The Philosopher’s Stone: The Search for Secret Matter

It is difficult to pinpoint his thesis.   It is easier to examine the argument and narrative as they unfold.   Strictly speaking, the question deals with the nature of the philosopher’s stone—the alchemical device allegedly used to transform base metals into gold.  Farrell looks at it from a different angle—the philosopher’s stone is the physical medium itself.    Transforming one element into another is simply putting stress on that medium.

From that thesis Farrell brings in his discussion of the occult, high physics, and Nazi technology.   First, alchemy’s occultic roots.  Farrell picks up where his Giza Death Star Destroyed left off.  Before we discuss that we should note a little background information and some of Farrell’s presuppositions.  Farrell assumes (and I think I hold to something similar) there was an ancient “high” civilization with an ancient technology.   Either this civilization experienced a civil war or fought (and lost) a war from the outside.  In either case the losing side “went underground” for much of what would later become ancient and Western history.[i] Much knowledge was lost and alchemical research is perhaps a search for that knowledge.

Farrell notes that the ancient neo-Platonic magicians spoke in alchemical concepts (and probably studied alchemy).   When St. Constantine converted the Roman Empire, alchemy and many of the schools of magic disappeared.[ii] With the rise of the Templars almost 1,000 years later, alchemy and “magic” revived in full form.  Farrell asks the very interesting question, “How did it appear without ‘missing a beat’ when most movements take decades to fully develop?”   The reasonable explanation is an underground alchemical movement.

Farrell takes this reasoning a step further.  Many alchemists were able to disguise alchemical research via Filioquist terminology.  Indeed, if one studies the hermetic and neo-platonic texts of this period, they use almost the same language and concepts of the Augustinian Filioque and doctrine of Absolute Divine Simplicity.

Farrell’s book then becomes an extended discussion in theoretical physics and will probably lose most readers.  Granted, the Nazi connections are intriguing and explain the evidence better than any other model offered by “academics,” but only the most committed reader can progress beyond this phase.

There was a very good discussion on Nikolai Kozyrev and St Maximus the Confessor.  Farrell (likely borrowing from God, History, and Dialectic) shows how Maximus’ worldview on “being and becoming” is very similar to what Kozyrev said on the nature of time.[iii]


It was really hard to follow at times.   I’ve followed Farrell’s works and have read some of his books, but many of his discussions seemed to belabor the point.


While his discussions belabored the point, they also seemed to prove the point.  His arguments are most thorough.

Further, his rhetorical skill has few equals.  He can draw out the implications of a concept or line of argument better than most.  While his discussions on theoretical physics are dizzying because most people aren’t familiar with post-Einsteinian physics, he does a good job of explaining the points.

[i] An alternative reading of this situation is that the losing side was completely destroyed and the victors were too weak to press the advantage.   Further, one could surmise that most of the knowledge was lost and only a small segment was passed down through certain “cliques.”

[ii] While it is doubtful that David Bradshaw entertains this thesis, his book Aristotle East and West suggests something similar.   He notes that many of these ancient sources went mysteriously untranslated.

[iii] Thomas Torrance said the ancient Greek scientist John Philoponos translated the concepts of St Athanasius and St Cyril of Alexandria into “physical concepts” and anticipated something like modern physics.

Preliminary Notes on Joseph Farrell’s Corpus

Almost one year ago Jay Dyer and Maximos Companik introduced me to the work of Joseph Farrell.  Farrell is a leading voice in the alternative history/science community.  Unlike many in that community, Farrell, being a theologian in the Orthodox tradition,* he has a firmer foot on reality.

Outside of his theological works, Farrell is known primarily for the Giza Death Star Trilogy.  While I am not familiar with the specific outlines of the Trilogy, I do know the general movement of the argument from his numerous radio interviews.  Presumably, the Pyramids represent a form of High Ancient physics that had planet-destroying potential.  Further, Farrell argues that a planet was destroyed.  Upon that destruction, the representatives of the “High Civilizations” encrypted their knowledge by means of different secret societies.  (The next sentence is entirely my own supposition and should in no way be assumed that Farrell holds to this view–he might or might not). Even more, the representatives of these societies, having been kept in check by the Romano-Byzantine-Tsarist monarchies, could influence civilization only in limited ways.  With the destruction of the Tsarist system, though, the fringe elements have become mainstream.

If one announces belief in Farrell’s theses, one will likely be laughed at in the academy, the church, and the conservative news outlets (already being scorned by the Left).  And granted, it is a tall drink of water.  Here are my thoughts:

  • I am willing to entertain the idea of a “High Civilization” with high physics.  This strains the traditional biblical timeline, and that does bother me somewhat, but it is not near as nefarious as positing that we came from monkeys.  Indeed, while I do not know Farrell’s personal views on evolution, his system in many ways turns it on its head.  If anything, mankind has devolved.
  • I don’t know if Farrell believes aliens are involved.  Further, I suppose one could argue that advanced civilizations colonized other planets, including a planet’s destruction, and yet these do not have to be aliens.  Aliens is the simpler answer, but since I follow Fr Seraphim Rose’s look on this, it is not an option.
  • Or maybe there is a synthesis to this dialectic.  Given the dark (almost satanic) designs of both Nazism and elements within Washington D. C. (those in the CFR calling for global government), there is a way one can maintain that the UFO appearances are both High Paleophysics/Aliens and Demonic activity (per Seraphim Rose).  Farrell has noted that when the US and the Russians tested their atom bombs in the 40s and 50s, the yield was twice as great as anticipated.  Farrell suggests, given the nature of his physics, that the atom bombs in some way opened a dimensional gateway (try not to interpret this in the kookiest manner.  I mean “gateway” in the sense that it tinkered with the physical medium–which is beyond doubt–and tremored the space-time continuum).  Around the same time there were increased UFO sightings.  Assuming the latter are demons, there is no contradiction between Farrell and Rose.
  • Along with Jim Marrs, Farrell suggests that the Nazis were able to carry their international financial scheme to South America.  Even more interesting, they had many banking connections with the Rockefeller clan, who would later be instrumental in forming the Bilderbergs, Council on Foreign Relations, and the Tri-Lateral Commission–three groups that directly rule America and the Anglo-banking world today.

There are still too many loose ends.  There are many questions I do not know the answer to.  In many ways I simply do not understand how the physics works and lacking that understanding, I cannot offer a serious critique and/or defense.  However,

  • I remain unconvinced that the people we call Egyptians built them.  I was challenged on this point last year (a commenter on the old Tesla site sent me this link), but the arguments they presented (or whatever they presented) missed the point.  I am not a Sitchenite (not sure what that is) and it seems the truth of the rebuttal assumes the proponent is a Sitchenite.  Further, people keep thinking I am saying that aliens built the Pyramids.  I have never said that.  It is quite possible the Nephilim built it–that fits in quite nicely with the biblical evidence.  In any case, positing that Egyptians built the Pyramids doesn’t account for the evidence of vertical water erosion the Pyramids and Sphinx.  Just saying…
  • Farrell is spot-on concerning secret societies and the banking international.

*I am referring to Dr Farrell’s work on St Maximus the Confessor and his magisterial God, History, and Dialectic–two works which are world changing. However, I do not know Farrell’s current status in the Orthodox Church.  My point is that Farrell is widely read in multiple traditions and has a degree from Oxford.  Understanding that the modern university system is a joke and such degrees more often than not are meaningless, it still counts for something.