[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / asatru / ausneets / christ / nofap / o / ss / vichan / wooo ]

/fringe/ - Fringe

Esoteric Wizardry
Comment *
Password (Randomized for file and post deletion; you may also set your own.)
Flag *
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Show oekaki applet
(replaces files and can be used instead)

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, swf, pdf
Max filesize is 16 MB.
Max image dimensions are 15000 x 15000.
You may upload 5 per post.

RulesMetaModerator LogLibraryArchivesFAQFringe GuideRanksCSS/fringe//asatru//4chon//ask/#looshFringechan

The rules are simple and mostly apply to the creation of threads on /fringe/:
1. No duplicate threads of topics that already exist unless the previous thread has hit the bump limit
2. No making threads just to ask questions, actually present substantial information if you're going to make a thread
3. No creating new threads purely to no-effort shitpost (you will be forgiven if it's a major GET)
4. Post threads that fall under the subject matter of /fringe/ (creepypasta is not allowed here, take that to /x/)
5. Respect anonymity. No identifying posts.
6. Do not sit on the default flag or post with no flag all the time
7. Do not raid/attack the board
8. Meta board discussion goes in >>>/fringemeta/
If the board goes up for claim and the board owner can't be found anywhere, please contact chanseywrites@hotmail.com to give the board to her. To contact the board owner send an email to fringewizard@pm.me

Tipp's Fringe Bunker

File: 6ee3e73687d7971⋯.jpg (10.05 KB, 400x255, 80:51, silence.jpg)


I've been reading "The secret teachings of all ages" from P. Hall and I have encountered in more than one occasion that he describes how masters of occult knowledge would often teach incorrect information to say "separate the wheat from the chaff", and then later on the students once they prove themselves to be worthy of holding the secrets, will be told about the true nature of the teaching.

Now, isn't that just fucking stupid? Isn't it ABSOLUTELY RETARDED to give people wrong information, even if you think they're too stupid to handle the real thing? Why not just say "listen pal you don't have what it takes. I'm not gonna teach you anything until you achieve X and Y. Buh-bye!"

But instead of this —and always based on the stories told by people like Hall— secret masters have been spreading misinformation and making thing cryptic in order to hide these secrets from the people they consider to be unworthy. Yet, isn't this way more counter productive than simply not teaching anything at all? Why bother spending time to teach something that is deliberately wrong? What if you died before you got the wrong information, now you just learned a lot of bullshit and maybe you'll reincarnate in a fucking three-legged dog because you never learned how to live in the after life.

I compare this to having Apple release a smartphone which appears to take pictures but in reality doesn't, and then having them argue that "it's better this way, otherwise someone might misuse the camera to take pictures of naked ladies or dead bodies". Isn't it just fucking better if you just release ALL THE INFORMATION, ALL THE TECHNOLOGY and then just let people police themselves and find out the best way to use things? Why is it different with occult knowledge?

I'm not just talking about hiding information, which I also think is a problem in the long run. I'm referring to specifically wrong information, switching god names or attributes of the sephirot just because you want to keep the information for yourself and your group. I just don't understand why would someone smart come to the conclusion that misinformation is better than simply telling people to fuck off.

Do you guys think that it is better to share all information open and publicly, and trust that people will find the best ways to use it, or do you believe that it is necessary to some extent to lie to the general audiences and keep the jewels for a few initiated/lucky ones?


Because most "masters" are egoistical degenerates with mental problems. Fuck those idiots. A geniune, real enlightened master will teach the right thing, if he will teach at all. No mindgames, no lies, no bullshit.

Those deceivers and "secret keepers" are no good.


Pro tip: Any sort of attempt at obfuscation is an indication of a lack of quality. It doesn't matter if you're reading a book on the occult, or a book on how to draw -if it's not practical and straightforward it's shit.

The people that actually know what they're talking about can get information across in succinct and straightforward manner. Nothing in life is so complicated that it can't be simplified -at least on a beginner level.

Unfortunately, finding practical material is always difficult. There's something I noticed, where for whatever reason the vast majority of learning material -concerning any subject matter- is really, really bad. I'm into art myself for example, and I honestly couldn't recommend you a book that I feel teaches the ability in a worthwhile manner. I can literally think of a handful of books that are decent, out of the hundreds I perused. How could that be when we have tens of thousands of good artists?

Sometimes I think there's a conspiracy against knowledge.


File: 18bb757ff8f980f⋯.png (188.22 KB, 454x547, 454:547, thoughtforms101.png)

File: e48e76d1f635d58⋯.png (454.57 KB, 637x880, 637:880, thoughtforms101a.png)

File: 05d519e5f74ecf9⋯.png (430.12 KB, 633x878, 633:878, thoughtforms101b.png)




Yes, it's fucked up. It's not always a troll though. Sometimes knowledge is best attained through experience.


File: 2829961a77747ce⋯.png (461.31 KB, 642x896, 321:448, thoughtforms101c.png)

File: 39fe36690c3dde9⋯.png (448.38 KB, 636x890, 318:445, thoughtforms101d.png)

File: 4d559660ce12f39⋯.png (449.05 KB, 645x899, 645:899, thoughtforms101e.png)


File: 330292eeb0be426⋯.png (434.57 KB, 634x901, 634:901, thoughtforms101f.png)

File: de0415060db5698⋯.png (388.06 KB, 688x896, 43:56, thoughtforms101g.png)

File: b8e237781be9620⋯.png (93.01 KB, 672x259, 96:37, thoughtforms101h.png)


File: e93537c643d9bf4⋯.jpg (112.73 KB, 1020x1024, 255:256, 86263563d068852a4362069a97….jpg)


It's not that they lie, they tell you absurd and dumb things with sarcasm or irony and if you indeed is dumb you'll take it seriously despite it being ridiculous.

This board is filled with people repeating dumb shit and believe me it's not possible to tell anyone how it is because ya'll retards will discard reality and accept the misinformation instead.



>not realizing that this whole thoughtform concept is the test and entities are actually real



do you have an example? i don't think he says incorrect information is taught persay – it's exoteric information, the echo or the outer shell of what is known by the inner circle. this isn't necessarily meaningless trash, i'd interpret it more as a projection or a shadow of a more true reality onto a more concrete plane of existence. alchemy, for example, isn't so-much wrong information – but wrong vis-a-vis the physical plane, maybe. so, it's relative what's deemed 'correct' and 'incorrect' – what can be incorrect to one can be correct to another or vice versa. there is a hierarchy of rightness and wrongness, what is correct in the hell-realms is incorrect in the heavenly-realms and et cetera. if one lives in a big city, practical advice and guidelines for living are going to be completely different from living in a rural environment – the fact of these guidelines being compartmentalized to a certain state of existence not making them wrong. the source of truth (the innermost circle) may indeed be a constant, however its manifestation may easily be decided by a function, which has certain parameters pertaining to the medium of dissemination.

a secondary factor is thinking for the long-term and the preservation of ideas – exoteric information may be embedded in the architecture of a monument for example, and this will look fairly benign, so it might not be torn down, and may even inspire other architects to make similar monuments who propagate this information unknowingly.

i'm not defending the mystery schools in general, since weird stuff goes on there, but i'd still defend this mode of divulging information – profane is popular almost by definition, and popularization results in profanation, as should be obvious from advertising, marketing, etc – true occult information, it's extremely washed-out, watered-down, made to fit a certain subculture, etc.

in sum – we wouldn't even understand or recognize such real information if it came to us.



in our current, aquarian, age, most of the organizations divulging information in this fashion seem to be highly maleficent – which mostly occurs through pop music videos, celebrities, movies, political statements, corporations, various artwork, etc – a lot of it is just them brandishing their power-symbols, and teasing the populace in this way, perhaps with some nods and messages of respect and admiration to other organizations (knights templar, skull and bones, whatever).


I could give you answers but you're not ready for them.

That's what you asked for, isn't it?



That's because the only true teacher is practice.

You only begin to learn after you discard teachings and do the work yourself.


Believing that one source contains all knowledge is contradicting reality. If you blindly rely on one source to save you, that is energy constriction. This is why you learn, unlearn, use, discard, interpret, reinterpret and distill as necessary in your mind. That's what "true occult masters" make you do.

Don't be sheep.


This is occult knowledge, not 3d technology, or shit that can be easily replicated in objective universe. It's mental science. All a "teacher" or "guide" can do is trigger your "peripheries." It would seem the most efficient way is to purposely mislead you on some aspects to see if your BS meters go off. Now you're thinking about subtle occult principles that can only be properly understood after deep contemplation and analysis.

For example, the principle "all is mind. universe if mental" might be fully understood to it's fullest extent through playing with your head. Perhaps someone who understands the most efficient psychological tactics (that they know you will absolutely not understand at your current stage of understanding) to make you understand this principle has to resort to some form of playful deception, not for harmful or malevolent purposes necessarily (though that can always be the case), but to make you get it.

I'm not an expert, but I definitely understand why they would do something like that.



I think that it is absolute bullshit to be deceptive in such a manner. But, I also believe that there are certain things that can not be learned without making the mental connections yourself, and that being spoonfed it paradoxically prevents you from understanding the larger lessons of the information. Further, there are certain things that can only be explained in metaphor because our language proves fickle when discussing them. But, to intentionally hide the truth behind a seal of deception is abject horse shit.

What I mean to say by this is to declare "this is the truth" when it is not is fucking garbage but to say "this is not the full truth but it will lead you to ask the proper question the answer to which will lead you to the truth" is necessary on certain things.



Wow, thanks I needed to read that. Apparently I am much more ascendant than I thought I was. Pfft what a fucking paradox this all is.


Because theirs what I think,what I know, and what I believe. wisdom and belief dont necessarily stem from thought.


Does anyone have a link to a pdf of that book? I found it on Google scholar but only the first 56 pages.



What's the book called?



dont know what >>123467 found but i found an excerprt searching "pema tense"

Magical Use of Thought Forms: A Proven System of Mental & Spiritual Empowerment



> Manly P. Hall

That's a urethra you're reading, moron: A Manly pee hallway.

A. A. Bailey, (11 [magic], Baal Lie)

Crowley - Crows Lie.

H.P. Blavatsky - Blabs at the Sky

H.P. Lovecraft - Result of the "sex magic" (a love craft) Crowley "discovered".

These "Occult Masters" do not exist. Look into Blavatsky's life, she claims to have gained mastery over techniques and spheres of knowledge which take half a lifetime to teach eastern masters. The physical limitations of travel by boat / rail etc. alone make her claimed worldly gallivanting patently bogus. Her entire life is a lie, and she didn't write the book attributed to her.

Much like all the other "famous" folk these occult writers are just "frontmen" for a collective. The goal of the collective from which you're reading is to misinform and deceive with layer upon layer of deceit, each degree higher you embrace yet another level of the shit-test and don yet another layer of wool over your eyes.

Those books embraced by the Luciferian elite are all full of bogus bullshit which they claim is "enlightened" knowledge. They worshiping the Circle / Sphere as Holy and Enlightened and the Square / Plane as profane; While ignoring (or misleading you from) actual cold hard observable facts of reality. Thus they claim all ancient wise ones knew the earth was round, when it is demonstrably flat and everyone even slightly enlightened knows it.


See: >>117897

The heliocentric model was made by Sun worshippers backfitting figures using occult numerology into their esoteric ("Roman" derived) Astrotheology.

The "occult wisdom" you're reading never even reveals basic bitch facts such as the nature of our realm. You might as well read them and take the opposite of everything they say as being more likely true…


File: 4902d01e0b345e5⋯.pdf (9.56 MB, Magical-Use-of-Thought-For….pdf)


>Magical Use of Thought Forms: A Proven System of Mental & Spiritual Empowerment



There appears to be a download bug. To get the book click the " 4902d01e0b345e5⋯.pdf" name, not the actual name.



what's good then according to you? I've really started to feel that literature should only get you as far as finding an irl teacher/master, and from then on you should practice exclusively from what they teach you



The best teacher is experience. Everything that there is to learn is all around us. A great teacher can be a great help but great teachers are rare, especially when this sort of stuff really needs to be taught in an exclusively 1 on 1 setting. I think that great care must be exercised when choosing either a book or a teacher to learn from, especially if you have not yet reached an amazing level of awareness of when you are being deceived.




Return to the topic of the thread.

Everything a teacher ever taught me, I have proven wrong. Everything real I have accomplished has been a result of my own learning.



Thank you good sir



Listen to this anon he is enlightened

earth is flat


You said yourself, "once they prove themselves." They are students, so the master probably invested lots of time into them so that they can prove themselves, not just trash them after five or ten years. I don't know what time frame you're referring to but it could even be more complicated than a simple student-teacher relation and more like medieval monks living in a cloister. Then based on what information is being withheld from the student, it could make sense given a certain situation, such as protecting the student from harming themselves or leaking valuable information. It may seem stupid, but it could have made plenty of sense in their religious/political climate.


Only greedy faggots hold secrets. The world is gonna end anyways, the humans are doing it without even being aware of it despite evidence in their faces. They go and have hermit retreats and sometimes with others like it fucking makes a difference. It's like a candle being lit in the middle of no where providing no light but for itself. Utter failures. Spread the word and the proper course of action shall be taken.


keeping fags out is always good



THIS! nasas all lieing caus AINT NO GLOBE ERTH


What is the karmic consequence in giving a loaded gun to a child? This is your answer.


>karmic consequence

What is the karmic consequence of doing ANYTHING? You can say that everything is bad, you can always find a possible way of turning good things into bad ones without much effort.

You teach a child how to swim? Maybe he'll get eaten by a shark or he'll fucking drown. Was it your fault then? But you were just trying to do a good thing!

You teach your child how to drive a car? Maybe he'll run over someone.

You teach your child martial arts? Maybe he'll get drunk one day and beat someone to death.

That "karmic consequence" argument is fucking bullshit and I hope you don't really think you're being wise by using it. You can't really predict what is going to happen. You give a child a loaded gun? Maybe he'll accidentally kill a criminal and save your life. Your argument is stupid. What else do you have?



You're not great at this metaphorical language thing are you? He means "what are the karmic consequences of giving someone something they're far too immature to understand?" The difference is that a loaded gun in this instance is inherently dangerous rather than relatively innocuous like learning to swim or how to drive. Karma doesn't work with results alone.




Thank you anon.



>a loaded gun in this instance is inherently dangerous rather than relatively innocuous like learning to swim or how to drive

Because you say so? Where are the "rules of karma" written that you so stubbornly follow? I do understand the point you're trying to make, but that is just a reductionist argument. You're assuming that the child is going to use the gun to do something bad, because somehow you think you're wiser than everyone else and you know what's good for the universe. Somehow you can "predict" the future and tell that the child is 100% going to do something bad with the gun. What are you, nostra-fucking-damus?

Take something simple in magic, for example thought forms. Let's say you decide to write a book about thought forms. Who's to say that someone isn't going to use this knowledge to create an evil entity to hurt other people? But maybe this knowledge can also be used to help the world. How the fuck can you tell? The answer is, more often than not, you just can't. You don't know what the consequences of your actions are going to be. You have no fucking idea what is going to happen. You can "predict" or "guess" what is going to happen based on your own reasoning, but you are not god, no matter how smart you think you are (which you obviously think you are) you can never be sure that something will happen one way or the other. Yes you can make a guess, "if I drop this pen it will fall to the ground." But the universe is incredibly complex and assuming that you somehow can tell with perfect accuracy what the future holds is just being fucking retarded.

>giving someone something they're far too immature to understand

Who is to say that this person is immature? You? You know when people are too immature? Of course you don't. You THINK you do, but in the end, it's all a subjective reasoning. Maybe what people need is precisely this knowledge. Maybe by giving the child the gun he's going to be like "Holy fuck, this is a weapon. This is a huge responsibility. I need to learn how to use this wisely". You have no fucking idea what's happening in the child's mind.

Maybe the child will kill someone, go to jail, spend 10 years there and then come out and be a really valuable member of society. Maybe if you hadn't given him the gun he'd been a waiter and just ended up OD'ing on heroin. YOU SIMPLY CANNOT TELL THE FUTURE. The only thing you can do is to trust that people will learn how to use the knowledge properly. If you're going to use the bullshit "karma" argument, then you have to admit also that maybe withholding this knowledge might be bad karma. Hell, anything can be bad karma. You give a homeless person $10? maybe he'll buy a knife and stab a poor old lady. You help an old lady cross the street? Maybe she was supposed to die that day and instead she lives and changes her will, leaving nothing to her family and ruining their livelihood.

Again, my point is: you.CAN'T.fucking.tell. Period. You can make a guess ("this guy is a jerk, I'm not going to teach him martial arts because he'll beat someone up") but you can never be sure (maybe learning martial arts will teach him discipline and change him forever)

Therefore, it is my impression that we should just put all the knowledge out there. It's laughable that you believe in karma when it works to support your argument but somehow you ignore it when it goes against your preconceived ideas.

tl;dr we are fucking ignorant, you can't tell what's gonna happen, so just spread the knowledge and don't assume you know what's best for other people. If you believe in karma and swear by it, then shouldn't you just fucking trust that karma will somehow work things out in the long run? You are not making any sense. Either you believe in karma affecting all aspects of life or you don't.



You missed my point again. Karma is effected by not only the results of the act itself but the intention behind the act. An executioner gets less of a karma hit than a murderer. If it is believed that the net result of spreading knowledge is negative for society as a whole due to the rampant proliferation of degeneracy and self satisfaction then to act against that belief is negative karma. It means you'd be acting with malicious intent. I do not claim that I know the outcome but the fact is that the outcome may not even matter karmically speaking. You dont take the hit when it goes wrong, you take the hit because it could have gone wrong.

The child could go on to become the next Jesus as a result of me handing him a gun but I have reasonable expectation that he instead may harm himself and others, the effect of a cause I created. It's a kind of wisdom to seek to understand the effects of your actions. That said. People have and continue to release books on occultish topics without too much karmic fanfare. It's all right there in the library. What secrets could we possibly have left to keep?

>tl;dr we are fucking ignorant, you can't tell what's gonna happen, so just spread the knowledge and don't assume you know what's best for other people. If you believe in karma and swear by it, then shouldn't you just fucking trust that karma will somehow work things out in the long run?

I'm a neophyte but I am pretty sure that's not how karma works. It is always possible to accrue negative karma thanks to the free will principle. As an aside, what reason would I have to spread the information, in the case that I have no idea what is best for other people? Indeed why do anything for other people under the chaos principle? The best solution would be to not involve oneself right? After all, I don't know what the consequences of giving a hobo $10 is, so the safest option is to keep my money to myself.



Why do you talk about karma with such property, like you are an expert in Karma? As far as I know, karma is only a theory, not a proven thing. There is no evidence that bad actions create consequences. It's all wishful thinking, the hope we have that people who do bad things will get punished and people who do good things will get rewarded.

>I'm a neophyte but I am pretty sure that's not how karma works

paraphrasing: you don't know but you guess. And you want me to accept that your guess is actually the truth?

>you take the hit because it could have gone wrong.

It *could*? So again, you're presuming. You are guessing. So why do you even bother existing? If we use your argument then there is no reason to do anything at all —even existing— because anything "could go wrong". You use "karma" only when it pleases you. That's not objective reasoning, that's just being biased.

>the safest option is to keep my money to myself.

The fact that you even think there is a "safest" option shows that I'm not clearly explaining the difference between action and non-action. I start from admitting that we are ignorant and that given that the universe "is" , therefore it would seem clearly that there is a reason to prefer "action". You start from the idea that you somehow know the consequences of "action" and therefore you choose to do non-action.

Am I making any sense? Maybe it's just a question of both of us having different definitions of what is Karma, action or non-action. Let me try with an example to also make things clear to myself. You have 100 text-books. You are a teacher. You can either only show 10 books to the children, those that you (notice: YOU) consider to be "safe" or you can just let them read all the books and make their own decisions. In the first case, it is you who are choosing what is good and what is bad for them. In the second case, you renounce this responsibility by letting the children use their free will to read anything they want and do with the knowledge whatever they see fit. Isn't the second option better in terms of reducing possible "karmic" consequences? Aren't you more responsible (in general) by action than by non-action?

Case 1: You have narrowed the options for the children and, if we want to talk in terms of karma, you are being more responsible for this action because you are exerting your free will but limiting the options available to other people (I decide what is good for you and bear the burden of making a wrong decision)

Case 2: You have chosen to let the children exert their free will, and your part in the whole thing is more of a non-action thing (I don't tell you what to do, I let you choose what mistakes you make)

The first paragraph of your response is written like there are clear karmic rules but as far as I know it's all speculation, so you need to either cite sources or admit that the whole karma thing is just used to make people believe that it's better to do good things than bad things:

>An executioner gets less of a karma hit than a murderer

Says who?

>the fact is that the outcome may not even matter karmically speaking

the fact is? Where are we getting these "facts" from?



How can you understand the books if you don't even understood the message I wanted to pass? Most of the books explains things at least on this level of understanding because more able people have fewer chances to do stupid things that will end up damaging themselves or their loved ones. And this is exactly why the books are filled with riddles and metaphors.

"all truths are but half truths and every truth is half false"

"dao ke dao, fei chan dao, ming ke ming, fei chan ming"

If you are not capable of understand that, you are the child that the book is trying to protect.



You're exactly the kind of person I'm reacting against. Stop using metaphors to hide true meaning, stop thinking other people are dumber than you, and start treating them as intelligent mature creatures. Our society will not go anywhere if you keep thinking other people are like children,withholding whatever knowledge you possess.

Metaphors and riddles are only useful when they establish a parallel between one difficult piece of knowledge and another one that the layman are already familiar with. Parables are not useful because they obfuscate information, they are useful because they create a link between two stories, one that is clear and one that is confusing. The end goal is to make all the knowledge clear and public, not to hide the real meaning and keep it only for the "wise ones" or the "initiated". That's pure and simple elitist circle-jerking. This has been the problem with most knowledge in our history, this holier-than-thou attitude, "I know when you are ready to learn" is only useful for those people that want to keep their status within the hierarchy of learning and whatever power is associated with being the keepers of the wisdom. Haven't you learned anything from the history of religion and the development of priesthood?

Stop being such a patronizing dick lord and just let other people learn without having to pass your approval exam


Here's an example so that you understand my point.

Lots of people take pictures with their smartphones. Some of those pictures are damaging. Some people take naked pictures of themselves, and later these pictures are leaked online. Some of the people end up killing themselves because of the shame.

Should we then make smartphone cameras illegal? Of course not. What we did was, we let everybody have a camera, and then we reacted to the new problems that arose with this new technology. If Steve Jobs came to you and told you "listen pal, I don't think you're ready to have a camera. I'll be the one deciding whether or not you're allowed to take photographs" I'm sure you'd be like fuck that shit, I'll do what I want. I'll take pictures of my asshole because that is my own business and I have the right to do so."

If you decided to make cameras illegal, you would bear the responsibility of losing millions of pictures and videos that are beneficial to many people around the world. You can always argue that dealing with these bad situations is the same as "keeping the good knowledge only to those initiated" but the world is way too complex for us to predict what's going to happen. A single human being cannot predict what's going to happen and decide that it's better to keep certain knowledge away from the rest of the world. That is elitism.


File: b31df51330da419⋯.jpg (66.12 KB, 450x373, 450:373, Kirk Lazarus.jpg)


>metaphors to hide true meaning

>start treating them as intelligent mature creatures

And can't understand metaphors…

Anon… Whatever, Idc anyway…


probably because there is no grand secret. People tend to make things more complicated then necessary either to fuel there own ego or because they didn't know any better.

montalk which can pretty much be summarized to "hope for the best and things will get better" turns into a massive conspiracy with the constant threat of "THEM" and phony Bologna science.




…or maaaybe, it's that metaphysical matters can't be described exacty the way they are because human everyday concepts are insufficient so metaphors is all you have.

If you pick up a popular science magazine you'll see them use everyday metaphors too. It's not to "hide" some truth, it's to give you a way to maybe grasp complex abstract circumtances.

There is no literal way of talking about things that can't be empirically measured, you have to use metaphors, or avoid the area. Maybe you should just leave and do something else if you don't understand this.


File: b3a3fc2e97de007⋯.jpg (46.13 KB, 949x419, 949:419, Unbenannt.JPG)


>And can't understand metaphors…


>Maybe you should just leave and do something else if you don't understand this

See? you two idiots are perfect examples of elitism. This thread is not for the likes of you. I wish you could be more open and try to explain your point but your argument has just been basically "lol you don't understand metaphors/karma, i'm so smart and your dumb"

Metaphors are not for obfuscation. Or they should not be. They're not supposed to be used to make things more confusing. They are only supposed to be used when the person trying to understand the message has trouble grasping the whole meaning of the teaching. My point originally was to decry the use of metaphors precisely just to make things more complicated.

Here's a metaphor for you two fuck bunnies




I assume not that different from giving the child an empty gun, a box of ammunition, and a fake instruction manual.

Either educate the child on how to handle the gun properly, or don't give it a gun at all.



Either you didn't read my post or you really are too dumb to understand any meaning in text form.

>Metaphors are not for obfuscation. Or they should not be. They're not supposed to be used to make things more confusing. They are only supposed to be used when the person trying to understand the message has trouble grasping the whole meaning of the teaching.

That's what I said, retard.



nigga we agree then. My point is that sometimes it seems like metaphors are used to hide information, and the people using the metaphors are just being jerks because they don't want to share their knowledge (a great example of this is the catholic church)

That's what I mean



Everyone usually brings up the

>translate the bible into local languages

argument when defending degenerated versions of christianity, but I'd like to argue that the real reason is more sinister:

In the past, people were motivated to learn latin because it was promoted in church, it was the official scholarly language and a requirement for higher studies. It connected people with the tradition of Europe (the roman empire and ancient greece) and united them across country and language borders. If you learned latin you could read scientific writings and classical literature, it all became available.

By removing latin from church, people no longer came into contact with it in a natural and daily fashion, and it started getting marginalized. This also worked to turn latin into an elitist langauge, which even further was used as an argument to abandon it during revolutionary times… today it's something very rarely used, at most people know the latin names of muscles because they're into weight lifting.

With no common language, Europe, and America, was divided and cut away from their civilizational roots, essentially white culture.

Today instead we have the European Union "uniting" people in a superficial manner, creating more conflicts then actual unity.

The chinese as an example, understands the value of a common language and has everyone learn mandarin as the official langauge. "Chinese" is in reality more than 50 different languages or dialects, without mandarin it would be hard to keep the area united as a country.

Whoever attacked latin and the catholic church… did a pretty good job at seperating whites by langauge barriers, national borders, and from their history.

Just saying…

[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Nerve Center][Cancer][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ / / / / / / / / / / / / / ] [ dir / asatru / ausneets / christ / nofap / o / ss / vichan / wooo ]