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 KSigMason
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.
Originally posted by Kyoboshaspirus
It's also something freemasons, and antichristians do; frankly it is something all people do.
Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
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.
Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
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:
It was completely in context.
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.
Originally posted by Kyobosha
Didn't realize someone wasn't allowed to respond to a post that wasn't addressed to them.
Do you think the other male patrons won't take offense to that? Think if one decided to talk to her the male patron won't say 'I' am not a good for nothing jerk?
Your argument for the use of the pronoun 'I' is invalid.
Originally posted by Kyobosha
Cut the crap, I can 'interject' if I want to. It's called moderating the conversation to get back to a discussion rather than personal attacks like you were posting.
No, the topic was about who was covering old ground.
I have seen it in numerous cases when the name Jesus is brought up even without a reference to the Bible. There is such an attack in this thread as well claiming Jesus never existed...
Are you sure you want to go this route? Well then, show me the tangible evidence that God exists.
Your responses to me and false accusation of sockpuppetry proves otherwise.
Well, since any text that exists which has any reference to a soul would be considered 'religious' that would leave scientific papers and journalism. No matter what I gave you, you would write it off as a religious text.
Since the only mention of God is in a religious text.
Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
Originally posted by Kyobosha
Wow you took what I said way off base. I NEVER said the Great Seal was on the Dollar because of Clinton trying to contact Roosevelt. Would be nice if you didn't claim I made such comments.
Calm down there sweetheart, my use of brackets was to show the other poster claimed this (that is what brackets are for, an aside, an additional thought (kind of like this one)).
If you read them again, I said that if the Roosevelt's were truly Christian, then there is now way Mrs. Roosevelt's spirit would have communicated with Clinton. Which is relevant to the soul/spirit of Roosevelt.
No, it is irrelevant. Just because Hillary Clinton claims to have contacted Eleanor Roosevelt does not make the Roosevelts non-Christian or have anything to do with Franklin Roosevelt putting the Great Seal on the Dollar Bill (as the other poster claimed). Reminder: the bracketed portion indicates that the preceding sentence does not refer to your stance.
Again, since you seem to be stuck on this. I agree Christian's have used it and that it represented the eye of God and the Trinity (though the earliest symbol to represent the trinity was the triune not the eye of providence). This doesn't mean that the symbols didn't have other meanings before this particular use; and it certainly doesn't mean that the eye truly glorifies God.
Again, I am not disputing the fact that it evolved from somewhere else. It was, and is, used as a symbol to denote the Trintiy.
I'm not arguing the meaning to some Christian's. I am arguing that the origins can't be ignored and that the symbol doesn't glorify God.
Otherwise why would they incorporate it into artwork, architecture and literature?
Let me clarify my question. The eye in the eye of providence isn't the eye of horus even though there is a resemblance. Yet the bible, circle, and cross are the eye of providence because there is a resemblance? Just seems to me you arent using the same standards of analysis for both symbols.
My answer would be another question. What would be the reason to use a symbol of Horus in a Christian church? None. It did (or still may) represent Horus, but only when used in that enviornment.
To what specifically are you refering to?
"’Which commandment is the more important of all?’ Jesus answered, ‘The most important is, ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one. And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’ The second is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.’" Mark 12:28-31
This lesson is taught in Masonry. The candidate is reminded in every degree of this tenet.
Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
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.
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.
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?
Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
Originally posted by Kyobosha
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.
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.
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.
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 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.
Back to your common theme of demeaning remarks.
I am sorry that you are offended that the Tooth Fairy is not real.
Originally posted by Kyobosha
If this was your intention then be sure to place the words 'and claim' in the brackets as well next time. You failed to do so in this case and given your sentence said the following: 'You can not vilify Franklin Roosevelt and claim...' You were implying that I made such a claim.
The question was a red herring to begin with. You can not vilify Franklin Roosevelt and claim (as the other poster did) that the Great Seal is on the Dollar Bill because Hillary Clinton claims to have contacted the former First Lady.
Now that I understand you are panentheistic I can see why you find it irrelevant.
Yes, some use it as such. Some don't.
Because they don't understand the history behind it.
Your question doesn't answer my question... Haha.
That is good, this world as a whole could use more people who followed these commandments.
Reliance? Hardly, merely stating a fact and sourcing my comments correctly. It's referenced the exact same way on masonic websites. Are you going to claim those sites are ignorant as well?
You do NOT have to believe in eternal punishment to be a freemason. Nor was I implying that Scott was the voice for freemasons. Merely trying to show that since freenmasonry is the modern day keeper of the mysteries, and to be considered a worthy candidate you must have the prerequisite of believing in eternal punishment. Not all freemasons have to but to be a part of the mysteries you must.
Never said nor assumed that everyone was a unified group. The way you and other freemasons approached the whole 'it is impossible for a member to see lucifer as a supreme being' thing made it appear that way. Doesn't change the fact that people within freemasonry do uphold his writing. Just proves that you would never know what another freemason believes.
Never said nor assumed that everyone was a unified group. The way you and other freemasons approached the whole 'it is impossible for a member to see lucifer as a supreme being' thing made it appear that way. Doesn't change the fact that people within freemasonry do uphold his writing. Just proves that you would never know what another freemason believes.
Never assumed every freemason has read Hall. Nor have I said every freemason agrees with him. Some have and really support him. It is very possible that someone has an entirely different view of freemasonry and really believes in the mysteries.
They answer 'god' but you don't know who in their mind they believe is god do you?
It is still a forward for the book.
Conpirus already did in your last bout with him. Post by Conspirus
So are the people who are trying to discredit Jesus by saying he was married and had children fanatical as well?
I ask because if you believe that their view on Satan, demons, and spirits is make believe wouldnt that also negate the rest of their beliefs in your eyes?
What is your definition of Jesus-nutter?
All Christians believe in Jesus and all will have a strict adherence to their belief in salvation which is the fundamental core of Christianity. Does this not qualify all Christians as Jesus-nutters?
Here is a question, what is the origin of all things evil in this world?
Believing youre 100% right and the others views are ridiculous fairytale ideas.
Huh yeah... Epic fail on my part. Though with a mistake like this you still think I'm conspirus?
Though one thing, its origins is way before the 1500s.
You do with your constant nut, crazy, fairytale, mumbo jumbo comments.
What is the origin of the evil in the world?
No, you mocked Conspirus who said Satan likes to try and mimic God but you said 'who likes to mimic God, the tooth fairy?' Short term memory any?
Originally posted by Phenomium
Do what thou wilt. The very words translate to "Do what you will"....THE END. The other suggestions and interpretations are all your own. Simply translated it means, do anything you feel like doing whether it be wrong or right. It means to satisfy your personal lusts.How do I know this? Because people that were close to Crowley and some who served under him made claims of his evil deeds. He even called himself "The Beast"....hardly a biblical term that makes reference to Jesus and his ways. Jesus said "Do unto others, WHAT YOU WOULD HAVE THEM DO UNTO YOU"....just thought I'd finish that quote for you as you seemed to have left the last part out. Oh yeah, Jesus is the absolute opposite of Alister Crowley, you don't even have to be a graduate of Kindergarten to put those two side by side and know that there is a wide gulf between darkness and light.....Jesus of course being the light. Twisting words and quoting incomplete quotes do not substantiate truth nor does it make light similar to darkness. As for all the talk about willpower.... the last guy that I remember that focused so much on personal willpower was, (who was that funny looking guy with the mustache?) ...no not Gene Shalit.....oh yeah...HITLER. He wasn't an exact copy of Jesus either. Face it Alister Crowley was one of the most evil men on earth and it is well documented. His first wife, Rose, died in a mental asylum,his second wife also went insane,and five mistresses committed suicide. That makes a great statement about a person and hardly coincidental that all of these people so close to him were just born that way. That was the influence of a person that was horrible to live with insomuch that an escape to an imaginary world or even death was a better option. All one has to do is but a small search on the internet or library or ask anyone on the street (who doesn't wreak of goth stench) and you will be enlightened by a myriad of sources and information highlighting the evil footprints that this contemptible soul left behind.
Alister Crowley Quotes:
Does this sound like Jesus? Hardly.
I was not content to believe in a personal devil and serve him, in the ordinary sense of the word. I wanted to get hold of him personally and become his chief of staff.
Aleister Crowley
Just like looking in a mirror
If one were to take the bible seriously one would go mad. But to take the bible seriously, one must be already mad.
Aleister Crowley
Originally posted by KSigMason
reply to post by Kody27
Some offense intended, you sound very pretentious.
Originally posted by KSigMason
reply to post by Kody27
Augustus and I both responded to the relevant portions. Nothing you've said was necessarily correct, particularly your views on Jesus or Crowley. If you think what I said was wrong, please point it out.