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.

 

Templars

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 30 2004 @ 10:01 AM
link   
And apparently Necros isn't aware that the Templars were Crusaders.

Doesn't surprise me, though...

Fiat Lvx.




posted on Sep, 30 2004 @ 10:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Masonic Light
And apparently Necros isn't aware that the Templars were Crusaders.

Doesn't surprise me, though...


You have a bad opinion about Necros?
I don't mind him; I don't mind anyone here yet;
I haven't been here long enough



posted on Sep, 30 2004 @ 10:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by AtheiX



You have a bad opinion about Necros?
I don't mind him; I don't mind anyone here yet;
I haven't been here long enough


lol...once you've read a couple of his posts, I think you'll understand my off-hand dismissal of him. He's been caught in far too many lies to have any credibility, although it's possible that not all of them are lies, and he just has no idea what he's talking about (like the Templars and the Crusades, the 32 of Masonry, etc.). But the stuff about being drugged and stalked across the world all the way to Thailand by the little old ladies from the Eastern Star is a bit much!

If you've read one post by him, you've pretty much read them all; likewise with Gadfly.

Fiat Lvx.

[edit on 30-9-2004 by Masonic Light]



posted on Sep, 30 2004 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Masonic Light
. . . likewise with Gadfly.


Good, at last we're finally on the same page.
Now I don't have to worry about ML getting all ragged out by my posts- he can just ditto his answers.

On another note:
Masonry claims to use allegories to teach. One set of allegories revolve around the fantasy of Hiram Abif.

Hiram was a 'hired man' of the King of Tyre. Hiram couldn't qualify for modern masonry in some jurisdictions because he was not a free man. As a recognized master in metal works it takes Freemasonry, in all it's twisting, to make him THE acknowledged master of stone.
Other than masonry's creative use of Hiram as an farcical and allegorical figure purporting to use the death rites thereof, a master mason would remain lost. I can't see how being 'found' through a fairy-tale extolling death enlightens anyone.

There's probably some good mumbo-jumbo floating around that explains all this death-cult stuff.



posted on Sep, 30 2004 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by PublicGadfly

Originally posted by Masonic Light
. . . likewise with Gadfly.


Good, at last we're finally on the same page.
Now I don't have to worry about ML getting all ragged out by my posts- he can just ditto his answers.

On another note:
Masonry claims to use allegories to teach. One set of allegories revolve around the fantasy of Hiram Abif.

Hiram was a 'hired man' of the King of Tyre. Hiram couldn't qualify for modern masonry in some jurisdictions because he was not a free man. As a recognized master in metal works it takes Freemasonry, in all it's twisting, to make him THE acknowledged master of stone.
Other than masonry's creative use of Hiram as an farcical and allegorical figure purporting to use the death rites thereof, a master mason would remain lost. I can't see how being 'found' through a fairy-tale extolling death enlightens anyone.

There's probably some good mumbo-jumbo floating around that explains all this death-cult stuff.


Ahh, now we're getting somewhere... you don't understand... well, that explains everything.

As masons, WE DO understand the lessons taught to us, and it is not about death... too bad you can't see it, but, hey, after reading your posts, its clear you do not understand much of what you claim...



posted on Sep, 30 2004 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by PublicGadfly


Hiram was a 'hired man' of the King of Tyre. Hiram couldn't qualify for modern masonry in some jurisdictions because he was not a free man.


I dunno where you got the "hired" from. He was "sent" according to the Bible but nowhere in Masonic ritual or Biblical literature does the word "hired" occur.
But anyway, "hired" means he would have been paid for his work. This would imply that he was a free man, otherwise he would not have received a wage.

Try again.

[edit on 30-9-2004 by Leveller]



posted on Sep, 30 2004 @ 01:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Leveller

I dunno where you got the "hired" from. He was "sent" according to the Bible but nowhere in Masonic ritual or Biblical literature does the word "hired" occur.
But anyway, "hired" means he would have been paid for his work. This would imply that he was a free man, otherwise he would not have received a wage.


Exactly. The more I read from those two guys, the more I'm convinced they're 10th graders.

Fiat Lvx.



posted on Sep, 30 2004 @ 02:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Masonic Light

Originally posted by Leveller

I dunno where you got the "hired" from. He was "sent" according to the Bible but nowhere in Masonic ritual or Biblical literature does the word "hired" occur.
But anyway, "hired" means he would have been paid for his work. This would imply that he was a free man, otherwise he would not have received a wage.


Exactly. The more I read from those two guys, the more I'm convinced they're 10th graders.

Fiat Lvx.


My brother... you are being too charitable.

[edit on 9/30/04 by theron dunn]



posted on Sep, 30 2004 @ 02:14 PM
link   
I'm getting the impression that this topic is being used for private fights
If I was a moderator I would clean up here

People here really offend each other



posted on Sep, 30 2004 @ 03:06 PM
link   


Sorry to but in with some bad news for you all but the "Red Cross" was not the ensignia of the Templars, it was the ensignia of "The Crusade."


as i recall ca. 1150 the equal armed splayed red cross was granted to the
Knights Templar as their blazon. it differed from the crusader cross in those
two details, equal armed and splayed as opposed to the roman style with
extended lower arm.

The black and white battle flag of the Templars called Beauseant as i recall was just that a battle flag. I have never seen one or a representation of one with the cross overlaid but it could be. i would be interested in a source for this flag.



posted on Oct, 1 2004 @ 07:50 AM
link   
My point is that the Red cross was an emblem of The Crusades, the regimental banner of the Templays was as I said, two triangular B/W banners, sometimes it has the cross on it sometimes it doesn't.
Same way as you will see a Blue UN helmet on a German, British or any other soldier from a conglomerate force.

As far as my "lies" - the only one thats been really caught out here is Masonic Lite because he strangely tried to BS me over owning a book he clearly hasn't ever seen apart from the bits I posted from it.

It really ground him up because he just kept floating one wrong post after another as I kept posting more and more of the pages from it, lots of nonsense like the author was English (he was American) and that it wasn't Scottish Rite etc...
He hasn't been the same since.
Much the same as when Mirthful Me displayed his ignorance of Masonry and tried to insult me by calling me a "Rough Ashlar."

These guys really hate me, you only have to read their posts.
Could it be becuause what I'm saying is true?
Only myself and they know forsure...or do they?
I'm finding more and more that I give them too much credit these days.

[edit on 1-10-2004 by MrNECROS]



posted on Oct, 1 2004 @ 08:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by MrNECROS

As far as my "lies" -


These guys really hate me, you only have to read their posts.
Could it be becuause what I'm saying is true?
Only myself and they know forsure...or do they?
I'm finding more and more that I give them too much credit these days.

[edit on 1-10-2004 by MrNECROS]


Please don't forget the following:

1.) Your allegations that Masons vandalized your toilet.

2.) Your allegations that Masons drugged you, stole your girfriend, and got you fired from your job.

3.) Your allegatinos that Masons and Eastern Star members (that's a new one) pursued and harrassed you in several countries and over more than one continent, as if they had nothing better to do (i.e., jobs, famile, etc.) LOL . . . did they fly, did they plant a tracking device into your bottom? Perhaps they called ahead?

Anyone using the search function on ATS can find all of these allegations you have made.

Just trying to keep the record straight here. You have not bothered to make anty effort to explain these events in detail or prove their veracity. Names? Lodge #?

You were accused of spreading falsehoods. And thanks to your unfounded, utterly OUTLANDISH claims, which you have not bothered to prove with all of your heart and might . . . . they remain falsehoods to this day.





[edit on 1-10-2004 by LTD602]

[edit on 1-10-2004 by LTD602]



posted on Oct, 1 2004 @ 08:10 AM
link   
Oh yeah and that would be LTD trying to misquote me.
Dunno why people do this stupid cut'n'paste rubbish, all it does is make a thread illegible, or maybe thats why they do it?
Most of these threads would be less than one page if people didn't do this infantile nonsense.



posted on Oct, 1 2004 @ 08:15 AM
link   
Nope, you wrote all that. I just addressed certain parts of what you wrote, not the whole thing.

Once again:

1.) Your allegations that Masons vandalized your toilet.

2.) Your allegations that Masons drugged you, stole your girfriend, and got you fired from your job.

3.) Your allegatinos that Masons and Eastern Star members (that's a new one) pursued and harrassed you in several countries and over more than one continent, as if they had nothing better to do (i.e., jobs, famile, etc.) LOL . . . did they fly, did they plant a tracking device into your bottom? Perhaps they called ahead?

Anyone using the search function on ATS can find all of these allegations you have made.

Just trying to keep the record straight here. You have not bothered to make anty effort to explain these events in detail or prove their veracity. Names? Lodge #?

You were accused of spreading falsehoods. And thanks to your unfounded, utterly OUTLANDISH claims, which you have not bothered to prove with all of your heart and might . . . . they remain falsehoods to this day.



posted on Oct, 1 2004 @ 08:23 AM
link   
LTD in case your unaware this thread was about Templar links to Banking and suchlike - can you go bother somebody else please?
Also if you want to print out stuff I've said in the past, try not to embellish it, a lot of of what you're saying isn't correct, if you have a beef with it then re-raise the thread, don't polute this one.
Or better still just ignore this forum if you thinks it's full of nutbar crazies who just want to defame your beautiful cult.

Good to see you displaying the psychotic behaviour of a fanatic as usual.



posted on Oct, 1 2004 @ 08:32 AM
link   
When exactly are you going to address these allegation you have made? When are you oing to go through each one, point-by-point, so that we can all understand?

These are serious accusations you have made, and they have been dismissed as falsehoods.

Yet, you wonder about why you are accused of spreading "lies", and you wonder why the Masons "hate" you.

When you ask questions like that, and play the innocent lamb, you're going to be called out on it, and you'll be reminded of your unfinished business regarding the SERIOUS accusations you have made against Masonry.

If I DO start a new thread about your accusations, do you promise to address each one you have made, point-by-point, with explicit detail, names, Lodge #, etc??



posted on Oct, 1 2004 @ 08:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by LTD602
These are serious accusations you have made, and they have been dismissed as falsehoods.


How does this work out?
YOU or some other "judge" dismisses something then calls for a trial?

What is missing in this scenario?

Mason logic at its best.



posted on Oct, 1 2004 @ 08:47 AM
link   
Mason Logic at it's BEST:

- Person makes outlandish claims

- Person is asked about claims. Required to prove them.

- Person fails to prove them, and ignores every opportunity to do so.

- Person's claims are dismissed as falsehoods.

- Person cries on the boards about being called a 'liar."

- Person is reminded of his failure to prove/explain claims, even when given every opportunity to do so.




Originally posted by MrNECROS

As far as my "lies" - the only one thats been really caught out here is Masonic Lite because he strangely tried to BS me over owning a book he clearly hasn't ever seen apart from the bits I posted from it.


These guys really hate me, you only have to read their posts.
Could it be becuause what I'm saying is true?
Only myself and they know forsure...or do they?
I'm finding more and more that I give them too much credit these days.

[edit on 1-10-2004 by MrNECROS]


[edit on 1-10-2004 by LTD602]



posted on Oct, 1 2004 @ 08:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by LTD602
Mason Logic at it's BEST:


Don't know 'bout that.
Seems that pro-masons are the ones skipping sideways. You don't to need to check out your answers with theron or ML after you reach the 3rd deg!

Two years or so and you'll be able to answer all for yourself- good luck on that 'journey'



posted on Oct, 1 2004 @ 11:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by AtheiX
I'm getting the impression that this topic is being used for private fights
If I was a moderator I would clean up here

People here really offend each other

Now I'm absolutely sure this topic is used by you people for private fights
People: you offend each other; If I was a moderator... you know what would I do



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join