The Master Masons and the Origins of Modern Religion

Has anyone read the Hiram Key? Excellent read.

The Hiram Key

This book really changed the way I thought about the world. It connects Stonehenge and the Groved Ware Peoples to Enoch and the Israelites, it connects the worship of astrology and Pagan mythology to Jesus as a Messiah and Christianity in whole.

This book alleges that the Christianity we know today

is shown to be a political invention that has little connection with the man we call 'Christ.'

The authors also believe that the true teachings of Yeshua (Jesus) were lost with the destruction of Solomon's temple in Jerusalem, unearthed by the Knights Templar, and are now buried beneath the controversial site known as Roslin (Roslyn) Chapel. What are your thoughts?

The author of the book is NOTORIOUS for making conclusions based on assumptions. For example, in the Hiram Key he finds a mummy which died from blows to the head, neck and chest. In the old masonic legend, Hiram Abiff (the Master builder of Solomon's Temple) is killed by blows to the head, neck and chest, so the author concludes that the mummy is Hiram Abiff! He claims it as a fact!!! He then proceed to come to other conclusions based on THAT assumption!!! It's so ridiculous!

I couldn't read it all the way through because it was so bad. The author's a joke among real investigators.

[edit on 13-7-2005 by sebatwerk]

whoops...sry about that.

lol good fiction tho

ya he is pretty horrible. he even made claims of a bible versus in regards to Hiram a biff dieing and losing the masters secret. it was the first book i really read about masons.. and I didn't find it true even then when I had no knowledge on masonary. But it was a good read... I wouldn't use it for research... maybe a movie tho........

Originally posted by sebatwerk
The author of the book is NOTORIOUS for making conclusions based on assumptions. For example, in the Hiram Key he finds a mummy which died from blows to the head, neck and chest. In the old masonic legend, Hiram Abiff (the Master builder of Solomon's Temple) is killed by blows to the head, neck and chest, so the author concludes that the mummy is Hiram Abiff! He claims it as a fact!!! He then proceed to come to other conclusions based on THAT assumption!!! It's so ridiculous!

I couldn't read it all the way through because it was so bad. The author's a joke among real investigators.

[edit on 13-7-2005 by sebatwerk]

Okay, you have convinced me, Ill read it

Well, I just got a slap on the rist " A member of the forum staff, kinglizard, has noticed your use of excessive quoting in the thread, The Master Masons and the Origins of Modern Religion. "

Now, it was necessary to quote the entire message to show the extreme bias this member has. If sebatwerk says you shouldnt read something, by GOD, you shouldnt. To take only a small portion of the text and quote it would be opening myself to charges of taking his words out of context.

Kinglizard, I recieved your u2u about 15 seconds after the post. You think you could take a little more time in the future? Or, are you a mason too?

Originally posted by All Seeing Eye
Now, it was necessary to quote the entire message to show the extreme bias this member has. If sebatwerk says you shouldnt read something, by GOD, you shouldnt.

How about you not be a troll and just read what I said? I gave specific reasons as to why this author is not good. He has written many books favorable to Freemasonry, but he simply doesn't differentiate between fact and assumption (just like many users here on ATS).

Kinglizard, I recieved your u2u about 15 seconds after the post. You think you could take a little more time in the future? Or, are you a mason too?

Are you going to be like Akilles now? Everytime a moderator does something you don't like, just accuse them of being a Freemason? How childish.

Originally posted by All Seeing Eye
Kinglizard, I recieved your u2u about 15 seconds after the post. You think you could take a little more time in the future? Or, are you a mason too?

And you should know that you will receive it again...and again if you "big quote" again...and again. The rules are enforced the same way across the board. Period.....No Excuses......

Fortimus, sorry to stray away from the topic. Some people just dont want to discuss it and will go to any leanth to disrup it.

So, 6 lines is a BIG QUOTE? My God, what would you say 20 or 30 lines is? Sorry to be disrespectful, but LAME is the only thing I can say!

The Book? Yep, Im gonna read it, as I would suggest to anyone with a open mind. And I would go even further and say that anyone who tells you not to read something should be avoided like the pluage!

Is this considered "BIG QUOTING"? www.abovetopsecret.com...

Whats fair, is fair!


[edit on 25-7-2005 by All Seeing Eye]

Sebatwerk did not say you should not read it. Anyone (anti or pro Freemasonry) will see that is has HUGE gaps ( you could drive a freightliner pulling triples thru them). He mearly stated what he saw wrong with the book. If anything, you would think the "NWO illumiati super high degree masons" would be behind this book. It is mearly a few Freemasons trying to find ties to the Knights Templar and Jesus Christ that are made thru HUGE assumptions.

Huge assumptions or not, assumptions are the basis for learning. I think one of the first assumptions of our childhood was that teachers knew what they were talking about. It is through the proccess of questioning assumptions that we can learn. To dispell any assumption without first examining it is absolutly rediculious. And to examin the assumptions you suggest, WE HAVE TO READ IT FIRST

Originally posted by All Seeing Eye
Huge assumptions or not, assumptions are the basis for learning. I think one of the first assumptions of our childhood was that teachers knew what they were talking about. It is through the proccess of questioning assumptions that we can learn. To dispell any assumption without first examining it is absolutly rediculious. And to examin the assumptions you suggest, WE HAVE TO READ IT FIRST

I prefer knowing for sure or not if my teachers are full of it. This is done through investigation of FACTS, not through assumptions.

Its rather silly to suppose that Freemasonry started with Hiram King of Tyre and King Solomon asGrand Masters and Hiram Abif as Master of Work witha lodge operating in the temple.

I mean, first off, if it were true, then why a bible? Why not a book of masonic teachings? But no, we have nothing like that.

And then after the temple is destroyed, everyone forgets all about masonry, and it just so happens that a military order of warrior-monks rummaging thru the ruins of the tmple find them, can read them, and actually agree with them? And how could the mason';s have invented christianity if masonry was forgotten until the Templars, yet the templars and the european world was already christianized?

Also, this seem to be depenant upon the Templars taking masonry back to europe, keeping it a secret, then, after dissolution going underground and pretending to be stonemasons, or even dressing up what Temple Masonry was about as if it were relevant to stonemasons; rather than, say, militant knights? And then it just goes unnoticed for a few hundred years until we start finding the Constitutions of masonry unions in england?? Which only after another hundred years or so become speculative moder Freemasonry?

I don't think a person can reasonably accept those conclusions, even without knowing that the 'higher' degrees were invented in the mid 1700's!

Yes, but you can only find facts after you have assumed there are fact to uncover. Assumptions are great tools if used correctly. Assumptions do not always lead to incorrect lines of thought, far from it.

Originally posted by All Seeing Eye
Well, I just got a slap on the rist

You know, its funny, because I was just about to hit the 'big quote' warn here right before I read this.

Now, it was necessary to quote the entire message to show the extreme bias this member has.

I just want to address this in the forum, rather than u2u, so that others can read this. But understand that I am not trying to single you out, this is something that comes up with lots of people.

Its not necessary to quote entire posts. The post is available for everyone to see directly above. Usually, all that is needed is a small snippet of the post, or even just the person's name in the subject line to make sure that they know you are talking to them. People can look up-thread to see what specifically was said, and also most readers aren't following the converstation as it develops, but rather come in afterwards.

Obviously its subjective tho, but anything thats a large portion of a post is 'open' to being 'big quoted'.

To take only a small portion of the text and quote it would be opening myself to charges of taking his words out of context.

That would be a bunkum charge, no one would buy it.

Or, are you a mason too?

We're all mason's here. At least everyone that has access to the Secret Socieites forum. Actually, intrepid is an Illuminati, and I'm in the EAC, but its all under one big umbrella really.
Ok I'm obviously lying, and there is no EAC either.

s this considered "BIG QUOTING"? www.abovetopsecret.com...

post id: 1582240? What makes you think that it hasn't been hit up with it? Remember, little warns are not shown. Its a full post quote, so itsdefinitly open to being hit up. I don't even know if its been hit up or not.

And to examin the assumptions you suggest, WE HAVE TO READ IT FIRST

Indeed, however it looks liek Sebatwerk has read the book, and he's a generally honest and intelligent person, so his assesment is likely to be accurate. Heck, even the person that read the book and opened the thread with it seemd to reaslize that it was bunkum, or that its arguements and supports weren't as strong as it appeared in a perhaps too credulous initial reading. Que sera sera, some things are more convincing the first time we read them. A critical eye is usually helpful, and I think you will agree that sebatwerk can be critical!

Anyway, anyone that read the book or is familiar with these arguements that I outlined in my above post is more than welcome to point out where I have made an error and howso.

Originally posted by All Seeing Eye

Well, I just got a slap on the rist "

You've got a rist? Wow! Your wrists must be tired! (BWA HA HA HA HA)

Okay, you have convinced me, Ill read it

You DO that! It's a truly wonderful read. VERY interesting. Easy to follow (most 6th graders can even read it with relative ease) It's also VERY fictiticious (please note the lack of proper references in the form of footnotes, endnotes, etc. that any legitimate researcher would include and the abundance of speculation and conjecture stated as fact...much like several of the posters on this forum)

So if you'll do us the favor of reading this book (which was published in 1996...so I'm really surprised you've never heard of it until now...what with you being "all seeing" and all) and if you can TRULY recommend it, then it will be sufficient reason for any thinking poster on this forum to avoid it.

Keep us posted! I can hardly wait!

I picked up a copy ( as a novelty) at B&N for ~$10 about 6 months ago.

Originally posted by wiggy
I picked up a copy ( as a novelty) at B&N for ~$10 about 6 months ago.

Well wiggy, it's too bad that you helped support those two clowns (if I still had my copy that was given to me, I'd mail it to you free)

Oh well...like I said...it IS entertaining (much like the DaVinci Code) but history it "ain't"

HOWEVER, if you tear out the first 36 pages, bend the front board in half and kick it with the heel of your shoe it makes a WONDERFUL door-stop! (It's not weather-proof, though...but then again, who cares...)

Originally posted by senrak


Well wiggy, it's too bad that you helped support those two clowns (if I still had my copy that was given to me, I'd mail it to you free)

Edited for the reading pleasure of nygdan.

I belive it was from B&N press, and I assume they pay the authors a set amount, once their book looses popularity( or credibility) to publish as many as they want. They may have recieved royalties, but not too much. It does make a nice beer coaster

[edit on 25-7-2005 by wiggy]

Yeah, I just couldn't finish the whole thing because it was so bad. I got about 3/4 of the way through, but once the authors started using previous assumptions as the factual basis for further assumptions then I just couldn't take it anymore and had to throw in the towel. Knight and Lomas, both Freemasons (regretfully), may be great story-tellers; but they sure as hell aren't researchers!