The International Committee of the Red Cross is Occult and Esoteric

I wish to thank Victor Machin, author of The Secret Dictionary, for joining the debate. In his reply, Mr. Machin focuses in part on the symbolism of the Red Cross. He claims that it "actually represents the four points of the compass and the four turning points of the year". But why should this be the inherent, actual meaning of the Red Cross? A plus sign is also a cross, as are the letter t, the main symbol of Christianity, the intersection of two streets, the juncture of slats on a window pane, and other simple things. Sure, a compass can look like a cross, but why should a compass symbol be red? More importantly, why should we believe that the Red Cross had any of these meanings in mind when it chose its symbol?Tenuous claims about the Red Cross symbol vary wildly on the internet. One essay, "The Red Cross of Azazel" claims: The Sumerians worshipped Azazel as Ninazu (nin means 'lord‘), the god of healing and of the underworld. The Romans knew him as Aesculapius, the god of medicine, and he was known to be as well the Greek and Phoenician god of healing. The red cross which represents the god-angel of healing Azazel is for this reason used as a symbol of the medical organization known as the International Federation of the Red Cross, most commonly known as the Red Cross. ("Many of the magical charms and spells were for the healing of the sick or for the prevention of disease... Many charms and spells surviving to the present day contain the names of pre-Christian gods... These spells are usually connected with cures for diseases in human beings and animals" (Margaret Murray, The God of the Witches, p.75).[1] On closer review, however, that author relies on baseless, weakly connected asserts. He claims without evidence that Azazel was the same as the Sumerian Ninazu, Roman Aesculapius, or its Greek or Phoenician equivalents. He asserts that the Roman deity had a special medial staff, but does not prove that Azazel had that same staff. Likewise he claims that Azazel's sign is an X, but fails to show that this association is ancient and then he likewise asserts without any real basis that this translates into a cross, which is a different symbol. He fails to show that Azazel was a healing deity, except to claim that Azazel is portrayed this way in the apocryphal Book of Enoch, where the demigod was portrayed negatively. Finally, the essay did not show that the Red Cross as an organization intentionally picked the red cross symbol because they saw it as related to Azazel or because it saw Azazel as a"healing" deity. Therefore, while proposing the possibility that the red cross was associated in pagan times with pagan deities, that author of the passage fails to back up this claim.Turning now to the Knights Templar, it's true that they used a red cross on a white background like Machin says. However, the reason Muslims used the Red Crescent was not because they associated a Red Cross with the Templars, but because they associated it with Christianity.[2]Machin is also right that the Knights Templar were absorbed into other groups like the Knights Hospitaller. But those were both different groups. Why should we think that any occultism by the Templars was carried over into the Hospitallers? And why should we believe that centuries later it was passed into the Red Cross? These are major gaps in time and organization.Nonetheless, like a few other websites, The Red Cross of Azazel also tries to draw a connection between the Hospitallers and the Red Cross: Hospitallers of St. John of Jerusalem is the medical organization known as the International Organization of the Red Cross which likewise employs a red cross on white background insignia, this being the sign of Azazel. The British Red Cross Society works closely with a group called the St. John Ambulance Association, named after the leader of the Knights Hospitallers, St. John of Jerusalem. The red cross, also known as St. George‘s Cross, is the English national emblem...[1] As before, this essay appears to make large leaps in logic. It equates the Hospitallers with the International Red Cross, when in fact these are two distinct organizations. It then repeats the baseless claim that this is Azazel's "sign". And it then mentions that the Red Cross Society works with St. John's Ambulance Association. What conclusion exactly are we supposed to draw from this? How does the fact that the Red Cross chooses to maximize its efforts by cooperating with an ambulance association named after the Hospitallers' saint, St. John, show anything odd or unexpected about the Red Cross?I do not expect Machin to answer for the passage above, but rather to show the reader the kind of tenuous, if not invented, claims and suggestions sometmes made.Next, Machin points out that the Red Cross HQ is in Switzerland, that their flags are reversed, that they both take a neutral stance in wars, and that they are criticized for profiting from both sides.I fail to see how exacly that hardly suggests the Red Cross is esoteric at all. At most, one could conclude that the organization is closely connected to Switzerland and its government. Some writers, like Alan Butler in The Warriors and the Bankers, claim that the Templars moved to Switzerland.[3] They assert that Switzerland's political system became established about the same time as the Templars were banned from neighboring France, and that the Templars' abilities explain the rise of Swiss banking, independence, and military security. However, Switzerland was in fact already developing by that time. There doesn't appear to be any readily available direct proof of a connection between the Templars and Switzerland, either.Further, it's doubtful whether the Red Cross's symbol was really chosen as the inverse of the Swiss flag: According to the ICRC, the emblem adopted was formed by reversing the colours of the Swiss flag. However, according to jurist and Red Cross historian Pierre Boissier, no clear evidence of this origin has been found; the concept that the design was chosen to compliment the country in which the convention at which it was adopted was held, was promoted later to counter the objections of Turkey that the flag was a Christian symbol.[2] Although the reason for the symbol may be a bit uncertain, the question remains: Why should the reader imagine that the Red Cross's symbol was based on some supposed occult idea of the Templars, instead of the simpler idea that it has to do with Swiss neutrality, Christianity, or even mainstream ideas about those knights?Machin also mentions the Rosicrucians in his response. They were an esoteric group of the late medieval period whose name refers to the "red" or "rosy" "cross". For them, this cross had an esoteric meaning. As with the Templars, however, it is not clear why they or their interpetation of the symbol must be considered connected to the IFRC, since they were different organizations centuries apart. As for Masonry, as with others, the Red Cross is supposedly also a symbol. "According to the 'Structure of Freemasonry,' the 'Order of the Red Cross' stands third in the top echelon of power just behind the Sovereign Military Order of Malta and the 'Order of the Knights Templar.' ...the red... cross was adopted as an identifying symbol of the Masonic tradition".[4]Recent developments cast serious doubts however on claims that the International Red Cross sees its symbol as occult. Conflicts have arisen due to occasional perceptions of the Red Cross or Red Crescent as a religious symbol, and in a few cases there have been attacks on Red Cross workers. As a result, the "ICRC has called for a single, culturally neutral symbol."[5] The International Committee of the Red Cross has a sister organization, the International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, which disagrees, as its member nations wish to keep their national symbols. At this point, the Red Cross as a whole has decided that countries can use not only the symbols of a red cross or crescent, but a red diamond, which could be useful in areas of religious conflict. The debate within the Red Cross over its symbolism shows that the organization does not use the red cross symbol out of Rosicrucianism or another kind of esotericism, because it would hardly wish to remove its symbol.The ICRC's disagreement with the Israeli Magen David society also shows a lack of unusual meaning in its symbol. That society performs work similar to the Red Cross, but wanted to use a red hexagram for the Star of David instead. The ICRC's position disagreed out of reluctance to make its symbol easily replaceable with other religious or national symbols. Instead, it wanted one standardized, neutral, non-national sign that all countries would respect, and its official position is that the cross is merely the reverse of Switzerland's flag. Specifically, Arab countries disagreed with adding the hexagram, while the American Red Cross witheld $30 million in donations from the International Red Cross for failing to include the Israeli society.[6] The fact that Arab countries, who don't use a red cross, have enough decisionmaking power in the international organization as to make it lose millions over the issue of symbolism shows that the organization could hardly be united around something like occultism.1. www.scribd.com/doc/62144636/The-Red-Cross-of-Azazel2. http://mrcspetalingchapter.blogspot.com...3. http://blog.templarhistory.com...4. http://www.tetrahedron.org...5. http://www.csmonitor.com...6. http://news.bbc.co.uk...