Tattoos licit?
#51
I wasted a whole afternoon looking at these horrible awful tattoos (WARNING: Some are Not Safe for Work and/or Children's Presence)

http://awfultattoos.blogspot.com/
Reply
#52
(06-21-2009, 03:15 PM)kzarah Wrote: A number of years ago (25 * 30 years ago) I got drunk and had winnie the pooh tattooed on my butt.

Thanks!!!!  Excuse me while I go gouge out my minds eye!!! :laughing:
Reply
#53
It can't be any worse than this

[Image: patpatriottattoo.jpg]
Reply
#54
This one is pretty cool I think:
[Image: alien-tattoo.jpg]
Reply
#55
Seriously thought, I did for a while considered, "et Verbum caro factum est et habitavit in nobis " on my right arm.  But scripted tattoos runs together after a while and fades in the sun light so I have not.  In this secular world I live in I would love for people to ask me what it means. 
Daniel
Reply
#56
(06-22-2009, 12:15 AM)Rosarium Wrote: This one is pretty cool I think:
[Image: alien-tattoo.jpg]

Cool? Tattooing demon-spawn all over his back?
Reply
#57
(06-22-2009, 01:52 AM)Iuvenalis Wrote: Cool? Tattooing demon-spawn all over his back?

They are greys, fictional aliens.
Reply
#58
(06-22-2009, 11:06 AM)Rosarium Wrote:
(06-22-2009, 01:52 AM)Iuvenalis Wrote: Cool? Tattooing demon-spawn all over his back?

They are greys, fictional aliens.

"Fictional."

And so-called "ETs" are just demons, but no one believes in demons anymore, they believe in 'aliens'

The same people that play with the occult inevitably have 'sightings' or 'extraterrestrial visitations' and vice versa: the people that have visitations are typically people all wrapped up in 'new age' poppycock.

Even the "Great Beast" Aleister Crowley had such a 'contact,' his Amalantrak Working (emphasis added):

Quote:It would be beyond my competence to provide a complete and faithful account of the Amalantrah Working and its aftermath. The last word on the subject will probably never be written. For the purpose of this article I need only observe that Crowley was not interested in ideas for their own sake, but in results. The details are unclear, but it seems that some stage during the proceedings he underwent a form of contactee experience involving a large-headed entity now known to occultists as Lam.

Lam, (whose name derives from the Tibetan word for "way" or "path") later became the subject of a portrait by Crowley, drawn from life and imbued with a haunting inner quality of its own. Although lacking the crude power of Crowley's more extravagant canvases and murals, it is nevertheless a remarkable piece of work. The subject is depicted in extreme close-up and appears somehow dwarfish, despite the fact that there is no indication of scale in the overall composition. The head is large, smooth and hairless, tapering to a pointed chin. The mouth is slitlike; the eyes extend partways around the sides of the face. There is no suggestion of clothing beyond what appears to be a cloak buttoned at the neck, nor does the entity have any ears. In short, Lam resembles nothing so much as a typical UFO occupant of the "examiner" type (what Americans would call "greys".)

Crowley's portrait of Lam passed into the hands of Kenneth Grant (of the OTO -Iuvenalis) circa 1945 following an astral working in which he and Crowley were jointly involved. Grant, who was authorized in the early '50s to work the first three grades of the OTO, is now widely perceived as Crowley's natural heir and successor (what a can of worms that statement opens.--ed). His interest in CETI (Contact with Extraterrestrial Intelligence)-type phenomena is of long-standing duration. In 1955 for instance, he announced the discovery of a trans-plutonian planet called Isis, and simultaneously established an order called the New Isis Lodge OTO for the purpose (among others) of contacting higher intelligences. A similar situation arose some 30 years later in the late 1980s, when Grant allegedly received 'strong intimations' to the effect that Crowley's portrait of Lam "is the present focus of an extraterrestrial -- and perhaps trans-plutonic-- energy which the OTO is required to communicate at this critical period..." I have no idea as to the nature of these 'intimations', besides which, writing about magic is a dubious enterprise at best, fraught with semantic difficulties. Perhaps the best option in an article as necessarily as brief as this, is to quote directly from The Lam Statement, a text circulated among OTO initiates with a view to "regularizing the mode of rapport and constructing a magical formula for establishing communication with Lam." We are told first of all that:

"It has been considered advisable by the Sovereign Sanctuary to regularize and to examine results achieved by individual members of the OTO who have established contact with the magical entity known as Lam. We are therefore founding an Inner Cult of this dikpala for the purpose of amassing precise accounts of such contacts...

Here's "Lam" by the way:
[Image: LAM.gif]

What about L. Ron Hubbard's "Babalon Working" (before he started Scientology he was performing a series of sex rituals with Jack Parsons (yes, the rocket scientist and head of the California OTO) in the desert. These were in 1946. Right after in 1947, the 'UFO flap' began with Kenneth Arnold's 'flying saucer' sighting (quotations because this is not what Kenneth Arnold actually said), the very first 'flying saucer' sighting that started the 'craze' to last about 10+ years. Needless to point out, Roswell (whatever happened there) was the very next year as well (1947).

What about the 'real' star of Freemasonry? If you read Albert Pike, and take 'higher' Masonic degrees it is made abundantly clear that the 'temple work' of Freemasonry is in fact oriented to Sirius, the dog star, which is also the very same goal of much of occultism (Crowley's A.'.A.'. aka the "Argentrum Astrum" which he called the 'real business' of the occult).

There is significant overlap between demonic invocation and the appearance of these so-called 'greys'.
Reply
#59
[Image: funny-dog-pictures-why-so-serious.jpg]

Interesting, but far fetched. As far as we know, it is just an imaged image and is just a "psychocultural expression of intelligence" as the depiction emphasises only the characteristics of humans associated with intelligence.
Reply
#60
(06-22-2009, 11:56 PM)Rosarium Wrote: [Image: funny-dog-pictures-why-so-serious.jpg]

You're one to talk. Incessantly pedantic, often intentionally obtuse.

(06-22-2009, 11:56 PM)Rosarium Wrote: Interesting, but far fetched. As far as we know, it is just an imaged image and is just a "psychocultural expression of intelligence" as the depiction emphasises only the characteristics of humans associated with intelligence.
Oh yeah, true, true. My entire argument hinged on the picture. Excellent point.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)