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 the Roman Spirit

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 14 2006 @ 08:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Masonic Light

Originally posted by markusjharper

Pike was directly involved in the assassination and that is why he was hiding in Canada.


Sorry just for my own personal curiosity. What degree mason are you?




posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 08:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by markusjharper
I know that Pike was involved in the assassination of Lincoln and that your point is ridiculous;


Ok, I'll ask yet again: how exactly do you "know" this?



thus the reason for why Pike was a wanted man in the first place,


Baloney. Pike was never implicated in any crime other than treason, which was a generalized charge made against all Confederate officers and statesmen. He was later cleared of these charges, as were Lee, Beauregard, and the rest.


not to mention the brutal nature in which he went about “serving mankind” with his blessed trained Indians.


This statement simply demonstrates naivety. Pike was a soldier, as were the Indians under his command, and they were engaged in war. You expected them to meet their aggressors on the field with flowers, while singing "Kum-Ba-Ya"?



Are you trying to imply that en.wikipedia.org... has it backwards? It seems clear to me that it is YOU who are fishing and trying to imply that Pike was such a Saint as to lose his respect for his peers and thus leave and ONLY return after being redeemed and made a 32 Mason by a dirty President. Hmm, seems to make no sense for someone in non-hiding.


Not true. To begin with, the Wikipedia article says nothing about Pike "running and hiding", as you claim it does. It says:

Pike faced the postwar years unable to earn the trust either of his former comrades or of the Union victors, and subsequently relocated to New York and later to Canada. He was however at length given a formal pardon by Andrew Johnson on August 30, 1865, and therefore enabled to continue his career in public life, becoming an associate justice of the Arkansas supreme court, later practicing law in Memphis, Tennessee from 1867-8 (where he also served as editor of the Memphis Appeal), and finally moving his law office to Washington, D.C. in 1870, becoming editor of the Patriot newspaper.

Your charge that Pike gave Johnson the 32° in return for a pardon is likewise false. To begin with, Johnson never received the 32° (but Pike did confer the 14° upon him). Johnson was already eligible for the 14°, and Pike conferred the degree out of courtesy.

Secondly, Johnson pardoned hundreds of the Confederates: you deceitfully try to insinuate that he pardoned Pike alone.




I think you’re fibbing because if you had indeed read it, you would have noted that she (Helena Petrovna Blavatsky) was incredibly clairvoyant and as a WOMAN medium, she was part of a huge change taking place in the 1800’s that was both rare and powerful.


Blavatsky got a lot of publicity. However, publicity in itself does not redeem one from being a fraud: actually, it encourages it.



You are acting like a typical materialist, sir!


Apparently, your definition of "materialist" is "realist who refers to actual facts". If this is the case, then yes, I'm a "materialist".


You know nothing of Masonry and I bet you think that Atlantis never existed; ironically the essence of Masonry was the understanding of the new Atlantis and new found freedom.


I know enough about Masonry to get by: at least I don't make up stories about innocent people killing off presidents. Secondly, as to Atlantis, all evidence indicates that it was invented as a mythological allegory by Plato. It was Plato who first mentioned Atlantis, and only then in elaborating on the ideal state, which he first described in the Republic. Have you ever read Plato, or even heard of him?


Nonsense! The Jesuits were ONE with Rothschild and the Pope of Rome was basically in debt to Rothschild since the 1800’s and they to this VERY day want to kill the Reformers. They supported Communism 100% and support Israel (as many do, good or bad) and we know of the Jesuit rat-lines, during WW2. I am not bashing Catholics here but truth is the truth.


That makes absolutely no sense. Do you even know what Communism is?


We are coming up to a time when you shall see what is anti-Christian!


To be honest, I couldn't care less who is a Christian and who is opposed to Christianity. With only a generally few exceptions, I'm not greatly impressed with the fruits of the Christian sect. Nietzsche once called Christianity the "largest fraud ever to scourge the spirit of man". This may or may not be an exagerration, but your insistence on using fictions and false charges to spread your "gospel" doesn't help the credibility of your faith at all.



posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 08:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by count zero

Sorry just for my own personal curiosity. What degree mason are you?


I'm a Master Mason, Past Master in my Lodge, 32° in the Scottish Rite, Knight Templar in the York Rite, and hold various side and honorary degrees.



posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 09:34 AM
link   


www.monju.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk...
The United States was self-consciously founded by Freemasons and non-Freemasons with a New Rome in mind.

Yes, and? Whats wrong with that? The Founders looked to Rome for their model and inspiration, the Roman Republic. Its a good model and a good inspiration, not a bad one. As far as masonry's involvement in the American Revolution, the Italian Revolution, the Latin American Revolutions, even the French Revolution, without those revolutions america'd be ruled by a king, italy by the pope, and latin america by spanish global emperors.


The article seems to do nothing more than say that there are bad guys who are imperialistic oligarchs and good guys who are democrats, and that the freemasons are more or less the bad guys. Then it just cites some groups as being the bad guys and other groups as being the good guys, which is mostly just a bunch of 'glosses' and characterizations.
Why is the ostensibly more democratic Confederacy the 'imperialists' compared to the centralized, federalized, and anti-constitutional rule of Lincoln, for example?

As far as just finding out the influence of masonry on american history, and other details of history, allow me to shake your hand and say 'congratulations and welcome to real history, not text book history'. That article cites the work of Bullock. If you want to get more information about history, I'd suggest reading some of his articles, the author of that page seems to rely especially heavily upon him.



posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 04:31 PM
link   
See Pike's references to Lucifer in 'Morals and Dogma'. See 'Morals and Dogma' for sale in Masonic websites. Buy it for the sake of verification.

Why Freemasonry's apologetics hate for the practice to be called a religion, I shall never know (unless you call this a science.)

Considering where the knowlegeable apply for service, being Christian-friendly isn't much a recruitment tactic, is it?

At it's simplest, what do you believe is gnosticism's basic philosophy -
Per aspera ad astra ?



[edit on 15-2-2006 by pdo3]



posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 11:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Masonic Light

Originally posted by count zero

Sorry just for my own personal curiosity. What degree mason are you?


I'm a Master Mason, Past Master in my Lodge, 32° in the Scottish Rite, Knight Templar in the York Rite, and hold various side and honorary degrees.

Then I will never listen to a word that comes out of your mouth...
Thank you for clarifying your Satanic Ties.
Congratualtions on your side and honorary degrees.
I don't care.
Who is JaBulOn?



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 02:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by count zero

Originally posted by Masonic Light

Originally posted by count zero

Sorry just for my own personal curiosity. What degree mason are you?


I'm a Master Mason, Past Master in my Lodge, 32° in the Scottish Rite, Knight Templar in the York Rite, and hold various side and honorary degrees.


Then I will never listen to a word that comes out of your mouth...
Thank you for clarifying your Satanic Ties.
Congratualtions on your side and honorary degrees.
I don't care.
Who is JaBulOn?


Good lord......why is it that the ones who are supposedly 'non-evil' (according to their ignorant beliefs) are the vicious, spiteful, rude, and nasty ones? I think that fact alone speaks for itself. There truly isn't any need for this kind of attitude! Its just plain obnoxious.

Thats proof enough for me of who has evil in their minds and hearts.
And it isn't the Mason's.




posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 03:29 AM
link   
count zero,

Masonry has degenerated into a form of materialism that is very dangerous. You are wise to stay far away from any lodge that does not admit to anything more than a place where everyone just meets and brings their own beliefs and does good deeds. Of course, it sounds harmless and all; I mean who does bring to a lodge or even a church for that matter, exactly the same tastes, inclinations, beliefs etc? But then again, I see few Christians defending the established "church lodge', as I do Masons. Real Christians moreover, tend to defend "Christianity" and not the church, per se.

Here now is the real issue - the point which so few Masons seem able to grasp and the reason why I chose not to continue debating with them:

1) When we speak of their historical religious ties, based on either symbolism or actions, they deny it. It is only but a lodge (they say) where good men meet and do good deeds. Yet, I know personally that Masonry was not only connected to the Templar’s but it was in fact aligned with, and supported the mystical Protestant sects. In other forums, I have spent weeks engaged in debate with high-level Masons who continue to tell me that Freemasonry has no roots to the Templar’s, or Rosicrucian’s and that their symbols are not in any way connected to the early Solomon teachings or builders either. Of course, in them saying so, they remind you that you are not a Mason and they are, without first being sure to find out who they are talking to.

I have spend a great deal of time trying to convince them and eventually we reach a point of understanding which may be of particular interest to those with a keen mind - we find that those same defenders of Masonry eventually agree that "yes", there are ancient ties to religion, but of course they tell us, nothing is KNOWN FOR SURE and we may never know? Yet, we move on to trying to speak about the very definition of this so-called "religion" connection. Thus, naturally it follows that we must now spend hours; peddling through semantics to explain "what exactly is religion" and thus the Masons will always win because truly, religion is a problem to begin with and “spirituality” is often something else entirely!

However, when the Masons do agree that there may be some connection to "spirituality" and masonry, they at this point move to remind us that every lodge has its own flavor and that every mason is as unique as art itself. Now, without shedding tears for such glorious terms as this, I can agree with them, however if you can now see where I am heading with this, they will next try and oppose any wrong doing of an individual mason to masonry itself because even if a member is traced to a lodge (even if those members are in very high rank) their actions are not necessarily incumbent of the lodge as a whole. Of course, once again, dear friend, they WIN.

The very point I make now, is that in fact they rarely take any responsively for anything at all! And those who associate themselves with such apathetic materialism are not worth wasting much time over. Once again, Masonry created America and was at one time Christianized and later became un-Christianized......yet Masons find this notion insulting; even disgusted by it! Even though there are loads of books written by Christian-Masons in those days, once again they win, because those Christian-masons the masons will of course tell us, were not representing true masonry anyhow, thus the author was just ignorant or mistaken.

Even still the Pythagoras symbols are used...even still the Solomon symbols...and the rites but they are nothing at all; they are to be understood only in the "materialist" nature...they will exclaim "there is nothing at all religious connected in masonry". Ironically, many Masons remind us that we just don’t yet know "the secret". This in of by itself, should raise an eyebrow as to the very reason for why there need be any secret found in something materialistic in nature in the first place.

Truly, I will use the Masons logic and remind them ALL that the problem here is not the Mason himself, the problem here is the persons calling themselves "Masons" are "materialists" – thus their degrees are useless and amount to pride and egoism, since it is nothing more than a lodge anyhow and they insult the true masons - who may in fact, be posting here and very frustrated.



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 07:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by count zero

Then I will never listen to a word that comes out of your mouth...


"Ignore" is the root word of "ignorance", which, at least theoretically, this website exists to deny.


Thank you for clarifying your Satanic Ties.


My pleasure. If you're free next Tuesday, drop on by for the black mass.


Congratualtions on your side and honorary degrees.


Thanks.


I don't care.


Right back atcha, daddy-o.


Who is JaBulOn?


I thougt you didn't care?



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 07:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by pdo3
See Pike's references to Lucifer in 'Morals and Dogma'. See 'Morals and Dogma' for sale in Masonic websites. Buy it for the sake of verification.


Pike's comments on Lucifer (which were actually not Pike's comments at all, but quotations from Eliphas Levi) have been rehashed on this forum in other threads about a million times. Please see my comments on them in the older threads.


Why Freemasonry's apologetics hate for the practice to be called a religion, I shall never know (unless you call this a science.)


We hate Masonry to be called a religion because it isn't one. Masons do not consider Masonry to be their religion.


Considering where the knowlegeable apply for service, being Christian-friendly isn't much a recruitment tactic, is it?


Here, you've lost me: could you elaborate?


At it's simplest, what do you believe is gnosticism's basic philosophy -
Per aspera ad astra ?


Personally, I consider Gnosticism to be an outdated superstition, irrelevant to modern times and problems. If it's any consolation I feel basically the same way about most other popular religions.



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 07:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by markusjharper
Yet, I know personally that Masonry was not only connected to the Templar’s but it was in fact aligned with, and supported the mystical Protestant sects.


Your inability to answer my previous questions is duly noted. However, since you're going back to your same old line, I'll ask again, for the third time: How do you "know"? And know "personally", at that? Who told you? Were you there? Do you get your information from a "spirit guide"? What's the story?



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 12:42 PM
link   
pdo3: See Pike's references to Lucifer in 'Morals and Dogma'. See 'Morals and Dogma' for sale in Masonic websites. Buy it for the sake of verification.

Masonic Light: Pike's comments on Lucifer (which were actually not Pike's comments at all, but quotations from Eliphas Levi) have been rehashed on this forum in other threads about a million times. Please see my comments on them in the older threads.

pdo3: Does he mention Lucifer, or not? If he does, what does he say?
My description made clear that I was not quoting from this site, but from a publication endorsed by your organization. If I show you pictures of me holding the actual book, will those be fake, too?


pdo3:Why Freemasonry's apologetics hate for the practice to be called a religion, I shall never know (unless you call this a science.)


Masonic Light: We hate Masonry to be called a religion because it isn't one. Masons do not consider Masonry to be their religion.

pdo3: Yes, Masons call their practice truth, because it is not superstitious. For this reason, a Mason will absolutely experience congnitive disonnance to the point of psychophobia if he is shown an undeniable miracle which was not precipitated meticulously, for this would be unreliable. Not scientific enough.

pdo3: Considering where the knowlegeable apply for service, being Christian-friendly isn't much a recruitment tactic, is it?

Masonic Light: Here, you've lost me: could you elaborate?

pdo3: The neophyte goes through a series of tests, but who has examined the testers?

pdo3: At it's simplest, what do you believe is gnosticism's basic philosophy -
Per aspera ad astra ?


Masonic Light: Personally, I consider Gnosticism to be an outdated superstition, irrelevant to modern times and problems. If it's any consolation I feel basically the same way about most other popular religions.

pdo3: This is no consolation. You commented on gnosticism. I asked an objective question, and you reply with sentiments.



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 03:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by pdo3
Does he mention Lucifer, or not? If he does, what does he say?
My description made clear that I was not quoting from this site, but from a publication endorsed by your organization. If I show you pictures of me holding the actual book, will those be fake, too?


It seems like you're trying to accuse me of something here, but I have no idea of what. What do you mean by "fake too"? Who said anything about fakery? You asked a question about Pike's use of Lucifer in his writings, and I simply referred you to previous comments made on this forum.

Back to your original question, concerning Pike's use of Lucifer, here are the quotations taken from Pike's book "Morals and Dogma", where he uses the word "Lucifer":

Hypocrisy is the homage that vice and wrong pay to virtue and justice. It is Satan attempting to clothe himself in the angelic vesture of light. It is equally detestable in morals, politics, and religion; in the man and in the nation. To do injustice under the pretence of equity and fairness; to reprove vice in public and commit it in private; to pretend to charitable opinion and censoriously condemn; to profess the principles of Masonic beneficence, and close the ear to the wail of distress and the cry of suffering; to eulogize the intelligence of the people, and plot to deceive and be-tray them by means of their ignorance and simplicity; to prate of purity, and peculate; of honor, and basely abandon a sinking cause; of disinterestedness, and sell one's vote for place and power, are hypocrisies as common as they are infamous and disgraceful. To steal the livery of the Court of God to serve the Devil withal; to pretend to believe in a God of mercy and a Redeemer of love, and persecute those of a different faith; to devour widows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayers; to preach continence, and wallow in lust; to inculcate humility, and in pride surpass Lucifer; to pay tithe, and omit the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy and faith; to strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel; to make clean the outside of the cup and platter, keeping them full within of extortion and excess; to appear outwardly righteous unto men, but within be full of hypocrisy and iniquity, is indeed to be like unto whited sepulchres, which appear beautiful outward, but are within full of bones of the dead and of all uncleanness. - p. 73

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.
- P. 102

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. 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. Plato and Philo, also, were inspired. - P. 321

It is WISDOM that, in the Kabalistic Books of the Proverbs and Ecclesiasticus, is the Creative Agent of God. Elsewhere in the Hebrew writings it is דבר יהוה, Debar Iahavah, the Word of God. It is by His uttered Word that God reveals Himself to us; not alone in the visible and invisible but intellectual creation, but also in our convictions, consciousness, and instincts. Hence it is that certain beliefs are universal. The conviction of all men that God is good led to a belief in a Devil, the fallen Lucifer or Light-bearer, Shaitan the Adversary, Ahriman and Tuphōn, as an attempt to explain the existence of Evil, and make it consistent with the Infinite Power, Wisdom, and Benevolence of God. P. 323-324

Naturally, as is the case with all books of philosophy, it is necessary to read the entire thing to understand the concepts behind it, instead of concentrating solely on various extracts and quotes.



Yes, Masons call their practice truth, because it is not superstitious. For this reason, a Mason will absolutely experience congnitive disonnance to the point of psychophobia if he is shown an undeniable miracle which was not precipitated meticulously, for this would be unreliable. Not scientific enough.


Well, I don't know if this would be the case with all Masons, but I personally would probably flip if you could demonstrate a miracle.




The neophyte goes through a series of tests, but who has examined the testers?


If you mean Freemasonry, the only "tests" that are undergone are examinations in the basics of Masonic ritual. This type of examination is purely objective, and can be learned by anyone of at least average intelligence in a relatively short period of time, providing one studies.


This is no consolation. You commented on gnosticism. I asked an objective question, and you reply with sentiments.


When did I comment on Gnosticism?

[edit on 16-2-2006 by Masonic Light]



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 04:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by count zero

Originally posted by Masonic Light

Originally posted by count zero

Sorry just for my own personal curiosity. What degree mason are you?


I'm a Master Mason, Past Master in my Lodge, 32° in the Scottish Rite, Knight Templar in the York Rite, and hold various side and honorary degrees.

Then I will never listen to a word that comes out of your mouth...
Thank you for clarifying your Satanic Ties.
Congratualtions on your side and honorary degrees.
I don't care.
Who is JaBulOn?


Oh grow up. You asked, man...

And now you expect him to answer more of your questions?


Nice one, troll.



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 06:36 PM
link   
It seems that a person of such importance would have better things to do than debunk hotheads, but this conversation will end if you keep leaving the more functional parts of the work out, Masonic Light. (I would encourage noone to simply take me at my word on this.)

Who was the inventor of these rituals, and for what purpose?

The intepretations of the symbolism are verified by openly acknowleged Freemasons, whose works are sold by many lodges. Will anyone else's interpretations be as adequate as yours if their opinions are politically incorrect?



[edit on 16-2-2006 by pdo3]



posted on Feb, 17 2006 @ 07:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by pdo3
It seems that a person of such importance would have better things to do than debunk hotheads, but this conversation will end if you keep leaving the more functional parts of the work out, Masonic Light. (I would encourage noone to simply take me at my word on this.)


Again, I'm not quite sure what you're talking about. If you're threatening to end this conversation because you don't like my answers, then, believe it or not, I probably won't lose much sleep over it.


Who was the inventor of these rituals, and for what purpose?


The modern Masonic rituals can trace their ancestry to Jeremy Cross and Thomas Webb, who in turn based their work on earlier models by Rev. James Anderson, John Desaguliers, and possibly Elias Ashmole. And, once again in turn, they based their work on the earlier, medieval rituals of the stonemason guilds. The original purpose of the ritual was to initiate one into the guild as an apprentice to learn the craft of stonemasonry. The later purpose was to communicate the ideals and values of the Enlightenment.


The intepretations of the symbolism are verified by openly acknowleged Freemasons, whose works are sold by many lodges. Will anyone else's interpretations be as adequate as yours if their opinions are politically incorrect?


The interpretations of the symbols are found in the monitors of the Grand Lodges. However, many Masonic authors such as Pike, Mackey, Hall, etc., all begin under the premise that these interpretations are wrong. They then attempt to "correct" the situation by telling us the "real" meanings, i.e., their own.

Whether one accepts the official interpretations as given in the monitors, or rejects them as superficial, is a matter of personal philosophy and opinion. Therefore, which interpretations are "more adequate" is naturally a subjective question.

[edit on 17-2-2006 by Masonic Light]



posted on Feb, 17 2006 @ 01:00 PM
link   
Then, objectively speaking, the lodges are misled when continuing to call some correctors honorary members?



[edit on 17-2-2006 by pdo3]



posted on Feb, 17 2006 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by count zero

Originally posted by Masonic Light

Originally posted by count zero
Sorry just for my own personal curiosity. What degree mason are you?

I'm a Master Mason, Past Master in my Lodge, 32° in the Scottish Rite, Knight Templar in the York Rite, and hold various side and honorary degrees.

Then I will never listen to a word that comes out of your mouth...
Thank you for clarifying your Satanic Ties.




I don't care. Who is JaBulOn?

yeesh, its not like there isn't an entire thread on that already. I thought you didn't care and couldn't trust a word out of his mouth? Seems like you are the one talking out both sides of your mouth here.



posted on Feb, 17 2006 @ 02:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by pdo3
Then, objectively speaking, the lodges are misled when continuing to call some correctors honorary members?


What "correctors" are "honorary members", and what does such "honorary membership" have to do with "lodges being misled"?



posted on Feb, 17 2006 @ 04:42 PM
link   

Whether one accepts the official interpretations as given in the monitors, or rejects them as superficial, is a matter of personal philosophy and opinion. Therefore, which interpretations are "more adequate" is naturally a subjective question


As I have mentioned elsewhere, an answer such like this is so very convenient - neither accept, nor deny anything. It's always of the ambiguous nature. Albert Pike and Manly Hall, who amongst many others wrote about the roots of Masonry. ML will remind us that Pike had a different opinion and second that Manly Hall was not even a Mason until after he wrote his work on Freemasonry. Yet the same mason (ML), considers anything of the esoteric nature "quackery" and at the same time is so caught into materialistic thinking himself, that he cannot fathom that notion both Albert Pike and Hall were of an esoteric understanding, an understanding often lost in modern masonry and everything else in general.

Ironically, this losing of esoteric understanding is what leads into the very purpose for my starting this thread in the first and posting the article; an article not yet read by the defenders of personalities (like Pike) and those other defenders of Baconism science in general.

ML, you try and rationalize everything into dead matter and nothing of such self-absorbed rationalization belongs to Freemasonry.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join