/lit/ - Literature

Harry Potter

If you want to learn the practice of mysticism and henosis:
>Antonin Artaud's Heliogabalus: The Crowned Anarchist
>Lautrèmont's The Songs of Maldoror
>The Discipline of a Psychic Warrior
>The Gospel of Thomas
>Albert Pike's Morals and Dogma
But you didn't hear it from me.

>>22136727
neat!
is this what they study at Hogwarts?

>>22136739
You can shitpost all you want but you can't deny the profundity of esoteric experience.

>>22136749
With esotericism it's either silly or dangerous. No in-between.

>>22136764
why is it dangerous?

>>22136764
Sure. If you happen to be a materialist.

>>22136788
not necessarily
demons are not material and very dangerous, and esoteric practices often times lead to interaction with them

>>22136727
>Albert Pike's Morals and Dogma
Isnt this basically just theory or am I wrong?

>>22136711
Foreword by Satan and Ozzy Osborne

>>22136830
It is theory, and most of it is lifted from earlier hermeticists, but it still provides useful context for practical mysticism.

>>22136703
Introduction to Magic
Meditations on the Tarot

>>22136703
Tobin's Spirit Guide

>>22136703
Daily reminder that humans have always ascribed to magic anything they don't understand.
If you actually do want to understand, read pic related.
Also, nice painting. Was there anything he couldn't do?

>>22137065
I'm scared of doing invoking some dark spirits or some shit like that. Can this happen?

>>22137124
Isn’t that exclusively what that book is about?

>>22137185
I dont know, I haven't read it.

>>22137192
Well I’m gonna guess you aren’t exactly gonna be summoning Raphael and Metatron, ya know?

>>22137124
It can happen either way but it's better to be informed. Was the US MIC summoned on purpose using black magic? More likely demons influenced enough uneducated people to do the needed rituals.

>>22136844
Kek thanks

>>22137185
No it's not.

>>22136727
>Lautrèmont's The Songs of Maldoror
>magic

U wot m8

>>22137258
>he doesn't know the subtext
>he cannot recognize the metaphor or allegory

>>22137332
I’m all ears

>Jung
>Magic
I must have missed something since he explores ideas as a scientist

>In this study we must take each step with a feeling of security and courage. The illumination that comes to us comes through observation and study of our inner possessions. We are not blind like the mystic who, though radiating great love, has little to demonstrate; for the mystic and Yogi of this science are far apart. The mystic with fasting and praying weakens his body, seeking to make it subservient to its Higher Self, of whom he is ignorant, and only Its fragrance and peace remains in his heart; but the Yogi will develop and learn from his atomic intelligence his own great truth.
https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.217533/page/n10/mode/1up

>>22137524
bro i checked the link but how do i know any of this is true?

>>22137474
>Jung
>scientist
Lol. Lmao even

>>22136703
Big fan of this one. This was the main inspirational source for the Golden Dawn, and it's also where that picture of the Goat of Mendes.

>>22137723
>This was the main inspirational source for the Golden Dawn
objectively false

>The foundational documents of the original Order of the Golden Dawn, known as the Cipher Manuscripts, are written in English using the Trithemius cipher.
>In October 1887, Westcott claimed to have written to a German countess and prominent Rosicrucian named Anna Sprengel, whose address was said to have been found in the decoded Cipher Manuscripts. According to Westcott, Sprengel claimed the ability to contact certain supernatural entities, known as the Secret Chiefs, that were considered the authorities over any magical order or esoteric organization. Westcott purportedly received a reply from Sprengel granting permission to establish a Golden Dawn temple

Carl Jung's The Red Book

>>22137742
The LBRP was clearly inspired by the Conjuration of The Four which originates from Levi's book. To be fair this is just what I've heard form John Michael Greer who is an occult autist. I personally don't believe the stories surrounding the cipher papers, I think that Westcott forged them, but that doesn't mean I think it's all bullshit.

>>22136703
The King James Bible

>>22136749
I deny the profundity of esoteric experience.

>>22137826
what part?

>>22137853
The part where the carpenter turned water into grape drink

>>22137868
yeah but theres no instructions for doing the same. How does one gain the magical abilities of the ancient mystics like levitation, teleporting and being at different places at the same time, clarvoianc, etc....

>>22137834
Liar.

>>22137876
the keys of the kingdom were given to Peter by Christ. to access the keys you have to become Pope.

>>22136891
>Meditations on the Tarot
Reading this now. On the second Major Arcana, the High Priestess.

Can you explain what exactly he means by the “illegitimate twofoldness” vs. the “legitimate twofoldness”?

>>22136703

>>22136891
>>22137942
planning on reading both meditations on the tarot and introduction to magic. Is there actually realistic magic rituals and techniques or just basic theoretical knowledge?

>>22137985
I am only two chapters into MoTT, but I’d say more theoretical knowledge soaked in Catholicism. Or vice versa … Catholicism dipped in theoretical occult knowledge.

>>22138002
interesting, are you a catholic? I'm sure this book would be considered to be heretical for most catholics and catholic authorities

>>22138008
I am a new Catholic, so I don’t know a lot of inside baseball.

I initially assumed the same as you, but there is evidence to the contrary. The afterword is written by a (now deceased) Cardinal. And it was photographed on the desk of Saint Pope John Paul II.

>>22137876
By being Jesus and/or God

>>22138041
Yeah I remember reading about that, the Cardinal was also appointed by Pope John Paul II if I'm not mistaken so theres that. That being said, most normie Catholics would probably say that its heretical and shut you down, I know a few like that.

>>22138080
He was appointed by Pope Benedict. And yeah, that’s fair, I don’t know enough to provide a full defense of it, but the Catholic Church has an extensive history of co-opting “paganism” to teach Christin truth. In my opinion, it seems to fall in that bucket, though without watering down the mysticism to the point of the book becoming trite or uninteresting. If there are normies that will dogmatically balk because the word Tarot is involved at all … so be it. A lot of normie Catholics also don’t believe in the Real Presence.

>>22138091
>Hans Urs von Balthasar (12 August 1905 – 26 June 1988) was a Swiss theologian and Catholic priest who is considered an important Catholic theologian of the 20th century.[13] Pope John Paul II announced his choice of Balthasar to become a cardinal, but he died shortly before the consistory
I really want to read the book but I'm looking for something that is less theory and more practice. Anyways, what was your previous faith or religious background before becoming a Catholic?

>>22137646
How do you know anything?

>>22138106
My bad, you right. I do know Benedict was a big fan of bon Balthasar though and then got those two things conflated.

>I’m looking for something less theory and more practice
More practice of what?

>what was your previous faith or religious background before becoming a Catholic?
Atheist to Protestant (non-denominational) to Catholic. Might seem jumpy to others, but, even in retrospect, I see it as a path. Each step seems so much more true than the previous one, and as a Catholic I finally feel comfortable and confident in the truth of what I profess (I was plagued by constant doubt as an atheist and as a Protestant).

>>22138157
>More practice of what?
I want to learn more about the techniques and rituals that allowed the ancient mystics (christians, sufis, hindus, etc) to levitate, teleport and do all sorts of /x/ related stuff. Many occult books are just theoretical. That being said I wont deny that I'm very respectful and wary of doing occult rituals because I dont want to come into contact with dark energies and things like that.
>Atheist to Protestant (non-denominational) to Catholic.
Interesting, how did that happen?

>>22137985
Introduction to Magic is written in a very oblique way for the most part but there are some "rituals" in it. They're mostly for interest and should not be done on a whim.

>>22138232
Are there other books that systematically approach the ritualistic and practical aspect of magic that you would recommend apart from Introduction to Magic?

>>22138289
No, not really. Most books out there aren't like that unless they are a scam. There's different types of magic or occultism or esotericism and you do not want to get involved in charlatan devilry. There are good sources to be found in the three books of ItM and there are some rituals inside.
The important thing is that you have realizations caused by what you are reading and your life experiences; to acquire the correction orientation. Things will start to click and you will have a more spiritual view of the world and experience and that really is the first and most important thing. In the Traditionalist schema, knowledge comes only through one’s own realizations.

>>22138344
Interesting, thank you very much for the response. Just wondering, what do you think about Crowley, Pike and the Golden dawn book? What other occult books woukd you recommend?

>>22138357
Don't waste your time with those authors. You can gain small amounts of insight from some of them occasionally but its not worth it. You're better off doing everything you can to just orientate yourself so study Neoplatonism and the Traditionalist School. The proper goal is to create an opening only toward the "above", strictly toward transcendence. Anything else is deluded and evil.

>>22138041
>>22138080
>>22138091
>>22138106
Hans Urs von Balthasar is probably the most important and influential Catholic theologian of the 20th century. He's not just some guy that was also a cardinal or minor theologian. He is considered as a superior theologian to Ratzinger by almost everyone who know what they're talking about.

>>22138368
>strictly toward transcendence.
Ok this is my goal but I have read some books that stay very much on the theoretical side and never guive any practical system or path, I will try with the ITM books, I have also the Sufis by Idries Shah which I want to read since months ago and it seems like they go well together. Thanks anyway, anon

>>22138357

>>22138188
I appreciate your wariness of dark energies. Have you identified any books that seem promising toward accomplishing your goals (not sure if you’re OP)?

>how did you go from Protestant to Catholic
TL:DR: Primarily by studying early church history.

Protestants that are not Anglican or Lutheran don’t know any church history. None. The moment I started reading up on it I realized how ridiculous many of my church’s interpretations of the Bible were. For example, the Protestant church I attended at the time teaches that baptismal regeneration is a heresy and that the purpose of baptism is to profess your belief to other believers. Sounds nice, except that 0 Christians believed that until about 500 years ago. For the first 1,500 years of the church, all the way back to the letters written by the apostles’ disciples in the first couple centuries, all Christians agreed on baptismal regeneration. When I tried to invite Protestants I knew into my study of church history most just covered their ears. It’s now obvious to me that the early church was very Catholic/Eastern Orthodox. In the words of John Henry Newman: “To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant.”

What religious affiliation are you?

>>22137070
marie-luise von franz mentions this in the interviews that you felt like a lice around him. tall chad, rich, famous, multiple women, father. writing, stone carving, painting

So what is magic to you people? What does it do for you?
Can I learn to literally shoot fireballs or turn lead to gold if I read everything posted in this thread?

>>22136703
Are you 30 already?

>>22139014
>t.

>>22139021
Humor me. Is "magic" meant to purify the mind or allow access to Jung-style mental landscaping tools? Is it meant to grant you access to unintuitive philosophical truths which would otherwise require years of dry academic study? Or is it a method to literally learn to levitate, call lightning, and astrally project?
Answer carefully.

Any good books looking into metapsychology as it relates to ritual practice and magick?

>>22137070
This notion is complete nonsense. Define magic.

>>22139087
Not him but I did Yoga (I'm not into western meme occultism shit), and at some point started occasionally having very specific precognitions of my every day mundane life. And yes, I did a ridiculously critical analysis of the situation to scan for bias and coincidence and didn't come up with anything. It eventually stopped but it was still pretty cool experiencing it first hand. Downside is I can't really talk to anyone about it (besides on 4chan I guess) without worrying about how I'd just seem schizo/superstitious.

>>22138368
>The proper goal is to create an opening only toward the "above", strictly toward transcendence
That's the whole point of Crowley. How can you criticize someone you haven't even read?

>Ctrl+f
>no Abramelin
Only larpers itt so far

>>22138800
So with all of your deep study into Christianity where did you find the scripture that talks about popes and cardinals? What scripture says that Mary is a saint that should be prayed to? What part of the bible says the eucharist is literal (ie transubstantiation)? What part of the bible talks about the need to confess your sin to any authority on earth, rather than to God?

>>22138800
Can you remind me of the scripture about paying money to the church to forgive your sins? I know that was a common practice in the early catholic church (prior to the council of Trent), which should mean, according to your logic, that it was an accurate and definitely not heretical and corrupt means of atonement.

>>22139829
What part of the Bible says that the Bible is the highest authority?

>>22139914
2 Timothy 3:16

I must have missed the verse about inherently evil men claiming God's righteousness on earth.

>>22139925
Inherently evil men being granted the ability or right to claim perfect righteousness and amend scripture*

>>22139925
And what did Christians do before there was a Bible, then?

>>22139961
Fucked goats and burned children

>>22136703
The Lord of the Rings

>>22139322
I have read him. Yes that aspect is present at times and a others it isn't. Don't tell me goetia and all that garbage is the same thing. Furthermore he was a British agent and a conman.

Unironically this

The entire point of practicing "magic(k)" is to brainwash yourself into believing good things will happen to you. This will actually cause good things to happen to you, not because magic is real, but because for whatever reason the universe decided to abide by the Law of Resonance.

However you can achieve the same results much quicker and more effective if you read this book instead. Why? Because it gives you the same tools, without the baggage. It's a fool proof method if you follow it step by step.

The only downsides of going down the road I propose are:
1) You will have to give up the naive belief that things are just gonna magically happen to you and instead accept that you have to put in the work
2) The belief that you have gained secret knowledge that makes you superior to the hylic normies

Choose wisely.

>>22139829
This is a strange post my Protestant friend. My post was about studying early Christian history, yet none of your questions are about early Christian history. Instead, you are presupposing the truth of *sola scriptura,* despite the fact that this doctrine is a modern invention. Early Christians did not adhere to sola scriptura, which is understandable given that this doctrine is not taught in the Bible. Despite the fact that your challenges are mostly non sequiturs, I'm happy to engage.

>where did you find the scripture that talks about popes
Matthew 16:18-19 is the big one. Though there are others, like Luke 22 and John 21. Regarding Matthew 16, the renowned Protestant scholar Gerhard Kittel wrote: "It is thus evident that Jesus is referring to Peter, to whom he has given the name Rock. He appoints Peter, the impulsive, enthusiastic, but not persevering man in the circle to be the foundation of His ecclesia. To this extent *Roman Catholic Exegesis is right and all Protestant attempts to evade this interpretation are to be rejected*." Likewise, Protestant scholar Donald A. Hagner wrote: "The natural reading of the passage, despite the necessary shift from Petros to petra required by the word play in the Greek (but not the Aramaic, where the same word kepha occurs in both places), is that it is Peter who is the rock upon which the church is to be built ... The frequent attempts that have been made, largely in the past, to deny this in favor of the view that the confession itself is the rock (e.g., most recently Caragounis) seem to be largely motivated by Protestant prejudice against a passage that is used by the Roman Catholics to justify the papacy." Additionally, renowned Protestant early church historian J.N.D. Kelly wrote: "Peter was the undisputed leader of the youthful church."

>What scripture says that Mary is a saint
Saint is a shortened word for sanctified. In Luke 1:28, Gabriel greets Mary by saying: "Hail Mary, full of grace." Regarding this verse, Martin Luther wrote: "She is full of grace, proclaimed to be entirely without sin- something exceedingly great. For God's grace fills her with everything good and makes her devoid of all evil."

>What part of the bible says the eucharist is literal (ie transubstantiation)?
There are several, but John 6 is a big one. In John 6, Jesus uses extremely literal verbs and phrasing. The church unanimously believed in the Real Presence for more than a thousand years. We have a ~100 A.D. letter from Ignatius, a disciple of the Apostle John, teaching the real presence in the Eucharist. The renowned Protestant scholar J.N.D. Kelly wrote Ignatius "clearly" professed belief in Jesus real, literal presence.

>What part of the bible talks about the need to confess your sin to any authority on earth, rather than to God?
James 5:16. Notice that verse 16 begins with the word "Therefore," implying continuity with the previous verse about calling on the Elders of the church.

>>22139925
>anon asks for verse that says that the Bible is "the highest authority"
>Protanon cites a verse that says that scripture is "profitable"
>"profitable" = "highest authority"???

>>22139846
>paying money to the church to forgive your sins?
A regrettable practice of the medieval church. I'm not going to deny that this was very bad.

>according to your logic, if something was practiced by some leaders in the medieval church, then it is true Christian doctrine
This is not my logic. Though I'm happy to add nuance and explain my logic.

There are two big differences between the way that I studied early church history and the way that you just did.
1. I focused on *early* church history, and you did not. Medeival history is not early enough
2. I looked for consensus, not the mere existence of a belief/practice somewhere in the church

Your parody of my logic is: "If something was practiced by some church leaders in medieval times, then it is true Christian doctrine." My actual logic is: "If a doctrine/practice was universally held by Christian pastors/theologians in the first 3-4 centuries, then I can have reasonable confidence that it is true Christian doctrine."

The requirement of consensus is appealing because it weeds out heresies that were floating around in the early church. For example, some early Christians did seem to teach heresies like adoptionism and binitarianism. However, these doctrines did not even come close to being consensus views of the early church, so they are weeded out. Contrastingly, some doctrines that were universally held by Christian pastors in the first few centuries are: 1. Jesus' real presence in the Eucharist, 2. Baptismal regeneration, 3. true salvation can be lost, etc.

The requirement that we study very early church history is appealing because it allows for a reasonable assumption of continuity with the teachings of the Apostles. We have the writings of Christians that were discipled by the apostles. We have writings of Christians that were discipled by people that were discipled by the Apostles. If these people taught that Jesus was truly present in the eucharist, and an alternative belief didn't even exist at the time, it is hard to imagine how it could have been possible that the Apostles were teaching something different.

>>22139087
>answer carefully
o7 I’ll be sure to respect your authority, boss! You seem smart, and not intellectually lazy!

>>22140605
>Peter was the undisputed leader of the youthful church
This does not explain the station of pope.
>Martin Luther wrote
Not scripture
>John 6, Jesus uses extremely literal verbs and phrasing
I will concede this one. I believe it was intended as allegory, but there's shit like a flaming tornado that follows the Jews in the OT and that was supposedly literal too.
>James 5:16
Yes, it's saying to confess to other believers to hold oneself accountable. There is nothing there about hail Marys full of grace and a prescription for a specific amount of "our father"s

>>22140626
>in God we trust

>>22140778
>This does not explain the station of pope.
That's one sentence from what I said. Are you just going to ignore Matthew 16:18-19?

>Martin Luther is Not scripture
Right, I gave you scripture. Luke 1:28, then I told you how Martin Luther interpreted that scripture.

>I believe it was intended as allegory
You and no one in the first 1,500 years of the church. Do you believe in the virgin birth? True Christian belief requires that one believe in things like this, which is not illogical given that Christians also believe in an omnipotent God that can break and bend any rule he creates.

>to hold oneself accountable
You just made that up. It does not say anything about "being held accountable." The real context of the passage is an Elder praying for a member of the church and that church member's sins being forgiven. Within that context, James says "Therefore, confess your sins to one another."

>>22140678
>true salvation can be lost
How does that reconcile with Paul's teaching in Romans 11 about God's gifts (like eternal salvation) being irrevocable?

>>22140975
How does Matthew explain a group of church elders (cardinals) getting together and voting in the new Peter? I didn't see that part

>>22140975
Why are you using the father of protestantism, martin Luther's interpretation of scripture to argue the supremacy of catholicism?

>>22140985
I will admit that there are verses that appear to support each side of this issue. Romans 11:29, on a surface level, may appear to teach once saved always saved (OSAS). Likewise, I hope that you would admit that Galatians 5:4, on a surface level, appears to teach that people can lose grace that they once had and be severed from grace.

To resolve this ambiguity, we can look to the context of the writings of the pastors and theologians that lived in the time of the apostles. Some of them discipled by the apostles themselves. All Christian pastors and theologians, up until Calvin in the 16th century, taught that true regenerate Christians can lose salvation. However, the caveat of their belief is that they taught that this must always be consensual. That is, God cannot and will not revoke their salvation against their will. Rather, people that lose salvation have, of their own free will, decided to leave God's salvation.

Most (all?) OSAS proof texts that I know of can be convincingly incorporated into this framework. So, using Romans 11:29 as an example, an early church Pastor or Theologian would likely explain to you that this means that God will not revoke his calling of you. That said, they would add that that doesn't preclude you from deciding at some point in your Christian journey to stop cooperating with that perennial calling.

>>22140992
No, but the Biblical example of the method used to elect a successor is not prescriptive. Acts 1 shows Peter electing a successor to Judas' office by the casting of lots. This demonstrates Peter and the apostles' authority to elect a successor. However, Peter doesn't say: "At no point in the future can you use a vote instead of casting lots to elect a successor. For all time, you must use the casting of lots or else said election will be invalid."

>>22140998
I'm not presently arguing the supremacy of Catholicism. I am arguing that the fact that Mary is sanctified and full of grace is so agreeable that even Luther, the man who seemingly had a bone to pick each and every Catholic tradition, affirmed this teaching. I'm trying to find common ground.

>>22141010
>>22141017
>>22141030
I respect your good faith arguments while not being convinced by them. There are many issues with protestantism, most notably the rampant, modern revisionist interpretations, used by the episcopalians and presbyterians among others, to allow homos and trannies into the church. Unfortunately, among the laundry list of complaints against catholicism (indulgences - which, I respect you for admitting is a black mark on the entire institution, systemic child abuse and cover-up, placing Mary on even remotely similar ground as the Christ, etc.) they too have begun to bow to identity politics in order to secure congregational stability.

I just wondered how you decided that catholicism, of all sects, was somehow the most correct when it seems relatively plain that it is far and away the most heretical.
Again, I respect your candor and your gracious rhetoric.

>>22141145
>There are many issues with protestantism, most notably the rampant, modern revisionist interpretations
I agree. This is *exactly* the problem with Protestantism. Though it goes far beyond sexual liberalization. As one example, baptismal regeneration was taught by the disciples of the Apostles, it was ossified in the early creeds of the church (e.g. Nicene Creed), and it was universally agreed to be an important facet of salvation for the first 15 centuries of Christianity.

Then some dude named Zwingli came along and said, without exaggeration: "Every Christian before me, all the way back to the time of the apostles, is wrong about Baptism. Source: Trust me bro." Despite the frequent Bible thumping of Baptists and non-denominationals, they adopt Zwingli's 16th-century innovation on baptismal theology despite the fact that Zwingli didn't get his Baptismal theology from scripture. He just made it up. If this sounds as ridiculous to you as it does to me, then help me find the Bible verse that teaches that profession is a result of Baptism, let alone its primary purpose.

How is this anything other than a "modern revisionist interpretation"?

>I just wondered how you decided that catholicism, of all sects, was somehow the most correct
In my view, only Catholicism and Orthodoxy get an A-grade when all modern Christian sects are compared to early church.

>indulgences - which, I respect you for admitting is a black mark on the entire institution
For the record, I am not condemning indulgences per se. I am admitting that they have been abused by church leaders in the past, though I am ignorant to present abuses.

>systemic child abuse and cover-up
Yes, awful :(

>placing Mary on even remotely similar ground as the Christ
I think this is a good example with which to make my last point: It is important to distinguish between Catholic beliefs de jure and Catholic beliefs de facto (referring to their practice by certain laypeople). When selecting which church to join, I believe it is inadvisable to look at de facto beliefs, for reasons that I can expound on. I think Mary's relation to Christ, in terms of honor due, is a good example of a divergence between de jure and de facto Catholic teachings. I believe Protestants would often find that if they investigated the Catholic Church's de jure teachings, they would be much more appreciative of them.

According to the Catholic Church, the honor paid to Mary is a form of "dulia," and the honor due to God alone is termed "latria." Expounding on that distinction, the Catholic Encyclopedia says: "Catholic theologians insist that the difference is one of kind and not merely of degree; dulia and latria being as far apart as are the creature and the Creator." All the hubbub about "co-redemptrix" blah blah blah should be understood as a criticism of misguided laypeople rather than a criticism of the Church, which, for example, has vocally told Catholics to stop using the term co-redemptrix.

bump

Great book if you want a resource on magic that isn't soaked in 10 layers of religious dogma/terminology/symbolism

>>22141570
Why are you Catholic and not Orthodox?
I'm struggling to choose between the two at the moment.

>>22141888
Checked. I have read this book and followed Dean Radin from a while ago after I found out about the Gateway Process and Stargate project. Any other recommendations?

Listen niggers, magic isn't real. Newton proved that

>>22141952
The PK Man by Jeffrey Mishlove is on my list so try checking that out. He's a jew though so read with some skepticism.

>>22141956
Newton was a retarded pleb who died of mercury poisoning because he took alchemy literally and not as le individualisation process

>>22136703
My book, tho it doesnt exist yet. Soon

>>22141996
>and not as le individualisation process
Yes, because the individualisation interpretation is Jungian cope

>>22141947
The historical evidence for the papacy. Eastern authorities affirmed the papacy until they didn’t feel like it anymore, then they began acting like they never had. But you can’t unwrite history.

At the Second Council of Ephesus, the pope’s representative read the following from the pope:

>We offer our thanks to the holy and venerable synod, that when the writings of our holy and blessed pope had been read to you, the holy members by our [or your] holy voices, you joined yourselves to **the holy head** also by your holy acclamations.
>There is no doubt, and in fact it has been known in all ages, that the holy and most blessed **Peter, prince and head of the apostles, pillar of the Faith, and foundation of the Catholic Church, received the keys of the kingdom** from our Lord Jesus Christ, the savior and redeemer of the human race, and that to him was given the power of loosing and binding sins: **who down even to today and forever both lives and judges in his successors. The holy and most blessed pope Celestine, according to due order, is his successor and holds his place.**

No protests were made to the claims that 1. the Pope was the head of the council, 2. Peter was the prince and head and foundation of the church, and 3. Peter's authority is passed down to his successors forever.

The following is a letter from Pope Agatha to the Third Council of Constantinople:

>For this is the rule of the true faith, which this spiritual mother of your most tranquil empire, the apostolic Church of Christ, has both in prosperity and in adversity always held and defended with energy; which, it will be proved, by the grace of almighty God, **has never erred from the path of the apostolic tradition**, nor has she been depraved by yielding to heretical innovations, but from the beginning she has received the Christian faith from her founders, the princes of the apostles of Christ, and **remains undefiled unto the end**, according to the divine promise of the Lord and Savior himself, which he uttered in the holy Gospels to the prince of his disciples: saying, Peter, Peter, behold, Satan has desired to have you, that he might sift you as wheat; but I have prayed for you, that (your) faith fail not. And when you are converted, strengthen your brethren.

Pope Agatho told the council that the Roman Church 1. had never erred from apostolic tradition and 2. will remain undefiled until the end. The Sixth Ecumenical Council, held in the East and comprised almost in its entirety of Eastern bishops, addressed Pope Agatho as the “bishop of the first see of the Universal Church” and received his letter—and thus its claims—as “divinely written as by the Chief of the Apostles.”

The pope also wrote a letter to the second council of Nicaea that taught a "primacy" of "apostolate and pastoral responsibility" (not honor) that is given forever to the successors of Peter. The council responds to these claims: “We follow, accept and approve them.”

>>22142487
What do you make of the Donation of Constantine? What about the filioque and its theological implications? For all the doctrinal and Biblical support the Pope has, the Eastern church has real grievances with the West which have never really been resolved. Not to mention how the Latins betrayed the Byzantines during the Crusades.

>>22141947
Also, sorry for jumping straight into ranting and not asking: what is your religious background? What made you interested in Catholicism/Orthodoxy? I’ll be praying for your spiritual journey.

>>22142496
>the Donation of Constantine
If it was known to be a forgery, as is claimed by the critics, then bad bad bad. However, buttressing beliefs with documents that turn out to be forgeries does not invalidate the truth of those beliefs. The Orthodox Church has also been victim to the realization that documents that were previously relied upon are forgeries. Whatever was true in the Donation of Constantine is still true.

>filioque
Most debates between the Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church ultimately prove aimless. The filioque controversy is the epitome of such aimlessness; the discourse around the controversy hasn't progressed for centuries and the disagreement between the two churches on this issue will, seemingly, never be settled. The aimlessness of such debates results from the the opposing parties' inability to agree on the standard that should be used to evaluate, and therefore resolve, each particular issue.

When it comes to the filioque controversy in particular, the Orthodox Church demands *explicit* evidence and the Catholic Church is satisfied with *implicit* evidence. That is, the Orthodox Church will not concede unless the Catholic Church proves that filioque is taught explicitly in scripture. As long as Catholics fail to offer a verse that uses the phrase "proceeds from" to relate the Holy Spirit to the Son, then the debate will rage on. Catholics, on the other hand, don't require that the phrase "proceeds from" appear scripture for it to be true. That is, Catholics believe that "proceeds from" is taught implicitly in John 15 and 16. In any particular instance of a Catholic debating an Orthodox Christian on filioque, the discourse will bounce around like a pinball from the implications of John 15-16, to the alleged logical equivalence of "through" and "from," to the patristic witness that seems to support both sides, to the alleged mutability of creeds, and on and on. Yet these topics are all distractions because, after each has been thoroughly discussed, it becomes clear that the Orthodox debater will not accept filioque unless it is proved explicitly, word-for-word, from an authoritative text produced no later than AD 787, and it becomes clear that the Catholic debater cannot proffer a verse that says, word-for-word, that the Holy Spirit "proceeds from" the Son.

>the crusades
Very evil and regrettable things have been done. However, this is not evidence of which church is Jesus’ church. If we applied the same standard of judgment to the Israelites in OT times, then we’d conclude by their repeatedly awful behavior that there is no way they are the people of God and the stewards of his priesthood.

>>22142513
>If we applied the same standard of judgment to the Israelites in OT times, then we’d conclude by their repeatedly awful behavior that there is no way they are the people of God and the stewards of his priesthood
This is exactly the conclusion you should reach.

>>22142513
>If we applied the same standard of judgment to the Israelites in OT times, then we’d conclude by their repeatedly awful behavior that there is no way they are the people of God and the stewards of his priesthood
When looking at this, and the recent instance where they lied about the Holocaust (which did not happen) and subsequently used the victimization gained from it to spew their Marxist satanic globalist idolatry in books, music, movies, and public schools, I don't know how you can't come to the conclusion that the entire OT is Jewish fanfiction.

>>22142524
>>22142551
I’m assuming you’re both nta? This line of reasoning is only appealing to Christians, whose belief system is predicated on the belief that at some point in the past the nation of Israel was God’s holy people and the steward of his priesthood.

>>22142586
Indeed I'm nta and I'm not a christian. It's bizarre to me how anyone can read the bible, OT or NT, and feel anything but revulsion towards jews and their god.

>>22142596
>>22142586
I was brought up christian (southern Baptist) and I always felt vaguely uncomfortable with the seemingly fictitious stories in the OT. When I got older, and started actually reading the OT beyond the story of the garden, Noah, Moses, Jonah, etc., I was blown away by how similar the prophets' visions are to modern day cult leaders like Joseph Smith, David Koresh, Jim Jones, and Osho. There's really very little reason to be convinced that Jewish mythology is any more realistic than, say, Norse mythology. The fact that Jews are the authors of the bible, the same Jews that claimed there were holocaust roller coasters and death masturbation machines, makes the former much scarier and much more questionable.

I think Christianity can instill good morals and foster community, and I think that prayer is powerful (due to the law of attraction, not God, who I believe exists but is indifferent to us), but I can't - with a straight face - read about sneaky Jews telling tall tales about how God chose them and find myself even remotely convicted.

The majority of modern day Jews (see Israel) are openly atheist. That gentiles are still worshiping Yahweh, not to mention preaching aid to Israel from the pulpit in some misguided attempt to help the "chosen" people, makes my stomach turn. Most "religious" Jews hate white people and want to see them genocided (no, I won't spoon-feed you a source, open your eyes), so why would any self-respecting white adhere to their Pinocchio cosmogony?

What are good books that focus on white magic?
It seems to me that often when people seek to study magic practices they are eager to learn rituals that bring them wealth or power over others. I'm not interested in forcing my will onto others, I'd like to know about magic that works towards healing, protection, clarity of thought, etc.

>>22144500
The last wizard in my family was taken by the devil 150 years ago. Before that he recounted his story of seeking power through magic. According to him all this power can never be used for anything good, it always leads to evil so all it does is tempt us down the wrong paths. He said his soul was doomed and the devil would come take him, which he did.
The older stories say a cleric with enough faith to meet any temptation can use the temptations of the devil against him and for everyone.
If you suddenly have the ability to easily manipulate everyone in certain ways most people would not have the strength of conviction in ideals of human sovereignty etc to not exploit that. It needs someone even stronger to use the knowledge to help immunize the people against his own advantage.

>>22144814
>generational larping
Lol

>>22136703
>Best books to land me in hell

>>22144999
>a story has no value unless every detail is true
The post is condensed folklore from my area. An intelligent reader would read between the lines, a retard would learn nothing and reply "larp".

>>22144814
I am not sure if in your story the wizard vs cleric is meant to symbolize black magic vs white magic, or magic vs faith? But I suppose that performing magic requires faith in the first place... Interesting tale either way, thanks for sharing. I am wary of black magic because I do believe that it is ultimately a scam that turns you into a parasite, who in turn is feasted upon by your deceiving demonic "spirit guides". But though I am wary of it, I intend to study it just as well, so I can understanding it. Know your enemy...

>>22145354
I guess my post was shit. The first wizard is Galdra-Loftur. The cleric is Sæmundur Fróði. He's depicted on a statue outside the oldest university in Iceland riding the devil across the ocean and bashing him in the head with a heavy Bible.

>>22145457
Huh, I am completely oblivious to Icelandic literature and folklore, so I would never have guessed. Why is the post shit though? I still found it very interesting even if I missed the references.

>>22143527
>There's really very little reason to be convinced that Jewish mythology is any more realistic than, say, Norse mythology.
The difference is that Abrahamic religions demand faith and a canon. The few proofs they do try to offer are generally things like the ontological argument for god, and then they do a sleight of hand saying that the god of the philosophers is the god of the bible.
By contrast paganism doesn't demand faith. You can believe what you like, you can test the existence of deities by interacting with them if you want to, same with magic, and there are multiple interpretations which interact more or less harmoniously.

>>22147239
Goin into work so no time to explain

But you paganigger larpers are retarded and hardly understand your own traditions

Edgy teens the lot of you

Iamblichus or any other legit pagan philosopher would likely have more respect for a modern Christian than a modern neopagan

Wrt defense of judeo-christianity, I say three things:


Credo quam absurdum

Also revealed/natural exoteric/esoteric etc smthn smthn strauss/guenon etc etc etc

Lastly, if all religions are spokes on the wheel, judaism is the axle and christianity is the outer rim

>>22147386
Iamblichus was part of the degenerate Platonist tradition that ruined western spirituality. Fuck you greek-worshipping faggots.

>>22147403
You're even dumber than that other guy predicted.

>>22147403
Platonism is highest flowering of Greco-Roman tradition. Read less Heidegger and Nietzsche. Or at least read them critically and recognize their faults. Plato did nothing wrong. Aristotle on the other hand...

Alright so what caused the decline of magic? Scientism? Protestantism? Skeptical tradition in Greco-Roman thought? Seems like people flip flop between these and they’re all hopelessly intermingled, though personally I lean towards Protestantism but that’s probably because I just read a book asserting that

>>22147713
The light of Christ drives out the low level demons. That's the summary of the trend the people described and it seems observable in history.
The mechanisms are complex and include things like mass literacy and unified identities under trusted religious leaders.
In response the demons consolidated their power in larger enterprises, all emergent forces operate on larger scales. You now have to go big or get ignored by the forces you're appealing to.
Each house had a house spirit, those spirits are still there but they're bound to Christ.

>>22147874

>>22136711
holy fuck it's real

>>22147874
I guess that’s an expansion of the Protestant hypothesis. I know that the Bible attacks sorcerers, astrologers, pagans, diviners etc. continually. Would you say that had a definitive impact on the collapse of belief in magic, in other words, could the disenchantment of the world be read as a Christian triumph? The reason people point to Protestantism specifically though is that Biblical texts and conversions did not destroy belief in magic and magic-adjacent subjects, they persisted until the early modern period

>>22136780
Animal magnetism.

>>22147908
The enlightenment undermined belief in the idea that there was ever any "magic", it wasn't relatable to people anymore at that point. They just operated safely in their Christian construct, unaware that it's Christian and of the dangers it protects us from.
Post-Rome tribes with no Greek theatres were still emulating Greek plays and mixing Greek ideas with their own mythology. Rituals around nature, trees, sex etc were considered forms of Satyr worship, related to Greek theatre. These local folk religions were the biggest threats to European Christianity so the devil is depicted as a figure recognizable to the tribes of medieval Europe, something like a Satyr or Pan. The different magical traditions and even herbalism were all put under the hat of Satanism and the occult. The abstract forces involved all grew in scale and polarized.
This could have all been avoided if the early Christian schools had not been banned from also teaching classics by Julian. The later church wouldn't have felt threatened by ideas based on classical thought if the two traditions kept developing side by side as intended.

>>22147908
>judeo-christianity destroys everything and results in everyone being enslaved by (((bankers)))
>christians: we won!

>>22148337
You're compelling evidence that mass literacy was a mistake.

>>22136780
there are things in dimensions that you probably dont want to allow access to your psyche and body

>>22137658
He emphasizes the importance of empiricism throughout his work.

>>22148337
I wasn’t saying Christians would see that as a triumph, I was wondering what their thought on the matter is. The diffiiculty is that according to general modern conceptions, all religions are essentially a part of a magical worldview. It’s hard to get people to think about stuff like “Christian opposition to wizardry” when Christianity is seen as merely another form of wizardry, even if tendencies in monotheism (as I believe) greatly contributed to declining magical belief. Similarly, people aren’t accustomed to hearing takes like “Puritanism caused the scientific revolution” because they view science and religion as always opposed in every way

>>22136703
Unironically this, it's an actual compendium of most of the techniques you'll find in all the other traditions.

>>22148390
"Beware scholars of magic for they are oft magicians in disguise casting spells on you" -- some scholar of magic (forget who)

>>22147713
Read Hanegraaf's Western Esotericism: A Guide for the Perplexed. This is covered in the first chapter.
>>22148022
We can point out a few main things
1) hermetica was (post)dated to post-christianity, ruining idea of moses = hermes prisca theologia (modern scholars with access to hieroglyphics now see it as continuus w ancient egyptian knowledge despite new form)
2) idea of pura natura or that supernatural is opposed to nature as defined by science rather than supernatural as nature in itself as future/past science
3) protty doctrine of cessation of miracles -- idea that magic and demons left after christ
4) (prot-)christians/scientists/capitalists wanted to purge dissidents and entered unholy alliance

>>22148608
I really think it all comes from the split in the time of Julian.
Christians had to start coping with things like the fact that their schools didn't even try to account for physical phenomena anymore.
>you can't have these grapes
>I don't care all I needed was the Bible anyway, grapes are evil
These were the people that maintained our texts and they were banned from copying the classics they later demonized despite clearly wanting to at the time.

>>22148543
Satanic and fraudulent garbage written by a guy who talked to the Devil and was an incorrigible conman.

obligatory
https://gizmodo.com/the-untold-story-of-napoleon-hill-the-greatest-self-he-1789385645

He has nothing to do with any tradition.

>>22149137
Que sera sera

>>22148608
thanks I'll take a look at that book cause this problem has been grating me for like a year now also this
>protty doctrine of cessation of miracles -- idea that magic and demons left after christ
blew my mind when I read a book called Religion and the Decline of Magic. Was pretty crazy seeing 16th century ministers saying shit like the sign of the cross was only good for swatting away flies, exorcism didn't work, possession didn't happen, consecration was a meme, holy water was a scam etc. etc. You can really see how those positions quickly turned into "actually the demons in the new testament were just mental illnesses". Seems like their central contention was that no "magical" operation was effective or pious because the notion of humans because it was something like "stealing God's power". Plus the whole attempt to undermine the Catholic church and its control over what might be called white magic

>>22136891
>>22137942
>>22137985
>>22138002
>>22138008
>>22138041
>>22138080
>>22138091
>>22138106
>>22138157
>>22138376
I have a question for you, guys

>>>/his/15195111

>>22149536
Stop reading russian orthodox and/or traditionalist propaganda

>>22149593
No. It's a nice contrast to the normal propaganda.

The Templar treasure is hidden under a 700 year old stone tile pool built around a holy natural spring.
The British coronation stone is in a swamp in Scotland.
Atlantis is in the Sahara.
The end is near.
Cavemen had compasses.
The first expeditions of man out of Africa went north through the water systems where the Sahara is now all the way to Greece.

>>22149521
>"actually the demons in the new testament were just mental illnesses"
If you're interested in the topic of mental health and spirituality, look into the work of Jerry Marzinsky. He is a retired psychotherapist who worked with paranoid schizophrenics for decades and came to the conclusion that the voices they hear are immaterial parasitic entities (demons). And he was a total skeptic at the start of his career, he reached that conclusion without any religious bias on his part. After realizing this he was actually able to start curing people of schizophrenia (which psychiatry insists is incurable).

>>22149640
https://youtu.be/9J9haehfQeg

>>22147386
shut up christ

>>22150528
Not him but thanks for sharing. Looks interesting.

Don't let the demons kill the thread.

>>22152004
Are the demons in the room with you now?

>>22152152
Their insides look like trees. If you follow the branches they lead you places like to the end of thread. Total thread Armageddon is nigh.

>>22137070
>>22138985
what's the best biography on him?

>>22152325
The Aryan Christ


And Serrano's book on him and Hesse

>>22136703
>>22136709
>>22136711
>>22136727
>>22136739
>>22136749
>>22136764
>>22136780
>>22136788
>>22136810
>>22136830
>>22136844
>>22136848
>>22136891
>>22137060
>>22137065
>>22137070
>>22137124
>>22137185
>>22137192
>>22137205
>>22137208
>>22137211
>>22137228
>>22137230
>>22137243
>>22137258
>>22137332
>>22137455
>>22137474
>>22137524
>>22137658
>>22137723
>>22137742
>>22137751
>>22137756
>>22137759
>>22137818
>>22137826
>>22137834
>>22137853
>>22137868
>>22137876
>>22137887
>>22137912
>>22137942
>>22137956
>>22137985
>>22138002
>>22138008
>>22138041
>>22138056
>>22138080
>>22138091
>>22138106
>>22138150
>>22138157
>>22138188
>>22138232
>>22138289
>>22138344
>>22138357
>>22138368
>>22138376
>>22138378
>>22138559
>>22138800
>>22138985
>>22139014
>>22139020
>>22139021
>>22139087
>>22139094
>>22139223
>>22139242
>>22139322
>>22139809
>>22139829
>>22139846
>>22139914
>>22139925
>>22139931
>>22139961
>>22140044
>>22140056
>>22140097
>>22140338
>>22140605
>>22140626
>>22140678
>>22140698
>>22140778
>>22140814
>>22140975
>>22140985
>>22140992
>>22140998

>>22141010
>>22141017
>>22141030
>>22141145
>>22141570
>>22141869
>>22141888
>>22141947
>>22141952
>>22141956
>>22141963
>>22141996
>>22142030
>>22142033
>>22142487
>>22142496
>>22142504
>>22142513
>>22142524
>>22142551
>>22142586
>>22142596
>>22143527
>>22144500
>>22144814
>>22144999
>>22145038
>>22145048
>>22145354
>>22145457
>>22145479
>>22147239
>>22147386
>>22147403
>>22147411
>>22147415
>>22147713
>>22147874
>>22147898
>>22147900
>>22147908
>>22147917
>>22148022
>>22148337
>>22148374
>>22148385
>>22148390
>>22148468
>>22148543
>>22148573
>>22148608
>>22149137
>>22149165
>>22149166
>>22149521
>>22149536
>>22149593
>>22149640
>>22150224
>>22150528
>>22150551
>>22150555
>>22150665
>>22152004
>>22152152
>>22152209
>>22152325
>>22153082
From Deuteronomy 18:9-15 (KJV):
> 9 When thou art come into the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee, thou shalt not learn to do after the abominations of those nations.
> 10 There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch.
> 11 Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer.
> 12 For all that do these things are an abomination unto the Lord: and because of these abominations the Lord thy God doth drive them out from before thee.
> 13 Thou shalt be perfect with the Lord thy God.
> 14 For these nations, which thou shalt possess, hearkened unto observers of times, and unto diviners: but as for thee, the Lord thy God hath not suffered thee so to do.

>>22142487
>>22142513
based and Cath-pilled

>>22153220
Meanwhile the OT god also commands people to perform blood sacrifices to him in the form of circumcision. Fuck that fake clown.

>>22153218
KJV John 14-12
>Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.

1 Corinthian 6:3
>Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?

>>22153521
Satan rebels against God. Consider who you ally with.
>>22153588
And you believe that you will do the miracles of Christ? Do you?

>>22154242
>And you believe that you will do the miracles of Christ? Do you?
I believe you're an idiot. What makes one a diviner? What if I predict the weather? What if I learned my weather prediction skills from Canaanites?