Is Freemasonry really Satanic?

[MarkRohfrietsch]

"Masonry, around whose altars the Christian, the Hebrew, the Moslem, the Brahmin, the followers of Confucius and Zoroaster, can assemble as brethren and unite in prayer to the one God who is above ALL the Ballim, must needs leave it to each of its initiates to look for the foundation of his faith and hope to the written scriptures of his own religion." (page 226)


As I said above "universalism".

Directly from Freemasonry material:

From the doctrinal book of Freemasonry, "Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry" by Albert Pike, Grand Commander:

Its title page states that it was prepared for the "Supreme Council of the Thirty-Third Degree and Published by its Authority."

"It [Masonry] is the universal, eternal, immutable religion, such as God planted it in the heart of universal humanity. No creed has ever been long-lived that was not built on this foundation. It is the base and they are the superstructure." (page 219)

"Masonry, around whose altars the Christian, the Hebrew, the Moslem, the Brahmin, the followers of Confucius and Zoroaster, can assemble as brethren and unite in prayer to the one God who is above ALL the Ballim, must needs leave it to each of its initiates to look for the foundation of his faith and hope to the written scriptures of his own religion." (page 226)

"Everything good in nature comes from OSIRIS - order, harmony, and the favorable temperature of the seasons and celestial periods." (page 476)

"The Blue Degrees are but the outer court or portico of the Temple. Part of the symbols are displayed there to the Initiate, but he is intentionally misled by false interpretations. It is not intended that he shall understand them, but it is intended that he shall imagine he understands them." (page 819)

"The teachers, even of Christianity, are, in general the most ignorant of the true meaning of that which they teach. There is no book of which so little is known as the Bible. To most who read it, it is as incomprehensible as the Sohar." (page 105)

Other Mason Material:
"Man is a god in the making, and as in the mystic myths of Egypt, on the potter's wheel he is being molded. When his light shines out to lift and preserve all things, he receives the triple crown of godhood and joins that throng of Master Masons who, in their robes of Blue and Gold, are seeking to dispel the darkness of night with the triple light of the Masonic Lodge." (The Lost Keys of Freemasonry, Manly P. Hall, pages 92, 54-55)

"When the Mason learns that the Key to the warrior on the block is the proper application of the dynamo of living power, he has learned the Mystery of his Craft. The seething energies of LUCIFER are in his hands and before he may step onward and upward, he must prove his ability to properly apply [this] energy." (Lost Keys of Freemasonry, Manly P. Hall, page 48)

 

[circuitrider]

Directly from Freemasonry material:

From the doctrinal book of Freemasonry, "Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry" by Albert Pike, Grand Commander:

First mis-understanding. While Albert Pike wrote a lot of material, that book is his own opinion. It isn't "the doctrinal book of Freemasonry." Only about 30-40% of Masons belong to the Scottish Rite that he was Grand Commander of during the civil war. And he was only Grand Commander of the Southern Jurisdiction of Scottish Rite. A lot of northern jurisdiction Scottish Rite Masons barely know who he is.

Pike wasn't in charge of Freemasonry nor was his book ever used as "doctrine." He was the head of a single appendant order in Freemasonry and had his own philosophical opinions about things which people can believe or not believe.

The same is true of Manly Hall. His books are are only his opinions, not any rule or doctrine that anyone is required to believe.

In the US is is the state level Grand Lodges that are in charge of Freemasonry. None of them have adopted Pikes works as any official statement of Freemasonry. The Scottish Rite isn't in charge of the Grand Lodges.

Saying that Pike's book is the doctrine of Freemasonry would be like saying a book written by the President of the Southern Baptist Convention is doctrine and it is the doctrine for all Christians. Far from beings so!

 

[topher694]

*stuff directed at me*

I have nothing further to say to you. Kindly leave me alone.

 

[circuitrider]

I have nothing further to say to you. Kindly leave me alone.

Sorry, since you posted in the forum, I was under the impression you intended to discuss Freemasonry. If you don't want to, cool by me.

 

[topher694]

Sorry, since you posted in the forum, I was under the impression you intended to discuss Freemasonry. If you don't want to, cool by me.

I have nothing further to say to YOU. Kindly leave me alone.

 

[topher694]

Follow the breadcrumbs...

From famous Freemason Henry Wilson Coil:
"Dr. Newton was an active Freemason and lectured widely to lodges in Iowa, delivering especially a lecture called The Men’s House. At the request of the Grand Lodge of Iowa, he wrote The Builders, a copy of which was presented to every candidate raised in that State. It has also become one of the most widely read Masonic books of modern times." (Coil's Masonic Encyclopedia, page 445)


"Perhaps the greatest student in this field of esoteric teaching and method, certainly the greatest now living is Arthur Edward Waite, to whom it is a pleasure to pay tribute." (The Builders, page 57)

"And the result is a series of volumes noble in form, united in aim, unique in wealth of revealing beauty, and of unequalled worth. Beginning as far back as 1886, Waite issued his study of the Mysteries of Magic, a digest of the writings of Eliphas Levi, to whom Albert Pike was more indebted than he let us know." (The Builders, page 59)


"What is more absurd and more impious than to attribute the name of Lucifer to the devil, that is, to personified evil, The intellectual Lucifer is the spirit of intelligence and love; it is the Paraclete, it is the Holy Spirit, while the physical Lucifer is the great agent of universal magnetism.

To personify evil and exalt it into an intelligence which is the rival of God, into a being which can understand but love no more-this is a monstrous fiction. To believe that God permits this evil intelligence to deceive and destroy his feeble creatures is to make God more wicked than the devil. By depriving the devil of the possibility of love and repentance, God forces him to do evil. Moreover a spirit of error and falsehood can only be a folly which thinks, nor does it deserve indeed the name of spirit. The devil is God’s antithesis, and if we define God as He who is we must define His opposite as he who is not." (The Mysteries of Magic, page 428)

 

[circuitrider]

The Rev. Joseph Fort Newton quoted in the previous post was a Baptist minister and then an Episcopal Priest further pointing out that a lot of Christian clergy are and have been Masons. According to wikipedia " In 1939, Newton was ranked among the top 5 Protestant Clergyman in the United States."

A.E. Waite, who loved to write about all kinds of things, wrote "The Mysteries of Magic" in 1886 and didn't become a Freemason until 1901.

 

[topher694]

Masons take an oath to defend masonry and one another, no matter how wrong the behavior. This would include lying, manipulating, slandering, misdirection or whatever it takes to help them out of a bad situation.

Part if the oath for the Royal Arch Degree:

"I will aid and assist a companion Royal Arch Mason when engaged in any difficulty, and espouse his cause so far as to extricate him from the same, if within my power, whether he be right or wrong."

 

[Albion]

Masons take an oath to defend masonry and one another, no matter how wrong the behavior.

No, they don't.

This would include lying, manipulating, slandering, misdirection or whatever it takes to help them out of a bad situation.

You have been misinformed.

Part if the oath for the Royal Arch Degree:

"I will aid and assist a companion Royal Arch Mason when engaged in any difficulty, and espouse his cause so far as to extricate him from the same, if within my power, whether he be right or wrong."

The above wording is bogus, but in addition, only a small percentage of Masons are also Royal Arch Masons, so the claim made here about "Masons take an oath to defend Masonry and one another, no matter how wrong the behavior" is false on its face.

 

[topher694]

No, they don't.


You have been misinformed.


The above wording is bogus, but in addition, only a small percentage of Masons are also Royal Arch Masons, so the claim made here about "Masons take an oath to defend Masonry and one another, no matter how wrong the behavior" is false on its face.

lol, so it's ok, because only those higher up in leadership are required to lie.

The quote came directly from the oath itself, I have read the entire thing.

This is exactly the type of misdirection, deflection and denying that freemasonry teaches and requires. Thanks for the great example.

 

[Albion]

lol, so it's ok, because only those higher up in leadership are required to lie.

What's the evidence for this? Did you read it "directly," as you claimed in the case of the phony Royal Arch oath?

All of us here are interested to know where you read any of this, since you say you read it directly from something or other.

 

[topher694]

What's the evidence for this? Did you read it "directly," as you claimed in the case of the phony Royal Arch oath?

All of us here are interested to know where you read any of this, since you say you read it directly from something or other.

And what evidence do you have that it is bogus? And around and around we go.

I've provided authors and citations for all kinds of things, not that that matters in the least.

here is more context:
"I furthermore promise and swear, that I will employ a Companion Royal Arch Mason in preference to any other person of equal qualifications,

I furthermore promise and swear, that I will assist a Companion Royal Arch Mason when I see him engaged in any difficulty, and will espouse his cause so far as to extricate him from the same, whether he be right or wrong.

I furthermore promise and swear, that I will keep all the secrets of a Companion Royal Arch Mason (when communicated so me as such, or I knowing them to be such), without exceptions.

I furthermore promise and swear, that I will be aiding and assisting all poor and indigent Companions Royal Arch Masons, their widows and orphans, wheresoever dispersed around the globe; they making application to me as such, and I finding them worthy, and can do it without any material injury to myself or family.

To all which I do most solemnly and sincerely promise and swear, with a firm and steadfast resolution to keep and perform the same, without any equivocation, mental reservation, or self-evasion of mind in me whatever; binding myself under no less penalty, than to have my skull smote off, and my brains exposed to the scorching rays of the meridian sun, should I knowingly or wilfully violate or transgress any part of this my solemn oath or obligation of a Royal Arch Mason. So help me God, and keep me steadfast in the due performance of the same.

Principal Sojourner--Kiss the book seven times.

The candidate kisses the book as directed."
Duncan's Masonic Ritual and Monitor page 231

btw, note the line above it. They are required to hire (including vote for) one another regardless of qualification.

 

[Albion]

And what evidence do you have that it is bogus?

You made the claim, based upon some spooky-looking internet website or conspiracy publication, I'm thinking. Not I.

And then you admitted to my rebuttal, saying that it is only the higher ups who are not required to lie. But Royal Arch Masons are not the higher ups of Masonry. Earlier in this thread, Circuit Rider pointed out that the Scottish Rite degrees are not what Masonry is, or what "Masons do," etc. either. This is similar.

So, we don't have any truth to Masonry is Satanic. And we don't have the oath you claimed you had read "directly" but won't say what directly from what.

Lots of people have heard rumors or read sensationalist literature attacking Masonry, but people who don't have any personal knowledge and so cannot tell the facts from the fiction (and I assure you that there is a lot more money to be made from the fiction) really ought not to repeat what they cannot verify.

The candidate kisses the book as directed."
Duncan's Masonic Ritual and Monitor page 231

Aha. So we see that it was not from any Masonic initiation ritual.

Duncan's is not official Masonic material, although I suppose some people who have no other information might assume that it is because of the title. It isn't used in Masonic ceremonies (therefore not the oath you copied) but some people find general aids in this book that describes some of what Masonry was doing 200 years ago or so. And every Mason acquainted with Duncans will say it is not accurate.

 

[topher694]

You made the claim, based upon some spooky-looking internet website or conspiracy publication, I'm thinking. Not I.

And then you admitted to my rebuttal, saying that it is only the higher ups who are not required to lie. But Royal Arch Masons are not the higher ups of Masonry. Earlier in this thread, Circuit Rider pointed out that the Scottish Rite degrees are not what Masonry is, or what "Masons do," etc. either. This is similar.

So, we don't have any truth to Masonry is Satanic. And we don't have the oath you claimed you had read "directly" but won't say what directly from what.

Lots of people have heard rumors or read sensationalist literature attacking Masonry, but people who don't have any personal knowledge and so cannot tell the facts from the fiction (and I assure you that there is a lot more money to be made from the fiction) really ought not to repeat what they cannot verify.


Aha. So we see that it was not from any Masonic initiation ritual.

Duncan's is not official Masonic material, although I suppose some people who have no other information might assume that it is because of the title. It isn't used in Masonic ceremonies (therefore not the oath you copied) but some people find general aids in this book that describes some of what Masonry was doing 200 years ago or so. And every Mason acquainted with Duncans will say it is not accurate.

Hilarious, classic twisting of words to change the narrative (misdirection) I say, "lol, so it's ok, because only those higher up in leadership are required to lie." and you change it to, "And then you admitted to my rebuttal, saying that it is only the higher ups who are not required to lie" (manipulation to discredit)

Much like the other guy twisted my words to say all masons worship satan, when my assertion was that the organization itself is satanic. (I'm sure many in it have zero idea). He personalized it to make me look like I'm calling others names while he calls me names and questions my intelligence. (again twisting to discredit)

And, he did it other times too, Mark said, "Also the fact that members of the lodge that proclaim Christianity defend the lodge with so much zeal" and his quote was twisted to say, "As to the charge that Christian freemasons defend their Christianity too strongly, that is a strange charge."

I gave a quote, that is evidence. Then YOU made a claim that it was bogus, the claim of bogus is for YOU to prove, I already gave the quote.

Truth is I have given numerous citations directly from masons (famous ones even), and mason literature. The only defense that I have seen boils down to, "nu-uh, that ain't true" How about quotes from mason leaders or literature condemning these statements from other masons? How about a statement saying Duncan isn't official material from the organization. Nope, just emphatically running around saying "That's not true... cause I said so, and he doesn't know what he is talking about"

I've given enough quotes and references to make my case to anyone following this thread or reading it later. While those defending it have used the very tactics I've outlined as the oaths require to defend it and provided no evidence to the contrary other than, "That's not true cause I say so"

I encourage anyone reading this. If you are a christian and you love Jesus, why would you even take the chance of entertaining freemasonry? It's not worth it. Same if you are in it. Is it really worth it? Make sure that you are not letting masonry become an idol that you are holding above Christ.

I'm out of this one, blessings to all.

 

[topher694]

Oh, forgot to mention. The excuse of accidentally misquoting here doesn't really hold up since we have the ability to quote others so easily and both people used that ability many times, but not in these cases when the quote was used to discredit. hmmmmmm.

 

[Albion]

Hilarious, classic twisting of words to change the narrative (misdirection) I say, "lol, so it's ok, because only those higher up in leadership are required to lie." and you change it to, "And then you admitted to my rebuttal, saying that it is only the higher ups who are not required to lie"

First, my apologies. I meant to write that you switched the subject from Masons are required to lie...to higher ups are required to lie.

The point I was intending to make was that you not only changed the subject when I advised you that you were wrong to categorize all Masons (or at least all Royal Arch Masons) as you were doing but that, at the same time, the new claim about some unidentified higher ups was just made up out of thin air, too.

Much like the other guy twisted my words to say all masons worship satan, when my assertion was that the organization itself is satanic.

Well, that was another discussion, but there is no evidence that Masonry is Satanic, no evidence to support the notion was produced here and, in fact, the claim flies in the face of all common sense.

 

[Rick Otto]

You made the claim, based upon some spooky-looking internet website or conspiracy publication, I'm thinking. Not I.

And then you admitted to my rebuttal, saying that it is only the higher ups who are not required to lie. But Royal Arch Masons are not the higher ups of Masonry. Earlier in this thread, Circuit Rider pointed out that the Scottish Rite degrees are not what Masonry is, or what "Masons do," etc. either. This is similar.

So, we don't have any truth to Masonry is Satanic. And we don't have the oath you claimed you had read "directly" but won't say what directly from what.

Lots of people have heard rumors or read sensationalist literature attacking Masonry, but people who don't have any personal knowledge and so cannot tell the facts from the fiction (and I assure you that there is a lot more money to be made from the fiction) really ought not to repeat what they cannot verify.


Aha. So we see that it was not from any Masonic initiation ritual.

Duncan's is not official Masonic material, although I suppose some people who have no other information might assume that it is because of the title. It isn't used in Masonic ceremonies (therefore not the oath you copied) but some people find general aids in this book that describes some of what Masonry was doing 200 years ago or so. And every Mason acquainted with Duncans will say it is not accurate.

Answer no questions, simply deny all claims generally, stay vague on specifics, make two unsubstantiated claims against any claim, ...
Very convincing when I 'm sound asleep.

 

[Rick Otto]

"...but there is no evidence that Masonry is Satanic, "
LOL!
Nihilistic sense of humor.

"...you were wrong to categorize all Masons ..."
But it's perfectly sound to categorize all conspiracy theorists.

 

[Rick Otto]

Hilarious, classic twisting of words to change the narrative (misdirection) I say, "lol, so it's ok, because only those higher up in leadership are required to lie." and you change it to, "And then you admitted to my rebuttal, saying that it is only the higher ups who are not required to lie" (manipulation to discredit)

Much like the other guy twisted my words to say all masons worship satan, when my assertion was that the organization itself is satanic. (I'm sure many in it have zero idea). He personalized it to make me look like I'm calling others names while he calls me names and questions my intelligence. (again twisting to discredit)

And, he did it other times too, Mark said, "Also the fact that members of the lodge that proclaim Christianity defend the lodge with so much zeal" and his quote was twisted to say, "As to the charge that Christian freemasons defend their Christianity too strongly, that is a strange charge."

I gave a quote, that is evidence. Then YOU made a claim that it was bogus, the claim of bogus is for YOU to prove, I already gave the quote.

Truth is I have given numerous citations directly from masons (famous ones even), and mason literature. The only defense that I have seen boils down to, "nu-uh, that ain't true" How about quotes from mason leaders or literature condemning these statements from other masons? How about a statement saying Duncan isn't official material from the organization. Nope, just emphatically running around saying "That's not true... cause I said so, and he doesn't know what he is talking about"

I've given enough quotes and references to make my case to anyone following this thread or reading it later. While those defending it have used the very tactics I've outlined as the oaths require to defend it and provided no evidence to the contrary other than, "That's not true cause I say so"

I encourage anyone reading this. If you are a christian and you love Jesus, why would you even take the chance of entertaining freemasonry? It's not worth it. Same if you are in it. Is it really worth it? Make sure that you are not letting masonry become an idol that you are holding above Christ.

I'm out of this one, blessings to all.

Yep.
Jesus' phrase for the money changers is brought to mind "brooding vipers".
I been watching this channel for years.

 

[Rick Otto]

QUOTE="circuitrider, post: 73632238, member: 338223"]First mis-understanding. While Albert Pike wrote a lot of material, that book is his own opinion. It isn't "the doctrinal book of Freemasonry." Only about 30-40% of Masons belong to the Scottish Rite that he was Grand Commander of during the civil war. And he was only Grand Commander of the Southern Jurisdiction of Scottish Rite. A lot of northern jurisdiction Scottish Rite Masons barely know who he is.

We've heard that apology numerous times already.
Read the thread to find out why we know it's bogus.

Pike wasn't in charge of Freemasonry nor was his book ever used as "doctrine." He was the head of a single appendant order in Freemasonry and had his own philosophical opinions about things which people can believe or not believe.

Yeah, we've heard that nonsense before as well.
That's why he has a statue in D.C.
Somebody liked him enough to buy a statue, it doesn't mean anything more than that, right. LOL!!!

The same is true of Manly Hall. His books are are only his opinions, not any rule or doctrine that anyone is required to believe.

Your opinion. No one required to believe it, either.

In the US is is the state level Grand Lodges that are in charge of Freemasonry. None of them have adopted Pikes works as any official statement of Freemasonry. The Scottish Rite isn't in charge of the Grand Lodges.

So you are told.

Saying that Pike's book is the doctrine of Freemasonry would be like saying a book written by the President of the Southern Baptist Convention is doctrine and it is the doctrine for all Christians. Far from beings so!

It might be like saying that if the POSB had a statue of himself in Jerusalem and his book of opinions was handed out to each new member.
Try and keep it a tiny bit real.