|
Post by billmcelligott on Sept 15, 2006 21:32:28 GMT
Stewart, your making my head hurt.
|
|
|
Post by a on Sept 15, 2006 21:47:16 GMT
Bill Trust me for the moment - that is a good sign. One day you may well shake my hand and thank me. Not sure if that will be before or after you deck me like. Just think about it Bill. (and I don't mean about the decking me bit). Now go on have another stab at my questions. You know you want to.
|
|
|
Post by hollandr on Sept 15, 2006 21:53:30 GMT
>The never ending and eternal battle of logic and facts against total and utter bollocks.
(Brihadaranyaki Upanishad 1, 3, 28) :
"Lead us, 0 Lord, from darkness to light; from the unreal to the real; from death to immortality."
Darkness to light - EA Unreal to real - FC Death to immortality MM.
Thus Ruff's cry is that we may walk the path of the FC and know the unreal from the real - rather than having to speculate forever
Cheers
Russell
|
|
|
Post by ptbojim on Sept 15, 2006 22:24:12 GMT
Bill I could care less if you had a string of Phd's coming out your arse. My discussion with regard to this topic has absolutely nothing to do with who is smarter. I'll be the first to admit that I know very little, however it is with earnest and honest intent that I hope to learn and enlighten myself. As for the House of David Inscription: Assessing the Jehoash Inscription The Paleographer: Demonstrably a Forgery Hershel Shanks Was it too good to be true? In recent months, the world learned of an inscribed tablet apparently written by Jehoash, the ninth-century B.C.E. king of Judah. But almost immediately, questions were raised about its authenticity. After examining the text of the Jehoash Inscription, Frank Moore Cross, professor emeritus at Harvard and America’s leading expert in ancient Semitic inscriptions, to cite one notable example, has concluded that the inscription itself “leaves little doubt that we are dealing with a forgery, and that, fortunately, it is a rather poor forgery.” The Linguist: Hebrew Philology Spells Fake Edward L. Greenstein Department of Bible, Tel Aviv University The language of the Jehoash Inscription is fake. It is not idiomatic ancient Hebrew but rather a perversion of it. If authentic, it would be a phenomenal find. But clearly it is not a genuine artifact. for the whole article www.biblicalarchaeology.org/bswbOOossuary_assessing.aspAs I said before, one must consider the source of any claim. If the research or claim is from an agenda driven religious source it's pretty likely complete BS.
|
|
staffs
Administrator
Staffs
Posts: 3,295
|
Post by staffs on Sept 16, 2006 6:15:20 GMT
But if you and your lecturing to Freemasons leaves any part of the true love and beauty of Freemasonry behind, be assured I will be there banging a drum to make sure no one forgets. Is that a threat? Is this that so called bullying that is apparently so rife within the system ?
|
|
staffs
Administrator
Staffs
Posts: 3,295
|
Post by staffs on Sept 16, 2006 6:19:40 GMT
For once I agree with Bill Mc Elligott! It really does not matter if KST ever existed as we envisage it. For what it is worth I believe it did , but that is not the point, it is what is signifies. and the Esoteric significance of that Temple to many religions and to the various parts of the family of Freemasonry. Again there is the Symbolical aspect of "The Temple" in that we build it within ourselves. Jesus was accused of Blasphemy by the Jewish Elders when he said that he woud "Destroy the Temple and rebuild it within three days" They thought he was referring to Herod's Temple in Jerusalem but he actually meant himself. Steve i too also agree and that is the point exactly IMO....KST is symbolic...we are told FM is veiled in allegory....is this not exactly what we are talking about here. IMO The temple is all about YOURSELF your own Temple that you build. Do we not go into a LODE ROOM and find that there are many temples within it.?
|
|
|
Post by billmcelligott on Sept 16, 2006 7:06:22 GMT
This is what you asked , and I did what you asked. You then call into question what I found from your suggestion. Thats like saying to your child, go get me the paper darling. Then when she brings it to you, you smack her over the head with it. I keep trying to get over, there is no need for these debating tricks. You have a sound argument, off topic but a sound argument. I have never said you are wrong, I have just said what I believe. I leave you to believe what you wish. Still it makes a change from arguing with Steve. So we are left with the 'legend' of Solomons Temple which is refereed to in Hebrew and Islamic records. It is refereed to by Josephus, the most accepted. I believe. of the Historians of that era. You make the case that there is no archaeological evidence of its existence. I confirmed that your were probably right by mentioning there was no evidence of the Exodus either. So you must then go on the preponderance of the evidence available. Here we see a precise' of the legend of Moses. So we have two great Religions both claiming that Moses was the communicator with God that, that he gave them exclusive rights to the one and only 'Holy Book'. Both religious books explain the Exodus. So why would there be this conspiracy. Did this happen? why is there no evidence left behind of these wondrous events. ? I suspect it is like the fisherman's tale, like Solomons Temple it probably did happen but not quite on the scale written down. Lets remember the Tabernacle of the ark, was most likely 4 poles and several large sheet of cloth - a big tent. It is also reasonable and logical to assume that if Exodus is true but inflated then Solomons Temple may well be the same. The reason why there is no evidence could be that there was not that much there in the first place. a Large building. To gain evidence at a later time your original account must be accurate.
|
|
|
Post by billmcelligott on Sept 16, 2006 7:10:12 GMT
Bill Trust me for the moment - that is a good sign. One day you may well shake my hand and thank me. Not sure if that will be before or after you deck me like. Just think about it Bill. (and I don't mean about the decking me bit). Now go on have another stab at my questions. You know you want to. When did I say decking ? I'll go back and check. I remember a drum, might hit you with that. Nothing I say is personal Stewart, forums are for debate. Thats it. I'll be back later. You'll have to wait till I finish with the hackers.
|
|
|
Post by a on Sept 16, 2006 9:01:49 GMT
Is this that so called bullying that is apparently so rife within the system ? Very funny - It felt like a threat so I asked for clarification.
|
|
|
Post by a on Sept 16, 2006 9:05:29 GMT
Bill Trust me for the moment - that is a good sign. One day you may well shake my hand and thank me. Not sure if that will be before or after you deck me like. Just think about it Bill. (and I don't mean about the decking me bit). Now go on have another stab at my questions. You know you want to. When did I say decking ? I'll go back and check. I remember a drum, might hit you with that. Nothing I say is personal Stewart, forums are for debate. Thats it. I'll be back later. You'll have to wait till I finish with the hackers. The decking bit was me trying to inject humour following what appeared to be a threat. I will stick to being serious.
|
|
|
Post by billmcelligott on Sept 16, 2006 11:07:48 GMT
Hold on Bill, we are talking about the hidden mysteries of nature and science here, which you yourself have confirmed that UGLE Freemasons are expected to research. This is not in itself symbolism. This is the very fabric of your daily existence. If 99.5% of UGLE Freemasons as you say, choose not to do what is expected of them, is that not a breach of the trust given to them; corrupting the masonic experience for those who follow (if you cant feel it how can you teach and guide?); and making a mockery out of Freemasonry? No I didn't, you have your own meaning or agenda for the description hidden mysteries. I maintain that these mysteries are as someone has already said the examination of oneself. you seem to me to be looking for some external mystical source, which I do not believe exists. to be able to look in a mirror and know the man looking back is the greatest mystery any of us will ever experience. There is no requirement or compulsion, those that wish to learn and expand are able to do so those that do not are not rejected in any way. They just take a different path. There is a well used phrase. Freemasonry is about me improving me, not me improving you. My objection Stewart to your approach is you are advising Freemasons, on Freemasonry. You have said as much. but your knowledge of Freemasonry is second hand. To take your analogy, would you take advice from a Doctor who has never prescribed a pill or performed an operation. And would the other Doctors who have stand by and let you do so? Banging a drum, I thought was a normal expression for "making a noise" nothing threatening in that , unless your afraid of drums. You make constant reference to disillusioned Freemasons, how about you organize a casual meeting , I'll come along and we will talk to these disillusioned Freemasons together.
|
|
|
Post by ptbojim on Sept 16, 2006 12:06:08 GMT
Bill I think you may have debated with the fundies for too long. A respectful debate over academic claims is anything but a personal attack on one's effort or malicious in intent. Please understand that I am not tryng to trick you or undermine your faith. If you are uncomfortable discussing science and history separate from your religious beliefs I can understand. I approached this topic as an exercise in discovering kown fact, basing that knowldge to form sound reason and hopefully coming a little closer to understanding the symbols and allegory from antiquity. Who's going on now? If you are interested in my opinion regarding this aspect of Bibical allegory, I'd be happy to share it with you, but pehaps we should start a new thread as I agree we are heading off on a tangent here. Note that I do see a very strong argument in the answer you laid out. It is a topic and debate I would be sure to enjoy. Beautifully said Bill and a opinion I share with you.
|
|
|
Post by a on Sept 16, 2006 12:30:56 GMT
you have your own meaning or agenda for the description hidden mysteries. I maintain that these mysteries are as someone has already said the examination of oneself. you seem to me to be looking for some external mystical source, which I do not believe exists. to be able to look in a mirror and know the man looking back is the greatest mystery any of us will ever experience. Now Bill here is something that we do agree on. I do however take issue in your insistence that I have my own meaning or agenda for the description of the hidden mysteries. The hidden mysteries are all around you Bill, it is not an academic term. They intertwine through your very life. You have said yourself that UGLE Freemasons are encouraged to research them. You have also confirmed that virtually no one does. This is a shame, for theirin lies the answers. You may also find that in the wider masonic world what I know about the Mysteries is actively taught and/or encouraged in Lodges/associated lessons. You should consider the possibility that if UGLE Masons did, that which by you own words most do not even though it is encouraged in ritual, they would gain similar knowledge.
|
|
|
Post by billmcelligott on Sept 16, 2006 13:38:36 GMT
No Stewart your reading your own answers into my replies. What I said was if you follow the tenets of the Craft you will experience an improvement in your self. If you wish to call that a hidden mystery then fine. Not too sure what you mean by associated lessons, I presume your refering to non UGLE Freemasonry? See here it goes again, if you poor UGLE Masons did just what I tell you you would know what its all about. Do you not understand how insulting that is to a man who has spent say 40 years as a Mason and probably done 5 times more research and understanding than anyone on this forum? I dont mean Me I mean that vast army of unpretentious hard working Masons who just get on with it. Never visit a forum like this. To me you seem to wash them aside as if they dont matter. They are Freemasonry, without them you would have nothing to discuss. I am sorry if I am not reading your words incorrectly but I have to say what I hear or rather what I see.
|
|
|
Post by billmcelligott on Sept 16, 2006 14:09:13 GMT
I'll try to follow your example then Jim.
Your probably right , but it does help to keep you grounded on what has actually been said. Rather than what is assumed to have been said. You soon learn, if you take your eye of the ball, you loose the thread.
Yes we all want that I suspect. Tolerance is the key. From tolerance come understanding, from understanding comes wisdom, from wisdom comes knowledge. So start with tolerance. I am not at all uncomfortable in any way. But you forgot to listen to what I actually said. I did not at any time say you were wrong, indeed I don't remember you ever saying you did not believe, you said there was no evidence. I just said that I believed.
I thought I was continuing the conversation along the lines of the probability of the line of David and hence Solomon being historically accurate. In other words if both main Religions of the world have the same tale told by different authors , we should at least give that some credibility.
Maybe Staffs would like to hive off this last section to be continued separately ?
|
|
|
Post by maat on Sept 18, 2006 0:44:40 GMT
This thread is definitely a lesson in perseverance ;D
Maat
|
|