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.
According to popular conception, Jesus was crucified during the thirty-third year of His life and in the third year of His ministry following His baptism. About A.D. 180, St. Irenæus, Bishop of Lyons, one of the most eminent of the ante-Nicene theologians, wrote Against Heresies, an attack on the doctrines of the Gnostics. In this work Irenæus declared upon the authority of the Apostles themselves that Jesus lived to old age. To quote: "They, however, that they may establish their false opinion regarding that which is written, 'to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord,' maintain that He preached for one year only, and then suffered in the twelfth month. [In speaking thus], they are forgetful of their own disadvantage, destroying His whole work, and robbing Him of that age which is both more necessary and more honourable than any other; that more advanced age, I mean, during which also as a teacher He excelled all others. For how could He have had His disciples, if He did not teach? And how could He have taught, unless He had reached the age of a Master? For when He came to be baptised, He had not yet completed His thirtieth year, but was beginning to be about thirty years of age (for thus Luke, who has mentioned His years, has expressed it: 'Now Jesus was, as it were, beginning to be thirty years old,' when He came to receive baptism); and, (according to these men,) He preached only one year reckoning from His baptism. On completing His thirtieth year He suffered, being in fact still a young man, and who had by no means attained to advanced age. Now, that the first stage of early life embraces thirty years, and that this extends onward to the fortieth year, every one will admit; but from the fortieth and fiftieth year a man begins to decline towards old age, which Our Lord possessed while He still fulfilled the office of a Teacher, even as the Gospel and all the elders testify; those who were conversant in Asia with John, the disciple of the Lord, (affirming) that John conveyed to them that information. And he remained among them up to the time of Trajan. Some of them, moreover, saw not only John, but the other apostles also, and heard the very same account from them, and bear testimony as to the'(validity of) the statement. Whom then should we rather believe? Whether such men as these, or Ptolemæus, who never saw the apostles, and who never even in his dreams attained to the slightest trace of an apostle?"
Originally posted by 911stinks
From my research, I have concluded that 1 is the highest degree.
It's an inverse pyramid. You start out at 33rd degree, with the rest of the schmucks, and then you go up the pyramid until there's only 1 position, that position being held by
Queen Elizabeth II.
Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
This is what i am getting at. The Scottish Rite is the successor of Knights Templars.
The fact that they have a 33rd degree as their "highest level" being tied directly to the 33 years that Jesus is reported to have lived.
But why 33? 33 years, 33 degrees? What is the significance of this number? It seems as though there is a metaphorical death that is occuring, or an end to something. What is it?
Originally posted by Saurus
Originally posted by 911stinks
From my research, I have concluded that 1 is the highest degree.
It's an inverse pyramid. You start out at 33rd degree, with the rest of the schmucks, and then you go up the pyramid until there's only 1 position, that position being held by
Queen Elizabeth II.
How is this possible, since Queen Elizabeth is female, and Freemasonry is a male-only organization?
The only site that makes this claim is FreemasonryWatch. I would suggest that you research more than one radical anti-Masonry site before making such outrageous claims.
[edit on 14/5/2010 by Saurus]
Originally posted by 911stinks
The Queen is the largest land owner on earth. She's been in power for 52 yrs.
She is the head of the Knights of Malta, a Masonic Organization.
Originally posted by Masonic Light
Originally posted by 911stinks
The Queen is the largest land owner on earth. She's been in power for 52 yrs.
That has nothing to do with Freemasonry.
She is the head of the Knights of Malta, a Masonic Organization.
There are two different organizations called Knights of Malta. The Masonic Knights of Malta are headed by Sir Knight William Koon, Grand Master of Knights Templar.
The Catholic Order of Knights of Malta, technically called the Sovereign Military Order of Malta, is headed by Matthew Festing, Grand Master of that order.
The queen of England is not a member of either of the Malta orders, and in fact, cannot become a member of either, as one must be a Mason to become a member of the Masonic Malta order, and Masonry is a male-only fraternity. And one must be Catholic to join the Catholic Malta order, whereas she's the head of the Anglican church.
Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by Masonic Light
Perhaps i have misunderstood, but i had read that the Freemasons, after being "eradicated" went on to found the Scottish Rite. The 33rd degree concept coming into use at this time referenced the great secret they had about the Church.
But I would be completely shocked to learn that a Masonic group would just haphazardly combine rites without regard to the sacred numerology. There is purpose to almost everything that is done.
Lots of good information there. Thanks for sharing.