Is Every Mason Good?

In life we find that there are many good people and bad. Freemasons do have some bad people. When they are found to be bad they are kicked out of Freemasonry. In my 16 years as a Freemason the No of people who are kicked out has been very small in comparison to the No of Freemasons who act in a just and decent way.

As Freemasons we have a duty to serve the whole community. I have never seen Freemasons start fights. It is more likely that a Freemason will be the victim of an assault that start a fight. In Scotland the average of a Freemason will be that of a man who is almost retired and not likely to start fights.

When the Trolls who post on the board produce solid evidence of wrong doing they will get respect. Until then we see them as being trouble makers with a malice against Freemasons.

Bro Gerard

most Masons are good... they are ignorant and innocent.

Its the higher degrees that do the bad stuff and only the rich and powerfull get in those degrees.

Originally posted by Novusordo
most Masons are good... they are ignorant and innocent.

Its the higher degrees that do the bad stuff and only the rich and powerfull get in those degrees.

The highest degree is the sublime degree of a Master Mason. All the other degrees and grades are just additional to the degree of Master Mason.

Bro. Gerard
PS what evidence do you have for your charge of wrong doing in the so called higher degrees.

Originally posted by MrDog
Isn't the Scottish Rite of Freemasonary the Oldest? So how would that make them the Appendant body?

I'm asking out of curiousity and not as scarcastic remark to your post

MrDog, the Scottish Rite of Masonry began in 1786 (I believe). Lodge Freemasonry far exceeds that, for sure by more than 400 years, and probably longer.

Originally posted by Gerard

Originally posted by Novusordo
Its the higher degrees that do the bad stuff and only the rich and powerfull get in those degrees.

what evidence do you have for your charge of wrong doing in the so called higher degrees.

Bro gerard, he has none. You should read the thread titled "Round Table network - The REAL power." where I asked Novusordo to provide evidence for his claims 8 times, and 8 times he denied my request and gave a paltry excuse as to why he would not provide evidence. He is a troll of the worst kind.

The groups within the RT Netowork are fully accepted by most here so I dident bother providing proof.

As for proof on the higher degrees of Freemasonry being bad... all books by ex-Masons concur this and some of the most disgusting acts of serial killing were carried out by 33rd degree masons and grandmasters. This included Jack the Ripper.

Its an undistputible fact that the upper echelons of Masonry is an evil purpose.

Originally posted by Novusordo
The groups within the RT Netowork are fully accepted by most here so I dident bother providing proof.

As for proof on the higher degrees of Freemasonry being bad... all books by ex-Masons concur this and some of the most disgusting acts of serial killing were carried out by 33rd degree masons and grandmasters. This included Jack the Ripper.

Its an undistputible fact that the upper echelons of Masonry is an evil purpose.

You see what I mean, this is what intelligent people on this post have to put up with. IF IT'S UNDISPUTABLE, THEN SHOW US THIS UNDISPUTABLE EVIDENCE!!!

I can't believe you are still posting and making claims without backing them up!!! CAN YOU ONLY GIVE EXCUSES!?!? IS THAT THE ONLY THING YOURE GOOD AT!?!?!

BE A MAN and either back up your claims, or admit that you cannot.

Originally posted by Novusordo
The groups within the RT Netowork are fully accepted by most here so I dident bother providing proof.

As for proof on the higher degrees of Freemasonry being bad... all books by ex-Masons concur this and some of the most disgusting acts of serial killing were carried out by 33rd degree masons and grandmasters. This included Jack the Ripper.

Its an undistputible fact that the upper echelons of Masonry is an evil purpose.

undistputible? This misspelling of undisputable, a nonword itself which is a corruption of indisputable, is perfect proof of the evil plot. It is clear that the uneducated are much easier to manipulate and control, and our present education system is clearly doing its best to noneducate us.
But, although the allegation of evil aimed at the Shriners, et al, may be indeed laughably false, at least someone finally proved who Jack the Ripper was.
By the way, I would sure like to know. Who was Jack the Ripper, and when was his/her identity finally proven?

I heard that there is a new conspiracy theory that those who are in power are doing things to stay there!! I swear to God its true!

Undistputable, that's what you are
Undistputable though near or far
Like a book of ritual that sings to me
How the thought of you does things to me
Never before has someone been more

Undistputable in every way
And forever more, that's how you'll stay
That's why, trolling, it's incredible
That someone so undistputable
Thinks that we are undistputable too

Undistputable in every way
And forever more, that's how you'll stay
That's why, trolling, it's incredible
That someone so undistputable
Thinks that we are undistputable too.

Originally posted by MaskedAvatar
Undistputable, that's what you are
Undistputable though near or far
Like a book of ritual that sings to me
How the thought of you does things to me
Never before has someone been more

Undistputable in every way
And forever more, that's how you'll stay
That's why, trolling, it's incredible
That someone so undistputable
Thinks that we are undistputable too

Undistputable in every way
And forever more, that's how you'll stay
That's why, trolling, it's incredible
That someone so undistputable
Thinks that we are undistputable too.

Are you ''singing'' again Masked Avatar
how are you?

Originally posted by MaskedAvatar
Undistputable, that's what you are
Undistputable though near or far
Like a book of ritual that sings to me
How the thought of you does things to me
Never before has someone been more

Undistputable in every way
And forever more, that's how you'll stay
That's why, trolling, it's incredible
That someone so undistputable
Thinks that we are undistputable too

Undistputable in every way
And forever more, that's how you'll stay
That's why, trolling, it's incredible
That someone so undistputable
Thinks that we are undistputable too.

BWAHAHAHAHA! That's GREAT MaskedAvatar! Undistputably great!

What I think is strange, is....

I have accused dead Freemason of the 33 degree Scottish Rite, Ilia Pavlov of being a criminal, and no one here has asked me for proof!

Is it because the name should rather be forgotten?

Ilia Pavlov, richest man in Bulgaria. Was not found guilty of any crimes.

So what did he do, why was he killed? And why is he still honored by the Scottish Rite?

Originally posted by akilles
What I think is strange, is....

I have accused dead Freemason of the 33 degree Scottish Rite, Ilia Pavlov of being a criminal, and no one here has asked me for proof!

Is it because the name should rather be forgotten?

Ilia Pavlov, richest man in Bulgaria. Was not found guilty of any crimes.

So what did he do, why was he killed? And why is he still honored by the Scottish Rite?

I'm guessing because you never provide proof for anything. Jeez, Sherlock Holmes not needed for this one. Pfft.

Originally posted by akilles
What I think is strange, is....

I have accused dead Freemason of the 33 degree Scottish Rite, Ilia Pavlov of being a criminal, and no one here has asked me for proof!

Is it because the name should rather be forgotten?

Ilia Pavlov, richest man in Bulgaria. Was not found guilty of any crimes.

So what did he do, why was he killed? And why is he still honored by the Scottish Rite?

You said he "was not found guilt of any crimes" yet you say "I have accused [him] of being a criminal." Who could argue with logic like that? Why would we waste our time?

I've read a bit about him (not much because his story is of no real interest to me). But if he was innocent, he should not be accused (particularly by the likes of you) If he was guilty, he should not have been a Mason.

Next.

[edit on 20-3-2005 by senrak]

that was a touching rendition, I still have a lump in my throat.
Regarding the fellow from Bulgaria who was a criminal, though not charged, who is now dead.
I suggest that pursuing legal action against him at this point would be rather pointless, what can we do, kill him again?

We can recognize that he was a billionaire.

We can recognize that he helped set up the 33 degree club over in Eastern Europe.

We can also become aware of his Multigroup company's involvement with drugs and arms smuggling.

The man who was involved in the criminal aspect's name was Kurd Fatik, changing his name to Philip Naydenov. He has also subsequently been killed.

Obviously, they were involved with EVEN bigger criminals, thus they are now dead. They had proof of what they did, so they are dead. I do not have proof, thus am ALIVE. Interesting how KNOWLEDGE of some things works, isn't it?

Originally posted by akilles
Obviously, they were involved with EVEN bigger criminals, thus they are now dead. They had proof of what they did, so they are dead. I do not have proof, thus am ALIVE. Interesting how KNOWLEDGE of some things works, isn't it?

You can make all the excuses you want, Akille. But in the end, you do not have evidence that what you are claiming is true. Thus, it must be false.

See, this is the key difference.

I don't have INCONTRIVERTIBLE PROOF that could have sent these men to jail, you see.

There is plenty of evidence, however.

If I did have such firsthand knowledge, as my statement reflected, I would not be sitting here without fear for my life.

Now, I hate to break it to you, but there aren't too many websites from Bulgaria that discuss who is smuggling drugs and arms over there, but there are a few, and they all discussed Ilia Pavlov's connections to the underworld, so really, you are just ignoring the evidence by ADMITTING to yourself there is none, and that I must be lying.

It takes a real man to take a step back and look at what is being said.

Just a quick question or 2 to sebatwerk!

Which part of the masons was formed around the beginning of the 1700's(1715 or 16 I think)? Was that then the York Rite?

Was the knights templar part of the original masonic lodges? This would coincide with the 400 years difference you mentioned.

Thanks for giving me sound information about these things as I've been wondering on whether I would feel right in pursuing this path. I'm at an age where I feel I should learn more but as of yet unsure if the masons is my way to enlightenment. The more information I come across and people I talk too, then I'm sure the answer will present itself to me

As you could tell in my early post I was hesitant on what I thought as the upper echelons in the masonic degrees. I was under the impression of corruption and wrong doings.

A person can only choose one path from many after seeing what each path offers.

A good brief outline if the cults early years is here:
www.freemasonry101.org.uk...