This is the Place X: The Tabernacle Organ and the Freemasonic "Architects"

 Previously: A Tabernacle and an Assembly Hall

Welcome readers to part ten of my series on Old World Utah. Have you ever wondered how Utah pioneers built that massive and elaborate Tabernacle pipe organ? According to official Church history, the first phase of the organ was constructed by one Joseph H. Ridges, in only one year. 

With nothing but gumption, grit, and his bare hands, we are told that this man built one of the largest pipe organs in the world out of virtually nothing, because there were literally no supplies in the isolated Utah territory. Until 1869, nothing came into Utah unless it was hauled by horses and teams of oxen. The nearest railroad was over 800 miles away in Council Bluffs, Iowa. However, what the Latter-Day Saints lacked in raw materials and supplies, they supposedly made up for in pure determination. And somehow, in some miraculous way, they finished the entire Tabernacle and its organ just in time for October 1867 general conference.

Of course I believe this is all nonsense, and not physically or logistically possible in the slightest. And as you're about to find out, this man Ridges was not an organ builder at all, he never worked a day in his life in an organ factory, yet the “official” storytellers want us to believe that somehow he pulled off this incredible feat in record time.

If only we could borrow some of that 19th century fortitude and ingenuity; just imagine the things we could accomplish today!

As the story goes, our hero Ridges was a man of unprecedented talent, growing up in England and developing a fascination with organs at a very young age. According to an article published in the Deseret News in March of 1914, around the age of two years old, Ridges became mesmerized by "the operations of workmen in an organ loft and factory across the street from his boyhood home."

After befriending a boy employee who worked in the factory, the two children would often visit the organ loft and play around on the organ together. As he grew older, we are told that he delved further and further into the intricate workings of organs: the pipes, the tones, bellows, stops, etc. At the age of 23 he sailed for Australia to work in the gold mines, but instead of working for a miner he found a job as a cabinet maker. Soon thereafter, we are told, he began to build his first organ in his spare time. 

As the story goes, there were no "experienced workmen to assist him", so Ridges slowly worked on the organ each night after earning his modest wages as a carpenter. We are not told how long it took to complete, but when he was finished, it was "the first church organ in Australia." It apparently became quite an attraction in Sydney where Ridges lived, and after being seen by some unknown "Mormon" elder, Joseph was asked to donate it to the LDS Church. Apparently, he had been baptized shortly before being asked to to do this. 

So let's recap: a 23-year-old kid, having zero experience in organ manufacturing (except for watching factory workers as a 2-yr-old), decides to build an organ in his spare time and at his own expense. We are not told where the materials came from or how he machined the pipes and various parts with meticulous precision. And supposedly, this organ becomes the first church organ ever built in Australia. Then after going through all that toil and tedious labor he simply just gives it to the LDS Church. 

But wait, the story gets even more ridiculous. 

We are told that after soldering "the various sections of the instrument up in large tin cases" (before electrical welding was invented), Ridges traveled 6,502 nautical miles by boat from Sydney, Australia to San Pedro, California with the fragile organ on board. From there he accompanied his creation via horse-drawn wagon to Salt Lake City, arriving sometime in 1857. We are told that the organ was installed in the Old Tabernacle. It was used for only a short time until it was disassembled and sent south during the Mormon War. Once Johnson's army had left, the organ was brought back in horse drawn wagons and reassembled in the Old Tabernacle. When that building was razed, parts of the organ were used in building the larger organ installed in the Assembly Hall.

Where did the metal alloys come from that were used to construct the larger organ pipes used in the Assembly Hall? We are simply not told, yet expected to believe that among all the things that blossom in the desert, a pipe organ can transform from base raw materials into whatever a people need it to become. Indeed, the 19th century was a golden age when it seemed like anything was possible.

When Brigham Young asked Joseph Ridges if it was feasible to build a second organ for the New Tabernacle, he responded, "Yes we can; we can do anything we put our minds to." We are told that work began shortly thereafter in January of 1866 (notice that almost all Old World building projects in Utah were started in winter, yet another pattern in this enigma called history).

We are told that Brigham Young's first order of business was to find wood that was free of knots to construct the organ out of. He requested that samples be sent from all over Utah to find the best source of lumber, and the lot fell on Pine Valley, near St. George, a 350 mile trip to Salt Lake. This "smooth pine" lumber was hauled on wagons by teams of oxen, over rough dirt roads and rocky, rugged terrain. Here is how it was described by Levi Edgar Young:

Over the long, lonely roads trudged the oxen day by day, hauling the heavy logs to Salt Lake City. At times there were as many as twenty large wagons, each with three yoke of oxen drawing its load. The roads were rough and dusty, and many streams had to be bridged that the wagons could pass over them without difficulty. In crossing one stream in southern Utah, the logs were let down over the bank with ropes and the oxen driven some miles to find a ford, where they crossed and followed on down the bank to pick up the wagons and loads again. The timber was finally landed in Salt Lake City. (A Tabernacle in the Desert, Stewart L. Grow, p. 72)

After securing the lumber, we are told that Ridges set about collecting the other supplies he would need to construct the organ. He made a trip to Boston where he "procured spring wire, thin sheet brass, soft fluff leather for the valves, ivory for the keys, and other items which could not be manufactured in Utah" (Ibid, p. 72). Supposedly, glue, leather bellows from tanned hides, and nails were made locally in Utah.

The distance between Boston and Salt Lake City is around 2,100 miles, and in 1866, Ridges would've had to rely on horse and wagon to get to Council Bluffs, Iowa, a distance of over 800 miles. From there he could've made his way to Boston by train. A typical horse-drawn wagon covered between 20-30 miles a day, so about 80 days of 1866 would have been burned up just traveling across the plains to procure materials.  Traveling by train from Council Bluffs to Boston could have taken a week or two, and securing materials to build the organ, making shipping arrangements, and getting the material back to Council Bluffs could have easily taken over a month. 

Finally, getting the material (including the heavy brass to make the pipes) back to Salt Lake across the plains probably would have required several fully-loaded wagons. This trip back would have been slow and dangerous, requiring more teamsters and other employed men to help transport and keep Mr. Ridges' valuable load safe and secure (from raiding Indians or groups of bandits).

In all, this detour to Boston to secure materials would have taken a minimum of 120 days, or a third of the entire year of 1866.    

We are told that after Ridges returned, he was able to complete enough of the pipe organ (apparently by himself) to have it ready for use in the first conference held in the Tabernacle in October of 1867. This means that the narrators want us to believe that Mr. Ridges completed the first phase of the massive organ in just over a year. This would have been completely impossible, because in our modern day, construction of much smaller organs (than the one in the Tabernacle) can typically take a full crew working for an organ company anywhere from 1-2 years, using modern power tools, large machine shops, computers for drafting plans, CNC machinery for cutting out parts, and semi-trucks for transporting.

Once an organ is designed and built it has to be disassembled, moved to the site, installed and, laboriously tuned. Installation of a large organ today can take a modern company working with state-of-the-art technology anywhere from six months to two years. Organs are extremely complicated instruments, consisting of thousands of precise working parts, and hundreds of tons of material. Yet, we are told that in August of 1866, a few months before the organ was used for general conference, Brigham Young directed it to be "put in the west end of the new Tabernacle...", while the roof was being finished and the interior scaffolding was still being taken down. This was done, we are told, to cover the organ and keep it out of the weather. 

Where was it being built and housed before? We are not told. And are we suppose to believe that after all this effort and expense to build the Tabernacle organ it was disassembled and then reassembled again in the Tabernacle, before the roof was even finished? 

In his Master's Thesis, Stewart L. Grow surmises that the installation of the incomplete organ only took two months:

Although the preliminary work on the organ was started in 1866, the base for the organ was not laid in the Tabernacle until the summer of 1867. Truman O. Angell records the laying of the foundation for the organ: "Tuesday, August 6, 1867. All the fore part of today my attention was on placing the stones to take the timbers under the organ, singers stand etc." From the time of the laying of the foundation for the organ the work progressed rapidly, because it was in condition to accompany the choir at the first meeting in the Tabernacle on October 6, 1867. Thus, the organ was installed in its place and was sufficiently tuned to accompany the singing in the short space of two months. This indicates that most of the building of its parts was done at a place other than in its location in the Tabernacle. (Quoted in Esplin, The Tabernacle: "An Old and Wonderful Friend", pp. 206-207, emphasis added)

Although Grow claims the organ was tuned, a newspaper reported that Brigham Young declared that despite its not being tuned, it was still able to accompany the choir. Notice the language of the article excerpt below, painting Ridges as some kind of superhero working day and night getting the organ ready: 

[President Brigham Young] thought it proper to say something of the unfinished condition of the organ. Not over one-third of the pipes were up, and till the casing was built, they had thrown around it a loose garment. It was now only about fifteen feet high, but when completed it would be forty feet high. Bro. Ridges and those who had labored with him had done the best they could, and notwithstanding their diligence, by early day, noon, and night, they had been unable to have it properly tuned. It was, however, in a condition to accompany the choir, and he was pleased with it. ("The Thirty-Seventh Semi-Annual Conference," Salt Lake Daily Telegraph, October 8, 1867)

The storytellers tell us that work continued on the pipe organ for the next three years, and it is estimated that in the summer of 1870 it was finally finished, consisting of: 2,368 pipes, two manuals, 27 pedals, and 35 stops. The largest pipe was 32 feet tall, and the beautiful 600 square-foot wooden case that housed the organ was 40 feet tall.

The artwork on the organ was immaculately carved into the smooth pine wood with hammers and hand chisels before power tools were invented as shown below:

The face above sure looks a lot like all the other Old World art (graven images) that we have seen on many buildings, usually carved in stone. Compare it to the photos below I took inside a cathedral (built in the 1870s) from a recent trip to Boston:

 

The previous civilization was big on including faces in their artwork. The narrators want us to believe that this artwork was carved tediously with  hand tools into wood and stone. Such exquisite detail is next to impossible to freehand, even by the most talented artists. It is far more likely that these stone designs were 3D printed using some kind of advanced technology. 

As you look at the wooden face above ask yourself this question: 

Why would Utah pioneers, working with extremely limited resources, go through all the trouble to carve this image in an already over-the-top organ case made with wood that was hauled from 350 miles away on wagons? 

Furthermore, why would they include faces on any of their buildings when they were supposed to be a Christian people who claimed to adhere to scriptures that expressly prohibit the creation and adoration of idols and graven images?

The Lord talked with you face to face in the mount out of the midst of the fire—I stood between the Lord and you at that time, to show you the word of the Lord, for you were afraid by reason of the fire and went not up into the mount—saying, I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage. You shall have no other gods before me. You shall not make any engraved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the waters beneath the earth. (Deuteronomy 2:10, RE, emphasis added)

This, dear readers, makes entirely no sense at all. 

For any of you who live close to downtown Salt Lake City, when you have some spare time just walk around and look at some of the older “pioneer” era buildings, and take note of all the carvings of human faces, lions, eagles, demons, gargoyles, dragons, etc. 

You'll begin to see these graven images everywhere. The same is true for any major city in the United States supposedly built in this era.

Was all of this built by a Christian nation, or by some other people who did not acknowledge or worship the God of the Old Testament bible who gave the Ten Commandments to Moses?

Built in Pieces 

As the story goes, Joseph Ridges had completed enough of the organ for it to be used in the October conference of 1867, but the mighty organ was missing its “wings”, and would not receive them, we are told, until a later renovation in 1915.

Here is the organ before the wings:

And here we see it after the wings were added in 1915:

The first photo obviously looks to be photoshopped, notice the vanilla sky walls surrounding the organ. The second photo appears natural and real; notice that the shadows are realistic and defined, and the shadows in the first photo appear to be drawn in. We've seen many of these anomalies in "construction" photos of buildings in the 1800s, but there is a stronger argument that should sway us toward the opinion that Utah pioneers could not have built this massive organ. And that is simply the way organs are built.

In fact, professional organ builders do not even begin to draft plans and designs for a new organ until they have gone into the building that will house the organ and study its acoustics and layout. Building the organ before the building is constructed is putting the proverbial cart before the horse. In the video below, an organ building company lays out all the preliminaries of building an organ, how long it typically takes, and how intricate every part and piece really is. Keep in mind this process and these construction timelines are in our modern day, not 1866:

Organs are the most complicated instruments on earth, and historians tell us that during the middle ages and Renaissance organs were the most complex machines in existence, made of thousands of working parts, requiring long hours of tedious labor, with technicians meticulously fitting parts and pieces together in an intricate web of wood, metal, leather, and ivory. In an old book entitled Organ Construction, author J.W. Hinton makes a most interesting observation. He records that pipe organs were built with much higher quality in the past. Writing in 1900, he declared:

There was a time, not many years distant, when the number of old GG organs existing (many of which contained pipe work of great excellence) would have afforded reasonable excuse for a long chapter upon this fascinating subject. As a matter of fact such organs have now virtually disappeared, and the few that remain scarcely justify a writer in devoting space to their possibilities. It is with organs, as with every other industrial product. Now, when the seams of coats are not intentionally spoiled to prevent this, the material itself is seldom good enough.

Moreover, even in the case of instruments by thoroughly first-class builders, the modern organ is such an ephemeral thing, made of toy-like motors, magnets, and wires, and one whose fashion changes so quickly, that--to follow up my simile--it is better to buy another garment, than to have an old one, already shewing signs of wear, remade according to a new fashion. The old slider and pallet sound board, when well made, is practically everlasting; but it is quite different in the case of the intricate (and of necessary fragile and perishable) work of which modern organs are composed. Lastly, age does not appear to improve modern pipes to the extent (probably from the higher pressures of wind now used,) it did those of the old school of builders. (Organ Construction, p. 53-54)

If society is supposed to be "evolving," then why was the quality of pipe organs actually diminishing at the turn of the 20th century, at the apex of the industrial revolution no less? If we are truly advancing in technology and industry shouldn't the quality of our manufacturing increase? This brings up an important question: were all of the best pipe organs built by the previous civilization, and did our modern society just do its best to duplicate the technology pioneered by them? 

I wonder who these "old school builders" really were who Hinton speaks of? Builders who build in such a way as to make their organ pipes, and entire buildings for that matter, become stronger as they age. 

Here are some of the "old school" pipe organs that Hinton claimed couldn't be duplicated in 1900:

The organ of the Cathedral of Notre Dame (which recently burned in 2019), built in the 12th century:

The organ of the Riga Cathedral in Latvia, the largest in the world at the time before it burned down in 1547. This "restoration" was completed by a German firm in one year, from 1882-83. We are told it was restored again in 1983:

This one was built in Halberstadt, Germany, in 1361:

This one, housed inside St. Stephen's Cathedral in Germany, was built sometime after 1682. In 1662 the entire cathedral burned to the ground, along with the original organ. The one you see below supposedly took centuries to rebuild. My guess is that it's the original organ and there was no fire at all:

Question: do we see any modern pipe organ companies building organs like this today? 

The most important part of the organ is housed inside the casing and is not visible at all to the audience. It is known as the action. According to one website I found explaining the intricacies of pipe organs, "the action is the complex mechanism which is operated by the console to control the flow of air to the pipes." Actions can be mechanical, pneumatic, electric, or electropneumatic.

Below is a typical action of a smaller organ. Notice how many working parts there are. Ask yourself how Ridges was able to tediously manufacture each of these delicate precision parts (we are told for one of the largest pipe organs in the world at the time) without modern resources, in an isolated desert 800 miles from civilization, and in only one year:

According to official history, early 19th century organs had manual pumps for air bellows operated by workers while the organist was playing the keys on the console. We are told that later innovations involved powering the pumps with water wheels. According to Stewart Grow, there was a story told by an old Tabernacle Block guide (keep in mind Grow wrote his thesis in the late 40s) named Samuel S. Bateman, about a time when a distinguished guest was invited to perform on the organ at the Tabernacle. When the performance began he put his fingers to the keys yet no sound came out.

This man, who remains nameless, eventually got up from the console and went behind the organ to search for the five men who were supposed to be pumping the bellows. He found them doing nothing but sitting on their chairs, and after scolding them severely, one of the men replied with, "I wanted our dignified guest to know that there was someone else beside you who had something to do with the working of the organ." Grow, after quoting this ridiculous story, proceeds to make a claim that creates a glaring contradiction in the narrative, having to do with the Tabernacle basement. 

According to the Encyclopedia of Mormonism and an article published by the Society of Architectural Historians, the Tabernacle basement was not added until 1968. Yet Grow, in his 1948 Thesis, nonchalantly slips in the following sentence regarding the basement:

A little later [after the dignified guest incident] a large waterwheel was put in the basement of the Tabernacle, and that provided power for the organ. (Ibid, p. 209, emphasis added)

Grow claims that this waterwheel was powered by diverting the flow of City Creek from North Temple Street to the basement of the Tabernacle, and from there to "a point about fifteen feet north of the present west gate." He claims that this was done in 1875. 

It is no small thing to divert a creek out of its course, especially in 1875 when the only means for doing so were hand shovels. Furthermore, once diverted how did they adjust the flow to keep the water from washing out the foundation of the Tabernacle during seasonal flooding? Was there enough of a slope to keep the water running at a flow rate significant enough to power the water wheel? 

As to the matter of the Tabernacle having a basement, we are given no detail of the excavation process. How many men with shovels did it take to dig it out? How many stories down did workers excavate? Was it dug down as deep as the Salt Lake Temple, exceeding four stories? Were there tunnels that connected the Tabernacle to the Temple? Was this really possible to accomplish with only hand shovels and wagons to haul out hundreds of tons of dirt? 

If the basement wasn't added until 1968, then what kind of sense does it make to add a basement in an already existing building? Was it possible, even in 1968, to excavate underneath a massive building without disturbing its foundation or compromising its support structures? 

According to this Tabernacle Project Fact Sheet published on the LDS Church's website, a basement was dug out in 1967, yet we not only have several other accounts of a basement already existing, we have accounts of a baptistry being installed in the basement of the Tabernacle in 1890. Apparently, scores of baptisms took place in that basement, including the baptism of Thomas S. Monson. 

Supposedly, in 1935, when Monson was only eight years old, his mother took him there to be baptized on a Saturday, apparently without his father. Monson recalled in 2007 that in those days it was not "customary as it is now for fathers to baptize their children, since the ordinance was generally performed on a Saturday morning or afternoon, and many fathers were working at their daily professions or trades" (Tabernacle Memories, May 2007).

How did Thomas S. Monson get baptized in the basement of the Tabernacle in 1935 when it didn't exist until 1968? 

Upon further scouring of the internet, I found this interesting article written by a blogger who goes by Latter-Day Soprano. In 2021, an 89-year old woman left a comment on the blog where she shared that her own baptism was performed in the Tabernacle in 1932:

I was baptized in the baptistry in the basement of the tabernacle. For several years I have been trying to find information about the baptistry and especially a photo. In writing my personal life history I wish to include this information and, if possible a photo. (About the Salt Lake Mormon Tabernacle, emphasis added)

Again, like Monson, how could this woman have been baptized in the basement of the Tabernacle in 1932 when the basement didn't exist until 1968? Here is the long-lost photo of the Tabernacle baptismal font this elderly woman has been looking for:

Indeed, isn't it strange that such things as wings to a massive organ and a basement to a massive building can seem to be added later with such ease? 

I'm beginning to notice a common theme in all of the construction history of Old World buildings (and organs) in Utah: 19th century workmen seem to able to construct these things out of literally nothing, in record time.

Think of the patterns: the massive Tabernacle was said to be built in an isolated desert without a railroad to bring in supplies; Joseph Ridges' first organ used in the Old Tabernacle was somehow expanded into a larger organ and installed in the Assembly Hall; and the first phase of the Tabernacle organ, the largest in the United States at the time, was also built in an isolated desert in just over a year. 

Only two men were actually named as the builders of the organ: Joseph Ridges and Ralph Ramsey (the carpenter said to have built the case).

Did two men actually build the Tabernacle organ in less time than professional organ manufacturing companies with hundreds of employees and state-of-the-art technology can do today?

Dear readers, this is not history, this is mythology. 

Ironically, the Desert News actually references Greek mythology when describing Ridges' effort in building the organ:

The story of the building of the original Tabernacle organ is an epic of the West. In perhaps no other country could such mountains of difficulty and obstacles have piled one upon another like Pelion upon Ossia, to harass and thwart so noble an ambition as that of Joseph Ridges. (Quoted in Grow, A Tabernacle in the Desert, p. 73)

These 19th century workmen were not miracle workers, they did not have the power tools we have today, but were said to have done better work in shorter time frames. And yes, their "work" is much more elaborate than we can accomplish today, but that is because they did not build these structures. They could not have built them. They did not have the resources or the technology to do so. They did not have the manpower. The populations of 19th century cites and towns were much smaller than they are telling us.

The Freemasonic "Architects"

In Luciferianism, Lucifer the "light-bearer", the god of primordial knowledge, is also worshipped as "the Supreme Architect of the Universe." This title is a massive fraud, because Lucifer does not create anything, but only imitates the true God. But the fact that he calls himself an architect is very interesting when we consider this research into Old World buildings. 

You may recall from my last post that historians recognize the fact that most 19th century architects had little to no formal schooling or training in architectural drawing or design, yet somehow managed to design and build some of the most elaborate and structurally sound stone buildings on earth, better than we can build today. How is this possible? 

Could this be another pattern?

Is Lucifer incorporating his own lie about himself pretending to be an architect into the narrative of his own story, or “his-story”?

According to Freemasonic lore, Hiram Abiff (the supposed builder of Solomon's temple) is honored as one of the greatest architects that ever lived. He is an almost messianic figure to the Masons, with his story being incorporated into the very rituals that permeate Masonic halls today. Is Lucifer trying to tell his-story through the lore of this great architect named Hiram? 

Manly P. Hall, in his book, The Secret Teachings Of All Ages, explains just how important this concept of architecture is in Freemasonic lore:

According to those who regard Masonry as an outgrowth of the secret society of architects and builders which for thousands of years formed a caste of master craftsman, Hiram Abiff was the Tyrian Grand Master of the world-wide organization of artisans, with the headquarters in Tyre. Their philosophy consisted of incorporating into the measurements and ornamentation of temples, palaces, mausoleums, fortresses, and other public buildings their knowledge of the laws controlling the universe. Every initiated workman was given a hieroglyphic with which he marked the stones he trued to show to all posterity that he thus dedicated to the Supreme Architect of the Universe each perfected product of his labor. Concerning Mason's marks, Robert Freke Gould writes:

"It is very remarkable that these marks are to be found in all countries -- in the chambers of the Great Pyramid at Gizeh, on the underground walls of Jerusalem, in Herculaneum and Pompeii, on Roman walls and Grecian temples, in Hindustan, Mexico, Peru, Asian Minor -- as well as on the great ruins of England, France, Germany, Scotland, Italy, Portugal and Spain." (Kindle Edition, p. 204, emphasis added)

Hall's admission here is most revealing: Freemasonry is a guild of "architects" who meet together in secret societies. But obviously, they are not real architects, their architecture is nothing but symbolism, as in they are architects of society, their building materials consisting of human beings and societal constructs. 

They did not build all of the Old World buildings that have been the subject of this series, and the "marks" that Mr. Gould writes about that are found in myriad buildings spread across the entire world, were obviously put there by some past civilization, not by Freemasons. 

Like Lucifer, the Freemasons did not create or build anything, but a house of cards supported upon a foundation of lies.

Yet, the Freemasonic connection to Old World buildings is a massive clue to the fraud that has become our accepted history. Just as Mr. Hall writes, the Masons have dedicated to Lucifer (their supreme architect of the universe) all of the buildings which they have, in my opinion, founded and taken over. They, being liars, dedicate their spoils to the greatest liar, Lucifer. This, to me, is the most revealing pattern that the true origins of these great buildings has been covered up and hidden from us.

My Lunch Break did an interesting video on this very subject of Freemasons controlling the building narrative:

If you go the 7 minute mark, you'll see that My Lunch Break found a very compelling clue concerning the Roslin Chapel said to be built in the 15th century. Inside this Old World chapel there are two pillars: the Apprentice's Pillar and the Mason's Pillar. The Apprentice's Pillar was formerly named the Prince's Pillar but overtime was renamed due to an apprentice boy that supposedly carved the designs with nothing but a mallet and chisel:

According to Wikipedia, the name of the pillar was changed due to "the master mason in charge of the stonework... and his young apprentice mason." So we have two pillars, the Apprentice and the Mason, representing the two pillars of Solomon's temple, Jachin and Boaz. In Freemasonic lore, these pillars were built by Hiram Abiff, the original Master Mason who was martyred in a ritualistic manner by the three ruffians, representing the Church, the State, and the Mob.

The Hebrew word for Jachin, yakin, means "he will establish," while Boaz, bo'az, means, "in him is strength." Jachin is positioned on the right and Boaz on the left. In the Roslin Chapel, the Apprentice's Pillar, located in the south east corner, is positioned on the right as you walk through the main entrance, and the Mason's Pillar is positioned on the left. Now look again at the image above, notice that the pillar also looks like the symbol we associate with fascism, the fasci. 

The fasci, we are told, dates back to Roman times and was a symbol for the absolute power of the State over the individual. It consists of what appears to be a bundle of metal tubes or sticks held together by some kind of metal band, rope or garland, and sometimes depicted with an axe at the top. The axe may signify that the fasci was some kind of ancient energy weapon, used to brutally subject the masses to the ruling elites running the State. 

We can see that the fasci is used as a symbol literally everywhere in the United States, and even on our money. One of the most notable places is at the Lincoln Memorial. Notice that the graven image of "honest Abe" is resting his arms on two pillars, each one a fasci:

Now, I don't know what the fasci meant to the previous civilization that actually constructed these buildings, but I suspect it may have represented some type of advanced technology that could've been used for good or evil. To our modern society, the fasci represents the State's great power over the individual. The significance of the Lincoln Memorial displaying the fasci is symbolic of Abe being the great centralizer, crushing states rights and forcing all Americans to become subject to a centralized federal government; a treasonous act that violated every principle the original Constitution was based upon.

Getting back to the Roslin Chapel, the Apprentice's Pillar was located in the south east corner, which is interesting when you consider that in a Masonic cornerstone ceremony, the figurative cornerstone is laid in the northeast corner in honor of the Entered Apprentice. This is symbolic of the apprentice completing his initiation and beginning the ascent to becoming a Master Mason. The direction of northeast represents a melding of opposites, north (representing darkness), and east (representing the sun; light). 

In the case of the Roslin Chapel, I don't know why the pillars have been inverted (the Apprentice's Pillar being located in the opposite, or southeast corner), but I think it may be a subtle clue that the Masons did not build the Roslin Chapel at all, an admission of sorts that has been hidden in plain sight. 

(Who do I think really built the Roslin Chapel? The Knight's Templar, before they were infiltrated and corrupted, and I think they were somehow linked to the Tartarians, but that is a blog post for another time.)

To tie this all together and put it in perspective for you, I'm going to share some details about the cornerstone ceremony that was performed for the Salt Lake Temple, held on April 6 of 1853. Only a few months before, on February 14 (always in winter) of 1853, the temple site was dedicated and excavations began. These excavations were accomplished with hand shovels in less than two months. Yet, we are told, that this original foundation was sandstone and had to be scrapped and rebuilt out of granite during the 1860s. 

As the story goes, the original foundation was covered up when Johnson's army stormed into Utah in 1857, and when it was uncovered a few years later, it was found to be "defective." Beginning in 1862, renovations were undertaken to remove the sandstone foundation and replace it with granite. This process, we are told, took five years (and excavations reached down to depths of 40 feet, with hundreds of tons of hard rocky dirt dug out with hand shovels of course). The footings of the "new" temple foundation were solid stone blocks, sixteen feet thick, and the walls of the temple would be solid stone blocks six feet thick. The walls reached up to ground level fourteen years after the original cornerstones had been laid. 

Pay attention to the numbers 16, 6, and 14. They are all symbolic. Fourteen is the number of parts that Osiris's body was cut up into and sent all over the earth (think 14 fundamentals of following the prophet or Wilson's 14 points). The number six needs no explanation, but what of the number 16? 

Here is what Brigham Young said the day of the original cornerstone ceremony in 1853:

I scarcely ever say much about revelations, or visions, but suffice it to say, five years ago last July [1847] I was here, and saw in the Spirit the Temple not ten feet from where we have laid the Chief Cornerstone. I have not inquired what kind of Temple we should build. Why? Because it was represented before me. I have never looked upon that ground, but the vision of it was there. I see it plainly as if it was in reality before me. Wait unit it is done. I will say, however, that it will have six towers, to begin with, instead of one. Now do not any of you apostatize because it will have six towers, and Joseph only built one. It is easier for us to build sixteen, than it was for him to build one. (Journal of Discourses, 1:133)

Brigham said a lot here, and I believe much of it is encoded with layered meanings. The Chief Cornerstone is a Masonic concept, "the Chief Cornerstone the builder's rejected." It is symbolic of the ignorant rejecting light and truth, and is displayed symbolically as the top of a pyramid, which is missing on the pyramid that displayed on the back of the U.S. dollar bill. 

The phrase is also used in Christianity, with Jesus being the Chief Cornerstone, but to the Freemasons, the Chief Cornerstone represents gnosis, or primordial knowledge. (Remember, Luciferian's believe they are saved through knowledge, and not a literal Savior like Christ.)

Why would Brigham use this terminology (and capitalize it so we know what he is talking about) in regard to the cornerstone of the Salt Lake Temple?

Next Brigham says that he never had to inquire of the Lord "what kind of Temple we should build." Why did he say that? This flies against very basic teachings in scripture. Nephi had to inquire about a thing as simple as finding ore to smelt to make tools to build a ship. The brother of Jared had to inquire about how to light (with sixteen stones) the barges that he built to cross the great deep, and Joseph Smith's every inquiry led to a direct revelation from the Lord. The fact that Brigham said that he did not have to inquire is revealing who he really is: an imposter in sheep's clothing. 

And of course he did not have to inquire of the Lord because as we are starting to realize that the Temple was there all along. Of course he knew how many towers it would have, because they already existed ("I see it as plainly as if it was in reality before me"). But why did he say that it was easier for them to build sixteen towers, than for Joseph to build one?

What is the significance of 16? Find out in my next post.

There were four cornerstones laid in the ceremony that took place on April 6 of 1853. These stones were supposedly quarried from Red Butte Canyon, and were made of firestone (another clue; think fire narrative). The stones were 2 x 3 x 5 feet in size. These are also symbolic numbers. 2 represents the power of 2, or the 2nd dimension, and 3 represents the power of three, or the 3rd dimension. 5 represents the perfect fifth in music, which synthesizes the powers of 2 and 3 (much more about this in my next post).

The southeast cornerstone was laid by the First Presidency and the Church Patriarch, the Presiding Bishopric (representing the Aaronic priesthood) laid the southwest corner, and the Stake Presidency and high priests laid the northwest corner. 

The Twelve, seventies, and elders laid the northeast cornerstone, the stone representing the Masonic Entered Apprentice.

Dear readers, in all reality, this ceremony was most likely the Masonic claiming and founding of this temple they had discovered.  The Twelve, having usurped the authority of the Church in opposition to the checks and balances Joseph had established, was claiming ownership of its new Masonic temple, granted to them by their Jesuit superiors. 

Join me next time for a deep dive into the reality behind our modern music...