think like them !? Some think GOD gave them licence to sin !? Why are they not doing manual labour ? Some just have too much time to think...

    Questions...  flower  Who are you to judge?  Coupled with your assumptions/'truths', who are you to judge any of it let alone who has 'too much to think' lol? Laugh   You have a pretty serious yardstick. Let people think whatever they want and let them pay the consequences for their actions. This is why it is good to eat from 'the tree of knowledge' so each of us can think freely for ourselves and make responsible (response able) choices that guide our lives. In my mind and heart, all that matters is what I think, what I feel, and what I know.  By the way, that doesn't mean I care less about you or anyone else.  Because I care about me, I care about you, too. I love you
    .
    .
    RedEzra wrote:I'm not judging... just thinking out loud that it may be much more fruitful for all of us if some or most concentrate on manual labour instead of philosophizing. After all we are supposed to steward this earth and not sit around thinking thoughts that are more or less thoughtless. So much confusion today about truth as just about everyone has a thought about it... but as we know when grashoppers become too plentiful they destroy everything that is fruitful. It is not too much to ask for some sort of proof which back up what we believe else we may be wasting time and energy with vain imaginations. Don't get me wrong dreaming is fine... but please don't try to pass it on as truth. In this thread there is provided proof about GOD... so anyone can imagine what i think about all the philosophizing. And the reason i take the time to do the research and share the results is because i care as well... compassion and charity is love in action.
    Swanny wrote:Sorry but due to the nature of this reality there is no such thing as proof of a god or anything else for that matter. No one can claim to know the truth about anything and only a fool would do so. The very best anyone can offer is their theory on what they believe to be true.
    RedEzra wrote:Apology not accepted lol... i'm sorry too but the fulfilled prophecies in the bible and the testimonies from thousands who have met Jesus and the archaeological discoveries of Ron Wyatt and the astronomical work of FA Larson prove GOD.
    What would happen if the Worst Archangel ruled this solar system without interference from any other Archangels?? What if this particular Archangel hated Humanity?? What if this solar system has been ruled by those who are not Human -- and Hate Humanity -- for thousands of years?? What if things are about to get exponentially worse?? What if Humanity has just rejected it's last chance for a Truly Happy Existence?? What if Probation is Now Closed -- with No Going Back -- and No Second Chances?? What if a small number of Humans will be taken to a truly better place, to live with an Archangel who Believes in Humanity?? What if there are other Human Civilizations throughout the Galaxy?? What if Earth is the Least Idealistic Human Civilization?? I have NO idea if this might be the case -- but I wonder and tremble. What if Titan were Purgatory -- and Earth were Paradise?? What if there were NO Hell?? What if Titan were simply a Workers-Purgatory Karmic-Debtors Prison-Planet -- with 7 day work-weeks and 12 hour shifts of moderately-hard labor -- run by the 'Regressives'??!! What if Earth were a Paradise-Planet with Zero-Tolerance for Bullshit??!!

    Believe it, or not, I'm really quite mild and nice. I'm simply conceptualizing alternatives to the Book of Revelation. As crazy as it seems, what if the Hillsboro Baptist Church is at least partially correct regarding God's intentions toward Humanity?? Read the Old Testament and the Book of Revelation -- for God's sake!!! I continue to think that there are VERY Powerful Galactic Forces who want Humanity Exterminated -- and I have encountered that which is evidential to me, that this is indeed the case. I don't think most of you have any idea of what we're REALLY dealing with. That nasty stuff in the Bible might make perfect sense if it were given a proper context -- and perhaps a few changes of names and places. If I endorse Revelation, it seems as if I must endorse torture, religious-persecution, and mass-murder in God's Name -- and executed by God and the Angels. If I seek alternatives to Revelation, it seems as if I am a rebel against the Government and Wisdom of God. It seems as if I am a Threat to National-Security if I attempt to think and write clearly and rationally about This Present Mess. It seems as if Ignorance and Blind-Obedience are Virtues. BTW -- What Might a Common Liturgical Denominator look and sound like?? What if Strict-Honesty were applied to the Governments and Religions of the World??!! I suspect that everything would go to hell for a century or two!! What if Earth-Civilization is built upon the shifting sands of LIES??!! What if there is NO Way to correct this mess without destroying everything -- and starting from scratch?? Damned if I know.

    Consider Hinduism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinduism

    Hinduism is the major religion[1][2] of the Indian subcontinent, particularly of Nepal and India. Hinduism includes Shaivism, Vaishnavism and Shrauta among numerous other traditions. Among other practices and philosophies, Hinduism includes a wide spectrum of laws and prescriptions of "daily morality" based on karma, dharma, and societal norms. Hinduism is a categorisation of distinct intellectual or philosophical points of view, rather than a rigid, common set of beliefs.[3]

    Hinduism consists of many diverse traditions and has no single founder.[4] Among its direct roots are the ancient Dravidian culture[5] and the historical Vedic religion of Iron Age India.[6] As such, Hinduism is often called the "oldest living religion"[7] or the "oldest living major religion" in the world.[1][8][9][10] Since Vedic times, a process of Sanskritization or Indo-Aryanization has been taking place, in which "people from many strata of society throughout the subcontinent tended to adapt their religious and social life to Brahmanic norms".[11]

    One orthodox classification of Hindu texts is to divide them into Sruti ("revealed") and Smriti ("remembered") texts.[12] These texts discuss theology, philosophy, mythology, Vedic yajna and agamic rituals and temple building among other topics.[13] Major scriptures include the Vedas, Upanishads, Puranas, Mahabharata, Ramayana, Manusmriti, Bhagavad Gita and Agamas.[14]

    Hinduism, with about one billion followers[15] (950 million estimated in India),[16] is the world's third largest religion, after Christianity and Islam.

    Etymology

    The word Hindu is derived (through Persian) from the Sanskrit word Sindhu, the historic local name for the Indus River in the northwestern part of the Indian subcontinent. The word Sindhu is first mentioned in the Rigveda.[17][18][19]

    The word Hindu was taken from from the Arabic term al-Hind, by European languages, referring to the land of the people who live across the River Indus. [20] This was itself taken from the Persian term Hindu, which refers to all Indians. By the 13th century, Hindustan emerged as a popular alternative name of India, meaning the "land of Hindus".[21]

    The term Hinduism was later referred to occasionally in some Sanskrit texts, such as the later Rajataranginis of Kashmir (Hinduka, c. 1450), and some 16th to 18th-century Bengali Gaudiya Vaishnava texts, including Chaitanya Charitamrita and Chaitanya Bhagavata. It was usually used to contrast Hindus with Yavanas or Mlecchas.[22] It was only towards the end of the 18th century that European merchants and colonists began to refer to the followers of Indian religions collectively as Hindus. The term Hinduism was introduced into the English language in the 19th century to denote the religious, philosophical, and cultural traditions native to India.

    Pluralism

    Hinduism is not only one of the numerically largest faiths, but is also the oldest living major tradition on earth, with roots reaching back into prehistory.[23] It is described as both the oldest of the world's religions, and the most diverse.[1][24][25][26]

    Hinduism is defined as a religion or as a religious tradition, or as a set of religious beliefs.[2]

    Hinduism does not have a "unified system of belief encoded in declaration of faith or a creed",[27] but is rather an umbrella term comprising the plurality of religious phenomena originating and based on the Vedic traditions.[28][29][30][31]

    Problems with the single definition of what is actually meant by the term 'Hinduism' are often attributed to the fact that Hinduism does not have a single or common historical founder. Hinduism, or as some say 'Hinduisms,' does not have a single system of salvation and has different goals according to each sect or denomination. According to the Supreme court of India "unlike other religions in the World, the Hindu religion does not claim any one Prophet, it does not worship any one God, it does not believe in any one philosophic concept, it does not follow any one act of religious rites or performances, in fact, it does not satisfy the traditional features of a religion or creed. It is a way of life and nothing more".[10][32]

    Commonalities

    Most Hindu traditions revere a body of religious or sacred literature, the Vedas, although there are exceptions. Some Hindu religious traditions regard particular rituals as essential for salvation, but a variety of views on this co-exist. Some Hindu philosophies postulate a theistic ontology of creation, of sustenance, and of destruction of the universe, yet some Hindus are atheists. Hinduism is sometimes characterized by the belief in reincarnation (samsara), determined by the law of karma, and the idea that salvation is freedom from this cycle of repeated birth and death. However, other religions of the region, such as Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism, also believe in karma, outside the scope of Hinduism.[27] Hinduism is therefore viewed as the most complex of all of the living, historical world religions.[33]

    Indigenous understanding

    A definition of Hinduism is further complicated by the frequent use of the term "faith" as a synonym for "religion".[27] Some academics[34] and many practitioners refer to Hinduism using a native definition, as Sanatana Dharma, a Sanskrit phrase meaning "the eternal law", or the "eternal way".[35][36]

    To its adherents, Hinduism is the traditional way of life,[37] and because of the wide range of traditions and ideas incorporated within or covered by it, arriving at a comprehensive definition of the term is problematic.[27]

    A definition of Hinduism, given by the first Vice President of India, who was also a prominent theologian, Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, states that Hinduism is not "just a faith", but in itself is related to the union of reason and intuition. Radhakrishnan explicitly states that Hinduism cannot be defined, but is only to be experienced.[38]

    Western understanding

    The characteristic of comprehensive tolerance to differences in belief, and Hinduism's openness, makes it difficult to define as a religion according to traditional Western conceptions.[39]

    Some academics suggest that Hinduism can be seen as a category with "fuzzy edges", rather than as a well-defined and rigid entity. Some forms of religious expression are central to Hinduism, while others are not as central but still remain within the category. Based on this, Ferro-Luzzi has developed a 'Prototype Theory approach' to the definition of Hinduism.[40]

    Colonial influences

    The study of India and its cultures and religions has been shaped by the interests of colonialism and western notions of religion.[41][42] Since the 1990s, those influences and its outcomes have been the topic of debate among scholars of Hinduism[41][note 1] , and have also been taken over by critics of the western view on India.[43][note 2]

    The notion of "Hinduism" as a "single world religious tradition"[44] was developed by 19th-century European Indologists, who depended on the "brahmana castes"[44] for their information of Indian religions.[44] This lead to a "tendency to emphasize Vedic and Brahmanical texts and beliefs as the "essence" of Hindu religiosity in general, and in the modern association of 'Hindu doctrine' with the various Brahmanical schools of the Vedanta (in particular Advaita Vedanta)."[45]

    Sweetman identifies several areas in which "there is substantial, if nor universal, agreement that colonialism influenced the study of Hinduism":[46]

    1.The establishment of a textual basis for Hinduism by European Orientalists, akin to the Protestant culture.[46] This establishment was also driven by the preference of the colonial powers for written authority rather than oral authority.[46]

    2.The influence of Brahmins on European constructions of Hinduism.[46] Colonialism has been a significant factor in the reinforcement of the Brahmana castes, and the "brahmanisation"[47] of Hindu society.[47] The Brahmana castes preserved the texts which were studied by Europeans, and provided access to them. The authority of those texts was enlarged by the study of those texts by Europeans.[46] Brahmins and Europeans scholars shared a similar perspective in the perception of "a general decline from an originally pure religion".[46]

    3.The identification of Vedanta, and specifically Advaita Vedanta, as the "paradigmatic example of the mystical nature of the Hindu religion"[46][note 3] and the "central philosophy of the Hindus".[46] Several factors aided in favouring Advaita Vedanta:[48]

    1.Fear of French influence, especially the impact of the French Revolution; the hope was that "the supposed quietist and consrvative nature of Vedantic thought would prevent the development of revolutionary sentiment;[49]

    2."The predominance of Idealism in nineteenth century European philosophy";[50]

    3."The amenability of Vedantic thought to both Christian and Hindu critics of 'idolatry' in other formsd of Hinduism".[50]

    4.The European construction of caste, which denied former political configurations, and insisted upon an "essentially religious character" of India.[51] During the colonial period, caste was represented as a religious system, and divorced from political powers.[50] This made it possible for the colonial rulers to portray India as a society characterised by spiritual harmony, but to portray the former Indian states as "despotic and epiphenomenal"[50], with the colonial powers providing the necessary "benevolent, paternalistic rule by a more 'advanced' nation".[50] It also contributed to the significant role of religion in the Indian freedom struggle, since religion was the area to which Indian powers were confined.[citation needed]

    5.The construction of 'Hinduism' in the image of Christianity[52], as "a systematic, confessional, all-embracing religious entity".[52] Several forces played a role in this construction:

    1.The European scholarship which studied India,[52]

    2.The "acts of policy of the colonial state",[52]

    3.Anti-colonial Hindus[53] "looking toward the systematisation of disparate practices as a means of recovering a precolonial, antional identity".[52][note 4]

    Hindu denominations

    The Swaminarayan Akshardham Temple in Delhi, according the Guinness World Records is the World’s Largest Comprehensive Hindu Temple[54]
    Hinduism as it is commonly known can be subdivided into a number of major currents. Of the historical division into six darsanas, only two schools, Vedanta and Yoga, survive. The main divisions of Hinduism today are Vaishnavism, Shaivism, Shaktism and Smartism.[55] Hinduism also recognizes numerous divine beings subordinate to the Supreme Being or regards them as lower manifestations of it.[56] Other notable characteristics include a belief in reincarnation and karma, as well as in personal duty, or dharma.

    McDaniel - six generic "types"

    McDaniel (2007) distinguishes six generic "types" of Hinduism, in an attempt to accommodate a variety of views on a rather complex subject:[57]

    Folk Hinduism, as based on local traditions and cults of local deities at a communal level and spanning back to prehistoric times or at least prior to written Vedas.

    Shrauta or "Vedic" Hinduism as practised by traditionalist brahmins (Shrautins).

    Vedantic Hinduism, for example Advaita Vedanta (Smartism), as based on the philosophical approach of the Upanishads.

    Yogic Hinduism, especially that based on the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali.

    "Dharmic" Hinduism or "daily morality", based on Karma, and upon societal norms such as Vivaha (Hindu marriage customs).

    Bhakti or devotionalist practices

    Michaels - Hindu religions and Hindu religiosity

    Michaels distinguishes three Hindu religions and four forms of Hindu religiosity.[58]

    The division into three Hindu religions corresponds with the Indian subdivision of ritual practice into Vedic (vaidika), village and folk religions (gramya), and sectarian (agama or tantra).[59] The three Hindu religions are:

    1.Brahmanic-Sanskritic Hinduism: a polytheistic, ritualistic, priestly religion that centers on extended family domestic rituals and sacrificial rituals, and an appeal to a corpus of Vedic texts as an authority.[58] It takes a central place in most treatises on Hinduism, because it fulfills many criteria for the definition of religion, and because "in many regions of India it is the dominant religion into which the non-Brahman population groups strive to assimilate.[58][note 5]

    2.Folk religions and tribal religions: polytheistic, sometimes animistic, local religions with an extensive oral tradition. Often in tension with Brahmanic-Sanskritic Hinduism.[60]

    3.Founded religions: salvation religions with monastic communities, usually ascetic, often anti-Brahmanic.[58] Three subgroups can be distinguished:

    1.Sectarian religions: for example Vaishnavism and Shaivism.[60]

    2.Syncretically founded religions: Hindu-Islamic (Sikhism), Hindu-Buddhist (Newar-Buddhism), Hindu-Christian mixed religions like Neohinduism.[60]

    3.Founded, proselytizing religions, "Guru-ism": groups like Maharishi Mahesh Yogi and Transcendental Meditation, Satya Sai Baba and the Satya Sai Federation, Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada and the ISKCON, Maharaj Ji and the Divine Light Mission, Osho.[60]

    The four forms of Hindu religiosity are:

    1.Ritualism: Vedic-Brahmanistic domestic and sacrificial ritualism, but also some forms of Tantrism.[59] This is the classical karma-marga, the path of action.[61]

    2.Spiritualism: intellectual religiosity, aimed at indvidual liberation, often under guidance of a guru. It is characteristic of Advaita Vedanta, Kashmir Shaivism, Shaiva Siddhanta, Neo-Vedanta, moden esoteric Guruism, and some sorts of Tantrism.[59] This is the classical jnana-marga.[61]

    3.Devotionalism: mystical worship of a God, as in bhakti and Krishnaism.[59] This is the classical bhakti-marga.[61]
    4.Heroism: a polytheistic form of religiosity rooted in militaristic traditions, such as Ramaism and parts of political Hindusim.[59] This is also called virya-marga.[61]

    History of Hinduism

    James Mill (1773-1836), in his The History of British India (1817),[62] distinguished three phases in the history of India, namely Hindu, Muslim and British civilisations.[62][63] This periodisation has been criticised, for the misconceptions it has given rise to.[64] Another periodisation is the division into "ancient, classical, medieaval and modern periods".[65] Smart[66] and Michaels[67] seem to follow Mill's periodisation,[note 6], while Flood[68] and Muesse[70][71] follow the "ancient, classical, medieaval and modern periods" periodisation.[72]

    Smart calls the period between 1000 BCE and 100 CE "pre-classical". It's the formative period for the Upanishads and Brahmanism[note 7], Jainism and Buddhism. For Smart, the "classical period" lasts from 100 to 1000 CE, and coincides with the flowering of "classical Hinduism" and the flowering and deterioration of Mahayana-buddhism in India.[74]

    For Michaels, the period between 500 BCE and 200 BCE is a time of "Ascetic reformism"[75], whereas the period between 200 BCE and 1100 CE is the time of "classical Hinduism", since there is "a turning point between the Vedic religion and Hindu religions".[76] Muesse discerns a longer period of change, namely between 800 BCE and 200 BCE, which he calls the "Classical Period":

    ...this was a time when traditional religious practices and beliefs were reassessed. The brahmins and the rituals they performed no longer enjoyed the same prestige they had in the Vedic pariod".[77]

    According to Muesse, some of the fundamental concepts of Hinduism, namely karma, reincarnation and "personal enlightenment and transformation", which did not exist in the Vedic religion, developed in this time:

    Indian philosophers came to regard the human as an immortal soul encased in a perishable body and bound by action, or karma, to a cycle of endless existences.[78]

    According to Muesse, reincarnation is "a fundamental principle of virtually all religions formed in Indias".[79]

    The period of the ascetic reforms saw the rise of Buddhism and Jainism, while Sikhism originated during the time of Islamic rule.[80]

    Smart[66] Michaels
    (overall)[80] Michaels
    (detailed)[80] Muesse[71] Flood[81]
    Indus Valley Civilisation and Vedic period
    (ca. 3000-1000 BCE) Prevedic religions
    (until ca. 1750 BCE)[67] Prevedic religions
    (until ca. 1750 BCE)[67] Indus Valley Civilization
    (3300–1400 BCE) Indus Valley Civilisation
    (ca. 2500 to 1500 BCE)
    Vedic religion
    (ca. 1750-500 BCE) Early Vedic Period
    (ca. 1750-1200 BCE) Vedic Period
    (1600–800 BCE) Vedic period
    (ca. 1500-500 BCE)
    Middle Vedic Period
    (from 1200 BCE)
    Pre-classical period
    (ca. 1000 BCE - 100 CE) Late Vedic period
    (from 850 BCE) Classical Period
    (800–200 BCE)
    Ascetic reformism
    (ca. 500-200 BCE) Ascetic reformism
    (ca. 500-200 BCE) Epic and Puranic period
    (ca. 500 BCE to 500 CE)
    Classical Hinduism
    (ca. 200 BCE-1100 CE)[76] Preclassical Hinduism
    (ca. 200 BCE-300 CE)[82] Epic and Puranic period
    (200 BCE–500 CE)
    Classical period
    (ca. 100 CE - 1000 CE) "Golden Age" (Gupta Empire)
    (ca. 320-650 CE)[83]
    Late-Classical Hinduism
    (ca. 650-1100 CE)[84] Medieval and Late Puranic Period
    (500–1500 CE) Medieval and Late Puranic Period
    (500–1500 CE)
    Hindu-Islamic civilisation
    (ca. 1000-1750 CE) Islamic rule and "Sects of Hinduism"
    (ca. 1100-1850 CE)[85] Islamic rule and "Sects of Hinduism"
    (ca. 1100-1850 CE)[85]
    Modern Age
    (1500–present) Modern period
    (ca. 1500 CE to present)
    Modern period
    (ca. 1750 CE - present) Modern Hinduism
    (from ca. 1850)[86] Modern Hinduism
    (from ca. 1850)[86]

    Prevedic religions (until c. 1750 BCE)

    The earliest evidence for prehistoric religion in India date back to the late Neolithic in the early Harappan period (5500–2600 BCE).[87][88] The beliefs and practices of the pre-classical era (1500–500 BCE) are called the "historical Vedic religion".

    Vedic religion (c. 1750-500 BCE)

    The Vedic religion is an off-shoot from the Proto-Indo-European religion.[89][90][91][92] The oldest Veda is the Rigveda, dated to 1700–1100 BCE.[93] The Vedas centre on worship of deities such as Indra, Varuna and Agni, and on the Soma ritual. Fire-sacrifices, called yajña are performed by chanting Vedic mantras chanted but no temples or idols are known.[94][95]

    Ethics in the Vedas are based on the concepts of Satya and Rta. Satya is the principle of integration rooted in the Absolute.[96] ?ta is the expression of Satya, which regulates and coordinates the operation of the universe and everything within it.[97]}}

    The term "dharma" was already used in Brahmanical thought, where it was conceived as an aspect of Rta.[98] The term rta is also known from the Proto-Indo-Iranian religion, the religion of the Indo-Iranian peoples prior to the earliest Vedic (Indo-Aryan) and Zoroastrian (Iranian) scriptures. Asha[pronunciation?] (aša) is the Avestan language term corresponding to Vedic language ?ta.[99]

    The 9th and 8th centuries BCE witnessed the composition of the earliest Upanishads.[100]:183 Upanishads form the theoretical basis of classical Hinduism and are known as Vedanta (conclusion of the Veda).[101] The older Upanishads launched attacks of increasing intensity on the rituals.[102] The diverse monistic speculations of the Upanishads were synthesized into a theistic framework by the sacred Hindu scripture Bhagavad Gita.[103]

    Ascetic reformism (c. 500-200 BCE)

    Shramana

    Increasing urbanisation of India in 7th and 6th centuries BCE led to the rise of new ascetic or shramana movements which challenged the orthodoxy of rituals.[104] Mahavira (c. 549–477 BCE), proponent of Jainism, and Buddha (c. 563-483), founder of Buddhism were the most prominent icons of this movement.[100]:184 Shramana gave rise to the concept of the cycle of birth and death, the concept of samsara, and the concept of liberation.[105] Radhakrishnan, Oldenberg and Neumann believed that the Buddhist canon had been influenced by Upanishads.[106]

    Classical Hinduism (c. 200 BCE-100 CE)

    Pre-classical Hinduism (c. 200 BCE-300 CE)

    The major Sanskrit epics, Ramayana and Mahabharata, were compiled over a protracted period during the late centuries BCE and the early centuries CE.[107] They contain mythological stories about the rulers and wars of ancient India, and are interspersed with religious and philosophical treatises. The later Puranas recount tales about devas and devis, their interactions with humans and their battles against rakshasa.

    In early centuries CE several schools of Hindu philosophy were formally codified, including Samkhya, Yoga, Nyaya, Vaisheshika, Purva-Mimamsa and Vedanta.[108]

    "Golden Age" (Gupta Empire) (c. 320-650 CE)

    The period between 5th and 9th century CE was a brilliant era in the development of Indian philosophy as Hindu and Buddhist philosophies flourished side by side.[109] Of these various schools of thought the non-dualistic Advaita Vedanta emerged as the most influential and most dominant school of philosophy.[110][111] Charvaka, the atheistic materialist school, came to the fore in North India before the 8th century CE.[112]

    Late-Classical Hinduism (c. 650-110 CE)

    Sanskritic culture went into decline after the end of the Gupta period. The early medieval Puranas helped establish a religious mainstream among the pre-literate tribal societies undergoing acculturation. The tenets of Brahmanic Hinduism and of the Dharmashastras underwent a radical transformation at the hands of the Purana composers, resulting in the rise of a mainstream "Hinduism" that overshadowed all earlier traditions.[113] In 8th-century royal circles, the Buddha started to be replaced by Hindu gods in pujas.[114] This also was the same period of time the Buddha was made into an avatar of Vishnu.[115]

    Islamic rule and Sects of Hinduism (c. 1100-1850 CE)

    Though Islam came to India in the early 7th century with the advent of Arab traders and the conquest of Sindh, it started to become a major religion during the later Muslim conquest in the Indian subcontinent.[116] During this period Buddhism declined rapidly and many Hindus were forcibly converted to Islam.[117][118][119] Numerous Muslim rulers or their army generals such as Aurangzeb and Malik Kafur destroyed Hindu temples[120][121][122] and persecuted non-Muslims; however some, such as Akbar, were more tolerant. The 17th-century Hindu Maratha Empire of India is credited for ending the Islamic Mughal rule in India.[123] and furthermore the Marathas are considered as champions of Hinduism.[124] Hinduism underwent profound changes, in large part due to the influence of the prominent teachers Ramanuja, Madhva, and Chaitanya.[116] Followers of the Bhakti movement moved away from the abstract concept of Brahman, which the philosopher Adi Shankara consolidated a few centuries before, with emotional, passionate devotion towards the more accessible Avatars, especially Krishna and Rama.[125]

    Modern Hinduism (from c. 1850)

    Indology as an academic discipline of studying Indian culture from a European perspective was established in the 19th century, led by scholars such as Max Müller and John Woodroffe. They brought Vedic, Puranic and Tantric literature and philosophy to Europe and the United States. At the same time, societies such as the Brahmo Samaj and the Theosophical Society attempted to reconcile and fuse Abrahamic and Dharmic philosophies, endeavouring to institute societal reform. This period saw the emergence of movements which, while highly innovative, were rooted in indigenous tradition. They were based on the personalities and teachings of individuals, as with Ramakrishna and Ramana Maharshi. Prominent Hindu philosophers, including Aurobindo and Prabhupada (founder of ISKCON), translated, reformulated and presented Hinduism's foundational texts for contemporary audiences in new iterations, attracting followers and attention in India and abroad. Others such as Vivekananda, Paramahansa Yogananda, Sri Chinmoy, B.K.S. Iyengar and Swami Rama have also been instrumental in raising the profiles of Yoga and Vedanta in the West.

    Beliefs

    Hinduism refers to a religious mainstream which evolved organically and spread over a large territory marked by significant ethnic and cultural diversity. This mainstream evolved both by innovation from within, and by assimilation of external traditions or cults into the Hindu fold. The result is an enormous variety of religious traditions, ranging from innumerable small, unsophisticated cults to major religious movements with millions of adherents spread over the entire subcontinent. The identification of Hinduism as an independent religion separate from Buddhism or Jainism consequently hinges on the affirmation of its adherents that it is such.[126]

    Hinduism grants absolute and complete freedom of belief and worship.[127][128][129] Hinduism conceives the whole world as a single family that deifies the one truth, and therefore it accepts all forms of beliefs and dismisses labels of distinct religions which would imply a division of identity.[130] Hence, Hinduism is devoid of the concepts of apostasy, heresy and blasphemy.[131][132][133][134]

    Prominent themes in Hindu beliefs include (but are not restricted to), Dharma (ethics/duties), Samsara (the continuing cycle of birth, life, death and rebirth), Karma (action and subsequent reaction), Moksha (liberation from samsara), and the various Yogas (paths or practices).[135]

    God in Hinduism

    Hinduism is a diverse system of thought with beliefs spanning monotheism, polytheism, panentheism, pantheism, monism, and atheism among others;[136][137][138][139] and its concept of God is complex and depends upon each individual and the tradition and philosophy followed. It is sometimes referred to as henotheistic (i.e., involving devotion to a single god while accepting the existence of others), but any such term is an overgeneralization.[140]

    The Rig Veda, the oldest scripture and the mainstay of Hindu philosophy does not take a restrictive view on the fundamental question of God and the creation of universe. It rather lets the individual seek and discover answers in the quest of life. Nasadiya Sukta (Creation Hymn) of the Rig Veda thus says:[141][142]

    Who really knows?
    Who will here proclaim it?
    Whence was it produced? Whence is this creation?
    The gods came afterwards, with the creation of this universe.
    Who then knows whence it has arisen?

    Most Hindus believe that the spirit or soul — the true "self" of every person, called the atman — is eternal.[143] According to the monistic/pantheistic theologies of Hinduism (such as Advaita Vedanta school), this Atman is ultimately indistinct from Brahman, the supreme spirit. Hence, these schools are called non-dualist.[144] The goal of life, according to the Advaita school, is to realize that one's atman is identical to Brahman, the supreme soul.[145] The Upanishads state that whoever becomes fully aware of the atman as the innermost core of one's own self realizes an identity with Brahman and thereby reaches moksha (liberation or freedom).[143][146]

    The schools of Vedanta and Nyaya states that karma itself proves the existence of God.[147][148] Nyaya being the school of logic, makes the "logical" inference that the universe is an effect and it ought to have a creator.[149]

    Dualistic schools (see Dvaita and Bhakti) understand Brahman as a Supreme Being who possesses personality, and they worship him or her thus, as Vishnu, Brahma, Shiva, or Shakti, depending upon the sect. The atman is dependent on God, while moksha depends on love towards God and on God's grace.[150] When God is viewed as the supreme personal being (rather than as the infinite principle), God is called Ishvara ("The Lord"),[151] Bhagavan ("The Auspicious One"[151]) or Parameshwara ("The Supreme Lord"[151]).[144] However interpretations of Ishvara vary, ranging from non-belief in Ishvara by followers of Mimamsakas, to identifying Brahman and Ishvara as one, as in Advaita.[144] In the majority of traditions of Vaishnavism he is Vishnu, God, and the text of Vaishnava scriptures identify this Being as Krishna, sometimes referred to as svayam bhagavan. However, under Shaktism, Devi or Adi parashakti is considered as the Supreme Being and in Shaivism Shiva is considered Supreme.

    The multitude of devas are viewed as avatars of the Brahman.[152][153][154][155] In discussing the Trimurti, Sir William Jones states that Hindus "worship the Supreme Being under three forms — Vishnu, Siva, Brahma...The fundamental idea of the Hindu religion, that of metamorphoses, or transformations, is exemplified in the Avatars.[156]

    In Bhagavad Gita, for example, God is the sole repository of Gunas (attributes) also as:[157]

    His hands and feet are everywhere, He looks everywhere and all around, His eyes, ears and face point to all directions, and all the three worlds are surrounded by these.

    Atheistic doctrines dominate Hindu schools like Samkhya and Mimamsa.[158] The Samkhyapravachana Sutra of Samkhya argues that the existence of God (Ishvara) cannot be proved and hence cannot be admitted to exist.[159] Samkhya argue that an unchanging God cannot be the source of an ever changing world. It says God was a necessary metaphysical assumption demanded by circumstances.[160] Proponents of the school of Mimamsa, which is based on rituals and orthopraxy states that the evidence allegedly proving the existence of God was insufficient. They argue that there is no need to postulate a maker for the world, just as there is no need for an author to compose the Vedas or a God to validate the rituals.[161] Mimamsa considers the Gods named in the Vedas have no existence apart from the mantras that speak their names. To that regard, the power of the mantras is what is seen as the power of Gods.[162]

    Deva (Hinduism) and Avatar

    The Hindu scriptures refer to celestial entities called Devas (or devi in feminine form; devata used synonymously for Deva in Hindi), "the shining ones", which may be translated into English as "gods" or "heavenly beings".[note 8] The devas are an integral part of Hindu culture and are depicted in art, architecture and through icons, and mythological stories about them are related in the scriptures, particularly in Indian epic poetry and the Puranas. They are, however, often distinguished from Ishvara, a supreme personal god, with many Hindus worshiping Ishvara in one of its particular manifestations (ostensibly separate deities) as their i??a devata, or chosen ideal.[163][164] The choice is a matter of individual preference,[165] and of regional and family traditions.[165]

    Hindu epics and the Puranas relate several episodes of the descent of God to Earth in corporeal form to restore dharma to society and to guide humans to moksha. Such an incarnation is called an Avatar. The most prominent avatars are of Vishnu and include Rama (the protagonist in Ramayana) and Krishna (a central figure in the epic Mahabharata).

    Karma in Hinduism

    Karma translates literally as action, work, or deed,[166] and can be described as the "moral law of cause and effect".[167] According to the Upanishads an individual, known as the jiva-atma, develops sanskaras (impressions) from actions, whether physical or mental. The linga sharira, a body more subtle than the physical one but less subtle than the soul, retains impressions, carrying them over into the next life, establishing a unique trajectory for the individual.[168] Thus, the concept of a universal, neutral, and never-failing karma intrinsically relates to reincarnation as well as to one's personality, characteristics, and family. Karma binds together the notions of free will and destiny.

    This cycle of action, reaction, birth, death and rebirth is a continuum called samsara. The notion of reincarnation and karma is a strong premise in Hindu thought. The Bhagavad Gita states:

    As a person puts on new clothes and discards old and torn clothes,
    similarly an embodied soul enters new material bodies, leaving the old bodies. (B.G. 2:22)[169]

    Samsara provides ephemeral pleasures, which lead people to desire rebirth so as to enjoy the pleasures of a perishable body. However, escaping the world of samsara through moksha is believed to ensure lasting happiness and peace.[170][171] It is thought that after several reincarnations, an atman eventually seeks unity with the cosmic spirit (Brahman/Paramatman).

    The ultimate goal of life, referred to as moksha, nirvana or samadhi, is understood in several different ways: as the realization of one's union with God; as the realization of one's eternal relationship with God; realization of the unity of all existence; perfect unselfishness and knowledge of the Self; as the attainment of perfect mental peace; and as detachment from worldly desires. Such realization liberates one from samsara and ends the cycle of rebirth.[172][173] Due to belief in the indestructibility of the soul,[174] death is deemed insignificant with respect to the cosmic self.[175] Thence, a person who has no desire or ambition left and no responsibilities remaining in life or one affected by a terminal disease may embrace death by Prayopavesa.[176]

    The exact conceptualization of moksha differs among the various Hindu schools of thought. For example, Advaita Vedanta holds that after attaining moksha an atman no longer identifies itself with an individual but as identical with Brahman in all respects. The followers of Dvaita (dualistic) schools identify themselves as part of Brahman, and after attaining moksha expect to spend eternity in a loka (heaven),[177] in the company of their chosen form of Ishvara. Thus, it is said that the followers of dvaita wish to "taste sugar", while the followers of Advaita wish to "become sugar".[178]

    Objectives of human life

    Classical Hindu thought accepts the following objectives of human life, that which is sought as human purpose, aim, or end, is known as the purusarthas:[179][180]

    Dharma (righteousness, ethics)

    The Brihadaranyaka Upanishad views dharma as the universal principle of law, order, harmony, all in all truth, that sprang first from Brahman. It acts as the regulatory moral principle of the Universe. It is sat (truth), a major tenet of Hinduism. This hearkens back to the conception of the Rigveda that "Ekam Sat," (Truth Is One), of the idea that Brahman is "Sacchidananda" (Truth-Consciousness-Bliss). Dharma is not just law, or harmony, it is pure Reality. In the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad's own words:

    Verily, that which is Dharma is truth, Therefore they say of a man who speaks truth, "He speaks the Dharma,"
    or of a man who speaks the Dharma, "He speaks the Truth.", Verily, both these things are the same.

    —(Brh. Upanishad, 1.4.14) (2)

    In the Mahabharata, Krishna defines dharma as upholding both this-worldly and other-worldly affairs. (Mbh 12.110.11). The word Sanatana means 'eternal', 'perennial', or 'forever'; thus, 'Sanatana Dharma' signifies that it is the dharma that has neither beginning nor end.[181]

    Artha (livelihood, wealth)

    Artha is objective & virtuous pursuit of wealth for livelihood, obligations and economic prosperity. It is inclusive of political life, diplomacy and material well-being. The doctrine of Artha is called Arthashastra, amongst the most famous of which is Kautilya Arthashastra.[182][183][184]

    Kama (sensual pleasure)

    Kama (Sanskrit, Pali; Devanagari: ???) means desire, wish, passion, longing, pleasure of the senses, the aesthetic enjoyment of life, affection, or love.[185][186]

    Mok?a (liberation, freedom from samsara)

    Moksha (Sanskrit: ????? mok?a) or mukti (Sanskrit: ??????), literally "release" (both from a root muc "to let loose, let go"), is the last goal of life. It is liberation from samsara and the concomitant suffering involved in being subject to the cycle of repeated death and reincarnation.[187]

    Yoga

    In whatever way a Hindu defines the goal of life, there are several methods (yogas) that sages have taught for reaching that goal. Texts dedicated to Yoga include the Bhagavad Gita, the Yoga Sutras, the Hatha Yoga Pradipika, and, as their philosophical and historical basis, the Upanishads. Paths that one can follow to achieve the spiritual goal of life (moksha, samadhi or nirvana) include:
    Bhakti Yoga (the path of love and devotion)
    Karma Yoga (the path of right action)
    Raja Yoga (the path of meditation)
    Jñana Yoga (the path of wisdom)[188]

    An individual may prefer one or some yogas over others, according to his or her inclination and understanding. Some devotional schools teach that bhakti is the only practical path to achieve spiritual perfection for most people, based on their belief that the world is currently in the Kali Yuga (one of four epochs which are part of the Yuga cycle).[189] Practice of one yoga does not exclude others. Many schools believe that the different yogas naturally blend into and aid other yogas. For example, the practice of jnana yoga, is thought to inevitably lead to pure love (the goal of bhakti yoga), and vice versa.[190] Someone practicing deep meditation (such as in raja yoga) must embody the core principles of karma yoga, jnana yoga and bhakti yoga, whether directly or indirectly.[188][191]

    Practices

    Hindu practices generally involve seeking awareness of God and sometimes also seeking blessings from Devas. Therefore, Hinduism has developed numerous practices meant to help one think of divinity in the midst of everyday life. Hindus can engage in puja (worship or veneration),[151] either at home or at a temple. At home, Hindus often create a shrine with icons dedicated to their chosen form(s) of God. Temples are usually dedicated to a primary deity along with associated subordinate deities though some commemorate multiple deities. Visiting temples is not obligatory,[192] and many visit temples only during religious festivals. Hindus perform their worship through icons (murtis). The icon serves as a tangible link between the worshiper and God.[193] The image is often considered a manifestation of God, since God is immanent. The Padma Purana states that the murti is not to be thought of as mere stone or wood but as a manifest form of the Divinity.[194] A few Hindu sects, such as the Arya Samaj, do not believe in worshiping God through icons.

    Hinduism has a developed system of symbolism and iconography to represent the sacred in art, architecture, literature and worship. These symbols gain their meaning from the scriptures, mythology, or cultural traditions. The syllable Om (which represents the Parabrahman) and the Swastika sign (which symbolises auspiciousness) have grown to represent Hinduism itself, while other markings such as tilaka identify a follower of the faith. Hinduism associates many symbols, which include the lotus, chakra and veena, with particular deities.

    Mantras are invocations, praise and prayers that through their meaning, sound, and chanting style help a devotee focus the mind on holy thoughts or express devotion to God/the deities. Many devotees perform morning ablutions at the bank of a sacred river while chanting the Gayatri Mantra or Mahamrityunjaya mantras.[195] The epic Mahabharata extols Japa (ritualistic chanting) as the greatest duty in the Kali Yuga (what Hindus believe to be the current age).[196] Many adopt Japa as their primary spiritual practice.[196] Yoga is a Hindu discipline which trains the consciousness for tranquility, health and spiritual insight. This is done through a system of postures and exercises to practise control of the body and mind.[197]

    Rituals

    The vast majority of Hindus engage in religious rituals on a daily basis.[198][199] Most Hindus observe religious rituals at home.[200] but this varies greatly among regions, villages, and individuals. Devout Hindus perform daily rituals such as worshiping at dawn after bathing (usually at a family shrine, and typically includes lighting a lamp and offering foodstuffs before the images of deities), recitation from religious scripts, singing devotional hymns, meditation, chanting mantras, reciting scriptures etc.[200] A notable feature in religious ritual is the division between purity and pollution. Religious acts presuppose some degree of impurity or defilement for the practitioner, which must be overcome or neutralised before or during ritual procedures. Purification, usually with water, is thus a typical feature of most religious action.[200] Other characteristics include a belief in the efficacy of sacrifice and concept of merit, gained through the performance of charity or good works, that will accumulate over time and reduce sufferings in the next world.[200] Vedic rites of fire-oblation (yajna) are now only occasional practices, although they are highly revered in theory. In Hindu wedding and burial ceremonies, however, the yajña and chanting of Vedic mantras are still the norm.[201] The rituals, upacharas, change with time. For instance, in the past few hundred years some rituals, such as sacred dance and music offerings in the standard Sodasa Upacharas set prescribed by the Agama Shastra, were replaced by the offerings of rice and sweets.

    Occasions like birth, marriage, and death involve what are often elaborate sets of religious customs. In Hinduism, life-cycle rituals include Annaprashan (a baby's first intake of solid food), Upanayanam ("sacred thread ceremony" undergone by upper-caste children at their initiation into formal education) and Sraddha (ritual of treating people to a meal in return for prayers to 'God' to give peace to the soul of the deceased).[202][203] For most people in India, the betrothal of the young couple and the exact date and time of the wedding are matters decided by the parents in consultation with astrologers.[202] On death, cremation is considered obligatory for all except sanyasis, hijra, and children under five.[204] Cremation is typically performed by wrapping the corpse in cloth and burning it on a pyre.

    Pilgrimage

    Following pilgrimage sites are most famous amongst Hindu devotees:

    Char Dham (Famous Four Pilgrimage sites): The four holy sites Puri, Rameswaram, Dwarka, and Badrinath (or alternatively the Himalayan towns of Badrinath, Kedarnath, Gangotri, and Yamunotri) compose the Char Dham (four abodes) pilgrimage circuit.

    Kumbh Mela: The Kumbh Mela (the "pitcher festival") is one of the holiest of Hindu pilgrimages that is held every 12 years; the location is rotated among Allahabad, Haridwar, Nashik, and Ujjain.

    Old Holy cities as per Puranic Texts: Varanasi formerly known as Kashi, Allahabad formerly known as Prayag, Haridwar-Rishikesh, Mathura-Vrindavan, and Ayodhya.

    Major Temple cities: Puri, which hosts a major Vaishnava Jagannath temple and Rath Yatra celebration; Katra, home to the Vaishno Devi temple; Three comparatively recent temples of fame and huge pilgrimage are Shirdi, home to Sai Baba of Shirdi, Tirumala - Tirupati, home to the Tirumala Venkateswara Temple; and Sabarimala,where Swami Ayyappan is worshipped.

    Shakti Peethas: Another important set of pilgrimages are the Shakti Peethas, where the Mother Goddess is worshipped, the two principal ones being Kalighat and Kamakhya.

    While there are different yet similar pilgrimage routes in different parts of India, all are respected equally well, according to the universality of Hinduism.

    Pilgrimage is not mandatory in Hinduism, though many adherents undertake them.[205]






    Last edited by orthodoxymoron on Mon May 08, 2017 9:14 pm; edited 3 times in total
    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7368
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The United States of the Solar System, A.D. 2133 (Book Three)

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Sun May 07, 2017 10:52 am



    What if there were a church which consisted of ONLY The Wall Street Journal and Sacred Classical Music??!! I've become frighteningly-fixated upon the Medical-Military-Money Complex. I understand the Peace-Prevention-Philanthropy Complex -- but what if Ancient and Ongoing Star-Wars have everything to do with why things are the way they are (in an obviously non-idealistic manner)?? At one point in my life -- I was headed toward the Medical-Military-Money Complex -- but my conscience bothered me -- and I dropped-out -- never recovering. I've been a Shell of a Guy for most of my adult-life -- mostly because of hyper-religiosity and hyper-idealism. The contrast between the Ideal and the Reality is truly devastating -- but most people haven't got a clue (or a backbone). I once worked in a Major Teaching-Hospital (just down the street from a Major VA-Hospital). There were a couple a Major Air-Force Bases just a few miles away. I rented a Room with a View of the Hospitals and One of the Air-Force Bases -- and I sort of made the connection. At one point -- I was very interested in becoming a Flight-Surgeon -- and I think I would've made an excellent one. I'm foolish and stupid now -- but I wasn't always this way. If I had persisted in my pursuit of the Medical-Military-Money Complex (and murdered my conscience) I'd probably be a Multi-Millionaire with a Model-Wife and Charming-Children (attending Harvard and Yale) -- and I might be performing Alien-Autopsies in Deep Underground Military Medical-Centers. Who Knows??? Let's see -- if I sell my house and write a book -- I might be able to afford an Old-Porsche and a Mountain-Cabin -- where I can vegetate away the rest of my miserable life. Truth and Ethics are SO Overrated... BTW -- I continue to be interested in the contrast between the following three groups of six:

    I. Genesis through Joshua.
    II. Job through Isaiah.
    III. Matthew through Romans.

    What's really going on here?? What if the Red-Letter Teachings of Jesus were somehow assimilated into Job through Isaiah?? I also continue to be interested in Gospel Source "Q". What is it's true origin?? How extensive was "Q" in it's original form?? Consider the following:

    I. Torah Judaism.
    II. Talmud Judaism.
    III. Wisdom-Books -- Major-Prophets -- Source "Q" Judaism with a Non-Exclusive Universal Interpretation and Application.

    There seems to be a real zoo of mythologies -- theologies -- philosophies -- and general BS. The confusion is out-there. Way out-there. What would an Ecumenical Christian-Muslim-Hindu-Jewish 'Cathedral' and 'Liturgy' look like?? Would this unite everyone -- or just make everyone angry?? Everyone has to be "RIGHT" -- don't they??? But what if Everyone is "WRONG"??? Delusions v Delusions??? Lies v Lies??? What if the confusion is intentional??? What if One God Created ALL Religions??? Think long and hard about Ancient Babylon and the Tower of Babel. Hinduism  continued. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinduism


    Festivals

    Hindu festivals (Sanskrit: Utsava; literally: "to lift higher") are considered as symbolic rituals that beautifully weave individual and social life to dharma.[206] Hinduism has many festivals throughout the year. The Hindu calendar usually prescribe their dates.

    The festivals typically celebrate events from Hindu mythology, often coinciding with seasonal changes. There are festivals which are primarily celebrated by specific sects or in certain regions of the Indian subcontinent.

    Some widely observed Hindu festivals include:

    Maha Shivaratri
    Pongal
    Holi
    Vasant Panchami
    Thaipusam
    Ram Navami
    Krishna Janmastami
    Ganesh Chaturthi
    Shigmo
    Dussera
    Durga Puja
    Diwali
    Gudi Padwa
    Ugadi
    Bihu
    Bonalu
    Rath Yatra
    Guru Purnima
    Raksha Bandhan
    Onam
    Gowri Habba
    Chhath
    Vishu

    Sruti, Smriti, and List of Hindu scriptures

    Hinduism is based on "the accumulated treasury of spiritual laws discovered by different persons in different times".[207][208] The scriptures were transmitted orally in verse form to aid memorisation, for many centuries before they were written down.[209] Over many centuries, sages refined the teachings and expanded the canon. In post-Vedic and current Hindu belief, most Hindu scriptures are not typically interpreted literally. More importance is attached to the ethics and metaphorical meanings derived from them.[87] Most sacred texts are in Sanskrit. The texts are classified into two classes: Shruti and Smriti.

    Shruti

    Shruti (lit: that which is heard)[210] primarily refers to the Vedas, which form the earliest record of the Hindu scriptures. While many Hindus revere the Vedas as eternal truths revealed to ancient sages (??is),[208] some devotees do not associate the creation of the Vedas with a god or person. They are thought of as the laws of the spiritual world, which would still exist even if they were not revealed to the sages.[207][211][212] Hindus believe that because the spiritual truths of the Vedas are eternal, they continue to be expressed in new ways.[213]

    There are four Vedas (called ?g-, Sama-, Yajus- and Atharva-). The Rigveda is the first and most important Veda.[214] Each Veda is divided into four parts: the primary one, the Veda proper, being the Sa?hita, which contains sacred mantras. The other three parts form a three-tier ensemble of commentaries, usually in prose and are believed to be slightly later in age than the Sa?hita. These are: the Brahma?as, Ara?yakas, and the Upanishads. The first two parts were subsequently called the Karmaka??a (ritualistic portion), while the last two form the Jñanaka??a (knowledge portion).[215] While the Vedas focus on rituals, the Upanishads focus on spiritual insight and philosophical teachings, and discuss Brahman and reincarnation.[87][216][217]

    A well known shloka from Brihadaranyaka Upanishad is:

    IAST:

    om asato ma sadgamaya | tamaso ma jyotirgamaya ||
    m?tyor ma am?ta? gamaya | om santi santi santi ||
    – b?hadara?yaka upani?ada 1.3.28

    Translation:

    Lead Us From the Unreal To the Real |
    Lead Us From Darkness To Light ||
    Lead Us From Death To Immortality |
    Om Let There Be Peace Peace Peace.||
    – Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 1.3.28.

    Smritis

    Hindu texts other than the Shrutis are collectively called the Smritis (memory). The most notable of the smritis are the epics, which consist of the Mahabharata and the Ramaya?a. The Bhagavad Gita is an integral part of the Mahabharata and one of the most popular sacred texts of Hinduism. It contains philosophical teachings from Krishna, an incarnation of Vishnu, told to the prince Arjuna on the eve of a great war. The Bhagavad Gita, spoken by Krishna, is described as the essence of the Vedas.[218] However Gita, sometimes called Gitopanishad, is more often placed in the Shruti, category, being Upanishadic in content.[219] Pura?as, which illustrate Hindu ideas through vivid narratives come under smritis. Other texts include Devi Mahatmya, the Tantras, the Yoga Sutras, Tirumantiram, Shiva Sutras and the Hindu Agamas. A more controversial text, the Manusmriti, is a prescriptive lawbook which lays the societal codes of social stratification which later evolved into the Indian caste system.[220]

    A well known verse from Bhagavad Gita describing a concept in Karma Yoga is explained as follows[221][222]

    To action alone hast thou a right and never at all to its fruits;
    let not the fruits of action be thy motive;
    neither let there be in thee any attachment to inaction. (2.47)
    Order of precedence of authority

    The order of precedence regarding authority of Vedic Scriptures is as follows,
    Sruti, literally "hearing, listening", are the sacred texts comprising the central canon of Hinduism and is one of the three main sources of dharma and therefore is also influential within Hindu Law.[223]

    Sm?ti, literally "that which is remembered (or recollected)", refers to a specific body of Hindu religious scripture, and is a codified component of Hindu customary law. Post Vedic scriptures such as Ramayana, Mahabharata and traditions of the rules on dharma such as Manu Smriti and Yaagnyavalkya Smriti. Smrti also denotes tradition in the sense that it portrays the traditions of the rules on dharma, especially those of lawful virtuous persons.
    Pura?a, literally "of ancient times", are post-vedic scriptures notably consisting of narratives of the history of the universe from creation to destruction, genealogies of kings, heroes, sages, and demigods, and descriptions of Hindu cosmology, philosophy, and geography.[224]

    Si??achara, literally "that which is followed by good (in recent times)". Atmatu??i, literally "that which satisfies oneself (or self validation)", according to which one has to decide whether or not to do with bona fide. Initially this was not considered in the order of precedence but Manu and Yajñavalkya considered it as last one.

    That means, if anyone of them contradicts the preceding one then it disqualified as an authority. There is a well known Indian saying that Sm?ti follows Sruti. So it was considered that in order to establish any theistic philosophical theory (Astika Siddhanta) one ought not contradict Sruti (Vedas).

    Adi Sankara has chosen three standards and named as Prasthanatrayi, literally, three points of departure (three standards). Later these were referred to as the three canonical texts of reference of Hindu philosophy by other Vedanta schools.

    They are:

    1.The Upanishads, known as Upadesha prasthana (injunctive texts), (part of Sruti)
    2.The Bhagavad Gita, known as Sadhana prasthana (practical text), (part of Sm?ti)
    3.The Brahma Sutras, known as Nyaya prasthana or Yukti prasthana (part of darsana of Uttara Mima?sa)

    The Upanishads consist of twelve or thirteen major texts, with many minor texts. The Bhagavad Gita is part of the Mahabharata.The Brahma Sutras (also known as the Vedanta Sutras), systematise the doctrines taught in the Upanishads and the Gita.

    Demographics

    Hinduism is a major religion in India and, according to a 2001 census, Hinduism was followed by around 80.5% of the country's population of 1.21 billion (2012 estimate) (960 million adherents).[225] Other significant populations are found in Nepal (23 million), Bangladesh (15 million) and the Indonesian island of Bali (3.3 million).

    Countries with the greatest proportion of Hindus from Hinduism by country (as of 2008):

    1.   Nepal 86.5%[226]
    2. India 80.5%
    3. Mauritius 54%[227]
    4. Guyana 28%[228]
    5. Fiji 27.9%[229]
    6. Bhutan 25%[230]
    7. Trinidad and Tobago 22.5%
    8. Suriname 20%[231]
    9. Sri Lanka 15%[232]
    10. Bangladesh 9.6%[233]
    11. Qatar 7.2%
    12. Réunion 6.7%
    13. Malaysia 6.3%[234]
    14. Bahrain 6.25%
    15. Kuwait 6%
    16. United Arab Emirates 5%
    17. Singapore 4%
    18. Oman 3%
    19. Belize 2.3%
    20. Seychelles 2.1%[235]

    Demographically, Hinduism is the world's third largest religion, after Christianity and Islam.

    Denominations

    Hinduism has no central doctrinal authority and many practising Hindus do not claim to belong to any particular denomination.[237] However, academics categorize contemporary Hinduism into four major denominations: Vaishnavism, Shaivism, Shaktism and Smartism. The denominations differ primarily in the god worshipped as the Supreme One and in the traditions that accompany worship of that god.

    Vaishnavas worship Vishnu as the supreme God; Shaivites worship Shiva as the supreme; Shaktas worship Shakti (power) personified through a female divinity or Mother Goddess, Devi; while Smartas believe in the essential oneness of five (panchadeva) or six (Shanmata, as Tamil Hindus add Skanda)[238] deities as personifications of the Supreme.

    The Western conception of what Hinduism is has been defined by the Smarta view; many Hindus, who may not understand or follow Advaita philosophy, in contemporary Hinduism, invariably follow the Shanmata belief worshiping many forms of God. One commentator, noting the influence of the Smarta tradition, remarked that although many Hindus may not strictly identify themselves as Smartas but, by adhering to Advaita Vedanta as a foundation for non-sectarianism, are indirect followers.[239]

    Other denominations like Ganapatya (the cult of Ganesha) and Saura (Sun worship) are not so widespread.

    There are movements that are not easily placed in any of the above categories, such as Swami Dayananda Saraswati's Arya Samaj, which rejects image worship and veneration of multiple deities. It focuses on the Vedas and the Vedic fire sacrifices (yajña).

    The Tantric traditions have various sects, as Banerji observes:

    Tantras are ... also divided as astika or Vedic and nastika or non-Vedic. In accordance with the predominance of the deity the astika works are again divided as Sakta (Shakta), Saiva (Shaiva), Saura, Ga?apatya and Vai??ava (Vaishnava).[240]

    Varnas

    Hindu society has been categorized into four classes, called varnas.They are,
    the Brahmins: Vedic teachers and priests;
    the Kshatriyas: warriors, nobles, and kings;
    the Vaishyas: farmers, merchants, and businessmen; and
    the Shudras: servants and labourers.

    The Bhagavad Gita links the varna to an individual's duty (svadharma), inborn nature (svabhava), and natural tendencies (gu?a).[241] Gita's conception of varna allowed Aurobindo to derive his doctrine that "functions of a man ought to be determined by his natural turn, gift and capacities."[242][243] The Manusm?iti categorizes the different castes.[244]

    Some mobility and flexibility within the varnas challenge allegations of social discrimination in the caste system, as has been pointed out by several sociologists,[245][246] although some other scholars disagree.[247] Hindus and scholars debate whether the so-called caste system is an integral part of Hinduism sanctioned by the scriptures or an outdated social custom.[248][249][250] The religious teacher Sri Ramakrishna (1836–1886) taught that

    Lovers of God do not belong to any caste . . . . A brahmin without this love is no longer a brahmin. And a pariah with the love of God is no longer a pariah. Through bhakti (devotion to God) an untouchable becomes pure and elevated.[251]

    Ashramas

    Traditionally the life of a Hindu is divided into four Ashramas (phases or stages; unrelated meanings include monastery). The first part of one's life, Brahmacharya, the stage as a student, is spent in celibate, controlled, sober and pure contemplation under the guidance of a Guru, building up the mind for spiritual knowledge. Grihastha is the householder's stage, in which one marries and satisfies kama and artha in one's married and professional life respectively (see the goals of life). The moral obligations of a Hindu householder include supporting one's parents, children, guests and holy figures. Vanaprastha, the retirement stage, is gradual detachment from the material world. This may involve giving over duties to one's children, spending more time in religious practices and embarking on holy pilgrimages. Finally, in Sannyasa, the stage of asceticism, one renounces all worldly attachments to secludedly find the Divine through detachment from worldly life and peacefully shed the body for Moksha.[252]

    Monasticism

    Some Hindus choose to live a monastic life (Sannyasa) in pursuit of liberation or another form of spiritual perfection. Monastics commit themselves to a life of simplicity, celibacy, detachment from worldly pursuits, and the contemplation of God.[253] A Hindu monk is called a sanyasi, sadhu, or swami. A female renunciate is called a sanyasini. Renunciates receive high respect in Hindu society because their outward renunciation of selfishness and worldliness serves as an inspiration to householders who strive for mental renunciation. Some monastics live in monasteries, while others wander from place to place, trusting in God alone to provide for their needs.[254] It is considered a highly meritorious act for a householder to provide sadhus with food or other necessaries. Sadhus strive to treat all with respect and compassion, whether a person may be poor or rich, good or wicked, and to be indifferent to praise, blame, pleasure, and pain.[253]

    Ahimsa, Vegetarianism and religion, and Cattle in Religion

    Hindus advocate the practice of ahi?sa (non-violence) and respect for all life because divinity is believed to permeate all beings, including plants and non-human animals.[255] The term ahi?sa appears in the Upanishads,[256] the epic Mahabharata[257] and Ahi?sa is the first of the five Yamas (vows of self-restraint) in Patanjali's Yoga Sutras.[258] and the first principle for all member of Varnashrama Dharma (brahmin, kshatriya, vaishya and shudra) in Law of Manu (book 10, sutra 63 : Ahimsa, satya, asteya, shaucam and indrayanigraha, almost similar to main principles of jainism).[259][260]

    In accordance with ahi?sa, many Hindus embrace vegetarianism to respect higher forms of life. Estimates of the number of lacto vegetarians in India (includes adherents of all religions) vary between 20% and 42%.[261] The food habits vary with the community and region: for example, some castes having fewer vegetarians and coastal populations relying on seafood.[262][263] Some avoid meat only on specific holy days. Observant Hindus who do eat meat almost always abstain from beef. The cow in Hindu society is traditionally identified as a caretaker and a maternal figure,[264] and Hindu society honours the cow as a symbol of unselfish giving.[265] Cow-slaughter is legally banned in almost all states of India.[266]

    There are many Hindu groups that have continued to abide by a strict vegetarian diet in modern times. One example is the movement known as ISKCON (International Society for Krishna Consciousness), whose followers “not only abstain from meat, fish, and fowl, but also avoid certain vegetables that are thought to have negative properties, such as onion and garlic.”[267] A second example is the Swaminarayan Movement. The followers of this Hindu group also staunchly adhere to a diet that is devoid of meat, eggs, and seafood.[268]

    Vegetarianism is propagated by the Yajur Veda and it is recommended for a satvic (purifying) lifestyle.[269] Thus, another reason that dietary purity is so eminent within Hinduism is because of “the idea that food reflects the general qualities of nature: purity, energy, [and] inertia.” It follows, then, that a healthy diet should be one that promotes purity within an individual.[267]

    Based on this reasoning, Hindus should avoid or minimize the intake of foods that do not promote purity. These foods include onion and garlic, which are regarded as rajasic (a state which is characterized by “tension and overbearing demeanor”) foods, and meat, which is regarded as tamasic (a state which is characterized by “anger, greed, and jealousy”).[270]

    Some Hindus from certain sects - generally Shakta,[271] certain Shudra and Kshatriya castes[272][273] and certain Eastern Indian[274] and East Asian regions;[275] practise animal sacrifice (bali),[276] although most Hindus, including the majority of Vaishnava and Shaivite Hindus abhor it.[277]

    Notes

    1.^ Sweetman mentions: Wilhelm Halbfass (1988), India and Europe
    IXth European Conference on Modern Asian Studies in Heidelberg (1989), Hinduism Reconsidered
    Ronald Inden, Imagining India
    Carol Breckenridge and Peter van der Veer, Orientalism and the Postcolinal Predicament
    Vasudha Dalmia and Heinrich von Stietencron, Representing Hinduism
    S.N. Balagangadhara, The Heathen in his Blindness...
    Thomas Trautmann, Aryans and British India
    Richard King (1989), Orientalism and religion

    2.^ See Rajiv Malhotra and Being Different for a critic who gained widespread attention outside the academia.
    3.^ Sweetman cites Richard King (1999) p.128.[42]
    4.^ Sweetman cites Viswanathan (2003), Colonialism and the Construction of Hinduism, p.26
    5.^ See also Sanskritization, Indo-Aryanization and Vedantification.
    6.^ Michaels mentions Flood 1996[68] as a source for "Prevedic Religions".[69]
    7.^ Smart distinguishes "Brahmanism" from the Vedic religion, connecting "Brahmanism" with the Upanishads.[73]
    8.^ For translation of deva in singular noun form as "a deity, god", and in plural form as "the gods" or "the heavenly or shining ones", see: Monier-Williams 2001, p. 492. In fact, there are different ranks among the devas. The highest are the immortal Mahadevas, such as Shiva, Vishnu, etc. The second-rank devas, such as Ganesha, are described as their offspring: they are "born", and their "lifespan" is quite limited. In ISKCON the word is translated as "demigods", although it can also denote such heavenly denizens as gandharvas. See: "Vedic cosmology". Vedic Knowledge Online. VEDA - Bhaktivedanta Book Trust. Retrieved 2007-06-25.. For translation of devata as "godhead, divinity", see: Monier-Williams 2001, p. 495.

    References

    1.^ a b c Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Encyclopedia, Merriam-Webster, 2000, p. 751
    2.^ a b Hinduism is variously defined as a "religion", "set of religious beliefs and practices", "religious tradition" etc. For a discussion on the topic, see: "Establishing the boundaries" in Gavin Flood (2003), pp. 1-17.
    3.^ Georgis, Faris (2010). Alone in Unity: Torments of an Iraqi God-Seeker in North America. Dorrance Publishing. p. 62. ISBN 1-4349-0951-4.
    4.^ Osborne 2005, p. 9
    5.^ Zimmer 1989, p. 219.
    6.^ http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/hinduism/history/history_1.shtml
    7.^ D. S. Sarma, Kenneth W. Morgan, The Religion of the Hindus, 1953
    8.^ Laderman, Gary (2003), Religion and American Cultures: An Encyclopedia of Traditions, Diversity, and Popular Expressions, Santa Barbara, Calif: ABC-CLIO, p. 119, ISBN 1-57607-238-X, "world's oldest living civilisation and religion"
    9.^ Turner, Jeffrey S. (1996), Encyclopedia of relationships across the lifespan, Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press, p. 359, ISBN 0-313-29576-X, "It is also recognized as the oldest major religion in the world"
    10.^ a b Klostermaier 1994, p. 1
    11.^ Encyclopedia Brittanica, Other sources: the process of "Sanskritization".
    12.^ http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/hinduism/history/history_1.shtml
    13.^ http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/hinduism/history/history_1.shtml
    14.^ http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/hinduism/history/history_1.shtml
    15.^ "The Global Religious Landscape - Hinduism". A Report on the Size and Distribution of the World’s Major Religious Groups as of 2010. The pew foundation. Retrieved 31 March 2013.
    16.^ "Major Religions Ranked by Size". Adherents.com. Retrieved 5 March 2013.
    17.^ "India", Oxford English Dictionary, second edition, 2100a.d. Oxford University Press.
    18.^ Rig Veda
    19.^ Subramuniyaswami, Satguru Sivaya (2003). Dancing With Siva: Hinduism's Contemporary Catechism. Himalayan Academy Publications. p. 1008. ISBN 0-945497-96-2, 9780945497967 Check |isbn= value (help).
    20.^ Thapar, R. 1993. Interpreting Early India. Delhi: Oxford University Press. p. 77
    21.^ Thompson Platts, John, A dictionary of Urdu, classical Hindi, and English, W.H. Allen & Co., Oxford University 1884
    22.^ O'Conell, Joseph T. (1973). "The Word 'Hindu' in Gau?iya Vai??ava Texts". Journal of the American Oriental Society 93 (3). pp. 340–344.
    23.^ Weightman & Klostermaier 1994, p. 1
    24.^ Merriam-Webster's Encyclopedia of World Religions, p. 434
    25.^ Vaz, P. (2001), "Coexistence of Secularism and Fundamentalism in India", Handbook of Global Social Policy (CRC Press): 124, ISBN 978-0-8247-0357-8, retrieved 2008-06-26, "Hinduism is the oldest of all the major world religions."
    26.^ Eastman, R. (1999), The Ways of Religion: An Introduction to the Major Traditions, Oxford University Press, USA
    27.^ a b c d Flood 2001, Defining Hinduism
    28.^ Smith, W.C. (1962) The Meaning and End of Religion. San Francisco, Harper and Row. p. 65
    29.^ Stietencron, Hinduism: On the Proper Use of A Deceptive Term, pp.1-22
    30.^ Halbfass, (1991) Tradition and Reflection. Albany, SUNY Press. pp. 1-22
    31.^ Smart, (1993) The Formation Rather than the Origin of a Tradition,in DISKUS: A Disembodied Journal of Religious Studies, vol. 1, no. 1, p. 1
    32.^ Koller, J. M. (1984), "JSTOR: Philosophy East and West, Vol. 34, No. 2 (April, 1984 ), pp. 234-236", Philosophy East and West (www.jstor.org) 34 (2): 234–236, JSTOR 1398925.
    33.^ Joel Beversluis (2000), Sourcebook of the World's Religions: An Interfaith Guide to Religion and Spirituality (Sourcebook of the World's Religions, 3rd ed), Novato, Calif: New World Library, p. 50, ISBN 1-57731-121-3
    34.^ Hinduism in Britain Kim Knott, (2000) The South Asian Religious Diaspora in Britain, Canada, and a United States.
    35.^ The Concise Oxford Dictionary of World Religions. Ed. John Bowker. Oxford University Press, 2000;
    36.^ Harvey, Andrew (2001), Teachings of the Hindu Mystics, Boulder: Shambhala, xiii, ISBN 1-57062-449-6
    37.^ Insoll, Timothy (2001), Archaeology and world religion, Routledge, ISBN 978-0-415-22155-9
    38.^ Bhagavad Gita, Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan: "Hinduism is not just a faith. It is the union of reason and intuition that can not be defined but is only to be experienced."
    39.^ Bryan S. Turner "Essays on the Sociology of Fate - Page 275"
    40.^ Ferro-Luzzi, (1991)The Polythetic-Prototype Approach to Hinduism in G.D. Sontheimer and H. Kulke (ed.) Hinduism Reconsidered. Delhi: Manohar. pp. 187-95
    41.^ a b Sweetman 2004.
    42.^ a b King 1999.
    43.^ Nussbaum 2009.
    44.^ a b c King 1999, p. 171.
    45.^ King1999, p. 169.
    46.^ a b c d e f g h Sweetman 2004, p. 13.
    47.^ a b Sweetamn 2004, p. 13.
    48.^ Sweetman 2013, p. 13-14.
    49.^ Sweetman 2004, p. 13-14.
    50.^ a b c d e Sweetman 2004, p. 14.
    51.^ Sweetman 2004, p. 14-15.
    52.^ a b c d e Sweetman 2004, p. 15.
    53.^ Sweetamn 2004, p. 15, 16.
    54.^ Jha, Preeti (26 December 2007). "Guinness comes to east Delhi: Akshardham world’s largest Hindu temple". ExpressIndia.com. Retrieved 2008-01-02.
    55.^ Adherents.com, which itself references many sources; The World Almanac & Book of Facts 1998 being especially relevant.
    56.^ Flood, Gavin. D. 1996. An introduction to Hinduism. 1996. P.14
    57.^ J. McDaniel Hinduism, in John Corrigan, The Oxford Handbook of Religion and Emotion, (2007) Oxford University Press, 544 pages, pp. 52-53 ISBN 0-19-517021-0
    58.^ a b c d Michaels 2004, p. 21.
    59.^ a b c d e Michaels 2004, p. 23.
    60.^ a b c d Michaels 2004, p. 22.
    61.^ a b c d Michaels 2004, p. 24.
    62.^ a b Khanna 2007, p. xvii.
    63.^ Misra 2004, p. 194.
    64.^ Kulke 2004, p. 7.
    65.^ Flood 1996, p. 21.
    66.^ a b Smart 2003, p. 52-53.
    67.^ a b c Michaels 2004, p. 32.
    68.^ a b Flood 1996.
    69.^ Michaels 2004, p. 31, 348.
    70.^ Muesse 2003.
    71.^ a b Muesse 2011.
    72.^ Muesse 2011, p. 16.
    73.^ Smart 2003, p. 52, 83-86.
    74.^ Smart 2003, p. 52.
    75.^ Michaels 2004, p. 36.
    76.^ a b Michaels 2004, p. 38.
    77.^ Muesse 2011, p. 115.
    78.^ Muesse 2003, p. 14.
    79.^ Muesse 2003, p. 15.
    80.^ a b c Michaels 2004.
    81.^ Flood & 1996 21-22.
    82.^ Michaels 2004, p. 39.
    83.^ Michaels 2004, p. 40.
    84.^ Michaels 2004, p. 41.
    85.^ a b Michaels 2004, p. 43.
    86.^ a b Michaels 2004, p. 45.
    87.^ a b c Nikhilananda 1990, pp. 3–8
    88.^ "Hindu History" The BBC names a bath and phallic symbols of the Harappan civilisation as features of the "Prehistoric religion (3000-1000 BCE)".
    89.^ Invasion of the Genes Genetic Heritage of India, p. 184, by B. S. Ahloowalia, Strategic Book Publishing, 30 Oct 2009. "Elements of Vedic religion go back to Proto-Indo-European times."
    90.^ Indo-European sacred space: Vedic and Roman cult, p. 242, by Roger D. Woodard, University of Illinois Press, 25 Sep 2006. "Vedic and Roman religious practice both continue a Proto-Indo-European doctrine and cultic use of dual sacred spaces"
    91.^ The Wiley-Blackwell Companion to Religion and Social Justice, p. 18, by Michael D. Palmer and Stanley M. Burgess, John Wiley & Sons, 3 Apr 2012. "The Vedas are a collection of religious texts brought to India by the Indo-European peoples, various tribes that moved into India perhaps from about 2000 BCE onwards."
    92.^ Hindu History "...the language of vedic culture was vedic Sanskrit, which is related to other languages in the Indo-European language group. This suggests that Indo-European speakers had a common linguistic origin known by scholars as Proto-Indo-European."
    93.^ T. Oberlies (Die Religion des Rgveda, Vienna 1998. p. 158) based on 'cumulative evidence' sets wide range of 1700–1100.
    94.^ Singh, Upinder (2008), A History of Ancient and Early Medieval India: From the Stone Age to the 12th Century, Pearson Education India, p. 195, ISBN 978-81-317-1120-0
    95.^ Brockington, JL (1984), The Sacred Thread: Hinduism in its Continuity and Diversity, Edinburgh University Press, p. 7
    96.^ Krishnananda. Swami. A Short History of Religious and Philosophic Thought in India, Divine Life Society. p. 21
    97.^ Holdrege (2004:215). Conformity with ?ta would enable progress whereas its violation would lead to punishment. Panikkar (2001:350-351) remarks: {{quote|?ta is the ultimate foundation of everything; it is "the supreme", although this is not to be understood in a static sense. [...] It is the expression of the primordial dynamism that is inherent in everything...."
    98.^ Day, Terence P. (1982). The Conception of Punishment in Early Indian Literature. Ontario: Wilfrid Laurier University Press. P. 42-45. ISBN 0-919812-15-5.
    99.^ Duchesne-Guillemin 1963, p. 46.
    100.^ a b Neusner, Jacob (2009), World Religions in America: An Introduction, Westminster John Knox Press, ISBN 978-0-664-23320-4
    101.^ Melton, J. Gordon; Baumann, Martin (2010), Religions of the World, Second Edition: A Comprehensive Encyclopedia of Beliefs and Practices, ABC-CLIO, p. 1324, ISBN 978-1-59884-204-3
    102.^ Mahadevan, T. M. P (1956), Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, ed., History of Philosophy Eastern and Western, George Allen & Unwin Ltd, p. 57
    103.^ Fowler, Jeaneane D. (1 February 2012). The Bhagavad Gita: A Text and Commentary for Students. Sussex Academic Press. pp. xxii–xxiii. ISBN 978-1-84519-346-1.
    104.^ Flood, Gavin D. (1996), An Introduction to Hinduism, Cambridge University Press, p. 82, ISBN 978-0-521-43878-0
    105.^ Flood, Gavin. Olivelle, Patrick. 2003. The Blackwell Companion to Hinduism. Malden: Blackwell. pg. 273-4. "The second half of the first millennium BCE was the period that created many of the ideological and institutional elements that characterize later Indian religions. The renouncer tradition played a central role during this formative period of Indian religious history....Some of the fundamental values and beliefs that we generally associate with Indian religions in general and Hinduism in particular were in part the creation of the renouncer tradition. These include the two pillars of Indian theologies: samsara - the belief that life in this world is one of suffering and subject to repeated deaths and births (rebirth); moksa/nirvana - the goal of human existence....."
    106.^ Pratt, James Bissett (1996), The Pilgrimage of Buddhism and a Buddhist Pilgrimage, Asian Educational Services, p. 90, ISBN 978-81-206-1196-2
    107.^ "Itihasas". ReligionFacts. Retrieved 1 October 2011.
    108.^ Radhakrishnan & Moore 1967, p. xviii–xxi.
    109.^ Sharma, Peri Sarveswara (1980). Anthology of Kumarilabha??a's Works. Delhi, Motilal Banarsidass. p. 5.
    110.^ "Consciousness in Advaita Vedanta ," By William M. Indich, Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, 1995, ISBN 81-208-1251-4.
    111.^ "Gandhi And Mahayana Buddhism". Class.uidaho.edu. Retrieved 2011-06-10.
    112.^ Bhattacharya, Ramkrishna (15 December 2011). Studies on the Carvaka/Lokayata. Anthem Press. p. 65. ISBN 978-0-85728-433-4.
    113.^ Vijay Nath, From 'Brahmanism' to 'Hinduism': Negotiating the Myth of the Great Tradition, Social Scientist 2001, pp. 19-50.
    114.^ Inden, Ronald. "Ritual, Authority, And Cycle Time in Hindu Kingship." In JF Richards, ed., Kingship and Authority in South Asia. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1998, p.67, 55 "before the eighth century, the Buddha was accorded the position of universal deity and ceremonies by which a king attained to imperial status were elaborate donative ceremonies entailing gifts to Buddhist monks and the installation of a symbolic Buddha in a stupa....This pattern changed in the eighth century. The Buddha was replaced as the supreme, imperial deity by one of the Hindu gods (except under the Palas of eastern India, the Buddha's homeland)...Previously the Buddha had been accorded imperial-style worship (puja). Now as one of the Hindu gods replaced the Buddha at the imperial centre and pinnacle of the cosmo-political system, the image or symbol of the Hindu god comes to be housed in a monumental temple and given increasingly elaborate imperial-style puja worship."
    115.^ Holt, John. The Buddhist Visnu. Columbia University Press, 2004, p.12,15 "The replacement of the Buddha as the "cosmic person" within the mythic ideology of Indian kingship, as we shall see shortly, occurred at about the same time the Buddha was incorporated and subordinated within the Brahmanical cult of Visnu."
    116.^ a b Basham 1999
    117.^ Goel, Sita (1993), Tipu Sultan: villain or hero? : an anthology, Voice of India, p. 38, ISBN 978-81-85990-08-8
    118.^ Sharma, Hari (1991), The real Tipu: a brief history of Tipu Sultan, Rishi publications, p. 112
    119.^ Purushottam (199?), Must India go Islamic?, P.S. Yog
    120.^ "Aurangzeb: Religious Policies". Manas Group, UCLA. Retrieved 2011-06-26.
    121.^ Studies in Islamic History and Civilisation, David Ayalon, BRILL, 1986, p.271; ISBN 965-264-014-X
    122.^ "Halebidu - Temples of Karnataka". TempleNet.com. Retrieved 2006-08-17.
    123.^ "The Marathas". Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc.
    124.^ Maratha (people) - Britannica Online Encyclopaedia
    125.^ J.T.F. Jordens, "Medieval Hindu Devotionalism" in & Basham 1999
    126.^ Weightman 1998, pp. 262–264 "It is Hindu self-awareness and self-identity that affirm Hinduism to be one single religious universe, no matter how richly varied its contents, and make it a significant and potent force alongside the other religions of the world."
    127.^ Olson, Carl (2007). The many colours of Hinduism: a thematic-historical introduction. Rutgers University Press. p. 9. ISBN 978-0-8135-4068-9.
    128.^ Andrews, Margaret; Boyle, Joyceen (2008). Transcultural concepts in nursing care. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. p. 386. ISBN 978-0-7817-9037-6.
    129.^ Dogra, R.C; Dogra, Urmila (2003). Let's know Hinduism: the oldest religion of infinite adaptability and diversity. Star Publications. p. 5. ISBN 978-81-7650-056-2.
    130.^ Badlani, Hiro (2008), Hinduism: Path of the Ancient Wisdom, iUniverse, p. 303, ISBN 978-0-595-70183-4
    131.^ Lane, Jan-Erik; Ersson, Svante (2005), Culture and politics: a comparative approach (Edition 2), Ashgate Publishing, Ltd, p. 149, ISBN 978-0-7546-4578-8
    132.^ de Lingen, John; Ramsurrun, Pahlad, An Introduction to The Hindu Faith, Sterling Publishers Pvt. Ltd, p. 2, ISBN 978-81-207-4086-0
    133.^ Murthy, BS (2003), Puppets of Faith: theory of communal strife, Bulusu Satyanarayana Murthy, p. 7, ISBN 978-81-901911-1-1
    134.^ "India and Hinduism". Religion of World. ThinkQuest Library. Retrieved 2007-07-17.
    135.^ Brodd, Jefferey (2003), World Religions, Winona, MN: Saint Mary's Press, ISBN 978-0-88489-725-5
    136.^ Rogers, Peter (2009), Ultimate Truth, Book 1, AuthorHouse, p. 109, ISBN 978-1-4389-7968-7
    137.^ Chakravarti, Sitansu (1991), Hinduism, a way of life, Motilal Banarsidass Publ., p. 71, ISBN 978-81-208-0899-7
    138.^ "Polytheism". Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. 2007. Retrieved 2007-07-05.
    139.^ Pattanaik, Devdutt (2002), The man who was a woman and other queer tales of Hindu lore, Routledge, p. 38, ISBN 978-1-56023-181-3
    140.^ See Michaels 2004, p. xiv and Gill, N.S. "Henotheism". About, Inc. Retrieved 2007-07-05.
    141.^ Kenneth, Kramer (1986), World scriptures: an introduction to comparative religions, p. 34, ISBN 978-0-8091-2781-8
    142.^ Subodh Varma (6 May 2011). "The gods came afterwards". Times of India. Retrieved 2011-06-09.
    143.^ a b Monier-Williams 1974, pp. 20–37
    144.^ a b c & Bhaskarananda 1994
    145.^ Vivekananda 1987
    146.^ Werner 1994, p. p37
    147.^ See Theistic Explanations of Karma, pg. 146 of Causation and Divine Intervention by BR Reichenbach, citing Uddyotakara, Nyaayavaarttika, IV, 1, 21, at http://ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-PHIL/reiche2.htm
    148.^ Reichenbach, Bruce R. (April 1989), "Karma, causation, and divine intervention", Philosophy East and West (Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press) 39 (2): 135–149 [145], doi:10.2307/1399374, retrieved 2009-12-29.
    149.^ Neville, Robert (2001), Religious truth, p. 47, ISBN 978-0-7914-4778-9
    150.^ Werner 1994, p. 7
    151.^ a b c d Monier-Williams 2001
    152.^ Lisa Hark, Lisa Hark, PH.D., R.D., Horace DeLisser, MD (7 September 2011). Achieving Cultural Competency. John Wiley & Sons. "Three gods, Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva, and other deities are considered manifestations of and are worshipped as incarnations of Brahman."
    153.^ John McCannon (1 January 2006). World History Examination. Barron's Educational Series. "In addition to the Brahman, Hinduism recognizes literally hundreds of gods and goddesses. Thus, Hinduism is a polytheistic religion. However, Hindus consider all deities to be avatars, or incarnations of the Brahman."
    154.^ Brandon Toropov, Luke Buckles (3 May 2012). The Complete Idiot's Guide to World Religions. Penguin. "The members of various Hindu sects worship a dizzying number of specific deities and follow innumerable rituals in honor of specific gods. Because this is Hinduism, however, its practitioners see the profusion of forms and practices as expressions of the same unchanging reality. The panoply of deities are understood by believers as symbols for a single transcendent reality."
    155.^ Orlando O. Espín, James B. Nickoloff (2007). An Introductory Dictionary of Theology and Religious Studies. Liturgical Press. "The devas are powerful spiritual beings, somewhat like angels in the West, who have certain functions in the cosmos and live immensely long lives. Certain devas, such as Ganesha, are regularly worshiped by the Hindu faithful. Note that, while Hindus believe in many devas, many are monotheistic to the extent that they will recognize only one Supreme Being, a God or Goddess who is the source and ruler of the devas."
    156.^ The Popular Encyclopædia. Blackie & Son. 1841. p. 61.
    157.^ The Lord'S Song Gita, Dr. Sant K. Bhatnagar, Pustak Mahal, 2009, ISBN 81-223-1032-X, ISBN 978-81-223-1032-0
    158.^ Sen Gupta 1986, p. viii
    159.^ Sa?khyapravacana Sutra I.92.
    160.^ Rajadhyaksha (1959), The six systems of Indian philosophy, p. 95, "Under the circumstances God becomes an unnecessary metaphysical assumption. Naturally the Sankhyakarikas do not mention God, Vachaspati interprets this as rank atheism."
    161.^ Neville, Robert (2001), Religious truth, p. 51, ISBN 978-0-7914-4778-9, "Mimamsa theorists (theistic and atheistic) decided that the evidence allegedly proving the existence of God was insufficient. They also thought the was no need to postulate a maker for the world, just as there was no need for an author to compose the Veda or an independent God to validate the Vedic rituals."
    162.^ Coward, Harold (2008-02), The perfectibility of human nature in eastern and western thought, p. 114, ISBN 978-0-7914-7336-8, "For the Mimamsa the ultimate reality is nothing other than the eternal words of the Vedas. They did not accept the existence of a single supreme creator god, who might have composed the Veda. According to the Mimamsa, gods named in the Vedas have no existence apart from the mantras that speak their names. The power of the gods, then, is nothing other than the power of the mantras that name them."
    163.^ Werner 1994, p. 80
    164.^ Renou 1961, p. 55
    165.^ a b Harman 2004, pp. 104–106
    166.^ * Apte, Vaman S (1997), The Student's English-Sanskrit Dictionary (New ed.), Delhi: Motilal Banarsidas, ISBN 81-208-0300-0
    167.^ Smith 1991, p. 64
    168.^ Radhakrishnan 1996, p. 254
    169.^ Bhagavad Gita 2.22
    170.^ See Bhagavad Gita XVI.8-20
    171.^ See Vivekananda, Swami (2005), Jnana Yoga, Kessinger Publishing, ISBN 1-4254-8288-0 301-02 (8th Printing 1993)
    172.^ Rinehart 2004, pp. 19–21
    173.^ Bhaskarananda 1994, pp. 79–86
    174.^ Europa Publications Staff (2003), The Far East and Australasia, 2003 - Regional surveys of the world, Routledge, p. 39, ISBN 978-1-85743-133-9
    175.^ Hindu spirituality - Volume 25 of Documenta missionalia, Editrice Pontificia Università Gregoriana, 1999, p. 1, ISBN 978-88-7652-818-7
    176.^ "Hinduism - Euthanasia and Suicide". BBC. 25 August 2009.
    177.^ The Christian concepts of Heaven and Hell do not translate directly into Hinduism. Spiritual realms such as Vaikunta (the abode of Vishnu) or loka are the closest analogues to an eternal Kingdom of God.
    178.^ Nikhilananda 1992
    179.^ as discussed in Mahabharata 12.161; Bilimoria et al. (eds.), Indian Ethics: Classical Traditions and Contemporary Challenges (2007), p. 103; see also Werner 1994, Bhaskarananda 1994, p. 7
    180.^ The Philosophy of Hinduism : Four Objectives of Human Life ; Dharma (Right Conduct), Artha (Right Wealth), Kama (Right Desire), Moksha (Right Exit (Liberation)), Pustak Mahal, 2006, ISBN 81-223-0945-3
    181.^ Swami Prabhupada, A. C. Bhaktivedanta (1986), Bhagavad-gita as it is, The Bhaktivedanta Book Trust, p. 16, ISBN 0-89213-268-X, 9780892132683 Check |isbn= value (help)
    182.^ Radhakrishnan, Sarvepalli (1973). The Hindu view of life. Pennsylvania State University: Macmillan. p. 92.
    183.^ Sivaraman, Krishna (1997). Hindu spirituality: an encyclopedic history of the religious quest. Postclassical and modern, Volume 2. The Crossroad Publishing Co.,. pp. 584 pages. ISBN 0-8245-0755-X, 9780824507558 Check |isbn= value (help).
    184.^ Kodayanallur, Vanamamalai Soundara Rajan. Concise classified dictionary of Hinduism. Concept Publishing Company. ISBN 81-7022-857-3, 9788170228578 Check |isbn= value (help).
    185.^ Macy, Joanna (1975). "The Dialectics of Desire". Numen (BRILL) 22 (2): 145–60. JSTOR 3269765.
    186.^ Lorin Roche. "Love-Kama". Retrieved 15 July 2011.
    187.^ Kishore, B. R. (2001). Hinduism. Diamond Pocket Books (P) Ltd. p. 152. ISBN 81-288-0082-5, 9788128800825 Check |isbn= value (help).
    188.^ a b Bhaskarananda 1994
    189.^ For example, see the following translation of B-Gita 11.54: "My dear Arjuna, only by undivided devotional service can I be understood as I am, standing before you, and can thus be seen directly. Only in this way can you enter into the mysteries of My understanding." (Bhaktivedanta 1997, ch. 11.54)
    190.^ "One who knows that the position reached by means of analytical study can also be attained by devotional service, and who therefore sees analytical study and devotional service to be on the same level, sees things as they are." (Bhaktivedanta 1997, ch. 5.5)
    191.^ Monier-Williams 1974, p. 116
    192.^ Bhaskarananda 1994, p. 157
    193.^ Bhaskarananda 1994, p. 137
    194.^ arcye vi??au sila-dhir. . . naraki sa?.
    195.^ Albertson, Todd (2009), The gods of business: the intersection of faith and the marketplace, p. 71, ISBN 978-0-615-13800-8
    196.^ a b Narendranand (Swami) (2008), Hindu spirituality: a help to conduct prayer meetings for Hindus, Jyoti Ashram, p. 51
    197.^ Encyclopaedia of Hindu Gods and Goddesses - Page 178, Suresh Chandra - 1998
    198.^ Muesse, Mark W. (2011). The Hindu Traditions: A Concise Introduction. Fortress Press. p. 216. ISBN 0-8006-9790-1, 9780800697907 Check |isbn= value (help).
    199.^ "Religious Life". Religions of India. Global Peace Works. Retrieved 2007-04-19.
    200.^ a b c d "Domestic Worship". Country Studies. The Library of Congress. September 1995. Retrieved 2007-04-19.
    201.^ "Hindu Marriage Act, 1955". Retrieved 2007-06-25.
    202.^ a b "Life-Cycle Rituals". Country Studies: India. The Library of Congress. September 1995. Retrieved 2007-04-19.
    203.^ Banerjee, Suresh Chandra. "Shraddha". Banglapedia. Asiatic Society of Bangladesh. Retrieved 2007-04-20.
    204.^ Garces-Foley 30
    205.^ Fuller 2004
    206.^ Hindu culture, custom, and ceremony, p195, Brojendra Nath Banerjee, Agam, 1978, 26 May 2009
    207.^ a b Vivekananda 1987, pp. 6–7 Vol I
    208.^ a b Vivekananda 1987, pp. 118–120 Vol III
    209.^ Sargeant & Chapple 1984, p. 3
    210.^ See, for instance, René Guénon Man and His Becoming According to the Vedanta (1925 ed.), Sophia Perennis, ISBN 0-900588-62-4, chapter 1, "General remarks on the Vedanta, p.7.
    211.^ Note: Nyaya-Vaisheshika believe that the Vedas were created by God, not eternal.
    212.^ Harshananda, Swami (1989), A Bird's Eye View of the Vedas, in "Holy Scriptures: A Symposium on the Great Scriptures of the World" (2nd ed.), Mylapore: Sri Ramakrishna Math, ISBN 81-7120-121-0
    213.^ Vivekananda 1987, p. 374 Vol II
    214.^ Rigveda is not only the oldest among the vedas, but is one of the earliest Indo-European texts.
    215.^ "Swami Shivananda's mission". Retrieved 2007-06-25.
    216.^ Werner 1994, p. 166
    217.^ Monier-Williams 1974, pp. 25–41
    218.^ Sarvopani?ado gavo, etc. (Gita Mahatmya 6). Gita Dhyanam, cited in Introduction to Bhagavad-gita As It Is.
    219.^ Thomas B. Coburn, Scripture" in India: Towards a Typology of the Word in Hindu Life, Journal of the American Academy of Religion, Vol. 52, No. 3 (September, 1984), pp. 435-459
    220.^ Sawant, Ankush (1996), Manu-smriti and Republic of Plato: a comparative and critical study, Himalaya Pub. House
    221.^ Radhakrishnan 1993, p. 119
    222.^ The Bhagavad Gita, Eknath Easwaran, Edition 2, Nilgiri Press, 2007, ISBN 1-58638-019-2, ISBN 978-1-58638-019-9
    223.^ Coburn, Thomas B. 1984. pp. 439
    224.^ Puranas at Sacred Texts
    225.^ CIA-The world factbook
    226.^ Nepal
    227.^ Dostert, Pierre Etienne. Africa 1997 (The World Today Series). Harpers Ferry, West Virginia: Stryker-Post Publications (1997), pg. 162.
    228.^ CIA - The World Factbook
    229.^ CIA - The World Factbook
    230.^ Bhutan
    231.^ Suriname
    232.^ [1][dead link]
    233.^ "SVRS 2010". Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics. Retrieved 2 September 2012.
    234.^ CIA - The World Factbook
    235.^ CIA - The World Factbook
    236.^ "Padmanabhaswamy Temple - Assets". Padmanabhaswamy Temple. Retrieved 2011-12-19.
    237.^ Werner 1994, p. 73
    238.^ Hindu Way of Life
    239.^ Heart of Hinduism: The Smarta Tradition
    240.^ Banerji 1992, p. 2
    241.^ Hacker, Paul; Halbfass, Wilhelm (1995), Philology and Confrontation: Paul Hacker on Traditional and Modern Vedanta, SUNY Press, p. 264, ISBN 978-0-7914-2581-7
    242.^ Sri Aurobindo (2000), Essays On The Gita, Sri Aurobindo Ashram Publ., p. 517, ISBN 978-81-7058-613-5
    243.^ Cornelissen, R. M. Matthijs; Misra, Girishwar; Varma, Suneet (2011), Foundations of Indian Psychology Volume 2: Practical Applications, Pearson Education India, p. 116, ISBN 978-81-317-3085-0
    244.^ Manu Smriti Laws of Manu 1.87-1.91
    245.^ Silverberg 1969, pp. 442–443
    246.^ Smelser & Lipset 2005
    247.^ Smith, Huston (1994). "Hinduism: The Stations of Life". New York, New York, USA: HarperCollins. ISBN 0-06-067440-7. Unknown parameter |name= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
    248.^ Michaels 2004, pp. 188–197
    249.^ V, Jayaram. "The Hindu Caste System". Hinduwebsite. Retrieved 28 November 2012.
    250.^ Venkataraman,, Swaminathan; Pawan Deshpande. "Hinduism: Not Cast In Caste". Hindu American Foundation. Retrieved 28 November 2012. "Caste-based discrimination does exist in many parts of India today.... Caste-based discrimination fundamentally contradicts the essential teaching of Hindu sacred texts that divinity is inherent in all beings" More than one of |author= and |last= specified (help)
    251.^ Nikhilananda 1992, p. 155
    252.^ S.S. Rama Rao Pappu, "Hindu Ethics", in Rinehart 2004, pp. 165–168
    253.^ a b Bhaskarananda 1994, p. 112
    254.^ Michaels 2004, p. 316
    255.^ Monier-Williams, Religious Thought and Life in India (New Delhi, 1974 edition)
    256.^ Radhakrishnan, S (1929), Indian Philosophy, Volume 1, Muirhead library of philosophy (2nd ed.), London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd., p. 148
    257.^ For ahi?sa as one of the "emerging ethical and religious issues" in the Mahabharata see: Brockington, John, "The Sanskrit Epics", in Flood (2003), p. 125.
    258.^ For text of Y.S. 2.29 and translation of yama as "vow of self-restraint", see: Taimni, I. K. (1961), The Science of Yoga, Adyar, India: The Theosophical Publishing House, ISBN 81-7059-212-7, p. 206.
    259.^ http://wikisource.org/wiki/%E0%A4%AE%E0%A4%A8%E0%A5%81%E0%A4%B8%E0%A5%8D%E0%A4%AE%E0%A5%83%E0%A4%A4%E0%A4%BF_10 ?????? ??????????? ???????????????????? ??? ???????? ????? ????????????????????? ???, ahimsâ satyamstenam shaucmindrayanigrahah, etam sâmâsikam dharmam câturvanaryabravîn manu
    260.^ The Laws of Manu X
    261.^ Surveys studying food habits of Indians include: "Diary and poultry sector growth in India", "Indian consumer patterns" and "Agri reform in India". Results indicate that Indians who eat meat do so infrequently with less than 30% consuming non-vegetarian foods regularly, although the reasons may be economical.
    262.^ Fox, Michael Allen (1999), Deep Vegetarianism, Temple University Press, ISBN 1-56639-705-7
    263.^ Yadav, Y.; Kumar, S (14 August 2006). "The food habits of a nation". The Hindu. Retrieved 2006-11-17.
    264.^ Walker 1968:257
    265.^ Richman 1988:272
    266.^ Krishnakumar, R. (30 August–September 12, 2003). "Beef without borders". Frontline (Narasimhan Ram). Retrieved 2006-10-07.
    267.^ a b Narayanan, Vasudha. “The Hindu Tradition”. In A Concise Introduction to World Religions, ed. Willard G. Oxtoby and Alan F. Segal. New York: Oxford University Press, 2007
    268.^ Williams, Raymond. An Introduction to Swaminarayan Hinduism. 1st. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001. 159
    269.^ Michael Keene (2002), Religion in Life and Society, Folens Limited, p. 122, ISBN 978-1-84303-295-3, retrieved 18 May 2009
    270.^ Rosen, Steven. Essential Hinduism. 1st. Westport: Praeger Publishers, 2006. Page 188
    271.^ Harold F., Smith (1 Jan 2007), "12", Outline of Hinduism, Read Books, ISBN 1-4067-8944-5
    272.^ Smith, David Whitten; Burr, Elizabeth Geraldine (28 Dec 2007), "One", Understanding world religions: a road map for justice and peace, Rowman & Littlefield, p. 12, ISBN 0-7425-5055-9
    273.^ Kamphorst Janet (5 Jun 2008), "9", In praise of death: history and poetry in medieval Marwar (South Asia), Leiden University Press, p. 287, ISBN 90-8728-044-0
    274.^ Fuller Christopher John (2004), "4", The camphor flame: popular Hinduism and society in India (Revised and Expanded ed.), Princeton University Press, p. 83, ISBN 978-0-691-12048-5
    275.^ Gouyon Anne; Bumi Kita Yayasan (30 Sep 2005), "The Hiden Life of Bali", The natural guide to Bali: enjoy nature, meet the people, make a difference, Equinox Publishing (Asia) Pte Ltd, p. 51, ISBN 979-3780-00-2, retrieved 12 August 2010
    276.^ Fuller C. J. (26 July 2004), "4 Sacrifice", The Camphor Flame: Popular Hinduism and Society in India [Paperback] (Revised ed.), Princeton University Press, p. 83, ISBN 0-691-12048-X
    277.^ "Religious or Secular: Animal Slaughter a Shame". The Hindu American foundation. 2009. Retrieved 30 July 2010.

    Sources

    Banerji, S. C. (1992), Tantra in Bengal (Second Revised and Enlarged ed.), Delhi: Manohar, ISBN 81-85425-63-9
    Basham, A.L (1999), A Cultural History of India, Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-563921-9
    Bhaktivedanta, A. C. (1997), Bhagavad-Gita As It Is, Bhaktivedanta Book Trust, ISBN 0-89213-285-X, retrieved 2007-07-14
    Bhaskarananda, Swami (1994), The Essentials of Hinduism: a comprehensive overview of the world's oldest religion, Seattle, WA: Viveka Press, ISBN 1-884852-02-5[unreliable source?]
    Bhattacharyya, N.N (1999), History of the Tantric Religion (Second Revised ed.), Delhi: Manohar publications, ISBN 81-7304-025-7
    Chidbhavananda, Swami (1997), The Bhagavad Gita, Sri Ramakrishna Tapovanam
    Duchesne-Guillemin, Jacques (1963), "Heraclitus and Iran", History of Religions 3 (1): 34–49, doi:10.1086/462470
    Eliot, Sir Charles (2003), Hinduism and Buddhism: An Historical Sketch I (Reprint ed.), Munshiram Manoharlal, ISBN 81-215-1093-7
    Flood, Gavin D. (1996), An Introduction to Hinduism, Cambridge University Press
    Fuller, C. J. (2004), The Camphor Flame: Popular Hinduism and Society in India, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, ISBN 978-0-691-12048-5
    Growse, Frederic Salmon (1996), Mathura - A District Memoir (Reprint ed.), Asian Educational Services
    Garces-Foley, Katherine (2005), Death and religion in a changing world, M. E. Sharpe
    Guénon, René (1921), Introduction to the Study of the Hindu Doctrines (1921 ed.), Sophia Perennis, ISBN 0-900588-74-8
    Guénon, René, Studies in Hinduism (1966 ed.), Sophia Perennis, ISBN [[Special:BookSources/0-900588-69-3|0-900588-69-3 [[Category:Articles with invalid ISBNs]]]] Check |isbn= value (help)
    Guénon, René, Man and His Becoming According to the Vedanta (1925 ed.), Sophia Perennis, ISBN 0-900588-62-4
    Hoiberg, Dale (2001), Students' Britannica India, Popular Prakashan, ISBN 0-85229-760-2
    Khanna, Meenakshi (2007), Cultural History Of Medieval India, Berghahn Books
    King, Richard (1999), Orientalism and Religion: Post-Colonial Theory, India and "The Mystic East", Routledge
    Kulke, Hermann; Rothermund, Dietmar (2004), A History of India, Routledge
    Kuruvachira, Jose (2006), Hindu nationalists of modern India, Rawat publications, ISBN 81-7033-995-2
    Michaels, Axel (2004), Hinduism. Past and present, Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press
    Misra, Amalendu (2004), Identity and Religion: Foundations of Anti-Islamism in India, SAGE
    Monier-Williams, Monier (2001), English Sanskrit dictionary, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 81-206-1509-3, retrieved 2007-07-24
    Morgan, Kenneth W.; Sarma, D. S. (1953), The Religion of the Hindus, Ronald Press
    Muesse, Mark William (2003), Great World Religions: Hinduism
    Muesse, Mark W. (2011), The Hindu Traditions: A Concise Introduction, Fortress Press
    Nikhilananda, Swami (1990), The Upanishads: Katha, Isa, Kena, and Mundaka I (5th ed.), New York: Ramakrishna-Vivekananda Centre, ISBN 0-911206-15-9
    Nikhilananda, Swami (trans.) (1992), The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna (8th ed.), New York: Ramakrishna-Vivekananda Centre, ISBN 0-911206-01-9
    Oberlies, T (1999), Die Religion des Rgveda, Vienna: Institut für Indologie der Universität Wien, ISBN 3-900271-32-1
    Osborne, E (2005), Accessing R.E. Founders & Leaders, Buddhism, Hinduism and Sikhism Teacher's Book Mainstream, Folens Limited
    Radhakrishnan, S; Moore, CA (1967), A sourcebook in Indian Philosophy, Princeton University Press, ISBN 0-691-01958-4
    Radhakrishnan, S (Trans.) (1995), Bhagvada Gita, Harper Collins, ISBN 1-85538-457-4
    Radhakrishnan, S (1996), Indian Philosophy 1, Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-563820-4
    Ramstedt, Martin (2004), Hinduism in Modern Indonesia: A Minority Religion Between Local, National, and Global Interests, New York: Routledge
    Rawat, Ajay S. (1993), StudentMan and Forests: The Khatta and Gujjar Settlements of Sub-Himalayan Tarai, Indus Publishing
    Richman, Paula (1988), Women, branch stories, and religious rhetoric in a Tamil Buddhist text, Buffalo, NY: Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, Syracuse University, ISBN 0-915984-90-3
    Sargeant, Winthrop; Chapple, Christopher (1984), The Bhagavad Gita, New York: State University of New York Press, ISBN 0-87395-831-4
    Sen Gupta, Anima (1986), The Evolution of the Sa?khya School of Thought, South Asia Books, ISBN 81-215-0019-2
    Silverberg, James (1969), "Social Mobility in the Caste System in India: An Interdisciplinary Symposium", The American Journal of Sociology 75 (3): 442–443, doi:10.1086/224812
    Smart, Ninian (2003), Godsdiensten van de wereld (The World's religions), Kampen: Uitgeverij Kok
    Smelser, N.; Lipset, S., eds. (2005), Social Structure and Mobility in Economic Development, Aldine Transaction, ISBN 0-202-30799-9
    Smith, Huston (1991), The World's Religions: Our Great Wisdom Traditions, San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, ISBN 0-06-250799-0
    Sweetman, Will (2004), "The prehistory of Orientalism: Colonialism and the Textual Basis for Bartholomaus Ziegenbalg's Account of Hinduism", New Zealand Journal of Asian Studies 6, 2 (December, 2004): 12-38
    Vasu, Srisa Chandra (1919), The Catechism Of Hindu Dharma, New York: Kessinger Publishing, LLC
    Vivekananda, Swami (1987), Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda, Calcutta: Advaita Ashrama, ISBN 81-85301-75-1
    Walker, Benjamin (1968), The Hindu world: an encyclopedic survey of Hinduism, Praeger
    Zimmer, Heinrich (1989), Pholosophies of India, Princeton University Press

    Further reading

    Dowson, John (1888), A Classical Dictionary of Hindu Mythology and Religion, Geography, History, and Literature, Trubner & Co., London
    Bowes, Pratima (1976), The Hindu Religious Tradition: A Philosophical Approach, Allied Pub, ISBN 0-7100-8668-7
    Flood, Gavin (Ed) (2003), Blackwell companion to Hinduism, Blackwell Publishing, ISBN 0-631-21535-2
    Jones, Constance; Ryan, James D. (2007), Encyclopedia of Hinduism, New York, USA: Infobase Publishing, ISBN 0-8160-5458-4
    Klostermaier, K (1994), A Survey of Hinduism (3rd (2007) ed.), State University of New York Press, ISBN 0-7914-7082-2
    Lipner, Julius (1998), Hindus: Their Religious Beliefs and Practices, Routledge, ISBN 0-415-05181-9, retrieved 2007-07-12
    Michaels, A (2004), Hinduism: Past and Present (5th ed.), Princeton University Press, ISBN 0-691-08953-1
    Monier-Williams, Monier (1974), Brahmanism and Hinduism: Or, Religious Thought and Life in India, as Based on the Veda and Other Sacred Books of the Hindus, Elibron Classics, Adamant Media Corporation, ISBN 1-4212-6531-1, retrieved 2007-07-08
    Morgan, Kenneth W., ed. (1987), The Religion of the Hindus (New ed.), Delhi: Motilal Banarsidas, ISBN 81-208-0387-6
    Renou, Louis (1964), The Nature of Hinduism, Walker
    Richards, Glyn, ed. (1985). A Sourcebook of Modern Hinduism. London: Curzon Press. x, 212 p. ISBN 0-7007-0173-7
    Rinehart, R (Ed.) (2004), Contemporary Hinduism: Ritual, Culture, and Practice, ABC-Clio, ISBN 1-57607-905-8
    Weightman, Simon (1998), "Hinduism", in Hinnells, John (Ed.), The new Penguin handbook of living religions, Penguin books, ISBN 0-14-051480-5
    Werner, Karel (1994), "Hinduism", in Hinnells, John (Ed.), A Popular Dictionary of Hinduism, Richmond, Surrey: Curzon Press, ISBN 0-7007-0279-2







    Hot Hindu Hell Hot
    avatar
    Vidya Moksha

    Posts : 470
    Join date : 2010-04-17
    Location : on the road again :)

    Re: The United States of the Solar System, A.D. 2133 (Book Three)

    Post  Vidya Moksha on Sun May 07, 2017 7:20 pm

    pop up like a bad penny i do..

    i had to buy more internet credit to communicate with friends on other continents...

    had a glimpse above. few random thoughts?

    1. ever heard of the concept of paragraphs? it involves the carriage return, makes reading the text a lot easier.

    2. hindhus on the ground are a cool bunch for the most part, as everyone and everything is Hindu :) Jesus? yeah, hes Hindu, Buddha? yep, hes a Hindu god as well.. etc.. which is actually more relaxed than say, Christianity, which always seems to have a nasty streak, promising hell fire and awful things if we dont comply.. is it a symptom of their nailed tortured god? i mean what is that for a religious symbol? seriously!

    3. consider exoteric vs esoteric religions. All exoteric religions have an esoteric 'inner' 'hidden' part (theosophy now, not religion) and ALL esoteric religions say the same thing. i always considered exoteric stuff to be a smoke screen and distraction, allowing those beyond time and space to think and breathe..

    4. the esoteric side of hinduism is more interesting, although the exoteric is more colourful. i do like the hundu pantheon, which can also be viewed as universal energies..

    The shad darshanas are esoteric forms of Hinduism. There are two main schools: sagunavad (divine spirit) and nirgunavad (nature).  The sagunavad philosophies describe ‘the highest/absolute’ as having some form or attributes whereas the nirgunavad scriptures say ‘the highest/absolute’ is without any form, it is nothing.  

    In the sagunavad (divine spirit) school, the orthodox minimosa system describes mantras, chants and rituals to be offered to deities who will return favours and grant boons. The non-orthodox tarkic systems (vaisheshik and nyaya) are logical philosophies that claim deduction and inference are valid methods of attaining knowledge. The tarkic systems classify everything in the universe according to seven main principles including elemental make-up, motion (karma) and the state of existence.

    In the nirgunavad (nature) school, the orthodox vedanta system recognises brahman as the indivisible ultimate reality without form and teaches advaita (non-dualism). The non-orthodox samyoga systems (sankhya and yoga) teach that union with the highest can be achieved through practical effort and experience (karma). They recognise the concept of brahman as the ‘unknowable and ultimate’ but in order to analyse the ‘unknowable’ it is sub-divided it into 25 categories or attributes that are knowable and may be analysed. Purusha (soul) and prakriti (nature) are the two primary classifications in samyoga teachings; these being equal and opposite principles (c.f. yin and yang). The phenomenal universe is then further divided into 23 other physical and non-physical categories. Yoga differs from sankhya in recognising an additional principle, ishvara (god), who is supreme ruler of the universe. In the upanishads, yoga is sometimes referred to as serhvara sankhya - ‘theistic’ serhvara.
    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7368
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The United States of the Solar System, A.D. 2133 (Book Three)

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Mon May 08, 2017 3:48 pm

    Vidya Moksha wrote:pop up like a bad penny i do..

    i had to buy more internet credit to communicate with friends on other continents...

    had a glimpse above. few random thoughts?

    1. ever heard of the concept of paragraphs? it involves the carriage return, makes reading the text a lot easier.

    2. hindhus on the ground are a cool bunch for the most part, as everyone and everything is Hindu :) Jesus? yeah, hes Hindu, Buddha? yep, hes a Hindu god as well.. etc.. which is actually more relaxed than say, Christianity, which always seems to have a nasty streak, promising hell fire and awful things if we dont comply.. is it a symptom of their nailed tortured god? i mean what is that for a religious symbol? seriously!

    3. consider exoteric vs esoteric religions. All exoteric religions have an esoteric 'inner' 'hidden' part (theosophy now, not religion) and ALL esoteric religions say the same thing. i always considered exoteric stuff to be a smoke screen and distraction, allowing those beyond time and space to think and breathe..

    4. the esoteric side of hinduism is more interesting, although the exoteric is more colourful. i do like the hundu pantheon, which can also be viewed as universal energies..

    The shad darshanas are esoteric forms of Hinduism. There are two main schools: sagunavad (divine spirit) and nirgunavad (nature).  The sagunavad philosophies describe ‘the highest/absolute’ as having some form or attributes whereas the nirgunavad scriptures say ‘the highest/absolute’ is without any form, it is nothing.  

    In the sagunavad (divine spirit) school, the orthodox minimosa system describes mantras, chants and rituals to be offered to deities who will return favours and grant boons. The non-orthodox tarkic systems (vaisheshik and nyaya) are logical philosophies that claim deduction and inference are valid methods of attaining knowledge. The tarkic systems classify everything in the universe according to seven main principles including elemental make-up, motion (karma) and the state of existence.

    In the nirgunavad (nature) school, the orthodox vedanta system recognises brahman as the indivisible ultimate reality without form and teaches advaita (non-dualism). The non-orthodox samyoga systems (sankhya and yoga) teach that union with the highest can be achieved through practical effort and experience (karma). They recognise the concept of brahman as the ‘unknowable and ultimate’ but in order to analyse the ‘unknowable’ it is sub-divided it into 25 categories or attributes that are knowable and may be analysed. Purusha (soul) and prakriti (nature) are the two primary classifications in samyoga teachings; these being equal and opposite principles (c.f. yin and yang). The phenomenal universe is then further divided into 23 other physical and non-physical categories. Yoga differs from sankhya in recognising an additional principle, ishvara (god), who is supreme ruler of the universe. In the upanishads, yoga is sometimes referred to as serhvara sankhya - ‘theistic’ serhvara.
    Vidya Moksha wrote:Hi Chris. I wasnt really thinking about this, but it sort of popped up as another excuse for some more procrastination on my part.

    I do like analogy and metaphor to describe some of these higher experiences, its actually a pretty useful tool, a series of animated cartoons would be the easiest and best way to portray a lot of this 'mystical' stuff.

    It is my opinion that the biggest hurdle to these higher states is the barrier that has been placed by the wrong words, either intentionally (to mislead and distract, new age is massive business) or simply through poor understanding.

    There are many seekers but they all have the wrong map, they cant find what they are looking for if the map is pointing the wrong way. the map is words.

    "we must get rid of the ego to reach spiritual enlightenment" is painfully funny, or just painful some days, or sometimes not funny at all. the three main words in that sentence are all misleading or inadequate or wrong. ego is nebulous, it needs to be better defined, you really do have to know how to separate the components of 'ego' if you want to reach these states through personal effort. spiritual is third eye, astral, dreams, they mean 'mystical'. enlightenment is new age bullshit par excellence, im not even going there again - see above.

    Metaphor time, Horse and cart. Imagine the monkey mind as egotism (asmita, the 'i-want' ego). That monkey-mind chatter is the horse, driving the cart, the cart is the self (ahem, the 'i-am ego'). its a clever monkey because it can train itself (through meditation etc) to be so quiet you dont think its driving the cart. but it is.

    When you reach advaita the monkey-mind is switched off, it is not quiet, it is turned off. there is no i-want ego. this is the 'ego' the 'spiritual' (sic) crowd ( Adv2 ) seek to lose to achieve enlightenment ( Enlightened )

    Now! the monkey mind isnt dead, it is now the cart, it 'follows' you! and you are you , the i-am ego remains, without monkey-mind there is no choice, so you only have free will. you, ahem, are free to do whatever you want, but you have no choice. You are the horse now, but you cant do anything there is no action, or intention to do an action or a memory of an action, you are just you in that instant, with free will..

    do you start to imagine what it is do do something without doing it? but there is still a self to do nothing!

    does that work as a metaphor?

    i must add! achieving advaita is not a rational thought process, you dont think your way there or analyse your way there, you step through an invisible gate into an alien world, it is an order of magnitude above what you can 'imagine'.. but the metaphor holds good, which is why metaphors are good, and cos im not clever enuff to make up sutras.

    but i say the horse and cart are for peasants, Freedom i want it all... and i want it now

    Another metaphor?
    have you realised, good folk, that consumerism is the number one enemy?, wars and climate are just distraction while we terraform the planet for our iphones, the martians did land and we are terra -forming the planet for them..
    UFO2
    or is a metaphor? lol..
    Pris wrote:
    Swanny wrote:Sorry but due to the nature of this reality there is no such thing as proof of a god or anything else for that matter. No one can claim to know the truth about anything and only a fool would do so. The very best anyone can offer is their theory on what they believe to be true.
    Bingo! Very Happy  I certainly have plenty of my own foolish ideas to what I think is going on (that's what happens when you have lots of time to think... heaven forbid).  Insanely Happy
    .
    .
    Pris wrote:
    RedEzra wrote:I'm not judging... just thinking out loud that it may be much more fruitful for all of us if some or most concentrate on manual labour instead of philosophizing. After all we are supposed to steward this earth and not sit around thinking thoughts that are more or less thoughtless.

    So much confusion today about truth as just about everyone has a thought about it... but as we know when grashoppers become too plentiful they destroy everything that is fruitful.

    It is not too much to ask for some sort of proof which back up what we believe else we may be wasting time and energy with vain imaginations. Don't get me wrong dreaming is fine... but please don't try to pass it on as truth.

    In this thread there is provided proof about GOD... so anyone can imagine what i think about all the philosophizing.

    And the reason i take the time to do the research and share the results is because i care as well... compassion and charity is love in action.


    Okay then.  Let me rephrase myself.  Your 'thinking out loud' thoughts tend to be rather... judgemental. Big Grin 1

    Anyway, we are not grasshoppers.  Even as an allegory, I won't bite that one.  Don't get me wrong -- I like grasshoppers.

    'The more, the merrier.'  Toast

    What's proof really in the end?  Each person has to decide for themselves what is 'proof'.  What one sees as proof may not be what another considers to be proof.

    .
    .
    Pris wrote:
    RedEzra wrote:
    Swanny wrote:Sorry but due to the nature of this reality there is no such thing as proof of a god or anything else for that matter. No one can claim to know the truth about anything and only a fool would do so. The very best anyone can offer is their theory on what they believe to be true.

    Apology not accepted lol... i'm sorry too but the fulfilled prophecies in the bible and the testimonies from thousands who have met Jesus and the archaeological discoveries of Ron Wyatt and the astronomical work of FA Larson prove GOD.

    Testimonies...  Have any photos by chance? sunny

    Side note:  When a person's 3rd eye is open, they tend to come up with all kinds of interesting... testimonies -- depending on their belief system/how they perceive their 'reality'.

    Assuming Jesus is/was real, 'Jesus' could come back claiming to be Jesus and all and that still wouldn't be proof enough (for everyone) because it all comes down to the individual and how that individual decides to interpret their reality.  In this convoluted world?  Any one of us could be -- or claim to be or believe themselves to be -- Jesus. Even to assume that 'Jesus' must represent a single person... therein lies the joke.

    The same goes for 'God'.

    Fulfilled prophecies?  Lol you gotta love those.  Humans are soooo good at shaping/steering the reality they want, don't you think?  Wink

    It's all very amusing/entertaining... entraining...

    .
    .
    RedEzra wrote:I did not believe what was written in the bible about GOD because it did not sound that believable to me. It just didn't resonate... so i can understand and relate with all of you.

    Actually i thought i had found a truth which would suffice for me and that truth looked a lot like what venerable greybeard and mother mudra thought as well.

    But one day i came across a testimony from a muslim man who was attacked by an invisible being who would not let go of his throat until he cried out to Jesus. Whoa i thought wait a minute that can't be right... that man must be making this up. It just sounds too far out doesn't it ? But then a whole world of people who have been helped and healed by Jesus in similar ways opened up to me... and i thought they can't all be lying can they ?

    Perhaps there is something to this Jesus saving people in need and distress... so i set out to study the bible i mean really really study and i even got a chance to experience calling on Jesus myself when invisible beings where whispering around me at night in bed... i felt afraid and said Jesus and the moment i said it was as if a light was switched on inside my head so bright and then all went quiet no more whisperings in the dark.

    After a while i came across the work of Ron Wyatt and FA Larson who used what was written in the bible to find biblical artifacts and the star of bethlehem.

    So i came to my senses and said there is just too much tangible evidence for the biblical story here... so i cannot but believe.
    RedEzra wrote:It could come around to you... that hard rock bottom or the end of the line where all resources are exhausted and there is simply no way out except suicide. It could come around to you !

    "WHOEVER WILL CALL ON THE NAME OF THE LORD WILL BE SAVED" - Romans 10:13

    GOD has done His part people !

    So sorry as if GOD's work was done no GOD is still doing His part.
    Swanny wrote:If it works for you then I'm happy for you Red

    But it would take more than a few stories for me to believe in gods and deities. Nothing more than hearsay.
    Plus I don't need to believe in lords or gods thanks
    rabbit
    RedEzra wrote:Okay then swanny... just remember to call on Jesus if you're in trouble right : )
    Swanny wrote:Haha no thanks, no point calling on something I don't believe in Enlightened
    Might as well call on Father Christmas New Year
    RedEzra wrote:What is the abomination of desolation ?

    "So when you see standing in the holy place the abomination of desolation as described by the prophet Daniel (let the reader understand) then let those in Judea flee to the mountains. Let no one on the housetop come down to retrieve anything from his house and let no one in the field return for his cloak." - Matthew 24:15-18

    Something suddenly showing up on the temple mount in Jerusalem ? Something which is flying in the air ? Something which would signal it is time to take to the hills ?

    "And he shall make a strong covenant with many for one week, and in the middle of the week he shall put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate, until the decreed end is poured out on the desolator.” - Daniel 9:27

    Is the abomination of desolation a ufo ? Ufos are nazi tech and an important part of the new nazi world order.
    RedEzra wrote:So a lot of powerful people in just about every nation were closet nazis and especially in the UK where the royal stock come from Germany and the US where the majority of the population were germans before and during the two world wars.

    So there is a very good reason as to why the politic of the world today feel like nazi... is because it is !
    I'm presently reading Treaty of the Great King (regarding the Covenant Structure of Deuteronomy) by Meredith G. Kline. Historical-Legality might be more important than we can imagine. Is this thread completely off-the-wall?? Does it make a semi-credible hypothesis?? I continue to think that the real magic might occur when I spend a couple of years privately studying this madness in ways I don't wish to discuss. What is the true purpose of the Bible?? What is the true Biblical Orthodoxy in Modernity?? Is the Bible merely a mental and spiritual exercise -- from which one extrapolates the real-truth via inspiration and perspiration?? Is the Bible merely a stepping-stone on the Yellow Brick Road to Utopia?? If one completely rejects the Bible -- what should replace it?? How should we approach a serious study of ancient history?? What if God does NOT wish for us to know the truth?? What if God is punishing us -- and teaching us a lesson?? I continue to feel as if I am in conflict with Divinity, Humanity, and Myself. Has anyone taken my Biblical Study-Guides seriously?? Do they approximate the definitive Biblical Interpretation?? What about the work of Ralph Ellis?? Imagine studying the Bible on the International Space Station!! I continue to think that the Bible is a Means to an End -- rather than being the Truth, the Whole Truth, and Nothing But the Truth. If the Bible describes a Mean and Violent God -- should we believe it?? Should the Televangelists be honest regarding the contents of the Old Testament and the Book of Revelation?? Why is there so much Religious-Dishonesty?? What if God is waiting for us to be Honest to God?? Should the Bible be studied rather than quoted?? Are the Teachings of Jesus in the Gospels the Last-Word in Biblical-Research??

    Are all of the nasty events which were supposed to occur in 2012 going to occur in the next few months?? I think something major might happen -- but I don't know what. I think there are a lot of angry beings in this solar system right now. I think the internet has changed everything (in good and bad ways). Is everything ultimately a great, big fight?? Are all of us fighting for fame, fortune, power, and pleasure -- in one way or another?? We try to act cool and sophisticated -- but what's really going on inside?? Have I been too rude toward the rulers of the solar system?? Have I been too easy on them?? Does the rabbit-hole really go right up my @$$?? If so, is that why I seem to always have my head up my @$$??!! Please don't take my Babylonian-Egyptian-Roman approach personally. I mean this focus as being an area of research -- rather than being a personal attack against those most closely associated with the Babylonian-Egyptian-Roman Empire. Are we stuck with this empire -- whether anyone likes it or not?? If I turn on the bright-lights -- will the Empire Strike Back?? Will the Queen of Heaven order my execution?? Is it possible to accept and reject God, Religion, and the Bible -- simultaneously??

    What if we are dealing with God the Father (living in Sirius or possibly killed by the Queen of Heaven?), the Queen of Heaven (Gabriel - living in this Solar System?), and Two Children (Lucifer and Michael - living in this Solar System?)? What if we are dealing with a Galactic Family Feud? What if we are dealing with a conflict regarding ownership and rulership of this Solar System? What if we are dealing with Reptilian Humanoids vs Mammalian Humanoids? What if God the Father is a Reptilian King? What if the Queen of Heaven is a Reptilian Queen? What if Lucifer is in charge of the Reptilian Humanoids? What if Michael is in charge of the Mammalian Humanoids? What if God the Father, the Queen of Heaven, and Lucifer are all opposed to Michael and the Mammalian Humanoids? But what if Lucifer turned against God the Father, the Queen of Heaven, and Michael - and wants it all? This is based upon next to nothing - but I think a lot when I go for long walks. I am probably completely wrong - and I've probably made 99% of the universe angry with me for even suggesting that this might be the case. But if it were the case, what would be a possible resolution modality? COORDINATE REPRESENTATION BY MICHAEL AND LUCIFER BEFORE GOD THE FATHER (IF STILL ALIVE?) AND THE QUEEN OF HEAVEN?

    How might a Vatican-Based Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom United States of the Solar System be integrated with Coordinate Representation? Would the Mammalian Humanoids be governed by Michael (as an Intergalactic Representative and Authority of Last Resort?) and 10,000 Mammalian Humanoids in a Vatican-Based United States of the Solar System? Would the Reptilian Humanoids be governed by Lucifer in a theocratic manner? Would the Queen of Heaven return to Sirius and rule with God the Father in a theocratic manner? I have no idea - but what if 'East of Eden' is a thumbnail sketch of our predicament? And don't forget Stargate Continuum . It would be really nice if I could get some help with this. I'm really not seeing a Loving God the Father active in this Solar System. I keep sensing a Vengeful Queen of Heaven and an Opportunistic and Sinister Lucifer - and a completely Disempowered and Exiled Michael. Is the Obelisk in St. Peter's a symbol of the Murder of God the Father? Is the Crucifix atop the Obelisk a symbol of the Murder of God the Son? Has the Queen of Heaven been ruling Earth for thousands of years - with Lucifer serving under the Queen of Heaven as the God of This World? Did God the Father give this Solar System to God the Son? Has this Solar System been hijacked by the Queen of Heaven and the God of This World - working through Puppet Pharaoh's, Emperors, Kings, Queens, Popes, and Presidents - ruling In Place of Christ - or Anti-Christ? Again, I'm going way, way, way out on a limb to make these speculations. Also, I have no animosity toward anyone, at this point, although when I learn the whole truth, I might go nuts, quite literally. I'm sort of numb right now. I'm not feeling much of anything - good or bad.



    I found this post on one of my Avalon 1 threads. I don't necessarily agree with it, but there might be some truth to it, just the same. How are we to know what's truth, and what's bs?

    Archangel Michael, the Price of Light, and Lucifer, the Price of Darkness, locked in battle for all eternity over the fate of mankind, or so the church would have you believe. It's perhaps the most rearranged and misinterpreted story of them all. Allow me to explain a quite different version of events.

    God and the Angels were together in Oneness, Everything was still united as One. Creation existed, but individual experience of Creation wasn't yet possible. It's like having a cake, but not getting to eat it, what fun is that? Creation wanted to experience itself being Creation, and so the Divine Plan was formed. Some of the Angels would enter into a dream, where they would pretend to be outside the Oneness so they could participate in the unique aspects of the Oneness. The one you know as Lucifer was the first to volunteer to “leave” Heaven, while Archangel Michael was the head of the angels who stayed. No conflict here, rather everyone working together towards the same Goal.

    The real story of what happened afterwards is that of the prodigal son, not of a war between “good and evil”. Lucifer, literally the “light-bearer”, was the son who left his Father's House (Heaven) to share his inheritance with all of Creation. Michael, literally “he who is like God”, was the son who stayed at Home. Note how the people judged the son who left for spending all his Inheritance, while the Father was overjoyed. Lucifer was meant to have a good time in Creation, not to be stingy with the blessings he was given. When the prodigal son returned, the Father gave him the other son's Inheritance as well. What would be the point of leaving it with Michael anyway if he's not going to do anything with it?

    Not that Michael minded at all, he already was Creation. Michael is Creation, Lucifer is the experience of Creation. Of course, if you're here experiencing Creation, how can you be outside of Creation? You can't, so you are Creation experiencing Itself, and hence Lucifer is Michael and Michael is Lucifer. Two aspects of the same Oneness. And you're not separate from this, which means both aspects are within you as well.

    Speaking of you, how did you get to be here? How did you get to the so-called “lower realms”? We were born of Oneness, so how did Humanity get to be separated from God? Simple, every Soul in this realm is one who chose to join Lucifer, a “fallen” angel. There's a little bit of truth to the story, but you aren't a “wrong”, “bad” or “evil” being, rather a very brave and adventurous one. Not one who rebelled against God, but one who disconnected from God within themselves for the wondrous experience of Reunion.

    And it wasn't Lucifer that caused people to be so mired within their illusions. When Lucifer “left” Heaven, there was still the understanding that one was still always one with Heaven, they were simply dreaming. This is the Garden of Eden of legend. It wasn't until Humanity lost the Violet Flame and couldn't effortlessly cleanse the lower vibrational energies that things started really getting messed up. Then the angels forgot they were even angels and started doing really funny things, like working at walmart and joining the republican party.

    Now, what I'm saying is probably going to bother a few, if not a whole bunch of people. I'm telling them that they're a part of what they've been told is the most evilest of evils. These beliefs are so widespread that pretty much everyone has been conditioned by them. Hell, Lucifer and the fallen angels, they've got many other names in different cultures. People sure don't want to hear they're the “fallen” angels, what would that make the world they live within? The world most people are in is hell, though the Planet they live upon is the Garden of Eden, a Living Starship. They super-imposed their illusions upon the Truth and missed the Reality altogether, yet they still are the prodigal sons and daughters, and the door Home is always Open. This is Lucifer, the Light Bearer's, message.

    The illusionary conflict between Michael and Lucifer has been projected out into people's everyday lives. There isn't, and never was, a war that divided Heaven against itself. It's a metaphor for people's own internal conflict. The angels came to the manifest to enjoy it, yet religion teaches us this realm is ruled by evil and the whole point of us being here is to escape to heaven. This creates a dualistic illusion of two paths, one of the “wicked”, who indulge themselves in physical pleasures, and one of the “righteous”, who deny physical pleasures believing they'll get some reward in Heaven. Both of these so-called spiritual paths just lead around in circles, Buddha shared this over 2,000 years ago, yet people still don't quite get it. There aren't two paths, there's only the one you're walking, and when you learn to enjoy it you wont need to wait for some reward in Heaven, you'll have brought Heaven here to Earth through your own joy. Dividing Lucifer and Michael creates conflict within your own Being, and separates Heaven and Earth. Letting go of the conflict unites Lucifer and Michael and creates Heaven on Earth. Lucifer never left Heaven and neither did You, You simply forgot that Reality of this whole situation and Heaven was hidden behind the lie of separation, reinforced through twisted, superstitious mythologies.

    Love,

    Will, Mother and Father God

    http://gflcentral.ning.com


    Please help me think through and refine the following paragraph. Some of it is repetitious - and all of it is speculative. I mean no harm or disrespect to anyone. I never get a straight answer to my questions - and I can understand why - but I will continue to attempt to figure this thing out - and try to do that which is in everyone's best interest.

    What if God the Father and God the Son were Draconian Interdimensional Reptilians who created Male and Female Human Physicality on Planet Earth - and then convinced one third of the Draconian Interdimensional Reptilians throughout Orion to incarnate into Male and Female Human Bodies? What if this were the Original and Unpardonable Sin - which resulted in the 600,000 Year Gaian/Orion War in Heaven - and ultimately resulted in the murder of God the Father (Osiris?) - and taking God the Son (Michael?) hostage - under the control of the Queen of Heaven (Gabriel?) and the God of This World (Lucifer?)? What if Lucifer overthrew Gabriel some time between 1941 and 1964 - with an official enthronement occurring in 1963 or 1964?



    Here is an example of the discontent felt by many Roman Catholics following the death of Pope Pius XII in 1958 - and especially following the 1962-65 Second Vatican Council. I think that the Roman Catholic Church (or Protestantism, for that matter) has not followed the Teachings of Jesus throughout it's existence - but that the changes occurring between 1958 and 1965 were not changes for the better. I recently have been considering a church based upon 1. The Teachings of Jesus. 2. The U.S. Constitution. 3. The Traditional Latin Mass. 4. Gregorian Chant. 5. Sacred Classical Music. This would anger everyone throughout the world - in and out of the church - but I think it would be a step in the right direction. This might conceivably be at the heart of a Vatican-Based Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom United States of the Solar System - which might be facilitated by Jesus Christ - rather than the Queen of Heaven or the God of This World. But please remember, THIS IS A TEST. THIS IS ONLY A TEST. But if no one talks to me, how can I constructively proceed with my pursuit of idealized models of church and state - and with the proper relationship between the two?

    The HOLY MASS: From Holy Sacrifice to "Happy Meal" http://www.novusordowatch.org/archive2006-04.htm

    The Holy Mass is the central act of Catholic worship. As such, it is not surprising that the liturgical actions, gestures, and prayers must reflect the true Catholic Faith to a tee. In all its details, the Catholic Mass reflects what Catholics believe, and vice versa: What Catholics believe is reflected in the Holy Mass. It therefore follows that if someone were to change the liturgical actions or prayers of the Holy Mass, this would necessarily change or impact the belief of Catholics. A common Catholic adage is that the law of prayer is the law of belief: "Lex orandi, lex credendi." Therefore, whenever changes were made to the Catholic Mass, these changes were minor and never substantial, and complete orthodoxy was always ensured so that the faithful would always have pure and sound doctrine in this principal act of worship to the Most Holy Trinity.

    The Catholic Church teaches clearly that she is infallible/indefectible and spotless in the promulgation of her sacramental rites and sacred laws imposed upon all. It is not possible for the Catholic Church to promulgate a sacramental rite that is invalid, impious, harmful to souls, or evil. In fact, the Council of Trent has hurled an anathema ("let him be excommunicated") against anyone who would dare to suggest that the Church's sacramental rites are an incentive to impiety:

    Council of Trent, Session 22, Canons of the Sacrifice of the Mass, promulgated by Pope Pius IV in 1562:
    Canon 7: "If anyone says that the ceremonies, vestments, and outward signs which the Catholic Church uses in the celebration of masses, are incentives to impiety rather than stimulants to piety, let him be anathema."

    Likewise, Pope Pius XII taught authoritatively:

    Pope Pius XII, Encyclical Mystici Corporis, par. 66 (1943):

    “Certainly the loving Mother [the Church] is spotless in the Sacraments, by which she gives birth to and nourishes her children; in the faith which she has always preserved inviolate; in her sacred laws imposed on all; in the evangelical counsels which she recommends; in those heavenly gifts and extraordinary graces through which, with inexhaustible fecundity, she generates hosts of martyrs, virgins and confessors.”

    There are many other examples of this kind, but these suffice to make clear that the sacramental rites of the Catholic Church are without blemish and are of themselves conducive to the salvation of souls. This should not be surprising, given that the Blessed Lord Jesus Christ Himself established the Catholic Church, and promised that the gates of hell would never prevail against her. If this Church could promulgate sacramental rites that are harmful to souls and even invalid, the gates of hell would definitely have prevailed.

    As all practicing Catholics assist at the Holy Mass at least once a week (on Sundays), as far as they are able, it is clear that the Faith is taught them principally and most often specifically in the liturgical rite of the Holy Mass. It stands to reason, therefore, that in order to change the faith of Catholics, to change what they believe and how they believe it, it was necessary to change the liturgical rites and prayers of the Holy Mass. The modernistic takeover of the Vatican in 1958 could never have been successful if they had only changed the beliefs on paper. Most Catholics are not familiar with papal encyclicals (which are addressed to bishops, anyway, and not to laymen), nor do they read conciliar documents; but all practicing Catholics assist at the Holy Mass at least once a week. Just as the secular-sexual revolution of the 1960's was transported into every home via rock music on the radio, and mostly thereby took abundant evil fruit, so the New Faith of the modernists could not spread into every Catholic heart and soul except by imposing on the faithful a "New Mass" that would longer be an expression of the pure Catholic Faith but of the poisonous new modernistic faith that was officially introduced and sanctioned by John XXIII and his successors, especially Paul VI.

    Interestingly enough, something very similar occurred when the Anglican heretics broke with Rome in the 16th century. They changed the Mass and sacraments to express the new faith they were preaching. In his magisterial document declaring the invalidity of the Anglican "priesthood" and "masses," Pope Leo XIII pointed out what could very well be said of the modernistic revolutionaries of the 1960's:

    Pope Leo XIII, Bull Apostolicae Curae, par. 30 (1896):

    "Being fully cognizant of the necessary connection between faith and worship, between 'the law of believing and the law of praying', under a pretext of returning to the primitive form, they corrupted the Liturgical Order in many ways to suit the errors of the [Protestant] reformers. For this reason, in the whole Ordinal not only is there no clear mention of the sacrifice, of consecration, of the priesthood (sacerdotium), and of the power of consecrating and offering sacrifice but, as we have just stated, every trace of these things which had been in such prayers of the Catholic rite as they had not entirely rejected, was deliberately removed and struck out."

    Note how Pope Leo emphasizes the connection between faith and worship -- it is essential! The infamous Martin Luther once said, "Tolle Missam, tolle Ecclesiam" - "If you take away the Mass, you take away the Church." He was right on this point. Note also that Pope Leo says that the Anglicans made changes to the Mass "under the pretext of returning to the primitive form," which is precisely what Paul VI and his cohorts claimed they were doing when introducing the New Mass. By the way, it is probably not insignificant that the New Mass was promulgated on April 3, 1969, the first day of the Jewish Passover (recall that Christ established His True Sacrifice of the Mass at the same time when the Jews were celebrating Passover, in 33 AD).

    Indeed, on April 3, 1969, the first day of the Jewish Passover, "Pope" Paul VI introduced what he claimed was simply a "reform" of the Catholic Mass based on "more ancient liturgical sources" (see Paul VI, Missale Romanum, 1969). He called it the "new order of the Mass," or, in the Latin draft, the "novus Ordo Missae." This "new order of the Mass," a term perhaps more pregnant with meaning than he then realized, gradually came to be known as the "Novus Ordo Mass," or simply the "New Mass." Since then, true Catholics who have kept the Faith handed down to us unadulterated from Pope St. Peter until Pope Pius XII (who died in 1958), have come to label the entire new religion this "Mass" expresses as "Novus Ordo," and hence we refer to it as the "Novus Ordo Religion" and their establishment in the Vatican as the "Novus Ordo Church." This web site monitors this strange new church, and hence is called "Novus Ordo Watch."




    The bottom-line is that I simply wish for everyone (human and otherwise) to be happy.
    devakas wrote:
    orthodoxymoron wrote:The bottom-line is that I simply wish for everyone (human and otherwise) to be happy.
    Qualification and authority required. Qualify and know authority Ortho to be happy yourself first
    magamud wrote:
    In his right hand he held seven stars, and coming out of his mouth was a sharp,
    double-edged sword. His face was like the sun shining in all its brilliance.









    avatar
    orthodoxymoron

    Posts : 7368
    Join date : 2010-09-28

    Re: The United States of the Solar System, A.D. 2133 (Book Three)

    Post  orthodoxymoron on Mon May 08, 2017 7:58 pm



    Thank-you magamud. I don't think being happy is an option for me, at this point. I truly think I'll be lucky to be alive ten years from now -- and even luckier to remain sane five years from now. I wish I were kidding. I think I've made significant enemies (seen and unseen) -- but I might be my own worst enemy. I feel as if I screw myself daily with my lack of productivity, and with my wild and irreverent speculation on the internet. Just the other day, a couple of Dogma Type Individuals (DTI) spoke to me in a rather sarcastic and condescending manner. It seemed as if they were sending me a message. I realize I'm paranoid, but after a while, one becomes sensitive to certain things. But please know that, at this point, this whole thing remains a Game to me. I have NOT made-up my mind about much of anything. Also, please know that I'm too screwed-up to be much of a threat. However, I think some of you might have something to worry about when I reincarnate. Just a hunch. I think this thread might be a threat if anyone actually read it -- and read between the lines. When I go silent in approximately one month -- I will probably just use this thread as a study-guide for the rest of my life. I should probably move to a location half-way between the United Nations and Washington D.C. -- and hang-out with Renegade Fordham and Georgetown Jesuits!!! I have a bad feeling about the Info-War and the Quickening. I also have a bad feeling about Factional-Fighting and Regime-Changes. I think all of this might end very badly -- regardless of any good intentions. Too many chickens are coming home to roost. I think I'll probably spend the rest of my life as a Useless and Harmless Wretch -- agonizing over what might've been. I still think we might Enslave and Exterminate Ourselves in a MOST Sophisticated and Respectable Manner.



    I think EVERYONE should think long and hard about BIG-CHURCH and BIG-STATE (before it's too late)!! Please recognize that I am NOT attempting to speak as any sort of authority. I'm simply placing a lot of very controversial material on a rather private table. It's true that anyone can view my tripe -- but how many do -- and of those who do -- how many comprehend and care?? One might refer to me as being a 'Novus Protestante'. What is the theology inherent within the Traditional Latin Mass - without any external documents or proclamations being imposed upon it? What is the simple theological message of this Mass? In other words - what would a Grammatical-Historical Exegesis of the Traditional Latin Mass reveal? What support is there for this Mass in the Teachings of Jesus? How might the Traditional Latin Mass be interpreted using only the Teachings of Jesus and the Mass itself? Would church governance based upon the U.S. Constitution harmonize with the Teachings of Jesus and the Traditional Latin Mass? What would the Patriot Movement say if the Secret Government and the United Nations were located within Vatican City - and were subject to 10,000 representatives under the U.S. Constitution - in complete openness and transparency? Would this make them triumphalistically exultant - or would it make them angrier than they already are? Would the Protestants cry 'Foul!'? Would the Roman Catholic Faithful and Hierarchy shout 'Heresy!'? This is all really too big and scary for me to properly contemplate. I don't even want to think about what a debate in the College of Cardinals, on this subject, might be like! Can you imagine?? Would a well-intentioned pipe-dream quickly degenerate into either chaos or a harsh theocracy?

    Could the best of the United States be incorporated into the Vatican, with the best aspects of the Vatican incorporated into the American Model? It would literally be Hell of Earth to get to this destination. I suspect that most everyone would be opposed to it - and perhaps with good reason. It might be the worst possible idea. Still - I like thinking about the best aspects of the Secret Government, the Underground Bases, the Secret Space Program, Gizeh Intelligence, the Alphabet Agencies, Secret Societies, etc. - but the corruption, violence, and various and sundry horrors connected with these things are absolutely terrifying to me. Somehow - all of this must be properly and safely managed, in a non-corrupt and transparent manner. I am not an insider, so I really don't know what I'm dealing with here. Just imagine a Vatican-Based Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom United States of the Solar System in the Year 2112. Think of all of the secret stuff no longer being secret. Think of the General Public travelling throughout the Solar System, and colonizing various moons and planets. Think of them riding on magneto-leviton trains throughout the world. Think of them touring Deep Underground Military Bases. Think of the Weapons of Mass Destruction being completely under control, and situated in such a manner that they could only be used to repel hostile invaders of the solar system - rather than being poised to exterminate the inhabitants of the solar system. Think of both church and state issues being debated in the House and Senate. I realize these are fighting words to everyone - but I do think that the secular must become sacred - and that the sacred must become secular. If the church and state were minimalist and non-corrupt, would a separation be desirable? Does this sort of thing exist anywhere in the universe? Has anyone really thought this through? Is there any documentation of discussions pertaining to a minimalist church and state solar system government? What would be the advantages? What would be the disadvantages? This is playing with very hot fire - isn't it??? Pass the Hash!!!

    Thank-you Mercuriel. I'm thinking of various possibilities regarding Coordinate Representation - but I don't wish to post them until I have a better idea of what you mean by the term. Your post was quite interesting, especially this part:

    The Outer Doctrine Trinity = Father - Son - Holy Spirit.

    The Inner Doctrine Trinity = Father - Mother - Only Begotten Son and Daughter.

    The Unholy Trinity = Lucifer - Jahbulon - Mehabone...

    The Father seems to be absent - and this really bothers me. I keep seeing Hollywood representations of a Queen killing a King. Or even the story of Oedipus. I fear that somehow God the Father (Osiris?) has been removed or murdered. I'm sensing a Vengeful Mother (Gabriel?) Assisted by a Sinister Son or Daughter (Lucifer?) - and a Despised Out of Power Son or Daughter (Michael?). I have speculated that the Obelisk and the Crucifix are symbols of the Vengeful Mother and Sinister Child's victory over Osiris and Horus. But this is just more speculation. I'm suspecting a Family Feud / Civil War - spanning tens or hundreds of thousands of years - throughout our solar system and Sirius. But I could be completely wrong. A galactic tug of war could REALLY get out of hand in a hurry. When I speculate about all of this - I mean no harm or disrespect to any and all involved parties. I'm just trying to figure out what the hell is going on - and how to defuse whatever madness exists in this neck of the woods. The official history is horrible - and I think the real truth will prove to be unimaginably horrible. I am VERY concerned regarding what part I might've played in the madness. I have no peace - even on a good day. Take a long, hard look at 'East of Eden' and 'Rebel Without a Cause'. Guess who Osiris, Isis, Ra, and Horus might be. God the Father, Mary/Isis/Queen of Heaven, God of This World/Amen Ra/Lucifer, and Michael/Horus/Jesus? Righteous Parent and Child vs Rebellious Parent and Child? Local Annunaki vs Incoming Annunaki? Was Michael/Horus/Jesus a Rebellious Annunaki who became a completely Human Being - and became Persona Non Grata and Galactic Enemy Number One - of both the Local and Incoming Annunaki? Are we facing a Three-Way Showdown? Is there any way to properly unite the three hypothetical parties - and to avert Armageddon?




    I remain idealistic and hopeful - but there are so many problems facing humanity - that it may be impossible to move smoothly into the future - without huge disillusionment, catastrophe, and discouragement. No matter how we set things up, and no matter what we do, I think that life is going to continue to be hard for most of the people of the world. Things will probably get worse, before they get better. Things could get a lot worse. I continue to desire conversation regarding solar system governance. I continue to desire conversation regarding idealistic forms of government and religion - especially as they relate to solar system governance. Do we need government at all? Do we need religion at all? Should church and state always be kept completely separated - or should there be some sort of integration? Is democracy really mob-rule? Is theocracy really tyranny? Has Rome really ruled the world for thousands of years? Does Rome presently rule the world? Does Rome really rule the solar system? What do you get when you cross Washington D.C. with Vatican City? An oxymoron - or the wave of the future? How does the City of London, the United Nations, and the Secret Government fit into all of this? How do the Annunaki fit into all of this? How does Sirius fit into all of this? My level of fear, disillusionment, and disorientation are reaching critical levels. My unyielding despair seems to be winning out over my incurable optimism - and this is without being at the center of things. I'm just an armchair student of solar system governance, and it's almost too much for me to handle. Perhaps it would be impossible for a genuinely compassionate and idealistic individual to properly administer this solar system. At some point, one might have to become very, very hard and tough. But then we bi+ch about Megalomaniacs Anonymous - who don't seem to give a damn about the peasants. I can also see the sad phenomenon of idealistic reformers getting their butts kicked from one end of the solar system to the other.

    How does one become a truly responsible bad@ss big-shot - with all of the positives - and none of the negatives? The baggage of the past might be too heavy for us to properly deal with at this point. I will continue to request that at least some individuals - human and otherwise - really give this thread some serious time and attention. I don't feel confident and on top of the world at all. I feel like someone keeps kicking the shi+ out of me, each and every day. I'm trying to think things through, and be happy, but it just isn't happening. I will keep at it, but I often wonder why. This might be the Century of Facing Reality. It might take the entire century to properly face reality. If there is any merit to a Vatican-Based Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom United States of the Solar System - it might not become a reality until 2112 - and it might emerge in a completely different form than the one I am presently considering. The words of Raven keep ringing in my ears, regarding me being a 'completely ignorant fool'. I didn't disagree, and I don't disagree. The words of Anchor keep ringing in my ears, regarding 'self-governance' in the context of my ranting and raving about solar system governance. My level of self-governance seems to be at an all-time low. The more I contemplate solar system governance - the less self-governance I seem to exhibit. But is it possible for a highly organized, charming, and polished individual - with a high level of self-governance - to lead this solar system straight to hell? Is it possible for someone who sits in front of a computer in their jammies all day, eating chocolates, to make proper determinations regarding the future of this solar system? A super-salesman does not always market the best products. Beware of the Primrose Path and the Road to Hell.




    I am considering political and religious ecumenism based upon 1. The Teachings of Jesus. 2. The U.S. Constitution. 3. The Latin Mass. 4. Sacred Classical Music (including Gregorian Chant and Improvisation). I have recently become interested in Pope Pius XII - as being the last pope before the revamping of the Roman Catholic Church. Imagine a Pope who might be completely onboard with these four points!!!! Anyway, here is a statement by Pope Pius XII regarding ecumenism. http://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDFECUM.HTM I was just imagining what it might have been like to discuss theological and liturgical issues with Eugenio Pacelli and Charles Marie Widor in the organ loft of Saint Sulpice - perhaps in the 1920's!!!

    ON THE "ECUMENICAL MOVEMENT" - An Instruction of the Holy Office addressed to the ordinaries of places, given December 20, 1949.

    The Catholic Church, although she does not take part in congresses and other conventions called "ecumenical," yet has never ceased, as is clear from many Pontifical documents, nor will she in future ever cease, to follow with the most intense interest and to promote by earnest prayers to God, all efforts toward the attainment of what is so dear to the Heart of Christ Our Lord, namely, that all who believe in Him "may be made perfect in one."[1]

    For she embraces with truly maternal affection all who return to her as the true Church of Christ; and hence, worthy of all. praise and encouragement are all those plans and projects which, with the consent of Ecclesiastical Authority, have been undertaken and are being carried forward, either for the proper Catholic instruction of future converts or for the more thorough training of persons already converted to the faith.

    Now in many parts of the world, as a result of various external events and changes of views on the part of people, but especially in consequence of the common prayers of-the faithful through the grace of the Holy Spirit, there has grown constantly in the minds of many persons separated from the Catholic Church the desire for a return to unity on the part of all who believe in the Lord Christ. To the children of the Church this is surely a cause of true and holy joy in the Lord, and at the same time an invitation to help all those who sincerely seek the truth, by earnest prayer to God imploring for them the grace of light and strength.

    However, some of the initiatives that have hitherto been taken by various individuals or groups, with the aim of reconciling dissident Christians to the Catholic Church, although inspired by the best of intentions, are not always based on right principles, or if they are, yet they are not free from special dangers, as experience too has already shown. Hence this Supreme Sacred Congregation, which has the responsibility of conserving in its entirety and protecting the deposit of the faith, has seen fit to recall to mind and to prescribe the following:

    I—Since the above-mentioned "union" is a matter which pertains primarily to the authority and office of the Church, it should be attended to with special care by the Bishops, whom "the Holy Ghost hath placed to rule the Church of God."[2] They should, therefore, not only diligently and effectively watch over this entire activity, but also prudently promote and direct it, for the purpose of both helping those who seek the truth and the true Church, and protecting the faithful against the dangers which may easily flow from the activity of this "Movement."

    Hence they must in the first place be fully aware of everything that has been and is being done through this "Movement" in their dioceses. For this purpose they shall designate well-qualified priests who, according to the doctrine and norms prescribed by the Holy See, for example by the Encyclicals "<Satis cognitum>,"[3] "<Mortalium animos>,"[4] and "<Mystici Corporis Christi>,"[5] shall pay close attention to everything which concerns the "Movement" and report thereon to the Bishops in the manner and at the time which they shall prescribe.

    They shall watch with special care over publications which may be issued in any form by Catholics on this matter, and shall see that the canons "on the previous censure and prohibition of books" (canons 1384 seq.) are observed. And they shall not fail to do the same with regard to publications of non-Catholics on the same subject, in as far as these are published, or read, or sold by Catholics.

    They shall also diligently provide whatever may be of service3 to non-Catholics who desire to know the Catholic faith; they shall designate persons and Offices to which these non-Catholics may go for consultation; and <a fortiori> they shall see to it that those who are already converted to the faith shall easily find means of more exact and deeper instruction in the Catholic faith, and of leading a more positively religious life, especially through appropriate meetings and group assemblies, through Spiritual Exercises and other works of piety.

    II—As regards <the manner and method of proceeding in this work>, the Bishops themselves will make regulations as to what is to be done and what is to be avoided, and shall see that these are observed by all. They shall also be on guard lest, on the false pretext that more attention should be paid to the points on which we agree than to those on which we differ, a dangerous indifferentism be encouraged, especially among persons whose training in theology is not deep and whose practice of their faith is not very strong. For care must be taken lest, in the so-called "irenic" spirit of today, through comparative study and the vain desire for a progressively closer mutual approach among the various professions of faith, Catholic doctrine-either in its; dogmas or in the truths which are connected with them-be so conformed or in a way adapted to the doctrines of dissident sects, that the purity of Catholic doctrine be impaired, or its genuine and certain meaning be obscured.

    Also they must restrain that dangerous manner of speaking which generates false opinions and fallacious hopes incapable of realization; for example, to the effect that the teachings of the Encyclicals of the Roman Pontiffs on the return of dissidents to the Church, on the constitution of the Church, on the Mystical Body of Christ, should not be given too much importance seeing that they are not all matters of faith, or, what is worse, that in matters of dogma even the Catholic Church has not yet attained the fullness of Christ, but can still be perfected from outside. They shall take particular care and shall firmly insist that, in going over the history of the Reformation and the Reformers the defects of Catholics be not so exaggerated and the faults of the Reformers be so dissimulated, or that things which are rather accidental be not so emphasized, that what is most essential, namely the defection from the Catholic faith, be scarcely any longer seen or felt. Finally, they shall take precautions lest, through an excessive and false external activity, or through imprudence and an excited manner of proceeding, the end in view be rather harmed than served.

    Therefore the <whole> and <entire> Catholic doctrine is to be presented and explained: by no means is it permitted to pass over in silence or to veil in ambiguous terms the Catholic truth regarding the nature and way of justification, the constitution of the Church, the primacy of jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff, and the only true union by the return of the dissidents to the one true Church of Christ. It should be made clear to them that, in returning to the Church, they will lose nothing of that good which by the grace of God has hitherto been implanted in them, but that it will rather be supplemented and completed by their return. However, one should not speak of this in such a way that they will imagine that in returning to the Church they are bringing to it something substantial which it has hitherto lacked. It will be necessary to say these things clearly and openly, first because it is the truth that they themselves are seeking, and moreover because outside the truth no true union can ever be attained.

    III—With regard especially to <mixed assemblies and conferences of Catholics with non-Catholics>, which in recent times have begun to be held in many places to promote "union" in the faith, there is need of quite peculiar vigilance and control on the part of Ordinaries. For if on the one hand these meetings afford the desired opportunity to spread among non-Catholics the knowledge of Catholic doctrine, which is generally not sufficiently known to them, yet on the other hand they easily involve no slight danger of indifferentism for Catholics. In cases where there seems to be some hope of good results, the Ordinary shall see that the thing is properly managed, designating for these meetings priests who are as well qualified as possible to explain and defend Catholic doctrine properly and appropriately. The faithful, however, should not attend these meetings unless they have obtained special permission from Ecclesiastical Authority, and this shall be given only to those who are known to be well instructed and strong in their faith. Where there is no apparent hope of good results, or where the affair involves special dangers on other grounds, the faithful are to be prudently kept away from the meetings, and the meetings themselves are soon to be ended or gradually suppressed. As experience teaches that larger meetings of this sort usually bear little fruit and involve greater danger, these should be permitted only after very careful consideration.

    To <colloquies between Catholic and non-Catholic theologians>, none should be sent but priests who have shown themselves truly fit for such work by their knowledge of theology and their firm adherence to the principles and norms which the Church has laid down in this matter.

    IV—All the aforesaid conferences and meetings, public and non-public, large and small, which are called for the purpose of affording an opportunity for the Catholic and the non-Catholic party for the sake of discussion to treat of matters of faith and morals, each presenting on even terms the doctrine of his own faith, are subject to the prescriptions of the Church which were recalled to mind in the <Monitum, "Cum compertum>," of this Congregation under date of 5 June, 1948.[6] Hence mixed congresses are not absolutely forbidden; but they are not to be held without the previous permission of the competent Ecclesiastical Authority. The <Monitum>, however, does not apply to catechetical instructions, even when given to many together, nor to conferences in which Catholic doctrine is explained to non-Catholics who are prospective converts: even though the opportunity is afforded for the non-Catholics to explain also the doctrine of their church so that they may understand clearly and thoroughly in what respect it agrees with the Catholic doctrine and in what it differs therefrom.

    Neither does the said <Monitum> apply to those mixed meetings of Catholics and non-Catholics in which the discussion does not turn upon faith and morals but upon ways and means of defending the fundamental principles of the natural law or of the Christian religion against the enemies of God who are now leagued together, or where the question is how to restore social order, or other topics of that nature. Even in these meetings, as is evident, Catholics may not approve or concede anything which is in conflict with divine revelation or with the doctrine of the Church even on social questions.

    As to <local> conferences and conventions which are within the scope of the <Monitum> as above explained, the Ordinaries of places are given, for three years from the publication of this Instruction,[7] the faculty of granting the required previous permission of the Holy See, on the following conditions:

    1. That <communicatio in sacris> be entirely avoided;
    2. that the presentations of the matter be duly inspected and directed;
    3. that at the close of each year a report be made to this Supreme Sacred Congregation, stating where such meetings were held and what experience was gathered from them.

    As regards the <colloquies of theologians> above mentioned, the same faculty for the same length of time is granted to the Ordinary of the place where such colloquies are held, or to the Ordinary delegated for this work by the common consent of the other Ordinaries, under the same conditions as above, but with the further requirement that the report to this Sacred Congregation state also what questions were treated, who were present, and who the speakers were for either side.

    As for the <inter-diocesan conferences and congresses, either national or international>, the previous permission of the Holy See, special for each case, is always required; and in the petition asking for it, it must also be stated what are the questions to be treated and who the speakers are to be. And it is not allowed before this permission has been obtained, to begin the external preparation of such meetings or to collaborate with non-Catholics who begin such preparation.

    V—Although in all these meetings and conferences any communication whatsoever in worship must be avoided, yet the recitation in common of the Lord's Prayer or of some prayer approved by the Catholic Church, is not forbidden for opening or closing the said meetings.

    VI—Although each Ordinary has the right and duty to conduct, promote, and preside over this work in' his own diocese, yet the cooperation of several Bishops will be appropriate or even necessary in establishing offices and works to observe, study, and control this work <as a whole>. Accordingly it will rest with the Ordinaries themselves to confer together and consider how a proper uniformity of action and coordination can be obtained.

    VII—Religious Superiors are bound to watch and to see to it that their subjects adhere strictly and faithfully to the prescriptions laid down by the Holy See or by the local Ordinaries in this matter.

    In order that so noble a work as the "union" of all Christians in one true faith and Church may daily grow into a more conspicuous part of the entire care of souls, and that the whole Catholic people may more earnestly implore this "union" from Almighty God, it will certainly be of assistance that in some appropriate way, for example through Pastoral Letters, the faithful be instructed regarding these questions and projects, the prescriptions of the Church in the matter, and the reasons on which they are based. All, especially priests and religious, should be exhorted and warmly encouraged to be zealous by their prayers and sacrifices to ripen and promote this work, and all should be reminded that nothing more effectively paves the way for the erring to find the truth and to embrace the Church than the faith of Catholics, when it is confirmed by the example of upright living.

    Given at Rome, from the Holy Office, 20 Dec., 1949.


    1. Consider the Psychological, Ethical, Religious, and Political Implications and Ramifications of the Teachings of Jesus, the U.S. Constitution, the Latin Mass, and Sacred Classical Music (Including Improvisation and Gregorian Chant).

    2. Consider the Psychological, Ethical, Religious, and Political Implications and Ramifications of a Vatican-Based Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom United States of the Solar System.

    The first option includes specific historical items - while the second is more general, and is based upon principles and concepts. I think it is extremely important to study this subject from the perspective of both options - and to study them separately and together. Also, repetition is highly useful in gleaning all of the gems hidden within these few words. It is easy to just read options one and two - and then forget them - and turn to the 'experts' for answers. Once again, consider reading 'The Desire of Ages' by Ellen White, 'The Keys of This Blood' by Malachi Martin, and 'The Federalist Papers' - while listening to Latin Masses, Gregorian Chants, and Sacred Classical Music. This is also deceptively simple and anti-intellectual sounding - but this is a very deep study - and I didn't just pull all of the above out of an anatomical black hole. This isn't just the idle chit-chat of a completely ignorant fool.

    I really like studying all of the new material on the internet (even though it's hard on the nerves), but I think we need some historical structure to all of this - and the best aspects of the church can help us to achieve lasting gains for humanity. I have chosen to attempt to sort out the madness - by looking at everything from the context of the Roman Catholic Church - despite the historical and theological problems. I am both a friend and an enemy of the church. I continue to think that the top people in the Roman Catholic Church know more about what's really going on than just about anyone in the solar system - but I don't follow them, because there is only so much that they can say without losing their jobs - or worse. Once again, I am a Protestant Catholic New-Age Agnostic! I'm so gonna burn.

    I wish I had the resources to hire a dream-team of Philadelphia Lawyers to make a detailed and convincing case for and against all of the above. Then I would love to watch them fight it out in Moot-Court. Wouldn't that be cool? I'm sure they would unearth pros and cons that I never dreamed existed. Then I'd like to see a small country or island adopt the hypothetical religious and political system - and observe it in action for a decade - and possibly use it as a model for implementation on a larger scale. Once again, THIS IS A TEST. THIS IS ONLY A TEST. Someone please talk to me about all of this. Is there a small country out there which would be willing to try this?? I really don't know if it would work - especially long-term. The world is changing so quickly, and there are so many problems, that perhaps nothing will really be satisfactory. I really wish to positively reinforce the best of the past, as we move into a Brave New Solar System. The Weapons of Mass Destruction REALLY worry me. I suspect that presently they might be in the worst of hands. We need to somehow get the WMD situation under control - so that they would be in the best of hands - and only be used to defend the solar system from hostile invaders - rather than using the WMD's to exterminate ourselves. Using them on ourselves would be the epitome of stupidity - don't you agree??

    I keep wondering what Russia and China would think about this sort of thing. If they had a prominent seat at the table - and were not dictated to - would they be receptive to maximizing Responsible Freedom - while minimizing Church and State? Again, the goal would be to maximize political and religious freedom within the member states. I am sorry to keep repeating a lot of things over and over again - with various applications - but this is really the only way that I can properly do a conceptual study - especially when I am mostly going solo - with a galactic masturbation of the mind. I really could use some help with this. How rich, corrupt, and ruthless would I have to be - before I would be taken seriously, and given at least a tiny bit of respect? Just using common-sense and logic - in a nice and polite manner - really doesn't seem to work in this solar system - does it????





    Wouldn't it be cool if there were someone who could really make the bad-guys tremble - but who would never be a threat to the good-guys, or to the rank and file members of society? What would a Pope and/or President look and act like in a Vatican-Based Namaste Constitutional Responsible Freedom United States of the Solar System? I just think that the current governmental systems are HIGHLY corruptible - and that it's almost impossible to be a really good guy or gal at the highest levels of governance - in both secular and sacred settings. That haunting image of Pope Pius XII is both attractive and repulsive to me. If he were emerging from a meeting where he had just read the riot-act to the Nazis, and had told them NOT to go to war, or to harm anyone in any way, shape, or form - THAT would be cool - wouldn't it??? But if there were some sort of diabolical and corrupt collusion in the works - that would be reprehensible - wouldn't it??? I would LOVE to talk to the most knowledgeable individual in the solar system - regarding what REALLY went on between Eugenio Pacelli and Adolph Hitler!! I would also like to know what part Gizeh Intelligence played in all of this. I wonder if Pope Pius XII visited any Underground Bases??!! I tend to think that he was under more pressure than anyone could possibly imagine. I'm not sure exactly why I think that might've been the case. What reincarnational parts did Isis, Ra, and Horus play in the first half of the twentieth-century?? We might be surprised!! Osiris seems to be absent throughout most of recorded history. Just my impression. I should stop...



    I continue to be very afraid of the dangerous state of the world, and possibly the dangerous state of the universe. I am terrified by who I might've been, and what I might've done - reincarnationally. I feel quite desperate because of my not seeming to fit-in anywhere on this planet - and because of the lack of interest in my research and ideas over the past couple of years. I am very, very nervous that I might've gotten key elements wrong in my threads in 'Avalon 1' and 'The Mists of Avalon'. I sometimes get the feeling that the only ones who might take any of this seriously are in underground bases or huge ufo's. Who knows? The most faithful readers of my work might be Dracs and Greys - and I'm not kidding one little bit...

    What would the Traditional Latin Mass - combined with the Teachings of Jesus and Sacred Classical Music - and nothing more - yield theologically and liturgically? Isn't the whole Roman Catholic raison d etre supposedly based upon what Jesus taught? So why do we need all of the church councils and excathedra pontifications to supposedly show us the way of salvation? Why aren't the Teachings of Jesus the Rock Upon Which the Church is Built???


    1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OaVaNw3jito&feature=related
    2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vyAB4lJddY&feature=related
    3. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbtTx8ljn_4&NR=1
    4. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpB8GfnbQ3o&feature=related
    5. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJlUP3yDvkQ&feature=related
    6. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohDqL6pjpjY&feature=related
    7. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zlSK8vn55ZA&feature=related
    8. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQGBMl_CGQI&feature=related
    9. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTiM-khUePY&feature=related
    10. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sI8lS8hr-nY&feature=related
    11. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aKF8K9cJCuY&feature=related

    You new age types might think my discussion of religion is a waste of time - but look at how many people in this world practice some form of the Mass. This is something which must be properly dealt with - whether we like it or not. I love cathedrals, cathedral music, ceremony, reverence, reflection, etc. - but I have HUGE problems with the history and theology of the church. The following is a very conservative Roman Catholic view - and it has it's good points and bad points. I can't imagine arguing with whoever wrote the detailed and passionate article. I really don't like to fight with people - so I just keep talking to myself on the internet - hoping that someone might notice my tripe. Hope springs eternal. Why will no one so much as give me the time of day??? Should I just wash my hands - and walk away from this mess??? I'm sick and tired of the bullshit. What would Isis, Osiris, Ra, and Horus say???

    What are Catholics to think of the New Mass? http://www.catholicapologetics.info/modernproblems/newmass/missa.htm


    The Catholic Church has always first and foremost spoken of the Mass as a "sacrifice." In fact, it is infallible teaching that Christ left a visible Sacrifice to His Church "in which that bloody sacrifice which was once offered on the Cross should be made present." (Council of Trent)

    This doctrine is wonderfully and precisely expressed in the traditional Latin Mass. And down through the centuries the Church closely guarded the text of the Mass to make sure that nothing would find its way into the Missal which compromised this doctrine. She knew that the way you pray shows what you believe. Pope Pius XII expressed this principle in his Encyclical on the Liturgy:

    "The worship she [the Church] offers to God, All Good and Great, is a continuous profession of the Catholic Faith…. In the Sacred Liturgy, we profess the Catholic Faith explicitly and openly."

    The Protestants also knew that the Mass clearly expressed the Church’s doctrine. When they wanted to spread their new and false doctrines, they changed the liturgy. In the 16th century, Luther made Catholics into Protestants by getting Catholics to worship like Protestants. In Roland Bainton’s book on Luther entitled "Here I Stand," we read:

    "Next came the reform of the Liturgy, which touched the common man more intimately because it altered his daily devotions. He was being invited to drink the wine [sic] at the Sacrament, to take the elements into his own hands, to commune without previous confession, to hear the words of institution [consecration] in his own tongue, and to participate extensively in sacred song."

    "Luther laid the theoretical groundwork for the most significant changes. His principle was that the Mass is not a sacrifice…" (p. 156, Mentor ed.)

    Since the early 1960s, Catholics began to notice more and more changes being made in the Mass. Those changes resemble, to a remarkable degree, the changes made by Martin Luther in the 16th century. His motive was to destroy the belief that the Mass is a sacrifice. Is it any wonder, then, that many Catholics - priests and lay people - have lost their faith? Since worship and belief go hand in hand, it is important to find out what the beliefs were which brought about all these changes in worship. To do this we have to speak about the Second Vatican Council.

    Vatican II & Its Reforms

    The Second Vatican Council (October 11, 1962 to December 8, 1965) was called by Pope John XXIII. He said he wanted to "open the windows" of the Church to the modern world. He said he hoped to "update" the Church, make it more relevant to the times, and thus draw more people to the Church. He called the Catholic bishops together so that they could discuss sweeping changes in Catholic worship and discipline. After the death of John XXIII, the work of this Council continued under Paul VI and resulted in many radical changes. Catholics soon found themselves faced with "reforms" in every phase of their religious life.

    Millions of words have been written about these "reforms". Catholics were told time and time again, "the essentials of the faith have not been changed" and that Vatican II brought about a true "renewal" in the Church.

    However, Our Lord said that we can know a tree by its fruit - that a good tree brings forth good fruits and a bad tree brings forth bad fruits. What then have been the fruits of Vatican II? Priests and sisters abandoned their sacred calling by the tens of thousands, once-full seminaries and convents now stand empty or closed, attendance at Mass has dropped dramatically, theologians have called into question or denied nearly every doctrine of the Catholic Faith, and the Church’s teachings on morality are openly denied or carefully ignored by clergy and laity alike.

    Can these fruits be called good fruits? Most Catholics would say no. And, since the fruits are bad, this leads many people to conclude that the tree that produced such fruits, in this case Vatican II, is bad as well.

    The reason the "renewal" of Vatican II produced such disastrous effects is that its spirit was founded on the wrong principles, particularly that of ecumenism. When you get right down to it, ecumenism has come to mean "union at any price". It meant that the hierarchy was ready to compromise and water down the Church’s doctrine and worship in order to achieve unity with non-Catholics and to attract the world to her. It was ecumenism that led to the creation of the "New Mass."

    The New Mass

    The Catholic Church, as we said earlier, always taught that the Mass is, first and foremost, a sacrifice, one which is offered to God to make satisfaction for sin. This teaching, however, has always been rejected by Protestants. Luther, and countless heretics before and after him, taught that it is blasphemous to say that the Mass is a sacrifice offered up for the living and the dead, or that the bread and wine are really and substantially changed into the Body and Blood of Christ. They also taught that the Mass is a simple meal where Christians gather together to commemorate what Christ did at the Last Supper.

    Because of this Protestant teaching, those who promoted ecumenism and unity with non-Catholics at any price set about to purge the Mass of any specific references to the Mass as a sacrifice offered up for the living and the dead, and to blur other Catholic doctrines which Protestants found offensive. A Vatican commission was formed to change the Mass, and among the participants were six Protestants: Dr. George, Canon Jaspar, Dr. Shepherd, Dr. Konneth, Rev. Eugene Brand and Max Thurian. They represented the World Council of Churches, the Anglicans, the Presbyterian Community of Taize, and other Protestant bodies. On June 27, 1967, Bishop (later Cardinal) William Baum told The Detroit News that "they [were] not simply there as observers, but as consultants as well, and they participated fully in the discussions on Catholic liturgical renewal. It wouldn’t mean much if they just listened, but they contributed." The result of the work of this Vatican commission was the introduction of the New Mass in 1969.

    In the document which originally introduced the official text of the New Mass, its authors presented a definition of the Mass which clearly shows that the New Mass is founded on Protestant and ecumenical principles. They call the Mass "the Lord’s Supper" - a term favored by Protestants - and define it as "The sacred assembly, or gathering together of the people of God, with a priest presiding, to celebrate the memorial of the Lord."

    A member of the Vatican commission, Father Luca Brandolini, said of this passage: "It defines it [the New Mass] exactly, beginning with the assembly."

    Martin Luther could have accepted this new definition of the Mass. There is no reference to the Mass as a sacrifice offered unto the remission of sins for the living and the dead, but only to a "memorial of the Lord," nor is there any mention of the Real Presence in this definition. The priest is only called someone who "presides" over an assembly of people, in the same way that a Protestant minister "presides" over a communion service.

    The prayers and ceremonies of the New Mass were brought into line with these ideas. Old prayers and ceremonies were deleted or changed, and new ones were added which represent the Mass as just a "community meal" shared among the faithful. This, of course, led to the introduction of Communion in the hand, another Protestant practice.

    The Protestant nature of this new definition of the Mass was so obvious to many that it was later deleted and replaced with another definition. But the rites and prayers which were based on that definition were used and continue to be used to this day in churches throughout the world. They clearly reflect the ecumenical and Protestant nature of the New Mass.

    Traditional & New: Contrasts

    To see how these Protestant principles in the New Mass differ from the Catholic principles of the traditional Latin Mass, it is useful to contrast how they are celebrated.

    In a typical modern parish on a Sunday, the man in the pew notices a number of things: The entire service is conducted in English; the priest sits or stands facing the people, and often makes spontaneous remarks to them during the course of the service; sometimes a number of lay people are in the sanctuary, adding their comments and doing readings; part of the service takes place on a table with the priest facing the people; the tabernacle is almost never on the table, but at the priest’s back, or off in a corner; there are handshakes and smiles all around at the "Sign of Peace"; the priest usually distributes Communion in the hand many times, assisted by lay men and women; the priest makes few genuflections (if any); and the prayers hardly mention the idea of the Mass as a sacrifice. The emphasis is often on vague ideas such as "brotherhood" and "sharing," etc.

    Such is the typical celebration of the New Mass. Remember, though, that no two celebrations are ever necessarily exactly alike. They vary from priest to priest and from parish to parish. In many places some very surprising things have been incorporated into the New Mass: There are "Clown Masses," "Puppet Masses," "Balloon Masses," Masses which feature movies, slide shows, skits, and popular music of every sort.

    When a Catholic who has assisted at the New Mass for a while begins to assist at the traditional Mass, he finds the differences striking: The Mass is celebrated in Latin, the ancient and venerable language of the Catholic Church; the priest faces Our Blessed Lord in the tabernacle on the altar; he makes no spontaneous comments on his own, but recites exactly the same prayers which have been used by priests for centuries; only the priest is permitted to touch the Sacred Host with his consecrated hands; the people kneel for Holy Communion before their Lord and Savior, and receive Him on the tongue alone; there is no handshaking and socializing before the Blessed Sacrament, but rather the people follow the Mass silently and reverently with their Sunday or Daily Missals which translate the words of the priest; the gestures of the priest are reverent and restrained, and include numerous genuflections out of reverence for the Blessed Sacrament; the texts of the Mass speak of the Real Presence of Christ on the altar and of the awesome sacrifice that is offered for the living and the dead.

    The traditional Latin Mass is offered the same manner everywhere. It does not vary from priest to priest and from church to church. This is so because the Catholic faith is the same everywhere, and that true unity of faith must be reflected in a true unity of worship as well. It should be clear from this description that the traditional Mass is absolutely faithful to Catholic teaching and the New Mass is not.

    Ecumenical Compromises, Doctrinal Distortions

    But, you might say, give me some more specifics - where and how does the New Mass "give in" to Protestantism or "distort" Catholic doctrine?

    When you place the prayers and ceremonies of the traditional Latin Mass side by side with those of the New Mass, it is easy to see how much of the Church’s traditional doctrine has been "edited out" - and the "editing" always seems to have been done on those parts of the Mass expressing some Catholic doctrine which Protestants find "offensive." Here are some examples:

    1. Common Penitential Rite: The traditional Mass begins with the priest reciting personal prayers of reparation to God called "The Prayers at the Foot of the Altar." The New Mass begins instead with a "Penitential Rite" which the priest and people recite together. Who were the first to introduce a common penitential rite? The 16th-century Protestants, who wanted to promote their teaching that the priest is no different from the layman.

    2. The Offertory: The Offertory prayers of the traditional Mass clearly express a number of Catholic teachings: That the Mass is offered to God to satisfy sin, that the saints are to be honored, and so on. The Protestants rejected these teachings and abolished the Offertory prayers. "That abomination called the Offertory," said Luther, "and from this point almost everything stinks of oblation!" In the New Mass, the Offertory is gone - it has been replaced with a ceremony called "The Preparation of the Gifts." The prayers "offensive" to Protestants have also been removed. In their place is the prayer "Blessed are you, Lord God of all creation," based on a Jewish grace before meals.

    3. The "Eucharistic Prayer": The traditional Mass has only one "Eucharistic Prayer," the ancient Roman Canon. The Canon was always a favorite target of Lutheran and other Protestant diatribes. Instead of just one Canon, the New Mass now has a number of "Eucharistic Prayers," only one of which we will mention here. Eucharistic Prayer No. 1 is an "edited" version of the Roman Canon. The lists of Catholic saints, so despised by Protestants, are now optional, hence rarely used. The translators did some further "editing": among other things, the idea that Christ the Victim is offered at Mass (a notion Luther condemned) has disappeared. All the Eucharistic Prayers now incorporate some typical Protestant practice: They are recited in a loud voice instead of silently, and they have an "Institution Narrative" instead of a Consecration. (According to Protestant beliefs, their ministers do not consecrate the Eucharist like Catholic priests do; they just narrate the story of the Last Supper.) The various signs of respect toward Our Lord present in the Blessed Sacrament (genuflections, signs of the cross, bells, incense, etc.) have been reduced, made optional, or eliminated.

    4. Communion in the Hand: The 16th-century Protestant Martin Bucer condemned the Church’s practice of placing the Host on the tongue of the communicant as something introduced out of "a double superstition; first, the false honor they wish to show to this sacrament, and secondly, the wicked arrogance of priests claiming greater holiness than that of the people of Christ, by virtue of the oil of consecration." The practice in Protestant churches of "communion in the hand," thus, is based upon their rejection of Christ’s Real Presence and the priesthood. At the New Mass, just as at a Protestant service, there is Communion in the hand. But the men who created the New Mass went the Protestants one better: A layman may not only receive Communion in the hand - he is actually permitted to distribute it as well, even on a moment’s notice.

    5. Veneration of the Saints: The prayers of the traditional Mass frequently invoke the saints by name and beg their intercession. The Church’s veneration of the saints in her worship was another practice which Protestants dismissed as "superstition." The New Order of the Mass dropped most invocations of the saints by name, or made them optional. In the new Missal, moreover, the weekday prayers for saints’ feastdays (most of which are also optional) have been rewritten for the benefit of Protestants - allusions to miracles, the defense of the Catholic Faith, or to the Catholic Church as the one, true Church have disappeared.

    6. The Faithful Departed: As a Catholic, you know that when someone dies, you pray for the repose of his soul. This Catholic belief is reflected in the Prayers for the Dead in the traditional Mass - "Be merciful, O Lord, to the soul of …" etc. Again, the Protestants rejected the teaching that we can pray for the soul of someone who has died. Now, the New Mass provides 114 prayers for the Dead. In all of the prayers but two the word "soul" has been removed. An oversight? Father Henry Ashworth, who helped compose the New Mass, stated in 1970 that the omissions were intentional.

    7. False Translations: Then there is the matter of the false official English translations of the New Mass. A whole book could be written on the errors and distortions they contain. Here we will mention briefly only the official translations of the prayers for the 34 "Sundays in Ordinary Time." The following are some of the ideas which the English translation suppresses: God’s wrath, our unworthiness, error, sins which "burden our consciences," God’s majesty, obedience to His commandments, supplication, humility, eternity, heaven - the list could go on and on. Perhaps the most serious omission is the word "grace." It appears 11 times in the Latin original. Not once does it appear in the official English "translation." Grace has disappeared without a trace!

    Clearly, then, the prayers and ceremonies of the New Mass represent a change of doctrine. The new worship is Protestant, ecumenical - hence, a danger to the Catholic Faith and to the salvation of souls.

    Why Catholics Should Never Go To The New Mass

    What has been said above ought to make it clear why Catholics should not assist at the New Mass. However, there is more to the issue than just what a Catholic "should" do; there is also the question of obligation, under pain of sin, not to assist at a service which is Protestant and ecumenical.

    Now, at first, this might sound surprising and even radical. But when you apply Catholic principles to the concrete case of the New Mass, this is the practical conclusion which follows.

    But perhaps you are yet not convinced. If not, consider then three more reasons why it is sinful to assist at the New Mass.

    1. The New Mass is False Worship: Father Heribert Jone, an eminent Catholic moral theologian, in his famous Handbook of Moral Theology, discussed the sin of "False Worship," which is one of the offenses against the First Commandment. He said that "God is worshipped in a false manner if one mingles religious errors and deception with the worship of the true God" (Newman Press: Westminster MD, 1961, p. 97)

    Is this a description of the New Mass? We have already shown that the rites and prayers of the New Mass are based on a Protestant and ecumenical understanding of the Eucharist. We have also shown how the erroneous official translations distort Catholic doctrine. So in this respect the element of religious error is present. As well, those who created the New Mass insisted there was nothing wrong with it, in spite of its Protestant nature. In so doing, the element of deception was added; an essentially Protestant service was presented as something Catholic.

    2. The Validity of the New Mass is at least Doubtful: Every sacrament has a form, that is, certain essential words which must be pronounced to make the sacrament "happen." For the Eucharist, the form is: "This is My Body" and "This is the chalice of My Blood of the New and Eternal Testament, the Mystery of Faith, which will be shed for you and for many unto the remission of sins."

    In the New Mass, however, the form for the consecration of the Precious Blood is different: The phrase "the Mystery of Faith" is omitted, and "for you and for many" was changed to "for you and for ALL." When this point is brought up, a common answer is that Christ died for all men. Therefore, it should be "all." Well, Christ died for all men, but all men are not saved. And when Our Lord instituted the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, He said "many" not "all" because He was speaking not about His desire to save all men, but rather of the fruits of His Passion - that is, the "elect," those who would be saved.

    How do we know this? We know it because this is the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church. You can find this teaching in the Catechism of the Council of Trent. Here is what it says about why Our Lord did not use "for all".

    "With reason, therefore, were the words ‘for all’ not used, as in this place the fruits of the Passion were alone spoken of, and to the elect only did His Passion bring the fruit of salvation." (p. 227)

    The New Mass’s use of "for all" is then a new meaning; it contradicts the Catholic teaching that the Mass is for the "many," or the "elect." The consecration form in the New Mass implies that all men are the elect, that all men are going to be saved, that all will go to heaven. You can see how this fits in with ecumenism. (The use of "for all," by the way, was first suggested in our day by Joachim Jeremias - a German Protestant.)

    "Many," obviously, is not the same as "all" - they mean two different things. What’s more, Our Lord didn’t say "all" - He said "many." Thus, the meaning of the form of Consecration in the New Mass is different from the meaning of the form Our Lord Himself gave us. And when the meaning of a sacramental form is changed, the sacrament becomes invalid. If the Consecration is invalid, then Christ’s sacrifice is not renewed. There is no Mass.

    But let us say for the sake of argument you are not absolutely convinced. Perhaps, you think, "many" means "all" and "all" means "many," or that only the words "this is My Blood" are necessary. Are there not theologians who say that those words alone are essential? If they are right, then maybe the meaning of "all" and "many" doesn’t matter for the validity of the Consecration.

    The first answer is that St. Thomas Aquinas says the words which follow "This is My Blood" "are of the substance of the form." (Summa Theologica, III, q. 78, art. 3) But just for the sake of argument, let us admit that there are two opinions on just which words are essential to the form. This being the case, we are left with a dispute and hence a doubt. Thus at the very least, all honest men must admit that the words for the consecration of the wine in the New Mass in English are "doubtful" - that is, there is a doubt as to whether or not the sacrament is valid or "happens." In the case of the New Mass, then, the changes in the form give a reason to doubt whether Our Lord is really present there under the appearances of bread and wine.

    Father Jone tells us: "Matter and form must be certainly valid. Hence, one may not follow a probable opinion and use either doubtful matter or form. Acting otherwise, one commits a sacrilege" (ibid., p. 308). Because of this change in the sacramental form, then, one can consider the New Mass in English to be objectively a sacrilege.

    3. The New Mass is Irreverent: Moreover, St. Thomas Aquinas teaches that "…whatever pertains to irreverence for sacred things is an injury to God, and comes under the head of sacrilege" (Summa, II-II, q. 99, art. 1). There are, of course, other practices in the New Mass which show "irreverence for sacred things" (such as the practice of "communion in the hand" and lay distributors), but space here does not permit a full treatment.

    So, it would seem clear that Catholics are obliged to stay away from the New Mass in English, not only because its nature is Protestant and ecumenical, but also because (1) it is false worship, (2) its validity is doubtful and (3) it is irreverent and sacrilegious.

    It is for these, and many other reasons, that Catholics who "stand fast and hold the traditions" do not assist at the New Mass, but assist at the traditional Latin Mass exclusively. They want to be sure that their public worship is not offensive to God and that they are receiving real Catholic sacraments - and not doubtful or invalid ones. In fact, they will not go to church on a Sunday at all if the traditional Mass is not available, but will stay home, read their missals and unite themselves to the true Masses being said throughout the world.

    Fulfilling The Sunday Obligation

    This is a problem which troubles many Catholics who have just begun to assist at the traditional Latin Mass. Their parish priests or diocesan bishop will say that "they are not fulfilling their Sunday obligation." The solution to the problem is really quite simple.

    The Third Commandment which obliges us to keep the Lord’s Day holy is a divine law, that is, it comes from God Himself. The law which binds Catholics to assist at Mass every Sunday in a particular type of building is a Church law. Now, while it is true that the purpose of the Church law is the same as the purpose of the Third Commandment, nevertheless, it is still a Church law and subject to God’s law. Thus, the Church could not force her children to participate in the Mass of an heretical or schismatic priest. If that were the only Mass available, a Catholic would sin gravely by assisting at it. Hence, we are excused from the Church’s law in certain cases if there is a serious reason.

    As Catholics, our first obligation and the highest law is the glory of God and the salvation of our souls - all other purely ecclesiastical laws are subordinate to this. The means through which we save our souls are the Catholic Faith and the Catholic sacraments. Since the New Mass celebrated in parish churches is both irreverent worship and a positive danger to the salvation of a person’s soul, a Catholic is automatically released from his obligation to assist at it, even if he is directly ordered to do so - for no one has the authority to command you to do something which is sinful. Therefore, since it is a sin to assist at the New Mass, it is impossible to fulfill one’s Sunday obligation by going to it. Otherwise one would be in the impossible position of rendering homage to God by committing a sin.

    magamud wrote:






    avatar
    Eartheart

    Posts : 456
    Join date : 2012-02-23
    Age : 52
    Location : surface omnidim gridpoint

    Re: The United States of the Solar System, A.D. 2133 (Book Three)

    Post  Eartheart on Tue May 09, 2017 8:24 am


    Alloha Dr. Oxy , who so carelessly quantumnavigated those traps of medevil beastality foodsourcing...

    hey that made my day -"processed by an wicked spirit/ghost by the name of *CHI*" or so... Harp

    This modern racist trash got good pounded and condensed by your unflinching efforts lately, seems to ring all my church bells
    just by contemplating a few of your hints. Thanx and farewell...

    here some more perspiration:
    1* that lifeforce/chi packet-which is a frequency pixelcloud stores a lot of intrusive implantations & ideas - especially those morons of contradictional/controverse diabolic dialectix, sick mnemoplexes and pretraumatic conditioning (like dust on the heart)... So the joke was really on the real - what a stink.

    2* Best of quotes was from M about the souverign state of anyone as a promise to this threads fruitition into our now/soon ascended Yoniverse with our solar system got over it to "enjoy/play" with bondage... Those Grailvisions are absolutistix and will replace all common idiocrazy dogmatic schools - UknowhatImean Tacodog

    3*Hey Trinity from Matrix was such a perverted subterfuge trying to underscore the free loving heart, well that could be their BS revealed - so that the whole trinity concept is just that - an unholy BS from the powerhungry ghostrealm, so your speculation of the 3 artangels competing for supramacy here are just for our demolition team... But who in Her/His perfected godstate whould redeem all the angelic host from their service to elevate those mortal combatants beyond their AI competition - Dr. Who seems to be one of those crownagents who wrecked our late history in the first place (with the help of the subraces and demonic reverse code). May you succed instead - as RA feared you would...

    4*And here some account to the story of "poop pious" from ANUS/PONTUS/... At the beginning of 19th c. there was this humanoid effort of new thought and education to elevate the collective misery of early capitalhungry societies. The secret societies sprung into new growth, talmudic writings culminated into such holocaustic BS like 'the elders of zio-n' and other
    wickedly twisted concocktions of possesed chi/Cheese. Even in those times heavenly/alien inspiration was twisted into materialistic concepts - like marxism and jewish highjacked communism sacrificed millions for really what progress into the next machinistic wars - scripts and longtime projections from 18th c. Papa-cy... (BIG block of red ink in everybodiess CHI-dont go to communism!!!! Morons!)
    So after those early instigated revolutions in Eurasia (1913-1918) with the 1WW provoked by british/american agents in sarajevo that progressive force of those demonic subraces was in full swing, "that Great Work" of building that temple which never X-isted for that Artangel and hosts. The great work since the inception of the OT/NT writings around the 14th c. and the consequent closing of all gaps and knowledgeable holes in their alleged spamm. That was when those brutish jews wanted it literally, their iland from where out to leech and loot the enforced babylon on the surface.
    Here was Pious suggestion to bring them to Ethiopia/Eritrea where the Knights had reportedly found the survivors elithium, where the son of solomon brought that ark of the G and where the original jews left over from egypt exodus where cultivating the gardens...Angelic Beeings had envisioned to bring this African Israel in so that today the whole continent would be the spiritual center of humanity and first contact had spaceports in sahara ect... (At that time there was no palestine, no palestine population and yeah a few jews hung out there like everywhere, trying to make sense of their mutated disfunktional state/affairs). Poop pious must have known of the concocted biblical mare and choose for his churchly M-pire, meanwhile getting all those intel from around the block...
    It must have schocked when those P2 ect.loges forced the italian army to suddenly annex ethiopia/eritrea (they could only win against those tribeman with the spraying of mu-gas from aircraft) and started the 2.WW before those germans become Xxxxxx over by british agent adolfo (by the way Mussolini was as well a british agent before). ECT...
    So there was then after the destruction of said new Israel, which was enforced by industrial complex, those conferences of international jews in London (or around there) to enforce the literal script with Zion in Judea and the international finance led by jew banksters stipulated german blockade and their reactions of bbrrrr iggittiggitt demonic subraces wtheck...
    So conclusive my 5cent is that the nazipope wasnt one, but knew of all this and more, beeing unable to steer the wreck of that insidioussness of artificall riffs and babylons hateagendas... Jenneta

    5*the orgastic wholeness and UV-envelope - an ongoing comparition of adamic, athlantic and MU-bodytypes with the fruit of our creation - an avalonian meshiach body hosting the round view creation of all species and their specific contributions into our omniverse - hint @ EXIT from holoprojected induction... Hadriel The Karen Hadriel

    6*The doubleheaded eagle is a symbol of the survivors of the atlantian ghostwars, like the Trident of Shiva/Neptun is a sign of the atlantian King or Kingform of that era-like the suncross a lucky sign brought to earth from those spacefaring humanoids long before those reptiles started their sumerian deceptions!!!!!

    Lawless see U allmighty


    Sponsored content

    Re: The United States of the Solar System, A.D. 2133 (Book Three)

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sat Jul 22, 2017 7:50 am