Anyone interested in probing beyond that which we are told by others about Freemasonry should look in to the misdirection we are handed concerning "Hiram".
On the one hand, the Masons go on with their tale about the mythical "Hiram Abiff" and the construction of the Temple of Solomon. On the other hand, there was indeed a nearby king in Tyre, Hiram I, who reigned during the construction of said temple.
You think they'd fall all over themselves trying to claim the historical king was the basis for Hiram Abiff, and that they were not just spewing a load of loony bullshit they dreamed up somewhere along the line.
Quite the opposite is true: they go out of their way to say the two Hirams have absolutely no relation to one another. That's odd. So odd, in fact, I consider it clear misdirection.
I find it relevant that Hiram's father was Abibaal ("Baal is my father") and his son was Baal-Eser ("Baal is foremost"). Some may have heard of Baal before.
Anyone interested in probing beyond that which we are told by others about Freemasonry should look in to the misdirection we are handed concerning "Hiram".
On the one hand, the Masons go on with their tale about the mythical "Hiram Abiff" and the construction of the Temple of Solomon. On the other hand, there was indeed a nearby king in Tyre, Hiram I, who reigned during the construction of said temple.
You think they'd fall all over themselves trying to claim the historical king was the basis for Hiram Abiff, and that they were not just spewing a load of loony bullshit they dreamed up somewhere along the line.
Quite the opposite is true: they go out of their way to say the two Hirams have absolutely no relation to one another. That's odd. So odd, in fact, I consider it clear misdirection.
I find it relevant that Hiram's father was Abibaal ("Baal is my father") and his son was Baal-Eser ("Baal is foremost"). Some may have heard of Baal before.