Upvote
0
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Biblical Content and/or Christian Interpretation II: Monitorial
- Thread starter Rev Wayne
- Start date
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Skip Sampson
Veteran
- Apr 18, 2010
- 1,067
- 6
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
To all:
The discussion of 'currency' in Masonic training documentation came up in this thread, partly directed towards the FL GL. Since then, information has come to light concerning this, which I will note. First, this overall view of Florida training program:
What the GL has apparently done is swept up the main points of the LSME booklets and placed then into the Module III Study Guide of their Lodge Officers Training Course. (Grand Lodge of Florida) In this SG, the LSME booklets are referenced as existing documentation, by number, for the further use of the members. As well, the sections of the Mod III SG are patterned after the booklets and contain extractions from them. Thus, they cannot be said to be either outdated or superceded.
I have ordered copies of training documentation from the GL, but have not yet received them. What they provide will no doubt shed more light on the issue of Masonic training in FL. Cordially, Skip.
The discussion of 'currency' in Masonic training documentation came up in this thread, partly directed towards the FL GL. Since then, information has come to light concerning this, which I will note. First, this overall view of Florida training program:
The training program is directed under the auspices of the FL Digest and most of it appears on their website as downloadable documents. Missing from those documents are the Lodge System of Masonic Education (LSME) booklets mentioned in my posts and in the above article. That, however, does not mean they are not still in force.
What the GL has apparently done is swept up the main points of the LSME booklets and placed then into the Module III Study Guide of their Lodge Officers Training Course. (Grand Lodge of Florida) In this SG, the LSME booklets are referenced as existing documentation, by number, for the further use of the members. As well, the sections of the Mod III SG are patterned after the booklets and contain extractions from them. Thus, they cannot be said to be either outdated or superceded.
I have ordered copies of training documentation from the GL, but have not yet received them. What they provide will no doubt shed more light on the issue of Masonic training in FL. Cordially, Skip.
Upvote
0
There's the ticket, right there, to explain the differences mentioned. He takes the degree, hears that the Holy Bible is one of the Three Great Lights, that it is also part of the necessary Furniture of the Lodge; THEN, as part of the understanding he gains concerning "Grand Lodges throughout the world," he finds out that not all of them have the Bible on the altar. Hence the training booklet's use of the term "VSL"--as stated more than once already, it is a more general term rather than the specific reference to "Holy Bible" when referring to one jurisdiction and its requirements.
Upvote
0
An irrelevant point at best, since the rituals and monitors, even by your own standards, are what counts when it comes to Masonic authority of Grand Lodge publications.
Nor will you be receiving them either. I was denied even after my payment was accepted, and even after submitting the requested verification that I am a Mason, which consisted of a scanned copy of my current dues card. My request was rejected simply because I am not a Mason in Florida. So even though you can pass the residency requirement, I'm pretty sure you don't have a dues card, and cannot therefore obtain those materials. Which of course, is why all we've heard from you is talk about those materials, with no subsequent indication you've obtained them.
But getting back to what has been your declared standard: the only reason you have suddenly opted for educational booklets is, your usual practice of insistence upon "rituals and monitors" has backfired on you since it was discovered that Florida monitor and ritual both declare the Holy Bible, Square, and Compasses as the "Three Great Lights of Masonry." But resorting to the educational booklets does not help you, as the EA booklet (Module 2) says the same thing in its glossary:
Fact is, you have tried to enforce a couple of standards which have backfired on you: (1) the insistence on "rituals and monitors," which do not support your contentions about "great light" of Masonry; and (2) your claim that what you have found in a stray educational booklet here and there represents some sort of pattern of movement away from the Bible as "Great Light."
In the former case, you have tried to back off your consistent stance of "rituals and monitors" by trying to act like you have always put educational materials on a par with rituals and monitors. The falsehood of that claim is demonstrable from your own recent flailing diatribes on the Ashlar thread, where you have consistently railed about "rituals and monitors," NOT about "rituals and monitors and educational materials":
The latter claim is very similar to a more generalized version you were trying to assert earlier, which had to do with Christian/biblical references in Masonry in general, rather than the more specific claim you have made more recently concerning the Great Light of Masonry. That earlier claim was roundly refuted with an ample collection of references found in Masonic Short Talk Bulletins of fairly recent output (though admittedly, it was Mike who fell for that one rather than you). Naturally, though, you abandoned your own insistence of the authoritative value of those documents, contradicting your own earlier views in favor of trying to win a point at all costs.
But what I find in regard to the "Three Great Lights" references, as well as references to the Bible as the "Great Light of Masonry," is that you cannot sustain your claim of a pattern in that case either. The very same "rituals and monitors" which you claim to consider of greatest authoritative value in Masonry, simply do not support you in that claim. I submit the following as evidence against your claim, citations from rituals and monitors, which run contrary to your claims. You will note that, where possible, I have included many identical quotes from different editions of their own monitors within jurisdictions, in order to establish the consistency of what has appeared there, often over quite a number of decades. These materials, as you will notice, encompass quite a wide chronology of Masonry, from current materials all the way back to well over a century ago, showing quite a stamp of consistency:
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Actually, it's been so long I really don't recall. It's been on here since at least '04 I'd guess. As I recall, I picked it up at a website offering free animated icons, but I've long since forgotten where.
However, by entering the filename by which it is stored in my computer (I discovered I do still have it) into my browser, I came up with a link where you could find it:
picture file - church_glowing_sky_md_wht.gif - peperonity.com
Also at photobucket:
church_glowing_sky_md_wht.gif picture by daltonga1 - Photobucket
Upvote
0
O.F.F.
An Ex-Mason for Jesus
Harold J. Bolen writes:
Consider what the Word of God says to the contrary:
According to Everett C. De Velde Jr. of The Presbytery of Ohio, "Bolen explains the meaning of several Masonic symbols in this essay (A Revelation of the Royal Secret). He attempts to show that the Zoroastrian god Ahura-Mazda, and the Hindu gods Brahma, Vishnu and Siva, are really other names for the true God."
This, and all of the other biblically solid Christian arguments posed on this forum against Freemasonry, calls into question anyoneespecially one who claims to be a "Christian" pastorthat would start a thread on a Christian forum to defend Freemasonry on biblical grounds. In the final analysis, any person who would defend Freemasonry knowing what they really teach, would be either a deliberate liar, a lunatic or simply a false teacher. But to consider him a "Christian pastor" would be ludicrous.
It is the creeping apostasy and sloppy exegesis, intentional or not, mixed with carnal or humanistic thinking, that has brought the abominable idea that Masonry is compatible with biblical Christianity; hence so many Masons in the Church. Many professed, nominal Christians today, and obviously some pastors as well, just don't really care what the word of God says. They just want to be called "Christian" and live in harmony with the world, and be liked by the world. They are just too deceived to understand that this kind of peace with the world, is enmity with God.
Consider what the Word of God says to the contrary:
According to Everett C. De Velde Jr. of The Presbytery of Ohio, "Bolen explains the meaning of several Masonic symbols in this essay (A Revelation of the Royal Secret). He attempts to show that the Zoroastrian god Ahura-Mazda, and the Hindu gods Brahma, Vishnu and Siva, are really other names for the true God."
This, and all of the other biblically solid Christian arguments posed on this forum against Freemasonry, calls into question anyoneespecially one who claims to be a "Christian" pastorthat would start a thread on a Christian forum to defend Freemasonry on biblical grounds. In the final analysis, any person who would defend Freemasonry knowing what they really teach, would be either a deliberate liar, a lunatic or simply a false teacher. But to consider him a "Christian pastor" would be ludicrous.
It is the creeping apostasy and sloppy exegesis, intentional or not, mixed with carnal or humanistic thinking, that has brought the abominable idea that Masonry is compatible with biblical Christianity; hence so many Masons in the Church. Many professed, nominal Christians today, and obviously some pastors as well, just don't really care what the word of God says. They just want to be called "Christian" and live in harmony with the world, and be liked by the world. They are just too deceived to understand that this kind of peace with the world, is enmity with God.
Upvote
0
Ah yes, that eminent Masonic personality, "Harold J. Bolen," whose name, as far as I know, I just saw for the first time.o.f.f. said:
You can't be serious? A publicized essay of one man's personal opinions, and you try to pass it off as "Freemasonry?" You don't seem to be aware of the fact that Christians came up with similar opinions, LONG before any such thing was published by any Mason. For instance:
This is the opinion of one Christian researcher, calling the first Persian religion the "worship of the true God" (which is strange, considering the fact that he also says that Abraham found it necessary to "reform" it). And the conclusion is drawn after the author has made several unprovable inferences as the basis of his conclusion, such as "Abraham effected a reformation of religion among the Persians." He even treats Abraham's departure from his native country as an "expulsion," brought about due to his being "persecuted" after his attempt at "reforms!" All of which goes against the biblical witness telling us that he left because God told him to leave!
But that's not all:
Imagine that! A Christian, speaking of the "many excellent things" taught in the Zend-Avesta!
So do we then, by inference--based on the expressed written opinions of one man--accuse all Christians of holding this belief, as though they somehow all share this man's beliefs, by some kind of spiritual osmosis?
I think you'd have to agree, the idea is ludicrous. Well, so is your idea that one Mason's opinions, expressed freely in ANY magazine, Masonic or otherwise, can be attributed to Masons in general. When you take into consideration that the publication in which it appeared is published by Scottish Rite--to which most Masons do not even belong--well, your theory of "guilt by association" or whatever you're attempting, falls even farther by the wayside than it already was.
"Defend Freemasonry on biblical grounds?" You really need to read the OP, you seem to have strayed a bit in your description of the purpose of the thread.
Deliberate liar? You dare make such accusations, after you post material that expresses one man's opinion, and try to paint it as "what Freemasonry teaches???"
Moreover, you dare make such accusations, when you know good and well the publication in which this appears is published by Scottish Rite, and not by "Freemasonry?" Besides, what happened to your ages-old insistence upon "rituals and manuals" as the true purveyors of "what Masonry teaches?" Did that suddenly go by the wayside when it was shown on this forum that the rituals and manuals gave no support to your claims?
You seem oblivious to the fact that Scottish Rite seems to be, by nature or by design or for whatever reason, prone to the kind of esotericism that antimasons love to try to portray as the general tenor of all Masonry. (Or maybe that was the very REASON you chose it.) Practically anyone can tell you, it simply is not so. In fact, much of Masonry (especially the "mother" lodge, the UGLE) has been critical of Scottish Rite Masonry as practiced in both its U.S. bodies. (And even more so of the Shrine.)
Not everyone is Scottish Rite. In fact, I am not, for that very reason, its tendencies are much too prone to wandering speculations about other religions for my liking, and I have no interest in it. I find it ludicrous that anyone would even try to take Scottish Rite publications and try to make them out to be representative of all Masonry.
Talk about a mixed-up estimation of things. "Sloppy exegesis?" Where, pray tell, do you find in ANYTHING presented on this thread, even the FIRST example of "exegesis????" Just as the OP states, this thread and the one it derives from have been created for the sole purpose of posting the material. And it was posted in response to a request--FROM YOU--to do so, to show examples of Christian content found in Masonry. And for the most part, with a couple of notable exceptions when challenges were made based on reasons that had nothing to do with the OP--that stated procedure has been followed. Calling anything on this thread "exegesis" is the surest indication that your accusations are not only in error, but they are founded on false, non-existent notions in regard to the purpose of the thread.
No, the idea that Freemasonry is not incompatible with Christian faith derives from the fact that nothing therein conflicts with it. Arguments that try to show otherwise, for the most part, involve either "arguments of absence" (accusations based on what it does NOT say--which most of the time, in essence, find Masonry blameworthy because it is not the church), or isolated statements or phrases that are misinterpreted and not in agreement with what can easily be shown elsewhere in Masonry.
Here we go again, with the worn-out assumption that to make accusations against other Christians stick, one must by necessity first show them to be "nominal." And on what objective piece of evidence, Michael, do you make such generalized assumptions?
Once again, faulty notions are at work here. "Peace with the world, and enmity with God" is not referring to our relationships with others. It has reference to our adoption of the world's actions and manner of living, as opposed to the instructions we have received from God's Word. As regards the PEOPLE of this world, Paul wrote in 1 Cor. 5:9-10:
"I wrote you in my letter not to associate with immoral people; I didnot at all mean with the immoral people of this world, or with the covetous and swindlers, or with idolaters, for then you would have to go out of the world."
Having associations with those of this world is not prohibited by Scripture, nor is it called "peace with the world," nor is it considered "enmity with God"--even when it involves, as Paul stated, "idolaters" and "swindlers." What you stated is, quite simply, a misunderstanding of what Scripture says. Besides, how in the world will anyone ever lead anyone else to Christ, if they never take the time necessary to make contact with them, or to establish the kind of relationships with them that are most conducive to discussions of the kind of depth it takes to share one's most deeply-held personal beliefs? That makes no sense.
I'd much rather remain open to any situation which allows for mutual understanding with one another, and the opportunity to live as a witness for Christ before someone, than to forever remain at a perpetual distance from them, and thereby forfeit even the very opportunity to do so.
Which in my case is all hypothetical anyway, since in my locality I've never run across a Mason whose profession of belief was anything other than Christian. Nor do I buy the blanket idea that Masons simply "want to be liked by the world," that's pure generalization on your part, attributing to all Masons that which you cannot even presume to establish by any tangible evidence in regard to even ONE Mason.
That kind of back-porch logic is one of the most glaring problems with antimasonry today: anybody can say anything, even the most off-the-wall comment, and by its very appearance in print, 100 others take it almost as if it were gospel truth.
Upvote
0
O.F.F.
An Ex-Mason for Jesus
Wayne said:
You can't be seriously asking that question. You are one man who publicizes his personal opinions and interpretation of Masonry and try to pass it off as "Freemasonry." But you have the hypocritical audacity to object when someone else does the same thing.
Wayne said:
This is one of your biggest problems, and an area where we are in strong disagreement. YOU accept anyone to be a Christian simply if they claim to be one. I do not accept them as such until I see the fruit they produce by their words and behavior. Jesus said, "you will know them by their fruit." If it is consistent with biblical Christianity, then and only then will I view them as a Christian.
Wayne said:
Unless you are trying to establish a double-standard, that would include YOUR own personal opinion and interpretation of Freemasonry, which is what this thread is all about. So thank you for allowing me to agree that the idea that Masonry in general is compatible with biblical Christianity is ludicrous!
Wayne said:
You can't use a Scottish Rite publication (Pike's Morals & Dogma) and say in one instance its "our Masonry" and in another instance or Scottish Rite publication say its "not Masonry." You can't have it both ways pseudo-pastor.
Wayne said:
Christians do it all the time, from leveraging their work relationships with non-believers on the job, to kindling relationships with non-Christians in their neighborhoods and community as those opportunities present themselves. They don't have to do it by joining a non-Christian, religiously pluralistic fraternity called Freemasonry.
Upvote
0
Nope, you're always trying to label what I post as "personal opinion," even when it reflects the generally accepted positions found in Freemasonry.
Funny, I was just pointing out the hypocritical audacity of your employing the very things you accuse others of doing. So what are trying to say? "Back atcha?" Smooth move.
Believe me, I'm well aware of your attempts to discredit any author cited, no matter who the person or what the qualifications. Perhaps it would be better if you refrained from automatic attempts to discredit anything anyone cites, and actually look up the information on a person first. It might save you the embarrassment of trying to suggest that you can meet a person and "see the fruit they produce by their words and behavior," who died in 1754! Wouldn't it make eminently more common sense to find something by way of information on someone I cited and spoke of as "Christian researcher," rather than launch immediately into unfounded insinuendoes?
I think the reprints of his work speak for its value as much as anything else, especially when as trusted a theologian as Adam Clarke served as editor for one of the reprints. Apparently people have found his work not only reliable, but useful.
"What this thread is all about" has more to do with YOU than with me, of course, since it was YOU who requested that I post everything I could find anywhere in Masonry with Christian content. This I have done, refraining as much as possible--even to the point of stating my intent to do so--from posting any opinions along with it, interrupting only to respond to queries and challenges--most of which are made upon inferences you have drawn about the posted material, creating opinions and inserting them into the discussion along with your accusations, in response to that which I have posted, for the most part, without any accompanying comments at all. Go figure.
If you were to be honest about the matter (which you probably will not, if past history is any indication), you would recall that my comments along that line were in response to material that YOU posted, not me. And as I recall, the Pike material was posted by way of Pirtle, who falsified it by adding his own comments. All I did was clarify (1) Pirtle's source material, (2) Pirtle's addition that falsified the quote, and (3) what Pike was actually saying in the material quoted.
That's very different from what YOU did on the matter, trying to introduce a citation which you had already been shown REPEATEDLY had been falsified from its original wording.
As for your attempt to level some kind of accusation at ME about "our Masonry," you'd better get your hat turned around straight. That was not ME, nor was it "personal opinion," it was EXACTLY WHAT PIKE STATED:
PIKE--not I--made that comment about what "our Masonry" is. I simply pointed it out, and you label it "personal opinion" because I did so??
You're just trying to create a false appearance that I have said one thing in one place, and another elsewhere. You are doing so by appealing to two different types of contexts.
There is no inconsistency in clarifying for you in one instance what Pike was saying, and in another instance pointing out that in citing Scottish Rite publications, you have no warrant whatsoever for making application to/accusations against Freemasonry in general. If you REALLY wanted to compare the present comment with past comments regarding Morals and Dogma, then instead of appealing to an instance in which I was simply clarifying what Pike was saying, you should have appealed to an instance in which I was addressing the same matter: the legitimacy (or not) of making proclamations about all of Masonry, based on what you find in a piece publicized by Scottish Rite.
If you had done so, or attempted to do so, you would find that I have been entirely consistent on the matter, and have told you repeatedly in the past, that Morals and Dogma is a Scottish Rite publication, and should not be considered applicable to all of Masonry. A clarification of "what Pike was saying" in any specific portion of that work, has no bearing whatsoever on my estimation of what type of material it represents. You are comparing apples and bowling balls.
Nor can you, pseudo-layman, despite how hard you tried to with this post.
Most places of work these days have any of a number of forms of prohibition of such a practice. Places where this would be a possibility are minimal at best.
Just out of curiosity, how much of this do you actually engage in personally?
Nobody said or implied that they did. But it doesn't hurt either.
And you mischaracterize the matter with "religiously pluralistic." Freemasonry is no such thing, the description is a false one. We've been there, done that on this one before, remember? To be "pluralistic," they would have to have combined content from one or more religions, with another religion. You were challenged to provide evidence of this, from the most obvious source where it would have to be found, the ritual--and you never managed to do so. Freemasonry's content is biblically founded and rooted. But you already knew that.
Upvote
0
Skip Sampson
Veteran
- Apr 18, 2010
- 1,067
- 6
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Just an update: the FL GL training manuals which I had ordered by mail finally arrived today. They include the Mentor's Manual and the 8 Masonic Education booklets.
As I noted, all one has to do is send in an order form with payment and the books show up. This tactic has worked in several jurisdictions. Cordially, Skip.
Upvote
0
As I already told you, they would not even sell them to me even though I provided Masonic identification as requested, because I do not reside in Florida. Naturally, since you live there, the residency issue would not come up.
But whose Masonic credentials did you use in ordering them?
And anyway, none of this explains why you have abandoned your position on what constitutes Masonic authority, which with you was always "rituals and monitors," in favor of "Mentor's Manual and Masonic Education booklets?
Upvote
0
Similar threads
