It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Albert Pike on Adonai and Lucifer

page: 5
5
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 04:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mryhh
Albert Pike was a distinguished scholar. But I am clearly dealing with low level Freemasons the ones he spoke of that deserve to be misled with false interpretations.

The outer circle. No important Mason would be on this website arguing with me. But they are useful to the upper level Masons for the rabid indoctrinated perspective and willingness to spen countless hours on the internet harassing some guy about page numbers. Serious dedication.

Your actually only useful in this capacity. Your of the dwindling few who will believe everything you've been told by your lodge MASTER.

Make your masters proud and don't forget your cool aprons. And we know about your love of Phallic appendages.

I like Vaginas myself.


Look, this have gone on far enough. you kind of either have to just admit you were wrong, or you will continue to appear to be a 10 year old having a temper tantrum on the living room floor. it's not a good look.

Being wrong isn't a death sentence, it's part of life. Being able to admit you were wrong is something we all like to call "growth".

Don't be the 10 year old kid.




posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 04:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mryhh
Pikea reply to: Mryhh

But I will provide a link that will answer the question I was asked, which contains a link itself regarding the alleged hoax.

It's above.


May Peace be with you and may Light scatter the darkness before you.

Thanks to your link, I found one of the quotes you mentioned on Page 321 of Morals and Dogma:


"The Apocalypse is, to those who receive [source], the Apotheosis of that Sublime Faith which aspires to God alone, and despises all the pomps and works of Lucifer. LUCIFER, the Light-bearer! Strange and mysterious name to give to the Spirit of Darkness! Lucifer, the Son of the Morning! Is it he who bears the Light, and with its splendors intolerable blinds feeble, sensual, or selfish Souls? Doubt it not! for traditions are full of Divine Revelations and Inspirations: and Inspiration is not of one Age nor of one Creed."


But the verse pertaining to Adonai/Adonay is said to have been:


"Recorded by A.C. De La Rive, La Femme et L’enfant dans La Franc-Maconnerie Universelle, Page 588. Cited from ‘The question of freemasonry, ( 2nd edition 1986 by Edward Decker pp12-14)"

“That which we must say to the crowd is, we worship a god, but it is the god one adores without superstition. To you sovereign grand inspector general, we say this and you may repeat it to the brethren of the 32nd, 31st and 30th degrees - the Masonic religion should be by all of us initiates of the high degrees, maintained in the purity of the Luciferian doctrine. 

If Lucifer were not god, would Adonay (the God of the Christians) whose deeds prove cruelty, perfidy and hatred of man, barbarism and repulsion for science, would Adonay and His priests, calumniate Him? 

Yes, Lucifer is god, and unfortunately Adonay is also God, for the eternal law is that there is no light without shade, no beauty without ugliness, no white without black, for the absolute can only exist as two gods. Darkness being necessary for light to serve as its foil, as the pedestal is necessary to the statue, and the brake to the locomotive. 

Thus, the doctrine of Satanism is heresy, and the true and pure philosophical religion is the belief in Lucifer, the equal of Adonay, but Lucifer, god of Light and god of good, is struggling for humanity against Adonay, the god of darkness and evil."


 

 

 


According to my own personal opinion,... "Lucifer" is actually a title of Jesus, and was never meant to signify Satan or the Devil. But outside of "religion", I understand "Lucifer" to be an archetype of the Higher-Self, Intellect, Knowledge, and Freedom.

I can not give full credit to the "Adonay Quote", because I have not yet authenticated its alleged source. However, I am personally in agreement with the quote's explanation of Lucifer and Adonay, more specifically, according to a literal Bible reading with etymological and linguistic considerations of the oldest texts considered. My own personal research has shown me that Judaism was created on the polytheistic ashes of the Canaanite and Mesopotamian religions. I have long been under the opinion that El is a separate deity than YHWH/Adonai, and that YHWH/Adonai displays the complete opposite of loving and compassionate qualities expressed by Jesus.



edit on 3/13/16 by Sahabi because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 04:51 PM
link   
That link I provided was actually very good. The comment was from a letter not Morals and Dogma, I don't know why I thought that was its source.

I provided the comment, and the calling of the letter a hoax seems like the real hoax. This Taxil could have had good reason to claim that he concocted the letter. Money, a favor owed, fear, you can use your imagination. But it doesn't seem like he would come forward because people don't concoct elaborate hoaxes only to reveal the truth later. It doesn't make much sense for him to come forward unless he was pressured. If he is such a scoundrel then why should he be believed? The only thing I can gather is he was compensated for taking blame for the letter as part of a conspiracy to tarnish the image of Freemasonry, or whatever his stated motivation was, but he was compensated somehow. Someone could have had dirt on him and could have fallen out of favor with the Masons who needed a sacrificial lamb because of Christianity and the misunderstanding over Lucifer. The letter NEEDED to be a hoax because of the intoleranceof Christianity.

So they did the smart thing and Christianity lost interest. Understandable.



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 05:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Sahabi

I addressed the error about the source of the quote before reading your message and I also agree without knowing for sure with and about the quote. I read my link and I got lucky that it was a good one. And I just used a little common sense and came up with a theory of my own. But I am going to go read Morals and Dogma because the guy had good and vast resources for priestly tradition and ancient mystery religions and god and goddesses in that book that itdoesn't read like a masonic degree guide at all.



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 05:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Mryhh

Have you given Manly P. Hall's, "The Secret Teachings of All Ages", a read? From what you just said, it sounds like it'll be to your liking.



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 06:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mryhh
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I just realized you are David Icke. Sorry to blow up your spot but it just hit me. Wow, that just blew my mind.





I'm so glad that I wasn't drinking anything or it would have come out my nose....

My poor poor misguided friend....AM is MUCH better looking and far more sane than David Icke....



posted on Mar, 13 2016 @ 09:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: CIAGypsy
My poor poor misguided friend....AM is MUCH better looking and far more sane than David Icke....


Flattery will get you everywhere my dear Gypo.

The whiskey is on me.



posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 12:33 AM
link   
a reply to: Mryhh

If I remember correctly Taxil went public with admitting it's a hoax because of his agenda to make the Catholic church/even some of it's followers look stupid. If I'm not mistaken (if I am someone please correct me) Taxil wrote some story about a Freemason being turned into a Crocodile and forced to play the piano, if he did write that how does that not sound like a hoax to you?


Edit: I also think it needs to be pointed out that Augusts didn't insult you and the harassment accusation is far from the truth. You were the one who has used Insults to defend your thread and here are the examples

you claimed he's propagandize your thread
"minister of the status quo"
"Freemasons have no problem lying when it comes to defending Freemasons"
"Freemasons are secretive liars who can't be trusted in general"
"Your just an agitator"
claims he's schizophrenically attacking your claims,
"You are not honorable about it either you are very adolescent"
"it's just barbaric what you do"
"You are like a cheesy lawyer who lacks manners. Drunk at a card game"
he's ignorant,
"you are so sinister and obnoxious",
he's david icke which makes no sense since David Icke hates Freemasonry
claim the masons on this thread are low level
"Your of the dwindling few who will believe everything you've been told by your lodge MASTER."

You got caught being wrong and instead of acting like an adult you went straight to insults and ad hominem insults (even after Network dude was nice enough to give you a link to the full book so you could show everyone your quote).


edit on 14-3-2016 by nancyliedersdeaddog because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 02:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: Mryhh
But I am clearly dealing with low level Freemasons the ones he spoke of that deserve to be misled with false interpretations.

The outer circle. No important Mason would be on this website arguing with me.


What do you consider to be a low-level Mason? Or a high-level Mason? Who is in the inner circle?

If I had to ask you if the following Masons would be high level or low-level, what would you say:

Grand Officers?
Worshipful Master of at least two to three Lodges?
2nd General in the Knight's Templar?
Preceptor of the Knight's Templar?
Knight of Malta in the English Constitution?
1st Principal in the Holy Royal Arch?
Grand Officer in the Royal Arch and Secret Monitor?
Supreme Ruler in the Order of the Secret Monitor?
33° in the Scottish Rite?

I have just collectively described four of the Masons on this thread.

Apart from being the Grand Master himself, you can't get higher in Masonry than I've just described.


edit on 14/3/2016 by Saurus because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 05:08 AM
link   
a reply to: nancyliedersdeaddog

Actually, the only gentleman besides the guy who gave me the link was Sahabi. As soon as I said I don't think it was a hoax I was harassed, even after admitting I could be wrong, about the source of the comment. I didn't feel the need to defend or explain, and I responded in kind to the idiots harrassing me about page numbers because they obviously weren't asking me what page that the comment was on without already knowing that it was in a letter and not a book. They were convinced it was a hoax, I disagree, I was harassed for disagreeing, I responded appropriately to a bunch of seriously vindictive Masons who did not even notice that I was in agreement with the comment andmust hhave assumed that I was Pike bashing when that is clearly not the case. They asked me to supply the source of the comment and I did.

Did that stop the harassment? Not even close.

Masons here except for a few have not displayed any semblance of respectable behavior. All because I don't believe in the taxil story. I think calling it a hoax IS the hoax. They acted like literal babies who aren't getting their way and went into attack mode.

Self defense on my part with some humor included just because I don't actually care what( use any of my previous insults) think, or you. This thread is dead because of insane people not being able to let others have opinions that aren't theirs.

Fact.



posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 05:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Mryhh

What utter rubbish.

You declared, more than once, that it was in the book. I asked you several times for the page. You then went off on a tangent.

You were told already it wasn't in the book, yet you chose to disbelieve it and carry on with your statements.

Nobody harassed you. You were simply asked for the page. If that's harassment in your eyes then you need to man up and grow a pair.



posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 05:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Mryhh

A couple of people asking you which page it was on is far from harassment and it was you who kept saying multiple times it's in his book. So then if you believe the taxil hoax isn't a hoax then you believe the story about the Crocodile (if it is in the letter)? You can claim they were attacking you but your posts, name calling, and accusations were way over the top compared to their's. See the thing about this site is if someone makes a claim that multiple members disagree with they are more than likely going to ask the person who made the claim to back it up and if that person doesn't/keep making that same claim over and over/making other comments they are 9 times out of 10 going to keep asking that person to back up their claim. I know you have only been a member a couple of days but I hope you know that calling people names and making accusations for doing what a couple of members did earlier is only going to derail a thread, mod' will more than likely end up closing the thread, and other members might attack you back.



posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 06:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: Mryhh
...it was in a letter and not a book.


Oh, wonderful. Now that we have that cleared up maybe you can link to the actual letter.



posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 07:12 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

Yeah, but that is Taxil supposedly 'citing' a letter allegedly written by Pike. Maybe someone can link that letter.



posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 08:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: Mryhh
I responded appropriately to a bunch of seriously vindictive Masons who did not even notice that I was in agreement with the comment and must have assumed that I was Pike bashing when that is clearly not the case.


Not all Masons are in favour of Pike. Most haven't even heard of him.

It was more about the logical fallacy of trying to argue/discuss a point while we do not agree with the premise. It really had very little to do with whether or not we agree with Pike.

If you had said "I read somewhere that... 'Lucifer is God, and unfortunately so is Adonai', and a I would like to have a discussion on what this might mean" you probably would have ended up with a meaningful, and completely different discussion in a similar vein to Sahabi's posts.

But saying that Pike said "..xxxx..." introduces consequences of the outcome of the discussion as it would be perceived to be from a Masonic source.

The forum members on this thread were simply trying to point out that the source is definitely not Masonic before discussing it further. It's better to prevent a possible misconception about our Order that to try and manage one afterwards.


edit on 14/3/2016 by Saurus because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 10:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Mryhh
It's called a hoax because it was never spoken by Pike so there's no moral valuation.

a reply to: Mryhh
Except Pike did not write that quote and it is not located within the pages of Morals & Dogma. It was penned by Marie Joseph Gabriel Antoine Jogand-Pagès (aka Leo Taxil). Plus, if you want a good book by Pike I'd suggest Esoterika.

We call it a hoax because Taxil admitted that he made it all up. You can independently verify this. We don't need to lie to defend Freemasonry, the facts speak for themselves, but you are denying the facts.

You can't agree with Pike on anything since you're agreeing with a statement he never made.

Freemasonry is not subservient to Zionism.

a reply to: Mryhh
How convenient? So you read it on a site, not a book, so far all you know, the book was edited and revised for anti-Masonic reasons, but now that site is "shut down".

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus
Or even...what chapter of the book?


originally posted by: Mryhh
Albert Pike was a distinguished scholar.

Meh...he was good, but he wasn't perfect. Bro. Arturo de Hoyos has had to reprint Morals & Dogma with many corrections.


But I am clearly dealing with low level Freemasons the ones he spoke of that deserve to be misled with false interpretations.

What do you consider low level? I'm only asking because I'm running out of groups to join.


Your of the dwindling few who will believe everything you've been told by your lodge MASTER.

Most of us Masons here on ATS have served as Master of our respective Lodge(s).


Make your masters proud and don't forget your cool aprons. And we know about your love of Phallic appendages.

It's usually conspiracy theorists and anti-Masons that have the obsession with sex and sexual imagery.

a reply to: Mryhh
Because you're playing fast and loose, and you think you know more than actual Masons here on ATS.



posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 01:11 PM
link   
Reply to ksigmason:

Slow down. Relax. Take a deep breath. And pay attention.


I noticed a few things about your reply from briefly skimming it.

You probably don't care to mention that I already admitted that I made a mistake when I said this was a quote from Morals and Dogma, so obviously, anything I said that was based off my error can be disregarded. I didn't even advertise myself as that knowledgeable on, never mind more knowledgeable on Masonry, than an actual Mason. So you can claim that I am trying to do something that I am not as long as you would like, but the truth is my thread was of an inquiring nature and that rules out any claim that I am trying to appear more knowledgeable than a Mason because I am in fact asking Masons for information. So I can't be accused of claiming to be more knowledgeable than the very people I am asking for information without abandoning logic.

I noticed something about fast and loose now, this is also not a logical accusation because I have admitted to the error I made and am happy that at least I wasn't allowed to remain in error. I had also been asked what page the quote was on, which was a trick question, and I didn't answer it because I had already admitted I could be wrong so didn't at that time feel I had to explain myself to someone who was obviously asking me a trick question, which led me back to my own link whichI ggot lucky and was good. I figured out it was a letter and not from the book and I admitted I was wrong.

I did not and will not concede that it was a hoax. The human mind is capable of deceit and I don't see this man they call Leo Taxil coming forward and admitting to an elaborate deception for any reason other than he was extorted into doing it. What did he have to gain from publicly ruining his reputation is the question that demands an answer in order to deduce what really happened.

Anyone can make up a story to protect the interests of their organization and enlist a patsy to take the blame. It's a tried and true method.

The letter was not Masonic International doctrine. It was new. So I am not saying that it is accepted or doctrine and I am especially not saying it is a bad thing to say. My sentiments are identical regarding Adonai of the Jews. Don't mistake me for anti Pike. I am not trying to dishonor him, the opposite is true. I was saying it was a courageous remark.

Again, relax, I don't do fast and loose, I'm just not perfect or an expert. But I do think the true hoax is calling the letter a hoax, not the letter or the remark.

You have your right to think what you want and I am cool with you believing whatever you want.

I hope you have the best day anyone has ever had, ever.



posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 01:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Mryhh

on the chance that you care enough about this to investigate Taxil.

esotericagnosticismandfreemasonry.wordpress.com...

If not, continue to believe what you wish.



posted on Mar, 14 2016 @ 02:02 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I'm sorry, but after finding that you are indeed David Icke, I feel that our communication should be done in reptilese from hence forth.

So to you I say:
"SSSSSSSSSSSssssssss sssssss ssssss" (I hope that last part doesn't get moderated out)



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join