> You said: “That is my opinion, yes because of the issue of
> the Fall.”
> My reaction:
> You leave me totally in the dark with such remarks. Apart
> from setting my associative powers to overdrive, I have no
> real understanding over what you mean.
> Please explain a bit further. I really want to understand
> where you are coming from in these matters.
I was refering to the fall of some of the angels, who according to ancient texts came to earth and interbred with human women thus spawning a race of Nephilim or "Watchers", who imparted to mankind knowledge. Lawrence Gardner has writen at leangth about this and it'll be interesting to hear how he bears this out when he becomes next month's forum guest...
> You said: “I'm not anti individual Masons as most Masons
> aren't told what the adepts of Freemasonry believe; they have
> to find it out for themselves. In fact, many Masons are
> deliberately misled.”
> My reaction:
> Do you mean to say that within masonry there is a scam within
> a scam as in that they all fool each other? And if so, where
> are they misled away from anyway, by whom, for what purpose?
Freemasonry, according to Albert Pike and Manly P. Hall, is two organisations within one:
"Freemasonry is a fraternity within a fraternity - an outer organization concealing an inner brotherhood of the elect ... it is necessary to establish the existence of these two separate and yet interdependent orders, the one visible and the other invisible. The visible society is a splendid camaraderie of 'free and accepted' men enjoined to devote themselves to ethical, educational, fraternal, patriotic, and humanitarian concerns. The invisible society is a secret and most August (defined as 'of majestic dignity, grandeur') fraternity whose members are dedicated to the service of a mysterious Arcanum (defined as 'a secret, a mystery')." - Manly P. Hall, "Lectures on Ancient Philosophy" (contained in The Secret Teachings of All Ages)
"So Masonry jealously conceals its secrets and intentionally leads conceited interpreters astray... If you have been disappointed in the first three degrees, as you have received them... remember that... symbols were used, not to reveal but to conceal... The symbols and ceremonies of Masonry have more than one meaning. They rather conceal than disclose the Truth" (Albert Pike, Morals and Dogma,pp. 105-106; 148)
"The Blue Degrees [first, second and third] are but the outer court or portico of the Temple. Part of the symbols are displayed there to the Initiate, but he is intentionally misled by false interpretations. It is not intended that he shall understand them; but it is intended that he shall imagine that he understands them. Their true explication is reserved for the Adepts, the Princes of Masonry (the 28th degree and beyond)." [Morals and Dogma, p. 819]
"Masonry, like all the Religions, all the Mysteries, Hermeticism, and Alchemy, conceals its secrets from all except the Adepts and Sages, or the Elect, and uses false explanations and misinterpretations of its symbols to mislead those who deserve only to be mislead; to conceal the Truth, which it calls light, and draw them away from it." [Morals and Dogma, p. 104-5]
"A Spirit that loves wisdom and contemplates the Truth close at hand, is forced to disguise it, to induce the multitudes [that is you] to accept it... Fictions are necessary to the people, and the Truth becomes deadly to those who are not strong enough to contemplate it in all its brilliance. In fact, what can there be in common between the vile multitude and sublime wisdom? The truth must be kept secret, and the masses need a teaching proportioned to their imperfect reason." [Morals and Dogma, p. 103]
The reason why Freemasonry misleads even its own, IMO, is because Freemasonry is one of many tools to usher in the NWO according to an esoteric doctrine that if it became widely known, would cause even more problems that the world is already facing, what with Islamic terrorist groups targetting the "Great Satan".
> You said: “I'm sure the original meaning of Osiris probably
> was different but I still don't believe this deity really had
> mankind’s interests at heart.
> My reaction:
> Erm, as far as I understand, Osiris was a symbol created by
> the AE that, over the centuries, went through several stages
> in it's meaning. How in heavens name can that be extrapolated
> into “Osiris did not had mankind’s interests at heart”.
> Aren’t you comparing apples and pears?
> Aren’t you putting to much reality into the Jesus myth?
> Check this
> for a reasonable easy to read story over the Osiris cult.
Thanks for the link which I've read along with countless other articles on Osiris... I've already expressed my opinion that the Osiris stroy was a reflection of the already existing Son of God, namely Jesus. IMO, humanity began to go wrong as soon as it put its trust in the Watchers who created the foundations for the civilisation we have today.
> You said: “I don't have much regard for Churchianity.”
> My reaction:
> Sheesh, I think we have found yet more common ground :-))