Thread 17981383

Why did the Knights Templar have gnostic symbols like Abraxas engraved on their treasures?

>>17981383 (OP)
Baphomet is not a demon, it means the same thing as Abraxas - that is, the ultimate God of reality who, by virtue of preceding manifestation, necessarily encompasses all apparent opposing polarities at once (male and female, good and evil, dark and light, man and beast, etc.). The idea that the Templars were "Satanic" is simply based on a misunderstanding.

>>17981420
Based

>>17981383 (OP)
Show me

>>17981425
Interesting - I’m not too sure how far back this idea of Abraxas goes, isn’t he/it the demon that is meant to bring basically a perfect autonomous would (inherently making humans dumber) via tools like AI and such?

>>17981428
>, isn’t he/it the demon
That's what the church said in the medieval period because anything not mentioned in the bible = demonic to them

>>17981428
See
>>17981420
Both Abraxas and Baphomet (two symbols representing the same thing, God) were never demons, they were just painted that way in retrospect because they look frightening and the Church fucking hates Gnostics.

>>17981420
baphomet is mahomet ie muhammad, everything else is a 12 yo larp. jung was a manchild

>>17981469
Regardless of what they look like I disagree; the goal of Abraxas like I said is to make things super easy and autonomous for us for the main purpose of distancing ourselves from the one true God, there is a spiritual warfare taking place to make our species dumber and less clairvoyant thru microplastics and other chemicals to make our pineal gland small/shit so we can’t tap into these higher consciousness as easier as our ancestors could, so for that very motivation is why Abraxas is evil / demonic and you know looking like that doesn’t help either

>>17981425
What is the source of this, could be easily something from the 18th century or just plain occult fantasy, after all it's just a drawing.

>>17981491
You've lost me there with the schizo tangent, pal.

>>17981493
This post source
>>17981501
Schizophrenic tangent on a schizo post - what’s not to get
>OP posts demon saying it’s not demon
>Explain motives of said demon is to basically make us fat lazy retards who drift further away from God

>>17981383 (OP)
Apparently a goat is a demonic symbol while they sell you on icons of predators such as lions and wolves, take possession and casually consume flesh from animals that have been enslaved, butchered and consumed on a massive industrial scale.

And y'all think its fucking gravy....

I can't get over the hilarity...
I just can't....

Look at this happy butcher..... so fuckin' wholesome.

>>17981513
Yeah but that's not based on anything real. Those symbols were never intended to be demonic by their creators.

Baphomet is just a corruption of Muhammad akshually.
Muhammad > Mahomet > Baphomet

>>17981471
>evidence that the templars were gnostics
>literally everything

>evidence that the templars were Muslim
>kinda sounds the same

>>17981420
Baphomet was a crusader slur or mistranslation of Muhammad. They were talking about Muhammad. Its that simple.

>>17982027
he didnt say the templars were muslims you fuckin idiot, he said baphomet means muhammad. a surviving templar account says the sandniggers of antioch worshipped baphomet (muhammad) and the templars then slaughtered them all. no one said the templars were bapomet worshippers, and furthermore you have no evidence for them being gnostic either. this is nonsense surface level ignorant normie dan brown type horseshit

>>17981383 (OP)
Did they?

>>17982054
Even if that's true the Gnostic conception of the figure still developed as described. Many ancient symbols originated from misunderstandings. Think the meaning of the Caduceus being conflated with the Rod of Asclepius.

>>17981383 (OP)
>>17981420
>muh edgy goat lord deity
Truly pathetic and gay

>>17982114
Nothing is edgy about any of the traditional symbolisms of the goat except christians sperging out that it's the devil.