THE ROSICRUCIANS benevolent Illuminati

[link to www.godlikeproductions.com]

They are the ones that put up the Georgia "guide stones".

Blavatsky on them jesuits:

[link to www.theosociety.org (secure)]

Scroll down to page 394^

Last Edited by Asuralikeproduction on 06/15/2022 11:52 AM

Nah it was probably ‘AMORC’ who did that.

Just a guess.

You're overlooking the fact that many Rosicrucian teachings originated in the Egyptian mystery-schools that predate Buddhism by several millennia. And in fact, many Rosicrucians were once burned at the stake for the practice of alchemy.

Again: you're on the outside looking in, a perspective that puts you at a strong disadvantage.

It should also be noted that comprehensive Rosicrucian teachings are available only to those that seek it through traditional channels that do not include random Youtube videos or internet illuminati exposes'. In fact, at one time, the classic Rosicrucian order only accepted new initiates every 100 years to maintain an exclusive connective thread of wisdom. And all true Rosicrucians swear a sacred oath not to divulge those teachings but rather to assist others via leading by example. The lessons we share may be subtle, but they have already stood the test of time itself.

And while we don't feel a need to impose ourselves upon a world consumed by it's own corruption, we do stand by to keep it from totally destroying itself.

Last Edited by GSB/LTD on 06/15/2022 11:57 AM

It was. I have their magazines going back years.

The stones are featured in their articles.

Elitism appeals to the ego.

Truth is the opposite of ego.

I’m not though.

There are Buddhas who appeared long before the Buddha Sakyamuni.

Like I’d said too: Blavatsky, Steiner, Hartmann, Manly P. Hall, Heindel, etc. all seem way more legit than “Crowley” or ‘AMORC’.

No surprise there.

Crowley left a wake of death and destruction. He knew nothing.

Harvey Spencer Lewis, was a remarkable man, the founder of AMORC, the modern incarnation of the order. His writings, monographs, are deep, profound. Too bad modern AMORC decided to take them away.

Not quite, because it is the ego that spawns the search for truth. Elitism is the result of an ego run amok.

Hm, well “Crowley” was an degenerate within ‘the sphere of Lilith’.

Perhaps the ‘AMORC’ (or the original one of Spencer Lewis at any rate) can at least say for themselves that they were within ‘the sphere of Nahemah or Na’amah’….

Last Edited by Asuralikeproduction on 06/15/2022 12:03 PM

You are mixing many differing philosophies into a blender and yielding a drink lacking any nourishment; but then, your palate is not my own.

Truth is that the ego doesn't exist.

An idea about oneself is not oneself.

Western, through the ego, Eastern, dissolve the ego.

Destination is the same.

I’m not actually.

All of the above-mentioned were within the same stream of Masonry/Rosicrucianism, etc.

Like many others dancing around the perimeter of wisdom, you speak a great deal and yet say very little.

The bottom line is simply this: until you've actually studied Rosicrucian monographs, you don't know what you're talking about and are instead regurgitating esoteric garbage that passes itself off as profound existentialism. But, again, that's just my opinion and if that's the pathway you've chosen, then... so mote it be!

FYI: H. Spencer Lewis' teachings are still very prevalent in modern AMORC teachings.

Last Edited by GSB/LTD on 06/15/2022 12:12 PM

You're an insulting little prick.

Your ego is quite huge, needs constant validation.

Pathetic.

I have compared monographs written originally by Lewis

And the ones revised by AMORC in the 90s.

I estimate a good 80% of the material was removed.

The new head of the Order wanted to move away from the home study course and go more towards a lodge model.

He's French, was heard saying that an American doesn't have a mystical bone in their body, so advanced in character and thought was he.

My words are not ego-based at all. At nearly 72, I have the benefit of age that is not obstructed by youthful arrogance such as your own. And that's the greatest chasm between we two.

Honesty, especially with one's self, is the highest virtue.

All this esoteric bullshit appeals to the ego.

Secret knowledge, lording it over others.

Pathetic.

Then of course denial and lies to oneself are needed to insulate.

The ego is one fucking fragile little baby.

The earliest H. Spencer Lewis monographs have never been published outside the order itself and they are only available for study in the U.S. by serious scholars in the archives at Rosicrucian Park in San Jose, CA. To do that you'd need to be an active Frater. If you have not done that, you are merely a deceptive poseur.

Why is it that threads about spirituality on GLP can become so darkly negative?


It's sad really.

Gary says otherwise. I joined his order too.

He has all the originals, naturally since he was the successor to Lewis' son, Ralph M.

Also I had a good friend that was a member he had all his monographs, 20 years worth, plus his mothers.

Then there were mine, the modern ones.

I know what I'm talking about because I was a member went to initiations etc.

Well, Bacon thought he was talking to angels and later found out it was a demon, so there is that part. Most of them did call up demons, and this is in historical archives. One was working with the King of France who is a wife was in labor, and he wanted to save his wife, didn't work, and his wife died and moral of this story demons do not like mankind.

They did believe they were talking to angels before they found out it was demons, so why do you believe it good now? It has a lot to do with the working of Alchemy, this is where it started. I don't know how a believer in The LORD GOD thought this was a good idea, if an angel was to show up you would have to test them to see what they really are.

Knowledge that is shared cannot by definition be secret, and to give something that could be misused is pointless.

You do not hand a child a loaded gun just as you don't teach an adult in areas they can only marginally comprehend without first learning the natural order that surrounds us.

This friend of mine liked to compare notes about the modern monographs. I gave them to him to read. He was disappointed.