Later titled.. (attributed to Adams ideal) – Illuminati.
“I declare and I challenge all mankind to contradict my declaration, that no man can give any account of the order of Freemasonry, of it’s origin, of it’s history, of it’s object, nor any explanation of it’s mysteries and symbols, which does not leave the mind in total uncertainty on all these points.”
“Nothing would be more profitable to us than a right history of mankind.
Despotism has robbed them of their liberty.
How can the weak obtain protection?”
The next read,. leads me to question why to base upon what
obviously is not, lest of course along the lines of something
aligory.. but,. why to PRETEND when TRUTH speaks for itself?
“Jesus of Nazareth, the Grand Master of our order, appeared at a time when the world was in the utmost Disorder, and among a people who for ages had groaned under the yolk of Bondage.
He taught them the lessons of reason. “
My thinking? – Get yourself up to speed!
We simply dont indulge our toil amidst things like
No.. no i did not just say.. 501c non profit system intertwined
CHRISTO skitting.. quaker.
To each their own,. PRETEND.
We are simply NOT pretending with you,. nor will we be governed nor ruled over by your brains thinking based upon presumption concocted premise and outright pretend.
Actually,. we’d appreciate if you’d keep,. as well as YOUR gender referencing
sexual behavior orienting issues
which are for others – NON issues, that you seem to think that you need rewarded for while imposing upon others public,. behavior, no free soul would have ever accosted upon theirs or anyone elses self, children or sanctity..
thieving ill leading others lives,. back around the endless circle of REACTING to what the others learnt to PRETEND trapped in the same tale a happy slave toiling,. unaware of their loss beserk.. a puppet tool demoralizing the rest,.
if only you would make up YOUR mind,. to
have the look that really will allow you to,. see.
Reginald Scot (Scott), (d. 1599), writer on witchcraft. The Discoverie of Witchcraft, his most important work, was published without licence in 1584 and reprinted in 1651, 1654, and 1665… Scott’s objective was to refute the Démonomanie of Jean Bodin (1580) and to go well beyond the arguments of the most radical author on witchcraft known to him, Johann Weyer, whose De praestigiis daemonum (1566) had been attacked by Bodin. Scott made a number of remarkable claims. He maintained that there were no witches in contemporary England and that all those executed for witchcraft were innocent: “he had tried to find anyone who would offer instruction in witchcraft without success. He asserted that none of the terms used in the Bible which had been translated as ‘witch’ had that meaning in the original languages, thereby undermining the claim that there was a biblical sanction for the execution of witches, and he is thus a significant figure in the history of biblical criticism. According to Scott, witchcraft was an impossible crime, because words could not work upon the world. His arguments thus implied a radical separation between mind and matter. He contended that where curses or spells were followed by unpleasant events the link between the two was entirely coincidental. Scott went beyond a systematic attack on the intellectual foundations of the belief in witchcraft because he described witch accusations in England as resulting out of a particular type of social encounter: old women begging for food or other assistance would curse their neighbours when they were turned away empty handed; if something bad then happened – the death of a child, perhaps – the old woman would be taken to be a witch. Witchcraft accusations in England thus arose in the context of disagreements over expectations and obligations relating to charitable giving. This sociological account was persuasive to contemporaries and has been adopted by modern historians. As far as Scott was concerned, those who confessed to being witches were either deluded or the victims of torture, while much of what Bodin had taken to be evidence for the existence of witchcraft in different eras and diverse cultures Scott was prepared to dismiss as mere fable and fiction. His book was a remarkable triumph of erudition for an obscure country gentleman with little formal education: he listed 212 Latin and 23 English authors on whom he drew. He had clearly taken an interest in contemporary English trials, but there is no evidence to support the suggestion that he was a JP, beyond the fact that he claimed the title of esquire. Scott bolstered his study of witchcraft with attacks on other forms of credulity and superstition, under which heading he included Catholicism and astrology. He dismissed alchemy as a type of confidence trick. He reproduced from a manuscript detailed procedures for conjuring up demons, presumably with the idea that his readers could demonstrate for themselves that such techniques were ineffective. And he set out to show how easy it was to confuse an observer. To this end he dedicated book 13 to the first significant account of how to perform conjuring tricks. The book, with some revisions, was republished as The Art of Juggling (1612; repr. 1614) by S. R., which was itself absorbed into Hocus Pocus Junior (1634); this had numerous editions in the seventeenth century (one calling itself the thirteenth edition appeared in 1697) and was the basis of later manuals on legerdemain which continued to appear into the twentieth century.
The Discoverie ended with a ‘Discourse on devils and spirits’ (which is unfortunately omitted from some modern reprints; the 1665 edition contains a spurious second discourse). Although this discourse avoided a full-frontal attack on orthodoxy, it appears from it that Scott was not a Trinitarian and did not believe that the account of the fall in the book of Genesis referred to a historical event. He seems to have held that the idea of good and evil spirits was simply a metaphor for internal promptings towards good and evil experienced by the individual and that the individual could overcome evil and become truly good. The discourse was incompatible with orthodox protestant Christianity, which stressed predestination, and it, together with Scott’s association with Abraham Fleming (who worked with him on the Discoverie and published a familist prayer book in 1581), suggests that he may well have been a member of the Family of Love.