This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was nominated for deletion on October 26, 2006. The result of the discussion was keep. |
Ok, there are a couple of weird errors on this page. First of all, there is no evidence that Francis Bacon was ever a Freemason. And second of all, it was Roger Bacon who was the early developer of the [scientific method], not Francis. There's a 300 year difference there. Pymander Jones 19:08, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
It may be interesting to look for the meaning of "Grand,or Great,or Supreme Architect"in older sources.It occurs in the famous text of Pico della Mirandola: Oratio de dignitate hominis.It may be that the concept of a Creation 'ex nihilo' required a Creator -Initiator, who could be referred to as 'Architect' -Unsigned
As I write this, 'Supreme Being' redirects here. I'm changing it to redirect to God. -- Andymussell 01:44, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
I do not really think it is appropriate to have Speculative Commentary in an encyclopedia... At least not in the way done here. It is fine to report on the speculations of Masonic Scholars and "experts" in the field of Masonry (provided we can properly cite the material), but what is written here is the speculation of an editor, and not that of a recognized Masonic scholar. The section either needs to be majorly re-written or deleted. If the statements can be backed by a noted scholar, then much more needs to be cited. I will add citation requests for now, but if nothing is changed or added after about a week, I will delete. Blueboar 18:26, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
No objections... Just a comment. About the only other information I could see adding might be that the term first appeared in Anderson's Constitutions ... and that Brent Morris says that Anderson seems to have taken it from the writings of John Calvin (who refers to either the "Great Architect" or "Architect of the Universe" several times.) I don't think my info will add enough to change the prod nom. However if you think it will help I can provide refs. Blueboar 22:26, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
I have now had to remove this text several times... While the statments have now been attributed (an improvement) they needs to be sourced (ie cited to a particular book or scientific journal, etc.) In addition to that problem is the one of the reliability of sources. Wilson, Leary and Crowley are not reliable sources on Freemasonry, or Freemasonry's use of the term Great Architect of the Universe.. They may be reliable on how some other group of people (perhaps essoteric groups such as OTO, Thelema, etc.) use the term, but not Freemasonry.
More to the point, this paragraph smacks of Original Research without clear sourcing to indicate who says what. Blueboar ( talk) 15:06, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Esoteric Masonic teachings do teach that god is the individual. However, This is not something that is outwardly taught. One must either join the order or read the works of those who study these types of orders. Either way, one will always come to the conclusion that Esoteric Masonry inevitably teaches that God is a concept and that God is the individual, even if this true meaning is shrouded in metaphor and veiled language. THC Loadee ( talk) 17:12, 30 January 2009 (UTC)THC Loadee
I too am a speculative mason of many years. It now occurs to me that you are either unaware of such teachings about the order or you are purposefully attempting to hide certain truths from public discussion. Either way I will not relent. Secrecy is no longer viable. All must know and learn. Ask a Christian or Buddhist about he teachings of their philosophy and they will quote Jesus or Siddhartha even though these "enlightened" beings would not recognize the religions named after them. Mass religion is a tool used by those in power to control those who have no power. THC Loadee ( talk) 23:34, 30 January 2009 (UTC)THC Loadee
(#49) Watertown, NY. Have you ever heard of the term allegory? This is what I refer to when I say Masonic teachings. You are totally correct; no discussion of deity is allowed in the temple. In the literal sense that is true, however, the ideas and stories told in masonic initiation and ascension through the degrees have allegorical/metaphorical meanings as well. Whether your interpretation includes such acumen is completely and totally up to you. A strict literal interpretation is your choice. THC Loadee ( talk) 22:11, 1 February 2009 (UTC)THC Loadee
Great, it seems as though we are making progress here. Can you discern between the outward masonic teachings and the inward or esoteric teachings? Once again I use the term allegory. Do you think masonic ideas are expressed in allegory or is it all straightforward literal interpretation? 67.113.192.50 ( talk) 19:37, 2 February 2009 (UTC)THC Loadee
I will agree with you for the most part. Thanks for taking the time to hash this out. THC Loadee ( talk) 23:44, 2 February 2009 (UTC)THC Loadee
As much as I am enjoying our exploration into the teachings of Freemasonry... they really are besides the point. I have another issue with the two sentences under dispute, an issue that is more directly relevant to whether it can be included in the article or not... As written the material fails Wikipedia's WP:Verification policy. Unless you can provide a reliable source that says: "Freemasonry often includes concepts of God as an external entity, however, esoteric masonic teachings clearly identify God as the individual himself, the perceiver. We are all God and as such we create our own reality." you can not say it in the article. In fact, without a source, it also violates our WP:No original research policy. Blueboar ( talk) 22:34, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Very well. I agree with your placement into the HERMETICISM section and will leave it as is, however I do not agree with your final conclusion concerning what is and isn't taught or learned at a masonic temple and what the teachings mean. I will thank you for not attempting to block my ID and for arguing with me in a calm and rational manner. THC Loadee ( talk) 23:41, 2 February 2009 (UTC)THC LOADEE
It is still under discussion. Have some patience please. Blueboar ( talk) 22:13, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
I think the article should explicitly mention Jahbulon as one of the possible interpretations of GATU. I know some Masons may not agree with this, but I think it would be NPOV for all the non-Mason critics of the Lodge, especially on the part of British author Stephen Knight, who was one of the more scholarly and intellectual writers to openly discuss this view or hypothesis. ADM ( talk) 01:12, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
It appears that one of the most common criticisms of GATU is its purported incompatibility with the belief in the Holy Trinity, something which was noticeable in some 18th century religious tests. The Holy Trinity is one of the principle dogmas of Nicene Christianity, and it is rejected by all other religions, including Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, Animism, Arianism and Mystery religions. It was also on this basis that the Church Inquisition denounced 18th century deists for their purported anti-trinitarianism, given that Masons have always excluded the possibility of Trinitarian belief. ADM ( talk) 05:59, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
The editors of the article should consider asking whether the cult of the Supreme Being has something to do with the cult of the Great Architect of the Universe found in Freemasonry. The cult of the Supreme Being intervened during the most difficult and anti-Christian moments of the French Revolution and some anti-Masonic writers such as abbé Augustin Barruel have taken it as evidence that Freemasonry is radically incompatible with Christianity. ADM ( talk) 14:12, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
Böri ( talk) 11:05, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Great Architect of the Universe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:57, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was nominated for deletion on October 26, 2006. The result of the discussion was keep. |
Ok, there are a couple of weird errors on this page. First of all, there is no evidence that Francis Bacon was ever a Freemason. And second of all, it was Roger Bacon who was the early developer of the [scientific method], not Francis. There's a 300 year difference there. Pymander Jones 19:08, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
It may be interesting to look for the meaning of "Grand,or Great,or Supreme Architect"in older sources.It occurs in the famous text of Pico della Mirandola: Oratio de dignitate hominis.It may be that the concept of a Creation 'ex nihilo' required a Creator -Initiator, who could be referred to as 'Architect' -Unsigned
As I write this, 'Supreme Being' redirects here. I'm changing it to redirect to God. -- Andymussell 01:44, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
I do not really think it is appropriate to have Speculative Commentary in an encyclopedia... At least not in the way done here. It is fine to report on the speculations of Masonic Scholars and "experts" in the field of Masonry (provided we can properly cite the material), but what is written here is the speculation of an editor, and not that of a recognized Masonic scholar. The section either needs to be majorly re-written or deleted. If the statements can be backed by a noted scholar, then much more needs to be cited. I will add citation requests for now, but if nothing is changed or added after about a week, I will delete. Blueboar 18:26, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
No objections... Just a comment. About the only other information I could see adding might be that the term first appeared in Anderson's Constitutions ... and that Brent Morris says that Anderson seems to have taken it from the writings of John Calvin (who refers to either the "Great Architect" or "Architect of the Universe" several times.) I don't think my info will add enough to change the prod nom. However if you think it will help I can provide refs. Blueboar 22:26, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
I have now had to remove this text several times... While the statments have now been attributed (an improvement) they needs to be sourced (ie cited to a particular book or scientific journal, etc.) In addition to that problem is the one of the reliability of sources. Wilson, Leary and Crowley are not reliable sources on Freemasonry, or Freemasonry's use of the term Great Architect of the Universe.. They may be reliable on how some other group of people (perhaps essoteric groups such as OTO, Thelema, etc.) use the term, but not Freemasonry.
More to the point, this paragraph smacks of Original Research without clear sourcing to indicate who says what. Blueboar ( talk) 15:06, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Esoteric Masonic teachings do teach that god is the individual. However, This is not something that is outwardly taught. One must either join the order or read the works of those who study these types of orders. Either way, one will always come to the conclusion that Esoteric Masonry inevitably teaches that God is a concept and that God is the individual, even if this true meaning is shrouded in metaphor and veiled language. THC Loadee ( talk) 17:12, 30 January 2009 (UTC)THC Loadee
I too am a speculative mason of many years. It now occurs to me that you are either unaware of such teachings about the order or you are purposefully attempting to hide certain truths from public discussion. Either way I will not relent. Secrecy is no longer viable. All must know and learn. Ask a Christian or Buddhist about he teachings of their philosophy and they will quote Jesus or Siddhartha even though these "enlightened" beings would not recognize the religions named after them. Mass religion is a tool used by those in power to control those who have no power. THC Loadee ( talk) 23:34, 30 January 2009 (UTC)THC Loadee
(#49) Watertown, NY. Have you ever heard of the term allegory? This is what I refer to when I say Masonic teachings. You are totally correct; no discussion of deity is allowed in the temple. In the literal sense that is true, however, the ideas and stories told in masonic initiation and ascension through the degrees have allegorical/metaphorical meanings as well. Whether your interpretation includes such acumen is completely and totally up to you. A strict literal interpretation is your choice. THC Loadee ( talk) 22:11, 1 February 2009 (UTC)THC Loadee
Great, it seems as though we are making progress here. Can you discern between the outward masonic teachings and the inward or esoteric teachings? Once again I use the term allegory. Do you think masonic ideas are expressed in allegory or is it all straightforward literal interpretation? 67.113.192.50 ( talk) 19:37, 2 February 2009 (UTC)THC Loadee
I will agree with you for the most part. Thanks for taking the time to hash this out. THC Loadee ( talk) 23:44, 2 February 2009 (UTC)THC Loadee
As much as I am enjoying our exploration into the teachings of Freemasonry... they really are besides the point. I have another issue with the two sentences under dispute, an issue that is more directly relevant to whether it can be included in the article or not... As written the material fails Wikipedia's WP:Verification policy. Unless you can provide a reliable source that says: "Freemasonry often includes concepts of God as an external entity, however, esoteric masonic teachings clearly identify God as the individual himself, the perceiver. We are all God and as such we create our own reality." you can not say it in the article. In fact, without a source, it also violates our WP:No original research policy. Blueboar ( talk) 22:34, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
Very well. I agree with your placement into the HERMETICISM section and will leave it as is, however I do not agree with your final conclusion concerning what is and isn't taught or learned at a masonic temple and what the teachings mean. I will thank you for not attempting to block my ID and for arguing with me in a calm and rational manner. THC Loadee ( talk) 23:41, 2 February 2009 (UTC)THC LOADEE
It is still under discussion. Have some patience please. Blueboar ( talk) 22:13, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
I think the article should explicitly mention Jahbulon as one of the possible interpretations of GATU. I know some Masons may not agree with this, but I think it would be NPOV for all the non-Mason critics of the Lodge, especially on the part of British author Stephen Knight, who was one of the more scholarly and intellectual writers to openly discuss this view or hypothesis. ADM ( talk) 01:12, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
It appears that one of the most common criticisms of GATU is its purported incompatibility with the belief in the Holy Trinity, something which was noticeable in some 18th century religious tests. The Holy Trinity is one of the principle dogmas of Nicene Christianity, and it is rejected by all other religions, including Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, Animism, Arianism and Mystery religions. It was also on this basis that the Church Inquisition denounced 18th century deists for their purported anti-trinitarianism, given that Masons have always excluded the possibility of Trinitarian belief. ADM ( talk) 05:59, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
The editors of the article should consider asking whether the cult of the Supreme Being has something to do with the cult of the Great Architect of the Universe found in Freemasonry. The cult of the Supreme Being intervened during the most difficult and anti-Christian moments of the French Revolution and some anti-Masonic writers such as abbé Augustin Barruel have taken it as evidence that Freemasonry is radically incompatible with Christianity. ADM ( talk) 14:12, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
Böri ( talk) 11:05, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Great Architect of the Universe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:57, 22 October 2017 (UTC)