Is the Statue of Liberty Masonic?

page: 5
8
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by pepsi78


All you have to do is show everyone here where in the above quote you offered as proof that masons were the ones to raise this money. this is the kind of thing that makes me wish we could vote the boneheads off the ATS island. If you were on the apprentice, you would be fired.




history1800s.about.com...
The French writer and political figure Edouard de Laboulaye first came up with the idea of a statue celebrating liberty that would be a gift from France to the United States. And the sculptor Fredric-Auguste Bartholdi became fascinated by the idea and went forward with designing the potential statue and promoting the idea of building it.

The problem, of course, was how to pay for it.

The promoters of the statue in France formed an organization, the French-American Union, in 1875.

Masons raised the founds for it ? Are you happy ?

Men, some of whom were masons, helped raise money for this. It was not a masonic endeavor not was the money from a masonic source as far as any evidence I see points to. If you have other information, please display it, but make damn sure you read it before you post it.


Edouard de Laboulaye also a mason and Fredric-Auguste Bartholdi well know mason.

Masons design it, built it, rased funds for it.

The man who designed it, and the man who was in charge of building it were both masons. Did they do this on behalf of masonry, or did they meet because they were both masons, and happened to come up with this idea as artists?

And again, some of the fundraisers were masons, and many were not. Unless you have some new undisclosed information on that.




twins.babyaf.com...
Masonic brothers from both France and the United States formed a fund-raising committee called the Franco-American Union. By the time Libertas was ready to be shipped from France, little progress had been made on the other side of the Atlantic. Controversy continued to swirl over the origin of the statue and its mammoth costs.


did they do so on behalf of masonry? If so, there would be all kinds of votes on this from different lodges, there would be letters and speeches made to most if not all lodges in France. There would be something from the Grand Orient of France stating that they approve this and funded it. I have sent a message to them in hopes that they can shed some light on this. Forgive me if I don't just take your word for it.




posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 01:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Resentedhalo08
 


Yes she go's by many names, Ishtar, Inanna, Isis, libertas and so on.



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 01:48 PM
link   


All you have to do is show everyone here where in the above quote you offered as proof that masons were the ones to raise this money. this is the kind of thing that makes me wish we could vote the boneheads off the ATS island. If you were on the apprentice, you would be fired.

I did, the foundation was made by masons.



Men, some of whom were masons, helped raise money for this. It was not a masonic endeavor not was the money from a masonic source as far as any evidence I see points to. If you have other information, please display it, but make damn sure you read it before you post it.

I don't see how since the organisation was founded by masons and most of the members were masons.
What information, I already provided it.



The man who designed it, and the man who was in charge of building it were both masons. Did they do this on behalf of masonry, or did they meet because they were both masons, and happened to come up with this idea as artists?

Everything was masonic, the president of the french american union was a mason, Edouard de Laboulaye it's place is taken by another mason since he dies, Ferdinand de Lesseps another high ranking mason

Yes it's a coincidence masons, designing it building it, masons founding the union, masons running it, with masons replacing eachother.

There would be no need for a masonic celebration after, so the answer would be because they were masons.
The answer lies on the main plate also, with the two masonic elements.



And again, some of the fundraisers were masons, and many were not. Unless you have some new undisclosed information on that.

The organisation built was masonic, ran by masons.

edit on 17-6-2011 by pepsi78 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by pepsi78


All you have to do is show everyone here where in the above quote you offered as proof that masons were the ones to raise this money. this is the kind of thing that makes me wish we could vote the boneheads off the ATS island. If you were on the apprentice, you would be fired.

I did, the foundation was made by masons.

no. It wasn't. The cornerstone was/is masonic. That is one brick. There are a few more than one bricks in the foundation. You link something that shows the foundation was made by Freemasons(speculative as in apron wearing, go to meeting, have a lodge number masons).




Men, some of whom were masons, helped raise money for this. It was not a masonic endeavor not was the money from a masonic source as far as any evidence I see points to. If you have other information, please display it, but make damn sure you read it before you post it.

I don't see how since the organisation was founded by masons and most of the members were masons.
What information, I already provided it.

Most of the members were masons? that in itself is a dead giveaway that this was most likely a public project and not a masonic one.




The man who designed it, and the man who was in charge of building it were both masons. Did they do this on behalf of masonry, or did they meet because they were both masons, and happened to come up with this idea as artists?

Everything was masonic, the president of the french american union was a mason, Edouard de Laboulaye it's place is taken by another mason since he dies, Ferdinand de Lesseps another high ranking mason

Yes it's a coincidence masons, designing it building it, masons founding the union, masons running it, with masons replacing eachother.

There would be no need for a masonic celebration after, so the answer would be because they were masons.
The answer lies on the main plate also, with the two masonic elements.

again, for the really slow people, the plate you speak of was a commemoration to the laying of the cornerstone. It essentially has nothing to do with the statue itself. It could have fifty masonic emblems on it, and it would have the same significance. Let that sink in among the rocks.





And again, some of the fundraisers were masons, and many were not. Unless you have some new undisclosed information on that.

The organisation built was masonic, ran by masons.

edit on 17-6-2011 by pepsi78 because: (no reason given)


Just so I understand what you are saying, if I find a builder who happens to be a Freemason, and he has a mason working for him, then anything he builds is masonic? If he builds a prison, it's masonic, if he builds an outhouse, it's masonic?



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 02:08 PM
link   


no. It wasn't. The cornerstone was/is masonic. That is one brick.

I was talking about the foundation of the union, I think we are on a different page you and I.



Men, some of whom were masons, helped raise money for this. It was not a masonic endeavor not was the money from a masonic source as far as any evidence I see points to. If you have other information, please display it, but make damn sure you read it before you post it.

I posted the information I have, the foundation of the union was masonic, and masons ran it.



Most of the members were masons? that in itself is a dead giveaway that this was most likely a public project and not a masonic one.

I don't see how, the presidents were masons, people that made the union were masons, of course others were invited for the money, but it was mainly masonic, made and ran.



again, for the really slow people, the plate you speak of was a commemoration to the laying of the cornerstone. It essentially has nothing to do with the statue itself. It could have fifty masonic emblems on it, and it would have the same significance. Let that sink in among the rocks.

The plate is the main plate of the statue, it's for the statue, it talks about installing the statue into function with a masonic ceremony, what corner stones ? the plate is on there because it's on the base of the statue, where do you want them to put the plate, on the statue ? it has nothing to do with the corner stones, no dah.




Just so I understand what you are saying, if I find a builder who happens to be a Freemason, and he has a mason working for him, then anything he builds is masonic? If he builds a prison, it's masonic, if he builds an outhouse, it's masonic?


Yes masons doing this that, building it, designing it, building and runing the union, and no it's not masonic, I see how it works.
edit on 17-6-2011 by pepsi78 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 02:11 PM
link   
If the 'Statue' was 'Masonic' what does that prove?

Either way what exactly does it prove? that this statue is masonic?

were there not signatures on the 'Declaration of Independence' that were 'Masons'?

if it is a 'Masons Statue' does it prove that it is an 'Occult Figure'?

again what does that matter? what is wrong with the 'Occult'? how does that differ if it was a 'Christian Symbol' or other 'Religious Statues'?

what if the Statue was designed by the 'Catholic Church'?



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 02:24 PM
link   
reply to post by pepsi78
 


As with anything there has to be an end. And in endings there is usually a victor and a looser.
Being a looser is something that happens in life. firstly, lets look here:

a plaque on the Statue of liberty. It is one with a poem and some information on who built it. Very nice. Not masonic, but very nice.



Now on to exploring the vastness that is Looserville, population 1, Pepsie.


Please take all the time you need to study this plaque. Think on it, reflect back to the days when you thought that a repetitive opinion, however wrong, would sway the opinions of many.

there is no shame in loosing, but there is immense shame in not admitting when one is wrong.
Have a super day.



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 02:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Darth_Prime
 


I was just trying to research this. I didn't much care which way the answer came. But the arrogant insistence of this guy made me keep digging. I now have my answer. I learned a lot, and enjoyed most of it. There were a few points where I could have ate nails and crapped BB's, but that is all in the past.

I am proud of the masonic involvement in this Statue. It shows how masons are true leaders and how the real "power of masonry" is. We can use what we learned in the craft to accomplish great things. These men are an inspiration.



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 02:34 PM
link   
reply to post by network dude
 


Yes it was offered by grant orient de france, we all know by who it was offered.
They even returned it as a symbol, grant orient us to grant orient de france as in reverse to how it was then.
We have bee thru this.


On June 27th, 2008, the Statue of Liberty returned to Paris when the Grand Orient of the United States of America presented the Grand Orient of France with a framed print of the Lady Liberty in New York harbor. This was symbolic of the continued spirit of fraternity that has existed between America and France since the American Revolution.

You know who grant orient de france and grand orient us are.

As I was saing, he him self was the member of grand orient of france


www.freemasonrytoday.com...
Bartholdi was initiated on 14 October 1875 in the lodge L’Alsace-Lorraine, Grand Orient of France. He was encouraged in the project by a mason, Henri Martin; the inner steel skeleton of the statue was supplied by another mason, the engineer Gustav Eiffel.





Funding came ostensibly from the efforts of Freemasons in France and America, including the future President Theodore Roosevelt, a keen mason.

The only reason they let others in is because they did not have suficient funds.

A nice find, masons reviewing work in the lodge, under the review of masonry.


When the statue was virtually complete, Bartholdi convened the Brethren of his mother lodge in order that they might review his work, even before it was shown to the United States committee

edit on 17-6-2011 by pepsi78 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 02:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by pepsi78
reply to post by network dude
 


Yes it was offered by grant orient de france, we all know by who it was offered.
They even returned it as a symbol, grant orient us to grant orient de france as in reverse to how it was then.
We have bee thru this.


On June 27th, 2008, the Statue of Liberty returned to Paris when the Grand Orient of the United States of America presented the Grand Orient of France with a framed print of the Lady Liberty in New York harbor. This was symbolic of the continued spirit of fraternity that has existed between America and France since the American Revolution.

You know who grant orient de france and grand orient us are.

If you look at your source for the above (even though you didn't provide a link to it) you will notice that this is talking about a picture of the Statue not the Statue itself. It was a symbolic gesture.


As I was saing, he him self was the member of grand orient of france


www.freemasonrytoday.com...
Bartholdi was initiated on 14 October 1875 in the lodge L’Alsace-Lorraine, Grand Orient of France. He was encouraged in the project by a mason, Henri Martin; the inner steel skeleton of the statue was supplied by another mason, the engineer Gustav Eiffel.

Yep, no arguments there. In fact, I have no further arguments. My case has been presented.






Funding came ostensibly from the efforts of Freemasons in France and America, including the future President Theodore Roosevelt, a keen mason.

The only reason they let others in is because they did not have suficient funds.

A nice find, masons reviewing work in the lodge.


When the statue was virtually complete, Bartholdi convened the Brethren of his mother lodge in order that they might review his work, even before it was shown to the United States committee

edit on 17-6-2011 by pepsi78 because: (no reason given)



Funding came ostensibly from the efforts of Freemasons in France and America


please look at the bold part in the above quote. Their efforts to help find funds. That is all.

Once more for dramatic effect!!!!



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 03:01 PM
link   
reply to post by network dude
 

The statue of liberty is a masonic art work, under the review of the masons, design by the masons, funded by the masons,built by the masons, if you think otherwise then that is your opinion.



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by pepsi78
reply to post by network dude
 

The statue of liberty is a masonic art work, under the review of the masons, design by the masons, funded by the masons,built by the masons, if you think otherwise then that is your opinion.

and the opinion of the People of France and the People of the United States.

don't worry, I never thought you would be man enough to admit you were wrong.
It's just no in you. lack of character I suppose.



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 03:04 PM
link   


If you look at your source for the above (even though you didn't provide a link to it) you will notice that this is talking about a picture of the Statue not the Statue itself. It was a symbolic gesture.
]
Well yes the return was symbolic, they gave a picture, you don't want them returning the statue, so they gave a picture, a symbolic gesture of how it happened then, GOF giving the statue to GOUS.
edit on 17-6-2011 by pepsi78 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 03:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by network dude


don't worry, I never thought you would be man enough to admit you were wrong.
It's just no in you. lack of character I suppose.


There is nothing to admit, it's a masonic statue from all points of view.



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by pepsi78
The statue of liberty is a masonic art work, under the review of the masons, design by the masons, funded by the masons,built by the masons, if you think otherwise then that is your opinion.
Aw, say what you really think. The statue of liberty is a rich white man's art work, under the review of the rich white men, design by the rich white men, funded by the rich white men,built by the rich white men, if you think otherwise then that is your opinion.



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 04:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by JoshNorton

Originally posted by pepsi78
The statue of liberty is a masonic art work, under the review of the masons, design by the masons, funded by the masons,built by the masons, if you think otherwise then that is your opinion.
Aw, say what you really think. The statue of liberty is a rich white man's art work, under the review of the rich white men, design by the rich white men, funded by the rich white men,built by the rich white men, if you think otherwise then that is your opinion.


It's not about white rich folks, but masons and the statue of liberty.



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 04:12 PM
link   
OK, let's get past this ambiguity. A question for the Masons. Are Shriner's hospitals the work of Masons?



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 04:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by pepsi78
It's not about white rich folks, but masons and the statue of liberty.
But isn't it true that the men who designed, funded and built the Statue of Liberty were caucasian males? I'd bet most of them were Christian, too.

By your own logic, the Statue of Liberty is a male statue, since it was designed, funded, and built by men.
By your logic, the Statue of Liberty is a Christian statue, since it was designed, funded and built by Christians.
By your logic, the Staute of Liberty is a Human statue, since it was designed, funded and built by homo sapiens.



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 04:15 PM
link   
reply to post by intrepid
 


In my opinion, yes. Every Shriner is a mason. All of the money is raised by masons/Shriners. the hospital is managed by Shriners/masons.

That is my opinion and I have offered no hard facts. I could be wrong.

What do you think Intrepid?



posted on Jun, 17 2011 @ 04:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid
OK, let's get past this ambiguity. A question for the Masons. Are Shriner's hospitals the work of Masons?
Give me ambiguity or give me something else! (Battle cry of the ambivalent.)

The Shriner's Hospitals are the work of the Shrine.

A prerequisite of joining the Shrine is being a Master Mason.

A prerequisite of joining Masonry is being a man, free born, sound of mind and member, of lawful age and properly vouched for.

So the Shriner's Hospitals are the work of men, free born, sound of mind and member, of lawful age and properly vouched for, if you want to abstract. Or they're the work of Shriners if you don't.

What we're arguing here is where the line is drawn.





top topics
 
8
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join