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.

 

Freemasonry and sun worshipping.

page: 6
0
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 14 2005 @ 10:02 AM
link   
What you say Leveler is true, to a point. That point being Friday Oct 13th 1307.
from that point on they were hunted by the very church their brothers had died
in the hundred if not thousands for. Their Pope and Church had betrayed them.
Their Pope had ordered the very thing that as clerics they were supposed to be
immune from , Torture. These Men of faith were now cut off from their faith.
IMO these are the exact conditions that would bring about the dont ask-dont tell religious policy that holds today in Masonry. Just simply do you believe?

Another is the charge against intercourse with a brothers wife or daughter.
this might not have the impact today that it did then but there would still be
an impact. Put yourself in that time. You are giving shelter and aid to a man
who in many cases just answering a question for him could get you imprisioned and tortured. If found in your home could result in loss of property
imprisionment for you and your family and possibly burning. So what is going
to be your reaction if you walk in and this man is making the two backed beast with your daughter or your wife?

Another point to remember (to my knowledge) not all Templars were arrested. The Knights were arrested in France. They however only made up about one third of the membership. I would guess that the serving clerics
and scribes were also arrested. No mention is made however of the craftsmen,tradesmen, or others "lesser members". IMO it is to these
people that we should be looking for connections to the modern Masonic
order. If indeed Masonry is decended from Operative masons I Think this
is a place to start. While these people were members of the Templar Order
they were not Knights Templar and not privy to the "secrets" of the Order, they would provide the perfect base on which to build.

Again as I recall the 4th GM of the KT was from a Cathar family. During the
Albigensian Crusade there were members of the KT in that area from Cathar
families, and there was an influx of Cathar knights into the Order in that area.
This is also the only " crusade" that the KT refused to take an active part in.

Then there is the likelyhood of certain terms used in Masonic ritual, etc. being
rooted in old French. this may or may not be of import as until the 15th or
16th century French was the official language of the aristocracy.

Again the alleged assertion of being made "a brother to Pirates and Corsairs.
A reference to the escaped Templar Navy? Is this assertion actually a part of the ritual? Does it matter beyond a historical sphere?

So Yes there are circunstantial links between the two orders but again as you said there is nothing possitive and proveable. at this time.




posted on Mar, 14 2005 @ 11:45 AM
link   
I like that.

Men of faith. Let us remember them as they were, not for what they were claimed to be, an entirely male order that engaged in occasional sodomy.

Come on, are we going to keep denying the link between sex and occult/religion?

Catholicism's stance on sex is legendary, did I mention purposefully misguided.

If there was one thing those darn Knights were NOT, it is celibate. Well, ok, the ones they didn't want to inherit land were. So that ruled out women...

Their end was symbolic only. If you have heard of the Knights Hospitaller, you will know quite clearly that the land ownership was not transferred back to the Church, as one would ENTIRELY expect, or to the people... Dirt cheap bastards!



posted on Mar, 14 2005 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by stalkingwolf
What you say Leveler is true, to a point. That point being Friday Oct 13th 1307.
from that point on they were hunted by the very church their brothers had died
in the hundred if not thousands for. Their Pope and Church had betrayed them.



That's the whole point. They were betrayed for money.
Would that not strengthen your belief that you are the righteous and he who sold you out is the false one? We have a precedence in Biblical literature if you need to find one.
As I've already stated, there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that the Templars changed their faith. I'd love to be able to go along with the romantic notion. I'd love to be able to say, "There you go. Conclusive proof that the Freemasons are descended from the KT." It would answer some questions for me. But I can't say that because the evidence is so flimsy and it requires massive leaps in logic.

Akilles. You seem to have some sort of hang up about homosexuality and sodomy - are you trying to tell us something? Maybe you should leave your bedroom and get out into the real world a bit more?
By the way. Thanks for the U2U.



posted on Mar, 14 2005 @ 05:04 PM
link   
Yeah, I am justly against male relationships being expressed through the exchange/interaction of blood and feces, as the occult clearly states this is a form of 'magick' which I won't bother explaining to you Leveller, you know what you're doing
. Or you know whats being done to you
.

Why is it wrong that I take the accusations that atleast SOME of the Knights Templar had been guilty of this, and most likely those most involved in the sex rituals (IE. higher-ups) ruined it for the rest, as they say
.

So the ones who were tortured probably weren't guilty, but doesn't mean SOMEONE wasn't, in the Brotherly Order.

Tolerance doesn't mean you express your admiration for something, especially because most people have absolutely no clue about this kind of thing, and would rather dismiss it outright, despite the evidence of all-Male religious orders and 'magick sex' amongst each other dating to, oh, Babylon? Then Greece, Rome, and underground, until the Templars...



posted on Mar, 14 2005 @ 05:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by akilles
Yeah, I am justly against male relationships being expressed through the exchange/interaction of blood and feces, as the occult clearly states this is a form of 'magick' which I won't bother explaining to you Leveller, you know what you're doing
. Or you know whats being done to you
.




And how do you know that this goes on? Have you partaken in something that you're not telling us about?



posted on Mar, 14 2005 @ 05:17 PM
link   
Leveller, everyone knows everything.

They just forgot it. Don't act so surprised, sensitive, and shocked.



posted on Mar, 14 2005 @ 05:20 PM
link   
I can't say that I'm suprised or shocked. And sensitive? Well I've had to deal with you akilles. I guess I'm hardened to the subject of "feces" by now.
But what I would like is for you to supply me with some sort of evidence that the KT partook in ritualistic sex magick. Any evidence will do. In your own time.



posted on Mar, 14 2005 @ 05:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Leveller
But what I would like is for you to supply me with some sort of evidence that the KT partook in ritualistic sex magick. Any evidence will do. In your own time.


A link would help. For a change.



posted on Mar, 14 2005 @ 05:33 PM
link   
Yup.
And if we're laying ground rules I wanna see links with the specifics regarding the blood and "feces" claim.


At least researching that should keep him happy for an hour or two.



posted on Mar, 14 2005 @ 06:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Leveller
Yup.
And if we're laying ground rules I wanna see links with the specifics regarding the blood and "feces" claim.


At least researching that should keep him happy for an hour or two.


"Ground Rules" on how you can research Secret Societies and post, supplied by Secret Societies.



posted on Mar, 14 2005 @ 06:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThePunisher
"Ground Rules" on how you can research Secret Societies and post, supplied by Secret Societies.


Well I could post I have 3 balls, Hitler had none and Churchill had a bad case of acne. It get's to the point that supposition gets redundant. See?



posted on Mar, 14 2005 @ 06:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by akilles
Why is it wrong that I take the accusations that atleast SOME of the Knights Templar had been guilty of this, and most likely those most involved in the sex rituals (IE. higher-ups) ruined it for the rest, as they say
.

So the ones who were tortured probably weren't guilty, but doesn't mean SOMEONE wasn't, in the Brotherly Order.




Akilles, nobody is calling you a liar, yet. Just provide some solid evidence and we'll be on our way. Otherwise, admit that you have no leg to stand on.



[edit on 14-3-2005 by sebatwerk]



posted on Mar, 14 2005 @ 06:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid
Well I could post I have 3 balls, Hitler had none and Churchill had a bad case of acne. It get's to the point that supposition gets redundant. See?


What is it that you are saying is "supposition" and "redundant"?.


[edit on 14-3-2005 by ThePunisher]



posted on Jan, 10 2009 @ 05:39 PM
link   



posted on Jan, 10 2009 @ 07:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThePunisher



"Ground Rules" on how you can research Secret Societies and post, supplied by Secret Societies.


This is assuming, that in fact, these societies are indeed secret. Is it, hypothetically, possible that they have no need to disquise themselves?



posted on Mar, 15 2011 @ 05:57 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join