Lawful Sons of B****
During the course of his diagnoses, Edgar Cayce explained that sometimes illness was caused by psychological problems left unsolved in previous lives. Some of these lives, he traced back as far as the patient’s existence in Atlantis.
What did Cayce say about Atlantis? Except for a single interview, later given as a lecture, the bulk of Cayce’s references to Atlantis are offhand. In 1988 his granddaughter, Gail Cayce Shwartzer, and author Douglas Richards collated the comments and published them as Mysteries of Atlantis Revisited.
In a nutshell, Cayce stated that mankind’s true arrival on Earth came approximately 10,000,000 years ago--despite the scientific evidence that dates the origins of our species no earlier than around 200,000 BC. Cayce explained that man’s arrival wasn’t in physical form, for humanity is, in actuality, a linked spiritual entity. Out of sheer boredom, it would seem, we endeavored to make physical forms of themselves so that we could exist as all of the other creatures did. We thus fashioned a body that best suited us. These were the early hominids – Zinjanthropus, Australopithecus, etc.. We went on to create better versions of these early prototypes (kinda like Windows 3.1, Windows ‘95, Windows XP, etc..), and eventually came up with homo sapiens sapiens.
Some spirits liked these new bodies so much they refused to leave the physical plane. In effect, they became bodyholics. These spirits would tenaciously cling to their precious highs until their bodies either malfunctioned or wore out. They became so enthralled by life, that they forgot what they really were.
(“Who are these bodyholic spirits,” you ask? Hint: take a look in the mirror.)
The other entities were more like social drinkers. They could enjoy a good in-body experience every now and then, but they knew their limits. But wouldn’t you know, just like a mean drunk, the bodyholics caused a lot of damage. Their zeal to manipulate the environment, according to Cayce, caused the first destruction of Atlantis, occurring approximately 100,000 BC. The inhabitants got so annoyed by the animals that roamed around the perimeter that they decided to nuke them with atomic weapons. (Interesting note: Cayce said this in February 1932, when no such weapon existed.) They wound up sinking a good deal of the island in the process, and knocked the Earth off it’s axis. As a result, the Arctic, which at one time was a temperate zone, became the geographic North Pole.
After the catastrophes, those spirits who only indulged their physical desires every now and then were loath to let a bunch of yahoos spoil it for everybody else. Yet, they were divided on how to handle the situation. Cayce called one major faction the Law of the One, led by the High Priestess. The LotO attempted to enlighten the bodyholics as to who they actually were, and the consequences of their actions.
The other faction, which Cacye called the Sons of Belial, said “Aw, screw ‘em. Make ‘em slaves.”
Today, there are two distinct factions of esoterics who have believed in Cayce’s vision centuries before Cayce’s birth. These are the main two flavors of esoterica that one will find. It would be too pat to say that certain organizations are clearly allied with the Law of One or with the children of Belial, for you’ll find both within all arcane societies.
Nevertheless, understanding these two groups from Cayce’s perspective helps a lot in explaining the role esoterica has played in public life.
What did Cayce say about Atlantis? Except for a single interview, later given as a lecture, the bulk of Cayce’s references to Atlantis are offhand. In 1988 his granddaughter, Gail Cayce Shwartzer, and author Douglas Richards collated the comments and published them as Mysteries of Atlantis Revisited.
In a nutshell, Cayce stated that mankind’s true arrival on Earth came approximately 10,000,000 years ago--despite the scientific evidence that dates the origins of our species no earlier than around 200,000 BC. Cayce explained that man’s arrival wasn’t in physical form, for humanity is, in actuality, a linked spiritual entity. Out of sheer boredom, it would seem, we endeavored to make physical forms of themselves so that we could exist as all of the other creatures did. We thus fashioned a body that best suited us. These were the early hominids – Zinjanthropus, Australopithecus, etc.. We went on to create better versions of these early prototypes (kinda like Windows 3.1, Windows ‘95, Windows XP, etc..), and eventually came up with homo sapiens sapiens.
Some spirits liked these new bodies so much they refused to leave the physical plane. In effect, they became bodyholics. These spirits would tenaciously cling to their precious highs until their bodies either malfunctioned or wore out. They became so enthralled by life, that they forgot what they really were.
(“Who are these bodyholic spirits,” you ask? Hint: take a look in the mirror.)
The other entities were more like social drinkers. They could enjoy a good in-body experience every now and then, but they knew their limits. But wouldn’t you know, just like a mean drunk, the bodyholics caused a lot of damage. Their zeal to manipulate the environment, according to Cayce, caused the first destruction of Atlantis, occurring approximately 100,000 BC. The inhabitants got so annoyed by the animals that roamed around the perimeter that they decided to nuke them with atomic weapons. (Interesting note: Cayce said this in February 1932, when no such weapon existed.) They wound up sinking a good deal of the island in the process, and knocked the Earth off it’s axis. As a result, the Arctic, which at one time was a temperate zone, became the geographic North Pole.
After the catastrophes, those spirits who only indulged their physical desires every now and then were loath to let a bunch of yahoos spoil it for everybody else. Yet, they were divided on how to handle the situation. Cayce called one major faction the Law of the One, led by the High Priestess. The LotO attempted to enlighten the bodyholics as to who they actually were, and the consequences of their actions.
The other faction, which Cacye called the Sons of Belial, said “Aw, screw ‘em. Make ‘em slaves.”
Today, there are two distinct factions of esoterics who have believed in Cayce’s vision centuries before Cayce’s birth. These are the main two flavors of esoterica that one will find. It would be too pat to say that certain organizations are clearly allied with the Law of One or with the children of Belial, for you’ll find both within all arcane societies.
Nevertheless, understanding these two groups from Cayce’s perspective helps a lot in explaining the role esoterica has played in public life.
posted by X. Dell at 12:21 PM
10 Comments:
I'm new to your site. It's cool. :)
I enjoy reading about Edgar Cayce. I remember the first time I read something he said about reincarnation.
I knew that at one time, reincarnation was a standard belief-- even in Christianity -- but later dropped. (Made me wonder about all those mysterious "dropped" subjects.)
He talked about how the church leaders decided it was too hard to explain and would make people more virtuous if they didn't think they could just have fun in this life and make up for it in the next.
But it was the discussion he had with, I think it was his son, about the whole "born again" and "I am the way" concept that really hit me. Interesting.
Hi Rinda, Glad you are enjoying our site.
X:
I suppose this partly explains a glitch my friend Hellkitten and I noticed with reincarnation. Now more humans are alive than ever lived on the planet before. Where do these other souls come from? Hk think they might be animals who were not quite ready to evolve yet. Explains some things, doesn't it? Bodyholism explains a lot too. While I do believe in reincarnation, I still have this idea/belief that the simplest explanation is the most probable--so I can't say I buy Atlanteans, etc., etc. Also, wouldn't bodyholics want to be housepets? I would definitely want evolve into a pampered pet.
Welcome, Rinda. You've hit something that is one of the wonderful oddities of Cayce's life and belief. As a conservative Christian, Cayce's readings are sometimes couched in, or colored by those beliefs. Nevertheless, Cayce also maintained that God doesn't care what you're religion is, or what your path is.
I was unaware of a Christian belief in reincarnation. That's something for me to look up.
As for believing in the Atlantis mythology, Cacye simply offers it as explanation, so there's no need to buy into anything.
I, for one, would hate the thought of coming back as a lapdog.
Cayce did contradict himself often. And as you pointed out, he was looking at things through a conservative Christian perspective. I think it would have been interesting for all this to have happened to someone without any preconceived ideas.
He was pretty upset when he was first told he'd talked about the subject, wondered why it wasn't mentioned in the bible. Then later, he came to believe that Jesus talked about it when he spoke of being born again, when he talked about John the Baptist. He brought up other mentions but what he believes is that Jesus thought the concept too difficult for the people, so he basically put the emphasis on himself-- that he was an example of the perfect life. His "I am the way" meant, you gotta be like me to get there.
Totally different concept than what people are taught today, isn't it?
I find his talks/findings interesting but I like to read them outside the box. I also believe a lot of things were left out of that bible. It was put together by man, wasn't it? Translated from an ancient culture... then you get all those different translations, so who knows? :)
Why there are more souls on the planet now makes for interesting discussion, doesn't it?
My cat stays pretty frustrated trying to get me to understand what he wants-- I'm not sure I'd have the patience to come back as a cat. Oops, might have juggled my karma a bit now. heh heh
Some interesting things left out of the Bible (other than the Apochrypha) were the Gospel according to Peter (which is kinda strange, seeing that the other gospels paint him as Christ's goto guy), the Gospel of the Infant Jesus, The Gospel according to Philip, etc.
The putting together of the Bible at the 325 AD Council of Nicea pretty much assured the production of a holy text with barely-hidden political meanings (especially when Paul preaches such things as blind obedience to earthly masters).
Someone warned me against eating meat because he said that my karma would send me back in the next life as a tiger.
But then I wondered, "If I become a vegetarian, does that mean I come back as a rabbit?"
Frankly, I'd rather be the tiger.
You got me on the Gospel of the Infant Jesus-- I'm intrigued. What are your thoughts on the Gospel of Thomas?
Well, a vegetarian could also come back as a blade of grass-- that is if we go by the ideal that all things have life. (Think I'd prefer a tiger in this instance, too.) Or they could come back as a Venus Flytrap and get all kinds of messed up.
This makes me think of the increased number of souls on earth thing again. (g)
Paul. Sigh. Even Paul admitted that a lot of his teachings came from his personal perspective. He was a product of his culture. And yes, he was bigoted, chauvinistic. I tend to get annoyed with people who quote Paul because they pick and choose which parts they agree with. I have family members, Pentecostal Holiness family members, who love to quote scripture from Romans and they'll be making pork tamales at the same time.
Anything I point out hits deaf ears with them. They consider me godless for not following an organized religion and for studying all kinds of religions. Reading something like Edgar Cayce is a seriously bad offense in that world. Hell, everything is a seriously bad offense in that world. Even thinking about reincarnation??? uh uh
Bet you weren't expecting such a long winded visitor today. I've been reading Edgar Cayce so it was fresh. :)
I have to confess to not reading Thomas' gospel, even though I have it in the same volume as the three that I mentioned (which I actually did read). It's on my reading list.
The Infant Jesus covers Christ's life up to puberty, and fills in some of the Biblical stories of the NT. Here, and in the other two, Christ is a much more human figure.
Pete and Phil, however, are very interesting in how they treat the Magdeline. Peter out and out refers to her as a fellow apostle. Philip is puzzled as to why Christ shows her such respect.
Suki and Rinda have given me an idea. What if there is only one soul in the universe, and we're simply little pieces of it? Hence, the more populous Earth becomes, the thinner the soul is thread to the point where humanity itself breaks.
Funny, but I associate Oklahoma with Oral Roberts and Christian polemic more than I do theological exploration and honest spiritual questing. Either I'm stupid for believing the stereotype of the plains-stater, or people who think about such issues there might not have a lot of company.
Then again, both statements could be true.
I'm not alone here in my quest for spiritual knowledge, but I do feel like I am quite a bit. I've been called names, been introduced at parties as "the liberal we like" and got into a few heated discussions. The town I live in is particularly conservative so I don't fit in well. I'm on the outs with quite a bit of my evangelical family. Once I do have a book come out, they'll probably write me out completely. (I tend to go into this kind of stuff in an urban fantasy setting with magic, etc.) One was recently told about my current "horror" story publication and well, we won't go into that reaction.
But, even though I'd like to think I would have looked beyond what some church would tell me to believe, a lot of my outlook comes from my upbringing. My father started out Pentecostal Holiness then came to a few realizations and went on to write a book called The Tyranny of Christian Dogma. (grin) He has a book out now about one philospher's journey after death.
I've lived all over. Washington DC, North Carolina, Northern Idaho, and even a commune in the Ozark Mountains-- I was around twelve at the time.
But I also find people interesting and listen to them. That's the problem with a lot of people caught up in conservative religion. They truly believe theirs is the only, the right way, and they don't pay attention to people. There are so many religions and cultures, it never made sense to me that only one was the "right" one.
I wrote about some of this in my blog under 10 Pet Peeves. Since it's a new blog and mostly local authors hang out with me there, I expected a backlash but it didn't come. Some of the conversation was pretty interesting.
http://thewritesnark.blogspot.com/2006/01/10-pet-peeves-feeling-very-snarky-rant.html
I read about Peter's outlook toward Mary Magdeline and went on to read Holy Blood, Holy Grail-- before the DaVinci code. Very, very interesting info there.
That's like how many people know about the Catholic church quietly apologizing for making her out to be a whore? I think it was in the sixties... You'd think more people would start asking questions.
One soul spread out? I think this is actually something explored in a religion, but I can't remember which. It's certainly makes you think about the "we are all one" philosophy. It's a cool but kind of creepy idea. I like it.
(1) Your pet peeves would tick me off too (especially the daytime talk shows, and the telephone), even if not all would make my top ten.
I'd include stupidity.
(2) When your Dad writes a tome titled "The Bloodlust of Christian Actions," I'm buying it.
(3) Until Brown, BLL was almost everyone's introduction into the Grail mystery and the Priory of Sion. I don't mind "The Da Vinci Code" being a gateway to other things, but in and of itself it's kind of a silly book.
Yeah, some of that top ten was for fun-- sunflower seeds and all.
Enjoyed the conversation!
Post a Comment
<< Home