THE LOST SYMBOL BY DAN BROWN
Publisher: Bantam Press
Hardback: large print, 505 pages,
AUTHOR WEBSITE: http://www.danbrown.com/
MY LOCAL LIBRARY:
Minet Library – http://www.facebook.com/pages/Minet-Library-Lambeth-Archives/182910281761857
NOTE: the origins and early development of Freemasonry are a matter of some debate and conjecture. A poem known as the “Regius Manuscript” has been dated to approximately 1390 and is the oldest known Masonic text. There is evidence to suggest that there were Masonic lodges in existence in Scotland as early as the late 16th century (for example the Lodge at Kilwinning, Scotland, has records that date to the late 16th century, and is mentioned in the Second Schaw Statutes (1599) which specified that “ye warden of ye lug of Kilwynning […] tak tryall of ye airt of memorie and science yrof, of everie fellowe of craft and everie prenteiss according to ayr of yr vocations”). There are clear references to the existence of lodges in England by the mid-17th century.
“…What I’m saying is this…two heads are better than one…and yet two heads are not twice better, they are many many times better. Multiple minds working in unison magnify a thought effect… exponentially. This is the inherent power of prayer groups, healing circles, singing in unions and worshipping en masse. The idea of universal consciousness is no ethereal New Age concept. It’s a hard-core scientific reality…and harnessing it has the potential to transform the world. This is the underlying discovery of Noethe Science. What’s more, its happening right now. You can feel it around you. Technology is linking us in ways we never imagined possible. Twitter, Google, Wikipedia and others — all blend to create a web of interconnected minds.”
I agree to a point. For what if it had answered or had made some sort of suspense or thriller element as a sub-context in the book regarding that of about the ‘God-Head’.
As the ‘God Head’ denotes the Divine Nature or Substance, set apart from the Trinity; as the ‘Word’ is set apart in Genesis in the beginning. As the ‘Godhead’ is a ‘substance’ of Divine Nature, that is a part of a Single mind, three into one converged energy, which acts with a Multiple mind purpose.
Then the book would have given another perspective on what the main character Robert Langdon might have explored, as Dan Brown’s theme within this book was regarding science, religion and the Freemason, that of two aspects that can be found to be: ‘transformation’ and ‘transubstantiation’ that is to change in substance as a person as to something beyond oneself.
As the ‘God-Head’ is mentioned in Acts 17:29, Romans 1-20 and Colossians 2:9 from the Wycliffe 1395 bible version and Tyndale 1525 bible version, which specifically gives that word to the reference of ‘Godhead’ that is a Middle English variant of the word ‘godhood’, and the ending ‘-head’, is not connected with the word ‘head’ as in terms of leadership, its something else entirely. Also John Wycliffe introduced the term godhede into the English Bible versions in two places, and, though somewhat archaic, the term survives in modern English because of its use in three places of the Tyndale New Testament (1525) and into the Authorized King James Version of the Bible (1611). For “…while three entities comprise the Godhead (state of being God), they are one in nature, purpose, and thinking (cf. Jn. 14: 8-11)…” it is mentioned within this book a similar premise; the Freemasons creed, the universal consciousness and the Noetic science.
And I’d say that just because the ‘Godhead’ hasn’t been delved into as much by authors, doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist, just that its been sidelined in the realm of explored research and theories, and it could’ve tied into science, the Freemasons and religion within this book, and that is because as far as I know, the ‘Godhead’ doesn’t have a symbol, therefore its lost, and you’d have thought it would, being that everything else does of somekind, with an associated attribute of a symbolic classification, that started in the Age of Enlightenment during the 17th century, and they overlooked this one element?