Los Secretos de Lucifer

[aliceinwonderland]

A propósito de la rebelión, coloco unos links de una presentación que me enviaron, con las supuestas Sociedades Secretas Luciferinas y verdades esotéricas en la Biblia.

[aliceinwonderland]

From the book:

Lucifer has been known by many names throughout the millennia since his arrival on Earth. In certain places which we shall examine these names overlap and set the basis for literally all of the ostensibly pantheistic religions of the Near East. The following summary is intended to show that Luciferianism has had an unbroken succession from its inception to the present day and how Luciferianism became synonymous with Satanism.

He is represented by several gods of the Hindu pantheon, especially Agni. As Enlil in the Akkadian pantheon he is the husband of Ninlil. Ninlil, also known as Lilith (Hebrew), Isis (Egyptian) and Iris (Babylonian), is therefore the forerunner of the goddess cults which are merely an extension of Luciferianism. She serves in various capacities ranging from the seductress of Cain (sometimes Adam) to the mother of the Horus figure. Horus, in turn, is the Antichrist, the son of Lucifer who avenges his father against the evil god Set which represents Adam’s righteous bloodline.

Nimrod’s influence over the religious beliefs and practices of the Akkadians extended into Canaan. (As we will see, the Canaanites also had knowledge of the Asar and worshiped him apart from the influence of Nimrod whose conquests began in Egypt and inspired the Horus myth.) The Akkadian form of Milqartu was transliterated into the Phoenician language as Melqart, the ‘Lord of Tyre,’ and into Hebrew as Molekh. As Malku he is associated with Nergal, a judge in the underworld, and this was either caused by or developed parallel to his equivalent role in Egypt.

Dagon too was regarded as a judge of the dead in the Babylonian and Assyrian pantheons derived from their mutual Akkadian source. The Mari texts show that Dagon was considered the chief -god of the Philistines as early as 2500 BC, and the Ebla texts from the following centuries reaffirm this. This name also comes from the Akkadian name of Dagana, another of Lucifer’s many roles. The relationship which the Akkadian kings had with their god as Dagana is unmistakable; the stele of Ashurnasirpal II indicates that “Naram-Sin slew Aram and Ebla with the weapon of the god Dagan who aggrandizes his kingdom.” This kingdom is a reference to the Akkadian Empire of Sargon, the regnal name of Nimrod who preceded Naram-Sin.

Dagon’s importance is also stressed in the Bible. The Nazarite judge Samson destroyed the temple of Dagon in the Philistine city of Gaza as his last heroic act, and the Ark of the Covenant was taken to his temple in Ashdod when it was captured by the Philistines. It was then returned to the Hebrews after Dagon’s statue was discovered prostrated and dismembered in front of it.

It is not as though the ancient religions were superstitious or pantheistic, as modern scholars would have us believe. They were all cults built around the henotheistic worship of either Lucifer or Lilith (sometimes both, in conjunction with Horus), and they were based in what was then the well-known history now presented unchanged in the Bible. Throughout both testaments we are presented with the duality of the conflict between the prophets of God and the prophets of Lucifer, respectively called the “sons of light” and the “sons of darkness,” with each side claiming to represent light and truth and life. While the correct interpretations of the Hebrew scriptures has been lost to the public, in the context of the greater picture they provide the background information necessary for an understanding of the correlations between the other ancient traditions.

The ancient word for ‘king’ in Hebrew is written as mlk. This is variously translated according to the context as melek or melchi, malakh (‘messenger,’ ‘angel’) or as the proper name Molekh, also spelled Moloch or Molech. The fact that contemporary translators have never been aware of the meaning of this world has led to a great deal of confusion not only to its meaning, but also to the Satanic cult of the Canaanites which was in constant conflict wit the Mosaic religion of the Old Testament prophets.

As mentioned in The World At War, Lucifer’s contemporary name comes from the Latin translation of Isaiah 14:12. The context of this chapter is a prophecy against the king of Babylon followed by prophecies against the nations of Assyria and Philistia or Phoenicia. While the identification of the king of Babylon is subject to interpretation due to the fact that many Christians think of this as also pertaining to the present or future, the prophecies against these other two nations is due to their association with him. It is no coincidence that the prophet’s remarks are addressed to the king of Babylon and not some other historical or future persona, but this discussion is covered elsewhere in the writings of Christians. The important thing to remember is that the spiritual and terrestrial kingdom of Nimrod was comprised of these three lands.

The most significant prophecy against Lucifer is found in Ezekiel chapter 28. Like Isaiah 14 it is directed at the “king” or “ruler,” this time of Tyre, but the Hebrew word and the context of the chapter clearly indicate that this “king” is actually a specific reference to a fallen spirit or entity. In the context he is called both a kherub (a winged angel) and a man, which also indicates that the prophecy was spoken against an actual living person who had passed through the Luciferian initiation.

In all but one instance which has been regarded as an error of transcription, mlk appears only as the subject of a preposition in the Bible. “Passing children through the fire lmlk” is usually interpreted as human sacrifice to the god of the Philistines (Molekh), but in reality it is most likely a metaphor for initiation into the doctrines of Lucifer which are collectively referred to as the fire of the magi. That’s not to say that human sacrifice is not also meant, and there is substantial evidence that thousands of children were sacrificed over several centuries at the post-Phoenician capital of Carthage.

A literal rendering of lmlk suggests ‘as the Molekh’ and, therefore, ‘as the Asar.’ Any change to a proper name is arbitrary, though not necessarily without merit. Both melek and malakh could be the words intended by the Biblical authors where Molekh is inserted and could even have been incorporated into the Hebrew language because of this association. Malakh would be a reference to his status as one of those who came from heaven to earth or else as a transliteration of the Akkadian Milqartu or Malku. (In the Enochian tradition the leader of the nefilim was called the mal’akh ha’mastema or ‘angel of hostility.’) Melek would have evolved as a reference to his lordship over a territory or territories, and indeed the Akkadian word bel and the Phoenician word be’al which mean the same thing were synonymous with the local deities of the Levant. As evidence of this, the Mandaic derivative melki retains the same meaning but is actually used in reference to heavenly beings—the Ascended Masters of the New Age Movement.

Most often the generic name Baal was understood to be in reference to Molekh, since Molekh was the supreme god of the oldest of the pantheons in Canaan as well as the Lord of Tyre, but it could have also been applied to Yahweh by the Israelites living there. He was often depicted as a bull, and the fact that the Hebrews built a golden calf as their idol after leaving Egypt may be positive proof that the association between the bull and the hunter extends beyond the Fertile Crescent into antediluvian Egypt. In any case the language and alphabet of the Hebrews are similar to and probably inspired by those of the Phoenicians, and it is not always easy to differentiate between the separate pantheons since most people falsely believe that the religion of the Hebrews was monotheistic rather than henotheistic.

The name of Molekh was also interchangeable with Baal Hammon, indicating that he was the lord or patron god of Ammon (descendants of Abraham’s nephew Lot). Likewise, Beelzebub (be’al of zebub) was used by the Pharisees in the New Testament and is often translated as ‘lord of the flies’ but has the literal meaning of ‘lord of those which have flown,’ and is therefore probably also a reference to the Sumerian air-god Pazuzu who was the original Mesopotamian prototype of Molekh. Other names by which he was known are the Tyrian Herakles, the Greek Kronos and the Roman Saturnus. In his last form he was known as the Cretan Zeus or Marnas, and his cult became the last to survive the purge of paganism in the Christian centers of Europe, persisting until 402 AD.


From the notes:

Ever since the dukes of Normandy opted to take the more prestigious title of king in England and Ireland, the title of duke in the United Kingdom has been reserved for the men who have inherited it as a Masonic title. For example, Prince Edward is the duke (as opposed to earl) of Kent and Strathearn, indicating that he is the grand master of the grand lodges in England and Scotland, and that the title of grand master of the Templars in Scotland has passed from Atholl (now an earldom) to Strathearn (formerly an earldom). Likewise, Prince Arthur was the duke of Connaught and Strathearn, indicating that Connaught was the seat of the order in Ireland. This shows that the ceremonial titles of the grand masters of the respective lodges are still considered to be militaristic in nature. The general public considers ‘duke’ and ‘earl’ to be synonyms but they obviously are not (at least not in the British Peerage) and do not even have the same origins. That’s why I have included this explanation here. This interpretation is helpful for a correct understanding of why Walter Stewart was simultaneously Duke of Atholl and the earl of Strathearn and Caithness, and why David Stewart was Duke of Rothesay and why Robert Stewart was Duke of Albany. These titles were created for specific militaristic or ceremonial purposes, not inherited like the others. In all other cases where the Gaelic or Scandanavian titles apply, the title of mormaer or jarlr is appropriate before the Franco-Norman influence.

[Malak hamavet]

Alice, gracias por los link y el escrito, pero aquí hay muchos amigos que no "parlan el gringo" (no saben inglés) y entonces es muy difícil que sepan lo que enviaste.

The following summary is intended to show that Luciferianism has had an unbroken succession from its inception to the present day and how Luciferianism became synonymous with Satanism.

Traducción: El siguiente resúmen es un intento de mostrar que el Luciferanismo ha tenido una sucesión ininterrumpida desde su inicio al día presente y como el Luciferanismo se convirtió en sinónimo de Satanismo.

En este foro hemos analizado las características "personales" de Lucifer y Satanás sabiendo que cada uno de ellos son individuos con su propia personalidad, así que mezclar uno con el otro es error conceptual.

Si deseas hacer la traducción completa amiga Alice, es bienvenida. Todo conocimiento compartido siempre se recibe de buen agrado.

Malak

[aliceinwonderland]

Hola Malak:


En cuanto tenga un poco de tiempo posteo la traducción.

Se que los Urantianos y Caligastianos consideran que Lucifer y Satanas juegan distintos papeles en cuanto a la administración planetaria. Yo por mi parte aun no tomo partido por ninguna ideología, lo cual me permite observarlas desde un punto de vista agnóstico.

Ahora el Satanismo o Luciferanismo es una manera de clasificar estas religiones con filosofías y creencias antiguas, porque fueron catalogadas de malignas en principio por el Judaísmo y posteriormente por el Cristianismo.

El libro del que posteo trata sobre el transitó de estas antiguas religiones, su fusión y transición y como algunas sectas de la actualidad se han nutrido de ellas, desde la visión de su autor.

Un Saludo

Alice

[aliceinwonderland]

www.libermundus.org/images/M_images/religion.bmp

[Abdiel]

Alice, todo se reduce a una pregunta:

¿puedes probarlo?

Abundan las teorías de sociedades secretas que controlan los hilos del mundo. Y sin embargo escasean los analistas políticos que pueden ver a sus gobiernos como las fuerzas que comienzan a dominar cada aspecto de la vida de individuo.

No se necesita una nueva teoría de los Iluminati, sino una mente crítica para ver la situación actual.

¿Tienes esa mente?

Por cierto, Satanás no es Lucifer.

Abdiel.