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.

 

How does JAHBULON even make sense?

page: 3
2
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 26 2007 @ 05:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Beelzebubba

Originally posted by Trinityman
I'm still hoping Beelzebub will let me know where he got this snippet from so I can have a look-see.


From the Wiki link Trinity, I was sort of hoping you might have a better chance of finding an actual transcript.

Well, like I said most of my books are in storage. I'll see what I can turn up but my days of visiting the Library at Great Queen Street on a whim are gone
.




posted on Jan, 26 2007 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Beelzebubba
I guess I got a little carried away.


Oh *I* would NEVER do that!




Appak, how could I put you on 'ignore'?

"It seems very pretty," [Alice] said when she had finished it, "but it's rather hard to understand! ... Somehow it seems to fill my head with ideas--only I don't exactly know what they are!"

You make me feel like Alice.

Uffish, indeed...


Aw shucks!


By the way I was looking through Sheville & Gould's "Guide to the Royal Arch Chapter" (which I erroneously called "Macoy's") and found the following which might clarify the origin of the syllables.

Regarding the Tetragrammaton:

"The true pronunciation, however chimerical is said to be preserved in the ritual of Freemasonry, and as we have before remarked, it is the grand symbol of the Order. It was corrupted among all the heathen nations, in the rites of whom it yet maintained a prominent place. Thus among the Syriac nations we find it contracted into the biliteral word JAH. Among the Chaldeans we find it changed to BEL, or BELUS, or BAAL. Among the Egyptians we find it changed to ON, derived, perhasp, from the Hindoo AUM or OM. Among the Latins we find Jupiter and Jove." (Page 180)

There is a lot more to the lecture, but that might explain the origin of the three words. It doesn't however, explain why anyone would think that they are used as ONE word.

And, as I've said before, they aren't used as one word in any ritual I've ever seen or read.

BTW, Trinityman, you can add the following rituals to your list that it's not in. I have the Worcestershire, Oxford, Perfect Ceremonies and Staffordshire rituals.



posted on Aug, 16 2007 @ 10:42 PM
link   
I just couldn't let it alone.

I did some digging as to the context in which the Canon Richard Tydeman made his comments concerning Jah Bul On.


According to The Rev. Canon Richard Tydeman, in an address to the Supreme Grand Chapter of England on 13 November 1985, the word is a compound of three Hebrew terms:
יהּ (Yah, I AM, which indicates eternal existence),
בּעל (bul, on high, in heaven) and
און (on, strength); pronouncing three aspects or qualities of Deity, namely Eternal Existence, Transcendence, and Omnipotence and equating to "The True and Living God - Most High - Almighty".


In a letter Grand Lodge sent to lodges on 13 November 1985, an address given to members of the Supreme Grand Chapter of England of Royal Arch by Canon Richard Tydeman, Grand Superintendent 'in and over Suffolk', was quoted. In which he gave his explanation of the word Jah Bul On:


The first syllable indicates eternal existence, the continuing and never-ending I AM. The second syllable, as we are told later (unfortunately only as an alternative) really does mean in Hebrew 'in heaven' or 'on high' and the third syllable is a Hebrew word for Strength or Power.
Thus we do not need to go into apologies for faulty scholarship in the past, and we can leave Syria and Egypt and Chaldea out of it all together; for what we are pronouncing are not three names of God (or worse still the names of three gods, as some would suggest) but we are pronouncing three aspects of qualities of the Deity which are well known and well used, in Christianity and in other religions, namely His Eternal Existence, His Transcendence, and His Omnipotence. In other words we are describing The True and Living God - Most High - Almighty. It is as simple as that.


This explanation was rejected by the Church of England's working group. The reason being that if the word derived soley from the Hebrew, the question of whether it is a name for God, or a description of God, was unresolved because in

'Hebrew, description and name are interlocked, the description is the name.'


The working group were then given to consider the three Hebrew characters that are set at the angles of the triangle that contains the word Jah Bul On and the Ritual that accompanies it:


(The Altar-top of the Holy Royal Arch with the letters arranged in the words JE-HO-VAH, JAH-BUL-ON. These articles were purchased at a recognised Masonic outfitters in London, and assembled in accordance with a diagram put out by a member of the Aldersgate Chapter of Improvement, # 1657)


Take the Aleph and the Beth, they form AB, which is Father; take the Beth, the Aleph and the Lamed, they form BAL, which is Lord; take the Aleph and Lamed, they form AL, which means Word; take the Lamed, the Aleph, and the Beth, they form LAB, which signifies Heart or Spirit. Take each combination with the whole, and it will read thus: AB BAL, Father, Lord: AL BAL, Word, Lord; LAB BAL, Spirit, Lord.


The group found that this mixture of characters emphasised the formation of BAL, who they associated with the Semitic Deity opposed by Elijah.

The working group report stated:


JAHBULON (whether it is a name or description), which appears in all the rituals, must be considered blasphemous: in Christian theology the name of God (Yahweh/Jehovah) must not be taken in vain, nor can it be replaced by an amalgam of the names of pagan deities.
Link

The Ritual itself undermines Tydeman's assertions, far from being a means of describing God, it seems to be a syncretistic name for God made out of the names of YHVH, Baal, and Osiris.


The word in the triangle is that Sacred and Mysterious Name you have just solemnly engaged yourself never to pronounce, unless in the presence of two or more Royal Arch Companions, or in the body of a lawfully constituted Royal Arch Chapter, whilst acting as First Principal. It is a compound word, and the combination forms the word JAH-BUL-ON. It is in four languages, Chaldee, Hebrew, Syriac, and Egyptian. JAH is the Chaldee name of God, signifying "His Essence and Majesty Incomprehensible." It is also a Hebrew word, signifying "I am and shall be," thereby expressing the actual, future, and eternal existence of the Most High. BUL is a Syriac word denoting Lord or Powerful, it is in itself a compound word, being formed from the preposition Beth, in or on, and UL, Heaven, or on High. ON is an Egyptian word, signifying Father of all, thereby expressing the Omnipotence of the Father of All, as in that well known prayer, Our Father, which art in Heaven. The various significations of the words may be thus collected: I am and shall be; Lord in Heaven or on High...
Link

I also found out that discussions were carried out by the Supreme Grand Chapter, proposing changes to the Royal Arch Ritual. This included revision and explanation of the word Jah Bul On.

I discussed this thread with my priest awhile ago and he put me in contact with the Bishop, who in turn happened to know certain members of the working group when he lived in England. I have had much back and forth via email and phone, in which this information was culled.

As this information was culled from sources outside the web, it is difficult for me to provide links.

This is the best I can do:

Freemasonry & Christianity



All that I have cited above seems to undermine what I have been told in this thread.



[edit on 17/8/2007 by Beelzebubba]



posted on Aug, 16 2007 @ 10:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by FreiMaurer
Jah becomes "yahweh" oh really? When It's YHWH and that's all that's known, the Tetragrammatron.

Bul becomes Baal?

What?

And On becomes Osiris?

How?

Where do these people put this crap together?


Well, I think we put it together by:

A. Either being Freemasons, and taking the oath and seeing the rituals ourselves,
or by talking to people that have, or written references.

B. In this case, or in your case rather, you are missing an entire level of reading that is keeping you from grasping this.

If say you read a book called "Freedom is a Two Edged Sword" and then
"The Secret Teaching Of all Ages", and the "Book of Enoch" you'd be well on your way. Men have been combining gods forever. The Christian god Jehova, or Enlil, was picked up by the Israelites stolen from the egyptians and sumerians and their pantheons (Is= isis 11:11 the scarlot lady, ra = amen ra, the ray of sun, light, the son of the sun, el = saturn, time, the old man and the elhoim inorganic beings, aliens, annunaki, fallen angels, nephylim.

Here let me slow it down for you Is (Isis) Ra (Amen ra) El (saturn, elohim, higher arches of angels) Now put it together Israel. It's not magic man, just words and numbers. We can do this all day long. We could take everything you know as real apart.

You have to understand, it's what we do. We make gods, we make and unmake ourselves in a cosmic dance. Its all rather common sense once you watch the monkey play with its poop for awhile, you get it. Don't play with your poop, read.

[edit on 08/14/2007 by Horus8]



posted on Aug, 16 2007 @ 11:56 PM
link   
Horus8,

FreiMaurer can't get back to you on that. He's gone to that void that banned members reside in.



posted on Aug, 17 2007 @ 06:35 PM
link   
Suggested reading:




From Isis Unveiled: JESUITRY AND MASONRY. (348-404)


-- JAH-BUH-LUN






H. P. BLAVATSKY’S MASONIC PATENT










[edit on 17-8-2007 by Tamahu]



posted on Aug, 17 2007 @ 11:40 PM
link   



CANON TYDEMAN’S ADDRESS


Reproduced from the United Grand Lodge’s letter of 13 December 1985 to Grand Officers and to Secretaries of Lodges.


THE WORDS ON THE TRIANGLE - AN ALTERNATIVE VIEW


An address to Grand Chapter on 11 November 1985 by E Comp the Revd Canon Richard Tydeman, Grand Superintendent in and over Suffolk.


ME Pro First Grand Principal and Companions, recent attacks on Freemasonry have shown up all too clearly that the Royal Arch is one of our most vulnerable fronts, and the thing that our critics have seized upon as proof of our evil intentions is the composite word or words on the triangle in the very centre of every Chapter.


Unfortunately we are not giving the right impression at all. Only the other day I was accosted by a vociferous churchwarden: "How can you", he said, "How can you, a minister of religion, take part in ceremonies which invoke heathen gods by name?", and as evidence for his accusations, he brandished before me, not a copy of Stephen Knight’s book, but a copy of the minutes of last November’s Grand Chapter containing the address by ME Comp the Revd Francis Heydon, the then Third Grand Principal.




Canon Tydemans address in full:

Link




[edit on 18/8/2007 by Beelzebubba]



posted on Aug, 19 2007 @ 07:01 AM
link   
Am I to interpret silence as acquiescence?



posted on Aug, 19 2007 @ 08:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Beelzebubba
Am I to interpret silence as acquiescence?


In my case Beelzebubba it's actually apathy.

I said several times that the word "Jahbuhlon" is NOT, nor has it EVER been used in my Royal Arch Chapter, nor by the Grand Chapter under which my Chapter is chartered

Further, it does it appear in the Ritual of the General Grand Chapter, Royal Arch Masons, International.

That being the case, it's of no interest to me at all.

Beyond that, I'm not sure how the topic even fits on a "conspiracy" forum. It would be better suited to a Masonic topic forum, or Anti-Masonic.



posted on Aug, 19 2007 @ 05:04 PM
link   
That's funny Appak. Because in earlier correspondance with me, I was given the impression that you enjoyed discussion on this forum about things "that might not surface otherwise."


Beelzebubba,

I do hope you take my posts as I intend them. "tongue-in-cheek" I truly enjoy this forum and sometimes come across as being angry, but quite the opposite is true. I think it's entertaining and it brings out a lot of discussion that might not surface otherwise.

I've been a Mason for 25+ years and have taken just about every Masonic degree there is except two that I can think of. I enjoy talking about it and I learn from the various opinions posted.

Regards,

Appak


I must say, your last post didn't sound too "tongue-in-cheek."

If it was of no interest to you, why did you take part in the thread to begin with?


Originally posted by Appak
Certainly doesn't to anyone who's actually EXPERIENCED the Royal Arch Degree...regardless what you "googled" on the web.



Originally posted by Appak
Push the "ignore" button for all I care, but I don't like lies being spread when I know the truth about the Royal Arch Degree (and numerous other Masonic Degrees) and I'll continue to refute slander in whatever form it may take.


Oh yes, to Defend Freemasonry from "liars" (did you think I enjoyed being called out by you as one?).

Of no interest? Sounds more like sour grapes to me.

The OP's stated purpose in this thread was to have the existance of the term JAH BUL ON (not JAHBUHLON as you continually choose to spell it) proven or disproven. It has clearly been proven.

I think it is right at home on this forum.

Even if the term does not exist in your jurisdiction, does it not interest you to learn that the term is not something cooked up by Anti-Masons?

Or did you already know that?

If the latter is the case, I will refer you to the T&C:


1). Posting: You will not post any material that is knowingly false, misleading, or inaccurate.

Link

I thought Trinityman was interested in Canon Tydemans address?
Yet no comments from him either...


[edit on 19/8/2007 by Beelzebubba]



posted on Aug, 19 2007 @ 10:24 PM
link   
[sigh] As if I didn't have serious things to do....


Originally posted by Beelzebubba

Of no interest? Sounds more like sour grapes to me.
The OP's stated purpose in this thread was to have the existance of the term JAH BUL ON (not JAHBUHLON as you continually choose to spell it) proven or disproven. It has clearly been proven.


Clearly? By Internet sources??? Sheesh! Give me a break.

Believe EVERYTHING that some fool puts on a web-site do you? HMMMM?????

OK. Then let's say

JAH

BUH

LON

Rather than cramming them all the hell together like most of you do.

How plain is this?

I have NEVER seen THOSE words (except "Jah"....read: Jehovah) used in ANY Masonic ritual.

I sure wish my obligations (which I take seriously) didn't forbid me from doing so...because I'd SEND you my ritual AND several others that I have.

If they ARE used by some Jurisdictions...they are a darned good secret because I've taken just about EVERY Masonic Degree there is and I have been in NUMEROUS jurisdictions around the globe and have attended NUMEROUS Masonic meetings where they have NOT been utilized....no matter WHAT your infallible [ahem] internet sources say.

Is THAT plain enough?



I think it is right at home on this forum.


That's fine. Think what you like. Send me a U2U and I'll tell you what I *really* think.
(Good thing I'm not a Moderator, huh?)



Even if the term does not exist in your jurisdiction, does it not interest you to learn that the term is not something cooked up by Anti-Masons?


How do you KNOW that it's "not something cooked up by Anti-Masons?" Have you SEEN it performed in a Masonic ritual? Have you PERSONALLY read a Masonic ritual that had the term/terms? Have you ever attended a Masonic meeting? Are you or have you EVER been a Mason?

Most importantly, do you believe EVERYTHING you read?

(For YOUR sake, I sure hope not...although you OBVIOUSLY believe the garbage you've been reading....)

Seems to me that bastard word COULD VERY WELL HAVE BEEN "cooked up" (as YOU say) by Anti-Masons....moreover that there are some uninformed Masons who don't know any better than to believe it.

Plausible?

Methinks so.



Or did you already know that?


I imagine you'd be surprised what I know. Honestly. You would




If the latter is the case, I will refer you to the T&C:



1). Posting: You will not post any material that is knowingly false, misleading, or inaccurate.


[sigh]


OK. You got me, beelzebbuba. Let's be honest with one another.

We Masons sure is real stoopid. We worships JAH and BUL and ON .... not to mention JAHBULON and Jesus Jumpin' Jehoshaphat! On top of that we is ALL Luciferians and Devil-worshipers and we pray to false gods and we sacrifice babies and we eat our own children and we kill all the Virginians we can find.....provided we can find any. If none are available...WEST Virginians will do....and worse than all we participate in bake sales and let our wives have the remote control (EGAD!)


Happy now?

[shrug...sigh....]

Ta-ta!


[edit because I'm too darned polite to post what I *really* think about this crap]

[edit on 19-8-2007 by Appak]



posted on Aug, 19 2007 @ 11:48 PM
link   
I don't see what the big deal is...

The anti-Mason, Stephen Knight, interprets JAHBULON as the "compound-god" (Jehovah-Baal-Osiris).

The Masonic scholar, Arturo de Hoyos, says that it was used in an outdated version of the French Royal Arch from the 1700's as the name of an allegorical explorer searching for Solomon's temple.

I'd tend to believe the latter, to be honest. Pantheistic fertility gods like Baal and Osiris have no place in the Lodge. Jehovah (being a name of the Creator, or GAOTU) certainly does.

In any case, I'm sure Appak was telling the truth when he said that the stupid word has never been used in any degree or ceremony in which he's been involved.

I've never encountered it in Freemasonry and I don't consider it to be of any consquence whatsoever. If people want to believe the rather shaky foundations laid out in books like Knight's "The Brotherhood" to demonstrate a conspiracy of evil, that's their business.

Meh.



posted on Aug, 19 2007 @ 11:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Beelzebubba
I thought Trinityman was interested in Canon Tydemans address?
Yet no comments from him either...
]

Hi Beelzebubba

Yes I am interested - just been busy... you know how it is...

I'm sure the image is genuine, although perhaps a bit old. It seems that JBL was a discussion point in England in 1985 or Canon Tydeman wouldn't have written a paper on it. However to date I still can't find any use of that word (or group of words) in the actual ritual. It certainly isn't in use now in England to the best of my knowledge.



posted on Aug, 20 2007 @ 12:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Appak
[sigh] As if I didn't have serious things to do....


Do you?



Originally posted by Appak
Clearly? By Internet sources??? Sheesh! Give me a break.


Um... actually, no. If you had bothered to read my earlier post you would have seen that my information was initially gleaned from people that my local priest put me in contact with. People involved in the 1985 Synod investigating the compatability of Freemasonry with Christianity.

I then did a search on the web to in some way verify, what I learned. The website provided was created by... a Freemason.


From my point of view, as a Christian and a Freemason of some 40 years...



Originally posted by Appak
Believe EVERYTHING that some fool puts on a web-site do you? HMMMM?????

OK. Then let's say

JAH

BUH

LON

Rather than cramming them all the hell together like most of you do


Still mispelling it are you?



Originally posted by Appak
I have NEVER seen THOSE words (except "Jah"....read: Jehovah) used in ANY Masonic ritual.

I sure wish my obligations (which I take seriously) didn't forbid me from doing so...because I'd SEND you my ritual AND several others that I have.


That's funny, in an earlier post you conceded that BEL (which Macoys Dictionary defines as the same as BUL) and On were used as well.


Originally posted by Appak
If they ARE used by some Jurisdictions...they are a darned good secret because I've taken just about EVERY Masonic Degree there is and I have been in NUMEROUS jurisdictions around the globe and have attended NUMEROUS Masonic meetings where they have NOT been utilized....no matter WHAT your infallible [ahem] internet sources say.


More than Canon Tydeman?

Because prior to 1985 (according to him) the term was used by EVERY Chapter in the UK.

What my information gathering (which was done outside the web) informed me (may I remind you that these were deacons, priests, and a Bishop of the Anglican Church, not crazed conspiracists) was verified by the latest link I provided.

That link, as I stated before, was to a website created by a Freemason of some 40 years. He sure didn't comment on the C of E as having it wrong when it came to the RA.


Originally posted by Appak
That's fine. Think what you like. Send me a U2U and I'll tell you what I *really* think.
(Good thing I'm not a Moderator, huh?)


I'll say it's a good thing you're not a mod, because I must say, you come off as slighty threatening.


Originally posted by Appak
How do you KNOW that it's "not something cooked up by Anti-Masons?" Have you SEEN it performed in a Masonic ritual? Have you PERSONALLY read a Masonic ritual that had the term/terms? Have you ever attended a Masonic meeting? Are you or have you EVER been a Mason?


I admit, I am not and will never be a Mason. My life is too enjoyable to clutter it with the drudgery of pointless ritual.

Why do I have to see it when one of your "Brethren" was foolish enough to create a website publishing the Synods findings. If I hadn't found that site, I would have had a bit more trouble verifying what I had been informed about.

The photo I inserted was provided to me by a member of the Synod, he also provided the caption below it.


Originally posted by Appak
Most importantly, do you believe EVERYTHING you read?


No, no sir I don't.


Originally posted by Appak
(For YOUR sake, I sure hope not...although you OBVIOUSLY believe the garbage you've been reading....)


Look at my links throughout this thread and tell me where the rubbish is. Actually provide links so we can all see this "rubbish."


Originally posted by Appak
Seems to me that bastard word COULD VERY WELL HAVE BEEN "cooked up" (as YOU say) by Anti-Masons....moreover that there are some uninformed Masons who don't know any better than to believe it.

Plausible?

Methinks so.


Methinks the man doth protest too much. Tydeman readily admitted it. I think his experience may slightly outweigh yours.


Originally posted by Appak
I imagine you'd be surprised what I know. Honestly. You would


Yes, I imagine I would. You must really enjoy lauding your supreme intellect over us plebs.



Originally posted by Appak
OK. You got me, beelzebbuba. Let's be honest with one another.

We Masons sure is real stoopid. We worships JAH and BUL and ON .... not to mention JAHBULON and Jesus Jumpin' Jehoshaphat! On top of that we is ALL Luciferians and Devil-worshipers and we pray to false gods and we sacrifice babies and we eat our own children and we kill all the Virginians we can find.....provided we can find any. If none are available...WEST Virginians will do....and worse than all we participate in bake sales and let our wives have the remote control (EGAD!)


Happy now?

[shrug...sigh....]

Ta-ta!




In my time here at ATS I have never cast aspersions about the nature of Freemasonry. You may try to paint me as a raving nut who believes all that is said about Freemasons, but it is not so.

As I stated earlier, I was merely seeking an answer to the OP's question.

Does the term make sense?

Not to me.

Does the term have it's roots within the Fraternity?

Undoubtably.

Is it or was it a name describing God.

Undoubtably.

But I did some serious searching to find my answers and for you to write it all off as garbage with no attempt to explain why, is, quite frankly, insulting.


Originally posted by Appak
[edit because I'm too darned polite to post what I *really* think about this crap]


I think you should look up the definition of polite.




[edit on 20/8/2007 by Beelzebubba]



posted on Aug, 20 2007 @ 12:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Trinityman
Hi Beelzebubba

Yes I am interested - just been busy... you know how it is...

I'm sure the image is genuine, although perhaps a bit old. It seems that JBL was a discussion point in England in 1985 or Canon Tydeman wouldn't have written a paper on it. However to date I still can't find any use of that word (or group of words) in the actual ritual. It certainly isn't in use now in England to the best of my knowledge.


Ah, the urbane Trinityman, finally someone with manners.

Thank you for your reply Trinityman. I concede that the term possibly went out of the ritual around 1985 and wrote so earlier. My point (all along) was to prove that the term came from within the Fraternity and that it was used as a term to describe God. Tydeman admitted as much.

Would you say that is acceptable.

I did not want to offend anyone, but I obviously did.

My skin must be a little thicker than others.

I believe my character was attacked a bit more than anything I could have said to offend anyone.

Trinity, you reinforce all the positive things that I hear about the "Brotherhood."

Thank you.



[edit on 20/8/2007 by Beelzebubba]



posted on Aug, 20 2007 @ 12:31 AM
link   
[edit double post]

[edit on 20/8/2007 by Beelzebubba]



posted on Aug, 20 2007 @ 12:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Roark
I don't see what the big deal is...

The anti-Mason, Stephen Knight, interprets JAHBULON as the "compound-god" (Jehovah-Baal-Osiris).

The Masonic scholar, Arturo de Hoyos, says that it was used in an outdated version of the French Royal Arch from the 1700's as the name of an allegorical explorer searching for Solomon's temple.

I'd tend to believe the latter, to be honest. Pantheistic fertility gods like Baal and Osiris have no place in the Lodge. Jehovah (being a name of the Creator, or GAOTU) certainly does.

In any case, I'm sure Appak was telling the truth when he said that the stupid word has never been used in any degree or ceremony in which he's been involved.

I've never encountered it in Freemasonry and I don't consider it to be of any consquence whatsoever. If people want to believe the rather shaky foundations laid out in books like Knight's "The Brotherhood" to demonstrate a conspiracy of evil, that's their business.

Meh.


Read my posts, there is not one single reference by me to Stephen Knight (I actually think his books are so full of holes as to be slightly ridiculous).

The term, undeniably, played a central part in the British Royal Arch Ritual. Until 1985... at least.

[edit on 20/8/2007 by Beelzebubba]



posted on Aug, 20 2007 @ 01:40 AM
link   
Sorry dude, I wasn't trying to imply that you were referencing Knight.

It was just my understanding that the notion of the Jehovah-Baal-Osiris composite god originated from his work, which spawned a lot of the Church of England's religious objections to Freemasonry.

I guess I wasn't really flowing with the thread as well as I could have. Sorry.



posted on Aug, 20 2007 @ 07:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Roark
In any case, I'm sure Appak was telling the truth when he said that the stupid word has never been used in any degree or ceremony in which he's been involved.


Thank you Roark. And as Trinityman pointed out, it's not used in UK rituals either. Don't know if it ever WAS as a "word" and certainly not in the U.S.

As I pointed out in my previous post, I've seen the words "Bel" "Ba'al" "Bul" etc. as well as "On" "Om" "Aum" in numerous writings, but never slammed together as a word.

Somehow the "attributes of Deity" come to mind here.



posted on Aug, 20 2007 @ 07:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Beelzebubba
The term, undeniably, played a central part in the British Royal Arch Ritual. Until 1985... at least.


Beelzebubba,

I just can't accept that. The reason being is I have several really OLD British Royal Arch Rituals and that so-called "word" does not appear in them.

A cursory glance on my shelves shows British Royal Arch rituals from 1904, 1918, several from the 1950's 60's 70's and 80's.

No Jah-Buh-Lon Nowhere.

Obviously someone somewhere has crammed this all together (and yes, I DO know WHY they did it) but if they've tried to make a "word" out of it, they've made a huge mistake and missed the point...and if Masons have bought into the idea that this is somehow a "word" or worse yet a "name" for God, then shame on them. They, too have missed the point.

Sorry you thought I sounded "threatening" in the last post. Wasn't meant to be, nor did I intend to sound rude. It's difficult to convey "feelings" in "text" sometimes.




top topics



 
2
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join