|
Post by sammy on Jul 8, 2014 2:25:46 GMT 9.5
Solomon fell from grace before he died ... how wise was he? 1 Ki 11:1 But king Solomon loved many strange women, together with the daughter of Pharaoh, women of the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Zidonians, and Hittites; 1 Ki 11:2 Of the nations concerning which the LORD said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall not go in to them, neither shall they come in unto you: for surely they will turn away your heart after their gods: Solomon clave unto these in love. 1 Ki 11:3 And he had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines: and his wives turned away his heart. 1 Ki 11:4 For it came to pass, when Solomon was old, that his wives turned away his heart after other gods: and his heart was not perfect with the LORD his God, as was the heart of David his father. 1 Ki 11:5 For Solomon went after Ashtoreth the goddess of the Zidonians, and after Milcom the abomination of the Ammonites. 1 Ki 11:6 And Solomon did evil in the sight of the LORD, and went not fully after the LORD, as did David his father. 1 Ki 11:7 Then did Solomon build an high place for Chemosh, the abomination of Moab, in the hill that is before Jerusalem, and for Molech, the abomination of the children of Ammon. 1 Ki 11:8 And likewise did he for all his strange wives, which burnt incense and sacrificed unto their gods. 1 Ki 11:9 And the LORD was angry with Solomon, because his heart was turned from the LORD God of Israel, which had appeared unto him twice, 1 Ki 11:10 And had commanded him concerning this thing, that he should not go after other gods: but he kept not that which the LORD commanded. 1 Ki 11:11 Wherefore the LORD said unto Solomon, Forasmuch as this is done of thee, and thou hast not kept my covenant and my statutes, which I have commanded thee, I will surely rend the kingdom from thee, and will give it to thy servant. 1 Ki 11:12 Notwithstanding in thy days I will not do it for David thy father's sake: but I will rend it out of the hand of thy son. 1 Ki 11:13 Howbeit I will not rend away all the kingdom; but will give one tribe to thy son for David my servant's sake, and for Jerusalem's sake which I have chosen.
Thanks friend
|
|
|
Post by sammy on Jul 8, 2014 4:54:53 GMT 9.5
If it isn't personal then what is left for our self to connect with?
Observing is great for transitions, but no action gets you no where. Emotion is a part of the life we are given.
What would you think... If you gave your greatest house for others to live in, and They then show no emotion toward it? Even go as far to reject some of the physical objects based solely on that simple fact of objectivity, and others arguing its existence all together and leaving its protective walls being thrown to darkness?
God gave each of us a house to get around in, a mobile home if you will. We need to not only tune it with our knowledge, but also use what we have gained to bear fruit. If there is nothing to harvest... well, that says it all. Like the seed reference. We plant them in each other to progress the thoughts already planted, bearing a new fruit from the same tree.
Another way to see it is when a tree is weak and dying. You can cut it to a stump(get rid of the old idea), and plant a new seed in its center(build a new idea off the old foundations). The new tree off the old roots will be stronger then any seed planted in soil that is of equal age.
|
|
|
Post by cwhite on Jul 8, 2014 22:58:35 GMT 9.5
I enjoyed the house analogy. As a carpenter, it has crossed my mind several times.
I also like to think in terms of cars. Some people pick up hitchhikers and have no idea they have done so. A certain degree of awareness is needed to recognize this.
|
|
|
Post by sammy on Jul 8, 2014 23:26:45 GMT 9.5
Has your heart chakra ever felt as though you had a jet engine there or an other worldly power plant? Promises are made in the bible great read BTW of a peace that passes all understanding, and you ,,,, express or ask me or someone to explain it better than the bible > Observing is great for transitions, but no action gets you no where. < The serenity prayer tells me you are entitled to believe as you wish and I am not about to try to reprogram your beliefs against your will or tell you what to do ,,, as we all manifest what we focus on Jesus manifests wine Americans manifest pollution and trash and the death of animals almost genetically identically to them as food , by animals held in torture like conditions > What would you think... If you gave your greatest house for others to live in, and They then show no emotion toward it? Even go as far to reject some of the physical objects based solely on that simple fact of objectivity, and others arguing its existence all together and leaving its protective walls being thrown to darkness? < Way over my head here in the question and I do not care to think what others think as what others think of me is none of my business I do not understand the main points BUT I do not need to understand for you to find what you are looking for as it is your choice of which questions you carefully ask and desire answered, and you will find your path for your journey You have reasons and believe what you believe and it must serve you well or you would not do it or believe it
I am not concerned about others either Fox, the question is what do YOU think. Not what do others think about you. I would be willing to answer any questions you might have about my statements. If there is one thing you should have learned about me by now is that I love to talk So really anytime.
The Bible is a good read, and even after being pounded into my head as a child I still read its pages. It helps me remember a time before I grew up, when I saw the world with infinite potential and growth that can make everyone happy.
|
|
|
Post by sammy on Jul 8, 2014 23:27:20 GMT 9.5
I enjoyed the house analogy. As a carpenter, it has crossed my mind several times. I also like to think in terms of cars. Some people pick up hitchhikers and have no idea they have done so. A certain degree of awareness is needed to recognize this. Thanks Cwhite
Very good point.
|
|
|
Post by sammy on Jul 9, 2014 13:58:30 GMT 9.5
> I would be willing to answer any questions you might have about my statements Yes when are going to finish reading 4 agreements and Allegory of the cave? Not long after I said I would do so. I do remember mentioning I didn't like how the cave ended, I think the story could have a much more constructive ending toward the light.
Curious though, what if I hadn't?
|
|
|
Post by sammy on Jul 9, 2014 20:26:21 GMT 9.5
Any other standards people have to live up to for you to accept them?
I had no emotion other than the irritation of someone else trying to live my life. When you are done trying... I would like to get back to topic.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2014 17:26:48 GMT 9.5
> Perhaps it is worth trying the originally proposed experiment with the square and compasses before introducing letters I will do so, I just need to construct the wooden square first, I couldn't find one to buy that I liked. Which got me thinking, on how I can create one with the correct 90 degree angle, which comes back to the compass, to me this is interesting, as one of the tools can be created using the other tool, but not, I think, vice versa. I pictured the points of the compass on E and W at either end of a square laying flat, the (sketchy) response was of the square standing up, the 90 degree point, pointing upwards.
|
|
|
Post by paul on Aug 13, 2014 17:44:38 GMT 9.5
So the square wishes to be like the compasses - connecting the architect to the creation?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2014 17:50:18 GMT 9.5
So the square wishes to be like the compasses - connecting the architect to the creation? very interesting thought... My first thought response to image at the time was of the 'angle point' of the square corresponding with the sun being at its highest point that day. I'm stumbling around a bit with it, needs more effort.. as always.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 14, 2014 5:01:18 GMT 9.5
Placing a square on the second diagram, it's as if one of the 'arms' of the square is female and the other is male.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 14, 2014 6:23:08 GMT 9.5
One of these was taken with a camera so the aspect ration is not locked and male female layers
|
|
|
Post by sapientia3579 on Oct 27, 2014 23:16:47 GMT 9.5
At one time preferred the Hebrew letter yod rather than Gimel. However now I am of the opinion that Gimel is the correct word. For many reasons one being the FM is a traveler, Gamel means "Camel" which animal is the primary means of "travel" through the "desert ", the same being the ave . Of travel for all Masons. I encourage anyone interested in this topic to seek out W. Bro. P.F. Case's (rip) work "the Masonic Letter G". Wherein in breaks down the correct application of the "G".
|
|
|
Post by paul on Oct 28, 2014 5:59:51 GMT 9.5
Welcome sapientia - we could certainly do with more wisdom here. Personally I wonder how recent is the placing of a letter (commonly a G) within the square and compasses. The square and compasses are non-cultural, being functional implements, while a letter belongs to a culture. Idries Shah maintains that the symbol that commonly hangs in the centre of the temple is not an English G but rather an Arabic Q Rotate the letter by 90 degrees and lose the dots. Qaf has the value 100. Thus 99 names of God are known but the 100th name is secret. Hence the Qaf symbolises the lost word.
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Oct 28, 2014 7:55:04 GMT 9.5
I do like your reasoning sapientia! Had not thought of that. I am a real fan of P.Foster Case. Maybe you could start a thread on some of what he has to say about Freemasonry.,?
My gut feeling for the letter is G for Generation ... making good men better by means of soul enhancement -> conscious awareness of Spirit. And then I change my mind back and forth a bit on the subject. Work in progress. lol
Welcome to the forum. Hope you find some subjects of interest here.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 10, 2015 21:17:04 GMT 9.5
So the square wishes to be like the compasses - connecting the architect to the creation? I came across this section of Morals and Dogma, is this along the lines you hint at? "The Square is a right angle, formed by two right lines. It is adapted only to a plane surface, and belongs only to geometry, earth-measurement, that trigonometry which deals only with planes, and with the earth, which the ancients supposed to be a plane. The Compass describes circles, and deals with spherical trigonometry, the science of the spheres and heavens. The former, therefore, is an emblem of what concerns the earth and the body; the latter of what concerns the heavens and the soul."
|
|
|
Post by paul on May 11, 2015 7:40:03 GMT 9.5
The intent of the M&D statement is correct in metaphysical terms: the square concerns manifested Creation and the compasses the flow of Light into the manifested Creation.
But the geometric practicalities are not correct as a square can exist in a non-planar form.
In geometry objects may be defined by the presence of angles or sides. Thus a planar square has 4 equal sides and in Euclidean geometry the angles are then 90 degrees. So in a plane we could describe a square as a shape with 4 equal angles or 4 equal sides. But when we put the 4 equal sides on a sphere the angles are now greater than 90 degrees.
It is however possible to form a triangle on a sphere using only 90 degree angles - making a total of 270 degrees.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 12, 2015 0:08:42 GMT 9.5
Thanks Paul, understood. As a little thought experiment to explore the idea a little further, I imagined a 'square' of light projected through Euclidean space. Actually I mean to say that four beams of light are projected through space exactly parallel to each other, such that when incident on a plane they would define the four corners of a square, lines drawn connecting each point to its nearest two neighbours would be separated by an angle of 90 degrees. Now, when incident on the surface of a sphere the four points, when lines are drawn make angles greater than 90 degrees, i.e. not square. So the nature of the four beams of light is essentially unchanging, but the interpretation of squareness in this experiment is down to how we imagine the straight lines connecting points at the receiving end. In the real world now, if we were to build a structure with corners at the points where light is incident from the beams, and in line with the beams as we build upwards, the walls could be square as measured by our Square, even on very large scales, but we would have to compensate for or alter the curvature of the sphere over the surface of the foundation, i.e. making the foundation flat locally. A ground breaking experiment terrestrially but not cerebrally. I found the above an interesting starting point, more interesting might be beams of light from a single point. I see that the triangle of 270 degrees can be imagined as originating from three rays from centre outwards, it reminds me of this and this: "The points established to locate the four corners of the principal constituent of the building were also set out from the centre point. This was achieved by fixing a skirret at the centre point, from which a line of the required length could be extended to each of the four corners in succession. The required direction of each of these diagonal lines was a function of the shape of the principal component of the building. It was one of the duties of the master mason to determine the required directions, which he then set out with reference to the north-south and east-west axes that had been established through the centre. The diagonals were set out using the three long rods, each of which was appropriately graduated to enable the required angles to be measured with reference to the main axes of the building. The method was similar to that used when setting out the east-west axis from the north-south axis, except that the right-angled triangle formed by the three rods was rotated by the required amount. Having marked the four corners, the accuracy of the rectangle was checked by comparing the measurements of the two ends and the measurements of the two sides. When the four corner marks had been established, distinctively marked perpendicular stakes were set up near them, drawing attention to their location and protecting them from inadvertent damage. Suspended coloured cords or streamers distinguished the marker stakes, in the same way as brightly painted stakes or stakes with coloured bunting are used to indicate important survey marks in the present day."
|
|
|
Post by paul on May 12, 2015 7:33:14 GMT 9.5
>when incident on a plane they would define the four corners of a square,
But only when the plane is at right angles to the rays. Otherwise they define the vertices of square rectangle.
>beams of light from a single point
In projective geometry, parallel lines may be considered to meet on the line at infinity. The dual of that is that lines coming from the line at infinity are all seen as parallel.
>four corner marks had been established... Suspended coloured cords or streamers
Are you relating those to the 4 tassels? On the other hand 4 tassels appear in Mithraic ritual - but I have seen no explanation of them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 12, 2015 17:06:25 GMT 9.5
> But only when the plane is at right angles to the rays. Otherwise they define the vertices of square rectangle. The square rectangle is a very interesting case. Actually, any quadrilateral I believe would be possible depending on the inclination of the plane.
> Are you relating those to the 4 tassels? That is interesting, does it make an impression on you as having value? It was not the comparison that had come to my mind though.
|
|