Jump to content

Talk:Eye of Providence/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1


The Eye of Lucifer

There should be some mentioning that the Eye represents Lucifer. Indeed, Masonry Is Luciferianism. See Dr. Stanley Monteith's "Secrets of the Illuminati Revealed" at http://suppressedminds.com/?p=271. FreeMasonry is Luciferianism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.227.129.233 (talk) 18:00, 22 May 2009 (UTC)


The eye on the Supreme Court of Israel

Why nobody mentioned that?

Because nobody knew about it, and because you didnt leave a reference. Got a picture? --PopeFauveXXIII (talk) 01:16, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

this is the devils eye

Alien eye

Since the article about the dollar bill dont say anything about it as it should, this article should include it as well. Why is the eye, allegedly "the eye of providence", on the dollar bill alien or non-human? It is for sure not a picture of a human eye, it is for sure nonhuman. But the question is why.? Why does the seal of the united states and the dollar bill carry a nonhuman eye? There is no answers to be find anywhere... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.197.153.168 (talk) 09:04, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't see it... what about it looks inhuman to you? --PopeFauveXXIII (talk) 22:35, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Other connections

Whilst looking for another Masonic version of the Eye of Providence, I came across this symbol

File:SunFace.gif
Sun-face

I would imagine this sort of personification derives from general sun worship, and possibly Ra or the Eye of Horus/Ra. Does anyone know whether that is true, and is the personified Sun symbol then connected to the Eye of Providence? And if so, can we put in a reference to the Teletubbies, which has an all-seeing baby-faced sun. -- Solipsist 12:22, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I have heard several statements saying Horus, and one or two connecting therefore to Mithras, but I've seen the symbol on the article for Ars_Goetia, a book on Demonology. Druminor 00:24, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)


The Sun and Moon are two of the three Lesser Lights in Freemasonry, which (together with the Master of the Lodge) serve to illuminate the Great Light, or Volume of Sacred Law / Bible. As part of our NY State ritual goes: "As the Sun rules the day and the Moon governs the night, so should the Worshipful Master, with equal regularity rule and govern the Lodge". I'm trying to stress this to show there is no worship of the Sun (or moon) involved. Saxophobia (talk) 17:15, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Freemasonry

The answer to the question Is the eye and pyramid a masonic symbol? provided in the Anti-Masonry Faq is very informative.

Loremaster 17:58, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for that, but the article already says that the conection between the great seal and masonry is a common misconception, and gives a similar link in the External links section. -- Solipsist 18:17, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Although I was aware of the comment in the article you are refering to, I didn't notice the link. Thank you for pointing that out to me. Loremaster 01:18, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

"It is a common misconception that the Eye of Providence and unfinished pyramid show the influence of Freemasonry in the founding of the United States. Although Benjamin Franklin, one of the members of the original design committee for the Great Seal, was a Freemason, it appears that he was not responsible for introducing the symbol, and may not even have been aware of it."

I think this is factually inaccurate, as well as misleading. It could be reworded as one POV amongst many, but should not be expressing itself thus in the voice of the narrative. Sam Spade 18:25, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Sam you should know better than to make unexplained deletions.
Now why is it you think this information is POV? It is certainly true that many American's believe that pyramid and EyeOProv are on the one dollar bill as a result of the influence of Freemasonry on the founding fathers. So the only real question is whether these are in fact Masonic symbols. We have two references from Masonic web sites which say they are not. To counter the argument, we would need to find a credible reference that says they are.
I'm not an expert on the iconography of the Freemasons, but I have taken the time to look into it, and to be honest, the explanation on the Rosslyn Templar's site rings true. The unfinished pyramid, or even a completed pyramid doesn't appear to be a symbol used by the Masons. The triangle, pentagram and the obelisk are, but the pyramid isn't. On the whole, Masons use a semi-circular glory, usually with extended rays from the base. You can find examples of full glories as in the Sun Face above, but I haven't seen any full glories surrounding the EyeOProv, nor an EyeOProv enclosed in a triangle - although these were Christian symbols.
There is a chance that William Barton, on drawing the Great Seal, was trying to please Benjamin Franklin (and if you are into conspiracy theories no doubt other behind-the-scenes Masons). But if so, it appears he got his symbols mixed up - and it would be surprising that controlling Masons didn't set him right. Alternatively, I might suggest that the Masons were still busy inventing their traditions and symbols at the same time that the Great Seal was being created. Both drew on symbols and ideas that were popular at the time, and that's about it.
There is good evidence for Masonic involvement in the erection of the Washington Monument, but then that's an obelisk. -- Solipsist 20:32, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I say again. Who is it that is saying there is another POV? -- Solipsist 21:22, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

? You freely admitted most peopels think it is a masonic symbol. I don't see what we are debating here. Sam Spade 21:41, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I freely admit that is what many people think, but the evidence says otherwise. Therefore it is useful to include a paragraph that explains why this is a common misconception. -- Solipsist 21:51, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Obviously some masons (and others assumably) think it is a misconception; many others disagree.[1]

Sam Spade 15:17, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I take it that the disagreement section you are refering to is the quote from The Insider at the bottom. The Insider appears to be a newsletter for conspiracy theorists - so not terribly impressive. It isn't particularly well researched either - one of the links they give for examples of the EyeOProv as a Masonic symbol, is actually for the Society of OddFellows who split from the Masons around the 1720s about 50 years earlier than the Great Seal. Plus they are based in England - have they ever had a footprint in the US?

The one interesting link on that page is to this Canadian Freemasonry site showing an example of the EyeOProv in a triangle and another in a triangle related context. However, further research shows that these were published in an 1880 journal in England, called The Kneph and seems to have been largely attacked by mainstream and American Masons. Even if The Kneph was controversial in Masonic circles they probably didn't randomly make up the symbols illustrated, so that suggests the EyeOProv in a triangle was being used by some Masons at the tail end of the 19th century.

Now I thought that example was going to contradict the Rosslyn Templars article. But checking it again, they in fact say there is no example of an EyeOProv inside a triangle in The True Masonic Chart or Hieroglyphic Monitor, the definitive almanac on Masonic symbols of 1819 and they would have expected to see one if it was being used as a Masonic symbol in 1782. So it looks like Masons have picked up this symbol combination later in the 19th century quite possibly as a result of seeing it used in America.

So ultimately that references tells you nothing. Remember, you need to be proving that Masons were using these symbols prior to 1782 and so could have plausibly influence the design of the Great Seal. It is of no help to demonstrate that people in the 20th century believe there is a connection, that is not in doubt, the question is whether they are correct to believe it. If they are not, there is no point continuing the mistake here. -- Solipsist 21:47, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I think your confusing NPOV and objective truth. Our job is not to present the objective truth, but rather to cite the various verifiable POV's. So far, we seem to have 2 POV's. One is that this is based on a mason symbol, the other that it is not. Why not present both sides of the argument, and let the reader be the judge of who they want to believe? Sam Spade 21:55, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
If you want to expand the section, go ahead, but I wouldn't put too much credence on conspiracy theorists as the proponents for saying that there is a connection to the Masons - that's more or less implied by saying they are conspiracy theorists.
I suggest you read the Great Seal article for more background. It goes into more depth about the symbolism on the Great Seal, this article is only really interesting in the Eye of Providence part.
You seem to be forgetting that the starting point for this is that you deleted a paragraph which is relevant. That is not expanding on either side of an argument. Perhaps you would like to restore the paragraph now. -- Solipsist 22:11, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I have read Great Seal of the United States, its what I linked to here from. I'll restore the paragraph, but w some adjustments of POV. Sam Spade 22:14, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The discussion still seems suspect in that it appears to clearly assert the truth of the Masonic conspiracy rather than that it is a speculation. The citation is indirect. I can't verify this. It needs either to be weaselified to ensure that it says that this is a point of view of the origins, or alternatively the citation needs to be considerably improved. As this problem has existed for some time, it is about time it was resolved. Spenny 08:02, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

I saw the Eye of Ra(Horus)[2] on the wall inside a Freemason temple while I was watching the documentary "Secrets of the Freemasons" on National Geographic. I was confused as the Masons claim to be Christian. The only explanation I can see is that the Egyptians used the Eye to divide one into fractions. Heeds 02:10, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

"Conspiracy debunkers?"

"Today some conspiracy debunkers link the symbol with conspiracy organizations, especially Adam Weishaupt's Bavarian Illuminati. This is possibly the only context in which the Eye of Providence is shown actually embedded in a pyramid. The eye is meant to be the eye of Lucifer."

I... I do not grok. Surely this blurb was intended to read "Today some conspiracy theorists...", not "debunkers". Is this a particularly subtle vandalism, or am I completely missing the point? And If I am, would it be possible to get a citation for this claim?

Yes, I don't really know much about some of those smaller sections at the end that have been added over time. That particular sentence was more or less present from the earliest versions of the article and it was indeed originally conspiracy theorists, so it looks like a minor vandalism problem. -- Solipsist 22:19, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps because we object to the term 'conspiracy theorists'. How would you like it if we called you a "Coincidence Theorist" or you have some sort of "Belief Disorder". Enough name calling aready can we stick to the information please? I am concerned because I just realized that this symbol really is on every dollar bill and honestly, I find it to be extremely creepy. Why is an egyptian pyramid with an all seeing eye on the american currency? What is the connection? --anon 6:11, 6 Nov 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.98.248.167 (talk)


Eye of Lucifer

The Illuminati version of the Eye in the pyramid is not the only version to be found. It is also represented in a pyramid in the Israeli supreme court. Just out of interest 1776 is also the date of the founding of the Bavarian Illuminati - Jefferson approved of the Illuminati and was in correspondence with Adam Weishaupt.

Time Warner logo?

User:Jolomo questions whether Time Warner did indeed have a logo based on the Eye of Providence. I say, 'good catch' - it looks dubious. At a guess the logo that is being refered to is the eye/ear logo from 1993 that is shown as figure 5 on this page (quite an interesting article besides). There is plenty of other documentary evidence to say that that symbol, designed by Steff Geissbuhler, was a combination of eye and ear - Time Warner being a sound and vision company. It may echo the shape of the Eye of Horus (or have been influenced by it), but that's not the same thing as the Eye of Providence and it clearly isn't intended to have any conotations of an all-seeing-eye. As there doesn't seem to be any connection, I'll delete it. -- Solipsist 15:46, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Biblical references

on the Great Seal of the United States page, it says that the eye of providence is referenced in the Christian Bible, but I cannot find reference to that or the all-seeing eye, using my (primitive) Biblical index. Can anyone find any bibilical references? I think that such references should be here. That's why I came to this article (among other reasons) McKay 05:23, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Redirect template

I've changed the way "all-seeing eye" works, for more information see "Talk:All-seeing eye (disambiguation)" McKay 23:05, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Origins

While the symbol of the eye is indeed ancient its combination with the triangle is said to appear no earlier than the 17th century according to the above article. It may in fact be a century older if not more. A 16th century artist Jacopo Carruci Pontormo (b. 1494 d. 1557) used the symbol of the eye within the triangle in his painting “Supper at Emmaus” (1525)[3]. The symbol is placed above the figure of Christ indicating its Christian affiliation as the eye of providence in its original context. It is interesting to note that Pontormo was a pupil of Leonardo Da Vinci, quite possibly implicating the latter in the symbol’s origin. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.137.174.246 (talk) 14:03, 13 December 2006 (UTC). --Romuald.C.K 13:50, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Eye of Horus

Is in no way the eye of the Christian God for The God from the bible was in horror at the Eygptian`s many gods.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.176.229.113 (talk • contribs) 23:39, 19 January 2007

Then it's a good thing that the article doesn't say that it is, isn't it? MSJapan 00:28, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

hogwash! every god is the same god don't you get it yet? yahweh, and horus are the same entity but with different names because every culture has different languages. why doesn't this seem to be obvious to everyone? especially the ones killing each other in the holy land —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.98.248.167 (talk) 23:14, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Pentagram?

I know that pentagrams are way scarier, but they only have five sides. Fixed. Erissian 09:04, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

trivial sections

not that this information is inappropriate, but as sections, these are extraneous. im placing them here to be integrated or expanded. --PopeFauveXXIII 08:27, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

==Salt Lake Temple== The [[Salt Lake Temple]] of [[The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints]] uses the symbol in its [[Temple architecture (Latter-day Saints)|architecture]] as a reminder that God sees all. ==Virgin of Garabandal== According to some sources {{Fact|date=February 2007}}during the first [[Marian apparitions|apparition]] of the [[Blessed Virgin Mary|Virgin Mary]] at the village of [[San Sebastian de Garabandal|Garabandal]], she was accompanied by two identical angels on either side of her, and the flaming Eye above them all. ==Cao Dai== The [[Vietnam]]ese religion [[Cao Dai]], as well as a number of other churches, uses the Eye of Providence (specifically, the left eye) within a triangle to represent God. ==Illuminati== Today some [[conspiracy theory|conspiracy theorists]] link the symbol with conspiracy organizations, especially [[Adam Weishaupt]]'s Bavarian [[Illuminati]]. This is possibly the only context in which the Eye of Providence is shown actually embedded in a pyramid. Some say the eye is meant to represent the [[Eye of Horus]] ("the new born Son," "God's Son.") or even the eye of [[Lucifer]].<!-- <ref>''The Illuminati'' (2005), by Chris Everard and [http://www.enigmatv.com/ The Enigma Channel]</ref><ref>''The Illuminati Vol. II - The Antichrist Conspiracy'' (2006), by Chris Everard and [http://www.enigmatv.com/ The Enigma Channel]</ref> --> The all-seeing eye is also mentioned along with Illuminati in [[Dan Brown]]'s Book [[Angels and Demons]]

(Fair use image removed by ImageBacklogBot) Took the colorado state seal image out until it can be reincorporated into the text of the article. --PopeFauveXXIII 22:16, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

cbs

Why dont you add the CBS logo, the all seeing eye? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.232.1.50 (talk) 21:46, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Trivia section

i changed the name of the trivia section from current and recent usage to notable usage of the symbol, and removed the following references as cruft:

my criteria for inclusion was whether it seemed likely that a reference to the subject might ever be made to fit into the article proper. if you disagree with any of these removals, by all means establish the notability by fitting the information into the article somewhere. the items above are mostly pop-culture; this symbol is so pervasive in that arena that a list including all of them could run on for many, many pagelengths. --PopeFauveXXIII (talk) 09:37, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

oh, and additionally, to whomever keeps adding the Information Awareness Office to this list, it is briefly mentioned in the United States section. expanding that section would make for a far more interesting article than a short, redundant mention here. theres actually an interesting story about how the logo was made more generic (pyramid sans eye) as a result of public outcry over the draconian imagery of the original. id be happy to do it myself, but i probably wont anytime in the near future. --PopeFauveXXIII (talk) 09:48, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Then you would like to keep it here, because this was the former logo of the Information Awareness Office and it is of historical importance. Furthermore it was only linked as example of actual use. The Eye of Providence is visible there without doubt. There is no way you can distract that fact. We could also add the MI5 Logo that is another Eye of Providence logo or we could refer to the Eye of Providence that is visible in the Supreme Court of Jerusalem, Israel. Please, make this place a place of wisdom and not of censorship. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.173.175.96 (talk) 11:38, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm not censoring anybody. the trivia section in this article is a magnet for unecessary references. per my statements above, i have been stewarding it. i believe that the reference is unecessary here because there is a reference to it in a previous section that could be expanded, even as much as a subsection. Here, it is redundant. i will continue to remove this link. --PopeFauveXXIII (talk) 01:03, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
OK, I give up. i readded it to pad the section a little and set the notability precedent more clearly. --PopeFauveXXIII (talk) 02:49, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Salt Lake Temple

I'm not opposed to adding things like this per se (sombody said earlier that the symbol is used on the supreme court of israel), but i really dont think they should be added unless a picture exists. i think we should start a picture gallery for these, and leave the trivia section for very notable uses such as seals, logos, and currencies that havent been mentioned elsewhere in the article. --PopeFauveXXIII (talk) 01:45, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Esoteric section

I have removed this as the references provided do not support the claims made. Mangoe (talk) 16:46, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

The Tathagata

According to Diamond Sutra the Tathagata is said to have the human eye, the divine eye, the eye of insight, the eye of transcendent wisdom and the Buddha eye.

Is there any literature whether there is a connection of/from those eyes to the eye of Providence? I would like to mention the fact, but I don't know how. that article according to my perception does not give place for some other type of eye.

Austerlitz -- 88.75.210.202 (talk) 17:47, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

oh, the article says the following: "Buddha is also regularly referred to as the "Eye of the World" throughout Buddhist scriptures (e.g. Mahaparinibbana Sutta) and is represented as a trinity in the shape of a triangle known as the Tiratna or Triple Gem.

Austerlitz -- 88.75.210.202 (talk) 17:51, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Urna

  • [5]
  • [6] Here it is said: "The All-Seeing Eye is one of many forms of reflective eye-charm used as a talisman against this danger. In its specifically protective role, the All-Seeing Eye is always on guard to protect the bearer from evil glances. A similar talismanic function was assigned to the protective Wadjet Eye of Ancient Egypt and the Third Eye of Buddha. The common eye sees only the outside of things, and judges by that, but the 'all seeing eye' pierces through, and reads the heart and the soul, finding there capacities which the outside didn't indicate or promise, and which the other kind couldn't detect."
Austerlitz -- 88.75.207.21 (talk) 11:23, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
File:MI5.jpg
Original MI5 logo. Believed to be pre-1955 or as part of her 1950's to 1970's official insignia It features the 'Eye of Providence', also known as the 'all-seeing eye'.

Should the MI5/SS logo be mentioned in this article? I believe it is pre-1955 but have also read that it was used from the 1950's to 1970's. Any more information on this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.96.24.33 (talk) 21:41, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Do we have any indication that the eye in this logo is supposed to represent the "Eye of Providence" (ie the eye of God)... many symbols have developed multiple meanings and usages over the years. The eye, as a symbol, can also stand for "watchfullness" in general, not just the watchfullness of God. I think for us to mention the logo, we need a source that points out that the eye in the logo actually is an "Eye of Providence". Blueboar (talk) 22:33, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

WHOA! hey that's a little obvious i've never seen that before!!! look at it, a triangle with the all seeing eye on top. case closed. - user:anon 6:18 5 november 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.98.248.167 (talk) 23:18, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Masonic usage

OK... Last week I reverted an edit because I wanted to verify the informaion myself... I now have, so I think we need to discuss it. Multiple reliable sources state that the earliest use of the eye of provedence as a Masonic emblem comes in 1797 (with the publication of Webb's Monitor). However, Steven Bullock's book Revolutionary Brotherhood contains a photograph (on page 88) of a Summons (ie a notice that a meeting is due to take place) from Ancient Lodge No. 2 in Philidelphia, dated 1760, that includes the eye. It seems that we have conflict between the sources (with multiple secondary sources definitively stating 1797... but a primary source clearly indicating an earlier date).

Now, Bullock does not actually discuss this Summons or the use of the eye in his book (he simply includes a picture of it, as an illustration), so it could be OR to discuss it (it would certainly be OR for us to draw any conclusions from it.) The question is whether this Summons is enough for us to change what we say in the section (and if so, how we should word it)? Blueboar (talk) 16:33, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

this evidence is interesting. however, i believe the freemasonry section has been substantially gutted--i would wager that 90+% of the visitors to this article are interested in associations between the eye/pyramid on the back of the dollar bill and an alleged freemasonic-illuminati-conspiracy. there is no argument that both the eye of providence and triangles/pyramid figures are prominent symbols of freemasonry. while we are required to avoid speculation, the facts should be presented in this section in a way which acknowledges, neutrally, that the subject of discussion is a secret society--and as such, speculation is made about it based on extant public evidence. that is the only way to resolve NPOV policy and the interest of the people who look up this article. --PopeFauveXXIII (talk) 01:26, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Um... not sure what you are saying. Are you saying that no one says these are both symbols, or are you saying they do? If the latter... actually there is argument. While the Eye is a Masonic symbol, the Pyramid isn't. Blueboar (talk) 02:10, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
Pyramids are not publicly acknowledged symbols of freemasonry, but triangles are prominent. I'm not interested in starting a huge argument here, im just saying that people who visit this article are probably interested in a complete breakdown of the facts and common speculation regarding the reverse of the great seal as it appears on the back of the one-dollar bill. 50% or more of this information has been removed from the section. --PopeFauveXXIII (talk) 22:28, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
Well, people interested in the great seal should probably read the article on the Great Seal of the United States. That article goes into great detail as to its history and symbology (including, I might add a solidly referenced debunk of the idea that the Masons were involved). Blueboar (talk) 00:27, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

but the masons WERE involved. who are you working for? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.98.248.167 (talk) 23:20, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Read the sources... one Mason (Ben Franklin) was invovled and his ideas were not adopted. Blueboar (talk) 23:30, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

It's really adorable how people will throw in "WHO ARE YOU WORKING FOR?" or "WHO IS PAYING YOU". Even if that is true, adding that is just silly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.19.201.242 (talk) 22:04, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Christianity?

"The Eye of Providence (or the all-seeing eye of God) is a symbol, having its origin in Christian iconography, showing an eye often surrounded by rays of light or a glory and usually enclosed by a triangle." Like a pyramid? The eye of Horus is now Christian? 83.84.100.133 (talk) 03:12, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

Too specific linking

Just so there is a record of this... we had a long discussion at Talk:Great Seal of the United States over specifying (through a link) that the Pyramid in the Great Seal might be considered a "step pyramid" or that the pyramid is a fustrum. I refer editors to that discussion, but to summarize... this is over specific (and technically Original research) as the official description does not actually specify either. Blueboar (talk) 14:51, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Religious views

I realize that this is a long post and is a little rambling, but it is worth the read. I would like to add a unique viewpoint on the following sentence in the article. "Popular among conspiracy theorists is the claim that the Eye of Providence shown atop an unfinished pyramid on the Great Seal of the United States indicates the influence of Freemasonry in the founding of the United States." This is not a conspiracy. Freemasonry is an integral part of the US. Do some research on the Founding Fathers and the Framers. Many were Freemasons. This is not a bad thing. The universal truths expressed in Freemasonry have been expressed throughout all ages and all religions. The ethics of reciprocity, the Golden Rule, treat ALL men as your brother, not just when convenient. Sound familiar? Jesus of Nazareth is the epitome of the Master Mason. Our signs, handshakes and words while allegorical in nature, in the end are meaningless, for words are constructs of the human mind and can only express as much. Becoming a Master has nothing to do with your exoteric rank. Many Master Masons are not true Masters and there are many non-Masons who embody the spirit of the Master and live it every day. Mother Theresa, john paul II, Jesus, to name a few. All students of the Mystic School, all people who spent their whole life laboring to build a temple within their hearts so that in the end they may dwell in the house of the Grand Architect. The secrets of Freemasonry will never be revealed to those who have not readied their hearts. Though the Lodge room exists, it is but a doorway to something greater, that is the true secret of Freemasonry. While dissidents may release the rituals, signs and words, they are not true Masons because they do not understand that Freemasonry is esoteric, it does not exist on the plane of reality, rather it exists in the hearts and minds of all true and upright men. If this does not make sense, do not worry. If you desire to be brought into Light, search with your heart. Become a student of religion, of the human mind and of the human condition. Realize that every moment of your life is an opportunity to do good and that non-action is even worse then the wrong action. You must wake yourself up, words are meaningless. How many people go to Church every Sunday and yet when the time comes to show his true character, he falters. Once people realize that humanity must work together for the common goal of bettering themselves and others, humanity will have awoken to fulfill our destiny. That is our Choice as a species. Hiram king of tyre (talk) 12:38, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

I add muslim's view about all seeing eye. In summary, all seeing eye is considered as eye of dajjal. We can verify this by reading about dajjal features in the book of hadeeth narated by bukhari & muslims.

http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/bukhari/055.sbt.html#004.055.553

This hadeeth confirmed by recent research, for example:

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread559418/pg1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.162.212.37 (talk) 08:43, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Abovetopsecret.com is not going to pass any test for reliability. The quotation from the hadith seems to me to be less than relevant because Judaeo-Christian does not in general assign God a specific number of eyes; there seems to me to be quite a bit of original research going on here.
in islam, althought there is no (or i doesn't find it yet) verse/hadeeth talking about how many number of god's eye, but that hadeeth above clearly state that true god is not one eyed. Moreofer, that same hadeeth emphasis that One eyed is a feature of exact opposite of god, the false god (lucifer). In Christian believe, Jesus is god. As we know, jesus is not one eyed. So why in this article, Eye of providence is considered as eye of god in christian view? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.154.61.195 (talk) 07:50, 15 October 2010 (UTC)


If you can find a reliable source which states the connection outright, you might have a point here. Otherwise this claim has no place in this article. Mangoe (talk) 14:09, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
I absolutely agree with Mango. If this isn't OR, then mentioning it gives undue weight to a fringe Islamic viewpoint (ie a fringe viewpoint within Islamic scholarship). It should go. Blueboar (talk) 14:28, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
you can find islamic scholars comment about Eye of Providence is actually The Eye of Dajjal (lucifer) in here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWnACKZBc9M. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.154.61.195 (talk) 08:14, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
I am absolutely certain that a clip from The Matrix has nothing to teach me about Islam. Mangoe (talk) 13:03, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
You not watching that video because you made very early and WRONG conclusion. Skip first part on that video (clip from The Matrix part), and than jump at 02:00-08:00. You'll found there is two famous islamic scholars spoke about Dajjal connection in Eye Of Providence.
in christian view, the article quote one reference from http://www.catholic-saints.info/catholic-symbols/eye-christian-symbol.htm. In that link, writer quoting one verse in bible about eye of god (Psalm 33:18: But the eyes of the LORD are on those who fear him, on those whose hope is in his unfailing love). As we can see. That verse didn't mention God's eye as one eye, but More than one ("EYES" instead of "EYE"). So claim about Eye of Providence is eye of god in Christian believe is dubious too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.154.61.195 (talk) 08:36, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
antoher contradiction in Christianity claim about Eye of Providence can be explained by this: Eye of providence was dated back in Egyptian mithology & Paganism. Based on biblical & Quranic source, all abrahamic religion was the direct opposite of Egyptian Paganism, especially in terms of god concept & symbolism. So, claim that there is a connection between Eye of Providence and christian is dubious & contradicting.
Youtube viedos are not reliable sources either. Blueboar (talk) 12:52, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
All reliable source have been mentioned (exa: hadeeth and famous islamic scholar speak broadcasted in youtube). Please explain why those source are considered as not reliable source and muslim's view section was deleted because of this. And Please explain too, what kind of source that can convincing. Whereas, claim that Eye of Providence is based on biblical source was not convincing enough (moreover: contradicting) & Christian section is still there despite of this same issue.
Because the youtube video is a clip from a movie and not an "famous islamic scholar"... and the catholic-saints site actually supports the Christian section and not your personal interpretation. Blueboar (talk) 03:40, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
Pasted from above: You not watching that video because you made very early and WRONG conclusion. Skip first part on that video (clip from The Matrix part), and than jump at 02:00-08:00. You'll found there is two famous islamic scholars spoke about Dajjal connection in Eye Of Providence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.214.232.7 (talk) 04:16, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
OK... I viewed the entire video... and listened carefully... the "famous islamic scholar" (Imran Hussein) does discuss his view of Dajjal (which I would classify as a Fringe view in Islamic scholarship) ... but he does not connect the symbol of the Eye of Providence to Dajjal. In fact he does not mention the Eye of Providence at all... there is an anonymous voice that makes this link (the creator of the video?)... but it is clearly not the voice of Imran Hussein. So... sorry... even if we consider Hussein to be a reliable source, the video is not a reliable source for saying that Hussein see the eye as a symbol for Dajjal, or that Muslims in general see it as such. Blueboar (talk) 13:48, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
that anonymous voice before syaikh imran hussein is actually voice of Syaikh hamza yusuf, islamic scholar of america. You can listen the complete speech at part 10 of that same videos. here is the link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THFIYgszwR8, jump at 04:00. He explain about that symbol and connection about dajjal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.214.232.13 (talk) 04:12, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
You obviously disagree with my assertion that the video is not reliable... suggest you get a second opinion on the reliability and usability of the video by asking at the Reliable Sources noticeboard. Blueboar (talk) 13:25, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

It means the eye of God is worthy of the end of the world is soon. And means that we should be perpaired for so fourth the end is soon...

The assertions made about Christianity are contrary to the source provided

There is very few source material, in fact only one source. [1] This is a very good source, very informative. But it doesn't say what is stated.

1. The statement

°°°"In Renaissance European iconography the eye surrounded by a triangle was an explicit image of the Christian Trinity."

is not affirmed in that source. In fact, it says specifically that the iconography has unknown origins and only pops up in context of Christianity in the baroque era, even, as it seems, the 18th century rather than the 17th. So it is far removed from Christianity.

2. The source actually affirms that the icon enters the Christian tradition without any explicit explanation, and that the idea that the triangle represents the Trinity is a logical modern assumption, but it is not discussed in contemporary sources of the time when the symbol was injected into the Church tradition.

3. The source further affirms that the icon was re-injected into Church tradition after and despite its been officially outlawed by Augustinus in the 5th century in Contra Faustus, book 20. This prohibition had held firm in the Church until the 18th century when it was re-introduced.

4. The source further affirms that the icon was re-introduced into the Church specifically by way of Masons who took a tradition that is Cabalistic, associated with Medieval magic (alchemy) and the Rosacruz cult and was via Masons inserted into Christianity.

5. The source further and specifically connects the great seal with a German coin, the 1781 Eichstätt Thaler, from the town of Eichstätt, today but a suburb of Ingolstadt, which is exactly where Adam Weishaupt had founded the German Illuminati order a few years earlier, and ironically, Adam Weishaupt's wife hails from Eichstätt.

So, rather than proving that the triangle was ever designed to represent the Trinity and the eye is not connected to the tradition that goes back to the eye of Horus, the source actuality makes a connection to medieval occultism, Rosacruz cult and the Masons, and even specifically the German order of the Illuminati.

The text should hint to at least some of the difficulty with this source, and not make a statement (renaissance) which the source does not contain.

Gschadow (talk) 00:11, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Potts, Albert M. The World's Eye. University Press of Kentucky. pp. 68–78.

the eye of the 1 dollar bill

It means the eye of God is worthy of the end of the world is soon. And means that we should be perpaired for so fourth the end is soon... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.24.121.39 (talk) 17:04, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Um... not exactly... you may wish to read our article on the Great Seal of the United States. Blueboar (talk) 13:10, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Religious usages

I am fine with adding material about Buddhist and Hindu concepts of the Eye of Providence... but could we please get a source for it? Blueboar (talk) 12:21, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Well, I'm not, unless we want to rename the article or something like that. I don't think that every occurrence anywhere of an all-seeing eye should be bundled into this; Shiva's eye is unlikely to be providential, after all. This also smells of "eastern religions had it first"-ism. Mangoe (talk) 18:00, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


{{Eastern religions did have it first -ism in your face- — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.36.197.178 (talk) 03:34, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Hmmm... I think we may need to better define what the article is about... If it is about the "The All Seeing Eye of God" (which is essentially the Masonic usage), then any discussion of the use of an eye to symbolize God, form what ever era or religious tradition belongs... but if we are going to limit it to the more Deistic concept of "God as Providence", then we should probably remove anything before the reformation... including the medieval Christian usages. The concept of God as "Providence" is a more modern concept, essentially dating to the Age of Enlightenment. Blueboar (talk) 22:56, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Poor/unclear wording

"a symbol showing an eye often surrounded by evil"

Um... evil WHAT? I wasn't aware that evil could literally be seen. Or is this an artifact of some conspiracy nutjob edit that didn't get properly removed? 174.68.96.62 (talk) 04:03, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

It's been corrected. Blueboar (talk) 05:04, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Is there a way to lock this page?

We're getting way too many paranoid nutjobs conspiracy theorists on this page. I don't come here often so I'm wondering how we can sort this out.--Editor510 drop us a line, mate 10:04, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Yup... no question, this article is a "POV vandalism" magnet. Thankfully, it tends to occur only once every few weeks, and not every day. Personally, I am not overly concerned (I am content to watch the page and just revert away the vandalism as it occurs), but I can see how others might get frustrated by having to do this.
To answer your question... yes, there is a way to "lock" the page (see: Wikipedia:Requests for page protection). If you think the situation has gotten out of hand, I would suggest requesting a "semi-protect". This will allow good faith editors to continue to work on the page, but prevent IPs and other non-registered edits. Blueboar (talk) 13:35, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
All right, I suggest we all keep our eye on it to see if any more of these...eccentrically opinionated, shall we say...people show up again, and then see if we can get a page lock. --Editor510 drop us a line, mate 12:27, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

"Conspiracy Theorists" Nonsense.

The following sentence is presented in the article:

"Popular among conspiracy theorists is the claim that the Eye of Providence shown atop an unfinished pyramid on the Great Seal of the United States indicates the influence of Freemasonry in the founding of the United States."

There is no "conspiracy" here. It is well documented that many of our founding fathers and original presidents were Freemasons. Is this fact even debateable? I will find some RS, link them, and delete that nonsensical statement later. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yesitsraining (talk • contribs) 18:05, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

You can go read the appropriate section of our article on the Great Seal and see for yourself that those responsible for including the eye were not masons. If you can come up with RS to the contrary, be my guest. Mangoe (talk) 19:26, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Hinduism

After some cursory research, I have taken out the Hinduism section. Nobody that I found supports the text that was there. I did find a couple of sources pointing towards Surya, one of whose titles is "Jagat Chakshu" (the eye of the world). However, this may be related to a Zoroastrian myth of the sun as the eye of Ahura Mazda, and in any case the all-seeing and providential aspects may or may not be a part of this. I also found one source saying that Usas (about whom we apparently do not have an article) is titled as an all-seeing eye. Krishna, and possibly other gods, supposedly has the title "sarva locana", meaning "His eyes see everywhere". As is dreadfully typical, the sources I found are almost entirely lacking in citations, so I don't know how much to believe them. But I don't see anything that convinces me that Hinduism has an "all-seeing eye" as a separate concept or even as anything beyond an honorific. Mangoe (talk) 12:01, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

I will also note that this article is primarily about a specific bit of symbolic imagry. Hindu traditions may talk about various gods being "all seeing", but unless Hindus depict that idea using the imagery of an "all seeing eye" then that fact is essentially irrelevant to this article. Blueboar (talk) 12:15, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Eye of Horus

I have removed the Eye of Horus image from the gallery. The Eye of Horus and the Eye of Providence are two separate symbols from separate religions. WarlordFrederick (talk) 05:02, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

That was a BIG mistake! Christianity is a fusion of Messianic-Judaism, Mithraism, and other Pagan religious beliefs. The Eye of Horus evolved into the Eye of Providence, just like Isis carrying the baby Horus evolved into Mary carrying baby Jesus. The 'Return of the Light' on December 25 - 3 days after the winter solstice of Dec. 21-22 - was celebrated long before the birth of Y'shua bar Yosef on April 17, 6 BC / 17.4.748 AUC, etc. - Benjamin Franklin 75.74.157.29 (talk) 14:42, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

ANNUIT COEPTIS(13 letters)

"On the seal, the Eye is surrounded by the words Annuit Coeptis(13 letters), meaning "He approves (or has approved) [our] undertakings", and Novus Ordo Seclorum, meaning "New Order of the Ages". The Eye is positioned above an unfinished pyramid with 13 steps, representing the original 13 states and the future growth of the country." The article already included that the pyramid's 13 steps represented the Original 13 United States. I added ANNUIT COEPTIS(13 letters) that is also part of this symbolism. - Benjamin Franklin 75.74.157.29 (talk) 14:34, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

The number of letters in "Annuit Coeptis" is really nothing more than trivial coincidence. There is no evidence to show that the various committees that designed the Great Seal intentionally chose a motto with 13 letters in it (or even realized that the motto had 13 letters in it)... they left us detailed accounts of why chose each element of the seal, and these accounts do not mention the number of letters in the motto. What they talk about is the meaning of the motto. When you read these accounts, it is clear that the two mottos are not really part of the symbolism of the seal... but more explanations of the symbolism. The motto "Annuit Coeptis" was intended to explain why the eye appears in the seal.
Also... I think your addition slightly detracts from the focus of the section. The purpose of the section is not to outline the symbolism of the entire seal (we have a separate article for that)... the purpose is to explain one specific element of the Seal (the eye). In that context the number of letters in the motto is essentially trivia... and trivia that really has nothing to do with the eye. Blueboar (talk) 14:42, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Cao Dai

I have a question regarding the mention of the eye in the Cao Dai religion. Does Cao Dai equate this symbol to the concept of "Divine Providence"?

Please note that I am not questioning whether Cao Dai uses an eye as a religious symbol... as the article notes, many religions do so... However, this article isn't about that generalized use of an eye in religious symbolism. This article is narrower in scope, and is about one specific use of an eye in religious symbolism (ie use in the context of "Divine Providence").

What I am getting at is this... if Cao Dai uses the symbol of an eye in some other context, then then mentioning it in this specific article may be misplaced. Blueboar (talk) 14:07, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Perhaps there should be a separate article, or this article should be renamed to encompass both the Cao Dai symbol and the Eye of Providence. Or perhaps, a section should be added entitled "As the 'Left Eye of God'". If the Cao Dai symbol was inspired by the Eye of Providence (which will require some googling on my part), then I'll add that note and resolve the issue. Thoughts? Asarelah (talk) 22:12, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
We really need to know whether the Cao Dai "Left Eye of God" is conceptually the same (or at least similar) to the western "Eye of Providence" before we mention it. So, my opinion is that we should (temporarily?) omit it... with the understanding that we can always return an appropriate mention if it turns out that the two are similar. Blueboar (talk) 14:59, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
I can't seem to find any references, but I think we should include it because the two are almost exactly the same in appearance. The cross article has information on the meaning of crosses outside of Christian contexts, so it makes sense to keep this in. Asarelah (talk) 17:54, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
Without references we can't include it... that is Wikipedia policy (see WP:Verifiablity, and WP:No original research). While the two of us may agree that it is quite likely that Cao Dai's "Left Eye of God" is similar to the Western "Eye of Providence", we can't say so in the article without being able to support the statement.
I suppose the underlying question is this... is this article supposed to be about the symbol (an eye in a triangle)... or is it about the specific concept that the symbol represents in western religious and Masonic contexts (Eye of Providence)? My understanding was that it was intended to be about the concept more than the symbol.
Perhaps what we need is a broader Eye in triangle symbol overview article that would briefly mention all contexts in which the symbol appears, and would then point the reader to other articles (such as this one and the Cao Dai article) for more information on the specific uses (and their histories and meanings) in those different contexts. Blueboar (talk) 13:06, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
I agree with Blueboar on this one. Asarelah (talk) 21:26, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

old Ukrainian dialect

There is NO any naturally-occurring "old Ukrainian dialect"! The language of the message is "old church slavonic" OR "old slavic" - старославянский (церковнославянский) in Russian.178.45.56.160 (talk) 10:57, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Question: Are "Old church slavonic" and "old slavic" the same thing? ... if not, do we know which appears in the image? Blueboar (talk) 11:05, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Masonic symbol

"Popular among conspiracy theorists is the claim that the Eye of Providence shown atop an unfinished pyramid on the Great Seal of the United States indicates the influence of Freemasonry in the founding of the United States. This was dramatized in the 2004 Disney film National Treasure. However, common Masonic use of the Eye dates to 14 years after the creation of the Great Seal. Furthermore, among the members of the various design committees for the Great Seal, only Benjamin Franklin was a Mason (and his ideas for the seal were not adopted). Indeed, many Masonic organizations have explicitly denied any connection to the creation of the Seal."

Even official documentary on money making says that it's a masonic symbol, why then Wikipedia engages in denial? [7] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.162.113.76 (talk) 00:23, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

True, it is currently a masonic symbol. When the seal was made, however, it wasn't a masonic symbol until 14 years later--TemplarJLS (talk) 15:04, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
Yup... The claim that the Masons placed the Eye on the Great Seal is indeed widely repeated (it is even repeated by misinformed Masons). But the reality is different. The Masons adopted the symbolism after the Eye was placed on the Seal. Blueboar (talk) 12:45, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
To clarify... the Eye of Providence became a common Masonic symbol after the publication of Thomas Smith Webb's Masonic Monitor or Illustrations of Freemasonry (first published in 1797)... Prior to that, it was not commonly used by the Masons. Blueboar (talk) 13:55, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

The Black All Seeing Eye from Ecuador as part of the La Mana artifacts seems related but absent from article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suki9992 (talk • contribs) 21:08, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Mentioning Bill Cipher

I note that we seem to repeatedly add and remove a mention the cartoon character Bill Cipher (from the TV cartoon "Gravity Falls"). I realize that this is a popular cartoon, and the character has it's share of fans. It should definitely be mentioned in the article on the TV show. But should it really be highlighted in this article (which is about the symbol in broader terms)? My personal opinion is that mentioning the cartoon character in this article is not necessary (as we already say that the symbol appears in numerous TV shows)... highlighting it gives UNDUE weight to one depiction among many. However, I am just one editor... so I would love to hear any argument for why the character should be mentioned. Let's establish a consensus, rather than engage in slow edit wars. Blueboar (talk) 14:23, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Origins

Proper origins: Panoptes

All-seeing, as an epithet of Zeus 'All-seeing God'. Which became the third eye of Zeus, thus 'All-seeing eye of God'. Greek kings also possess this epithet, as they often associated themselves with gods.

The actual connection is in the fact that it's an Aristocratic symbol, such as Fasces; the basis for a Fascio, and that of Fascism. Both are used in United States iconography.

Essentially, it is the ideal of an aristocracy as being of 'the best' stock/breed, and maintaining 'power'; last nail in that coffin.

See also: Aristocratic Class, Polish Szlachta, British Lords, and also the definition of a 'franchise' from the article on Suffrage (where the term 'disenfranchised' originates, meaning those not eligible to vote, because they did not own land, and thus were not members of the aristocracy, which is how 'democracy' functioned even into the late 20th century).

Essentially, it's about blood/relation/clan/dynasty/cronyism/nepotism, as per the French Prince of the Blood, for lack of a better reference; inherited wealth.

64.228.93.94 (talk) 19:52, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

All very interesting... but to mention it we need sources that make all the connections you make. Blueboar (talk) 19:55, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Yea, I understand, that's why I posted it here. It's original synthesis. I haven't found any literature that makes the connection, simply because most literature is written BY the aristocracy, and epitomizes their ideology. But that's ok, because I'm writing a book about it. Honestly, the only connection you need is 'aristocracy'. That essentially explains all the world's 'mysteries'. 64.228.93.94 (talk) 20:15, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Correct the link to Aristocracy (class). The main article is Aristocracy, power in the hands of "a small, privileged ruling class".

"most literature is written BY the aristocracy, and epitomizes their ideology"

Possibly true at various of the past. I do not think this has been the case since the mass production and spread of printed books started in the 15th century. Writers from all types of social backgrounds started publishing works. Erasmus, for example, was the illegitimate (low-born) son of a Catholic priest and grandson of a physician. Not remotely aristocratic. Martin Luther was the son of a "leaseholder of copper mines and smelters" and a woman from the trading class. Luther's enemies accused his mother of having been "a whore and bath attendant". Luther was not an aristocrat and he was a law school drop-out. Dimadick (talk) 09:35, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Unclear sentence?

The "Religious use" section says "The association of an eye with the concept of Divine Providence did not emerge until well into the Christian Era, in Renaissance European iconography, where it was an explicit image of the Christian Trinity." Does this sentence indicate that "an eye" was an image of the Trinity in Renaissance European iconography, or that specifically an eye in a pyramid was an image of the Trinity? It might also be worth changing the wording to "was explicitly an image." The phrase "explicit image" has negative connotations, and it's also nonsensical: a symbol is not an explicit image, but an implicit one. Sadiemonster (talk) 16:43, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

ok... this is a bit complicated... first, the eye in a triangle (not a pyramid) was, during the Renaissance, explicitly a symbol for the Trinity. Second... the term "divine providence" also dates to the Renaissance ... and was in those days another way of talking about the Trinity (note: the term "divine providence" was somewhat cooped by the Deists during the Enlightenment era... and thus lost it's association with the Trinity, but during the Renaissance that had not happened yet).
So... in the Renaissance... eye=Divine Providence, and eye in triangle= Trinity.... but Divine Providence=Trinity... so... eye not in triangle=eye in triangle.
Finally, placing the eye (surrounded by a triangle) on top of a pyramid dates to the creation of the Great Seal of the United States in the late 1770s... much later.
Hope that clarifies things. Blueboar (talk) 17:45, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

"See also"

@Blueboar: Hi! We have hatnotes at the top of the page directing readers to articles that are topically connected to this one:

For the album by The Agonist, see Eye of Providence (album).
"All-seeing eye" redirects here. For other uses, see All-seeing eye (disambiguation).
For Eye of God, see Eye of God (disambiguation).

At the bottom we had, and I think should have, links to other articles that are not about this same topic, but that are connected semantically and semiotically because they are also about eyes--not biological eyes but woo-woo kinds of eyes:

See also
  • Eye of Horus
  • Eye of Ra
  • Third eye

YoPienso (talk) 19:30, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

I am not sure what you think the semantic or semiotic connection is. Blueboar (talk) 21:42, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
This article is about the symbolic, all-seeing eye of a god-figure, or an amorphous god-like force.
The Eye of Horus is a "symbol of protection, royal power and good health . . . personified in the goddess Wadjet."
The Eye of Ra "is a being in ancient Egyptian mythology that functions as a feminine counterpart to the sun god Ra . . . personified by a wide variety of Egyptian goddesses."
"The third eye (also called the mind's eye, or inner eye) is a mystical and esoteric concept referring to a speculative invisible eye which provides perception beyond ordinary sight."
Thus, all four eyes are symbolic, supernatural, and powerful. They all have visual representations but none exists in the realm of science. The Eyes of Providence and Horus protect; the Eye of Ra has a violent aspect; the third eye sees into higher consciousness. All four would likely be examined by a researcher into symbolic eyes, so it's handy to have them linked together, even though only the Eyes of Horus and Ra are connected to each other within a particular philosophical framework, i.e., ancient Egyptian mythology. YoPienso (talk) 22:17, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
You definitely have some strange ideas about Divine Providence. And, I don't see how completely different religions using an eye to symbolize completely different things constitutes a connection. Blueboar (talk) 23:29, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
Blueboar is right. We need references to connect the other bullshit eyes to the bullshit eye of the article. A commonality of utter drivel does not indicate connection. Fiddlersmouth (talk) 00:38, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
Blueboar, I have no idea what you mean about my strange ideas. If explaining will help us edit the article, please explain. Otherwise, I'll ignore.
Per MOS:SEEALSO: The links in the "See also" section might be only indirectly related to the topic of the article because one purpose of "See also" links is to enable readers to explore tangentially related topics. Seems to me that symbolic, supernatural, and powerful eyes from various cultures are "tangentially related topics." YoPienso (talk) 01:42, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
No responses after more than 3 days, while Blueboar has been editing on other articles, so I'll restore the links. YoPienso (talk) 18:16, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Eye of Providence is often associated with police states type subservience programs (Aka Stasi/KGB/COINTELPRO/Etc.)

We could use some more info on it's associations in many peoples minds with police states type subservience programs (Aka Stasi/KGB/COINTELPRO/Etc.). When the "police states type subservience programs. When the Total Information Awareness program was made public shortly after 9/11, one of the controversies over it was it's use of the Eye of Providence in it's logo. Even people who are not "conspiracy nuts" associate the symbol with total subservience which has led to it's modern use in new contexts being very controversy. Also it's association with conspiracy theories of one sort or another is significant enough that while still a minority view, it's still overall enough of a view to warrant a little more detailed explanation of how it is associated by some with alleged conspiratorial groups. --Notcharliechaplin (talk) 16:39, 15 September 2018 (UTC)

Changes made

Hello, this page needs to be changed back! This new page is lacking specific and appropriate information! Divine Power Born (talk) 18:12, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Back to what? Acroterion (talk) 18:14, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
I have to ask the same question... other than some minor tweaks, this article has not changed all that much over the last year, so it is unclear which version you think was better. Blueboar (talk) 19:23, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

"All seeing eye cross"

In the image section, the "All seeing eye cross" does not appear to have any relevance to anything or any source other than its author. Should it be there ? Darkman101 (talk) 02:34, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Where did it come from?

What I'd like to know about this symbol is it's origin and it's earliest uses. In fact, this article doesn't really have much to it. (Anonymous) 09:59, 17 October 2020 (CDT) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:6C63:637F:E920:A8DA:A0DF:BDFD:E78C (talk)

As the article states… lots of ancient cultures used an eye to symbolize the idea that God (or the gods) is (are) watching us.
We don’t actually know which culture was the first to use it. Nor do we know whether the use in one culture influenced the use in the others… or if each developed the concept independently.
What we do know is that the linking of an eye to the more modern concept of “Divine providence” dates to late medieval era Christianity. Blueboar (talk) 12:18, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:11, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Underlined Linked Items on images (eg. SealOfTheUS_Prototype.png underlined image description links: "pdf" , "here") not functional on Wikipedia application.

Application installed on up-to-date Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 Pro ; operating system is MIUI Global 12.5.6.0 (RGGEUXM). Liventruth (talk) 22:45, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Eye_of_Providence/Archive_1&oldid=1145720578"