Why do masons get angry at people researching their beliefs?

Originally posted by John_Rodger_Cornman
How can you smell over the internet?

Never heard of a packet sniffer?

Originally posted by JoshNorton

Originally posted by John_Rodger_Cornman
How can you smell over the internet?

Never heard of a packet sniffer?

yeah.

There is that.



What does HTTP,SOCKS, TCP/IP smell like?

Carrots?

reply to post by JoshNorton

No. Again, Lucifer was never meant to be a name in the Bible. Nowhere in the Bible does it say that there was an angel named Lucifer who was cast out of heaven and became Satan.

I know, JN. You aren't going to get an argument from me there.

I didn't link you to the Bible, I linked you to Margaret Murray; and she wasn't talking about the devil either.

You familiar with Margaret Murray, JN?

reply to post by JoshNorton


I can't believe you made me go ferret that out for myself when you were obviously looking right at it.



It may be on page 101 of whatever you are looking at but it is not in what I am looking at. So if anyone is interested JN's quote comes from Pike's Morals and Dogma: 3rd Degree, Master Mason.

I am going to digest this, JN, and get back to you shortly.

Originally posted by Frater210
You familiar with Margaret Murray, JN?

Actually, no. I haven't had much academic interest in neopaganism, even though a friend of mine is handfasted to Morning Glory and Oberon Zell-Ravenheart. While I'm fairly well-read on some of Robert Anton Wilson's Cosmic Trigger series and related books, and some of the chaos magick works of Phil Hine and Patrick Dunn (and even Grant Morrison), I'm less familiar with the more historical texts.

reply to post by Frater210


Sorry, it wasn't clear from your post which part needed more context. When quoting M&D, I'm generally referring to page numbers included in the one posted here. It's much more searchable than PDF copies, being in plain-text.

reply to post by JoshNorton

No, Pike knew that there was no Lucifer as well

I hate going on about this lucifer thing, as there are bigger fish to fry in Pike than lucifer.

But if Pike knew that there was no lucifer why would he refer to a false lucifer?

You might be wondering what, if any, my agenda may be. I will tell you.

To get to the bottom of what the hell Pike was talking about. That's it.

I am sure you can see the inconsistency there as well, JN.

reply to post by JoshNorton


Dude, you nailed it. I kept thinking, 'Searchable, searchable, I need one that is searchable'.

Thank you.

My old school library skills are pretty quick though, huh?

reply to post by Frater210


I disagree that there must be a dichotomy when he says "false Lucifer." To me, he's saying that Lucifer is a lie, not that there's a "real Lucifer" to contrast with.

reply to post by JoshNorton




Oh, man. I am dying. I don't know if you meant to be funny here but this was just a really impressive post...

Actually, no. I haven't had much academic interest in neopaganism, even though a friend of mine is handfasted to Morning Glory and Oberon Zell-Ravenheart. While I'm fairly well-read on some of Robert Anton Wilson's Cosmic Trigger series and related books, and some of the chaos magick works of Phil Hine and Patrick Dunn (and even Grant Morrison), I'm less familiar with the more historical texts.

I get it. You get around. Me too.

So you must have some opinion on Pike's goatiness. I am just interested in what it is. I bet I learn something.

Yer funny, JN.

Originally posted by Frater210
reply to post by JoshNorton

 

Dude, you nailed it. I kept thinking, 'Searchable, searchable, I need one that is searchable'.

Thank you.

No worries. I end up quoting him here so often, I've started using Google to my advantage:

site:www.sacred-texts.com/mas/md/ blah

will search the Sacred-Texts version of Morals & Dogma, through all chapters, for the term "blah". Replace blah with your search term as necessary.

reply to post by JoshNorton

I disagree that there must be a dichotomy when he says "false Lucifer." To me, he's saying that Lucifer is a lie, not that there's a "real Lucifer" to contrast with.

This I am going to get back to you on. I have a feeling that we aren't going to agree but I am gonna find out.

and even Grant Morrison

Invisibles?

Originally posted by Frater210
Oh, man. I am dying. I don't know if you meant to be funny here but this was just a really impressive post...

I get it. You get around. Me too.

You know MG and Oberon? I gather that they're a pretty big deal in some pagan communities, fairly well respected authors, etc, as well as big proponents of polyamory, obviously. (That's not really my scene either, but I try not to judge…I have a lot of friends in triads, foursomes and moresomes.)

The point I was trying to get at was that I'm more of a sole practitioner chaos magician, and not well-read in texts on wicca or other, perhaps more organized, pagan belief systems. I don't go to Beltane or Samhain campouts even though a large portion of my social circle would be at such events. I'm not familiar with Murray, and haven't even read Drawing Down the Moon or other Dianic texts, really.

Just so you know where I'm coming from… *shrug*

Originally posted by Frater210

and even Grant Morrison

Invisibles?

He had a pretty good essay on sigil magick in Disinfo's "Book of Lies". I've been meaning to read the Invisibles, and have bought the first 2 volumes, but I'm behind on my reading…

reply to post by JoshNorton


Yargh.

I just finished it.

Yargh.

Wanna see what Cebe's Tablet looks like? Pike mentions it at the beginning of the 3rd degree.




Listen, JN, I will be honest with you. Pike sucks. Trying to wade through his garbled pseudo kabbalah is about as much fun as 2 or 3 hundred pages of Paul Foster Case.

I am not sure if I will ever understand why Pike did what he did with M+D. I think it is safe to say that Pike is responsible for injecting all of that stuff in to Freemasonry. I think Freemasonry was probably 'esoteric' enough without Pike coming along and adding all that stuff.

The reason why no one ever gets to the final word on this Pike/lucifer thing is because in order to do so one would have to go and read that stupid book. Who wants to do that?

I present an open challenge to anyone who thinks that there is actually anything in all that poorly presented pile of occult rigamorale (M+D) that is cogent, complete and actually offers any useful insight in to The Mysteries.

I am pretty nifty with my occult cipher tool kit and I am telling you there is nothing in there but a bunch of 'sorta Theosophical', 'sorta Louis Alphonse Constant', 'sorta Rudolph Steiner' mix mash. In other words like a lot of stuff that was being published around this time. And Pike trying to sell 'Kabbalah' as ancient is just humorous.

That being said.

You won't get any more guff from me regarding the silly lucifer quote. I don't really even want to know what Pike was meaning any more. So what.

The guy is definitely unique and there is just no way that Freemasonry can be identified by Pike.

He was just a colorful guy that really loved the occult and wanted to write about it and be respected as a guy that new a lot of mysterious stuff. I get it.

No lucifer in Freemasonry. Never has been.

It was fun stirring the pot though.

Thanks, ATS Freemasons. I learned a lot.

Originally posted by Frater210

No lucifer in Freemasonry. Never has been.

It was fun stirring the pot though.

Thanks, ATS Freemasons. I learned a lot.

As did I as usual. BTW, your avitar is priceless.
I know you get that all the time, but I think it's sweet.

reply to post by JoshNorton

The point I was trying to get at was that I'm more of a sole practitioner chaos magician, and not well-read in texts on wicca or other, perhaps more organized, pagan belief systems. I don't go to Beltane or Samhain campouts even though a large portion of my social circle would be at such events. I'm not familiar with Murray, and haven't even read Drawing Down the Moon or other Dianic texts, really.

No freakin' way. You and I have been running in the same circles. Oh God, the stories I could tell. Let's just say that although I have never lived in Germany or Iceland I live in L.A. and I was really active between 88 and 00.

I have just taken a real interest over the past several years in Witchcraft. Not Wicca though. The only interest in the thing called Wicca that I have is in its presence as a historical marker in culture and society.

I have no interest in personal practice; my interests come from more of a yearning to understand the Anthropological and Sociological aspects and especially the Psychological (and even looking at Witchcraft through the lens of Computer Science ) I sense there is power in the understanding.

Witchcraft when studied in it's international context can yield some pretty amazing insights in to how people think and feel and operate in their environments. Sounds glib but try me on that one and check it out.
My usual studies stay focused around America, East Anglia, UK, Salem and lately, Nathaniel Hawthorne (Septimius Felton).

You know MG and Oberon?

Nah. I just thought it was funny when you started to run it down and I was thinking, 'Oh boy, here we go'. It stands to reason that you would have a 'background' so to speak.



I have been in the front end and out the behind of all that stuff going on, well, a decade ago. If I were to say where I am coming from presently, it might blow my cover as, "a mysterious guy that knows stuff about the occult", I have a rep to consider. But I will say for sure that my paramount interest after all these years is in Alchemy and Spagyrics. I am a skilled stovetop spagyricist.

He had a pretty good essay on sigil magick in Disinfo's "Book of Lies". I've been meaning to read the Invisibles, and have bought the first 2 volumes, but I'm behind on my reading…

The Invisibles were great. A little funky, but it is hard to come by anything that has a focus on the stuff we are in to.

I imagine you must be a fan of Spare?

Thanks, JN, this has been fun.

reply to post by network dude


Thanks, NetworkDude. I really like the little guy, too.

You are a good pot stirrer.

Did you notice? For effect I put Venus (As the morning star) as my background since I have been going on and on about lucifer.

I hope I haven't pissed off the big guy. All in fun ya know.

Well, ATS.

I guess they don't get all that angry after all.

In fact these guys are hideously knowledgeable and terrifyingly friendly...

Ahhhhh!

...much like any group of jokers that you might run in to at a local lodge. Just slightly weirder.

A lot of people in a lot of strange places on the web have a lot to say about Freemasons on ATS. I guess it is like the Masons themselves; if you want to get it, you got to get in there. Same with ATS; if you want to get it, you gotta get in there.

ATS just is.

Originally posted by Frater210
Well, ATS.

I guess they don't get all that angry after all.

In fact these guys are hideously knowledgeable and terrifyingly friendly...

Ahhhhh!

...much like any group of jokers that you might run in to at a local lodge. Just slightly weirder.

A lot of people in a lot of strange places on the web have a lot to say about Freemasons on ATS. I guess it is like the Masons themselves; if you want to get it, you got to get in there. Same with ATS; if you want to get it, you gotta get in there.

ATS just is.

What is the difference between a Wiccan and a black magician?

What is the difference between a york rite Freemason and a Scottish rite Freemason and a Shriner?