Fell

I was young and silly about love (in a good way) it ended it sucked. After that havent really felt the desire to commit that much of myself in another. Im still young but relationships require a certain amount of ummm trust and emotional investment that im not willing to commit. Rather take the path of emotional security and brief but pleasant sexual encounters than the ever so trying commited ones. Course of all the people ive "seen" since then i havent felt compelled to attempt to make it anything more. id do have rather lofty ideas about who id commit myself towards so that probably slims down my possibles alot.

Maybe im cold but i think the tube should be removed. Family cant pay for the resources the girl is consuming. her injuries are self inflicted. The drain of resources being wasted on her would be better off going to people with a chance at recovering. The president getting involved is a political ploy to expound his values and be a general dumbfuck. Its not emblematic of big brother. its classic political fuckery

Grandfather joined the marines when he was 17 fought in korea. Got blown up got sent home. Went from being poor to owning 2 multi-million dollar companies. One was a construction company. He owned a small fleet of fishing/crabbing boats. Around this point in time he was a raging alchoholic. Never violent or mean but always piss drunk. Through some twist of events becomes broke. Goes from broke to rich again in a decade or so. through some other twist of events involving fraud or something is forced to sell his company. Basicaly was a self made millionaire twice in his life then fucking up both times. Im very close to my both my grandparents. Hes honestly an older version of myself. Real smart and clever funny as shit. but deep down has a streak of bastard (in an endearing way) and a fuck up :D Has the best life stories ever. Hes seen much done alot and been rich and poor many times. Grandmother is also a really interesting smart woman. My house is about two blocks down from theirs so i see them often. Its awesome to listen to them talk about the past. A bit of mystery in my family is that my grandfather never spoke about his side of the family to anyone. Grandmother has never met and rarely heard a story involving them. When asked grandpa just clams up probably a good tale or two in there somewhere. i know he was involved in some shady buisness stuff. I can tell in some stories there are elements hes leaving out.

mud is undignified.

 

I might have been Queen Slut, but I do have standards. Besides, one would hope that the STH gentlemen had more unusual fantas--, er, well-developed imagination, more creative minds, etc.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If that was the case nobody would be interested in the forum queen slut

I'm somewhat disappointed that no one has suggested that Rossi and I should fight for the title.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

You know they'll only ask you to wrestle in mud for it, or something. You know what they're like.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

vote for mud wrestling. :icon_sam: :icon_twosgun:

And 64% worse is a lot of worse.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

But im not a slut im just "open minded" had sex with a relative small amount of people. I just have lots of interesting sex! im pure as driven snow!

Uhhh wiccan is a religion it was created by gardner and it borrows most of its ideas directly from the GD but it is a religion its source doesnt change that "fact".Also a vast majority of wiccans arent of the gardner persuasion any longer making the dictates of that specific branch null to define the belief system as a whole. The k other then to distingish between stage magick and "real" magick is to also make the word conform to crowleys gematria. He morphs all kinds of words to fit into his system or creates them from scratch. I defined tools as any ability or method to get the result you will. This isnt limited or was even in reference to physical objects as actualy reading the post would reveal. As to people butchering wicca it was a half assed creation to begin with dont see how a religion based on adaptation can be butchered when thats it source. Rituals and beliefs evolve being skyclad isnt required. A sexual act isnt required for "the great rite" things change doesnt invalidate them essentialy. But yes most "wiccans" like most of any other religion have next to no actual knowledge about the roots of their belief system. And the "stuff" you do has nothing to do with magick. Dont confuse paranormal abilities with magic. awareness is the fundamental aspect of "magic". If you dont understand why and how you effect change its obviously not in accordance with will. post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacies dont help anyone. critical thinking,knowledge and wisdom are as important for the "occult" as any other aspect of life. Its when people discard these tools that it becomes the new age pseudo scientific bog we have today. But i do agree the "tools" one employs should never be confused to being the crucial aspect. The tools used evolve as the person who uses them does (being they are a reflection of self). I use language as a tool to communicate i dont confuse the tool used to being inherent to the act itself.

64% worse then i thought :icon_redface:

You want to know how to make magic work? Simple. BELIEVE.

Simple as that. It doesn't matter the name, the formulaes, the rituals, any of it! All it takes is an innate belief in something, the will to have it, delude yourself into thinking that it's going to come true. And, before you know, it has come true!

You don't need to meditate, you don't need angels or demons, you don't need fancy words, you don't need candles, you don't need anything except your own mind and will.

There ya go. I revealed the truth about magic....how shocking! I just saved everyone on this Forum who wants to learn magic hours of their time and 100s of dollars.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Well, yeah, although I think deluding yourself isn't the point. You can delude yourself into thinking you're a walrus, but that doesn't mean you're a walrus. And usually, if you think you're a walrus, you're nuts.

 

It's more of an intent thing. If you want something to happen, and you intend for it to happen, then it's more likely to happen. Magic is intent shifting probabilities.

 

I don't think I've actually spent any money on any magic books, or candles, or anything like that. I think I got some matches once to see if I could light them with my mind.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Magick (a term i despise and never use) has nothing to do with "shifting probabilties" Intent is the focusing of the will having a known and clear intent to project a coherent will. Its not about shifting the cosmic balance or causing imparting kinetic energy to cause combustion. Its about knowing "why" and "what" What do you want to do. And why. When you know the "whys" and "What" of a choice then you confer to the tools you have to manifest will. This can be an education on how to run a buisness. This can be charm used to persuade. And sadly yes some of these tools are dependent on experience and knowledge. Sometimes you actualy do have to study and train to be able to utilize a tool. This goes from the mundane to the magickal. And just because you have a clear intent and tools to draw on doesnt mean you will accomplish your task. As to the reference of crowley he was a half rate tard wrapped up in the "magickal orders" of his day. No ideas expressed were original in any manner he was just "popular". Pretty similar to asking keanu reeves how to perform a exorcism. Crowley was a weakling with not enough will to save himself from using drug's sex or generaly keep his mouth closed. His books are half borrowed ideas. For example his knowledge and use of gematria and hebrew o dear. How one can expound on the concept of "will" so strongly could be so weak is beyond me. Only limitation on how you can express will is yourself and your available tools. There is always resistance reguardless what the goal is. Will can be applied to the "mystical" just like anything else. Someone mentioned wicca previously. Wicca is first and foremost a religion magickal practices are secondary if you dont hold their morality to me true id have no idea why one would be considered a "wiccan". One could be wiccan and have nothing to do with the mystical aspect of it.

Actualy your reference to fluidic condensers was in direct relation to your claim that "water" is a universal medium hard to say it wasnt when its recorded in your post. The elementalism in IIH doesnt place "water" as anymore of a universal medium than any of the other elements. I can see why you are so confused given your reference to occultforums.com the domain of the armchairist and roleplayer.

And give the depth of knowledge demonstrated in posts i think the popularized concepts of magick is rather on topic.

By the way, I question this 40% number. Are you sure? I'd be more willing to believe 40% of women don't regularly achieve it but I think anyone's capable of it. Forgive me for being blunt, but I think a lot of women - indeed, perhaps most women - can't achieve without direct and prolonged stimulation of the clitoris. To which I say - what's your hurry? Wait for it, lovers, wait for it.

Once dated a girl who had never had an orgasm. Took like a month to figure out the manlfunction. First step get them to masturbate. I fail to believe that one cannot self induce an orgasm with regular practice. If they themselves dont know what does it for them its kinda hard to figure it out (lord knows i tried). Alot of it is mental as well. Being completely comfortable with themselves and you. Barring some extreme mental barrier from abuse or something else i find it hard to to accept that they just cannot get off. Once she figured out what she wanted/needed she splurged at the drop of a hat :wacko:

The primary reson I feel that later Christianity borrowed from other faiths as it emerged and separated from Judaism is that Christian conversion throughout the world has followed this path. Arguing that Mithras borrowed from Jesus is akin to arguing that Odin derived from the Viking interpretation of Father Christmas. Personally, I think Mani, more than Zaroaster, had more influence on the development of Christian philosophy.

 

However, the more interesting discussion was in determining the nature of evil in Christianity. Is Christianity more dualistic than monotheistic? I'd suggest that the primary belief expressed in books like the LEFT BEHIND series is a dualistic perspective like Zoroastrianism with a Spirit of Evil, Satan/Antichrist, consciously defying the will of a much more powerful Spirit of Good, God/Christ.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Fire and brimstone sermons and the dualistic approach for the "god fearing christians" seems another tool at propagating a religion. Its hard to analyze something objectivly when you assume the very nature of it is divine. What kind of room does that leave to criticaly examine of something if the very act of questioning it is a sin?

Alot of the of themse of mythology existed in many forms. Im not saying that christianity as a whole was stolen from pagans. A synergy takes place give and take of course pagan beliefs adopted christian beliefs. the roman church made sure of this to propegate christianity. Pagan hollidays were converted to christain times of celebration etc. But when beliefs predate the supposed "historical" occurance of something its time to question the distinction between mythology and history. Faith in christ and god shouldnt be dependent on the dubious interpration of biased scholars thousands of years ago. Your faith should come from experience personal insight and realization. Not what youve been "told". Have faith in your god not the stigma created by people about your god. Its a fine line but one worth treading.

It only reveals that there is some modicum of Truth that has been percolated among the gentiles since the first Christological text of Genesis

.

 

Mithraism has evolved independently of judaism and the text of genesis. As did dionysis mythos. But please feel free to morph any contrary evidence. Christ his divinity his self sacrafice. The cornerstone of your faith as mentioned is adopted from older pagan beliefs. Sorry if this insight offends you. Probably should study the roots of dionysis and mithra before assuming you know what it means and what it reveals huh?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

My friend, you assume too much. Do you think that I haven't engaged the other pseudo-Christian developments throughout cultures? You can't even get the gist of a post my fellow. You continually place words in my mouth to support your position. You would benefit well from a closer study of comparitive religions when you make statements such as "the cornerstone of my faith was adopted from older pagan beliefs." That is insane. But I see how your whole system would fall apart if it turned out to be untrue. So by all means don't look into any scholarship that is antithetical to your preconcieved notions. Just sit comfy by the warm fire of ignorance.

Is it not possible that the myth of Mithras when it emerged from Mesopotamia slowly gathered Christian elements as it was adopted by the Romans? Of course not. That is crazy? Even when the Hebrews were compiling doctrines of the Messiah thousands of years earlier. Is it possible that the Sumerians, Babylonians, Assyrians, Persians might have adopted some Hebrew scholarship into their mythology. Of course not. We all know that pagans are superior to monotheists and would never borrow from them even though there are significant High God myths buried deep within many religious mythologies. The Babylonians and Persians never elevated Jews to positions of power. Magi didn't leave Mesopotamia to follow a star to Bethlehem. Insane!

I mean if something has two feet, two arms, a circulatory system, and lungs, it has to be a human right? Just too many similarities. Couldn't be an ape?

Doesn't matter that when you set Mithraism, Osiris, and any other dying and rising god next to Christ the internal messages are light years apart ! Couldn't have anything to do with sympathetic magic to make the crops fertile and babies heatthy now could it? Crazy! :wacko:

 

I'm done. I've beat my head against this wall enough this week.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

id like for you to explain how a pagan belief system could be influenced by the christian mythos when the pagan beliefs PREDATE the christian ones? The story of christ didnt happen till christ was BORN and he DIED. strangly the story of that occurance is common place and existed in some form in dozens of places.

What a completely fitting post a man of faith

I think the thread has taken unfortunate turns and would suggest new ones be made to discuss interesting material like Mithraism and Dyonisius, although I fear those will devolve, as well.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

When faith replaces judgement it always does.

Well you should because Christianity as revealed in scripture and the Old Testament build up to the apex in the Cross and Resurrection completely stands or falls on Christ's ontological Deity as YHWH Himself, from the begininng of time, foundations of the world.

Yes christianity as revealed by the destruction of contrary gospels and texts does reveal that. Sorry my perspective is slightly more broad then being dependent on appeals to authority.

The fact that you will not admit to the truth of the passage even in the face of the entire canon, even after having been spoon fed a grammatical diagraming of the text, reveals that your a priori presuppositions are preventing you from approaching this text with ANY semblance of objectivity. Don't mean to be snarky but we are all looking at a green coat and you kepp calling it red because that is your favorite color.

I have no invested interest in my interpratation of christianity it doesnt threaten my world view or beliefs one way or the other. How a a follower of the gospel can even manage to utter the word "objectivity" is laughable. Your entire faith is dependent on that interpratation. Besides your interpratation is conforming the actual words to conform to your faith. I have no vested interest in it one way or the other it doesnt make a difference. the fallacies in the gospel are many and have been stated and funny enough ignored.

It only reveals that there is some modicum of Truth that has been percolated among the gentiles since the first Christological text of Genesis

Mithraism has evolved independently of judaism and the text of genesis. As did dionysis mythos. But please feel free to morph any contrary evidence. Christ his divinity his self sacrafice. The cornerstone of your faith as mentioned is adopted from older pagan beliefs. Sorry if this insight offends you. Probably should study the roots of dionysis and mithra before assuming you know what it means and what it reveals huh?

 

So, knowing all this, what the woman is asking is " Please make yourself uncomfortable, to provide me with some moments selfish pleasure. "  *

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Because waiting half an hour to get home and have a wank is more uncomfortable than having something rammed into you that you don't want in there?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So romantic *swoons*

Not in my 30's but i cant recall in the past 3 years where a heavy sexual encounter didnt conclude with some orgasm inducing act. But yes i do miss the days when my heart went pitter patter over a makeout session. Now that sex is common does kind of detract from its "OMG IM GONNA GET LAID" factor

When i was a kid i used to sleep walk. Even so much as to unlock doors. I woke up outside twice. Stopped happening when i got older. Strangly i never have nightmares that really inspire fear. I have dreams with monsters and violence and intense situations but never really crosses the line into being affraid.

I dreamed last night that I had an unabashed affair with one of my online friends.  :o

 

We were also trying to escape something, but I can't remember what. I think they were some kind of gremlin or those round alien creatures who shot spines from that cheesy horror movie. Crapoopoo, what was that movie called anyway?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Critters?

ummm... will anyone address that Mithraism thingie, or should i make a new thread about it? The whole thing fascinates me ever since we had a series of classes on Mithraism during our medieval/ancient world art history classes.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Its far too interesting to be paid attention. Dionysis mythology is more interesting to me im sure the two systems relied heavily on eachother having many similar themes practiced in the same area.

If jesus called himself a god or anyone else is pretty low priority as far as what should be responded to. I really dont care if he did or didnt. Its like arguing over what batman was thinking when he threw a smoke bomb as lizard boy. Did he really mean to knock lizard boy off the rail or was it an accident. That he was saying "god" existed within in each person as a means to justify his claim of being god and to not be stoned seems a pretty consistent explanation of the usage of the word. The fact the story of christ pre-dates the birth and death of christ by pagan religions in the same city where the bible was formed seems vastly more interesting.

The crowley deffinition of magick doesnt need to imply the "supernatural". People cause change in accordance to will in all manner of ways. To having enough insight into your own consciousness. the "whys" why do i feel this way,why do i act this way etc. And using that knowledge to dictate your choices instead of being a half asleep sheep person is as magickal as anything else. universe is a weird place im sure there are all manner of ways you can express your will. Probably all manner of beings and what have you. I also think that the entire field of "magick" attracts those that want "power" or some form escape from the "mundane." I kind of like to think that if one could as in manipulate some supernatural forces to great effect that the amount of self disclipline and wisdom required would probably assure that they wouldnt. Magick is in the details look around youll see it. all kinds of patterns exist that most people dont reconize. People tend to study the occult and neglect the study of themselves. Self awareness is far more powerful then any ritual.

Every single aspect of the exorcism scene is in contrast with the formal rite. Except maybe the words spoken which im not sure. i dont think saying a latin phrase repeatedly constitutes as a real exorcism.

We're in agreement here. Still they bothered to look up the actual words and did not make up some themselves.

What would gnosis have to do with lucifer slowing down time the concept is slightly more involved then a special effect and has no relation to its use in the movie.

I for one can't think of a much better way to describe gnosis in movie metaphor. It could be argued that Constantine summoned Lucifer in an effort to save Angela and the period where everything was slowed down was part of the summoning. I.e. Lucifer did not slow things down, Constantine did, and the spell ended when his magical intent (saving Angela) had been fulfilled. (Things sped up again after that point, after all.)

facing a direction is just random mythos they tossed in.

It is a key element of almost all of western ritual tradition. A Golden Dawn guy, a Thelemite and a Catholic priest will not agree of a lot of things, but they all face east in their invocations.

Where in IIH is water spoken and used in that manner? The principals of all the elements are intrinsic to his work.

They are, but water gets a special role in the chapters on Fluidic Condensers, which are used for Clairvoyance and such. It is in the soul section of stage 6 IIRC.

 

Christian, I do not think the Goetia is very useful for a beginner. "Liber Null & Psychonaut" is more likely to be helpful, as are a lot of other books. In general, I think Hellblazer does seem to favor a chaos magic style approach. The Goetia might be more useful for people trying to get behind Promethea, although even in that case, there are many more useful, and much more accessible, books.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Fluidic condensers in IIH dont relate to water but to the magnetic and electric fluids of the body. They are described as fluids and magnetic and electric as a metaphore. Seeing an instance of bullet time and saying OMG thats a clear indication of gnosis is laughable. As is the bastardized concept of gnosis. Much like all magick today its the tool of roleplayers. Actual study doesnt extend beyond a few books by carol. Maybe some dee deffinitly some crowley. Spend 200 bucks on ebay and one is a wizard!

1) Do we want the thread to remain civil? If not, just let me know, and we'll agree to disagree before we get shitty with each other and I'd just as soon leave the thread. If so, perhaps we should refrain from lobbing words at me like "blind" and "indoctrinated."

The word indoctrination isnt a slander its an observation wasnt intended to offend. Blind while slightly not nice is still an accurate description of someone who ignores all that contrasts ones opinion and accepts and interprates information only in a way to reinforce ones opinion. instead of having ones opinion be shaped by it.

Main Entry: in·doc·tri·nate

Pronunciation: in-'däk-tr&-"nAt

Function: transitive verb

Inflected Form(s): -nat·ed; -nat·ing

Etymology: probably from Middle English endoctrinen, from Middle French endoctriner, from Old French, from en- + doctrine doctrine

1 : to instruct especially in fundamentals or rudiments : TEACH

2 : to imbue with a usually partisan or sectarian opinion, point of view, or principle

2) The Elohim question has been sufficiently answered. Perhaps you should re-read what's been written in the thread, to wit, that the word can mean God, false gods, angels and demons, and people of god, and that its meaning (it occurs over 1,000 times in the Bible) is dependent on the context in which it is used. This is the third time I've said this.

If jesus was using the word elohim to mean something other then he was god why would the jews prepare to stone him for blasphemy i dont see any other usage for the word that fits the context of the story and the reaction of the jews.

Mark 2:1-12--Jesus heals a paralytic. He had authority to forgive sins, which is something only God Himself can do. Then, to authenticate His claim, He demonstrated His power by healing the paralytic.

During Christ's trial, the chief priests asked Him point blank, "Tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God." And He said,

"I am." (Mark 14:60-62)

"Yes, it is as you say." (Matt. 26: 63-65)

"You are right in saying I am." (Luke 22:67-70)

John 8:56-58. Jesus is talking to the unbelieving Jews. "Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing My day; he saw it and was glad." "You are not yet 50 years old," they said to Him, "and you have seen Abraham?" "I tell you the truth," Jesus announced, "before Abraham was, I AM!" Jesus was the great I AM from before the beginning of time; He existed before Abraham ever was. He is claiming here to be the I AM of the Old Testament. Verse 59 says the Jews picked up stones to stone Him, but the Lord Jesus slipped away. The reason they wanted to stone Him was because stoning was the death penalty for blasphemy.

3) Not sure how to proceed because we have some very different assumptions and you guys are not particularly interested in reading the text as much as taking pieces of it and trying to use them to support your arguments. My approach to the text - and the approach of believers and non-believers alike - is one of consistency, the works have to be looked at as a whole. Any serious scholar - even those opposed to Christianity - will tell you this. And, as I said, most serious scholars find the gnostic ideas being discussed in this thread as below consideration.

How can you claim that your approach is one of consistency when you ignore all material that doesnt fit your pre-defined beliefs? That is the exact opposite of what you said is required for serious study. Ive read the bible. Ive read the religious doctrine of just about every major religion at some point or another. Ive read a good amount of gnostic texts (christian and un-christian) If you are ignoring all material that you deem "below consideration" i have no idea how you can claim you are looking at the material as a whole. Most serious scholars find the gnostic ideas below consideration. What "serious scholar" could justify the summary dismisal of relavant materials? I suppose dismissing any knowledge that is contrary to ones opinion is consistent at least.

4) Fell, I'm not sure where to start with that last one. The Gospels were sorted out 325 years BEFORE Christ's birth? To make quotes, put this [ quote ] before the quote (only without the spaces between the word and the brackets) and [ / quote ] after the quote (ditto).

Should have been more specific 325 AD.

However, it is a "good" answer that seems to cover the bases, but its is based upon the presupposition that only Christ could experience divinity in human form.  Just as with the problem of the use of the word "evil" in the bible, the answer revises the interpretation to avoid really questioning the implications. The line says, pretty clearly "you are gods." Throughout the bible Jesus calls men the children of God and says that he is the father of everyone. The answer in the link essentially claims that 'that's not what Jesus really meant.' It's an attempt to quell dissension and return to dogmatic and singular interpretation rather than explore the sheer complexity inherent to a living spiritual text.

 

Essentially, the problem is with the idea that Christianity is simply based upon scripture, when most of the acts in the scripture arise from mystical revelation. The spirit of any religion is in the people who practice it, not in written words, and the pioneers, the Prophets, Jesus, Mohammed, gain their knowledge from mystical experience, not from dogmatic adherence to the scripture.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No a religion is the dogma and formalization of the beliefs. the spirit of faith on the otherhand doesnt need to be restrained by those things. When the authority of the dogma becomes the motivating force behind a faith is when the problems arise