• 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

Rev Wayne

Simplicity + Sincerity = Serenity
Sep 16, 2003
4,128
101
72
SC
Visit site
✟21,040.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Florida is not the only monitor where this appears:


It's not just in the MM degree either, for we find in the Virginia Manual:

 
Upvote 0

Skip Sampson

Veteran
Apr 18, 2010
1,067
6
Fayetteville, NC
✟24,025.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
More Florida material:
From which edition of monitor are you quoting from?


You should have also mentioned this comment from the FL GL Mentor's Manual: Or this from the Mod II Study Guide:
You can see now that the words in the Monitor may have seemed familiar, but the FL GL had altered their meaning. It is not unusual to find within Masonry comments that undercut Jesus' claim about being the only mediator between God and man.

You also missed this from the monitor, which is far more indicative of Masonry's position: You can see where your cut & paste approach to Masonry often leads you into unwarranted assumptions. But looking at GL literature in entirety, one gets a better idea of the true teachings. It is clear that in Florida, being like Hiram Abiff is a sure-fire way to make it heaven for the Mason, regardless of his religious beliefs. Cordially, Skip.
 
Upvote 0

Skip Sampson

Veteran
Apr 18, 2010
1,067
6
Fayetteville, NC
✟24,025.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Florida is not the only monitor where this appears ... It's not just in the MM degree either, for we find in the Virginia Manual:
And you've managed to make the same mistake with the Virginia material as you did with the Florida, as this indicates:
I'll have to find my copy of the KY monitor, but it wouldn't surprise me to find a similar statement therein. Cordially, Skip.
 
Upvote 0

Rev Wayne

Simplicity + Sincerity = Serenity
Sep 16, 2003
4,128
101
72
SC
Visit site
✟21,040.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
And you've managed to make the same mistake with the Virginia material as you did with the Florida
The Florida quote was no "mistake," what I posted comes from the current usage.

as this indicates:
Sorry, but even with the pecking order that you claim to adhere to, the Mentor's Manual doesn't hold an ounce of mustard in comparison to the Monitor itself.

But what is really appalling is that a Christian--a professing one, anyway--would come out in support of that statement over the truth of the matter: that "Lion of the Tribe of Judah" is a biblical phrase, and appears only in Revelation in the Bible, and is a DIRECT reference to Jesus Christ.

Let me show you something else that you probably never noticed:

The Lion of the Tribe of Judah also describes the Messiah of the Jewish Mason
Do you mind telling me where this comes from? It definitely does not come from Scripture. There is NOWHERE in Scripture you will find "Lion of the Tribe of Judah" other than Revelation 5:5. And that is NOT "the Messiah of the Jewish Mason," for that is the Messiah that the Jews REJECTED. In fact, there is nowhere else in Scripture that I have found, where you will even find the shortened version of it, "Lion of Judah." The funny thing is, there are a lot of people in some jurisdictions who seem to be fond of denying that "Lion of the Tribe of Judah" refers to Jesus Christ. And a lot of them who do so, are fond of basing it on the idea that "kings of Judah were referred to as the Lion of Judah." Problem is, there's not a single one of those who MAKE that claim who offer any SUPPORT for the claim. And with good reason: there IS none. I don't know what faith the folks come from who have penned that denial, but if they are Christians, they don't know their Bible, and it's abundantly clear they are not Jewish, or else they would not be making the claim that it fits their Messiah, when the context clearly indicates it does not.

Fact is, from the time the phrase began to be used, it was clearly attributed to its true source. And in some places, there are those who are at least honest enough to acknowledge it.

And if anyone were familiar enough with the traditional "Great Light of Masonry," they would recognize what an error it is to claim that the phrase can be attributed to anyone else. I will show why from what is an example of the most common form of this from the MM degree:


"Our bodies will be raised" is not Jewish. Nor is it an expression found in any other religion, but Christianity. "Become incorruptible as our souls" is also Christian theology, and no other, and is a direct reflection of the language found in Paul's discourse upon the resurrection in 1 Corinthians 15.

Those, therefore, who defend against the "Lion of the Tribe of Judah" as Christ, do so either by (1) dealing with the phrase in isolation by not considering the context in which it appears--an automatic error in judgment; or (2) dealing with the phrase in ignorance of its source, as well as ignorance of the Jewish faith which they claim it could also be said to represent, since there is nothing Jewish to be found there other than "Lion" and "tribe of Judah" from which the Christian phrase derives.
 
Upvote 0

Skip Sampson

Veteran
Apr 18, 2010
1,067
6
Fayetteville, NC
✟24,025.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
The Florida quote was no "mistake," what I posted comes from the current usage.
Partial usage, as I pointed out. At the danger of repeating myself, your cut & paste approach to Masonry allows you to 'prove' things that you want prove; however, the reality is often different, as I indicated. You should have done some research and analysis before you posted the Monitor. BTW, what edition are you using?

Sorry, but even with the pecking order that you claim to adhere to, the Mentor's Manual doesn't hold an ounce of mustard in comparison to the Monitor itself.
Actually, it does. It's what the Master Mason is using to help train the new guys. It's what they want taught, Monitor not withstanding. In another sense, they are not in conflict. The Monitor mentions the Lion, but the Manual defines it. There is no inconsistency between them.

Yeah, I'm pretty appalled that the Masons in those states, some of whom are self-professed Christians, would promulgate and support such a view by their continued membership. But there it is, to remind us yet again that there are no Christians in Freemasonry.

As to me, you might keep in mind that my post was very clear in identifying Freemasonry as the source of the viewpoint. Keep in mind that I'm just pointing out what Freemasonry teaches. You remember: that group of which you are a member and support with funds and your presence, such that it is. Don't get so huffy with the Masons who wrote and support it; they are what they are. And I'm just the messenger, pointing out your errors, and, of course, those of Freemasonry as well. Yes, it's quite a task, but I'm happy to do it.

Do you mind telling me where this comes from?
I already cited it as coming from the Mentor's Manuals in FL and VA, among others. It a Masonic teaching, and not limited to those two states. Masonry just cannot allow a single mediator between God and man or they'd have to show that Jesus is exactly that.

It definitely does not come from Scripture.
Glad you realized that. Are you going to complain to those two states about their views and let them know they have it wrong? You could at least glare at their web sites, then logoff.

And if anyone were familiar enough with the traditional "Great Light of Masonry," they would recognize what an error it is to claim that the phrase can be attributed to anyone else.
Yet both GL's do just that. I guess the Masons in both those states aren't "familiar enough" to know the truth, which makes sense. Incidentally, I don't think you are "familiar enough" with it either, at least in the Masonic sense. More to come.

I will show why
Don't bother. You should take this up with the GL's as noted above. It's their teaching. Incidentally, Alabama is also consistent with FL that imitating Hiram Abiff will get a man into heaven:
Hiram Abiff is the Masonic 'messiah,' as GL documentation shows.

Yep, I agree that both GL's are pretty ignorant of Christianity, to say nothing of Judaism. But what do you expect from Masons? They are on the outside, looking in. Cordially, Skip.
 
Upvote 0

Rev Wayne

Simplicity + Sincerity = Serenity
Sep 16, 2003
4,128
101
72
SC
Visit site
✟21,040.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
At the danger of repeating myself, your cut & paste approach to Masonry allows you to 'prove' things that you want prove

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! You dare talk of "cut and paste approach to Masonry" and "proving things you want to prove," after your fiascoes with "Jacob's Staircase," "rectangular cubes," "authoritative pictures," Grand Secretaries contacting themselves for rulings, all of which you engaged in repeatedly, ad infinitum??? Dude, you have some serious problems of projection.

Your "danger" is not in repeating yourself, it's in being so bull-in-a-china-shop set on vilifying Masonry, that you do so at the expense of common sense.

however, the reality is often different, as I indicated.

Well, you've given abundant evidence on this forum in the past, that you are hardly a reliable gauge of "reality."

"The reality" of the matter is EXACTLY what I've been getting at. I'm not interested in speaking of the term as this Mason or that Mason understands it, or this Masonic source or that one understands it, and even less in how you understand it. What I'm getting at is, what is the true significance of the phrase itself, and whether it is something whose definition is beyond the stated opinions. I readily and heartily submit that this is most definitely the case. At the same time, I submit that the "Masonic understanding" of "Lion of the Tribe of Judah" is overwhelmingly tilted in favor of it as a Messianic and direct reference to Jesus Christ.

The Monitor mentions the Lion, but the Manual defines it.

Wrong: the manual does not "define" it, the Bible does, which is my point. "Lion of the Tribe of Judah" as a scriptural term is not negotiable, it is a specific reference to a specific person. Statements such as those you are fond of trying to assert, which deny the specificity of the phrase, are simply attempts to undo the status quo.

For those who are aware of its singular reference, it cannot help but be accorded its true significance--even in Masonic documents, which I've shown you many times over in the past. One such statement you've seen many times already:


"Lion of the Tribe of Judah" is simply a reflection of that Christian foundation upon which Masonic lectures were formulated.

Yeah, I'm pretty appalled that the Masons in those states, some of whom are self-professed Christians, would promulgate and support such a view by their continued membership.

I doubt you are either pretty or appalled. And I get the idea that those who do lobby for the neutrality of the term do so for exactly that reason, its neutrality--real or imagined. And there are far fewer of them than you would lead us to believe.

As to me, you might keep in mind that my post was very clear in identifying Freemasonry as the source of the viewpoint.

Sure, Pontius, wash your hands, that'll take care of your own complicity in the matter.

Likewise, keep in mind that I am not interested in "the viewpoint," I'm only interested in the truth of what the phrase itself signifies.

Don't get so huffy with the Masons who wrote and support it; they are what they are.

Sorry, but the above comment to which you are replying was not stated about them, it was about you. Don't get huffy about what it says, you are what you are. And you do continue to support what is a dissenting view, over the actual Masonic view. Naturally you will try to limit the collateral damage to your Christian credibility. But I take your support of that view over the actual view of who the Lion of the Tribe of Judah actually is, no differently than I would take it should you come out with an opinion on this forum expressing agreement with Marcus Borg that the resurrection was merely a spiritual reality.

I already cited it as coming from the Mentor's Manuals in FL and VA, among others.

Naturally I was not referring to the appearance of the claim in any Masonic source, but to the supposed "information" upon which the claim is based.

As I stated, there IS no support ever given for such a claim, because there IS NONE. It's just an attempt to assert a challenge to the already solid Masonic opinion that the Lion of the Tribe of Judah is Jesus Christ. Like I said, I understand the reason for the challenge as an interest in "preserving neutrality," and it's a noble gesture for those interested in being considerate of those who have chosen to join Masonry from faiths other than Christianity; but it has no basis in fact, because what it tries to state about the Jewish faith, in reality goes against certain beliefs of that faith.

But since you seem to think it IS supportable, be my guest, and show us:

Where in the OT Jewish Kings were referred to as "Lion of the Tribe of Judah";
Why the phrase "Lion of the Tribe of Judah," "does not of necessity refer to Jesus of Nazareth," despite the phrase having only one usage in all of Scripture, and that being Rev. 5:5 in DIRECT reference to Jesus;
How "Lion of the Tribe of Judah" can be a description of the "mediator of the Jewish religion," when there is no adherent to the Jewish religion who has ever taken it as such?

Masonry just cannot allow a single mediator between God and man or they'd have to show that Jesus is exactly that.

Actually, they do: but symbolically rather than directly. Symbolic systems do not declare, they allude.

W: It definitely does not come from Scripture.
S: Glad you realized that.
Glad you acknowledged it as well.

Thank you for your admission that the opinion as stated in the source you cited is wrong. Now if we can just figure out why you as a Christian choose to support that statement rather than recognizing the truth of the matter as stated in MOST Masonic opinion.

Alabama is also consistent with FL that imitating Hiram Abiff will get a man into heaven:

I will respond, but I will first suggest that we stick to the current focus.

Hiram Abiff is an allegorical figure. In an allegory which has been most typically described in Masonry as teaching the resurrection, the "figure" he represents is none other than Jesus Christ.

Hiram Abiff is the Masonic 'messiah,' as GL documentation shows.

Thanks for your stated opinion of what "GL documentation shows." Now all you need to do is get the thinking cap screwed on straight so that you recognize it well enough to give it a more accurate expression of it. It's really no different than the same allegorical and symbolic representations by which we come up with a body as a temple, and a Savior as a Lion. One thing represents another. Hiram Abiff, in an allegorical drama designed to teach resurrection, figuratively/symbolically/typologically represents Christ.

They are on the outside, looking in.

No, for the most part, they are on the inside looking in, same as you. Not that it improves that much from the inside. There are Christians who are equally Bible knowledge-challenged, it's been a well-known fact for quite some time. In fact, you offer us a wonderful illustration of it with your continued failure to recognize that "Lion of the Tribe of Judah" is a unique reference to Jesus Christ, as well as your continued attempt to assert opinions to the contrary every time you find them.

No wonder it's so difficult for some Masons to see the truth of the matter of "Lion of the Tribe of Judah," when even Christians assail it.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Rev Wayne

Simplicity + Sincerity = Serenity
Sep 16, 2003
4,128
101
72
SC
Visit site
✟21,040.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Here are just a few Masonic references which directly name Christ as the "Lion of the Tribe of Judah":


The phrase, "Lion of the tribe of Judah," therefore, when used in the Masonic ritual, referred in its original interpretation to Christ, him who "brought life and immortality to light." (E.R. Johnson, Masonry Defined, 2002, p. 533)




Lion of the Tribe of Judah: Jesus Christ (Masonic Glossary, Acimnos Ceihpr, 1946, p. 243)

 
Upvote 0

Rev Wayne

Simplicity + Sincerity = Serenity
Sep 16, 2003
4,128
101
72
SC
Visit site
✟21,040.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Yet another collection of Masonic references specifically stating Christ as the "Lion of the Tribe of Judah":


On mention of the Lion of the Tribe of Judah, the Christian immediately traces the lineage of Jesus, and interprets such reference as pertaining to him. (George Steinmetz, Freemasonry: Its Hidden Meaning)
Lion of the Tribe of Judah
The phrase in the Masonic ritual, "The lion of the tribe of Judah," is Messianic and refers to Christ, the anointed of God and royal head of God's Kingdom. (Missouri Lodge of Research, “Key Masonic Words and Phrases”)
 
Upvote 0

Skip Sampson

Veteran
Apr 18, 2010
1,067
6
Fayetteville, NC
✟24,025.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I'm not interested in speaking of the term as this Mason or that Mason understands it, or this Masonic source or that one understands it, and even less in how you understand it.
Oh, I don't know. You earlier said this was your objective:

Ok, we've seen a Christian reference and we're talking about it.

What I'm getting at is, what is the true significance of the phrase itself, and whether it is something whose definition is beyond the stated opinions.
Significance is in the eye of the beholder. If the Mormon professes faith in 'Jesus Christ,' we know that the person he's talking about is not that of the Bible. Same in Masonry. They like to use familiar Biblical terms, but give them new meanings. Same bait & switch as in Mormonism, or in the Koran for that matter. Same hand at work as well.

At the same time, I submit that the "Masonic understanding" of "Lion of the Tribe of Judah" is overwhelmingly tilted in favor of it as a Messianic and direct reference to Jesus Christ.
Yet the two GL's you started with rejected just that understanding.

Wrong: the manual does not "define" it, the Bible does, which is my point. "Lion of the Tribe of Judah" as a scriptural term is not negotiable, it is a specific reference to a specific person.
But the MM DID define it, and as a totally different concept than that found in the Bible. That conclusion is inescapable. In the Masonic treatment, it is no longer a "specific reference to a specific person;" rather, it's something entirely different. Any Mason in such a jurisdictions where those comments are to be found and who claim to be Christian are showing their true colors by remaining in the organization. The Craft has more for them than does the Cross.

One such statement you've seen many times already:
An interesting reference; however, you cited it as being published before Mackey was born. I'll have to find the actual reference and get back too you. I do know that during the 19th century, several writers tried to find such a meaning behind Masonry, but that wasn't true at the beginning of the GL era and certainly isn't true now. For example, Anderson's Constitutions of 1723 doesn't mention the Bible at all, but does contain this injunction:

Kinda hard to see Christianity all throughout Freemasonry when it wasn't there from the beginning. You continue to find meanings that aren't really there.
"Lion of the Tribe of Judah" is simply a reflection of that Christian foundation upon which Masonic lectures were formulated.
No, it's a redefinition of a Biblical term that Masonry uses to hide it's true teachings.

Sorry, but the above comment to which you are replying was not stated about them, it was about you.
Yeah, I already knew that. It just indicated that you really didn't read my post. As usual.
It's just an attempt to assert a challenge to the already solid Masonic opinion that the Lion of the Tribe of Judah is Jesus Christ.
And you've been shown where that is untrue. Every GL that teaches that there are multiple 'messiahs' contradicts your view. And there are more of them, to say nothing of the SR/SJ.

But since you seem to think it IS supportable, be my guest, and show us:
I don't need to; you should direct your question to the GL's making such claims. I'm sure they'd enjoy that.

I will respond, but I will first suggest that we stick to the current focus.
Should be interesting.

In an allegory which has been most typically described in Masonry as teaching the resurrection, the "figure" he represents is none other than Jesus Christ.
Not in FL and VA. You can quote opinions all you wish, but I'd like to see a GL proclamation on that.

Hiram Abiff, in an allegorical drama designed to teach resurrection, figuratively/symbolically/typologically represents Christ.
Which GL's teach that?

Wayne, your response is a very unserious one. You really do not know what you are talking about, and your commentary is very superficial. Attacking me does not hide that fact. Cordially, Skip.
 
Upvote 0

Rev Wayne

Simplicity + Sincerity = Serenity
Sep 16, 2003
4,128
101
72
SC
Visit site
✟21,040.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Wayne, your response is a very unserious one. You really do not know what you are talking about, and your commentary is very superficial. Attacking me does not hide that fact.
My response was serious, I posted two more full posts afterward to illustrate what I was talking about, and the commentary actually shows your own superficiality. Not to mention, you go against your own stated order of authority of Masonic documents, in the vain attempt to cover up and/or refute evidence you don't particularly like.

And calling any Masonic material I've posted an "attack on you" does not hide the fact that your stated opinions are self-delusional and self-contradictory--in fact, it is the surest evidence of it.
 
Upvote 0

Rev Wayne

Simplicity + Sincerity = Serenity
Sep 16, 2003
4,128
101
72
SC
Visit site
✟21,040.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
W: Hiram Abiff, in an allegorical drama designed to teach resurrection, figuratively/symbolically/typologically represents Christ.
S: Which GL's teach that?

Figuratively/symbolically/typologically speaking, quite a number of them do, just not directly. Now if you're looking for the more direct kind, certainly they are there to be found:



But in line with what I stated, the figurative/symbolic/typological/allegorical references are many, and the reason they can be taken as no other than Christ are numerous:

Ye know not when the Master cometh = based on Jesus' statements in Matt. 24
He that taketh away the sins of the world = said of Jesus by John the Baptist
"Peace which man cannot understand" = Paul in Philippians 4
"thru the merits of the Lion of the Tribe of Judah" = Revelation 5:5
"resurrection of the body" = 1 Corinthians 15
"bodies will rise & become as incorruptible as our souls" = 1 Cor. 15
"Right Hand be as a shield & buckler" = various places in Psalms
 
Upvote 0

Rev Wayne

Simplicity + Sincerity = Serenity
Sep 16, 2003
4,128
101
72
SC
Visit site
✟21,040.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Again, highlighted portions are those which cannot be taken but as references to Christ.
 
Upvote 0

O.F.F.

An Ex-Mason for Jesus
Jan 22, 2004
1,422
49
USA
Visit site
✟16,848.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Wayne said:
. . .your stated opinions are self-delusional and self-contradictory--in fact, it is the surest evidence of it.

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

Wayne said:
At the same time, I submit that the "Masonic understanding" of "Lion of the Tribe of Judah" is overwhelmingly tilted in favor of it as a Messianic and direct reference to Jesus Christ.

Of course you really mean "Wayne's Masonic understanding." You've been shown in the past evidence by more than one Grand Lodge that the non-Christian Mason is free to view this phrase as symbolizing his own "savior" motif. Moreover, here are several interpretations presented under the auspices of several Grand Lodges from current 21st century websites (mostly from MM Masonic Education material) that refute your claim:









So much for your misconception of some sort of "overwhelming tilt" in another direction. Beside to say otherwise is self-contradictory. After all, it is YOU who insist that EVERYTHING in Masonry is SYMBOLIC and is freely open to interpretation as any individual Mason sees it.

Wayne said:
Masonry is symbolic, so it doesn't "declare," and doesn't dogmatize.

Yet you "declare" any Masonic objection to your personal Masonic interpretation as:

Wayne said:
It's just an attempt to assert a challenge to the already solid Masonic opinion that the Lion of the Tribe of Judah is Jesus Christ.

As if YOUR position on the matter is Masonic "dogma." Yet in doing so, you further demonstrate your own self-contradiction:

Wayne said:
...you have to take the system as it exists as a whole, and not just a snippet quote ... in hopes of a snappy comeback. And you have to recognize it for the symbolic system that it truly is.

Therefore, you TOO cannot take a snippet Masonic quote and limit its symbolism to a "Christian" interpretation. To do so either you contradict YOURSELF or you are operating under a DOUBLE STANDARD, period.

Wayne said:
And, ... you forget the entire system is symbolic.

If the ENTIRE SYSTEM IS SYMBOLIC, than the phrase in question is symbolic. And, you've just read that several Grand Lodges provide OTHER possible symbolic interpretations for its adherents, while at the same time affording them the freedom to view it ANY WAY THEY CHOOSE!

Moreover, any attempt on your part to IMPOSE a "Christian" interpretation on a system in which YOU and the institution of Freemasonry has DECLARED as SYMBOLIC, would not only be unMasonic, it would self-defeat your own "computer template analogy" your made 4 years ago:


So the next time you want to accuse someone that their "stated opinions are self-delusional and self-contradictory" you ought to take a good look in the mirror and bite your tongue before making yourself look like a fool.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Rev Wayne

Simplicity + Sincerity = Serenity
Sep 16, 2003
4,128
101
72
SC
Visit site
✟21,040.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
More of your usual, I see, Mike. Can't help but notice for every single thing you've posted, all you have posted as the source is "the Grand Lodge of ______." What's the matter, didn't you keep up with exactly what sort of materials you were quoting these from? You realize, of course, that being unidentified, they are automatically questionable.

But again, just as I told Skip, the problem here is, you guys seem to be more interested in dealing with people's OPINIONS than with the REALITY of the situation. The REALITY of it is, that "Lion of the Tribe of Judah" has only ONE reference point, and that is found in Revelation 5:5. The fact is, when this came into Masonry, they were well aware of what they were stating, and described it for exactly what it is, a phrase signifying Jesus Christ.

And anyone can see from what I posted, complete with sources and dates (unlike your generic "Grand Lodge of" statements that affirm no specific source at all really), that the overwhelming Masonic opinion HAS BEEN, and REMAINS, that "Lion of the Tribe of Judah" refers to Jesus Christ.

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

Only when the kettle truly is black, and observably and provably so.

After all, it is YOU who insist that EVERYTHING in Masonry is SYMBOLIC and is freely open to interpretation as any individual Mason sees it.

Everything but the language in which it is described, and it is precisely that language which reveals this for what it is--besides the fact of Masonic monitors from which I have cited, being totally and overwhelmingly against what you claim. You see, I draw the line when the content is demonstrably Christian, and antimasons are trying to label it as something else.

But since you wish to play games with this, I'll bite. You seem to think that with this post you have "countered" what I have posted. I think you have grossly over-estimated your input. Let's conduct a little tally, First of all, sources monitorial sources in which the phrase either directly states it as a reference to Christ, or in which the phrase can have no other reference, given the details that describe the matter:

Texas Monitor
PH-Arkansas
New Jersey
Illinois
Kentucky
Maryland
Louisiana
North Dakota
Tennessee
South Carolina
Virginia
Washington
Wisconsin
Alabama
Acimnos Ceihpr

Now, sources which are Grand Lodge-generated/published but not monitorial:

New York (Proceedings)
Iowa (Annals)
Nova Scotia (Proceedings)
District of Columbia (Proceedings)
Georgia (Proceedings)
Missouri (Proceedings; also, current online glossary; also, Transactions of their Research Lodge)
Pennsylvania (Proceedings)
PH-Washington (Current Online Glossary)
New Jersey (GL discussion board)
Vermont (Lodge of Research)
GL of India (Webpage Article)


Now, sources which though listed among monitorial works, are not tied to one specific Grand Lodge:

Dermott: Ahiman Rezon
K.J. Stewart: Freemason's Manual
Jeremy Cross: True Masonic Chart
Samuel Cole: Ahiman Rezon
Daniel Sickels: Ahiman Rezon

Now, sources which though not monitorial, have earned a certain position of respect and/or authority of their own:

Mackey's Encyclopedia
Macoy's Dictionary
Heirloom Masonic Bible
Mackey, Symbolism of Freemasonry
Haywood, Symbolical Masonry
Mackey, History of Freemasonry
Oliver, Antiquities of Freemasonry

Now, sources often quoted by antimasons, which in this case go against the grain and do not support their claims in this instance:

Pike's Morals and Dogma
Steinmetz's Freemasonry: Its Hidden Meaning
Coil's Encyclopedia

Finally, other Masonic sources, which as Skip has amply illustrated for us, do merit attention despite not being of the same nature as the above:

American Masonic Record
Lights and Shadows of the Mystic Tie (Mackey & Morris)
Masonicworld
Outlines of the Temple (Cornelius Moore)
History of Masonic Persecutions (Oliver)
Keystone of the Masonic Arch (Charles Scott)
Masonry Defined (E.R. Johnson)
American Tyler-Keystone
Masonic Words and Phrases (Michael R. Poll, current online glossary)
Phoenixmasonry webpage (Current online Glossary)
The Lost Word of Freemasonry (Henry Pirtle)
Memoirs of Rev. Ammi Rogers
Freemasonry: Its Symbolism. . . (Paton)
Freemason's Monthly Magazine

END TALLY:

MONITORIAL: 15
GL SOURCE BUT NON-MONITORIAL: 13
MONITORIAL BUT NOT TIED TO ONE GL: 5
NOT GL BUT OF SIGNIFICANT AUTHORITY: 7
COMMONLY QUOTED BY ANTI'S: 3
"OTHER": 14

GRAND TOTAL: 57


Now for YOURS:

GRAND LODGE, BUT SPECIFIC SOURCE NOT PROVIDED:

California
Maryland
Nebraska
Florida
New York
Ohio
Washington
Michigan

GRAND TOTAL: 8

Out of the ones listed here, Florida, New York, Maryland, and Washington may be discounted--at least until proper sourcing can determine which sources would take precedence between what I cited and what you cited. Of the four, the only one we can go ahead and specifically rule out among your sources, is the one from Florida--which, having seen it already, accompanied by its proper identification as being from the Mentors' Manual, in the earlier discussion with Skip, we already know that its weight can in no wise be taken to trump the statements found in the current monitor usage, which I provided.

With that adjustment, we have:

GRAND TOTAL: 7

Now, what was that you just said:

So much for your misconception of some sort of "overwhelming tilt" in another direction.

Gee, you come here with a grand total of seven sources--all of which are as yet unidentified as to what sort of "Grand Lodge" sources they truly are--and expect THAT to be considered as "overwhelming evidence to the contrary" of what I posted? to the point that you feel you can come here and gloat as though you just accomplished something???

Fact is, the monitorial sources alone from what I posted, more than DOUBLES the ENTIRETY of what you just posted. And the total count is over 8 TIMES what you posted.

It appears to me that YOUR idea of "some sort of 'overwhelming rebuttal' in the opposite direction" or whatever you're calling this nonsense, is the REAL "misconception" here.

Therefore, you TOO cannot take a snippet Masonic quote and limit its symbolism to a "Christian" interpretation.

I post 57 sources to your 7, and you're calling MINE "snippets?" Better go back to the drawing board, Ace, I ain't even touched the surface yet, and you haven't even caught up to what I've ALREADY posted, not by a long shot.


I hear what you're saying. Problem is, you've got it all turned around in your head in such confused fashion, it doesn't even come out the same when we hear you try to state the case when you try to describe what has posted. Sure, "the entire system is symbolic." And so is "Lion of the Tribe of Judah." And what I've cited, and what I've pointed out is, that far more often than not, MASONRY DECLARES "LION OF THE TRIBE OF JUDAH" TO BE JESUS CHRIST. And it does so MUCH more consistently than it presents comments to the contrary such as you and Skip are so fond of trying to claim as some kind of mainstream position in Masonry. Once again, you both employ the tactic of continually taking the part and trying to present it as though it were the whole.

Not that what I've presented reprsents "the whole" either--but it certainly appears that "there's a lot more where that came from" when it comes to what I've presented--but such is not the case with what you guys come up with.

Not only that, but what about the abundance of other sources whose language leaves no doubt that the Christian interpretation is the only possible one that fits the details given? I find it hard to believe that someone claiming to speak for Christ, and/or claiming to be in some sort of "Christian" ministry, cannot recognize Christian theological concepts like "resurrection of the body," "lamb that taketh away the sins of the world," "ye know not when the Master cometh," and a host of others.

Yet you "declare" any Masonic objection to your personal Masonic interpretation. . .

You mischaracterize my comments, as usual. What I stated about the Masonic objections had nothing to do with "my personal Masonic interpretation"; I clearly pointed out--and cited--ABUNDANT references to SHOW it--that their objection was to THE MASONIC STATUS QUO OF IDENTIFYING THE LION OF THE TRIBE OF JUDAH AS JESUS CHRIST.

And so far, if there truly is a "status quo" on this matter, the weight of what has been presented certainly is overwhelmingly on the side of what I've already stated. So give up your usual futile efforts to make this about me, stop twisting my words to formulate your miscegenated accusations, and start trying to cultivate, as a bare minimum, the intellectual honesty to deal with what I've presented. Your constant straw man substitutes become more trifling every time you spin them.

And, you've just read that several Grand Lodges provide OTHER possible symbolic interpretations for its adherents, while at the same time affording them the freedom to view it ANY WAY THEY CHOOSE!

And I've just pointed out what was wrong with the objections as presented. Someone non-Jewish is trying to declare what will work for someone viewing it from a Jewish interpretation, and is suggesting things which, given the language of the passages in which the Lion of the Tribe of Judah phrase appears, would be IMPOSSIBLE for any Jewish believer in his right mind to set forth as his belief about the phrase.

any attempt on your part to IMPOSE a "Christian" interpretation . . .

You still don't get it, even after all that was presented, do you? No one is "imposing" any "Christian interpretation" upon this; everything I've presented DEMONSTRATES--FROM THE TEXTS THEMSELVES AS QUOTED FROM THE MONITORS--that what is ALREADY THERE is undeniably, unalterably, unchangeably Christian in its very content:

"Lion of the Tribe of Judah"--Rev. 5:5
Ye know not when the Master cometh = based on Jesus' statements in Matt. 24
He that taketh away the sins of the world = said of Jesus by John the Baptist
"Peace which man cannot understand" = Paul in Philippians 4
"thru the merits of the Lion of the Tribe of Judah" = Revelation 5:5
"resurrection of the body" = 1 Corinthians 15
"bodies will rise & become as incorruptible as our souls" = 1 Cor. 15
"Right Hand be as a shield & buckler" = various places in Psalms

That's not "interpretation," Michael, every single one of these are phrases and statements that come straight from the MONITORIAL SOURCES THEMSELVES.

All I did was cite them and point out what they said, and explain for these antimasons who don't quite seem to get it, exactly what the nature of that content is, and why it is thus not as "open to interpretation" as you suggest.

Now how about leaving o.f.f. trying to label this by painting it with the accusations you wish to try to create on this particular day--and start dealing with the content for what it IS for a change? Can you do that, Michael? Or are you going to persist in trying to say that the above scriptural references and content that are a part of the context of discussions of the "Lion of the Tribe of Judah," are not Christian in bearing and origin?
 
Upvote 0

Skip Sampson

Veteran
Apr 18, 2010
1,067
6
Fayetteville, NC
✟24,025.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
And calling any Masonic material I've posted an "attack on you" does not hide the fact that your stated opinions are self-delusional and self-contradictory--in fact, it is the surest evidence of it.
It's not the material I'm referring to; rather, it's your personal denigration of others that helps neither your analysis nor your reputation for that matter. The above quote highlights the truth of my comment. But, you are what you are. Cordially, Skip.
 
Upvote 0

Rev Wayne

Simplicity + Sincerity = Serenity
Sep 16, 2003
4,128
101
72
SC
Visit site
✟21,040.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Yeah, Popeye was always a favorite of mine, too, and "I yam what I yam," which of course is true of everybody.

Your problem is, you think you get away with this, and that the baiting and biting that you always start engaging in when your arguments go south, had nothing to do with the fact I chose to respond in kind, as always. Perhaps a good growing edge for you would be, start accepting responsibility for it when you can't find sufficient proof for your arguments, and quit whining about how you don't like me. I think everybody is probably very much aware of that by now.

I'll still be waiting to see if either of you has any kind of actual response.
 
Upvote 0

Rev Wayne

Simplicity + Sincerity = Serenity
Sep 16, 2003
4,128
101
72
SC
Visit site
✟21,040.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
So the next time you want to accuse someone that their "stated opinions are self-delusional and self-contradictory" you ought to take a good look in the mirror and bite your tongue before making yourself look like a fool.

Too bad, Mike, that the selection you chose for your criticism is hardly analogous to the current discussion. If we were merely speaking of adaptable generic terms like "GAOTU" or even the English word "God," then yes, the things I stated in that context would be germane to the issue being discussed.

Unfortunately for your attempt at criticism, we are not dealing with such generic forms. We are currently addressing a very specific and very Messianic reference, "Lion of the Tribe of Judah." Moreover, it is not, as some descriptive phrases are, just a phrase generated by the framework that often gets generated as an aid to theological discussion (cf. millennial theology, eschatology, etc.). Instead, it is a BIBLICAL phrase; and not only that, it is a hapax legomenon, that is, it has only one instance in which it finds biblical usage, and that one appearance is in Revelation 5:5, a usage which leaves absolutely no doubt that it is a reference to Jesus Christ, the Lord of Life.

So I'm afraid your comparison to the use of the generic phrase "Grand Architect of the Universe," is a misapplication. Even calling it a "misapplication" is being generous, because the two phrases are actually diametric opposites, a generic phrase as compared to a phrase with only one very distinct referent. Therefore, I stand by what I have posted, and reiterate once more, "Lion of the Tribe of Judah" is a biblical phrase and has only one possible designation. And I still find it appalling that Christians, no matter how well-meaning they may consider their efforts to be, would continue to go to such great lengths in railing against another Christian's recognition of the phrase as biblical, or would go to such great lengths in offering their support for opinions to the contrary.

As for " opinions that are self-delusional and self-contradictory":

Skip made his own bed on that one. Your taking aim at me on the matter is simply "kill-the-messenger" tactics.

(1) He proved his opinions to be "self-delusional" when he carried a thread to umpteen pages of deliberate and unending, non-edifying tripe about Jacob's Ladder being a staircase; and when he carried another thread to equally useless lengths with ramblings about pictures having some kind of "authority" in Masonry--and continued to do so even after being shown the opinions of numerous Grand Lodges to the contrary. In the former case, he was guided by an inordinate desire to find something to accuse Masonry of being wrong about; in the latter, he was guided by the overarching and overwhelming fear of having to concede a single point, or to admit to his own error; and in both, he did so to his own detriment.

Is "self-delusional" too strong a language for you? Then you need to consider, (a) nobody calls Jacob's Ladder a staircase, that I've been able to locate, other than Skip; (b) no Grand Lodge I contacted affirmed any "authority" for pictures in any Masonic publication; in both instances, Skip was alone in his opinion--hence the use of "self-delusional."

(2) He proved his opinions to be "self-contradictory" when he kept insisting on "rituals and monitors" on numerous occasions on these threads, and then broke ranks with his own insistences on the matter, when he initiated a response with citations gleaned from web-surfing. He continues to show the self-contradiction even now, as he tries to assert statements from Mentors' Manuals over statements found in Monitors.

Is "self-contradictory" too strong a language for you as well? I'd hardly think so, it's an accusation you have leveled time and again in the past (though without success).

I appreciate that you are simply going to bat for a friend, but attributing his errors to me by trying to downgrade what he has done, to make it appear to be simply a loose accusation, is hardly the route you'd want to go, I think. Sure, given a setting where proper decorum has been observed by all, you might be able to make something like that stick. But given a setting where someone has engaged in such deliberate sidetracking and for no apparent reason, and given a setting in which said person also drips with sarcasm with his every post in an attempt to bait or goad someone into coming down to their level, perhaps you'd be wiser to stick to your own battles and keep your nose out of the battles of others. Skip's a big boy, I think he can hold his own without your help.

Perhaps you should try to stick closer to the topic, and I think I can provide a bit of assistance on that one. A good start would be, identifying the sources which you just posted with the vague attributions of "Grand Lodge of _______." Once we learn the nature of those sources, perhaps we will have a bit better estimate of where things stand--not that we don't have a pretty solid picture already.
 
Upvote 0

Skip Sampson

Veteran
Apr 18, 2010
1,067
6
Fayetteville, NC
✟24,025.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Wayne:
Your long list has several problems, the most glaring of which is that you didn’t think it through first. It was standard fare for you: all cut & paste, with neither analysis nor thought.

Your assumption is that any Mason who mentions a Christian or Biblical concept means he’s speaking with direct reference to the biblical understanding. We disagree. What you continue to miss is that Freemasonry, like many false religions, redefines common Biblical terms for their own edification.

The phrase ‘Lion of the Tribe of Judah’ is a perfect example. As Mike and I have pointed out, the phrase, when used Masonically in authoritative GL documents, doesn’t refer to our savior at all, but rather points to any person that a Mason may believe to be a messiah figure.

This can be proven. In the vast majority of your GL references, the phrase is used without further definition. In your universe, there is no other definition but the Christian one, but that isn’t true within Masonry. In many GL’s using that phrase, they take care to redefine it to make it more acceptable to all religious viewpoints. Using some of the GL’s you referenced, here are examples of how they define the phrase:
Other GL's carry the same themes:
Once the entire picture is studied, one finds that your view is simply unsupportable, and that Freemasonry, at the GL level, does indeed redefine the biblical view to make it acceptable to Masonry. And self-professed Christians within the Craft do nothing about it.

A second, smaller, problem you get into is relying too much on sources without actually looking into them. For example, you quoted both the Phoenix website and Mackey, apparently without realized the former apparently got the quote from the latter (E.R. Johnson may have done the same). As well, the Phoenix quote misrepresented Mackey in that they compressed Mackey’s article without indicating something had been left out.

A third element of interest is what you didn’t pick up on when sending along your quotes. Your lack of consideration of the implications of your quotes often presents you with a real problem. For example: I thought you said Christians didn’t face judgment. Oh, that’s right: he’s talking about Masons. Do you find it interesting that Jesus is not enough for salvation according to the IL GL? One must have a pure and blameless life also. I wonder where in the Bible it states that God will “be pleased to pronounce us just and upright Masons?” Must reflect the thought of many Masons that Masonry is itself of divine origin, as this quote further indicates:
The survival of Masonry throughout the ages, when all else has passed away, is one of the strongest collateral evidences that we have of its Divine origin and supernatural excellence.(Texas Monitor, 1908, Introduction, p. 21)
And did you read this one before you posted it? Hardly know where to start to address the offensive nature of that post. Sound familiar? In several jurisdictions it applies to Hiram Abif, not ‘the Christian.’ Wonder how it changed from Cross’ time to today.

You really should spend more time analyzing things before you post them. Cordially, Skip.
 
Upvote 0