Can a Christian be a Freemason???

[Rev Wayne]

Look, there is no re-frame at all. Take the recently deceased Mason out of the picture. I simply asked you a question regarding the belief of anyone who denies the veracity of Scripture and Jesus Christ as the only way to salvation.

And the only reason you asked the question is what...? Now you try to pretend your question had nothing to do with your whole regurgitation of that entire mess????

I executed a controlled burn, and you tried to magnify it and make it an out-of-control flameout, just to try to make hay from it, as I knew you would. You really should have known better. But just so you will not try the same here by re-framing and spewing the same rot in a different fashion:

I am a Christian, have been since my teens. I have believed ever since becoming a Christian that Jesus Christ is the way, the truth, and the life. He is and ever has been my only hope of salvation. I teach and preach the Gospel message of Jesus Christ as Prophet, Priest, and King, who alone is Lord and Savior, living and reigning in heaven, who was, and is, and is to come.

I choose to operate in the gifts of the Spirit. You, for some reason, wish to have me operate in a model of your choosing instead. So, like the disciples said to the Jews in Acts 4:19, “Judge for yourself whether it is right in God’s sight to obey you rather than God.”

I have not hesitated to declare this here or on any other forum you care to name. My pattern of witnessing may be very different than yours, but that makes it no more nor less valid. The Bible, after all, provides many models for us, and not everyone chooses the same path, nor does God choose the same path for everyone. You seem to think if I don’t try to convert people in the presence of others on a public forum, I am not “doing evangelism.” Not everyone is called to be an evangelist, any more than everyone is called to be a pastor. These are spiritual gifts, and the gifts are distributed by the Spirit “to each one, just as He determines.” I have taken gift inventories, and evangelism is at or near the bottom of gifts I have been blessed with. Preaching and pastoral care are high on the list. So it is no surprise that “feed the flock of God” figures into the model. Music would be high on the list also, if music were on the list of spiritual gifts. Not that it needs to be, for I have discussed this with many others, and we all agree that music ministry is as much a gift and calling of God as anything on the list of spiritual gifts. In the pastoral office, I am able to maximize that gift, because I can match the preached message and the message of the music in a harmonious blend. When I am faithful to do that, that is, follow the gifts according to the manner in which God gave them, putting full effort into exercising those gifts that God has given, I have found that it opens doors for further ministry, which often includes evangelistic ministry. The reason for that is, when one operates in the gifts God intends them to have and use, they maximize the flow of the Spirit in worship. And when the Spirit has free flow in a church’s worship, hearts get touched in places they often have not been touched before, and people invariably get hungry, or curious, or puzzled, or any of a full range of responses, and they come to me for answers to their questions. That being the case, I choose also for my model of witnessing, the one described by Peter, who gave the admonition to “be ready to give an answer to those who ask you the reason for your faith.” Notice he presupposes the fact that people will come with questions; notice too, he doesn’t say "go to them," but simply to "be ready when they come to you."



I have been up-front on the forum at which you made your unfortunate comments, in declaring myself to be in the same camp as Hutchinson, Oliver, Mackey, and Wilmshurst, all of whom directly compared Masonry, in their own individual and various ways, with Christianity. In fact, as many times as you have been present in all the places where I have made those statements, you should have the quotes from these particular authors memorized by now. But, assuming that you don't, I cite them again, and reiterate my own agreement with them. And should it become necessary, as it usually does in your case, I shall once again provide the overwhelming abundance of materials that support what they have said:

First, from Mackey:

The very spirit of all of our lectures proves conclusively that when they were formulated they were designed to teach pure trinitarian Christianity, and while the Jewish scriptures did forecast the intermediary of a Christos, as all the ancient heathen mysteries did also, yet Jesus Christ as shown and demonstrated in the writings of the New Testament, was not understood by the Jewish writers of the Old Testament, nor by but very few of that faith since. The first three degrees taken in connection with the Holy Royal Arch, as they have always been with our Brethren of England, certainly show pure Christianity, as taught throughout the writings of the New Testament scriptures. (Mackey, History of Freemasonry, p. 1769)

From Wilmshurst:

By a tacit and quite unwarranted convention the members of the Craft avoid mention in their Lodges of the Christian Master and confine their scriptural readings and references almost exclusively to the Old Testament, the motive being no doubt due to a desire to observe the injunction as to refraining from religious discussion and to prevent offence on the part of brethren who may not be of the Christian faith. The motive is an entirely misguided one and is negated by the fact that the "greater light" upon which every member is obligated, and to which his earnest attention is recommended from the moment of his admission to the Order, is not only the Old Testament, but the volume of the Sacred Law in its entirety. The New Testament is as essential to his instruction as the Old, not merely because of its moral teaching, but in virtue of its constituting the record of the Mysteries in their supreme form and historic culmination. The Gospels themselves, like the Masonic degrees, are a record of preparation and illumination, leading up to the ordeal of death, followed by a raising from the dead and the attainment of Mastership, and they exhibit the process of initiation carried to the highest conceivable degree of attainment. The New Testament is full of passages in Masonic terminology and there is not a little irony in the failure by modern Masons to recognize its supreme importance and relevancy to their Lodge proceedings and in the fact that in so doing they may be likening themselves to those builders of whom it is written that they rejected the chief Corner Stone. They would learn further that the Grand Master and Exemplar of Masonry, Hiram Abiff, is but a figure of the Great Master and Exemplar and Saviour of the world, the Divine Architect by whom all things were made, without whom is nothing that hath been made, and whose life is the light of men.

From Hutchinson:

The knowledge of the God of Nature forms the first estate of our profession; the worship of the Deity, under the Jewish law, is described in the second stage of Masonry; and the Christian dispensation is distinguished in the last and highest order.

From Oliver:

Little need be said of this man who was, after all, a Christian minister, and as prominent a professor of Christian faith as any Mason ever was, and the most arduous in his insistence that Masonry’s symbolic system pointed to Christ. He even wrote a book titled, The Star in the East, Shewing the Analogy Which Exists Between the Lectures of Freemasonry, the Mechanism of Initiation Into its Mysteries, and the Christian Religion. Pretty emphatic, I’d say.

Despite this continued witness to my Christian faith, and despite your presence in places where every bit of it has posted, you isolate one incident, ironically one of which you haven’t the least knowledge of any specifics or details, and start throwing rocks, based on nothing more than the wandering ruminations of your own fertile imagination. I can't imagine what's up with that.

 

[Rev Wayne]

However, as far as I'm concerned, any further delay or refraining from answering said question duly indicates intellectual and spiritual cowardice on your part.

Full of pretense, are we? Everyone knows by now, you never ask me an unloaded question. Your every comment on this matter drips with Pharisaical anticipation as you go from accusation to accusation.

And as far as I'm concerned, any further delay in acknowledging the nature of your recent actions in the incident you so regrettably chose to spread here, and any further attempt to continue a conversation that had already gone on longer than it should the minute you entered the first post, indicates intellectual and spiritual bankruptcy on your part.

Tit for tat, naturally.

(Taking a chance here, folks, no telling what Michael will try to make of THAT one!)

 

[SealedEternal]

First if all, the only war that is going on is happening inside your head. You know nothing about me, my beliefs, or who I follow for that matter. Let's not get besides ourselves. There is but one Lord and that is Yehoshua Ha Mashiach or as you call him, Jesus Christ.

I just believe that there is also an esoteric side to the scriptures, and an understanding of which that is not meant for everyone. That is where the jewels and pearls lie, hidden from common view and that is the area of study that I am interested in. The exoteric and dogmatic aspects of religion are open for one and all, but my lot is not there to be found.

Gratias ago vos Deus

So you're a gnostic professing Christian. The Yehoshua Ha Mashiach of scripture says He speaks nothing in secret, but called Himself the light of the world to be put on a lampstand for all to see. To some extent His teachings are veiled to those who don't have eyes to see or ears to hear, but this is more of an issue of hearts being hardened which blinds them to truth, whereas gnosticism is usually a system of control where elites protect information in order to maintain their power over the masses.

What often happens when people read into the text their own esoteric interpretations, is they end up missing the clearest fundamental points and contradicting them. Freemasons for example will use the King James Bible and claim that it is an esoteric book that supports their occult mystery religions, while their conclusions are precisely the opposite of the true Spirit of the Word in its exoteric sense. When you start to go down that path a clever person can make virtually any writing, teach whatever the interpreter wants it to teach, and everything becomes relative and subject to the elites who define the esoteric interpretation.

You're correct that I don't know much about you, but this is the impression I'm getting about your approach to Scripture.

SealedEternal

 

[izarya]

Now I'm a "Gnostic?"

I have been studying long enough to know that conversations such as these are fruitless. Neither of us will change the view of the other (nor do I have the desire to do so), and no matter what I say you will always jump to conclusions (as you have already shown). So rock on, all I have to say is that I have been where you now are, and I have no desire to go backwards.

And you are right that He spoke nothing in secret... but the majority still didn't understand. Such is the case. The key is the understanding, which to many is sealed.

 

[izarya]

There is and was much more substance to the teachings of Jesus than is recognizable from the surface of the canonical gospels. For several centuries a belief circulated among early Christian writers that there had always been a secret, or inner tradition entrusted by Jesus to only a few of his followers.

Eusebius quotes from a now lost work of Clement of Alexandria, Hypotyposes:

"James the Righteous, John and Peter were entrusted by the LORD after his resurrection with the higher knowledge. They imparted it to the other apostles, and the other apostles to the seventy, one of whom was Barnabas." (History 2.1)

​

This brief statement offers an important piece of evidence: the tradition was given to an inner circle of disciples, and the tradition was a form of higher knowledge.

Jesus, when he walked the earth in the flesh, taught openly and to all the message of repentance, and God’s love toward humanity.
But, there were some things that he did not teach the masses of people openly, in fact he made clear distinction, and taught his disciples to do the same. "Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine…" (Matt 7:6).
We see this again in Matt 13:9-11, and in Mark 4:11. The account in Mark is most interesting because in it is used the word “without” (KJV). “Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables...” The word without, in this usage meaning 'outside,' is the opposite of within, which is the Greek word esoteros, the root of the word esoteric, secret, “occult;” it designates “that which is hidden within.” Also, note the use of the word “Mystery” in Mark 4:11, the word here in the Greek is musterion from the root muo meaning to shut the mouth; a secret or mystery through the idea of silence imposed by initiation into religious rites): mystery (according to Strong’s #3466)
So here we see that there was a distinction made between them that are “within,” from them that are without, though both had equal opportunity to receive Christ's grace, and hear his teachings; both however had not the ability to decipher and recieve the same.

 

[izarya]

I also must ask, who are these "Elites" that you guys constantly speak of? Your elected officials? That is one thing about Esoterica, it is evident that you don't know much about it besides what can be commonly and erroniously aquired from a few Tex Marrs books and Bill Schnobelen videos...oh and let's not forget Alex Jones; no one facilitates or 'defines' what the interpretations or symbols mean definitively as they attempt to do in the exoteric aspects of religion.

 

[SealedEternal]

Now I'm a "Gnostic?"

Aren't you? Do you not claim to possess intellectual or esoteric knowledge of spiritual things? I'm sorry if you find the term derogatory, but it does seem to describe your view of interpreting scripture.

And you are right that He spoke nothing in secret... but the majority still didn't understand. Such is the case. The key is the understanding, which to many is sealed.

I completely agree with that statement, but as I stated earlier, I believe it is a matter of ones heart that dictates how close we come to relating to Him, and is not about man possessing secret knowledge.

SealedEternal

 

[SealedEternal]

I also must ask, who are these "Elites" that you guys constantly speak of?

The people who hold power over others by claiming to know the secret esoteric interpretations of religious writings. Naturally this relegates the masses as laity and gives the elites power over those who desire to become one of them. It is how pagan religion has always been structured, and is illustrated in the religion of Masonry today.

SealedEternal

 

[Rev Wayne]

From the link (An Amazon.com catalogue page for this book (I knew it sounded familiar, then I saw the cover, I've read this from the public library!): Publisher: Chick Pub

That says it all right there and shows the zero credibility it has in just two words.

Don't know if we can get much continuity on the matter here. One would think, with a thread titled, 'Can a Christian be a Freemason???', that there would be something on it besides hateful character assassination. But then, maybe that is the way of the "Gentle Craft".

Talk about “defending the indefensible!” I can’t believe this would be the comeback when someone takes note of Jack Chick Publications, arguably the most infamous of the anti-masonic liars brigade. Check out the following critique of “The Godfathers,” a typical Chick tract:

It took me several tries to finally read this thing through. Each time I tried I at some point became exasperated at the utter historical ignorance of the author. All conspiracy theories ignore things that would contradict their thesis, but this runs so roughshod over the truth, its just not funny.

Among some more egregious examples:

*It says that the Vatican ordered the Kaiser Wilhelm II to invade France in 1914, in order to start World War I. It notes that the Kaiser was a good Catholic. Wilhelm II was a Lutheran.

*It states that Marx, Engels, Lenin, Trotsky, and Stalin were all Jesuit agents. Furthermore that the goal of Communism was to destroy the Orthodox church. That international communist movement, and before that the "Marxist" tendency within the second international was always political enemy of the Vatican is a matter of record.

*It says that a Jesuit priest named Staempfle wrote Mein Kampf for Hitler. According to William Shirer, father Stempfle only helped him edit the manuscripts which Hess made from Hitlers dictation. Hitler would later have Stempfle killed.

*It presents Himmler and the SS has loyal Catholics. In fact the SS was almost as fervently anti-Catholic as anti-Semitic. Hitlers quote that the Himmler would be the Nazi Loyola is taken out of context. It only meant that the SS would be to Germany what the Jesuits were to the Vatican.

*It presents the Blue Division (not Army) of Francoist Spain as having a decisive influence on the Eastern front, and as being an official Spanish expeditionary force. The Blue Division was made up of volunteers to help fight Bolshevism, and though Franco approved of the venture, it was not part of the neutral Spanish armed forces. It was one of many formations from Western European countries, occupied or neutral, that went to the Eastern Front.

*It presents an apologetic obituary for Hitler, publish in an Francoist newspaper as expressing the official views of the Vatican. While Madrid did have warm relations with Rome, that does not mean its propaganda is ipso facto "Vatican" propaganda.

*It states that the KKK was founded by Catholic ex-Confederate soldiers to discredit Protestantism, particularly in the eyes of blacks. Firstly, the original KKK was not the organized movement that it is portrayed as in movies; it was more like a disorganized resistance made of many groups of different names and styles that appeared ad hoc to counter reconstruction measures. If some of the founders were Catholic, a rarity in the Conf. army, that does not necessarily mean they were all controlled by Rome. Secondly, the 2nd KKK - the one that wrapped itself in Americanism and Protestantism - was an explicitly anti-Catholic group, as can be seen from the materials from them on this website. Subsequent KKKs have generally replaces Catholic with Jew baiting for various reasons.
*It states that the Illuminati and Freemasons are a Jesuit/Catholic front. Anyone with a knowledge of the history of these organizations knows that is patently false.

One of the chief planks in any antimasonic platform is, having an obvious axe to grind. Jack Chick has more than the average share, and if he tries to disguise them at all, he does so very poorly. Most of his errors seem to derive from the poorly considered premise that if one has more than one villain to nail, they can lump them together and save nails. I laugh every time I see conspiracy theories that join Catholicism with Freemasonry, or Freemasonry with Jesuits.

 

[izarya]

Aren't you? Do you not claim to possess intellectual or esoteric knowledge of spiritual things? I'm sorry if you find the term derogatory, but it does seem to describe your view of interpreting scripture.

Wikipedia:

Gnosticism (Greek: γνώσις gnōsis, knowledge) refers to a diverse, syncretistic religious movement consisting of various belief systems generally united in the teaching that humans are divine souls trapped in a material world created by an imperfect god, the demiurge, who is frequently identified with the Abrahamic God. The demiurge may be depicted as an embodiment of evil, or in other instances as merely imperfect and as benevolent as its inadequacy permits. This demiurge exists alongside another remote and unknowable supreme being that embodies good. In order to free oneself from the inferior material world, one needs gnosis, or esoteric spiritual knowledge available to all through direct experience or knowledge (gnosis) of God.

Advent Catholic Encyclopedia:

Gnosticism: The doctrine of salvation by knowledge. This definition, based on the etymology of the word (gnosis "knowledge", gnostikos, "good at knowing"), is correct as far as it goes, but it gives only one, though perhaps the predominant, characteristic of Gnostic systems of thought. Whereas Judaism and Christianity, and almost all pagan systems, hold that the soul attains its proper end by obedience of mind and will to the Supreme Power, i.e. by faith and works, it is markedly peculiar to Gnosticism that it places the salvation of the soul merely in the possession of a quasi-intuitive knowledge of the mysteries of the universe and of magic formulae indicative of that knowledge.

Both indicate accurately that Gnosticism dictates that salvation lies within the acquisition of knowledge. Where did I say such a thing? I said I am interested in the esoteric interpretation and nature of scripture, you wrote the rest of the story yourself.

Me thinks that you better read and study more before throwing around stereotypes and labels that you yourself do not fully understand.

Shalom

 

[O.F.F.]

I have been up-front on the forum at which you made your unfortunate comments, in declaring myself to be in the same camp as Hutchinson, Oliver, Mackey, and Wilmshurst, all of whom directly compared Masonry, in their own individual and various ways, with Christianity.(emphasis added)

The individual opinions of 5 Masons (including yourself) do not mean anything, except their own personal interpretation and rationalization of Freemasonry being Christian in its religious teachings. Yet that is NOT what the authorities of Freemasonry teach. What matters is what they teach, not what any Mason thinks.

The authorities of Freemasonry are the Grand Lodges that disseminate Masonic education material to its disciples. Despite the fact that Christianity is the predominate religion in the U.S., NOT one Grand Lodge in this country has ever declared Masonic teaching as being Christian, like you and the 4 other Masons you quote have deluded yourselves into thinking.

Freemasonry welcomes men of ALL faiths into one religious order; the Masonic Order. Therefore, it's religious teachings MUST apply to ALL Masons regardless of their faith-background. As a result, any genuine, biblically educated Christian can read what these authorities have to say and immediately discern the heresy in their religious teachings. Even if they try to apply a Christian principle here or there, they are applying them to ALL disciples of Freemasonry, including believers, non-believers, Hindus, Muslims, Buddhists, and other pagans. That alone is contrary to biblical teaching, no matter what 5 deluded Masons have to say about it.

They (the authorities of Freemasonry) teach the idea of multiple Saviors (Mediators or Redeemers):

Kentucky Monitor, Thirteenth Edition, pages XIV-XV

All believed in a future life, to be attained by purification and trials; in a state or successive states of reward and punishment; and in a Mediator or Redeemer, by whom the Evil Principle was to be overcome and the Supreme Deity reconciled to His creatures. The belief was general that He was to be born of a virgin and suffer a painful death. The Hindus called him Krishna; the Chinese, Kioun-tse; the Persians, Sosiosch; the Chaldeans, Dhouvanai; the Egyptians, Horus; Plato, Love; the Scandinavians, Balder; the Christians, Jesus; Masons, Hiram. (emphasis added)

Yet the Bible teaches:

1 Timothy 2:5

For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.

They are taught to emulate their false Savior:

Kentucky Monitor, Grand Lodge of Kentucky, p. 152

Then let us imitate our G. M. H. A. (Grand Master Hiram Abif) in all his varied perfection. Let us emulate his amiable and virtuous character, his unfeigned piety to God, and his inflexible fidelity to his trust, that, like him, we may welcome the grim tyrant Death, and receive him as a kind messenger sent by our Supreme Grand Master to translate us from this imperfect to that all-perfect, glorious, and celestial Lodge above, where the Great Architect of the Universe presides, forever reigns. (emphasis added)

Yet the Bible teaches:

1 Peter 2:21

To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps.

They teach that "good works" are an essential requirement to go to heaven:

The Colorado Craftsman or Masonic Monitor of the Grand Lodge of Colorado

The lamb has been deemed in all ages an emblem of innocence. He, therefore, who wears the lambskin as a badge of Masonry, is constantly reminded of that purity of life and conduct which is so essentially necessary to his gaining admission into the Celestial Lodge above, over which the Supreme Architect of the Universe presides. (emphasis added)

Yet the Bible teaches:

Ephesians 2:8-9

8For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9not by works, so that no one can boast.

They also teach that the goal of Masonic initiation is spiritual rebirth:

Entered Apprentice Candidate Guide -- Grand Lodge of California

The lambskin apron is at once an emblem of innocence and the badge of a Mason. By innocence is meant clean thinking and clean living, a loyal obedience to the laws of the craft, and sincere goodwill and charity toward one’s brethren. The “badge of a Mason” signifies, among other things, that Masons are workers and builders, not mere theorizers, gadflies, and intellectual eunuchs.

The lamb has always been a symbol of innocence and sacrifice. There are two senses in which innocence is being used here: Innocence, in one sense, meaning free from moral defect; the other sense is that of being newly born and without blemish (sinless), in the sense of fulfilling the goal of Masonic initiation --that of spiritual rebirth. (emphasis added)

Yet the Bible teaches that spiritual rebirth comes only to those who receive Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior:

John 1:12-13

12Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— 13children born not of natural descent,[c] nor of human decision or a husband's will, but born of God.

They teach that by the Masonic ritual ALL Masons (be they Jews, Gentiles, Hindus, Christians, Occultists, Buddhists, Wiccans, Muslims, etc.) are redeemed (saved):

Indiana Monitor and Freemason’s Guide, Grand Lodge of Indiana, p. 154

By its legend and all its ritual, it is implied that we have been redeemed from the death of sin and the sepulchre of pollution. "The ceremonies and lecture," as a distinguished writer has observed, "beautifully illustrate this all-engrossing subject; and the conclusion we arrive at is, that youth, properly directed, leads us to the honorable and virtuous maturity, and that the life of man, regulated by morality, faith, and justice, will be rewarded at its closing hour by the prospect of eternal bliss. (emphasis added)

Again, this is taught by other Grand Lodges:

Nevada Masonic Monitor, Third Degree, Grand Lodge of Nevada, p. 3

This is the scope and aim of its ritual. The Master Mason represents man, when youth, man-hood, old age, and life itself have passed away as fleeting shadows. yet raised from the grave of iniquity, and quickened into another and a better existence. By its legend and all its ritual, it is implied that we have been redeemed from the death of sin and the sepulchre of pollution.

Ahiman Rezon, Grand Lodge of South Carolina, p. 141

It was the single object of all the ancient rites and mysteries practiced in the very bosom of pagan darkness. . .to teach the immortality of the Soul. This is still the great design of the third degree of Masonry. This is the scope and aim of its ritual. The Master Mason represents man, when youth, manhood, old age, and life itself have passed away as fleeting shadows, yet raised from the grave of iniquity, and quickened into another and better existence. By its legend and all its ritual, it is implied that we have been redeemed from the death of sin and the sepulchre of pollution. . . .and the conclusion we arrive at is, that youth, properly directed, leads us to honorable and virtuous maturity, and that the life of man, regulated by morality, faith, and justice, will be rewarded at its closing hour by the prospect of eternal bliss. (emphasis added)

Yet the Bible teaches that redemption comes from Jesus Christ alone:

Romans 3:23-25

23for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.

Once a true saint, who just might be a bit curious about the possibility of joining the Lodge learns any of this, it is like a litmus test of his faith, and he will NOT become a Mason. And, the same test holds true for those who ignorantly stumble into becoming a Mason before recognizing these teachings for what they really are -- pure heresy.

If he sees or hears information from any Grand Lodge that conflicts with biblical Christianity, then he too will have nothing more to do with Freemasonry whatsoever, even if the information comes from another jurisdiction.

If he passes this litmus test, he will surely run from Freemasonry entirely; knowing that maintaining membership gives tacit approval of whatever is taught in the Lodge, no matter where it comes from. Otherwise, he should examine himself to see whether or not he is still in the faith, because a true Christian that is biblically educated will NOT persist in remaining a Mason, without being in deliberate rebellion against God.

P.S.

Wayne, I see you seem to have decided not to address post #121 in its entirety. So I guess we can assume its true. Unless you can provide clarification on the things you've said in the past on the matters indicated therein. For readers who missed it, here is the link for your convenience.

http://christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=47276069&postcount=121

 

[SealedEternal]

Both indicate accurately that Gnosticism dictates that salvation lies within the acquisition of knowledge. Where did I say such a thing? I said I am interested in the esoteric interpretation and nature of scripture, you wrote the rest of the story yourself.

Me thinks that you better read and study more before throwing around stereotypes and labels that you yourself do not fully understand.

Shalom

It reallty depends on whose definition you use. Another Wikipedia entry defines it as I have:


Gnosticism From Wikipedia

http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism


Gnosticism comes from the Greek: gnosis which means knowledge.
Some religions and sects mostly in the few hundred years before and after Christ are said to be gnostic or practice gnosticism.
This is because these religions believe that there is a special, hidden knowledge that only a few people may have.


There are two problems finding out a lot about believers in gnosticism:

1. Most Gnostic teachings were secret or hidden (occult);
2. Most of what we know about Gnostics comes from attacks written by non-Gnostic Christians.

http://nostalgia.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism


Gnosticism is a blanket term for various religions and sects most prominent in the first few centuries A.D. Its name comes from the Greek word for knowledge, gnosis, refering to the idea that there is special, hidden knowledge that only a few may posses.

Compact Oxford English Dictionary

gnostic /nostik/ • adjective 1 relating to knowledge, especially esoteric mystical knowledge.

The Free Dictionary by Farlex
Gnos·tic (n

s

t

k) adj. Of, relating to, or possessing intellectual or spiritual knowledge


"Salvation" is tied into some peoples definition of Gnosticism, but it is not inherent to the term itself. I'm glad you at least acknowledge that your esoteric knowledge is not related to salvation, but you apparently do consider it to be of great importance for some reason or another that you have not yet explained. So I will qualifty my statement saying that you are not necessarily a gnostic in the salvation sense, but are in the sense that you claim to possess esoteric intellectual and spiritual knowledge that makes you superior to others for some cause other than salvation.

SealedEternal

 

[izarya]

FYI, I do not equate occult or secret knowledge as you put it with superiority (there you go again), nor do I consider my self superior for obtaining such; I am merely interested in it because it IS inherent in the scriptures and the teachings of Christ.

Once you have a foundation laid in Christ, there is no need to wallow in the rudimentary and elementary aspects of the doctrine, if of course one is so endowed.

Hebrews 6:1-3, "Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God, Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment.
And this will we do, if God permit."

 

[SealedEternal]

Back to the topic at hand, Freemasonry at its highest degrees is nothing more than the same paganism practiced throughout history, and is ultimately Satanism, which is clear when one reads the writings of its most revered prophets:

'The Mysteries Of Magic' by Eliphas Levi

"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." page 428

'The Book Of Black Magic' by Arthur Edward Waite 33°

"First Conjuration Addressed to Emperor Lucifer. Emperor Lucifer, Master and Prince of Rebellious Spirits, I adjure thee to leave thine abode, in what-ever quarter of the world it may be situated and come hither to communicate with me. I command and I conjure thee in the Name of the Mighty Living God, Father, Son and Holy Ghost, to appear without noise and without ...." page 244

'The Secret Teaching Of All Ages' by Manly Palmer Hall 33°

"I hereby promise the Great Spirit Lucifuge, Prince of Demons, that each year I will bring unto him a human soul to do with as as it may please him, and in return Lucifuge promises to bestow upon me the treasures of the earth and fulfil my every desire for the length of my natural life. If I fail to bring him each year the offering specified above, then my own soul shall be forfeit to him. Signed.....
{ Invocant signs pact with his own blood } " page CIV

'The Lost Keys Of Freemasonry' by Manly Palmer Hall 33°
"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." page 48

'The Secret Doctrine' by Helena Petrovna Blavatsky
"Lucifer represents..Life..Thought..Progress..Civilization..Liberty..Independance..Lucifer is the Logos..the Serpent, the Savior." on pages 171, 225, 255 (Volume II)"It is Satan who is the God of our planet and the only God." pages 215, 216, 220, 245, 255, 533, (VI)

"The Celestial Virgin which thus becomes the Mother of Gods and Devils at one and the same time; for she is the ever-loving beneficent Deity...but in antiquity and reality Lucifer or Luciferius is the name. Lucifer is divine and terrestial Light, 'the Holy Ghost' and "Satan' at one and the same time." page 539 (Volume?)

Albert Pike 33°
"That which we must say to a crowd is - We worship a God, but it is the God that one adores without superstition. To you, Sovereign Grand Inspectors General, we say this, that you may repeat it to the Brethren of the 32nd, 31st, and 30th degrees - The Masonic Religion should be, by alll of us initates of the high degrees, maintained in the purity of the Luciferian Doctrine.

If Lucifer were not God, would Adonay whose deeds prove his cruelty, perdify and hatred of man, barbarism and repulsion for science, would Adonay and his priests, calumniate him?
Yes, Lucifer is God, and unfortunately Adonay is also god. For the eternal law is that there is no light without shade, no beauty without ugliness, no white without black, for the absolute can only exist as two gods: darkness being necessary to the statue, and the brake to the locomotive.

Thus, the doctrine of Satanism is a heresy; and the true and pure philosophical religion is the belief in Lucifer, the equal of Adonay; but Lucifer, God of Light and God of Good, is struggling for humanity against Adonay, the God of Darkness and Evil."

Instructions to the 23 Supreme Councils of the World, July 14, 1889. Recorded by A.C. De La Rive in La Femme et l'Enfant dans la FrancMaconnerie Universelle on page 588

"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 it's splendors intolerable blinds feeble, sensual or selfish Souls? Doubt it not! Morals and Dogma page 321

Both Freemasonry, and most man made religions (professing Christian or otherwise) are all based largely on paganism which is ultimately the religion of Satan. They will often refer to Him as "Lucifer" because they believe that he is the true source of enlightenment, but in reality he is the great deceiver and promoter of spiritual darkness.

Freemasonry, more than most of the pagan mystery religions practiced today is in its purest form, while many other religions have more exoteric veneers hiding their true meanings of their doctrines. Freemasonry relies entirely on the degree system to shield its lower adherents from the esoteric understandings, while others hide their gnosis in false interpretations and religious veneers, so that the masses think they understand the religious terminology, but are given a false understandings of the doctrines.


Freemasonry does essentially the same thing, except with each degree the adept is given a closer and closer understanding of the true "knowledge" mixed with less and less lies, until they reach the higher degrees and receive the greatest secret of all, which is that Satan (lucifer) is "god". Then they have reached Freemasonry's highest pinnacle and supposedly become fully "enlightened".



SealedEternal

 

[izarya]

Fruitless! All of the sources you quote are grossly misrepresented and misused. A clear indication of one who has undoubtedly not read one single word in either of the works set forth but merely cuts and pastes from conspiratorial websites perpetuating someone else's ignorance. Try reading a book or two and forming your own perspective.

Here's a novel idea: try reading sources both for and against...it's called objective research.

 

[izarya]

Leo Taxil, born Gabriel Antoine Jogand-Pages, was a freethinker who made his living writing pornographic stories in serial form. Freethinker was a term given to those who opposed the authority and dogma of society, especially when that authority was religious in nature. In addition to his anti-Masonic writings, Taxil also was known for his works opposing Catholicism. Taxil upon petitioning admission to the Masonic lodge met with opposition of its members, largely due to his reputation as an anti-Catholic writer. Objections aside, Taxil was made a member for a short time after which he was expelled from the order. Perhaps this expulsion prompted him to write his Anti-Masonic works or perhaps it was his purpose for joining in the first place. In any case Taxil would go on to perpetrate a hoax that has lasted decades.
The Hoax Document


The Hoax Document

The following is the form, which the bogus quotation usually takes. It was later admitted by Taxil to be a hoax, yet to this day is quoted by those that would use it to slander Freemasonry:

[SIZE=-1][SIZE=-1]Albert Pike 33°[/SIZE][/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1][SIZE=-1]"That which we must say to a crowd is - We worship a God, but it is the God that one adores without superstition. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]To you, Sovereign Grand Inspectors General, we say this, that you may repeat it to the Brethren of the 32nd, 31st, and 30th degrees - The Masonic Religion should be, by all of us initiates of the high degrees, maintained in the purity of the Luciferian Doctrine.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]If Lucifer were not God, would Adonay whose deeds prove his cruelty, perdify and hatred of man, barbarism and repulsion for science, would Adonay and his priests, calumniate him?[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]Yes, Lucifer is God, and unfortunately Adonay is also god. For the eternal law is that there is no light without shade, no beauty without ugliness, no white without black, for the absolute can only exist as two gods: darkness being necessary to the statue, and the brake to the locomotive.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]Thus, the doctrine of Satanism is a heresy; and the true and pure philosophical religion is the belief in Lucifer, the equal of Adonay; but Lucifer, God of Light and God of Good, is struggling for humanity against Adonay, the God of Darkness and Evil."[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]Instructions to the 23 Supreme Councils of the World, July 14, 1889. Recorded by A.C. De La Rive in La Femme et l'Enfant dans la FrancMaconnerie Universelle on page 588[/SIZE]
[/SIZE]

Taxil Admits Document A Hoax

On April 17th, 1897, twelve years after Taxil first launched the hoax, he admitted it was just that. Before an assembly at the Paris Geographical Hall, Taxil told the crowd that the last decade plus of anti-Masonic literature had been falsely stated fabrications. The crowd, who in all likelihood had gathered to hear some new anti-Masonic revelation, was angered to a point where Taxil had to duck out a back exit.
As well documented as his admission of defrauding a gullible public is, the myth of Albert Pike's statement is still used today to slander the fraternity of Masonry. In fact some Fundamentalist Christian Web sites go so far as to attach the above document to Pike's book Moral's and Dogma.

The worst readers are those who proceed like plundering soldiers: they pick up a few things they use, soil and confuse the rest, and blaspheme the whole.

• • • • • [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][SIZE=-1]--Friedrich Nietzsche, Mixed Opinions and Maxims[/SIZE][/FONT]
          ​

 

[SealedEternal]

The following is the form, which the bogus quotation usually takes. It was later admitted by Taxil to be a hoax, yet to this day is quoted by those that would use it to slander Freemasonry

Even if that were true it doesn't explain the other quotes which are written in books that anyone can check for themselves. How are you going to explain those away?

SealedEternal

 

[izarya]

Lucifer has been used in the scholarly sense, misunderstood by those less educated in those times, and these.

To a scholar, Lucifer has nothing to do with Satan, in fact the reference used in Isaiah 14 was referring to a king of Tyre, not an angelic being. Here is something I wrote and researched before:

There is an interesting history behind the origins of the name commonly associated with Satan. In the first place, the true definition of the name Lucifer is Light Bearer, or Morning Star. In Roman astronomy, Lucifer was a reference or the name given to the morning star which appears in the heavens just before dawn, heralding the rising sun.

The name derives from the Latin term lucem ferre, bringer, or bearer, of light. If you refer to Revelations 22:16 Jesus Christ is quoted, "I am the root and offspring of David, and the bright and morning star." Some interesting associations can and have been made by students of esotericism if one were to closely consider the dynamics of the relationship between these two opposing archetypal principles.

“Lucifer” makes his first appearance in the fourteenth chapter of the book of Isaiah, at the twelfth verse, and nowhere else in the Old Testament of the Biblical text: "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! How art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations?” Contrary to popular belief, the fourteenth chapter of Isaiah is not about a fallen angel at all, but about a fallen Babylonian king who during his lifetime, persecuted the children of Israel.

It contains no mention of Satan, by name or reference and it is certainly not a story about an angelic being’s disobedience or rebellion against God who then banishes this insubordinate being from heaven to earth.
Until the translation of the Vulgate (the “official” Latin version of the bible), Lucifer was a Latin common word, never used as a proper name or title. Here's the story:

There was a Bishop at one time named, Lucifer Calaritanus, Bishop of the capitol city of Cagliari in Sardinia, an Island under the providence of Italy. He was the antagonist of a schism that caused a division within the Roman Catholic Church in or around the year 354 AD. Later, sometime between the years 382 and 405 A.D., St. Jerome translated the Hebrew and Greek scriptures into Latin.

It would appear that Jerome intentionally took a reference in the scriptures to an ancient Babylonian King; and he, being a rhetorician, framed the translation as Lucifer to equate the evil king with both Satan, and the Bishop. Jerome was evidently on the other side of the schism perpetuated by Bishop Lucifer as is demonstrated in his work entitled, "A dialogue against the Luciferians," A sect named after their founder... the Bishop.

Originally the name Lucifer denotes the planet Venus, emphasizing its brilliance. Metaphorically, the word was applied to the King of Babylon (Isaiah 14:12) as being preeminent in status among the princes of his time; in the actual Hebrew text the word used to describe the Babylonian king before his death is Helal, son of Shahar, which can best be translated as "Day star, son of the Dawn." The name was used to evoke images of the golden glitter of a proud king's dress and court. Comparably, the personal splendor of King Louis XIV of France earned him the appellation, "The Sun King."

The Vulgate employs the same word also for "the light of the morning" (Job 11:17), "the signs of the zodiac" (Job 38:32), "the aurora" (Psalm 109:3), the High Priest Simon: son of Onias for his unsurpassed virtue (Ecclesiasticus 50:6), to the glory of heaven by reason of its Excellency (Revelation 2:28); to Jesus Christ himself in 2 Peter 1:19; and as we previously indicated, Revelations 22:16.

The light beams of truth and knowledge shine forth chasing away the imaginary phantoms of darkness and ignorance.

 

[SealedEternal]

Lucifer has been used in the scholarly sense, misunderstood by those less educated in those times, and these.

To a scholar, Lucifer has nothing to do with Satan, in fact the reference used in Isaiah 14 was referring to a king of Tyre, not an angelic being. Here is something I wrote and researched before:

For someone who claims to understand esoteric meanings, you have totally missed the point of that prophecy. In this passage the King of Tyre is given the attributes of Satan because Satan literally has indwelt some of the most powerful leaders throughout history. The attributes described of a being who falls from heaven because he aspired to take God's position , could not possibly refer to a human king, but are obviously referring to Satan himself. The Book of Revelation states that there would be ten such kings, and one would return from the dead in the last days and be the most powerful of all. This of course will be Osiris/Gilgamesh/Nimrod. The explanation is too complex to discuss here.

Lucifer is the Latin term for "light bearer" and is used by occultists to refer to their god who is Satan, the enlightening serpent of old, because they believe he enlightened mankind and saved us from the oppressive God of the Bible. I don't know if you simply aren't as trained in the mysteries of the occult as you claim, or are intentionally pleading ignorance to protect your gnosis, but everyone who knows the true interpretations of the ancient mysteries knows this. It's not a Biblical title, and the King James Version mistranslates "morning star" as Lucifer, perhaps due to the influence of Rosicrucian's in the translating process.

The king of Tyre did not enlighten anyone, and he is hardly worthy of adoration by modern occultists, so obviously that is not the true foundation of their religion. Satan however did give mankind hidden knowledge, and separated us from the true God who occultists despise, so he is the "Lucifer" that they are esoterically referring to.

I also see the thinly veiled reference to dualism in your dissertation, yet you act offended when you are rightly called a gnostic. Your signature also quotes gnostic sources rather than scripture. Obviously you are playing games and don't want to reveal your true agenda.

SealedEternal

 

[izarya]

Oohh......an agenda conspiracy. The sky is falling the sky is falling.

Whatever dude.