Tag Archives: Jesuits

Big Bang is an occult concept known as the Cosmic Egg

Last time I wrote about the Kabbalistic ideas behind the Copernican model of the solar system, and how the Catholic church did not seem to have a problem with these un-Biblical theories. This time I’ll look at the Big Bang.

Although the Big Bang is supposedly a theory, it is commonly heralded as scientific fact in our modern society, and if you question it, people look at you as an uneducated bumpkin or a religious nut. This is quite silly since purely by reason can debunk the claim the Big Bang is a fact, since the event supposedly occurred billions of years ago when there was no life, no-one to observe it. It is at best a far-fetched theory that we can never falsily. At least by comparison the Copernican heliocentric model is more scientific since we should at least be able to verify if it’s true or not; does the earth revolve around the sun, or vice versa? It is not based on non-sensical theorizing of something that might have happened before anything even existed. However, I don’t want to discuss the ridiculousness of the Big Bang any further, since plenty of people have already done it, instead I’ll focus on the occult or religious aspect of it.

 

Georges Lemaître and the Cosmic Egg

The Big Bang theory was coined by Georges Lemaître, a Belgian Catholic priest. According to main stream history he attended a Jesuit secondary school, and according to many others, he was a Jesuit. Whether or not he was one is not as relevant as the fact that he was a Catholic priest.

The Physics of the Universe website “Lemaître himself called his [Big Bang theory the] ‘hypothesis of the primeval atom’ or the ‘Cosmic Egg’.” Cosmic Egg, that sounds intriguing. What is it? In the Greek Orphic tradition there is the Orphic Egg, another version of the cosmic egg. According to myth, the hermaphroditic deity Phanes hatched out of it. Hermaphroditic, i.e. male and female at the same time, reminds me of the LGBT agenda, Conchita Wurst in the Eurovision song contest and so on.

 

Wikipedia describes Phanes as having had golden wings, he was male-female deity of light and goodness, his name means “to bring light” or “to shine”. Does it sound like Lucifer yet? Wikipedia also refers to a tradition according to which Phanes had been hatched from the World Egg of Chronos (or Saturn).

 

“The Secret Doctrine of the Rosicrucians” says the following: “The Germ within the Cosmic Egg takes unto itself Form. The Flame is re-kindled. Time begins. A Thing exists. Action begins. The Pairs of Opposites spring into being. The World Soul is born, and awakens into manifestation. The first rays of the new Cosmic Day break over the horizon.”

 

Un-Biblical Catholics

The Cosmic Egg clearly is an ancient occult, pagan and/or religious concept. It has nothing to do with science, i.e. gathering evidence by observation of natural world. Ever since I was a child had bought the narrative that there is tug-of-war between scientists and fundamentalist Christians, or science and the Bible. The conflict, in fact, is between two religious systems: occult and the Bible. Science itself seems to have been pushed to the side.

And what is of course interesting is that it is the Catholic church that has been pushing these unscientific, pagan notions as science. This is curious for two reasons: the Catholic church is allegedly a Christian organization that believes in the Bible. That is an old and debunked allegations. Second is that the Big Bang, and many other pillars of modern scientific thought, such the Copernican model and Evolution, are not scientific, are religious notions at best, complete lies at worst.

My point is not to argue that the Biblical account of history and cosmology is the correct one. It’s more that if the Catholics want to pretend Christian, they should not be pushing these non-Christian religious ideas. Moreover, I’d like to see more of actual scientific observations related to cosmology, alas we have very little as the concept of Dark Matter pretty much proves all of modern cosmology as pointless theorizing. So far, the Bible does seem more reasonable than most of modern science, but that does not prove the validity of the Bible either.

 

Links:

Georges Lemaître: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lema%C3%AEtre

The Physics of the Universe: http://www.physicsoftheuniverse.com/scientists_lemaitre.html

Orphic Egg: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orphic_Egg

Phanes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phanes_(mythology)

Secret Doctrine of the Rosicrucians: http://www.sacred-texts.com/sro/sdr/sdr04.htm

 

Advertisements

Kabbalistic Origins of the Copernican Model

The Copernican heliocentric model and the Big Bang are the basis to the understanding of the cosmology of modern science. Those who tend to look at things critically have probably found these claims somewhat questionable, and there are claims that these ideas, and others concepts of modern science, such as Evolution, are actually of occult or religious origin. There is also alleged Jesuit involvement in our current understanding of the universe. While there are certainly plenty of material on the internet about this, I decided to take a look at it myself. In this article I’ll focus on Nicolaus Copernicus and his ideas. Next time I’ll look at the Big Bang.

However before I move on, I’d like to share my take on the Jesuits, or the claim you see here and there: “It’s the Jesuits.” Jesuits are actually the first conspiratorial group I ever heard about. When I was a child learned that Jesuits embodied the maxim: the ends justify the means. I’m not sure where I learned, maybe from my parents, but ever since I had had the idea of Jesuits of being some sort of conspiratorial cabal. That was years before I even heard the names Freemason or Illuminati. Then around ten years ago, when I was getting serious about learning about conspiracies and secret societies, I heard from a Christian friend that Jesuits are actually really nice, he said they are sort of like hippies. That confused me greatly.  He seemed to be describing a completely different group from the historical Jesuits. Both because I suppose I associated Jesuits with my former childhood self, and my friend’s confusing comments, I hadn’t looked much into Jesuit conspiracy theories in my conspiracy theorist “career”, but maybe a couple years ago I saw some articles about Jesuit universities.

I’ll this article from NY Times as an example from 2013. It describes how the Jesuit Georgetown college celebrated OUTober, an LGBT gay-parade with students prancing around wearing pink shirts. My friend’s view of Jesuits must have originated from these kind of liberal, tolerant modern Jesuit colleges. The Jesuits have been, and still are, all about pursuing their own nefarious agendas and subverting society’s values. It’s just that the times are different, and they are using different methods nowadays. A few centuries ago they were probably more focused on sequestering knowledge, assassination and more traditional cloak and dagger stuff, now they are putting on a benevolent mask and are engaging in social engineering, such as LGBT agenda.

Yet I still do not agree that “it is the Jesuits”. You see and hear these people saying “it’s the Jesuits and that guy never mentions the Jesuits, so he must be a shill”. The next guy says: “No, it’s actually the Freemasons. You’re the shill.” Whereas the third guy claims: “It’s the Jews.” I think these groups, and many others are part of the secret society control system, but I do not know who or what group is on top of it all, nor do I trust anyone who claims they know the truth, unless they are a member of the group that rules over all other groups.

 

Copernicus and Kabbalah

Let’s move on to Nicolaus Copernicus and the heliocentric model of the solar system. Before Copernicus’ theories, most Europeans believed in the geocentric Ptolemaic system. According to Wikipedia, Copernicus had formulated his theory already in 1510, but his book “On the Revolutions of the Celestial Spheres” was published after his death in 1543. Interestingly in the Controversy-section of the article it states:

“The immediate result of the 1543 publication of Copernicus’s book was only mild controversy. At the Council of Trent (1545–63) neither Copernicus’s theory nor calendar reform (which would later use tables deduced from Copernicus’s calculations) were discussed. It has been much debated why it was not until six decades after the publication of De revolutionibus that the Catholic Church took any official action against it, even the efforts of Tolosani going unheeded. Catholic side opposition only commenced seventy-three years later, when it was occasioned by Galileo.”

I suppose the Catholic church created the controversy on purpose, since Copernicus’ theories had not caught on in the regular people. So they turned Galileo into this oppressed anti-hero basically to advertise the Copernican model as the new and exciting thing that the establishment supposedly is afraid. Sort of how they got a lot of people, myself included, to support Donald Trump. (Although my support of him wasn’t really so much because the establishment pretended to hate him, but because of Hillary Clinton and Pizzagate, but that’s another story.)

Let’s get back to Copernicus. His book was called “On the Revolutions of the Celestial Spheres”. Just the name itself reminds me of the Tree of Life of Kabbalah and Sephiroth spheres on it, or the Norse World Tree with the hanging worlds on it.

 

I used to think this similarity pretty much proves there is some truth to Kabbalah and the ancient myths, but now I am skeptical of the modern cosmology, so I am more inclined to think the “scientists” who have been pushing this model do so because their religion says so. Nowadays many of the flat earthers believe in the Biblical geocentric, domed-model. I suppose I am one of them, but I am happy to admit I could be wrong. There does seem to be some sort spiritual and scientific battle between these two religious concept going on. One of them could be right, and one wrong, or perhaps both are simply religious ideas.

Anyway, the heliocentric model that Copernicus was pushing is rather Kabbalistic. A Kabbala site called Revealing Science of God says: “It should be noted that the 16th century also witnessed perhaps the first scientific verification of Kabbalist teaching with the book written by Copernicus. The Kabbalists never taught the Earth to be the center of the universe, and Copernicus’ discovery proved them right.”

Another blogger on WordPress had written an article titled: “Copernicus And His Kabbalistic Methods”. He quotes Copernicus saying: “Nor is it necessary that these hypotheses should be true, nor indeed even probable, but it is sufficient if they merely produce calculations which agree with the observations…” This sort of reasoning does indeed seem Kabbalistic.

Torahscience.org has an article states that the Torah, i.e. the first five books of the Old Testament, has a geocentric universe. However, when a “holy” Rabbi Ruzhiner was presented with Copernicus’ theories, people expected him to deny them, however the Rabbi responded as follows:

“When he was informed of this, the Holy Ruzhiner remained completely composed and his response was a very special one. He said that whether the earth revolves around the sun or the sun revolves around the earth depends on the service of the tzaddikim, the righteous Jews of the generation. The answer to the question of “What revolves around what?” is not an absolute answer. If, for instance, the tzaddikim in this generation would serve God in a manner in which it would be correct to see Pluto as the center of the solar system, then in some mysterious way scientific discoveries would adapt to reflect that change.”

Those “tzaddikim” are probably the good Jews who believe in Kabbalah and the Talmud instead of the Torah.

Later on the article gives another example of this: “Accordingly, the variation between geocentricism and heliocentricism can be compared to a difference between a service of God that sees man (on earth) as the center, with God, as it were, revolving around man and caring for all of man’s needs; or perceiving God as the center, whereby man is obligated to God and His commandments.”

According to Kabbalah, it would seem, anything can be anything as long as you can bullshit and fast talk others to believe in it. Even the laws of nature and God are subject one’s ability to make stuff up. I have noticed similar things have permeated all aspects of modern society. Feminism is one example. They say rape is power + privilege, and since White women have them, they cannot be raped. Alternatively, a woman who had consensual sex with man can turn the act post coitum into a rape if she regrets later her promiscuity. Once again, twisting words around can supposedly change reality to suit one’s needs.

I do not know whether Nicolaus Copernicus had studied the Kabbalah, but he did seem to adhere to many Kabbalistic notions. I also do not know if there is any connection between Copernicus and the Jesuits. The Jesuit order was officially formed 1540 and Copernicus died 1543, so it is possible they might have had something to do with it, but I haven’t seen any actual evidence of this.

 

The Catholics

The Standford Encyclopedia of Philosophy says that during Copernicus’ lifetime, the Catholic church seemed to be fine with his theories:

“Pope Clement VII (r. 1523–1534) had reacted favorably to a talk about Copernicus’s theories, rewarding the speaker with a rare manuscript. There is no indication of how Pope Paul III, to whom On the Revolutions was dedicated reacted; however, a trusted advisor, Bartolomeo Spina of Pisa (1474–1546) intended to condemn it but fell ill and died before his plan was carried out. Thus, in 1600 there was no official Catholic position on the Copernican system, and it was certainly not a heresy.”

So Pope Clement VII, who appears to have died before Copernicus, reacted favourably to his theories, and the Pope who succeeded him was Paul III to whom Copernicus dedicated his book. Had the Catholic church been hostile to Copernicus’ theories, you might interpret this as a kind of FU from Copernicus, however it does not appear that was the case. There probably were many individuals who did not appreaciate his un-Biblical cosmology, but overall, as Stanford Encyclopedia stated, the heliocentric system was not a heresy.

Interestingly, as is mentioned above, Pope Paul III’s advisor, Bartolomeo Spina, wanted to condemn Copernicus’ book, and presumably he could have influenced the Pope as well, but he fell ill and died. Convenient, wouldn’t you say? Perhaps he was poisoned. His Wikipedia page doesn’t say much, but it says Bartolomeo Spina was involved in prosecuting witches, so he probably understood the Copernical model as the occult concept that it is.

There are some claims that Nicolaus Copernicus may have been a prist. At least he did not marry, and he was a member of the Third Order of Saint Dominic, which is some sort of lay Dominican order. The New Advent website states:

“After his university studies Copernicus practised medicine for six years (1506-1512) at Heilsberg, being sought by bishops and princes, but especially by the poor, whom he served gratis. There is no document to show that Copernicus ever received higher orders. His medical practice, which was only private, would not speak against him being a priest, and the fact that in 1537 King Sigismund of Poland put his name on the list of four candidates for the vacant episcopal seat of Ermland, makes it probable that, at least in later life, he had entered the priesthood.”

So he might have died a Catholic priest. I’ve uncovered no evidence of any involvement of Jesuits with Copernicus himself. The Catholic church, however, did seem be in good relations with him.

Copernicus certainly seems to have been influenced by the Kabbalah, and it was all approved by the Catholic church.

Next time I’ll focus on the Big Bang theory and it’s obvious occult origins.

 

Links:

A Rainbow Over Catholic Colleges
How Georgetown Became a Gay-Friendly Campus: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/04/education/edlife/how-georgetown-became-a-gay-friendly-campus.html

Nicolaus Copernicus: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolaus_Copernicus

One Possible History of Kabbalism: http://www.revealingscienceofgod.com/index.php?page=one-possible-history-of-kabbalism

Copernicus And His Kabbalistic Methods: https://migchels.wordpress.com/2015/04/02/copernicus-and-his-kabbalistic-methods/

Science Versus Torah?: http://www.torahscience.org/natsci/astronomy_rav2.htm

Nicolaus Copernicus: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/copernicus/

Bartolommeo Spina: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bartolommeo_Spina

Do you have a calling to be Third Order of St. Dominic?: http://www.sacredheart-op.org/Vocations.htm

Copernicus: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04352b.htm

The Jesuits & The Globe Earth: The Mother Of All Conspiracies!: https://www.worldslastchance.com/end-time-prophecy/the-jesuits-the-globe-earth-the-mother-of-all-conspiracies.html

By whom, when and why was Great Wall of China built?

I find several details on the official history of the Great Wall of China questionable. This has been bothering me for over a year since I claimed that Marco Polo did not go to China, he went to Cathay, a different kingdom. As this is somewhat of a current issues since Donald Trump may be building his own Great Wall of ‘Murica I thought of revisiting it.

 

The Qin Wall

According to official history, the first emperor of China, Qin Shi Huang, built the first section of the wall around 220-206 BC. Prior to this China consisted of several small kingdoms, but the emperor unified them, and built the wall to keep out hostile nomads. Or rather he unified already existing fortifications and walls from the various kingdoms in China and unified them into a bigger wall. This wall was, according to China Highlights website, 5,000 kilometers long. It supposedly took 20 years to build. China Highlights points out that there are historical records that suggest that “300,000–500,000 soldiers were assigned to both build and guard the Qin Great Wall with the help of 400,000–500,000 conscripted laborers. Other records suggest that up to 1.5 million men were used during the peak of Qin construction.”

This sounds like a huge amount of people, especially since Qin, according to a Wikipedia estimate, had a population of 20,000,000 at the time. If 1.5 million men were involved in the construction of the wall, it would be around 13% of the population. Moreover of that 20,000,000 at least half would be women, then there would be young boys and old men who couldn’t work, so I wonder how many of the able-bodied men in Qin would not have been working on the wall? This sounds dubious to me. On top of that, building the wall supposedly took 20 years. According to Wikipedia the Great Pyramid of Giza also took around 10-20 years to build. Building the great wall was probably even more arduous than the pyramid. And of course, many critically thinking people find the official claims about the building of the pyramid dubious as well.

The Great Wall of China website states that over a million men died building the wall. Wouldn’t it have been easier just to have those men fight the invading nomads instead of working them to death on the wall?

 

The Ming Wall

Much of the Great Wall we know today was built during the Ming dynasty around 1368-1644 AD. Much of the Qin wall has been lost. The Ming wall was 6,259 km long, a bit over a thousand kilometers longer than the Qin wall. According to China Highlights it took over 200 years to build this wall. This sounds more reasonable, however, it doesn’t mean necessarily that they spent all of the time building the wall. There might have been periods of inaction when it came to the wall.

The Great Wall certainly is genuine enough. I’ve climbed it as well, the feeling up there was marvellous. It really felt like a spiritual place, and not a place of war. Certain historical claims of the wall though might be different.

 

Lack of References

A book by J. Marshall Unger titled “Ideogram: Chinese Characters and the Myth of Disembodied Meaning” has a chapter by the name of “The Great Wall of China and other exotic fables”. In it the author suggests that the Great Wall is indeed a fable constructed during the Ming period, and no older references to it exist. Even Wikipedia, i.e. main stream history seems to concur.

In an article on the History of the Great Wall of China, it is mentioned that “One of the first mentions of a wall built against northern invaders is found in a poem, dated from the seventh century BC”. Yet this is 500 years before the Great Wall of Qin was allegedly built. Walls and fortifications certainly existed before the Great Wall did. However, in the section on the Qin dynasty the article states: “Details of the construction [of the Qin wall] were not found in the official histories, but it could be inferred that the construction conditions were made especially difficult by the long stretches of mountains and semi-desert that the Great Wall traversed, the sparse populations of these areas, and the frigid winter climate.” Yes, you can infer whatever you want if you unquestionably accept the story, however it seems off that there are no records the greatest feat of human engineering ever that took decades to finish. You’d think there was some sort of scholar who would have recorded the details for posterity both to ensure that Qin could maintain their defenses and also to glorify the magnificence of their emperor. Perhaps someone did, and the records have been lost, or perhaps there was record since there was no wall.

Wikipedia does quote a Han dynasty (206 BC-220 AD) statesman Zhufu Yan’s comment on the construction. However, it appears his quote comes from the histriography book “Zizhi Tongjian”, which was published in 1084, at least 800 years after the Han dynasty ended. This sounds unreliable to say the least.

 

What does all of this mean?

I believe there is disinformation and a cover-up regarding the Great Wall. For what reason, I do not know, but I have a few different scenarios.

One is that the Qin wall never existed and it was invented during the Ming dynasty for some reason. One might be to give posthumous prestige to emperor Qin Shi Huang. Another might be that there had been another construction similar to the Great Wall, but the purpose had been different. Perhaps the lack of scholarly evidence of this construction is due to Jesuit missionaries creating ties with China around the time of the Ming dynasty. They might have confiscated ancient manuscripts or destroyed them.

If the construction was not simply a wall used for defense and transporting troops, what was it then? This is purely speculation, but it might have been some sort of aqueduct or perhaps even a power grid of some sort. China could hold all sorts of ruins and relics of an ancient civilization that are kept under wraps. There are pyramids in China that have not been excavated. Perhaps there are ruins under some sections of the Great Wall, and since the wall is there, it is a great excuse not to excavate there.

We have a clear image of how the walls look today, many people, like myself, have visited the wall, or at least seen many pictures of it. Perhaps it looked different in the past.

In 2009 it was announced that new sections of the Great Wall were uncovered spanning 180 miles. This might be true, or perhaps they are simply manufacturing these ruins, or “reconstructing” them, for tourism. Maybe there are ruins that would reveal an ancient civilization with an advanced technology in China and they are destroying it and making look like just another section of the wall.

 

Links:

The Great Wall of the Qin Dynasty: http://www.chinahighlights.com/greatwall/history/qin-dynasty-wall.htm

How Long It Took to Build the Great Wall of China: http://www.chinahighlights.com/greatwall/fact/building-time.htm

Great Pyramid of Giza: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Pyramid_of_Giza

Why was the Great Wall of China Built ?: http://www.great-wallofchina.com/why-was-the-great-wall-of-china-built.html

Ideogram: Chinese Characters and the Myth of Disembodied Meaning: https://books.google.fi/books?id=fRqKreZFVTYC&pg=PA40&lpg=PA40&dq=china+great+wall+was+an+aqueduct&source=bl&ots=1-XsgUj7X9&sig=O3dF5rhNmWKcnm9Lntm0Rzwv9Z4&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjC8ZmDm7DKAhUGqHIKHUjxB2wQ6AEISDAJ#v=onepage&q=china%20great%20wall%20was%20an%20aqueduct&f=false

History of the Great Wall of China: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Great_Wall_of_China

Zizhi Tongjian: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zizhi_Tongjian

Jesuit China missions: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesuit_China_missions

180 Hidden Miles of Great Wall Found: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/21/world/asia/21wall.html?_r=0

My other writings on ancient China:

https://concordiaabchao.wordpress.com/2016/01/17/marco-polo-did-not-go-to-china/

https://concordiaabchao.wordpress.com/2016/10/18/china-egypt-greece/