Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > Electronic Harassment / Mind Control / Subliminal Programing > The Nature of Matrix Religions and what they mean.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 15-09-2016, 10:38 AM   #461
chevron
Inactive
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 382
Likes: 75 (67 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rapunzel View Post
Icke talks about the fear felt by sacrifices in ancient times and how this ‘feeds’ these inter dimensional beings.. To begin with, human sacrifice in the ancient world, in the West at least, was not a frequent occurrence despite the wishes of some people to see it as widespread. Secondly it was normally not an involuntary sacrifice since the victim was aware that he was giving his life for the good of the community and was also aware that his sacrifice would be welcomed by the Gods. They would therefore not be in a fearful state but an anticipatory state and just to ensure they did not panic at the last minute they would usually be given sedative drugs.

The idea that it was primarily young virgins who were sacrificed is due to the repressed sexual urges of Victorian scholars, who must have trembled with horrific delight at the thought. They wrote long and rambling descriptions of such events which were products of their own depraved minds.

As for these entities being an electro magnetic force I can go with that, since I believe magic to be a form of energy as well. I have no idea where spirits with bad intentions come from, they simply are – as all life is and like all life they are many and varied. They are not evil in the sense that we understand it since evil does not exist as a separate force but is generated by human beings. There is no ‘force of evil’ or Satan if you like and although a human can create an entity with evil intentions that entity can only exist as long as the human puts energy into it. Evil cannot exist on its own since it would destroy itself since evil is contra-life.

Your comment that “life was never meant to be brutal for us” reminded me of a Star Trek episode where they visited a planet that was run by a benevolent computer. The computer, or their god, supplied them with everything they needed. Food grew easily and plentifully, the climate was just right and the people lived in peace and happiness. It was a paradise. The only downside was the people there never developed; they never achieved anything or advanced in knowledge and abilities; they never had the chance to grow because they didn’t need to, in fact they were no more than children with their god providing everything they needed. The community was stagnant. The argument between Kirk and Spock was - should they be left like that or should they have the chance to be fully human.

Isn’t that what Eden was like? A paradise where everything was provided without any effort. A place where no-one could ever ‘grow up’.
Hi Rapunzel.

I've often heard that said about life in Eden ....that it was like that Star Trek episode where the community had become stagnant.

I've also heard it said that it's the strife that we endure that makes us grow.

In Eden i don't think that they were to laze around and do nothing all day and be cared for as babies ....I believe they were to cultivate it ....to dress it .....we all know how wild an overgrown garden can become left unattended so in the first instance they were to learn how to look after it ....i don't think it was handed to them on a plate.

It tells us in the scriptures that to eat and drink and feel satisfied after a hard days work is God's gift to us .....I believe our creator made us with all this muscle structure to use it and physically work.

Whilst child-like in innocence ..... imo their intellectual capacity was far greater than contemporary mankind and that just as a child's mind endlessly wants to explore and create things they would have been the same and done so.

I don't think the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Bad imparted any special knowledge to them it was just a test to see if they would obey God.....if they didn't touch it then they got to live forever ...if they touched it then they would die as the story says ......and basically that's what I see the Bible telling us ....that we will return to the original state of living forever on the Earth.

We see how as parents how a baby and a young child flourishes in a loving environment .....usually a child that has grown up in a stable loving family tends to become a well balanced adult.

We wonder at the ancients such as the Egyptians and how they had the knowledge to build both huge structures as the pyramids and stuff and also made incredible small artefacts such as vases and pots etc that still baffle some of the most skilled craftsman, architects and engineers of our day.

I believe that the human brain and body has degenerated since Eden .....we still see in the ancients evidence of superior learning and knowledge and whilst we have much technology today I think we pale into insignificance at some of the marvels of the generations that came before us.

As for the fear and sacrifice ....phew!! ....this is a thread in itsel lol

I am not sure as to what I believe is going on there with the fear and the victim
....I hear what you are saying.

Trying to look at it from my understanding of what the Biblical demon is ....... I'm not sure if there is a transference of an energy force created by the fear of the victim that is 'feeding and sustaining' these entities or if it's just the whole ritual and intention of the participants that is in defiance of God's ways that somehow justifies their argument against God.....all they want is for us to disobey.

I don't see these entities as any form of any particular creature as I think they are electromagnetic in nature yet I believe they have the power to manifest themselves in various forms especially when evoked.

Your posts are so thought provoking Rapunzel and you have my mind all over the place .....I'm sure if me and you ever met we would not stop talking for days on end

Last edited by chevron; 15-09-2016 at 10:41 AM.
chevron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-09-2016, 05:40 PM   #462
rapunzel
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: neath the starred and leafy sky
Posts: 5,748
Likes: 372 (250 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blackyblue View Post
As i have already debated with Sevenhills, the Normans did not speak a French dialect anymore than the citizens of Gaul adopted a Norman dialect.

They spoke Lingua Franca.
Lingua Franca does not mean 'French language', it means 'assimilated language', therefor the Normans and Gauls assimilated a language that they could both understand, although of course, there was a use of Latin in the assimilation.
This assimilated language got further assimilated in to the old English when they conquered.

You are making the mistake of reading that the Normans brought lingua franca in to our law courts.
However lingua franca 'is not' french, and the Lingua Franca of Normandy spoken by a handful of diasporas today, is no relation to todays French language in the slightest.

I know what Lingua Franca is and the Normans did not speak it. The spoke Norman French which is a dialect of lt langue d'Oil, which the northern French spoke. French is a Romance language because it is based on the Latin spoken in Gaul. When the Vikings settled in Normany they adopted the language of the people who were already there, although over time some Scandinavian words were absorbed into the language creating Norman French. This was the language brought over at the Conquest, which the nobility spoke for several centuries and with which all administration, legal and financial, were conducted, although sometimes Latin was used. The Domesday Book was written in Latin. Norman French evolved into Anglo Norman as it assimilated some Anglo Saxon words.

The English spoke Old English (Anglo Saxon) and Norman words came to be assimilated into English. Since, in th 13th century, Parisian French became the 'Courtly' language and this began to be spoken by the nobility instead of Anglo Norman there was an assimilation of these Frenech words as well. Eventually the nobiity and the royals, who by now thought of themsleves as English, started speaking the English tongue, which by the time of Chaucer had evolved into Middle English. Also the start of the Hundred Years War with France meant that French was the language of the enemy. In 1362 Edward III addressed the Parliament in English. There was never any Lingua Franca involved.

The Law Courts used Norman French, although some of the Langue d'Oil did creep in. Have you ever read anything in Norman French or Anglo Norman? Have you read anything in Middle English before Chaucer? Did you know that there is an Anglo Norman Society dedicated to keeping the language alive?

http://www.anglo-norman-texts.net/
__________________
"What have you done to the cat, Erwin? He looks half dead."
- Mrs. Schrödinger.


Is it a bit solipsistic in here or is it just me?

"Bother," said Pooh, as Cthulhu rose up and ate him. "
rapunzel is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:27 PM.


Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.