It has nothing to do with the burning of the house by the British in 1814, although every schoolchild is likely to have heard the story that way. The building was first made white with lime-based whitewash in 1798, when its walls were finished, simply as a means of protecting the porous stone from freezing. Why the house was subsequently painted is not known. Perhaps presidents objected to the dirty look as the whitewash wore away.
The house acquired its nickname early on. Congressman Abijah Bigelow wrote to a colleague on March 18, 1812 (three months before the United States entered war with England): "There is much trouble at the White House, as we call it, I mean the President's" (quoted in W. B. Bryan, "The Name White House," Records of the Columbia Historical Society 34-35 [1932]: 308). The name, though in common use, remained a nickname until September 1901, when Theodore Roosevelt made it official.
Originally posted by: Dari
Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Originally posted by: Dari
I don't think you understand what Freemasonry is or where it came from. It may be better if you did a little reading of it before saying that its true origins are European. You also fail to understand that America has never been seen as just any other country. It was supposed to be the ideal country; the city on the hill. For these reason African Freemasonry has a heavy influence on American idealism.
You should look into Churchward, Higgins, Jackson, etc to understand how the Egyptian Mystery system influenced everything you see that is great about America, from the colors (red, white, blue), the number 13 (13 colonies, 12 jurors plus one judge, Channel 13, the official government channel, etc...) and the many signs and symbols of Government Center.
So, the British created 13 colonies in order to give America the correct numerological base to start from? And the British, likewise, chose Red, White, and Blue for their Union Jack in order to inspire America to take those same colors?
And are you really claiming that because one (utterly unverifiable from my searches) ancient Egyptian temple was called "The White House of Heru" that our own White House is somehow named after it? Despite the fact that the Rosetta Stone was not found until 1799 and that it was still not possible to decipher hieroglyphic writing until the 1820's, fully 10 years AFTER the term "White House" was in public use to describe the Executive Mansion? At the time the White House was named, no-one alive on earth could have deciphered the name of any Egyptian temple.
The oldest Masonic documents cite Greek men as their influences (specifically Euclid). While this does place one of the influences in Alexandria, it is well to remember that, at the time, Alexandria was more accurately considered a Greek city than an Egyptian one. Also, mystery religions were common in both Greek and Roman thought well before contact with Egypt. To call Masonry's origins "African" is to engage in nothing more than wishful historic revisionism.
Finally, to which lodge do you belong?
ZV
Why can't it be verified? All you have to do is go there yourself. And if you think that Greeks are the origins of Masonry then you are sourly, sourly mistaken. lol, in all my learnings, I have never come across Greeks as being the origin of Masonry. You are the first to say such thing. And the mystery religions of the near east were all inter-related. Considering how old Misraim (Egypt) was, there is no doubt that it predated both Greek or Roman.
Seriously, read up on those authors and take a visit to the House of the Temple; take a stroll throughout Washington D.C. and you will be able to decipher the countless signs and symbols that are in public view but have double meanings. Their Egyptian origin are beyond doubt and have little to do with Greece. Some other authors are Massey and Hall.
If you want to know which lodge I belong to, PM me and I'll respond.
Originally posted by: lupi
You mean the same founders that sent a marine expedition to take care of the 19th centuries version of islamic extremist.
Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Originally posted by: Dari
Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Originally posted by: Dari
I don't think you understand what Freemasonry is or where it came from. It may be better if you did a little reading of it before saying that its true origins are European. You also fail to understand that America has never been seen as just any other country. It was supposed to be the ideal country; the city on the hill. For these reason African Freemasonry has a heavy influence on American idealism.
You should look into Churchward, Higgins, Jackson, etc to understand how the Egyptian Mystery system influenced everything you see that is great about America, from the colors (red, white, blue), the number 13 (13 colonies, 12 jurors plus one judge, Channel 13, the official government channel, etc...) and the many signs and symbols of Government Center.
So, the British created 13 colonies in order to give America the correct numerological base to start from? And the British, likewise, chose Red, White, and Blue for their Union Jack in order to inspire America to take those same colors?
And are you really claiming that because one (utterly unverifiable from my searches) ancient Egyptian temple was called "The White House of Heru" that our own White House is somehow named after it? Despite the fact that the Rosetta Stone was not found until 1799 and that it was still not possible to decipher hieroglyphic writing until the 1820's, fully 10 years AFTER the term "White House" was in public use to describe the Executive Mansion? At the time the White House was named, no-one alive on earth could have deciphered the name of any Egyptian temple.
The oldest Masonic documents cite Greek men as their influences (specifically Euclid). While this does place one of the influences in Alexandria, it is well to remember that, at the time, Alexandria was more accurately considered a Greek city than an Egyptian one. Also, mystery religions were common in both Greek and Roman thought well before contact with Egypt. To call Masonry's origins "African" is to engage in nothing more than wishful historic revisionism.
Finally, to which lodge do you belong?
ZV
Why can't it be verified? All you have to do is go there yourself. And if you think that Greeks are the origins of Masonry then you are sourly, sourly mistaken. lol, in all my learnings, I have never come across Greeks as being the origin of Masonry. You are the first to say such thing. And the mystery religions of the near east were all inter-related. Considering how old Misraim (Egypt) was, there is no doubt that it predated both Greek or Roman.
Seriously, read up on those authors and take a visit to the House of the Temple; take a stroll throughout Washington D.C. and you will be able to decipher the countless signs and symbols that are in public view but have double meanings. Their Egyptian origin are beyond doubt and have little to do with Greece. Some other authors are Massey and Hall.
If you want to know which lodge I belong to, PM me and I'll respond.
Go to Egypt myself? That's hardly a viable option and you know it. Surely you can produce some scholarly reference to this temple. And do you have anything against the fact that it was impossible for scholars to decipher hieroglyphics prior to the 1820's?
I'll grant that those symbols were in common use. I'll even grant that many were Egyptian/Semetic in origin. But the core philosophy that drove the creation of the American Republic was largely European. There's simply no credible denial to the fact that the United States was founded on the very Continental ideas of Hume, Locke, Paine, and Voltaire.
As for Greeks not being involved in the origins of Freemasonry, am I to take it then that you deny the Regius Poem?
ZV
Originally posted by: Dari
The core philosophy was about enlightenment. At its very core was the belief in the ideal man and the manifestation of G-d. Freemasonry has, at its core, been a very humanist endeavour. For Masons, kings and theocrats have no place in leadership.
I really don't want to get into an argument with someone who isn't in front of me (and who I know nothing about), so I'll let my part of the argument die.
As with all things regarding secret societies, let's just say all this was a coincidence:laugh:.
Our government was founded on the ideas of men named JohnOriginally posted by: Dari
Yes, and the same founding fathers who modelled America after an African philosophy.Originally posted by: loki8481
the same founding fathers who owned slaves and didn't use the constitution to make slavery illegal?
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Oops.. misread the thread title.
Who would they be most PROUD of?
I think McCain for what he did as a POW. Obama has accomplished a lot and has a lot to be proud of, but he has never had to sacrifice one thing in order to get to where he is.
McCain gave up his chance for freedom to make a stance on principle. I think the founding fathers would identify with that. Especially since so many of them were rich and could have sat on their asses and enjoyed their wealth instead of risking it all in a revolution against the most powerful country in the world.
As a POW McCain was offered a chance to go free because his dad was a high ranking admiral. McCain turned down the get out of jail free card and spent almost another 3 years as a POW. THAT is sacrifice.Originally posted by: Dari
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Oops.. misread the thread title.
Who would they be most PROUD of?
I think McCain for what he did as a POW. Obama has accomplished a lot and has a lot to be proud of, but he has never had to sacrifice one thing in order to get to where he is.
McCain gave up his chance for freedom to make a stance on principle. I think the founding fathers would identify with that. Especially since so many of them were rich and could have sat on their asses and enjoyed their wealth instead of risking it all in a revolution against the most powerful country in the world.
He didn't "give up his chance for freedom". He signed up for war service and got shot down. The reason why he signed up, we don't know. Senator Obama, gave up a lucrative career in practicing law to work on the streets of Chicago and teach constitutional law.
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Oops.. misread the thread title.
Who would they be most PROUD of?
I think McCain for what he did as a POW. Obama has accomplished a lot and has a lot to be proud of, but he has never had to sacrifice one thing in order to get to where he is.
McCain gave up his chance for freedom to make a stance on principle. I think the founding fathers would identify with that. Especially since so many of them were rich and could have sat on their asses and enjoyed their wealth instead of risking it all in a revolution against the most powerful country in the world.
Originally posted by: IGBT
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Oops.. misread the thread title.
Who would they be most PROUD of?
I think McCain for what he did as a POW. Obama has accomplished a lot and has a lot to be proud of, but he has never had to sacrifice one thing in order to get to where he is.
McCain gave up his chance for freedom to make a stance on principle. I think the founding fathers would identify with that. Especially since so many of them were rich and could have sat on their asses and enjoyed their wealth instead of risking it all in a revolution against the most powerful country in the world.
..the obama has led a life of privilege, entitlment and shelter similar to the lives of the limousine liberals. No surprise he has the support of the liberal elite heirs. They identify with him.
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
As a POW McCain was offered a chance to go free because his dad was a high ranking admiral. McCain turned down the get out of jail free card and spent almost another 3 years as a POW. THAT is sacrifice.Originally posted by: Dari
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Oops.. misread the thread title.
Who would they be most PROUD of?
I think McCain for what he did as a POW. Obama has accomplished a lot and has a lot to be proud of, but he has never had to sacrifice one thing in order to get to where he is.
McCain gave up his chance for freedom to make a stance on principle. I think the founding fathers would identify with that. Especially since so many of them were rich and could have sat on their asses and enjoyed their wealth instead of risking it all in a revolution against the most powerful country in the world.
He didn't "give up his chance for freedom". He signed up for war service and got shot down. The reason why he signed up, we don't know. Senator Obama, gave up a lucrative career in practicing law to work on the streets of Chicago and teach constitutional law.
Obama's "sacrifice" seems to have been more of a political calculation. Start off as a community organizer and then move into an elected position from there.
Originally posted by: Thump553
IGBT: why do you ALWAYS refer to Senator Obama as "the obama?" Were you taught by your parents to refer to people that way? Does it give you some sense of superiority or are you trying to dehumanize him in some sense? I'm curious to understand this bizarre behavior pattern of yours. In any event, it's juvenile and unpersuasive to anyone who doesn't already accept your viewpoint.
I'm also interested how you conclude that the mixed race child of a working mother has led a life of "privilege, entitlement and shelter similar to the lives of limousine liberals" (to use your exact words) but you accept the son of an admiral who was the son of an admiral as a nonprivileged person? A rather distorted worldview you have.
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Go to Egypt myself? That's hardly a viable option and you know it. Surely you can produce some scholarly reference to this temple. And do you have anything against the fact that it was impossible for scholars to decipher hieroglyphics prior to the 1820's?
I'll grant that those symbols were in common use. I'll even grant that many were Egyptian/Semetic in origin. But the core philosophy that drove the creation of the American Republic was largely European. There's simply no credible denial to the fact that the United States was founded on the very Continental ideas of Hume, Locke, Paine, and Voltaire.
As for Greeks not being involved in the origins of Freemasonry, am I to take it then that you deny the Regius Poem?
The Sufis had translated hieroglyphics long before the modern era.
One example
Masonry has its origins in Sufism.
A source
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
People sure tend to have romantic viewpoints about our founding fathers.
A half Black president? Our founding fathers would be rolling over in their graves much like the original founders of Augusta would have upon learning that Tiger Woods won their tournament.
Nor am I claiming that Obama is Tiger Woods. But where winning is concerned they are both very good bets. I'm betting that Obama wins that tournament in November.
Originally posted by: IGBT
..the obama has led a life of privilege, entitlment and shelter similar to the lives of the limousine liberals. No surprise he has the support of the liberal elite heirs. They identify with him.
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Oops.. misread the thread title.
Who would they be most PROUD of?
I think McCain for what he did as a POW. Obama has accomplished a lot and has a lot to be proud of, but he has never had to sacrifice one thing in order to get to where he is.
McCain gave up his chance for freedom to make a stance on principle. I think the founding fathers would identify with that. Especially since so many of them were rich and could have sat on their asses and enjoyed their wealth instead of risking it all in a revolution against the most powerful country in the world.
Originally posted by: Dari
Originally posted by: IGBT
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Oops.. misread the thread title.
Who would they be most PROUD of?
I think McCain for what he did as a POW. Obama has accomplished a lot and has a lot to be proud of, but he has never had to sacrifice one thing in order to get to where he is.
McCain gave up his chance for freedom to make a stance on principle. I think the founding fathers would identify with that. Especially since so many of them were rich and could have sat on their asses and enjoyed their wealth instead of risking it all in a revolution against the most powerful country in the world.
..the obama has led a life of privilege, entitlment and shelter similar to the lives of the limousine liberals. No surprise he has the support of the liberal elite heirs. They identify with him.
You really believe what you just wrote? What privilege did he have? How does that compare to the son of an Admiral who's married to a millionaire with multiple homes?