Talk:Illuminati/Archive 1

message: The article is too conversational in places; also in some places it borders on lacking objectivity. It needs a bit of a rewrite so as to make it more professional sounding --Mydoghasworms 18:56, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  General comments on article 

message: The Illuminati are very real, and are currently manipulating the world toward a New World Order based upon Draconian beliefs.  I wish it weren't true, but I can't deny reality, history or my own experience.   For proof that the Illuminati exist and that the New World Order is a very real threat, refer to Prison Planet, www.infowars.com infowars.com is fringe, does not meet our sourcing guidelines and should not be used Infowars], and Propganda Matrix  Since most of this information is difficult for most people to swallow, I would suggest beginning with 9/11, the Road to Tyranny--Alex Jones' excellent film on government-sponsored terrorism.  You can see it for free at 9/11, the Road to Tyranny.  Truth is indeed far stranger, but also far more realistic than fiction.  This is the way governments always behaved throughout history, except for a few rare exceptions.  It is a delusion to believe that there are not elitist royals controlling as much as they can today. -129.173.208.188 (Talk) 09:39, September 9, 2004
:I feel free to divulge this since you would be hard pressed to trace me being born to a family of "Illuminati" (as we are commonly known) and subsequently being inducted into the order in my teenage years. Our goals are not "Draconian", this is a myth perpetrated by a rival and less powerful order, but we do indeed have global political goals. We work "in the dark" not because what we are doing will be malignant to mankind but because mankind resists change (the very definition of conservatism) that is needed for the long term survival of humanity.  We do not  have direct control over all governments, and I assure you the Illuminati weren't responsible for 9/11. If you were to put the goal of the "Illuminati" simpy it would be the same as it was since the Bavarian Illuminati was initially founded: to work towards a world dominated by humanism instead of irrational religious ideas. We aren't trying to enslave humanity, we are trying to free humanity from ignorance and irrationality. You may ask why the Illuminati don't just come out and say what our goals are? The answer is simple: an effective strategy against resistance is for the resistors to be unaware, or unsure, of your existence and your nature. And to state our goals would be to acknowledge our existence. The negative image hardly effects us as our existence is so thouroughly questioned. Of course every once in a while it doesn't hurt to acknowledge our existence to a few individuals, because most of them won't believe us, and the ones that do can never find any solid traces of our existence. Hiding such an organization is an art that, at the risk of sounding pompous, has not been surpassed by any organization since our founding; much of our edification as "Illuminati" is in this art. We know when, where, and what we can divulge, and what we can't. --Brentt 06:10, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: heh, sorry, I was just messing with the guy who started this toptic. I shouldn't have misused the talk page like that--I apologize. (Of course it was also innapropriate for the person who started the topic to use the talk page to discuss the reality of the illuminati--this isn't a discussion forum for anything but the article). --Brentt 07:55, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The Reality of the Illuminati

message: Your conspiratorial content may be edited out and treated as spam here. The wiki link on my Userpage will welcome that content though Conwiki 04:58, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Conspiracy Folks

message: AFAIK, the Bavarian Illuminati were inclined very much towards the ideals of enlightenment, and this was one of the reasons for their direct conflict with the contemporary Rosicrucians (more specifically: the "Orden des Gold- und Rosen-Kreutzes"), who were deep into Christian mystics. This conflict should at least be mentioned.
The decline of the B.I. is also said to have been favoured by the rise to power of the RCs in Prussia. I'll have to look up the sources, but Schiller's novel "Der Geisterseher" is probably based on events that actually took place in Berlin around 1784.
Suggested reading: Karl Frick, "Die Erleuchteten" -- a work generally considered as the product of serious scholarship. I'll search out the ISBN.
-- flaig@sanctacaris.net (Chevalier Dr. Dr. Ruediger Marcus Flaig, Heidelberg Univ.)
-- I also did find no reason to have these two section here, explicating what Rosicrucians and Martinist are:
:"=== Rosicrucians ===
:The Rosicrucians claimed to have originated in 1407, but rose to notice in 1614 when their main text Fama Fraternitatis appeared. As a secret society, they claimed to combine the possession of esoteric principles of religion with the mysteries of alchemy. Their positions are described in three anonymous treatises from 1614,Richard and Giraud, Dictionnaire universel des sciences ecclésiastiques, Paris 1825 as well as in the Confessio Fraternitatis of 1615. Rosicrucians also claimed heritage from the Knights Templar. "
:"=== Martinists ===
:Later, the title Illuminati was applied to the French Martinists, which had been founded in 1754 by Martinez Pasqualis, and to their imitators the Russian Martinists, headed about 1790 by Professor Schwartz of Moscow; both were occultist cabalists and allegorists, absorbing eclectic ideas from Jakob Boehme and Emanuel Swedenborg."
I suppressed both sections, and simply placed a link to Rosicrucianism and to Martinism in the introductory section, where they seem (IMMO) more appropriate. -- Gco 09:00, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Illuminati vs. rosicrucians 

message: 'No Purpose No Design' Song by the Artist 'Meat Beat Manifesto' has some reference to Bavarian Illuminati.
Like WHAT reference? And who are you? Add your name and what the hellin' reference ya talkin' 'bout?--OleMurder 19:03, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Illuminati in Popular Culture 

message: edit:
Oh, it reads much better than the other day!  Thanks people!
original:
The Illuminati entry is silly, unrealistic, and spotted heavily with misinformation.  It should just be replaced with something less fantasy-filled.
--D24 19:56, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Illuminati entry is silly 

message: Timothy LaHaye apparently thinks that the Illuminati exist.  I don't think that this is relevant to the Illuminati article.
For one, the current presentation is overly verbose - all we really need to convey the information is "Timothy LaHaye has been quoted as saying that the Illuminati are a currently existing evil organization".  But that's not an important addition to the article on the Illuminati - if the Pope said something like that, it still doesn't belong here because it doesn't add to our knowledge about the Illuminati, only about the speaker.
Now if LaHaye was to write a non-fiction book about the Illuminati, I could see mentioning it.  (Fictional books already have a place in the article.)  But there's no new information in this single quote, and it doesn't belong in this article. 
If no-one responds to this, I'll assume that I'm generally agreed with and continue reverting this addition. DenisMoskowitz 19:54, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Timothy LaHaye quote 

message: I recently watched BBC's "Revealing Angels and Demons". I don't take secret societies even nearly that serious, but one thing crossed my mind. When the name "Illuminati" was discussed, they told that people often translate it as "enlightened", although illuminati themselves claim that the name means "light bearers". Was it left to ourselves to figure, or was it just because nobody in BBC noticed that, put out other way, "light bearer" translates into "Lucifer". (check the lucifer quote in wikipedia).
:No, Lucifer translates as an adjective as "lightbringing" and as masculine noun as "Morning Star" - more commonly known as "Venus" and is the Vulgate translation of the original Hebrew which was used to refer to the King of Babylon. It appears twice in the OT, and has nothing to do with satan or anything else demonic. But don't let facts stand in the way of polemic. docboat 04:43, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The name 

message: I would like to request some heavy editing of this article. My suggestion would be to add more biographical information on Adam Weishaupt and a lot more information on the actual beliefs and philosophical views of the Illuminati - both the Bavarian variant and it precedents and antecedents.
Also I think the article is too colored by the notions of the Illuminati which have been nurtured by the conspiracy theorists. I am thinking of sentences such as the following:
"Groups describing themselves as Illuminati say they have members and chapters (lodges) throughout the world; only time will tell if the Illuminati still exists and if they suceed in taking over the world to establish Satan's New World Order."
This is extremely speculative and it hardly seems fit to include such a statement in a Wikipedia article. From what I've read about Weishaupt's actual views on society it would seem that he represented a kind of proto-social liberalism which, albeit extreme and atheistic in nature, was not necessarily "Satanic" - except possibly in the eyes of Christian fundamentalists.
Please rework this article thoroughly. (Jonas Liljeström 22:25, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with your conclusions, but it's all very well to ask other people to do things - why don't you take a stab at it and we'll back you up.  I'd also appreciate your continued attention to the article to help revert the constant vandalism it attracts. DenisMoskowitz 19:18, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea, Denis - I'll give it a shot as time permits. I just have to locate some sufficiently impeccable and level-headed sources first. Jonas Liljeström 16:07, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too POV and conspiratorial 

message: Found this in the catneeded category.  I'm redirecting the entry here (since another name doesn't need another article), but I'm afraid to merge the info in case it's not true.  If it is verifiable, someone please merge it:
:Knight of the Secret Circle is the named used by Albert Pike and Aleister Crowley for the Illuminati
NickelShoe 20:30, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Knight of the Secret Circle]]

message: I think that the Alumbrados of Spain is of sufficient historical interest as to warrent their own article.  Especially given that Wikipedia supplies a small tome on the history of Superman. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.252.81.211 (talk • contribs) .
:Go for it. Let me know if you have questions about the mechanics. Tom Harrison Talk 20:01, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done! You will find the new article here. The Alumbrados had absolutely nothing to do with the Illuminati or any of those conspiracy schemes.  --Jdemarcos 23:18, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Alumbrados

message: Is the origins section really well-named?  Origins of what?  It seems to be primarily pre-Bavarian Illuminati groups that called themselves or were called illuminati.  Also, where should groups called the illuminati that came after the Bavarian Illuminati go in the article, like James Strang's Society of the Illuminati? Schizombie 08:15, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Origins & other Illuminati

message: I do not know anything about it, but I stumbled upon a deleted paragraph...
*Revision as of 11:12, 24 January 2006
*Revision as of 02:48, 25 January 2006
:Others were not so fortunate. In 1529 a congregation of naïve 
:adherents at Toledo was subjected to whippings and imprisonment. Greater 
:rigors followed, and for about a century the alumbrados sent many 
:victims to the Inquisition, especially at Córdoba.
I am inserting it a again, as I see no reason on the talk page why this would have been deleted deliberately. — Xiutwel (talk) 22:16, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing text on "Alumbrados" 

message: There's a really good explanation for d illuminati in the book 'Angels and demons' by Dan brown.It's a fiction but the Iluminati are described correctly.Fact:I am 13 but i have read the book.It's meant for 18 and above.Hey,but dont call me a prodigy,alrite? diff showing rev as of 10:38, 21 April 2006 by User:59.95.163.75
: Actually, the book is stupid, poorly researched, and unoriginal. For even just a quick look at a few of the more egregious errors in the book, see this  Wikipedia article. And no, reading it at 13 doesn't make you a prodigy. JoshuaZ 13:00, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment moved from article 

message: As the Illuminati appeared 
The Illuminati is a millenarian institution, been born in the dawn of history. In its beddings they are specific secrets, forming a society based on the secrecy and the obedience. The system of the illuminated ones was developed by diverse leaders, between them Hassan Sabath (nazarins - 1090), of Bayezid Ansari (roshynaia - 1550), and of the illuminated ones of Weishaupt (1776). Other sets of ten of lesser groups had developed the system illuminati, more or less perfectly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.67.129.6 (talk) 
:errr, what? It looks like that was the output of a program made to imitate a person saying something. Brentt 03:09, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Illuminati 

message: There is no information in the article on how to apply. Masterhomer  06:33, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You apply here. Cheers,   Netsnipe  (Talk)  10:39, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  How do I apply? 

message: I suggested a merge incoming article "Order of Illuminati" is same info about the Bevarian Order --- with no source on the incoming article I propose to just delete it altoghether and redirect people here, unless anyone can salvage anything useful out of it ? Goldenrowley 03:03, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Tom Harrison Talk 12:59, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Also agree. JoshuaZ 18:09, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok. Now completed. Goldenrowley 20:26, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Order of Illuminati

message: I'm a bit puzzled by this section:
About the time that the Illuminati were outlawed in Bavaria, the Roman Catholic Church prohibited its members from joining Masonic lodges, on pain of excommunication.  This was done as a general edict, since the Church believed many lodges to have been infiltrated and subverted by the Illuminati, but was not able to accurately ascertain which ones.
Not only is there no citation on this, Ratzinger's quote says nothing about the Illuminati, and the original edict against Freemasonry (see here) dates from 1736, forty years before the Illuminati existed.  Therefore, are thre any objections to removal of the above statement, as well as Ratzinger's statement, which is really irrelevant anyway? MSJapan 18:24, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that just proves how powerful the Illuminati are: obviously they must have time machines. Its no wonder they've been able to keep the conspiracy a secret for so long. Brentt 21:21, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cultural effect section. 

message: What a bunch of speculation this article is.
Incidently there are any number of reliable source about the Bavarian Illuminati so that a perfectly sober article about them can be written, compare :de:Illuminatenorden. 
As the conspiracy theorists will never stop to put their version on this page, I suggest splitting off Bavarian Illuminati for the historical facts.
Pjacobi 09:39, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ouch! 

message: What (the devil) is "mopery with intent to gawk"? Does this mean something of is it vandalism? Billlion 13:55, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "Cosmic Trigger Volume 1 - Final Secret of the Illuminati...", by Robert Anton Wilson is the likely source of this phrase. Ronabop 08:37, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "mopery with intent to gawk" 

message: I've removed material pasted in by 72.64.159.98 at 19:21, October 6, 2006, from Cosmic Trigger I: Final Secret of the Illuminati by Robert Anton Wilson that unfortunately lasted for a while in the history without anyone catching it. Luckily, it remained in two discrete paragraphs in the "Origins" section, so I  was able to just remove that and leave the rest of the revised content on top. Here is the history, for the purposes of fulfilling the GFDL. Of course, administrators can view the deleted revisions if necessary. --Slowking Man 11:34, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done thanks. --Alf melmac 18:20, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyvio removed from history 

message: I just reverted an edit which replaced "Illuminati" with lower case "illuminati". I'm not an expert on the subject but I think the capitalizing is appropriate, yes? If I'm wrong and someone has a problem with this, drop me a note on my talk page because I'd like to know. --Pigman (talk • contribs) 06:19, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revert of lower case 

message: I am a Free Mason and I will tell you that groups calling themselves the Illuminati did (and posibly stil do) exist, but not reconized by the ruling body of the Free Mason Fraturnity.
The is so main assumptions made in this article it looks like it should be listed in the Wolrd News Daily.
Stop with the hourse shit and only list what is confirmed as factual. (thegrimmling)
:The sections on the World Wars is filled with fiction/conspiracy therory nonsense presented as fact. --71.110.157.123 15:56, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's always good to see a fellow FreeMason, but I'm pretty sure most FreeMasons take the time to spell correctly. As per your proposal to delete this article, there is a Wikipedia process for deleting an article, but it contains a vote and it will for all intensive purposes, will not pass. Your far better off improving and 'factualising' the existing article through the normal Wikipedian means. --Sharz 22:35, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

text: ok youre supposed to use the 4 tilda thingys and this article is in love with conspiracy theories. Dappled Sage 18:37, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Article should be deleted

message: Novus Ordo Seclorum has nothing to do with 'nonreligious order'.  This translation is in accurate. 129.57.9.147 18:27, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Explanation of the Great Seal of the United States  

message: I have a question about the following line: "About the time that the Illuminati were outlawed in Bavaria, the Roman Catholic Church prohibited its members from joining Masonic lodges, on pain of excommunication."  I am not challenging the factual accuracy of this statement (it is somewhat misleading, but is accurate) ... but is there a direct connection?  What does the Illuminati being outlawed in Bavaria have to do wtih the RCC banning Freemasonry?  If there is a direct connection, we need to state that connection (with proper citation of course)... if there is no connection, we should probably cut the sentence as being irrelevant. Blueboar 20:04, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well it is now August, and since there has been no reply to my querry, I have cut the line. Blueboar 17:16, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is there a connection 

message: I think the subsection called "Groups identifying themselves as Illuminati" was a valid subsection and should be returned, especially since some of the groups are specifically mentioned in the article.  I noticed that the O.T.O. has a long list of groups referenced in its article.  I am sure there are others.
I realize that one of groups was apparently a blog site, but the Orden Illuminati and The Illuminati Order are actual groups that have been around for years.  They are established claimants.
The reason given for the section's removal was: "The 'groups' links are nothing but advertising, and there's nothing notable about any of them."  The last part is just one person's opinion with which I obviously disagree, but the first...is not all of this "advertising"?  That is, is not the purpose of Wikipedia to "make generally known" a vast array of information?  Neither of the sites referenced above are pay sites or openly selling anything.
I reviewed WP:EL.  The first item under "What should be linked" says, "Articles about any organization, person, web site, or other entity should link to the official site if any."  This is an article about an organization.  When one tries to view a Wikipedia article of the Bavarian Illuminati or The Illuminati Order, one is redirected to this article.  Since the two groups mentioned above do not have their own Wikipedia article, I think it makes sense to include them (and any other valid groups) in the External Links of this article.
JustMe1776 14:00, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As I mentioned on your talk page, no it isn't, and if they are important, you've got a better idea in mentioning them in the article and linking them as refs. MSJapan 15:32, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Return the groups in the External Links section 

message: Never. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.41.245.249 (talk) 
:Please stop vandalising this article. IPSOS (talk) 13:53, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thelema, OTO .....illuminati? 

message: claiming… illuminati article. These people cannot be cited, therefore they are it are of the context. They are satanists and atheists, but not illuminati. Veriter 22:27, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But there is a citation for the claim. Therefore, you may not remove the statement. GlassFET 22:30, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

text: You make no sense whatsoever. If English is not your first language, might I respectfully suggest that you consider editing the Wikipedia which is in your native language.  GlassFET 22:39, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: New discussion

message: Exclude claiming.... fraudulent organizations.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Veriter (talk • contribs) 
*Yoda.--Isotope23 talk 18:16, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll bet this is the IP from above.  I'd say a username block if the "Veriter Institute" exists. MSJapan 01:59, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it seems pretty clear to me that it is the same individual. Just waiting for it to do something justifying filing a sockpuppet report. Of course, the puppetmaster account, , has been indef blocked so I suppose block evasion has been committed. IPSOS (talk) 02:04, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't bother...I've blocked as it is abundantly clear this is the same individual as the IP editor and very likely Truesalomon.  Given the contributions, I need to have a talk with the individual behind this account before they edit here again.--Isotope23 talk 13:39, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Farse claiming

message: visit the website Ofalli.square.site 2601:5CB:C200:FB20:6451:156C:AB3E:F37E (talk) 19:15, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  illuminati