posted on Jan, 22 2008 @ 10:01 PM
Originally posted by NewWorldOver
What is Masonic about Obelisks?
Odd that you chose to answer the same way as the original poster, by not answering. Tell me in your
opinion, if it is not too difficult, what
is Masonic about it.
Being a Mason yourself it seems silly to even ask that question.
Being a Mason I find it silly that everyone thinks obelisks are Masonic in nature. They were used extensively in Anicent Egypt as impressive
architectural elements. Their rennaissance and return to vogue can be directly attributed to Napoleon's Egyptian campaigns in 1798-1799 and the
Egyptian Revival style of 1808-1959 which subsequently followed the aforementioned military operations.
While it may be revered by some Masons for its symmetry and structure it by no means is a true 'Masonic' emblem or icon. Its progenesis far predates
modern Speculative Masonry by millenia and there are no usages of it in a Masonic Lodge.
If the OP didn't answer you, what can we do? Force him? If you as Masons don't believe this is even an obelisk, that it's an unrelated
pyramid, than why not leave it at that? I am painfully aware of the reason why...
Painfully aware of what? Please enlighten me.
I certainly believe that a pyramid or structure of any sort on ground zero of the first nuclear blast is significant. If it's not of Masonic
origin, so be it... no need to doggy-pile the thread with the aim that the discussion simply die out. But again, I am painfully aware why this seems
to happen in EVERY thread mentioning Masons. And I'll leave it at that.
Perhaps if people actually addressed questions directed to them threads would not end up diverging on these unwanted tangents. To assert a position
and then not offer opinion or, more importantly, facts why is not helpful nor helps germinate conversation.
[edit on 22-1-2008 by AugustusMasonicus]