RE: The history of mankind

RE: The history of mankind (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

NakedOnMyChain -> RE: The history of mankind (10/1/2006 10:18:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SirKenin I find all this shit really fascinating. Ditto. I'm a huge conspiracy theory buff (like the guy in the movie of the same name, but with less social anxiety and better hair). I'm glad you brought the book up. I'm going to see if I can find it at my local bookstore. They have quite a variety of books on the topic. It may have its errors, but it seems like it would be worth a read. As a side note, someone I know (reluctant to express how) is a member of The Knights of the Holy Temple. It's a Catholic youth version of of the Masons. So you see, despite Masons being condemned by the pope, the Church found a way to keep their practices alive and well. What is it they say? A rose by any other name...

Zensee -> RE: The history of mankind (10/1/2006 10:32:17 PM)
He quote: ORIGINAL: Rule Possibly he believes that he does not. Satan is the Lord of lies, though. He must feel right at home in the average church then. 0

SirKenin -> RE: The history of mankind (10/2/2006 1:52:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth quote: ORIGINAL: SirKenin Actually that is not true, beth. Pope Clement V issued a bull on April 2, 1314 following the execution of the Masons in France that was published May 2, 1312, abolishing Freemasonry altogether. In 1738 the Church of Rome was once again persecuting them under the authority of a Bull issued by Pope Clement XII on April 28, 1738. In May 1751 Pope Benoit XIV renewed the order. So as you can see the Masons did not have the support of the Roman Church at all. actually, everything this slave stated IS true, SirKenin. this slave never said the catholic church supported the Masons. it is a fact of catholic history that they supported the Knight's Templar...and eventually turned their backs on them when King Phillip decided to take everything, even their lives, away from them. A Knight's Templar was not a Freemason. Freemasonry is not a religion, nor a substitute for religion. There is no separate 'Masonic god', and there is no separate proper name for a deity in Freemasonry. The main problem the catholic church has with the Order is that the Freemasons don't require a belief in "one, holy Roman Catholic Church"...a belief in a "Supreme Being"---as defined by the person petitioning the Lodge---suffices. A number of Papal pronouncements have been issued against Freemasonry, since the institution of the first Grand Lodge of England in 1717. The first was Pope Clement XII, April 1738; the last was Pope Leo XIII, October 1890. In 1983, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (who becamePope in 2005) as the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, issued Quaesitum est. This states that "...the Church’s negative judgment in regard to Masonic association remains unchanged since their principles have always been considered irreconcilable with the doctrine of the Church and therefore membership in them remains forbidden. The faithful, who enroll in Masonic associations are in a state of grave sin and may not receive Holy Communion" For its part, Freemasonry welcomes Roman Catholics as members. this slave is wellllllll aware that the feeling is not mutual and on that note, will be staying out of this thread from now on. On the OFF chance that you happen to read this.... I am not sure how the Knights Templar in specific got brought up in this. That is perhaps where My confusion lie. I am just referring to Freemasonry as a whole, as that is all this book addresses. I also understand that there is some connection between Knights Templar and Freemasonry, but not only have I not gotten into that yet, I have not been addressing that for the purpose of this thread. It makes things even more confusing. I know that Freemasonry is not a religion. They just set out to ascertain knowledge of God (The Great Architect as the call Him, and thus seemingly the origin of the insignia of the Freemasons) and the human race and asserted that this knowledge gave them the right to have power over the rest of mankind so to speak (I use the term somewhat loosely). Much of their symbolism comes from the Christian faith, including the Ark that the Act of the first Union is stored in and the Bible. The challenge of this book is that in their quest for knowledge, they got certain key elements of history wrong. I have not finished the book, so I have yet to establish the full nature of his arguments. I do not agree with the Catholic church's position either, but I am simply stating that Freemasonry does not have support of the Catholic Church and that at least in the beginning the edict of the Masons was that you had to be an Orthodox Christian to join. I do not know if it is still like that or not. I have not gotten that far yet.

SirKenin -> RE: The history of mankind (10/2/2006 6:46:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NakedOnMyChain quote: ORIGINAL: SirKenin I find all this shit really fascinating. Ditto. I'm a huge conspiracy theory buff (like the guy in the movie of the same name, but with less social anxiety and better hair). I'm glad you brought the book up. I'm going to see if I can find it at my local bookstore. They have quite a variety of books on the topic. It may have its errors, but it seems like it would be worth a read. As a side note, someone I know (reluctant to express how) is a member of The Knights of the Holy Temple. It's a Catholic youth version of of the Masons. So you see, despite Masons being condemned by the pope, the Church found a way to keep their practices alive and well. What is it they say? A rose by any other name... Heh. My wife and I watched that movie not long ago. That was pretty good. [:)] It has been worth reading so far. For all it's inaccuracies it raises some very interesting points. You might want to try the library so you do not have to buy it. Once I finish the whole book I am going to go back and start cross-referencing with other research and see how much of it has been proven accurate and how much of it is hulabaloo. It will make for an interesting project. [:)]

Rule -> RE: The history of mankind (10/2/2006 7:13:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth their youth groups were the only ones this slave was allowed to participate in Interesting. quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth this slave was encouraged at 17 to marry into another heavily Masonic family... Interesting. Seems like a heavily inbred subpopulation. Were your relatives aware at the time of your slave nature?

Arpig -> RE: The history of mankind (10/2/2006 7:43:30 AM)
General reply to this foolishness... Good Lord, what's next...somebody going to come across a copy of The Protocols and think it raises some "interesting points"? Its a load of crap! Beth knows what freemasonry is about, and yet people who know nothing about it are arguing with her....claiming there are secret inner orders that somebody who grew up in a masonic family knows nothing about, yet that somebody who has absolutely no affiliation with anything masonic knows about....bud, if you know about it, you can be damned sure the average mason does as well!!

SirKenin -> RE: The history of mankind (10/2/2006 9:03:16 AM)
See, this book raised a lot of ire amongst Masons, because it challenged their very way of doing things. It still does. And with compelling evidence. You have not read it, so until you do you are hardly qualified to talk. Beth is not talking about Masons either. She is talking about the Knights Templar, which she herself admitted are not Freemasons. If you were paying attention (you CAN do that can you not?) you will notice that I am talking about primarily the origins of mankind, and secondly about Freemasonry. I have not presented facts that can not be backed up, I have presented simply the facts that can be. Not to mention that she said firstly that the Masons had the support of the Catholic Church, and then seemingly contradicted herself before she mentioned that she was talking about Knights Templar, after which she provided the facts that backed up what I was saying. So, what is your issue exactly, or are you just looking to pick apart something you know fuck all about, have not read the book, have done absolutely zero research one way or the other and just wanted to interject your two cents to criticize a work that you had no idea even existed until now? Incidentally, this is not the first time I have done research into the origins of mankind and studied their theories. The topic fascinates Me. If nothing else, but for it's controversy. In this particular book I found it awesome that the origins of the Jesus story are much older than the Israelites, and equally fascinating the roots of Freemasonry, which can not be denied. Catholic persecution can not be denied either. So what is your problem? To Me, it is all about the quest for knowledge, and no one person has all the answers. If you want to consider yourself informed on a topic you consider all the sources. You obviously are not prepared to do that, so you can live in your little shell. Beth does not have all the answers either, whether she would like to think she does or does not, I do not know. It does not matter. She has the information the Masons would like her to believe. The whole point of this book, as I said, is to challenge that line of thinking and I am not at all surprised that it would raise the ire of a Mason. It did then, it will now. That does not, however, make it any less accurate, whether you would like to admit it or not. I will not know either until I finish cross-referencing everything after I finish the book.

Mercnbeth -> RE: The history of mankind (10/2/2006 9:30:21 AM)
quote: Once I finish the whole book I am going to go back and start cross-referencing with other research and see how much of it has been proven accurate and how much of it is hulabaloo. Kenin, You have an opinion and have made conclusions based upon the vast knowledge obtained by almost finishing one book on the subject? The schism between the Catholics and the Masons goes back to the Crusades, and was a major reason for the Inquisition. Mostly is was about money. But that will require much more reading from a varied sources to appreciate the perspective. As important as any of the information you read is knowing the source. More importantly know the author's agenda and prejudice. "Facts" standing alone don't provide historical perspective and taken out of context can lead to the wrong conclusions.

CrappyDom -> RE: The history of mankind (10/2/2006 9:51:25 AM)
I now see why Bush found it so easy to fool so many with such simple and transparent lies.

Mercnbeth -> RE: The history of mankind (10/2/2006 10:33:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CrappyDom I now see why Bush found it so easy to fool so many with such simple and transparent lies. Yes, I can understand that reading multiple sources from multiple perspective would challenge you. You would be required to learn. To you, that's obviously too much of a challenge.

SirKenin -> RE: The history of mankind (10/2/2006 10:43:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth quote: Once I finish the whole book I am going to go back and start cross-referencing with other research and see how much of it has been proven accurate and how much of it is hulabaloo. Kenin, You have an opinion and have made conclusions based upon the vast knowledge obtained by almost finishing one book on the subject? The schism between the Catholics and the Masons goes back to the Crusades, and was a major reason for the Inquisition. Mostly is was about money. But that will require much more reading from a varied sources to appreciate the perspective. As important as any of the information you read is knowing the source. More importantly know the author's agenda and prejudice. "Facts" standing alone don't provide historical perspective and taken out of context can lead to the wrong conclusions. I completely hear you. I am not prepared to solely take this person's word for it. He is well-travelled, highly educated and extremely bright, but he is not the only source of Masonic knowledge for sure. I am quite prepared to admit that. This is only the start for Me in My pursuit of knowledge about the Masons. I just love how it addresses the history of man though. That has long been a subject that fascinates Me. I am equally completely intrigued by the intertwining of the history of Freemasonry with the evolution of man. Amazing stuff. I can hardly put the book down. I know just from reading it that some of it is completely misguided. But I also know that there is a lot of it that is on the money. I can not recommend it enough as a fascinating read. I am of the firm belief that if you are going to learn something about any one given subject you have to take into consideration all the angles. All the sources. When you discover the commonalities, therein lies the truth.

CrappyDom -> RE: The history of mankind (10/2/2006 10:50:10 AM)
Merc, Do you really think I was refering to you?

Arpig -> RE: The history of mankind (10/2/2006 8:33:33 PM)
quote: So, what is your issue exactly, or are you just looking to pick apart something you know fuck all about, have not read the book, have done absolutely zero research one way or the other and just wanted to interject your two cents to criticize a work that you had no idea even existed until now? And you "know" this how, exactly...have you been peeking at what is on my bookshelf? You have no idea what I have and have not researched, and unfortunatly for your position SirK, I happen to know a hell of a lot about the origins of near-eastern religions, and happen to have known about the antiquity of the Christ story for well over 20 years quote: She has the information the Masons would like her to believe Did it ever cross your mind that perhaps you have the information that those who wish to discredit the Masons want you to have? quote: If you want to consider yourself informed on a topic you consider all the sources. You obviously are not prepared to do that Again, you are talking through your hat, you really have no clue what sources I have or have not considered. And it is possible that a serious and well-informed researcher will consider a source, and when he finds it to be full of unsupportable and false twaddle, he rejects that source, rather than automatically assuming that every other source must be incorrect. My remarks about beth were not really directed at you, but rather at Rule and Sisifytoserve, who rejected her statements outright. And unfortunatly for your position, she is correct that it was the Knights Templar that were all wiped out in the early 1300s. The bull issued May 2, 1312 (Ad Providum) dealt with giving the property of the Templars to the Knights Hospitaller, the other bull you refer to does not exist, there was no papal bull issued on April 2, 1314. There is no mention of freemasons in the bull Ad Providum. As I said before, the book is bunkum....read it and enjoy it, hell even believe it if you wish....but that doesn't make it true.

Rule -> RE: The history of mankind (10/2/2006 9:13:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arpig My remarks about beth were not really directed at you, but rather at Rule and Sisifytoserve, who rejected her statements outright. I valued her inside view, as I am very much outside myself. This is the truth as she knows it and I respect that. I also know that there are other, dark and evil truths that have been kept from her.

cuddleheart50 -> RE: The history of mankind (10/3/2006 4:01:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rule Possibly he believes that he does not. Satan is the Lord of lies, though. And possibly YOU do too.

Arpig -> RE: The history of mankind (10/3/2006 4:02:42 AM)
And you know of these "other, dark and evil truths" how exactly???

SirKenin -> RE: The history of mankind (10/3/2006 8:37:46 AM)
Arpig, have you read the book? It is a simple question. Yes or no will suffice.

Arpig -> RE: The history of mankind (10/3/2006 8:46:17 AM)
Yes, or rather part of it before I tossed it aside, about 15 years ago.

raiken -> RE: The history of mankind (10/3/2006 9:57:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rule quote: ORIGINAL: Arpig My remarks about beth were not really directed at you, but rather at Rule and Sisifytoserve, who rejected her statements outright. I valued her inside view, as I am very much outside myself. This is the truth as she knows it and I respect that. I also know that there are other, dark and evil truths that have been kept from her. This is true...i was raised with both free masons and knights of columbus...both have their darker truths...and the point about money is a good one, as each group has their agendas, some blatant and some very secretive, as some of you may guess as to why. It is another way to organize crime, power, greed and selfishness, with religion and good samaritan mentality as a backdrop. (my personal opinion based on my personal experience only) The groups in my area are also heavily associated with elder mob ties from long ago, and believed by many elder locals, to be partly responsible for the curruption in many a catholic church and in other groups of power and societal influence. Folks are selective about what they share, and just because it is "family" does not equate to those members being honest, it is selective honesty, for protective purpose and to keep up a good front...on many levels...i have ugly memories, they lay buried. To be fair though, there are many members that are kept in the dark as to the darker secrets and activities, so for those members i acknowledge that they believe they are serving a god of light, and doing their best to offer positive support and help for the communities they participate in. There have been very good people helping others in the name of free masonry and knights of columbus, and in my communities they work in conjunction with one another on several different events and are board members on more than a few charitable orgs in my area. They do pretect each others interests, but this gets sticky, for if there are conflicts, members would do well to acknowledge that once you pledge to masonry, you are owned by that particular collective, and they control your actions, especially in the financial realm. As long as you are in alignment with what they wish, they will solidly protect you (protect what belongs to them). Again my thoughts based on personal experience only, i do not speak for anyone else.

SirKenin -> RE: The history of mankind (10/3/2006 9:58:32 AM)
Part of it. So you are qualified to comment on the work how? Because you read a couple of pages? I do not think that is how this works. You read the whole book. Then you crossreference it with any other material you can get your hands on, and at the end you ascertain the middle ground. In the interim, I do not think you are qualified to pass judgement on it. Neither am I for that matter. An open mind is all that is needed here, and research will accomplish the rest. You had a closed mind, because it either did not fit in with what you wanted to believe, what you were told to believe or some of the facts were misconstrued (which we know this for a fact) so you threw the baby out with the bathwater. That is your problem, not Mine. That is not how I do things. EDIT: When finished this book, I have been generously offered a list of resources with which to crossreference. Couple those with what I can find on the internet and I should have a pretty good idea of what is going on.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625