Is there any major distinction between the Anatolian/ Zoroastrian/ Canaanite/ Babylonian paradigm and the Egyptian mystery schools? It seems like the "additional chapters" of Mithra/ Orphic cults would be redundant if it was all based on the same paradigm or foundations.
They all seem to be the same. Caananites were egypts proxy empire. Something like half egyptian and greek. The entities they focus on are all similar. Plato spent three days in the pyramid and started a school. The canaanites would have been another sub chapter. They call these cults new names to hide in plain sight and work towards the same goal.
"half egyptian and greek" You are referring to what I'd say are the "Phoenicians", I am referring to the population before that one, although it's not like that one was ever fully replaced or destroyed.
Romans, Greeks, Phoenicians and Egyptians had a lot of cultural exchange between them. The Greek alphabet came from the Phoenicians, which was developed from the Egyptian Hieroglyphics.
I thought the caananites and phoenicians were practically the same, but caananites were more localized and earlier
Its redundant on purpose. Most people wouldnt join satanists but would not think twice about jesuits etc. Low level people are led around by their noses.
Perhaps it is mostly superficial. What would you call this "proto-Gnosticism"? Because saying "Gnostic" makes it sound like it originated with Greeks and Christians.
Paganism. Satanism is paganism evoked.
(post is archived)