Originally posted by notmindcontrolled
I haven't read all of this. There are about three books I am reading now. I have speed read through it and it is about to take the front seat.
Please everyone read and let's get a good friendly disscusion going here.
The degree as described here is presented by an anti-masonic site. vatican assasins does not fill you with confidence of a reasoned well balanced
The word J-B-O has been dropped from most if not all UK Royal Arch.
The York Site works diffently to the UK Royal Arch but I believe the basic ceremony is much the same.
for many years the Post of Grand Chaplain has been taken by the Arch Bishop of Canterbury or a high Ranking Bishop. This tradition has only been
broken in recent years. L believe in the 1970's the Angican Church and the Grand Lodge of England met and arranged to change the word used in Royal
arch to Jah....... This at the time seemed acceptable to the established Church in England.
Duncan's ritual was the words and meanings of Duncan , and may well be perfectly acceptale to a large number of Freemasons but as no man speaks alone
for Freemasonry , you can not take that as a blanket acceptance by all Freemasons.
There are also other explanations of the word J-B-L which differ greatly from the one presented here. As there is no record of the original meanings
each attributed meaning must be speculation.
I offer here an explanation from another poster on another board:
There may be some ears in here that are not ready to accept this, but an investigation of Mr. Pyle's claims concerning the name "J-B-O" are
absolutely on target. The "J" is a no-brainer, and has already been conceded by practically everyone here. The others were a bit more of a problem,
and truthfully, I thought at first you were far off the mark. The name of "O" was the one I took on first, because I had never heard a suggestion of
a Greek God named On. Nowhere in anything I have or in anything I could find online suggested any different, so I was ready to disagree totally. Then
I re-read the post and saw I had been mistaken and you were not even hinting at a "Greek God" at all, but a Greek word for the God of the Bible.
Next I tried a Septuagint concordance, and there was not even a word "on" included. A lexicon, and a New Testament Greek concordance still turned up
nothing. I was literally about to give up and refute your claim, when I thought about the Septuagint itself and figured it wouldn't hurt to look.
When I did so, checking the Exodus 3:14 reference, there it was, right before me, only instead of the Greek letter omicron (“short” o), it was the
omega (“long” o). Can’t see it in the English, but it’ll sure throw you for a loop in Greek. Then I had the idea this wasn’t really a name
for God at all, but simply a form of the Hebrew “I AM” verb, and began to research it from that angle. I ran into a snag when checking out the
reference I found from Hosea 12:4, where I found in the side-by-side English translation of the Septuagint, a mention of the “house of On.” I had
a problem because it simply was not there in my other English translation (NKJV). At least it wasn’t there until I recognized that “house of On”
was translated as “Bethel” in my English version. Took me longer than it should have, but finally realized that the translation of “Bethel”
literally means “house of God,” and so “house of On” was an equivalent. A tedious process of discovery, but found it eventually.
The “bul” was much harder, but only because I made it so by starting at the harder sources first. I first started an internet search on the hunch
that “bel” and “ba’al” may not be one and the same. All I came across were places where they are spoken of interchangeably, and a
non-canonical book about Daniel and Bel. Since I knew it was more or less an equivalent of “ba’al,” I started the search at “ba’al.” This
was a bit harder, because I had to re-familiarize with the Hebrew lettering and reverse reading. Also, even though I have a Hebrew-English Bible, it
is not one of your better versions, the Hebrew lettering is difficult to determine in places. I was not finding “ba’al” in the passage in Isaiah
54:5, nor was I finding it in a Hebrew concordance. Something finally told me to look in the Strong’s concordance and get an idea what I was l
looking for. When I did, there it was plain as could be, and I looked up the corresponding number. I found it, and it’s there, plain as you want it
to be, “ba’al” as the Hebrew word for “husband.” The word can also mean “master,” so that the verse translated comes to, “For the Lord
your Maker is your Master.” (For those interested, it is in KJV concordance as #1167. “Ba’al” with a capital is under #1168 as the Canaanite
deity. I assumed the root word may be somewhat different, but the two in the Hebrew are exactly the same.)
My conclusion is, Mr. Pyle, you have made an excellent case for a strictly biblical origin for this word that has been suggested as a combination of
gods that include a pagan fertility god adopted from the area around them, and an Egyptian sun god. The conclusions are simple:
(1) “J” = a shortened form of “Yahweh” or “Jehovah.”
(2) “B” = another form of “ba’al,” translated as “husband” throughout most of the Old Testament, but also translated as “master” in
Exodus 22:8, and Judges 19:22-23.
(3) “O” = the same name God gave Moses when questioned, “whom shall I say has sent me?” The fact that this is a name for God is clear from the
passage in Hosea 12:4, translating “house of On” from the Septuagint Greek version, which corresponds to the Hebrew “Bethel,” which means
“House of God.”
Just as feasible as Duncans but by definition it must be speculative.