|
Post by Isaac Asimov on Jun 15, 2013 21:54:37 GMT 9.5
"The wilder and more ridiculous something is, however, the firmer and more solid the evidence will have to be” - Isaac Asimov.
|
|
|
Post by stepnwolf on Jun 15, 2013 22:43:27 GMT 9.5
That is just how the priests taught me. When the theological questions got too hard they said: It is a Mystery. That is English for you. It's not exactly English: we heard it in American Catholic schools as well. Isn't there a difference between not having an answer and there not being an answer. An example: the Immaculate Conception is a mystery, we're taught. To tell the truth it was probably an invention of theologians to explain another mystery: how was the BVM made worthy to be the Mother of God. And, btw, how could a human woman carry the body of the triune God? The more we attempt to explain a mystery, the more confounded the explanation becomes. Is it a mistake to think the human mind can explain rationally the great unknowns of the universe? We keep inventing words and concepts to explain the mysteries and instead of explaining them we get tripped up by our own words, creating even more untenable ideas. Our ancient Brn undoubtedly were aware of the problem and invented or appropriated symbols to illustrate the problem, not to solve it. The problem of ultimate origin was explained by the Big Bang. Then to explain that, we had to invent strings and multidimensional space. Then to explain that we came up with branes and multiple universes. The further away we moved from the mystery the more mysteries we create with our own words. The more I think about it, the more I'm persuaded to think that the mysteries are explained on a need-to-know basis not to the mind but to a higher faculty currently unknown to most of us.
|
|
|
Post by stewartedwards on Jun 16, 2013 1:27:20 GMT 9.5
"The wilder and more ridiculous something is, however, the firmer and more solid the evidence will have to be” - Isaac Asimov. Better to sensibly look at the global evidence rationally than to simply debunk and destroy careers simply besause of personal fear or prejudices. Made more difficult in this case I give you as almost all high quality evidence that should be peer acceptable is covered by secrecy through national official secrets. Most of it only comes to light when things slip through offical disclosure (the Halt [deputy US nuclear base commander] memo for example which sparked knowledge of Rendlesham only came to light when Britain declassified some files and there it was (but the UK and the USA governments have allegedly "lost/mislaid/destroyed" some of the evidence like the photos [you could not make it up] - the UK government at least iirc has admitted this). Or when people retire and they believe that the public have a right to know. But over the past 10 years the rate of both has accelerated with several great pushes by people involved to force more disclosure. Also in Europe for example you have an Italian MEP (the Europena Union) trying to get all nations to follow France and the UKs lead and disclose. As an observer it is absolutely facinating. The best bit though, in terms of what many who claim direct contact with craft [supported by multiple credible witness testimony, military photos and other evidence - radar etc] etc is that they tend to talk about personal human evolution (in one way or another) which is not that far away from many masonic teachings. Science already pretty much accepts that it is out there, just not here. That is a lot of progress from when I studied a bit of astroscience around the millenium when the scientific communbity was firmly in the grasp of "there must be something out there lets look for it". That a lot of progress in under a generation. So in another 15 years who knows the scientific world might have public access to currently secret files. I mean if the Catholic church can be comfortable with it - wow. Then again they have had a lot of involvement with abductees, so they have quite some inhouse knowledge, nice to see them lead. For me Issac Asimov just call me Mr 15% when I cut the trade deals, unlikely as that may seem. I can see it now - visitor come and hold a masonic lodge meeting and say "ok lads and lassies join us in lodge for we gave you freemasonry" while some masons accept the invite others argue that "theres women in aprons!!!" or" these aliens must be from 1717", or "you mean its not just a social club"
|
|
|
Post by Brian Lane on Jun 16, 2013 17:58:18 GMT 9.5
Have you seen the "New Tricks" episode which appears to have been based on the Rendlesham incident? www.imdb.com/title/tt1478652/Something happened. The question is what? An incident around a military base need not be down to aliens.
|
|
|
Post by stewartedwards on Jun 16, 2013 20:16:28 GMT 9.5
Have you seen the "New Tricks" episode which appears to have been based on the Rendlesham incident? www.imdb.com/title/tt1478652/Something happened. The question is what? An incident around a military base need not be down to aliens. Indeed Brian Lane, indeed. Those who were actually there (you know the trained security military professionals who were regularly tested in every aircraft recognition and who led and guarded a nuclear base at the height of the cold war - say - you will love this Brian....drum roll...."they" are "us" from the future - time travellers. Not aliens but us from the future. Their reasoning has to do with things you probably wont believe - touching the craft and binary code downloads etc - anyhow what they are all certain of is that it was not from this planet. Something with the head of the UK defence forces Lord Hill Norton agreed with in our House of Lords (government). Before you go all googli eyed about their time travel belief - remember that with regard to the physical object there were multiple credible trained witnesses over 2 nights, the craft was physicly touched, tape recordings, photos, officers tetimonies, radiation readings, landing marks, tree marks, radar tracks, the whole cabbodle. There is even an unsubstantiated account of a retrieval, but as that is unsubstantiated I ignore it [claimed obviously to be under heavy guard - but this is not a claim by those at the landing site but by a base security officer who allegedly watched it being checked]. What it wasnt was a lighthouse beam. Dont you think it funny that debunkers cling to the flimsiest of theories? Anyhow as I have said before you enjoy this too much. Personally I enjoy every year that passes when more and more ex military folk come forward (sometimes the government accidentally as in Rendleshams case) and disclose the facts. But he ho an armchair debunker always knows better than the trained professionals there with all theirfirst hand evidence. Mind you us travelling back from the future makes even me pause for thought. But at least I am thinking about it. And I prefer to weigh the judgements of very senior military people (like Lord Hill Norton) over nameless internet debunkers. Besides what does it matter to you? Ah yes if you have to accept that you are wrong on this then you might have to accept that you are also wrong on some other things that you give Paul a hard time for.... As someone recently said the truth comes out with time and that is precisely what is happening in the ufo world
|
|
|
Post by Horace Rumpole on Jun 16, 2013 20:27:22 GMT 9.5
I look forward to the court case you mentioned.
|
|
|
Post by stewartedwards on Jun 16, 2013 20:37:35 GMT 9.5
I look forward to the court case you mentioned. So do I, hopefully the US government wont settle out of court beforehand.
|
|
|
Post by paul on Jun 18, 2013 7:39:46 GMT 9.5
Thus far we have that the mysteries and privileges of ancient Freemasonry include:
- freedom of thought - sitting with the brethren in lodge - participating in ritual that has planetary impacts.
That is a start on the privileges, but are there mysteries that underpin such privileges? For example can freedom of the thought exist without some preconditions?
|
|
|
Post by good faith on Jun 18, 2013 17:53:36 GMT 9.5
For example can freedom of the thought exist without some preconditions? Freedom of thought is a given and is certainly not restricted to Freemasonry. Good faith may be a condition of freedom of expression.
|
|
|
Post by paul on Jun 18, 2013 18:02:21 GMT 9.5
I agree freedom of thought is pretty generic. Do you have some suggestions for the list of mysteries and privileges of ancient Freemasonry? Few brethren do.
|
|
|
Post by C. Bruce Hunter on Jun 18, 2013 18:30:55 GMT 9.5
I agree freedom of thought is pretty generic. Do you have some suggestions for the list of mysteries and privileges of ancient Freemasonry? Few brethren do. Freemasonry's mysteries are the masques of the degrees, to which only initiates are admitted. www.amazon.com/dp/B007BVADDU
|
|
|
Post by paul on Jun 18, 2013 19:46:49 GMT 9.5
So what are your suggestions for the mysteries and privileges of ancient Freemasonry?
|
|
There's your problem
Guest
|
Post by There's your problem on Jun 19, 2013 18:59:18 GMT 9.5
Freemasonry is not ancient.
|
|
|
Post by paul on Jun 19, 2013 19:37:24 GMT 9.5
>Freemasonry is not ancient.
We are each free to choose whom to believe. For myself I would not choose the London brethren of the early 18th century.
|
|
|
Post by Harlan Ellison on Jun 19, 2013 20:19:54 GMT 9.5
>Freemasonry is not ancient. We are each free to choose whom to believe. For myself I would not choose the London brethren of the early 18th century. "Everybody has opinions: I have them, you have them. And we are all told from the moment we open our eyes, that everyone is entitled to his or her opinion. Well, that’s horsepuckey, of course. We are not entitled to our opinions; we are entitled to our informed opinions. Without research, without background, without understanding, it’s nothing. It’s just bibble-babble. It’s like a fart in a wind tunnel, folks." - Harlan Ellison.
|
|
|
Post by stewartedwards on Jun 19, 2013 23:03:24 GMT 9.5
Freemasonry is not ancient. There's your problem can you clarify your thoughts on this please? Do you mean:- 1. Freemasonry as we know it today is not ancient (ie invented in the 18th century), or 2. The teachings that have become incorporated into Freemasonry are not ancient or 3. Something else, and if so what?
|
|
|
Post by Albert Mackey on Jun 20, 2013 19:06:48 GMT 9.5
Freemasonry is not ancient. There's your problem can you clarify your thoughts on this please? Do you mean:- 1. Freemasonry as we know it today is not ancient (ie invented in the 18th century), or 2. The teachings that have become incorporated into Freemasonry are not ancient or 3. Something else, and if so what? "Freemasonry as a society of long standing, has of course its history, and the age of the institution has necessarily led to the mixing in this history of authentic facts and of mere traditions or legends. We are thus led in the very beginning of our labors to divide our historical studies into two classes. The one embraces the Legendary History of Freemasonry, and the other its authentic annals." - Albert Mackey
|
|
|
Post by stewartedwards on Jun 20, 2013 19:56:12 GMT 9.5
There's your problem can you clarify your thoughts on this please? Do you mean:- 1. Freemasonry as we know it today is not ancient (ie invented in the 18th century), or 2. The teachings that have become incorporated into Freemasonry are not ancient or 3. Something else, and if so what? "Freemasonry as a society of long standing, has of course its history, and the age of the institution has necessarily led to the mixing in this history of authentic facts and of mere traditions or legends. We are thus led in the very beginning of our labors to divide our historical studies into two classes. The one embraces the Legendary History of Freemasonry, and the other its authentic annals." - Albert Mackey Albert Mackay you haven't answered the question, merely diverted it. I am striving for truth from you not looking for you to copy somone elses words, however eminent that person may be.
|
|
|
Post by stepnwolf on Jun 21, 2013 10:09:25 GMT 9.5
For example can freedom of the thought exist without some preconditions? Freedom of thought is a given and is certainly not restricted to Freemasonry. Good faith may be a condition of freedom of expression. This reminds me of a conversation I had with Buddy, my cat. He is an altered tomcat, much given to nightly prowls in the neighborhood. He's definitely not a house cat and prefers the dangers of the night to a warm saucer of milk by the fire. Last night around 2 am we had a thunderstorm with gallons of water and heavy lightning. I got out of bed and opened the back door in case Buddy was in the vicinity and he dragged his wet self in complaining bitterly. "Buddy," I said, "you know freedom has a very high price, especially for you." There are people like Buddy. They're driven by genetics, I guess, to strike out into dark places in the name of freedom. I am a warm saucer kind of guy myself and just don't understand the attractions "freedom" holds out for these people. No doubt freedom-oriented explorers among humans are needed to explore and strike out into the unknown. But when the storms come, whether meteorological or emotional, it's nice that the warm saucer waits for them. I have no doubt that my speech was lost on Buddy, but I'll love him all the same.
|
|
|
Post by Albert Mackey on Jun 22, 2013 17:19:04 GMT 9.5
Albert Mackay you haven't answered the question, merely diverted it. I am striving for truth from you not looking for you to copy somone elses words, however eminent that person may be. "Freemasonry as a society of long standing, has of course its history, and the age of the institution has necessarily led to the mixing in this history of authentic facts and of mere traditions or legends. We are thus led in the very beginning of our labors to divide our historical studies into two classes. The one embraces the Legendary History of Freemasonry, and the other its authentic annals." - Albert Mackey.
|
|