Gordon White, Is Magic Outdated Tech? |405|

#61
Classic and fantastic show!

I’ve been diggin’ Gordon’s show for a few years now, myself. I enjoyed Gordon’s breakdown of how we think and draw conclusions. Not anything we have not heard before - but even when endeavoring to follow blind empiricism, we still fall prey to altering our conclusions of specific data sets based on how we ask questions, our tools and our bias. Consider the replication crisis these days.

Totally dig Gordon’s early childhood recollection of spirits observing him and he observing them. Spooked me out, bc as a 5 year old, I came to the same conclusions of the exact same phenomena in my childhood home (later to be assumed to be haunted by many others not just me). I’ve flirted with just thoughts and curiosity of the magic realms but have, at times, fallen back into empiricism and fairly boring science mindsets in between open minded rumination bouts. One reason I still can’t let go of the scientific method is it fills me with a sense of predictable peace. Example... half way through reading “Chaos Protocols” a few years back, it seemed like all hell broke loose in my life. I had really been exploring a lot of different concepts and it felt like that “in between” place was not a comfortable place to be. In a panic I had to make peace with the happenings - so what could possibly go wrong by burying it behind some other books in my chest and saying a few affirmations that whatever was happening was not welcome. Hey, things settled down right quickly after that. Coincidence? Superstition? Maybe... just like the childhood hauntings. That’s what I tell myself these days anyhow. PS I am certainly convinced we are all invincible in a CP sort of way. I have not lost that understanding at least.
 
Last edited:
#62
Is the impediment to harmony a dark spirit or unequal capacity to express harmonious sentiments and actions?
I think it could be both of those, Micheal, or one of those reasons coaxing us into the other. Either way it leads to human disadvantage as discord often leads to strife and strife to human pain and suffering. As I see it, compromising until harmonious balance is regained is a much better path to take. On the other hand, to compromise to the point of ones unquestionable disadvantage may be the intent of malevolent spirits as strife and human suffering is their goal. Ultimately it is the humans involved who may need a bit of Divine help in the form of intuition, to guide them to the least painful resolution.
 
#63
As I see it, compromising until harmonious balance is regained is a much better path to take
I am interested that you say 'regained' - as if such a state has existed previously. I know there are assertions that this is the case, but I have found few persuasive. For example the 'paradise' of Eden is presumed to be place in which humans (all 2) dwelt in harmony within God's will - until they didn't. That is more likely a fanciful interpretation of a deeper Sumerian story, which certainly had no depiction of innocent harmony.

The Christian notion of redemption can't be a restoration of Edenic bliss. Here we have the complexity that humanity was 'expelled' from Paradise in consequence of the attainment of the capacity to 'know good and evil', and before our ancestors could discover how to live for ever. So it might better to say that we are on an uncharted journey of self-awakening, which takes us in the direction of being like the Gods of Eden (plainly plural) - but not all the way.

Some see the Eden story as a projection of the human soul into the physical world to learn what is to be learned from the strictures and the suffering of being in the flesh. So in the sense that there is any return, it is not to as we were, but as we have become. In Biblical terms, the story of the Prodigal Son is a better tale - coming home after sojourning in the world - sorrier but wiser - and into a embrace of rejoicing.

There is an interesting book called the Sirach (https://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/apo/sir001.htm#001) which Christianity seems to want to own, but which, in fact, belongs to a deeper Wisdom tradition that is so far beyond anything the Church proposes the connection between the two is almost absurd.

I like the idea that our goal, in this physical life of suffering and struggle, is attainment of Wisdom. From Wisdom we can develop the capacity for Love. And from both we can craft an ability to live in harmony. This may explain why a lot of religious struggle to express harmony - they prefer dogma over wisdom and judgement over love. Wisdom is an attribute of a life lived with humble intent, and not something a faith can confer by virtue of obedience to a creed or a text.

I would argue, then, that a capacity to live in harmony is something we grow into - a potential we have. But I don't think its a goal to be aspired to - rather it is a consequence of a moral challenge we set ourselves, however that may be framed.
 
#64
In a panic I had to make peace with the happenings - so what could possibly go wrong by burying it behind some other books in my chest and saying a few affirmations that whatever was happening was not welcome. Hey, things settled down right quickly after that. Coincidence? Superstition?
It could also be that spirts/Spirit is respectful of your desire to be let alone. I endured several years of mad stuff happening and a few events led me to demand it stop. I had had enough. I was exhausted and wrung out. And straight away the crazy stuff backed off. For some time I got nothing and then it became a steady stream of not so crazy stuff. From that moment the really wild shit quit and never came back.

About 2 decades later I took a break from had been a full on immersion in magic and the occult over maybe 15 years. I read nothing but secular stuff for 5 years, during which time nothing especially spectacular happened. Then I got back into the occult and things got wild and interesting (but nothing as bad as they had been) for around 3 years. Two years ago things started getting entertaining again.

So maybe they are not done with you yet.
 
#65
Thanks Michael, appreciate your thoughts. Your history and experiences have been fascinating to read, thank you for sharing!

What are your thoughts on where intuition, dreams and synchronicity fit in with the casual, non-practicing person who may be “tuned into” the wider spiritual world around them but are not actively seeking magical practices, contact or otherwise? This is an area I suspect I’ve had most of my spiritual contact. Some have been rather profound and impossible to ignore.
 
#66
I would argue, then, that a capacity to live in harmony is something we grow into - a potential we have. But I don't think its a goal to be aspired to - rather it is a consequence of a moral challenge we set ourselves, however that may be framed.
Quite the contrary I believe michael; as a Gospel Christian, if Jesus gave us a new commandment: "That ye love one another..." then somehow I think it imperative we achieve harmony. Let us consider the vastness of space. Although the Universe occupies a considerable portion of that space there is still unlimited room for more Universal growth. Suppose the Creator wishes that more of that space be utilized? He will need groups of accomplished Spirits to begin the process of occupation of the globes He creates there. Such morally triumphant Souls will need to be able to work together to originate the work, notwithstanding Dark Entities no doubt active there as here.
 
#67
What are your thoughts on where intuition, dreams and synchronicity fit in with the casual, non-practicing person who may be “tuned into” the wider spiritual world around them but are not actively seeking magical practices, contact or otherwise?
If our mind is captive to the materialist or religious narrative that demands belief that the world is this or that way, I think we switch off a natural sensitivity to deeper awareness. For example a few years back I was heading out of the house to go to the local fruit and veg - a quick trip. I decided not to lock the front door. As I was getting sorted to go I was pre-occupied by something I was thinking about and when I got a persistent urge to take my house keys with me I ignored it. But because I decided I wasn't going to lock the front door I ignored those urges as being wrong. So, of course, I leave then house pre-occupied, habit kicks in and I flick the catch that locks the door. As I head to the car I realise what I have done. I am outside, door is locked and I have no flaming keys! Was I warned? Repeatedly. Did I know I was being warned? Yes. Did I pay attention? No.

Even though I have lived most of my life subjected to word stuff I still can ignore flagrant hints because I let my rational mind filter them out or counter them with seemingly rational alternatives. I think the world would way more magical if folk let themselves be aware of what is native to them. We are way more sensitive than we give ourselves credit for. But we are conditioned to reject or ignore those sensitivities.

For example, I am not a fan of super short skirts. I am old-fashioned enough to prefer sufficient modesty to tease the imagination. So one day I am sitting at my favourite cafe's outdoor table and I see a young woman and I think that skirt is way too short. And what does she do? She tugs her hem down at the precise moment I think that. And guess what? It happens routinely. The link between my thought and an action is frequent and instant. In fact I make it a kind of a game to test my hypothesis. I think we interact intuitively a lot, but mostly that does not lead to discernible responses. Our reactions can just fold into the self-talk that goes on in our heads constantly.

Not everybody reacts to thoughts in a readable way, but you can experiment yourself. But you can't disapprove of a skirt length and be lustful at the same time. And you shouldn't experiment with harmful or degrading thoughts. It has to be natural and sincere, and you have to observe the response - and know it is possible.

Listen to your inner voice and senses and practice doing so long enough for it to become a habit. You will, be wrong a lot to start off with, but as you get familiar with your own senses that will, change. We have to learn to trust that we know, and then refine our filters so that what we know can come to awareness with minimal distortion. Also we gotta stop thinking self indulgent crap - anger or ego - because that generates so much static it drowns out the finer senses.
 
#68
if Jesus gave us a new commandment: "That ye love one another..." then somehow I think it imperative we achieve harmony.
This is the most important commandment, and the least cited and acted upon. I agree there is an imperative to act on it, but after over 1500 years this is still not happening.

John 13:34-35 "A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another." is immensely difficult. Jesus says "As I have loved you.." That is a huge standard to aspire to. Love is the hardest thing for humans to do well in a mundane sense, and to love in the imitation of Christ is even harder. So to the extent that we can interpret the injunction in a way that is even close to the intended meaning, responding in obedience is profoundly difficult.

That is why, I think, the Christian church struggles to honour and manifest that aspect of Christian teaching. In fact the faith works in the opposite way. It offers succour in failure, and the distracts into easier sentiments - like self-righteousness, judgement and bigotry. In fact the imitators of Christ were routinely abused and tortured and then held up as exemplars, once they were safely dead.

The deep misfortune of Christianity is that it so often insists that those who aspire to be Christ-like are torn down and that most are told they cannot attain such a standard - certainly not without the intervention of priests and creeds. The Christ-like are routinely 'crucified'. Indeed this is the very moral message of the gospels - piss off those who run the faith and you are all kinds of trouble.

So my point is that, while I can agree with you in terms of then idea, the practical reality of manifesting the love of which Jesus spoke takes immense effort and courage. It is something we grow into. We can't just switch it on as an act of faith. Of course we can imagine we can and believe we do it.

There's a reason why, after 1500 years of Christianity, so many have abandoned the faith. It is because the faith, in all its manifestations, discourages obedience to that 11th commandment. Why? So the faith can survive. The stories that convey to us the message of Jesus are not stories about the foundation of a religion, but of communities of shared inspiration and reflection., If you read the gospels carefully you will see the assertion of a moral philosophy in a cultural context - not a religion. Not much of Christianity after 325 is actually relevant to that 11th commandment in my view.

I think we grow towards that capacity to love as best we can in any given life. The key mystery is "As I have loved you." How do we know how we have been loved and how do we know how to emulate it? Were it any other way than it is, that ability to love would have been perfectly manifested and profoundly contagious. Instead it is imperfectly manifested. It is still profoundly contagious. It is imperfectly manifested because we must 'evolve' toward the ideal expressed in the Christ.

Christianity has made a hash of all this by the lunatic fantasy that we can be transformed by magical acts of grace. How has that worked out? Ordained priests rape children because their ordination is a bureaucratic act, not a divine one. They are not transformed because the fantasy is a delusion that creates an addiction for constant disempowering acts of redemption and forgiveness. That creates an environment for predation and acquiesce. We have to earn our enlightenment. That's something Buddhism got right.
 
#69
This is the most important commandment, and the least cited and acted upon. I agree there is an imperative to act on it, but after over 1500 years this is still not happening.

John 13:34-35 "A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another." is immensely difficult. Jesus says "As I have loved you.." That is a huge standard to aspire to. Love is the hardest thing for humans to do well in a mundane sense, and to love in the imitation of Christ is even harder. So to the extent that we can interpret the injunction in a way that is even close to the intended meaning, responding in obedience is profoundly difficult.

That is why, I think, the Christian church struggles to honour and manifest that aspect of Christian teaching. In fact the faith works in the opposite way. It offers succour in failure, and the distracts into easier sentiments - like self-righteousness, judgement and bigotry. In fact the imitators of Christ were routinely abused and tortured and then held up as exemplars, once they were safely dead.

The deep misfortune of Christianity is that it so often insists that those who aspire to be Christ-like are torn down and that most are told they cannot attain such a standard - certainly not without the intervention of priests and creeds. The Christ-like are routinely 'crucified'. Indeed this is the very moral message of the gospels - piss off those who run the faith and you are all kinds of trouble.

So my point is that, while I can agree with you in terms of then idea, the practical reality of manifesting the love of which Jesus spoke takes immense effort and courage. It is something we grow into. We can't just switch it on as an act of faith. Of course we can imagine we can and believe we do it.

There's a reason why, after 1500 years of Christianity, so many have abandoned the faith. It is because the faith, in all its manifestations, discourages obedience to that 11th commandment. Why? So the faith can survive. The stories that convey to us the message of Jesus are not stories about the foundation of a religion, but of communities of shared inspiration and reflection., If you read the gospels carefully you will see the assertion of a moral philosophy in a cultural context - not a religion. Not much of Christianity after 325 is actually relevant to that 11th commandment in my view.

I think we grow towards that capacity to love as best we can in any given life. The key mystery is "As I have loved you." How do we know how we have been loved and how do we know how to emulate it? Were it any other way than it is, that ability to love would have been perfectly manifested and profoundly contagious. Instead it is imperfectly manifested. It is still profoundly contagious. It is imperfectly manifested because we must 'evolve' toward the ideal expressed in the Christ.

Christianity has made a hash of all this by the lunatic fantasy that we can be transformed by magical acts of grace. How has that worked out? Ordained priests rape children because their ordination is a bureaucratic act, not a divine one. They are not transformed because the fantasy is a delusion that creates an addiction for constant disempowering acts of redemption and forgiveness. That creates an environment for predation and acquiesce. We have to earn our enlightenment. That's something Buddhism got right.
It's not often I agree with the bulk of a post you write, Michael, but on this occasion I do, perhaps especially the last paragraph.
 
#70
Rick Archer just did an interview with Damien Echols on how ceremonial magick helped him in the death row. It would be interesting to see him on skeptiko too...
It would be especially interesting to see both he and former Skeptiko guest Ed Opperman on the same show.
"There is the myth of the West Memphis 3 -- innocent teenagers railroaded by malicious police and prosecutors into murder convictions because of the way they dressed and the music they listened to, there being no evidence against them except the prejudices of Southern white Christians. And then there is the reality --- three criminally inclined young thugs involved in occultism who gleefully tortured three 8-year-old boys and then brought the justice system down upon them based on multiple factors, including a series of confessions, failed lie detector tests, failed alibis, eyewitness sightings and a history of violence. The second volume in this series, following "Blood on Black," continues to examine the evidence against Jessie Misskelley Jr., Jason Baldwin and Damien Echols in the murders of Christopher Byers, Michael Moore and Stevie Branch on May 5, 1993. Misskelley, Baldwin and Echols met up that afternoon just outside Lakeshore Estates Trailer Park, according to the multiple confessions of Misskelley. Echols and Baldwin were drinking beer. The plan was to go to West Memphis and beat up some boys. They walked about two miles into woods known as Robin Hood or Robin Hood Hills. Echols knew the woods well, having lived in the nearby Mayfair Apartments, frequently walking through the area as a shortcut between his home in West Memphis and his friends in the trailer parks and having been spotted in the woods recently by an acquaintance. Michael, Stevie and Christopher Byers, all second graders at Weaver Elementary School, lived south of the woods and visited the woods frequently to play. That afternoon they were spotted heading toward Robin Hood around 6, close to the time their killers entered from the north. When Echols heard the children approaching, he began making sounds to lure them in, while Misskelley and Baldwin hid. Then, according to the confessions of Misskelley, and indicated by the blood patterns at the scene and other evidence, the teens jumped the 8-year-olds, beat them viciously, stripped them of their clothes, mutilated Stevie's face, castrated Christopher, sexually molested them, hogtied them and dumped them in a muddy ditch, where Michael and Stevie drowned. Christopher already had bled out from his wounds. Misskelley quickly left the scene, which was scrupulously cleaned up. Echols was spotted walking along the service road near the crime scene later that evening in muddy clothes. After frantic parents sparked an extensive search for the missing children, their bodies were discovered the next afternoon by law enforcement officers. Tales of strange rituals held in the woods by mysterious strangers spread quickly among the crowd gathered near the crime scene. As detectives and other officers gathered information and talked to witnesses or potential suspects, Echols quickly drew the scrutiny of officers. Besides the talk among the boys' neighbors, the ritualistic aspects of the murder -- including the way the boys were bound, and timing possibly influenced by setting, proximity to a pagan holiday and celestial events -- furthered suggested occultism as an impetus for the killings. Local officers were familiar with Echols as a dangerous, mentally ill teenager immersed in witchcraft. Among the many tips coming into police were reports that Echols had been seen near the crime scene that night and that he was heavily involved in a cult. A series of police interviews with an all-too-knowing Echols did nothing but deepen suspicions. Echols failed a lie detector test, thereafter refusing to talk. Police heard that Echols had been telling friends about his involvement in the murders. Vicki Hutcheson, an acquaintance of Misskelley, decided to "play detective." Soon police brought in Misskelley for routine questioning. After he, too, failed a lie detector test, he gave the first of a number of confessions. The case was solved, but the questions continue."
 
#71
We have to earn our enlightenment.
I agree. Many "Christians" will have us believe that the shed blood of Jesus was the ransom required for the salvation of all and that no further effort was required by us as individuals. I will concede that the murderous death of Jesus the Son of the Creator was the payment necessary for the gates to open at all; but this does not automatically allow even criminals to pass through. I believe a lot of effort toward spiritual reform perhaps over several lifetimes so that we might at last no longer be, "evil" (Matthew 7;11) will finally allow our admission into the Kingdom.
 
#72
the teens jumped the 8-year-olds, beat them viciously, stripped them of their clothes, mutilated Stevie's face, castrated Christopher, sexually molested them, hogtied them and dumped them in a muddy ditch, where Michael and Stevie drowned. Christopher already had bled out from his wounds.
I've read the book, Lord of The Flies, but it's got nothing on this story, Dear God! Well, I guess it's a good example of how far human beings can gradually be enticed into perversion by occult demonic entities. If only the teen murderers could have at some point realized where psychologically they were slowly being taken. Having once been more or less Godless thus also guideless I am aware how fallible we can become. I don't mean to wear anyone out with religious bullshit but I will hold fast to the thought that if the teenagers had carefully and sincerely recited the Lords Prayer even once, especially the words, "...lead us not into temptation but deliver us from evil." the influential demons would have been forced into dispersal and the teens would have come to their senses.
 
Last edited:
#73
I've read the book, Lord of The Flies, but it's got nothing on this story, Dear God! Well, I guess it's a good example of how far human beings can gradually be enticed into perversion by occult demonic entities. If only the teen murderers could have at some point realized where psychologically they were slowly being taken. Having once been more or less Godless thus also guideless I am aware how fallible we can become. I don't mean to wear anyone out with religious bullshit but I will hold fast to the thought that if the teenagers had carefully and sincerely recited the Lords Prayer even once, especially the words, "...lead us not into temptation but deliver us from evil." the influential demons would have been forced into dispersal and they would have come to their senses.
In the original Aramaic text of the Lord's prayer, it does not say "...lead us not into temptation but deliver us from evil". This would imply that God is the one who intentionally leads us into evil. It says something more like "Do not allow us to be led into temptation but help us avoid it", i.e. is asking for God's help not to be led into temptation by worldly desires, which come from our own egos.

It's interesting to examine the Lord's prayer from the point of view of someone who understands Aramaic; it's rather different from what the usual English translation would suggest. This is the first video from a series covering the meaning of the original prayer that deals with, among other things, this particular mistranslation:

 
Last edited:
#74
In the original Aramaic text of the Lord's prayer, it does not say "...lead us not into temptation but deliver us from evil". This would imply that God is the one who intentionally leads us into evil. It says something more like "Do not allow us to be led into temptation but help us avoid it", i.e. is asking for God's help not to be led into temptation by worldly desires,
Thank you very kindly for explaining this Michael Larkin. and also for the video. It makes a person wonder how we could have recited the prayer lacking as it is true correct translation for so many centuries. Oh well, I guess for our Father Spirit, the thought is really what counts. Circumstances through life have caused me to resort to it in it's familiar form many times and be granted favorable, sometimes amazing results nevertheless. But those of us who are Christians really should work on a correct translation of scripture.
 
#75
Thank you very kindly for explaining this Michael Larkin. and also for the video. It makes a person wonder how we could have recited the prayer lacking as it is true correct translation for so many centuries. Oh well, I guess for our Father Spirit, the thought is really what counts. Circumstances through life have caused me to resort to it in it's familiar form many times and be granted favorable, sometimes amazing results nevertheless. But those of us who are Christians really should work on a correct translation of scripture.
I have no reason to doubt that if you have said the Awun with the correct intention and a pure heart, it will have helped you. As regards a fairly new translation (1988) of the bible from Aramaic to English, look up George Lamsa on Amazon - he's also written a book with Rocco Errico (the guy in the video).
 
#77
Vested interest in spirituality include existing powers on earth wanting to be very sure to preventing the likelihood of real spiritual abilities being commonly available (since someone who could blow up a nuclear power-station or kill any man instantly anywhere in the world by decision would be a weapon that they would want to prevent the existence of, at any cost), and of course there are plenty of existing profits and power derived from what might be termed “non-ideal” versions of “spirituality”, one reason being that people who are told they can become free, but not given a way to actually get fully to that goal, continue pay a lot more money than those who have actually got free from the need to believe anyone else.

Silence....
 
#78
It makes a person wonder how we could have recited the prayer lacking as it is true correct translation for so many centuries.
This happens way more than we realise. For instance the word 'meek' does not mean timid or submissive, but is closer to gentle or respectful. Som the meaning of 'the meek shall inherit the Earth's very different from what many of us are accustomed to. Similarly, fear - as in to 'fear God' means 'revere', not to be afraid of. How different would our understanding of Christianity be if many words had retained their original meaning?
 
#79
have no reason to doubt that if you have said the Awun with the correct intention and a pure heart, it will have helped you. As regards a fairly new translation (1988) of the bible from Aramaic to English, look up George Lamsa on Amazon - he's also written a book with Rocco Errico (the guy in the video).
Thanks for this Michael. There is a bunch of interesting stuff by Lamsa on Kindle. I just downloaded his Idioms of the Bible Explained and a Key to the Original Gospels. On the money for what Garry and you spoke of.
 
#80
This happens way more than we realise. For instance the word 'meek' does not mean timid or submissive, but is closer to gentle or respectful. Som the meaning of 'the meek shall inherit the Earth's very different from what many of us are accustomed to.
Agreed MP, this phrase absolutely has to have a different meaning - because it's wrong. In my work, I find that the cheater, the surreptitious, the methodical, the greedy, those who harm and derive joy from it, the desire to get something for nothing, those who refuse to work, live only for fueling their intoxication, yet consume and have sex and give not a care to serve anything or anyone who results from it, including their own children... They are the one's inheriting the Earth.

I think that either this quote was incorrectly rendered (to garry's point) or Christ was just not exposed to enough of humanity and was flat wrong. The evil are inheriting the Earth - and they are going to inherit the hell they have earned.

But this begs the question, if a phrase so essential to the philosophy of Christianity can be this dramatically wrong - how are we to regard the other, even less-clear tenets of the doctrine set?
 
Top