Freemasonry is NOT a Religion!

Freemasonry is definitely a religion. Its core focus is eugenics. It has

to do with superior types of people and those down at the bottom which are

sometimes referred to as the base. Sorry for talking about the fact that Free-

masonry isn't just some do good fraternity that helps to raise money for

charitable organizations.

Pike also wrote page 213: "Every Masonic Lodge is a temple of religion; and its teachings are instruction in religion."

I guess what we are left with is trying to figure out which time he was lying?


This is exactly what I mean by religion. That is all it is - religion. I'm sorry you don't see all that he has written as an explanation of why all Masonic temples are temples of religion, is the "recipe", if you will, for "a purity of life and rectitude of conduct"; and said "purity of life and rectitude of conduct" is precisely what Freemasonry says is "essentially necessary" for gaining admission into heaven. This is precisely why we say Freemasonry is a religion that is works-based. Why do we say that? Because Pike says that, and so does Masonic ritual.
based on Pike's premise that a man cannot have two religions. Here is what we find in 'Coil's Masonic Encyclopedia', page 512:
". ; . Pike argued that one could not hold two religions at the same time and hence, a Christian, a Jew, or a Moslem could not also accept Freemasonry as his religion. The logic of Pike's statement is not convincing,for,while one might not hold two inconsistent religions at the same time any more than he could be a monarchist and a republican at the same time, there is nothing to prevent one holding two or three religions, philosophies, or political theories which are not inconsistent."

Masonry has been very successful in its syncretistic blending of religions, so as to be able to point to quite a bit of what it teaches about morality, integrity, faithfulness, etc., and be able to convince Christians, for example, that on the basis of such matters Freemasonry is not incompatible with the Christian faith. This claim of compatibility is, in actuality, false, when realizing the differences in the doctrinal statements of each, pertaining to God and Religion. Of course, the one way they get away with this is, they do not say Freemasonry and Christianity are compatible religions, so it's okay to be both. Nope. Instead they say, "Were only a fraternity, we're not a religion; were only religious, we're not a religion; . .", reminiscent of the Sonny and Cher song, "The beat goes on, the beat goes on. The drum keeps pounding rhythm to the brain.. ." "Tell them enough times that this religion of ours(Masonry's) is only a fraternity, and they will begin to believe it, not because it isn't a religion, but because we have conditioned them to think that it is not a religion."

Freemasonry has managed, by ritual, to gloss over the heresies and concentrate on matters such as Brotherly Love, Relief, and Truth, claiming these to be the "principal tenets" of Freemasonry, and emphasizing traits such as these, while inserting, and quickly passing over, seemingly innocous statements such as, "The word Lodge is analogous to that of church, referring not so much to the place of meeting as to the persons assembled."

And if some of the members see something that troubles them, such as the insistence in many lodges that no prayers are to be made in the name of Jesus Christ, or The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, they are quickly diverted to the word, "God", and in far too many instances, never challenged as to what the Masonic says God is. And, of course, always falling back to, "After all, we are only a fraternity, and our principal tenets are Brotherly Love, Relief and Truth. What's wrong with that?

Quite a system, tragic as it actually is. Better luck next time in trying to say masonry is not a religion.

Originally posted by Rockpuck
First ML: Where or rather when are non masons referred to as Profane in Masonry? I cannot recall ever hearing that word used.

I see it in a footnote in Duncan's...

The ceremony of OPENING THE LODGE is solemn and impressive. Every brother is reminded of his duties and obligations. The necessary precautions are employed to avoid the intrusion of the profane, and every member, being compelled to assume a share of the necessary forms, is thus admonished that Masonry is a whole of which each Mason forms a part.

I can't say for certain that it's ever used in today's ritual though. It could be spoken once during one of the degree lectures, but I honestly don't recall (and I'm certainly not any closer to having all the lectures & charges memorized...)

[edit on 6/20/2008 by JoshNorton]

reply to post by mitchelcopper


Man, that was a good read for comedy.

If you had done your research, you would know that Albert Pike's book - while certainly a interesting read - it is not the scripture of freemasonry. It is the work of 1 scholar on 1 appendent body - that is all. Albert Pike could proclaim that Masonry worships Baal for all I care, and it wouldn't mean anything - his word is not law, and his is one of many voices.

Pike's writing style is complex and it requires you actually read the book to understand what he means, which you obviously have not. He does not use the term religion in the way we use it today, and you could tell because many of the words he uses are not used in the same context today. Something can be religious in nature without being a religion. Patriotism is religious in nature - in fact - religious scholars call patriotism a form of public religion. Why is it I don't see the zealots coming out screaming that I'm worshiping a false God every time I do the pledge of allegiance? Because something which is religious in character is not a religion. Its an important difference, and is not something I would expect your average anti-mason to understand. It requires an examiniation of Pike and the peer reviewed literature on the character of religion, and that goes far beyond the agenda pushing and propagandizing anti-masons are up to.

Masonry is religious in character in that it commands a reverence for Deity, and it teaches important lessons on morality. It is as much of a religion in the sense your using it as is patriotism for ones country. Patriotism also teaches you a reverence for the concept of country, and it establishes morality in the sense that patriotism and love of country is seen as good, and the opposite is seen as bad.

Please do not use terms you do not understand the meaning of. Masonry is far from syncretic, as it makes no attempt to blend religions together or teach that all religions are correct - it simply says its members should have a religion. That is all it says. Your hatred for the ecumenical movement is fine, but you won't find it in masonry no matter how bad you want it.

I am a Christian, and a mason - and no matter how bad that gets the zealots wound up, I have done the rituals and I have found absolutely nothing in masonry that is incompatible with my religion. Those who do should probably stay away from all civic and fraternity groups - including the boy scouts, college fraternities, Elks etc. In fact, they better not talk with anyone who isn't of their religion - if they are going to be consistent.

Nice try though. Maybe you'll have better luck next time.

[edit on 20-6-2008 by ALightinDarkness]

the debates are over the beliefs of the respective religious institutions, one said religious institution being the church, the other being the lodge. The debate is, which religious institution is correct? Is it the one that is Christ-centered and says that which is essentially necessary to gain admission into heaven is acceptance of Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior; or is it the one that is works-centered and says living a pure life and being of good conduct is that which is essentially necessary?

As far as keeping up with Pike goes, it isn't difficult at all. Doesn't require any particular expertise other than reading and phys. ed. The reading is required in that a person needs to know how to read, which most defenders of the Masonic faith would like to think is impossible unless one is a Mason. The phys. ed. is required, or at least an aspect of it - track. It certainly does require that one be capable of running around in circles in order to follow Pike. Nothing more, nothing less. Coil understood him perfectly. But then, of course, that was one of Coil's problems. I say "one" of his problems because there were definitely two problems he encountered in his writings. The first was his thorough knowledge of the teachings of Freemasonry, whereby he came to the conclusion that, casting Jesus Christ aside as one is required to do in lodge, it is quite possible for any lodge member to accept Freemasonry as a second religion. The other problem he encountered was the fact that regardless of how unsettling it proved to be to his contemporaries (fellow Masons), he was at least open and honest in his assessment of what his expertise on the subject caused him to determine Freemasonry to be - a works-centered religion.
I have simply countered it with other writings. One of the writings I deferred to was Coil's, wherein, when putting Pike's statement into proper context, Mr. Coil determined that Pike was wrong when he claimed Freemasonry is not a religion. The other statement I deferred to was Pike's, when he said quite the opposite on another page of the same book - M&D. Obviously, Coil agrees with Pike on Pike's "second opinion

Originally posted by JoshNorton
reply to post by Road Warrior 31

 

Cults follow a charismatic leader. Who do Freemasons follow?

Pin'Dar. Egyptian gods. Lucifer.

[edit on 20-6-2008 by mystiq]

reply to post by mystiq


Well thats a problem. Because you see, to be a cult, the religion in question must be following a living charismatic leader. Living in the sense of the person has to be on earth in the flesh - since the organizations day to day operations revolve around the leaders instructions. You'll have to try again, I'm afraid.

By the way, this whole thing is a exercise in futility since in order for freemasonry to be a religious cult you'll need to prove its a religion. Which so far, the antis have failed miserably at.

One step at a time, antis.

Oh, and I won't even get into the FACT that Lucifer is most likely the name of a Persian King, and is most definitely not a reference to Satan. But that would be too much truth for the zealots.

I have simply countered it with other writings. One of the writings I deferred to was Coil's, wherein, when putting Pike's statement into proper context, Mr. Coil determined that Pike was wrong when he claimed Freemasonry is not a religion. The other statement I deferred to was Pike's, when he said quite the opposite on another page of the same book - M&D. Obviously, Coil agrees with Pike on Pike's "second opinion
The only thing Freemasonry endeavors to establish is that its members believe in something they like to call a god. To say that the candidate lives in a relationship with the True and Living God is totally false. And the only reason you are "moving on" is because you are in hopes that some people will actually believe what you have written. The only thing Freemasonry endeavors to establish is that its members believe in something they like to call a god. To say that the candidate lives in a relationship with the True and Living God is totally false. And the only reason you are "moving on" is because you are in hopes that some people will actually believe what you have written.
Masonry presents a "god"(symbol) for its members to pray to; teaches a way to heaven(slavation); engages in a regeneration ceremony(baptism). Walks like a duck, quacks like a duck.
Masonry presents a "god"(symbol) for its members to pray to; teaches a way to heaven(slavation); engages in a regeneration ceremony(baptism). Walks like a duck, quacks like a duck.

Originally posted by mitchelcopper
the debates are over the beliefs of the respective religious institutions, one said religious institution being the church, the other being the lodge. The debate is, which religious institution is correct?

Incorrect. This is a debate over masons who are part of a fraternity and know its not a religion, and anti-masons who have never been in the fraternity but are absolutely positively sure that it is a religion. The debate is - who is more likely to know the truth - the people who are actually a member of the institution your accusing things of, or people who have no evidence but keep claiming masonry is a religion?

Originally posted by mitchelcopper
Is it the one that is Christ-centered and says that which is essentially necessary to gain admission into heaven is acceptance of Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior; or is it the one that is works-centered and says living a pure life and being of good conduct is that which is essentially necessary?

I hope you realize not all churches are Christian. Christian churches may preach that, and that is fine. Masonry does not disagree - which you would know, had you done the research. Masonry says to its members: your family and religion come first. If anything, it has a positive view of church.

You are intentionally trying to confuse the fact that Masonry makes no promise of salvation, it does not say doing good works is necessary because it has no religious dogma. It says do good works, for the sake of doing good works. Period.

Originally posted by mitchelcopper
As far as keeping up with Pike goes, it isn't difficult at all. Doesn't require any particular expertise other than reading and phys. ed. The reading is required in that a person needs to know how to read, which most defenders of the Masonic faith would like to think is impossible unless one is a Mason. The phys. ed. is required, or at least an aspect of it - track. It certainly does require that one be capable of running around in circles in order to follow Pike. Nothing more, nothing less.

You are correct. He is easy to understand, but your showing you don't. You cannot comprehend the difference between something being religious in character and something being a religion. Your to busy spreading the anti-masonic propaganda to do the research. I understand.

Originally posted by mitchelcopper
Coil understood him perfectly. But then, of course, that was one of Coil's problems. I say "one" of his problems because there were definitely two problems he encountered in his writings. The first was his thorough knowledge of the teachings of Freemasonry, whereby he came to the conclusion that, casting Jesus Christ aside as one is required to do in lodge, it is quite possible for any lodge member to accept Freemasonry as a second religion.

And now your just making things up. You may not be aware, but like Pike, Coil is not the writer of the scripture of masonry - since there is none. His opinions are his own.

No one has argued some masons may make masonry a religion. But here is a newsflash for you - people can make anything their religion. Is not some unique quality of masonry, nor does it mean its bad, it means some people don't know when to stop.

Originally posted by mitchelcopper
The other problem he encountered was the fact that regardless of how unsettling it proved to be to his contemporaries (fellow Masons), he was at least open and honest in his assessment of what his expertise on the subject caused him to determine Freemasonry to be - a works-centered religion.

Its not unsettling at all, because most masonic scholars do not agree with him and his opinions are not authoritative. Has it occurred to you that - gasp - masonry allows people to disagree? Surely a sign that evil is brewing.

Freemasonry is not a religion, no matter how bad you wanted it to be. Try again.

I once again would request you actually do your research instead of trying to spread anti-masonic propaganda. I know, I know, its probably a lost cause.

Originally posted by mitchelcopper
Masonry presents a "god"(symbol) for its members to pray to; teaches a way to heaven(slavation); engages in a regeneration ceremony(baptism). Walks like a duck, quacks like a duck.

1) Masonry does not present a God for its members to pray to. It says God exists, and the identity of that God is up to its members.
2) Masonry offers no salvation.
3) Masonry offers no "regeneration ceremony."

If it walks like a dog, barks like a dog...it is certainly not a duck.

Of course if you had done your research, you would know neither of the 3 requirements you listed for something to be a religion actually makes it a religion. You would know that what makes something a religion is a body of belief that attempts to answer existential questions about the human condition. A religion requires no God, no salvation, or a "regeneration ceremony." Unfortunately for you, masonry does not fit the ACTUAL definition of religion - or the definition you just made up.

Try again.

[edit on 20-6-2008 by ALightinDarkness]

I'll have to be sure and remind my pastor of how absurd it is of him - according to a "man of the cloth" - that there could possibly be any inner works in a man. He usually explains during baptism ceremonies that baptism is an outer expression of God's inner works in us - that there is no salvation in baptism. Which, of course, is very unlike Masonry which states, ". .the drama of Hiram the Builder is a symbol of redemption - - and redemption is the central theme of this degree. 'Raised from a dead level to a living perpendicular' suggests far more than a physical accomplishment." ('Officers Manual of Lodge Organization and Operation' - Grand Lodge of Nevada) But I will give you this much, Wayne, obedience to Christ certainly does appear to defy all logic of the secular world which Freemasonry is born out of.

And who, exactly, is "their" Creator, Are you trying to establish an intentionally erroneous assumption that all Masons believe in the True and Living God who is the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit? Or, are you telling us that Allah, Krishna, Vishnu, Bessie the Cow, Lucifer, Baal, Ra, and whoever or whatever anybody wants to claims is his "Creator", is the same as the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit? Looks to me like the only "fact" you are trying to establish has no base other than shifting sand.
Are you trying to establish an intentionally erroneous assumption that all Masons believe in the True and Living God who is the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit? Or, are you telling us that Allah, Krishna, Vishnu, Bessie the Cow, Lucifer, Baal, Ra, and whoever or whatever anybody wants to claims is his "Creator", is the same as the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit? Looks to me like the only "fact" you are trying to establish has no base other than shifting sand.
In the first place, none are required to profess a relationship with anything. All they are required to stipulate is that they believe in the existence of a supreme being, which is requiring absolutely nothing in the way of acceptance - only recognizing that something of a supreme nature exists.

to remind you of that purity of life and rectitude of conduct which is so essentially necessary. . ' for gaining admission into heaven. What does it say is essentially necessary for gaining admission into heaven to remind you of that purity of life and rectitude of conduct which is so essentially necessary. . ' for gaining admission into heaven. What does it say is essentially necessary for gaining admission into heaven

You're assumption cannot logically be based upon what Christians in the lodge would like to make everybody think Freemasonry is saying in its ritual. It must be based upon what Masonry says, and Masonry makes no mention of saving grace in Jesus Christ. It simply says a purity of life and recititude of conduct is what is essentially necessary. Nothing more, nothing less. This is why personal opinions of a religious nature are unwelcome in the lodge room. Can you imagine what would happen the first time a "Christian Mason" begins a dissertation, explaining the symbolism as being unquestionably grounded in Christian faith, with a couple of Moslems or Hindus in the room? The fact is that there is no exclusivity of Christian beliefs in a syncretistic religion like Freemasonry. If you want to convince people that Masonry's teachings are unquestionably Christ-centered, I suggest you begin with the Moslems, Buddhists, Hindus, Luciferians, etc., and see if there isn't a second opinion - something you are thus far attempting to ignore.

reply to post by mitchelcopper

I appreciate your well-reasoned response, but notice that you fall into the fallacy of quoting Pike out of context. Can't put it all here without facing the "too-long-quote" warning, but I'd recommend you read pp211-214 to get a better idea of what he was talking about.

And the propaganda continues...

Originally posted by mitchelcopper
I'll have to be sure and remind my pastor of how absurd it is of him - according to a "man of the cloth" - that there could possibly be any inner works in a man. He usually explains during baptism ceremonies that baptism is an outer expression of God's inner works in us - that there is no salvation in baptism.

Red herring. No one cares.

Originally posted by mitchelcopper
Which, of course, is very unlike Masonry which states, ". .the drama of Hiram the Builder is a symbol of redemption - - and redemption is the central theme of this degree. 'Raised from a dead level to a living perpendicular' suggests far more than a physical accomplishment." ('Officers Manual of Lodge Organization and Operation' - Grand Lodge of Nevada)

You should learn that themes of morality and character are not unique to Christianity - or any religion. It is important you learn this now. The third degree teaches that redemption is important - but as the quote shows - it does not redeem the member. Many institutions teach that redemption is important - including civic clubs - while not actually offering redemption.

Originally posted by mitchelcopper
But I will give you this much, Wayne, obedience to Christ certainly does appear to defy all logic of the secular world which Freemasonry is born out of.

I'm not sure who Wayne is, but whatever he is telling you is a lie. For Christian masons, obedience to Christ is commanded by masonry.

Originally posted by mitchelcopper
And who, exactly, is "their" Creator, Are you trying to establish an intentionally erroneous assumption that all Masons believe in the True and Living God who is the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit? Or, are you telling us that Allah, Krishna, Vishnu, Bessie the Cow, Lucifer, Baal, Ra, and whoever or whatever anybody wants to claims is his "Creator", is the same as the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit? Looks to me like the only "fact" you are trying to establish has no base other than shifting sand.

Lets repeat for you: there is no masonic Creator. It doesn't really matter what the qualities of a masonic creator would be, since there is none. No matter how bad you want one, this does not change reality.

The pledge of allegiance says one nation under God - OH MY! IT DOESNT SAY WHAT GOD IT IS! THE HEATHENS! THERE MUST BE A GOD OF THE UNITED STATES - according to your logic. Of course, reasonable people understand the God in the pledge of allegiance is referring to the God of the person reciting the pledge. There is no seperate entity.

Originally posted by mitchelcopper
In the first place, none are required to profess a relationship with anything. All they are required to stipulate is that they believe in the existence of a supreme being, which is requiring absolutely nothing in the way of acceptance - only recognizing that something of a supreme nature exists.

Ding, ding, ding. Being that this isn't a religion, why exactly would masonry care?

Originally posted by mitchelcopper
You're assumption cannot logically be based upon what Christians in the lodge would like to make everybody think Freemasonry is saying in its ritual.

Oh, there is no "would like" to make everyone think. I know. I know that the lodge is not a religion, and it respects the religion of its members and leaves it at that.

Originally posted by mitchelcopper
Masonry makes no mention of saving grace in Jesus Christ. It simply says a purity of life and recititude of conduct is what is essentially necessary. Nothing more, nothing less.

Right again! And why would masonry make a mention of Jesus Christ, because it is not a religion? Careful, your proving yourself wrong.

Originally posted by mitchelcopper
This is why personal opinions of a religious nature are unwelcome in the lodge room.

Oh and you were on a roll. Wrong. The reason why religion is not allowed in the lodge room is that it causes disharmony. You are free to preach outside though, if you like. Just so you know, you also cant stand up and starting preaching in most meetings - try it. Its not a masonic thing.

Originally posted by mitchelcopper
Can you imagine what would happen the first time a "Christian Mason" begins a dissertation, explaining the symbolism as being unquestionably grounded in Christian faith, with a couple of Moslems or Hindus in the room?

Yes, I've seen it happen before. Everyone discusses the topic, some agree or disagree, and we move on. You see, there is no problem applying religion to the symbolism if you like - no ones going to stop you - as long as you keep it in the context of the symbolism and don't attempt to start a sermon. See, your little scenario shows what a great fraternity masonry is - where else could people discuss something like that and no anger flare? Thanks for helping prove yourself wrong.

Originally posted by mitchelcopper
The fact is that there is no exclusivity of Christian beliefs in a syncretistic religion like Freemasonry. If you want to convince people that Masonry's teachings are unquestionably Christ-centered, I suggest you begin with the Moslems, Buddhists, Hindus, Luciferians, etc., and see if there isn't a second opinion - something you are thus far attempting to ignore.

Wrong again - the fact that there is no exclusively Christian belief in masonry is because its a fraternity. I make no attempt to preach masonry is Christ centered because they are not. It appeals to members of all faiths, because masonry is a fraternity.

Thanks again for proving yourself wrong - you did so well I didn't have to type much.

Try again.

reply to post by JoshNorton


I get the sense that hes copying and pasting this stuff from somewhere, because it doesn't flow and there are copy and pastes of the same paragraph often. It looks like he googled "masonry is not christian" and started copying and pasting from websites.

In the Greek, the correct term for you contention is "baloney". Let's look at it again And to eliminate your absurd contention that anything is taken out of context, here is the entire paragraph from the Entered Apprentice lecture, per Nevada Ritual, with the paragraph before and after having nothing whatever to do with this particular doctrinal statement of the Craft: "You were presented with a lambskin or white leather apron, because the lamb, in all ages has been deemed an emblem of innocence. The lambskin is therefore to remind you of that purity of life and rectitude of conduct which is so essentially necessary to your gaining admission to that Celestial Lodge above, where the Supreme Architect of the Universe presides."

There is no "part and parcel" to it,I would like to believe that your "part and parcel" contention is sincere, but I don't think so. Rather, it is your method of distorting the facts with baseless contentions. I am not the one who has engaged in the exclusion of all else. If, however, you truly do believe that, it is totally cruel at least, and evil at worst, for Freemasonry to give only "part and parcel" of some sort of salvific teaching and present it as the total package to its members. Yes, total package. If there is any "exclusion of all else", it is Freemasonry that has done the excluding, as well as distorting.
Once again, I say present your proof. If there is something I have missed in the ritual of Symbolic Lodge, you would be negligent in your duties as a Christian if you did not show me where I have misinterpreted ritual - if you did not show me where the intent is to direct one toward Jesus Christ. I am sure the Moslem, Hindu, etc. Masons will be equally appreciative of your revelation.

No copying and pasting here.

No copying and pasting here.

And you could have saved yourself a lot of time if you would just admit that purity of life and rectitude of conduct means purity of life and rectitude of conduct, whether the Mason is a Christian, a Jew, a Moslem, a Hebrew, a Hindu, a Buddhist, a Luciferian, or an avowed atheist, for that matter.
Freemasonry doesn't care who a Mason might claim he believes to be God. They just don't care. And the reason they don't care, is because it has absolutely nothing to do with what they say is "essentially necessary" for gaining admission into heaven.

I know you don't like to hear this, but rectitude of conduct is rectitude of conduct. Webster's:
rectitude: 1. conduct according to moral principles; strict honesty; unrightness of character. 2. correctness of judgment or method. 3. straightness.

I see nothing whatever in Webster's definition of "rectitude" that even so much as hints at claiming "this includes, of course, accepting Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior".

Now to the other phrase, "purity of life". Here, the Grand Lodge of Nevada saves us a trip to the dictionary by citing what the Grand Lodge itself means when it says "purity of life":
By purity is meant blamelessness, a loyal obedience to the laws of the Craft and sincere good will to the Brethren; ." ('A Lodge System Of Masonic Instruction' - Nevada, p. 28)

Doesn't say "that purity of life which is the proof that you have accepted Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior."

Granted, you want very much to try to convince everybody that it is the "unwritten tenet of the gently craft", but it just ain't so.
Not judging the hearts of the men. I'm judging ritual. We're talking about ritual,you try to defend the heretical teachings of Freemasonry. It may well be that your defense of heresy is embraced elsewhere, but I do not intend to embrace or otherwise patronize it here.
Let's take a look at one of the "symbols" of one of these alleged Presbyterian "ministers". Anderson used a representation of Apollo in the frontispiece of his first book of constitutions. An article titled, 'Why Apollo?', had this interesting commentary about the "god" that was showcased by one of the "ministers" you have alluded to: "Apollo was one of the greatest of Greek and Roman deities. he was seen as the principal god of prophecy, divination and of the arts, most especially music, for the muses were directly subordinate to him. He was also a patron of medicine. The ancient Greeks also viewed him as the sun god, in which incarnation, he was known as 'Phoebus' meaning 'bright'. The name Phoebus was attributed to his receipt fo the Delphic Oracle from the Titaness Phoebe, and which was famed for its philosophical injunction, 'Man know thyself'. He was the sone of Zeus and Leto, and therefore by analogy, Zeus was classically equated with Jahweh, and Apollo has attributes similar to those of Christ." More edification of this "minister's" "god" is stated on the website of the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania: "Whose head is depicted in the center of the Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania seal?
"The head depicted in the Grand Lodge seal is that of Apollo in Greek mythology. He was not only a sun god, but also a god of pure streaming light, particularly of the light of heaven. This phase of his character was made more conspicuous by the fact of his mother's name being Leto, "darkness", strictly, "goddess of the dark night". Therefore, Apollo symbolizes light from darkness. The Grand Lodge seal is the head of the sun god Apollo at the center which emanates rays of light or glory encircled by the words "Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania", and "Birtute, Silentio, Amore", Latin for "virtue, silence, love." (Source: The Exemplar, A Guide to a Mason's Actions, Grand Lodge F. & A.M. of PA, 1985)"

That might be your brand of "Christianity"That dog don't hunt."

What it is you have categorically refuted is what Freemasonry teaches. I went into it eyes wide shut, also. But at least when the Holy Spirit convicted me on a few things, I didn't fight Him. I stepped back, took a look at myself and what I saw broke my heart. There is nobody on the face of this earth who wanted more badly than I, to think that Masonry was no more than what I had always envisioned it to be. You are not the only person who has been raised with it all his life. When I left the lodge was when satan went to work on me the hardest. I finally came to the conclusion that there was every possibility in the world that I could have been badly mistaken. I set out to read the writings of some of the men who I was told were Masonic authorities. Masonic authorities. That is exactly the way their stature within the Craft was explained to me all the while I was in Masonry. I was told by several men, "If you want to learn more about Freemasonry, read Coil, Mackey, Pike, etc. It wasn't until I actually began to read the writings of these men that I ran into problems. Now all of a sudden, as I began to show some of those very same people what Coil, Mackey, and Pike were writing, they all shifted gears. Now I was hearing, "Those men aren't authoritative. All they're writing is their own personal opinions. Their writings don't mean anything." They can't have it both ways, Wayne, and neither can you or I. Masonry teaches a formula which it says is "essentially necessary" for gaining admission into heaven. Why is this taught as a truism inside the lodge room and utterly refuted outside the lodge room? Which is it, Wayne? You have to line up on one side or the others. Are Masonry's most highly acclaimed and recommended scholars authoritative, or are they liars? Is Masonry teaching what it says is essentially necessary for attaining to heaven, a teaching which makes no mention whatever of that which is truly necessary, are they telling the truth, or are they lying? It's that simple, Wayne. You can try to wheel and deal around the truth all you wish, but there is one immovable constant about the truth. It can be denied, but it cannot be changed.



[edit on 20-6-2008 by mitchelcopper]

Originally posted by mitchelcopper
In the Greek, the correct term for you contention is "baloney".

In the Latin, the correct term for what your doing is "anti-mason propaganda."

Originally posted by mitchelcopper
Let's look at it again And to eliminate your absurd contention that anything is taken out of context, here is the entire paragraph from the Entered Apprentice lecture, per Nevada Ritual, with the paragraph before and after having nothing whatever to do with this particular doctrinal statement of the Craft:

As with most anti-masons, you do not seem to understand that "out of context" means you must take the entire text into consideration - in this case, the entire EA ritual. If you were interested in the truth and not propganda, you would of course find that lovely section that talks about how Freemasonry encourages its members to have their own religion, and the needs of their religion come first and foremost before masonry.

But you conveniently forgot to copy and paste that, didn't you. Oopsie.

Of course if we wanted to even look at this out of context paragraph your contention still does not hold. It says that the lambskin is a reminder that purity of life and rectitude of conduct is necessary. Would you disagree? Please show me the scriptures which says the purity of ones life and the conduct you have has absolutely no meaning.

Originally posted by mitchelcopper
Rather, it is your method of distorting the facts with baseless contentions. I am not the one who has engaged in the exclusion of all else. If, however, you truly do believe that, it is totally cruel at least, and evil at worst, for Freemasonry to give only "part and parcel" of some sort of salvific teaching and present it as the total package to its members. Yes, total package. If there is any "exclusion of all else", it is Freemasonry that has done the excluding, as well as distorting.

Its not nice to not tell the truth. You are trying to exclude all non-Christian faiths and make masonry a religion, and no matter how hard you try you just can't do it. No, its not exclusive, and no, it is not a religion.

Again it is important for you learn that teaching about morality and character is not the sole realm of religion. Teaching these concepts does not make something a religion, no matter how bad you want it.

Originally posted by mitchelcopper
Once again, I say present your proof. If there is something I have missed in the ritual of Symbolic Lodge, you would be negligent in your duties as a Christian if you did not show me where I have misinterpreted ritual - if you did not show me where the intent is to direct one toward Jesus Christ. I am sure the Moslem, Hindu, etc. Masons will be equally appreciative of your revelation.

Straw man, yet again. No one has ever stated it is the intent of masonic ritual to direct one towards Jesus Christ. Masonry - because it is - LETS REPEAT - not a religion - directs members toward their own individual religions, whatever that may be.

I have presented my proof very well, and you've done a good job at proving yourself wrong.

I will pray for you. I hope God will guide you and show you that your chasing after demons that do not exist. Of course, Satan might be behind what your doing as well - trying to divert you from the true evil of the world.

By the way, who is Wayne? Are you sure your mentally stable? Are you OK? I don't know of any of the masons here named Wayne. If the voices are telling you that...seek help. Its not the Holy Spirit, I'm afraid.

[edit on 20-6-2008 by ALightinDarkness]

Thank you. Of course that is what its members are intended to think about it, even though it doesn't say that at all. It is the generated air of "religiosity" in the lodge room that permeates every bit of its ritual, and well-meaning men are being seduced by heresy. This is why Gallup Polls don't count. What counts is ritual. Reminds me of the analogy to rat poison - 98% good tasting stuff, but it's the 2% that'll kill ya.

Thank you. Of course that is what its members are intended to think about it, even though it doesn't say that at all. It is the generated air of "religiosity" in the lodge room that permeates every bit of its ritual, and well-meaning men are being seduced by heresy. This is why Gallup Polls don't count. What counts is ritual. Reminds me of the analogy to rat poison - 98% good tasting stuff, but it's the 2% that'll kill ya.

Actually it was me who said, totally tongue in cheek, "By jove, I believe you've got it." If you really want to run with something as foolish as that, be my guest. Otherwise, I will assume that you intended this to be a bit of your own humor, countering mine.


Actually, I have discussed ritual as per ritual - the way it is written. "One size fits all" is exactly how it is intended. Why do supposed nobody is teaching acceptance of Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior as being what is essentially necessary for gaining admission into heaven in supposed "Christian" lodges?
If you call your attempted diversions from the issue hitting the nail on the head, I suggest that you don't give up your day job.