Pope Francis Admits An 'Elegant Demon' Is Lurking in the Vatican (newspunch.com)

Sun worship disguised as followers of Yeshua.

@JBL

Thank you for such a well though out response.

It is certainly of the great importance that we both understand the Truth of the contemporary circumstances as they are, for we inhabit and live here and now. It also certain that we both have a true desire to honor YHWH and his Truth, Yeshua, in our hearts.

Now to discuss the history, there is some significant work to be done in removing the false exoteric histories they have presented as ruse to keep most people from discovering what lurks beneath: millenia of Luciferians, the seed of the serpent, biting the heel of the seed of The Woman.

1) Because there are a preponderance of artifacts from Babylon that predate the the Chai Rho as part of the Greek alphabet by several centuries. It is now finally admitted by academia that most all of the mathematics and philosophy of the Greeks was transported from Mesopotamia, as people such as Pythagoras visited there and studied the knowledge, only to publish it as his own. The pythagorean thereom, and the quadratic forumal appear on Mesopotamian stelles from the second millenia BCE, Thousands of year before Pythagoras ever existed. See the picture below, from a tablet dating to around 1800 BCE. Also See the Plimpton Tablet 322, which is an offhand cheat sheet for “Pythagorean” triples, calculated using the quadratic formula, 1500 years before Pythagoras. The use of 322 for this tablet is intentional, and indeed related to the Skull and Bones number 322, which is an inversion of 223, the number of synodic months in one Saros Cycle.

The Aryeh Yehudah had also taught in mesopotamia how to model exponential growth, use algebra to create proto-calculus formulas such as sigmoid functions (constrained growth), and to calculate the time-mile, which calculated the travel distance of the Earth around the Sun.

Here is another bowl, which uses what later became known as pythagoras Rotating squares proof.

The Modern equivalent

Hence it is the number of a man, because this diagramic tool was, using 6 limbs (like a MAN with a Phallus, and they engage in Phallic worship) and still is used to show the eccentricity of Earth’s orbit, in comparison to the solstices and the equinoxes, which process relative to the Perihelion/Aphelion points at a rate of about 1 day per 306 years (more or less). In fact the new year is on January 1 because that was PeriHelion, the point the Earth got closest to the Sun, in approximately 1101 AD.

The Julian Calendar was set (By Juluis KaSARos) arond 60 BCE, when the Day of Saturnalia (now Xmas), was aligned with Perihelion. They then set the “New Year,” to be a week afterwards, previewing the 1080 years it would take to process 1/2 zodiac (which is 72 years per degree or 2160 years in ancient calculations.)

@JBL

Constantine was a serial killer. He first murdered/executed/sacrificed his son Crispus. Then he suffocated his Wife Fausta while she was in a hot Bath. Then He had his nephew flogged to death. Then he ordered his Brother-in-Law strangled. Yes, this Great Saint of Catholicism, their Father, was a serial killer obsessed with earthly power; the third temptation Yeshua rejected in the wilderness.

These facts regarding the murderous nature of Constantine “The Great,” are not disputed by anyone.

Here are some Easy Sources

1) on Crispus and Constantine Murdering Him:

jstor.org/stable/1087057
britannica.com/biography/Crispus
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crispus

Easy Sources on Fausta and Constantine Murdering Her:

ianjamesross.com/journal/2018/7/11/the-fates-of-fausta-and-crispus-an-ancient-murder-mystery
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fausta

Easy sources discussing this and the Pagan Iconography of Demuzi and Dagon in Catholicism from the very Start in 325 AD:

clseducation.org/2012/11/12/emperor-constantine-kills-his-wife-and-sacrifices-his-son-to-gain-power/
imperiumromanum.pl/en/curiosities/constantine-the-great-and-his-wife-fausta/

The death of his mother the exoteric evidence as murder is less well known, but indeed it was a sacrifice. It is still of little consequence, the Solar Worshipper fed the bloodlust of his pagan deities, and then claimed to follow Yeshua.

I won’t go into great detail regarding the issue of the Pope’s Dagon Mitre, but suffice it to say that today, and in all depictions going back a very ways, the Pope’s hate is born directly out of the Solar Mitre used by Dagon worshippers and MAGIcians. The idea that this somehow disappeared at the behest of a serial killer (Constantine), and his Presbuteron during the creation of a synchronistic universalist Solar Worshipping Catholic Church is highly unlikely.

The term for Easter, which in Greek is πάσχα Paska/Pasha, it does mean “Pass Equator,” in some sense, but it does not come from the Hebrew term פֶסַח “Pesach,” which originally means “To Soothe,” and references the soothing effect of Spring coming and warmer days; meaning that those that survived until that date had been given immunity from the rash of deaths common in winter from cold, starvation, and illness.

. In fact the real root of πάσχα is from Sanskrit, derived from the days of Alexander and the later Greco-Bactrian EmpireThe case of the Greek πάσχα is an example where the apparent lexical similarity comes from the use of a pre-existent term in Greek which sounds similar to The Hebrew, then subsuming the original words meaning in the derivatie languages such as Latin.

The Greek Term originally comes from:

पाश “Pasha” = The Noose in Sanskrit.

This occurred because it was around this date when the sun passed the equator and forms a noose shape in the analemma of the Sun. Yes, more Solar Worship.

Note that Pashas are weapon of Ganesha to bind Souls to Earth (More demon binding in materiality…) Ganesha itself being the same as the word “Hanas(a),” which is the original word for Serpent. Genesis = Ganes is, The Serpent is. The actual title of the scripture is Berashid, Not that hard to say, but who cares in a religion formed by Luciferian Solar Serpent worshippers; change the title to venerate Ganesa/Hanas.

The Pashas weapon of Ganesha to bind souls were called:

1. Avidyā—Ignorance of our true nature
2. Karma—Our actions done in conformity with the false identification with the material vehicle
3. Vāsanā—The habitual pattern formations which we create

And so they actually incorporated these three elements of the Pashas into Pashka… Create ignorance of the True Nature of the meaning, make people take actions that punish their material vehicle, such as the Semana Santa self flogging practices in Spain, and create a habitual pattern of ritualized worship and call it Mass. The entirety of the Catholic religion actually venerates the AntiXristos rebirth on a day it calls Pashas, the Binds of Human souls to make them dwell on Earth.

@JBL

In fact, the very coins of Constantine the creator of the Christian Solar Worship universalist cult stated, from the start of his reign until long after the Council of Nicea: SOL INVICTO COMITI – “The Unconquered Sun is Our Guide.”

Here is one with a much clearer form of the Pashas. Today, this is still used as an Xmas (Mass of Osiris, the Mark of the beast staring with X) wreath.

Below him sit the letters PTR, for Pater, as in Deus Pater, whom is Zeus, the illuminator, or Jupiter (Ju-pater = Deu pater = Sky Father, Mr. Luci-Fer, Ba’al, the sun BalHamon, Sol-Amon)

In the picture above Constantine even wears the diadems warned about in Revelations by Yeshua.

Here’s Nero playing Apollo-Apollyon’s (Also warned about in Revelations), Lyre on a coin, with a serpent in his robe, just like the Queen Mother’s Stamps and Constantine’s sun worshipping charagma coins.

You have my sincere thanks, Gem444, for your most thorough and thoughtful reply, from which (as is ever the case when I read your comments) I have learned a great deal, even in those places where I might disagree with your conclusions.

To begin, it is indubitable that the Greeks borrowed much of their wisdom from prior civilizations, and I do not doubt that Babylon was among the lenders, so the genealogy of the Chi Rho which you posit is by no means inconceivable. (I think that speaking of the Greeks “stealing” here is somewhat anachronistic, however, as the ancient world had no concept of intellectual property, but that is another matter.) I will also admit forthwith that the images you have presented – and particularly that of the bowl from Nippur – do in fact bear a striking resemblance to the Chi Rho. (I very much appreciate these images, by the way.) Up to this point, then, we can consider ourselves in agreement.

Here is the problem that confronts us, as I see it. We know that many Christians since the time of Constantine have used a certain symbol as a cipher for their faith. We know that a closely similar symbol was used in prior civilizations with occult or magical intent. On what grounds can we draw or dismiss a historical or intentional equivalence between the two? For it seems to me evident that one and the same symbol might be used in a variety of ways and with a variety of intents in diverse times and places (as indeed the Chi Rho seems to have been; it appears it was used even by pre-Christian Greek scribes to indicate the Greek χρηστόν, chreston, useful or good, next to passages in texts to which they wished to draw attention).

I will use a deliberately obvious example to clarify my point. (N.B.: I do NOT mean to suggest that your argument is in any way as facile as that I will hypothetically present here; I am merely attempting to elucidate a problem.) The very letters we both use to write the words of our dispute originally derived from images or hieroglyphs which almost indubitably originally contained symbolic, ritual or cultic significance, but it would be simply absurd if I were on those grounds alone to claim that your use of these letters somehow suggested your acquiescence to the gods or practices that might have originally inspired our ancestors to put image to stone.

The mere use or appearance of a given symbol is in and of itself not a proof of anything. Dark or malicious intent can be meaningfully inferred from the use of certain symbols, I think, only when there is already a reasonable prior suspicion of malevolence; I am highly skeptical as to whether symbols can be legitimately taken as independent evidence of such malevolence, and I am certain that excesses here can lead to the unjust incrimination of the innocent. As I have pointed out, even if the Babylonian descent of this symbol could be established beyond a shadow of a doubt, that would not yet entitle us to conclude that the Christians who employed it, even those in the highest levels of Christendom, did so in a Babylonian spirit, or with demonic intent.

It seems to me (and I think you will agree with me at least this far) that symbols are not arbitrary, but in some way reflect or embody or “make present” some aspect of reality. But this does not mean that symbols are univocal or that their “valence,” if I might use this word, is unchangeable. Early Christianity quite naturally borrowed a great many symbols from the cultural milieu of its time (such as, for instance, the fish, or bread, or the tree, or the “good shepherd”). It took these symbols both from its own Hebrew culture and from the pagan culture surrounding, and fulfilled these symbols, or, in the case of certain pagan symbols, inverted them, fashioning truth of falsehood. We are contrariwise seeing at present a widespread attempt at the reversion of Christian symbols back into the morass of paganism and crypto-paganism rising around us. The vehemence of this attempt is almost enough to prove that at least many of these symbols are not inherently pagan, despite their having arisen first in pagan times. So it seems to me that the right reading of a symbol is at least often strongly dependent on the context in which it emerges.

Given this, the special value or weight that one puts on a symbol like the Chi Rho within the Christian tradition, or the interpretation of the intent behind such a symbol, depends decisively on the estimation one has of that tradition. If I believed, as you do, that Catholicism has been corrupt to its core from the start, your view of the Chi Rho might well seem more congenial to me. But as I disagree with you on this, I have a certain natural difficulty in accepting your theory.

So we come back to the question of early Church history, and what precisely happened in the first few centuries — if there was, as you have suggested, a radical break with tradition which subsequently became the norm.

@JBL

I very much appreciate your measured, profound questioning and critical thinking. It is the only path to discover The Truth of YHWH.

I am not inclined to believe anything, other than that which the evidence bears out, and which with much conversation with YHWH I have found is The Truth. Often after much careful consideration and prayer/connection with the ineffable creator, I have found that a conclusion I reach begins to bear fruits of a predictive nature; that is in new fields of research I am given confirmation in ways I could have never foreseen.

Let us begin with the Constantine question:

No, I do not find it credible that an institution started by a man who murdered 4 of his close family members over power is one with pious foundations; A man such as this has not understood anything of the scriptures nor of The Truth of Yeshua.

We could dive into the issue of Saul of Tarshish (Whose name means Solar seeker of the Six), but even by comparison, Constantine is a monster. Saul supposedly repented and then became an apostle, while Constantine converted and then kept right on murdering into his latter years. The Battle of the Milvian Bridge, his mythical supposed conversion (after looking into the Sun no less) is in 312 AD. The Council of Nicea is in 325 AD, and then Constantine follows his decade and a half of conversion and the formation of a universalist church that expels the “detestable Jews,” with a series of monstruous acts:

He murders his son, wife, Brother-in-Law, and Nephew in less than a year of the Council of Nicea (by 326 AD they were all murdered at his behest); a most splendid start to supposedly fourteen years of being a follower of Yeshua, and then codifying himself as the soul authority and mouth of the YHWH on Earth. He then continues to print coins glorifying Solar Worship until his death for another decade, directly fulfilling the prophecy found in Revelations regarding the Charagma; nobody could buy or sell under Constantine’s rule without using the mark of the first beast, The Sun, on his official coins. It fulfills the prophecy in Revelations 13 exactly…

Look at the picture below, which is a contemporary depiction of Constantine at the council of Nicea: There are so many Luciferian Symbols it is undeniable:

1. The Priest at his Right Hand holds up the 666 “OK” symbol, with a slight variation that is much closer to the Sanskrit version of Shiva-ites. Keep in mind that Shiva, is Queen Shiva in 1 kings 10, the consort of Soli-Man, as Shiva is a transgender deity, and thus the texts are revealing the luciferian concepts of Lucifer as a Sun King, and a Moon Queen… Shiva and his Son Ganesha are always represented by the Moon, and considered the gaurdians of enlightenment and knowledge (as Lucifer..) I would urge you to really look into the level of transcultural influence of the Hindus upon Greece following Alexander’s conquests.
2. His priests are adorned in the black and white squares typical of Fr33Mas0nry, which refers to the concept of DUALITY, and this is expressly warned against by Yeshua in Mathew 5: “Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘Do not break your oath, but fulfill to the Lord the vows you have made.’  But I tell you, do not swear an oath at all: either by heaven, for it is God’s throne;  or by the earth, for it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the Great King. And do not swear by your head, for you cannot make even one hair white or black. All you need to say is simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’; anything beyond this comes from the Deceiver.” Yeshua was warning of the oaths sworn on the heavens and earth, while wearing and standing upon black and white squares by Luciferians, whom are now called the Masons, AKA the Builders who rejected the Chief Cornerstone
3. Constantine wears a trapezoidal crown, which is exactly one of the makers of ALL LUCIFERIAN DEITIES. I show this in 13 Monkeys Chapter X, but from Ganesha, to Thoth, to Cybele, to Tannit, to Muhammed, to Horus, to KukalKAIN (mesoamerica), to a near infiniti of Luciferian Deities, they all wear trapezoidal crowns. Trapezoids are also the symbol of Ptah, patron deity of geometry and stone MASONS, and this represents an occult belief that a trapezoid of 10-5-6-5 (The Gematria of YHWH) is the Godhead, and thus the divine, including the sun king incarnate (Soli-man, the number of a man) comes from a trapezoid. In Revelations 13, the words used for “Blasphemous Names upon (the beast’s) heads,” is κεφαλὰς ὀνόματα βλασφημίας and this is a clear double meaning, as to a Hebrew and Greek speaker, the word βλαξ means “Block-Head.” (Here’s an easy source en.wiktionary.org/wiki/βλαξ#Greek) Who spoke Blasphemies? The people that worshipped Luciferian Deities with Trapezoidal blocks on their Head, just as constantine here. In fact, look up the iconography of royal arch freemasonry, and you will see how important the trapezoid is as the center stone of their arches.
4. Constantine is adorned in gold, as Soli-Man, given a golden solar halo (not part of Aryeh Yehudah iconography, period.), and has golden spiral 6s emblazoned all over him, which is highly typical of Luciferian iconography, and the chosen shape of the modern numeral 6 and 9, as the golden ratio it is approximated by the number 1.6. The symbol of cancer 69 is due to the fact that Cancer was the zodiac (ζαω the living beast) at the Zenith of the Sun, the Summer Solstice, during the time of Neo-Babylon.
5. The entire scene is taken directly from Egyptian iconography which is revealed in Revelations 4:4, the same as 44 BCE when Julius kaSARos was sacrificed.
6. The number of individuals shown is 9+1, exactly as the Egyptian Ennead, with Horus, The reborn Sun King, always being the 10th member, just as Constantine here.
7. Constantine is holding the triple cross, which is exactly the middle symbol of the Mark of the Beast, written as: ΧΞϛ. This cross is a tool for measuring the sun and the stars, and represents the Sun King, Sol-Amon, whose number of a man is 666 solar eclipses in one Sar.

This symbol, the letter Chi Ξ, is not a purely Greek one, but found throughout the ancient world in regards to astrotheological Pagan worship that was and is so detestable. Let us look at where this symbol appears across the time and space. It is one of the very oldest symbols, and it represents the three Pachas of existence (oh yes, as the Incans, who also use the word Pacha to represent the same concept as Pashas and Pashka.. don’t worry we’ll get there). Pacha in this case meaning “Realms,” and they are the three realms of the underworld, earth, and the heaven. The line in the middle represents the King Horus, The Reborn Sun, who unites them all.

Let’s look at where this symbol appears throughout the ancient world connected to Luciferianism:

1) 𐤎 is the Pheonician Samekh, whose uppercase letter itself is the solar analemma: ص although if you look it up in Sabean s’a, which is where it derives from in Arabic its closer.

2) 𓊽 is the Egyptian Djed Pillar of Osiris, another Solar Dying and Rising Deity. Osiris symbol on his chest was the X, his spine was the Djed that represents Ξ and the Pharoah, who called himself Fara-on (The Solar Fire incarnate) wore a uraeus on his forehead that was always appeared as the Digamma ϛ on his forehead. The similitudes were extremely clear to any Aryeh Yehudah who knows the struggles with Luciferian Egypt, and so that iconography was designed specifically due to its familiarity to all Aryeh Yehudah in that epoch, and really today as well, for anyone that has internet and looks at Wikipedia.

Also of note regarding solar worship, we have 7 heads, 10 horns and 10 crowns, making a total of 27, which is the number of days it takes the Sun to rotate around its equator, based on sun spot observation. Horus was the 10th member of the Ennead, the Reborn Sun of his father Osiris from the Djed. And do your research and you’ll find there were 7 enneads that incorporated 10 deities. Those 42 “Months,” the Greek word used is μῆνας which is a word play upon the first unifier of Egypt MENNES/MENAS (Narmer, which means Leopard, as the body of the Beast. The Term Mennes/Manu/Minu/MNJ is the occult luciferian name for the Sun Seed Man, Sol-Amon) who united the 42 districts of Egypt into 1 kingdom.

Regardless, I would urge you to look up and use 13 Monkeys Chapter X as a reference study guide, because this really is beyond what I can cover here, but it again circles back to why Constantine here is the 10th among 9, he is representing himself as Horus, the Reborn Sun King

3) 王 is the middle character in the name for the Mythical Fish Sun King Founder of Korea Dangun (Just as Dagon, who the pope emulates with his hat. Seriously, its the beast out of the sea, the mythical Sun Fish king that is so precious to all Luciferian worship.) The actually name itself reveals the connection to the Pheonicians and Tyrean Purple,
檀 = “Dan” = Purple-Red the same colors as Tyrrean, Pheonician Royalty Cloaks君 = “Gun” = Mouth and Scepter 王 = “Wan” = Superior One, or MASTER儉 = “Kem” = Saver
DanGun Oan-Kem = “The Royal Commander who is the Superior Master that Saves.”

Note that the Wan/Oan is as Oannes, another name for Dagon, and Kem, is the root of the word for Egypt Kemet, itself meaning “AlKEMy,” also found in hebrew for the word of the Pleades, the 7 sisters so glorified in luciferian mythology, as HaKEM.

This is the essence of the AntiXristos, the first beast, it is the numerous incarnations across ancient kingdoms of the mythical Sun King Fish Man

4) It is smeared across the foreheads of the Hindus with a solar dot in the middle. who worship Shiva. It is called a विभूति, Vibhuti and it is said that the ash that sticks to the forehead is what makes their actions worthy.

This is exactly as said in the Mark of the Beast on the forehead, CHAR-AGMA, which is a Hebrew Greek play on words of חָרַר חָכְמָה = “Char(ar)-Hakma” = The Burning Solar Wisdom. There is so much more word play in there, but suffice it to say here that any Greek and Hebrew speaker reading the word for the mark immediately hears “Burning Wisdom” in Hebrew, and immediately knows it relates to Solar Worship, Luciferian Sex MAGIk, as discussed in 1 Kings regarding Sol-Amon and his worship of ISHTARte, like Easter…

As you have a much stronger scholarship that most I am going to provide you further reading on the early hatred of the Aryeh Yehudah in the Gentiles. This does not mean non Aryeh Yehudah cannot or should not be followers of Yeshua, it is meant to show you that from the very earliest, the gentiles of the “Church,” took the scriptures and pastors and detested those from whom it came. Do not forget that it was Paul, who is not an Aryeh Yehudah, but a Pharisee, which means PHAR-I-SEE or “Fire I See,” Another “reformed” solar worshipper whose name is literally Solar seeker of the six, (שָׁאוּל Saul – Sun תּוּר Tar – “Seeker” שִׁ֤ישׁ Shish – “Six.”) that is the first in Thessalonians to start blaming “The Jews,” for killing Yeshua. This bring to light one of the most important elements almost no gentiles have any clue about, there are not simply “Jews,” There are Isis-Ra-Elis (isis = The moon, Ra = The Sun and El = Saturn) who are the descendants of the slave class from Egypt, Pheonicians impostering as Jews, (the Pharisees, such as Saul of Tarsis) who came from Sidon and Byblos, and the Aryeh Yehudah, from whom they have taken the name.

Let’s Examine some of the key lines of the Sermon of Pasha of the Bishop Melito speaking in Sardis Turkey around 191 A.D. (a very important Luciferian number as 9-11, where he disparages Jews, under a cloak of false holiness. Full English translation can be found here:

christlutherancleveland.org/sermons/sermon/2018-03-27/-on-the-passover-by-melito-bishop-of-sardis-ca-170-a-d

“The people, therefore, became the model for the church, and the law a parabolic sketch. But the gospel became the explanation of the law and its fulfillment, while the church became the storehouse of truth.”

The terminology is a reference to the parabolic sketch of the pashas of the solar analemma, even though probably only he and a few others there had any clue of that. That’s the point of secret societies and Luciferianism, to hoard knowledge. They do this in order to obtain bread from stones (easy earthly pleasure and comfort “If your son asked for bread would you give him a stone, if he asked for a fish would you give him a serpent?” These are all references to Luciferianism by Yeshua), flying atop the temple (ego-glorification, which is what the pope and priests do, pretend to be the mouth of YHWH), and to gain earthly power (Like Power-Hungry Serial Killer Constantine and the Popes that followed in his footsteps), just as the temptations Yeshua refused.

Melito also places the gentile Church as the storehouse of Truth, which is directly in contra-version of the teachings of Yeshua. And now, he gives us what the true etymology of Pashka, on Pashka, in 191 AD, one hundred and thirty three years before Constantine began his official antiXristos of Catholicism:

“Now that you have heard the explanation of the type and of that which corresponds to it, hear also what goes into making up the mystery. What is the passover? Indeed its name is derived from that event–“to celebrate the passover” (to paschein) is derived from “to suffer” (tou pathein).”

It must give you pause, that a Greek Speaking Gentile Priest (That obviously knows nothing of Hebrew) in Anatolia/Turkey of a large congregation in 191 A.D is attributing the lexical root of Pashka to the term παθεῖν which means “to Suffer,” ON PASHKA and that not one modern source will tell you this or even mention it. Melito makes absolutely no mention of the Hebrew term Pasech, WHICH MEANS THE EXACT OPPOSITE, “To Soothe.” The Luciferians are masters of inversion.

Modern academia and modern churchery hides the Truth vigorously in all secondary sources and interpretations they offer. They control the world by hoarding knowledge and making you think they’re giving it to you to help you, when they are really twisting The Truth and lying constantly. They keep the divine pact by leaving The Truth only to be discovered by those that think critically for themselves.

If you follow the term παθεῖν it certainly comes from πᾰ́σχω which means to suffer. Here is an easy to find lexical attribution that then links it to the bindings of Pasha in Sanskrit:

“Beekes and others have connected the word to Proto-Indo-European *bʰendʰ (“to bind”) with semantic shift from “to be bound” to “to suffer”. Cognates would then include πενθερός(pentherós, “father-in-law”).”

Now you ask me, what does this etymology really matter? Well, because it speaks to exactly what these gentile pagan wolf priests masquerading as sheep were doing: replacing everything related to the magnificence of YHWH and Yeshua with their imposter, sound alike, look alike, nicely dressed Satanic Luciferianism. They take “Soothing” and making it “Suffering,” They take the father YHWH and Yeshua, and make it the “Father-in-Law,” and Jesus…

@JBL

A more complete etymology of Paska and its relation to Pashas (“To Bind” as Ganesha/Hanas binds), as linked in 191 AD by a Presbuteron “Church Father (in law),” one of the masters of twisting, can be found here:

en.wiktionary.org/wiki/πάσχω#Ancient_Greek

And this is where these patterns, across time and history, cannot be ignored: over and over, we find enormous quantities of evidence of the replacement of the ineffable creator with Lucifer (The AntiXristos), by those that falsely claim to represent him, through linguistics, practice, and then subtle but insidious manipulation. It is a legacy that stretches across geography and the ages. I am using language as a tool to track what these Luciferians have tried to hide by deceiving. For YHWH created Everythng by The Word.

This is one of the meanings of the “Man of Many Faces,” found in Ezekial, said as PANim פָנִים like PAN the more modern version of Amon, who is one half of the name Sol-Amon…

As Yeshua commanded, I am shouting from the rooftops what is whispered in the inner tabernacles of the Pharisee/Luciferian temples. Yeshua said:

“There is nothing concealed that will not be disclosed, or hidden that will not be made known. What you have said in the dark will be heard in the daylight, and what you have whispered in the ear in the inner rooms will be proclaimed from the roofs.“

You are very smart, but they are masters at concealing everything by hiding it in plain sight.

Let us examine three examples in modernity where they have replaced the name of YHWH with Lucifer, but which no etymology will acknowledge

English:

Everyone Calls the ineffable creator “God” in English. This comes directly from the name for Ba’al-Gad, as revealed in Isiah 65:11

“But as for you who forsake the LORD and forget my holy mountain, who spread a table for Fortune and fill bowls of mixed wine for Destiny, I will destine you for the sword, and you will all kneel down to be slaughtered, because I called and you did not answer, I spoke and you did not listen; you did evil in My sight and chose that in which I did not delight.”

The words for Fortune and Destiny here are

גַּד֙ = “God/Gad” = The Deity of Fortune, and an epithet of Ba’al well known in the ancient semetic world. The Cult of Ba’al-Gad was about giving sacrifices in return for good fortune. AKA “selling your soul to the devil.” And yes, as absurd as it seems to a modern academic mind, Ball God, really is about being the Sun, which is a giant Fiery Ball.

מְנִ֥י = “Moni/Meni” = The pagan deity that controlled Destiny, and yes is the actual root of the word Money, which is a coding for “Mono-Eye,” One Eye, which sits on the back of your Dollar with a symbol of a serpent. Revelations wasn’t kidding about the Charagma on the Moni. This comes from the same root as Mennes/Manu/Minu/MNJ the “sun seed man.” In Norse mythology these are the deities Sol and Mani, the Sun and the Moon. This is the same as the Akkadian word Aku, which inscriptions often read “Aku is my Fortune.” This is The Moon, which relates to the 30 pieces of shining silver Judas throws into the tabernacle, the 30 moons of any given month. And hence today silver round pieces are called “mani.”

The one eye connection comes from the Egyptian Luciferian astrotheological mythology of the moon as the Eye of Horus being healed by Khnosu. In another story, Thoth plays the board game Senate with Khonsu and gets 5 more days of the year to birth more of the Luciferian deities. And this is why Rome had “Consuls and Senate-ors.” They will not tell you this in any history book printed after 1940 or so, because the NW0 consolidated all power over education during WWII.

Regardless, today in English we call YHWH by the Epithet of Ba’al, who is Satan/Lucifer, and nobody thinks anything of it. The serpents are always taking sound alikes, and replacing the ineffable creator with Satan, Lexically, in practice, in thought, and in prayer. It is ceaseless.

More info Here:

yahushua.net/baalgad.htm
religionofancientpalestine.com/?p=488
biblestudytools.com/dictionary/eri-aku/
norse-mythology.org/sol-mani/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Máni

@Ralphie 225 @Igageharleya This May all be very useful to guide further studies for you regarding who and what the AntiXristos is. For we have all seen the Beast, and been none the wiser.

Here is another coin from Mithradates Empire in Anatolia, venerating by Mr. Lucifer-Jupater with the Chai Rho. Dates to 90 BCE, and the other side is Dionysus Δῐόνῡσος, whose name itself means

Dio = The Illuminator, Zeus
Gnosis = Gnosis/Knowledge

The Gnosis of the ILL-luminator Zeus.

Even the exoteric NW0 etymology can’t help itself and points to Kain, The Spearer/Possessor:

δίεμαι = To Impale/To SpearΝῦσα = The mountain where the Hyades raised Dio-gnosis as a child. And it also is the root of the term “Noose,” relating to the Pashas, which are the Noose that binds/ (“The Ties that Bind”), knowledge of the Solar movement in the form of a Noose and its worship..
It must be pointed out that in Aryeh Yehudah The word Hyades connects to Hada’at and Yada’at which means “Knowledge” as used when Eve bears Kain in Genesis 4:1. and Yes, it also points to the star cluster The Hyades which are the two horns of the Bull Taurus, the daughters of Poseidon… That of course is displayed all over Luciferian Iconography.

He is standing atop the owl, one of the greatest symbols of Occult Luciferianism out there, well known to represent Malek/Molek. As is still done at the bohemian grove with so many US presidents. And this really is where it becomes undeniable, the iconography (by the Catholic Church especially) is constant, multifaceted, and properly interconnected and displayed regarding its meanings and associations, clear through from Sumerian to Modern Day Luciferianism- Solar-Lunar-Astrotheological worship.

Heres the Pope again, depicted with the Solar Mark of Baphomet on his forehead in a later depiction around the later part of the first millenia AD.

Here is the oldest known painting of Paul dating to 450 AD. He is holding up, as expected, the Bunny Ears of Wennefer/OSIRIS that can be traced from 3000 BCE to modernity as a prominent symbol of the TYPHONIC BEAST and Satan.

Although the painting may depict someone named Paul, the Apostle Paul in the Bible was a follower of Yeshua and, therefore, not pagan. I recognize the need to separate the light of Yeshua from the darkness of Catholicism. Catholicism is confusion and its images are intended to confuse everyone.

Luke 11:35 Take heed therefore that the light which is in thee be not darkness.

If we look at this depiction of “saint” Andrew, (the saint system being another thinly veiled method of continual pagan deification of humans that are murdered/sacrificed as Demi-gods) it is clear that the sun above his forehead is the head of a demon which stretches its arms out over the stelle; a bold and non chiral form (no need for mirrors) of Babylonian demon projection with the solar the chai Rho. The entire engraving is built to encode a jackal lantern (like Anubis) type face of a demonic owl, the lighter portions are the eyes and mouth with the brow ridge being very prominent. So we have a form of multiple demon projection with the Chai Rho on a Babylonian Demon Curse Bowl with 666-666 on it in 500 BCE, and then Solar demon projection with the Catholic chai Rho in Rome with “Saint Andrew,” in 700-800 AD bearing XXX for 666. The iconography is extraordinarily congruent, as the prophecy says they are sea beasts, Tanninu in Hebrew, the same root as Tannaim, the repeaters. And Ill give them that they are extraordinarily consistent in repeating their Luciferianism across the ages and continents.

It is typical that during the heights of the medieval period, when the Catholics were at the height of their power, they did not even bother to hide behind chiral mirror projection of demons as they do today.

They choose their names accordingly, both fictional and those they sacrifice and later deify/sanctify… Ram-Ashes II (The Powerful Aries, like hiRAM abide) ruled for 66 years. U-Dis-as is 666 in Sumerian/Akkadian. And the coins above with the chai Rho and Lucifer-Zeus are used by Myth-Ra-Da’ates.

Myth = The mysteries
Ra =The Lord of Light
Da’at = Knowledge (Hebrew)

“The Knowledge of the mysteries of the lord of the light.”

Of course this connected to the well known Persian and later Roman Solar and astrotheological secret cults that made statues of Solar Lions obtained by serpents, MITHRAS.

This is now coded in English as “Emit Rays.” Just as what the sun and all sources of light do…

@JBL @Ralphie 225 @Igageharleya

And yet, this painting is hiding an image buried below it, which is revealed when we use the infrared spectrum of the images captured by the DSLR cameras (which use infrared to enhance dark photos, as this one which was taken in the catacombs):

Saul’s Face has a Snake in the exact form of the Serpent Apep, which was always represented in a figure 8, painted behind his face, wrapping its way from his neck in the trapezoid, up through his face and around his one Eye, his MONEYe.

This is from the Vatican in the first 100 years of the Church. It is utterly wretched Solar Worship, disguised as Worship of Yeshua, the AntiXristos, in Place of the Truth of YHWH.

And here is a direct comparison of the earliest painting of Saul of Tarshish, from 450 AD in Ephesus, Greek Anatolia, making the Bunny Ears hand Signal of V, with Set doing the same to hail Horus (The Reborn Sun), and the ears of the Typhonic Beast (Satan) the Jackal/Dog form of Set that Represented Chaos in Egyptian Mythology.

Esoterically these ears are the horns of taurus, the Hyades, the stars that make the ears of The SAROS.

This comes from a Lesotho, South and East African Myth; not hard to imagine how it ended up in Egypt, the largest and most powerful empire that received all trade from the Nile that originates in the East African Rift.

The mythology and iconography of the story all fits with the Porcupine being the spearer (as Kain, the Spearer/Possessor) and Seth, the jackal. And the typical Luciferian inversion where the spearer is the good one, and Seth is a trickerous monster. It also fits with the black and white squares of masonry, the “beauty,” of Lucifer (that makes Seth Jealous…), and the black and white coats of Eastern Orthodoxy, as shown at the Council of Nicea Mosaic, draped in Sol-Amon’s Gold.

Here is a picture of both African variant animals: this is a common theme of the ancient tales, where the Cosmos, Animals, and Human Events are mixed together to identify fractal patterns in existence.

When we examine the maps of the ranges of the animals, for which I have also looked at historical records to ensure that the ranges haven’t changed substantially, we see that the Spiny Crested Porcupine and the Black Backed Jackal of Africa do not overlap in their ranges niether in South Africa from where this myth is found present day, nor in North Africa where the Egyptian Bust with the Exoteric Jackal and Esoteric Porcupine was found. Yet, we do find that they overlap in one place (In the Green Circle), East African Rift Valley, near modern day Ethiopia, sitting at the mouth of the Blue Nile that has access to go North towards Egypt, as well as south towards Lake Victoria, which has continuos river and lake water ways down to eastern South Africa where the Lesotho of modern day reside.

We can see @Ralphie 225 and @Igageharleya this is the reason the Luciferians have been so adamant about hyperspecialization of Academia in order to keep them blind; when we employ this type of well founded multidisciplinary approach, in this case including: Multiculturual Theology/Mythology, Archeology, Anthropology, History, Zoology, Psychology, Geography, Photographic Techniques, Linguistics, and Mathematics, the Truth reveals itself, and the knowledge cannot be hoarded.

Coming back to early catholic Luciferianism, lets examine the full mosaic of Saul of tarshish making the symbol of the Typhonic Beast of Egypt. He is accompanied by a Woman, whose hand symbol has been blotted out, although for those in the gno it is the symbol of Sabazios, holding up three fingers, as we can see the thumb attachment of the palm is open as well as two fingers, making the typical sabazios salute. Sabazios, being a female satanic figure often worshipped by “Jews” in Rome from the 1st century onwards.

The word that appears next to this female figure is θεοκαι “Theokai” although the full word/phrase has been blotted out, it is very similar to the very common Catholic and Byzantine Phrase: Θεοτοκάριον

Θεοτοκάριον = Theotokarion = Theo + To + Karion which is God Seed, Or “The Seed of God.” It is a name that is commonly applied to “The Virgin Queen of Heaven,” in catholic and later Eastern Orthodox tradition, despite it having absoluely no scriptural basis. However, this might initially make sense given Mary birthed the Son of Man. Yet, it certainly buries both the term Kher, for Horn or Head, and Kurion, for Lord.

However, lurking underneath the name is a very old Pheonician-Aryan tradition of the “Great Mother,” who birthed the serpent seed. The name is reflected in the Tokharion peoples of Greco Bactria written in ancient Greek as Τόχαροι and in Sanskrit as तुखार Thukara which means “Very Cold/Frigid,” a reference to Thokaria being on the Himalayan Mountains.

And thus the inscription, (or at very least 5th century onwards church liturgical literature) appears to say “The god of Tokharia…” whom we know from the ancient inscriptions is the non-existence of YHWH. All Tokarion texts are Buddhist, Atheistic in Nature.

Look Below at a Tokharion Ancient Text; The Hand symbols mirror exactly that of Saul of Tarshish, and the Virgin with Him, similarly with the two fingers blotted out.

@JBL

What I am trying to give you here are the direct links between the early vatican, and what is a UNIVERSALIST, amalgamation luciferian religion, often which heavily borrowed from the East. I am also trying to show you just how much iconographic and theological substance from places connected by Alexander’s Empire played a role in this abominable Luciferian Solar Church masquerading as the mouth of YHWH, and that the problem is not Recent or even of the past millenia, but rather from the start of this church, and tracking directly back to Sumeria in 6000 YBP. In fact this is why so many try to insist that JESUS was a Buddhist Monk or came from Asia; because so many of the VATICAN SOLAR CHURCH CONCEPTS come from Asia, and particularly India. The NW0 allows the theories to exist and flourish in order to undermine any believe in The Truth, who is Yeshua, by using their false antiXristos, JESUS, as a strawman. They are Insidious.

Some More Tokharian iconography, Their name meaning “The Lords, The Heads,” in Greek To Kurion…

The Hidden Hand the Solar Haloes and the celestial iconography, just like the Catholics and Constantine in his comemoration of Nicea.

Ive made a Comparison Image below, color coding the symbols between Roman Catholic – Eastern Orthodox, and Tokharian Iconography. Keep in mind the Tokharian Iconography dates from the exact period of Early Gentile christianity until The Great Schism, Roughly 150 – 1200 AD. Most Tokharian imagery is found in cave temples, exactly the same as the early Vatican artwork that depicts their Iconography. It is not a simple coincide that we find Paul, in a Cave Painting next to “The Queen Virgin of Heaven,” with the same iconography as Thokarions, whose name itself means To Kurion, “The Lords.”

Contemporary documents from the period show that Tokharions use a Brahmi type script, which is a script very similar to Pheonician, but that appears in the 4th century sort of “out of nowhere in South India,” and then in the Thokarians, a Pheonician Script with Indian influence, but which I know for a fact, having translated the Indus Valley Script, is actually an occult priest class liturgical language only that stems from the Indus Valley in Gujarat carried from 2500 BCE into Modern Day by Secret Societies, only used among the elite of the elites. I have Pictures of Stelles, which I cannot put here right now for security purposes, that show Carthiginian Stelles of the 3rd Century BCE depicting slain bulls next to Pyramids and saying “Ra the Deva-Indra” a Clear Levantine, Indian Mix once you decypher the Indus Valley text.

This language is thus found, occulted with limited examples, but very clearly with congruent iconography, first in Gujarat coastal India and Yemen in 2500 BCE, and then reappears out of the depths of dark Luciferian Temples after Alexander The Great’s conquests around 300 BCE in Carthage-Pheonicia briefly (the power priests in the levant being displaced by Alexander and the subsequent Selucid wars), and then again reappears out of nowhere with Mithradates in 90 BCE in some limited examples, and then again dissapears and reappears in 350 AD in the Tokharians in Greco Bactria, and in the Roman Catholic early iconography simultaneously. This language and its iconography is intimately linked with ancient Luciferianism across the world: Shivaism-Hinduism, Buddhism, Pagan Anatolia, and then Catholicism. It is why in 1 Kings 10 Sol-Amon is visited by Queen Shiva… Its a warning against the Solar Worshippers, and then in Revelations 13… another warning they will replace Yeshua with Jay-Z/Jessie/Yeezy/Jesus, the AntiXristos who looks like, seems like, and talks like the real thing, but is a total inversion and twisting of The Truth designed to create a UNIVERSALIST CHURCH that controls the masses for their power.

Even look at the colors of the book being held by Jesus AntiXristos Superstar: Black, White, Red, and Green the colors describes in Revelations 6 of the foure horseman of the apo-KALI-pso all united by the Solar Gold.

The Mummy also has the typical death mask we see in all Solar Worshipping Luciferian societies, like Egypt, or Rome with its “incorruptables,” they still worship. This is the Sardonic Mask of the Panim, the Men of Many Faces.

@JBL

There is no rush, careful consideration and independent critical thought while asking YHWH is the only path to The Truth.

In the meantime I want to offer some more comparisons and a bit of info that shows even greater, undeniable similitudes between the creation of Catholicism under Constantine and the pagan-buddhist Tokharions (“The Lords”) who are depicted as very fair skinned, often orange haired peoples, in the high mountains of modern day Afghanistan.

Both sit at the opposite ends of Alexander “The Greats” earlier Greek-Macedonian empire, separated by such a distance, natural physical obstacles, and hostile empires (particularly the Persians, which did not like the Romans) that the likelihood of exoteric cultural exchange is nearly impossible.

Again, the earliest catholic iconography and worship has absolutely tremendous similitudes in iconography, language, architecture and worship practices that it is often stunning. We also known that the To-Kurions cannot be a Greek-Roman offshoot that went to hide out in the mountains, because they use a script very similar to Brahmi, derived from the original Indus Valley script of the 3rd millenia BCE (a script which disappears for 2500-3000 years and the suddenly re-appears as Brahmi on the Indian Coast, and then only again sporadically in occult elite sources throughout ancient history in Indo-European contexts) and their language has gained some facets of Persian and Sanskrit that would require a very long period of cultural contact and assimilation, but which is indicative of a group which chooses to culturally and genetically self isolate as much as possible over the centuries.

Catholicism (which as is Luciferian Solar Worship that assimilates and usurps Yeshua) and the To-Kharions (Pagan Luciferianism which assimilates and usurps Sidhartha) share a near exact chronological appearance in the historical record with nearly exactly identical iconography, that it is beyond being a simple coincidence or any posited “shared proto-indoeuropean ancient roots,” particularly because these peoples with these shared ancient PIE roots geographically in between them, such as: the Akkadians, Sumerians, Babylonians, Turks, Persians-Medes, Sassinids, Egyptians, Pheonicians, Levantines, Gujarati Indians, and Armenians do not share near the level of identicalness in iconography, language, and religious practice. In fact, I can prove to you that Catholic priests share this To-Kharion root, but also assimilate, under the guise of “Church Tradition,” several practices of Babylonian Astrotheological Worship of Marduk/Enki -Tammuz – Ishtar/Astarte, Pheonician Tannit-Dagon Worship, Anatolian Galli (Cult of Attis and Phrygian Bird) Eunuch worship (See the passage where Yeshua mentions that some have “become eunuchs for the sake of others), and Egyptian Mysticism, all overlayed with the names, images and likeness of Yeshua and his disciples.

The point is that its very name CATAL-ISCM tells us exactly what it is: a Luciferian CATAL-ogue of Religions mish-mashed, that was created for a purpose of UNIVERSALISM under a large empire and in order to subsume The Truth of Yeshua and YHWH. This is why set about to expel the Aryeh Yehudah that are the disciples of Yeshua, as “murderers,” because it served to steal the Messiah, Scriptures and Prophets, and to keep us from expounding The Truth. They used a common Luciferian Serpent Seed Power Tactic: Divide and Conquer, and set the people (who they call CATTLE and hence CATTLE-ISCM, a religion to control the Masses whom they view as livestock) against the Truth tellers by spreading a highly erroneous myth: “The Jews killed Yeshua.”

To anyone thinking logically, it is clear that the Tannaim, the Pharisees (whom Saul of Tarshish was one) were the ones who sentenced Yeshua to death, with the help of the Roman military and governmental apparatuses, and that even the Lay people (who are called Layic in Matthew 27 in order to distinguish they know not what they do), could not have been more than a few hundred in number. As always, they did what Luciferians do: Point the fingers and accuse others of what you yourself are doing. Does this not appear to be the same as modern politics and every other Us vs. Them used to gain power and ostracise threats from society used throughout history by people in power trying to keep that power?

Notice the names: Κωνσταντῖνος – Κοσσανῶν/𐭇𐭔𐭕𐭓 “Kusan” – κυσίν “Kusin”

Konstantinos – Kussan – Kushin – Kushites (Egyptians and other Luciferians)

The last word, Kusin, is the word for “dogs” used by Yeshua against whom were are warned about sharing holy things very clearly. All the worship of the Dog Star. This same metaphor is used in Judges 7:

“So Gideon took the men down to the water. There the Lord told him, “Separate those who lap the water with their tongues as a dog laps from those who kneel down to drink.”Three hundred of them drank from cupped hands, lapping like dogs. All the rest got down on their knees to drink.”

This is a very ancient metaphor in the scriptures, comparing those that are as dogs, because they worship the Dog Star Sirius (Well known as Anubis in Egyptian Iconography), and those that worship the one true YHWH. The word used in Judges for dogs is:

כֶּ֗לֶב “Kaeleb” = The same root as the Roman CAELUS who is the deity of the “dome of heaven,” aka the Stars and cosmos, and the Greek Καλλεις Calleis who is a charity, daughter of Zeus-Jupiter, and Κύβελις “Kybele” who is the “Great Mother, Queen of Heaven.” This is why it is absolutely blasphemous and vile that they call Mary “Queen of Heaven,” and worship her with no scriptural support. It is the Mark of Dogs, pagan astrotheolgical worship as denounced against the Solar king Sol-Amon with Ashtarte/Ishtar/Easter.

You may want to take issue with Kal-eb and Ka-bel being associated linguistically, but I can assure you that inverting the second syllable into the name of an associated animal of a word is a common Hebrew linguistic device used for reporting the names of Luciferian deities, so as not to actually name the many blasphemous names in the scriptures, and as well as to encrypt and hide the denunciation from Luciferian authorities who always come and try to burn any scriptures that report their occult practices: As they did with the original Greek-Hebrew bilingual of many of the books of the new testament (excluding Saul’s work.)

It’s a bit like a form of pig latin used specially for deities: invert the second syllable and make the word the name of the associated animal: KAL-EB is KA-BEL, and we associate the Dog of the Dog Star Sirius they Worship.

Another examples is the word NA-HAS in scriptures which means serpent, but which reports the occult practices of Serpent worshippers under names such as GA-NASa (Ganesha), WE-NUS (Venus the two headed bird-serpent), Ja-Nus (Janus the two face), and BENUS (The Egyptian Benu Bird) and OA-NES (Dagon.)

Even the Brahmi To-Kharion name for the empire is iconographically regarding The Serpent Seed (It can be found easily on w1k1-pedia)

The Serpent coming Over the Horizon – Venus in the Crescent Moon – The Anchor/Anvil.

Here I’ve attached a comparison of the 330 AD coin of Constantine holding the Pashas around, solar crown, and deification pose, and a coin from the Kushan Empire in around 120 AD (located in the Modern day Hindu-Kush and Afghanistan Regions), under which the To-Kharions were sactioned and operated as the elite priest class.

Notice that they have the exact same pose and spacing, and that while Constantine holds the Earth and Pashas with a solar crown, the To-Kharion holds the Trident of Poseidon (The deity of the Sea, and also a symbol found associated with TIAMAT the Sea Serpent of primordial Chaos in Mesopotamia.) They are pointing at the same thing denounced in Revelations: The Beast out of the Sea, which is THE SUN. They are Two sides of the Same CHARAGMA on the Coin, The Sun and the Sea, Two Horns and Mouth like a Dragon.

Let is also not go unnoticed that an early Catholic Saint and a retroactively created “Pope” was Pope Callixtus I, Gentile bishop of Rome in the early 200s AD. Once again, we see the root name of Cael (astrotheology worship, as expressed in Judges) appearing, as well as the Deus Callestus another name for Juno, Rome’s patron “Queen of Heaven,” and the stars, and another Great Mother Figure of Rome (They always venerate a “Great Mother” who they now have redressed up under the name Mary. It’s called re-branding) This “Saints” chosen name of a DOG STAR WORSHIPPER is in line with his Vile, Detestable actions and Greed. He is now deified (“sanctified”) by the Church.

You can do your own research on him but I’ll give a high level overview of this Pope’s life, which once again confirms there is, nor ever was anything holy regarding Catholicism/CATTLE-ISCM; it is a Luciferian hypocritical, murderous, thieving, and blasphemous institution from its very beginning up to today.

This early Gentile “Bishop of Rome” of the 199-222 AD started off like a typical Catholic “Saint.” He was somehow “lost” enormous quantities of money that had been donated to the church in order to help Widows and Orphans. After being caught, he then tried to extort Jews of Rome using brutal, oppressive, and often violent means.

Later as Bishop of Rome, he ordained the entry of Pagans into the Church who did not renounce their former beliefs and then ordained raping ones slave as an acceptable form of marriage.

This is directly in line with Pope Poniface VIII in the 13th century, who is quoted in several sources as having said that pedophilia with young children is as natural as rubbing ones hands together, and who ordered the genocides of cities with peaceful surrender. A thousand years apart, and stealing orphans money, raping your slaves, raping young children, and committing genocide were going strong. This is the Catholic Tradition.

Here is a side-by-side comparison of the Circa 450 AD painting of Saul of Tarshish and his blatent hand signaling, and a Yuezi (yes that’s said like Yeezi or JESUS) emissary in a Chinese document from roughly 600 AD. the Yuezi are essentially the same as the To-Kurions. The Lords and Jesus (as said in Greek and Latin!), in the northern Tibetan mountains…

So we have two paintings, of two men from the To-Kharions/Yuezis (Kurions and Jay-Zs), one in China and the Other in Rome separated by only 150 years, with the same beard style and hand signal. No less, depicted in an art from two completely separate cultures: China and Rome, for two very different purposes: Religious veneration and record keeping.

On the left we have a To-Kurion image from around 330 AD. and on the right we have a depiction of Neptune, Deity of the Deep Waters (which is the underworld and the stars), from near mount Vesuvius in around 70 AD.

It is striking to see that the To-Kurion is very pale, red haired, and has a typical hairline and hair quality of a modern 30 something Irish person. They all hold the tridents, and the To-Kurion appears to be a perfect fusion between Poseidon and his Consort Amphitrite. I understand that Rome in 70 AD is purely Pagan, but I am shwing you this, because it is the origin of the Triple Cross used so commonly by the early Catholic church, and to show you that there is a deep connection between the Nepal-im/Nefalim and Luciferian Serpent Worship of the Great Deep (The Cosmos), which was directly infused into Catholicism from the very start, itself being a sort of revealing of very occult, very el-ite worship that was the basis for creating a Universalist Catholicism to try and Usurp the Truth of Yeshua.

Attached is the image

The Picture

Gem, once again I am grateful to you for the time and care you continue to dedicate to this exchange. I see from the comments surrounding that I am not the only one who has benefited here from your knowledge and insight.

I am going to begin with a few general remarks which occur to me on overview of our conversation to date; from there, I will move to an outline of what I regard as some of the decisive historical reasons standing against your position. Following this, and as time permits, I’ll address some of the specific points and symbolic derivations you have suggested. (As we already have a great deal to reckon with, I am going to leave aside for now your statements regarding St. Paul; if, however, you think consideration of them indispensable to right assessment of these questions, I will gladly return to this topic.)

A. GENERAL REMARKS

You say:

“And so, you are correct that a single symbol by itself doesn’t necessarily mean anything, like the color Red doesn’t necessarily mean Blood, it could be strawberries or tomatoes, but when it is combined with congruent iconography, that has long extensive histories of congruent use, that all point to solar worship, then yes, it becomes overwhelmingly clear that the symbols use was intended.”

I do not dispute whether the symbols you indicate were intentional (they were), but whether they were intended with the occult, pagan and solar-centric meaning you have attributed to them. Christianity has been marked from the very first by the deep, deliberate and conscious use of symbols, and via the Church (as an Orthodox Christian, when I speak of the Church as such, I mean the Eastern Orthodox Church) has transmitted, in a clear and intelligible form, the meaning it has consistently ascribed to them. For instance, the iconographic tradition (of which I am a part) defines the significance of every individual element used in the arrangement of icons, from the material substrate of the icons themselves, through to the colors, perspective, gestures, figures, etc. used in them. This living tradition provides a thorough interpretation of the elements that you yourself have pointed to, but one that differs radically from your own.

Considering the icon of Constantine, for instance, and limiting myself to but a few examples: as you no doubt know, the gesture in the Bishop’s hand (as well as in many of the other icons and mosaics you have posted) is taught to be the gesture of blessing, and recapitulates the IC XC of Jesus Christ’s name in Greek (the same letters, incidentally, which are canonically present on all icons of Christ). This gesture also contains theological import, representing the Trinity (in the upright fingers) and the unity of God and man in Jesus Christ (in the two joined). This gesture is found throughout Christian iconography, and is used to this day in blessings by Orthodox clergy. For as long as the Church was wealthy enough to permit it, gold has always been used in iconography, in sign of the imperishable glory of Christ and the divine energies, and for its inherent light-bearing properties; it is not, strictly speaking, a color, but rather a radiance, and is used to signify the celestial realm and the divine light radiating from within saintly men (the very opposite, therefore, of the natural light given by the sun; the faces of the figures are painted to represent this same inner light, in absolute inversion of pagan naturalism and solar worship). The triple cross is used to represent the Trinity and the three theological virtues; it also has a historical justification, clearly visible in traditional icons of the crucifixion: the bottom beam was a foot rest the Romans used to prolong the torment of crucifixion, while the top beam bore the inscription nailed to Christ’s cross (THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS), which, in classic Christian inversion, transformed a phrase meant to mock Christ and Israel into a truth which validated them both. The crown worn by Constantine is a symbol of the secular power invested in his figure, a status glorified insofar as it is at harmony with the Church; and similarly, he, as the tenth member of a group of nine (= 3 X 3, emphatically Trinitarian), contributes to this nine as an element at once external and harmonized with it, thus bringing its consummation in 10, but not via imposition of a merely human structure; this is the very opposite of the number 6 (and by extension also 10), which represents false, forced, wilful, demonic “completion.” The group gathered together here thus forms the icon of Christ, the Priest-King, precisely in its avoidance the diabolical, pagan, and profoundly anti-Christ figure of the single man in whom the functions of the priest and the king are supposedly wed. Constantine in this icon is, once again, precisely the opposite of the “Soli-Man” that you have rightly impugned.

You deny the Church’s public teachings on these matters, and no doubt consider them to be a cover for the occult significance of these symbols. But this denigration of the official position cannot be maintained without external justification, and it is radically insufficient (as I think I have demonstrated, if only in principle, with my analysis of the Chi-Rho) to merely indicate similarities between these symbols and prior symbols.

We can fruitfully compare the situation, I think, with that in which we find ourselves today. Whee we today look at the contemporary media, film, and music, along with all their paraphernalia, we see a ceaseless repetition of clear gestures and symbols, whose constant use receives no explanation whatsoever from the persons who employ them, except for the flat and manifestly inadequate dismissal that their ubiquity is merely a coincidence. We are thus entitled — nay, obliged — to provide some account, not only for the symbols themselves, but also for the silence surrounding them. To take but a single obvious example, if every single major Hollywood actor and mainstream musician covers an eye in expensive and carefully planned photo shoots for major magazines, and no explanation is forthcoming for this strange and universal behavior, we can begin to posit occult ramifications. Secrecy here highly suggests, if it does not demonstrate, malice. On the other hand, if we find a certain hand gesture used repeatedly in a millennia-old living tradition, which has always and everywhere given the same exoteric interpretation for it, then we must have well-founded reason to accuse this tradition of concealing an esoteric and malevolent truth behind its exoteric teaching.

I have yet to find such justification in your comments. To be sure, regarding Constantine, you say: “I do not find it credible that an institution started by a man who murdered 4 of his close family members over power is one with pious foundations.” But I agree with you entirely on this point. If I believed, or the Church taught, that Constantine were its founder, I would be the first to withdraw from it, for we would be speaking of a human, not a divine, institution. Your claim (if I understand it) is that Constantine imposed his will on the Christian community, transforming its structure (in accord, perhaps, with the will of certain ignorant or malevolent individuals prior to him) and misdirecting it from its true course. The Church’s stance, by contrast, is that Constantine, by lifting the prior imperial ban on Christianity and thus allowing her to organize ecumenical councils enjoying the protection of the law, provided the necessary preconditions for the Church to publicly and definitively decide her internal affairs in alignment with right dogma. The Church’s position does not depend in any way on Constantine’s moral or theological perfection, and the Church has never regarded him as being integrally involved in the development of her institutions, to say nothing of her dogma. Constantine is considered a saint by the Church, but not a Church Father; the distinction is essential.

You dispute the Church’s position; you claim, indeed, that Constantine is guilty of “codifying himself as the soul authority and mouth of the YHWH on Earth.” It seems to me that the evidence you have provided for this is circumstantial at best, but I might be underestimating it. I think that if your position is to be borne out, you would have to show a visible and articulable change in the Church’s doctrines, views, or inner life following the Nicaean Council in particular. You would have to be able to identify those foreign and anti-Christian elements which were introduced or distorted following Nicaea, and which did not form a part of the prior Apostolic tradition. Only in the light of this kind of evidence could we finally conclude that the Church’s claims to maintaining integral the apostolic tradition are false, and then we would begin to uncover the necessary ground for a more thoroughgoing investigation into the post-Nicaean Church’s use of symbols.

I would like now to consider this problem of Church history from three different vantages which, to my mind, powerfully corroborate the Church’s integral unity from the time of Jesus to the present day, and thus furnish the necessary underpinnings to the Church’s own interpretation of her use of symbols.

II. THE CONTINUITY OF THE EASTERN ORTHODOX CHURCH

The second major counterpoint to your view can be found in the stance that the Orthodox Church has maintained in the world, a stance which is rigorously faithful and spiritual, and which resists the temptations of worldliness, impiety and faithlessness. This is not to say that every man who has been placed in high office within the Church has been a paragon of virtue; such could not reasonably be expected from any institution manned by human beings, so long as one does not presume that mere outward adherence to the true faith countermands the capacity for free choice. But on the whole, and in a way which is unparalleled by any merely human institution, the Church has maintained its independence and its doctrine against the tremendous variety of pressures brought against it throughout two thousand years of history.

I have already noted the signs of faithfulness in the Nicaean Fathers. But everywhere the Church has risen to power, it has demonstrated the same remarkable resistance to the corruptions that power so often brings. In the Byzantine Roman Empire, for instance, where Christianity was unequivocally the faith of the land, and where it would have been extremely easy for the Bishops to fall into a life of ease, complacency, and comfort, we see sterling examples of men standing against the ways of the world and the interference of secular powers (again in direct contrast to the view of Constantine as unspoken head of the Church). Again, a very few examples: Sts. Philotheus and John Chysostom (the man responsible, together with St. Basil, for the final form of the Church liturgy) died in exile. St. John Damascene reportedly lost his hand for his defense of icons, and is but one of a whole host of bishops to suffer physical trauma, exile or death during the great iconoclasm. Patriarchs Nicholas and Polyeuctas excommunicated emperors.

Again, during the rise of communism in Russia, the Church saw innumerable martyrs, rather than bow to the impious demands of the state. It then managed to survive several generations of the most intense anti-theological sentiments and anti-Christian laws, and to come out on the other side with no visible change in its sacramental or liturgical practices.

The faith of the Church is itself visibly and undeniably anti-pagan in everything from theology to daily practice. Practicing Orthodox are trained to withstand the temptations of the world, from greed to gluttony to cupidity to ambition. I honestly do not see how any of the general praxis of the Church could be in any way construed as “solar worship,” and the very contrast standing between Christian and pagan lifestyles, together with the coherency of the Church’s inner history, attest to precisely the opposite conclusion.

III. THE DISCONTINUITY OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH

Finally, we have, in telling contrast to this continuity of the Orthodox Church, the visible disunity of the Catholic, which negatively substantiates the Orthodoxy’s authenticity to tradition. Thus we come back to Catholicism, returning full circle to the problem that set us off into this dispute.

Now, you have spoken of iconography in Christian antiquity, the Middle Ages and the Renaissance all in a breath, as though they were identical; but there is absolutely nothing in common between the images of the Christ Pantocrator which you have presented (to keep to but a single telling example) and Michaelangelo’s Christ of the Final Judgement; they stand in two antipodal worlds. The one is austere, spiritualized, ascetic, deliberately distant from naturalism and realism alike; the other is all flesh and embrace of the carnal, all passion and physical virtue. The one stands in intentional contrast to the pagan art preceding it; the other brings the wilful culmination of that art. The Renaissance encompasses a break with prior tradition of such violence, depth and evidency that it is reflected even in the name itself: what is being “reborn” here if not pagan antiquity? And how could pagan antiquity be reborn, if it had not for a long time perished?

That radical changes which the past five hundred years (and especially the last century and a half or so) have wreaked on the Catholic Church are painfully visible to anyone who compares an Orthodox liturgy with a contemporary Catholic mass. The stunning lack of kinship in these two great branches of original Christianity nigh demonstrates that one or both of these traditions has failed to keep its promise of maintaining the Apostolic faith. Whatever one might think of Orthodoxy, it is at least clear that Catholicism has turned against its own roots in order to increasingly embrace a modern view, and this strongly suggests that those roots were not consonant with modern views. The unabated hostility which the modern world only lately displayed for the Catholic Church and everything it represents is another proof of this. So too is the present crisis of so many of our Catholic brothers, who no longer recognize the faith in which they have been baptized. Catholicism has been transformed; but then, it has become something it was not. It has failed its own mission, and the devastating and world-affecting consequences of this are only now really beginning to be played out.

How could this contemporary situation even be possible, if Catholicism were only maintaining some inner solar-worshipping core granted to it by Constantine’s machinations? How are we to explain to ourselves the patent and sensible difference between pagan antiquity and Christendom, between Rome or Athens and Jerusalem? The entire history of Christian spirituality, up until the fifteenth century, has so little in common with the spirit of pagan antiquity, that it could even be regarded as a bulwark against the demons of the past. And it is only as that Christian bulwark began to fail that we see the emergence of the crisis of our times, the reemergence of those old demons.

@JBL

Thank you again for taking the time to make such a pointed series of questions and to provide some further responses on where you are coming from. I was certain that you hail from an Eastern Orthodox and highly academic background, and so among the nearly innumerable paths of proof I could provide regarding this topic, I tried to provide you a very in depth esoteric, but True account of the origins of the early Catholic Church as it connects to Greece/Anatolia. You may not realize it, but as you have identification attachments to this institution, you accept their exoteric teachings, and have a bias towards a narrative that is congruent with your life up to this point; this is natural and understandable. Here are some questions to ponder:

1) Why did you fail to address the terrible, hatred filled persecution of Aryeh Yehudah, the very foundation upon which the early Gentile Church is built? This fact, which is attested to by countless primary sources throughout Gentile Church History from the 2nd century on, is highly congruous with a notion of subsuming The Truth by removing the givers of that Truth. Remove the messenger and steal the message to twist it for power and control. It is a stain we can’t ignore, and no, we cannot contextualize hatred, genocide, and outright false accusations that sit at the very foundation of The Gentile Church Movement, it was coordinated, manipulated and planned, and it is fowl and rotten.

2) How can you hand waive away an early “Church Father” of Greek Anatolia who is a learned native Greek Speaker and High priest Theologian, as simply giving a wrong etymology for the word Pashka on Pashka in the late 1st century AD? Do you have more ancient primary sources that directly contradict this? There is a nuance you missed because you have simply assumed he is wrong, without checking primary sources (of which there are so many), and because it may be very hard to accept given your allegiance to this opulent murderous institution:

Just as the Luciferian Gentiles playing Christian took our prophets and scriptures and rejected all Aryeh Yehudah and called us murderers (based on the word of a murder, Saul of Tarshish, and the actions of Pharisees and a small group of people, say less than 0.01% of all living Isis-Ra-Elis at the time), Bishop Melito and countless others like him from the 2nd century on were very careful to ensure they drew all of their ties between words and concepts from Ancient Gentile Luciferian Sources, rather than the Aryeh Yehudah roots, as much as possible. This is why he included an etymology of Passover that skips over “Soothing,” and skips directly to “binding, suffering,” that connects to the Solar Pashas, as depicted in Constantine’s very own hands. And then he went about condemning us with great bigotry to all die.

There is another thing you may not be aware of: if you read the primary source ancient Greek scriptures, the words have no spaces, and as such, buried between “seperate words,” are often exact matches of names for ancient pagan deities of the East like: ISTERON (Ishtar/zoro-Aster of Persia), GARUDA (Solar Eagle of Hindus), MENI (The Moon), AIZINMYO’O (angry Buddhist Sage of solar cult sex magik.) These deities names and actions appear particularly around the time of the judgement of Yeshua: they are shown, for those with eyes to see and read between the exoteric spaces now added, to play a role in condemning Yeshua to death by motivating the human actors. These types of deities are done so in a way that is extremely congruent with the ancient astrotheological mythology each deity is represented in terms of narrative, function and iconography. It is a warning against allowing these deities to murder the Truth, and to be wary of their incursion upon it.

An example: we find the names: Ish-ter and Isteron appear heavily and repeatedly in the portions of Matthew 27 when Yeshua is going to be judged, and Judas descends to the underworld. The name of Judas itself is a phonetic match to Iodine in Greek (ιώδιο and Ἰούδας) which is then directly followed by the word παραδιδοὺς for “betray, given up.” Why draw this parallel? Because the share two very exact pieces of iconography which match:

Iodine was the active ingredient used to fabricate Tyrrean Purple by the Pheonicians, The color of Royalty throughout the ancient world (remember Din-Gun/Dagon of Korea’s name itself means “Red-Purple King,”) and Dido is The Queen Fire Serpent of the Pheonician Carthiginians. Meanwhile Para, is from the ancient root for Fire. So reading between the lines we find that the one that betrayed Yeshua is the Tyrrean Purple King of the Fire of the Queen Mother Dido. Immediately following this, we have the word Kata-Krithe, seperated by a typica auton (of him), which means “The Downer of the Barley,” or “The one who reaps the Barley.” Keep in mind that Ishtar was and is the one to whom blood sacrifices are performed.

The text is revealing something of invaluable importance, which I proved using mathematical statistics in Monkeys Chapter X, charting all of the most publicized and bloodiest calamities of the past 120 years. This chart shows a direct pattern in the types of sacrifices and the position of Venus in its cycle during which something less than 3% of sacrifices, occur during the 144 days either side conjunction (between each maximum elongation.) Statistically 25% of the bloody events should occur during this period if there was a HIDDEN HAND acting to influence when these bloody events occured.

What I did not put in that article, is that THE ONLY HIGHLY PUBLIC BLOOD SACRIFICE TO OCCUR WHEN VENUS IS AT INFERIOR CONJUNCTION OVER THE PAST 2000 YEARS, AT THE VERY MIDDLE OF THE 7 DAYS OF THE PHEONIX DEATH, IS YESHUA’S. The statistical probability of this is less than 1 in a trillion, a 5 sigma result.

No Church is going to teach you this… And it’s significance is absolutely mind-boggling and of inordinate importance. This is the problem; they are keeping so much of The Truth by suckling the sheep with Luciferian tainted Milk, but making them all believe it is actually solid food (to borrow an allegory from Saul the Murderer.) The higher ups (not the random priest necessarily) are doing this to hide The Keys to the Kingdom of the Cosmos mentioned in Matthew 16:19 from the people; they are all in the scriptures. The word for cosmos used? οὐρανός OURANOS, the deity of the cosmos…

So on first reading it may seem weird, but I have hundreds of pages of notes on this type of scriptural works, and it is constant and congruent, going clear back to Berashid.

@JBL

Below attached is a reconstruction of the etymology for the words for fire across the Eurasian Continent.

“Two main terms for “fire” are reconstructible for Proto-Indo-European: h₁n̥gʷnís and péh₂wr̥. They are usually considered in semantic opposition. The term h₁n̥gʷnís is usually masculine and refers to fire as something animate and active (compare Agni, the most prominent Old Indic deity), whereas the term *péh₂wr̥ is neuter and refers to fire as something inanimate and passive, i.e. as a substance.”

In English we find that both of these PIE terms have found their way into our lexicon in terms for fire: Pyrotechnics/Fire/Ferocious, and Ignite/Arson (Arson may seem unrelated but its just coming through a different intermediate source language tree) English is one of the most heavily coded languages in the world, having been subjected to Dragon Royalty of Germanic, Anglo, Normand-French, and Phoenician blood lines encoding it over the past millennia or so.

We often see languages use Fir/Fara/Fer/Pyr/Per/Pher/Phara/Hara etc. for these roots, just as Pharisee. Let us look at why I choose to call it Fire-I-See, so as to give a shorthand that reveals a much, much deeper look at this.

Hebrew: פְּרוּשִׁים “Parisim/Farisim” You might notice that the word uses “Per/Fer” for the root, which indeed means Fire. The exoteric term for fire in Hebrew is ash… that still has its obvious correlations into English, Fire makes Ash. The word for Black in Ancient Hebrew, אַשְׁח֖וּר Ashur, comes from this root and at its oldes means “one who comes from Fire,” hence all the ash rubbing on the Fire-I-See’s foreheads (keep this custom in mind, as we’ll come back to it later), and this has its cognates in ancient Luciferian deities with:

Akkadian 𒀭𒊹 “Assur,” literally a Solar Deity, whose symbolism is the winged sun, and logographically whose name shows the Sun at Full Eclipse. This is congruent with all the Eclipse worship, such as Bishop Melito venerated in his speech, but going back much further to the “Saros” cycle. It is not a coincidence that we have Ge-Orge Saros, and that written logographically, the term 𒀭𒊹 is An.Sar. Do you know who got all of the CORONA (Crown, Solar Crown), contracts for creating all the false statistics? A company called Ansar…
Egyptian “Usarus/Osiris,”
Pheonician: 𐤀𐤃𐤓 “Adar/Ashar,” who is the Solar Deity of Burning and אֲשֵׁרָה “Asherah,” who was always depicted as a moon goddess with fire stones in her eyes, and patroned sexual gnostic type fire riturals. She is also known as Ashtarte, as told in Kings.
Sanskrit: असुर as the “Assur-as” who use fire to seek divine power.
Celtic: æsce Ash Trees, worshiped by the Druids (because they get struck by lightning and make fire.)

practice regarding fire word The list is really, really long of cognates for this word, and shows a consistency not only lexically, but also in religious practices regarding fire worship, sex fire rituals, and golden solar fire. This is why this exoteric explanation of the use of opulent Gold behind graven images is completely unconvincing, and actually shows the true roots: The entire point of fire rituals is to get your inner light to shine forth as the sun, to transmute internal lead into gold, so you may ascend to divinity with the sun. The explanation you gave me mirrors this tradition, many thousnads of years older than Catholicism/Eastern Orthodox and which is consistent across time, cultures, and space exactly, including 6000 year old graven images that engrave this same message of solar fire alchemy.

I’m not buying it when you repackage Oreos and call them “Fat Free Health Food.” Putting that label on an Oreo box doesn’t make it an apple. They’re both sweet, but not the same. Yes, they use the same tricks to sell capitalistic junk today (Oroes over Apples) as they did to rebrand Luciferian junk to supplant Yeshua and my peoples, the Aryeh Yehudah (also known as the Essenes in Greek.)

Now let us look at a very similar Sanskrit word to the Hebrew “Perisim”/Pharisee, of which the entirety appears within the Hebrew Title: ऋषि “Rishi.” that is spelled exactly identifically to רוּשִׁים “Rishim,” which forms the rest of the word Pharisee. It means, at the first level, a Sage/Guru of divine wisdom.
So here we have a word in India that means “Sage/Guru of Divine Wisdom,” and a Hebrew word that represents “Teacher of Divine Wisdom.” They are phonetically, Orthographically, and Semantically identical.

Here are further exoteric meanings of Rishi:

1. A Vedic poet and a seer who composed Rigvedic hymns
The Pharisees compose the Talmud, just the same

2. A Hindu sage or saint occupying the same position in India history as the patriarchs of other countries, constituting a peculiar class of beings in the early mythical system.
Just the same as the Pharisees, who claim to be Patriarchs of the 10 northern tribes.

And finally:

From Sanskrit ऋषि  (ṛ́ṣi), from PIE r̥šíš(whence Avestan ərəṣ̌iṣ̌, “seer”That Avestan Eresis, is essentially identical to Pharisee. and the Sis at the end, is the word 6, just like Saul of TarShish, and his name Saul = Sun Tar-Shish = Seeker of the Six. His own name is identical to Luciferian Solar Fire Alchemy Seers half a world away… And so we have a clear, well established, highly cemented linguistic, conceptual, anthropological, and theological through line between Perisim/Pharisees (Hebrew,) Rishis (India), and Fire-I-See (English). I didn’t even get ino the connection with France’s Paris (Faris.)

*Of note: The current PM of the UK, a supposedly “Christian” nation, whose Church was started by a man who murdered his mother (as well), and burned thousands of witches in very cruel ways for funsies (in line with te Fire sacrifice rituals of Ba’al/Molek), is called Rishi Sun-ak… The Solar Sage. And this is the problem with any argument surrounding “oh we’ve used all these combinations, its just coincidence.” No, the pattern is constant and consistent, that those in power, those that start and perpetuate churches that bring great suffering and death upon the world, those that become “Men of Old, Men of Renown,” clothe themselves and their organizations in this same Luciferian symbolism, in congruent manners, over and over and over again across time and space, and then profess something completely the opposite while committing atrocities. This is the prophecy of the antiXristos, the ones who clothe themselves in astrotheological Luciferian Solar Worship while exoterically (publically) professing something else.

A Few more random little notes around the word, although its woefully small regarding the topic.

Latin: ferro ignique ferro ignique which is Iron Fire, both roots encoding these words, and thus we get Lux-i-Fer. The Iron Light… which represents the being with one eye atop the PYR-amid/Fire-Amid…

Germanic Subset:

English: Fire
German: Feuer

Semetic and Near east
Arabic: حرق “Hara” and “Haraq” like Charakma

Albanian: Agni
Sanskrit अग्नि “Agni”

@thekwon @JBL

This painting, from The Sinai in around 550 AD, by Catholic/Eastern Orthodox churches, contains Anubis and several other dog demon references with great detail. The congruence of animal figures, including at least three canine forms, is not a coincidence of mirroring.

I did not do this mirror image, it is taken from Wikipedia itself, originally part of an official public and published “theological academic,” art critique. They claim the painting shows 1/2 half of Jesus divinity and 1/2 Jesus humanity. Why then are their no mentions of the clearly visible and highly detailed images of demonic canine κυσιν dogs demons all over the place? Why does Jesus look so incredibly menacing, and very similar to later depictions of the antiXristos?

It is well known Davinci used this technique @ralphie 225. So why should we believe no intention in the painters of 550 AD?

The only “mirroring technique” that Leonardo is universally recognized as having used was in his so-called “mirror writing” — something of a misnomer, since it really only refers to his practice of writing his letters, words and sentences backwards, a technique which requires the use of a mirror neither in its production, nor in its deciphering. All the attempts that I have seen to “mirror” his paintings have produced only the most dubious results.

Indeed — and these remarks are meant also for Gem444 — the idea that occult meanings can be revealed by physically mirroring paintings seems to me extraordinarily tenuous — first, because prior to very recent centuries, it was nigh impossible to find a mirror of appropriate build and quality to physically reflect a painting in this way at all (it goes without saying that no one in the past had the luxury of photoshop); and second, because apparently meaningful patterns and images emerge from practically any self-reflected asymmetrical image under the sun, including random photos. It is thus almost impossible to ascertain whether a given “mirroring” of an image reveals secrets, or only accidental semblances.

@JBL

Even in scripture far predating this proven secret mirroring technology, we find references to mirrors. You have put your faith in men who deceive you, and have not known the word of YHWH.

Exodus 38:8

They made the bronze basin and its bronze stand from the mirrors of the women who served at the entrance to the tent of meeting.

The word used for “Mirror” in this passageis:

בְּמַרְאֹת֙ “BeMARUT” which is also used for spiritual “Visions” throughout the old testament and is also related to the deities: Hammaruca/Amurru/Maruts/Martu/Mars etc. The word הַמַּרְאָ֖ה “Hammarah” which is the identical lexical root, appears in Daniel and Samuel for visions as well. And in Ezekiel the term is מַרְא֥וֹת “Maruts,” the same name मरुत “Maruts” as the warrous semi-divine Storm/Lightning warriors in Hinduism.

Why are we finding the same words around mirroring and visions, as deities from India, China, and Mesopotamia… It is because the occult has long used mirrors for esoteric practices among only its El-ites.

Job 37:18

Can you, with Him, spread out the skies,
Strong as a molten mirror?

The word used for Mirror in Job is כִּרְאִ֥י “Chiri” just like we use CHIRALITY today. Because mirrors create CHIRAL images which do not super impose the same in real life. The optics of light were very well understood, and so were mirrors. In this sense in job, it is a reference to the sky… And the Sky mirrors. Job is written around 1500 BCE and handed down orally from 3-4000 BCE.

Isiah 3:23

hand mirrors, undergarments, turbans and veils.

The word used is: גִּלָּיוֹן “Gillion.” which means mirror or glass tablet, and comes from the root גָּלָה “Gala,” which means to uncover, to be revealed (what is hidden). Once again we find the word used for mirrors leads to the root of uncovering a hidden vision. Isiah is from 550 BCE or so.

From James 1:23-24

For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man who looks at his natural face in a mirror

The word used for mirror is ἐσόπτρῳ “Esoptron,” which means Mirror Looking Glass, so already certainly by the 3rd or 4th Century they had advanced optics for looking glass.

The Greek word is to esoptron, meaning, as the translation, “looking-glass, mirror” (Liddell) and comes ultimately from osse, meaning “[two] eyes” 

Your claim that they didn’t have mirrors that were good enough to make detailed mirror images in the 5th century AD and after is patently false, refuted not only by scripture, but by academic sciences as well.

Let’s examine a story from the Quran involving King Solomon, presumably written before 630 AD, in which King Solomon hears a rumor that Queen Shiva, who is coming to visit him, has the legs of a goat (Like Pan…) hidden under her skirt. The Soli-Man always had demonic forms hanging around him in all of his stories from 1 Kings through the Middle ages, a very telling motif…

Upon hearing this rumor, whispered into Soli-Man’s ear from a Djinn, a demon of sorts itself, King Solomon builds a room with Glass Mirrors on the ceiling and floor, with water running underneath to enhance the effect and trick Shiva into revealing her goat’s feet.

(Water of course is the original mirror, the one that Narcissus stared into and fell in love with himself.)

Upon entering the room, Queen Shiva sees the mirrors and water, and thus lifts up her skirt revealing her goat’s hoof, and her true identity as the child of Pan the goat. The skirt, covering her demonic half is an allegory for THE VEIL OF REALITY, so discussed in the occult. And here we have a story from the early 600s AD showing that a Golden Solar King, uses mirrors to trick the demon into revealing herself, enshrined in the Koran itself.

We see this same motif repeat in the later midieval stories of Sol-Amon:

In one tale Ashmodei prince of demons steals his identity, and flings him halfway cross the Earth. Ashmodei then runs the kingdom of Sol-Amon as if here were him, although after a time the advisers become suspicious because of his nasty, brutish behavior, and that he is always wearing full length stockings and shoes, even in bed. Eventually the real Sol-Amon returns, and lifts up Ashmodei the imposters trousers, showing he has the legs of a bird (yes the solar bird.) Ashmodei then flies away….

As an aside, even in 1 Kings 10, Sol-Amon is said to receive “Peacocks,” (The Solar Bird) and Baboons (The animal of Thoth, the Moon god) once every three years. The word used for “peacocks,’ occuring nowhere else in scripture and which is not a hebrew word, is We-Tukkim. This comes from Akkadian-Sumerian, in which the Tukki were a council of divine, but demonic, spirits which were advisers to Marduk, the Sun God. And the Yazidi, who claim to be children of the devil in modern Persia, still worship the peacock, with all of its many colors and Eyes of Ra-Horus everywhere.

And so we see even in 1 Kings 10, written in 555 BCE in Babylon, in which Demonology was rampant (almost every excavation of living quarters uncovers buried demon statutes from the Neo-Babylonians), that Astronomical Themed Birds and Monkeys are connected with Demonology that continues through to modern day.

The point of telling you this second story from the medieval sources of Sol-Amon mythos, and the earlier etymology from Kings, is to show you that indeed here we have a story inscribed in Arabic Sacred Texts where Sol-Amon reveals the child of Pan using mirrors, written around 600 AD, within 180-200 years of this mural being painted.

@JBL

So now we have mirrors being used for supernatural divinatory practices involving demons and realms unseen from China in 200 BCE, to Meso-America in 200 AD, to the Koran and King Solomon in 600 AD, to Babylon in 1500 BCE, to Persia in 400 BCE. How much more evidence do you need that this was a widespread occult practice among pagans?

Below a Dragon spitting out a triskell 666, the Tra-Pezes, from Teotihuacan dating to around 250 AD, before the earliest existin copy of Revelations. How is this possible if there was no contact, as main stream shamademia claims?

Is it a bird, a frog, a man holding up two disks in the sun, a trapezoid, or a Frog bird Demon with a human feminine form below its skirt/Veil? Its all, because these are the types of images produced from occult mirroring practices, which here in Teotihuacan are on full display. I won’t post more of their artwork, but it is constantly congruent with occult mirroring practices.

@JBL

More research on mirrors as an occult El-Ite ritual item involved in religious rituals and burials:

Mirrors have been found in almost every part of the Maya region, mostly in burials and ritual caches. They have been dated to all periods of Maya Civilization from the Middle Preclassic (around 600 BC) right up to the Spanish conquest in the early 1520s. They reached the height of their production and use in the Maya highlands during the Early Classic, while most mirrors from the Maya lowlands date to the Late Classic. Maya mirrors were produced by exceptionally skilled artisans and were highly valued by the Maya elite. Production was likely to have been so specialised that they were made by high-status artisans dedicated to their manufacture, who may have been members of the aristocracy or even royalty.

Mirrors excavated from Maya tombs have been found placed near the head, the chest, the small of the back, the groin and the feet of the deceased. A few were placed on the floor of the tomb at some distance from the human remains. In Maya art, mirrors appear to be depicted as hand-held objects; sometimes they are depicted mounted on stands or held by dwarfs or servants in front of elite Maya individuals. Advances in the decipherment of Maya script have revealed the central function of mirrors as instruments for ritual scrying.

This coming from a stone-age civilization from 600 BCE… It is endless my friend, and your assertion that mirrors just weren’t good enough or available enough for elite priest and royalty classes or Eurasia to engage in ritual practices of mirroring in their art, is pure made out of ignorance.

I have now provided you with not only an exact contemporary reference in Arabia to Sol-Amon and revealing Pan the Goat Demon with Mirrors, but also a myriad of evidence from around the world that they were used for occult ritualistic practices to reveal unseen and unhidden realms full of dark esoteric religious symbolism.

Here is an image of the Painting by Hans Burgkmair from 1529 in which he depicts himself and his wife in a painting, holding up a mirror. Where there faces are, we see instead two floating demonic skulls.

This painting is produced contemporarily to within 10 years of DaVinci’s Mona Lisa.

Continuing on with the connecting of the Sun Worship of Egypt, and the Occult Priests Practices with Mirrors, long predating Church paintings and icons full of solar gold.

Below we have the great solar mother Hathor, flanked by two solar falcons of Horus that are perfect mirrors, which are the handles of a ceremonial mirror object in the sky.

@JBL

On Mirror and Water Practices in Ancient Greece and Rome:

In Ancient Greek times, this was known as either catoptromancy or enoptromancy, and involved the witch or magician who practised the art dangling a mirror on a thread, until its lower edge touched the surface of the water. Then, by looking into the mass of reflections created by the mirror and water reflecting each other, the future could be told.

A Contemporary Account of the Practice from around 300 BCE:

Before the Temple of Ceres at Patras, there was a fountain, separated from the temple by a wall, and there was an oracle, very truthful, not for all events, but for the sick only. The sick person let down a mirror, suspended by a thread till its base touched the surface of the water, having first prayed to the goddess and offered incense. Then; looking into the mirror, he saw the presage of death or recovery, according as the face appeared fresh and healthy, or of a ghastly aspect.

More Information:

A mirror is placed so that it catches a reflection of another substance. Usually this is something that is hard to hold, for example moonbeams or water reflections. Then the reflections in the mirror are interpreted.

Another divinatory method of using a mirror was to place it at the back of a boy’s or girl’s head when their eyes were bandaged shut. In Thessaly the responses appeared in characters of blood on the face of the moon, probably projected in the mirror. This practiced was derived by the Thessalian sorceresses from the Persians who wanted to establish their religion and mystical rituals in the countries which they invaded.

In ancient Rome, special diviners known as “blindfolded boys” were known to gaze into looking glasses in order to experience visions of the future or of the unknown, and according to the 4th century ‘Scriptores Historiae Augustae’, the death of Julian the Apostate was accurately predicted by Catoptromancers.

Ancient Egyptian Mythology said that Hathor (The Sun Goddess) created the first mirrors from her shield, which could reflect all things back in their “True Light.” Then in the first century BCE Romans perfected the art of glass making and fashioned the first glass mirrors. Religious beliefs developed that the devil could appear from the other side of the mirrors.

Mirrors were considered magical tools in ancient pagan paths. The Egyptians Persians, Celts, Greeks and Romans not to mention various Shamans used various surfaces to scry in order to determine future events, uncover hidden events, or commune with spirits from other realms.

There is such a wealth of information on the uses of mirrors, reflections, and its connection to occult astrotheological solar and lunar worship for divination and other forms of demonoly throughout the ancient world far predating as well as contemporarily as the artwork I have shown you, that any argument against the possibility, indeed the likelihood of the practice is ridiculous. It is as if a Jury were to insist that a killer could only be convicted if he confesses under oath.

@444gem

I would like to ask few questions. Please answer only those you can/are willing to answer. I’ve had very odd dream yesterday but i would like to ask few questions first before going into the details.

1. How Aryeh Yeduah “discovered” the Truth?
What is the origin, surely there must be some starting point

2. What teaching method was in use before Your people wrote the scriptures? What were people’s beliefs before that?

3. Does Yeshua has a something like burial place? What happened to his body after being crucified?

4. The story about his resurrection is about how his teachings were still “live” after his death or this is just another made up story created by dragons?

5. What was written in original 10th commandments by Moses? Does this changed in some way?

6. If people in power are with them anyway, why we are seeing some muppet show sometimes such as Zuckeberg in court, the templars and DeMolay being burned and so on and on. Just to keep up their story or it is some sort of punishment? Or they were not needed anymore

7. What templars found in Akka so they returned so fast to vatican?

8. John Dee and his “discovery” of enochian language.

9. You said earlier that we are given free will in this dimension, could you please explain more?

10. And final, does the Truth only apply to our planet earth?

Thank you as always for everything. I will be glad to any source or knowledge from you.

Thank you @Ralphie 225, i believe this is our first interaction here 😉 but i read every single comment of yours. You have amazing knowledge.
It seems that my question sinked in the ocean of others haha. They are different than yours and others but… everyone want to know different part of the Truth i believe.

Best to you and your family.
Stay warm

@Maciej @Ralphie 225
1. We knocked at the door and asked the YHWH to show us The Truth. It is written:

Blessed is the one
who does not walk in step with the wicked
or stand in the way that the illuminated take
or sit in the company of jesters

but whose delight is in the law of the Lord,
    and who meditates on his Word day and night.

That person is like a tree planted by streams of water,
which yields its fruit in season
and whose leaf does not wither—
whatever they do prospers.

The last metaphor is very important, remember that scriptures are written as fractals, using things we all understand and recognize to demonstrate much greater fractal patters.

Tree: a living and growing being in YHWH, and pathway grown in time with many branches and roots
Streams of Water: The Waters of YHWH, his Wisdom, which gives live from his breath. A well watered tree goes strong and True
Yields Fruits in Season: That through enduring all aeons and eras, gives its fruit at the times appointed by YHWH
Leaf does not Wither: The word for wither is יבול which comes from a very ancient month name, the time when leaves would fall, the time of harvest. And thus he is never cut down for the harvest of others.

@444gem

Thank you for this. Amazing. I really like how you answered this so my small brain can understand. I wish there could be a different way we could interact and you could explain, show and teach but for obvious reasons we all know, that’s the best you can do for now and i am really grateful. I have so many other questions and if YHWH will allow i would like to ask more but that’s for another topic. I am visual person so seeing things helps me to understand more how things are working. Back to the questions… apologies they are not in order

5. “Love others as i love you” Am i correct? If yes, this is so plain and simple as Yeshua said “you only need to answer yes or no – everything else comes from deceivers”
This is so pure, like children’s making choices. So simple. Like asking if you are hungry, yes or no. You are thirsty? Yes or no, there is nothing in between. Are you living in the Truth in your heart? Yes or no. I Really like this.

7. My question regarding templars… i cancel this. When i was young and didn’t know much, i thought they are really the “soldiers” of God, but when i started to go deeper and deeper things didn’t seems to be so honourable anymore with them. They conquered lands and slain people and it seems to me that they weren’t soldiers of god, just like with all the religious nonsense, “kill in the name of god” thing seemed to be stretched and told for specific reason. When i found their cross in Grimoire it striked me. Yes, i do have few books from the past that i thought might be useful at that dark time in my life but now i have different approach towards this lecture. Way way different. Whether i like it or not, they hide many things in plain sights in those books.

3. Does shroud of Turin real? Is this a real piece of cloth that Yeshua has been covered with? Is this his real face? Please answer only if you can. I would like to visit places that have touch of Aryeh Yeduah, see them by myself and touch the past. Can you name few if allowed? Perhaps i have seen some but been non wiser…

8. John Dee. Again in my dark times i though of him as a real connector between God and humans. Especially this enochian language which he claimed it’s been given to him and Kelly from the Angels. During my time in UK i visited museum that keeps his artefacts. I took pictures and notes of his items and i have seen this obsydian mirror he was using. I was wondering what was the purpose of this. Thanks to your explanation of mirroring technique i know more. I remember that i brought attention to myself as i was doing notes, drawings and i even brought a book with me to compare few things. After few hours of me staring at this one cabinet They really started to questioning me. Why i am so interrested in this, why i am asking those type of questions, why i need this knowledge, etc. From where i got my books, (some of them were really old and the wanted to know where i got them)I had to escape as things were getting really heavy.
Could you please explain his symbol described in Monas hieroglyphica? I have some thoughs but don’t know if that’s the right direction. Now i can see heavy symbols buried within it but again my small brain don’t know if that’s it. Also he visited Poland and had meeting with King Batory and did some of his Magik, that story always bothered me and it seems that the deeper i go the more obstacles i came across. Especially in Poland.
Sorry for off-topic. Even Poland became christian in 966, what a date ha! I wonder how “important” this land was for dragons. Could you please put some light on the history if you can?

6. They really have no rules whatsoever towards other dragons. The are all being used as pawns for their goals. Pathetic.

As for rest of your answers, thank you so much. I will take it from there, that’s all i wanted to know.

I am so gratefull for everything

@444gem @Ralphie 225 @Maciej

“His death was before Sun Down, and thus he was given medical care to revive him after his death.” –juxtaposed with
Ephesians 4:26
“Be ye angry, and sin not: let not the sun go down upon your wrath:”

– what does Sun Down, capitalized, mean?

11th commandment was given by Yeshua, John 13:34 “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. 35 By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.”

For point 9. please change the emphasis to: “You said earlier that we are given free will in this dimension, could you please explain more?” – does “in this dimension” change things at all? For instance, you replied, “Instead your soul is given a totality of free choices throughout its existence, whether to Live in Truth or not, and all which that entails.”- which, superficially may appear to state that this free will remains ours for all time, yet if it applies only to this dimension and we, in fact, are now “sealing our fates”, that could be understood to contain subtle differences.

I suppose this goes back to the question Ralphie and I, specifically, have been trying to extract now for awhile – what happens next? I have asked before about reincarnation and you essentially stated, where does scripture say it cannot be so? (something along those lines). Okay, but if Yeshua has broken that looping cycle for us, what does that mean for us moving forward? Do we enter into a new type of existence, in which our parameters for free will may change, some, depending on past choices we have made? What is taught and understood by many to be heaven?

Or does it mean that we have been rescued from self-annihilation in this age, but that after a period of rest and restoration, we will reenter a new cycle of ages and free will? Which is what some understand will be the new earth, established by Yeshua and with him reigning over it and all its inhabitants during that period of rest.

Or something entirely different? Are there different destinations for different people according to their walk? Are you at liberty to disclose this yet/at all?

It is the nature of this site and how notifications come across through email, @Maciej that I only saw your response to Gem after I’d made mine. I see you knew the 11th commandment so my response on that wasn’t necessary.

These are very good questions and I appreciate your asking them. I’m very interested in seeing some of your secondary questions answered as well.

I think Gem also often is waiting to gauge what we truly know before he adds more atop, because many understandings build on the ones before them, so you can’t lay the next bricks until the former ones are firmly set. It can be immensely frustrating for me, because I am strong in some areas and so painfully weak in others, that the weak areas are pinning my strengths down to some extent. In the same vein as: “Mark 4: (NKJV) 13 And He said to them, “Do you not understand this parable? How then will you understand all the parables? “

I take no offense. Truth is undeniable. You are probably right as well.

@AE

Agreed….all excellent questions as well especially the “What’s next?”…..

I too have read similar, mostly from various metaphysical or Theosophy books, about what’s next ….

…. about what is the purpose of being here on Earth at this time, and the multidimensional aspects of the soul and its ‘tethering via the silver cord’ (Elizabeth Prophet’s books are quick reads – though she’s of a Theosophist/Blavatsky lineage, I believe) …..

…..and they all seem to create more questions….for ex:

▪︎ Is Earth a “school” or “prison” for souls?
▪︎Are we in the final year of ‘school’ and who ‘graduates’? Graduate to where? What is the criteria for said graduation?
▪︎If our our souls multidimensional are we just one aspect of our own greater ‘Oversoul’?
▪︎If Earth is prison, whose prison and why?
▪︎ Have the souls on Earth been captured elsewhere, brought to Earth and forced to embody here for Ki/Chi/Loosh harvesting?
▪︎Are the current number of souls on Earth now, equivalent to the total number of souls that has existed since the beginning of time on earth?
▪︎Etc etc etc…..

More so, what, if any, of these theories are even true or True? 🤔

Although I do have my favorite of these….

Best…..

Hi @444gem

Have you missed my question? Did i offended you in some way? I do apologize if i did.

I am presently working on a response to your latest major response to my comments, Gem, and it should be ready soon. But since it seems I have once more failed to be sufficiently clear once in my own formulations on the question of mirror-imaging, I wanted to try again.

The information you have given on mirrors in pagan rites and practices is fascinating, and I thank you for it. While I was well aware of the symbolic connotations of mirrors, and knew that they were used in a variety of pagan rites and practices and were (probably rightly) believed to be connected in various ways to the spirit world, much of this information is wholly new to me.

However, I do not see how any of this even indirectly corroborates, much less demonstrates, the special kind of mirror-imaging that you are presently investigating, and I seek in vain among your provided references for a clear connection thereto. None of the citations you have offered suggests image self-reflection. None of the actual ancient mirrors that you point us to would be in any way useful for this kind of reflecting. You have said, “It is as if a Jury were to insist that a killer could only be convicted if he confesses under oath,” but the analogy is wholly inexact: It is more as if a jury were to insist that, since five men in five different towns had been found unambiguously guilty of robbing five different gas stations at five different times, for that reason alone, another man in another city should be convicted of robbing a bank.

I say “for that reason alone,” because, to repeat, I think the practical difficulties involved in mirroring a given image in antiquity are in important cases insurmountable, and in lesser cases sufficiently grave as to call the entire theory profoundly into question. Let me speak on these problems at greater detail.

To produce an image such as those you have posted would require a mirror with a free straight edge that could be placed directly against the painting, along the required axis, at an appropriate angle with respect to the image it was meant to reflect. Any space left between the mirror and the image would result in a gap in the reflected image which would interrupt many of the effects you claim to have discovered. Some of the artworks you have indicated are not even painted on flat planes, but are found in semi-spherical apses or cupolas, and thus would require a perfectly fit, dedicated, custom-made curved mirror that, given the known technology contemporary to their production, would have been (to say the very least that can be said) extraordinarily difficult to manufacture.

Moreover, any mirror so used would have to be of appropriate dimensions to reflect a given artwork. Very large artworks (and you have pointed us to several) would require equivalently large mirrors. Before the second millennium, Western mirrors were (with the exception of tiny, irregular glass mirrors utterly insufficient even to the task of mirroring small artworks) exclusively made of burnished metal, usually bronze or copper. Even the best of these mirrors produced vague and hazy images (as can be seen in the reflection even of one of the ancient mirrors you have posted), and it would be surpassingly difficult to produce a bronze mirror of any great size with any uniformity. To make a large (say, half the height of a man, and thus much smaller than several of the works you have noted), frameless, rectilinear sheet of bronze of sufficient rigidity to withstand natural flexing (which would of course distort the reflected image) would require a quantity of metal that would render the implement extraordinarily heavy, making for evident practical difficulties even in maneuvering the mirror into proper place.

Now, so far as I have been able to ascertain, almost all the ancient mirrors that have come down to us are handheld tools, usually affixed with a handle, and themselves no larger than the width of an open hand or so. I have yet to see even a single exemplar larger than maybe a foot in width, if that. All the ancient mirrors that I have seen without exception are circular, ovular or round in shape. Many of them are framed in a variety of ways. Not one of them could be used to produce the images you have given us, even partially, and it is evident from their build that they were fashioned with altogether other uses in mind.

We are then left with this: we have no textual evidence suggesting any images were ever consciously produced in the way that you claim they were, or ever mirrored and interpreted in this way. We have no physical evidence of mirrors built to the task of reflecting such images, and it is hard to imagine how such tools might even have been produced, given the technology then available. We have no way of explaining how such mirroring was to be physically undertaken in cases of large artworks, and in many cases it is nigh impossible to imagine such, due to the dimensions, build or position of the works in question.

Indeed, the only evidence we have are the interpretations that we believe we can derive from images of certain works of art that we are able easily to mirror using our modern technology. We find, moreover, that we can posit precisely the same interpretations with works of art that we know, with an almost total degree of certainty, it would have been physically impossible to physically mirror, thus suggesting that the interpretations we are putting on all these artworks are nothing better than our own personal constructions.

I am open to being refuted on any of these points. In the meantime, it seems to me far more probable that the patterns you are perceiving are the work of your mind, and are not to be found in the works of art themselves. And to say it again, even supposing there really were some select number of artworks intended to be mirrored in such a way, you have not yet offered even a single clear criterion by which to impartially distinguish between the “guilty” and the “innocent” here.

@thekwon

They weren’t making mirrors for each project, that is an absolutely foolish, modernly trained “so smart I’m dumb” education talking. They were using diagrams and mathematical equations to plan drawings on grids beforehand. The artwork itself demonstrates as much by its advanced scaling and angle projection. They were using not only smaller mirrors, but camara Oscuras, which flip and invert images on their own, to achieve the effect.

There are certainly no hard feelings, thekwon, and I very much appreciate your input here.

I will object to the charge that I am backpedaling: each response I have made has literally been nothing other than an attempt to clarify and render more complete what I had said before, since it was evident I wasn’t getting my message across. This is no doubt my fault.

You of course have no reason to believe me in this, but I can assure you that I have radically and profoundly changed my worldview on at least three different occasions in my life. I know precisely what it means to discover that my castle has been founded on sand, for I have been through that agonizing experience more than once, and come out the other side of it alive. But whenever I have undergone a sea change of this kind, it has been because I have been convinced, by careful thought and the patience of good men, that I was wrong, that the truth lay elsewhere.

I am still devoted to the truth, and I am open to yet another radical conversion in the name of the truth; but I have so far not found anything absolutely compelling in the positions set forth. As far as image mirroring goes, I have yet to see any real indication as to how many of these images were supposed to be mirrored in the past, to perceive the meanings that they purportedly contain. I am speaking on a very simple practical, mechanical level. My challenges have not been addressed, arguments I did not raise have been imputed to me, and all the explanations that have been afforded for the presumed practice of image-mirroring (ranging from the mere existence of ancient mirrors to the anachronistic use of camerae obscurae) are to my eyes manifestly inadequate.

It may be that I am misunderstanding Gem’s claims, which I hope to clarify below. Here is my position at present:

If the claim is that ancient artists deliberately designed their works to be physically mirrored by other individuals — with the intention, that is to say, of communicating hidden meanings and occult significances — then I can say with some assurance that there is no external evidence, either for the practice of so painting these works, or for the practice of so visualizing these works, or for the technologies that would be necessary to so visualize them. The entire claim rests on nothing more solid than the patterns we think we perceive when take high-fidelity renderings of these images and subject them to digital mirroring. I think I can be forgiven for not seeing in this sufficient reason to overhall my worldview.

If, on the other hand, the claim is merely that certain artists, for purely occult reasons, planned their works with this mirroring in mind, in order, for instance, to embed certain energies within them, and without ever intending anyone to actually mirror the images to perceive this hidden plan, then I can by all means allow for such a possibility. I return then to my questions above: how can we possibly differentiate between an artwork which contains such a plan, and one that does not, given that we can mirror even random photographs and perceive patterns in them? On what possible grounds can we make any of the assertions that Gem has so confidently made?

@thekwon I have been considering this debate and I think that the challenge facing @JBL is one very true meaning for “easier for a camel to pass through the eye of the needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven” –
because his riches are his natural learnings/understandings, which place him in favor and good stead with these same dragons who now lord it over the earth and dispense favors as they will. This favor results in the further riches of material wealth/security, laud from other men, power and position/authority, immediate support/help from others within his organization, etc. 

Given this understanding, it makes perfect sense to me why all learning, including the trades, are now only attainable via the gatekeepers and only come at great initial and ongoing expense – so much money/time/effort invested makes a thing so much more difficult to lay aside. It truly becomes a treasure. Even the one who later determines to set these things aside will receive guaranteed pressures from others who helped him to attain this worldly “education” or who rely on the security and wealth now, because they will see letting it go, along with all the treasures it brought, as reckless madness.

We read riches to mean strictly monetary goods, but these are not what Yeshua said must be relinquished – it is the love for them above YHWH and our fellow men and the worldly system for gaining them we must cast aside. 

Also, “The “Eye of the Needle” has been claimed to be a gate in Jerusalem, which opened after the main gate was closed at night. A camel could not pass through the smaller gate unless it was stooped and had its baggage removed.” (wiki)

This makes sense as a parable, in that, the rich merchant must himself, dismount, humbling himself. Then he must dismount his goods from the camel, showing a willingness to set them aside and to risk losing them in his journey forwards. Then, the camel had to be brought through as well, in a cramped, uncomfortable posture – I can only imagine the struggle this might have been, trying to drag/push an unwilling animal whose very anatomy begs against the ability to low crawl at all – all in order to reach a city to trade. I can imagine the merchant either camping for the night or moving on so as to avoid the trouble.

That merchant would have to value the fruits of that trade exceedingly valuable to him to go through such trouble and personal risk and indignity.

It is a curious practice, A E, to make such pointed assertions about the circumstances of persons you have never met, but since you have decided to do so, I feel compelled to respond.

You have suggested, and more than suggested, that I am the beneficiary of “riches of material wealth/security, laud from other men, power and position/authority, immediate support/help from others.” That is admittedly a wide net to cast, and probably by a loose interpretation catches every one of us, including myself, merely because we live in the modern world and are touched by its tremendous and unprecedented material wealth.

Having said that, and for what it’s worth, I will give you some small window into my life, that you can judge for yourself to what extent your reproach is justified. I live a life of comparative seclusion, keeping to a fairly narrow circle of friends and family. I work freelance, with clients who do not otherwise know me, in a job which does not require even tacit intellectual consent to any man’s ideology but my own. I live in the countryside, in a house I built with my own hands, and work my homestead with no one’s aid but my family’s. Apart from my membership in the Orthodox Church and my attendance of an extremely small and impecunious local parish, I am part of no organization, recognized by no authority, and listed in the ranks of no public or private institution. I have on numerous occasions forgone or abandoned precisely the temptations of wealth, power, status and authority to follow paths that paid far less and, when they gave recognition at all, gave it in the form of infamy rather than acclaim. I have crafted my life to afford myself precisely the liberty to think and believe as I see fit, without undue influence from any of the powers you have noted, and I would sooner withdraw into absolute hermitage here on my homestead, than bow to any man on this planet. For it is not to flesh and to blood, but to God alone that we should bow.

Having said all of this, let me make an admission, in the spirit of your words. It may be, as you say, that I am blinded by what I have learned and what I believe I have understood; I may be, despite my efforts to the contrary, too proud of what I think I know and of my presumed independence, which in truth depends entirely on God’s gifts and good will. So I will extract from your warning this much, which I think can be justly applied to my case: we all must be as humble and honest as we can, and strive with all our powers not to set our personal glorification or comfort before the truth. I can promise you I will work toward this high ideal, beginning from this very conversation.

Now you know more about me than I do about you, A E. And since you have decided to publicly admonish me in these things, as a friend would do, I am afraid you have tacitly accepted also a certain responsibility which comes with all friendship: namely, to set me right again in the future, if ever you suspect I am straying from this pledge.

I really appreciate the comments, Ralphie, thank you.

You can be sure that, if I thought less of Gem’s intelligence and insight, I would not have spent so much time and care here pressing him on his views, or taking shameless advantage of his generosity in pressing me on mine. His knowledge is indeed impressively vast — though that can as often as not be a perilous gift.

Regarding your point about gold and jewels, I think it an excellent one, and I make a similar point in my latest response to Gem below. The wealth that we dedicate to God, we no longer give to men; thus these things, which outside the Church work toward the corruption of human souls, are divinized and transfigured within it, reattaining their proper beauty and their proper place.

At the same time, I agree there is something excessive in the opulence of the Catholic Church particularly, and this was one of the reasons (though admittedly one of the lesser) I did not convert to Catholicism. In the Catholics, it often seems to me that wealth and splendor are sometimes adopted only under the pretext of dedicating them to God. This may just be my sense; it is difficult to say to what extent my own impressions are based on what I know of Catholic history, and times in the not-so-distant past when Cardinals and Popes openly flouted every element of Christian asceticism. and lived in flagrantly worldly ways. Not that I necessarily believe the present situation is much better than those bad old days…

All this to say — your questions, I think, were not at all childish, even if they came to you when you were a child. We would ideally like to see in our leaders exemplars of Christian virtue, but that has always been rare enough. As I have pointed out several times in my exchange with Gem, wherever there are human beings, there will be human vice, and it would be childish of us, I think, to expect any organization of men, however Christian it might strive to be, to be immaculate. The question is always when the line has been crossed, and the vice and worldliness grown too much. I think if I were a Catholic in these latter days, I would be fairly desperate over this question.

As for your last, and surely most poignant, question — why God would ever establish a human institution to deliver His most sacred and simple message — I think the answer lies in the variety of human experience. We are like the gold and the gems: just as these things have a proper role, a proper place, outside of which they work only to damage and to damn, so we, too, each one of us, have a proper role and a proper place. But most of us are direly in need of help in finding it.

I think your same question could be posed about practically any of God’s actions in Creation, from the Scripture to the life of Christ; why were these things necessary? Why did we need the Law of the Old Testament, or all the paper used up on Psalms and Proverbs and the history of the Jews, or the Prophets and the Apostles? But these texts and these human beings, like the institution of the Church herself, do not exist simply to bear that single message, however central and sacrosanct it may be; they exist to reclaim, to heal, to recover the whole of man to his ancient destiny as the likeness of God. For we human beings are born weak, fragile, and easily misguided, as the entirety of our often sorry history attests. Those of us who are ungifted are easily afflicted with envy for those of us who are, while those of us who are greatly gifted are easily blinded by the pride of our talents, abilities, knowledge. We are all of us born sick in one way or another, in need of aid in our growth toward God; and the Church, with all her dogmas, doctrines, canons, laws, and rules, is supposed precisely to be the one true aid in our maturity and healing. That is why she is called the new Ark.

A question for you, Ralphie — one I pose in all sincerity, and without trying to lead to any answer in particular: have you ever known a human being, not to speak of an entire community, city, nation or people, that did not need such guidance, or for whom the simple words “love one another” would suffice to bring about his full potential in virtue and goodness?

I definitely wasn’t trying to set you up with my question, Ralphie, and I thank you for answering it. I, too, have known several individuals I might say the same about (amusingly, in my case, my father and my wife), so I really wasn’t trying to lay a trap. Yet I do think it safe to say that most individuals are not like your father and your husband, and it seems to me that we human beings, when left to our own devices and made to rely our own inner strength or the luck of our circumstances, are almost never up to the task of making ourselves holy. Far , far more often we succumb to demonic temptations, both gross and subtle, and fall by the wayside soon or late, even when we have some will toward the good.

Still, I can only be sympathetic to your objections to many actual church situations, and I have seen these realities with my own eyes in many cases. I was an atheist for many long years precisely because of my experiences in real churches. I am fortunate to have found the parish and the priest I have found; but many are not so fortunate. The state of our churches today is a scandal, there is no doubt, and many are lost and wandering because of the dereliction and betrayal of our spiritual leaders. But in truth, I think most men in the West were better off spiritually when the Catholic Church was still universally strong, even despite its periods of manifest corruption.

Thank God there are still many valid churches about. Indeed, it seems to me that a growing number of people, hungry for guidance in a lost world, are finding refuge, help and healing in them. I can attest to this much at least in the Orthodox Church. And I do not see how such a thing could be possible, if, as Gem has asserted, this institution was founded and headed from the first by Satanic and anti-Christian men. It is far easier for me to believe that churches originally dedicated to good should be compromised by the frailties and failings of human beings, than that churches originally founded on evil should ever blossom in good.

I think you’re seeing people finding refuge, help and healing because generally, amongst the common folk, it is good/decent people who are drawn to the church if they’re not as yours or Ralphie’s family members. There is a lot of peace and rest within a larger group of good/decent people, especially coming from the world into a church for the first time.

Gem has said that most people within these religions are good people who really love the Father and are trying, it’s the organizations themselves and those who hoard knowledge and understanding at the tops of these orgs who are the corrupting ones.

I truly appreciate your response, A E, and I take your critique in the spirit in which it is given. It is all the more appreciated, because I, too, have a very long way to go.

We agree on the “poverty” issue; as I noted in my first reply to you, in our time of inordinate wealth, there are vanishingly few individuals (in Western societies) who can claim real poverty, and I am certainly not one of them. It is also undeniably the case that I am invested in my views for the blood and sweat (as it were) that I spent to acquire them, so it is good to be reminded that this constitutes a proof of precisely nothing.

Yet in recognizing this fact, I find myself left in something of a dilemma. For my present worldview is actually the fruit of a conscious attempt to cease relying on my unaided intellect (as I did for many years in my life), and instead to humbly submit my views to a God-given Tradition. I recognize that this subtracts nothing from your admonishment, for, as you rightly say, “tangible things are only signs, not the underlying process,” and a man can be as proud of what he has sacrificed, as of what he thinks he has gained by his own efforts. I bring all of this up, then, not to defend myself, but rather in the interest of attempting to understand just what we human beings can rely on in the absence of a God-given Tradition, if not our mere intellects.

I consider, for instance, the tremendously intricate and complicated claims that Gem has brought before us in his “13 Monkeys” series. I know he believes he is the recipient and the transmitter of personal revelation, and on that issue I probably should not comment; but it is at least fair to note that many who claim personal revelation from God disagree radically with one another, which demonstrates that at least some of them are wrong.

Now supposing, as is not only fair but even visibly true, that not everyone on this site has been so fortunate as Gem in having God immediately answer their prayers for intellectual guidance, where does this leave us? Must we not find some way of weighing the truth in these claims? And if we cannot rely on any God-given standards in our judgement, then what standards do we have, if not the purely intellectual and rational?

@JBL

My previous post to you was somehow deleted…

Please email me at: ralphie225 at protonmail dot com , f that’s OK with you…

I would like to discuss my Eastern Rite background with your Eastern Orthodox

Best…

Those are excellent questions and I am still learning how to differentiate myself, but John 10:27-28. It takes practice and dedication to knocking to learn to hear and to recognize His voice, but He is very living and does speak actively to us.

I appreciate the clarification, thekwon, thank you. And I agree with you entirely that it is our human failing to hold desperately to beliefs in which we have invested a great deal. Though I try to be a sincere and judicious man, I am no doubt as susceptible to these weaknesses as the next man, and it is good to be reminded of these pitfalls often and amicably. So I accept your words in all humility, and indeed thank you for them. I pray I do not forget them as I proceed.

As to Gem’s arguments on mirroring, you have condensed them admirably, and I can readily accept the possibility that such a practice, with the psychological aims that you have indicated, might really have existed.

That mere possibility, however, seems to me altogether inadequate to sustain the really grandiose conclusions that Gem has built upon it. Gem has jumped from the theoretical possibility that a certain kind of subliminal messaging might have been embedded in some work of art somewhere, to almost universally accusing Christian artists of employing this technique.

Now, Gem bases his claims on this: he purports to find in these self-mirrored works certain demonic images or presences. But is this really sufficient? I can take images that I myself have painted, reflect them in Photoshop, and produce “demonic”-looking distortions. (I know this because, to test Gem’s propositions, I have tried to do so.) Now, either I am unconsciously manifesting demonic powers in my work, despite my constant prayers and intentions to precisely the contrary, or this image does not really contain “demons” at all. I can even take random photographs of people I know and love, and subject them to the same manipulations, and find demonic-looking images in these, as well. (Again, I have tried this; I encourage you to do the same.) Am I to think that there are demons lurking in these photographs? Am I to suppose that each time I look at a certain photo of my wife, for instance, I am subconsciously being convinced of her demonic nature? Is that not totally absurd? But if I am able to find such distortions in everyday, unplanned images, then on what possible grounds can we definitely ascertain such malevolent intentions in the artists of the past?

And here we come to my repeated request for evidence, which, I believe, has still not been met, even in barest part. Let’s look at this a moment, and if you feel I am not doing justice to Gem’s claims to date, I will gladly reconsider them.

Gem has demonstrated, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that mirrors have been used in a variety of pagan and Satanic rites. I have never disputed this. But he has yet to show a single case of mirrors being used to self-reflect images along an axis contained within the image; he has yet to show a single scrap of independent evidence that such self-reflected images were ever, anywhere, by anyone, thought to be spiritually or psychologically meaningful or effective; he has yet to furnish a single document indicating this practice, anywhere in our history, either on the part of an artist, or on the part of an interpreter of artistic works, or on the part of a non-modern scholar or occultist or practitioner. There is a total lack of external evidence even for the very modest claim that a single work of art somewhere, some time, contained an intentionally hidden demonic message, such as can be revealed through image self-reflection; and yet, Gem believes he can construct mighty castles on these vanishingly narrow foundations, and condemn the whole of our Christian heritage in the light of his purported claims.

With this in view, and bearing in mind to the best of my ability your kind admonishments above, I say again that I simply cannot find in any of this anything nearly solid enough to “put a crack in my carefully constructed beliefs,” to borrow your evocative phrase.

It is all in the eye of the beholder, thekwon. I can pick dog heads out of mirrored photographs just as easily as I can pick them out of the three mirrored images Gem has set side by side a few comments below — even more easily in some cases. Again, I urge you to try it.

If this practice is as universal as Gem has made it out to be, there is bound to be external evidence for it. Where are the sketches that Leonardo made in preparation to produce some mirrored painting? We have innumerable of his cartoons and bozze in his notebooks, yet not one which suggests the use of such a technique; why were these the only ones to be lost? Where are the occultists suggesting to potential initiates how to proceed in the disambiguation of these images? By now there are few enough of their secrets that have not been revealed in this or that book of theirs.

I am really not asking for much, just some simple indication, outside my subjective impressions, that what I am seeing represents anything more than our human capacity at pattern-seeking. As of now, the only evident consistency I see here, is the consistency of the human mind to make form out of color.

Precisely because we live in a time of general deception, we must be twice as careful in our analyses. For when we push our interpretations too far and too eagerly, it is not the evil who will suffer the consequences.

Thanks for the response, Gem.

I remember seeing your work on the cover of The Economist, and some of it seemed quite on target to me, though I admit I did not give it the attention it probably deserved. I hope I’ll be able to remedy that.

The evident similarity between Leonardo’s Mona Lisa and his John the Baptist is new to me, and I very much appreciate you for pointing it out. There is no question that Leonardo hides secrets in his work, but from all I have seen (and I have spent some time studying this matter), I believe these to be highly idiosyncratic, following the Renaissance fetish of the individualistic genius. I might be wrong on this, and perhaps you can help me to expand my view. More on that below.

You seem to have access to knowledge that is entirely beyond my grasp, Gem, given your personal experiences, and I hope you will not take it as a personal affront if I am unwilling, simply on the basis of what you claim to have seen or heard, to grant you your claims. Neither do I want simply to abandon them, however.

We have covered a tremendous amount of ground — and, at risk of becoming tiresome in repeating it, I want to thank you for your time once again — so it might be worthwhile to focus tightly on a single issue, not even necessarily to come to a common conclusion about it, but just to help me understand your approach and method. I want to carefully consider the following claim, which you make in this latest comment. You say:

“Mona Lisa is an anagram for SALI-MANO which is Italian for Soliman. The Solar Man, The Golden Luciferian Sun King.”

If you could address these following points, to help me see where my logic is running aground, I would greatly appreciate it:

1. Sali mano in Italian would actually be “salt hand” (sale = “salt”; mano = hand), not “sun man.” Mano (“hand”) in Italian is never used to mean uomo (“man”), and there is no mistaking sale (“salt”) for sole (“sun”).
2. Moreover, the order is wrong; Italians would put predicate descriptors after the noun, not before (as we do in English), and would not use a noun-form adjective at all here, which sounds positively strange in Italian — not not “sole uomo” but “uomo solare,” or some derivative, would be the Italian form. (Sole uomo would sound even stranger and less intelligible in Italian than “man sun” sounds in English.) But uomo solare seems to be very far indeed from “Sali mano.”
3. Finally, “Mona Lisa” is the English name. In Italian, the far more common name is “la Gioconda,” and even in those rare cases where “Monna Lisa” is used, it is used with two n’s, from the Italian contraction for “Madonna,” ma-donna, or “my lady.” The singular “n” would not make any sense in the Italian context, since double consonants are consistently pronounced, meaning that the spelling here is not as arbitrary as it might be in English, but must rigorously contain two n’s. Thus the anagram would have to make space for another consonant, taking us still further from the equivalent you have proposed.

With these points in mind, I honestly do not see how the Italian has anything to do with your proposed anagram. Perhaps you mean to say that the anagram was a later English production? If this is so, by what steps can the later English accretion be traced back to some equivalent message on the part of Leonardo or his contemporaries?

Continuing on with 1)

The word “Mano,” goes back much, much further than Italian. And the word for “the hand,” is directly connected to the prophecy of the mark of the beast on the hand in revelations. It was said in Luciferian mythologies that the first “Man,” had thumbs and thus a hand instead of a paw to MANipulate the world to his will.

The esoteric (hidden) meaning of the name “Mano” as the Sun Seed Man is enormous in antiquity. Mano is the antiXristos, (hence the reference to Soli-Manu and the number of the beast 666 in revelations, which appears only there and 1 Kings in scriptures.) Manu is the Luciferian who claims himself to be the Solar King on Earth, descended from the gods.

You find this name and its slight variants across space, time and cultures throughout ancient Luciferian history, always within congruent mythology and iconography, King Soliman is a warning, not a reverence, as is told in Revelations.

1) The Egyptians have MNj said “MANes,” who was the mythical Solar King “Narmer,” that united both kingdoms. He was said to be born from directly from the sun and Be Horus on Earth.

2) Manu मनु is the archetypal “first man,” in Vedic texts in India. It is said that that there are 14 incarnations of Manu in this grand age. The mythology states that the 1st Manu was born of Brahma himself. Brahma is the generative force. The second Manu is born from Agni, Agni is the Fire god. The Third Manu is born from Shiva’s Third Eye, the deity of Luciferian wisdom and the moon. Take note that Shiva still means “Seven,” in Hebrew. It goes on like this with the “super god man,” being born from different deities until The Seventh Manu is born from Surya, the Sun God.

Not inconsequentially, The name Manu means both “Fish” and “Star,” in all Dravidian Languages. The Indus Valley language, which is Pheonician writing with the use of hieroglyphic syllabic associations, the Fish symbol, that looks just like the gentiles “Jesus,” Fish symbols, is the syllable “Ma.” For brevity’s sake, I won’t get into the connections with MAry and MAgna MAter, and the blasphemous great mother worship they subsumed into gentile “Mary” worship, and the Vesica Pisces being the “womb of the great mother,” in all ancient religions due to its connection to the geometry of the universe. Check out the “Pacino” post where I tagged you if you wish to see more detail on that, but it certainly involves why Yeshua said that “John is the great/oldest of those that came from the woman…” and then recounts the tale of Oannes who took no food during the day and then went into the sea.

3) In Babylon they had what was called an Ummanu which is a human figured god with wings descended from The Sun Portal who came to Earth to be their ruler and is one of the Apkallus.

4) In Greek mythology we have king MINOs and the MINOtaur, The Bull man, The bull always being associated with solar deities (like the Apis bull in Egypt, or The Solar Calf in India, The Bull that stands at the four cardinal directions of the Sun in Islam etc.) The Minotaur is said to be born from a white cow that came out of the Sea at the command of Poseidon and a human woman. And here we have a full connection between Revelations (revealing Luciferian twistings) Beast out of the Sea, the Sun, and “Sal i Mano.”

The beast out of the sea is, at its most basic, the Sun, and the worship of the sun and the soliman (golden solar king) in all of its incarnations throughout the world, designed to decieve and ILL-luminate people. Gold has, and always will be the metal that represents the Sun and the Sun King, as it did in the tale of Solomon.

Oannes/Dagon the Fish out of the sea (in Hebrew “Sea” the Shamayim means cosmic waters above, the sky, not just the water here on Earth) appear all over the world, from Dingun who started Korea and whose graphics of his name mean “Tyrean Purple King,” to Dagon in Pheonician, to the Dogon Tribe in Africa, who tell the tale of a Mythical Fish Monster Alien that came from space and taught them cosmic wisdom.

And so, even the italian translation of Sal i Mano is a reference to the Salt that is left on the hand from putting it in the Sea, The salt left on the “reborn Man” who is given a BAPTISM OF WISDOM in Sea Water of Dagon, initiated into the Solar Mysteries. The way to say “Baptism of Wisdom,” a well known reference to Baphomet Satanic Worship around the world is חניכת של חוכמה “Hannukah Shal Hakma.” The Fire-I-Sees have gone a long, long way in embedding luciferianism into the Isis-Ra-Elis as well. “Shal-Hakma” being the Hebrew Greek Transliteration of the Mark of The Beast “Charagma.”

So here in the Davinci painting, which has been titled “Mona Lisa,” comes from the writings of Vasari, a contemporary of Davinci’s, and the name was certainly in use by the 16th century. You have discussed the use of the word “Monna” vs “Mona,” one being a proper dame, and the other being a vulgar word for a wh0re or an adultress. Within the conceptual framework of the painting being of Davinci’s gay male lover (Davinci was caught several times with gay and transvestite prostitutes), the term “Mona,” is far more fitting, as it is a slang reference to the use of Transvestite Temple “Priestesses,” that were so common in Babylon (Ishtar/Innana), Pheonicia (Ashtarte) Phryigia (Gallis of Attis) and then in Nemi of Rome for the Magna Mater. These “priestesses,” were and are still used for Solar sex rites and 0rigies to increase the illuminations of initiates. Given this is the spelling we have received, and its congruence, it bolsters the case even further. DaVinci frequented Transvestite wh0res, a historical fact, and painted his lover into two of his most well known paitings, including one of Oannes the Baptism of Wisdom maker, who is The Fish Man Beast out of the Sea, Covered in a salty hand (which is a grotesque, but well-known occult reference to having one’s hand covered in male ejaculate.)

This is another issue you must realize: the occult (Hidden religious orders) is often concerned with using minor details like this that make something factually “incorrect,” while surrounding it with undeniable patterns that otherwise lead to a conclusion, in order to create plausible deniability, and to lead materialist thinkers off their trail while those “in the gno,” can communicate without fear of being discovered.

I am, as always, truly impressed by your ability to draw out so many connections, Gem. I’m glad I asked the questions I did, and I thank you for answering them so comprehensively.

I’m not going to try to nitpick your responses with what seem to me factual errors, as I have done in the past, since I believe that would be entirely contrary the mental agility you are proposing, and also unlikely to bear any fruit. At the same time, I am having some difficulty in understanding where the line stands between mental agility and a blind abandonment to human invention. Not every relation a man might dream up between two discrete entities actually represents a real connection between them, as I think you will agree. We are all of us able to fancy we see patterns where none exist. I myself have been guilty of giving too much credence to imagination on numerous occasions in my life, and, like the burned child, am wary of finding myself in similar case again.

So my tendency here (as I need not tell you, for you have seen it already) is to try to perceive which connections hold and which do not in what you are presenting, and I do not know how to do this if not analytically, looking at them one by one, and then returning to the overall picture, to try to gauge the interplay between specific and general. Up to now, I can say that the picture you give of the generality seems to me marvelously stable; but the specifics dance before my eyes like so many colors in a kaleidoscope, and I am unable to get hold on any of them individually.

In consequence, I am mistrustful. If I may be totally honest, I am probably disconcerted by that lack of concreteness, for it does not accord well with my natural intellectual inclinations. I offer that as a personal confession. In my defense, however, and attempting to transcend my mere inclinations: if there is no coherent, articulate, discernible and specifically verifiable underpinning to the general view, I cannot for the life of me see how we can differentiate between it and a false vision of the world. Even bold lies can give a tenacious appearance of verity, but it is in their failed connection to reality itself that these webs begin to fall to pieces.

It might help if I paraphrase something you said. You suggested that I am “struggling to make the theological/mythological, iconography and historical connections” that you are presenting. But my struggle is not in making these connections; I can follow you in them easily enough, Gem. My struggle is in verifying that they really are connections, rather than the fruit of a highly gifted and overworked fantasy.

I hope I have been clear in this, and, as always, would be grateful to know your thoughts.

@JBL

Let’s continue to examine this mythological root of the deity Manu/Minu/Mennes/Mino etc, and where we find more examples:

In Persia we have MANIcheanism started by آیینِ “Āyīn-e Mānī,” a Transliteration of “Eye and Hand,” Ayin being “The Eye” in Hebrew and Mani, as we have discussed being representative of the ILL-lumined solar man opening his third eye. (Salty Fish Hand opens his third eye) This is Just as foretold in Revelations about 120 years earlier, the mark on the hand and the forehead. How did John know? Because the Aryeh Yehudah know the enemy, who are obnoxiously repetitive in their twistings of The Truth of YHWH. the middle symbol of the mark of the beast Ξ is the same as the symbol painted on the third eye in India Shivaism (Shiva is lucifer and Krishna the “Nameless Krist, the AntiXristos…) called as the tripundra. This stuff is very, very ancient.

Mani was born in 216 – 277 AD, and he provides exactly the connection between gentile reformed solar worship called “Christianity,” and the occult Buddhism of the Thokarions symbolism which we see manifested so plainly.

Let’s examine the details of the life of this man that lived geographically in the middle of the Persian Empire and who lived right as Gentile Christianity was becoming extremely hostile to the Aryeh Yehudah, and about two generations before Constantine’s new-fangled Solar Church called “Christianity” and the Thokarions were painting the exact same stuff Solar Illuminism stuff on walls 4000 KM apart.

1) He was often called mânâ rabba what means “Lord of Enlightenment.” And amagalms the same of Sol Amon/Mino and Ba-rabban, the thief who the Fire-I-Sees and Masters of Twisting are said to have convinced the lay people to desire over The Truth of Yeshua. Again we find the Manu being associated with light worship.

2) Mani was said to be born of a Virgin named Myram… This is identical to the Catholic insistance of Mary being a virgin, even though the word is παρθένον used for “Virgin,” which actually means “Maiden,” and only means chaste by assumed association unwed women are virgins. It is also the word for the constellation Virgo, and the reason behind this is puirely astrotheological, as revealed in Revelations (The Child and the Woman were carried safely while the dragon raged.) The Dragon, the Hydra chases Virgo the virgin across the cosmos night after night.

Virgo was the constellation that was in the center of the Pashas, at the Spring Equinox, around 15,000-13,000 YBP, right before the catastrophi of the Younger Dryas that occured in the age of Leo. This is what Revelations 12 discusses.

Read the scientific confirmations of the cosmic impact (Kata-Astro-Phi, Kata = Down Astro =Star/Fire Phi = Earth, “the Stars that falls to Earth Kata), Volcanic Eruptions/Earthquakes, and Glaciers melting to form rivers during this period of Leo (13,000-11,000 YBP aproximately), and line this up with Revelations 12 and the Egyptian Mythology of Sekmet. It is far too perfect to be coincidence.

3) Mani then travelled to India, specifically the Indus Valley, and learned Hinduism/Shivaism and Buddhism. He then returns to Parthia and spreads his teachings among ZoroAster’s (zoro = Fox Aster = Star/Fire the FireFox) in what was previously Babylon. It is well known during this period that Greek philosphy was heavily influenced by the Parthian Empire of the Age.

4) Mani’s followers depict his death as a crucifiction openly comparing him to Jessie.

5) Mani declares himself an apostle of Jessie

The similarities don’t stop there, and it is the bridge, both spatially and temporally, between Thokarion’s and the gentile Latin/Greek Solar Christian Church, which openly admits to incorporating pagan practices to appease the people. During the life of Mani the Roman Empire often incorporated Mesopotamia where he lived and bordered Parthia.

We even have 5th century writers, contemparories of the very early Christian church discussing him, such as Socrates of Constantinople and others, who directly state the Manes was from Anatolia and learned his doctrines enter from a Disciple of Jesus named “Buddhas.” These accounts exist in both Latin and Greek.

I have spent a considerable number of hours researching, praying, and meditating on your words, Gem, and while I do not consider our conversation to be at an end (perhaps it is only at its beginning), I feel it right to tell you where I currently stand.

You have insisted that we must choose between your explication of the world, and that which has been transmitted to us by our traditions. I therefore find myself, personally speaking, standing between the following alternatives.

On the one hand, I have the account given by the (Orthodox, meaning the only authentically Christian) Church of her own origins, history, theology, and destiny, and of our human lives in relation to her. This account is self-consistent, complete, and integral. So far as I have been able to ascertain after long (and initially skeptical, almost hostile) pondering, it leaves out no part, contains no self-contradictions, bears the hallmarks of transcendent and divine revelation, and explains our human lives in a way that is comprehensive (it excludes nothing essential to our human experience), non-violent (it works to confirm and complete human nature, not to mangle or distort it), and edifying (it teachs and forms man, rather than encouraging him in his miserable complacency). It provides a clear course of action for all the Church’s members, self-work and discipline that heals man of his wounds and illnesses, improves man in his totality, cleanses his mind in preparation for right perception and contemplation, works toward his sanctification and growth in Christ, and under no circumstances (save in the folly or vice of individual clergymen, which are always in manifest contrariety to the Church’s teaching and tendency) confirms him in his self-destructive habits, vices, or illnesses. It has been carried on by countless men of verifiable sanctity, and has been protected by the blood of men who were willing to give their very lives for it. The Church which transmits this account keeps no secrets from the faithful, demands no initiation of them but the transparent initiation of baptism and sanctification, and perfectly unites her exterior (exoteric) teaching with her interior (esoteric). She resists worldliness in a hundred ways, great and small, after having been powerfully tempted in a thousand ways over the course of twenty centuries, and to this day holds out as the single global and visible beacon against a hard-encroaching modernity and the fast-accelerating advance of Satanism in our time.

On the other hand, I have your account, Gem, and thus the account of a single individual — an account which is outwardly brilliant and inwardly obscure, presenting to the eye a solid, multifaceted, resplendent gem, but to the mind and spirit a confused and tortured labyrinth of halflights and shadows and undefined glimmers, and a twisting, stuttering path toward “wisdom.” All of which is highly redolent to me of the occult world, whose snares I evaded thanks only to the direct intercession of God in my life.

Now, you have explained to us why these difficulties arise in your account, and there is nothing in your explanation that is prima facie unbelievable or difficult to digest. If history is really as you have presented it — namely, a narrative written by a practically unbroken succession of mendacious crypto-Satanists — then what else could one expect, but, as you have put it, “a spider weaving its web where flies cannot detect it”? Moreover, you have pointed to real and undeniable abuses, particularly in the Catholic Church of the past thousand years, which give your more obscure claims a certain force and impetus.

To a merely intellectual view, then, there is little which can help me discern which of these accounts is the correct one — particularly since, if your view is right, the intellect itself is utterly disarmed by the sheer enormity of the Lie that has been inflicted upon us.

Then I must step back, and take a wider view. As I look upon the two accounts I have outlined above, I ask myself: which one bears the signs of divinity?

I look to my personal life. I (and others I know) have found undeniable, life-altering, miraculous grace, healing, and direction in my church, surrounded by the icons you have called demon-possessed, amidst a material richness you have reduced to “gold and self aggrandizement,” celebrating in a liturgy you have accused of containing “magical incantations,” taught by a priest you have suggested is probably money-grubbing, and in general joining myself to a body which you have harshly arraigned for concealed solar- and devil-worship. I have moreover discovered in that Church numerous men of spiritual depth, moral purity, upright unworldliness, and noetic awareness such as are simply not to be found anywhere else, as I can well attest after years of fervent seeking. I ask: how could such manifest goodness flow from a putrid body? How could such fruit come of a rotten tree? If the Devil owns the Church, why would he ever permit that which he hates most to blossom within the bosom of his own institution?

Again, I look to the broad arc of history, and I must wonder: if the Church was, from the first, compromised by demonic forces, how was she permitted to stand without essential change these seventeen hundred years (counting from the First Council, when we begin to have sufficient records to gauge her historical consistency)? Why has she been so viciously assailed and maligned throughout the modern period, beginning in the Renaissance, by men of openly humanistic and even atheistic bent? You have (altogether hyperbolically and inaccurately) accused the Catholics of “burning anyone that claimed the Earth is round,” quite as if men like Galileo Galilei or Giordano Bruno were champions of Christian faith and posed no threat to Christian doctrine apart from their views of the shape of the planet. The Catholic Church, as you have painted it, would be a thousand times more likely to reward and promote a God-hating heretic like Giordano Bruno, than to burn him. Of course, it is true enough that demonic hierarchies will eat their own children, but, if your view is correct, how in the world are we to understand the ever-growing acrimony against the Catholics in early modernity, which bloomed in late modernity into full-fledged hatred and enmity, and has only now subsided — now that the Catholic Church has been visibly compromised and has begun to cede openly to innumerable modern heresies?

Your view demands of us that we see all of human history as a vast and intricate theater piece, diabolically designed, masterfully concealed and almost flawlessly executed by reams of carefully bred, selected and consistently malevolent actors over the course of almost two millennia, who, for reasons that remain totally obscure, waited this long to see their pantomime through to the end and to publicize the devil that has all this while been lurking at their core. But what in the world took them so long? What, if not this: that the Church itself, and those great sovereigns that she long chastened and educated, have been the sole barrier standing between us and the rise of anti-Christ?

My personal experience powerfully militates against your view, Gem, as does, I believe, the visible and traceable course of history. To agree to what you are proposing, we must posit a grandiose lie, so total and so well-buried in time, that not even a single corner of it emerges visibly to our eyes. We are forced to infer its merest outline by the most circuitous and round-about trajectories, through a process of reasoning which we must wilfully distort. But if this is the real essence of the past two thousand years, then here is what we must also accept: that God, having sent his Son to the world to save it, promptly handed the world to the Devil again; that Christ, having promised us a Church that would stand against the gates of Hell until the end of ages, then departed almost without a trace, letting His true followers and His true teachings fall into the hands of murderous liars, conscienceless perjurors and Godless devils; that for almost two millennia almost every man born beneath the sun has been spoonfed deception from his infancy on by serpents, who act in the putative name of Christ, while an omnipotent and all-loving God watched these desecrations of His own revelations and did nothing.

I do not believe it. I do not believe that God would so totally abandon us to our enemies. I do not believe He would vanish from the earth without entrusting us with sacrosanct teachings that are vouchsafed to us by His saints, in Scriptures that He has brought to us integral and unaltered by merely human wills. I do not believe that we have had to wait two thousand years to finally be able to perceive the truth, thanks only to modern science, modern technology and modern scholarship. I do not believe that the world following the birth of Truth was at once consigned to the Father of Lies, quite as if the Son of God had never walked among us or triumphed over death. I do not believe that countless generations of men were handed over without mitigation to the power of Satan and his minions, save as they are able to extricate themselves from deception through “the extraordinary requirement of interdisciplinary mastery.” I do not believe that God would long permit the world to wallow into the mire of absolute deception, and I do not believe that God would force us to learn to think diabolically, before we can learn to think divinely.

Or, to put all of this positively: I believe in One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, as the Creed teaches; for only the existence of such a Church accords with the incarnation of the Son of a Merciful and Loving God. I think that your account of history not only stands at odds with such a God, but even would disprove Him.

How do you view this, Gem?

Apologies for the late reply, Gem. I was inundated with work these past weeks.

I greatly appreciate your reflecting on my qualms. There is little enough which unites us, but I do believe we share at least a common sincere love for the truth and maybe a common root faith. This may be very much indeed. It is my hope that it is enough for the purposes of our dialogue.

As regards your brief response, I would protest that the delineation that I have drawn between Church and non-Church is precisely as clear as I have drawn it. The blurriness of which you speak — and which I fully acknowledge — is not in the Church as Church, which is guaranteed by the Holy Spirit, but in the human beings that participate incompletely (or sometimes only ostensibly) in the Church. I do not believe in men; and it is precisely for that reason that I believe in the Church. For if there is no Church, we are thrown back on our human powers alone, as I have noted before. You have pointed to prayer and to a direct relationship with God as a means of transcending the limits of our mere humanity; but how many men, of how many radically different views, have claimed to be receiving personal communications from God? How do we discriminate between their claims? Even in the case of personal revelation that comes directly to us, how can we be certain it is God who has sought us out, and not some demon? Greater men than I have been taken in by Satan’s duplicity. Indeed, without the solidity of the Tradition, we cannot even determine what scripture to accept as God’s, and what to take as man’s. The biblical canon itself comes to us via the Church, and if it has been tampered with, there is no way even of knowing this, or evaluating how much has been changed in it, without the continual aid of science, scholarship, research, academia — i.e. men and the work of men. But to say it again: I do not have faith in men.

What am I missing in this critique, Gem? How do you propose we escape this conundrum?

After this brief reply, I want to return at some greater length to a specific point, once again in the hope that it might help me orient myself with respect to your views. You have said that I “brushed over” a “genocide” in early Church history, and for the second time you have broached it, to show me, I presume, my error in holding to the Church. In truth, I have already addressed these points in one of our various exchanges, but since you have brought them to table again, I have decided to research the matter with some care, to be sure that I was not missing something. As I am a sucker for hopeless causes, I’ve gone through all the primary source material I could find on the events surrounding the massacre of the monks, and all the secondary source material that is accessible, with the desire to provide a certain clarity to our dispute on it. Here is the list of the original sources I have reviewed:

Socrates, Ecclesiastical History, VI 7, 10; Sozomen, History of the Church, VIII 12-14; Palladius of Helenopolis, Lausaic History 7 and Dialogue Concerning the Life of St. John Chrysostom 7; and finally the Letters of St. Jerome, 82, 86-100 and 103.

If I have left out anything, I will be sincerely grateful to you for informing me of it. As for my conclusions, I will number my principle points, to facilitate your rebuttal:

1. Theophilus is not a saint in the Orthodox Church, nor (I believe, though I have found a single potentially conflicting report on this) in the Catholic tradition. He is a saint in the Coptic Church and in the Syrian Church. I belong to neither of these churches, and cannot answer for their motives. In Orthodoxy and Catholicism alike, he is principally remembered for his pugnacious, invidious attacks on St. John Chrysostom, and is spoken of relatively poorly in all of the material above (Palladius in particular has a palpably low opinion of his character), with the exception of the letters of St. Jerome, who was writing contemporaneously with these events, and from a far away city, and was informed of them by none other than Theophilus himself.

2. It is almost certain that the figure of 10,000 is a hyperbole of the kind one encounters often in biblical, as well as early Judaic and Christian, language, to accentuate the gravity or the importance of the actual figure. The Synaxarion uses the word “myriad,” which, while literally meaning 10,000, is also used simply to indicate a very large number. I even wonder if the figure of 10,000 here is based on a confusion of martyrdoms, since there are actually no fewer than three other events in which so many monks were said to have been killed. None of the sources on this event list near so many individuals. According to Palladius, there were only 5,000 men in all the monastaries of Nitria, and only 600 anchorites in the desert — the latter in particular being the alleged victims of Theophilus. Palladius, who by his own account in the Lausaic History lived with these monks for a year, was in a position to know something of their numbers, and given his friendship with the victims had every reason to exaggerate the crimes of Theophilus; yet he only mentions explicitly (and then with visible hesitation) the possible murder of a single boy. Theophilus is charged openly with violence and with exiling men causelessly and against good Christian principles and practices, and it should be noted that the entirety of Palladius’ lengthy reproach of Theophilus takes for granted the precise opposite of the intolerant, tyrannical and genocidal intentions you have again and again imputed to the Christians of his time.

3. The monks in question, however many of them perished, are considered martyrs of the Church, to a one. Their memory is celebrated on July 10. They are not regarded as heretical, neither by any of the source material (outside of Theophilus’ letters, and St. Jerome’s responses, which pardonably took Theophilus on his word) nor by any later commentators. No one above the rank of bishop, nor any important Fathers or theologians, at any time within Church history, and certainly not at any time near these actual events, has ever celebrated the demise of these monks, or named them heretics. Nor, so far as I am aware, has there ever been a single figure in the early Church who suggested that the proper way of dealing with heretics was by massacring them, but perhaps you can convince me otherwise.

4. You have implicated Theophilus’ nephew in his crimes, by which I presume you mean to point to St. Cyril. Apart from the fact that St. Cyril accompanied his uncle to the Synod of the Oak, There is absolutely no historical indication of any kind whatsoever, and nothing indeed beyond the realm of pure connection based on animus alone, that St. Cyril was even peripherally involved in these events.

5. There is no evidence anywhere, nor even any contemporary claims, that Theophilus directly ordered the death of these monks. Rather, he ordered the seizure of their encampments by his soldiers and the burning of their houses and heretical materials. I am not saying that any of this is justifiable (many of his contemporaries believed it was not), but it is a far cry from “genocide.” It is also recorded in several of these sources, despite their chilly appraisal of Theophilus, that he had received death threats from several of these monks, and had actually long evinced a certain indulgence toward them.

6. Finally, a tangential point: Theophilus was not a pope of Rome. You do not explicitly say he was, but you suggest as much, and it seems worth clarifying this point for the sake of anyone who might be reading this, since our conversation first sprang out of a discussion on the Catholics. Theophilus was patriarch of Alexandria, an office occasionally referred to by the title of “pope,” but of a “papal line” that is not recognized as such by the Catholics.

I could make further remarks based on the secondary material, almost all of which would be still more favorable to Theophilus (he seems to be treated more gently by later generations than by those Christian historians who were his contemporaries or near contemporaries), but all of that seems less firmly grounded to me, so I leave off here.

Now, I would like to think that, unless you have some other source material of which I am simply unaware, we can leave this matter behind us, but I suspect this is not the case. I anticipate that you will once again chide me for academic or linear thinking, for not reading enough between the lines of the accounts that have reached us. But if that is your response, I am at a total loss to see how we will ever come to terms in our conversation. There seems to be absolutely no point of even potential contact between us; I have no practical way of taking even a single step into your view. If every time you make a specific historical claim, I find absolutely nothing concrete underpinning it, nothing that I can verify without merely accepting the foundations on simple faith, then how could I, an outsider to your position, ever be convinced that your view is anything more than an impressively elaborate fiction?

Note well: I am not claiming you do not have a coherent or self-consistent view. I am not even primarily saying that your view is wrong. I am saying rather that there is no way for us to actually communicate with one another. Given our respective presuppositions, I cannot possibly prove to you that you are wrong, and you cannot possibly prove to me that you are right. Every time I try to critique some single one of your points, you tell me that I am using the wrong approach; but I cannot take that approach itself as being correct if I do not have grounds to do so, and the grounds that you provide depend finally on the approach. To an outsider, it all appears hermetically self-contained, circular and self-justifying. I am not claiming it is such; but if it is not, how can you show me it is not?

Let me show you how they did this without holding up different size mirrors to every mural they performed. This way of thinking is the ignorance of a modern mind devoid of creativity.

Its called planning and diagrams, and CAMARA OSCURAS.

The Oldest mention of the Camara Oscuras effect is by Mozi, a Chinese philosopher and the founder of Mohism, during the 5th century BC. He noticed that an image from camera obscura is flipped upside down and from left to right as a result of light’s moving in straight line. The Greek philosopher Aristotle noticed in 4th century that light from a sun eclipse that passes through holes between the leaves, projects an image of an eclipsed sun on the ground. Passing of light in the straight line also noticed Euclid 4th century BC and Theon of Alexandria in 4th century AD. Anthemius of Tralles, who designed the Hagia Sophia, used a type of camera obscura in his experiments in 6th century.

The very creator of the first Catholic “Mega Church” (Ekklesia Megale) in Constantinople built it using Camara Oscuras to diagram, plan and construct the Hagia Sophia in the 500s AD, which is a huge construction project of enormous architectural complexity far beyond this mural. It seems you are claiming they weren’t capable of diagramming their mosaics before hand with smaller scale representations and advanced mathematics, but could mathematically diagram and plan enormous construction projects of far greater complexity hundreds and thousands of years earlier. The Pantheon, itself a Camara Oscura, and a copy of the even earlier Agrippa’s Temple, built 300 years before this little mural was painted in Rome just down the block, has a concrete dome that has a rate of expansion of its cupula of Phi, with extremely precise notched cut outs which track the Sun and the Moon with a calendar that drifts less than 1 day in 15,000 years. They poured this massive dome with concrete in 1 single piece, with 0 margin for error and it still stands nearly 2000 years later in perfect condition. Its called a diagram and advanced, highly precise mathematics in hyperbolic geometries of domes. And it was known to the priest classes of Rome long before Catholicism existed.

As you yourself stated, these murals are placed in domes and on curved surfaces, and yet look flat to the observer from the pews of the church, creating a sort of holographic spatial effect from just this correct angle of observation. Do you think the painter just got up there and did that by hand without a plan? It is impossible, as the painter has no perspective and wouldn’t be able to paint such a perfect visual effect unless he had prior diagrams using a grid system that correctly mathematically represented a dome’s hyperbolic geometry, and done in such a way that understood advanced trigonometric projections of light for the angle of a viewer in the pews.

The ancients understood “The Vault of Heaven,” which requires a knowledge of hyperbolic geometry and diagrammed it heavily using hyperbolic and spherical geometric equations. The advanced mathematical knowledge in Mesopotamia are not only clear from their architectural achievements themselves (such as the Pyramids, which Kwon showed, and which have such exacting mathematical precision it must have been foreplanned), but also from the clay tablets in Mesopotamia in 1800 BCE . 2500 years before this silly little mural was made, the ancients had advanced trigonometric functions which describe spherical and hyperbolic geometries, exponential and compound interest growth calculations, and Fourier transformations (Calculus and Algorithms) for predicting the eclipses of the sun and the moon hundreds of years into the future with precision to the hour.

Your argument of a lack of technology to be able to pre-diagram a relatively small painting to include mirror images, in an era with advanced architectural, camara oscura, and optics technology is based on your own lack of wisdom, knowledge and understanding.

This is why these wicked solar priests hoard knowledge and lie to you, To control you and limit your thinking.

On an aside in advanced technology which was hidden away for thousands of years:

The ancient Greeks and Romans had the antikythera mechanism in 200 BCE, which was an analog computer that tracked the planets with exacting precision, so exacting that it must have required a level of machining and diagrammed planning of gear ratios and rotation not publicly known until around 1890 AD,

The Romans had ships on lake Nemi for the Emperor, at the time of Yeshua, which showed advanced bilge pumps and precision hydraulic steam control not publicly known again until the 1700s.

All of these constructions are for more advanced than what would be required to preplan a diagram of a small fresco with a mirror image in it.

I feel that we’re talking past one another here, Gem, and it may well be because I have failed to understand your basic claim.

Are you claiming that artists of the past produced their works in such a way that some viewer, at a later date, would be able, by producing an actual mirror image of these works, to visualize and discover hidden messages or occult information?

Or are you claiming that artists of the past simply planned and designed their works to contain certain mirrored features, with no intention or expectation that anyone should ever discover these hidden features, but rather from other motives altogether (for instance, so as to obtain certain occult effects or to mock at the subject matter)?

In other words, are you claiming that these images contain hidden messages, or simply hidden aspects that no one, not even the “elite,” was ever really meant to see?

I have been understanding you to say the former, but many of your latest counter-objections suggest the latter. If you meant the latter, then I humbly beg your pardon, for I have inadvertently been arguing against a straw man this entire time. I certainly never meant to object to the possibility that an artist, of practically any known historical period, might have designed even very large works of art in such a way. It would not even require a mirror to do such a thing (to say nothing of a camera obscura), but only a clever head and a decent amount of ability. But if this is the extent of your claim, it seems rather trivial to me, for we still have (to say it yet again) no criterion whatsoever for distinguishing between artworks so composed, and those which were not so composed, and cannot even rightly say what concrete intentions the artists had in making this kind of art.

But if, as I have thought up to this point, your claim is that these images contain hidden messages, properly so-called, meant to be discovered by the initiated and to transmit definite information to them, then I will continue to object, and on the same grounds.

I am well aware of the ancients’ prodigious engineering abilities, and I am very far from considering them the backward children that they are generally made out to be in our time. In philosophy and theology, they were far our betters, and I suspect that they probably surpassed us in certain kinds even of scientific and engineering knowledge. But simply because they were capable of producing a marvel like the antikythera mechanism, does not mean they did produce mirror technology which would bear out your claims. The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence — but still less is it evidence of existence.

Is it possible that the ancients possessed some now lost technology, all least memory of which has been consumed by time, that would have allowed a man to produce a vertical self-reflected mirror image of a concave fresco, some twelve feet long at its base and hanging twelve feet in the air, like that which you have given us here? Yes, this is possible. Is it possible that such contraptions were sufficiently well known, at least in occult circles, that a given commissioned artist could count on their use, and so would have a definite incentive to produce his artwork with this in mind? Yes, this, too, is possible. But, given our ignorance of the period in question, it is equally possible that no such technology was ever made, used, or presupposed in the painting of even a single fresco.

We do not know, and nothing you have said so much as indicates an answer to this question . You continue to produce data regarding the importance of mirrors in a variety of ritual practices, quite as if I had not already agreed on this point, but yet again, not one of these rites or usances even suggests the kind of mirrored self-reflecting of a single work of art that you have claimed was almost universally present in early Christian art.

My difficulty here is simply one of evidence, Gem, nothing more, and nothing less. You have made some very large claims, which seem to my eyes to rest on nothing better than your subjective interpretation of a number of manipulated images; and on the basis of these tenuous claims you have arrived at many definite, damning, and highly consequential conclusions about the artists, those who commissioned them, early Christian hierarchy, and the entirety of the Church itself. Those conclusions, given their weight, require a far larger evidential basis than that which you have so far produced.

But again, as a mere point of commencement, I would rest content even with a single definite piece of evidence which directly points to the specific artistic practices you have outlined.