Kabbalah the perpetuated evil

Good three-part series in layman’s terms.

By SEK4110

Related articles:

The Hollywood Kabbalah Cult Unmasked

The Hollywood Kabbalah Cult Unmasked – Part II – The Robotic Agenda

Kabbalah, crop circles, and UFOs: what’s their connection?

About these ads
Leave a comment

3 Comments

  1. apollonian

     /  December 29, 2013

    Kabbalist Psychology In Strict Philosophic Terms: Triumph Of Subjectivism And “Good” Over Truth

    Well, I watched all three vids; thought they were pretty good for info. Of course I’ve read Hoffman’s works too (see RevisionistReview.blogspot.com), on the Kabbalist subject. Kabbalah is all about psyching–oneself and others. But I like to convert these sort of psychologic-religious issues, much as possible, into straight-out philosophic terms. My theory then is that Kabbalism reifies subjectivism within the mind, removing objectivity, hence any solid idea of truth.

    I think Gosp. JOHN is best, for a short, but definitive work, in laying out the basic philosophy involved. Thus Christ is TRUTH, the only way to Godly happiness (JOHN 14:6). And Christ assures us about such TRUTH, affirming the Aristotelian, objective (God-given) reality which gives criterion for such truth–this is extremely important for philosophic purposes.

    At JOHN 18:38, P. Pilate invites Christ to dispute upon the subject of truth–what, in pt. of fact, is it, actually? Of course, Christ allows the moment to pass, knowing it can be done, and indeed, that it has already been done, as by Aristotle who lived hundreds of years previously.

    At JOHN 8:44, Christ tells us about his rivals and opponents, the Pharisees, foremost liars, the “sons of satan.” Christ effectively explains these Pharisees and master liars are SUBJECTIVISTS because, u see, as they deny the underlying objectivity, thus do they destroy truth.

    Only in an objective reality can there be truth–so how then is truth destroyed?–one must remove objectivity and insinuate subjectivism–AND THIS IS DONE BY MEANS OF “GOOD-EVIL.” For note the young are susceptible to this obsessive insistence upon ineffable “good,” and most people never grow-up enough to learn of the necessary primacy of truth (Christ) over everything else.

    Thus to destroy truth, the Pharisaics (moralists) and liars must persuade folks it’s better to be “GOOD,” thus replacing and over-riding the value of truth by means of subjectivism which is implicit in “good”–hence, for example, the “noble lie” of Leo Strauss and Plato.

    Note the Pelagian heresy, analyzed by St. Augustine confirms there’s no possibility of “good works” that can earn humanity into heaven, humans being sinners that no possible human will can change. THERE IS NO PERFECTLY “FREE” human will–we’re sinners, always have been, always will be. And this state of sin is because we’re possessed of will, even if not perfectly free–hence we’re always self-interested, always subject to sin.

    Thus it was necessary for dear Christ to die for the sins of mankind–for mankind, by himself, can’t change that sinful nature. Thus Christ freed humanity fm guilt-complex, for another example.

    Hence one understands the issue of “good-evil” can only be metaphorical–there can’t be any “good-evil” in reality, only REASON VS. INSANITY. For how could one sin willingly?–knowing one would be sent to Hell?–impossible, only insanity can explain such sin.

    Thus Christ is always properly understood primarily as foremost value of TRUTH and honesty, not other things like peace or good or even love, though Epistle of 1John 4:8 says God is love (as this refers to the link btwn Christ and the father, etc.). Thus love is necessary part of God, but Christ is pre-eminently TRUTH above all/any other virtue in pursuit of Kingdom of God (happiness).

    Finally then, the lesson regarding Kabbalah is it will be effective if, first, u are subject to the “good-evil,” thus the subjectivist fallacy/delusion/heresy. The trick, philosophically, is to note that as subjectivism/objectivity are most basic notions, they can only be assumed, not proven–as proof would require a prior premise which cannot exist.

    Reply
  2. searchnewsglobal

     /  January 4, 2014

    Reblogged this on .

    Reply
  3. AP

     /  January 9, 2014

    Great info, worst speaker ever!

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 147 other followers

%d bloggers like this: