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.

 

ATS -> Pro Masons?

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 8 2006 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by pepsi78
No you dont get it, words tiped in a book arent like words spoke they remain.
If he wrote such interpretation about lucifer (i didint say he quoted that he folows lucifer)but i did say that he describes him.
Just like in the bible the 10th comandments are wrote on a small part of the book, but they do matter.
A word a fraze matters as long as it's wrote down.
I will show you books of math where it says 1+1=2 and it only says it once.
Your reply is pour, if you decide to come with a argument regarding the post i made earllyer then that is something else.
Has i said better earlier takeing defensive position this early will just make you look funny to the rest of the users has in hideing something or not being able to reply.
Or let your felow masons reply for you.



Also in that book so I can show you that pour doesn't mad bad but "poor" sure does. Okay I'll agree to let them if you agree to let someone push the spell check button for ya?

AGAIN I simply asked and clear to Have you READ the Book or are you quoting that which you have picked up from other sites? So let me ask you slower... Have YOU (Pepsi) read M&D?




posted on Feb, 8 2006 @ 01:31 PM
link   


Also in that book so I can show you that pour doesn't mad bad but "poor" sure does. Okay I'll agree to let them if you agree to let someone push the spell check button for ya?

It's understandable english is not my first laguege so excuse my crapy english.


AGAIN I simply asked and clear to Have you READ the Book or are you quoting that which you have picked up from other sites? So let me ask you slower... Have YOU (Pepsi) read M&D?


1 You aswer with an aswer
2 I was intrested what pike only says about lucifer specific about lucifer.
3 It's in the book, i know it so if you wish to explain his interpretation and the rest that i have wrote fine if not fine again.
4 words like war or freedom can impact the world depends who says them.

It does not matter where i picked it BECAUSE IT'S IN THE BOOK OF DOGMA&MORALE , i have talked to others and they admited it's there but they denied lucifer has satan, i see you are doing something else now, you are desmising even the fraze.

I just need a explenation of that "specific fraze" i'm curios what can i say,
and if willing you can comment on the rest of my post.

It's not like you have to aswer

It's your call.



posted on Feb, 8 2006 @ 01:53 PM
link   
Cug i dont care how many times he showes up i need you to interpret
that specific fraze.
Can you do that?
I need to know how a king radiates sun, how a king is the morning star, and how a king brings light, and how a king is the spirit of absolute darnknes, what i dont need is to know how many times he apears.

So little quotes from you guys

Lucifer a ordinary man
just a human king that radiates light like a star, and that is the esence of darknes.

Are you sure this was just a king.


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!" (Morals and Dogma, p.321)

Like albert pike says at the end of it i will say it in reverse. I doubt it.



[edit on 8-2-2006 by pepsi78]


Cug

posted on Feb, 8 2006 @ 02:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by pepsi78
I need to know how a king radiates sun, how a king is the morning star, and how a king brings light, and how a king is the spirit of absolute darnknes, what i dont need is to know how many times he apears.


That's why you were asked if you read the book. have you?

No where in the book is the word 'king' connected to Lucifer. Why do you think Lucifer is the king?



Like albert pike says at the end of it i will say it in reverse. I doubt it.


So I guess you doubt the sentence that immediately proceeds the bit you quoted.


The Apocalypse is, to those who receive the nineteenth Degree, the Apotheosis of that Sublime Faith which aspires to God alone, and despises all the pomps and works of Lucifer.



posted on Feb, 8 2006 @ 02:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cug

Originally posted by pepsi78
I need to know how a king radiates sun, how a king is the morning star, and how a king brings light, and how a king is the spirit of absolute darnknes, what i dont need is to know how many times he apears.


That's why you were asked if you read the book. have you?

No where in the book is the word 'king' connected to Lucifer. Why do you think Lucifer is the king?



Like albert pike says at the end of it i will say it in reverse. I doubt it.


So I guess you doubt the sentence that immediately proceeds the bit you quoted.


The Apocalypse is, to those who receive the nineteenth Degree, the Apotheosis of that Sublime Faith which aspires to God alone, and despises all the pomps and works of Lucifer.

Thanks that's all i expected a honest answer, your felow mason refused to aswer he was afraid this conversation was becoming a cess board.
The think is that alot of masons say that lucifer was a babilonain king which by descriptions of albert pike& the bible are incorect.
You contradict with your felow masons in a way.




[edit on 8-2-2006 by pepsi78]


Cug

posted on Feb, 8 2006 @ 02:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by pepsi78

You contradict with your felow masons in a way.


I'm not a Mason.

Really you need to focus on one subject, but anyway I see now what you were talking about. But what I think your not getting is the word Lucifer is used in many diffrent ways. It's up to you the reader to figure out how the term is used by reading it in the context that it is used in.

I have to assume you have not actually read the text in question.. it might be helpfull to at least read chapters 4 and 20 where the word Lucifer is used. there is an on-line version here www.sacred-texts.com... Post when you are done then we can at least have a discussion where everyone is on the same page.


[edit on 2/8/2006 by Cug]



posted on Feb, 8 2006 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cug
I have to assume you have not actually read the text in question.. it might be helpfull to at least read chapters 4 and 20 where the word Lucifer is used. there is an on-line version here www.sacred-texts.com... Post when you are done then we can at least have a discussion where everyone is on the same page.


[edit on 2/8/2006 by Cug]


That will most certainly take a little time, but it will be time well spent.



posted on Feb, 8 2006 @ 03:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by lost in the midwest

Originally posted by Cug
I have to assume you have not actually read the text in question.. it might be helpfull to at least read chapters 4 and 20 where the word Lucifer is used. there is an on-line version here www.sacred-texts.com... Post when you are done then we can at least have a discussion where everyone is on the same page.


[edit on 2/8/2006 by Cug]


That will most certainly take a little time, but it will be time well spent.

Lost in time i think i proved that lucifer is satan no matter what inerpretation, translation, other caracteristics describe satan has being lucifer, lucifer is a light bolb has the name says "lucifer" .
I wont go now connecting lucifer with masonary, beliving in another god if it's what you wish it's not my problem and if it is.
Has for studing that link yes it's worth it.
The only thing that would be hoest is to stop calling luci-fer some guy that was supose to be a king.
That will only make people ask if you are hidding somethink.
Lucifer being a human king in babilon is bogus after all i can reverse the table and say the same It cant be The name is latin, latin in babilonia at that time?, has you say the same it cant be latinity didint exist in the old testament so lucifer cant exist as satan.

Well i can prove to you that latin existed long ago but not in babilonia, recent descoveries show acient people talking a similar languege to latin long ago around east europe.

The name is rather modern but it's meaning comes from long ago and it had aspects before changeing like "the shiny one" "morning star" "the beauty brithfull one"
he is smart brite "enlighted" cause god made him like that (se genesis 3), he shines like a star has described in the bible but his the rong guy to serve, there can never be 2 gods.


Cug

posted on Feb, 8 2006 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by pepsi78

Lost in time i think i proved that lucifer is satan no matter what inerpretation, translation, other caracteristics describe satan has being lucifer, lucifer is a light bolb has the name says "lucifer".


Well I'm disappointed. you can't be bothered reading 2 webpages. I was hoping to hear your view on what Pike wrote.



Lucifer being a human king in babilon is bogus after all i can reverse the table and say the same It cant be The name is latin, latin in babilonia at that time?


Can you be bothered to read the Bible? It's right before the quote from Isaiah you posted.


Isaiah 14:4, 14:10-12
14:4 And you shall bear this parable against the king of Babylon, and you shall say, "How has the dominator ceased, has ceased the haughty one!
14:10 All of them shall speak up and say to you, 'Have you too become weak like us? Have you become like us?'
14:11 Your pride has been lowered into Gehinnom, the stirring of your psalteries. Maggots are spread under you, and worms cover you.
14:12 How have you fallen from heaven, Lucifer, the morning star? You have been cut down to earth, You who cast lots on nations.


See right there in the Bible itself. They are using a story about Lucifer to describe the King of Babylon.



posted on Feb, 8 2006 @ 04:06 PM
link   



Isaiah 14:4, 14:10-12
14:4 And you shall bear this parable against the king of Babylon, and you shall say, "How has the dominator ceased, has ceased the haughty one!
14:10 All of them shall speak up and say to you, 'Have you too become weak like us? Have you become like us?'

14:11 Your pride has been lowered into Gehinnom, the stirring of your psalteries. Maggots are spread under you, and worms cover you.
14:12 How have you fallen from heaven, Lucifer, the morning star? You have been cut down to earth, You who cast lots on nations.


See right there in the Bible itself. They are using a story about Lucifer to describe the King of Babylon.

Well thats how you interpret it.
It can say as well that god placed him in babilonia when he felt from heaven, how can a king be the morning star, how can he be cut to earth
if he is a king he is already on earth.

A good explenation would be that in fact he did rule over babilonia.

Here is early babilonian culture.


In fact human has described the devil with the hornes from there from the babilonian gods and took it has tradition.
It's well known babilonians would worship demons.
Sacrifices feeding babys to wood satuets with reptilian head and bird body.
But for all this i'm not sure but could be, i just dont see the bringer of light a simple king.
For the link you gave me i will take a look at it tomorrow i'm way to lame at this hour , it's late.







[edit on 8-2-2006 by pepsi78]



posted on Feb, 8 2006 @ 07:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by African459
No discussion of anti-Masonry would be complete without an extensive mention of Albert Pike. The flyleaf of a recent biography of Pike by Mason Jim Tresner describes him as "...a pioneer, a crusader for justice for Native Americans, a practical joker, a reformer, a journalist, a philosopher, a prominent Washington lawyer, and a Civil War general." For many years, he was leader of the Scottish Rite in the southern United States and he was the author of Morals and Dogma published in 1871.

Most who join Masonry have no idea who Pike was. In fact, of those who join Freemasonry, few will own a copy of any of Pike's works. And of the few who do, it will likely be Morals and Dogma - a book most admit to never having read! For about 60 years it was given to all who joined the Southern United States jurisdiction of the Scottish Rite, an appendant body of Freemasonry. Of the few who actually begin reading this ponderous 850+ page tome, few finish it and of those who do, the great majority admit that they could barely understand it. Yet despite this, anti-Masons assert that Pike and his works exert significant influence over Freemasonry today.

Morals and Dogma is a philosophical work, created by an individual who was an extraordinarily prolific writer even for an age when prolific writing was the norm. It was also fashioned in the style of Pike's time when public speaking was a high art form and Pike was known far and wide for his skills in this area. Morals and Dogma is not a manifesto (i.e. public declaration of principles, policies, or intentions) for Masonry or even for the Scottish Rite's Southern Masonic Jurisdiction. It is, rather, an attempt by Pike to provide a framework for understanding religions and philosophies of the past. Pike believed that without understanding the history of a concept, one couldn't grasp the concept itself - and thus his lengthy explanations of various religious beliefs (consistent with knowledge of those beliefs in the mid-1800s).


Nice one. Got my vote.



posted on Feb, 9 2006 @ 05:57 AM
link   
To Pepsi (AGAIN)

Please take a minute to read:
quote: Originally posted by African459
No discussion of anti-Masonry would be complete without an extensive mention of Albert Pike. The flyleaf of a recent biography of Pike by Mason Jim Tresner describes him as "...a pioneer, a crusader for justice for Native Americans, a practical joker, a reformer, a journalist, a philosopher, a prominent Washington lawyer, and a Civil War general." For many years, he was leader of the Scottish Rite in the southern United States and he was the author of Morals and Dogma published in 1871.

Most who join Masonry have no idea who Pike was. In fact, of those who join Freemasonry, few will own a copy of any of Pike's works. And of the few who do, it will likely be Morals and Dogma - a book most admit to never having read! For about 60 years it was given to all who joined the Southern United States jurisdiction of the Scottish Rite, an appendant body of Freemasonry. Of the few who actually begin reading this ponderous 850+ page tome, few finish it and of those who do, the great majority admit that they could barely understand it. Yet despite this, anti-Masons assert that Pike and his works exert significant influence over Freemasonry today.

Morals and Dogma is a philosophical work, created by an individual who was an extraordinarily prolific writer even for an age when prolific writing was the norm. It was also fashioned in the style of Pike's time when public speaking was a high art form and Pike was known far and wide for his skills in this area. Morals and Dogma is not a manifesto (i.e. public declaration of principles, policies, or intentions) for Masonry or even for the Scottish Rite's Southern Masonic Jurisdiction. It is, rather, an attempt by Pike to provide a framework for understanding religions and philosophies of the past. Pike believed that without understanding the history of a concept, one couldn't grasp the concept itself - and thus his lengthy explanations of various religious beliefs (consistent with knowledge of those beliefs in the mid-1800s).




Originally posted by pepsi78


Also in that book so I can show you that pour doesn't mad bad but "poor" sure does. Okay I'll agree to let them if you agree to let someone push the spell check button for ya?

It's understandable english is not my first laguege so excuse my crapy english.


AGAIN I simply asked and clear to Have you READ the Book or are you quoting that which you have picked up from other sites? So let me ask you slower... Have YOU (Pepsi) read M&D?


1 You aswer with an aswer
2 I was intrested what pike only says about lucifer specific about lucifer.
3 It's in the book, i know it so if you wish to explain his interpretation and the rest that i have wrote fine if not fine again.
4 words like war or freedom can impact the world depends who says them.

It does not matter where i picked it BECAUSE IT'S IN THE BOOK OF DOGMA&MORALE , i have talked to others and they admited it's there but they denied lucifer has satan, i see you are doing something else now, you are desmising even the fraze.

I just need a explenation of that "specific fraze" i'm curios what can i say,
and if willing you can comment on the rest of my post.

It's not like you have to aswer

It's your call.



posted on Feb, 9 2006 @ 07:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by pepsi78


Now for the quoting out of the book
Morals&Dogma
"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!" (Morals and Dogma, p.321)


For some reason, you cut him off in mid-sentence. The entire sentence is "Doubt it not! for traditions are full of Divine Revelations and Inspirations: and Inspiration is not of one Age nor of one Creed." This may be irrelevant (or it may not); but if we're going to discuss Pike quotations, let us at least quote the entire sentence to see what he's talking about.



He does not say he folows him or worships him corect?corect, but how ever
you take it he does quote and reconises that he is the spirit of darknes.


Actually, Pike didn't write the above, but was himself quoting the French author Eliphas levi. So, technically, you're also quoting Levi instead of Pike. In context, Levi makes, IMO, a pretty good point: Lucifer is a "strange and mysterious name" for the Church to give to its "prince of darkness".






You ca not refer to Lucifer has "IT" albert pike describes Lucifer has an entity something magnificent that brings light
No planet, not venus it's HIM and not IT has described.
Let's see what lucifer means
lucis=light and fero = bear, to bring.


From chapter 3, we see Pike again quoting Levi concerning Lucifer (from p. 102 of "Morals and Dogma"):

The true name of Satan, the Kabalists say, is that of Yahveh reversed; for Satan is not a black god, but the negation of God. The Devil is the personification of Atheism or Idolatry.

For the Initiates, this is not a Person, but a Force, created for good, but which may serve for evil. It is the instrument of Liberty or Free Will. They represent this Force, which presides over the physical generation, under the mythologic and horned form of the God PAN; thence came the he-goat of the Sabbat, brother of the Ancient Serpent, and the Light-bearer or Phosphor, of which the poets have made the false Lucifer of the legend.


Therefore, what Pike and Levi did was the exact same thing that Dr. Sigmund Freud would do 20 years later, and take the credit for it, although Pike, Levi, and the occultists discovered it first: they simply pointed out that "Satan" was the symbol for the libido, not a "person". The use of "he" is a convenient literary tool, but Pike has already stated that one should not take it literally.


Masons describe him something like this "ohhh you just dont know lucifer is not even satan he is just a fallen Babylonian king"


No, "Masons" don't say that, biblical scholars do. It has always been the case that the Hebrew scholars have known that the passage refers to the Babylonian monarch. It was only after many centuries that some Christians began to mistakenly believe it referred to the devil. I say "some" Christians because Christian Bible scholars who have gone to seminary and studied the bible in its original languages are also aware that "Lucifer" does not refer to the devil.



posted on Feb, 9 2006 @ 08:10 AM
link   
No matter if translations were rong lucifer has all aspects of satan.

And :
1 A king can not fall from heaven(he is on earth among humans)
2 Lucifer is a latin name, i dont know any king in babilonia named in latin this would brake the rule.
3 The morning stars refers to something realy bright, i just dont buy the morning star is a king.


Genesis, to know why it's the shining one.
Reference
non conspiracy site
members.tnns.net...


in Numbers 21:6 and Deut.8:15 we have 'fiery serpents'. These 'fiery serpents' are 'saraph nachash' in the Hebrew, meaning 'shinning, or burning ones' (Strong's nos. 8314 & 5175). They were shinning spirits, not literal snakes as we know in the world of flesh. God doesn't leave us guessing, for He makes it very clear who this 'serpent' of Genesis is.

Rev 12:9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.


Makeing Lucifer just a king to push the name away might have something behind it


df1

posted on Feb, 9 2006 @ 08:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by pepsi78
No matter if translations were rong lucifer has all aspects of satan.

This type of twisted response is why I keep my participation in the SS threads to a minimum. It really doesnt matter what anyone says to "you people" as you have already made up your mind, the facts be damned.



posted on Feb, 9 2006 @ 09:18 AM
link   
"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!"

Three sentences (of which two are actually exclamations), taken from a book of 861 pages with a 216 page index. Does this seem a bit disingenuous right from the start?

"Masonry is not a religion.
He who makes of it a religious belief, falsifies and denaturalizes it."
Albert Pike (1809-1891); "Morals and Dogma (p. 161)

www.masonicinfo.com...

There you are Pepsi, though you conintue to "try" but failing to destort a book of which mind you, you have NOT read for yourself to be able to comment accurately I have provided a link for you to skim over.




[edit on 9-2-2006 by African459]



posted on Feb, 9 2006 @ 09:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by African459
"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!"

Three sentences (of which two are actually exclamations), taken from a book of 861 pages with a 216 page index. Does this seem a bit disingenuous right from the start?

"Masonry is not a religion.
He who makes of it a religious belief, falsifies and denaturalizes it."
Albert Pike (1809-1891); "Morals and Dogma (p. 161)

www.masonicinfo.com...

There you are Pepsi, though you conintue to "try" but failing to destort a book of which mind you, you have NOT read for yourself to be able to comment accurately I have provided a link for you to skim over.




[edit on 9-2-2006 by African459]

African i was not even discusing if masonari is a religion or not any way not yet

This just proves how you interpret things.
I was discusing about other aspect, about the name lucifer.
Like albert pike says doubt it not Lucifer is all that.

Pike's book is not the only one


Rev 12:9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

compare the 2 pasages from the bible


14:12 How have you fallen from heaven, Lucifer, the morning star? You have been cut down to earth, You who cast lots on nations.



Give me an answer and stop this walking around the subject.

Do you think that pike describes lucifer in that quoting?
Or you dont think he describes him?
And do you think he describes him as a king or as satan.
I would apreciate a sharp answer.
It cant be in the middle it can be yes or no.
now your opinion?




[edit on 9-2-2006 by pepsi78]



posted on Feb, 9 2006 @ 10:17 AM
link   
Pepsi,

Is it the english that is getting to you? Dude, AGAIN AGAIN Lasttime Again. Read the FULL BOOK (Stop) dancing and glancing over cliff notes?

Dude where you this bad in school?

Also check out the link which discusses many of the inaccurate misquotes from M&D..

Done.. Unless you can come back after having read the book and have a clue of what you're talking bout OR have read completely all that I have quoted from the pages about Pike (the facts) and provided the link I got the information from.. This is a wrap you've tried just came up short.



[edit on 9-2-2006 by African459]



posted on Feb, 9 2006 @ 12:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by African459
Pepsi,

Is it the english that is getting to you? Dude, AGAIN AGAIN Lasttime Again. Read the FULL BOOK (Stop) dancing and glancing over cliff notes?

Dude where you this bad in school?

Also check out the link which discusses many of the inaccurate misquotes from M&D..

Done.. Unless you can come back after having read the book and have a clue of what you're talking bout OR have read completely all that I have quoted from the pages about Pike (the facts) and provided the link I got the information from.. This is a wrap you've tried just came up short.



[edit on 9-2-2006 by African459]

(dude)!!!english is not my first languege.
(dude) i asked you a simple question and you dont want to answer.
See i am not asking for my opinion, i'm asking for yours in a sharp clear answer.

[edit on 9-2-2006 by pepsi78]



posted on Feb, 9 2006 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by pepsi78

Originally posted by African459
Pepsi,

Is it the english that is getting to you? Dude, AGAIN AGAIN Lasttime Again. Read the FULL BOOK (Stop) dancing and glancing over cliff notes?

Dude where you this bad in school?

Also check out the link which discusses many of the inaccurate misquotes from M&D..

Done.. Unless you can come back after having read the book and have a clue of what you're talking bout OR have read completely all that I have quoted from the pages about Pike (the facts) and provided the link I got the information from.. This is a wrap you've tried just came up short.



[edit on 9-2-2006 by African459]

(dude)!!!english is not my first languege.
(dude) i asked you a simple question and you dont want to answer.
See i am not asking for my opinion, i'm asking for yours in a sharp clear answer.

[edit on 9-2-2006 by pepsi78]


You spent time on the short bus didn't you?

Answer still remains. READ the .... BOOK (say it slowly you'll get it). If you have questions after fully reading it. I'll be happy to go further. You came with bit and pieces of Text for a book of vase information and poetic expression of which is taken out of complete context. So until you do your studies its a wrap..

No need to end it with further cut and past. You were done after your posting on the topic.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join