Knights Of Templar

page: 4
1
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 9 2006 @ 10:46 PM
link   
Could any of you tell me the actual relation between the Masons and Solomon? I see it everywhere I see Masons, they have some kind of link? Such as the use of "Solomons towers/columns" ?




posted on Jun, 9 2006 @ 10:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by yin_yang
man at least try other things before asking...its not hard these days, the information is readily available to anyone about anything, if they just take the time to look...i.e. google..wikipedia, etc.

im sorry im not taking this out on you, particularly, but im growing tired of these "hey tell me about..." threads that just come across as lazy.

the quest for truth and answers is meaningless if you did not put in any of the work yourself to get the info.


I like to think I can ask "like-minded" people my opinion on something. I am much more interested in what people here have to say, than info I could surely get on my own. Give the guy a break; after all, if he has the internet saavy to read, post, and generally interact with a bulletin board, I'm sure he's able to google something.



posted on Jun, 9 2006 @ 11:03 PM
link   
....To my knowledge the Knights Templar protected people going to the Holy Land (Jerusalem)....Right?



posted on Jun, 10 2006 @ 05:57 AM
link   
yes, that is correct. however, it's much more complex than that. The Knights Templar were one of three Christian miltiary orders that protected pilgrims on their way to Jerusalem. the other two orders were the Knights of St. John, more commonly known as the Hospitallers, and the third order was a germanic order known as the Teutonic Knights.

One thing that the whole DaVinci code conspiracy uses is the fact that the templars became immune to all laws. The pope gave them full immunity and the Templars answered only to the Papacy. The reason being, (according to many conspiracy theories) that the templars found something in the ruins of Solomon's temple that ws so damning to the church that the pope gave them immunity to keep them quiet and then with the help of "Philip the fair" (King of France), ahd the templars quickly exterminated in 1307.

what the conspiracy theories don't mention is that the Hospitallers were around before the Templars and they also had immunity. So, the whole thing about the templars being given immunity to keep them quiet is more than likely bogus. Also, the tempalrs weren't wiped out because they held damning secrets. If we are to base our theories off of what historical evidence we have, they were wipe dout because they were extremely successful bankes, and very influential in europe. the King of France owed them ALOT of money. Killing the templars was a brilliant political and financial move for the King of France. That isn't to say that there couldn't have been other circumstances though. perhaps the King and Pope used that as an excuse to kill the templars and prevent them from releasing their secrets. (the pope at the time was a pupped of the French King)

(the Teutonic knights were never given immunity and actually were under the command of the King of Hungary prior to 1225. They also answered to the Pope)


Could any of you tell me the actual relation between the Masons and Solomon? I see it everywhere I see Masons, they have some kind of link? Such as the use of "Solomons towers/columns" ?


There is no evidenciary proof between Solomon's temple and the masons. the mason's society uses pictures of solomons temple and the such. The 9 founding knights of the templars, who had pretty much locked themselves in the building built above Solomon's ruins for 9 years after the first crusade captured Jersualem in 1099 were excavating and this si where they supposedly found documents dating back to the time of Christ (enter: DaVinci Code, and the Holy Grail documents). After the templars were almost wiped out on October 13th (a fridayto lol), 1307, there ceases to be any clear evidence about what became of the order. It is known that a few templar ships managed to Escape from Southern France that night, and it conveniently dissapeared. It's possible that it docked in The British Isles and the Templar Order eventually mixed in with the mason's society many years later. However, there is no historical proof of this. No one knows what happened to the surviving Templars in France after that night in 1307, and no one knows what happened to their ships, that we assume carried treasure.

I think it's probable that there is a connection between the templars and the Masons. Them templars supposedly found something in the ruins of Solomon's Temple and that perhaps that knowledge that tehy possess was handed off to the mason's society, which would explain why they have symbosl such as the "all-seeing eye" and are all about secret knowledge. perhaps they know what the truth about what the 9 "poor knights of christ" found in the ruins.

[edit on 10-6-2006 by Red Dawn]



posted on Jun, 10 2006 @ 08:31 AM
link   


ith the help of "Philip the fair" (King of France), ahd the templars quickly exterminated in 1307.


actually it was the other way around Phillipe fourced/extorted the Pope ( ClementV)
to his programme. He had already had a hand in the death of at least one other pope
and probably 3 others. It was ofcourse just after this that the french captivity of the papcy began



posted on Jun, 10 2006 @ 04:30 PM
link   
yes. You're absolutely right. I actually mentioned that in my post

That isn't to say that there couldn't have been other circumstances though. perhaps the King and Pope used that as an excuse to kill the templars and prevent them from releasing their secrets. (the pope at the time was a pupped of the French King)


Also interesting that the King and pope both died shortly after they had Jacques De Molay put to death. he supposedly cursed them. I believe King Philip's sons also died later on, thus complicating his bloodline a bit. I'll ahve to double check that though.



posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 01:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Masonic Light

Originally posted by greek6787


ML,
I was thinking about joing Prince Hall. Can you tell me why your grand lodge considers them clandestine?


The Constitution of my Grand Lodge states that there can only be one legitimate Grand Lodge within its geographical jurisdiction. This is a result of the merger between two Grand Lodges who did not formerly recognize each other (Free and Accepted Masons and Antient York Masons, in the early 19th century).

It could be that some time in the future the PH Grand Lodge will request our recognition. If so, our Constitution could be amended to allow for that (it has already been done in quite a few states).


In my State ,Prince Hall is recognised, but Black brothers cannot join a " non
Prince Hall" Lodge.

As much as this gives ammunition to our enemies, I personally find this to be a shame to Masonry.

I believe that our Prince Hall brothers have obeyed the dictates of Grand Lodge, without complaint, and I think that makes them EXACTLY the type of men that we should welcome into our fraternity.

However, I understand that change comes slowly, and I pray that our Brothers will forgive me, and believe me when I say that I have definately let my opinions be known.(Loudly)

I truly hesitate to admit this, as our enemies will use it to make their arguments against us, but perhaps this will help to hasten something that should have happened long ago.

To me, what this proves is that Masonry can change, and we as Masons can change when confronted with Truth.

After all, this is what Masonry is supposed to be all about.

Truth.



[edit on 6/11/2006 by tylerdjp]



posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 02:11 AM
link   
You, tylerdjp, are one of the few Masons I can respect.



posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 03:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by All Seeing Eye
You, tylerdjp, are one of the few Masons I can respect.


Believe it or not

The principles of what I believe Masonry to be, gave me the courage to be who I am

I sincerely thank you

DJP



posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 09:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tylerdjp
In my State ,Prince Hall is recognised, but Black brothers cannot join a " non
Prince Hall" Lodge.


Er, what? In your state the organization is institutionally racist???


believe that our Prince Hall brothers have obeyed the dictates of Grand Lodge

Are you saying that blacks can't become members of non-PH lodges, OR that peopel in PH-lodges can't join regular masonry, without a 'ceremony' of 'healing' or some such? I have heard where a person in an 'illegal' or unrecognized masonic organization has to be 'healed' first to join regular masonry.

So is it becuase they are black, or because of jurisdiction?


[edited to correct italics code -nygdan]



[edit on 12-6-2006 by Nygdan]



posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 09:59 PM
link   
I asked my granpa this.

some state "grand lodges" do not recognize Prince hall lodges because PH lodges allow the lodge master to collect money from his office. Thus technically making them for-profit institutions, and destroying their claim to non-profit status.

In regular masonry, the master swears he will not profit a penny from being the boss of the local lodge.

So PH lodges aren't regular, and a regular mason cannot trafic withthem.



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 08:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by tovenar

I asked my granpa this.

some state "grand lodges" do not recognize Prince hall lodges because PH lodges allow the lodge master to collect money from his office. Thus technically making them for-profit institutions, and destroying their claim to non-profit status.

In regular masonry, the master swears he will not profit a penny from being the boss of the local lodge.


This isn't universally true. In my jurisdiction, the Master does not receive compensation either. However, the Treasurer, Secretary, and Tiler receive annual salaries, but we remain a non-profit organization.


So PH lodges aren't regular, and a regular mason cannot trafic withthem.


This also is not universally true. Most US Grand Lodges recognize Prince Hall Affiliation as being regular Masonry, and intervisitation is practiced.



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 08:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by tylerdjp

In my State ,Prince Hall is recognised, but Black brothers cannot join a " non
Prince Hall" Lodge.


Is there a clause in your Constitution to that effect? I've honestly never heard of such a thing. I realize that PH Masons cannot join mainstream Lodges and vice versa, but are you saying that a black non-Mason cannot petition a mainstream Lodge in your jurisdiction if he is proposed by two members in the regular fashion?



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 03:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Masonic Light

Originally posted by tylerdjp

In my State ,Prince Hall is recognised, but Black brothers cannot join a " non
Prince Hall" Lodge.


Is there a clause in your Constitution to that effect? I've honestly never heard of such a thing. I realize that PH Masons cannot join mainstream Lodges and vice versa, but are you saying that a black non-Mason cannot petition a mainstream Lodge in your jurisdiction if he is proposed by two members in the regular fashion?



My apologies for this statement

By our constitution, a black man is not "forbidden" to join a Lodge in our state.

I was under this misconception because of statements made by some brothers when we recieved an application for membership by a black man ( "I told him that he would be more comfortable in a Prince Hall Lodge" and "We explained that Prince Hall was in need of good leaders" ).

When I questioned them later, I was told that it was the way this issue was handled.

Needless to say, the gentleman did not inquire further about membership.

I have since re-read our Constitution, Masonic Law, Rules and Regulations and Lodge By-Laws, and no where is anything like this even implied.

I can be as guilty as the next person of blaming the organzation as a whole for the ignorance (including my own) of a few members, and once again, I apologise.

It's not the first time I've been wrong, and I fear that it won't be the last time.









[edit on 6/12/2006 by tylerdjp]



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 03:21 PM
link   
Ah, so basically its some racists within your Lodge that are doing this, not the regulations.

No wonder people think Masonry is a racist organization.



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 03:22 PM
link   
Just for reference

Prince Hall Recognition
The following states recognize Prince Hall Masons:

Alaska Arizona California
Colorado Connecticut District of Columbia
Hawaii Idaho Illinois
Indiana Iowa Kansas
Maine Maryland Massachusetts
Michigan Minnesota Missouri
Montana Nebraska Nevada
New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico
New York North Dakota Ohio
Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania
Rhode Island South Dakota Utah
Vermont Virginia Washington
Wisconsin Wyoming

The following Canadian Provinces recognize Prince Hall Masons:

Alberta British Columbia
Manitoba New Brunswick
Nova Scotia Prince Edward Island
Quebec Saskatchewan

Other countries which recognize Prince Hall Masons:

Australia Australia/Queensland
England Ireland



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 03:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
Ah, so basically its some racists within your Lodge that are doing this, not the regulations.

No wonder people think Masonry is a racist organization.


I'd prefer to think of them as ignorant, but I guess if the shoe fits.....

To temper this however, the majority of the Brothers that I've spoken to about this feel as I do.

Unfortunately, all organizations are made up of people.

And people tend to be imperfect.

But I'd like to beleive that people can change

[edit on 6/12/2006 by tylerdjp]



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 04:06 PM
link   
*** The national stereotypes in this post are made for illustrative purposes only, and is in no way a suggestion that any given member of a given constitution acts in this way***

I've made the point before that freemasonry reflects the society in which it is grounded. English freemasons are traditionalists, enjoy the pomp and ceremony of the ritual. Dress code is formal and freemasonry is a 'serious' business. The Scots are far more robust and ribald, the Irish more chilled out. The French masons are convinced that their version is right and everyone elses is wrong. Freemasons in the US are more relaxed and sociable, and masonry in the Southern States seems to have trouble with race issues.

The only surprise is that anyone is surprised.

Now... how far off topic have we gone...?



posted on Jun, 14 2006 @ 05:56 PM
link   
Fun thread


To me, it sounds like All Seeing Eye is hinting at some sort of existing theory being true, like the hollow Earth tale.



I've read a fair bit of popular/conspiracy-related literature on the Templars -- and I always come away thinking that it's a very interesting chapter of "non-history". It's very romanticised, but definately a ripping yarn -- I always presumed that whatever secrets they held, are presumably long, long gone or hidden -- hence the allowance of such familiarity of their story amongst the general populus



posted on Jun, 15 2006 @ 09:29 AM
link   
This thread seems to have gone way off topic, debating the pros and cons of Masonry really belongs on one of the many other threads on these boards. I do know one thing. My Father was a Mason, i am not and have no intention to be, but my Father was a good, honest hardworking man, he was a Policeman and i do not believe he would join any thing that he thought was against the greater good. Because of that i have over time adjusted my view of Masonry and i don't believe that the organization is bad or evil.
As for the racist aspects of what is being discussed i have no personal experience of any of that so i don't think its my place to comment on it.
There are Masons who believe that the Lodge is directly decended from the Templars but the is no evidence or proof to support any of that, just Masonic tradition.
As i have said before there is nothing wrong with claiming that Masonry is derived from the Templars as the Templars contrary to popular views were no bad but were servants of the church. Anything that comes from original sources that paints the Templars in a bad light needs to be treated with some suspicion as the Templars were not popular because of their wealth and the fact they were answerable to the Church and not to secular Kings. Their wealth power and influence made them a target for much of the negative propaganda that seems to dog their every move.
From Ivanhoe to the film The Kingdom of Heaven the Templars have been villified when in reality the opposite is in fact true.
The Templars were tolerant of Muslims for example, much more so than their contempries and even worked alongside Muslims who were hostile to Saladin. They also wore long beards, shaving was forbidden by members of the Templars, and in an age when almost all men were clean shaven they stood out as different. Also because of their beards they were sometimes accused of going "native" as all Muslims also had beards.
Then of course there are accusations made against the Templars because of their secrets and initiations ceremonies that took place behind closed doors, accusations of devil worship and the like ( something that the Masons have been accused of over the Centuries ) At the beginning of the Templars time of influence the initiations were usually conducted by the Master of whatever Chapter you were joining but as time went on initiations were done by lower ranking Knights and even at times Sergeants so the original meaning and format of the initiation became corrupted by what one writer of the time called " men of low rank and course habits "
In the end the Templars fell under the the weight of their own power and influence by a King who owed them a lot of money aided by a weak Pope.





new topics
top topics
 
1
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join