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.

 

What does drinking out of a skull signify?

page: 12
17
<< 9  10  11    13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 17 2013 @ 08:56 AM
link   

MysterX

You appear to be making a false assumption. You seem to be saying that if someone has a profound thought or idea, then that thought or idea actually IS profound outside of their imagination..


This, then, is a matter of semantics.

You are defining 'profound' as something which is regarded by the general population to be significant, whereas the context in which I am defining 'profound' is as a personal event which has a dramatic impact on that individual's life.

As long as we differ on the meaning and context of 'profound', we cannot logically argue the rest.




posted on Dec, 17 2013 @ 09:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Saurus
 





How is it any different from someone who dies in an accident and has never told anyone what they want done with their remains. What right does anyone have to bury or cremate the remains? It is based purely on the whims and preferences of the survivors, nothing else. Your argument is based on the premise that the majority of people in the world have the same viewpoint as yours, and you assume that, therefore, the owner of the skeleton would have wanted the same. Besides, what happens to unidentified bones does not affect any survivors, so how can it be an ethical issue?


If someone doesn't state what they wish to be done with their remains, it may well be that they simply don't care what happens to them, although most people would assume the alternatives are going to be limited to burial or cremation...not many would think having their body hacked apart and used as tableware was a third option.

Using part of a Human body in some kind of ritualistic dining experience raises ethical questions in the same way eating flesh of that same body would.

It is akin to cannibalism imo.

No less ghoulish or sensible than the Victorians' practice of eating desicated and powdered Egyptiam mummies, to promote good health.

Yeah, i'm sure they thought it was a great idea too.


ETA; You're right...we're not going to agree are we.

Interesting exchange nonetheless...it's been a pleasure, see you around.
edit on 17-12-2013 by MysterX because: added more info



posted on Dec, 17 2013 @ 09:56 AM
link   
reply to post by MysterX
 


Back long ago people were cremated and their ashes were incorporated into cement tombstones or artifacts. This practice was used all over the place. This is one of the reasons that artifacts are protected.

I have found bone chips in some rocks I have but they do not seem to have been burnt. They are still white, not black. It appears someone smashed the bones and incorporated them in a cement. The bones were probably boiled. The stone is a little transparent, so I think it is clay based material, sort of like a glaze that has been fired.

I also found what looks like barley or rye in a stone, probably the same process. I guess they could store seeds this way, the clays would protect them for eons from the effect of bacteria. This is where the idea of clay pottery originated, the ions in the clay pottery protected the food. And of course, the pots were kapalas.



posted on Dec, 17 2013 @ 01:14 PM
link   

MysterX

network dude
reply to post by MysterX
 


RIght, and those who would condemn something without understanding it are exactly where they belong. On the outside.


Lol..what's to understand mate?

A group of tossers drinking something from an animal or human skull is what it is, it's a group of tossers ascribing some ethereal meaning to it where none really exists...it means nothing, regardless of what those who would do it imagine it means. It's simply a dead part of an animals anatomy that can hold a liquid...apart from the barbaric, ghoulish aspect, that's about as deep as it goes IMO.


As it is your opinion, that's fine, but let me try to explain why that may be incorrect.

If I told you that I could open a door and show you lots of folks you know and do business with on a daily basis, symbolically performing cannibalistic rituals, eating flesh, and drinking blood, you might think I was crazy. Until I showed you a Catholic mass. While you may not agree with their beliefs, they do, and are happy to continue to follow their beliefs.

Our rituals would seem pointless if you saw them and had no context to understand them. Luckily, when you do them in a lodge, we are nice enough to explain it to you.
edit on 17-12-2013 by network dude because: bad spelr



posted on Dec, 17 2013 @ 06:57 PM
link   

network dude
reply to post by oxford
 


just because you are not OK with it, doesn't mean everyone else has to stop doing what they are doing.

And check your drivers licences, if it has a little heart on it, they you too have offered whatever parts others want once you die. I have one. When my spirit leaves this earth, it will not be taking my body with it.


Your absolutely right we are all free to do whatever we choose to do in this life.

Its not a judgement of right or wrong, but if it was my skull being used as a cup I'd be seriously unhappy without my prior consent and I think most people would be also.

Really can't equate organ donation to help save some bodies life with using human remains of unknown origin to drink out of.

What qualities does this action on an individual and an organisational level reflect?

What would a Supreme Creator make of this practice? A being that has infinite love for us all.

Really not out here to bash you guys, but there is something here for me to learn, so please ease up on the negative karma



posted on Dec, 17 2013 @ 07:32 PM
link   

Saurus

oxford

No its not a Western pov, It just seems very unethical, would understand if they were former members etc but because most lodges don't even know where they come from,...

...Its because they are 'unknowns' and probably wouldn't agree to it while they were alive that bothers me, if it was one of your own lot I wouldn't bat an eyelash and could quite happily accept that.


How is it any different from someone who dies in an accident and has never told anyone what they want done with their remains. What right does anyone have to bury or cremate the remains? It is based purely on the whims and preferences of the survivors, nothing else. Your argument is based on the premise that the majority of people in the world have the same viewpoint as yours, and you assume that, therefore, the owner of the skeleton would have wanted the same. Besides, what happens to unidentified bones does not affect any survivors, so how can it be an ethical issue?



it comes across to me as the desecration of human remains.

...Just because people have been doing stuff for years or it might stem from an Indigenous tribe doesn't make it ok, it is more important to question what we do on a personal level rather than follow a tribe blindly.


I live in Africa where such practices are commonplace, and not considered to be desecration, nor are they considered unethical. In Preceptories where such practices are generally frowned upon, artificial skulls are used, and in some constitutions, such as the English constitution, they have actually substituted this piece of ritual with something slightly different.

Besides, how do you know it's desecration, when you don't know what the ritual entails, or symbolizes?



Just out of interest how many here would donate their own skull to their lodge for this initiation?


It's not an initiation!!!!!!

Oh my God, did you think this was all for fun or to embarrass the candidate. The part of the ritual in question teaches one of the deepest and most beautiful lessons on life and our own mortality in all of Freemasonry!

I don't care what my body is used for after I die - I would gladly have a Lodge using my bones. However, since what happens to my remains after I die affects the grieving process of my family, I will leave it up to them to decide.

Also, in the case of unidentified bones, relatives don't come into the issue, and there are, therefore, no such considerations to take into account.


edit on 17/12/2013 by Saurus because: (no reason given)


Most people after they die probably wouldn’t consider that someone would use their remains in this way, nor would they like it. Yes agreed my viewpoint is based on what most people would think.

If I got a camera crew and went out into the streets of Britain and asked a good selection of people, ‘How would you feel about the Masons using your Skull after you die, to drink out of in one of their rituals?’ I would be very surprised if I even found one person that would be ok with it, most would be downright horrified!

You say the English constitution has replaced this with something slightly different, so this ritual with real skulls isn’t practiced in the UK?

Earlier on in the conversation one of you guys said it was an initiation I thought, but apologies for getting this wrong, no offense intended. No I did not think this was all for fun or to embarrass the candidate, that hadn’t crossed my mind. Maybe funny peculiar but not funny haha


Just because someone is unidentified does not mean considerations should be taken into account.

We all deserve consideration, dead or alive.



posted on Dec, 17 2013 @ 07:45 PM
link   

MysterX
reply to post by Aleister
 


Does eating ice cream from a skull mean that the brain freeze is halved?



Isn't there a mystic level in the Pastafarian religion where pastafarians eat pasta out of a skull? If not, there should be!



posted on Dec, 17 2013 @ 08:31 PM
link   
reply to post by kingswillquiver
 


I find it interesting that although I have been able to flag your thread I can not give you a star, this ritual would appear to be a fragmentary branch of the masons and how much it proliferates the whole network is debatable but remember that though we refer to the masonic order as a singular it is in fact many different chapters which in many cases may have grown from a common seed but not all though over time they have taken to accepting one another as fraternity, in many ways they are a admirable organisation but in others 'Well' and ultimately these people are human beings for most of whom whatever oath they may have sworn they actually do not believe in.

As pointed out on the first page the ancient Celts of the warrior elite and royalty were supposed to have drank from the skulls of vanquished enemy and this may well have been twisted in the early days of the Christian spread through Europe however it did most certainly not originate in the catholic church and begs the question of weather the quote made was made by someone whom has actually read the new testament, it was a practice common in the enactment of the Black Sacrament were the Satanist would use the skull of either a victim of sacrifice often filled with there blood or the blood of a later sacrifice as well as eat human flesh (the real ones not the new age version whom think the devil was good) and though this was almost eradicated such things have a tendency to go underground as with any belief system when hunted and hated (Sadly this cult has been the hardest to totally eradicate), it was a practice conceived to blaspheme the Christ, during the 16th through to the 18th century many nobles were members of the Hellfire club as it was known in England and other titles in Europe where is may have included such as countess bathory (whom is famous for murdering virgins and bathing in there blood to stay young) amongst others and they would attend debauched satanic orgies a little like there version of the somewhat tame scene from Stanley kubrics eyes wide shut as well as make drunken ceremony to honour the devil in the form of a satyr, it can be surmised that as the hellfire club which in England included dukes and duchess as members went underground that the growing influence of the Masons and there secrecy (though not there traditions) would have tempted and allowed certain echelons of society whom by dint of there peerage were guaranteed an automatic high rank (at the time) in these organisations and whom would most certainly have had there own lodges with selected exclusive membership and not open to the body of the TRUE masons would have moved there activity under the veil of secrecy that came with this disguise they adopted and over time they would have spread there corrosive influence throughout many of the unwitting lodges but likely not all.

The body of the masons is not necessarily evil but like any body it can get sick and this is one way that such a disease may have been contracted by that body, the influence of the hellfire club was of course long ago exported to America as well as other locality's and can be seen in the skulls with there mock human sacrifice and own unclean initiation as well as back in its spiritual home the desecrated halls of Eton and the Bullingdon club but and though these secret orders have there levels of corruption they are merely the lower rank of the initiation and most of the highest members of international power society in the west either have ties or are indeed member of the secretive sect that these are merely the door too.
One can obviously surmise therefore by this the logical link to the other power game organisations that exist but remember the Masons were merely used by these people and over time there oath has changed or unified as one order once linked to the masons originally contained an oath to fight Satan if at all possible in life and in death and when all is said and done it is not the order but the people whom make it up that matter, bad ingredients make a poisonous cake but good ones well.
Did I say Bilderberg?.

There is hope for the Masons but not for some of there members like any organisation and remember power attracts the corrupt.

edit on 17-12-2013 by LABTECH767 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2013 @ 11:42 PM
link   

oxford

If I got a camera crew and went out into the streets of Britain and asked a good selection of people, ‘How would you feel about the Masons using your Skull after you die, to drink out of in one of their rituals?’ I would be very surprised if I even found one person that would be ok with it, most would be downright horrified!

You say the English constitution has replaced this with something slightly different, so this ritual with real skulls isn’t practiced in the UK?



Correct.

English constitution Masons (under the United Grand Lodge of England) do not drink out of a skull at all, either real or artificial (the ritual is slightly different for this part). This is because, as you say, the English are not comfortable with the idea.

Many constitutions still do (such as the Scottish, Irish, American and many other constitutions), but usually from an artificial one.

Some Preceptories do use a real skull, but this more commonly found outside of Europe.


edit on 17/12/2013 by Saurus because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 01:08 AM
link   

LABTECH767

... however it did most certainly not originate in the catholic church and begs the question of weather the quote made was made by someone whom has actually read the new testament,


In the Catholic church, the miracle of transubstantiation means that the bread is his body, and the wine is his blood.

This means every Catholic that partakes in communion literally drinks blood and eats flesh.



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 07:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Aleister
 


LMAO...Oh that is the funniest darn thing!

Can I use my extra special crystal skull to eat out of? I'd worship every day and be a good pastafarian!

Monday could be Rastagetti....
Tuesday....Rastatelle.....
Wednesday.....Rastailli....
Thursday...Rastaguine
Friday...Rastaeloni
Saturday...Rastaenne
Sunday...Rastachigli




posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 09:31 AM
link   

Saurus

oxford

If I got a camera crew and went out into the streets of Britain and asked a good selection of people, ‘How would you feel about the Masons using your Skull after you die, to drink out of in one of their rituals?’ I would be very surprised if I even found one person that would be ok with it, most would be downright horrified!

You say the English constitution has replaced this with something slightly different, so this ritual with real skulls isn’t practiced in the UK?



Correct.

English constitution Masons (under the United Grand Lodge of England) do not drink out of a skull at all, either real or artificial (the ritual is slightly different for this part). This is because, as you say, the English are not comfortable with the idea.

Many constitutions still do (such as the Scottish, Irish, American and many other constitutions), but usually from an artificial one.

Some Preceptories do use a real skull, but this more commonly found outside of Europe.


edit on 17/12/2013 by Saurus because: (no reason given)


Just as we evolve spiritually as individuals our traditions and rituals should also reflect this, often ask myself when not sure about something 'what would love do?' in this case for me it would say respect others and the sacredness of life. The Supreme Being loves us all, is there a greater ideal to aspire towards and manifest in the world.

The whole concept of skull drinking for me is reflecting the lessons of spiritual maturity, as individuals and as collective groups, we own our 'choices', and when these are made with love, it is the greatest expression we can show.



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 10:14 AM
link   
reply to post by oxford
 


Do you believe that the eternal soul stays with the mortal body for eternity?

Do you think you have any rituals that others might find odd?

Do you honestly feel it's possible to make a judgement on something that you have no reference or knowledge of based on it outward appearance alone?

I ask these questions with sincerity.



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 07:57 PM
link   
Network Dude I've replied below to your questions...

Do you believe that the eternal soul stays with the mortal body for eternity?

No, however it is possible the soul can be 'linked' in psychic ways to its previous vessels, therefore 'bound' as in 'binding' a practice most often used in 'dark' or 'black' magic.

Do you think you have any rituals that others might find odd?
That involves human bodies without their prior consent, no.

Do you honestly feel it's possible to make a judgement on something that you have no reference or knowledge of based on it outward appearance alone?

Its not the ritual that is the issue, the issue is with the paraphenalia used i.e 'human remains'.

I ask these questions with sincerity.
That is always appreciated.


If it doesn't make a difference in the object itself, only the effect, would it not be better to just get some skulls made from someone that maybe makes props for films? (some of the guys sound disappointed with the current plastic ones).
edit on 18-12-2013 by oxford because: squiffed

edit on 18-12-2013 by oxford because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 08:05 PM
link   
reply to post by kingswillquiver
 


You will never truly get a straight answer from another Mason here. Why?
Because they are on the lower rungs of the ladder and don't know anything beyond what they know.


Ignore them. The lower initiates and outer courts are designed by the upper rungs of the ladder and inner courts to keep you busy and preoccupied.

Besides....how can you be so cruel to harass people of charity.

Same way ya discourage people from speaking out against jews naturally.

Was solomon jewish? or rather
what type of jew was solomon and what type of jew are you?



posted on Dec, 18 2013 @ 08:10 PM
link   
reply to post by network dude
 


All I know is I would like to petition to be uncreated before i ever existed and return to that.


=ZERO


Whomever designed it all screwed it up in a A royal and Royale fashion



posted on Dec, 19 2013 @ 12:45 AM
link   

superluminal11

You will never truly get a straight answer from another Mason here. Why?
Because they are on the lower rungs of the ladder and don't know anything beyond what they know.

Ignore them. The lower initiates and outer courts are designed by the upper rungs of the ladder and inner courts to keep you busy and preoccupied.


How on earth could you possibly know where we (the active Masons in this thread) stand on the ladder?
You don't even know who we are!


edit on 19/12/2013 by Saurus because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 19 2013 @ 01:52 AM
link   
reply to post by superluminal11
 

Wow. Reading your post made me throw up just a little.

You do get answers from the Masons, but just because you don't like the information, doesn't mean it's not true.

Please, oh wise one, tell us what designates one a high-level vs a low level. Please explain to us how we're structured since we're "too low" to know ourselves even though you're not a member and would be by "logic and reason" of your argument, be lower than us on the ladder and thus know less. Please give me 2nd, 3rd, and/or 4th hand information that somehow trumps my 1st hand experience and research. I can't wait.

What's wrong with being Jewish? I know many Jewish people. There's nothing naturally wrong with them.



posted on Dec, 19 2013 @ 02:43 AM
link   
Furthermore, superluminal11, which part of this thread do you think we're lying in? We have been dead honest, even though many non-Masons did not approve of what we said. What exactly do you consider a lie? That we admit that in some Orders, we may use skulls in the ritual?

Or are you just so used to saying: "Oh, you're just low-level Masons", that you use this phrase indiscriminately, without even reading what anyone has said?

Unlike the excellent discussion we have had in this thread, you come along with a post that is both arrogant and ignorant, which will certainly not be appreciated by either the Masons nor the non-masons on this thread.


edit on 19/12/2013 by Saurus because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 19 2013 @ 03:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Saurus
 

I Would suggest you read the new testament, paying particular attention to the statement made by Christ (WHOM IS NOT LUCIFER - how can a house divided stand) that 'this is my body', 'this is my blood', 'do this in memory of me' and then if your accusation against the Catholics is such and that no other church regards it in this fashion then are they by your argument not more Christian, I actually disagree as it is a pan Christian belief and those whom partake of the sacrament (not those whom pop it in there mouth but those whom partake) actually by taking the body of Christ into themselves offer there own Body as a living sacrifice to the Lord and whom take his Blood offer there own LIFE and so are one in Christ, this is what binds Christians together (not all that go to church are Christians) and in doing so they become one with him and one another.
If you do not understand now then you never will.



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 9  10  11    13  14 >>

log in

join