God and the universe are, in this view, distinct and separate. God, not the universe, is the supreme mystery. The universe is completely explicable in terms of God, but completely inexplicable if we understand nothing of the thinking, modus operandi and plan of God. He is beyond any scientific or philosophical analysis as to his substance, origins and evolution. He just IS. He is the ultimate "brute fact" of existence. We just have to accept that existence at its most fundamental level is eternal perfection in the shape of a flawless being of infinite knowledge, power and capacity called God.

There's no point, say the Abrahamists, in asking WHY? The starting point of existence is PERFECTION, hence cannot improve, cannot get any better - yet the obvious fact of our lives on earth is that imperfection is everywhere. How can this discrepancy be accounted for? Why is the starting point of existence not IMPERFECTION that then evolves towards perfection? Then we would have no difficulty in explaining the imperfections of this world. But such questions are neither answered nor permitted by Abrahamists.

A universe that consisted of nothing but a flat earth inhabited by a few thousand people would qualify as an unambiguous creation. An infinitely large universe full of countless stars and planets, almost all of them hidden forever from humanity, might be considered proof that there is no Abrahamic God because the human race has no conceivable importance in such a universe: it is but an infinitely small speck of dust. There would be no conceivable reason for the "Son of God" or any Messiah, prophet or angel to visit the earth, since earth would simply be one of an infinite number of worlds.

Infinity kills the Abrahamic God stone dead because it reduces the apparent significance of the human race and the planet Earth to zero. There is no possible reason why a Creator God would create an infinite number of something when he could create just one of that thing. Why have infinite stars rather than one? Why have infinite planets rather than one?

An alternative approach of Abrahamist theologians is to describe evil as the absence of good. But why should the absence of good result in evil rather than morally neutral acts? "Good" is absent from the animal world, but no one would ever describe sharks and lions as evil. Sharks and lions kill many other creatures; however they don't do so gratuitously, but simply to survive using the only means available to them. And did not God create them thus? So who is responsible for all the killing?  Abrahamism, quite simply, cannot explain what evil is and where it comes from.

Evil in ancient Gnosticism thus belongs to a specific location - the material world - and ultimately derives from the creator of the evil material world: the Demiurge. Thus Gnosticism, unlike Abrahamism or Eastern religion, is dualistic. It denies that God created everything, hence avoids the problem of accounting for evil in a cosmos created exclusively by a perfect being. God is responsible for the realm of light, and the Demiurge for the material world. God is the source of good, the Demiurge the source of evil. Good and evil are thus two rival principles, each as real as the other. One is yin to the other's yang. Souls - inherently part of the Light - are lured, or "fall", into the material world where they suffer the evils of that domain. They yearn to return to the Light, but they do not know what the mechanism is and have to discover this infinitely precious knowledge over many lifetimes of suffering. 

Oneness - pure, eternal Oneness - is a sterile environment. In order for evolution to reach a summit, in order for teleology to be fully satisfied, alienation is a necessity. Dimensionality - "Maya" - must be imposed on the dimensionless. The One must experience the Many. But the Many must ultimately return to the One and the One will then be vastly superior to what it was before because of all that it has learned through being many, through having experienced reality through the dimensional prism. That is the true tale of the cosmos, encapsulated by r >= 0. R = 0 "expands" into r > 0 and, finally, r > 0 returns to r = 0 to complete the cosmic cycle. Using scientific jargon, we might say that the hypothetical "Big Crunch" reverses the "Big Bang". The Big Bang came from "nothing" (r = 0), and creates the universe (r > 0). The Big Crunch is the opposite process, returning r > 0 to "nothing" (r = 0). And thus brings to an end one Age of the universe. But, of course, a new one always begins. The universe does not end in stasis. It never stops. There are infinite Ages because existence can never come to an end. The central, defining property of existence is, of course, that it exists and cannot not exist. It is best described by the First Law of thermodynamics that energy can neither be created nor destroyed.

But energy is the arche, the fundamental substance of existence, hence existence itself cannot be created or destroyed, only transformed. Existence (energy) cannot ever cease to be. New existence (energy) cannot ever be created (thus disproving the existence of a Creator God who contradicts the First Law by making things out of nothing). Existence cannot choose to not exist. Existence is forever. We exist and so we are forever. We die, but do not thereby cease to exist. Death is just a dimensional means of transforming energy into new expressions of energy. Nothing is destroyed by death other than a particular energy configuration, which is immediately and seamlessly replaced by a new configuration.

Illuminism - agrees with Gnosticism, but on a philosophical level. The material world is the product of the alienation of the One (a process that is inexorably brought about by the unfolding of the dialectic). The One thus fragments into the Many. The existence of the Many leads inevitably to a master-slave dialectic whereby individuals ruthlessly compete for power. The Many do not see that they derive from One, that their origins are all identical. They do not treat others as they would themselves. In fact, they do the opposite. They treat those around them as "Other", as strange, foreign, alien, a threat, an enemy. They are terrified of what the Other might do, so they have to fight it. If they win, they become the Master of the Other and they then enjoy the removal of their previous fear and, even more, they now enjoy the power of life or death over the Other. They relish making the Other do their bidding. The more the Other complies, the more they have contempt for the Other, and the less sympathy and empathy they have for the Other. Eventually, the Other is regarded as just some "thing", barely more than an object. The alienation between the master and slave becomes absolute. The master then regards himself as God in relation to these contemptible objects, and demands their worship. The personalisation of the master-slave dialectic and the associated dialectic of the Other is the Demiurge/Satan.

Pick up the "holy" books of Abrahamism and you will read of an egotistical maniac who demands absolute submission from every human being and absolute power over all human beings. He demands absolute worship and glorification. He will punish you to an infinite degree forever if you fail to do his bidding. He is the Ultimate Master and human beings are the ultimate slaves. In the Eastern religions, and the Enlightenment religions of the West, the master-slave dialectic is resolved by way of the union of the Many with the One: no more masters and no more slaves. In Abrahamism, the dialectic is NEVER resolved. Abrahamists are ALWAYS the abject slaves of their God. It is extraordinary that so many humans choose to be slaves and to worship Satan as the supreme power of the cosmos and the Eternal Master. These people have totally failed in terms of the dialectic. 

All dialectics result in their personalisation i.e. the dialectic of the "Good" must conclude with a single consciousness that expresses the culmination of that dialectic. The Master-Slave dialectic inevitably reaches a stage of the Absolute Master and Absolute Slave. The former finds its personalised expression in Satan, the latter in all those who worship him without question (the Abrahamists). But the Master-Slave dialectic as related by Hegel reaches its true culmination in the removal of all distinctions between masters and slave, in the state where there are no more slaves and no more masters.

Abraxas stands at the Omega Point of all the different dialectics that are in play. Lucifer stands at the end of the dialectic of good, Satan at the end of the dialectic of evil, and Abraxas at the end of the dialectic of the struggle between good and evil.

Billions worship Satan and imagine they are worshipping God. Billions are evil because they'd do anything to help their family even if it meant trampling the rest of the world into the dirt. Nearly everyone reading this article comes from an affluent, wealthy, Western nation. If, for even a second, they glimpsed the lives of the billions who live on a dollar a day they would feel sick to the pit of their stomach if they had a single particle of decency and consideration for others. But we who live in comfortable countries couldn't give a fuck. So are we not evil? Who are we kidding to call ourselves good? There is virtually no one on earth who is good. But at least the Illuminati acknowledge the problem and seek to address it. All of the people who say, "Me, me, me," all the time, and all the families that say, "Family first; Family right or wrong," aren't thinking about it for a second.

The Tea Party are all about family, family values, family first, family right or wrong, family über alles, family as the Master Race in miniature, as the Chosen People. Who in their right mind would ever want to be on the side of the racist, family-oriented Tea Party? And make no mistake - racism and discrimination are ingrained in the family unit. In what environment do children become racist? - in the family home, of course. That's where the poison is first spread. There would be no racism or sexism if children were raised in communities where they regularly mixed with a wide range of people of all types and all differences. Family is about locking people in tiny boxes called houses where all sorts of toxic ideas are allowed to flourish unchecked. If people lived in diverse communities, none of these toxins would survive.

The Psychological Model of Evil

Super Ego-driven societies (theocracies, Communism) are disastrous because they destroy the Id and make people into pleasure-hating fanatics (the 9/11 murder squad preferred killing over fucking).

In Russia, beautiful girls go to sex classes to learn the most potent sex techniques. Their objective is to snare a rich husband, and they need every advantage they can get. After all, the competition is intense: there are many beautiful girls and very few rich men. Imagine the sort of society based on these values.

*****

The Cosmic Psyche reflects the human psyche: as above, so below. In terms of the Cosmic Psyche, the Id = Satan (obeying the Pleasure Principle, total selfishness, narcissism, hedonism and desire), the Super Ego = Lucifer (obeying the Morality Principle, altruism, self-control and cooperation with others) and the Ego = Abraxas (obeying the Reality Principle, cooperating with others but allowing the Id its freedom when the circumstances are right).

If Abraxas, Lucifer and Satan represent the eternal Trinity of a "balanced" cosmic psyche then the Holy Trinity of Christianity represents something unbalanced, fanatical and prone to extreme violence. Is that not what we have witnessed from Christianity for 2,000 years? The Islamic and Jewish psyches are every bit as deranged. We have had to endure legions of death-cult Muslims killing themselves and others in what they refer to as "martyrdom" operations and which everyone else calls cold-blooded Satanic murder. And look at the Israelis treating the Palestinians as sub-humans in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. This behaviour stems from the warped psychology of the underlying religious beliefs. In Taoist terms, it is as if yin has tried to kill yang, or vice versa, and has failed to grasp the most basic fact that both yin and yang are necessary. You can't have one without the other. No component of the psyche can be eradicated. Each part is there for a reason. The task is to get them to work together as harmoniously as possible.

In Jungian terms, Satan is the Shadow, Lucifer is the Persona (the mask that someone puts on in society) and Abraxas is the Self, the God Image. The human ego (the Lower Self) is engaged in a fight with the Persona and the Shadow and only when it has attained balance can it become the Higher Self i.e. only then does it achieve gnosis and enter into union with Abraxas.

Life, society, politics, community, law, policing, economics should all be about psychological health, balance and harmony. They should not be about creating a disastrous "moral" imbalance that leads dialectically to much greater trouble. Prohibition sought to make Americans morally better but all it actually succeeded in doing was turning ordinary citizens into criminals and giving birth to brutal gangster mobs. That's usually what happens when moral fanatics are let loose.

Judaism, Islam and Christianity all preach "moral goodness" and yet all they ever achieve is sin, crime and violence. These are the inevitable dialectical products of these mentally unstable religions. Religion, it cannot be stressed enough, is not about moral goodness, but rational balance. "Sin for Salvation" is Illuminism's means for maintaining psychological health by allowing "sinful" pleasures to be expressed.

Apotheosis, from the Greek apotheoun, means "to deify or to make divine" i.e. it's all about "becoming God". So, yes, apotheosis plays the central role in secret societies, but it's not the answer to the "big secret". It's no more of a secret than the Hindu teaching that atman = Brahman.

Weirdly, Dan Brown also included the Abrahamic religions in his assertion about apotheosis, his argument being that their followers have woefully misinterpreted these religions. To be fair to Brown, there is a sense in which this is true. Judaism, Islam and, especially Christianity all had opportunities to go down radically different paths, but they didn't and the reason they didn't was that their founders saw that these alternative paths were catastrophic to the integrity of the central message. For example, the whole episode of the "Satanic Verses" in Islam concerned an attempt by Mohammed to be conciliatory towards other religions by suggesting that maybe it was OK to worship gods other than Allah. Of course, this was anathema to the concept of monotheism, so he rapidly backtracked and invented a story about having been deceived by Satan masquerading as the Angel Gabriel. The Abrahamic religions rejected all the paths that softened the Abrahamic hard line. In the end, there was no misinterpretation at all. They are now exactly what they were intended to be.    

It's important to be accurate about the Freemasons. Most modern Masons have virtually no idea of the history of "their" organisation. You will hear contemporary Masons talking about respecting all religions. Indeed, this is exactly what Dan Brown asserts in The Lost Symbol.

The character Peter Solomon says to Robert Langdon: "Robert, you and I both know that the ancients would be horrified if they saw how their teachings have been perverted…how religion has established a tollbooth to heaven…how warriors march into battle believing God favors their cause. We've lost the Word, and yet its true meaning is still within reach, right before our eyes. It exists in all the enduring texts, from the Bible to the Bhagavad Gita to the Koran and beyond. All of these texts are revered upon the altars of Freemasonry because Masons understand what the world seems to have forgotten…that each of these texts, in its own way, is quietly whispering the exact same message." Peter's voice welled with emotion. "Know ye not that ye are gods?"

Yet just a paragraph or two earlier, Langdon had said to Solomon: "Peter, the Bible and the Ancient Mysteries are total opposites. The mysteries are all about the god within you…man as god. The Bible is all about the God above you…and man as a powerless sinner."

Langdon is EXACTLY right. The Ancient Mysteries, the religions of Enlightenment, are all about man becoming God, while the Abrahamic religions are about the infinite separation between man and God. These two views of religion are absolutely and eternally opposed. They are irreconcilable in every way. One view is aligned with the True God, the other with Satan. Humanity can make no progress until the Satanic religions of Abraham with their vile depiction of humanity as worthless, degraded, depraved sinners are abolished forever.

Abrahamism has done untold damage to the human race. It has alienated humanity from its true self. It has warped the psyche of all those who worship the God of Abraham. It has turned the world into a mental asylum. It is the root of all evil.

As part of the infiltration and corruption of Freemasonry by the Old World Order, they promoted the ridiculous idea that all religions are somehow the same.

Freemasonry was the organisation that rose like the Phoenix from the ashes of the Knights Templar. The Templars were Gnostics. Many of those who joined the Templars came from the Cathar families of France. Catholicism put Catharism to the sword. Catholicism declared the Templars heretical. The Pope banned any Catholic from joining the Masons. The idea that Masons would ever have revered the Christian Bible is too ridiculous for words. All Templar knights had to explicitly renounce the Jesus Christ of Christianity, to trample on the cross and spit on it to show their contempt for it. And they had other ceremonies where they equally demonstrated their rejection of the Torah and Koran.

The Cathars, and other Gnostic sects, are sometimes described as Christian, which leads to considerable confusion. To be clear, no Gnostic ever regarded Christ as somebody who was born of a virgin and died on a cross. No Gnostic ever regarded Christ as man and God in one person. No Gnostic ever thought that God became incarnate on earth.

For Gnostic "Christians", Christ was a super-angelic being sent by the True God to guide the human race towards the Light. He did not ever enter into material existence (since Gnostics regarded the material world as evil and the domain of Satan); his apparent body was but a phantom, and being a phantom it clearly did not perish on any cross and it certainly wasn't resurrected (the Cathars, like all Gnostics, advocated reincarnation). So, the Christian Christ and the Gnostic Christ are theologically almost opposite.

The original Freemasons, as the inheritors of the Templar banner and ethos, performed many of the same ceremonies as the Templars, including spitting and trampling on the cross and renouncing Jesus. Any modern Freemason who fails to do so is no Mason at all, but someone who is entirely ignorant about authentic Freemasonry.

There are some modern Freemasons who are neither true to the traditions of the original Masons nor puppets of the Old World Order. They sit on the fence, unsure of their origins, unsure where they are going. It's about time they chose which side they are on. All of life is about choices, about having the guts to commit to one position or another. There is never anything noble or inspiring about agnostics - the skeptics and cynics, the sneerers and the weak-willed, those who just shrug their shoulders and refuse to take any stance in life. Many Masons are of that ilk. They go with the flow. They stand for nothing.

Original Freemasonry was directly opposed to the Abrahamic religions. It was not some sort of bland "respect all religions" organisation. It was central to the corruption of Freemasonry by the Old World Order that Masons abandoned their fight against Abrahamism, and allowed many Christians, Jews and even Muslims to be admitted to the ranks of Masons. Freemasonry has become a parody of its origins, an embarrassing mockery.

How can anyone regard these two absolutely contradictory views as being somehow the same? It's impossible for them to be any further apart. You can choose one or the other, not both. Once you have made your choice you automatically reject all religions associated with the opposite view.   

In modern Freemasonry, the highest degrees are manufactured by the Old World Order and are all about gaining and sustaining earthly power and wealth, accompanied by some fake ancient knowledge and pseudo-mysterious ceremonies and rituals. They have nothing at all in common with the authentic Masonic degrees.