A challenge to all Masons

My apologies for being back late: T’is a shame in this elapsed time, no Mason has tried answering any question about Taxil and his mention of Lucifer, other than asking other questions of their own. As I stated at the beginning of this thread:

"You may underestimate my intention and before I answer your questions, which would of course accomplish your true objective in getting us all way off topic, can you tell me why would Leo Taxil wish to lie publicly about something which he already knew to be 100% true"

It seems that most of the responses following are also nothing but typical mushiqrooms, piling over each other to destroy a thread on something new and not previously discussed elsewhere. How typical?

What exactly do you mean by "perverted and corrupted", and just how exactly do you "intend to prove it"? We still haven't seen any prrof, just the same rhetoric that we see posted practically every day.

But one example: Masons deceive us by attacking people who question anything subversive, or those who try and expose evil. Why do Masons lie and attempt to dispute a virtuous man like John Robison “Proofs of a Conspiracy” Was John against Masonry in general, or was John really just trying to expose the Bavarian Illuminati that had infected the Grand orient etc? Masons prove they have an agenda and cannot be trusted, because they attempt to smear someone like John Robison. Robison was there (in person) and practically initiated into the Illuminati yet Masons have something nasty to say about that. And like Masons care that France is now witnessing hell at their doorstep, funded by subversive interests. Surely you do not believe the French riots are caused because France is too busy making love and drinking fine wine? If Mason Manly Hall were still alive he would admit once again that the Masons were back in action tearing France apart, as they did in the 1700’s. Since Masonry was polluted by Hegelian sickness, Masons have always supported anything anti-national and want globalisation on a political level. They particularity hate Catholics and will support all groups to rival the church and state. History does not lie, like a Mason who forgets his roots.

This is simply untrue. What is true that one cannot go to any anti-Masonic website without running across the Taxil Hoax.

I’m not sure what your point is? I said Taxil was mostly telling the truth and thus every Masonic website that tries to pin Leo Taxil to an anti-Masonry agenda, are plain deceiving or just plain foolish.

Absolutely not. The Taxil Hoax, exposed well over a century ago, is not taken seriously by folks in the mainstream. Obviously, any Mason researching or writing about the history and development of anti-Masonry has little choice but to allude to it, but it isn't really that important today. It may be on the Internet among conspiracy theorists, but not in the real world.

How can you say that? Masons stick their noses where they do not belong and then ask why people always blame them? If you touch your hand to something hot, you may get burned and since Masons have the nerve to critic the works of people as revered as John Robison, you get what you deserve! Remember, John was a true Mason and someone trying to expose the original illuminate. Why a Mason has an issue with that only further justifies how they have been compromised! I have John Robison’s book sitting right here in front of me and I can tell you that unless the Masonic websites remove their pathetic lies about him, I will assume they are attacking a man with a call to goodness, and the duty and task to expose terrible evil. Sounds a lot like politics to me, and where there are politics, a Mason is the first to stand and support the mainstream agenda that is against all national sovereignty, yet they pose as being supporters for freedom.

Which Pike letters are you referring to? Do you mean real ones, or the ones that don't exist but were invented by conspiracy theorists, such as Taxil's "Lucifer is God", and the forgered letters to Mazzini?

Glad you asked. I was referring to the three terrible world wars that Pike “possibly” wrote about to the dirty mobster pal of his. Would you tell me who wrote those letters, is it was not Pike? I bet you want to say Leo Taxil wrote them, don’t you? I know all too well, friend. No Mason can tell me who wrote them because Albert Pike really DID write them and a Mason would rather feign ignorance to Pike, then go out and search for proof, either way and this of course makes perfect sense when you wish to brush a matter of importance under the rug.

Taxil is much more important to anti-Masons than he is to Masons. And, by the way, it has never been demonstrated that Morgan was murdered.

Are you kidding me? Leo Taxil is a Masons’ best pal! And Morgan was never found according to Masons but according to eyewitnesses and family, he was kidnapped and never found. I guess the Masons were pretty darn upset about him revealing too much. If he were my father, I’d say screw the Masons’ lies because I know HE WAS MURDERED!! John Quincy Adams was no fool! He seemed to accept this understanding along with the people of the time! Why should people deny that up is up, and down is down? Thanks to Masons we now have a serious issue with neo-Jacobins in the White house also.

Whether or not Adams was a "great president" is a matter of personal opinion. I'm inclined to disagree, and did so long before I became a Mason.

Good. I’d give anything to have man like JQ Adams today. He would rout the snakes out and called a spade, a spade. He was brilliant and that’s why Masons wish he wasn’t so open about the truth. You have little to go on, as JQ Adams was not convoluted in any way at all.

Huh? To begin with, Taxil had nothing to do with America, and to best of my knowledge, he never set foot on American soil. He was French, and had been initiated as a Mason in a French Lodge. Shortly after receiving the First degree, he was expelled, and simply wanted revenge for the humiliation.

Leo Taxil was a mason agent. He hated Christians and was a die-hard Mason. If you disagree, be inclined to dispute his writings of real substance. Not the silly stuff that was obviously part of the tactic but the writings where Taxil spoke about duality and Lucifer etc. Can you call this a lie? By calling him a lair, you prove he spoke the truth. I have already quoted him and gave the quick example. What new evidence do you offer other than what is parroted on Mason websites?

I think you are confused, and perhaps you've never even read Taxil. Taxil is quite clear that Pike worshiped Satan, and even claimed that Pike and Satan had tea together every Friday on the planet Venus. (see Taxil's "Mysteries of Freemasonry").

Yes of course – Leo was joking. But surely you can understand that even a two year-old would find this statement rather ludicrous. Obvious the #1 rule of disinformation is to say 80% truth and 20% lies. But the ultimate disinformation tactic is to discredit oneself by using plausible deniability, thus closing all discussion to ALL truth, and some lies. It is used in politics consistently. Besides, would I wish to insult the intelligence of Christians, I’d have to be a Mason. I bet you think the early Christians were just as dumb as most people are nowadays. I can assure you that they knew more truth back in those days about Freemasonry, and then many of us do today.

I think you are confused again. "Lucifer" is the Latin word which means "light bearer". There's no need to "endorse" it.

I am not confused; I AM very tired though of being told by Masons that they do not worship Lucifer or M’aat, when I know they most certainly do. I’m only quoting Pike (there are many more proofs) and you know that I am correct. Is that a bad thing, NO, but its true nonethless, so admit it?

What exactly is a "Mason of choice"?

It depends on what Mason you speak with. Every Mason is so dynamically different that they can deny everything. It is difficult to prove or disprove anything when masons cannot agree, except that they are always 100% innocent and claim everyone else is always plotting against them. It doesn’t seem to matter what time period it is, what nation, what economic structure in place; Masons still claim complete innocence from ALL wrongdoings. Masons think they are perfect; I bet that had it not been for the Bavarian government exposing the diabolical tenets of the Illuminati, you Mason would still say it ALL never happened and call John Robison a lair. AND you know exactly what I’m talking about.

The O.T.O. did not exist when Taxil was writing his books and forging Pike letters. The O.T.O. was founded in 1899 in Germany, long after the fiasco was over, and the hoax admitted.

Unknown to many people, an actual Order of the Palladium did really exist at the time in France, and there is no doubt that Taxil had heard of it. It admitted both men and women, which apparently was lurid to Taxil. In reality, the Order was sort of like the Eastern Star in the USA, mostly being composed of Masons and their wives. The Palladium had two degrees: Companion of Penelope and Companion of Athena, and the degrees were based on Greek mythology and Homeric literature, and not, as Taxil claimed, on satanism.

Satanism is just a word used to describe something that opposing or something evil. The cult of Mithra could just as well be called “a satanic cult”, or INCULABULA even though they are not true Satanists. Yet, they do sacrifice children and Hegel adopted his owl logo from the “Grey on Grey” Minerva/Athena/Dionysus cults. Both Hegel and Adam W were obsessed with ancient mysteries and lo’ and behold, we find the same thing at Bohemian Grove and Skull and Bones. The Order of Death was a Freemason society (thanks again for helping it stay secret, Masons) and was shut down by good average Americans. Then it re-appears later as Skull and Bones. Masons try to deny that the order of death had anything to do with freemasonry. But how else could a person get Hegel based crap into politics? Join a Masonic lodge and it’s easy! Go ask Adam W. how he did it so easily in 1770’s and also ask GW Bush why he likes Owls so much, while you’re at it. He too is a Hegelian goon pushing a nightmarish global agenda. Look at France burning!! It is bloody hell there and you people cannot see the repeat of history, in front of your faces. I dislike Masons because you were/are too lazy and brainwashed to find out that you were used and abused to push a terrible agenda, and I intend to stand against this evil. If we must destroy Masonry to liberate it to what it should be, by thereby exposing this evil, so B it!

There will be NO more secrets and I will continue to fund and support any organisation which will expose and rout out ALL secret societies. I hold Masonry responsible for allowing, fostering and nourishing the growing evil which is creating a hell for our children to grow up in.

Originally posted by markusjharper
...T’is a shame in this elapsed time, no Mason has tried answering any question about Taxil and his mention of Lucifer, other than asking other questions of their own..."

You opened this discussion by saying "...I intend to prove..." then proceeded to prove nothing. You then proceed to deride those who ask you to do what you promised, accusing them of "piling over each other to destroy a thread." Gosh, we're sorry

...can you tell me why would Leo Taxil wish to lie publicly...

Sure. He lied because he was a rather twisted individual who managed to live quite handsomely at the expense of those gullible enough to buy his nonsense. As to the "100% true" bit, well, anyone capable of deciphering footnotes can see his claims were anything but.

Why do Masons lie and attempt to dispute a virtuous man like John Robison...

Again you betray your lack of knowledge -- of both history and Masonry. Within years of the founding of the U.G.L.o.E. Masonry had spread into France, where it was promptly corrupted and bastardized. The Bible was removed from the altar, and discussion of politics and religion were welcomed in lodge -- thus violating three of the most basic tenets of Regular Masonry.

Again -- your ignorance shines. No US Grand Lodge, nor the U.G.L.o.E. recognize French lodges as Masons. We can do nothing to stop them from calling themselves such, any more than we can stop North Korea from calling itself a democracy. We can do only what other forms of government can do -- refuse "recognition" of an illicit body. That said, I've also never seen any Masonic body deride John Robison as anything other than what he was -- an intelligent man who wrote so marvelously on science but was pathetically out of his league in his attacks on Masonry. In short he railed against the "Illuminati" then called for the suspension of Masonic Lodges, having proven nothing negative about them -- coincidentally much like yourself. Perhaps this fact-in-common explains your apparent affinity for him?

< Snip of lots of irrlevant hoo-hah rambling from 18th Century conspiracy theorists to the recent riots in France. >

Sorry, I tried, but I really can't resist...

Surely you do not believe the French riots are caused because France is too busy making love and drinking fine wine? If Mason Manly Hall were still alive he would admit once again that the Masons were back in action tearing France apart, as they did in the 1700’s.

Are you seriously blaming Masonry in any form for what is happening in France? How do the actions of young hoodlums, of Arab descent, come to be the fault of Masons?

For the record, I -- speaking as a man and only for myself -- believe there are reasonable explanations. Fred Reed has one as good as any I've ever read.

Getting back on topic, sorta, I'll just stop here. Your mind -- such as it is -- is clearly closed on the topic. I've endeavored to take my Father's advice and ensure that mine is open before I suffer my mouth to be likewise.

Other than the rambling above, you've done nothing but parrot the same tired garbage that can be found on any Anti-masonic website.

And here I thought you promised something original....

I really don't have the energy to begin to address the rest of this post. Most intelligent people will do what I'm about to -- back slowly, and carefully away.

I'll do one more thing, though, in the interest of your enlightenment-- Suggest that:
(1) You learn something about Masonry and what it stands for -- preferably from a book written by a Mason, with lots of words and few pictures -- rather than by the works of long dead and debunked charlatans and websites written by charter members of the AFDB Brigade
(2) Take a basic course in The Fundamentals of Logic

DD

You opened this discussion by saying "...I intend to prove..." then proceeded to prove nothing. You then proceed to deride those who ask you to do what you promised, accusing them of "piling over each other to destroy a thread." Gosh, we're sorry

Don’t be sorry – just don’t sway from my main point which was how Leo Taxil spoke in detail regarding Lucifer, Baphomet and Duality and then mixed in tons of silliness to make him sound like a con-man. Once more my point is:

Leo Taxil offered insight and much truth regarding Lucifer as it is understood in Esoteric teachings and Masonry – both of which was not accepted by the average Christian. Thus, it must be then understood that his other ramblings were but a diversion to be used later as an aid to discredit him – thus it discredits all the truth he spoke about Baphomet and all the truth he said about Lucifer and duality etc. I have proven my point but since you don’t agree, it just means you need more evidence. Proof, is what’s placed in the eye of the beholder – I offer evidence ONLY.

Sure. He lied because he was a rather twisted individual who managed to live quite handsomely at the expense of those gullible enough to buy his nonsense. As to the "100% true" bit, well, anyone capable of deciphering footnotes can see his claims were anything but.

Leo lied about having tea and worshiping Satan and such but as I said already -it was tougne in cheek and obviuolsy garbage. However, the real lie was by him admitting he lied in public because he needed an audience and because he was playing a game which makes everything true that he spoke earlier, now thrown out of court so-to-speak as it was attached to all the pure rubbish he spoke. In other words, Leo Taxil wanted to put an end to the Lucifer issue and made it all into a big joke but in reality, a Mason must accept Lucifer as not an evil God like the Christian but a force used for good or evil.

If you wish to discuss this esoteric understanding with me, I am still waiting? But seems you’d rather nit-pick at me and remind me of English class – how typical for a Mason?

Again you betray your lack of knowledge -- of both history and Masonry. Within years of the founding of the U.G.L.o.E. Masonry had spread into France, where it was promptly corrupted and bastardized. The Bible was removed from the altar, and discussion of politics and religion were welcomed in lodge -- thus violating three of the most basic tenets of Regular Masonry.

Tell me how does such a virtuous system like Masonry get so, as you said it “promptly corrupted and bastardized.”? Can you tell me how Masons were so foolish in allowing this to occur? I don’t see masons thanking John Robison for trying to protect Masonry in AMerica from being further corrupted? Closing the lodges would have saved Masonry, not destroy it.

Again -- your ignorance shines. No US Grand Lodge, nor the U.G.L.o.E. recognize French lodges as Masons. We can do nothing to stop them from calling themselves such, any more than we can stop North Korea from calling itself a democracy. We can do only what other forms of government can do -- refuse "recognition" of an illicit body. That said, I've also never seen any Masonic body deride John Robison as anything other than what he was -- an intelligent man who wrote so marvelously on science but was pathetically out of his league in his attacks on Masonry. In short he railed against the "Illuminati" then called for the suspension of Masonic Lodges, having proven nothing negative about them -- coincidentally much like yourself. Perhaps this fact-in-common explains your apparent affinity for him?

So let me get this straight, your implying that some European Masonic lodges got “promptly corrupted and bastardized” and your agreeing that John Robison was correct in his warnings but somehow you feel he was still “pathetically out of his league in his attacks on Masonry”? Then you wrote “In short he railed against the "Illuminati" then called for the suspension of Masonic Lodges, having proven nothing negative about them -- coincidentally much like yourself.”

You state this after you just finished writing that John Robison was correct in the fact the Illuminati did spread into Freemasonry. I think the Masonic Lodges MUST be shut down and G. Washington himself was concerned that the spread was also in America, even if only by individuals. I know your upset, as it sounds unfair to Masons, but I’m afraid that anything as diabolical as this and secret, must be shut down under - even in America it was necessary. I feel this way about the Vatican also.

But you should stop confusing a very simple issue. It is a historical fact that TRUE Masonic lodges got infected in many parts of Europe, PERIOD. I SAY THEY WERE INFETED HERE and you speak about John Robison being pathetically out of his league in his attacks on Masonry! I believe in the Morgan incident (which proves my point even further) and that’s too bad if you disagree with someone like me, or someone else like JQ Adams. I care about the Republic of America, as did JQ Adams.
Let me just state that I think since those French lodges got infected, it might have warranted a more open-minded discussion to the possibility that the US lodges were also compromised. But rather it seems more important for the Mason nowadays to focus on John Robison’s being as you say “pathetically out of his league in his attacks on Masonry”. Boo Hoo!

Are you seriously blaming Masonry in any form for what is happening in France? How do the actions of young hoodlums, of Arab descent, come to be the fault of Masons?

Yes and no. I should have been more clear, as it may seem harsh of me to place blame on Masons. But afterall , it was Masons that allowed the Jacobins to remain inside France (hidden underground) and continue to spawn a Globalist agenda. Where else could they hide – in the Church using pentagrams or other Masonic symbols? How do I know the Jacobins are behind these riots? Well, they are in the white house also (Chiraq is one of them) and they all came from secrety societies and if you understand globalism, you see the tenants of the Illuminati. Beside, Muslims do not just cause riots without funding from large organizations and that organization is secret, just like Masonry. So I blame Masonry only so far as they have allowed protection for those who plotted against established governments in the past.

Other than the rambling above, you've done nothing but parrot the same tired garbage that can be found on any Anti-masonic website. And here I thought you promised something original....

Where do see any reference to Leo Taxil being a double-agent? You just don’t catch on too quickly, do you? I offered something new, didn’t I?

I really don't have the energy to begin to address the rest of this post. Most intelligent people will do what I'm about to -- back slowly, and carefully away.

Then stop back-patting yourself and don’t waste your valuable aether. May be go and spread more lies about the riots being caused by Muslim so mad at France for not letting them have a nicer house to stay in.

I'll do one more thing, though, in the interest of your enlightenment-- Suggest that:
(1) You learn something about Masonry and what it stands for -- preferably from a book written by a Mason, with lots of words and few pictures -- rather than by the works of long dead and debunked charlatans and websites written by charter members of the AFDB Brigade
(2) Take a basic course in The Fundamentals of Logic

I have read and studied, more then you would ever believe and I recommend you answer me about Lucifer, else you prove to be nothing more than just another lodge frat-boy, who may or may not know that Freemasonry is indeed, more than a simple Fraternity and very susceptible to infiltration.

Just a moment, I have a question.


So in essence, you are claiming, that my Grandfather, a 32nd degree member of the Williamsburg Consistory, a good and righteous Christian, a math professor at Westpoint, and an engineer, whom taught me many virtuous values, was in fact a Lucifer/Satan/Anti-God whorshiping fool?

Allow me to quantify that question/statement with the knowledge that I am not a Mason.

Irregardless your argument is null and void, you have provided no factual proof that Masonry as a whole is corrupt. In fact I have yet to see ANY factual evidence on ANY of these threads.

If Freemasonry can produce men the caliber of my Grandfather, then all I have to say to you sir is where do I sign up...

Just a moment, I have a question.


So in essence, you are claiming, that my Grandfather, a 32nd degree member of the Williamsburg Consistory, a good and righteous Christian, a math professor at Westpoint, and an engineer, whom taught me many virtuous values, was in fact a Lucifer/Satan/Anti-God whorshiping fool?

Allow me to quantify that question/statement with the knowledge that I am not a Mason.

Irregardless your argument is null and void, you have provided no factual proof that Masonry as a whole is corrupt. In fact I have yet to see ANY factual evidence on ANY of these threads.

If Freemasonry can produce men the caliber of my Grandfather, then all I have to say to you sir is where do I sign up..

I didn't think you were a Christian either, but your Grandfather was. I'm not even going to ask if you are, lest you'll accuse me of being a Bible thumper.

Yet, organizations don't make the man, secret or otherwise.

I wish to have a proper discussion regarding Leo Taxil being a double agent. I laugh at how far any of you will go to avoid discussing the Lucifer writings, quoted by Taxil, word per word.

Originally posted by markusjharper

But one example: Masons deceive us by attacking people who question anything subversive, or those who try and expose evil. Why do Masons lie and attempt to dispute a virtuous man like John Robison “Proofs of a Conspiracy”

Man, talk about deception! Where here was John Robinson attacked? I daresay you just made that up.

Now, the following is taken from the online Catholic encyclopedia (you remember the Catholics, the ones who persecuted the Illuminati in the first place):

Concerning the influence actually exerted by the Illuminati, the statements of ex-Freemasons--L. A. Hossman, J. A. Starck, J. Robinson, the Abbé Barruel, etc.--must be accepted with reserve, when they ascribe to the order a leading rôle in the outbreak and progress of the French Revolution of 1789. Their presentation of facts is often erroneous, their inferences are untenable, and their theses not only lack proof, but, in view of our present knowledge of the French Revolution (cf., e. g., Aulard, "Hist. pol. de la Rév. Franç.", 3rd ed., 1905; Lavisse-Rambaud, "Hist. générale", VIII, 1896), they are extremely improbable.

www.newadvent.org...

The above is not an "attack" on Robinson. Apparently, you are either unable to distinguish the difference between an "attack" and the pointing out of a fact, or a simply trying to twist logic.

Since Masonry was polluted by Hegelian sickness, Masons have always supported anything anti-national and want globalisation on a political level. They particularity hate Catholics and will support all groups to rival the church and state. History does not lie, like a Mason who forgets his roots.

Everything in the above is a complete fiction, and I think most members of ATS are intelligent enough to realize it.

Leo Taxil is a Masons’ best pal!

Most Masons have never heard of Taxil. He is only of interest historically, and to anti-Masons who continue to fall for his bait.

And Morgan was never found according to Masons but according to eyewitnesses and family, he was kidnapped and never found. I guess the Masons were pretty darn upset about him revealing too much.

Ah, but that's why the whole thing doesn't make sense. Morgan didn't reveal anything that hadn't already been in print for over a century. So, the question is, why would a Mason murder Morgan for publishing something that had already been published before either of them were even born?

John Quincy Adams was no fool!

On that, you are correct. He saw the opportunity to capitalize on mass hysteria for his own political gain, and took it. Sorta like George Bush with 9/11.

Leo Taxil was a mason agent. He hated Christians and was a die-hard Mason. If you disagree, be inclined to dispute his writings of real substance.

It's not a matter of disagreeing, it's simply a matter of facts. Taxil was never a Master Mason, which means he was never a member of any Masonic Lodge. He had been expelled while still an Entered Apprentice. And I've never seen any writings of his that were "of real substance"; they're all ridiculous nonsense.

Can you call this a lie? By calling him a lair, you prove he spoke the truth.

Yeah, that makes sense. Not.

Yes of course – Leo was joking. But surely you can understand that even a two year-old would find this statement rather ludicrous.

Wrong. The anti-Masons bought it hook, line, and sinker, and many still do.

I bet you think the early Christians were just as dumb as most people are nowadays. I can assure you that they knew more truth back in those days about Freemasonry, and then many of us do today.

Freemasonry did not exist until the middle ages, and when it was founded, it was an all-Christian organization. Therefore, your statement is by default meaningless.

I AM very tired though of being told by Masons that they do not worship Lucifer or M’aat, when I know they most certainly do. I’m only quoting Pike (there are many more proofs) and you know that I am correct. Is that a bad thing, NO, but its true nonethless, so admit it?

Yawn.

You haven't quoted Pike as to anything of the sort. Pike didn't worship any "Lucifer". Pike was a baptized Communicant of Christ Episcopal Church in Washington, D.C., and as such he accepted the Apostles Creed, Nicene Creed, and Athanasian Creed.

There will be NO more secrets and I will continue to fund and support any organisation which will expose and rout out ALL secret societies. I hold Masonry responsible for allowing, fostering and nourishing the growing evil which is creating a hell for our children to grow up in.

And I hold your mommy responsible for allowing you to use her computer.

The above is not an "attack" on Robinson. Apparently, you are either unable to distinguish the difference between an "attack" and the pointing out of a fact, or a simply trying to twist logic.

Are you expecting me to care what the Catholics think? Didn’t they think the earth was flat until just recently? I think those references the Catholics use (cf., e. g., Aulard, "Hist. pol. de la Rév. Franç.", 3rd ed., 1905; Lavisse-Rambaud, "Hist. générale", VIII, 1896) are not as accurate as Robinson and Barruel. History can be re-written and it was re-written by the Guggenheim and Carnegie foundations – refer to Norman Dodd’s work in exposing the income tax exempt foundations and the re-education of America into collectivism etc.

Most Masons have never heard of Taxil. He is only of interest historically, and to anti-Masons who continue to fall for his bait.

May be of more interest to those historically but we are speaking about the scapegoat which Masons just love to refer to.

Ah, but that's why the whole thing doesn't make sense. Morgan didn't reveal anything that hadn't already been in print for over a century. So, the question is, why would a Mason murder Morgan for publishing something that had already been published before either of them were even born?

What evidence do you have that suggests Morgan spoke of nothing new? Did you just make that up? Even still, people do not always read but Morgan simply blew the lid open

On that, you are correct. He saw the opportunity to capitalize on mass hysteria for his own political gain, and took it. Sorta like George Bush with 9/11.

Do you have any evidence to support that JQ Adams would throw away his honor to simply capitalize on mass hysteria of the public?

It's not a matter of disagreeing, it's simply a matter of facts. Taxil was never a Master Mason, which means he was never a member of any Masonic Lodge. He had been expelled while still an Entered Apprentice. And I've never seen any writings of his that were "of real substance"; they're all ridiculous nonsense.

So are you’re implying that since Taxil was not Master Mason, he never knew anything about the true meaning of Lucifer or holder/bringer of the light etc? Did he make all that up even though, when I look into morals and dogma and see that how Leo Taxil, really did understand that Lucifer was not Satan.

Wrong. The anti-Masons bought it hook, line, and sinker, and many still do.

They bought that Satan has tea on Venus? Are you serious? I think most Christians saw through the lies but the books that Taxil wrote were not creating anything new, except that they mixed in truth with a ton of crap, in an attempt to discredit him and the truth.

Freemasonry did not exist until the middle ages, and when it was founded, it was an all-Christian organization. Therefore, your statement is by default meaningless.

You need to find a new lodge because you are very incorrect. Masonry started long before the time of Christ. Don’t you see, none of you can agree.

Yawn.

You haven't quoted Pike as to anything of the sort. Pike didn't worship any "Lucifer". Pike was a baptized Communicant of Christ Episcopal Church in Washington, D.C., and as such he accepted the Apostles Creed, Nicene Creed, and Athanasian Creed.

“The true name of Satan, the Kabalists say, is that of Yahveh reversed; for Satan is not a black god... Lucifer, the Light Bearer! Strange and mysterious name to give to the Spirit of Darkness! Lucifer, the Son of the Morning! Is it he who bears the Light...Doubt it not!" “

What does Pike worship, please do tell? He worships the light – or Lucifer!

Originally posted by markusjharper
What evidence do you have that suggests Morgan spoke of nothing new? Did you just make that up? Even still, people do not always read but Morgan simply blew the lid open

LOGIC ALERT

The onus is not on somebody else to prove a negative (which is what the above question demands).
The onus is on you to prove that Morgan did "blow the lid open".

Carry on.

Your original premise seems to have been that Taxil was "a double agent" -- that somehow his conspiring against Masonry and the Catholic Church was done in service of both. That in itself was an interesting, if preposterous, concept, and would have no doubt been treated as a curiosity were it not for your subsequent posts which seem to better indicate your capacity.

In navigating such a target-rich environment as that offered by your posts, it is difficult to know where to begin, and moreso where to end. As I lack the time (not to mention inclination) to devote my life to attempting to educate you, I must subjugate my natural inclination to "deny (all) ignorance" and stick to enough points to make the case.

Here goes...

Originally posted by markusjharper"...in reality, a Mason must accept Lucifer as not an evil God like the Christian but a force used for good or evil..."

Again you demonstrate your ignorance and arrogance, proclaiming to those who ARE masons what they "must believe" by parroting of nonsense spouted by other "authorities"

Tell me how does such a virtuous system like Masonry get so, as you said it “promptly corrupted and bastardized.”?

By Men. Just like every other institution of great potential. Judging an institution by the actions of a small percentage of its members is ridiculous, especially when the rest of the members have spoken publicly against said actions and members.

Can you tell me how Masons were so foolish in allowing this to occur?

I already did. Read my post. There was nothing -- other than publicly denouncing said bastardization -- they could do about it.

What would you have them do?

You state this after you just finished writing that John Robison was correct in the fact the Illuminati did spread into Freemasonry.

I said nothing of the sort. Read my posts.

G. Washington himself was concerned that the spread was also in America

Evidence?

I know your upset

You know NOTHING -- least of all about me.

I've had no choice but to snip lots of drivel, wherein you again demonstrate your incomplete or irrational grasp of Masonry, history, and reality. You pathetically attempt to place yourself in the company of many great men -- as if claiming that disparaging your nonsense constituted disparaging them. You go on to blame the actions of some semi-literate teenage muslims on Masons and "Jacobins" and span an ocean placing "Chiraq" in the "white house" as a "tenant" of the illuminati.

Beside, Muslims do not just cause riots without funding from large organizations

Yeah, striking a match to someone else's car takes a lot of "funding." Do you really believe that these people -- who have made painfully clear their ridiculous reasons for their barbaric actions -- are all really in the employ of some secret "large organization"? If so, you should take your medicine.

"...that organization is secret, just like Masonry..."

What exactly is secret about Masonry? Lodges are marked as such and listed in the phone book, our members identify themselves with rings, lapel pins and auto emblems. Our meeting times are posted on signs around town. We march in parades, hold funeral services for our members, fund (FREE!) hospitals for crippled children -- What exactly could we do to be less "secret"?

Where do see any reference to Leo Taxil being a double-agent?

You just don’t catch on too quickly, do you?

I offered something new, didn’t I?

All over your posts -- this seemed to be your entire premise!

Forgive me, I'm slow.

I'm afraid your "something new" has gotten lost amongst your rambling about Taxil, Washington, Robison, Muslims, Masons, Pike, Chiraq, the white house, Zionists, France, Illuminati, Catholics and a partridge in a pear tree.

I'm sure this is an imperfect list of your suspects, but honestly (if Taxil=Double wasn't your point) I'm a bit lost. I'm also sure I'm not alone. Maybe you should start over, try to stay on topic, try to support your conclusions in something resembling a reasoned argument. Maybe even draw us a map? That I am sure would be a treat.

I have read and studied, more then you would ever believe

It wouldn't take much study to end with a quantity that would constitute "more then (sic) I would ever believe" of you.

For clarity, my rejection of your nonsense has nothing to do with my status as a Mason, but rather from the blessing of God that is my status as a rational and intelligent being. You proclaim "proof" and provide none, later claiming to have instead offered "evidence" yet we've seen none of that either.

If we needed further evidence of your "studies" we need only use your last post in this thread.

“The true name of Satan, the Kabalists say, is that of Yahveh reversed; for Satan is not a black god... Lucifer, the Light Bearer! Strange and mysterious name to give to the Spirit of Darkness! Lucifer, the Son of the Morning! Is it he who bears the Light...Doubt it not!"

What does Pike worship, please do tell? He worships the light – or Lucifer!

The quality of your "study" is only as good as the source you plagiarize. Let's examine this, in context:

The first half of your quote comes from Chapter 3 of Albert Pike's Morals and Dogma.

This chapter is Pike's discussion of the Third Degree of Scottish Rite Masonry. In this lecture, Brother Pike transcends a discussion on Symbolism and Deity in an attempt to "...understand literally the symbols and allegories of Oriental books as to ante-historical matters..."

40 pages into this discussion, on page 102 in the midst of enumerating the teachings of "the Kabalists" he makes the first part of your statement. Unlike your source, I have the integrity to post it in context. I will place the minute segment your source twisted into its lie in plain text, to distinguish it from the rest -- from the truth which I will place in bold. [My comments are enclosed in brackets]. Italics are preserved in the original.

The true name of Satan, the Kabalists say, [Note: not "the Masons say"] is that of Yahveh reversed; for Satan is not a black god, but the negation of God. The Devil is the personification of Atheism or Idolatry.

For the Initiates, [that is, Initiates in the Kabalistic religion he's discussing] this is not a Person, but a Force, created for good, but which may serve for evil. It is the instrument of Liberty or Free Will. They represent this Force, which presides over the physical generation, under the mythologic and horned form of the God PAN; thence came the he-goat of the Sabbat, brother of the Ancient Serpent, and the Light-bearer or Phosphor, of which the poets have made the false Lucifer of the legend.

As you can see, Pike is not teaching Masonic Dogma, but rather relating what "Oriental books" had to say about "ante-historical matters." Furthermore, he clearly states that "Lucifer" is not a God -- to "the Kabalists" or Masons -- and is obviously speaking of Satan in negative terms.

To complete this flagrant slander, we must jump well ahead in the context.

Over 210 pages later, on Page 312, Brother Pike opens his discussion of the nineteenth degree.

This Degree concerns the sad nature of humanity -- how slowly we progress and how quickly the unsparing ravages of barbarous force can destroy good things that took generations to accomplish.

Again, I will place the minute segment your source twisted into its lie in plain text, to distinguish it from the rest -- from the truth which I will place in bold. [My comments are enclosed in brackets]. Italics are preserved in the original.

At the bottom of page 320 he issues a challenge to all good Masons, to continue to work in spite of the destruction others will cause. He indicates that even our Holy books demand us to work to discern their exhortations to still more work.

Therefore faint not, nor be weary in well-doing! Be not discouraged at men's apathy, nor disgusted with their follies, nor tired of their indifference! Care not for returns and results; but see only what there is to do, and do it, leaving the results to God! Soldier of the Cross! Sworn Knight of Justice, Truth, and Toleration! Good Knight and True! be patient and work!

The Apocalypse, that sublime Kabalistic and prophetic Summary

p. 321

of all the occult figures, divides its images into three Septenaries, after each of which there is silence in Heaven. There are Seven Seals to be opened, that is to say, Seven mysteries to know, and Seven difficulties to overcome, Seven trumpets to sound, and Seven cups to empty.

The Apocalypse is, to those who receive the nineteenth Degree, the Apotheosis of that Sublime Faith which aspires to God alone, and despises all the pomps and works of Lucifer. LUCIFER, the Light-bearer! Strange and mysterious name to give to the Spirit of Darkness! Lucifer, the Son of the Morning! Is it he who bears the Light, and with its splendors intolerable blinds feeble, sensual, or selfish Souls? Doubt it not! for traditions are full of Divine Revelations and Inspirations: and Inspiration is not of one Age nor of one Creed. Plato and Philo, also, were inspired.

The Apocalypse, indeed, is a book as obscure as the Sohar.

It is written hieroglyphically with numbers and images; and the Apostle often appeals to the intelligence of the Initiated. "Let him who hath knowledge, understand! let him who understands, calculate!" he often says, after an allegory or the mention of a number. Saint John, the favorite Apostle, and the Depositary of all the Secrets of the Saviour, therefore did not write to be understood by the multitude.

You, Sir, have provided ample evidence to support the conclusion that you lack the wisdom, knowledge and experience -- all generally born of the type of study I and others have recommended to you -- necessary to wonder what all those ellipsis were replacing. Further, you lack the initiative required to go find out, instead attacking, like the basest brute of the animal kingdom, that which you do not understand.

Further, your source is a liar of the worst sort. As a "Sworn Knight of Justice, Truth, and Toleration" I'll withold judgement as to whether or not you are in appropriate company, as I prefer to believe the best of my fellow man, even in the face of all apparent evidence. I believe you posess enough of the divine spark to do better in the future.

I will however make one final attempt to encourage you to stop parrotting nonsense and do some actual study for yourself.

In the interest of shedding some light on the "nefarious" nature of Masonry, permit me to interject the quote that opens this chapter:

THE true Mason labors for the benefit of those who are to come after him, and for the advancement and improvement of his race. That is a poor ambition which contents itself within the limits of a single life. All men who deserve to live, desire to survive their funerals, and to live afterward in the good that they have done mankind, rather than in the fading characters written in men's memories. Most men desire to leave some work behind them that may outlast their own day and brief generation. That is an instinctive impulse, given by God, and often found in the rudest human heart; the surest proof of the soul's immortality, and of the fundamental difference between man and the wisest brutes. To plant the trees that, after we are dead, shall shelter our children, is as natural as to love the shade of those our fathers planted. The rudest unlettered husbandman, painfully conscious of his own inferiority, the poorest widowed mother, giving her life-blood to those who pay only for the work of her needle, will toil and stint themselves to educate their child, that he may take a higher station in the world than they;--and of such are the world's greatest benefactors.

But I digress.

Really, son, you need to bring a better game if you want to play with the grownups.

DD

Originally posted by markusjharper

Ah, but that's why the whole thing doesn't make sense. Morgan didn't reveal anything that hadn't already been in print for over a century. So, the question is, why would a Mason murder Morgan for publishing something that had already been published before either of them were even born?

What evidence do you have that suggests Morgan spoke of nothing new? Did you just make that up? Even still, people do not always read but Morgan simply blew the lid open

Try this:
freemasonry.bcy.ca...

I actually used to be a typical Republican who accepted in a right and left and all that nonsense. Surely, you do not believe I awoke one day and betrayed by better more comforted ideology? I was very concerned about the looming threat of Islamic extremists after 9-11. I saw the mainstream news and bought the official story of 9-11. Yet, like many, I came to see the truth and my entire life changed. I actually read the Koran and compared it to the Bible and I had the foolish intention of trying to prove that the Koran was causing the evil somehow. But I eventually understood (as a true historian does) that no-one can read any book at face value and know anything, nor blame the book for the actions of the person. In all evil, we find the common factor is politics and those groups that get into bed with public policy and at the very worse, become cartels. In this day and age, it would seem hard to understand that Islam is not anything like what these insane Mullahs are now saying, or what we see on the mainstream news but I know that Islam is not the Mullahs and even they were moderate in the past; just as Masonry is not what you are now taught and I can prove this by simply asking "when did Masonry first begin" and I will get a thousand different answers. Imagine Christian not being sure when Christ came? It would seem rather ridiculous! Had I asked this long ago to a Mason, the answer would have come from a man who understood what I mean how Masons do not even know their own history. I insist that something so well preserved from corruption could not appear in such disorder, unless by design.

Again you demonstrate your ignorance and arrogance, proclaiming to those who ARE masons what they "must believe" by parroting of nonsense spouted by other "authorities"

First of all, I do not need to parrot anything. And second, what makes you so sure I’m incorrect in my assessment that Masons worship the great Architect of the Universe, or that of M’aat, or that of Lucifer? Are they not all one in the same God, Mason?

Why don’t you tell me then who do you worship or call God? If it’s so hard for you to do, then don’t bother, I don’t you to have a heart attack. So do you tend to use arithmetic and take an average, just to fit in or do you care to solve the riddle which is that Masonry is not what is should be and it has been corrupted? You must know that I would not stake anything here on this forum, unless I have actually once been involved with a Lodge in my hometown. I read Manly Hall’s work long before most Masons could even accept that their exists such a thing as the Kabala, or that Masonry is not anything less than that ancient system passed down from before the time of Christ. I take it you are somehow attempting make a fool of me by challenging my esoteric knowledge even though you reveal nothing of substance about yourself, other than calling me an ignorant, or correcting my grammatical writing skills. I have an esoteric background, which I have been hesitant to reveal thus far, and I think you lack any ability to discuss much more than what the lodges teach you. Do not underestimate me just as yet.

By Men. Just like every other institution of great potential. Judging an institution by the actions of a small percentage of its members is ridiculous, especially when the rest of the members have spoken publicly against said actions and members.

I already did. Read my post. There was nothing -- other than publicly denouncing said bastardization -- they could do about it.

What would you have them do?

Restore to truth Masonic history and restore the good name of John Robison by proving to me that you still stand for the original virtuous tenants of Freemasonry. All you have proven thus far is that you could not measure up to a Mason like John Robison, who had the courage to be ridiculed and stand against the norm and expose evil. You think that Masonry is still what it once was, and that Trojan Horses no longer exist. To be a Mason does not mean to go along with all your peers, it means to search for the truth – in all things; albeit even turning your back on your fellow Mason and embracing a non-mason should he stand for righteousness.

quote: G. Washington himself was concerned that the spread was also in America

Evidence?

memory.loc.gov...
The letters of Washington can be found here. Read his words and you will find out he knew all too well, that Jacobins were spreading into the Lodges in America (by individuals), but where he differed in scope at the time was in the severity of the infection. However, he was not alive to witness it's acute stage, as it occured in later times; thus the other Presidents must take it from there. What has come to pass would have proven the threat was far greater then understood at that time.

You know NOTHING -- least of all about me.

I've had no choice but to snip lots of drivel, wherein you again demonstrate your incomplete or irrational grasp of Masonry, history, and reality. You pathetically attempt to place yourself in the company of many great men -- as if claiming that disparaging your nonsense constituted disparaging them. You go on to blame the actions of some semi-literate teenage Muslims on Masons and "Jacobins" and span an ocean placing "Chirac" in the "white house" as a "tenant" of the illuminati.

Correct! And I, unlike the few foolish Masons, members of the OTO, Church of Scientology etc, prefer not to use the centers in the Kabala to remote view you, either. I also don’t know why you seem to be opposed to the story of Troy? You couldn’t see a conspiracy if it were right in front of your face unless it was on CNN or parroted by a lodge.

Yeah, striking a match to someone else's car takes a lot of "funding." Do you really believe that these people -- who have made painfully clear their ridiculous reasons for their barbaric actions -- are all really in the employ of some secret "large organization"? If so, you should take your medicine.

Where did these groups spring up from? We got lots of pissed off Muslims in USA and Canada also but they don’t riot. It’s called politics and you must ask who stands to gain. Where were the police when they should have been protecting the French people’s property and safety? Where and how could this be only happening o France when they are the last place to support any war in Iraq etc? It makes no sense and you better wake up and understand that I KNOW Chirac wants a military police state and so he just loves the chaos. Now do you think Islam teaches to commit suicide or burn cars? When did all this stuff begin to occur? Sooner or later you’ll have to learn that it has to do with politics (using religion as an excuse) and not religion. My only problem with Masonry is that it is veiled in politics and the means in which they are succeeding to continue doing so, is mostly due to its level of secrecy.

What exactly is secret about Masonry? Lodges are marked as such and listed in the phone book, our members identify themselves with rings, lapel pins and auto emblems. Our meeting times are posted on signs around town. We march in parades, hold funeral services for our members, fund (FREE!) hospitals for crippled children -- What exactly could we do to be less "secret"?

A frat club not much better than Skull and Bones! A 32 degree Mason knows nothing about any conspiracy because he is not supposed to know. The Masons at the bottom are decent people but that is not to say that at the top levels, it is controlled by a sinister force which was not there until the 1700’s.

For clarity, my rejection of your nonsense has nothing to do with my status as a Mason, but rather from the blessing of God that is my status as a rational and intelligent being. You proclaim "proof" and provide none, later claiming to have instead offered "evidence" yet we've seen none of that either.

You’re too proud, Mason. A rational and intelligent person who does not believe in Conspiracies is a huge fool. You forget what Roosevelt said about nothing happens in politics by accident.

quote: The true name of Satan, the Kabalists say, [Note: not "the Masons say"] is that of Yahveh reversed; for Satan is not a black god, but the negation of God. The Devil is the personification of Atheism or Idolatry.

For the Initiates, [that is, Initiates in the Kabalistic religion he's discussing] this is not a Person, but a Force, created for good, but which may serve for evil. It is the instrument of Liberty or Free Will. They represent this Force, which presides over the physical generation, under the mythologic and horned form of the God PAN; thence came the he-goat of the Sabbat, brother of the Ancient Serpent, and the Light-bearer or Phosphor, of which the poets have made the false Lucifer of the legend.

First of all, I have Pike’s eBook and I did not plagiarize but merely pasted the quotes of Pikes as requested. If you want to twist my words go ahead. And I also disagree with your assessment by Pike. As I was relating Pikes comment to what Leo Taxil said about Lucifer and Satan. Lucifer is not evil according to Pike but Satan is the negation of God. Lucifer is not Satan; as per both Leo Taxil and Pike. Taxil spoke too much truth about Pike’s esoteric understandings to be simply called a liar.

As you can see, Pike is not teaching Masonic Dogma, but rather relating what "Oriental books" had to say about "ante-historical matters." Furthermore, he clearly states that "Lucifer" is not a God -- to "the Kabalists" or Masons -- and is obviously speaking of Satan in negative terms.

And what is an archangel (Lucifer) if not a God? Can you explain that?

Originally posted by markusjharper
And what is an archangel (Lucifer) if not a God? Can you explain that?

Errrr.... you've answered your own question. In popular myth, Lucifer is an Archangel. In Biblical literature he appears only once in Isiaiah and is a Babylonian prince.
Lucifer as Satan only really took off in recent times with John Milton's "Paradise Lost".

I wouldn't expect you to know any of the above as it is blatantly obvious that you don't study your subject, although you do have a habit of spouting book names (not that you understand thier contents).
If you would like to discuss this further feel free and I will go into the Hebrew and Latin meanings of the word, the history of it, how it ended up in the Bible and how it came to be misinterpreted as Satan.
Maybe I can educate you with fact rather than the falsities that you tend to use.

Alternatively you can use the rather good ATS site search engine and pull up a couple of threads where this has been discussed and thoroughly debunked before - and not, may I add, by Freemasons.

I am not confused; I AM very tired though of being told by Masons that they do not worship Lucifer or M’aat, when I know they most certainly do.

Please provide verifyable documentry evidence of this assertion. In Particular
the Ma'at reference.

Imagine Christian not being sure when Christ came?

Of which "christ" do you speak? the term before being hijacked by the pauline church meant simply the anointed one. there were several that
claimed this title including David, Solomon, and all the Kings of Israel.

So is it David? Solomon ? Or perhaps the one that the title was claimed for
the R. Yehoshua bar Yosef?

And second, what makes you so sure I’m incorrect in my assessment that Masons worship the great Architect of the Universe, or that of M’aat, or that of Lucifer? Are they not all one in the same God, Mason?

Your ignorance is showing! Ma'at is not a God. full stop, end of story.

Other Names: Ma'at

Patron of: truth, law and universal order.

Appearance: A woman wearing a crown surmounted by a huge ostrich feather. Her totem symbol is a stone platform or foundation, representing the stable base on which order is built.

Description: Maat was the personification of the fundamental order of the universe, without which all of creation would perish. The primary duty of the pharaoh was to uphold this order by maintaining the law and administering justice. To reflect this, many pharaohs took the title "Beloved of Maat," emphasizing their focus on justice and truth.

At any event in which something would be judged, Maat was said to be present, and her name would be invoked so that the judge involved would rule correctly and impartially. In the underworld, the heart of the deceased was weighed by Anubis against Maat's feather. If the heart was heavy with wicked deeds, it would outweigh the feather, and the soul would be fed to Ammit. But if the scales were balanced, indicating that the deceased was a just and honorable person in life, he would be welcomed by Osiris into the Blessed Land. Maat's presence in all worlds was universal, and all the gods deferred to her.

Worship: Worshipped and revered widely throughout all of Egypt. Even the gods are shown praising Maat.

Relations: Daughter of Ra, wife of Thoth.

In the story of Maat - she was the wife of Thoth and had eight children with him. The most important of her children was Amun. These eight were the chief gods the Ennead - creating the Earth and all that is in it.
/quote]

Now do you think Islam teaches to commit suicide or burn cars? When did all this stuff begin to occur?

lets see , Sal al Din ? Baiber? the Crusades? Have you given any thought to
the possibility of any incursion of an xian army being viewed as another crusade?

[edit on 23-11-2005 by stalkingwolf]

I'll probably address more of your nonsense later, but this one is easy.

quote: G. Washington himself was concerned that the spread was also in America

Evidence?

Originally posted by markusjharpermemory.loc.gov...
The letters of Washington can be found here. Read his words and you will find out he knew all too well, that Jacobins were spreading into the Lodges in America

You really should check the sources you post instead of parroting the dishonest spewings of others.

From a query run at the site you referenced:

In this letter, Brother Washington acknowledged the gift from Mr. "George Washington Snyder Of Fredericktown (now Frederick), Md" of Mr. Robison's book. He says:

Sir: Many apologies are due to you, for my not acknowledging the receipt of your obliging favour of the 22d. Ulto, and for not thanking you, at an earlier period, for the Book [Proofs of a Conspiracy &c, by John Robison.] you had the goodness to send me.

I have heard much of the nefarious, and dangerous plan, and doctrines of the Illuminati, but never saw the Book until you were pleased to send it to me. The same causes which have prevented my acknowledging the receipt of your letter have prevented my reading the Book...

I believe notwithstanding, that none of the Lodges in this Country are contaminated with the principles ascribed to the Society of the Illuminati.

So what we apparently have here is (1) Someone sent Brother G.W. a book (2) he was aware of the rumors but didn't think it important enough to read -- even after it was given to him and [3] he specifically said the opposite of what you claim.

In another letter we find him writing to the same correspondent:

Mount Vernon, October 24, 1798.

Revd Sir: ... It was not my intention to doubt that, the Doctrines of the Illuminati, and principles of Jacobinism had not spread in the United States. On the contrary, no one is more truly satisfied of this fact than I am.

The idea that I meant to convey, was, that I did not believe that the Lodges of Free Masons in this Country had, as Societies, endeavoured to propagate the diabolical tenets of the first, or pernicious principles of the latter (if they are susceptible of seperation).

Here -- AGAIN -- we find that your parroting of supposed "evidence" in fact belies your assertion, and as a result you end up looking like ... well... never mind.

You'll do a lot better if you read things for yourself instead of parroting quotes from others, especially when said "others" are as sloppy and dishonest as the "examples" you've given thus far.

Really, man -- this is just too easy.

Any grownups want to play?

DD

Edit: Rookie Formatting

[edit on 23-11-2005 by Dedicated_Dad]

Please provide verifyable documentry evidence of this assertion. In Particular the Ma'at reference.

Run fast you do but negate to check your own Masonic website which of course (as always) has a section, just to refute the truth.

As for speaking about Christ and wanting to know what did I mean when referring to Christians? “Up is down and down is up" and as is above, is as of below. Could Christ as referred to by Christians = Jesus = Joshua = Yeshua? They all share something common to the time period but you see Mason, that's what's lacking in your knowledge of Masonic history, an honest history that all Masons can ascribe a fair time perod to.

Your ignorance is showing! Ma'at is not a God. full stop, end of story.

Did I reveal too much? What do you consider it to represent?


]

[edit on 23-11-2005 by markusjharper]

I'm getting nauseous reading all this "brother" this and "brother" that rubbish. No offense but when will you learn to accept that this plantation (earth) is not ONLY confined to "brothers" and "sisters" of a lodge? Get real man!

So what we apparently have here is (1) Someone sent Brother G.W. a book (2) he was aware of the rumors but didn't think it important enough to read -- even after it was given to him and [3] he specifically said the opposite of what you claim.

Actually, your BROTHER Washington was rather a Baptist who was not a happy Mason and thus never went back into any Masonic lodge since being forced not to - and for good reason.

Revd Sir: ... It was not my intention to doubt that, the Doctrines of the Illuminati, and principles of Jacobinism had not spread in the United States. On the contrary, no one is more truly satisfied of this fact than I am.

The idea that I meant to convey, was, that I did not believe that the Lodges of Free Masons in this Country had, as Societies, endeavoured to propagate the diabolical tenets of the first, or pernicious principles of the latter (if they are susceptible of seperation).

Seems clear to me that he confirms that individuals spread Jacobinism to America. But the later Presidents confirmed the infiltration into Masonry by closing down the lodges.

You'll do a lot better if you read things for yourself instead of parroting quotes from others, especially when said "others" are as sloppy and dishonest as the "examples" you've given thus far.

In case you have not noticed how important a concept is and how un-important loads of filler is on a forum: Anyone can do a Google search. I go by memory and prefer not to jumble with links (unless needed) for the most part and I made a fair case which you lend me no credit for and I do not expect the likes of you too, anyhow.

Originally posted by markusjharper

Your ignorance is showing! Ma'at is not a God. full stop, end of story.

Did I reveal too much? What do you consider it to represent?

As anyone who studies Egyptian mythology would know Ma'at was seen as a way of life.
It was balance. It was the fundamental order of the universe and even the Egyptian gods themselves were depicted worshipping it.

Probably the closest thing we have to it in Christianity is "The Word", although the Bible doesn't depict God worshipping it - rather He is entwined with it.



Now I've answered your question, maybe you could tell me what you think Ma'at represented?

Originally posted by markusjharper
Actually, your BROTHER Washington was rather a Baptist

Are you trying to be funny? Really -- this has become simply comical.

It appears from all evidence I have seen -- if one were inclined to define his beliefs -- that Brother Washington was likely a Deist

Further, in his May 10, 1789 Letter to the United Baptist Churches in Virginia he refers to them (Baptists) in language that would make it obvious that he did not consider himself "one of them."

I would welcome any evidence you may have to support this latest uneducated claim, although I hope you're beginning to learn not to serve me up any more softballs. Try to make it credible, huh?

Baptist who was not a happy Mason and thus never went back into any Masonic lodge since being forced not to - and for good reason.

Wow -- in spite of appearances of impossibility, your "scholarship" hits a new low.

Show me one bit of evidence that supports your claim that Brother Washington was "an unhappy Mason" or was "forced" "never [to go] back into any Masonic Lodge." I really can't wait to see this one.

Seems clear to me that [Brother Washington] confirms that individuals spread Jacobinism to America.

Your original claim, however was that "Lodges of Freemasons" had done so, and that Brother Washington was "worried" about this "fact." That's the nice thing about forums like ATS -- any interested party can review exactly what everyone said. In reading this, I'm mindful of the actions of a child who has been caught in a lie -- denial or deflection, claiming that they "didn't really say that" or that they "meant something else."

But the later Presidents confirmed the infiltration into Masonry by closing down the lodges.

Now it's "later Presidents"? You know, all this running around in circles is getting old, but what the heck ...

OK -- I'll bite...

Which "later Presidents" had anything to do with "closing down" which lodges? Do tell -- Please? Evidence?

You'll do a lot better if you read things for yourself instead of parroting quotes from others, especially when said "others" are as sloppy and dishonest as the "examples" you've given thus far.

In case you have not noticed how important a concept is and how un-important loads of filler is on a forum: ... I go by memory and prefer not to jumble with links (unless needed) for the most part ...

I get the sense that you say "filler" where the rest of us would use a word like -- oh -- "Evidence."

Yeah -- you wouldn't want to go junking up a forum with such "unimportant filler"

Are you saying all the the demonstrable inaccuracies in your statements are due to the "fact" that you "go by memory"? If so, your memory seems to be your worst enemy -- you might want to start taking notes!

and I made a fair case which you lend me no credit for and I do not expect the likes of you too, anyhow.

See, this is the problem. You've not made any case -- "fair" or otherwise.

Would you please define for me, and the others here, exactly what you believe constitutes "the likes of [me]"?

This should be fun...

Just when I thought the spinning was stopping........

Originally posted by markusjharper

Don’t be sorry – just don’t sway from my main point which was how Leo Taxil spoke in detail regarding Lucifer, Baphomet and Duality and then mixed in tons of silliness to make him sound like a con-man. Once more my point is:

Leo Taxil offered insight and much truth regarding Lucifer as it is understood in Esoteric teachings and Masonry – both of which was not accepted by the average Christian. Thus, it must be then understood that his other ramblings were but a diversion to be used later as an aid to discredit him – thus it discredits all the truth he spoke about Baphomet and all the truth he said about Lucifer and duality etc. I have proven my point but since you don’t agree, it just means you need more evidence. Proof, is what’s placed in the eye of the beholder – I offer evidence ONLY.

Then you go on to say this about Taxil....

Leo lied about having tea and worshiping Satan and such but as I said already -it was tougne in cheek and obviuolsy garbage. However, the real lie was by him admitting he lied in public because he needed an audience and because he was playing a game which makes everything true that he spoke earlier, now thrown out of court so-to-speak as it was attached to all the pure rubbish he spoke. In other words, Leo Taxil wanted to put an end to the Lucifer issue and made it all into a big joke but in reality, a Mason must accept Lucifer as not an evil God like the Christian but a force used for good or evil.

So what I'm understanding here, is that when Taxil says things you agree with and supports your beliefs and/or arguments he's right and dead on...

But when he says stuff you know to be false... and he presents it as fact its "tounge in cheek and obviously garbage".

So which is it?

Originally posted by markusjharper
Actually, your BROTHER Washington was rather a Baptist who was not a happy Mason and thus never went back into any Masonic lodge since being forced not to - and for good reason.
[much ridiculous nonsense snipped here]

You're completely delusional. BAPTIST????

George Washington (although not a frequent church-goer) was an Episcopalian. Some claim he was a Diest, although he was never documented as saying so himself. Episcopalian (i.e. Anglican...Church of England or as I lovingly call it "Catholic-Lite")

As for Masonry...he was the Master (President) of Alexandria Lodge...seems like he must have contributed quite a lot to work his way through the offices leading to Master (you don't just "jump" into that spot and you dont' get it by showing up once or twice)

Do some LEGITIMATE research or stop wasting time...