|
Post by rockytriton on Jan 31, 2006 13:22:33 GMT
Hi, I bought this book, but I'm not sure that I want to continue reading it. I kind of got the impression that these two are former brothers and didn't like the ritual and felt that it was stupid and meaningless. I skimmed over some parts mainly. Will anyone here suggest that I continue reading it? I really don't want to waste my time reading some anti-mason junk.
Also, I noted one thing about them saying that Jesus wasn't a decendant of David because he was traced to Joseph and Josheph wasn't supposed to be his father. Well, this reasoning is pretty dumb because they never used a woman's name when tracing the lineage of a man, if Mary was the daughter of the man previous, they would have used the husband's name, not hers. Anyway, I'm not using that for a reason not to read, I'm just pointing that out as how they are ignoring some things to push their points.
Thanks, -- Rocky
|
|
|
Post by maat on Feb 1, 2006 4:03:49 GMT
Dear Rocky
I personally enjoyed the book for no other reason than it introduced some new ideas and made me think. I enjoy Laurence Gardners books for the same reason.
Ultimately though - if you really don't want to read it - don't. It's just not for you.
Maat
PS - as all Saviours/Messiahs seem to be born of virgins/maidens - the official story would have to make Mary a virgin even if she wasn't. Perhaps she was just a young girl? Is this a new idea to you? If it is you will probably see what you can find out for yourself. Therein lies the value of some 'out of the ordinary books" IMO
|
|
staffs
Administrator
Staffs
Posts: 3,295
|
Post by staffs on Feb 1, 2006 7:19:05 GMT
i think we have discussed the book before here but like yourself Rocky i started and never finished it and only read about 80 pages.
I dont believe it is anti mason stuff as it was written by people who are freemasons themselves.
For me it followed a path that i did not want to go down.
|
|
|
Post by munkholt on Feb 1, 2006 8:23:43 GMT
I just finished it. There were maybe one or two sound ideas, but those guys are firing in all directions. Their arguments typically go like this: "Had we just discovered the something-something?", which two pages later becomes, "As we had already conclusively proven ..." -- conjecture becomes fact, which is then used to move towards other revelations/guess-work, which is then called proof, etc. So I read it to see what those crazy guys would come up with next -- where that whole line of thought would go. In that sense I enjoyed it.
|
|
|
Post by vadro on Feb 1, 2006 9:04:55 GMT
I read it many years ago and I really liked it. As Maat said, it makes you think, at least.
|
|
|
Post by rockytriton on Feb 1, 2006 17:28:12 GMT
Yea these are the exact types of problems I've been having with the book. I will take your advice and read it for the humor factor, thanks! ;D I just finished it. There were maybe one or two sound ideas, but those guys are firing in all directions. Their arguments typically go like this: "Had we just discovered the something-something?", which two pages later becomes, "As we had already conclusively proven ..." -- conjecture becomes fact, which is then used to move towards other revelations/guess-work, which is then called proof, etc. So I read it to see what those crazy guys would come up with next -- where that whole line of thought would go. In that sense I enjoyed it.
|
|
|
Post by maat on Feb 1, 2006 23:33:36 GMT
For what it is worth - his latest book "Turning the Hiram Key" is much better researched - or so my husband tells me. I haven't read it yet.
Maat
|
|
|
Post by corab on Feb 2, 2006 22:42:57 GMT
For what it is worth - his latest book "Turning the Hiram Key" is much better researched - or so my husband tells me. I haven't read it yet. Definitely - and less blatantly speculative, although its a weird one to get into, what with that introduction. Very, very interesting, though. Cora
|
|
|
Post by vadro on Feb 6, 2006 18:51:14 GMT
For what it is worth - his latest book "Turning the Hiram Key" is much better researched - or so my husband tells me. I haven't read it yet. Definitely - and less blatantly speculative, although its a weird one to get into, what with that introduction. Very, very interesting, though. Cora I will definetely read it.
|
|
|
Post by hollandr on Feb 6, 2006 23:40:24 GMT
>Well, this reasoning is pretty dumb because they never used a woman's name when tracing the lineage of a man, if Mary was the daughter of the man previous, they would have used the husband's name, not hers. Rocky You may like to read "The Bible Fraud" for a much more detailed analysis of that. Bushby comes with some surprising answers.. www.conspiracyplanet.com/review.cfm?rtype=22&reviewid=27&page=2For example "However, attempting to summarize what Tony has written..... in 325 AD, the first Christian council was called at Nicaea to bring the stories of twin brothers, Jesus 'the Rabbi' and Judas Khrestus into one deity that we now know as Jesus Christ. Tony says they were not born of virgin birth but to Nabatean Arab Mariamne Herod (now known as the Virgin Mary) and fathered by Tiberius ben Panthera, a Roman Centurion. The brothers were raised in the Essene community and became Khrists of their faith. Rabbi Jesus later was initiated in Egypt at the highest of levels similar to the 33rd degree of Freemasonry of which many Prime ministers and Presidents around the world today are members. He then later married three wives, one of whom we know as a Mary Magdalene, a Druidic Princess, stole the Torah from the temple and moved to Lud, now London. Tony believes the reason Jesus stole the Torah was that he said it contained "a very special secret", which he was going to reveal that secret to the world. He was stoned to death and the Torah taken from him before he could. The elder brother, Judas Khrestus, with his "Khrestian" followers conspired to take the throne of Rome, his royal birthright, and was captured, tried, and was sentenced to be crucified" Rocky, notice the reference to a lost secret with the death of the holder - sound familiar? Cheers Russell
|
|
|
Post by eddysocer on Apr 13, 2006 4:43:50 GMT
Dear all,
I like it very much, but also agree with most of you... I am sort of in favor and against it... weird.
But it makes you think. I share Maat's opinion.
Read all of their work, it is interesting.
Fraternal cheers,
Ed
|
|
|
Post by ingo on Apr 14, 2006 13:10:38 GMT
I found it interesting too because of some new ideas but you have to keep in mind that large parts are really speculative.
|
|
|
Post by rza008 on Apr 28, 2006 17:41:19 GMT
I have just started reading this book, Taylorsman recommended that I purchase 'beyond the craft', I went to waterstones today but could not find it, so instead i bought the Hiram key, written by 2 Freemasons, but I have read mixed reviews about it from freemasons themselves
|
|
|
Post by ingo on Apr 28, 2006 18:16:17 GMT
Ben You will find some interesting ideas but also many many "self-fulfilling prophecies"
|
|
|
Post by rza008 on Apr 28, 2006 18:34:38 GMT
yeah, i'm understanding some of the ideas already, and symbolism is somehting which I am particularly interested in, so in some cases (maybe those in Freemasonry) the message/teaching/understanding cannot be understood by words alone, but by an experience, for example a ritual, or a concept represented by the symbol
|
|
|
Post by ingo on May 3, 2006 13:32:50 GMT
Without ritual you will not understand that much of freemasonry, I am afraid.
|
|
staffs
Administrator
Staffs
Posts: 3,295
|
Post by staffs on May 3, 2006 18:13:59 GMT
Without ritual you will not understand that much of freemasonry, I am afraid. Ingo i agree with you on that 100 per cent although others here will beg to differ. IMO its a bit like the lottery saying "youve gotta be in it to win it " Over to you Stewart !!!
|
|
|
Post by a on May 3, 2006 21:03:22 GMT
How could I fail to respond to such a carrot? If you look at life as a once off here today gone tomorrow sort of thing then the entrenched view is probably right. However if you look at life as a vehicle for learning, for experiencing, for growing, for traveling, finding your way, and can do this from a reincarnation perspective, then well, just because you have been rejected in this lifetime, does not mean that you weren't in the system in previous lifetimes. For me I would not be surprised to find that I was in the system in lifetimes past, which could explain a few things. If I was or whether this is just a flight of fancy does not really matter. What matters is how I lead my life today, built from the lessons that I have learned. I for one would suggest that there are many Freemasons who are not in a Masonic fraternity on this planet at this time. Some because they don't realise that Freemasonry is there, others because they don't want to associate themselves with what Freemasons appears to have become, and some because there have tried and left disillusioned with the internal darkness - bullying, power struggles, egos etc. Now if you view Freemasonry as being an exclusive social club for doing deals etc then the inner side of Freemasonry will remain hidden in plain sight. But if you can experience its inner beauty then it does not really matter if you are in or out though in is other things being equal preferable. Though for in to be beneficial you would have to be amongst skilled craftsmen who genuinely practiced the Craft and who have traveled well. Staffs, you knew that I would respond to this, which is why I obliged on this occasion. But let me leave you with a thought:- If you really do have to be initiated into a fraternity to be a Freemason then why have so many Freemasons (including acting Grand ranks) in a range of fraternities around the globe wrote to me, emailed me, and introduced me as "Brother"? Sort of answers itself. Now if a Freemasons ego can't cope with this, then could I direct him towards this thing called .....Freemasonry. The theory if not necessarily the practice in our world today. Apologies to those fraternities, Lodges and Freemasons who do genuinely Practice the Craft.
|
|
staffs
Administrator
Staffs
Posts: 3,295
|
Post by staffs on May 4, 2006 2:32:34 GMT
How could I fail to respond to such a carrot? If you really do have to be initiated into a fraternity to be a Freemason then why have so many Freemasons (including acting Grand ranks) in a range of fraternities around the globe wrote to me, emailed me, and introduced me as "Brother"? . Stewart.....Because they were taught to be cautious !
|
|
|
Post by ingo on May 7, 2006 12:14:40 GMT
Stewart I just responded to Ben to avoid the opinion that you can "learn" freemasonry if you read books or attend lessons like at school. If you read books or listen to speaches, you can win interest in the craft, but you cannot initiate yourself. You wrote not about learning to be a freemasonry but about the attitude! Thats a difference for me. Thats what we call frankly "freemasons without apron" - there is an attitude which makes a good basis to become a brother (or sister) - if you are initiated. If no initation happens - you will always have to stay outside. You can keep up your attitude but maybe you will not recieve fraternal help in advancing - a so called alter ego or advocatus diavoli.
|
|