Freemasonry’s Absurd Claim that they are the Knights Templar

The mother lodge is in a small town next to where I stay here in Scotland attributing its origins to the 12th Century. Wasn't formed in London.

Right next to the lodge is an abbey built by a Templar.

Indeed records exists of lodge meetings in Edinburgh from 1599.

Last Edited by The Gathering Storm on 12/02/2013 06:13 PM

Sure, and if you believe that I have a bridge to sell you...

You are correct that organized freemasonry began in the early 18th century, but independent lodges existed from 12th century, started by groups of stonemasons.

Enlighten me then

Do you also believe you are a Knight Templar?

They change their tactics and form new organizations over time to throw people off their trail. Secret society has always done this.

What need did they have to throw people off their trail? They became Knights of Malta and started winning battles against the Moslems again. Battle was their desire, and it was satisfied now as Knights of Malta.

Didn't you hear? The official line is that the masons were brilliant stone carvers that had to hide their identities with handshakes and body language

So being a stone carver was so passé that they had to go underground?

that's what "she" said

I think all of the dangerous mason were eliminated

It makes for a better story than a bunch of goofy old turds who liked to wear funny hats and screw prostitutes every Thursday night.

the knights Templar where skilled masons too they built many good churches some still standing. the gold the Templars horded from their European stomp had to go somewhere when most of them got killed the few that scattered took a large chunk of the wealth with them and set up new orders, its very possible they could have founded freemasonry.

I've read in documents from the Knights of Malta that they received the treasure from the Templars treasury in Paris and bought back most of the properties illegally taken by King Phillip the Fair in France. They then manned those same properties with former Templars in their new Knights of Malta uniform.

[link to www.freemasons-freemasonry.com]

It's understandable that SOME find it 'terrible' that there would be a connection between the ancient Knights Templar and 21st century Freemasons.

However, those who make that erroneously skeptical claim simply have not bothered researching the matter. Their approach appears to be "The connection doesn't exist because I'm not looking for it, and I'm not believing anyone that has."

The fact of the matter, as verified by the Vatican itself in 2007, is that the Templars were exonerated by the Pope / Vatican in 1308 through trial by the Vatican.

Furthermore, only approximately 2500 of the roughly 25,000 Templars that existed in 1307 were overrun. Any yabo that believes was is well-accepted to be the most fearsome fighting force of the era (1307 a.d.) would simply "lay down their weapons and walk away" because a small percentage of the brethren were captured by a weak king simply doesn't understand (or denies) human nature.

Further, because the Templars were exonerated almost immediately, they were NOT 'hunted' in the significant number of other countries (Spain, England, Scotland, etc.) in which they held strongholds. The King of France at the time (Philip The Fair) was NOT 'all-powerful', and the Kings of any other country had NO 'obligation' whatsoever to adhere to Philip's 'ban'.

The Templars simply went about their business, albeit more 'low-key', in other countries. Those who were not murdered in France were sent to countries like England where, as 'prisoners' were treated most graciously, allowed to leave their 'prison' during the day to hunt, visit the towns, etc. That's not very 'prisoner-like' treatment for men who were allegedly proclaimed to be 'obliterated'.

Books such as cited by Cooper simply claim that there's no evidence of Templars becoming Freemasons IN SCOTLAND after their supposed "disbandment" in 1312. Cooper ONLY claims he (as curator) has NO records claiming such a connection in HIS possession, and ONLY claims he possesses the oldest known records of which he is aware. Obviously, his is all Cooper CAN claim as that's as far as his research has gone.

In the modern age (21st century) legitimate documents (as the Chinon Parchment) continue to surface that prove, indisputably, that the Templars did NOT 'disappear' after 1312 a.d., and became what, today, are the Masonic Knights Templar.

The lineage and history are, in fact, unbroken. IF one chooses to look for it. On the other hand, as the old cliché proclaims: None are so blind as those who WILL NOT see. Obviously, the OP falls squarely into that group.

You guys are forgetting one very important figure key to the entire Masonic theology.... Jaques De Molay

I'm not going to argue the actual factual content you posted, because it appears there are others better qualified to do so. Instead I'm just going to question your motivation for making a thread like this. Generally people cite sources when they are making historical claims. This sounds like it was copy pasted out of a wikipedia entry.

There's also a proliferate use of exaggerated dismissal. In two paragraphs you use: ridiculous, ludicrous, beyond reason, magical, in reality, delusional; all to describe a claim that it doesn't honestly seem like you know very much about.

This is a conspiracy website in the first place, so readers assume there is a truth underlying the popular or asserted version of events. It's terribly odd that somebody here would make a thread that was so self-assured of the truth while demonstrating such cursory essay-style knowledge of the subject.

My Grand Father was a very high ranking Freemason, and quiet frankly I am getting rather tired of all the derogatory threads regarding Freemasons

Freemasons built many of the Knights Templar commanderies, knights halls, churches, abbeys, preceptories and castles. In France, the Knights Templar were major financial backers for many major building projects, including the great cathedral Notre Dame de Paris, which was constructed under the direction and participation of operative Freemasons. Wherever Knights Templar's built or funded the building of great buildings, Freemasons were heavily involved; from the Middle East, through France, Italy Portugal, Spain, England, Scotland France and other European countries.

Wherever these building were constructed, the Knights Templar had holdings. Templar 'districts' were holdings that weren't subject to city or country taxation (they were - technically - Church property), where the ancillary personnel for the Commandry or other Templar operations lived. Many masons lived within the Templar districts, and by the 1200s, both group began profiting from each others expertise. Both groups simultaneously created labor unions, Masons (through historic documents) joined the Templar's and worked on Templar and church buildings. Templar's needed buildings for banks, churches and other buildings, and Masons ... well, they were builders. Built by Masons, financed by Templar's.

After the Knights Templar were arrested, their buildings certainly didn't disappear. Neither did the districts where many Freemasons and Templar's lived. This same held true in England, Scotland, Ireland, Spain and other nations throughout Europe. Masons & Templar's living in the same communities, doing much the same work (especially after the collapse of the popularity of running Crusades in the Holy Land).

This included building Roslin Castle (not to be confused with Rosslyn Chapel), which was started in the early 1300s, after a large influx of Freemasons from France ... this "large influx" happened right around the same time as the French arrest of the Templar's. Henry Sinclair (who was a witness at at least one Templar trial) is linked to the Knights Templar, as is his son and the entire Sinclair clan from the 1300s.

There is plenty of paperwork and documentation to prove the intermingling of the two from the earliest founding of the Templar's, through their arrest, and up through the point where Freemasonry changed from an operative fraternity to a speculative one.

As to whether the rituals and symbols are the same ... it's unlikely; the symbol of Freemasonry is the Square and Compass, the Knights Templar is the Beauceant, the Red Cross and the white mantle. The Knights Templar rituals are unique and completely different than any Masonic ritual. No Knights Templar ritual I have participated in has been related to or similar to any Masonic ritual.

thank you


kosm

As baseball what matters are the game rules not who plays ...

like father like sons...

same old

you are of your father the devil and your fathers works will you do...

counterfeiters, they one and all.

deal with it

we're all tired of their "works"

in general in some cases

most specifically, in others

tis what it be accordingly...

as it's written in so many words

the lower ranks which support the tip of that iceberg have been held in delusion with regard to same

I agree, it is absurd to hear the Freemasons claim they are the descendants of the Templars. Everything I have read states that the Templars became Knight of Malta as their ranks swelled by a couple thousand men at the very same time the Templars were abolished. The hope by the Pope was that the Templars would become more disciplined like their Order of Malta brethren.

Freemasonic delusion.

I've read of somebody that climbed the ranks of Freemasonry , got close 32 degree, was pulled aside by a group of other high ranking Freemasons and was told by them that they were god.

He promptly left.

Many clues given here:

[link to www.theosociety.org]

[link to books.google.com (secure)]

Last Edited by Asuralikeproduction on 02/07/2015 12:32 PM