Archive

Hermes

Luciferianism: not exactly this, just in case you were wondering.

This is going to be another one of those annoying “controversial” posts I write from time to time. Oh well. Best get used to it, because I’ve had a taste of writing controversial stuff and now I want more! MORE! BWAHAHA!!

Um, hem. Sorry about that.

Basically, I’m writing today because I feel there is a ton of confusion out there on the topic of luciferianism and what it is, and I wanted to “shine a little light” (I know terrible pun) on things for people a bit. Know now that what I’m writing probably isn’t what you may expect it to be.

First, when you ask what luciferianism is, you have to understand that it means different things to different groups of people. Most Christians for example, would probably equate luciferianism with satanism, which from a philosophical perspective, actually isn’t very far off, but for different reasons. I think most people who describe themselves as “luciferian” would not say they are satan worshippers, or even that they “worship” lucifer (to luciferians there is a difference between lucifer and the devil). If they worship anything, they worship mankind and the potential of individual people. In other words, they believe man to be god, or each individual person to be a kind of god of his or her own universe, or at the very least, gods in training.

Taking luciferian beliefs into this perspective definitely changes things, and it does make the belief system more attractive, but I would like to warn people that a very big danger lies embedded within it. More on that in a moment. First, let’s talk about the origins of the belief and how it has changed in recent times.

Origins

The statue of prometheus is one of many examples that show the Rockefeller family are believers in at least philosophical luciferianism. If you were to walk up and ask old David if he worshipped lucifer, he'd probably say no. If you asked him if he was a humanitarian however, he'd probably of course say yes. In essence, he believes that people have the power.

In essence, luciferians turn modern monotheistic beliefs in god on their heads by saying that since lucifer/enki/prometheus/hermes/thoth/any other trickster figure or assisted humanity in gaining knowledge, that because of this, lucifer is actually the good guy in all of this, a kind of savior of humanity from the control of a violent, jealous, and tyrannical god. It is from this belief that stems the idea of “humanity, save yourself.” where reliance on technology and the growth of civilization is needed to solve humankind’s most perplexing and dangerous problems.

I don’t know enough to tell you the exact origins of the idea, but it’s been with humanity for a really long time. Take for example the biblical story of the Tower of Babylon. According to the story, mankind decided it didn’t need God, so they built a tower that attempted to reach to the heavens itself. God promptly destroyed it and confused humanity by spreading people far and wide and creating language barriers. While you could say the tower of Babylon is “just a story” from the Bible, that story still illustrates that even during those ancient biblical times, people were willing to cast away the idea of an outside God and worship themselves.

To be fair, there is a lot of positive things that can come from thinking that humanity is completely responsible for its own fate and thus “God” so to speak. In a generalized sense, we can say that atheistic beliefs, humanistic beliefs, and many brands of new age thinking stem from the idea that humanity (or the individual) is God. These diverse fates often share the same trait. They treat humanity as empowered and responsible for its own problems. So the next time you meet a die-hard fundamaterialist, go ahead and call him a luciferian. It’s sort of technically true.

A quick aside: Why I left Christianity

When I first dared to venture outside my Christian roots, it was because of two reasons, (and no neither one was related to evolution). The first reason is more technical and completely irrelevant to this discussion. The second reason is that the Christian God struck me as a jealous, tyrannical, judgmental being that punished people merely for making the choice not to worship him (some not even aware that they had a choice to begin with). I didn’t want to worship a wrathful creator like that, regardless of the talks I heard of “law and gospel”.

I tried for the longest time to deal with the cognitive dissonance that came up. I told myself that God wasn’t really like that, that God was more true to himself during the Gospel, that the real God is completely different than the church, mere men, could ever depict Him, but the fact is that as long as I was involved in that religion I had it held over my head that not worshiping meant going to hell.

One Christian tried to explain it to me this way: “

When you go to hell, it’s not that God is punishing you, it’s just that you are experiencing eternity outside the presence of God.”

But even that explanation didn’t suffice for me. If it’s merely being outside the presence of God, then why can’t you change your mind? With Christianity, all decisions are final after you die. Otherwise, what’s the point of Jesus saving you? If you didn’t believe when you died, then too late. I thought, what if I just dispensed with the whole permanent damnation idea, and denied that the real God would ever do to people the terrible things the Old Testament claims He did? Well, then at that point I would have to stop calling myself Christian and start calling myself something different, like a spiritualist.

Let me explain why this relates to luciferianism, and, it’s not what you think I might say. While luciferiansim accurately points out the flaws and inherent tyranny of a monotheistic god, whether its biblical or from elsewhere, it in my opinion, wrongly states that people should step up and fill the void, that people should try to become god, or become powerful like god(s), or that we are actually gods or gods-in-training.

Why the luciferian idea is flawed

Is this the direction our quest for self-reliance and technology is taking us?

It isn’t that humans don’t have the power, potential, or ability to become god-like in nature. With all our technology and knowledge, there’s a good chance that over time, humanity will only become more and more powerful, more and –more “god-like”.

Rather, the questions I’m concerned with are:

1) Should we become more powerful, ie try to be more like God?

2) Will being more powerful actually solve the problems we want solved?

On the topic of 1, we have to take an honest look at what technology has yielded for us and at what cost. The discovery of nuclear fission led to both the creation of a new efficient energy source as well as the atomic bomb. With each new discovery we make, the potential for positive and negative uses is staggering. Imagine if a time machine was invented. Imagine all the problems we could both solve, and create, if that technology fell into the wrong hands. Now, realize that anybody’s hands are the wrong hands. Even if you gave Ghandi a time machine and he used it, he would screw up history because of the butterfly effect.

We have to ask, what is the nature of power? The nature of power is such that those who have power, abuse it. Some abuses may be slight. Others may be lower, but all abuses are abuses, even well-intentioned ones. Ultimately, the big ironic downfall of mankind being god, is that he steps into God’s shoes.

It is like the king’s son who, disgusted with the tyranny of his father, overthrows him, only to become him years down the road. It is the nature of power. If humanity desires this power, then humanity will abuse it, no matter how well-intentioned the struggle for power may be. If we choose to be god, then we choose to be tyrants. It is not something that can be avoided in this reality.

On the topic of 2, understand that there’s a little law I made up called the “conservation of problems”. I discovered this little law of the universe when I was on my college debate team and realized that every good idea is a bad idea to somebody else.

For every problem that is solved for someone, a new problem is created somewhere else. Thus, the net total of problems in the universe never changes. Let’s pretend, for example, that cancer is cured. On the surface, this seems like is is merely a solution to a problem. But of course, all the people that would have been dieing from cancer now live longer, and have more of an opportunity to reproduce. This means a contribution in overpopulation, which leads to different diseases, economic problems, waste management, starvation, thirst, and other related problems.

What if we tried, on the other hand to solve the problem of population control? What does that mean for us? The creation of new diseases to kill off our own people? Forced birth control? Fluoridated water (for conspiracy theorists). And suppose we did manage to control our numbers? Would that not make us more ripe for control from an elite? I’m not saying one way trumps the other. I’m saying that no matter what decision we make, we’re screwed somehow. It’s just a matter of the nature of our reality. The deception of a luciferian worldview is that with enough technology and power we can progress and solve our problems. That worldview is simply not true.

The “other” category

A testament to acceptance of life and personal dedication to spirituality, in my most humble opinion.

I once read an article about a Buddhist monk who spent so much time praying and meditating in one spot of a wooden floor that after 20 years, his feet had actually left imprints in the wood! One of the comments on the blog was along the line of “What wasted years. He could have spent his time curing cancer.”

Yes, he could have, and as I mentioned before, doing so would solve a problem and create new ones. Instead, this man chose not to play that game. That’s not an easy thing to do, and it is why I have a great respect for Buddhist belief systems. Is it the only way? Certainly not, but it is a great path to wisdom. Both monotheistic religions and luciferian religions focus on trying to change the world. For luciferians, it’s a matter of self and societal development that will save the world. For monotheists, it’s a matter of giving that power away to others. For Buddhists, on the other hand, it seems to be more about accepting reality as it is. Since luciferianism requires a person to have an ego to an extent (changing the world is in my hands) and since monotheism requires a person have an ego in a different way (It is up to me to spread the word of God/Allah/Yahweh or else my friends will go to hell! I must save them) Buddhism seems like a good third option.

I also still hold an interest in Keylontic sciences since they don’t seem to describe a luciferian philosophy. It is one thing to say we are God/gods in training. It is something entirely different to claim that we are an aspect of God, to claim that we are a small part of what you can say “God” is. That’s an important distinction to make. If you have any other ideas for “third” options, sound out on the comments or forums! Until next time, know where your beliefs are leading you.

Livewithwonder can be contacted through email at livewithwonder@thespiritscience.net, on his blog at livewithwonder.wordpress.com, or on twitter at @Livewithwonder

Judging from the feedback I received on here and Facebook, I would say the reactions to my last post were mostly positive. If you posted encouraging words, I thank you. If you posted criticism, I also thank you. Without it, I would be like the tarot card of the Fool, naively walking off a cliff with a look of pure bliss on his face. All feedback is good feedback.

To the best of my knowledge, the only criticism I’ve received thus far is that my post frequently went off topic and that I should focus more strictly on spirit science. That’s a fair assessment to make, and if you came to my site expecting me to write 100 percent about spirit science, then I wouldn’t blame you if you felt a little mislead.-

The truth of the matter is, everything I plan to write on here won’t be about spirit science. It is one of the issues that interests me, but it is not the only issue. What can I say, I’m a curious guy. What I

have told Jordan is that I only plan to send links to him of my posts when they relate in some way to spirit science. That way, he’s not driving traffic here for posts about say privacy (which is another issue of mine).

All that said, I did feel like my last post tied in, at least indirectly to the topic. The main gist I was getting at was that people are biased against certain ideas that society perceives as “crazy/evil/extraordinary”. Occam’s razor is broken for this reason because it presumes that there are claims that are extraordinary and claims that aren’t, when the truth is, you can’t really categorize a claim. It’s just a claim.

This ties in with spirit science because many could say that Jordan’s claims are certainly crazy/pseudo-scientific/ extraordinary. I’m not saying he’s right or wrong. I’m saying that because his claims don’t fit in with the general idea of what “normal” is, he has to fight against a very powerful bias.

In college I had an experience like this. I frequently walked out in the football field at night to relax

and one night I saw something in the sky that I couldn’t explain. I went inside and told my friends I saw a UFO. They responded by laughing, playing the theme for X-files around me, etc. and made it into a running joke.  I never said aliens. I never assumed anything about aliens. I said UFO, as in unidentified flying object. For all I know, there was probably a simple explanation for it, but because I uttered the phrase “UFO” they assumed the worse. Considering how much further Jordan pushes his ideas, I can guarantee he’s experiencing all kinds of negative bias, both from the scientific and religious end. I probably will too as more people read it. My first post was a way to preempt all of that.

Now that that’s taken care of, let’s talk spirit science.

The caduceus, part 1

Hermes holding a caduceus.

The caduceus is best known in modern times for its association in medicine, specifically in North America it is a symbol used by those who practice in the medicine field. It depicts a rod with two intertwined snakes staring at each other with wings on top. It is also known as the staff of Hermes in Greek mythology which was given to him by the god Apollo. Apollo was the Greek god of well, a whole bunch of stuff, including sun, light, truth, and art. (I’m basing my info on Apollo off of Wikipedia,

so mileage may vary)The caduceus staff is found in many cultures across the world. How many? Check out this site. 

The caduceus actually was present as a  symbol in our two most ancient cultures, Egypt and Sumer. In Sumerian culture, the caduceus represents the god Enki. Enki was a deity known for crafts, water, intelligence, and creation. He was also kind of like the Sumerian equivalent to Prometheus. In Genesis, man falls into sin when he gains knowledge. Enki, a being frequently depicted as a serpent provides knowledge and civilization to humanity. Enki then, could be the equivalent of the Biblical devil, who gave humanity both the blessing and curse of knowledge.

Also worth noting, much of the creation story in Sumerian culture coincides with the early stories of the Bible, such as Genesis. When the term “Annunaki” is thrown around, Sumer is the origin. Another one of the three gods in Sumerian culture is “Anu”. Annunaki means “sons of Anu.” Also of interest is the fact that Enki’s sacred number was the number 40, which coincides with the “number of trial” in the Bible. You see, in the Bible, certain numbers keep reappearing, specifically 3, 7, and 40. It rained on the ark for 40 days and nights. Jesus went into the desert and was tested by the serpent for 40 days. There are more examples, but I’m foggy on all of the details.

In Egyptian culture, you see the caduceus in on the staff of Osiris, who for some reason has a pine cone on top. That seems out of place, but the pine cone could represent the pineal gland. You also see Thoth depicted holding a caduceus in many images. There is more in relation to the Egyptians, but I’ll explain that later.

Now there is a process in history known as syncretism, where two cultures start communicating and “absorbing” each others gods. This happened when ancient Egypt and Greece started communicating with each other. Basically, Egyptians said, “Hey, your Hermes is a lot like out Thoth, maybe they’re the same person.” I don’t currently know if Hermes was recorded with the caduceus symbol before they met the Egyptians, and this could be an explanation for why the two cultures both use the caduceus.

However, an early sculpture of the Mayan god Quetzalcoatl shows him also holding a caduceus in his hand. Not only that, but Quetzalcoatl was believed to have the ability to shape shift into a winged serpent. In Greek mythology, Hermes is also known to have the ability to shape shift, because he was seen as a kind of trickster figure, and he is all about the whole winged thing, winged boots, winged hat, winged staff. It was his thing. I’m less sure about Thoth, but I believe the Egyptians described him having the same shape-shifting ability. All of this information, plus the fact that the Mayans and Egyptians both built pyramids despite supposedly never having contacted one another leads to a few distinct possibilities:

1) It’s all bizarre coincidence.

2) The two cultures somehow contacted each other at some point in time in prehistory.

3) Jung’s theories of subconscious archetypes: Basically, people are essentially very similar and have the same kinds of ideas floating in their subconscious.

4) The caduceus is an image buried deep in the human collective unconscious.

I’m not the one to decide which option is true, and there may be other options that I haven’t thought of. I do find this extremely interesting how well this fits with the spirit science theories that Jordan has shared.

In modern times, the symbol is most commonly associated with doctors, especially if you live in North America. To my knowledge, this is a mistake, and the medical establishment confused the symbol with the Aeschylus, a staff with a single snake that more often is associated with medicine. However, there are other modern associations with the symbol less commonly known.

One possible link is with the “kundalini” energy described in Hindu and other eastern religions. Theoretically, the kundalini is a spiritual energy that rises from the root chakra like a double helix snake. Releasing it is supposed to be a very spiritually powerful thing. The caduceus could also represent human DNA. While we’re guessing, maybe it hints at taoism, or dualistic nature. Who knows for sure?

We’ve also seen it, embedded in pop culture. Look to the poster for “snakes on a plane” for an

Gee illuminati, you aren't even trying to be secretive anymore, are you?

example. Governmental psy-ops programs have also placed images of snakes on their patches. Many of these programs, while top secret, have had patches that suggest, very eerily, the secretive nature of what they do, including one that shows three snakes enveloping the world.

Occultist, and (depending who you ask) possible satanist Aleister Crowley had an interest in the caduceus symbol as well. If you recall, he’s the guy with a pyramid on his head. Crowley devised his occult tarot deck, and in it, there is an allusion to the caduceus on his devil card. Strangely enough, Crowley led a group of people who worshiped the Egyptian god Horus (as in the eye of Horus) but also was said to worship Set, the Egyptian death god. He also was said to worship the Greek god pan, who was of all things, the son of Hermes.

What does all this information mean? I couldn’t honestly tell you. It seems like there is a ton of inter-related information, much of it linked to this symbol.

Why do government psyops use symbols like this and the firebird (which has its own history) to identify themselves?

Is the caduceus an evil/satanic symbol, and if so why is it inscribed on everything from Thoth to Hermes to the staffs of orthodox catholic priests across the world? And why was Crowley so interested in it?

Earlier Chronomut mentioned on the forums that Thoth had an ulterior motive for everything he did. Does the caduceus point as evidence to that, or is the caduceus a positive symbol, representing kundalini energy, changed DNA, and harmonics? Was it both? Is Thoth/Enki/Hermes really the biblical satan, or perhaps an alien?

I don’t know what to think. The possibility that Hermes = Thoth = Enki = The Biblical Devil does effect your worldview in strange ways. I for one plan to avoid the work of Crowley anyway, just a vibe I have from him. Perhaps the story of Enki and the caduceus suggests we are left with a choice: Accept

Looks like a tuning fork attached to an ankh, wouldn't you say?

innocence, naivety, pure right-brained thinking, or accept knowledge and left-brained thinking and the eventual self-destruction it creates. Can we have both innocence and the truth?

I don’t consider myself intelligent enough to know for sure, but I do know that there’s weird connections going on here. Maybe someone else can connect the dots.

One last possibility to consider: Remember how Jordan mentioned in a spirit science video how the ankh may have functioned as a kind of vibrational multiplier, and that, attached to a tuning fork, would vibrate three times as long?

Well check out this image of Hermes on a clay pot. His staff

looks a lot less like a pair of snakes, and a lot more like a tuning fork on a stick. Have fun playing with that in you head awhile.

Until next time, “procul este profani;)

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 796 other followers