This guy seems sort of like a rigid zealot, but I appreciate enough of what he's saying to agree with him a decent amount. It's clear there's quite a bit he misunderstands, especially like conflating Lucifer (well... what it used to be before the faggots changed it) and "Satan" or the Anti-Christ.
All Christ is is just an archetype - an energy you tap in to.
There's just so many more explanations of things that aren't so diluted or ambiguous than what this guy's willing to believe and the way he describes things.
Don't get me wrong [them] believing or saying all of those things may very well be true, but I think they're misunderstood because this guy doesn't understand the inversion magic, as an example. For instance, they're afraid to death of the concept of Lucifer - of shining Light. What Lucifer really is, before it was changed around a ton by the faggots that keep secrets, is a savior.
I'm not so sure how this relates to Jesus and although I've had it explained to me that both Jesus and Lucifer (the original meaning, not the morphed and faggot inspired bullshit we see espoused today) simply tapped in to the same energy, I'm still making up my mind about things.
I tried to reply to this quite a few times but never felt comfortable with the response. I guess this video really made me think, but ultimately I think this guy misses too much of the existing explanations out there that he unfortunately avoids taking away what he should of from what [they] believe.
To explain further, I think it's irresponsible to take a collection of works comprised by a bunch of noses somewhere close to two millennia ago that was diluted via translation endlessly unto today and base his whole refutation on it. People outing these systems isn't enough for me anymore. I think rejecting the binding agents they invented for us is important, no matter how imperative a figure Jesus was. Frankly, I think he was indeed the savior, the one who was chosen to deliver the message (Hermes/Mercury), the true guiding light. With that being said, I think that same entity has come here before, as per the old stories. I think it just keeps coming back and trying again and it's worth it to root for it over some being like Saturn that got (gets... maybe) all its power the "wrong" ways. Hopefully this is an easier explanation than the dynamic he describes. I know it's easier to grasp for me.
I keep wanting to distance myself from what I've said that's similar to [them]. It's sort of bothering me. For instance, I think independence is absolutely a necessity in this realm. I think we all deserve freedom and shouldn't be ruled by anyone. So, one world government and religion is out of the question for me. While I'm glad I don't agree with plenty of what I know [they] believe in, I'm still trying to make up my mind about some of the more nuanced bits (or what I see as pretty nuanced) like the real explanation of Lucifer.
Naturally, I can't help but feel like you're nudging me toward something. Even if that's not the case, thanks for sharing this with me. I clearly have some more thinking to do, which I think is a good sign (for you too, if I'm correct about your aim) no matter what.
Before I reply, I need context. Are you talking bout the second Robert Sepehr video I posted about Atlantians? Or are you talking about the UN and Occult video?
Oops. I was still too ambiguous. I meant the UN and Occult video.
I really enjoyed the first one, though. It's pretty in line with a lot that I've learned about.
That video is with a 7th day adventist, which is one of many millienail groups (millenial means the second messiah is coming soon ... at the end of the millenium).
I posted that so you could learn about the normie perspective on where Lucius Trust comes from. The video was a great watch for me, but I agree that he doesn't have a full picture on the Lucifer topic. One has to take data from the perspective of the technician reporting and recording it. This is why many perspectives are important.
I can't help but feel like you're nudging me toward something
Not really, I just thought you would find something interesting in that video. I usually watch a video or read a book, then gorge out on all the references, and find the references those books use, and so on. Kind of like how the airways in a lung are formed in more and more smaller and smaller channels. It gives one an idea of the perspectives out there.
From what I know about you, I have a deep suspicion you'd like that Blavatsky book. What you wrote here about what Lucifer is is mirrored there, and it's not at all the same as what Alice Bailey got out of it (I know some theosophy people and they are not impressed by her). I suspect your body of knowledge mirrors what Blavatsky was saying.
I don't think Walter Vieth (in the second video) understands Blavatsky either, but it's good to get perspectives.
(post is archived)