Novus Ordo Seclorum - Novae Tabulae - E PLURIBUS UNUM - Implicatio

page: 5
13
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 07:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
I am an advocate for the unborn over any rights the mother might claim as choice. I do not advocate rape. I advocate for the one raped. There is a difference.


This had nothing to do with abortion and everything to do with your vilification of Moses Harman who was imprisoned for fighting to stop marital rape.


Here is a copy of his magazine: Lucifer the Lightbearer Magazine by Moses Herman




posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 07:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by EnochWasRight

Right. It's an age or period of time. It's a good reason to post this on a forum so the idea can be refined. Either way, the the rest of what is listed still has a great deal of additional perspective for anyone to see. Are you suggesting that root morphology in Latin does not tell a larger portion of the story?

I am suggesting that you are imagining and inventing cognates, based on similar sound or appearance and a lack of familiarity with Latin. And that you are then working forward from these false friends and imaginings, and a poor grasp of Latin grammar, to assemble phrases and ideas that are simply not found in what you are attempting to analyze. "A New Nobility to set In Order what is Cut" translates exactly one word correctly, novus. You attempted to translate ordo twice, as both "nobility" and "to set in Order." The first might be defensible, the second is not. Your translation of seclorum as "what is Cut" is wrong in every respect. Wrong part of speech, wrong root. Sec- is not saec-, no matter how they were spelled in the 18th century. They are not the same in Latin, were not the same in Proto-Italic, and were not the same in Proto-Indo-European. See dnghu.org's Modern Indo-European Grammar, which suggests

*saitlom -> saeculum
*sekami -> seco

So the roots do not even have the same consonants, if you go back far enough.



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 07:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by FurvusRexCaeli

Originally posted by EnochWasRight

Right. It's an age or period of time. It's a good reason to post this on a forum so the idea can be refined. Either way, the the rest of what is listed still has a great deal of additional perspective for anyone to see. Are you suggesting that root morphology in Latin does not tell a larger portion of the story?

I am suggesting that you are imagining and inventing cognates, based on similar sound or appearance and a lack of familiarity with Latin. And that you are then working forward from these false friends and imaginings, and a poor grasp of Latin grammar, to assemble phrases and ideas that are simply not found in what you are attempting to analyze. "A New Nobility to set In Order what is Cut" translates exactly one word correctly, novus. You attempted to translate ordo twice, as both "nobility" and "to set in Order." The first might be defensible, the second is not. Your translation of seclorum as "what is Cut" is wrong in every respect. Wrong part of speech, wrong root. Sec- is not saec-, no matter how they were spelled in the 18th century. They are not the same in Latin, were not the same in Proto-Italic, and were not the same in Proto-Indo-European. See dnghu.org's Modern Indo-European Grammar, which suggests

*saitlom -> saeculum
*sekami -> seco

So the roots do not even have the same consonants, if you go back far enough.


I don't think you understand morphology.



Possibly you can do some research of how root morphology tells the story of the group of words surrounding the context of their history. Words are always related by context to the root they originate from. A morphological analysis of linguistics allows a generalization of the meanings as they bind across a common branch.

Watch this video of hebrew root morphology. Latin works in a similar way, as do most languages. You cannot get the true meaning of a word apart from the related words on the branch of its root.



Also, consider how languages have influenced others by this same root morphology.



edit on 4-3-2013 by EnochWasRight because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 07:46 PM
link   
You are stuck on one word here. Examine the rest and comment. We have moved past the age idea. As I pointed out to you, my lexicon directed me to the other words within the roots I was following. Again, I am simply showing a deeper context to how these words were ordered in the minds of the people who constructed them.


Originally posted by FurvusRexCaeli

Originally posted by EnochWasRight

Right. It's an age or period of time. It's a good reason to post this on a forum so the idea can be refined. Either way, the the rest of what is listed still has a great deal of additional perspective for anyone to see. Are you suggesting that root morphology in Latin does not tell a larger portion of the story?

I am suggesting that you are imagining and inventing cognates, based on similar sound or appearance and a lack of familiarity with Latin. And that you are then working forward from these false friends and imaginings, and a poor grasp of Latin grammar, to assemble phrases and ideas that are simply not found in what you are attempting to analyze. "A New Nobility to set In Order what is Cut" translates exactly one word correctly, novus. You attempted to translate ordo twice, as both "nobility" and "to set in Order." The first might be defensible, the second is not. Your translation of seclorum as "what is Cut" is wrong in every respect. Wrong part of speech, wrong root. Sec- is not saec-, no matter how they were spelled in the 18th century. They are not the same in Latin, were not the same in Proto-Italic, and were not the same in Proto-Indo-European. See dnghu.org's Modern Indo-European Grammar, which suggests

*saitlom -> saeculum
*sekami -> seco

So the roots do not even have the same consonants, if you go back far enough.



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 07:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
Are you speaking of the author of the Lucifer the Lightbearer (Liberal) Anarchist Magazine? My comments were pointed at his magazine and ideology and not the protest he did in Kansas (Chicago possibly?). You are again mixing one idea with another to create your own pretext.


No, your comments were at him as well:


The concept of Harman and the Lucifer periodical was a rebellion against conventions of authority. I can't say I have studied his writings enough to know his position, but I can say that he was on the same page as the Theosophists. We know them by Gnosticism and the Gnostics were against being cast from Heaven by what they considered a vengeful and evil God. A thorough study of the truth will alert us to the fact that God is a loving God and we are here, not to rebel against Him, but to correct the error in ourselves. Ultimately, we cannot do it apart from Him. There are two Lords on this Earth. The one to follow is the one that leads back up the harmony toward the true God that cast us down. God is love. It's all about what he has done FOR us.

Of course, as children, we will rebel. Who knows, maybe we left willingly. I have always had it set in my heart that I was here for a reason. I have had the urge my entire life to assist others in finding their way back. I don't know where this comes from, but many suggest that there are waves of souls that come here to assist other back through the path back. I can't say for sure, but this seems to be what my heart tells me.


Glad to see you need to 'assist others in finding their way back' particularly when they advocate against marital rape.



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 07:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
Are you speaking of the author of the Lucifer the Lightbearer (Liberal) Anarchist Magazine? My comments were pointed at his magazine and ideology and not the protest he did in Kansas (Chicago possibly?). You are again mixing one idea with another to create your own pretext.


No, your comments were at him as well:


The concept of Harman and the Lucifer periodical was a rebellion against conventions of authority. I can't say I have studied his writings enough to know his position, but I can say that he was on the same page as the Theosophists. We know them by Gnosticism and the Gnostics were against being cast from Heaven by what they considered a vengeful and evil God. A thorough study of the truth will alert us to the fact that God is a loving God and we are here, not to rebel against Him, but to correct the error in ourselves. Ultimately, we cannot do it apart from Him. There are two Lords on this Earth. The one to follow is the one that leads back up the harmony toward the true God that cast us down. God is love. It's all about what he has done FOR us.

Of course, as children, we will rebel. Who knows, maybe we left willingly. I have always had it set in my heart that I was here for a reason. I have had the urge my entire life to assist others in finding their way back. I don't know where this comes from, but many suggest that there are waves of souls that come here to assist other back through the path back. I can't say for sure, but this seems to be what my heart tells me.


Glad to see you need to 'assist others in finding their way back' particularly when they advocate against marital rape.



That was a very good quote. I am proud to have said those words out of my distal phalanges. Look me up next time you are in Springfield. I'm only 26 minutes away. You can't beat Blu Sesame up town for Asian food.



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 07:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by FurvusRexCaeli
I am suggesting that you are imagining and inventing cognates..


And I am suggesting you pick up the two books noted in the Original Post.

Once you do you end up with a miraculous grasp of Latin (and everything else). So much so that you are able to expound on its roots, meanings, morphology, definitions and phraseology even better than if you studied it in school. So get a clue Mr. Latin Expert. This is like the Phoenix University course in Classical Latin, only without the ability to surf eBay at the same time you are learning.



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 08:22 PM
link   
Augustus Masonicus, paulo maiora canamus.


Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
In the first century, Cesar asked Jesus, "What is truth?"


Really? When did 'Cesar' (or Caesar for that matter) hold a conversation with Jesus?


Here is where it gets interesting. Seclorum is not listed in my lexicon. The only reference I have is this.


That is because your book is based on Classical Latin. Medieval Latin saw the shift from the Classical 'æ' to 'e'. The word you should be looking up is 'sæclorum'. The phrase in question is taken from Virgil's Fourth Eclouge and reads 'Magnus ab integro sæclorum nascitur ordo', 'The great order of the ages is born afresh'.


Pluribus - Is it interesting to know that this word does not appear in my lexicon.


The almost exact phrase was used again by Virgil (who may not be the orignal author) in his poem Moretum. It reads 'color est e pluribus unus' and refers to blending of colors into one.



edit on 3-3-2013 by AugustusMasonicus because: networkdude has no beer.....in any language



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 08:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
Augustus Masonicus, paulo maiora canamus.


Incipe, parve puer.



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 08:38 PM
link   
Care to explain this video to the public? Remember, you speak openly and your comments below on the mother say more than the Latin suggests.

WOW! Are we back on topic or what? This thread is heating up NOW!!! What say you? This is your chance!




Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
Augustus Masonicus, paulo maiora canamus.


Incipe, parve puer.
edit on 4-3-2013 by EnochWasRight because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 08:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
Care to explain this video to the public?


What does a random video have to do with me? Should you not be asking whoever made it to explain it to you if you do not understand it?



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 08:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
Care to explain this video to the public?


What does a random video have to do with me? Should you not be asking whoever made it to explain it to you if you do not understand it?


Random? Are you sure you are a Mason? And you call me the deceiver.



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 08:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
Random? Are you sure you are a Mason? And you call me the deceiver.


It is a crap cover of a crap song with crap dubbing. What the hell is the relevance?



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 08:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
Care to explain this video to the public?


What does a random video have to do with me? Should you not be asking whoever made it to explain it to you if you do not understand it?


Either you really don't know, or you are playing dumb. Either way, you should know if you call yourself a Mason. Your last comment to me was: Incipe, parve puer, risu cognoscere matrem: Begin to know your mother with a smile, baby boy!

Granted, you only quoted part of it, but you likely knew what you were saying. Or did you? I think this may be part of the problem you always have with my threads. You don't know what the Masons actually believe. If you can decipher this video, go back to the Lodge and ask about it. If you do know, then simply tell us in the open.

Again, ON TOPIC!


edit on 4-3-2013 by EnochWasRight because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 08:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
Care to explain this video to the public?


What does a random video have to do with me? Should you not be asking whoever made it to explain it to you if you do not understand it?


Anyone else care to chime in. I'll start. "Mirror mirror on the wall." Why do the faces have veils, false faces and marionettes on them? Who is the one coming up. Why is she a lady? Raven? Top hat?

Ringing any bells?



edit on 4-3-2013 by EnochWasRight because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 08:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
Random? Are you sure you are a Mason? And you call me the deceiver.


It is a crap cover of a crap song with crap dubbing. What the hell is the relevance?


Your knowledge of the Masons astounds me. Are you sure you are a Mason, because you are either playing dumb or your lack of insight here reveals why you keep getting mad at me. Either way, you will be mad at me.

As I had anticipated when authoring the OP, each of these posts would have their own root morphology, never coming right out and saying it, but swirling around the various themes. Stay tuned, this party is just getting started.



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 08:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
Either you really don't know, or you are playing dumb.


Or maybe I really do not care because watching music videos (particularly crap covers of crap songs with crap dubbing) is really, really boring.


Either way, you should know if you call yourself a Mason.


Whatever you say, Hoss.


Your last comment to me was: Incipe, parve puer, risu cognoscere matrem: Begin to know your mother with a smile, baby boy!


No, inventive quoter, it was: Incipe, parve puer. With a period (.), meaning 'end of sentence'.


Granted, you only quoted part of it, but you likely knew what you were saying. Or did you?


I quoted exactly what I wanted my little man-child.


I think this may be part of the problem you always have with my threads. You don't know what the Masons actually believe. If you can decipher this video, go back to the Lodge and ask about it. If you do know, then simply tell us in the open.


Do you really think people sit in lodge talking about music videos and their symbolism? Do you think a lodge meeting is like some whacko revivialist tent congregation? "Je-zus wants you to be aware-uh of crappy covers and their Satanical messages used to corrupt-uh our youth and lead them from-uh, the path of Je-zus. Now dig deep, deep, deep into your pockets for Je-zus."


Again, ON TOPIC!


You were never on topic.



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 09:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
Random? Are you sure you are a Mason? And you call me the deceiver.


It is a crap cover of a crap song with crap dubbing. What the hell is the relevance?


Notice the horns on the masks. Why does everyone in the IMAGE have on masks? Who is coming up and why do you need to get ready? What does the 2nd nobility need to cut so they can be ready for what is coming up? Any clues? Go back to the OP. If you really don't know what I am showing you in this rather obvious video, you need to learn. Ask your grand poobah of the lodge to fill you in.



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 09:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
Notice the horns on the masks. Why does everyone in the IMAGE have on masks? Who is coming up and why do you need to get ready? What does the 2nd nobility need to cut so they can be ready for what is coming up? Any clues?


Who cares? What sane person agonizes over lame music videos looking for secret messages and hidden meanings that are completely and totally irrelevant to daily life?



posted on Mar, 4 2013 @ 09:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
Notice the horns on the masks. Why does everyone in the IMAGE have on masks? Who is coming up and why do you need to get ready? What does the 2nd nobility need to cut so they can be ready for what is coming up? Any clues?


Who cares? What sane person agonizes over lame music videos looking for secret messages and hidden meanings that are completely and totally irrelevant to daily life?



Redirection. That's a tactic that only works on people who do not know the trick. Deflection to name calling and condescension. Did I ever suggest you read Verbal Judo by George Thompson?

The video was an intentional way of "Sending out this message to all of my friends." Did you catch the changed lyrics in the main chorus? The symbolism in the media is now becoming obvious to most of humanity. The jig is up. We know about Annie and we know about the decoder ring. Daddy Warbucks is now identified and the moneychangers tables have been turned. Do you need more signs? Can you not read your own symbols?

Get in the frig and drink some monster energy. Unleash the beast.






edit on 4-3-2013 by EnochWasRight because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
13
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join