Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Jul 5, 2007 8:50:34 GMT
Contents deleted by author.
|
|
|
Post by hollandr on Jul 5, 2007 9:50:58 GMT
Philip
This sounds a lot like the sons of gods (giants) taking the daughters of men as wives as in the Old Testament
Cheers
Russell
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Jul 5, 2007 10:40:26 GMT
This sounds a lot like the sons of gods (giants) taking the daughters of men as wives as in the Old Testament I suggest the description of Luma Luma as a giant is conventional. Local carvings depict renowned "clever men," "medicine men" or "men of high degree" [Masters] as being much larger than other figures. And Elders are often referred to as "big men" despite their normal physical stature.
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Jul 11, 2007 3:50:55 GMT
|
|
|
Post by hollandr on Jul 11, 2007 3:59:53 GMT
>Local carvings depict renowned "clever men," "medicine men" or "men of high degree" [Masters] as being much larger than other figures.
The ancient egyptians did the same.
And I seem to recall sumerian depictions of much larger gods
And the hebrew El Elyon commonly translated as Most High could perhaps be translated more literally as Tall of the Tall Ones (based on the sumerian Ilu)
Cheers
Russell
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Jul 11, 2007 5:01:28 GMT
Exactly!
And in the case of the Egyptians, we have the normal statured mummies of many of the Pharaohs who were thus depicted.
|
|
|
Post by niggs13 on Jul 11, 2007 18:53:43 GMT
Or as Russell suggested, as in the book of Enoch, there may have been a racial group of 'giants'. I'me thinking of the Caucasian mummies of Cherchin in China, who had no business being there yet are beautifully preserved,early european (grooved ware/megalithic) people who in death measure 6ft 6ins ! Certainly giants to the native population. Tamrin, are there any legends concerning offspring from any union a la Watchers and Nephilim in Enoch. Thanks for an interesting thread.
|
|
|
Post by hollandr on Jul 11, 2007 19:59:05 GMT
"Even more impressive were fossil deposits found by naturalist Rex Gilroy around Bathurst. He excavated from a depth of 6 feet (2 m) below the surface a fossil lower back molar tooth measuring 67 min. in length by 50mm. x 42 mm. across the crown. If his measurements are correct, the owner would have been at least 25 ft. tall, weighing well over 1,000 lbs!
At Gympie, Queensland, a farmer, Keith Walker, was ploughing his field when he turned up the large fragment of the back portion of a jaw which still possessed the hollow for a missing lower back molar tooth. This is now in Rex Gilroy's possession. The owner of the tooth would have stood at 10 feet tall.
In the Megalong Valley in the Blue Mountains NSW, a Mr P. Holman found in ironstone protruding from a creek bank the deeply impressed print of a large human-like foot. The print was that of the instep, with all 5 toes clearly shown. This footprint measures 7 inches across the toes. Had the footprint been complete it would have been at least 2 feet (60 cm in length, appropriate to a 12 foot human. However, the largest footprint found on the Blue Mountains must have belonged to a man 20 feet tall!
A set of 3 huge footprints was discovered near Mulgoa, south of Penrith, N.S.W. These prints, each measuring 2 ft long and 7 inches across the toes, are 6 ft. apart, indicating the stride of the 12 ft. giant who left them. These prints were preserved by volcanic lava and ash flows which "occurred millions of years" before man is supposed to have appeared on the Australian continent (if one is to believe the evolutionary theory):
Noel Reeves found monstrous footprints near Kempsey, N.S.W. in sandstone beds on the Upper Macleay River. One print shows a toe 4 inches (10cm) long and the total toe-span is 10 inches (25cm) - suggesting that the owner of the print may have been 17 feet tall. "
Cheers
Russell
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Jul 11, 2007 21:07:23 GMT
"Even more impressive were fossil deposits found by naturalist Rex Gilroy around Bathurst. He excavated from a depth of 6 feet (2 m) below the surface a fossil lower back molar tooth measuring 67 min. in length by 50mm. x 42 mm. across the crown. If his measurements are correct, the owner would have been at least 25 ft. tall, weighing well over 1,000 lbs! I have met Rex Gilroy and his lovely wife Heather. He is a sincere and delightful enthusiast and is one of the most incredibly credulous people I have known, as any cautious overview of his website will confirm. Bro. Russell, we have discussed elsewhere on the forum the issue of giants and I have mentioned the physiological problems suffered by individuals not far outside the usual range. I imagine a 25 foot tall individual would have had difficulty just standing up. I am very disappointed and even somewhat dismayed that my opening post on this thread has met with such a response and I repeat my opinion that Freemasonry is a rational science, which was at the forefront of the Age of Enlightenment. Any R.A. Mason will recognise John Locke's metaphor, where he said that the philosopher ought to serve as an " underlabourer in clearing the ground a little and removing some of the rubbish that lies in the way of scientific knowledge" (Locke is also closely associated with the Craft's controversial Leland-Locke Manuscript). In my opinion, there is an esotericism which is appropriate in a Masonic context, but it is not one of giants, UFOs and unicorns, (which I regard as being among the rubbish to be removed), but rather one of spiritual development (indeed, in my Masonic career, I was charged to oppose superstition). I will not persist in such exchanges, which I believe demean the serious subject at hand. Rather, I propose to rework some of my existing material, post a link and say no more on the matter.
|
|
|
Post by hollandr on Jul 11, 2007 23:00:48 GMT
"The Lion and the Unicorn are time-honoured symbols of the United Kingdom. They are properly speaking heraldic supporters, appearing in the full Royal Coat of arms of the United Kingdom. The lion stands for England and the unicorn for Scotland. The combination therefore dates back to the 1603 accession of James I of England who was already James VI of Scotland." upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/41/UK_Royal_Coat_of_Arms.pngIt is fortunate indeed that the lion in the coat of arms does not extend a paw even further across to grip the Scottish unicorn Cheers Russell
|
|
|
Post by tws on Jul 12, 2007 4:18:12 GMT
"Even more impressive were fossil deposits found by naturalist Rex Gilroy around Bathurst. He excavated from a depth of 6 feet (2 m) below the surface a fossil lower back molar tooth measuring 67 min. in length by 50mm. x 42 mm. across the crown. If his measurements are correct, the owner would have been at least 25 ft. tall, weighing well over 1,000 lbs! I have met Rex Gilroy and his lovely wife Heather. He is a sincere and delightful enthusiast and is one of the most incredibly credulous people I have known, as any cautious overview of his website will confirm. Bro. Russell, we have discussed elsewhere on the forum the issue of giants and I have mentioned the physiological problems suffered by individuals not far outside the usual range. I imagine a 25 foot tall individual would have had difficulty just standing up. I am very disappointed and even somewhat dismayed that my opening post on this thread has met with such a response and I repeat my opinion that Freemasonry is a rational science, which was at the forefront of the Age of Enlightenment. Any R.A. Mason will recognise John Locke's metaphor, where he said that the philosopher ought to serve as an " underlabourer in clearing the ground a little and removing some of the rubbish that lies in the way of scientific knowledge." In my opinion, there is an esotericism which is appropriate in a Masonic context, but it is not one of giants, UFOs and unicorns, (which I regard as being among the rubbish to be removed), but rather one of spiritual development (indeed, in my Masonic career, I was charged to oppose superstition). I will not persist in such exchanges, which I believe demean the serious subject at hand. Rather, I propose to rework some of my existing material, post a link and say no more on the matter. Can't say as I blame you, Tamrin. There is no need to extrapolate giants form the dipiction when a much simpler explanation is availabe.
|
|
|
Post by penfold on Jul 12, 2007 9:40:16 GMT
anyone read 'the Songlines' by Bruce Chatwin?
|
|
|
Post by maat on Jul 23, 2007 3:49:20 GMT
In my opinion, there is an esotericism which is appropriate in a Masonic context, but it is not one of giants, UFOs and unicorns, (which I regard as being among the rubbish to be removed), but rather one of spiritual development (indeed, in my Masonic career, I was charged to oppose superstition). Don't forget they chucked the keystone out as rubbish Tamrin!! And here is a modern day Giant for you... www.genesispark.org/genpark/giant/giant.htmGiants in Masonry.... there is the King of Bashan, Og, who was a giant too big to fit in Noahs Ark.... for Ark Mariners consideration only. RE: UFO's .... and the sons of God visited the daughters of man... do you find angels more believable than aliens? Personally I believe in both (and experienced one). RE: Unicorns ( your favourite) .. dunno, never seen one myself, but I would not be too surprised if I did Cheers Maat
|
|
|
Post by hollandr on Jul 23, 2007 3:56:26 GMT
>but I would not be too surprised if I did
Particularly as unicorns are partial to Scottish Masonry
Cheers
Russell
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Jul 23, 2007 7:57:10 GMT
I will not persist in such exchanges, which I believe demean the serious subject at hand. Rather, I propose to rework some of my existing material, post a link and say no more on the matter. I apologize to the majority of readers but, while I had hoped a masonic readership would be suitably receptive, I no longer feel I can provide further information on this sacred topic by way of this forum.
|
|
jmd
Member
fourhares.com
Posts: 1,081
|
Post by jmd on Jul 23, 2007 7:59:41 GMT
...just as I started to (finally) read this thread! - but I understand.
|
|
|
Post by maat on Jul 24, 2007 1:30:58 GMT
In my opinion, there is an esotericism which is appropriate in a Masonic context, but it is not one of giants, UFOs and unicorns, (which I regard as being among the rubbish to be removed), but rather one of spiritual development (indeed, in my Masonic career, I was charged to oppose superstition). I must be blonde, because I really do not understand why you are miffed Tamrin. As I see it, the Lodge is opened and closed on the VSL, in which are to be found many accounts of giants, possible descriptions of UFO's, and I am not sure about unicorns but there definitely are much weirder creatures featured.... The Apocalypse, the Bible's description of the events leading to the Last Judgment, is filled with terrifying beasts. From Daniel we have a beast which was like a lion with eagles' wings. "As I watched, its wings were pulled off, and it was left standing with its two hind feet on the ground, like a human being. And a human mind was given to it." There was also something that looked like a leopard. It had four wings like birds' wings on its back, and it had four heads. Elsewhere we have the perennial dragon which was consistently identified with evil in the Bible. Serpents that speak. The Phoenix - which was identified with Christ. From this I have deduced that fantastic beasts have something very spiritual to say to us. In Scottish Freemasonry we have the two headed eagle.... ? (Talking about two heads. If you found an ancient drawing that featured a two headed person, you would possibly assume that it was purely symbolic. But then what if digging further you found the skeleton of a two headed person, the remains of conjoined twins. You have discovered a tombstone.) I am not saying here that a two headed eagle exists, but given the human example who is to say it doesn't or didn't. One can only surmise that pictures of dinosaurs were considered as fantasy figures at one stage in our history, as were pictures of kangaroos, etc. I guess it is a case of one man's meat is another man's poison. But you do raise a very good question - how does one determine what is superstition. I have to confess I had to look up the word superstition in the dictionary.... I know my version but wanted to see what the dictionary said... superstition: an irrational fear of mysterious or unknown things... Now I am really confused Apologies for unintended offence if any taken. Cheers Maat
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Jul 24, 2007 3:37:38 GMT
But you do raise a very good question - how does one determine what is superstition. I have to confess I had to look up the word superstition in the dictionary.... I know my version but wanted to see what the dictionary said... superstition: an irrational fear of mysterious or unknown things...
Now I am really confused su·per·sti·tion (spr-stshn) n. 1. An irrational belief that an object, action, or circumstance not logically related to a course of events influences its outcome. 2. a. A belief, practice, or rite irrationally maintained by ignorance of the laws of nature or by faith in magic or chance. b. A fearful or abject state of mind resulting from such ignorance or irrationality. c. Idolatry. Thus, primarily to do with belief and only to do with fear in so far as such beliefs may be fearful (what you describe would be a type of phobia). While, as has been repeated ad nauseam, one can not prove a negative and despite usually finding such discussions tedious, I am willing to discuss the pros and cons of any particular example (e.g., your beasts of the Apocalypse example strikes me as being anachronistically problematic). Perhaps a dedicated thread may be warranted.
|
|
|
Post by maat on Jul 24, 2007 4:08:11 GMT
;D
Dictionary I used was the Heinemann Australian Dictionary, second edition, 1978. Overseen by 33 (no more or less) Profs, Drs, etc from the La Trobe University.
Just goes to show why we Aussies don't know much at all ;D
Big kiss for Tammy - the true Wizard with Words.
I curtsy in your general direction Cheers Maat
|
|
jmd
Member
fourhares.com
Posts: 1,081
|
Post by jmd on Jul 24, 2007 9:59:02 GMT
When I replied above that I understood Bro. tamrin's removal of the original post, it was in light that here was posted something or initiatory rites that bore rather striking similarities to many aspects of Masonic rite - with of course culturally different details.
The overall form, however, even including recognisable numbers that one may not expect (eg, 3 and 15 together), was quite significant.
What I saw was that, instead of penetrating in thought the ritual and its similarities, attention was drawn to some of the non-similarities: eg, giants - nothing in our rituals has such, and in any case the symbolic depiction shown by tamrin was not necessarily of any giants.
There appears to have been much more that is of comparative interest between the ritual and ours, but frankly, I can see that if the reflections we take are not in seeking to understand the ritual as presented, as a first step, rather than seeking to invoke views that are quite at odds with both it and Freemasonry (whether or not true - such as giants and/or UFOs), then we step into realms where insightful reflections appear to be rather infertile.
|
|