The Church of Poppy is a great place for Poppy fans to congregate, chat, share thoughts in the forums.
Check it out at ChurchOfPoppy.com
Some Areas in The Church of Poppy:
Personal Report - The first place you will arrive. Your scores are shown here.
The Briar Patch - This is a common chat room, available to new users, and accessible from The Abyss and The Cemetery. There is a clearing somewhere in this patch where you can see others and trade items.
https://churchofpoppy.com/briar-patch/
The Abyss - A realm in the clouds where dreams can be manifested.
https://churchofpoppy.com/the-abyss/
The Cemetery - A vast graveyard, once overgrown by briars, which is adjacent to the Briar Patch.
https://churchofpoppy.com/cemetery/
The Forum - https://churchofpoppy.com/forum/
The Calendar - https://churchofpoppy.com/calendar/
Monday, January 6, 2020
Sunday, March 17, 2019
Poppy's Transmission from God
I'll be reprinting some excerpts of source material relevant to the Poppy religion on this blog for future reference and consideration.
Following is an excerpt from the Cai Trefor interview with Poppy on gigwise.com from January 24th, 2019.
Poppy: I find the fans of my music to be intelligent. I feel the community we're creating online - especially with poppy.church; the website that I started that has turned into an actual religion - we are attracting a kind of person who doesn't fit into the current mould. A person who doesn't find that current pop music resonates with them.
CT: I joined your church. I set up a digital bedroom yesterday.
P: Yay.
CT: How did it start?
P: Well, a lot of people were saying that I was in a cult. I’m not in a cult. So now I have created a church.
CT: What are the founding principles?
P: We believe in creative thinking, critical thinking, positivity, happiness, and making the world cute!
CT: When you’re at your happiest do you think that’s when a lot of people try to derail you?
P: I think a lot of people struggle with being positive and people try and blow out the light shining brightly because it's easier to be angry. I think that's a lot of people derail and I don’t blame them because the world is a crazy place. And we all wake up everyday trying to make sense of it and it can be really overwhelming. But I want to be the light and the escape, and I think my fans understand that.
CT: A lot of people in Poppy.church are quite young, do you feel like a guiding light to a lot of these young people - a positive influence?
P: I hope to be. I don’t want to say look at me everything I’m doing is correct. But I believe in leading by example.
CT: Are you blurring the lines between spiritual religious leader and pop star? Are there any others doing that?
P: Not that I know of.
CT: Do you feel that's where you’re at emotionally, then?
P: I think to a certain extent many pop artists live that way already but this is slightly different.
CT: Has this cult happened by public demand or something you've built slowly?
P: I think 50/50. I think the fans want somebody to fill that role. I also think that I'm cut out for it.
CT: You mentioned critical thinking - are there any theories that you particularly resonate with?
P: 1984. I think people should start there if they want to understand a bit more.
CT: I think you've cited Brave New World in one of your songs. I suppose Aldous Huxley’s a big influence on your work, too?
P: Yes. A large influence.
CT: Do you think the internet is a forum of freedom or a form of control?
P: Orwell and Huxley were extremely prophetic and I think the current climate of the internet is no different of any other form of media. And I think it's just the new one. A lot of people have the opportunity to use it for good or for bad. I try to use my corner of the internet happy and cute and as much as I can push the message of positivity.
CT: I read 2014 was when you cleared out YouTube and started Poppy the way it is now. Was there a particular artistic that influenced you around that time that sparked it the way it is?
P: I think 2014 is actually the birth. I received a transmission from God and I realised who I was and I realised that if I’m not the one saying these things somebody else is going to say them and they're not going to be as good.
CT: What transmission?
P: That I needed to be on this path. Titanic Sinclair happened to come into my life and we happened to be on a similar wavelength.
CT: What does this path look like? Can you visualise it?
P: It looks like a very twisty and turny road with lots of hills and a couple of valleys that I feel I've gone through. And there's a lot more mountain tops and a lot more turns [to come]. But, it's a really long road.
CT: What kind of god?
P: I don’t know if it’s an alien, a spirit, or a being of some sort.
CT: So you’re not talking about a Christian god?
P: God is just the word people use to make sense of the higher power.
Monday, May 7, 2018
Poppy as Fulfillment of Will in the New Aeon of Thelema.
Under the Old Aeon we had:
The Torah.
The Prophets.
The Writings.
And it was fulfilled in the New Testament.
In the New Aeon of Horus we have:
Liber AL vel Legis: The Book of the Law. In Hebrew, Sefer Torah translates to Book fo the Law.
Now, it has been fulfilled in The Gospel of Poppy.
The Gospel of Poppy is to the Book of the Law as the New Testament is to the Hebrew Bible.
"Do What Thou Wilt Shall be the Whole of the Law" has been fulfilled in "I Am Poppy"
93 has become 3:36. 9+3 = 12. 3+3+6 = 12.
3+3 = 6.
The Book of the Law concludes with "The Comment":
Poppy commences with:
Will you join me in Poppy's Future Paradise?
The Torah.
The Prophets.
The Writings.
And it was fulfilled in the New Testament.
In the New Aeon of Horus we have:
Liber AL vel Legis: The Book of the Law. In Hebrew, Sefer Torah translates to Book fo the Law.
Now, it has been fulfilled in The Gospel of Poppy.
The Gospel of Poppy is to the Book of the Law as the New Testament is to the Hebrew Bible.
"Do What Thou Wilt Shall be the Whole of the Law" has been fulfilled in "I Am Poppy"
93 has become 3:36. 9+3 = 12. 3+3+6 = 12.
3+3 = 6.
The Book of the Law concludes with "The Comment":
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.
The study of this Book is forbidden. It is wise to destroy this copy after the first reading.
Whosoever disregards this does so at his own risk and peril. These are most dire.
Those who discuss the contents of this Book are to be shunned by all, as centres of pestilence.
All questions of the Law are to be decided only by appeal to my writings, each for himself.
There is no law beyond Do what thou wilt.
Love is the law, love under will.
The priest of the princes,
ANKH-F-N-KHONSU
ANKH-F-N-KHONSU
Poppy commences with:
Delete Your Facebook.
Will you join me in Poppy's Future Paradise?
Wednesday, August 19, 2015
Book of Matthew, Prophecy Study (Part 1)
This isn't going to be well written, more or less notes to remind myself and my friends what we were discussing.
Scope: Matthew.
I suggested that we look through Matthew for all verses indicating fulfillment of prophecy, then look up the context of those prophecies (if possible), see what they were talking about, and deciding if they were fulfilled as Matthew claimed, and what their fulfillment indicates.
My friend clarified the scope by suggesting that we use the answers to work towards answering a question like: Is Jesus the Son of God? I suggested breaking this down into a series of more specific questions, however:
Is Jesus (or does he claim to be) the(a?) Son of God? (and what does that mean?)
Is Jesus (or does he claim to be) the(a?) Messiah?
Is Jesus ... Divine?
Matthew Chapter 1
1:1 - "Jesus Christ, son of David, son of Abraham" - this statement makes a lot a couple of important claims. I take this verse to be basically a title that was prefixed onto the book (long before it came to be known as the Gospel According to Matthew.) Claim 1: Jesus is Messiah ("Christ") Claim 2: Jesus is a descendant of King David (lineage.)
GENEALOGY
1:11-12 - Jeconiah is part of the lineage. This is problematic because Jeremiah 22:30 places a curse upon his lineage:
"This is what Yahweh says: Write down this man as childless, as a man who will not have any success during his lifetime, for none of his descendants will succeed in sitting on David's throne and ruling again in Judah."
It's possible that God reversed the curse after Jeconiah repented. Zerubbabel seems to have a similar difficulty to Jesus in this way.
1:16 - This genealogy comes down to Joseph. But Joseph is not Jesus' biological father according to Christianity, and is thus unable to convey to him the royal patrilineal descent from David.
Summary of Difficulties: (1) Jeconiah's line is cursed. (2) Jesus isn't of the Davidic Line.
FIRST CLAIMED PROPHETIC FULFILLMENT
1:22-23 - All of this actually came about to fulfill what was spoken by the Lord through his prophet, saying: "Look! The virgin will become pregnant and will give birth to a son, and they will name him Immanuel, which means, when translate, 'God is with us.'"
The Hebrew word for virgin is betulah but Isaiah used almah here (young woman.) The scripture in Isaiah had nothing to do with the sexual purity of the woman. When Isaiah means to say virgin (betulah) he does. Five times, in fact, 23:4; 23:12; 37:22; 47:1; 62:5. Isaiah 7:14 is not one of them.
From Wikipedia, "In the original Hebrew of Isaiah 7:14 the word almah meant a young woman of childbearing age who had not yet given birth and who might or might not be a virgin, but the Greek translation rendered almah as parthenos, a word which means virgin. This gave the author of Matthew the opportunity to interpret Jesus as the fulfilment of the Immanuel prophecy..."
As further example, Proverbs 30:19-20 uses the same word almah to mean young woman and clearly not a virgin because there she is being demonstrated as having sex, then freshening up and saying "I've done no wrong" - the sense of the verse is that there is no physical evidence that anything had happened, but if it were a virgin, there would be evidence.
Matthew was merely going off the Greek Septuagint translation available in his day, which had imprecisely translated almah as parthenos (a greek term which usually does imply virginity)
But lets look at it another way. Maybe the prophecy is still fulfilled even though it is supposed to just say young woman.
So Isaiah 7:14 says "Therefore Yahweh himself will give you a sign: Look! The young woman will become pregnant and will give birth to a son and she will name him Immanuel."
I should note that this is the second in a series of three children in Isaiah who are used as signs ("Shear-jashub", "Immanuel", and "Maher-shalal-hash-baz" Isaiah 8:18 indicates that these children are signs.
The context of Isaiah 7 is not being taken into consideration. Isaiah 7 is in answer to Ahaz's prayer. See what Ahaz is asking for and what this answer meant to him?
So when Jesus was born to Mary, a young woman did give birth to a child. This had happened hundreds of thousands of times since Isaiah's prophecy. Did she name him Immanuel? (Notice she has to name them this. It's not they--Isaiah said she will name him, but Matthew changes it to *they* will name him) name him Immanuel? Well, Matthew doesn't indicate that she named him Immanuel. It actually says in Matthew 1:24, "... and he named him Jesus." (referring to Joseph.) And in verse 21 the angel had directed Joseph to do this, "She will give birth to a son, and you are to name him Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins."
So I will admit that it is possible that Joseph named him Jesus (as directed by the Angel) but Mary named him Immanuel, although the text doesn't indicate that he was named or called Immanuel at any point after that.
Summary of Difficulties: (3) Matthew's idea that the prophecy specifies a "virgin" is a misunderstanding relating to translation issues. (4) If Jesus is a fulfillment, he is supposed to be part of a three child sequence, who is the child before and the child after him? (5) They seem to name him Jesus, contrary to the prophecy which says he should be named Immanuel.
Matthew Chapter 2
Verse 1 specifies that Jesus is born in Bethlehem of Judea. Verse 5-6 claims this to be in fulfillment of a prophecy:
They said to him: "In Bethlehem of Judea, for this is how it has been written through the prophet: 'And you, O Bethlehem of the land of Judah, are by no means the most insignificant city among the governors of Judah, for out of you will come a governing one, who will shepherd my people Israel.'"
If we look up Micah 5:2,
'And you, O Bethlehem Ephrathah, the one TOO LITTLE to be among the thousands of Judah, from you will come out for me the one to be ruler in Israel, whose origin is from ancient times, from the days of long ago.' (emphasis added)
You'll see Matthew reversed the meaning of this when he quoted it, saying that Bethlehem is "by no means the smallest" instead of the Prophet's own words that Bethlehem is "too little to be among the thousands of Judah" (other translations will say something like "one of the smallest clans of Judah") This is again due to Matthew relying on the Greek Septuagint translation, so is excusable, but yet proves to be a difficulty. It may not specifically have bearing on the prophecy, however...
The prophecy also reads "Bethlehem Ephratah" and Matthew's version says "Bethlehem of Judea." Perhaps these are two names for the same place, but we know for sure there are at least three Bethlehems, one is Bethlehem of Galilee - 6 miles northwest of Nazareth, which would have been a reasonable traveling distance for a pregnant woman on a donkey. Bethlehem of Judea is 69 miles from Nazareth... The other is Bethlehem of Zebulun which was mentioned in Joshua 19:15. (Micah was differentiating from this one.)
Micah is addressing the family of David which came out of Bethlehem. Micah isn't saying that the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem, he's saying that the Messiah will descend from King David who is from Beit Lechem (as described at the end of the Book of Ruth.)
Summary of Difficulties: (6) The quotation from Micah does not match the Prophecy. (7) By referencing this verse Matthew draws attention to the fact that the Messiah has to have Davidic Lineage. Jesus doesn't.
Micah 5, however, clearly is a Messianic prophecy. So we should study it in more depth to see what claims it makes about the Messianic figure.
That's it for now.
Scope: Matthew.
I suggested that we look through Matthew for all verses indicating fulfillment of prophecy, then look up the context of those prophecies (if possible), see what they were talking about, and deciding if they were fulfilled as Matthew claimed, and what their fulfillment indicates.
My friend clarified the scope by suggesting that we use the answers to work towards answering a question like: Is Jesus the Son of God? I suggested breaking this down into a series of more specific questions, however:
Is Jesus (or does he claim to be) the(a?) Son of God? (and what does that mean?)
Is Jesus (or does he claim to be) the(a?) Messiah?
Is Jesus ... Divine?
Matthew Chapter 1
1:1 - "Jesus Christ, son of David, son of Abraham" - this statement makes a lot a couple of important claims. I take this verse to be basically a title that was prefixed onto the book (long before it came to be known as the Gospel According to Matthew.) Claim 1: Jesus is Messiah ("Christ") Claim 2: Jesus is a descendant of King David (lineage.)
GENEALOGY
1:11-12 - Jeconiah is part of the lineage. This is problematic because Jeremiah 22:30 places a curse upon his lineage:
"This is what Yahweh says: Write down this man as childless, as a man who will not have any success during his lifetime, for none of his descendants will succeed in sitting on David's throne and ruling again in Judah."
It's possible that God reversed the curse after Jeconiah repented. Zerubbabel seems to have a similar difficulty to Jesus in this way.
1:16 - This genealogy comes down to Joseph. But Joseph is not Jesus' biological father according to Christianity, and is thus unable to convey to him the royal patrilineal descent from David.
Summary of Difficulties: (1) Jeconiah's line is cursed. (2) Jesus isn't of the Davidic Line.
FIRST CLAIMED PROPHETIC FULFILLMENT
1:22-23 - All of this actually came about to fulfill what was spoken by the Lord through his prophet, saying: "Look! The virgin will become pregnant and will give birth to a son, and they will name him Immanuel, which means, when translate, 'God is with us.'"
The Hebrew word for virgin is betulah but Isaiah used almah here (young woman.) The scripture in Isaiah had nothing to do with the sexual purity of the woman. When Isaiah means to say virgin (betulah) he does. Five times, in fact, 23:4; 23:12; 37:22; 47:1; 62:5. Isaiah 7:14 is not one of them.
From Wikipedia, "In the original Hebrew of Isaiah 7:14 the word almah meant a young woman of childbearing age who had not yet given birth and who might or might not be a virgin, but the Greek translation rendered almah as parthenos, a word which means virgin. This gave the author of Matthew the opportunity to interpret Jesus as the fulfilment of the Immanuel prophecy..."
As further example, Proverbs 30:19-20 uses the same word almah to mean young woman and clearly not a virgin because there she is being demonstrated as having sex, then freshening up and saying "I've done no wrong" - the sense of the verse is that there is no physical evidence that anything had happened, but if it were a virgin, there would be evidence.
Matthew was merely going off the Greek Septuagint translation available in his day, which had imprecisely translated almah as parthenos (a greek term which usually does imply virginity)
But lets look at it another way. Maybe the prophecy is still fulfilled even though it is supposed to just say young woman.
So Isaiah 7:14 says "Therefore Yahweh himself will give you a sign: Look! The young woman will become pregnant and will give birth to a son and she will name him Immanuel."
I should note that this is the second in a series of three children in Isaiah who are used as signs ("Shear-jashub", "Immanuel", and "Maher-shalal-hash-baz" Isaiah 8:18 indicates that these children are signs.
The context of Isaiah 7 is not being taken into consideration. Isaiah 7 is in answer to Ahaz's prayer. See what Ahaz is asking for and what this answer meant to him?
So when Jesus was born to Mary, a young woman did give birth to a child. This had happened hundreds of thousands of times since Isaiah's prophecy. Did she name him Immanuel? (Notice she has to name them this. It's not they--Isaiah said she will name him, but Matthew changes it to *they* will name him) name him Immanuel? Well, Matthew doesn't indicate that she named him Immanuel. It actually says in Matthew 1:24, "... and he named him Jesus." (referring to Joseph.) And in verse 21 the angel had directed Joseph to do this, "She will give birth to a son, and you are to name him Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins."
So I will admit that it is possible that Joseph named him Jesus (as directed by the Angel) but Mary named him Immanuel, although the text doesn't indicate that he was named or called Immanuel at any point after that.
Summary of Difficulties: (3) Matthew's idea that the prophecy specifies a "virgin" is a misunderstanding relating to translation issues. (4) If Jesus is a fulfillment, he is supposed to be part of a three child sequence, who is the child before and the child after him? (5) They seem to name him Jesus, contrary to the prophecy which says he should be named Immanuel.
Matthew Chapter 2
Verse 1 specifies that Jesus is born in Bethlehem of Judea. Verse 5-6 claims this to be in fulfillment of a prophecy:
They said to him: "In Bethlehem of Judea, for this is how it has been written through the prophet: 'And you, O Bethlehem of the land of Judah, are by no means the most insignificant city among the governors of Judah, for out of you will come a governing one, who will shepherd my people Israel.'"
If we look up Micah 5:2,
'And you, O Bethlehem Ephrathah, the one TOO LITTLE to be among the thousands of Judah, from you will come out for me the one to be ruler in Israel, whose origin is from ancient times, from the days of long ago.' (emphasis added)
You'll see Matthew reversed the meaning of this when he quoted it, saying that Bethlehem is "by no means the smallest" instead of the Prophet's own words that Bethlehem is "too little to be among the thousands of Judah" (other translations will say something like "one of the smallest clans of Judah") This is again due to Matthew relying on the Greek Septuagint translation, so is excusable, but yet proves to be a difficulty. It may not specifically have bearing on the prophecy, however...
The prophecy also reads "Bethlehem Ephratah" and Matthew's version says "Bethlehem of Judea." Perhaps these are two names for the same place, but we know for sure there are at least three Bethlehems, one is Bethlehem of Galilee - 6 miles northwest of Nazareth, which would have been a reasonable traveling distance for a pregnant woman on a donkey. Bethlehem of Judea is 69 miles from Nazareth... The other is Bethlehem of Zebulun which was mentioned in Joshua 19:15. (Micah was differentiating from this one.)
Micah is addressing the family of David which came out of Bethlehem. Micah isn't saying that the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem, he's saying that the Messiah will descend from King David who is from Beit Lechem (as described at the end of the Book of Ruth.)
Summary of Difficulties: (6) The quotation from Micah does not match the Prophecy. (7) By referencing this verse Matthew draws attention to the fact that the Messiah has to have Davidic Lineage. Jesus doesn't.
Micah 5, however, clearly is a Messianic prophecy. So we should study it in more depth to see what claims it makes about the Messianic figure.
That's it for now.
Monday, June 30, 2014
Freemasonry and Kabbalah
I'm not sure if anyone will understand this except for me. The system of York Rite Masonry fits perfectly with the Kabbalah both in the steps taken and the theme of each degree aligning with the meanings of the Sephirot.
Chesed = 1° Entered Apprentice - Loving-kindness (Youth)
Gevurah = 2° Fellowcraft - Severity/strength (Manhood)
Netzach = 3° Master Mason - Eternity (Sprig of Acacia)
Binah = 4° Mark Master Mason - Understanding (The stone which the builders rejected)
Chokhmah = 5° Virtual Past Master - Wisdom (King Solomon)
Hod = 6° Most Excellent Master - Splendor (Completion & Dedication of Temple)
Tiferet = 7° Royal Arch Mason - Beauty (Revelation of the Ineffable)
Malkhut = 8° Royal Master - Kingdom (Mortality, Clay Ground between Succoth and Zeredatha)
Yesod = 9° Select Master - Foundation (The foundation stone, depositing into the earth.)
Da'at = Illustrious Order of the Red Cross of Babylon (Not a Degree, not a Sephirah) - Integrative Knowledge (Zerubbabel, Crossing the Bridge)
A Mason prudent in observational skills will observe certain physical correspondences between the steps of Freemasonry with reference to the location of the Sephirot on the tree and its paths (certainly not a hollow comparison, but one that squares precisely with at least the earlier forms of the degrees, before they were modified in certain jurisdictions to accommodate the needs of the extremely aged. I don't mean to be a heel by blaming the elderly for this, but one who hasn't dipped their toes into the symbolism of a rite should not modify it on a whim in the name of convenience.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)