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.
Originally posted by MrNECROS
The Operative thing is debunked by both Pike and McClenechan as a deliberate ruse.
It's quite strange in many ways how open "The Book" and "Morals & Dogma" are on the matter that Freemasonry deliberatally decieves it lower ranks, neither author make any bones about it.
Originally posted by MrNECROS
And is "the lost word" recovered in the York Rite...errr no.
I could go on and on...but better that you actually acquaint yourself with the rite for yourself.
Originally posted by MrNECROS
Masonic Lite - I think you have your Rites mixed - it's the Scottish Rite that is the dominant form practiced in English speaking countries...well... at least it is in The UK, USA, Canada, Australia etc...I don't think you'll find many supporters for your little ruse to the contrary.
I'm under the impression that the Grand Lodge of Mexico is a York Rite body but that's about it really.
Anyway it's all in *that* book that you seem to have a great deal of trouble with....
Hiram Abif does not appear anywhere in the York Rite at all...full stop, yet he is in the next 11 degrees of the Scottish Rite.
And is "the lost word" recovered in the York Rite...errr no.
I could go on and on...but better that you actually acquaint yourself with the rite for yourself.
The point to be made about Jaccobin Freemasonry is that until it's arrival there is very little (if any) evidence to the existence of Freemasonry prior to this time.
Originally posted by MrNECROS
Masonic Lite:
No Scottish Rite "Regular" Lodges in Australia and The UK?
Funny you know 'cos even I have been inside the Grand Lodge of South Australia and seen all the Scottish Rite Regalia and lodge listings
The York Rite is an old largely defunct "Christian Only" rite and yet you are trying to say that it is the dominant right in the English speaking world?
So Hiram Abiff appears in the Fellow Craft Degree of the York Rite does he?
Anyway the Regius Manuscript and Gothic Constitutions of Freemasonry are in connection with stone masonry guilds, our friend Hiram is nowhere to be found in either of these writings and it’s not even clear that these works are genuine.
This is quite irrelevant though as they are not about Freemasonry at all, just a workmen’s guild like the Thatchers or Wheelwrights.
As an aside though, Gadfly and I discussed you at some length originally and more or less came to the conclusion that you actually believed what you were saying and thought you were shooting straight
Originally posted by MrNECROS
So Hiram Abiff appears in the Fellow Craft Degree of the York Rite does he?
Heh, I think you might want to put this one in the same basket as your “special” 32nd Degree.
Originally posted by Masonic LightSecondly, we know from Ashmole's own diaries that he was initiated into a Lodge under the jurisdiction of the Masons Company of London, which was operative
Furthermore, the manuscript recounts several Masonic legends, including Euclid's and Pythagoras' association with ancient Masonry.
Originally posted by Nygdan
From mackey's book, Ashmole apparently states that he was 'made a freemason' in a city desides london, and then many years later states that he was 'accepted into the company' or some such of freemasons in London. I don't think, in the quote I saw, that he said it was specifically the Mason's Company of London, but I don't know if thats any different from anything else either.
Also from Macekey, I had gotten the impression that the Pythagoras as a mason idea was something that was added later, when more educated speculatives had entered the fraternity, and is first mentioned in the Locke Manscript, which is beleived to be a 'pious fraud'. Macekey also thought it relevant that none of the other oldest manuscripts state the bit about pythagoras (but do have the hiram story and also use that terminology of the king 'who muched loved masonry'), and that this Locke Manuscript (aka the leland mauscript I think ) also refers to an ancient historical work , the Polycronicon, as the source for the mention of pythagoras.
Does this mean that things have changed since mackey's time?
Originally posted by Masonic Light
Research has changed, but the documents have remained the same. The Regius mentions Pythagoras, but calls him "Peter Gower".
However, prototypes did exist, and Pythagoras had been initiated at Heliopolis and at Eleusis.
Also, the contributions in the areas of geometry and mathematics are fundamental in the operative art of Masonry, another reason to claim him as an ancient Mason.
Originally posted by MrNECROS
He also continues to delude himself that the word Mason = Freemason.
Originally posted by Trinityman
Everyone (apart from you) knows that these are two words to describe the same thing.
if you think otherwise, please tell me what the difference is in your opinion.
Originally posted by Nygdan
The issue of the words mason, and freemason, is intersting, perhaps a detailed converstation is best left to a different thread
Originally posted by MrNECROS
What the heck has happed to Masonic Lite - he's really off the deep end now.
He used to be able to keep a good post of BS on track but now he's really off the rails with the whole York Rite thing.
However, prototypes did exist, and Pythagoras had been initiated at Heliopolis and at Eleusis.
Originally posted by Nygdan
What supports those two statements??
By mason do you merely mean stoneworker? Are you saying pythagoras was a stoneworker/architect??
Originally posted by MrNECROS
What the heck has happed to Masonic Lite - he's really off the deep end now.
As an aside though, Gadfly and I discussed you at some length