A Poll: Are Most Masons in the U.S. Truly Christian?

O.F.F.

An Ex-Mason for Jesus
Jan 22, 2004
1,422
49
USA
Visit site
✟9,348.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
This thread is prompted to explore the claim by some Masons that most Masons in America are of the Christian faith. Is this really true? Not according to all Masons in America.

Ferris Thompson was sitting on a bench outside of the lodge building, enjoying a pipe full of Marlin Flake. One of the younger, more progressive members of the lodge, Sean, came out of the building and sat by him.

“I hear that Brian dimitted from the lodge,” he said, “he gave some reasons including the fact that he determined that since Masonry wasn't solely Christian in nature, he didn't feel he could belong.”

“Is that so?” asked Ferris. “Well, if that's what he has decided then it is what is best for him.”

“Yup. I just don't get guys like that. Christians—especially church goers—are just so ignorant. Don't they know that the Jesus story has been told a million times before? Or that the origins of their religion are just as pagan as the origins of any other? I think that any Mason that still considers himself a devout Christian has no place in the organization.” ...

Should a Freemason reject Christianity? by Terence Satchell

Note to All Readers: Please feel free to comment on this topic as you wish. However, the accompanying POLL is strictly for those visitors here who are active Freemasons. Therefore, if you are NOT A MASON please do not answer this poll. It is ONLY for members of the Masonic Order.

The poll feature on this forum limits the number of words, so all active Masons please click here to get to the poll.
 
Last edited:

Rev Wayne

Simplicity + Sincerity = Serenity
Sep 16, 2003
4,128
100
71
SC
Visit site
✟13,530.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
This thread is prompted to explore the claim by some Masons that most Masons in America are of the Christian faith. Is this really true? Not according to all Masons in America.
Interesting comment. Which prompts the obvious question that follows: since you've apparently already polled "all Masons in America" (which of course would be the only way you could make such a claim), then why is this poll necessary?

And really---Terence Satchell? Not only do you make claims that you could never back up by any stretch of the imagination, you offer in support of that outlandish claim, one anecdotal reference by someone no one has ever heard of before?
 
Upvote 0

O.F.F.

An Ex-Mason for Jesus
Jan 22, 2004
1,422
49
USA
Visit site
✟9,348.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Interesting comment. Which prompts the obvious question that follows: since you've apparently already polled "all Masons in America" (which of course would be the only way you could make such a claim), then why is this poll necessary?

Interesting indeed, that someone as educated as you would mistake a rhetorical question as a claim. Besides, it was YOU who made the claim, implicitly or explicitly, in some form or another ever since you became a Mason. And no, I am not going to take the time to find all the posts to prove it to you. Or have you changed your position? Do you no longer believe that "most Masons in the U.S." are Christians?

Regardless, the purpose of the poll is to research if the claim is true or not. Hopefully respondents come from across the country. Ten or more respondents would give us a qualitative answer; a hundred or more would make it quantitative. The more respondents from a variety of US jurisdictions better are the results.

I plan on keeping it opened indefinitely; and market it as best I can beyond this forum (i.e. facebook and twitter). Your help would be greatly appreciated; as I also plan to report on the results from time to time. I just hope Masons are really honest in their answers, and not try to purposely skew the results.

And really---Terence Satchell? Not only do you make claims that you could never back up by any stretch of the imagination, you offer in support of that outlandish claim, one anecdotal reference by someone no one has ever heard of before?

Where in Freemasonry does it declare that only the opinions of known Masons matter? If that is the case, then that would make you too an insignificant Mason, since you too are unknown. But for your information, the story came from a current periodical published by a different lodge in Texas monthly. And in their own words, they are "proud to be recognized as a Texas Masonic history source by the Grand Lodge of Texas." I trust if you are really interested in it you will take the time to find it.

Finally, if you noticed, I have not been here for awhile because I've decided to stop arguing with you. And, I didn't start this thread to begin doing so again. I have much more important things to do with my time than to engage in anymore discussions with you. So please do us both a favor; either respond to the poll or ignore it, the choice it yours.

If you even took the time to view it, I thought you would find it a welcome opportunity to express what you believe, and recommend other Masons to participate in it as well.
 
Upvote 0

Rev Wayne

Simplicity + Sincerity = Serenity
Sep 16, 2003
4,128
100
71
SC
Visit site
✟13,530.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Where in Freemasonry does it declare that only the opinions of known Masons matter?

Who said that??? I was just pointing this out because it goes against your own eternal insistences that "one man cannot speak for Masonry."

Yet you cite one Mason (and that one likely not even real), and declare "not according to all Masons in America."

Truth to tell, I think you just started typing without even taking heed to what you were actually saying. Not that it's anything new, it's just a more bizarre example of it than usual.

Interesting indeed, that someone as educated as you would mistake a rhetorical question as a claim.

The comment to which I responded was neither rhetorical nor a question. You asked the question, then your answer was,

"not according to all Masons in America,"

which was immediately followed by your anecdote, which you obviously offered as some kind of "proof."

Besides, it was YOU who made the claim, implicitly or explicitly, in some form or another ever since you became a Mason.

I never made any such "claim," I was repeating what is taken for granted by Mason and antimason alike. Masonry has thrived primarily in English-speaking countries where Christianity is the predominant religion. The fact that most Masons are Christians, has been one of the single most obvious factors triggering antimasonic irrationalities and conspiracy theories. Convince everybody that Freemasonry is a snake, and that they have the only snake oil in town, and they will come running to purchase the "cure."

Do you no longer believe that "most Masons in the U.S." are Christians?

This has been acknowledged by quite a number of people, it's not just a "belief." And you are incorrect to try to attribute this to me only. It has been declared for some time now by a variety of sources:

Dr. Robert Morey, an opponent of Masonry, put it well, "Since most Masons in the United States are members of Christian churches and many clergymen belong to the Fraternity, the idea that they are all involved in some kind of devil cult is absurd." (Cited by Arthur DeHoyos and S. Brent Morris, "Is it True What They Say About Freemasonry?", chapter one)
That was published in 1993, it's been out there for 18 years. To put it in perspective, that's well over twice as long as you and I have even been debating this issue.

In the US, depending on where you are, most Masons are Christian. (Yahoo Answers, from a response chosen as the best answer to "Are the Freemasons a secret society but yet a secret maybe New World Order or Anti-Christian?")

While in America, most Masons are Christian. . . (From an anti-Masonic article, "What Are the Masons?" at catholiceducation.org)

Most Masons are Christians, although one is not required to be a christian in order to be a Mason. (From David Icke's Official Forums)

Q: Can a man be a Christian and a Mason at the same time?
A: Perhaps the best answer to is that most of us are, at least in the United States. (Jim Tresner, "Conscience and the Craft")

The only religious item in the Masonic lodge is the holy book of the initiate's own faith. Since most Masons are Protestant Christians, that book is usually the King James version of the Bible. (Excerpt from John J. Robinson, "Is Freemasonry a Religion?", A Pilgrim's Path)
Do you not find it rather odd, as I do, that three of the above citations come, not from Masons, but from anti-masonic sources?

But for your information, the story came from a current periodical published by a different lodge in Texas monthly. And in their own words, they are "proud to be recognized as a Texas Masonic history source by the Grand Lodge of Texas." I trust if you are really interested in it you will take the time to find it.

I already found the site, all right. Not only that, I also found the original source of the story, at the Masonic Traveler blogspot. The Texas site clearly indicated that the article was a reprint. Guess you missed that, otherwise you wouldn't be going on about "Texas Masonic history."

The puzzing thing, though, is why you stopped the story where you did. Why not post further, and let readers see what Ferris' response was? Picking up where you left off, the story continues:

Ferris puffed on his pipe for a couple of moments, composing his thoughts.
“So who convinced you to come to that conclusion?”
“Well, I did. I studied Christianity and spirituality a lot and it didn’t take long for me to realize it was worthless.”
“Hmmm…that is interesting indeed. But did you ever consider the early Christians that closely examined their religion like Paul and John? What about Martin Luther or John Calvin? There certainly have been men that studied Christianity much more thoroughly than you have, so thoroughly that it consumed their entire lives and yet they still subscribed to the Christian religion. What do you do for a living?”
“I’m a computer programmer.”
“So would you say you have devoted the majority of your life to the study of Christianity?”
"So who are you to tell these men that they are wrong? Who are you to tell any man who has devoted the same amount of time that you have to such study that they have come to the wrong conclusion?"

The answer is simple, of course: you wished to portray ONLY the side you WANT to portray, and therefore were not forthcoming with the fact that the other Mason challenged those opinions. Just couldn't have a Mason doing that, now could you? Not to mention, citing Paul and John, and Luther and Calvin.

Not only that, you chose to come here with this, and try to misrepresent this as some sort of "Masonic history," when it ought to be clear to any reader of the story that it is not even an actual event, but a fictional story told to illustrate the point that we should not be quick to condemn the religious opinions of others.

I have much more important things to do with my time than to engage in anymore discussions with you.

Somehow, it hardly seems sincere, coming as it does right in the middle of a discussion with me. And I figure it has more to do with the embarrassment you encounter each time your misrepresentations are exposed.

Besides, why would you assume I responded only to "engage in discussion" with you? In case you hadn't noticed--and apparently you didn't--my response was not "discussion," I simply asked a couple of questions by way of clarification, for the benefit of the readers.

I plan on keeping it opened indefinitely; and market it as best I can beyond this forum (i.e. facebook and twitter). Your help would be greatly appreciated; as I also plan to report on the results from time to time. I just hope Masons are really honest in their answers, and not try to purposely skew the results.

Sorry, but I'll be declining the offer.

Interesting way of putting it, though, describing your intent to "market" this. Market your wares on your own time, I won't be giving you mine.
 
Upvote 0

O.F.F.

An Ex-Mason for Jesus
Jan 22, 2004
1,422
49
USA
Visit site
✟9,348.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Wayne,

Like I said, I am not here to debate with you any longer. But I will not allow you, or any other 'Masonic pastor' think you can make hypocritical statements and get away with them.

Wayne said:
Do you not find it rather odd, as I do, that three of the above citations come, not from Masons, but from anti-masonic sources?

No I do not. And the sources you cite, Masonic or otherwise, do NOT meet the criteria for my current research. My goal is to hear from individual Masons themselves, not assumptions or generalizations from any other source.

Wayne said:
The puzzing thing, though, is why you stopped the story where you did. Why not post further, and let readers see what Ferris' response was?

What's NOT puzzling is your DELIBERATE attempt to avoid the most damaging part of Ferris' response.

Sean became defensive, “Well, do you believe that Christian stuff?”

Some of it, yes. Some of it, no. But it is my decision and my faith. In a Masonic lodge, no dogma is greater than any other. Christian, Jew, Muslim, Hindu, or even personal, independent worship are perfectly equal in the lodge. Our symbolism is applicable to every religion and no religion at the same time.

Moreover, you totally left out his slap in the face of YOUR OWN position!

Do Christian Masons have the right to tell you that you are wrong and that Masonry is a Christian organization?”

Sean swallowed, as though he was digesting his pride. “No they don't…I suppose I have been a little hard headed about this, huh?”

“Sure you have, but now you've learned. Now suppose you give me your interpretation of the symbolism of the Third Degree based on your religious views and later we can discuss it from my perspective.”
gavel.gif

So get O.F.F. your high horse, swallow your pride (or choke on it), and stop being as hard headed about your "Christian" interpretation of Freemasonry as Sean was about his non-Christian view, knowing that such a stubborn stance by either of you is the most unMasonic position you can ever have!

But again, your motives are hypocritical at best. However, the reason is simple, of course: you wished to portray ONLY the side you WANT to portray, and therefore were not forthcoming with the fact that the other Mason challenged YOUR OWN opinions. Just couldn't have a Mason doing that, let alone a FORMER Mason, now could you?
 
Upvote 0

Rev Wayne

Simplicity + Sincerity = Serenity
Sep 16, 2003
4,128
100
71
SC
Visit site
✟13,530.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Same old Mike, still re-inventing every single comment from me, so that it becomes something I never said in any way, shape, or fashion.

Like I said, I am not here to debate with you any longer.

Funny thing, the way you keep debating while insisting you won't debate any more.

No I do not. And the sources you cite, Masonic or otherwise, do NOT meet the criteria for my current research. My goal is to hear from individual Masons themselves, not assumptions or generalizations from any other source.


I have no interest in your poll or your criteria. I was simply pointing out for you that what you claim to be my own invented opinion, is the accepted opinion of quite a number of people, and has been for some time.

As for your expressed wish to hear from "individual Masons": Jim Tresner is an individual Mason. So is S. Brent Morris. So is John J. Robinson.

But let's examine your "criteria." You figure to post a poll here and get input from "every Mason in America?" Or exactly what? Where else does the poll appear besides here? Or is this the only place? If it's not the only place it appears, then of what nature are the others? Are they Christian sites as well? If it is the only place it appears, don't you run the risk of having your results forever asterisked with the notation that it was conducted on a Christian forum?

And in case you miss the implications of that: don't you make it much more likely, by conducting it on a Christian forum, that the only Masons who will even see the poll, will be Masons who frequent Christian websites--in other words, primarily Christian Masons--thereby skewing the results in the opposite direction of the one you hope this will go?

Or maybe you just figure on employing the usual tactic of labeling Christian Masons as "marginal" Christians. (From the manner in which the questions of the poll are structured, that certainly appears to be the case.) I think there are simply too many inherent problems with both the poll itself, and the procedure by which you choose to conduct it, both of which are intentionally skewed, with the intent of engendering the response you want to receive. You may call that whatever you wish, but have the honesty to recognize and admit, that it is not "research."

What's NOT puzzling is your DELIBERATE attempt to avoid the most damaging part of Ferris' response.


What you forget is, this comes from the blogsite of one individual Mason. He probably wrote the story himself, and it certainly is more along the line of one person's opinion than anything else. And the portion you just cited to try to call this "damaging" is the perfect example of why this is hardly Masonic position, and qualifies as personal opinion:

Some of it, yes. Some of it, no. But it is my decision and my faith.


He makes it CLEAR that what he expressed was personal opinion.

In a Masonic lodge, no dogma is greater than any other. Christian, Jew, Muslim, Hindu, or even personal, independent worship are perfectly equal in the lodge.


I don't find anything I would define as "worship" taking place in the lodge. So there can hardly be any basis upon which to declare them all "equal" from a standpoint of worship. The only real element of worship I find there is prayer. But prayer does not constitute worship, any more than we consider our state and U.S. Senators to be worshipping at the beginning of their sessions.

Our symbolism is applicable to every religion and no religion at the same time.


He's just stating that the principles of Masonry are neutral--that is, they can be applied within any religion. That is essentially true. But it would also be true that the same can be said of many of the basics of Christian belief as well (that god is omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, etc.). It hardly qualifies as a matter that is blameworthy, as you try to make it out to be.

Moreover, you totally left out his slap in the face of YOUR OWN position!

Really? The "proof" you tried to use to suggest this shows otherwise:

Do Christian Masons have the right to tell you that you are wrong and that Masonry is a Christian organization?”


So where did "Christian organization" suddenly become "my own position," when you started this out with a poll addressing the question of whether or not "most Masons are Christians?" I didn't say anything at all in my response to you, about it being a "Christian organization." That is a totally different issue. Of COURSE I omitted that from my comment.

But instead of trying to use that to criticize me, and instead of trying to force-feed this to the readers as "my position," you might simply consider making a more accurate selection for your next illustration. It certainly isn't MY fault you chose one with more irrelevant details in it than relevant ones.

So get O.F.F. your high horse, swallow your pride (or choke on it), and stop being as hard headed about your "Christian" interpretation of Freemasonry as Sean was about his non-Christian view, knowing that such a stubborn stance by either of you is the most unMasonic position you can ever have!

Not what I said, and you know it. You ought to be ashamed of such deliberate misrepresentation. It's one thing to state that "most Masons are Christians," and quite a different one to state that "Masonry is a Christian organization." The former I most certainly stated; the latter? Not even close.

Perhaps you thought to deceive the readers with this little sleight-of-hand, but I'm afraid I can't permit that, and so they have now been un-deceived.
 
Upvote 0

ALX25

Ex-Mason.Code:OFF
Sep 29, 2010
305
8
✟15,490.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Single
The lodge I belong to holds the Bible as its centerpiece...

It contains Old and New Testament. Which supports a belief in Christianity.

Therefor most Masons in the US would be Christian. This is true in my area.


Masonry is not of christ JESUS... christ never taught his disciples to be part of a secret scociety that identifies a man that sins as a worshipful master... christ JESUS never taught men to accept false prophets and false gods like muhamed and allah as being divine... the one and true living God of the Holy Bible is what christianity stands for ... masonry does not ...never did ... and never will stand soley for christianity... big difference friend..
 
Upvote 0

Rev Wayne

Simplicity + Sincerity = Serenity
Sep 16, 2003
4,128
100
71
SC
Visit site
✟13,530.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
christ never taught his disciples to be part of a secret scociety
Wanna bet?

But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth: That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly. (Mt. 6:3-4)

And as they came down from the mountain, he charged them that they should tell no man what things they had seen, till the Son of man were risen from the dead. (Mt. 9:9)
He also instructed many people who were healed, not to tell anyone, but simply to go show themselves to the priest.
that identifies a man that sins as a worshipful master
"Worshipful" in the Masonic context simply means "honorable," much the same as the term "honorable" is still used of judges in U.S. courtrooms. So, did Christ say anything about giving "honor" to one another? You betcha. He spoke of prophets being honored:

And they were offended in him. But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, save in his own country, and in his own house. (Mt. 13:57)

He said to give honor to father and mother

For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death. (Mt. 15:4)

Spirit-inspired NT writers also wrote of giving honor. Paul spoke of honor that God gives:

Who will render to every man according to his deeds. . . .glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile: For there is no respect of persons with God. (Rom. 2:6-11)

Paul also said we are to give honor where it is due:

Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute [is due]; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour. (Rom. 13:7)

He said we are to honor widows:

Honour widows that are widows indeed. (1 Tim. 5:3)

He even spoke of servants giving their masters honor:

Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honour, that the name of God and [his] doctrine be not blasphemed. (1 Tim. 6:1)

Peter wrote the same things as well, even saying we are to honor ALL persons:

Honour all [men]. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the king. (1 Pet. 2:17)

And he said husbands are to honor their wives:

Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with [them] according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered. (1 Pet. 3:7)
[FONT='Trebuchet MS','sans-serif'] [/font]
So it's no problem, biblically-speaking, for "sinners" to give honor to other sinful humans. In fact, it is urged upon us by those who wrote the inspired Word.

christ JESUS never taught men to accept false prophets and false gods like muhamed and allah as being divine
Nor does Masonry teach any such thing either. If you believe it does, then by all means, show us you are no false prophet yourself, by providing for us where Masonry says anything of the sort. Otherwise, you do not speak the truth, which is the chief observable point which identifies one as a "false prophet."

the one and true living God of the Holy Bible is what christianity stands for ... masonry does not
I guess you missed it.

It is hardly necessary to say that the letter G, wherever spoken of in Masonry as a symbol, Is merely a modern substitution for the Hebrew letter yod, which was the initial of Jehovah, the tetragammaton, and, therefore, constantly used as a symbol of Deity.

This comes from Ahiman Rezon (South Carolina's Masonic Manual), p. 151. It defines the common Masonic symbol, the letter G, in terms that are clearly founded on the Bible and the God of the Bible. It also states that it is "hardly necessary to say," meaning, of course, that it is already understood to be so.

and never will stand soley for christianity
That wasn't the claim. He said that most Masons in the U.S. are Christian. You seem to make the same error that others have made here, of confusing "most Masons are Christians" with "Masonry is a Christian institution." Those are two different statements. Masons here have consistently upheld the first statement, while critics here have tried to substitute the second for it, as if they thought both statements were identical. I assure you, (1) these statements do not say the same thing; and (2) Masons will affirm the first, but not the second.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

O.F.F.

An Ex-Mason for Jesus
Jan 22, 2004
1,422
49
USA
Visit site
✟9,348.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Wayne said:
But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth: That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly. (Mt. 6:3-4)

To claim that this passage teaches that Jesus told his disciples to be part of a secret society is absolutely absurd! It is a ludicrous statement for any biblically sound Christian person to make. This idea is totally ridiculous, has no Biblical merit, and is based upon nothing but supposition. Only a biblically uneducated fool would make such a claim! But since you are seminary-trained and should know better, we must conclude that you are deliberately lying to make your point.

Besides, Freemasonry often "sounds its trumpet" claiming to supposedly give $1 million dollars a day to charity, flies in the face of what Jesus was actually teaching in this passage (Mt. 6:3-4); which you conveniently left out from verse 2:

Therefore, when you do a charitable deed, do not sound a trumpet before you as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory from men. Assuredly, I say to you, they have their reward.

As for this:

And as they came down from the mountain, he charged them that they should tell no man what things they had seen, till the Son of man were risen from the dead. (Mt. 9:9)

First of all, you quoted the wrong passage; as this is Mark 9:9, not Mt. 9:9. You would think a seminary-trained pastor would quote verses accurately. Secondly, if what you claim is true, then you are saying that the disciples of Christ are a secret society. Again, what an absurd, ridiculous and ludicrous claim! Oh, and since He said don't tell anyone until after He had risen from the dead, I guess they were a temporary secret society. Do you HONESTLY expect readers to believe you, pastor?

Wayne said:
Nor does Masonry teach any such thing either. If you believe it does, then by all means, show us you are no false prophet yourself, by providing for us where Masonry says anything of the sort. Otherwise, you do not speak the truth, which is the chief observable point which identifies one as a "false prophet."

Masonry's false teachers are the false prophets of the Masonic Order. And, since you repeatedly tell falsehoods about Freemasonry, giving it a "Christian" veneer based on your personal interpretation, rather than the general interpretations of the institution, THAT MAKES YOU A "FALSE PROPHET!!!"

Wayne said:
This comes from Ahiman Rezon (South Carolina's Masonic Manual), p. 151. It defines the common Masonic symbol, the letter G, in terms that are clearly founded on the Bible and the God of the Bible.

This is proof of what I just said. Neither you, nor the Grand Lodge of South Carolina speaks for Freemasonry in general, and YOU KNOW PERFECT WELL that this is NOT WHAT is taught about the letter "G" in Masonry generally speaking; no more than the two passages you quoted teach what you claim. Again, THAT MAKES YOU A "FALSE TEACHER."
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
R

RickardoHolmes

Guest
Well, when I was in the FreeMasons , Most of the ones I met were practicing Christians, as far as I know, in that there were no Jewish or Muslims involved.
Of course, Aethiests cannot join. The reason I am not in it now has absolutely NOTHING To do with religion either.
But are all Masons Christians? Well, I don't deal in all or nothing thinking so I cannot answer that....
 
Upvote 0
R

RickardoHolmes

Guest
ADDENDUM
I think that MOST probably are Christians, the next group would be jews and then there are the non-religious spiritual types more of a minority.
MOST of the ones I knew were involved in Christianity through a church or through outright fellowship, although since religion is not something proselytized at the monthly stated meeting, I am not certain.

I mised the Question again, MOST but not ALL
 
Upvote 0

Rev Wayne

Simplicity + Sincerity = Serenity
Sep 16, 2003
4,128
100
71
SC
Visit site
✟13,530.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
To claim that this passage teaches that Jesus told his disciples to be part of a secret society is absolutely absurd!
No more absurd than calling Masonry a "secret society" when you know good and well you can find any information about it you wish to find, on the "information highway." In reality, there are no secrets in Masonry.

As for the passage in question, I had nothing more or less in mind about it than, they were a society with certain secrets. Jesus instructed them "do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing," which is undeniably telling them to conduct those actions in secret. He most certainly told people who were healed not to tell anyone, but to show themselves to the priest, which is to say, keep it secret from everyone else but the priest. He also told them not to mention the transfiguration until after the resurrection, which means, that until then, keep it secret. So as long as they operated in obedience to this command from Him, they operated in secrecy on certain points--Masonry is no different, there are only certain points which Masons are urged to make confidential. I'd say the majority of ritual, in our times, has been made monitorial--i.e., no effort is made to conceal it, and it is considered "lawful information."

We must conclude that you are deliberately lying to make your point.
"We?" Can't you speak for yourself? (Especially since you are the only one you can speak for here.) And how does "deliberately lying" come out of anything I said, as an automatic "conclusion?" Your claim that it does, simply does not follow from your premises.

I think we can safely conclude, that all you are doing is talking and squawking, just to make noise because you don't like what was said, and are well aware you have nothing to refute it. (What I presented, after all, was Scripture. Now, maybe where YOU come from, it's okay to refute that, but I have more respect for the Word than that.)

Besides, Freemasonry often "sounds its trumpet" claiming to supposedly give $1 million dollars a day to charity

(1) Freemasonry, like any organization involved in charitable giving, is required by law to make public report of its giving.

(2) The kind of statement to which you just referred has unfortunately been made necessary by the unwarranted accusations of disgruntled former members who have axes to grind. Words spoken in defense against railing accusations by Masonry's accusers, is quite a different context from the "sounding a trumpet" of which Jesus spoke.

(3) There is nothing wrong with defending when attacked. Paul had to do so many times during his ministry.

First of all, you quoted the wrong passage; as this is Mark 9:9, not Mt. 9:9. You would think a seminary-trained pastor would quote verses accurately.

You are correct that it is Mark 9:9. But you really went off the deep end trying to turn this into an accusation. The source where I pulled it up had it abbreviated "Mk.," and I inadvertently mistook the "k" for a "t." The ol' eyes ain't what they used to be, I've even had to go to a larger print Bible when reading in worship. You would think someone who also has a few more years on him than in earlier days, would have a little bit more understanding over a simple mistake, rather than risk looking ridiculous by trying to turn it into something worth criticizing.

Secondly, if what you claim is true, then you are saying that the disciples of Christ are a secret society.

No, just making a point. The person to whom I responded (which by the way, was NOT you), had stated that "Christ never taught His disciples to be part of a secret society. . ." My response was therefore intended to show that there were things that even Jesus did secretly, and taught His disciples to do secretly. The disciples qualify as a "society," just as any group of Christians would (cf. "Society of Friends," e.g.). Therefore, it is no stretch of the imagination to say, that when the disciples obeyed Jesus' instructions to maintain secrecy concerning the transfiguration until after the resurrection, they were operating as a "secret society."

Oh, and since He said don't tell anyone until after He had risen from the dead, I guess they were a temporary secret society
.

You guessed correctly. They were a society which had secrets for the entire duration of time from the point they were told to keep that secret, until the time of the resurrection. They met in secret, too, in an upper chamber. Heck, they were even given a secret mode of recognition by which to find the room where they were supposed to meet:

"As you enter the city, a man carrying a jar of water will meet you. Follow him to the house that he enters." (Luke 22:10--look it up)

In fact, the church has had to operate pretty much as a secret society in many times and many places throughout the centuries. This was especially true during the reign of Domitian, a time during which the early Christians took their abode in the catacombs to escape persecution from Roman soldiers, who were superstitious about graveyards. A tradition from that time says they used the symbol of the fish, and upon meeting someone unknown to them, who claimed to be a Christian, one person would draw half the symbol in the sand, and the other would complete it, as a mode of recognition.

This story is very commonly repeated in Masonry, Masonry's use of modes of recognition is often framed in that very context.

Masonry's false teachers are the false prophets of the Masonic Order.

This matter was not addressed to you. Alex's comment had to do with certain things he claimed Masonry "teaches." Since he was the one making the claim, I'm sure he can speak for himself, and supply the information, along with an identification of his sources, upon which he made the claim. Until he does, you may fret and stew all you wish about it, for all I care. Since I prefer light to heat, I will await Alex's response, so we can find out what was the basis and the information source upon which he made that particular remark.

YOU KNOW PERFECT WELL that this is NOT WHAT is taught about the letter "G" in Masonry generally speaking

Actually, no, I know no such thing. The "G" is said in many places to stand for "God," and the entire foundation of Masonry is based upon biblical stories, most particularly, the construction of Solomon's Temple. What antimasons do in regard to that is, they turn it around backwards in order to make cannon fodder out of it. The whole foundation of Masonry rests upon biblical stories and accounts. It is everywhere presumed that the God of which Masonry speaks is the God of the Bible, for that is the foundation on which it is built.

What has happened since the time of its inception is, people other than Christians have taken an interest in Masonry, and have had no problem accepting that God as expressed in Masonry--being, as it is, founded upon accounts of God's dealings with Israel, and having particular focus in many places upon the tetragrammaton, or four-letter name for God as imparted to Moses--is the God of the Bible. Now, for those of Jewish faith, that is no stretch. For those of other religions, it carries the further aspect, that in order to join, they must decide for themselves whether the God of the Bible is the God of their religion as well.

But it is THEY who face that dilemma, not Masons who happen to be of Christian faith. For the Christian, there is no such potential conflict with his own religion, for the accounts that make up the warp and woof of Masonry are BIBLICAL stories. What antimasons do with this is, they try to turn it around and make it look as if the CHRISTIAN Masons are somehow accepting something that comes from some other religion, when actually it is quite the reverse: the NON-Christians are the ones who must deal with the issue of whether there is a conflict with their own religion or religious beliefs. The antimasons try to make it look like Masonry's content derives from OTHER religions, rather than from the Bible as it does, and then try to use that FALSE misrepresentation to make it appear that Christian Masons are guilty of some kind of misappropriation of their beliefs.

And, since you repeatedly tell falsehoods about Freemasonry, giving it a "Christian" veneer based on your personal interpretation

Well, there you go again, making the same mistake Alex just made, of confusing "most Masons are Christians" with some straw man creation of your own about "Christian veneer." There is no "veneer" to anything I stated at all. What I stated had to do with whether most Masons are Christians. All this bluster about "Christian veneer" is just part of the facade the antimasons have tried to build, one made of straw man fallacies, which falls under its own weight every time they try to prop it up, mainly because they are trying to refute something that was not even claimed in the first place.
 
Upvote 0

O.F.F.

An Ex-Mason for Jesus
Jan 22, 2004
1,422
49
USA
Visit site
✟9,348.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Wayne said:
As for the passage in question, I had nothing more or less in mind about it than, they were a society with certain secrets. Jesus instructed them "do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing," which is undeniably telling them to conduct those actions in secret. He most certainly told people who were healed not to tell anyone, but to show themselves to the priest, which is to say, keep it secret from everyone else but the priest. He also told them not to mention the transfiguration until after the resurrection, which means, that until then, keep it secret. So as long as they operated in obedience to this command from Him, they operated in secrecy on certain points... Therefore, it is no stretch of the imagination to say, that when the disciples obeyed Jesus' instructions to maintain secrecy concerning the transfiguration until after the resurrection, they were operating as a "secret society."

Not only is it a "stretch of your imagination" it is a stretch of proper biblical exegesis; and you know it. If you expect anyone to think that you handled these passages in line with standard hermeneutical practice, and that this conclusion is what you were taught in seminary, you are sadly mistaken.

You know perfectly well that you were taught, like many theologians, such as Matthew Henry have taught, that despite Jesus' order to keep very private His miracles, they were made very public anyway. In doing so, it was considered an act of indiscretion, on the disciples’ part, rather than an act of disobedience. But Jesus certainly exercised His discretion to instruct them to "tell them what great things the Lord has done for you" (Mark 5:19) or at other times to instruct that they "should tell no man" (Mark 7:36).

You know perfectly well the reason He told them not to tell anyone, at certain times, about the wonderful miracles He performed, was for a few reasons; (1) He was setting an example of self-denial by demonstrating His humility; (2) it was not yet the time for Him to be delivered over to the hands of sinful men to be crucified; (3) and to this very day, He lovingly wants to reveal Himself to those who seek salvation, while at the same time, conceal Himself from those who only seek miracles. In other words, He wants the elect to seek Him, knowing that unbelievers would rather make His miracles – or anyone else’s for that matter – the object of their desire.

The challenge to you was, "Christ never taught His disciples to be part of a secret society." And, no matter how much you try to “stretch” and manipulate Scripture to fit your Masonic imagination, will you never prove through proper biblical exegesis that He actually did.
 
Upvote 0

ghendricks63

Well-Known Member
Feb 25, 2011
1,083
26
✟1,541.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Not only is it a "stretch of your imagination" it is a stretch of proper biblical exegesis; and you know it. If you expect anyone to think that you handled these passages in line with standard hermeneutical practice, and that this conclusion is what you were taught in seminary, you are sadly mistaken.

You know perfectly well that you were taught, like many theologians, such as Matthew Henry have taught, that despite Jesus' order to keep very private His miracles, they were made very public anyway. In doing so, it was considered an act of indiscretion, on the disciples’ part, rather than an act of disobedience. But Jesus certainly exercised His discretion to instruct them to "tell them what great things the Lord has done for you" (Mark 5:19) or at other times to instruct that they "should tell no man" (Mark 7:36).

You know perfectly well the reason He told them not to tell anyone, at certain times, about the wonderful miracles He performed, was for a few reasons; (1) He was setting an example of self-denial by demonstrating His humility; (2) it was not yet the time for Him to be delivered over to the hands of sinful men to be crucified; (3) and to this very day, He lovingly wants to reveal Himself to those who seek salvation, while at the same time, conceal Himself from those who only seek miracles. In other words, He wants the elect to seek Him, knowing that unbelievers would rather make His miracles – or anyone else’s for that matter – the object of their desire.

The challenge to you was, "Christ never taught His disciples to be part of a secret society." And, no matter how much you try to “stretch” and manipulate Scripture to fit your Masonic imagination, will you never prove through proper biblical exegesis that He actually did.

I have no dog in this fight nor do I have a firm opinion one way or the other. I have read the thread with interest as a Christian however and have an obsevation or two.

Your comments and examples given have been used in deceptive ways and clearly have been manipulative in nature. Partial stories ignoring the full context, quotes from biased sources, and other flaws of simple logic in your arguments have shown me clearly that you have such a pre-determined bias that your conclusions and "evidences" are simply not to be trusted.

I do not know how many Masons are Christians...but I do know who has exhibited more Christlike behavior in this thread.

It seems to me you have two choices. You can either attack me like you have Rev Wayne (accusing him of stretching and manipulating scripture to suit his imagination), or you can accept that perhaps, from an outsider's perspective, you may have lost proper focus and do a little soul searching as to just what your true purpose is.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
F

from scratch

Guest
This thread is prompted to explore the claim by some Masons that most Masons in America are of the Christian faith. Is this really true? Not according to all Masons in America.



Note to All Readers: Please feel free to comment on this topic as you wish. However, the accompanying POLL is strictly for those visitors here who are active Freemasons. Therefore, if you are NOT A MASON please do not answer this poll. It is ONLY for members of the Masonic Order.

The poll feature on this forum limits the number of words, so all active Masons please click here to get to the poll.
I don't come to this section often. The subject interests me. But I must ask how your quote promotes or supports the ideals proposed, especially this part of the quote - Yup. I just don't get guys like that. Christians—especially church goers—are just so ignorant. Don't they know that the Jesus story has been told a million times before? Or that the origins of their religion are just as pagan as the origins of any other? I think that any Mason that still considers himself a devout Christian has no place in the organization.” ...

That quote says that Christianity is pagan. I think that the origin of Chistianity can be traced to Judaism or the nation of Israel. Can some parallels be drawn with some pagan religious rites? Sure. How does that make Christianity pagan in origin?

I think that the point for the descerning reader is that masons aren't Christian but pseudo christian. Many church goers are mistaken as Christian by association only. Even acting like or taking on the values of Christianity don't make one a Christian.

Having read the thread I find that some are decieved because a bible said to represent the Bible appears on the altar of the lodge or temple. Yes I'm aware that the mason have a book they call the Bible published just for them. Any who wish can compare the masonic bible with any other and see the alterations. An altar, a bible and a temple are religious word connections not found outside of religion.
 
Upvote 0

ghendricks63

Well-Known Member
Feb 25, 2011
1,083
26
✟1,541.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I think that the point for the descerning reader is that masons aren't Christian but pseudo christian. Many church goers are mistaken as Christian by association only. Even acting like or taking on the values of Christianity don't make one a Christian.

You have just stated that "masons aren't Christian but pseudo christian". I would genuinely like to know what evidence you have to make such a claim. I am not talking about some vague reference from an attack site or what your preacher said but genuine evidence. This type of judgment should not be done lightly.

Keep in mind that I do not believe they identify themselves as a Christian organization and that is not really the question. Is there a philosophy that denies a basic Christian tenet that all masons must accept that would put them in conflict with Christian values?
 
Upvote 0

Rev Wayne

Simplicity + Sincerity = Serenity
Sep 16, 2003
4,128
100
71
SC
Visit site
✟13,530.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
o.f.f. said:
You know perfectly well that you were taught, like many theologians, such as Matthew Henry have taught, that despite Jesus' order to keep very private His miracles, they were made very public anyway.
I haven't denied that in the least. But I was not referring to people's reactions, I was referring to what He taught. The comment I made was:

o.f.f. said:
He most certainly told people who were healed not to tell anyone, but to show themselves to the priest, which is to say, keep it secret from everyone else but the priest.
This was in reference to Matthew 8:1-4, in which Jesus healed a man from his leprosy. What he said to the man was:

“See that you don’t tell anyone. But go, show yourself to the priest and offer the gift Moses commanded, as a testimony to them.”


And that's ALL that He said. His healing was performed as a witness to the priests. His instructions were in accord with the commandments received by Moses.

The chapter at that point leaves the story and moves to the story of the healing of the centurion's servant. It never says one thing about whether this man was obedient to what he was told, or whether he did otherwise. Not that it matters anyway, since the fact remains that Jesus TOLD him NOT to tell ANYONE but the priest.

Quite frankly, you have simply commented upon a different text, the context of which is quite different, and the response apparently different as well. You can't take a person's disobedience to the command of our Lord and try to turn it on its head as if it somehow negates what they were told. The fact still remains, Jesus Himself told them to keep it secret.

You cannot pull the sleight-of-hand move you just tried, by substituting the Mark 7 passage for the one I addressed. The Mark 7 passage is very different: it was a command to a group, not to an individual; there were several healings, not just one; and nothing at all was said about going and showing themselves to the priest. Therefore, you SHOULD have been able to tell, if you were actually paying any attention to what I said rather than foraging about for cannon fodder, that you had the wrong passage.

o.f.f. said:
You know perfectly well that you were taught, like many theologians, such as Matthew Henry have taught, that despite Jesus' order to keep very private His miracles, they were made very public anyway.

Well, you may claim it, but you really cannot sustain it. The only instances we seem to be told about are the ones in which they paid Him no attention. In fact, the very reason those instances ARE mentioned, seems to be, because they DID disobey the commandment given. It would be pretty safe to assume that in all the other instances where no mention is made one way or the other, that they did as instructed. And in the case of the transfiguration, I highly doubt whether they even understood what happened anyway, until the giving of the Spirit at Pentecost, whom Jesus had promised "will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you" (John 14:26), and "will guide you into all truth" (John 16:13).

o.f.f. said:
In doing so, it was considered an act of indiscretion, on the disciples’ part, rather than an act of disobedience.


Where, pray tell, does the Bible tell you THAT??? It WAS, after all, a "command," or an "order," as you yourself put it. I think you're out on your own created limb on this one, labeling as an "indiscretion" that which the Bible does not elaborate upon. Since it does not, we have to take it at face value when it says He "commanded" them not to tell, and they paid no attention to His command. That's disobedience, plain and simple.

I seem to remember an album by the Doobie Brothers titled, "What Were Once Vices Are Now Habits." You've taken a similar approach, by calling a direct act of disobedience to a command given by Christ an "indiscretion." Nice bit of theological legerdemain on your part. Next thing you know, you'll be calling Peter's denial of Christ a "slip of the tongue."

o.f.f. said:
But Jesus certainly exercised His discretion to instruct them to "tell them what great things the Lord has done for you" (Mark 5:19) or at other times to instruct that they "should tell no man" (Mark 7:36).


Exactly. And as I just illustrated, in many of those instances, we have no indication that they disobeyed Him. The ones that mention their choice to ignore the command, seem to have done so for the very fact that they did disobey Him. But either way, you have not even come close to disproving that they often conducted themselves secretly, nor have you refuted the fact that Christ TOLD them to do so. There are quite a few of them, actually:


Be careful not to practice your righteousness in front of others to be seen by them. (Mt. 6:1)

But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be in secret. (Mt. 6:3-4)


But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you. (Mt. 6:6)


But when you fast, put oil on your head and wash your face, so that it will not be obvious to others that you are fasting, but only to your Father, who is unseen; and your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you. (Mt. 6:17-18)


After he had said this, he stayed in Galilee. However, after his brothers had left for the festival, he went also, not publicly, but in secret. (John 7:9-10)


Then he ordered his disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Messiah. (Mt. 16:20)


As they were coming down the mountain, Jesus instructed them, “Don’t tell anyone what you have seen, until the Son of Man has been raised from the dead.” (Mt. 17:9)


Then He came to Bethsaida; and they brought a blind man to Him, and begged Him to touch him. So He took the blind man by the hand and led him out of the town. And when He had spit on his eyes and put His hands on him, He asked him if he saw anything. And he looked up and said, “I see men like trees, walking.” Then He put His hands on his eyes again and made him look up. And he was restored and saw everyone clearly. Then He sent him away to his house, saying, “Neither go into the town, nor tell anyone in the town.” (Mk. 8:22-26)


While He was still speaking, someone came from the ruler of the synagogue’s house, saying to him, “Your daughter is dead. Do not trouble the Teacher.” But when Jesus heard it, He answered him, saying, “Do not be afraid; only believe, and she will be made well.” When He came into the house, He permitted no one to go inexcept Peter, James, and John, and the father and mother of the girl. Now all wept and mourned for her; but He said, “Do not weep; she is not dead, but sleeping.” And they ridiculed Him, knowing that she was dead. But He put them all outside, took her by the hand and called, saying, “Little girl, arise.” Then her spirit returned, and she arose immediately. And He commanded that she be given something to eat. And her parents were astonished, but He charged them to tell no one what had happened. (Lk. 8:49-56)


o.f.f. said:
The challenge to you was, "Christ never taught His disciples to be part of a secret society."



You just don't like the fact that I've shown several instances in which they WERE shown to be conducting themselves in secret, and several instances in which they were INSTRUCTED by Jesus Himself to do so. In the John 7:9-10 passage above, Jesus even conducted His own movements secretively. By instruction and by example, then, there were many things which were treated as private.

And now you accuse me of "manipulating Scripture" when you know good and well you are being manipulative yourself when you substitute Mark 7 for the instance I referenced from Matthew 8--in essence, trying to substitute an instance in which someone did not obey the command to secrecy, for one in which we have no such indication.


But you mischaracterize the matter also, when you refer to Masonry as a "secret society," as if everything they do is couched in secrecy. There will always be people around who are so paranoid they will spot a conspiracy around every corner. We were addressing one of those yesterday at a pastors' meeting, concerning the theory some people in our SC UM Conference have, that at our church's annual conference, discussion and resolution of many important matters are put off until the last day of the conference, with the intent (so say the theorists) that people will be more interested in getting back home, and the leaders of the annual conference are then free to ramrod a vote which might have gone otherwise. In other words, their paranoid theory is, that the leaders of the conference are trying to conduct business matters in a way that keeps the proceedings secret from the "ordinary" conference members. (Interestingly, this follows the same general course of antimasonic accusations, that the "hierarchy" hides things from the rank-and-file.) The reality of the matter is, the ones making those comments are obviously among those who are so DISinterested in proceedings at the conference, and so much more interested in getting the jump on the clog of traffic, that their criticism is merely an attempt to ease their guilt for their early departure.


The fact is, our standing rules prohibit a vote on key proposals at any earlier point, stating that consideration of many important matters, particularly the budget, shall not be voted on until the "third full day of the conference." Since the conference only runs four days, and since the first day is never a full one, they can't proceed any other way than to vote on key issues on the last day. Common-sense knowledge of our standing rules and how the conference operates, really ought to have dispelled such suspicions long ago.


The idea of "Masonic secrecy" is very similar, in that it also is founded upon a faulty and paranoid premise, that if someone does something in secret, it must automatically be suspect. Let's face it, doing things in secret is not automatically "bad" or a "red flag": I don't invite anyone into the bathroom with me, my wife and I don't make love on the porch, and when I do any charitable giving, I do so discreetly, telling no one other than my wife. The first two are just common sense, the third is a model following the instructions of Christ Himself.


And for anyone who knows, the Masonic model follows the pattern of the Savior in many regards. Jesus taught His disciples in private, and He taught them "mouth to ear." Masonry does the same, and the moral principles it teaches are biblically founded. Jesus taught symbolically, in parables; Masonry teaches symbolically as well. You yourself said that Jesus sometimes instructed people to go and tell, and on other occasions instructed them to tell no one; Masonry also has some material that is considered "lawful information" and is made monitorial, while other material remains confidential and Masons are told to "tell no one."

o.f.f. said:
And, no matter how much you try to “stretch” and manipulate Scripture to fit your Masonic imagination, will you never prove through proper biblical exegesis that He actually did.


On the contrary, the Scripture itself, and the plainly spoken words of Jesus, show that I have nothing to "prove," that Jesus and the disciples functioned during His earthly ministry in similar fashion to the manner of the lodge: conducting many things in private, accompanied by instructions not to divulge certain points; while conducting many other things quite openly. And Masons, in similar fashion, clearly distinguish between what is to be considered confidential within the members of the group, and what is to be considered public information. When the church was faced with persecution, the issue of privacy became, for a time, extremely more important than usual, for both personal and corporate safety; likewise, during the Inquisition, Masons were faced with the necessity of being much more secretive, for their own and each other's safety.


The only "stretch" here is your overboard effort to deny that which can be plainly seen by anybody with two eyes and the ability to read.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
F

from scratch

Guest
You have just stated that "masons aren't Christian but pseudo christian". I would genuinely like to know what evidence you have to make such a claim. I am not talking about some vague reference from an attack site or what your preacher said but genuine evidence. This type of judgment should not be done lightly.

Keep in mind that I do not believe they identify themselves as a Christian organization and that is not really the question. Is there a philosophy that denies a basic Christian tenet that all masons must accept that would put them in conflict with Christian values?
Like I said I don't come to this section often. I'm quite busy elsewhere here and my personal life. I have not enough time to debate masonary with you or anyone else.

I don't think my statements are false charges. If you do, please show such. Who knows you may hook me into a discussion.

You made no comment on my c&p quote from the OP.

I'm very sorry if you take my comments as an attack on you or the masons.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

ghendricks63

Well-Known Member
Feb 25, 2011
1,083
26
✟1,541.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Like I said I don't come to this section often. I'm quite busy elsewhere here and my personal life. I have not enough time to debate masonary with you or anyone else.

I don't think my statements are false charges. If you do, please show such. Who knows you may hook me into a discussion.

You made no comment on my c&p quote from the OP.

I'm very sorry if you take my comments as an attack on you or the masons.

I was not offended, frankly not mine to be offended as I am not a mason.:p I was only curious as to what information you had leading you to such a harsh conclusion and perhaps advising caution on such a judgment if you in fact have none.

I really am interested in knowing what the claims against them are and if they are founded or simply conspiracy theories.
 
Upvote 0