#like the existence of temples is debatable + very likely a reaction to Christian churches erected only by the wealthy

[borom1r]

also the handful of ppl being like “it was sooooooo inaccurate” like where? they got tiny things like the axe heads and swords right. hello?? the use of arm rings both to show fealty and to bear a curse. the tree of the hanged as a family tree because when you’ve dedicated yourself to Óðinn as a warrior you’ve essentially dedicated yourself as a sacrifice.

+ like the seeress in Slavic attire is accurate because Amleth is IN a Slavic area at that time like of course she’s not dressed like a völva, she isn’t one.

like the most debatable thing is the use of hallucinogens for warrior initiation lmao

going thru the Northman tag and half of it being x reader content from ppl thirsting for Aurvandil 😭 you do you bestie but I’m here for the ulfheðnar

[ikkinthekitsune]

Funny you should mention Case for Christ, as I'd just finished watching Steve Shives's reaction to that not too long ago. In particular, he noted that scholarly consensus is that the Agony in the Garden was a later addition made during a church debate over whether Jesus was human or divine. His broader problem was that all of the "evidence" was just reiterating claims made by the Bible or church tradition, even if they were historically unlikely (crucified victims didn't get burial rights).

Well, assuming that it was added later, how and why would have hematidrosis been added into the text? 

Hematidrosis is real but rare medical condition. Would it have been familiar enough in the first few centuries AD for the supposed editor of the Gospel of Luke (who one must assume to be someone other than Luke, a physician who, ironically, would have been in a better position to be aware of the phenomenon than some random conspiratorial theologian) to even have known of it?

Assuming that it was known by the supposed editor, would he have expected his audience to have recognized it as such?  If the purpose of adding those verses to the Agony in the Garden was to confirm Jesus’ humanity, why in the world would the supposed editor refer to a rare medical condition that his audience would have more likely assumed to be miraculous in origin?  Even now, people tend to assume it’s just a weird mystical thing until informed otherwise by medical doctors… and if it was designed to be interpreted by 20th/21st century medical doctors, you’re either dealing with a miracle or a time-traveler.

And, if it wasn’t known by the supposed editor, the problem is even bigger – not only is its inclusion in direct contradiction to the supposed purpose of the addition (”Let’s show that Jesus is fully human and can suffer by having him suffer from a condition that I just made up and be helped by an angel!”), but the fact that it coincides to an actual medical condition constitutes one heck of a coincidence.

If sweating blood was either common knowledge or non-existent, it’d be easy to assume that it was added in later.  But, given that hematidrosis is rare but real, the verses in question appear to be in-character for Luke, and the content of those verses was awkward for just about everybody (from a first-few-centuries perspective, they’re both overtly supernatural and paint Jesus as weak!), it’s a lot easier to understand why they would have been elided (as suggested by a couple of the scholars quoted on the Wikipedia page regarding the controversy) than why they would have been added.

As for choosing the Bible and church tradition – in other words, the documents that recorded the events in question – over pure speculation based on probabilities, what could possibly be gained by not doing that?  All you’d be doing is prioritizing your own fairy tales over what you perceive to be fairy tales created by others.

With regards to burial of crucifixion victims in particular, there’s archaeological evidence that being crucified didn’t necessarily mean denial of burial – and, in fact, the man whose bones proved that was of the same race, lived in the same area, and died within a generation or two of Jesus himself.

The only narratives we have available provide good reasons to believe that Jesus would have been granted a similar exemption, namely, that the people who had him executed were very wary of the political consequences of that execution.

Said narrative came into existence far too close in time and distance to the tomb in question to avoid people going to the site and confirming the truth for their own eyes, or asking outside eyewitnesses, or asking Joseph of Arimathea (a member of the council that had demanded Jesus’ execution!) whether he’d been involved in the unlikely burial.

And then, of course, there’s the inexplicable burial shroud/face covering combination that extensive scientific testing has failed to explain or meaningfully debunk, which causes the same sorts of problems as the hematidrosis reference, times a thousand:

The Shroud of Turin’s image is much more compelling using modern scientific instruments than it would have been in medieval times, if its creation were even possible using medieval tools.  It gained notoriety primarily because of how striking it looked as a photo-negative, not because of how it looked to the naked eye, but no one knew what a photo-negative looked like hundreds of years ago.

There’s a ton of detail included in the Shroud of Turin that would have been all but invisible without modern scientific instruments.  Why would a forger bother adding details that no one in his time was going to notice as opposed to ensuring that his efforts didn’t go largely unnoticed (at least until the invention of instrumentation he couldn’t possibly have predicted)?

And, if the Shroud’s details were the result of an impression of some kind rather than artistic skill, what kind of process could have possibly been used?  We’re still not able to replicate the image’s unique attributes using modern technology.  What hope would someone from the Middle Ages have had?  Are we looking at time-travelers again?

Over and over again, documentary and physical evidence included in the Christian tradition seems to have been better designed to convince a 21st century audience (with forensics and a lack of living witnesses or a broken chain of custody) than a 1st century one, which makes no sense if said evidence was forged.  What we look at today and see as convenient ways to suggest accuracy through internal consistency – say, an unlikely burial, or a reference to sweating blood, or the abandonment of the disciples between the Passion and the Resurrection, or the apocalyptic references to the destruction of the Jewish Temple, or a reference to 500 people seeing the risen Jesus at the same time, or the traditional martyrdom of all but one of Jesus’ closest disciples – would have often been incredibly inconvenient amongst the target audience or in light of any known motivation for making up a religion.  There’s a reason why myths about real people tend to take place “a long time ago, in a land far away” in comparison to the time and place the myths themselves appear; in contrast, the New Testament documents all take place a few decades before they were written, not too far to visit, and practically dare the audience to confirm the facts for themselves.  If there could be no expectation that the account would hold up in the face of such scrutiny, why would the authors sabotage themselves?  People who thought the end of the world was nigh would have little motivation to attempt to manipulate people born too late to take advantage of the opportunity to see for themselves.

There are hundreds of “why?”s that can be answered with “Because the authors wrote what they had actually seen and believed to be true” which would otherwise need to be answered individually.  And once you’re forced to start multiplying explanations to avoid a single overarching one that’s not elsewhere contradicted, one must wonder whether it makes sense to avoid the single overarching explanation in the first place.

[shinss1-blog]

Sigils, Servitors, and Godforms

Sigils, Servitors, and Godforms Pt 1 Sigils, Servitors, and Godforms Sigils, servitors and god-forms are three magickal techniques that chaos magicians use to actualize magickal intentions. Sigils are magickal spells developed and activated to achieve a specific, fairly well defined and often limited end. Servitors are entities created by a magician and charged with certain functions. Godforms are complex belief structures, often held by a number of people, with which a magician interacts in order to actualize fairly broad magickal intentions. These three techniques are not quite as distinct as these definitions would suggest, they tend to blur into one another. The purpose of this essay is to explain these magickal tools, indicate their ppropriateness for different types of magickal intentions, and show how these tools relate to the general theories of chaos magick and of Dzog Chen, a form of Tibetan Buddhism. Part One: Sigils 1. A Universe neither of Man nor God The use of the techniques of the chaos magician presupposes a certain stance, or attitude, towards magick that is relatively new in the history of the occult. This stance may, for lack of a better word, be described as postmodern, since it is neither traditional nor modern. The differences between these three approaches to magick - traditional, modern or postmodern can be elucidated as three conceptions of the nature of the universe. The traditional approach is based in Judeo-Christian metaphysics and views the universe as anthropomorphic, in the image of the Christian God, or less rarely, some other anthropomorphic form. The traditional magician believes that the universe is understandable by human consciousness because human beings are made in the image of God. The modern view is essentially a reaction to this and humanist in the extreme. Here the universe may be perceived as Newtonian, as a machine that is ultimately understandable by human consciousness, although humans may have to evolve into a more powerful form to be able to do this. The postmodern view of the chaoist denies that the universe can ever be understood by the human mind. Influenced by modern physics, particularly quantum mechanics and chaos theory, the chaos magician tends to accept the universe as a series of phenomena that have little to do with human beings. In other words traditional magick can be said to be God centered, modern magick to be human centered while postmodern magick eschews the very idea of a center. A brief review of traditional and modern approaches to ceremonial magick may help to illuminate the postmodern stance of the freestyle chaoist. Ceremonial magicians use ritual magick to create effects in themselves or in the universe that they do not feel they can as efficiently bring about through normal means. All magicians agree that magick can cause change, but few would argue that the change is inevitable, completely predictable, or fully knowable by the magician. All magicians, to a greater or lesser extent, are engaged in an ongoing dynamic in which the issues of personal desire, personal control and personal belief are thrust against the strictures of the universal consensual belief structure, the concept of will as a universal force, and the ideas of fate, predestination, and karma. At the core of this confrontation is the question of the nature of the universe. The question is: is the universe human centered, designed, created and maintained by a god force, or is it, as modern science seems to indicate, just there? Until recently, magicians have tended to distinguish amongst themselves by hue, and the colors of the magician (white, gray or black) refer precisely to this dynamic, the confrontation between the personal wishes of the magician and a universal standard of morality or law. White, and to an extent, grey magicians, attempt to remove themselves from the debate by insisting that their magickal acts are inspired only by the highest motives of service and self-knowledge, that, indeed, they wish only to do the will of higher powers known as their Holy Guardian Angels. Perdition shall blast, so they say, those who use magick for self-centered or materialistic ends. Grey magicians may proclaim that the use of magickal powers for materialistic ends is valid sometimes, but rarely for selfish reasons, and in any event, is always problematical. Donald Michael Kraig, with the breezy superficiality of the traditional magus, in 'Modern Magick' terms white magick the use of magick'for the purpose of obtaining the Knowledge and Conversation of your Holy Guardian Angel'(1), grey magick as magick used 'for the purpose of causing either physical or non-physical good to yourself or to others (2) and black magick as magick used 'for the purpose of causing either physical or non-physical harm to yourself or others'(3). Kraig is influenced by Aleister Crowley and by modern Wicca, or Gardnerian witchcraft. Wiccans, ever concerned that their white magick might slide through some unconscious twitch of desire through grey into black, corrected Crowley's axiom 'Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be the Whole of the Law' with the enervating modifier 'An it Harm None'. Kraig, worried that readers of his treatise might fall 'into the pit of the black magician,' encourages neophyte mages to practice only white magick. Fortunately, before he is two thirds of the way through his book Kraig is happily discoursing on talismans, grimoires, and the correct methods for disposing of recalcitrant demons. Few magicians can resist the lure of dark magick, despite protestations of innocence. This is because even Wiccan influenced magicians are not, as Wiccans are, devotees of a religion. That is to say magicians are interested in the dynamic of personal will versus (in Crowley's term) True Will, while Wiccans have resolved this issue. While the occasional conflict may remain, Wiccans, like Christians, Jews, and Moslems understand that they have agreed to submit their wills to that which they construe to be the Will of their deities. Magicians, on the other hand, are not so sure. This, more than any other factor, accounts for the intense suspicion those of a religious cast view those who practice magick. The designation of black magician still tends to be a term that magicians use to vilify other magicians. Aleister Crowley, arguably the single greatest influence on the development of magick in this century, and, for the purposes of this essay, defined as a traditional magician, used the term in this way. In 'Magick', for example, he asserted 'any will but that to give up the self to the Beloved is Black Magick,'(4). That is to say, any use of magick unlike his use of magick is black magick. Elsewhere Crowley muttered darkly about the existence of 'Black Lodges' and 'Black Brothers', magicians who chose to remain in the Abyss, the metaphysical gap between the first three sephiroth and the remainder of the Tree of Life. A magus of this hue, Crowley stated, secretes 'his elements around his Ego as if isolated from the Universe'(5), and turns his back on the true aim of magick, which according to Aleister, is the 'attainment of the Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel. It is the raising of the complete man in a vertical straight line. Any deviation from this line tends to become black magic. Any other operation is black magick'(6).As students of mysticism will recognize, this goal is identical with the mystic's goal of the union of the self with God. Crowley, of course, wrote with his feet firmly planted in the Judeo-Christian paradigm, a paradigm in which the universe is visualized as AdamKadmon, the Great Man, and is thus wholly anthropomorphized. In 1969, Anton LaVey posited the argument of the modern black magician when in'The Satanic Bible' he asserted 'No one on earth ever pursued occult studies, metaphysics, yoga, or any other 'white light' concept without ego gratification or personal power as a goal '(7). Moreover, LaVey claimed 'There is no difference between 'White' and 'Black' magic except in the smug hypocrisy, guilt ridden righteousness, and self-deceit of the 'White' magician himself'(. Thus the term black magician began to be associated with a style of magick that did not distinguish between self-interest and self-knowledge. LaVey in his organization, The Church of Satan, and later MichaelAquino in his schismatic order, The Temple of Set, argued that the will of the individual magician was paramount. Both denied even the existence of a universal Will. LaVey stated 'The Satanist realizes that man, and the action and reaction of the universe, is responsible for everything and doesn't mislead himself into thinking that someone cares.' (9) MichaelAquino asserted 'The Black Magician, on the other hand, rejects both the desirability of union with the Universe and any self-deceptive tactics designed to create such an illusion'(10). Unfortunately the refusal of modern black magicians to deal with the possibility that man may not be at the center of the universe, or may just be one in a large series of interdependent phenomena leads to an error. Reluctant, it seems, even to adopt completely a materialistic or mechanistic view of the universe, LaVey and Aquino embrace the ghost in the machine and assert that the individual ego can continue after death. Thus LaVey stated 'If a person has been vital throughout his life and has fought to the end for his earthly existence, it is this ego which will refuse to die, even after the expiration of the flesh that housed it'(11). There is, of course, not a shred of evidence to prove that this has ever happened nor that it can happen, but magicians of all hues, together with the adherents of most of the world's religions, continue to assert blandly the existence of a transpersonal, individuated spark that somehow is exempt from the normal process of birth, life, death, and corruption, a kind of eternal homunculus. Apparently the notion that the universe may not actually be human centered is too frightening for Satanists and modern black magicians to bear, and the old chestnut of the soul is dredged out of the Judeo-Christian quagmire, brushed off, and presented as the 'fully gratified' ego of the modern immortal Satanist. Teetering on the edge of postmodern magick, PeterCarroll, the first contemporary popularizer of chaos magick, in 'Liber Null and Psychonaut', accepted the idea that the universal force may not be a force that bears much relationship to humanity. He stated:'The force which initiates and moves the universe, and the force which lies at the center of consciousness, is whimsical and arbitrary, creating and destroying for no purpose beyond amusing Itself. There is nothing spiritual or moralistic about Chaos and Kia. We live in a universe where nothing is true...'(12). Carroll was aware of the true nature of the ego, and stated 'developing an ego is like building a castle against reality'(13). Moreover, he recognized that 'the real Holy Guardian Angel is just the force of consciousness, magic, and genius itself, nothing more. This cannot manifest in a vacuum: it is always expressed in some form, but its expressions are not the thing itself.'(14) In this statement Carroll aligned himself with the quantum mechanical view of the universe, a view that refuses to discriminate phenomena on the basis of dualistic concepts, but stresses the wave like nature of energy. This is also the viewpoint of sophisticated Buddhism. The key phrase of the "PrajnaParamita", a critical sutra in the development of Buddhist metaphysics, states 'form is only emptiness and emptiness is only form.' Ultimately Carroll, however, was as reluctant as a Satanist to let go of the comforting paradigm of the soul or spirit and despite paying lip service to a universe in quantum flux stated 'The adept magician however will have so strengthened his spirit by magick that it is possible to carry it over whole into a new body'(15). This turns out to be a crippling flaw in Carroll's approach to magick and one that reinforces his belief in the efficacy of hierarchical magick, a contradiction of the fundamental principle of chaos magick, that it replicates the non-ordered flow of phenomena in the universe. The ego, after all, is an ordered construct that tolerates nothing so little as the inevitability of change. Perhaps the problem lay in Carroll's assertion that 'physical processes alone will never completely explain the existence of the universe'(16), a statement that eventuates from the dualistic, epistemological mindset of Newtonian physics and Aristotelian western philosophy. Perhaps it comes from a fear of death. Yet concurrent with this discriminatory, black/white, dualistic approach of western occultism, there has always been another strain, the shamanistic, orgiastic approach that deliberately blurrs these definitions and seeks to confront the universe as a dynamic, and non human process. This approach, however, has usually been the domain of art and artists rather than occultists. Modern English poetry since MatthewArnold's 'DoverBeach' has been obsessed with reconciling the poetic imagination with a stark and inhuman universe. Arnold recognized the universe in 1867 as a place that: Hath really neither joy, nor love, nor light, Nor certitude, nor peace, nor help for pain And we are here as on a darkling plain Swept with confused alarms of struggle and flight, Where ignorant armies clash by night By the time T.S. Eliot wrote 'The Wasteland' in 1922, he saw the universe as 'a heap of broken mirrors', an metaphor that aptly describes the shattering of the familiar concept of the universe as reflecting a human face. The year before, W.B.Yeats in 'The Second Coming' concurred: Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;. Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere The ceremony of innocence is drowned; But the fullest expression of the awareness that the movement of energy through the universe is absolute, interpenetrating, and neither particularly humane nor human comes in 1934 with DylanThomas and: The force that through the green fuse drives the flower Drives my green age; that blasts the roots of trees Is my destroyer. And I am dumb to tell the crooked rose My youth is bent by the same wintry fever. This dawning consciousness infuses all the arts, from the movement of modern art, from Dada and Cubism, through Abstract Expressionism, to modern music, from the dissonance of Ravel's 'La Valse' to JohnCage to minimalism to industrial. Artists for one hundred and fifty years have struggled to depict the face of a chaotic universe, and man's far from central place within it. In fact, the occult has been one of the last areas of human intellectual endeavour to avail itself of this perception of the universe. Not until the development of chaos magick can it truly be said that magick has finally started to deal with the insights of modern art and modern science. Chaos magick derives from a series of magical positions articulated by AustinOsmanSpare, a contemporary of Aleister Crowley. Spare's vision, itself influenced by the work of WilliamBlake, is contained succinctly in 'The Book of Pleasure'. Spare's approach to magick and the universe has been validated by the discoveries of the new physics, by quantum science, and by chaos mathematics. The metaphysical basis for Spare's magick is similar to that of DzogChen, a form of Tibetan Buddhism, and, in fact, the reference and counter reference between Buddhism, art, science, and chaos magick is striking and continuous. Spare wrote 'The Book of Pleasure' between 1909 and 1913, but most of Spare's work was ignored until Carroll began writing about it. There are a number of reasons for this. Spare's work was printed in small runs and he did not seek fame. His style is elliptical and obscure. His work is difficult to understand in the absence of his lush illustrations, and since the illustrations are spells, or more precisely, sigils, they affect a deep level of the mind and tend to distract one from the content of his writing. His style is declaratory, arrogant, and uses a special vocabulary, the definitions for which have to be teased out of the text. But perhaps of most importance, Spare's view of the universe is non-human, and consequently the usual god centered or human centered context of magick is absent. Not until contemporary metaphysical thought had changed to allow a non anthropomorphic universe did Spare become accessible. Even now he, together with KennethGrant, is one of the least read and least understood among modern magickal writers. Spare begins with the idea of Kia, of which he says, in an echo of the Tao Te Ching, 'The Kia that can be expressed by conceivable ideas is not the eternal Kia, which burns up all belief.'(17) Thus he does not designate by name that which later chaos magicians would call Chaos, but concentrates on the immediate manifestation of the formless which he describes as 'the idea of self'. This is precisely the viewpoint of DzogChen. DzogChen, a sorcerous form of Buddhism developed by Padmasambhava in the eighth century a.c.e., posits the creation of the manifest universe as occurring at the instant that the conception of self develops. Spare said of Kia 'Anterior to Heaven and Earth, in its aspect that transcends these, but not intelligence, it may be regarded as the primordial sexual principle, the idea of pleasure in self-love.'(1 In DzogChen the initial impulse splits emptiness from form, nirvana from samsara and develops dualistic thinking. The multiplicity of the universe streams out of this split. One of the central symbols of DzogChen is the dorje. A form of magick wand, the dorje is composed of two stylized phalluses joined by a small central ball. The dorje is, according to DzogChen, a 'terma', or hidden teaching. This teaching is a treasure hidden by Padmasambhava. The whole of the dorje refers to the unlimited potentiality of the universe, and thus, in modern terms, is an image of chaos, or the quantum flux of the universe that is before and beyond discriminatory thinking, inseparable, indissoluble. The two ends of the dorje refer, respectively, to form and emptiness, or samsara and sunyata. The small central bead that joins the two ends of this bilaterally symmetrical object is hollow to show the unknowable potentiality at the intersection between form and emptiness, and also to refer back to the chaos current. Thus the dorje is a three dimensional symbol for the way the universe manifests itself from unity through duality into its full, lush complexity. As Spare says 'As unity conceived duality, it begot trinity, begot tetragrammaton.'(19) In a statement that presages the modern understanding of the fractal universe as an event that is essentially a complex repetition and multiplication of a series of simple forms, Spare wrote: The dual principle is the quintessence of all experience, no ram-ification has enlarged its early simplicity, but is only its repetition, modification or complexity, never is its evolution complete. It cannot go further than the experience of self-so returns and unites again and again, ever an anti-climax. For ever retrogressing to its original simplicity by infinite complication is its evolution. No man shall understand 'Why' by its workings. Know it as the illusion that embraces the learning of all existence.(19) Recognizing the recursive movement of the movement of energy, or consciousness, through the universe, that is to say, of Kia, is essential to the understanding of the form of magick that Spare developed because it indicates the structure of the spells, sigils, and magickal techniques of chaos magick. Refuting absolutely the notion that this flow of energy is ever understandable by dualistic minds, Spare stated unequivocally that the magickal energy of the universe, the force that interpenetrates all phenomena is non-human. Moreover Spare required the magician, in order to avail himself of this force, to renounce his human belief systems, his dualistic mind, to achieve a state of consciousness that, as much as possible, mimicked the primordial. How to do this is the subject of the next section of this essay. Sigils, Servitors, and Godforms Pt 2 Servitors Servitors, Psychodynamics and Models of Magick Chaos Magick, at least if approached by through the internet and conversation with chaos magicians, can appear a sprawling, contradictory mess of techniques to the newcomer. The relativistic stance of Chaos Magick, and it's apparent lack of a unifying template can appear both morally disturbing and intellectually frustrating, especially to occultists coming to it from more traditional paths. Frater U.D., in a small essay published in 1991, provided a clearer approach to chaos magick by declaring it to be a meta-model, a fifth approach to magick. The other four he defined as the Spirit Model (used by shamans and traditional ceremonial magicians, in which autonomous entities exist in a dimension accessible to ours through altered states of consciousness); the Energy Model (where the world is viewed as being 'vitalized' by energy currents that the magician manipulates); the Psychological Model (in which the magician is seen as "a programmer of symbols and different states of consciousness," manipulating the individual and the deep psyche); and the information model (where information is the code that programs the essentially neutral energy of the life force). Frater U.D. points out that writers on chaos magick generally subscribe to a great extent to the Psychological Model, but, their approach utilizes a Meta-Model, which is really a set of instructions on how to use the other models. One of the most salient facts about chaos magick, and one of the most difficult for many newcomers to grasp, is that it is not really a magickal philosophy at all, it is really a technology, an approach, or stance towards magickal systems. The path to this was a result of chaos magicians developing and then transcending the Psychological Model. This essay on servitors while discussing many of the practical issues in the creation and deployment of servitors also elucidates the relationship between chaos magickal theory and modern psychology. Modern magicians, chaos magicians, contemporary sorcerers, and the other magickal users of servitors appear to have adopted a modified psychodynamic view of personality, and the way in which we identify ourselves. This view, first expounded by Freud and the other founders of psychoanalysis (Jung, Adler, etc.), suggests that the way in which we view ourselves develops over time, and motivational syndromes (what we want and how we go about getting it) are critical to this development. This is quite a different view than type or trait personality theories which were in favor throughout most of Western history (man is composed of a compound of four or five elements, for example). Chaos magicians tend to display more of a situationist stance to personality, that is to say they tend to act as though the situation in which one finds oneself is the dominant factor in observable behaviors. Chaos magicians also tend to suggest that this is a good thing, since it means the personality can be used opportunistically, as a tool to achieve desires. This stance also reflects Buddhist and Eastern views of the Self, which either repudiate its existence as a permanent construction, or state that its essential nature can only be discovered through profoundly altered states of consciousness (samadhi). Phil Hine, in his excellent pamphlet "Chaos Servitors, a User Guide" writes of the self: "I prefer the analogy of the self as an organic city-entity, where some portions are more prominent than others, where there are hidden tunnels and sewers, and where the under levels carry vital energies to buildings. The city-self is continually changing and growing - tear down a building of belief, and another grows back in its place." Austin Osman Spare was clearly influenced by psychodynamic theories of the self, as well as Eastern ones, and the general magickal theory he passed on to us embody these ideas. Primarily concerned with motivation (desire), Spare wrote in "The Book of Pleasure": "The 'self' is the 'Neither-Neither,' nothing omitted, indissoluble, beyond prepossession; dissociation of conception by its own invincible love is the only true, safe, and free...This Self-Love is now declared by me the means of evolving millions of ideas for pleasure without love, or its synonyms-self-reproach, sickness, old age, and death. The Symposium of self and love. O! Wise Man, Please Thyself." Note the combination of psychoanalytic vocabulary and Vedic metaphysics combined with an insistence on motivation as fundamental. Now a servitor is generally considered to be a part of the personality of the magician that has been severed from him. I would argue that this is a limited view of servitors, that they could be considered severed portions of the Deep Mind, and consequently not located in the psyche of any particular magician. In my view demons, angels, imaginary friends, poltergeists and perhaps even ghosts are servitors. Servitors can be called thought-forms (as opposed to godforms which may sometimes be servitors on steroids). Since contemporary magickal stances to personality are psychodynamic and motivational servitors tend to be viewed as functional entities, and rather easily operated. Contrast this with the type and trait theories that inform Traditional Ceremonial Magick. Magicians up until this century (and still some today) spend what seems to me ridiculous amounts of time and effort evoking demons, using grimoires, and engaging in a paraphernalia of magick that makes a great deal of sense if you believe in type and trait theories of personalities, but very little if your approach is situational and pyschodynamic. If you believe that a demon you summon is a wholly independent entity with a personality type all of its own you may have to resort to extreme measures to force it to do your bidding. If you believe that a demon is a servitor summoned as a manifestation of your desire then a simple bargain will suffice (I'll give you energy, you get what I want, I'll give you a nice place to live). What is a Servitor? Motivational syndromes (desire) are fundamental to Spare's form of magick, hence the name of his most popular book, "The Book of Pleasure." Spare and magicians, Chaos or otherwise, have adopted the Jungian expansion of Freud's theory of the Unconscious. Jung theorized the existence of a collective unconscious, shared by all. He considered it to be transpersonal and the residue of the evolution of humankind. I personally prefer Jan Fries' term, the Deep Mind, but it comes to much the same thing. Spare, who called the collective unconscious the sub-consciousness characterized it as follows: "Know the sub-consciousness to be an epitome of all experiences and wisdom, past incarnations as men, animals, birds, vegetable life, etc. , etc., everything that exists, has and ever will exist." Both Spare and Peter Carroll attempted to develop a technical vocabulary to describe the phenomena and techniques of the type of magick posited by Spare. Carroll, both FireClown and I believe, was trying to construct a vocabulary that could be used by magicians of any type. FireClown calls this a "discussional template", or a way in which, for example, thelemites could talk to wiccans without misunderstanding each other. Unfortunately Carroll's use of the hierarchical gambit resulted in this vocabulary becoming exclusionary. A fine example of this is the term "servitor." The time predates Chaos Magick and can be found to refer to bound spirits in the fiction of Clark Ashton Smith, who was writing for Weird Tales in the 1930s. Servitor is actually a word referring to entities that actualize through evocation, a magickal technique as old as magick itself. Carroll writes "These beings have a legion of names drawn from the demonology of many cultures: elementals, familiars, incubi, succubi, bud-wills, demons, atavisms, wraiths, spirits, and so on." Spare seems to indicate that these entities are bound to obsessions, that is to say the magician, experiencing an obsession (a way the psyche tells the magician that it desires something), forms part of the sub-consciousness into a semi-independent phenomenon that will do the work needed to actualize the magician's desire. Carroll disagrees somewhat, although he allows that such beings have their origin in the human mind. Phil Hine whose interest in his User's Guide to Servitors is the creation of such beings writes: "By deliberately budding off portions of our psyche and identifying them by means of a name, trait, symbol, we can come to work with them (and understand how they affect us) at a conscious level." So at least in the type of magick developed by Spare, Carroll, and Phil Hine, a servitor is a part of the magician's psyche, or a part of the Deep Mind that the magician evokes to perform a task. Do these entities have an existence prior to their evocation? Perhaps. Magick is trans-temporal, trans-spatial. If the Deep Mind contains all experience that has been or ever will be then the question is meaningless, or as Blake wrote: "Everything that can be Believed is an Image of the Truth." I do think that the use of servitors is widespread among many people who would not dream of considering themselves magicians. People personalize their cars, have imaginary friends as children, or give personalities to their toys, carry objects they consider to be "lucky" with them or allow their obsessions to absorb their personalities so they turn into demons. Many movies deal with servitors, Natural Born Killers being an obvious example, Tetsudo, a fine Japanese flick being an even more obvious example. In NBK the demons are eventually reintegrated and the two killers stop killing. The fine film Seven is essentially a magickal ritual in which the murderer uses people as the material bases for servitors, in this case representing the demons of the Seven Deadly Sins. To my mind these are all examples of the use of servitors because they follow Hine's simple definition of servitors as budded off portions of the psyche or personality developed for a simple or complex purpose which gain a semi-independent existence. Of course in the case of demons absorbing the personality the act is hardly adaptive, although it may have started out that way. I'll tell you a story. I had a friend about 12 years ago, a charming, handsome young man, intelligent, athletic, and sober. He used to baby-sit another friend's teenage daughter. It turned out that he was a serial rapist. He would stalk women, rape them, and beat them nearly to death. He got caught because he fell asleep in his car outside his last victim's apartment and was found by the police covered with his victim's blood. I have no doubt he would have ended up murdering his future victims. Fortunately he is unlikely to ever have that chance. Now what I think had happened with this man was that, perhaps as a result of some inability to integrate his rage towards women, he budded off a part of his personality, the violent, woman hating part, which became a demon, a semi-independent servitor. When his obsession was triggered it activated the demon which then completely possessed him and he became an utterly different person. For all I know he wasn't even conscious of the demon himself. None of his friends ever saw this demon, didn't even have a glimpse, but his victims surely did. Sigils, Servitors, and Godforms Pt 3 Creating Servitors Modern magicians have expanded on Jungian ideas of the collective unconscious to assert that magick occurs within what Spare calls the sub-consciousness, and Fries the Deep Mind. Servitors are semi-autonomous beings that are summoned from the Deep Mind and charged with the per- formance of some magickal task. Stephen Mace, in his monograph Stealing the Fire from Heaven, calls this sorcery. He defines it: "Sorcery is the art of capturing spirits and training them to work in harness, of sorting out the powers in our minds so we might manipulate them and make them cause changes both within our minds and beyond them." Most writers are unanimous in their opinion that the magician must develop a clear statement of intent before proceeding in acts of magick, which presupposes the magician understanding the nature of their original desire. In many cases there is simply no need to create a servitor. A simple spell might suffice, a desire sigilized and cast into the Deep Mind in a state of vacuity. Summoning servitors for the sake of psychic adventure might also be ill advised, although, judging from the grimoires of medieval literature in the absence of television it was a popular way to pass the tedium of an evening. Teenage satinists (so called in tribute to their innovative spelling) are also apparently fond of this sport. Chaos magicians, it is to be hoped, and the readers of this essay, would create servitors for more practical reasons. If the magician does not believe the desire can be actualized by sigilizing, either because of lack of success in the past, the inability of the sorcerer to forget the desire, or because the task is repetitive, or complex then a servitor may be appropriate. Servitors can be used for finding rare books, for developing sales in business, for aiding in gaining employment, for irritating an enemy, for protecting a house, for, really, any number of jobs. Servitors can also be used to aid in the deconstruction and reconstruction of a magician's personality. On the zee-list servitors have been described that compress and expand time, that attack spam mailers, that assist in speedy passage through rush hour and that are soldiers in magickal wars. I suggested above that the use of servitors is widespread throughout humankind. Magicians and sorcerers, however, consciously create servitors, extruding them from their own psyches for specific magickal purposes. Most people create servitors unconsciously. Sometimes, as I recounted, this can have poisonous results both for the creator of the servitor and for society. Servitors that contain elements of personality that the sorcerer finds maladaptive are usually known as demons. Mace writes in regards to demons: "Demons: reflexes that generate uncontrollable moods, fantasies, and even actions. Demons are often acquired as a response to a twisted environment that had to be endured during the weakness and dependence of childhood. The adult, empowered wizard will realize they are inappropriate to his current situation, and make every effort to bind them so they will no longer bother him." In fact bound demons can be quite useful. Since many servitors are available for use by the magician through grimoires, or the use of elementals, sylphs, incubi, and the like, it might be reasonably inquired why the sorcerer should go to the trouble of creating one. Mace answers this: "there's a problem with using preexisting spirits. They invariably come equipped with enormous amounts of moral and theological baggage, bundles of belief and righteousness that you must carry with you as you make your way through the world." I suggest readers who question this use a grimoire to evoke a lesser demon like Belphegor (not an archdemon like Belial), visit a channeller, or a medium for a seance. Apart from entertainment value I doubt that the reader will experience significant or lasting change from these experiences. Belphegor, I should note, has been credited with assuring regular bowel movements, so perhaps he might have a lasting effect on constipated mages. Apart from this possible exception, creating a servitor and charging it with a magickal task can have a profound effect on a sorcerer's life. This is why a fairly rigorous intellectual analysis of the desire of the sorcerer should be undertaken before evocation. The magician can use any number of techniques to do this, but the discussion of the magickal intent with other sorcerers is probably the most helpful. This is especially true when the servitor to be created is to effect a change in the personality of the magician since it is very possible that excising an apparent vice may also remove an intertwined virtue leaving the sorcerer weaker and poorer than before. Once the magickal intent has been determined and the magician is fairly sure that no unwitting damage to the psyche will ensue, then the actual process of creating a servitor can begin. Servitors can be easily divided into two classes, those that come from identifiable areas of the magician's psyche, and those that issue forth from the deeper levels of the subconsciousness ( and hence may not be recognizable to the magician as deriving from a property of the sorcerer's psyche). If, for example I create a servitor to afflict an enemy this can be easily seen to originate in my own rage. On the other hand, if I summon an elemental because I want rain this spirit may have no apparent connection with my own psyche. Of course it does, but perhaps at such a deep level that it is held in common by many others. Ghosts are another example of beings that issue forth from deep levels of the subconsciousness and are often perceived in very similar ways by different people. Whether the sorcerer creates a servitor from scratch, as it were, or summons a preexistent spirit may depend on the task to which the servitor is put. Servitors may also be created which have components of both the individual magician's psyche and of the Deep Mind. I'm in business for myself and my business depends on the timely receipt of payments. I'm in the process of creating a servitor to facilitate payments made to me through the mail. The servitor I imagine to look like Zippy the U.S.P.S. mascot but carrying a large hand gun - Zippy the psychotic Postal Worker. He will be charged with the specific job of speeding up my mail, particularly checks to me. Of course, part of Psycho Zippy is budded off from my own personality and includes my frustration with the mail, my anxiety over money, my dislike of bureaucrats, and my own violent tendencies. Part of Psycho Zippy, though, comes from the good work of the USPS's advertising staff who imbedded this image in the American consciousness and the American media that publicized the mass murders of numerous postal workers by their coworkers over the last few years. Psycho Zippy is a hybrid servitor in this sense, and so will derive its energy from both sources. Psycho Zippy may also be considered a bound demon, since he derives from obsessive (and maladaptive) elements of my own psychology which have been extruded and harnessed to perform a particular role. The development of this servitor is useful therapy since it frees me from these maladaptive elements. So let's review the process of creating a servitor like Psycho Zippy. First I become conscious of obsession, manifesting as a repeating pattern of anxious thoughts about payments which I know have been mailed but which for reasons quite beyond my ability to understand take a random number of days to reach me. This obsession clearly indicates a desire...I want my payments in a timely and consistent fashion. Now I could do a sigil to actualize this desire, but the problem is persistent and I doubt that a sigil done once will be enough to solve it. I could also use a godform, like Ganesh, or Hermes, or Legba or even Nyarlathotep, but I've tried this and the gods seem fairly fickle about it, and, in any case, I keep having to go back to them to bargain with them every time a payment gets lost. I have concluded that a servitor, charged by my own obsession, is the most appropriate magickal response. Now in my case the USPS's admen have come up with a sigil that I only have to modify by adding a large hand gun. For many servitors, however, it may be necessary to develop them from scratch by first forming your magickal intention into a sigil and then using your imagination to turn this sigil into the shape of servitor (which can be anything you consider appropriate to the task at hand). This process is greatly facilitated if you have developed a magickal alphabet that contains in sigil form the properties of your personality and the powers of your mind. Automatic drawing, a common way to develop this type of alphabet, can also be used to develop the shape of the servitor. These alphabets are also known as alphabets of desire. On Alphabets of Desire Mace writes: "Each letter (actually an ideograph) represents a power...an unconscious structure or variety of energy that the sorcerer recognizes or wishes to recognize within his deep psyche." In essence the sorcerer sigilizes a desire and then uses automatic drawing until an ideograph is created that is, as Mace says, "perfectly apropos." Letters from this alphabet can be combined to form the shape of a servitor, again using techniques of automatic drawing. An alphabet of desire is a set of personal magickal symbols that describe or trigger certain powers of the mind or aspects of the sorcerer's personality. Although the AoD is generally considered to be graphical there isn't any reason it can't be gestural, or a set of sounds, or a group of familiar emotional states or states of consciousness. The construction of an alphabet of desire also does not need to be nearly as formal as suggested by Spare, Carroll, Phil Hine, Jan Fries, Stephen Mace and others. It can develop organically as a result of, for example, repetitive gestures or sounds a sorcerer makes in rituals. Moreover, it is not necessary for the sorcerer to be able to define the elements of the AoD outside of the ritual space. The conscious mind does not have to know the meanings and attributions of the alphabet since the sorcerer uses it in an altered state of consciousness induced by ritual. FireClown and I, who have similar varieties of magick, actually don't have much of a conscious understanding of our personal alphabets of desire, which are linked more to repetitive gestures, sounds, and subtle states of consciousness rather than graphic symbols. Although most sorcerers working in the tradition of AOSpare are indebted to the theoretical structure he developed, slavish adherence to Spare's techniques would be quite contrary to what Spare himself would have wanted. Of course, if you want to create servitors from graphical sigils then an iconic alphabet of desire will certainly help. The impetus to begin writing this much postponed essay was prompted by a question from a member of the zee-list, a list for the use of the z(cluster), a loose international association of chaos magicians, ontological anarchists, and the like, primarily mediated through the internet. A listmember posted the following question: >In my work with sigilizing desire, I have frequently come >across strange beings which seem related to the sigils. Sometimes, >these beings have names and its gematrias are relevant to the object >of desire. What are these beings? Can I create servitors out of them? As the reader will have probably gathered, the original question that precipitated this essay has now been answered. In sigilizing desires the magician inadvertently encountered servitors that were in some way born from these sigils. The magician now needs to discover what these servitors are, what their relationship is to the Deep Mind and how they can be used. Other relevant questions relating to servitors concern servitor dependency and using a bound demon's energy to reinforce personality elements that the magician wants to strengthen. I'll deal with these questions as this essay continues. In creating servitors, once the magickal intention has been formulated an appropriate container for it can be developed. This can be a sigilized figure, an amulet or talisman, a fetish, a computer program or script, or even, possibly, an electronic pet. I advise against using living creatures as containers for servitors, partly because of their complexity, and partly because it is done all too often by parents wih their children, owners with their pets and bosses with their employees, to mention just a few cases where human beings extrude parts of their own psyches and attempt to ram them into other human beings. Manchurian candidates notwithstanding most attempts to do this are qualified failures. Animal familiars, such as cats, are arguably not servitors at all, but rather, associates of the magician or witch, voluntarily participating in magickal work. There is some argument that a material base for a servitor may not be necessary, but, as Phil Hine points out: "It does help to further construct the Servitor's persona as an individual entity, and is also useful for focusing on when you are recalling the Servitor for reabsorption or reprogramming." Let's return to my Psycho-Zippy servitor. Zippy-with-a-gun is designed to speed checks written to me through the U.S.Postal Service. I do not need to time limit the existence of this servitor since the problem is evidently continuous. I have decided that Zippy-with-a- gun should have a specific aetheric shape, which will be attached to a material link. This link will be an envelope with Psycho-Zippy's icon in the place of a stamp. The envelope will be addressed to me and will contain a check payable to me for as much money as I want and signed by the Universe. This envelope talisman will live on my altar and will also be a resting place for Psycho-Zippy when he's not out terrorizing postal and U.P.S. employees into sending me my checks. I've also developed a list of instructions for Psycho-Zippy constraining him to this one task, of facilitating payments through the mail. I don't, obviously, want Psycho-Zippy infecting a postal worker with the notion that murdering as many of his coworkers as possible before blowing his own brains out would be a fine way to spend the day. These are the preliminary tasks that need to be done before launching the servitor. Phil Hine suggests a servitor design checklist including deciding general and specific intents; sigilizing the initial desire; deciding whether time factor, material link, name, or a specific shape is needed; deciding what will happen when the task is completed; and, finally, making a list of instructions. Again this is a fairly formalistic approach to developing servitors, and I have to admit that most of the time I use servitors that are nameless, have no particular shape, no material link, and are created almost instantaneously for a specific purpose. Over a period of time these servitors have taken on personalities, or at least the shadows of such, if I use them repetitively. I have a few of them I send out to speed me through traffic jams. I have another that gets me tables in crowded restaurants before I walk through the door. I didn't develop these beings, but as a result of repeating spells (through gesture and sound) to achieve these results the servitors just seemed to develop of their own accord. Since I don't banish servitors but house them when their tasks are completed I think I have a pack of shiftless, and probably loutish servitors hanging around my aetheric environment who leap into action when I need them. My demons need work. Sigils, Servitors, and Godforms Pt 4 Launching Servitors - Banishing Rituals Almost all modern authors strongly recommend the use of Banishing Rituals prior to engaging in any magickal ritual. The word "banishing" in this concept is something of a misnomer since the purpose of this technique is to center the magician within a sacred space, banishing negative influences being a secondary effect of a banishing ritual. Uncle Al (Aleister Crowley) writes: "The first task of the magician in every ceremony is therefore to render his circle absolutely impregnable...If you leave even a single spirit within the circle, the effect of the conjuration will be entirely absorbed by it." Now that's certainly definite enough. And a wonderful declamatory statement it is! Crowley's banishing rituals include The Star Ruby (Liber XXV) and The Star Sapphire (Liber XXXVI), although he assumes that his readers have an understanding of the most famous banishing ritual, the Lesser Banishing Ritual of the Pentagram (LBRP). One of the clearest descriptions of this can be found in Donald Michael Kraig's "Modern Magick." The LBRP and its derivatives involve invoking godforms or angels at the corners of the compass as protective agents. Chaos Magicians, such as Peter Carroll, Phil Hine and Stephen Mace, also strongly suggest the use of banishing rituals, although their centering techniques are somewhat simpler. Phil Hine suggests that banishing rituals are necessary because they allow entry into altered states of consciousness, they dispel psychic debris, and the act to order the universe symbolically, allowing the magician to stand at the axis mundi. Peter Carroll writes that a well cosntructed banishing ritual enables the magician to: "resist obsession if problems are encountered with dream experiences or with sigils becoming conscious." By the latter Carroll clearly is referring to the inadvertent creation of servitors through sigil techniques. It also has the advantage of having a basis in Spare's theory of magick and the transformation of obsessional energy into organic energy. Carroll, Hine and Mace all suggest magicians develop a glowing magickal barrier around them when engaged in ritual. Carroll and the IOT used the Gnostic Pentagram Ritual(GPR), a deconstruction of the LBRP, in magickal work. Curiously I have not been able to discover if Austin Osman Spare used banishing rituals. The omission of such from his "Book of Pleasure" may quite likely be deliberate since he was certainly aware of them. I would suggest that Spare may have considered banishing rituals contrary to the free flow of magickal symbolism from the Deep Mind to the magician's psyche, that is to say an artifact that may not be useful. But Spare's magick, to this day, remains more radical, more controversial, and more audacious than most practiced by modern magicians. Is banishing actually necessary? I do it in an abbreviated form, singing the vowels (Eeh-Aye-Aah-Oh-Uuh-Uuh-Oh-Aah-Aye Eeh) in a scale down and up while following, generally, the chakras with hand movements. I do it because I feel better after I do. Other magicians I know don't banish at all, while others won't leave their house without doing an LBRP. My banishing ritual takes a few seconds, can be done with groups, and is a deconstruction of the GPR. I also tend to use drumming, incense, and the strange sound of a Nepali tiger thigh flute to set the scene and move myself into an altered, magickal state of consciousness. I also use the LBRP, but almost never for private ritual. In public rituals, especially before audiences who may never have seen Ceremonial Magick before, the LBRP has a comforting, a soothing effect. After all, it does contain the end of the Lord's Prayer and it does call the Archangels. I don't usually disturb such people with the fact that Demons are sometimes classified as Angels by another name. But if the aim of banishing is to create a sacred space and center the magician then perhaps this can be done just with a hand gesture, with a slight shift in consciousness, or perhaps a declaration like Jean Luc Picard's "Make It So"! Modern magickal writers, to my mind, seem terribly concerned over the sanity and well being of new or neophyte magicians. I'm not sure if this is motivated by fear of litigation, higher primate hierarchical motives, or genuine concern that new magicians will actually go crazy. My suggestion is try it both ways. Do rituals without banishing and do rituals with banishing. Then do what you prefer. After all, if you get infected by some strange denizen of the Deep Mind because you didn't bother to banish, you could always ask one of us to exorcise it. There's always a hearty welcome at my house for demonic entities! I like them. I like to make them work for me, and I like to eat them. They always have a choice, and demon heart is a lot tastier than angel heart! Free Belief and Vacuity A technique explored by AO Spare and discussed at length by Stephen Mace but strangely absent from many other discussions of Chaos Magickal techniques is the state of mind called Free Belief by Mace, and generally referred to by Spare as the Neither-Neither principle. Spare wrote: "When the mind is nonplused capability to attempt the impossible becomes known." Spare's magickal approach is reductionist. He wrote: "Magic, the reduction of properties to simplicity, making them transmutable to utilize them afresh by direction, without capitalization, bearing fruit many times." Spare believed that acts of magick were most likely to succeed when the mind had attained a state in which duality had been extinguished through a process in which dualistic notions were systematically eliminated by counterpoising them against each other. He called this the Neither-Neither principle. Students of Yogic techniques will recognize this as the Neti-Neti meditation, a meditation in which the seeker questions his or her self-identity by discounting all that he or she is not. For example: I am not my name. I am not my body. I am not my genetic structure. I am not my mind etc., etc. Mace gives a simple method for applying Spare's technique: "To apply this principle to conjuring, wait until you are absolutely positive something is true, then search for its opposite. When you find it, oppose it to your 'truth" and let them annihilate one another as well they may. Any residue you should oppose to its opposite until your truth has been dismembered and the passion behind it converted into undirected energy-free belief." FireClown explains this in another way. According to his theory on the formation of entities, obsession naturally creates thought forms which soon achieve a form of independence and turn into demons. Now demons, and semi-detached parts of the magician's psyche in general, do not wish to be re-assimilated, or destroyed. Consequently they will seek energy from any source in the magician's psyche, but primarily from long running maladaptive sub-programs such as resentment towards one's parents, one's spouse, or ex-spouse, feelings of inferiority, or whatever tape loops are recurrent in the magician's psyche. The generation of free belief presents the magician with a source of psychic energy, originating in obsession, that allows the actualization of magickal intentions. Without generating free belief the energy the magician summons is eaten by demons and used by them for their own self-perpetuation. Consequently the magickal act fails. Spare wrote: "When by the wish to believe-it is of necessity incompatible with an existing belief and is not realized through the inhibition of the organic belief-the negation of the wish, faith moves no mountains, not till it has removed itself." Or, if wishes were horses beggars would ride. Mere wishing is rarely sufficient if obsessional energy is at play. Simple spells, such as those used to get a table at a crowded restaurant, can succeed because of their simplicity, and because obsessional energy has not created demonic entities. The bar against success in magick is the contradictory opinions the magician holds of his or her capacity to succeed. Spare suggests that this very process can be used by the magician to create a state of mind in which magick will work. Correct use of the Neither- Neither principle brings about the state Spare calls Vacuity, which is, as T.S.Eliot suggests, is "A state of complete simplicity Costing not less than everything." To return to servitors, then, once the servitor has been developed, and a banishing ritual performed, the magician must achieve a state of vacuity, a state in which free belief exists. One way to achieve this is the Neither-Neither. As Mace writes: "By applying the Neither-Neither we can gut the meaningless convictions that obsess us every day and use the power released to cause the changes we desire." Peter Carroll calls this state of vacuity Gnosis. He wrote "Methods of achieving gnosis can be divided into two types. In the inhibitory mode, the mind is progressively silenced until only a single object of concentration remains. In the excitatory mode, the mind is raised to a very high pitch of excitement while concentration on the objective is maintained. Strong stimulation eventually elicits a reflex inhibition and paralyzes all but the most central function-the object of concentration. Thus strong inhibition and strong excitation end up creating the same effect-the one-pointed consciousness, or gnosis." The Neither-Neither technique is primarily inhibitory, although, through the artificial manipulation of emotional states attached to obsessive energy there is no reason why the method could not produce an excitatory effect. Achieving this state ensures that the servitor can be charged. Not achieving this state runs the risk that the care the magician has put into developing the servitor will come to nothing because the energy developed will end up feeding the magician's unbound and perhaps unknown demons. To continue with the example of the Psycho Zippy servitor I am creating to facilitate payments through U.P.S. and the Postal Service, I can create free belief by choosing a recurring tape from my own psyche. I know, for example, I still resent my father for sending me away to school in England. I believe he did it because he was jealous of my mother's affection for me. I can counterpoint this belief by reminding myself that sending me to boarding school was not only very expensive for him but that he believed he was affording me an education that he had been denied due to the poverty of his parents. On the other hand I truly hated the institutionalized cruelty of English boarding school. I can counterpoint this with the fact that when I was old enough to enumerate the problems with the type of school to which he had sent me he removed me at once and placed in a school that was actually enlightened. I can continue in this way counterpoising one belief with a contrary argument until finally I am left with nothing to which the obsessive resentment can attach. At this point I am ready to charge the servitor. I have moved myself to a calm and one-pointed state of mind that is nevertheless suffused with psychic energy. The Actual Launch To recapitulate: I have created a sacred space by means of a banishing ritual. I have created the appropriate energy to charge the servitor by using the method of Free Belief. I am in a state of vacuity. At this point I can bring the image of Psycho Zippy to my mind and create it as a living form. I can visualize it racing, wraithlike, through the information systems of UPS and the US Postal Service. I can visualize it making the hands of postal workers touching my mail move just a bit faster, see it increasing their concentration and visual acuity, revving up their hand-eye-body coordination for the apparently arduous task of getting my checks back to me on time. I can then dispatch the servitor into the aether with a stern admonition to do my will or suffer the consequence of psychic dissolution. In actual fact I did none of these things. Instead I hosted a ritual, an invocation of Baron Samedi, and before the invocation, but after the banishing, had the participants gaze at my rendering of Psycho Zippy. I then gave this rendering to a friend who was off to a Fire Performance Art that evening, but was unable to stay for the invocation. She had the rendering burned with a flame-thrower while a large group of onlookers chanted "Zippy, Zippy, Zippy." A few days later I turned my rendering of Zippy into labels which I have since placed in every package I ship. Zippy has, by and large, worked very well since then, and I would estimate that the speed of return payments has increased by about 30 per cent. Zippy is a servitor with a material base, the laser printed image of him that sits on my alter and is reproduced on my labels. Although it is by no means necessary for servitors to have material bases, in this case, it seemed appropriate. Phil Hine in his User's Guide gives as examples of material bases: "rings, bottles, crystals, or a small metal figurine" In a way Zippy can be termed a fetish servitor. I believe the image I have drawn of him to have magickal power, thus fulfilling the definition of fetish. To give you another example of a fetish servitor, FireClown, who was having difficulty during job interviews, developed a bear servitor, which he created with a material base made out of wood. It looked something like a wood carved zuni bear. FireClown wore this amulet within his shirt during job interviews. He visualized the bear as a large, somewhat comical, somewhat threatening, form dancing behind him as he sat before his interviewers. He reported that his prospective employers became quite confused during the interviews, ceasing to pay attention to him, and frequently glancing behind him. His interviews were concluded rapidly and cordially and he shortly found himself employed. Phil Hine also suggests that time is a factor to be considered in servitor design and creation, and suggests that the life cycle or periodicity of a servitor be included in its creation. I have not found this to be the case in my own work, but then this may just be because I tend to create servitors for perennial needs and use sigils or godforms for ad hoc situations where I must respond rapidly to a crisis or momentary desire. Hine suggests a technique that my local Chaos group -the TAZ, New Orleans node of the Z(cluster)-has used successfully. He calls it "The Airburst Exercise." In this technique for launching spells, including group sigils and servitors the participants in the ritual first develop an altered state of consciousness through whatever means they choose - chanting, breathing, group groping...whatever. They then visualize energy flowing to and from each other and finally crystallizing in a sphere within their circle. They visualize the sigil or servitor within the sphere. This sphere is then launched into the aether (perhaps after a countdown). The TAZ, New Orleans group, in 1993, decided to celebrate Mardi Gras into perpetuity by launching a chaos satellite, which they named the Zerbat. This satellite was sent into geosynchronous orbit 30 miles above the spire of St. Louis Cathedral shortly before Mardi Gras of that year. The group visualized the satellite as a chaosphere with a top hat, smoking a cigar. On Mardi Gras Day since then members have distributed Reichian orgone collectors throughout the French Quarter, and, at 6 pm discharged these collectors to the Zerbat satellite through a group ritual performed in Jackson Square. The orgones are visualized as a stream of energy containing the revelry of Fat Tuesday in the Vieux Carre. The Zerbat send these streams of orgiastic energy to other satellites launched around the world by other groups. The energy is then received by magicians using satellite receivers (either images of such, old hubcaps, metal bowls or, for the brave, their computers) who use the orgones for their own magickal works. The Zerbat is, of course, a group servitor and was launched using a variation of Hine's Airburst Exercise. Sigils, Servitors, and Godforms Pt 5 ther Methods to Launch Servitors Stephen Mace, in his "Stealing the Fire from Heaven", refers to another form of servitor, known as "The Magickal Child". This is a technique described at length by Crowley (and forms the central theme of his turgid work of fiction "Moonchild") in which a couple of magicians have intercourse to produce "an astral being whose power is devoted to carrying out the purpose of the participants. It is empowered by the white heat of orgasm and embodied in the 'elixer' generated by intercourse. The participants must give this child a name in advance and also agree on its astral appearance, for it must fill their imaginations throughout the rite, until climax sets it in their mingled fluids." Mace continues with the usual thelemic caveat: "Any loss of concentration upon it or independent thinking during copulation can be deadly, for then their child will be monster. The two participants must therefore agree on the symbolism they will use, making this formula much more relevant to traditional magick, where common imagery is easy to come by." I can't help but ask what, in these days of protected sex, one must actually do to "mingle fluids", but perhaps we shouldn't go there. It does occur to me that this ritual is not too far removed from normal intercourse between would be parents anxious to conceive. Mace states that this is a heterosexual ritual, but I can see no reason why it would not be quite as effective, and, in the long run, probably a great deal less stressful to society as a whole, if it were not a same sex rite. After all, if the heterosexual couple does not use protection and a child is the issue of the ritual, the result might be an actual monstrous child, rather than a servitor. Oh, the puzzles entrenched in thelemic logic! Possibly safer for all concerned by far is the ritual described by Mace that Austin Osman Spare used to create servitors, which he and Mace call, creating some confusion, "elementals". Mace describes a technique he asserts that Spare used called "The Earthenware Virgin." This is a clay vessel with an opening that fits snugly around the sorcerer's erect penis and into which he masturbates. At the bottom of the vessel is a sigil incorporating the attributes of the servitor. Needless to say this is a technique for male magicians, although I am certain that inventive female magicians could develop effective variations. On orgasm the magician charges the sigil and then buries it, doing the whole operation during the quarter moon (ask Mrs. Patterson why!) Mace continues: "When the moon passes full, the wizard digs up this clay womb, replenishes the sperm and -'while repeating suitable incantations'- pours it out as a libation on the ground. Then he reburies the urn." Sounds pretty raunchy to me, rather like a pornographic Clark Ashton Smith story. Does the sorcerer clean the vessel before ejaculating into it a second time, or does the grit add an ascetic tinge to the operation? In any event Mace states "Spare cautions that though this technique never fails, it is dangerous, and so he leaves much to be guessed." Rather too much in my opinion. What if the sorcerer gets the dimensions a little wrong? What if the sorcerer has been using Viagra? Will he get stuck? Then what? Never mind. Back to Mace: "...one may suppose that the urn acts as a clay womb in which the wizard breeds a familiar spirit. Such help can be as risky as it is effective, however, for if the wizard is in any way unable to control himself, he will have an even harder time managing a semi-independent power such as this. He must always keep the initiative over it, never allow it any scope for independent action, and always maintain a strict separation between its form and his own. He must never invite it into himself." Mace underlines "never." This curious tendency among magicians from all traditions to warn of the dangers of magickal operations may be no more than stagecraft ("Kids, don't try this at home!"), or perhaps it is more of the strange conservatism that magicians sometimes manifest. Mace's comments seem, from my perspective, to be quite contradictory. If the semi-independent power is not completely autonomous how may one maintain "a strict separation?" I'm afraid I'm puzzled. The Care and Feeding of Servitors Servitors feed from the obsessional energies of the magician that created them. In some cases, vampiric servitors, for example, the servitor may be charged with feeding from the energies of the individual or entity that is its target, but even here, the magician that created it both launches it and controls it with his or her own obsessional energies. A book-finding servitor, for example, can rest dormant until the magician's desire for a certain book sends it on its way. Servitors that do not perform according to the magician's desire need discipline. This can consist merely of a warning. On the other hand a servitor that consistently fails in its duties obviously needs to be recalled. Chaos magick is, after all, results oriented magick. Servitors can be dissipated by destroying their material base, by visualizing their dissolution, or by any other means the magician finds effective. Servitors may be domiciled on the magician's alter. I tend to return mine to a number of crystals strewn about my alter, or to some other material base there residing. Since servitors are semi-independent most authors caution against allowing them to exist in an uncontrolled form, since, at least in theory, they will continue to subsist off the life energies of the magician, which may, over a period of time, debilitate the sorcerer. Jaq. D. Hawkins, in her book, "Spirits of the Earth" has the following, fairly typical admonition about thought-form elementals (her name for servitors): "these artificial entities have survival instincts. Once a thought form is created, it will generally continue to take spiritual energy from its creator until it is dissipated or reabsorbed, which is something which should be kept in mind when deciding to do this in the first place. The energy to sustain a single thought form may go unnoticed, but sending streams of thought forms off to do one's bidding could sap one's energy to depletion and lead to illness. It is always prudent to have a plan in place to reabsorb the entity, and therefore one's own energy, once the purpose is accomplished." Again, the validity of this admonition has more to do with the magickal model to which the magician subscribes rather than natural law. Certainly magicians using the Spirit Model, the Energy Model, and even the Psychological Model to an extent, might agree. Magicians using the Information Model, in which the servitor is essentially self-replicating code programming energy, might disagree, since this Model does not require the magician to use his or her own life force, except perhaps to launch the servitor. Readers of this essay are advised to determine which paradigm, or which combination of paradigms they are using in a particular operation, and act accordingly in determining whether to reabsorb or dissipate the servitor. Binding Demons, Elementals, and Other Entities As stated above, this essay is primarily concerned with creating semi-independent entities out of the mind of the magician. However, it is possible to use the vast variety of independent entities that populate the Spirit Model as servitors. As indicated earlier, these entities tend to be less manageable for a variety of reasons. They are products of the group consciousness of Planet Earth, tend to be more self-willed (and consequently require more energy to be controlled) and are often contaminated by conflicting instructions placed upon them by prior sorcerers. However they may be used, particularly if the magician has a personal bond with the entity, through memory, propinquity, or a recognition of psychological characteristics within the magician that the entity in question also possesses. Some of these entities, however, are really godforms, or extrusions of such, and need to be handled in a quite different manner, but that's a topic for another essay. I would encourage magicians wishing to use these entities to use lesser demons, minor elementals. I do not intend to go into detail on the methods the magician can use to evoke and control these entities. The annals of magick are already full of extremely detailed instructions. However, the question posed earlier, whether one can use a bound demon's energy to reinforce personality elements that the magician wants to strengthen, should be answered. Traditional ceremonial magicians, of course, habitually do this, summoning, for example, a demon of lust and charging it with the task of causing an object of his or her amorous attentions to fall in love with the sorcerer. In this case, from the viewpoint of the theory of servitor dynamics outlined in this essay, the magician has bound the demon of his own lust and converted it into a type of glamour attractive to the object of his infatuation. The question was asked, however, by someone who wanted to use a personality defect as the energy source for a personality asset. To give an example, resentment towards one's parents, if fed frequently enough (and isn't it usually) creates demonic energy that can crystallize into a thought form. Can this demon can be bound and its energy then used to charge a servitor whose function is to increase the personality asset of, say, self-confidence? The process this would occur would be whereby, every time the magician feels resentment towards his or her parents, the energy from this resentment is directed towards the servitor whose task is to increase the magician's self-confidence. The answer is that the energy from the resentment must be clarified, or filtered, as it were, before it can be of use to the character enhancing servitor. An effective method for doing this would be the Free Belief technique outlined above. Thus the energy would not be contaminated by the emotional charge of resentment, but be pure psychic material, suitable for feeding a servitor. A final word about the therapeutic techniques of psychodynamic theory would be useful here since the above technique would be more properly classified as the use of servitors as a form of magickal psychotherapy. Magick and Psychotherapy Modern magick and psychotherapy share a number of commonalties. Both attempt to empower the individual, both attempt to discern the relationship of the individual to the universe, both attempt to make that relationship as functional, in terms of the individual's goals, as possible. Although many magicians might disagree, magick is also an attempt by the magician to integrate disparate elements of his or her personality into a unified whole, which is, of course, a primary goal in psychotherapy. This is not to say that magick is psychotherapy. Magick is clearly a quite different field of human endeavor. Psychotherapy generally has a sociological goal, that is the development of personality assets that allow the individual to function within society in an easy and comfortable manner. Magicians generally could care less about social approval, although they might well seek the approval of their magickal peers. Psychodynamic approaches to psychotherapy (also known as psychoanalysis) seek to overcome defenses so that repressed materials can be uncovered, insight into personal motivation can be achieved, and unresolved childhood issues can be controlled. Psychoanalysis, probably because of its dismal success rate and enormous expense, has now pretty much given way to psychopharmacological interventions among psychiatrists. However, servitor creation and deployment certainly uses psychoanalytic techniques, to the extent that the magician attempts to discover obsessional thought patterns, tries to find out exactly what it is that he or she wants, and uses the material of his or her own psychological history as part of the material in the development of the servitor. The primary difference is that psychoanalysis seeks to bring repressed materials to the surface so that they can dissipate (if, in fact they do), while chaos magicians mine their own repressions and obsessions for energy to empower creations of their own imaginations, a goal that many psychiatrists might regard as being quite contrary to mental health. Rather than looking at chaos magick in terms of its therapeutic uses as a psychodynamic form of therapy it may be more accurate to define it as a modality that looks remarkably similar to that adopted by situationalist or contextual psychologists. Situationalism, a view of personality championed by Walter Mischel argues that whatever consistency of behavior that is observable is largely determined by the characteristics of the situation rather than any internal personality types or traits. From this somewhat radical perspective it is arguable that personality does not actually exist, but is a construct placed by an observer on responses that an individual has to his or her environment. In other words, personality is contained in those behavior patterns the observer chooses to regard. Similarities in patterns of behavior result from similarities in the situation the individual encounters rather than any underlying traits or characteristics the individual might contain. This fluid conception of personality is integral to Chaos Magic which argues that it is not so much any internal validity (or consistency!) of belief structures that a magician may adopt that are important, but rather the tenacity with which the a magician can hold a belief during the period contained by the magical rite. Chaos magicians tend to be results oriented, more concerned, that is, with whether a magical rite works than with its consistency with any encompassing belief structures. Consequently the Chaos magician is quite content with adopting radically different personality characteristic than those with which he or she may find comfortable outside the space and period of the magical rite. Phil Hine, for example, cites a magician, who, wishing to pass a test in mathematics at college adopted the personality (to the best of his ability) of Mr. Spock from Star Trek for three days before the exam, and then passed the test with no problems. The magical practice of invocation, in which the practitioner adopts the personality characteristics of the deity or entity he or she invokes, also suggests that possession rituals are primarily situationist in underlying theory. The situation here is the expectation that the invoked God, demon, or entity will act in certain ways. Jan Fries, one of the clearest writers on magic derived from A.O.Spare, writes of the nearly epileptic seizures of contemporary Japanese spirit mediums "Dramatic healings have much to do with play acting and giving the audience the entertainment it desires. The medium or shaman pretends the eternal 'as if' which becomes the 'as is' in the act of doing." To summarize, then, Chaos Magick is distinguished by its empirical approach to magic (techniques that do not actualize the magician's desires are discarded), by an assertion that personality is a construct comprised of belief structures the individual chooses to regard as containing consistent and constant elements, and by the idea that the primary obstacle to the actualization of a desire through a magical rite is the interference of the conscious mind. The underlying concept here is that there exists an unconscious, perhaps even a collective unconscious, termed by Jan Fries "the Deep Mind" and by A.O.Spare "Kia", but an acceptance of this idea, because of the situationalist approach of Chaos magicians, not necessary to the successful fulfillment of desires through magical rituals. It is, rather, part of the argument, a method to persuade Chaos magicians that the techniques may actually work, but the primary function is rhetorical, not substantive. This is, of course, a radical approach to magic, not to mention psychology, but it can be substantiated as an effective approach among certain individuals. To be sure, chaos magicians routinely use chaos magickal techniques for personal psychotherapeutic goals. Phil Hine recognized this in his User's Guide: "A purely psychodynamic model of Servitor operation would state that our psyche is made up of a very large cluster of forces which can be projected as intelligences, complexes, or subpersonalities (whether you're into magick, NLP, Jungian Psychotherapy, etc). These mental forces enable us to do some things but prevent us from doing others. By consciously realigning and redirecting these energies we can create Servitors which will enable us to do things which we couldn't do before, such as refrain from compulsive behaviors, thoughts, or emotions. In these terms, a Servitor is a conscious form of redirecting these largely unconscious entities so that they work for us." I believe that chaos magickal techniques would actually prove quite valuable to psychotherapists in the treatment of abnormal behavior, but that, I'm afraid, is a topic for an entirely different essay. By Marik (MarkDeFrates, marik[at]aol.com)

[pastorcowboy]

Is God love?

Who is God: The Old Testament God of Love

 Why on earth would I have you look into laws, commands, and rules in the Bible. I might as well have you read and recite the lists of generations. I could also have you eat dry toast breakfast, lunch, and supper. It’s probably not the best way to sell God and the Christian life. It sounds boring, burdensome, and bogged down in religious mumbo jumbo.

The reason I went that route is because of the example of a car. I just read an article that says women voted along party lines more than because Hillary was a woman. The democrats targeted female voters but the female voters targeted the party over gender. That was very interesting. I bet buying a car is the same way.

I was a Chrysler dude for a long time. At some point the dealership began not acting like the Chrysler I once loved. By chance someone asked me to give Mazda a try. I was skeptical and visited the old Chrysler stomping grounds first. Something was out of place so I snuck into the Mazda lot just to see. Within minutes the dealer had me sold. I loved Mazda. So much so that I now own 2. I think we are devoted to what works. I think we are devoted to what we love. I also think we are devoted to who loves us. What are you loyal to? Think of these questions while you reflect on your answers.

1.       Am I loyal to my job?

2.       Am I loyal to women or a certain type of gender?

3.       Am I loyal to a phone brand?

4.       Am I loyal to my principles?

________________________________________________________________

I loved my Chrysler cars and trucks until they broke down. I disliked the service so I left. To an outsider it appears I fell out of love with the dealership because of how they treated me. In the Old testament, we get a strange reaction. At times God asked the people to behave. They did not and the wrath of God was kindled against them.

Deuteronomy 32:22 “For a fire will be kindled by my wrath, one that burns down to the realm of the dead below. It will devour the earth and its harvests and set afire the foundations of the mountains.”

Seems like scorched earth to me.

 1.    Is God a being of love or anger to you?

________________________________________________________________

If God of the old testament is just wrathful, angry, and scorched earth then where could there be love? How could there be love? It’s a real shame if Christians only talk about Jesus and the new testament. It’s a shame if Christians ignore the God of the Old testament. To begin someone’s journey with God only in the new testament is a travesty. All of the new testament exists because of the work done in the old.

It’s like this. If I find out a co-worker is hard to work with I could easily fire them. It’s so simple. I hate you, your gone. Take this lesson. Abraham Lincoln had an adversary in debates. Lincoln appointed him to command his army because he knew the man’s character. Although there was tension and difference of opinion. Lincoln knew above all else he could trust the character of that man.

Let’s begin to know the God of the Old testament and see how the people viewed him. If we’re going to trust him then we need to experience his character. Look at the verses below and think about who is writing them. Why are they loyal to God? They have a respect for God because of his consistent approach to them in love beyond all else.

Read these verses below for next week.

Extra reading for fun. Look up these extra passages to see how much the supposedly God of wrath is adored. 1 Kings 8:23, Psalm 52:8, Daniel 9:4

1.       I have watched kids playing with Play-doh. They rip it apart and mash it together. Us parents buy the colors separately but within minutes’ kids will have mixed them into a colorful mess. Kids love playing with that stuff. They also always want to show you what they have made. The Bible goes out of its way to say God delighted in creating. There is no anger in the first two chapters.

We expect God to be angry. Do you know why you expect that? In these first two chapters of Genesis, God says what he made was very good. He is concerned for the man and tries to make him a suitable helpmate. God lets man name the animals. God provides all they need. Is that the actions of an angry God?

Genesis 1: 31 “God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the sixth day.”

2.       The people in the old testament saw the wrath of God. He closed the sea on pharaohs army. He flooded the earth and destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah. Yet these very people sang songs of praise to God. They described him in glowing reports as compassionate and loving. These people witnessed the mighty power of God. They saw his pillars of fire. They saw him split the sea. He rained down fire and brimstone on the wicked. Still they praised him.

 The flip side has God negotiating with Abraham to save a town. We see Moses negotiating with God to save his people. God puts his hand over Moses to protect him. The people are warned to stay away from God because his power is too great. God provides manna and water in the desert. God goes before them to fight their battles. This powerful God even helps them build a tent so he could dwell among them. Yet again, the people praise him.

Genesis 24:27 “Praise be to the Lord, the God of my master Abraham, who has not abandoned his kindness and faithfulness to my master. As for me, the Lord has led me on the journey to the house of my master’s relatives.”

Exodus 34:6 “And he passed in front of Moses, proclaiming, “The Lord, the Lord, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness,

 3.       These verses in Deuteronomy are famous (Duet 6:4-9) This is called the Shema in the Middle East.  When you here that famous yelling or singing in the Middle East they are using this piece of the Bible. To this day, Muslims, Jewish, and Christian people sing songs of praise. They say the story of the Bible is about 6000 years old. There is no proof how old really. The ancient story is so old that nothing remains to correlate a time frame. To worship one God for that long must mean something. Certainly, businesses and traditions come and go. Why do these three religions still claim to worship one God?

 In our world, we can worship anything. I know that one group wants church status to worship the force from Star Wars. They say that from Jesus time and further back there were no atheists. True or not, Gods were part of their lives. People sold idols or images of Gods. They made temples. There were human sacrifices. We are examining this God. Why does he claim to be love? Why does he claim to be one? Why does he refuse idols and human sacrifices? This God in the Bible was different. They worship him then and today because he is constant and different.

Deuteronomy 6:4-5 “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. 5 Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength.”

 4.       Joseph was sold by his brothers into Egyptian slavery. He became a powerful ruler in that powerful kingdom. The God of the Hebrews humbled and trained Joseph to be compassionate and kind. He had the power to kill those responsible for his sorrow, yet he chose to love instead. Does that reflect the teaching of a wrathful God?

 I am stunned really. Abraham must have despised Sodom and Gomorrah. They were not best allies. Why negotiate to save them? His brother Lot was there. They had parted ways. Why try and save him? King David had several opportunities to kill his enemies. On more than one occasion he refused out of respect for them. What made Moses fight his fears and speak to Pharaoh? This God induces his character in those who love him. It seems that if you want God then his character becomes your character. There is something strange and curious within that.

Genesis 50:20 “You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done, the saving of many lives.”

The Jesus Connection

To know Jesus is to know God. To know God is to know Jesus. I purposely began this study of God in reverse of most introductions into Christianity. Almost 100% of them begin with Jesus. I feel that is putting the cart before the horse. Christians have been trained to promote Jesus. They are trained to tell you Jesus is love. They are supposed to ask you to trust in him from day one. Isn’t Jesus a stranger to you at this point? Oh, you have heard stories. People tell you he is the good news. He is the way to God. Yes, yes indeed he is the way to God. Yet, God is also the way to Jesus. The People in the old Testament did not know Jesus. All they knew was that God promised a messiah or Christ to save them. To understand Jesus is to understand how we get to Jesus. Jesus is everything God is. The people in Jesus day knew God but they did not know Jesus until they could see that they were the same person. Jesus carried the character of their God. That is the key.

The Jesus connection is in these verses below. This study of God will open your eyes to God. Within that you will see Jesus very clearly by the end of 13 weeks. Look at the passages below. Proverbs comes from the Old Testament. God says he loves those who love him. 1 John repeats this theme by proclaiming that God is love. Ephesians 3:19 was written after Jesus died. The writer Paul attaches the Christ to God in a bond of Love. Finally, read John 3:16. Jesus is connected to the God of the Old Testament in the eyes of those who met him. That is the Jesus connection.

Proverbs 8:17 “I love those who love me, and those who seek me find me.”

1 John 4:8 “Anyone who does not love does not know God, because God is love.”

Ephesians 3:19 “and to know the love of Christ that surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled with all the fullness of God.”

John 3:16 “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.