I have a question for the freemasons here

Originally posted by billmcelligott

Originally posted by michaelsharp

Putting aside the interpretation of Pike, if the third degree is the highest degree in masonry, then why does Pike talk about a 32 degree "Keeper of the Royal Secret"? Is there a distinction here between branches of masonry that I'm missing?

Its a common misconception michael, to become a fully fledged Mason you have to go through degrees 1,2,3 thats all. You then might go on to be a Master in a Lodge, this does not mean that you are any better or higher, it is just a job. The master of the Lodge is usually replaced each year with the next guy in line.

A Master Mason 3rd Degree can , if he wishes join additional orders, each time he joins or takes part in these add on orders he is said to have passed to say the 18th degree. They are in no way compulsory.

Those of us in Freemasonry do not recognise this as a superior degree , its just a name , a mode of recognistion.

The Grand master of The United Grand Lodge of England is the Duke of Kent. He is a Master Mason , and is no higher in rank than I am. Its a job , which has a mode of recognition. He is a 33rd degree Mason.

It is like the Boss of the Company where you work, is he better than you because he has more money and more power, well not as far as I am concerned he isn't. Its his job.

ok I can understand this. Though I wonder if the Boss of the Company sees himself in the same egalitarian light? I kinda highly doubt that. Its basic sociology that we all rank ourselves via wealth, status, and power.

As for the 33 degree mason, my question would be does this person gain any special priviledges from being a 33 degree mason that others don't? I'm guessing you'll say no but then up until the year 2000, you had to be a 33degree mason to join the Shriners. At least up until the year 2,000 there seems to have been a clear hierarchy whereby attaining 33degree mason allowed you the priviledge of wearing a fez and driving a little mini car.

So my question is do certain priviledges or status reward accrue to someone as they get the higher numbers? and before you answer let me draw you attention to the fourth degree in Pike's book "The Secret Master" where Pike clearly states that there is a hiearchy of degrees. He further uses the metaphor of climbing a mountain to reinforce the mental idea of ascension above something (the masses below?). I also find it fascinating that Pike seems to be saying that its at the fourth degree of masonry that the real secrets of masonary are to be revealed only in the fourth degree and higher. The first degrees are "only the entrance" he says and only at the fourth degree to you start ascending the mountain.

What is even better is that Pike says that submission to order is required if you are to advance. Advancement "depends upon your secrecy, obedience, and fidelity."

MASONRY is a succession of allegories, the mere vehicles of great lessons in morality and philosophy. You will more fully appreciate its spirit, its object, its purposes, as you advance in the different Degrees, which you will find to constitute a great, complete, and harmonious system.

If you have been disappointed in the first three Degrees, as you have received them, and if it has seemed to you that the performance has not come up to the promise, that the lessons of morality are not new, and the scientific instruction is but rudimentary, and the symbols are imperfectly explained, remember that the ceremonies and lessons of those Degrees have been for ages more and more accommodating themselves, by curtailment and sinking into commonplace, to the often limited memory and capacity of the Master and Instructor, and to the intellect and needs of the Pupil and Initiate; that they have come to us from an age when symbols were used, not to reveal but to conceal; when the commonest learning was confined to a select few, and the simplest principles of morality seemed newly discovered truths; and that these antique and simple Degrees now stand like the broken columns of a roofless Druidic temple, in their rude and mutilated greatness; in many parts, also, corrupted by time, and disfigured by modern additions and absurd interpretations. They are but the entrance to the great Masonic Temple, the triple columns of the portico.

You have taken the first step over its threshold, the first step toward the inner sanctuary and heart of the temple. You are in the path that leads up the slope of the mountain of Truth; and it depends upon your secrecy, obedience, and fidelity, whether you will advance or remain stationary.

Imagine not that you will become indeed a Mason by learning what is commonly called the "work," or even by becoming familiar with our traditions. Masonry has a history, a literature, a philosophy. Its allegories and traditions will teach you much; but much is to be sought elsewhere. The streams of learning that now flow full and broad must be followed to their heads in the springs that well up in the remote past, and you will there find the origin and meaning of Masonry.

And of course there's the reference to "the work" that I've been looking for here in the 4th degree "The Secret Master." Just what is that work? I think this is the "great work" you here referenced in virtually all esoteric texts. I think different orders understand this work differently but the essense in the same. Its elite interference in the politics, economies, and religiouns of the world the goal of which is ostensibly to advance human evolution, human moral character or whatever, but that is really about maintaining priviledge, hierarchy, and power. This is part of a tarot explanation I have for the tarot the star.

www.michaelsharp.org...

Again, this is just a working hypothesis. I'm not wedded to this conclusion. I'm just digging around trying to confirm or dismiss a theory.

Originally posted by The Axeman

Originally posted by michaelsharp
Putting aside the interpretation of Pike, if the third degree is the highest degree in masonry, then why does Pike talk about a 32 degree "Keeper of the Royal Secret"? Is there a distinction here between branches of masonry that I'm missing?

The way I understand it, Masonry is 1-3 Degrees. Period. Then, in addition to the Degrees of Blue Lodge, there are various other paths for Master Masons to take to expand on the teachings of Blue Lodge. It just goes more in depth. Now, I'm not a member yet, this is just how I understand what has been told to me, and what I have read here and there.

You have to understand that the Scottish Rite, York Rite, The Shrine, all of them are seperate entities from Craft Masonry (or Blue Lodge). Just because you are a 32nd Degree Scottish Rite Mason, it doesn't mean you are any more f a Mason than someone who is not, it just means that you are a member of the Scottish Rite. It is confusing, I'll admit, but they are completely seperate.

Like I said, after the 3rd Degree, a Mason is a Mason. The point is, the Scottish Rite degrees are not "ranks", they are lessons, the way I understand it. Being a 32nd Degree just means that you have witnessed and taken part in those lessons, nothing more.

Guys, am I missing something here? I'll give you that I don't fully understand yet, and I probably won't fully get it until I take the Degrees myself, but I'm trying...

so are there graduation ceremonies if you master the lessons. I would suspect yes since Masonary is big on ritual.

ms

Originally posted by The Axeman

originally posted by The Axeman
Now then, are the N and S Jurisdictions actually geographically separated? I mean, living in the South am I confined to only joining the Scottish Rite under the Southern Jurisdiction? I fully intend to join (SR,SJ) once I become a Mason and have studied to the point that I understand the teachings of Blue Lodge, but is the SJ the only option for me seeing as where I live? I want to see it all... I want to be like Senrak.

Sorry to be repetitive guys, but I think this got overlooked during Pikeapalooza... Funny monkey...

There are 15 states that are considered the Northern Jurisdiction:
Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut,
New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois,
Wisconsin.
All others are Southern Jurisdiction.

[edit on 12/15/2004 by cotwom]

Originally posted by The Axeman
OK MS, say you were the guy in charge of collecting all the "petrodollars". You have a job to do, yet you know that by doing your job, people somewhere, somehow, will suffer because of it. Do you do your job? Or do you commit a crime and divert the funds to the people or otherwise try to reverse the effects of your task? I don't know, but I don't think being a Mason has anything to do with that call.

Besides that, you've got a "shoot the messenger" type scenario going there... It wouldn't be the bank guy's fault, as you said he was ordered to do so. Clear conscience or not, the job has to be done. I'm not saying it's right, but I don't think your example holds water...

If I'm wrong, please explain...

[edit on 12/15/04 by The Axeman]

that's typical of the military model of control right. Orders come from above and you have to follow them without question. Now IMF is not strictly a military model, but all organisations (university, corporate) all carry aspects of that model.

All I'm saying here is that the philosophy this guy holds make the decision easier. He get's the order and the way has already been cleared so that he can follow the order like a good subordinate should.

Its not just this example. There seems to be this subtext in masonary (and other organisations) that emphasises obedience, submission, and secrecy. So what if the guys higher ups are also masons (or perhaps members of the Shiners or Skull and Bones). THe psychological props are already there so that this fellow is inclinded to follow orders. He has a moral justification that eases his conscious. It might bother him a bit, but he follows the orders anyway right because that's what he has been trained to do...

Do the opposite thought experiment. Imagine a philosophy that teaches the absolute unacceptability of povery and suffering. Further, imagine a perspective that teaches you do DO WHAT YOU THINK IS RIGHT and not rely on the teachings of others to guide you. What are the odds of our IMF banker following orders in that context. He'll know his actions are wrong and the cause of much suffering and he may just quit his job rather than engage the actions.

course at this point another one will rise up to fill his shoes. But what if that whole philosophical edifice crumbled and nobody believed in this philosophy of "equilibrium." then there would be no one to carry out the austerity measures. The bankers might be a little less rich as a result, but the children wouldn't starve to death.

the two philosophies lead to quite different world's I think

just a thought experiment.

ms

[edit on 15-12-2004 by michaelsharp]

Originally posted by michaelsharp

so are there graduation ceremonies if you master the lessons. I would suspect yes since Masonary is big on ritual.

ms

Actually no

When you learn a degree, you are given a proficiency exam. If you pass the exam, you then go through the ritual of the next degree. There's the standard "congratulations brother!!"
And then you go home. As for Scottish rite, once you've seen all the degrees performed, you get something stating as much, but no ceremonious ritual. I wish.



[edit on 12/15/2004 by cotwom]

Originally posted by cotwom

Originally posted by michaelsharp

so are there graduation ceremonies if you master the lessons. I would suspect yes since Masonary is big on ritual.

ms

Actually no

When you learn a degree, you are given a proficiency exam. If you pass the exam, you then go through the ritual of the next degree. There's the standard "congratulations brother!!"
And then you go home. As for Scottish rite, once you've seen all the degrees performed, you get something stating as much, but no ceremonious ritual. I wish.

[edit on 12/15/2004 by cotwom]

ok well I can accept this. I wonder though if a sense of status doesn't accrue as you pass through the degrees. In university, for example, students take lessons (courses), write exams, and advance through years (first year, second year, third year, graduate, post graduate) in much the same way as the masons. A piece of paper is provided at the end of the process but other than that, all symptoms of status are unspoken. But they still, according to some mainstream sociology thinkers like Max Weber, exist and their are real consequences.

The higher your degree of educational attainment, the more money you are likely to make, for example. You'll be more cultured, more refined, and members of a higher status of people. These things are actually measured by the Duncan scale, the BLishen scale, and the like.

ask a graduate student if they are better than a undergraduate student and they are likely to say no, of course not. We're all students. But belying that statement are the expectations of reward and status that these students have

ms

Originally posted by michaelsharp

Ya I agree with you there is a contradiction here. Mason's are supposed to do good work and all that. And I certainly don't want to enter a judgment against Masons. I can see the attraction of fraternity and the attraction of the support for doing good work and developing character. But I have a hard time with the notion that evil is ok in the grander scheme of things. I think whether or not Pike intends the justificaton, it still ends up being one.

I think either that you have missed my point, or that I did not elaborate in enough detail. Again, Pike never says that evil is "ok" or "justifiable" or "tolerable", or anything else.

The Bible itself quotes God as saying "I have created good and evil; I am the Lord". So what does this all mean? If God is all good, why did He create evil, and why does He allow it to continue to exist?

Pike's opinion on this is reflected from a few lines from a certain Scottish Rite degree ritual:

"If there were no evils and wrongs, nothing to bear, suffer, or forgive, there would be no positive virtues. If all men were good and happy, there would be no occasion for disinterestedness, no philanthropists, no martyrs for Liberty." (Ritual of 18�, Knight Rose Croix)

Here, Pike may have a very good point. It is possible that evil exists as a manner to purge the unworthy and selfish, while perfecting the righteous and virtuous. And it certainly seems correct that there could be no "good", "justice", "virtue", etc., unless their opposites existed to compare them to.

Therefore, Pike insinuates that life is sort of a test of character, and evil exists in order that the triumphant and virtuous may overcome it through struggle. In other words, real life is no rose garden, but those who work in it according to the power of righteousness have fulfilled its meaning.

Originally posted by michaelsharp
ask a graduate student if they are better than a undergraduate student and they are likely to say no, of course not. We're all students. But belying that statement are the expectations of reward and status that these students have

What if there are no expectations of reward or status? If you go into Masonry to gain money or social status you're going in for the wrong reasons. Masonry is about making good men better men, through instruction, study, and fellowship with other good men of like mind. Change starts with yourself, and Masonry helps guide you as you put in the work to build yourself into a better man. Your school analogy actually works quite well, I think. You can't go to college without a high school diploma, as you can't take the more elaborate lessons in Masonry until you have completed the Blue lodge, to give yourself a good foundation to learn what is to be learned, and continue to build yourself up and strive to always be better in all aspects of life. There is no reward or boost in status, it's about making yourself better. That is the reward.

At least that's how I see it.


P.S. ML that was eloquently put. That's what I was thinking, I just couldn't put it into words like that.

[edit on 12/15/04 by The Axeman]

You know, I'm sure every Mason even with the best motives for being in Masonry, gets a swell of pride when they advance in degrees. Especially the 3rd, 32nd, 33rd, Royal Arch Mason, or Knights Templar. Even though the 32nd, 33rd, RA and KT are OPTIONAL, it still gives you the feeling of... cool. In the lodge, in public and in their hearts, they are very humbled by it all. But in their minds when they get in the car on the way home, they're thinking... wow I'm a Master Mason, or I'm a 32nd, or I am a 33rd now I can get in on the illuminati. Just kidding. I wouldn't believe any Mason who said otherwise. However, that is not the purpose of advancement, and it's often an unspoken and private sense of pride. Every Mason knows, that 32nd, 33rd, RA or KT is not higher than 3rd, and we are all equally brothers. That's my take on it.



[edit on 12/15/2004 by cotwom]

Originally posted by the_truth_wants_2_B_found
I am growing tired of vague explanations by Masons. Masons are a craft not unlike Witchcraft, or Wicca. They believe in a higher level of enlightenment and strive to achieve this higher level of conciousness while keeping the masses unaware. They are meerly a part of the largest secret ever. Mankind is on the brink of a huge evolutionary step of conciousness, a level of the ILLUMINATED. Masons along with other organizations strive to control this level of conciousness to within their societies and other secret societies. They use tools such as Christianity, which is a hoax, as a means to control the masses. Christianity is invented to protect their secret. That is why Christianity teaches against all forms of Witchcraft, Satanism, etc. It is meerly to scare the masses into looking no further, into not seeking any further enlightenment or spiritual growth. To fear what is truly our next step in evolution. An enlightened state, a new level of conciousness. The global elite and secret societies of the world are aware of this next step (have been for centuries) and are trying to manipulate and control what is ultimately mankinds destiny.

I personally am not a Christian so don't take me for a radical, I seek the truth. Will a knowledgeable person (preferably Mason or Illuminati) respond?

I would love some more of you to please respond to the above quote. I am new here and am interested in any of you validating or contradicting what I have to say. This is a theory I have developed and pieced together over years of silent studies. I really don't discuss this with anyone, so I am interested in hearing what any of you have to say. Please elaborate as much as possible.

Originally posted by michaelsharp

Again, this is just a working hypothesis. I'm not wedded to this conclusion. I'm just digging around trying to confirm or dismiss a theory.

You have your own agenda here one suspects michael , the tarot card reference keeps apearing. Thats fine its your post and your work, but I am uneasy with the seeming linkage to Freemasonry , there is none.

The is similarly a regular reference to occult, there is no connection.

Pike was a Freemason of about 130 years ago, it was a different world. Pike although influencial was not the author of modern Freemasonry, his writings were more an exploration of possiblities. As demonstarted by his preamble to morals and dogma. They wer his thoughts, to which he was perfectly entitled.

Morals & Dogma :-

Preamble:
The teachings of these Readings are not sacramental, so far as they go beyond the realm of Morality into those of other domains of Thought and Truth. Every one is entirely free to reject and dissent from whatsoever herein may seem to him to be untrue or unsound. Of course, the ancient theosophic and philosophic speculations are not embodied as part of the doctrines of the Rite. (p.iv)

There is no sight under the sun more pitiful and ludicrous at once, than the spectacle of the Prestons and the Webbs, not to mention the later incarnations of Dullness and Commonplace, undertaking to "explain" the old symbols of Masonry, and adding to and "improving" them, or inventing new ones. (p. 105)

A Freemason, therefore, should be a man of honor and of conscience, preferring his duty to everything beside, even to his life; independent in his opinions, and of good morals, submissive to the laws, devoted to humanity, to his country, to his family; kind and indulgent to his brethren, friend of all virtuous men, and ready to assist his fellows by all means in his power. (p. 113)

It is not the mission of Masonry to engage in plots and conspiracies against the civil government. It is not the fanatical propagandist of any creed or theory; nor does it proclaim itself the enemy of kings. It is the apostle of liberty, equality, and fraternity; but it is no more the high-priest of republicanism than of constitutional monarchy. (p. 153)

No man, it holds, has any right in any way to interfere with the religious belief of another. To that great Judge, Masonry refers the matter; and opening wide its portals, it invites to enter there and live in peace and harmony, the Protestant, the Catholic, the Jew, the Moslem; every man who will lead a truly virtuous and moral life, love his brethren, minister to the sick and distressed, and believe in the One, All-Powerful, All-Wise, everywhere-Present God, Architect, Creator and Preserver of all things.... (p. 167)

and to finish ;

"For, contrary to the impression Masons have had, Pike's time, thought, and writing were not absorbed by the Fraternity."
Haywood, H.L.. Supplement to Mackey's Encyclopedia of Freemasonry. Richmond, Virginia: Macoy Publishing, 1966, p. 1334.

So he was an important contributor , but he was one Mason in a long hisory of Freemasonry.

Originally posted by the_truth_wants_2_B_found

I'll give it a bash for you if you like

I am growing tired of vague explanations by Masons.

I know what you mean, but I think the vagueness comes from the question. People tend to ask with alot of speculation, or with the same old information from sites such as FW. If you had to answer the same old questions over and over again I am sure your answer would become more vague as time went on. I know mine would.

Masons are a craft not unlike Witchcraft, or Wicca.

Not sure how you get that conclusion, there are no spells and all that stuff in Freemasonry

They believe in a higher level of enlightenment and strive to achieve this higher level of conciousness while keeping the masses unaware.

I have never seen it explained as enlightenment, except when using olden day readings where the phrase didn't cause such a stir, if you have an example of it in modern day practise I would very much like to see it as it is hard to know the context it was used in otherwise. as for keeping from the masses, other than a few restrictions anyone can become a mason if they want to so it is a bit by choice that people don't know as well.

They are meerly a part of the largest secret ever.

Something I have never understood is how people keep referring to this big secret that everyone seems to know about. It's a strange sort of secret to me

Mankind is on the brink of a huge evolutionary step of conciousness, a level of the ILLUMINATED.

Will not happen until mankind gets of greed and self rightousness. Until every person can accept that any view they hold, and opinion they have may be wrong we will not progress past this point.

Masons along with other organizations strive to control this level of conciousness to within their societies and other secret societies.

If it is an evolutionary track it will not happen under any kind of control. Mother nature, so to speak, is not controllable by any means known to man.

They use tools such as Christianity, which is a hoax, as a means to control the masses.

Can't be referring to Freemasonry with this one as they promote not particular faith, and are not a religous order. Although the last bit has always been a curiousity of mine also, and many have tried to prove the point.

Christianity is invented to protect their secret.

As above, you cannot be talking about Freemasonry, so can you give a quick repeat of these last two points with the group you are referring to.

That is why Christianity teaches against all forms of Witchcraft, Satanism, etc. It is meerly to scare the masses into looking no further, into not seeking any further enlightenment or spiritual growth.

Okay getting really confused now, a group/organisation invented christianity to help keep it's secret and then got chrisitianity to make it wrong to join the forementioned groups to prevent anyone outside the group finding enlightenment (I think that is what you mean) Then you could not be a part of both, which again means you are not talking about Freemasons, as they are apart of both, if the mason is a chrisitian that is of course. best make that 3 posts and who you are talking about.

To fear what is truly our next step in evolution. An enlightened state, a new level of conciousness. The global elite and secret societies of the world are aware of this next step (have been for centuries) and are trying to manipulate and control what is ultimately mankinds destiny.

You yourself are obviously aware of this next step, otherwise you wouldn;t know someone is hiding it, if you were to post it here then surely this would foil the master plan and all at ATS would know the next step and could work towards it. yes/no/maybe ???

I personally am not a Christian so don't take me for a radical, I seek the truth. Will a knowledgeable person (preferably Mason or Illuminati) respond?

Whether Christian or not, we all seek the truth, but it is hard to know your thought without any evidence. It is a constant post in repsonse to question like yours. Some take it as a blow off, others do not bother to re-post, to the true seeker they will make their sources known.

All it means is the person trying to answer your question wants to know how you came to your conclusions ie

If all you have done is read sites that say red is the best colour in the world, the person would know to direct you a site that says red isn't.

No one can give you your truth, all they can do is provide you with the information you need to make your own mind up.

If you want a Yes/No answer, or someone to say this is how it is you will not find your truth, and there will always be someone with a different opinion.

HTH

Originally posted by the_truth_wants_2_B_found

Originally posted by the_truth_wants_2_B_found
...


I would love some more of you to please respond to the above quote. I am new here and am interested in any of you validating or contradicting what I have to say. This is a theory I have developed and pieced together over years of silent studies. I really don't discuss this with anyone, so I am interested in hearing what any of you have to say. Please elaborate as much as possible.

www.hermetic.com...

check the above document out.

who knows how successful the O.T.O was in bringing all the secret societies together, but what is most interesting for me is the DESIRE to do so and the implication that all the various chiefs of the various orders know about each other, and intermingle.

fascinating stuff.

Originally posted by Masonic Light

I think either that you have missed my point, or that I did not elaborate in enough detail. Again, Pike never says that evil is "ok" or "justifiable" or "tolerable", or anything else.

The Bible itself quotes God as saying "I have created good and evil; I am the Lord". So what does this all mean? If God is all good, why did He create evil, and why does He allow it to continue to exist?

Pike's opinion on this is reflected from a few lines from a certain Scottish Rite degree ritual:

"If there were no evils and wrongs, nothing to bear, suffer, or forgive, there would be no positive virtues. If all men were good and happy, there would be no occasion for disinterestedness, no philanthropists, no martyrs for Liberty." (Ritual of 18�, Knight Rose Croix)

Here, Pike may have a very good point. It is possible that evil exists as a manner to purge the unworthy and selfish, while perfecting the righteous and virtuous. And it certainly seems correct that there could be no "good", "justice", "virtue", etc., unless their opposites existed to compare them to.

Therefore, Pike insinuates that life is sort of a test of character, and evil exists in order that the triumphant and virtuous may overcome it through struggle. In other words, real life is no rose garden, but those who work in it according to the power of righteousness have fulfilled its meaning.

no I'm not misunderstanding you and I understand what Pike is saying. What I'm saying is that that particular philosophical line is not Divine wisdom. It merely justifies power, inequality and all that jazz. You can see the progress in thinking here. From the notion of equilibrium to the notion that evil exists in order to 'purge" the unworthy and uplift the righteous?

so whose unworthy and whose righteous? Are the starving children in the world being "purged" so that the the righteous rich westerners can find their salvation.

I think this is a profound misunderstanding of the nature of God and Divinity. The whole party line about being chucked out of the garden, being on earth as trainees, its all hogwash. Its all a justification for power, inequality, and suffering.

Do a thought experiment. HOw many millions of powerful men in this world are trained in these secret organizations and believe this? This sort of thinking informs every day business and political decisions. What would happen tot he world if the underlying philosophy of these secret orders (and they are all pretty much the same from what I can see) was updated to reflect THE TRUTH about the universe.

i.e., that God is Good, that we are Sparks of the One, that we are here working on a great work (sure), but that that work includes everyone on this planet., that evil is manmade and arises because of manmade political and economic decisions, etc. etc. etc.

I think its time for a new philosophy of life -- one that doesn't justify the evils in the world but that instead wakes people up to the existence of unnecessary suffering and all that.

I'm not saying there is a deliberate conspiracy here. Just that this line of thinking ends up supporting the status quo.

of course this isn't exclusive to the masons. Its EVERYWHERE from the teachings of the Church to the OTO.

think about it, all these secret societies trace lineage back to a slave society.
IS iT SO HARD TO CONSIDER the fact that the "wisdom" from that era is merely a justification for a certain social order?



my bottom line is this, NO MOTHER SHOULD HAVE TO WATCH HER CHILD STARVE and if you make a decision that allows that to happy, well,

whose unworthy of divinity then??

ms

[edit on 16-12-2004 by michaelsharp]

Originally posted by billmcelligott

Originally posted by michaelsharp

"For, contrary to the impression Masons have had, Pike's time, thought, and writing were not absorbed by the Fraternity."
Haywood, H.L.. Supplement to Mackey's Encyclopedia of Freemasonry. Richmond, Virginia: Macoy Publishing, 1966, p. 1334.

So he was an important contributor , but he was one Mason in a long hisory of Freemasonry.

i've said it a couple times that I don't believe its a deliberate conspiracy. All i'm saying is that the philosophical underpinnings of masonry, or at least a part of them, justify the status quo, evil, or whatever you want to call it. I'm sure Pike was a good man. He just had a wrong idea.

and sure Pike doesn't speak for all masonry. I've heard that a couple times now. But when I started this thread, I was immediately referred to Pike's work. This certainly implies that some people believe Pike speaks for the masons no?

Originally posted by michaelsharp
I think this is a profound misunderstanding of the nature of God and Divinity. The whole party line about being chucked out of the garden, being on earth as trainees, its all hogwash. Its all a justification for power, inequality, and suffering.

Freemasonry is not a religion. It doesn't dictate a single thing to a man about who or what his creator is. It doesn't tell a man to justify a single action through his god. It doesn't dictate either consciously or subconsciously - PERIOD.

Your whole post makes the totally unfounded assumption that there is some sort of classification within Freemasonry as regards a deity and this could not be further from the truth. The whole point is that an individual makes up his own mind.

Whether deliberately or indeliberately - there is no religious conspiracy within Masonry. If your point is that men naturally progress to the mindset which you proclaim, the whole of mankind is guilty. You can't use a scapegoat which is exactly the opposite of that which you claim.

Originally posted by Leveller

Originally posted by michaelsharp
I think this is a profound misunderstanding of the nature of God and Divinity. The whole party line about being chucked out of the garden, being on earth as trainees, its all hogwash. Its all a justification for power, inequality, and suffering.

Freemasonry is not a religion. It doesn't dictate a single thing to a man about who or what his creator is. It doesn't tell a man to justify a single action through his god. It doesn't dictate either consciously or subconsciously - PERIOD.

Your whole post makes the totally unfounded assumption that there is some sort of classification within Freemasonry as regards a deity and this could not be further from the truth. The whole point is that an individual makes up his own mind.

Whether deliberately or indeliberately - there is no religious conspiracy within Masonry. If your point is that men naturally progress to the mindset which you proclaim, the whole of mankind is guilty. You can't use a scapegoat which is exactly the opposite of that which you claim.

Ok ok. point one, according to Mirriam Webster, I think freemasonry is a religion

1 a : the state of a religious b (1) : the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
2 : a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices

esp. point to a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices.

arguably, Freemasonary is an institutionalized system of attitudes, beliefs, and practices. I keep refering back to Pike here (for better or worse) but this description of the 32degree clearly outlines a philosophical and religious position including statements about the nature of God, the nature of Good and Evil, etc.

www.freemasons-freemasonry.com...

it is my understanding that the degrees of masonry are like lessons. So here we are clearly reading a religious doctrine and learning religious precepts.

it is also my understanding that masonry purpots to create "better men." How catholic/religious is that???!!



and I agree with you here, the whole of mankind is guilty. I think the whole system may have emerged to assuage the guilt of certain people and make them believe that their actions were ok in the wider scheme of things.

I certainly don't want to scapegoat Masons here. I think the order has heart. But I'm all for calling a rose and rose...

if it is a rose...


ms



[edit on 16-12-2004 by michaelsharp]

MS, if your opinions are already set why are you bothering to ask questions? You don't accept the answers. Seems like troll-like behavior to me.

Originally posted by intrepid
MS, if your opinions are already set why are you bothering to ask questions? You don't accept the answers. Seems like troll-like behavior to me.

I support the Masonic position, however I do not consider this trolling. MS is merely being provocative from my point of view and I would prefer his type of arguement not be limited. No doubt you will do as you wish, however I find that the recent uptick in warns and bans to be detrimental to the ATS mantra of "Deny Ignorance".
.

Originally posted by michaelsharp

Ok ok. point one, according to Mirriam Webster, I think freemasonry is a religion

OK, let me put it this way.
In my view, Freemasonry cannot be a religion. A religion dictates a belief, whereas Freemasonry gives a man the Freedom to believe what he wants. It is not a "system of institutionalised beliefs" but totally the opposite.
If a man chooses to believe a religion he is not believing in a/the religion of Freemasonry. Neither can Freemasonry be blamed for his choosing of religion because it is totally neutral on the subject - all it may encourage a man to do is to look for his god. He can find that god in a Bible or he can find it in a teacup. It can be a being of his own creation or one from a "recognised" religion. It's totally up to the individual.

You've got to understand that concept of freedom of choice before you go any further on this subject as this also puts your theory of why Freemasonry leads to self-interest in jeopardy.

I believe that Freedom to choose is an aspect of God - Freewill is one of the divine attributes. You may choose to follow a god or you may choose not to, but either way, you were given the ability to choose. By serving yourself and denying freedom to others, you may be limiting god. You should not deny others the opportunity to choose their own god/s.
The "starving children" that you refer to will not have that choice. Poverty is the biggest breeder of fundamentalism - a mindset that dictates religion to the individual. Now even if (and it's a massive IF) the so called power elite were Freemasons they would be acting totally contrary to the spirit of Freemasonry by creating the conditions where god could be imposed on others through enforced religion.

I believe a large part of Freemasonry is about Freedom to choose. It doesn't deny any man's god and it certainly doesn't deny their right to choose for theirself.

So heck. Blame Freedom for the state of this world if you want to. Personally, I don't think that it's Freedom which is to blame though. It's those who want to impose their beliefs on others who are the culprits.

By the way. Don't read too much into Pike. He doesn't speak for masonry. Nobody does. He was merely exercising his right to express the beliefs that he chose.