Re: Robertson's Lion's Paw - Freemasonry - Necromantic origins of the Lion's Grip

The Lion's Paw is the grip used in Freemasonry Master Mason's degree.

The really disgusting and sad thing is that Necromancers and Shadowmancers are the thing in this hour. It's way beyond Harry Potter, guys!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Necromantic Origins of Freemasonry

EARLY MASONIC RITUAL AS SHOWN BY CAPT. MORGAN:

The first publication of Masonic secrets resulted in the author's
death, a scandal, thousands of resignations and the USA's first
third party, the Anti-Masonic Party. This publication was Capt.
William Morgan's Exposition of Freemasonry in 1827.

THE RAISING OF HIRAM ABIFF:

We have by now all heard the rigamarole about Hiram Abiff's
murder to get the Master Mason's Word, that he was resurrected
and a substitute word provided, and that the initiate goes
through a mockup of all this. There may have been changes since
then in details, but this account of earlier details show where
this cult's founders were coming from. And maybe some select
inner circle types to this day.

Briefly, the ritual and its explanation do NOT describe a
resurrection, they describe a necromantic experiment.
The calling of a spirit into a fairly recent corpse. This might
involve blood sacrifice, and a male cirgin child was said to
be best as an assistant, because of his purity, and considerable
danger is involved. The corpse becomes stiffly animate, a
spirit speaks through its vocal chords , but this doesn't last
very long.

On page 84, two unsuccessful efforts to raise Hiram are made
using lower rank grips. The Master Mason then says he will
do it himself using the Master Mason's or strong grip, also
called the lion's paw. This procedure involves both a grip
that wraps around the hand to wrist, and a head to foot
contact and breathing on the "dead" initiate, reminiscent
of Elijah's lying upon and breathing into the mouth of the
widow's dead son, when he raised him to normal (not
necromantic) life. (This after the kid was dead for a while,
not a case of normal rescusitation.)

"They then all assemble round the candidate, the Master having
declared that the first word spoken after the body was raised
should be adopted as a substitute for the Master's word,..."
since Hiram Abiff died without any but himself knowing it.

That in itself is interesting, since it implies that the
word to be spoken will not be the original one, therefore what
will speak will not be Hiram Abiff, but one lacking the
knowledge., yet somehow giving the substitute word authority
by having it come out of the dead man's mouth. Otherwise, why
would it be a substitute? Why could not the risen Hiram
Abiff tell the true one?

Somehow (according to Royal Arch Masons) the original one was
rediscovered after 470 years. Morgan didn't live long enough to
reveal it. Now note this:

"In this position the candidate is raised, he keeeping his whole
body stiff, as though dead. The Master, in raising him, is
assisted by some of the brethren, who take hold of the candidate
by his arms and shoulders; as soon as he is raised to his feet
they step back, and the Master whispers the word Mah-hah-bone
in his ear, and causes the candidate to repeat it,..."

NOTE THE CADIDATE DOESN'T GET UP LIKE LAZARUS, HE KEEPS STIFF
AS A BOARD, EVIDENTLY DEAD THE WHOLE TIME. The history which
follows this, which Morgan says barely a third of which is
given to most Masons, if at all, due to sloth and slipshod
conduct of many American lodges of the time, shows that this
pseudo resurrection is strictly temporary. (Morgan researched
these points in lodge papers in America and England.)

IN FACT, A RESURRECTION OF ANY SORT, REAL OR NECROMANTIC,
WAS NOT EVEN INTENDED AT THE START OF THE SEARCH! They went
looking for his grave, not to rescue their master from death,
but to shake down the corpse for anything bearing the Master
Word on it. Failing to find anything, the efforts to raise
him ensue.

"It is also said that the body had lain there fourteen days,...
The body was raised in the manner herein before described,
carried up to The Temple, the buried as explained in the closing
caluses of the lecture." The initiate is usually given a brief
story about Hiram and referrral "to the manner of raising, and
the [catechism style] lecture...." The latter incl.

"What did they do with the body?"
Ans. "Raised it in a Masonic form, and carried it up to the
temple for more decent interment."
"Where was it buried?"
Ans. "Under the Sanctum Sanctorum, or holy of holies of King
Solomon's Temple, over which they rected a marble monument.,"

with a weeping virgin referring to the unfinished state of the
Temple, a broken column, a book and time with his hands in her
hair's ringlets. this shows the story is false, put together
by someone mostly ignorant of The Bible and Mosaic Law, or with
blasphemous intention, probably both.

(1) THE TEMPLE WAS NOT LEFT UNFINISHED.

(2) SO SUCH REPRESENTATIVE ART WAS ALLOWED, especially of any
personifications of things like time, which risked its being
viewed as a demigod and worshipped. A bell and a pomegranate,
alternating around the hem of the priest's robe, and two kerubs
one at each end of the Ark, were the exception, in such
controlled contexts that no way could idolatry result.

(3) IF THE MARBLE WAS PLACED OVER IT, PRESUMABLY TO BE SEEN BY
ALL, WHERE WAS THE SANCTUM SANCTORUM AND ARK, ETC. PLACED,
or was the slab buried?

(4) NO WAY WOULD A CORPSE HAVE BEEN ALLOWED TO BE BURIED IN
THE TEMPLE ITSELF, LET ALONG UNDER THE HOLY OF HOLIES. Later
on, kings were in the habit of being buried near The Temple,
whichGod denounced as defiling to it. If any secret burial
had been done during The Temple's construction, God would
surely have let it be known this had been done, and demand
the body's removal.

All of this can be shown from The Bible, but even Protestatns
didn't read it that carefully. Themes were sought more than
specifics in much preaching and teaching, even today.

Necromancy life stuff figures in Templar mythology. (The
groundwork for some morbidity may have been laid in excesses
of keeping segments of saint's bodies around. At least one
saint was minus head, or body. In France, monks of a rival
monastery stole the alleged body of Mary Magdalene from the
monastery it first resided at, and at one point some monk or
abbot was chowing down on one of her dried fingers because of
its sanctity. Hmmm. Graverobbing and necrophagy.)

(1) A Templar knight, in love with a noblewoman, dug up her
body when she died, and he had sex with the body. It spoke
afterwards, and told himn to return in nine months. When he
did so, he found a skull and two crossed thigh bones on her
body, and took these, implication of this legend is that this
is the "head" the Templars worshipped.

(2) The Templar's great relic was the severed head of some man,
supposedly John the Baptist. There may have been several, not
all of them real heads. Allegedly those who saw the head felt
great fear.

Magic and alchem were down played later, but the earliest known
Masons were involved in all this. A meeting of Rosicrucians was
held in the same building that held the first speculative
Masonic meeting, the same year or the year before or the year
after.

The earliest speculative Masons incl. Inigo Jones and Elias
Ashmole, who knew John Dee and Edward Kelly, who aside from
crystal and ritual magic they did, also performed necromancy
in a graveyard once, or at least Kelly did.

"So mote it be" famous in witchcults etc. and "blessed be"
likewise, are both Masonic terms. Masonry does not have these
because it originated from witchcults necessarily, more likely
vice versa. However, that vce versa is interesting in itself.
The origins of all these movements involve some of the same
people, some of them early or later Masons.

The Hiram Abiff story, can also imply:
(1) The false idea that Jesus' Resurrection was really a
case of grave robbing, if all death-and-resurrection stories
are treated as symbols of Jesus. Certainly the pagan dying-
and-rising sun gods and corn gods are not as much in the
popular American mind of the times so more likely one will
think of Jesus, and misapply whatever lessons one learned in
the lodge, or perhaps the lodge leaders hope the initiate will
do so.
(2) The false idea sorcery was involved in Jesus'
Resurrection.
(3) If the necromantic angle is overlooked, one will note
the Abiff eventually dies anyway. According to the ritual as
Morgan found it, he is reburied almost immediately after being
raised, one could argue this refers to much later. This resembles
the heretical idea Jesus died later, instead of the truth
that having died for all beings once, and risen, Jesus will
die no more, "death has no power over Him."

Later, Masonry led in wrongly distinguishing Lucifer from Satan
(although Lucifer is addressed in The Bible as evil and as a
fallen angel, who had tried to set himself above God). Also
in saying we were given freedom and intelligence in The Fall.
(Obviously false since without these we couldn't have sinned
in the first place.) One defender of Lucifer observed on USENET
that "Lucifer" is Latin for Hebrew "helal," which means shining
with implications like "the golden glitter of a king's robe."
It is my experience that a golden glittery or particulate,
mind scattering atmosphere on aperson invariably goes with some
major evil, usually a direct demonic involvement. It is
also significant that the word implies regal ostentation and
hauteur as well. Hauteur is also a feature of many sorcerers'
amd Satanists' and related Setian, etc. personas. Remember that
Satan's sin was pride and that Proverbs says God hates a proud
and haughty look.

The idea that one must stand above good and evil to be super-
human, and/or participate in both to be well rounded, along
with the foregoing idea, are key central ideas in Satanist
thought (if you want to call it that).

End of File.


Please send comments or suggestions about this page to: webmaster@advweb.com

This web page created by

Tweet