FreddieUK · 70-79, M
I've always associated that symbol with the Freemasons and that organisation is far from Christian. I'm interested to learn how it is interpreted so benignly in the States.
View 14 more replies »
Barefooter25 · 46-50, M
People need to remember that paper currency was first circulated back in the late 1800s. The current $1 bill people see today was first introduced somewhere in the early 20th century. I always thought as a kid that the eye on the back of the $1 bill either belonged to God or George Washington himself.
That being said, it's a possibility that the person who designed the dollar bill may have been a freemason. I knew someone years ago who was a freemason himself and I think many people over exaggerate about them. The Freemasons are basically a fraternity. They may be bigger and more organized but they're like a fraternity.
That being said, it's a possibility that the person who designed the dollar bill may have been a freemason. I knew someone years ago who was a freemason himself and I think many people over exaggerate about them. The Freemasons are basically a fraternity. They may be bigger and more organized but they're like a fraternity.
4meAndyou · F
@Barefooter25 I thought that the eye was an Egyptian thing...Eye of Horus, basically...but it is not.
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@4meAndyou They are only a mystery because we do not really understand how they were built, although structurally they are really very basic.
To my mind the great Gothic and Perpendicular cathedrals of Europe are the greater mystery.
Although we know far more about Mediaeval than Ancient Egyptian buildling techniques, with many of the Mediaeval masonry and woodworking tools and skills still used, the designs of these colossal structures are extraordinarily daring for an era relying on rules-of-thumb rather than any understanding of materials science, stress and strain, etc. And yes, sometimes too daring, with inadequate foundations, occasional collapses during construction, or needing complicated additions to stop the walls falling outwards.
The Egyptians most certainly call for our great respect for their knowledge of geometry, organising skills and sheer hard work; but their pyramids are simply self-supporting stacks of blocks with some small internal cavities. The cathedrals do not look very self-supporting at all for their very heavy rooves on very high, slender structures enclosing vast halls, yet those that did not fall down are still in regular use as churches, several hundred years after they were erected for that very purpose.
It is the Mediaeval "master masons" (we'd call them architects) popularly but possibly wrongly associated with modern Freemasonry. Not the Egyptian or even Roman, ones.
To my mind the great Gothic and Perpendicular cathedrals of Europe are the greater mystery.
Although we know far more about Mediaeval than Ancient Egyptian buildling techniques, with many of the Mediaeval masonry and woodworking tools and skills still used, the designs of these colossal structures are extraordinarily daring for an era relying on rules-of-thumb rather than any understanding of materials science, stress and strain, etc. And yes, sometimes too daring, with inadequate foundations, occasional collapses during construction, or needing complicated additions to stop the walls falling outwards.
The Egyptians most certainly call for our great respect for their knowledge of geometry, organising skills and sheer hard work; but their pyramids are simply self-supporting stacks of blocks with some small internal cavities. The cathedrals do not look very self-supporting at all for their very heavy rooves on very high, slender structures enclosing vast halls, yet those that did not fall down are still in regular use as churches, several hundred years after they were erected for that very purpose.
It is the Mediaeval "master masons" (we'd call them architects) popularly but possibly wrongly associated with modern Freemasonry. Not the Egyptian or even Roman, ones.