The Masonic Concept of God

[Skip Sampson]

One doesn't. You please your god via your own concept of god. Ie, a Christian turns to the bible and their religion for information on how to please god. They don't turn to masonry.

The question wasn't directed to you. Now if you are a mason, please advise as to jurisdiction.

Your answer doesn't actually follow the question. According to Albion, Masonry teaches that God will reward those with whom he is well pleased. Note that he indicates there is only one God and that some things people do will please him and bring upon them his reward. He did not care to respond to my request for further details, even though such details are at the heart of the matter.

I found a few Biblical references to pleasing God. In the first, Paul says that those living in the realm of the flesh cannot please God (Romans 8:7-9). He further addresses the concept in Colossians 1:9-11, noting that living a life worthy of the Lord is the goal. He goes further on that type of life in 1Thessalonians ch. 4.

Unless Albion cares to enlighten us further, I'll conclude he was referring to the salvation-by-works doctrine as taught in Freemasonry, that the good Mason doing good will certainly be rewarded by God. That goes well with Masonry's self-proclaimed task of taking men and making them fit to be stones in the heavenly temple. Cordially, Skip.

 

[Albion]

I'm more than willing to respond further to Aureus and answer to anything else that he may want to discuss, so you needn't worry about that, Skip.

 

[Simpleman25]

Albion,

It is truly beyond human comprehension that someone could read what you wrote and turn it into what Skip thinks it says. I'm truly shocked.

I've reread it 3 times. Once with my glasses, once without, and once with them upside down.

 

[Skip Sampson]

I'm more than willing to respond further to Aureus and answer to anything else that he may want to discuss, so you needn't worry about that, Skip.

Oh, it causes me no worry that you'll discuss Freemasonry with those who don't know much about it. It's clear that you are adverse to such discussions with those who do know much about it.

Similarly, I do not worry about your refusal to discuss your own statements. It's pretty standard operating procedure for you, specifically, as well as Masons in general. I guess what might worry me is your claim that no one speaks for Freemasonry, while you are speaking for Freemasonry. But I'm sure I'll get over it. Cordially, Skip.

 

[Skip Sampson]

It is truly beyond human comprehension that someone could read what you wrote and turn it into what Skip thinks it says. I'm truly shocked.

Sounds like you've been up late at night watching Bogart flicks again. Just what do you see as the differences between what Albion wrote and what I quoted back to him?

I've reread it 3 times. Once with my glasses, once without, and once with them upside down.

Try something different: read it for comprehension. Let Albion bail himself out of it. Cordially, Skip.

 

[Albion]

Oh, it causes me no worry that you'll discuss Freemasonry with those who don't know much about it.

Great. Then we are in agreement on that.

The Masons on CF have always been willing to help those who don't know about Masonry, so I can't see why you'd find anything unusual in my statement about being ready to do exactly that with Aureus.

 

[Simpleman25]

Great. Then we are in agreement on that.

The Masons on CF have always been willing to help those who don't know about Masonry, so I can't see why you'd find anything unusual in my statement about being ready to do exactly that with Aureus.

I guess our resident 'expert' didn't know we voted to let you speak for all of masonry.

It's almost comical what the anti's will do to try to push their agenda against freemasonry.

They are still up to the old trick of twisting someone's words then claim that person has twisted their own words.

All we can do is try to correctly educate those that really want to know the truth. I've just recently finished a very long exchange with another poster on here that was confused. While he still doesn't like a few things within masonry, he's much happier now that I've shown him truth vs stories.

 

[Albion]

Well, it's Saturday. That's time for Skip to jab and then disappear again.

My own posts just happened to be among the more current ones when he checked in this week.

 

[Aureus]

But..... I am a Mason

I'll toss a vote for Albion. You're doing a nice job on the explaining front.

 

[Albion]

But..... I am a Mason

I'll toss a vote for Albion. You're doing a nice job on the explaining front.

Thank you for saying that. And I apologize if you had made your membership evident and I'd just forgotten it over the past couple of weeks. I guess I also was following Skip's lead when he wrote:

Oh, it causes me no worry that you'll discuss Freemasonry with those who don't know much about it.

 

[Skip Sampson]

I am a Mason.

I'm sure Albion was surprised to hear that. What jurisdiction are you in? Cordially, Skip.

 

[Aureus]

I'm sure Albion was surprised to hear that. What jurisdiction are you in? Cordially, Skip.

I rather doubt he was that surprised and it has been a long time since the beginning of this thread. Masonry is a rather personal thing and there is no set dogma that one must believe in. My lodge is within regularity with the UGLE.

 

[Albion]

Masonry is a rather personal thing and there is no set dogma that one must believe in.

Although this has been explained to Skip many times, he wants it to be the case that there is some requirement that excludes Christians.

Anyway, I thought your particular explanation here was both accurate and succinct. Regardless of the topic, we posters don't always manage to take care of both of those goals at once.

 

[Skip Sampson]

Masonry is a rather personal thing and there is no set dogma that one must believe in. My lodge is within regularity with the UGLE.

Not an issue of dogma, but of GL doctrine. If a GL publishes specific doctrinal statements, you agree with them by your participation. If the requirement for membership demands a belief in a supreme being, it is what it is and your lodge must comply with it.

A historical case would be the SC GL, which had up until at least 1975 a prohibition against non-white candidates. Every SC Mason was therefore a knowing participant in institutional racism whether they believed it or not. The fact that they remained members tarred them with that brush.

And thanks for the jurisdiction response; I'll assume it means directly under the UGLE, vice any U.S. lodge whose GL is recognized by the UGLE. Cordially, Skip.

 

[Simpleman25]

.Freemasonry instils in its members a moral and ethical approach to life: its values are based on integrity, kindness, honesty and fairness. Members are urged to regard the interests of the family as paramount but, importantly, Freemasonry also teaches concern for people, care for the less fortunate and help for those in need.

Aureus mentioned he is part of the UGLE. That is but one a awesome paragraph I found on their site.

 

[Aureus]

.Freemasonry instils in its members a moral and ethical approach to life: its values are based on integrity, kindness, honesty and fairness. Members are urged to regard the interests of the family as paramount but, importantly, Freemasonry also teaches concern for people, care for the less fortunate and help for those in need.

Aureus mentioned he is part of the UGLE. That is but one a awesome paragraph I found on their site.

The UGLE does have some good stuff. But that was just my wonderfully vague way of answering a jurisdiction question since if a Lodge is not clandestine it's either recognized by the UGLE or I suppose the Grand Orient of France. But if we started talking about that branch of Masonry Skip might just have seizure with their whole letting in Atheists and women thing.

 

[Simpleman25]

I won't have a seizure. I'll just disagree with allowing atheist or women. That does contradict with my beliefs on freemasonry.

What most people like skip and duane don't understand is that we don't have to argue just because we disagree over something.

 

[Albion]

The UGLE does have some good stuff. But that was just my wonderfully vague way of answering a jurisdiction question since if a Lodge is not clandestine it's either recognized by the UGLE or I suppose the Grand Orient of France. But if we started talking about that branch of Masonry Skip might just have seizure with their whole letting in Atheists and women thing.

I'm fairly sure he doesn't even know what you're referring to. All he has to go on when it comes to Masonry is a bunch of downloads from the Grand Lodges of the various American states. That's why every conversation begins with "What state do you live in?" or something like that. Thusly informed, he'll tell you what you believe.

 

[Albion]

Grand Lodges don't really "teach" anything. You can have whatever interpretation and meaning from the ritual that you wish.

True, but he WANTS so much for you to hold that particular interpretation he's insisting upon, even if he has to assign it to you over your objections.

 

[Skip Sampson]

That's why every conversation begins with "What state do you live in?" or something like that. Thusly informed, he'll tell you what you believe.

Untrue, as usual. Any Mason participating in these discussions is under the jurisdiction of a Grand Lodge. I like to know which one that is so we may discuss the topic using the same references.

More than that, it's pretty humorous watching Masons trying to weasel out of what their own GL's teach. Since it's a fight they cannot win, they resort to hiding the facts of their membership. I understand their very real fears in releasing such information, because they know I'll demand that they defend the GL positions in open forum, which is not where they want to be. It is but another example of the intellectual cowardice of too many Masons. If they dare not defend what their Masonic jurisdiction teaches, why do they remain a part of it?

For all: Albion is not a stranger to refusing to engage in uncomfortable discussions. Earlier in this thread, he decided to take it upon himself to to speak for Freemasonry, and for all Masons as well, and reveal the Masonic view of deity:

So what IS the "Masonic Concept of God?"

God is one. Monotheism.
God has created us to be immortal.
God will reward those with whom he is well-pleased.

That's about it! Can you, dear reader, accept these affirmations about God? I can't think of any Christian church that doesn't. If you are in agreement with them, you might consider Masonry. If not, we Masons completely respect your decision. (post #74)

I have no problem concerning the first two bullets, but Albion refused my request to tell us by what measure God finds a person 'well pleasing.' I think he realized how badly he had stepped in it with the comment, which is consistent with Masonic doctrine on salvation, but not on that of most Christian denominations. He was therefore on the horns of a dilemma. He couldn't say "good works" are the measure of a God's approval (the Masonic view) nor could he say that it was strictly a person's is faith in Jesus (the Christian view). Hence the silence. Well, at least he knew when to stop digging, but it is a good example of Masonic selectivity in what they will discuss.

While on this topic, it's worth taking a look at another of Albion's refusal to comment. On another thread, he made this charge:

The one who posts here most often and once was a Mason until disciplined by his lodge ...(Founders of Freemasonry, post #91)

I asked him to identify the Mason and the source of that charge, but he never answered. One can ask this question: what kind of man will make such a charge and then refuse to back it up? In this instance, he's a Freemason, for whom the truth isn't all that big a deal in some circumstances, especially involving those who criticize Freemasonry. Cordially, Skip.