Sign In Sign-Up

Welcome!

Close

Would you like to make this site your homepage? It's fast and easy...

Yes, Please make this my home page!

No Thanks

  Don't show this to me again.

Close

What is NETER? Sure enough, it's not what Aquino says it is, just like Set isn't. Refer to post on COS and TOS.

From: Budge: HieroglyphicDictionary:

neter: the word in ALL texts of ALL periods is in general use to mean God or a god.

neteru: means gods (plural!).

Neterti: a god in the Tuat (no jokes please). The Tuat is "the everlasting and hidden."

Of note. Neter: a SERPENT-GOD who bestowed godhood on the dead. Neter aa: A two-headed winged serpent with a tail terminating in a human head; a three headed winged serpent with two pairs of human legs. Neter ua: the god One, a title applied to ANY god and even ANY GODDESS. Neter mut: a title of Isis. Neter nuti: the god of the town, the local god. Neter-neteru: a singing god. And so forth. (Budge)

According to Carleton S. Coon, forensic anthropologist, in "Racial Adaptations," the first Egyptians were Negro. According to more recent excavations it can be clearly shown that they were some kind of North African Negro race with some other kind of mixture that gave them an oriental cast. According to all the best known Egyptology experts including TeVelde, the "later" but still very early Egyptians used "SET" to apply to the various clans that claimed descent from Seth or Set: and Seth is the only remaining son of Adam in the Adam and Eve legend. Egyptians at the time wrote that Set gave birth to the Ishmaelites and Israelites (Manetho, just one most famous example) and so it is clear what Egyptians used the word Set to mean: the people WE would call SEMITES. TeVelde notes that Egyptians had the first anti-Semitism and their own manner of using "Set" proves this and which corresponds to deeds they simultanteously did. Later on in Egypt, during the 18th dynasty period, many Semites were IN Egypt as can be seen by their faces drawn with Semitic features and profiles. As such, Set or Seti was used as a prefix or suffix to denote anything that was Semite-Egyptian. Much later, the Ptolomies ruled Egypt and these people were not Semites but were a mixture of the original Hellenic Pelasgian stock plus the "Aryan" Achaean stock. The Dorians, the only "Aryans" to invade and wreck Greece, destroyed the Hellenic civilization. Spartans were Dorians. Cleopatra was a Ptolomy.

Aside from this, Aquino attempts to use gibberish illogic to squirm around the TOS's anti-JEWISH stance (let's be specific: if Aquino was pro-Arab and anti-Jewish, then he can hardly have been anti-Semitic since Arabs are the purest Semites around). There was no such thing as "A JEW" during the says of the Seti (SEMITE) rulers of Egypt (hence the appellation SETI to refer to ANYTHING OF SETH - the clans of Seth, son of Adam). There were Israelites and Ishmaelites, but there was no such thing as "A JEW" because the ISRAELITES were not amalgamated under the rulership of the JUDEANS until around 700 BC and they only came to rule what clans remained of the ISRAELITES IN CAPTIVITY under the Assyrians, or Babylonians as Hews might refer to this event. Hence, no tribes of Israelites were "lost" either, they amalgamated IN CAPTIVITY under "Judah," as JUDEANS, hence the name. Jews never called ANYTHING "Set" except, perhaps, themselves very long ago before their ancestors were Jews, before they were even Israelites or Ishmaelites. They may have had a severe and exclusive JHVH deity, but among themselves their history was one of clan warfare with the patriarchists trying to stamp out the matrilineal clans. Jews to this day are matrilineal. And so we know WHO WON. They did not have a god of extermination because they did not preach to others or convert others and still don't. So even here, Aquino is talking RUBBISH. What is he doing, taking the Bible myths as defacto history? Even JEWS don't do this! But who does? The Christians do and the Fundamentalists Christians take it word for word as fact. Most Jews today aren't even SEMITES. But ARABS are Semites and Egyptians are PREDOMINANTLY Semitic. In fact, according to Cavelli-Sforza on the human genome project, and from looking at genetic samples, the Ethiopians are about 60% Semitic and 40% African.

It was not the Israelite states or the pre-Israelite states that were agricultural bee-hives. The Egyptians hated ANYTHING "Semitic" as can be seen in TeVelde (SETH, GOD OF CONFUSION), most scholarly book on Set out there (the one Aquino used to use but which he obviously didn't read very well, like he didn't read Darwin very well or anything else very well or he CAN'T grasp what he's reading very well: that's obvious). And it was also these non-Jewish-Israelite agricultural Semities that the Pythagorean clans of PELASGIAN people didn't get along with either.

It was absolutely these Pythagorean clans that used (and STILL USE) the pentacle just as it is used in real Satanism. To call this the Pentacle of Set is an abomination. It is like calling the cross a Satanic sigil or claiming Jesus as a Satanic Saint!

The ubiquitous Set was a donkey. Donkeys figure all the time in the Old Testament as favorable and Jesus rode in on one; back then that was a statement. See our Set article.

The ONLY Leviathan or Serpent-Dragon idea in Egyptian thought was that of Apep or Apopis, a true "devil" idea: TeVelde agrees. Leviathan means "twisting coiling Serpent" EXOterically. The Serpent-Dragon symbol is still ubiquitous in the EASTERN places and among the EASTERN clans. These people are the forebearers of Hellenic thought. All philosophers agree, with Martin Bernal making a push for the acceptance of AFRICAN Egyptian influence to be included: he's alone in his ideas because the thought, the language and subtlety of it were PURELY Eastern. If anything, Eastern thought influenced Egyptians; not the other way around. Egyptians didn't travel much, especially over sea. Eastern nomads were NOMADS and surely were in Egypt along WITH those Sethites. The term HAPIRU, applied to these non-Egyptian people and these Sethites, means STRANGER in Egyptian. Among the Hapiru were the Danae who were PELASGIANS and included the ARGOI.

In Hebrew and all Semitic languages, "EN" means "not" or "no." It is a negative particle. In Hebrew there were specific names for principles or messengers of JHVH like Moveth or -ael or -el as a suffix as in Sam-AEL or Azaz-EL. EL means God and would be in front of the word, like ELoha ELohim. This was clearly explained in the first portion of our article on Serpents versus Adamites and included the GENDER of the word, important in Hebrew. I used biblical names in that article so as NOT to confuse anyone. Any person can walk into any xian bookstore and buy a dictionary of the bible therein. They can look up the names and find out WHO those people were in "normal language" which, had I used it, would have been too esoteric for readers who probably don't know what or where Kara-Shehr is aside from some erroneous WRONG location from the Cthulhu Mythos for this city that still exists today! It's in Sinkiang if that makes it clearer! Much information on Set, the ancient WORD meaning Sirius and the later word, were explained in our article on Set. The IDEAS were put forth, but not WHO put them forth.

Why did Aquino choose Set out of all those deities when any professor of Theology would easily be able to tell him that a Prince of Darkness concept would be better served by THOTH or even HERMES or even ANUBIS, i.e., the concepts we always had, and an outright Dark Chaotic Dragon concept would be Apep? Why? Because he's an idiot and his priests were idiots and he was talking and preaching to idiots: medieval minded fools that can be fooled by false etymologies as easily as can the British Israelites. Why Egypt? Because xians have always been fascinated by ooo ahh Egyptoid rubbish. Egypt was a theocracy complete with the practice of making mummies and building huge stones to put them in (exhausting their resources and using slaves to do this). FOOLS. What one might epithetically call primitivism and superstition. Even their heiroglyphics were primitive compared to the ALPHABETS that existed in India and Greece.

The Egyptians NEVER used the pentacle! The people in India and Greece surely did and the Pythagorean Masons STILL use it! What's so comedic about this is that Egyptian civilization, for the most part, was African with the Seti rulers being the ONLY SEMITES there! Egypt's entire most-ancient focus on Sirius came from S.W. Africa from the earliest people who migrated there: AFRICANS! The early Egyptian prefix "SO" or "ZO" or "ZA" (as in Soser) is the same as the one used in Songhay, a huge empire in S.W. Africa, very old, written about when it was still there by ibn Battuta in graphic detail: a true CITY OF GOLD and probably where King Solomon's gold originated from. What the Pythagorean and also Masonic "Egyptian" mysteries is all about is really ELEUSINIAN Mysteries. In these, Osiris is the GOD OF NYSA (Nysa is in N.W. INDIA): DIONYSUS, and GREEK LANGUAGE FORMS of Egyptian deity names are taken and USED AS characteristics of "man in tune." "We" might be using Egyptian-sounding names in Greek language form, but "we" are NOT talking about ANYTHING Egyptians EVER conceived of. Set doesn't exist in this tradition: AT ALL!

The OLDEST form of Satan can be gleaned from two pre-Sanskrit (Naga) words: SAT (the apeiron of the Pythagoreans, a boundless darkness that is ALL and immutable) and TAN (the stretching forth of this darkness infused into all that exists, and ALWAYS categorized in FIVE WAYS, always FIVE). The five is UBIQUITOUS in the East. And the FIVE was the MAIN THING in Pyhagorean doctrine. The pentacle is like a master glyph whereby all things or principles or MECHANISMS of nature are encoded. We use it in the same way that one would use numbers (from the Sanskrit to the Arabic to us) to do their income taxes! It's so automatic that you don't even realize that you are using a base-10 system or MET-ric system. This was also big in Pythagoreanism and was also used in India. ROMANS NEVER HAD IT. What did, indeed, come out of ANCIENT Egypt and by that I mean AFRICAN Egypt which was called KHEM, was CHEMISTRY, hence the name from Khem to the Arabic word to the word we use today. 200 years of European lies about this "racial" business is being slowly uncovered by new excavations and HONEST archeology without shams like what happened in Zimbabwe (destroyed finds and covered up who built the place).

This is not about race but, WHO is it that HAD SPDT (Set) in ancient Egypt as SIRIUS? AFRICANS DID! They had the SAME doctrines as the Songhayans and if not for SOME of them (the Dogons) telling some of this in MYTH form to a "white man" NO ONE would know of it. They called the highest mysteries of this SODOGWE. The Hebrews called the mysteries "SOD-IHOH." There were Semitic people down that far in Africa as can be seen by genetics and even ancient linguistics. Hence the old term for the language "Hamito-Semitic" is now "Afro-Asiatic." MUCH later (thousands of years later) in Egypt different people were mixed in with the originals as can be seen by the way they LOOKED. Seti rulers ALL look Semitic! But they weren't Jews.

Jews, when they were JEWS (JUDEANS) didn't like these Egyptians much but they'd surely never take the name of their OWN FOREFATHER and call it a devil! SETH! Adam and Eve, remember? Cain murders Abel. Abel has no kids. Cain is wiped out by the flood. NOAH is left and he's from SETH! Is something not clear, here?

See post on COS and TOS and the philosophical impossibility of one deriving from the other (or even being related in this way). Aquino can bend over backwards TRYING and TRYING to give his interpretation of "what happened" back then and NONE of it can hold water. ONE PROBLEM exists. Dr. LaVey WROTE ARTICLES all this while and in NONE of them did he ever deviate from his original premises. These articles were published and shown to the public. What Dr. LaVey says in a personal letter to "pat a hard worker on the back and make him feel good" or what jokes he might make (we make them too, we refer to His Infernal Magesty at times and The Joker at times and also to Santa) means NOTHING when it comes to writing and publishing a SERIOUS article for people who he really intends to CONVEY HIS IDEAS TO. The two can not be confused. It is TOO CLEAR why Aquino stormed off and TOO CLEAR what he was confused on. Dr. LaVey and the whole COS always tends toward REAL evolution, REAL science. COS people are NOT Gnostic dualists and usually can recognize this immediately. No one knows WHY those priests left the TOS AFTER they ran off with Aquino. What IS known is that 99% of the TOS consists of Fundamentalists Christians who have just elevated themselves to a higher level of Stoic anti-carnalChristianity-Dualism. They are now Fundamentalists without the hand-clapping music.

The Christians took a Jewish criminal named Yeshua ben Pandira of Notzri and made him into a God. They took some non-existent people and created "authors for other chapters" about their God. (I have a post FROM a Jewish Rabbi written TO OTHER Jewish Rabbis on this and "not for Christian eyes" but hackers will hack. One will notice that when Jews talk to Christians they treat these "authors" as if they do exist. That's called keeping secrets. That's called NOT SHARING with enemies.) What Aquino did was take the Adamic Forefather Seth and TURN HIM into a God and then called it Satan! He then turns around and makes Jehova into the devil in his cosmogony. He is the "good angel" and LaVey is a "monster." What's not to see, here? The Christians did the same even so their Jesus myth is a myth about a Jew: they called the Jews DEVILS! And why? Because the Jews did exactly what we Satanists did: REFUSE to become Christians (and a Christian by ANY NAME is still a Christian). What's not to see? He can go on and on about his dialogues with LaVey. Like Jesus talking to the Pharisees. Same thing. Jesus said, "You are of your father, the devil (diabolus) but I have logos (logic?). What does Aquino say: "You are of your father, the devil (a monster) but I have pure-mind (logic?) The only problem is that Christians AND Setians LACK LOGIC; they so woefully lack it that their huge-confused ideas would have to be dismantled idea by idea and FIXED before they could even BE connected up to form a coherant picture. But then, if Aquino could have done this to begin with he'd not have stormed off in a huff when words or actions finally made him realize that Dr. LaVey was NOT A CHRISTIAN after all, and in NO NEED of any good angels. ANIMALS DO NOT NEED ANGELS OR SAVIORS OR CREATORS. That was the ENTIRE POINT of MAKING a Church of Satan to begin with: WE DON'T NEED THIS SHIT!

No one was around back then? I happen to have a first edition Satanic Bible. I KNEW people back then. I'm OLD: remember? Dr. LaVey KNEW that the majority of readers of his book would be former Christians. He knew how they'd act and misinterpret things, too. He was an EASY GOING MAN. He would not have done what I'd have done back then: tell most of them to FUCK OFF and GO BACK to a church. He is presented with a gift, this Diabolicon. What does an easy-going Dr. LaVey say? "Thank you, it's a fine book, I value it, bla bla." DID HE? Actions speak. He would NOT have done what I would have done (and what I do when things like this happen to me). He would NOT have said, "What is this SHIT? This is rubbish, get rid of it." When a stiff and rigid Aquino walked in the door for the first time, what would an easy-going Dr. LaVey say? "Hello? Nice to meet you?" He would not have said what I say and what my father has said to people: "What the hell are YOU?" Saying that the "gift" was like the Book of Mormon speaks VOLUMES about what he really thought of it. ONLY a Christian wouldn't GET THE CLUE. Patting the gift giver on the back and saying he'd publish it when he NEVER did this? GET A CLUE! Christians are like that; they even raise their kids like that: KIND WORDS, but either no deeds forthcoming or shitty deeds. And their children grow up to be STUPID adults who swim in a sea of lies (words which mean nothing), polite niceties with no deeds to back them or lousy deeds. We don't do this. We are BRUTALLY BLUNT people, rude as hell with no intent on our part to compliment OR insult anyone no matter WHAT the words sound like to the MISINTERPRETER! Nor do we CARE how they interpret. We do DEEDS and by those DEEDS you know where we stand. As such, types of Christians who scream "Freedom of Speech" but who can't even speak from their own hearts or speak their minds can NEVER fool us. We KNOW, absolutely, such people are inwardly and innately grown to be the ENEMIES of real free speech. If Dr. LaVey had spoken this way (as a leader of a group? not the thing to do) he'd have had NO former-Christian people in the COS. NOT ONE. They SAY Freedom of Speech, but they can't even DO it. DEEDS are real. Christians use words to lie to themselves and thus, KIND WORDS can always be used to lie TO THEM and make them HAPPY. What else is new? Fiendish Christian parents can merely say "I love you" and that's that. All is well.

That Aquino CONTINUES to belabor the tired old "this is what happened" story and to-date, he can't figure it out: HE MISINTERPRETED things. He heard Dr. LaVey talk about the Man Downstairs and HE heard "GOD/SATAN." Diane Vera, an electrical engineer and one who KNOWS science, even had HER OWN "GOD BUTTONS" pushed by something I wrote as a catharsis ritual for her kind. ONLY LATER was she able to grasp that "A falling man IS INDEED, a slave to gravity! As such, Gravity is HIS LORD AND MASTER, HIS RULER." YES! But it's not a God! But she HEARD that, at first! That's the CHRISTIAN, born and raised, acting up. But she's also a scientist and due to that she was ABLE to put aside her own KNEE-JERK misinterpretation. Aquino is not a scientist or even able to GRASP science on a basic level. He proves this repeatedly. He has the mentality of a TYPICAL medieval theologian and makes the same exact errors that type has made over and over again. He heard what he thought he heard from the mouth of Dr. LaVey who was NEVER a Christian,NEVER a Jew or Moslem, and who was NEVER religious! Two different kinds of beings here: Dr. LaVey a whole animal. Aquino a broken specimen of half numbed and deadened human: NO LONGER an animal because the nature itself is broken. SO OF COURSE he feels outcast! What is this outcast alienated feeling? REPRESSION. That's ALL it is! It causes a person to dissociate. So they FEEL this way. Sure it's a mystery to them. Psychoanalysts have known this for years and now neurology has DEFINED it.

Why do they get things so wrong and think up the same STUPID ideas? Creators, ordering principles, pure mind, MORONIC ideas? Because they have been rendered SIMPLE MINDED (Chrestian) by all that repression which LEAD TO their dissociation (alienation, outside-nature feeling). That the two top ones are rubber room material is no wonder: vegetarians, one with a hysteria-related disease. NO WONDER. Almost predictable. Christians are like that too. Believe it or not: I'm NOT intending to flame. NO ONE NEEDS to listen to Aquino's version OR the COS version about "what happened." Not necessary! All one needs to do is look at the PRESENT philosophy and look at the ORIGINAL Satanic Bible and what LaVey wrote in published articles back then. Look at the first thing Aquino wrote. JUST LOOK. One can then, like archeologists do, KNOW what happened without having to hear their diametrically opposite versions of "what happened." What use is that? Each side calls the other side a liar. So then, push aside that data as irrelevant. LOOK at what I said to look at: THE DEEDS, the PUBLISHED WORDS (which constitute deeds as the INTENT IS for people to read it). >From this alone, a solid picture can be formed. It's clear.

What is still a mystery is why Aquino would want to call his Christian Deity Concept "the devil." THAT is a mystery. Or maybe it's not. The Deity of his parents (or his parents themselves) is what he HATES. He represses the feelings for his parents and transfers them onto "their Deity." Then he invents the SAME OLD CHRISTIAN Deity (not even Adonai or Allah!) and calls it Satan. Most neo-Satanists screaming about being freed from oppression are NOT BEING oppressed by ANYONE out there! But they were raised as repressed and now have become THEIR OWN oppressors. That's WHY they got into Satan! That's NOT why Dr. LaVey made a COS, tho.

MANY people referred to Dr. LaVey as "Uncle Anton" back then. A common name for a young-one is "little devil" or "devil child," especially if they seem to be gung-ho about something. That's like when I call a total emotional masochist I know "Jane de Sade" because she seems gung-ho and imagines she's strong when I see an emotionally dysfunctional person bent out of shape by nothingness. Or like when I call a woman who never wanted kids and never should have had them, but who tries to act like a caring mother and is obviously doing a LOUSY job: "Jane the Mom." It's clear that the person is WANNABEING and TRYING TO BE something he or she is obviously the completely opposite of: hence the nik-name. This is NOT done, however, to a person considered an enemy. So then, it's hard to know where "WE" are coming from by listening to WORDS! LOOK AT DEEDS! Aquino has his version of what LaVey THOUGHT ABOUT HIM and well, what can be said? "Yes, Daddy loves you?" Other people got different versions when Aquino wasn't around, like: "What's that guy doing in my COS? He's NOT one of us. Look at this SHIT he's writing, it's all wrong. Ah, what the hell." It was GLARINGLY noticeable back then (I'm old, remember?) that the articles Aquino was writing, especially in the old Cloven Hoof, were WAY off base. They were non-Satanic, hinted of secret gods and secret books and top secrets only the COS had, they were FULL of errors and were about GOD-IST subjects. SO WHAT if LaVey said "OK, go ahead, write it." What was he supposed to say: "I don't want that SHIT around; get rid of it."?? No need to ask Aquino or LaVey or Blanche and get the predictable two versions here. JUST GO AND LOOK AT IT! LOOK at the old articles Dr. LaVey wrote and LOOK at the influence Aquino was putting in there. You know, archaologists don't have ancient people to go and ASK what they fought a war about. They do it SCIENTIFICALLY by analysis now. And of course, 200 years of bogus bullshit is being blown apart. It's EASY to see what went on in 1970's COS. No need even to dig or excavate! JUST READ IT.

LaVey manages to think up scientific ideas without even knowing the sciences for it. The prime example is that Dr. LaVey FELT something one might call Luck or synchronicity and then went and DEFINED a perfectly recognizable definition of Second Law Entropy and didn't even realize that the sciences DO KNOW what this is! (Page 16, Satanic Bible). Aquino can't think a RIGHT scientific idea after reading lots of it. All he can manage to think up is CHRISTIANITY all over again. See post on COS/TOS for a simple clear look at the philosophical thing. See also post by Marsh on Set Evolution. It's so easy, e.g., to see when some Wiccan group is really just Christianity all over again. But I notice it takes Christian wannabe Wiccans a long time to see it. WHY? They are fooled by the WORDS. They don't see the inner real things easily. Also confusing is that lots of Wiccans are NOT like this. Neither is all of New Age like this; they are a mixed bunch; e.g., a New Ager studying Ninjitsu, philosophy and technique, is surely not a Christian.

What is extraordinary, and what has resulted in these posts, is that Aquino and his Tossers have kept up a barrage of tenacious slander and trouble-making against all the COS people: especially those who wandered into TOS only to reject it as Christ-ism in flimsy disguise. Also, that he insists on wearing the Eastern Star of Freemasonry for his Christ-ist TOS and that he...imagines? that one of us won't eventually DO THINGS to them for this. He's a PEST! His people are rejects, repressed things on two feet. They can't fool anyone. What is very very odd is that he doesn't use the sigil of Set that he creatively felt inspired to draw. VERY ODD!

What is this Gift of Set? It is the same thing, philosophically as the Gift of Jesus when a Christian becomes Born Again and "realizes" he is of the Elect. First of all, enough IS known about the human brain and genes now to conclusively show that NO tinkering by anyone or anything occurred. Homosapiens is only one ONE of many offshoots that diversified after coming down out of trees due to a climactic change. Presumably, though this is not certain, only one of these ancient Hominids survived and the others perished, many of whom had BIGGER BRAINS than we do today. The survivor is Sapiens going on the premise that no others survived and evolved. From thense on, Sapiens diversified (as all things do) and we have RACES as a result. Climate causes this: absolutely. Then selective breeding in an isolated area encourages it: you get another race. TOS maintains that they KNOW there is evidence of an intelligent entity. So do the Fundamentalists. There is no evidence for this AT ALL in reality. TOS states that somes sickle cell anemia. It has to be laboratory tested. These cognitively disabled types are NOT all that hard to spot: they can't read texts, they can't synthesize but when they try they dream up lunacy that can be empirically proven to be false. You can repeat something to them 100 times and they seem unable to HEAR it: anosognosic, the data is not GETTING INTO their whole brian. Finally, if they do understand what you are saying, they realize how different you are. Seldom do they realize that it is THEY who are disabled and talking nonsense. Prove it to them in a lab and they'll fall back on RELIGION. They "BELIEVE." FAITH!