Why so some many Catholic churches have the eye of providence in them, the same symbo

[LoAmmi]

But why would Freemasons adopt a Christian symbol, when they are in accordance with organisation ?

Why would the Nazis have belt buckles that said "G-d Is With Us" when other people believed that G-d was not with them?

 

[Sword of the Lord]

I am truly shocked that there appears to be a parish in the LCMS that has this symbol, Rhamiel. We are very reserved about even iconography of Saints. There's lots of Jesus, especially on our windows, and sometimes some of Mary, and the crucifix. That disappoints me.

 

[imind]

But why would Freemasons adopt a Christian symbol, when they are in accordance with organisation ?

why don't you ask a freemason/member of the illuminati?

 

[Rhamiel]

I am truly shocked that there appears to be a parish in the LCMS that has this symbol, Rhamiel. We are very reserved about even iconography of Saints. There's lots of Jesus, especially on our windows, and sometimes some of Mary, and the crucifix. That disappoints me.

not sure why you are so shocked?
it was a common symbol to represent God
I am sure you can find many Catholic, Lutheran, Anglican parishes that have that in their art
I am sure you can find many Catholic, Lutheran, Anglican parishes that do not have that in their art

this symbol was used by Christians before it was ever used by Freemasons

again, because it was also used by Freemasons and occultists and pagans, it is not a symbol I am very keen on using

here is another way to look at it
because God is described as "the Father" artists like Michelangelo depicted Him as a masculine elder on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel
there has been other depictions of God the Father in a similar way
you see that in a lot of Catholic popular art in the 1800's and early 1900's

some people do not like this being done, God is just spirit, Jesus is man and God, but God the Father is pure Spirit
so the eye and the triangle is a way to depict God in art without showing Him as a man

both depictions leave some people uneasy
both depictions have a long history in Christian art

 

[Simpleman25]

why don't you ask a freemason/member of the illuminati?

It's impossible to ask someone in the illuminati since they don't exist.

As far as freemasonry goes, the group used signs and identifiers that were familiar to the operative masons.

Since they were Christians, it was easy for them to use signs that they were familiar with.

Not sure about the stealing comment Rhamiel. As I said, they were using symbols that the masons who built the temples were familiar with.

 

[Rhamiel]

It's impossible to ask someone in the illuminati since they don't exist.

As far as freemasonry goes, the group used signs and identifiers that were familiar to the operative masons.

Since they were Christians, it was easy for them to use signs that they were familiar with.

Not sure about the stealing comment Rhamiel. As I said, they were using symbols that the masons who built the temples were familiar with.

what were the names of the founders of Freemasonry?
since they were in England we should be able to find their names in the parishes where they were baptized if they were Christians?

or are you just assuming they were Christians?
with no real proof to back up the claim

 

[Simpleman25]

what were the names of the founders of Freemasonry?
since they were in England we should be able to find their names in the parishes where they were baptized if they were Christians?

or are you just assuming they were Christians?
with no real proof to back up the claim

Who said it started in England?

One of the earliest set of guidelines were heavily influenced by Christianity. The earliest prayer that was written down speaks of heavenly father and his son Jesus Christ.

 

[Rhamiel]

my mistake, Freemasonry was first founded in Scotland right?
well the same would go for Scotland I believe, we would still be able to find the names of the founders of Freemasonry in Presbyterian or Church of Scotland baptismal records if they were Christian

 

[Simon_Templar]

yes but the internet is and these are very very well researched, I hae checcked the information, its accurate, let me know what you think ?

Hi Pauluk,

I'm well educated in history, I know the bible well, and I have studied the topic you are raising here fairly extensively. There are a number of points I want to address but I must begin here.

The information presented in the videos you linked is not accurate. It is often repeated by teachers and authors within certain christian groups, but it has very little historical or biblical basis. What I mean when I say it has very little basis is that a few elements of the story are taken from historical sources or the bible, but they are then twisted beyond recognition and the final product is completely unsupportable.

In short, it is a wild theory concocted by one very anti-catholic man 150 years ago, and has been repeated and reused over and over since then by anti-catholic conspiracy theorists. Specifically this all comes from a book called the Two Babylons written in the 19th century by a guy named Alexander Hislop. In this book he took all sorts of different legends and bits of mythology and mashed them together in a story of his own making. It has no basis in the bible, or in history.

Make no mistake, what you are talking about here is not history, it is not Biblically supportable, it is in every negative sense of the phrase, conspiracy theory.

The most accurate thing in the videos you presented was the idea that the Tower of Babel was a ziggurat (temple) which was an attempt to symbolically recreate the sacred mountain of God. Virtually everything else they said was wrong.

Here are the facts.

#1 - Nimrod is mentioned in exactly ONE sentence in the bible and that sentence tells us almost nothing about him. In fact, that sentence does not even clearly indicate whether Nimrod was good or bad.

#2 - There is zero historical evidence that Nimrod ever existed. His name is not mentioned in any historical sources other than as a legendary character.

#3 - Jewish Rabbinical writings and traditions elaborate on the character of Nimrod, portraying him as a leader of rebellion and linking him to the building of the Tower of Babel. However, there is little more than this and certainly nothing approaching the detailed account of his actions presented in the videos you linked.

#4 - Semiramis is never mentioned in the bible, ever. There are several women named Semiramis in history, none of which actually corresponds to the character of Semiramis as presented in the videos you linked.

The character of Semiramis as presented in those videos was a composite of a couple of real historical people, with a legendary person, and then on top of that a mythological babylonian goddess.

#5 - the idea of a link between Nimrod and Semiramis is born out of Persian/Greek legends about a character named Ninus and his wife Semiramis.

The Jewish historian Josephus assumed that Ninus was the same person as Nimrod because Ninus is supposed to have founded Nineveh in Persian/Greek legends. Ninus was a legendary King, of which no historical trace has ever been found. According to legend he had a wife named Semiramis who ruled his kingdom after he was killed in battle.

All sorts of things in the ancient middle east were attributed to this Semiramis by the Greek writer Diodorus but archeology and history have since shown that virtually all of these are incorrect.

However, even if we assume that this Ninus was Nimrod and he really did have a wife named Semiramis, their story as recounted in the legends these come from doesn't match the story presented in the videos or by the original author, Alexander Hislop.

The reason for this is that Hislop didn't just take these legends and mash them up with the biblical character of Nimrod and the Jewish traditions about Nimrod, he then also stole random bits of mythology from Babylon and added them into the story.

For example he makes the assumption that Semiramis is also the goddess Ishtar and Nimrod is Tammuz, he then incorporates elements of the stories of Isthar and Tammuz.

The problem with this is that there is no logical reason to do this and it has no basis in anything other than Hislop's imagination.

This is about like me saying that there is a secret history of the United States in which George Washington was married to a woman called Liberty who set herself up as a goddess and erected a statue of herself in New York, and all Americans have subsequently been worshipers of this pagan goddess.

Further, the irony of all this is that Hislop and people like him have used this for 150 years to attack Catholicism, however, if you actually pay attention to this story, it not only attacks Catholicism, it actually attacks the core of Christianity because it implicates everything from the virgin birth to the death and resurrection of Jesus as elements of pagan worship.

The point being, this is routinely used by certain anti-catholic protestant groups to attack Catholicism as a pagan cult, but the reality is if they actually paid attention to what they were saying, it sets their own house on fire as much as it does anything to Catholicism.

Now, moving on to symbols such as the all-seeing eye. People frequently get hung up on symbols but the reality is symbols are frequently re-used in different religions and cultures especially when those symbols are basic shapes like a triangle. Do you have any idea how many different symbols have been used that involve a triangle, or a circle, or an eye? Same thing with stars. Every type of star has been used repeatedly by different groups to mean different things.

So let me ask you, does a triangle have an objective universal meaning? Or do people assign their own meanings to it? Does an eye have a universal meaning, or do people assign their own meanings to it?

This video suggests that the eye is the eye of lucifer related to the tower of babel. This should raise two questions for you.

#1 - What is it about an Eye or a Triangle that makes it represent lucifer? Did lucifer create eyes? did he invent triangles? Does he some how have a patent on combining and eye and a triangle?

#2 - If this association is indeed true.. why don't any ancient Babylonian, Assyrian, or Sumerian sources actually have this symbol?

There are two further questions you should ask yourself given the line of thinking you are clearly pursuing.

#1 - Why did the Church stop using the symbol when it became more widely associated with things like Masonry?

#2 - Why is it that Masonry is historically associated with and supported by Protestant churches but has been condemned by the Catholic Church since the beginning of Masonry? Why are was Masonry founded by Protestants, and still draws its members largely from protestant churches while Catholics are forbidden to be Masons?

As to why groups like the Masons would use a symbol like the all seeing eye, its really quite simple.

Every occult group that has arisen in Europe since Christianity conquered Europe has been a perversion of Christianity mixed with other religious elements. As a result almost all of their symbolism has been taken from Christianity.

For example, the pentagram is probably the most well known occult symbol of our time, yet the reason for this is that it was originally used as a symbol of protection by occultists when they were dealing with demonic forces. Do you know why it was used as a symbol of protection? because it was associated with Jesus Christ and it represented his five wounds during his passion and crucifixion.

If you look into the occult societies such as the masons and numerous others that were born in the 17th through the 19th centuries you will find that virtually all of them use a mixture of Christian, Hebrew, and Greek/Egyptian symbols. This is because they all involved a mixture of Christianity with Jewish Cabalah and Hermetic Cabalah. Hermetic Cabalah being mostly Greek and Egyptian in its influences.

Once the cultural interaction of the British Empire began with India and the far East you also begin to have see a influence from eastern mysticism of hindusim and budhism.

Again, the irony of all this is that without exception the secret/occult societies of this time were all anti-catholic and were spawned out of protestantism, not Catholicism. This includes the Rosicrucians, the Masons, the Illuminati, the Golden Dawn etc.

 

[Anhelyna]

So here we have the two opposing views.

There's a common saying, here, in the UK - don't know about the USA

" You pays your money and you makes your choice "

 

[Sword of the Lord]

Ah see I thought the question was genuine and not anti-Catholic, like my thread on Michelangelo art. I'm disappointed with this eye in the LCMS because I had always associated it with Masonry and the Illuminati, but after reading this thread and do my own research, I'm not so convinced about this eye being anything terribly bad. If the eye is occult, it seems odd to me that it so easily represents God's omnipresence, his all seeing self, and the Most Holy Trinity.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

You will never see that image in an LCMS parish. I would believe it if you told me ELCA, though.

I don't think that the 'All-Seeing Eye/ Eye of Providence' is forbidden in Lutheran churches though I can not recall ever seeing one in north American parishes. But it is fairly common in Lutheran parishes in Europe and not necessarily really old churches.

 

[Tigger45]

I don't think that the 'All-Seeing Eye/ Eye of Providence' is forbidden in Lutheran churches though I can not recall ever seeing one in north American parishes. But it is fairly common in Lutheran parishes in Europe and not necessarily really old churches.

Wow great photos but I also have to admit it doesn't sit well with me either.it must be from initially learning it was from Freemasonry. I Need to work on that 'if' that's not so.

 

[Davidnic]

The concept of God being all seeing and all knowing has, in many cultures manifested as an eye. For Christians there are many verses in Scripture that justify the use of the symbol. One of the most direct and commonly used:

The eyes of the Lord are in every place, keeping watch on the evil and the good.
Proverbs 15:3
NAB Translation

Remember even in revealed religion human beings explain what they understand through a very commonly held symbolic language. The symbol was borrowed later by freemasonry. It is not the only Christian symbol to be appropriated by other forces, nor is it the only one that was also older than Christianity in use in other contexts.

And although the use of eyes to show the eye of God or gods is not unique to Christianity there was a definite proper Christian use of it. That use fell away because occult practices began to appropriate it even in the context of eye and triangle to show the always watchful eye of God and the nature of the Trinity.

Really the internet is a poor place to research such things, since it is filled with so much made up stuff. Best to actually go to a Library.