[FairfieldLife] Re: Seclorum Disputed ---- was/How Judy...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff rorygoff@ wrote: Either way, translating it as New Secular Order is about as logical as translating the cognate French phrase fin de siecle as end of the secular, instead of end of the century, and writing a Dan Brown novel about the secret fundamentalist sexist murdering land- grabbing French conspiracy to restore monasticism at the close of the 19th century, right after transmuting the moon into green cheese. Hey, why not? Its all good. Since Dan Brown and Off_World are [not yet whole, blissful and perfected in knowledge] parts of Rory. I mean parts of ... Parts of? Well its true us off-worlders have bigger private parts if that's what your trying to say? OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: Seclorum Disputed ---- was/How Judy...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: SECULAR: c.1290, living in the world, not belonging to a religious order, also belonging to the state, from O.Fr. seculer, from L.L. sæcularis worldly, secular,...Used in ecclesiastical writing like Gk. aion of this world http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=secular. THAT MEANS: sæcularis means worldy, secular. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, cardemaister no_reply@ wrote: From my Latin dictionary (Adolf V. Streng, Latinalais- suomalainen sana-kirja [keer-yah] = Latin-Finnish word-book): saecularis, [...] sata*[-]vuotinen [hundred-year-long] *) cf. Sanskrit shata- (hundred); eg. shata-patha-braahmaNa --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff rorygoff@ wrote: That's interesting; I'd not seen any evidence that *saecularis* retained the original meaning of *saeculum*; both of my etymological dictionaries (Eric Partridge's Short Etymological Dictionary of Modern English and W. W. Skeat's Etymological Dictionary of the English Language) show it as (Late Latin), meaning worldly, secular *deriving from* (but clearly different from) the (earlier Latin) *saeculum*, meaning generation, century, age or (according to Partridge, in Late Latin)world. Does your dictionary show it is an adjective and give the secular definition at all? (Either way, I've seen no evidence to imply that the noun *saeculum* ever meant the adjective secular. Novus Ordo Seclorum still is evidently best translated as New Order of the Generations, or New Order of the Centuries, or New Order of the Ages. I suppose it's remotely possible one could translate it as New Order of the Worlds, but given that that's Late Latin and that the phrase comes from the Classical Latin poet Virgil (as any 18th-century Latin scholar would well know), such a translation would be pretty unlikely. Either way, translating it as New Secular Order is about as logical as translating the cognate French phrase fin de siecle as end of the secular, instead of end of the century, snip And as an interesting aside, the Freemason Founders were probably *not* interested in a secular (in the sense of worldly, nonspiritual, or irreligious) world-view; one of the requirements to becoming a Mason is belief in a Supreme Being: atheists and polytheists not being admitted. If certain scholars are correct in positing the roots of Freemasonry in the Templars (likely IMO), and further correct in positing that the original Templars stem from French descendants of the Septimanian Jewish Exilarchs (possible, IMO), then this would make perfect sense -- Judaism being after all the ultimate and original Monotheism... :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Seclorum Disputed ---- was/How Judy...
(hundred); eg. shata-patha-braahmaNa --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff rorygoff@ wrote: That's interesting; I'd not seen any evidence that *saecularis* retained the original meaning of *saeculum*; And now you have. both of my etymological dictionaries (Eric Partridge's Short Etymological Dictionary of Modern English and W. W. Skeat's Etymological Dictionary of the English Language) show it as (Late Latin), meaning worldly, secular *deriving from* (but clearly different from) the (earlier Latin) *saeculum*, meaning generation, century, age or (according to Partridge, in Late Latin)world. Does your dictionary show it is an adjective and give the secular definition at all? (Either way, I've seen no evidence to imply that the noun *saeculum* ever meant the adjective secular. Novus Ordo Seclorum still is evidently best translated as New Order of the Generations, or New Order of the Centuries, or New Order of the Ages. I suppose it's remotely possible one could translate it as New Order of the Worlds, but given that that's Late Latin and that the phrase comes from the Classical Latin poet Virgil (as any 18th-century Latin scholar would well know), such a translation would be pretty unlikely. Either way, translating it as New Secular Order is about as logical as translating the cognate French phrase fin de siecle as end of the secular, instead of end of the century, snip You are stubbornly avoiding the fact that late Latin DID use it to mean secular. Con't you think your paltry 200 year old theives and traitors founding fathers were AFTER the Late Latin period??? Perhaps due to their infancy Americans are incapable of rational thinking ! And as an interesting aside, the Freemason Founders were probably *not* interested in a secular (in the sense of worldly, nonspiritual, or irreligious) world-view; one of the requirements to becoming a Mason is belief in a Supreme Being: atheists and polytheists not being admitted. If certain scholars are correct in positing the roots of Freemasonry in the Templars (likely IMO), and further correct in positing that the original Templars stem from French descendants of the Septimanian Jewish Exilarchs (possible, IMO), then this would make perfect sense -- Judaism being after all the ultimate and original Monotheism.. Incorrect. No.1: First of all, your land-grabbing, low-life, slave raping, theiving founding fathers :-), actually had one redeeming quality. Almost all of the influentual ones had a one-pointed belief in the Baconian method, and practically idolized Sir Francis Bacon (councillor to QE I, and called the Grandfather of Modern Science). It is very easy to show that Sir Francis Bacon, in fact, was THE MAIN INSPIRATION for your founding fathers actions in the New World, and the intention to create what Sir Francis Bacon, like all Masons, called founding the New Atlantis. Jefferson, Franklin, Hamilton and others believed one-pointedly in this goal. A non- theistic society. Perhaps your lack of knowledge of this crucial fact about the founders is what has caused you to so stubbornly resist the fact that the founding fathers used the word to mean secular. But what you fail to realise, is that that WAS THE DRIVING FORCE FOREMOST IN THEIR MINDS: A New Atlantis, based on the Baconian scientific method which would lead all mankind to enlightenment in the New Atlantis, which they DELIBERATELY AND METHODICALLY proceeded to ACTUALLY structure, including a Masonic arhitectural model (especially for Washington DC) that vagualy resembles the concepts of Sthapatya Ved. No 2. The Jewish Gnostics, which ultimately inspired the Templars, were NOT monotheistic fundamentalists. They claimed to have gained their wisdom from the anciant Egyptians and that it was KNOWLEDGE that would enlighten mankind. They were/are an ancient esoteric society within Judaism of the utmost and primary influence within Judaism. Everything else we know about Judaism - the exoteric religious aspects - are considered of secondary importance by all Jews. The Gnostic knowledge is the last word in Jewish society. Gnostic is from Gnosos which is from Sanskrit Gyan: Knowledge. OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: Seclorum Disputed ---- was/How Judy...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Either way, translating it as New Secular Order is about as logical as translating the cognate French phrase fin de siecle as end of the secular, instead of end of the century, and writing a Dan Brown novel about the secret fundamentalist sexist murdering land- grabbing French conspiracy to restore monasticism at the close of the 19th century, right after transmuting the moon into green cheese. Hey, why not? Its all good. Since Dan Brown and Off_World are [not yet whole, blissful and perfected in knowledge] parts of Rory. I mean parts of (well -- whole parts (sic), or whole reflections of) the infinite, boundless, pure potentiality and robust knowledge of Existence and Bliss (not the stupid kind -- a la Peter) Anything's possible, right? If we write a bad novel asserting it, I'm sure we can pick up a few credulous believers!) [infinite, unbounded] Rory [quite a scary thought :)], I mean We, can pick up a few more parts of Rory, in the POV of a few other parts of Rory, sorry, I mean Ourselves. The Wholenesses are cascading into WHOLNESSES. Its ALL ME! And the completion of the Tradition is ME. So who needs ME? Or me? Certainly not me. Well its a paradox! Lets thrive on it! D*D*D (happily and unabashedly Darkness, Dankness and Dumbness :)) (in playfulness) :)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Seclorum Disputed ---- was/How Judy...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So you are saying that Wikipedia is not a reliable source. All those interested please note: Rory is correct here, Wikipedia is not a reliable source. Many thanks for several things, Offworld! Thank you for giving me the impetus, and showing me how easy it is, to join Wikipedia, where (probably to the infinite relief of almost everyone on FFL) I have taken my sourced case against your argument that secularis = seclorum. As for your further desire for proof that seclorum is indeed the genitive plural form of seclum, I suggest -- if you don't believe me -- you heed any other Wikipedia contributor who has actually studied Latin, like Bonus Onus, or consult any good 1st-year Latin textbook, or Google 2nd declension Latin and come up with something like this: http://ancienthistory.about.com/od/caseusage/qt/Latin2nddecl.htm (Other than that, I'll just mention that you probably mean 18th century understanding of Latin, instead of 17th century, as you wrote here and on Wikipedia -- if you're referring to the mostly- Masonic Founding Fathers.) Thank you too for bringing up yet more particles of self-righteous fundamentalist fervor within me who think we absolutely *know* the truth, despite our vast ignorance, and who apparently just cannot be reached at this moment with anything other than awe-struck, silent, unconditional Love. I stand humbled! This is Me! Wow. The strength of my ignorance is the sheer force of Kundalini-Shakti Herself. I love you/me/Us! Thank you again. :-) *L*L*L* to support your secular stance since I first gave the link. They did forget to take out the line which says, correctly, The word seclorum does not mean secular, as one might assume, but is the genitive (possessive) plural form of the word saeculum, meaning (in this context) generation, century, or age. Which has no references to substantiate this dubious translation of 17th century understanding of Latin. Very amatuerish source without references. However, the new editor has then completely contradicted this correct statement by -- after removing the reference to Dan Brown's mistranslation of the phrase -- adding incorrect data like the Saecularis = Saeclorum material you've posted here. I can certainly understand the political motivation behind such a mistranslation, as I too believe the Founding Fathers (not sure where the Founding Mothers stood) were probably following a Masonic rather than a Christian blueprint for this nation, but that's no excuse for bad scholarship, is it? :-) Correct again Rory. Your scholar on Wikipedia actually states: ''Saeculum'' did come to mean world, worldly in late, Christian, Latin, and secular is derived from it, through ''secularis''. He is correct here, the founding fathers would have thought of it as meaning secular, and that is obvious to scholars, but he doesn't use any references. That is why I use proper references ! !!...unlike your Wikipedia pseudo-scholar: c.1290, living in the world, not belonging to a religious order, also belonging to the state, from O.Fr. seculer, from L.L. sæcularis worldly, secular, http://www.etymonline.com/index.php? search=secular OffWorld --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff rorygoff@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: Actually, your own quote states: Secular -- from the adjective Saecularis: worldly, secular, of the age In other words it means secular also. No, SAECULARIS means secular and SECLORUM means of the ages. Saecularis MEANS worldy, secular, so what is the dispute? See above; SAECULARIS means secular and SECLORUM means of the ages. The phrase is NOVUS ORDO SECLORUM, not NOVUS ORDO SAECULARIS. LolYou were the one that compared it to SAECULARIS , not me. SECLORUM means of the Ages, or of the Centuries, whereas if they had meant Secular they would have used SAECULARIS. It does not mean 'of the ages' and the seal's designer, Charles Thomson, wrote that the words signify the beginnings of the New American Era. Yes, the literal translation is A New Order of the Ages. Feel free to learn or re-learn Latin and see for yourself, or just take my word for it, or check out the Wikipedia link I gave you before. Here it is again: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novus_Ordo_Seclorum And according to your our own quote which states: Secular -- from the adjective Saecularis: worldly, secular, of the age In other words it means secular also. No, *only* SAECULARIS means secular, SECLORUM means of the ages. I was pointing out how it would be easy to confuse
[FairfieldLife] Re: Seclorum Disputed ---- was/How Judy...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Seclorum disputed: Actually, your own quote states: Secular -- from the adjective Saecularis: worldly, secular, of the age In other words it means secular also. Saecularis MEANS worldy, secular, so what is the dispute? The phrase is NOVUS ORDO SECLORUM, not NOVUS ORDO SAECULARIS. SECLORUM means of the Ages, or of the Centuries, whereas if they had meant Secular they would have used SAECULARIS. Check out Wikkipedia's entry http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novus_Ordo_Seclorum for a nice discussion on the phrase's origins and nuances :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Seclorum Disputed ---- was/How Judy...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: Seclorum disputed: Actually, your own quote states: Secular -- from the adjective Saecularis: worldly, secular, of the age In other words it means secular also. Saecularis MEANS worldy, secular, so what is the dispute? The phrase is NOVUS ORDO SECLORUM, not NOVUS ORDO SAECULARIS. LolYou were the one that compared it to SAECULARIS , not me. SECLORUM means of the Ages, or of the Centuries, whereas if they had meant Secular they would have used SAECULARIS. It does not mean 'of the ages' and the seal's designer, Charles Thomson, wrote that the words signify the beginnings of the New American Era. And according to your our own quote which states: Secular -- from the adjective Saecularis: worldly, secular, of the age In other words it means secular also. Seclorum means Saecularis which MEANS worldy, secular, so what is the dispute? secular- ADJECTIVE: 1.Worldly, rather than spiritual. 2.Not specifically relating to religion or to a religious body: secular music. 3.Relating to or advocating secularism. 4.Not bound by monastic restrictions, especially not belonging to a religious order. Used of the clergy. 5.Occurring or observed once in an age or century. 6.Lasting from century to century 7.http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/secular And it appears more related to these: secedo : to go apart, withdraw. secerno secrevi secretum : to separate. seco : secui : sectum : to cut, hurt, wound, amputate, divide, part. securis : axe, hatchet, battle-axe. ie. separation of religion and state. secular c.1290, living in the world, not belonging to a religious order, also belonging to the state, from O.Fr. seculer, from L.L. sæcularis worldly, secular, http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=secular OffWorld
[FairfieldLife] Re: Seclorum Disputed ---- was/How Judy...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The phrase is NOVUS ORDO SECLORUM, not NOVUS ORDO SAECULARIS. SECLORUM Is this like when Buddy Hackett visited the Vatican and asked too many questions about the opulance he saw there - the Pope finally had enough and said Abscounda illegitimo obesceri, which translates as, get otta here you fat bastard lurk :)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Seclorum Disputed ---- was/How Judy...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Actually, your own quote states: Secular -- from the adjective Saecularis: worldly, secular, of the age In other words it means secular also. No, SAECULARIS means secular and SECLORUM means of the ages. Saecularis MEANS worldy, secular, so what is the dispute? See above; SAECULARIS means secular and SECLORUM means of the ages. The phrase is NOVUS ORDO SECLORUM, not NOVUS ORDO SAECULARIS. LolYou were the one that compared it to SAECULARIS , not me. SECLORUM means of the Ages, or of the Centuries, whereas if they had meant Secular they would have used SAECULARIS. It does not mean 'of the ages' and the seal's designer, Charles Thomson, wrote that the words signify the beginnings of the New American Era. Yes, the literal translation is A New Order of the Ages. Feel free to learn or re-learn Latin and see for yourself, or just take my word for it, or check out the Wikipedia link I gave you before. Here it is again: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novus_Ordo_Seclorum And according to your our own quote which states: Secular -- from the adjective Saecularis: worldly, secular, of the age In other words it means secular also. No, *only* SAECULARIS means secular, SECLORUM means of the ages. I was pointing out how it would be easy to confuse the two words, given their similar sources, but it would still be a mistake to do so. Seclorum means Saecularis which MEANS worldy, secular, so what is the dispute? No, SECLORUM does *not* mean SAECULARIS. SECLORUM (noun, possessive plural) means, literally, of the Ages, and SAECULARIS (adjective) means worldly, secular. Again, feel free to take my word for it, or learn Latin for yourself, or consult Wikipedia regarding its nuances of meaning and its origins in Virgil's Eclogues: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novus_Ordo_Seclorum I've said all I have to say on this subject, ad infinitum et ad nauseam :-), and so this will be my last post on the subject of Novus Ordo Seclorum. I am in agreement with you on Judy! *L*L*L*
[FairfieldLife] Re: Seclorum Disputed ---- was/How Judy...
On second thought, don't bother consulting Wikipedia, as apparently someone with no understanding of Latin has revised it inaccurately to support your secular stance since I first gave the link. They did forget to take out the line which says, correctly, The word seclorum does not mean secular, as one might assume, but is the genitive (possessive) plural form of the word saeculum, meaning (in this context) generation, century, or age. However, the new editor has then completely contradicted this correct statement by -- after removing the reference to Dan Brown's mistranslation of the phrase -- adding incorrect data like the Saecularis = Saeclorum material you've posted here. I can certainly understand the political motivation behind such a mistranslation, as I too believe the Founding Fathers (not sure where the Founding Mothers stood) were probably following a Masonic rather than a Christian blueprint for this nation, but that's no excuse for bad scholarship, is it? :-) --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: Actually, your own quote states: Secular -- from the adjective Saecularis: worldly, secular, of the age In other words it means secular also. No, SAECULARIS means secular and SECLORUM means of the ages. Saecularis MEANS worldy, secular, so what is the dispute? See above; SAECULARIS means secular and SECLORUM means of the ages. The phrase is NOVUS ORDO SECLORUM, not NOVUS ORDO SAECULARIS. LolYou were the one that compared it to SAECULARIS , not me. SECLORUM means of the Ages, or of the Centuries, whereas if they had meant Secular they would have used SAECULARIS. It does not mean 'of the ages' and the seal's designer, Charles Thomson, wrote that the words signify the beginnings of the New American Era. Yes, the literal translation is A New Order of the Ages. Feel free to learn or re-learn Latin and see for yourself, or just take my word for it, or check out the Wikipedia link I gave you before. Here it is again: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novus_Ordo_Seclorum And according to your our own quote which states: Secular -- from the adjective Saecularis: worldly, secular, of the age In other words it means secular also. No, *only* SAECULARIS means secular, SECLORUM means of the ages. I was pointing out how it would be easy to confuse the two words, given their similar sources, but it would still be a mistake to do so. Seclorum means Saecularis which MEANS worldy, secular, so what is the dispute? No, SECLORUM does *not* mean SAECULARIS. SECLORUM (noun, possessive plural) means, literally, of the Ages, and SAECULARIS (adjective) means worldly, secular. Again, feel free to take my word for it, or learn Latin for yourself, or consult Wikipedia regarding its nuances of meaning and its origins in Virgil's Eclogues: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novus_Ordo_Seclorum I've said all I have to say on this subject, ad infinitum et ad nauseam :-), and so this will be my last post on the subject of Novus Ordo Seclorum. I am in agreement with you on Judy! *L*L*L*
[FairfieldLife] Re: Seclorum Disputed ---- was/How Judy...
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On second thought, don't bother consulting Wikipedia, as apparently someone with no understanding of Latin has revised it inaccurately So you are saying that Wikipedia is not a reliable source. All those interested please note: Rory is correct here, Wikipedia is not a reliable source. to support your secular stance since I first gave the link. They did forget to take out the line which says, correctly, The word seclorum does not mean secular, as one might assume, but is the genitive (possessive) plural form of the word saeculum, meaning (in this context) generation, century, or age. Which has no references to substantiate this dubious translation of 17th century understanding of Latin. Very amatuerish source without references. However, the new editor has then completely contradicted this correct statement by -- after removing the reference to Dan Brown's mistranslation of the phrase -- adding incorrect data like the Saecularis = Saeclorum material you've posted here. I can certainly understand the political motivation behind such a mistranslation, as I too believe the Founding Fathers (not sure where the Founding Mothers stood) were probably following a Masonic rather than a Christian blueprint for this nation, but that's no excuse for bad scholarship, is it? :-) Correct again Rory. Your scholar on Wikipedia actually states: ''Saeculum'' did come to mean world, worldly in late, Christian, Latin, and secular is derived from it, through ''secularis''. He is correct here, the founding fathers would have thought of it as meaning secular, and that is obvious to scholars, but he doesn't use any references. That is why I use proper references ! !!...unlike your Wikipedia pseudo-scholar: c.1290, living in the world, not belonging to a religious order, also belonging to the state, from O.Fr. seculer, from L.L. sæcularis worldly, secular, http://www.etymonline.com/index.php? search=secular OffWorld --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rory Goff rorygoff@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, off_world_beings no_reply@ wrote: Actually, your own quote states: Secular -- from the adjective Saecularis: worldly, secular, of the age In other words it means secular also. No, SAECULARIS means secular and SECLORUM means of the ages. Saecularis MEANS worldy, secular, so what is the dispute? See above; SAECULARIS means secular and SECLORUM means of the ages. The phrase is NOVUS ORDO SECLORUM, not NOVUS ORDO SAECULARIS. LolYou were the one that compared it to SAECULARIS , not me. SECLORUM means of the Ages, or of the Centuries, whereas if they had meant Secular they would have used SAECULARIS. It does not mean 'of the ages' and the seal's designer, Charles Thomson, wrote that the words signify the beginnings of the New American Era. Yes, the literal translation is A New Order of the Ages. Feel free to learn or re-learn Latin and see for yourself, or just take my word for it, or check out the Wikipedia link I gave you before. Here it is again: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novus_Ordo_Seclorum And according to your our own quote which states: Secular -- from the adjective Saecularis: worldly, secular, of the age In other words it means secular also. No, *only* SAECULARIS means secular, SECLORUM means of the ages. I was pointing out how it would be easy to confuse the two words, given their similar sources, but it would still be a mistake to do so. Seclorum means Saecularis which MEANS worldy, secular, so what is the dispute? No, SECLORUM does *not* mean SAECULARIS. SECLORUM (noun, possessive plural) means, literally, of the Ages, and SAECULARIS (adjective) means worldly, secular. Again, feel free to take my word for it, or learn Latin for yourself, or consult Wikipedia regarding its nuances of meaning and its origins in Virgil's Eclogues: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novus_Ordo_Seclorum I've said all I have to say on this subject, ad infinitum et ad nauseam :-), and so this will be my last post on the subject of Novus Ordo Seclorum. I am in agreement with you on Judy! *L*L*L*
