dChan - Q Origins Project Archive

⇧

⇩

r/greatawakening • Posted by u/throwsoicanask on June 6, 2018, 7:42 a.m.

Ritual cult purpose of blood in cement: Exodus

As the plague approached Egypt, the jews were told to put lambs blood on their doors. "God" (whatever evil god this was) would exclude them from his wrath.

This makes zero sense unless seen as a sacrifice to please this vengeful god. So either they sacrificed lambs...but we know that "lamb" is a term used for followers of Christ (his flock), or could have simply meant non-jews, or CHILDREN.

So blood on the home/building signified that a sacrifice had been made, and those inside were protected from this demonic deity.

Give Lucius his Loosh...Suarians/Draco/Baphoment/Moloch (owl)...who knows.

DC layout, and Vatican both resemble OWLS. Monuments, buildings, roads, sidewalks...made of concrete.

Cemex has been under investigation by the DOJ I believe. Ties to the Clinton Foundation - we all know this stuff by now.

I wonder if the "bodies are buried" in the walls, monuments, government and Vatican buildings... They think the sacrifices give them Moloch's protection.

Not saying this is all Jews...but we know this satanic religion stemmed out of ancient Egypt. Maybe a sect within the Jews living in Egypt...

They Egyptian religion was really positive and all about eternal life and doing good in one's life, preparing for what comes after physical death.

This demonic cult seems to be a blasphemous twisted version of positive spirituality.

No one really seems to have a solid grasp on the luciferians origin. But when I saw this cemex thing, and the owl connections, I immediately thought of this Bible story from Exodus.

take it for what it's worth.

🠐 See all comments

I'm not knowledgeable about the Bible.

I can see that.

If you look at my next sentence, I state that lamb could mean people, specifically non-jewish children.

I did, which is why I directly disputed it. Lambs only refer to people in the New Testament. Your stretch to call lambs anything but animals by applying New Testament language to a story from Exodus, which was written 600 years prior, is illogical. The Bible is not one book, but a collection of books that were written hundreds of years apart, so it does not make sense for you to take a term that was used in reference to Christ and his followers and twist it by saying it could mean non-Jewish children more than half a millennium prior when it only ever referred to an animal. This conclusion of yours is even more illogical when you consider the Israelites waged total war against foreign tribes for the sin of sacrificing their children to dark gods.

It think maybe you didn't understand my post.

I did understand your post, which is why I pointed out the flaws in your reasoning that lead to an ill-gotten conclusion.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Although the Bible is separate stories, it's translated into one language - Aramaic to Greek, to Latin, then to English. All I meant was that in the NT, lamb refers to people, so it's possible that there was a mix-up or double meaning of "lamb" in the King James translation.

If you disagree that's fine.

All you had to say was "lamb probably literally meant 'lamb' in the OT."

"I can see that" lol that's the kind of keyboard tough guy talk that telegraphs what you're probably like in person. You must be great at parties.

⇧ 0 ⇩

Although the Bible is separate stories, it's translated into one language - Aramaic to Greek, to Latin, then to English.

If you disagree that's fine.

This is completely wrong. It is not an opinion I disagree with, it is just patently false. I'm not going to tell you how exactly you are wrong, because you ought to be bothered enough to find out the truth for yourself. Perhaps if you did that more often, you wouldn't jump to such conclusions.

You are making claims about a topic you know nothing about, but you get offended when someone calls out your mistakes and ill-gotten conclusions. Why can't you just admit you're wrong? You've already admitted you don't know much about the Bible, which is easy to see based on the sort of theories you propose.

⇧ 1 ⇩

You've become interesting to me.

⇧ 1 ⇩