Author Topic: A new theory of Solomonic Magic  (Read 8063 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

June 29, 2007, 10:00:43 AM
Reply #15

Steve

  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 3685
  • Karma:
    139
    • View Profile
"Have you ever heard of translation? The bible doesn't resemble the biblical era of speaking, but yet... Some still acknowledge it as the word of God. Often times, translated texts are not word for word to help make it more understandable for current times." Not at all what I was refering to. There's references to Saint Peter in the books. That's not a translation thing, it's a post-christian thing. Veos: I'm not arguing the authenticity of the magic described within the text, just the authorship, which you agree regarding. I also do check the histories of the various books of the bible as well as other books which people claim should have as much or more authority than the books already in the bible.

"Also, since when is there EVIDENCE of oral/hidden traditions?" By people writing about them. For instance, the talmuds of the Jews show clearly that oral discussions and traditions were passed down along side the written scriptures, as do many references in other writings to such oral traditions. We wouldn't know much at all about many historical books and people if people didn't write about them, including the ones that are supposed to or are attempting to be hidden.

"Now then, just because you believe that something is fake, doesn't mean that everyone abides by your viewpoints." Oh no no, quite the contrary. Unlike other people who simply accept it when some magician or other says "this is the history of this piece of literature" I instead search out the actual history behind the work and I go by that. If other people don't want to agree with me then they can certainly do so, and if they want to argue against my views then they are also welcome to show any historical evidence which supports their point of view. So far, we have a tale that the goetia was written by Solomon, but looking into it's history reveals that practically everyone from mundane scholars to noted magicians already recognize that it was written post-christ under a pen name and had little to nothing to do with the biblical Solomon.

~Steve
Mastery does not occur when you've performed a feat once or twice. Instead, it comes after years of training, when you realize that you no longer notice when you're performing a feat which used to require so much effort. Even walking takes years of training for a human: why not everything else?

June 29, 2007, 10:48:29 AM
Reply #16

Zohar

  • A Familiar Feature

  • Offline
  • ***

  • 111
  • Karma:
    0
    • View Profile
"Also, since when is there EVIDENCE of oral/hidden traditions?" By people writing about them. For instance, the talmuds of the Jews show clearly that oral discussions and traditions were passed down along side the written scriptures, as do many references in other writings to such oral traditions. We wouldn't know much at all about many historical books and people if people didn't write about them, including the ones that are supposed to or are attempting to be hidden.

Even the accounts and writings on such things are not EVIDENCE. They'd be just as arguably fake by your standpoint as this book. They can be largely changed or even a fictional account mustered up by the author on an already pre-existing subject. We don't know that Solomon was the author for sure of these books, but that is not the point. The point is that it might have basis in traditions that Solomon could have started or just be a A.D. translation of a B.C. text with some distortions made by the author.

"Have you ever heard of translation? The bible doesn't resemble the biblical era of speaking, but yet... Some still acknowledge it as the word of God. Often times, translated texts are not word for word to help make it more understandable for current times." Not at all what I was refering to. There's references to Saint Peter in the books. That's not a translation thing, it's a post-christian thing. Veos: I'm not arguing the authenticity of the magic described within the text, just the authorship, which you agree regarding. I also do check the histories of the various books of the bible as well as other books which people claim should have as much or more authority than the books already in the bible.

Hmmm, not what you were referring to?

and 2) the terminology used within the goetia itself is clearly post-christian and cannot be mistaken as pre-christian writing by any except those who don't want to acknowledge the truth that Solomon didn't write it.
Then what were you, in fact, referring to?

On another not, even if there is reference to Saint Peter within the book, it might have been a figure added by the translator to help illustrate certain points. It also might have been the work of a Post Christ author who based nothing in his work on the word of Solomon. We can't be certain because we don't know everything about Solomon.

Besides, even if the texts are false, Goetic spirits are largely viewed as archetypal currents. I could care less if the greater and lesser keys of Solomon were written by a baboon, the energy associated with them on the Astral Plane, and their pull on what Prophecy might refer to as the "thought matrix" is still there. Through past summoning attempts lead by Goetic following, unintentional egregores have been formed in their stead. Still, I do believe there has been some basis on Solomon himself had done. Never the less, I only wish to state that just as sure as we don't know for sure that it was written by Solomon, we don't know for certain that it wasn't.
G-d created the world in the image of the world above; all which is found above has its analogy below... and everything constitues a unity.

June 29, 2007, 11:31:28 PM
Reply #17

Veos

  • Teacher Emeritus
  • Veritas Furniture

  • Offline
  • *****

  • 473
  • Karma:
    44
    • View Profile
Hah.  Steve is like a catalyst.  Put him somewhere, and the whole town explodes into anm argument in some form or another that has something to do with "Bible vs Magick".  Allthough in this case, Steve is correct.  The Keys of solomon, as we have them today, were not written by Solomon.  The author proclaims that Solomon wrote the original Keys down and stored it in the temple (before its destruction).  As such, even if Solomon really did possess such a magick, the Keys as we have them today allegedly contain some or most of the content in the mythical books of Solomon themselves.  Whether the existence of such "secret books" of Solomon is true or not can only be found out by experience. 
Soham Sivoham Aham Brahma Asmi Mahavakya
Suddha satchitananda purna parabrahma
Chidananda Rupa Sivoham Sivoham