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.
It is exactly how they see themselves:
They say, as I've noted, one thing, but practice another. Their historic racism is just one example of that.
We can take the example of a minister who is also a Mason. If he believes as I do, then what is the status of the Muslim who sits next to him in the lodge?
In Masonry's eyes, they are equal in God's sight as upright Masons. But how do they view each other? Does the Muslim see the minister as destined for hell and an avowed enemy of Allah?
Does the minister see the muslim as lost as long as he belongs to a religion which rejects Jesus?
My guess is that such men hide any feelings they may have towards each other in the best interests of Masonry, and, of course, to the detriment of the truth.
You are batting zero so far. My concept has nothing to do with it. All religions point to an authority for what they teach. Christianity points to the Bible and we base our doctrine on black letter Bible verses. What is real clear from them is that Jesus is the only means of salvation, and any religion that does not teach that, does not teach the truth. You can take it or leave it, but it is exactly what it says.
Skip Sampson said:It is exactly how they see themselves
smaneck said:Every single Freemason on this list has denied that Freemasonry is a religion.
smaneck said:Why? It is not how they see themselves.
Skip Sampson said:It is exactly how they see themselves:
You're exactly right about that, smaneck.
It seems to me part of the problem is poor wording on the Masons part here. It justified Skip saying the Masons were 'religious in nature."
That would be used as "proof" that Masons think that their fraternity is a "religion" in just the same way as they are doing now. When people set out to deceive, and the facts are deliberately ignored, a change like that doesn't stop them at all.It would have been much clearer if the Masons had said that Freemasonry was not a religion but was spiritual in nature.
That would be used as "proof" that Masons think that their fraternity is a "religion" in just the same way as they are doing now. When people set out to deceive, and the facts are deliberately ignored, a change like that doesn't stop them at all.
In other words, you identify your own concept with God's concept. A large wing of the church does not share your bibliolatry. They hold that it is Jesus not a book which constitutes the Word of God. But I will let CircuitRider tell us what he believes about the possibility of salvation outside of the church. It didn't seem to be a big concern of Jesus.
John Wesley himself believed that salvation through Christ was up to God and that some faithful persons of other faiths very well might end up in heaven. He didn't know, didn't believe he could know, and felt all that was up to God.
I preach salvation by faith in Christ because I believe that is the path God has pointed me down. However I never try to tell God what to do. Whom God chooses to redeem is up to God's grace and not my concepts about God. John the Evangelist mentions other sheep that we don't know about. That is in God's hands.
Skip does forget that different denominations/churches think differently about how salvation works. And while he accuses me of interpreting Freemasonry through my theology he often re-interprets Freemasonry through the lens of his own set of Biblical interpretations, many of which Christians in other kinds of churches wouldn't agree with.
I completely disagree. He purposely tried to pass off "religious" as meaning "a religion."
Or, how about this--there was a claim made only a couple of weeks or so ago that there was a picture of a devil on the sign in front of a Masonic center...and this poster gave us a picture of that sign. Guess what? No devil.
I'd go one step further. He knows that there is no "official" set of religious doctrines to be found in Masonry and, what's more, that all Masons know that they are encouraged to be faithful to their own particular church or beliefs. NEVERTHELESS, if there is any publication in which some writer advances his own perceptions, that then is held out by the opponent of Masonry as "proof" that Masonry as an institution supposedly stands for X or Y.
I am not a Mason. I think I might like to be, but so far haven't felt like spending the money to join. I know a number of Masons, nearly all of them serious Christian believers. Those friends are why I am interested in joining. They are good folk to a man.
All the Masons I know make pretty good sense. IF they really are planning to take over the world, I want them to get on with it. The Masons could not possibly make a bigger mess of things than whoever is running it now.
lol. I haven't read the former, but have found the latter to be pretty insipid. Cordially, Skip.Jane_the_Bane said:Personally, I find more insight and meaning in Crowley's "Liber Al vel Legis" than in any verse of the Qur'an, regardless of the man's more despicable character traits.
As does every U.S. Grand Lodge. Your comment pertained to my claim that Freemasonry describes itself as religious in nature, and my quote from the Iowa GL noted that. Bottom line is that Freemasonry, meaning its GLs, deny being a religion (which I do not concur with) but claim to be religious in nature (which I do concur with).smaneck said:Every single Freemason on this list has denied that Freemasonry is a religion.
A view often expressed by Masons, to which I respond:An ironic thing for a Southern Baptist to say given the fact that they split from the American Baptist over the issue of whether slave-owners should be allowed to become missionaries.
Probably. More interested in the words of men than the word of God.Apparently it is the less fundamentalist ministers who are more likely to become Masons.
Debatable. I think their denial of his being the son of God is a direct rejection, to say nothing of their denial that he was God incarnate. I'd say the entire Koranic treatment of him is one large rejection because it is false.Muslims don't reject Jesus.
Indeed. They tend to reject John 3:16 - 18 and Ephesians 2:8 - 10 on that topic. I think such men are the target of Freemasonry. Note this requirement for membership in the Iowa GL:Or more likely those men who are attracted to the Freemasons aren't so exclusive in their thinking about salvation as you are.
Pretty interesting requirement; just what does 'tolerant' mean? We can certainly tolerate anyone choosing his own religious beliefs and practicing them openly, but I cannot 'tolerate' remaining silent when I believe another's beliefs are false. It is not wrong to speak to another about religious truth; it is wrong to not speak your mind in fear of being anti-masonic. The requirement seems to me a clear warning against speaking of your personal beliefs to other Masons. Wouldn't want to destroy lodge harmony, ya know.You must be tolerant of other religions, cultures, and points of view.
No, I identify God's concept as my own.In other words, you identify your own concept with God's concept.
I would not say my reverence of the Bible is excessive; I merely treat it as the word of God and try to comply with it. Of interest, you could accuse Freemasonry of the same practice, based on their PR materials. But all are free to choose their authority for their doctrine, just as I have done. How do you view the Koran, by the way?A large wing of the church does not share your bibliolatry.
I think it more true to say that such people hold as authority the opinions of men as above and beyond the doctrine found in black-letter Bible.They hold that it is Jesus not a book which constitutes the Word of God.
Salvation as Jesus expressed it is not to be found in a church; it is to be found in himself. But don't forget that he upbraided Nicodemus in John Chapter 3 about the proper teachings of a 'church,' so to speak, and the importance of church leaders in knowing the truth, and then teaching it.But I will let CircuitRider tell us what he believes about the possibility of salvation outside of the church. It didn't seem to be a big concern of Jesus.
Not really. I'm just the messenger, stating what the GLs proclaim to be true. It's not an opinion, but provable fact. Cordially, Skip.It justified Skip saying the Masons were 'religious in nature."
You are greatly in error, and show clearly that you are not reading my posts for content. While I've pointed out that some masons have described Masonry as a religion, I've never said Freemasonry, or Masons in general, see it as such. I see it as a religion, and point out that such as assessment is based on the facts in Masonic ritual, practice and doctrine.Albion said:I wonder...Did Skip expect us not to notice that he tried to substantiate his allegation that Masons consider Masonry to be a religion...
Untrue. I quoted the Iowa GL in showing that I was correct to describe Freemasonry as religious in nature, and that it is a common theme in Freemasonry.He purposely tried to pass off "religious" as meaning "a religion."
And the 'good reason' is because they do not do what Freemasonry does. Refer to my post #135 to see why I make that comment. It might do you good to read what I actually write. In my view, anyone comparing Freemasonry to the Boy Scouts does so in abject ignorance of the former, and with insult to the latter. After all, Boy Scouts do have adult leadership.And as for the point, hundreds of associations from the Boy Scouts to the Community Chorus to the Optimists have some degree of a religious nature. But no one is calling them "a religion"-- and for good reason.
Actually, Smaneck's point is well-taken and, of interest, many GL's do proclaim its spiritual nature. Here's a fuller quote from the Iowa SMEC (emphasis added):That would be used as "proof" that Masons think that their fraternity is a "religion" in just the same way as they are doing now.
All GL's teaching the necessity of Masons building a Spiritual Temple in their bodies, thus highlighting the spiritual aspect of Freemasonry.While we cannot categorically define what Masonry is, we can say with assurance what it is not. It is NOT a cult, a religion, a secret society, or a political group. While Masonry is not a religion it is religious in nature. Belief in a Supreme Being is a fundamental requirement for becoming a Mason. Masonry is a charitable organization, an organization dedicated to strengthening a mans character, improving his moral and spiritual outlook, and broadening his mental horizons. (pg. 2)
I use both GL documentation and the writings of knowledgeable Masons in my discussions. The GL's are the authorities within their jurisdictions and the knowledgeable Masons write from their backgrounds within Masonry. I think there are 'official' religious doctrines to be found in GL documents and their treatment of the spiritual temple in the EA degree is most obvious.He knows that there is no "official" set of religious doctrines to be found in Masonry and, what's more, that all Masons know that they are encouraged to be faithful to their own particular church or beliefs. NEVERTHELESS, if there is any publication in which some writer advances his own perceptions, that then is held out by the opponent of Masonry as "proof" that Masonry as an institution supposedly stands for X or Y.
He is not just 'some writer.' Moreover, all the GL's that either sell his book or give it free to newly raised Masons are testifying to the truth of what he wrote. Cordially, Skip.You have entered a new world. Symbolically and spiritually you have been reborn. This started the moment you were prepared to become a Freemasonry. ... You will find that the ritual is but the beginning of what can be a tremendous spiritual and philosophical experience. (pgs. 3 - 4)
No, I'm not, and your deliberate abuse of that quote shows us what's what.You are greatly in error,
Well, I agree that this ^ is an improvement. Masons don't believe it to be a religion, but you do, and in defiance of all the facts of the matter. OK. I can live with that. By the way, what other religion do we know that doesn't have a list of doctrines, admits to membership people of widely-different beliefs, doesn't attempt to teach religion, and doesn't conduct any worship? I'm hard pressed to think of that as constituting a religion of any kind.I've never said Freemasonry, or Masons in general, see it as such. I see it as a religion
Yes, but you used that quote as allegedly proving not that it is religious in nature but as supposedly evidence that it is, rather, a religion. That kind of deliberate misuse of words, particularly when making such a serious allegation as this, completely destroys your credibility IMO, even if you might be able to raise other points worth considering.Untrue. I quoted the Iowa GL in showing that I was correct to describe Freemasonry as religious in nature
That is untrue. You may consult my post #146 to see where I made exactly those points.circuitrider said:It is like his whole line about how Masons either admit or should admit Satanists based on his very narrow interpretation of one qualification of being a Mason. Yet he totally ignores that believe in God is just ONE of the qualification to be a Freemason and that the other qualifications rule out the possibility of a Satanist from joining unless he just out and out lies to everyone about his affiliation.
More to the point, I know what the GL's teach via their code, ritual and training documentation, which is far more than just "bits an pieces."Skip, as a non-mason, knows bits an pieces.
No, I present such information exactly as I find it, and draw conclusions from that material accordingly. The reason I post the documentation is to allow the reader to examine the basis upon which my conclusions rest.So whatever word a Mason uses he will just re-interpret that word to fit his world view.
Again untrue. Freemasonry hides nothing from those who wish to know about it. I do think that individual Masons hide from reasoned discussions because they simply cannot answer factually the arguments expressed. You guys are simply incapable of, or afraid of, discussing Freemasonry in a rational manner in an open forum. One only needs to read this thread to see the truth of that.In his world view the very fact that we deny his beliefs about the Fraternity just reinforces his idea that we are hiding something from him.
You forgot to mention that your GL also says it is a religious organization.Such theories can't exist without denying the simple possibility that we Masons may just be actually telling the truth and that the Masonic fraternity is just a society of men who are seeking to better themselves, be good citizens, and benefit our society.
Where have I done that?And while he accuses me of interpreting Freemasonry through my theology...
Maybe because I read GL documentation and you don't? In a real sense, all I know from your views is that you think I'm wrong, but refuse to document where, why and how. At any rate, I'll let the GL's views remain the basis of my assessments. After all, they are the authorities.I guess what I never understand, that I don't know if Skip would or could explain, is why he thinks what Masons believe and know about Masonry is different than what he thinks/believes about Masonry.
Nope. They are not religions.Skip do you ever talk to Rotarians or Kiwanians and say "Oh now, your organization doesn't teach what you say it teaches."
Interesting. UMC doctrine indicates that the Bible contains all things necessary to salvation; don't you think John 3:16-18 and Ephesians 2:8-10 are clear that faith in Jesus is the only means to salvation? If not, why would you disregard that?preach salvation by faith in Christ because I believe that is the path God has pointed me down. However I never try to tell God what to do. Whom God chooses to redeem is up to God's grace and not my concepts about God.
A view often expressed by Masons, to which I respond:
1. Why do you think the sins of the SBC justify the sins of Freemasonry?
Moreover, the SBC apologized for it
; not sure I've seen any GL apologize for their treatment of blacks, but perhaps a Mason can weigh in on that.
2. The Baptists, of all flavors, were heavily involved in the abolitionist movement and never denied salvation to blacks. Freemasonry, on the other hand, fought tooth and nail to keep them out of their lodges on the basis of skin color alone.
Probably. More interested in the words of men than the word of God.
Debatable.
I think their denial of his being the son of God is a direct rejection
Indeed. They tend to reject John 3:16 - 18 and Ephesians 2:8 - 10
We can certainly tolerate anyone choosing his own religious beliefs and practicing them openly, but I cannot 'tolerate' remaining silent when I believe another's beliefs are false.
It is not wrong to speak to another about religious truth; it is wrong to not speak your mind in fear of being anti-masonic.
No, I identify God's concept as my own.
I would not say my reverence of the Bible is excessive; I merely treat it as the word of God and try to comply with it.
How do you view the Koran, by the way?
I think it more true to say that such people hold as authority the opinions of men as above and beyond the doctrine found in black-letter Bible.
Salvation as Jesus expressed it is not to be found in a church; it is to be found in himself. But don't forget that he upbraided Nicodemus in John Chapter 3 about the proper teachings of a 'church,' so to speak, and the importance of church leaders in knowing the truth, and then teaching it.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?