The Antimasonic Propaganda Machine

[interpreter]

Most of the founding fathers were Masons. That makes it a good thing in my book.

 

[Skip Sampson]

Most of the founding fathers were Masons. That makes it a good thing in my book.

Which ones are you referring to?

By the way, some were also slaveholders; does that also make slavery a 'good thing' in your book? Cordially, Skip.

 

[Rev Wayne]

Speaking of typical antimasonic practices! He's only read two lines, and already trying to critique the book.

 

[ChristianMasonJim]

By the way, some were also slaveholders; does that also make slavery a 'good thing'...?

Some were not slaveholders. And some Northerners owned slaves. And some Southerners did not own slaves. And some Blacks owned slaves. These are nothing more than 18th Century historical facts, yet your question is through 21st century eyes. The 18th century culture-at-large definitely promoted the slave trade, so at that time, yes, it was considered a "good thing". Obviously, since then, our culture has changed and slavery is no longer seen as a "good thing", we see it very differently. So does the involvement of some in slave trade at a time when it was considered acceptable necessarily preclude them from contributing solid and worthy opinions on the structure and form of government? I don't think so.

 

[Rev Wayne]

Some were not slaveholders. And some Northerners owned slaves. And some Southerners did not own slaves. And some Blacks owned slaves. These are nothing more than 18th Century historical facts, yet your question is through 21st century eyes. The 18th century culture-at-large definitely promoted the slave trade, so at that time, yes, it was considered a "good thing". Obviously, since then, our culture has changed and slavery is no longer seen as a "good thing", we see it very differently. So does the involvement of some in slave trade at a time when it was considered acceptable necessarily preclude them from contributing solid and worthy opinions on the structure and form of government? I don't think so.

And Northerners were all for the idea of hamstringing Southern representation in Congress by passing the "three-fifths" law, since the number of representatives increased/decreased according to population. They were increasingly worried that the South would simply import more and more slaves for the purpose of trying to gain power over the legislature. They were also worried that the slave population would eventually be strong enough in number to overpower the owners and then head north to exact retribution upon those who had been involved in the trade that brought them here in the first place.

There were an awful lot of people in the north for whom an anti-slavery stance was more of a personal or political expediency.

 

[ChristianMasonJim]

Sorry for the delay in my responses. I've been on vacation, and I'm now just catching up....

I had lots of elaborate and pithy responses to many of the comments, however after some thought, I decided to just try to analyze where the contention is and give my opinion. So here it goes....

I honestly DO understand where the Masonic Attackers are coming from.
In my opinion, viewing the concept of "God" from a strictly Christian perspective as O.F.F. and Skip are, results in their opinions being 100% correct. The viewpoint from which Freemasonry is describing the concept of "God" is different. Not different in that it is describing another or all-inclusive "God" but different in that it is looking at an entirely different equation. Freemasonry is really just acknowledging God's existence while not endorsing or embracing any one religion's viewpoint (although it is clear that the foundations of the rituals and teachings are decidedly Judeo-Christian.)

The Masonic concept of "God" is very universal in that it comes from the viewpoint that God either exists or He does not exist, and Freemasonry asserts that He does exist. And presuming that God does exist, He does so regardless of what you or I or anyone else thinks or believes about Him. And it is THAT basic and generally undefined concept of the existence of "God" that we are talking about--no more, no less.

Does that define an all-inclusive God? Does that mean that "all Gods are one"? From a top-down approach, specifically from a strict Christian worldview, yes it could be viewed that way. But from the bottom-up, no, it does not. As we start adding and compounding definitions of "God" to this fundamentally neutral and basic concept of "God", our understanding of the concept of "God" changes. As each religion adds its own definitions, it changes the overall understanding of how the concept of God is viewed from that perspective. Unfortunately, religions can and do change the overall concept so far from the basics that the concept becomes, as O.F.F. has put it, one of a "false God" which, as Wayne clearly pointed out, really means that THAT concept of "God" is of one who "really" does not exist. It is my personal belief that the Christian viewpoint is the "true" viewpoint because it describes "God" based upon spiritual and historical documentation as handed down to us through the Bible directly from God. So Christianity's definitions of "God" are completely aligned with the fundamental concept of "God" that Freemasonry is addressing. And frankly, I am not aware of any other religion that can claim that same authenticity with the same historical accuracy.

I really don't know how else to put it.

If all this sounds heretical to you, then I contend that it might be because your viewpoint is one of a Christian who is completely immersed in the Christian worldview. And to that, I commend you! Would that we all were so lucky to have that kind of focus! I really wish I did. But I can say honestly that I embrace Jesus as my Savior, and I believe that God exists, and that He created all that is, and who, after providing repeated attempts to provide missed opportunities for Man to atone, came to us in the form of the man Jesus to explain to us as peers how to establish a relationship with Him and how to be saved by His sacrifice by Grace. And I also understand and accept that other viewpoints exist--some very contrary, and some surprisingly close, and that other viewpoints may be completely incorrect. And I can only affirm the "correctness" of my viewpoint by my faith in what I just stated that I believe.

 

[Rev Wayne]

In my opinion, viewing the concept of "God" from a strictly Christian perspective as O.F.F. and Skip are, results in their opinions being 100% correct.

So, you're saying then, that when these two come here and tell us that God is against Freemasonry, and that as a result, Masons' aprons will "fall off or burn off," that they are "100% correct?" That is, after all, their opinion, as expressed more than once on this forum and elsewhere. Which is why I have a problem with the statement as worded. The truth of the matter is, we are all human, and no one could possibly have that kind of perfection in their opinions and ideas about God.

 

[Skip Sampson]

when these two come here and tell us that God is against Freemasonry, and that as a result, Masons' aprons will "fall off or burn off,"

When and where on this forum have I ever made such statements? Cordially, Skip.

 

[ChristianMasonJim]

So, you're saying then, that when these two come here and tell us that God is against Freemasonry, and that as a result, Masons' aprons will "fall off or burn off," that they are "100% correct?" That is, after all, their opinion, as expressed more than once on this forum and elsewhere. Which is why I have a problem with the statement as worded. The truth of the matter is, we are all human, and no one could possibly have that kind of perfection in their opinions and ideas about God.

Wayne, no, I am referring specifically to the concept of God, and the misconception that Freemasonry views all gods as one, nothing more.

 

[Rev Wayne]

When and where on this forum have I every made such statements? Cordially, Skip.

When and where on this forum have you ever denied such statements? My apologies if you wish to take exception to such comments, but as is usually the case, silence gets taken as implied consent.

But of course, if you disagree, then you could always make a statement to the contrary, and tell us that in your opinion, God is not against Freemasonry, and that Masons are in no danger of eternal retribution, that would be more definitive than silence on the point, or generalized objections, in the form of a question, after the fact.

 

[Rev Wayne]

Wayne, no, I am referring specifically to the concept of God, and the misconception that Freemasonry views all gods as one, nothing more.

Either way, you have to take into consideration the cannon fodder you can create for them when you make a generalized comment that "their opinions are 100% correct." I've seen them get the spin machine up and running with far less.

 

[ChristianMasonJim]

Either way, you have to take into consideration the cannon fodder you can create for them when you make a generalized comment that "their opinions are 100% correct." I've seen them get the spin machine up and running with far less.

I hope my clarification took care of that, but we'll see.

So now, I ask that they comment on my comments, not to continue with the inane bickering that draws away from the topic.

 

[ALX25]

Either way, you have to take into consideration the cannon fodder you can create for them when you make a generalized comment that "their opinions are 100% correct." I've seen them get the spin machine up and running with far less.

The truth of the matter is Masonry is not of the God of the Holy Bible, and for you to attempt to claim masonrys roots are from christianity is absurd.

 

[ALX25]

Think about it

 

[ChristianMasonJim]

The truth of the matter is Masonry is not of the God of the Holy Bible, and for you to attempt to claim masonrys roots are from christianity is absurd.

Now that you have made a sweeping claim, please provide evidence to support and substantiate your claim. Several Masonic Attackers have provided evidence and opinion to support their side of the debate, and several Masonic Proponents have provided evidence and opinion that supports their side of the debate. Though it appears that we continue to be at a stalemate, your comment really adds nothing to this debate unless you can provide evidence to support it.

 

[ALX25]

Most of the founding fathers were Masons. That makes it a good thing in my book.

A secret club for men in spiritual darkness , can only lead one place

Think about it

 

[ALX25]

Now that you have made a sweeping claim, please provide evidence to support and substantiate your claim. Several Masonic Attackers have provided evidence and opinion to support their side of the debate, and several Masonic Proponents have provided evidence and opinion that supports their side of the debate. Though it appears that we continue to be at a stalemate, your comment really adds nothing to this debate unless you can provide evidence to support it.

Lets see a secret scociety for men that beleive G.A.O.T.U is the the GOD of the Holy Bible?

 

[ALX25]

The one requirement to become a mason is to believe in " a god "

 

[ALX25]

silence ?

 

[Skip Sampson]

When and where on this forum have you ever denied such statements?

Point is that you made an accusation that you couldn't back up. Cordially, Skip.