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.

 

The Secret of Freemasonry Seen in the Reflection of a Mirror - What do you see?

page: 30
21
<< 27  28  29    31  32 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 18 2012 @ 06:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Conspirus
Old ground was being covered because you don’t understand how to follow a train of thought...


Sorry, just because conspirus does not think that Roosevelt was Christian because he is not the same flavor of Christian as you does not make it so.


Haha, do you REALLY think I’m just making up everything I’m telling you?


Funny you should ask.


I suggest you use some of the plethora of time you have to spend on ATS to do some legitimate research for your own good. You know the antichrist is going to function as a trinity too right?


Uh, no. I have no clue, unlike you, as to anything this fictional anti-Christ has planned. Do you know what the Easter Bunny has in store as well?


Whether or not you have an issue with it is besides the point, the fact that you don’t doesn’t surprise me at all and in fact is more proof mind control tactics work...


No, it is not 'mind control', it is called respect for other's opinions which the bulk of hard core religious individuals do not have.


...most of the population has already accepted secular humanism, readying the souls to be reaped in the very near future...


'Souls to be reaped'? More Biblical mumbo-jumbo.


You have to be involved in the mystery classes of freemasonry to even begin to know anything deeper.


Considering you do not know what my involvement level is and that your's is ZERO, I find your comments to be rather hilarious.



You’re hopeless man. It is YOUR plenty who are the mind-programmed public...


Maybe one day we can all be as cool and 'unplugged' as you are and demonstrate our self-preceived superior intellect and understanding of the world at large in an obnoxious and pendantic manner.


Your sour attitude rubs off on me negatively and you have given me nothing except your ignorance, self-assured knowledge, and condescending attitude...


Oh, waaah, so it is my fault you act the way you do? Please, take some personal responsibility.


...I am leaning towards avoiding long discussions with you as a whole in the future,as my time on ATS is drastically limited.


Do whatever you want, your personal life is really a non-factor to me.


Haha! You really don’t get it do you, you didn‘t then and you don‘t now.


Is that your way of saying that you could not find an eye in a triangle predating the Renaissance


Hmm, yes and that would explain why other esteemed 33rd degree masons would write forwards on Hall’s writings that he wrote before he was a freemason right?


You mean in the 1976 reprint? Oh, hah, hah, you kill me with your 'research'.


Why do the majority of freemasons support Manly P Hall’s writings and treat them as Masonic works to be esteemed yet you do not?


Because Hall's writings are his, get ready, OPINION. Not everyone shares the same OPINION. But you, as what I hope, are your own person and acutally can formulate your own OPINION, without unduly resorting to other's OPINION. This is called being a rational and cognitive adult.


Your statement does nothing but show how inconsistent you are in your views, or within Freemasonry as a whole (though it confirms certain other things of Freemasonry in my mind), and does nothing to convince me otherwise.


Which is precisely the point, that Masonry is not consistent in most things which pretty much disproves your assinine 'mind control' crap.



For having such a “factually-structured argument” yourself you’re one to talk. The amount of facts you ignore even when it is in your face to uphold your pride and brainwashed beliefs is staggering. Willingly ignorant. Know what that means? Dumb on purpose….though you’re probably just oblivious.


'Dumb on purpose'? Hah, you mean like quoting the Taxil Hoax or thinking forwards to Hall's books were in there from the beginning? That dumb? Yeah, you keep on being 'smart', it is doing wonders for your position. Maybe you can quote Nesta Webster or Jack Chick next.


YOU were disputing it man, you have short term memory complex or what?


I was disputing the Great Seal, not the Eye of Providence. The Great Seal is more than the Eye of Providence. Explain in detail how all the remaining symbolism is Masonic.


There are plenty more, some of which were described in the large quotation I gave to you - I have no desire whatsoever to go into any deep discussion of any other symbols with you.


Will not or can not? I suspect the latter. It is okay, I understand, when one is bereft of evidence, deflect.


Ah but are you proving otherwise? Are you not using the same exact argument? Can you confirm he was Christian? Mr. ‘Contormo’ you may like to know, in his original painting had an image of 3 heads connected, this represents Hecate, goddess of black alchemy and magic. Explains why the Pope would have had an issue with the original image eh? Why would Contormo even consider to put this on a painting if he’s a Christian?


Because Christians believe in the Holy Trinity and the Transfiguration where all three are one.


How are the authors of the Bible questioned as far as their beliefs go? See, this is why you shouldn’t put your personal conclusions out there when you don’t know much about the Bible yourself or those who wrote it. Most if not all of the authors on the books included in the canon of the Bible can be considered to have followed God or Christ - and are included in Jesus‘ genealogy.


Jesus' genealogy? No one can even prove if he actually existed and now you have a family tree for him? How nice. You let your fanatical religious beliefs dictate what is real and what is not and people are supposed to take you seriously?


Would you get sawn in half for anything you believe? What about beheaded, boiled in oil, torn in two, skinned alive, or crucified upside down?


How is dying for one's belief somehow make that belief system anymore valid or legitimate than another? It only means you decided to die for it. Hell, the radical Islamists have the Saints beat every day of the week.


One question for you: if I do have a “tight, Bible-hugging viewpoint” as you put it, why are my arguments more than “you’re wrong because the Bible says so.”


Your arguements are quite a bit of, 'The anti-Christ this and the anti-Christ that'. One needs to have a pretty severe adherence to literal Biblical theology to even contemplate a belief in this cartoonish anti-Christ.


Right, there is no Biblical evidence.


Exactly.


Where you scream “where does the BIBLE say THIS” everywhere else where you think it’s applicable, here it’s an exception, just for you.


Exception for me? You brought it up but did not say where in the Bible it was located. All I did was ask where the evidence was located but somehow you did not produce said evidence. You seem to be deflecting.


You know the antichrist will be known and work as a trinity right?


Uh, no. Nor do I care about your childhood boogeyman and his supposed dogmatic-inspired modus operandi.


You know that secret societies esteem Jahbulon as a Trinitarian god, right?


Really? You want to show a source for that? Before you do make sure you do not pull another Taxil Hoax boner.


Satan likes to mimic God.


Who likes to mimic God? The Tooth Fairy?


See you use the reverse logic from your belief that Easter and Christmas were originally pagan holidays here with this all seeing eye marathon, and you‘re almost correct.


My belief that they were? Try every knowledgable person's belief that they were.


Wow you really don't know very much do you. He wrote hymns for Satan...


No, he wrote a poem called Hymn to Satan.


...spent his honeymoon in the king's chamber of the great pyramid in which his wife got possessed...


You acutally believe in possession? Like in demons and other fake crap?


...taught rock bands that if they can’t openly sing songs for Satan to incorporate messages for him by backmasking...


'Taught rock bands'? When did he do this? After he got a time machine and went into the 1960's before he dropped dead in 1947 before Rock and Roll existed? Maybe Satan transported him into the future, or maybe he was reincarnated as Peter Grant. It is shameful how sloppy you are.


...these are just a few examples of what he did. He didn’t care for Satan though, not one bit nope.


Yup, that one poem just proves your point so succinctly.


Do you even read my arguments thoroughly? You say I miss the point, so do you dude, more than just often. I never said the all seeing eye “means the Illuminati is watching you”. It is a representation of Lucifer.


Lucifer the planet or Lucifer the make believe entity that you seem overly concerned about? Sorry, it has, and still does, represent the Holy Trinity.

Dude I went to the biggest Christian university in the world...


Wow, dude, so cool for you. How was the social scene? Must have rocked. Not the Crowley-influencing-rock-muscians-rocking most people would think, but I am sure it was happening.


...where you‘re forced to take theology classes and attend convocation speaker events on a weekly basis...


Yup, I was right.


...most theologians who esteem the Bible as a whole and are educated in its original languages end up with basically the same interpretation of important biblical concepts.


Wow, most have the same opinion? Interesting, and you think Masons are under 'mind-control'. Glad to see everyone who rolls through Jesus U can do some critical thinking.


Wow man, how bout you just not say anything to help your little group out then? So you’re allowed your own personal interpretations to be “God’s Word” in a discussion/debate and your basis of judgment and ridicule of all those you deem lower than you, yet Kyobosha or I or anyone you don’t like have no merit at all as in your mind every single thing we say is our own personal interpretation so they don‘t matter, even when they aren‘t just “personal interpretations“. Again, double standards.


You can believe in your boogeyman all you want, just do not tell me that I am somehow being influenced, worshipping or promoting said make-believe boogeyman.


Two years ago I would have agreed with you in saying he's fake until I learned that Satan is much more real than anyone can ever realize….led me to think if there’s one, there’s GOT to be the Other, hence why I‘m givin God a chance along with His lil book and taking on the information of the unknown.


I am glad you tink he is realer than real but it still does not change my stance on him one bit.


He is trying to beat God at His own game; being the father of lies and the great deceiver, why wouldn‘t it be his ultimate task to deceive the whole world before his time‘s up.


To me this is nothing but dogmatic nonesense.


Of course they would say it’s interchangeable. Dig a little deeper than the surface sometime. AugustusMasonicus' response prediction: “I already have.”


Since every candidate is asked in the First Degree, "In whom do you put your trust?", and the only acceptable answer is, "In God.", why would I have to dig any deeper?


Hah! So again, personal interpretation is allowed when it comes from you eh? IF I were to make a comment like that to you, would it stand? No. That’s like me saying the grass isn’t green to me so whatever you say to me about how and why it’s green means nothing - does it change the fact that it IS still green?


Poor analogy, grass is tangible, Satan is not.


Try talking to some SRA victims sometime and then tell me Satan’s not real. Get yourself in the presence of his demons...


It is bad enought that you want me to believe in your fairytale Satan, now you want me to believe in demons too? What next? Elves? Gnomes? Unicorns?


...and tell me he’s not real, find out for yourself the rampant on-goings of satanic human sacrifice that ritually goes on in the world and even in the US more so than ever before and tell me satan’s not real, - THEN we’ll talk about this in any kind of depth that you‘d understand. The fact you are able to say he doesn’t exist demonstrates how little you know about the occult.


I have yet to see any allegations of Satanic Ritual Abuse that can be taken legitimately.


That concept is not foreign to Pike’s other writings, or other esteemed masons.


Well then my Taxil-quoting friend, maybe you can show us all these writings.


If I remember correctly it’s in Morals and Dogma.


You remember incorrectly.

But I would like you to do what every other person who has not read Pike to do, quote him out of context.


And you would do well to stop crying Taxil Taxil and find other real evidences for why you don’t like what I say.


Then do not quote it.


Dude, I research by books and writings, not by ranting websites - apparently the plethora of sources I use means nothing to you, nor did you take time to see where they‘re from.


Hmmm, in your last group of posts I saw no links but watched as you used the Taxil Hoax and did not realize that Hall wrote his comments about Masonry 30 years prior to joining so you are obviously not reading those books.


Considering all the masons I’ve debated here so far NONE of them are as arrogant as you, nor debates in such a roundabout style with double standards. You’ve done nothing to back up 99% of what you have said to me in this thread, oh wait….you don’t have to because you’re personal ‘interpretation is the only valid one‘.


Such as countering your personal belief in the anti-Christ by my disbelief of the same? Or maybe your personal belief that the Eye of Providence was and is not a Trinitarin Christian symbol with evidence to the contrary? Or maybe pointing out that you quoted the taxil Hoax? Or that you never read Hall but cited him? Or maybe that you thought Crowley time-warped into the future to teach Rock bands how to record tributes to Satan? Yeah, you keep that 'evidence' coming.




posted on Mar, 18 2012 @ 11:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by Conspirus
Old ground was being covered because you don’t understand how to follow a train of thought...


Sorry, just because conspirus does not think that Roosevelt was Christian because he is not the same flavor of Christian as you does not make it so.


How your response relates to what conspirus said in the quote I don't know. I understand why she gets frustrated talking with you. You really do tend to post your replys out of context.



Haha, do you REALLY think I’m just making up everything I’m telling you?


Funny you should ask.


Funny... Reminds me of when people thought the Earth was flat and believed those who thought the Earth was round were quack's who made stuff up. Funny that everytime a Christian brings an arguement to ATS you hear deny ignorance left and right, don't get me wrong I believe that phrase is very pertinent to ALL here but it seems many use that as their only argument. It also seems to mainly be directed at Christian, Islamic, or Jewish folk. "Everything you believe isnt real, moron, deny ignorance, stop believing what the pastor spews". Such a lame cop-out. I think it would be beneficial for you to really research, maybe start with following the money. That's where I started, trying to figure out how the economy is manipulated, why and by whom. Even though you are a Freemason and by definition are part of a brotherhood not a religious sect, you are still very susceptible to ignorance.



I suggest you use some of the plethora of time you have to spend on ATS to do some legitimate research for your own good. You know the antichrist is going to function as a trinity too right?


Uh, no. I have no clue, unlike you, as to anything this fictional anti-Christ has planned. Do you know what the Easter Bunny has in store as well?


Your reply is the epitome of a cop-out. "Biblical mumbo jumbo based on fairytale." Even more so, your comment is demeaning and solely attempts to write Conspirus off as a 'nut' instead of debating. If you are going to do so, at least have enough decency to do it with actual EVIDENCE to support your arguements.



Whether or not you have an issue with it is besides the point, the fact that you don’t doesn’t surprise me at all and in fact is more proof mind control tactics work...


No, it is not 'mind control', it is called respect for other's opinions which the bulk of hard core religious individuals do not have.


You hardly have respect for other's opinions. You rarely keep the debate on topic and often use the "blind religious nut" attack.


'Souls to be reaped'? More Biblical mumbo-jumbo.


More evidence of your default "you're a religious nut" attack. Also, don't forget the core of this argument is a secret society of some kind seemingly controlling the world. Not ideological beliefs. We have been presenting ideas from sources that are NOT Christian yet you continue to write them off saying we are blind idiots that don't think for ourselves and who spew only what we've been taught to believe. You are exemplifying ignorance at its finest. As if you know how I came to my beliefs and faith...


Considering you do not know what my involvement level is and that your's is ZERO, I find your comments to be rather hilarious.


Sure, I'm not a freemason, doesn't mean I can't or don't read writings by Freemasons. Also, your adament belief that there is no devil or eternal punishment gives plenty of insight to where you are at in the mysteries. The following quote is from Leslie M. Scott who is a 33rd degree mason.

"Originally, the Mysteries were meant to be the beginning of a new life of reason and virtue. The initiated, or esoteric, companions were taught the doctrine of the One Supreme God, the theory of death and eternity, the hidden mysteries of nature, the prospect of the ultimate restoration of the soul to that state of perfection from which it had fallen, its immortality, and the states of reward and punishment after death. The uninitiated were deemed profane, unworthy of public employment or private confidence, sometimes, proscribed as atheists, and certain of everlasting punishment beyond the grave...

The veil of secrecy was impenetrable, sealed by oaths and penalties, the most tremendous and appalling. It was by initiation only, that a knowledge of the hieroglyphics (Egyptian) could be obtained, with which the walls, columns and ceilings of the Temples were decorated.... The ceremonies were performed at dead of night ... with every appliance that could alarm and excite the candidate"

If you were truly an 'initiated' member, you'd believe in punishment after life. Or are you going to say Mr. Scott's words are his opinion and not yours like you do with any other freemasons who say something you don't agree with?



posted on Mar, 19 2012 @ 12:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
Is that your way of saying that you could not find an eye in a triangle predating the Renaissance


There is, you just argue there is no connection to the evidence. Why not research it for yourself? Or at the very least reread what's already been posted here.



Hmm, yes and that would explain why other esteemed 33rd degree masons would write forwards on Hall’s writings that he wrote before he was a freemason right?


You mean in the 1976 reprint? Oh, hah, hah, you kill me with your 'research'.


And you kill me with your blatant ignorance. Freemasons around the world support and champion his writings, many have written forwards for online and hard copy productions. The point you blatantly missed is, why do so many accept his writings but you do not? I came into this thread respecting freemasons for having steadfast and uniform understanding of their teachings but now I am beginning to really question and doubt that notion.



Why do the majority of freemasons support Manly P Hall’s writings and treat them as Masonic works to be esteemed yet you do not?


Because Hall's writings are his, get ready, OPINION. Not everyone shares the same OPINION. But you, as what I hope, are your own person and acutally can formulate your own OPINION, without unduly resorting to other's OPINION. This is called being a rational and cognitive adult.


Really? I didn't realize that's what it was called. Thanks captain obvious. Nevertheless, ok, you can see it as his opinion if that's what you want to call it. Nor do you need to agree with others opinions. BUT, if that is what you are going to argue then there really must be some serious misunderstanding amongst all of freemasonry.



Your statement does nothing but show how inconsistent you are in your views, or within Freemasonry as a whole (though it confirms certain other things of Freemasonry in my mind), and does nothing to convince me otherwise.


Which is precisely the point, that Masonry is not consistent in most things which pretty much disproves your assinine 'mind control' crap.


So wait, its impossible for a mason to believe in lucifer as a supreme being since all masons know he is not supreme but it's possible for there to be inconsistency with everything else. Not very convinced here.



For having such a “factually-structured argument” yourself you’re one to talk. The amount of facts you ignore even when it is in your face to uphold your pride and brainwashed beliefs is staggering. Willingly ignorant. Know what that means? Dumb on purpose….though you’re probably just oblivious.


'Dumb on purpose'? Hah, you mean like quoting the Taxil Hoax or thinking forwards to Hall's books were in there from the beginning? That dumb? Yeah, you keep on being 'smart', it is doing wonders for your position. Maybe you can quote Nesta Webster or Jack Chick next.


Way to add your own twist there. Conpirus' quote does not say it was there from the beginning. Get your facts straight. Knock it off with the insults and have a worthwhile discussion.



There are plenty more, some of which were described in the large quotation I gave to you - I have no desire whatsoever to go into any deep discussion of any other symbols with you.


Will not or can not? I suspect the latter. It is okay, I understand, when one is bereft of evidence, deflect.


Do you read and research anything that has been presented to you? I really don't feel like you do. If you did you would have a plethora of evidence. I won't expound more upon your constant "religious nut" cop out.



posted on Mar, 19 2012 @ 01:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kyobosha
Sure, I'm not a freemason, doesn't mean I can't or don't read writings by Freemasons. Also, your adament belief that there is no devil or eternal punishment gives plenty of insight to where you are at in the mysteries. The following quote is from Leslie M. Scott who is a 33rd degree mason.

"Originally, the Mysteries were meant to be the beginning of a new life of reason and virtue. The initiated, or esoteric, companions were taught the doctrine of the One Supreme God, the theory of death and eternity, the hidden mysteries of nature, the prospect of the ultimate restoration of the soul to that state of perfection from which it had fallen, its immortality, and the states of reward and punishment after death. The uninitiated were deemed profane, unworthy of public employment or private confidence, sometimes, proscribed as atheists, and certain of everlasting punishment beyond the grave...

The veil of secrecy was impenetrable, sealed by oaths and penalties, the most tremendous and appalling. It was by initiation only, that a knowledge of the hieroglyphics (Egyptian) could be obtained, with which the walls, columns and ceilings of the Temples were decorated.... The ceremonies were performed at dead of night ... with every appliance that could alarm and excite the candidate"

If you were truly an 'initiated' member, you'd believe in punishment after life. Or are you going to say Mr. Scott's words are his opinion and not yours like you do with any other freemasons who say something you don't agree with?
Well, you're right—just because you're not a Mason doesn't mean you can't read writings by Freemasons. But you might do better to pay closer attention to what you're reading. The entirety of your quote wasn't Scott, it was Scott quoting Albert Pike, as he states in the three words preceding your exceprt:

Says Albert Pike:
source
But then, if you skipped the stuff leading up to that excerpt, it seems likely you missed the text after it as well, when he again quotes Pike:

Says Albert Pike: "Masonry inculcates its old doctrine . . , that God is One; that His Thought, uttered in His Word, created the Universe, and preserves it by those Eternal Laws which are the expression of that thought; that the Soul of Man, breathed into him by God, is immortal as his thoughts are; that he is free to do evil or to choose good, responsible for his acts and punishable for his sins; that all evil and wrong and suffering are but temporary, the discords of one great Harmony, and that in His good time they will lead by infinite modulations to the great, harmonic, final chord and cadence of Truth, Love, Peace and Happiness, that will ring forever and ever under the arches of heaven, among all the stars and worlds, and in all souls of men and angels."
That part "that all evil and wrong and suffering are but temporary" seems to go against the idea of eternal damnation.



posted on Mar, 19 2012 @ 01:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kyobosha
And you kill me with your blatant ignorance. Freemasons around the world support and champion his writings, many have written forwards for online and hard copy productions. The point you blatantly missed is, why do so many accept his writings but you do not? I came into this thread respecting freemasons for having steadfast and uniform understanding of their teachings but now I am beginning to really question and doubt that notion.
If you came into this thread believing that all Freemasons would have a steadfast and uniform position on ANYTHING, you entered greatly impaired. We're only men, and men have their own opinions. Some like Hall and Pike, some don't.

Let me put it to you this way, if you saw a DVD for The Next Karate Kid advertised as "Starring 2 time Academy Award Winner Hillary Swank", would you consider that false advertising?

There might be an implied relationship between that film and her achievements as an actress, and it's a fact that she's won the Oscar for Best Actress twice now in her career, but her first win was 6 years after she starred in the Karate Kid film.

People who refer to the writings of Manly Hall, 33° are ignoring the fact that he didn't even become a Mason until 30+ years after the writings they're citing. It seems a disingenuous descriptor to use…


So wait, its impossible for a mason to believe in lucifer as a supreme being since all masons know he is not supreme but it's possible for there to be inconsistency with everything else. Not very convinced here.
No, it's actually statistically probable that at least one Mason in the entire history of Freemasonry may have believed in Lucifer as a Supreme Being. But the exception doesn't make the rule.



posted on Mar, 19 2012 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by Conspirus
Ah but are you proving otherwise? Are you not using the same exact argument? Can you confirm he was Christian? Mr. ‘Contormo’ you may like to know, in his original painting had an image of 3 heads connected, this represents Hecate, goddess of black alchemy and magic. Explains why the Pope would have had an issue with the original image eh? Why would Contormo even consider to put this on a painting if he’s a Christian?


Because Christians believe in the Holy Trinity and the Transfiguration where all three are one.


Do you truly understand what the Transfiguration is? It doesn't establish any sort of trinity.



How are the authors of the Bible questioned as far as their beliefs go? See, this is why you shouldn’t put your personal conclusions out there when you don’t know much about the Bible yourself or those who wrote it. Most if not all of the authors on the books included in the canon of the Bible can be considered to have followed God or Christ - and are included in Jesus‘ genealogy.


Jesus' genealogy? No one can even prove if he actually existed and now you have a family tree for him? How nice. You let your fanatical religious beliefs dictate what is real and what is not and people are supposed to take you seriously?


Another one of your cop-outs. So believing in Jesus as a Christian or even being a scholar who isn't Christian but believes Jesus existed physically makes one a religious fanatic. Anyone who even mentions the name Jesus in support of him existing should automatically be written off and not taken seriously... Is this not the same way of thinking you criticize the church for?

Also, what is your opinion of those who are freemasons but are also Christian? Are they illegitimate masons because they believe in Jesus? Are you not saying that Christian beliefs are myth so therefore any mason who is a Christian doesn't believe in a REAL supreme being?



Would you get sawn in half for anything you believe? What about beheaded, boiled in oil, torn in two, skinned alive, or crucified upside down?


How is dying for one's belief somehow make that belief system anymore valid or legitimate than another? It only means you decided to die for it. Hell, the radical Islamists have the Saints beat every day of the week.


Wow you took this way out of context, good job... This in response to your ridiculous how do you know the authors of the Bible were Christian... No reference to validity of beliefs at all. The fact is you know someone's true beliefs by their actions.



One question for you: if I do have a “tight, Bible-hugging viewpoint” as you put it, why are my arguments more than “you’re wrong because the Bible says so.”


Your arguements are quite a bit of, 'The anti-Christ this and the anti-Christ that'. One needs to have a pretty severe adherence to literal Biblical theology to even contemplate a belief in this cartoonish anti-Christ.


You are sure good at this whole belittling tactic. 'Cartoonish', 'mythical' anti-Christ... That is hardly a philosophical argument. Again in your ignorance, this is the exact same stance you'd criticize the church for having with regards to science.



Right, there is no Biblical evidence.


Exactly.


Epic fail on your part. The symbol has no biblical foundation as a Christian symbol.



Where you scream “where does the BIBLE say THIS” everywhere else where you think it’s applicable, here it’s an exception, just for you.


Exception for me? You brought it up but did not say where in the Bible it was located. All I did was ask where the evidence was located but somehow you did not produce said evidence. You seem to be deflecting.


Another epic fail on your part. You didn't follow Conspirus' comment at all did you? The point of his post was that you demand Biblical evidence often times yet you ignore it when it is convenient for you. The fact is, there is no biblical evidence to support the symbol, he was asking you to show where there is. Another prime example of your attempt to twist the conversation to make Conspirus look like an idiot. In reality, you are just showing that you don't truly debate, you just do what you can to try and reduce the perception of your opponent as a mind controlled, crazy idiot.



You know the antichrist will be known and work as a trinity right?


Uh, no. Nor do I care about your childhood boogeyman and his supposed dogmatic-inspired modus operandi.


More proof of your default "you believe in mythical and false ideas" cop-out. Let me show you how to have a true philosophical debate; why do you not believe 'Satan' exists?



posted on Mar, 19 2012 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by Conspirus
You know that secret societies esteem Jahbulon as a Trinitarian god, right?


Really? You want to show a source for that? Before you do make sure you do not pull another Taxil Hoax boner.


My guess is you would write whatever source off as part of a "religious nutter" website or production. Either way, your comment is rather crude don't you think?



Satan likes to mimic God.


Who likes to mimic God? The Tooth Fairy?


Back to your common theme of demeaning remarks. Why do you believe Satan is fictional?



See you use the reverse logic from your belief that Easter and Christmas were originally pagan holidays here with this all seeing eye marathon, and you‘re almost correct.


My belief that they were? Try every knowledgable person's belief that they were.


Your misunderstood again. If you are 'knowledgeable' why ignore the pagan history of the all seeing eye, when you don't for Easter and Christmas? You cater your logic towards issues to suit your argument. How you continue to write off the pagan history of the eye is beyond me.



...spent his honeymoon in the king's chamber of the great pyramid in which his wife got possessed...


You acutally believe in possession? Like in demons and other fake crap?


I assure you Conspirus isn't the only one. Why do you think there is such an intrigue with possession, ghosts, and spirits within the entertainment industry? Billions around the world believe in such. Why not you? You believe in a God right? Are you saying those billions of people are fanatic freaks and morons?



posted on Mar, 19 2012 @ 04:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by Conspirus
..taught rock bands that if they can’t openly sing songs for Satan to incorporate messages for him by backmasking...


'Taught rock bands'? When did he do this? After he got a time machine and went into the 1960's before he dropped dead in 1947 before Rock and Roll existed? Maybe Satan transported him into the future, or maybe he was reincarnated as Peter Grant. It is shameful how sloppy you are.


Wow, so Crowley had no influence on the likes of The Beatles, Jimmy Page (Led Zeppelin), Ozzy Osbourne, Jim Morrison, and many other artists? All of these aforementioned artists were hugely influenced by Crowleys writings! And my oh my, what do you know, Crowley was a huge proponent of backmasking as a mode of thought and behavior modification. Let me guess though, "still Crowley was dead before they became famous". Doesn't change the fact the artists saw Crowley as a major influence on them.



...these are just a few examples of what he did. He didn’t care for Satan though, not one bit nope.


Yup, that one poem just proves your point so succinctly.


Do some reading at the following site:

hermetic.com...

You'll find numerous poems filled with hatred for God and dedication to Satan.



Do you even read my arguments thoroughly? You say I miss the point, so do you dude, more than just often. I never said the all seeing eye “means the Illuminati is watching you”. It is a representation of Lucifer.


Lucifer the planet or Lucifer the make believe entity that you seem overly concerned about? Sorry, it has, and still does, represent the Holy Trinity.


To use your most common defense, 'that is your opinion'. I do not see it as such after researching the origin. Not to mention that atheists and non Christians alike won't see it as the Holy Trinity.



Dude I went to the biggest Christian university in the world...


Wow, dude, so cool for you. How was the social scene? Must have rocked. Not the Crowley-influencing-rock-muscians-rocking most people would think, but I am sure it was happening.


Your view of Christians as 'bible hugging hermits that can't socialize' is very very flawed. Your ignorance with this perception is abounding.



...where you‘re forced to take theology classes and attend convocation speaker events on a weekly basis...


Yup, I was right.


Right about what? You seem to have a hatred or great dislike for Christians. How does that sit with the freemasons that are Christian. It really does seem to me that you hold the belief that a Christian cant be masonic.



...most theologians who esteem the Bible as a whole and are educated in its original languages end up with basically the same interpretation of important biblical concepts.


Wow, most have the same opinion? Interesting, and you think Masons are under 'mind-control'. Glad to see everyone who rolls through Jesus U can do some critical thinking.


Wow, your posts are seething with animosity and prejudice. You want to debate critical thinking when you cease to do so yourself? Also, he never said all masons are under mind control. It's amazing that you get stars for a post like this.



Wow man, how bout you just not say anything to help your little group out then? So you’re allowed your own personal interpretations to be “God’s Word” in a discussion/debate and your basis of judgment and ridicule of all those you deem lower than you, yet Kyobosha or I or anyone you don’t like have no merit at all as in your mind every single thing we say is our own personal interpretation so they don‘t matter, even when they aren‘t just “personal interpretations“. Again, double standards.


You can believe in your boogeyman all you want, just do not tell me that I am somehow being influenced, worshipping or promoting said make-believe boogeyman.


Again with the make believe... Why don't you believe in 'satan'?



Two years ago I would have agreed with you in saying he's fake until I learned that Satan is much more real than anyone can ever realize….led me to think if there’s one, there’s GOT to be the Other, hence why I‘m givin God a chance along with His lil book and taking on the information of the unknown.


I am glad you tink he is realer than real but it still does not change my stance on him one bit.


Billions of people believe in such all throughout history. 'Realer than real'? Who said that? You're misquoting yet again.



He is trying to beat God at His own game; being the father of lies and the great deceiver, why wouldn‘t it be his ultimate task to deceive the whole world before his time‘s up.


To me this is nothing but dogmatic nonesense.


That is apparent. Why?



posted on Mar, 19 2012 @ 05:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by Conspirus
Of course they would say it’s interchangeable. Dig a little deeper than the surface sometime. AugustusMasonicus' response prediction: “I already have.”


Since every candidate is asked in the First Degree, "In whom do you put your trust?", and the only acceptable answer is, "In God.", why would I have to dig any deeper?


Why not dig any deeper? Why not try to determine the true meaning of a phrase you say, every symbol you use or ritual you perform? Is this not the duty of a Freemason? Better yet, wouldn't any diligent person do as such? Isn't this statement you made what you criticize Christians of doing? After becoming a member they cease all critical thinking and just go along with what ever their superior says?



Hah! So again, personal interpretation is allowed when it comes from you eh? IF I were to make a comment like that to you, would it stand? No. That’s like me saying the grass isn’t green to me so whatever you say to me about how and why it’s green means nothing - does it change the fact that it IS still green?


Poor analogy, grass is tangible, Satan is not.


This is a fascinating response. Being a mason you must believe in God, do you find God tangible?



Try talking to some SRA victims sometime and then tell me Satan’s not real. Get yourself in the presence of his demons...


It is bad enought that you want me to believe in your fairytale Satan, now you want me to believe in demons too? What next? Elves? Gnomes? Unicorns?


If you don't believe that satanic rituals, torture, and sacrifice occur then you already live and believe in an imaginary world.


I have yet to see any allegations of Satanic Ritual Abuse that can be taken legitimately.


Again I'm astounded you don't believe satanic rituals and sacrifice doesn't occur.

m.news24.com...
www.ktla.com...
m.yahoo.com...

These are just two very recent examples of sickening occurances of abuse. Do you know what happened to the millions of missing children, women and men around the world?



That concept is not foreign to Pike’s other writings, or other esteemed masons.


Well then my Taxil-quoting friend, maybe you show us all these writings.


I'll some items from Pike that concern me and will put them together for you.



If I remember correctly it’s in Morals and Dogma.


You remember incorrectly.

But I would like you to do what every other person who has not read Pike to do, quote him out of context.


Wait, how could I quote something from a text if I didn't read it? Don't I have to read it to quote it?



And you would do well to stop crying Taxil Taxil and find other real evidences for why you don’t like what I say.


Then do not quote it.


The taxil quote was 1% of what he gave.



Dude, I research by books and writings, not by ranting websites - apparently the plethora of sources I use means nothing to you, nor did you take time to see where they‘re from.


Hmmm, in your last group of posts I saw no links but watched as you used the Taxil Hoax and did not realize that Hall wrote his comments about Masonry 30 years prior to joining so you are obviously not reading those books.


You fail to acknowledge the rest of the posts by Conspirus. There are loads of them. Also, you can't negate Halls writings just because you don't agree with them. Many other masons support it, therefore his writings are absolutely pertinent.


Such as countering your personal belief in the anti-Christ by my disbelief of the same? Or maybe your personal belief that the Eye of Providence was and is not a Trinitarin Christian symbol with evidence to the contrary? Or maybe pointing out that you quoted the taxil Hoax? Or that you never read Hall but cited him? Or maybe that you thought Crowley time-warped into the future to teach Rock bands how to record tributes to Satan? Yeah, you keep that 'evidence' coming.


I can't wait to see how you will apply your 'logic'. The same logic that sees pagan connections to Christmas and Easter but fails to see it with the eye of providence. The same logic that ignores the blatant connections between Crowley and numerous mainstream artists. Or how Hall can't be cited because YOU don't agree with the other masons that support Halls writings; or the logic that calls Christians brainless yet once the logic becomes masonic there is no need to further your understanding of phrases, symbols, and rituals. I'm sure that's true logic.



posted on Mar, 19 2012 @ 07:45 PM
link   
I think it is quite considerate of you to answer for conspirus prior to them logging back in to the site to check my repsonse. It would seem that you have takent the tact that they are unable to answer for themselves. Being that you have opted to interject yourself into the exchange I will humor you and reply:




Originally posted by Kyobosha
How your response relates to what conspirus said in the quote I don't know. I understand why she gets frustrated talking with you. You really do tend to post your replys out of context.


It was completely in context. Conspirus decided of his own volition that the Roosevelts were somehow not Christian because, well, just because. They were Episcopalians which is a Christian denomination, get over it.


Funny that everytime a Christian brings an arguement to ATS you hear deny ignorance left and right...


Because most of the time they are using the Bible as a history book.


Your reply is the epitome of a cop-out. "Biblical mumbo jumbo based on fairytale." Even more so, your comment is demeaning and solely attempts to write Conspirus off as a 'nut' instead of debating. If you are going to do so, at least have enough decency to do it with actual EVIDENCE to support your arguements.


Do you know what? I think people who do believe in Satan are nuts. And spare me the evidence part, no one, NO ONE, has evidence of Satan/Lucifer/The Boogeyman being real.


You hardly have respect for other's opinions.


Only when they distort history and accuse me of worshipping some comic-book entity I do not believe in.


More evidence of your default "you're a religious nut" attack. Also, don't forget the core of this argument is a secret society of some kind seemingly controlling the world. Not ideological beliefs. We have been presenting ideas from sources that are NOT Christian yet you continue to write them off saying we are blind idiots that don't think for ourselves and who spew only what we've been taught to believe. You are exemplifying ignorance at its finest. As if you know how I came to my beliefs and faith...


Oh, sorry, maybe you can source conspirus' 'souls to be reaped' comment from a non-Biblical/religious source. I anxiously await the result


Sure, I'm not a freemason, doesn't mean I can't or don't read writings by Freemasons. Also, your adament belief that there is no devil or eternal punishment gives plenty of insight to where you are at in the mysteries. The following quote is from Leslie M. Scott who is a 33rd degree mason.


It is obvious you are not a Mason nor understand the structure, hence your reliance of quoting '33rd Degree Masons' who, in your ignorant viewpoint, somehow hold more relevance to a Mason.


If you were truly an 'initiated' member, you'd believe in punishment after life. Or are you going to say Mr. Scott's words are his opinion and not yours like you do with any other freemasons who say something you don't agree with?


Mr. Scott's words are his opinion. There is no one voice for Masonry. Other Masons are more than able to disagree with him, Hall, Pike, Morris, me or anyone else who gives their opinion. Their is no dogmatic reliance on religious teachings to become or remain a Mason and their us no unified opinion on what may or may not constitute the afterlife and what punsiments may or may not be administered there.


There is, you just argue there is no connection to the evidence.


Well then, link the image in context and we will discuss it, otherwise you are wasting bandwith trying to prove what does not exist.


And you kill me with your blatant ignorance. Freemasons around the world support and champion his writings, many have written forwards for online and hard copy productions. The point you blatantly missed is, why do so many accept his writings but you do not? I came into this thread respecting freemasons for having steadfast and uniform understanding of their teachings but now I am beginning to really question and doubt that notion.


Why should I take the opinion of a 21 year old non-Mason on Masonry who years later addmitted: ""At the time I wrote this slender volume, I had just passed my twenty-first birthday, and my only contact with Freemasonry was through a few books commonly available to the public."? Once again you think that Masonry is some unified front were everyone has the same preprogrammed opinion. Guess what? You made a mistake.


Really? I didn't realize that's what it was called. Thanks captain obvious. Nevertheless, ok, you can see it as his opinion if that's what you want to call it. Nor do you need to agree with others opinions. BUT, if that is what you are going to argue then there really must be some serious misunderstanding amongst all of freemasonry.


Firstly, you wrongly assume that every Mason has read Hall, secondly you wrongly assume that every Mason agrees on what Hall said. Guess what? You made two more mistakes.


So wait, its impossible for a mason to believe in lucifer as a supreme being since all masons know he is not supreme but it's possible for there to be inconsistency with everything else. Not very convinced here.


It is impossible because all Masons must profess a trust in 'God' which they have to mention by name. The question, as I posted earlier, is: 'In who do you put your trust?' The only answer is 'God'. Not Lucifer, not Satan, not the Easter Bunny, not a head of lettuce. Is this clear enough now?


Way to add your own twist there. Conpirus' quote does not say it was there from the beginning. Get your facts straight. Knock it off with the insults and have a worthwhile discussion.


Neither does consprius say that it was not. Addtionally, the foreward of The Lost Keys of Freemasonry by Ronald Blight does not even address Hall but speaks of the esoteric aspects of Masonry.


Do you read and research anything that has been presented to you? I really don't feel like you do. If you did you would have a plethora of evidence. I won't expound more upon your constant "religious nut" cop out.


Really? So I will ask you then, other then the Eye of Providence, what part of the Great Seal's symbolism can be construed as Masonic? Please go into detail.

Do you truly understand what the Transfiguration is? It doesn't establish any sort of trinity.


Yes, any kid that went to Catechism School knows what it is and it is used to help establish Jesus as the bridge between this world and Heaven which only the Son of God (or God himself) can do.


Another one of your cop-outs. So believing in Jesus as a Christian or even being a scholar who isn't Christian but believes Jesus existed physically makes one a religious fanatic.


No, thinking you can plot his family tree when you can not even prove his own existance is fanatical.


Also, what is your opinion of those who are freemasons but are also Christian?


To be honest, since we do not discuss religion I would not even know how religious they may be, nor do I care.


Are they illegitimate masons because they believe in Jesus?


No, not at all.


Are you not saying that Christian beliefs are myth so therefore any mason who is a Christian doesn't believe in a REAL supreme being?


Stop being hysterical. I have no issue with Christians. I do have an issue with Jesus-nutter Christians just like I do with fundementalists of every persuassion.


This in response to your ridiculous how do you know the authors of the Bible were Christian... No reference to validity of beliefs at all. The fact is you know someone's true beliefs by their actions.


Which was in repsonse to conspirus' ridiculous 'You have no idea that Pontormo was Christian' assinine comment. Must have worked since you see the absurdity, maybe you should council conspirus not to judge anyone's faith based on your own.


You are sure good at this whole belittling tactic. 'Cartoonish', 'mythical' anti-Christ... That is hardly a philosophical argument.


No, more like a practical, common-sensical one.


Again in your ignorance, this is the exact same stance you'd criticize the church for having with regards to science.


What stance is that?


Epic fail on your part. The symbol has no biblical foundation as a Christian symbol.


Ooooooh. 'Epic fail', wow, so using sorry little catch phrases somehow camouflage the fact that conspirus asked for Biblical evidence that the Eye of Providence refered to the Trinity. I never said it was in the Bible. I correctly indicated that its origins were in the Renaissance which the artwork, architecture and literature support. See what happens when you jump into other people's conversation?


Another epic fail on your part.


Wow, there is that catchy catch-phrase again.


You didn't follow Conspirus' comment at all did you? The point of his post was that you demand Biblical evidence often times yet you ignore it when it is convenient for you.


Sorry, cream cheese, conspirus demanded the Biblical evidence. But you knew that already.


The fact is, there is no biblical evidence to support the symbol...


Exactly!


...he was asking you to show where there is.


Why should I show him evidence in the Bible of something that I previously stated came long after the Bible? Stop running up strawman arguements.


Another prime example of your attempt to twist the conversation to make Conspirus look like an idiot. In reality, you are just showing that you don't truly debate, you just do what you can to try and reduce the perception of your opponent as a mind controlled, crazy idiot.


I have no hand in making conspirus look like an idiot.


Let me show you how to have a true philosophical debate; why do you not believe 'Satan' exists?


Because I am a rational and logical adult.

My guess is you would write whatever source off as part of a "religious nutter" website or production.


If the Jesus-nutter shoe fits. But please, feel free to tell us all about how Jahbulon is somehow a Masonic 'God'.


Either way, your comment is rather crude don't you think?


Get your mind out of the gutter, a 'boner' is another word for a 'mistake'.


Back to your common theme of demeaning remarks.


I am sorry that you are offended that the Tooth Fairy is not real.


Why do you believe Satan is fictional?


For the same reason I stopped believing in the Boogeyman.


Your misunderstood again. If you are 'knowledgeable' why ignore the pagan history of the all seeing eye, when you don't for Easter and Christmas?


*sigh*

I never ignored that the origins of the Eye of Providence has much older origins. My point was its usage in the Renaissance forward, particularly when in a triangle, is a Christian symbol. Please feel free to re-read the entire thread to view my posts.


You cater your logic towards issues to suit your argument. How you continue to write off the pagan history of the eye is beyond me.


I believe this is where you would use your super-awesome catch-phrase 'epic-fail'.


I assure you Conspirus isn't the only one. Why do you think there is such an intrigue with possession, ghosts, and spirits within the entertainment industry?


Because people like to be frightened.


Billions around the world believe in such.


More than a billion people believe Mohammed dropped out of the sky at the Al Aqsa Mosque after flying there from Mecca, do you?


Why not you?


Because it does not make any logical sense to me.


You believe in a God right?


Yes.


Are you saying those billions of people are fanatic freaks and morons?


If they believe in demon-possession, well, let us say they are misguided.


Originally posted by Kyobosha
Wow, so Crowley had no influence on the likes of The Beatles, Jimmy Page (Led Zeppelin), Ozzy Osbourne, Jim Morrison, and many other artists? All of these aforementioned artists were hugely influenced by Crowleys writings!


You are right, just like John Lennon said:


"The whole Beatle idea was to do what you want, right? To take your own responsibility, do what you want and try not to harm other people, right? DO WHAT THOU WILST, as long as it doesn't hurt somebody.


Please re-read the bolded parts about what the evil John Lennon said. That dammned Crowley.


And my oh my, what do you know, Crowley was a huge proponent of backmasking as a mode of thought and behavior modification. Let me guess though, "still Crowley was dead before they became famous".


And my oh my, guess what? Crowley advocated backmasking as a mind improvement technique, not as some sort of teenage method of praising Satan as conspirus claimed when he spoke of '...incorporating messages for him by backmasking...'


Doesn't change the fact the artists saw Crowley as a major influence on them.


It also does not mean they were penning paens to Puzuzu.


Do some reading at the following site:

hermetic.com...

You'll find numerous poems filled with hatred for God and dedication to Satan.


Since you read them what are their names?


To use your most common defense, 'that is your opinion'. I do not see it as such after researching the origin. Not to mention that atheists and non Christians alike won't see it as the Holy Trinity.


Why would it matter what a non-Christian or an atheist thought of it? It was and still is a Christian symbol.


Your view of Christians as 'bible hugging hermits that can't socialize' is very very flawed. Your ignorance with this perception is abounding.


You are probably right, they most likely had a happening time there, Michigan State, look out.


Right about what? You seem to have a hatred or great dislike for Christians.


I take issue with all religious fundementalists, they are the root of nearly every problem in man's history.


How does that sit with the freemasons that are Christian. It really does seem to me that you hold the belief that a Christian cant be masonic.


Once again, we do not discuss religion, but if I somehow knew that a certain Brother was a Jesus-nutter (or a Mohammed-nutter) I would most likely not associate with them outside of lodge if there religious views became a predominant point of conversation everytime we met.


Wow, your posts are seething with animosity and prejudice. You want to debate critical thinking when you cease to do so yourself?


Justified, considering the moronic statement below.


Also, he never said all masons are under mind control.


Really? Refering to Masons:


...the fact that you don’t doesn’t surprise me at all and in fact is more proof mind control tactics work...


Stop being an apologist and stick to your own posts. You have a tendancy to miss things like this being that you did not read them.



Again with the make believe... Why don't you believe in 'satan'?


How come you do not believe in Unicorns?


Billions of people believe in such all throughout history.


Billions believe in a flying Mohammed, so?


'Realer than real'? Who said that? You're misquoting yet again.


'...more real than anyone can ever realize...' What is 'more real'? Realer than real qualifies to me.


That is apparent. Why?


Because it is based on nothing but religious teachings.

Why not dig any deeper? Why not try to determine the true meaning of a phrase you say, every symbol you use or ritual you perform? Is this not the duty of a Freemason?


Who is to say I have not done these things? Who is to say I have not explored the relevant symbolism of the Degrees?


This is a fascinating response. Being a mason you must believe in God, do you find God tangible?


Yes, to me, the Universe exists, therefore there is a God. I am panentheistic so God is very tangible for me.


If you don't believe that satanic rituals, torture, and sacrifice occur then you already live and believe in an imaginary world.

Again I'm astounded you don't believe satanic rituals and sacrifice doesn't occur.


What the press, and the average person, classifies as 'Satanic ritual abuse' has typically nothing to do with Satanism.


m.news24.com...


A couple of idiot teenagers light their friend on fire. Where is the Satanic ritual? What did it comprise of? What are the details? What does a 16 year old know of Theistic Satanism? Dousing someone with gasoline is not a ritual, it is sign of mental psychosis.


www.ktla.com...


What are the alleged 'books or literature relating to Satanism'? They always seem to leave this out. What Satanic books advocate the mutilating of humans? Please quote me one.

To me this is another case of a couple of numb-nuts doing pyschotic crap.


These are just two very recent examples of sickening occurances of abuse. Do you know what happened to the millions of missing children, women and men around the world?


Yes, most of them are taken by relatives, often-times a parent. You do realize that a 'missing person', once they are returned to the other parent are still considered a 'missing person' in regards statistics?


I'll some items from Pike that concern me and will put them together for you.


Please do.


Wait, how could I quote something from a text if I didn't read it? Don't I have to read it to quote it?


Hmmm....this is very interesting. You used the pronoun 'I' when refering to conspirus even though you are replying as kyobasha. You do know that sock-puppetry is against the terms and conditions. I am rather troubled that you seem to be going back and forth with me on two different screen names. Any reason for this deception?


The taxil quote was 1% of what he gave.


You mean 'you', and it was the only 1% you gave in relation to Pike. Nice try though conspirus kyobasha.


You fail to acknowledge the rest of the posts by Conspirus. There are loads of them. Also, you can't negate Halls writings just because you don't agree with them. Many other masons support it, therefore his writings are absolutely pertinent.


I addressed all of your quotes from both screen names. And Hall's writings are irrelevant because he was a 21 year old non-Mason when he wrote them and did not become a Mason until 31 years later. Does this satisfy both you and your alter ego?


I can't wait to see how you will apply your 'logic'. The same logic that sees pagan connections to Christmas and Easter but fails to see it with the eye of providence.


We addressed this alrea, you must have gotten confused with switching back and forth with your accounts.


The same logic that ignores the blatant connections between Crowley and numerous mainstream artists.


Yes, just like the nasty man John Lennon said when I quoted him.


Or how Hall can't be cited because YOU don't agree with the other masons that support Halls writings...


Again? Give it a rest.


...or the logic that calls Christians brainless...


Just the ones caught using sock-puppets.


...yet once the logic becomes masonic there is no need to further your understanding of phrases, symbols, and rituals.


I could explain Masonic symbolsim to you until your ears bled but would it make a difference to either one of your accounts? You think everything has to do with your make-believe pal Old Scratch.


I'm sure that's true logic.


Right now logic should not be your main concern. What should be your main concern is trying to keep your screen names straight when juggling them back and forth. I knew something was odd when both of your accounts referenced the other. Talk about sad justification. "I am right and I agree with me!"



posted on Mar, 19 2012 @ 11:40 PM
link   
reply to post by AugustusMasonicus
 


That's awesome how you jump to ridiculous conclusion such as me being Conspirus. So me responding to your post to Conspirus means I must be conspirus as well. And I must believe Conspirus cant answer for himself because I answered before he did. Wow, makes logical sense.

So that also means that joshnorton is also you agustusmasonicus because he replied to me before you did and made his response to me personal? Ridiculous logic that you have.

Want my reasoning why I used the pronoun "I"? Here you go:

You said quote:



....what every other person who has not read Pike to do, quote him out of context.


By you using the phrase 'every other person' you are also referring to me.

Thank you for the sock-puppet claim to attack my credibility. I would like to ask you to rescind your claim as it is absolutely false and you have absolutely no grounds to make such a claim. I will respond to the rest of your post later.

EDIT: Also since ksig referenced your screen name, you are also him...

Disclaimer: for those reading this post I am in no way accusing ksig or joshnorton of sock-puppetry. I am merely making a point on how ridiculous and off base Augustus is with his claim.

edit on 20-3-2012 by Kyobosha because: disclaimer



posted on Mar, 19 2012 @ 11:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Kyobosha
 

Augustus is entitled to his opinions, but I have never seen any disdain from him towards for my Christian faith, but then again, I don't abuse my faith for personal gain or to further the cause of Fear Inc.


The point of his post was that you demand Biblical evidence often times yet you ignore it when it is convenient for you.

This is something that anti-Masons do.



posted on Mar, 19 2012 @ 11:58 PM
link   
Jesus was a freemason.

Figure that was more original than,,,"My grandaddy (paw paw) was a freemason"



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 12:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by JoshNorton

Originally posted by Kyobosha
And you kill me with your blatant ignorance. Freemasons around the world support and champion his writings, many have written forwards for online and hard copy productions. The point you blatantly missed is, why do so many accept his writings but you do not? I came into this thread respecting freemasons for having steadfast and uniform understanding of their teachings but now I am beginning to really question and doubt that notion.
If you came into this thread believing that all Freemasons would have a steadfast and uniform position on ANYTHING, you entered greatly impaired. We're only men...


Without anyconsideration towards and for the rest of the ensuing thread... I interrupt herein to say...
"More than men they are and much more than anyone of us can conclude in a lifetime.
Be that as it may... I know herein in mine own rite that without Freemason this world would fall apart.


Now... Carry on...
edit on 20-3-2012 by Pinocchio because: typos



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 07:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kyobosha
Want my reasoning why I used the pronoun "I"? Here you go:

You said quote:



....what every other person who has not read Pike to do, quote him out of context.


By you using the phrase 'every other person' you are also referring to me.


Considering the post was addressed to 'conspirus', but 'kyobosha' decided to asnwer and said 'I', I will not be rescinding anything.


EDIT: Also since ksig referenced your screen name, you are also him...


Ksig should be so lucky. I get beer, he gets tea.



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 09:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kyobosha
EDIT: Also since ksig referenced your screen name, you are also him...

lol...yes WE are one. Thank you for your disclaimer, I was worried for a moment.



Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
Ksig should be so lucky. I get beer, he gets tea.

Idaho isn't really known for its tea.



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 11:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by KSigMason
Idaho isn't really known for its tea.


As you do not get beer and you do not get tea, in this your affliction what shall you do?



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by JoshNorton
Well, you're right—just because you're not a Mason doesn't mean you can't read writings by Freemasons. But you might do better to pay closer attention to what you're reading. The entirety of your quote wasn't Scott, it was Scott quoting Albert Pike, as he states in the three words preceding your exceprt:

Says Albert Pike:
source


You are absolutely right, it was not my intention to misrepresent that. Anyone who looked into it (like you did) would find he was quoting Pike. I wrote my post as such because I had no characters left (by the way how in the world do you post such long responses as agustus did? When I attempt to reply I lose at least half of his response due to character limit) and it was Scott that I was using as a reference so I wanted to show whom I got the quote from.


But then, if you skipped the stuff leading up to that excerpt, it seems likely you missed the text after it as well, when he again quotes Pike:

Says Albert Pike: "Masonry inculcates its old doctrine . . , that God is One; that His Thought, uttered in His Word, created the Universe, and preserves it by those Eternal Laws which are the expression of that thought; that the Soul of Man, breathed into him by God, is immortal as his thoughts are; that he is free to do evil or to choose good, responsible for his acts and punishable for his sins; that all evil and wrong and suffering are but temporary, the discords of one great Harmony, and that in His good time they will lead by infinite modulations to the great, harmonic, final chord and cadence of Truth, Love, Peace and Happiness, that will ring forever and ever under the arches of heaven, among all the stars and worlds, and in all souls of men and angels."
That part "that all evil and wrong and suffering are but temporary" seems to go against the idea of eternal damnation.


I read that quote, but I have an entirely different interpretation of it. By analyzing the following portion of the quit you provided:


...that the Soul of Man, breathed into him by God, is immortal as his thoughts are; that he is free to do evil or to choose good, responsible for his acts and punishable for his sins;


What I took from Pike saying evil, wrong and suffering is temporary on this earth. The fact that a man is 'responsible for his acts and punishable for his sins' shows that there is some kind of punishment. What is this punishment? Is it inflicted on the man or the soul of man? When is it inflicted?

That aside, the quote I gave you is referencing the 'Mysteries'. In order to be an initiated member of the Mysteries you must believe in eternal punishment. Within this same address by Scott he says:


The Masonic Fraternity is the modern repository of the Mysteries.


Scott is not the only one to say the Freemasonry is the current caretaker of the Mysteries that are traced all the way back to Egyptian practices. Given these quotes it is understood that some part within freemasonry is truly the Mysteries. Thereby to be involved with the Mysteries which is now a part or sect of freemasonry, you must believe in eternal punishment and be deemed 'worthy' of knowing the mysteries. These mysteries were only passed on throughout history to those that met these prerequisites; it is the same now as it was then and it will be the same in the future.



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 12:24 PM
link   
reply to post by AugustusMasonicus
 

I drink Bourbon.



posted on Mar, 20 2012 @ 01:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by JoshNorton
Let me put it to you this way, if you saw a DVD for The Next Karate Kid advertised as "Starring 2 time Academy Award Winner Hillary Swank", would you consider that false advertising?


Haha, funny analogy there. I understand what you are saying, certainly. I wasn't saying I believed there was total agreement with ideology or beliefs amongst freemasonry. But from previous debates with masons it seemed there was a general common understanding of what the brotherhood was.

I just have a hard time negating the writings. Some within freemasonry hold them with great regard, you and others may not, by some do. My point is, the concerns with the text may not address you but they certainly address those masons who use the text. Again, I'm not saying that all of Freemasonry and all masons are involved in the 'conspiracy'. I'm just arguing that there are parts, groups, sects, whatever you want to call it, that seem to be involved.


No, it's actually statistically probable that at least one Mason in the entire history of Freemasonry may have believed in Lucifer as a Supreme Being. But the exception doesn't make the rule.


I don't believe that is the rule. It just seems the exception is probable and other masons would be none the wiser of another members beliefs.




top topics



 
21
<< 27  28  29    31  32 >>

log in

join