Do masons build?

[smaneck]

Be aware that skip is a professional antimason.

That much is clear. Is he into conspiracy theories?

 

[Skip Sampson]

In that case all of the Christian Arabs in the world are in trouble because they too address God as Allah.

No, they are not. When they are speak Arabic, they would use that term, which merely refers to 'the god,' or similar meaning. An Arabic Bible might even use that term, much to the chagrin of Muslims.

But the Allah of the Koran is not the God of the Bible. No reading of the two books will result in one concluding that they refer to the same being, unless that person ignores much of the descriptions. When the Shriner takes his vow, he does so in English and it is very clear that it is the Allah of the Koran to whom his vow is directed.

The fact remains that the Church is the most segregated institution in America.

We keep hearing about that, but it is not the entire story, nor is it entirely true. The key point is that such segregation, where it exists, is voluntary, not mandated, and I'd be willing to bet that the integrated churches far outnumber the segregated ones. And, as I noted, American churches did not deny salvation to black men. In that, they stood head and shoulders above Freemasonry. The bottom line remains: while pontificating about a 'brotherhood of man,' Freemasons made sure that the 'brotherhood' was exclusively white, showing the depth of their hypocrisy.

An American Catholic. 98% of sexually active Catholic women in America practice birth control while 78% of American Catholics think a 'good Catholic" can reject the Church's teachings on such matters.

Doesn't really matter what they 'think' or how many 'think' it. To knowingly violate key Church doctrine is to show how important being a Catholic is to you. It's yet another good indicator of one's hypocrisy. Cordially, Skip.

 

[Skip Sampson]

Be aware that skip is a professional antimason.

Half right: I am indeed a professional.

More to the point, how is that relative to the topic under discussion? My points are either valid or they are not. If not, feel free to show me where I have it wrong. Cordially, Skip.

 

[smaneck]

No, they are not. When they are speak Arabic, they would use that term, which merely refers to 'the god,' or similar meaning.

Well, unless the Shriners are swearing on the Qur'an, there is no reason to think they mean anything other than what Arab Christians mean.

But the Allah of the Koran is not the God of the Bible. No reading of the two books will result in one concluding that they refer to the same being,

You are making that argument to the wrong person. I've read both texts in depth numerous times and concluded that they do indeed refer to the same Being.

We keep hearing about that, but it is not the entire story, nor is it entirely true. The key point is that such segregation, where it exists, is voluntary, not mandated, and I'd be willing to bet that the integrated churches far outnumber the segregated ones.

The key word is that it is the *most* segretated institution, not that it is entirely segregated.

And, as I noted, American churches did not deny salvation to black men. In that, they stood head and shoulders above Freemasonry.

Freemasons deny salvation to black men? I rather doubt that.

The bottom line remains: while pontificating about a 'brotherhood of man,' Freemasons made sure that the 'brotherhood' was exclusively white, showing the depth of their hypocrisy.

As did the rest of America at the time.

Doesn't really matter what they 'think' or how many 'think' it. To knowingly violate key Church doctrine is to show how important being a Catholic is to you.

Not necessarily. There are some people who are Catholics because they are committed to the unity of the church, not because they think the church hierarchy is always right.

 

[circuitrider]

Is It True What They Say About Freemasonry? -- Chapter Six

For everyone's edification about Skip.

 

[smaneck]

Half right: I am indeed a professional.

By that is meant you make your living running a "ministry" to debunk Freemasonry?

More to the point, how is that relative to the topic under discussion? My points are either valid or they are not.

I think it is valid to ask why someone dedicates their life to denouncing this organization?

 

[circuitrider]

The answer is that you can potentially gain prestige or income by creating a "ministry." I don't imagine Skip makes much money from anti masonry. But his self created opposition group means he is not an unbiased source.

Before Skip says I'm also not unbiased, that is true. I happen to be a Freemason rather than an outsider looking in. So I know what It is about first hand rather than from other sources.

 

[Skip Sampson]

Well, unless the Shriners are swearing on the Qur'an, there is no reason to think they mean anything other than what Arab Christians mean.

Unless you consider this:

In willful violation whereof, may I incur the fearful penalty of having my eyeballs pierced to the center with a three-edged blade, my feet flayed, and I forced to walk the hot sands upon the sterile shores of the Red Sea, until the flaming sun shall strike me with a livid plague, and may Allah, the God of Arab and Mohammedan, the God of our Fathers, support me in the entire fulfillment of the same.
The ritual of the Ancient Arabic Order of the Nobles of the Mystic Shrine, p. 23.

It is clearly the Islamic Allah to whom they refer and the case can be made that the candidate taking that oath also equates, as do you, Allah and the God of the Bible.

You are making that argument to the wrong person. I've read both texts in depth numerous times and concluded that they do indeed refer to the same Being.

And you are seriously mistaken. Do both the God of the Bible and the Allah of the Koran have a son?

Freemasons deny salvation to black men? I rather doubt that.

I don't. I believe Freemasonry does indeed offer a 'salvation by works' philosophy and teaches that all 'good' Masons go straight to heaven where God will recognize their apron and welcome them warmly, and, one assumes, fraternally. The real issue remains: why did a group promoting universal brotherhood deny brotherhood to men on the basis of their race alone? Hypocrisy is the only answer to that question.

As did the rest of America at the time.

Aside from the above, let us also remember that Freemasonry was supposedly composed of good men being made better. Yet you are pointing out that those good men never did rise above the practices of the general population. That speaks volumes about such men and the organization to which they belong.

Not necessarily. There are some people who are Catholics because they are committed to the unity of the church, not because they think the church hierarchy is always right.

I'd suggest such people read their Catechism. If you do not agree with the black-letter doctrine of your church, find another church. Otherwise, you're just a hypocrite, picking and choosing among the doctrine as though your wisdom was superior to that of your church authorities.

By that is meant you make your living running a "ministry" to debunk Freemasonry? ... I think it is valid to ask why someone dedicates their life to denouncing this organization?

The purpose of my ministry is to analyze and discuss false religions and cults, to shine a light, so to speak, on what they teach. With respect to Freemasonry, my goal is to point out why it is inconsistent with Biblical Christianity and is thus a positive danger to the spiritual life of any Christian. As to my life, I'd like to think I've devoted it to service, one way or another. Freemasonry is but a tiny part of that. Cordially, Skip.

 

[Skip Sampson]

The answer is that you can potentially gain prestige or income by creating a "ministry."

One can also spread the truth as well, which is my focus.

I don't imagine Skip makes much money from anti masonry.

How true. I think my anti-Masonry income last year was zero.

But his self created opposition group means he is not an unbiased source. ... Before Skip says I'm also not unbiased, that is true. I happen to be a Freemason rather than an outsider looking in. So I know what It is about first hand rather than from other sources.

I am opposed to Freemasonry because of its doctrine. That conclusion was reached after analyzing doctrinal material from many U.S. GL's, and was not a position from the start, nor was any bias involved. I also note that your bias has prevented you from answering fully the questions posed to you about Freemasonry. You tend to stick to the PR responses and avoid the problematical ones. I'll continue to help you out with those.

Since you are biased, here's a hypothetical question: if the UMC directed you to either leave the pulpit or leave Freemasonry, which would you choose? Cordially, Skip.

 

[smaneck]

Unless you consider this:It is clearly the Islamic Allah to whom they refer and the case can be made that the candidate taking that oath also equates, as do you, Allah and the God of the Bible.

Okay, now that passage just sounds silly and reinforces what circuit rider says about all that Arabic stuff just being for fun.

And you are seriously mistaken. Do both the God of the Bible and the Allah of the Koran have a son?

I don't believe the God of the Bible literally has a son either, but that is a different subject. Both texts teach the virgin birth. And I believe the denial of Jesus sonship in the Qur'an is a result of Christians taking a metaphor too far.

I don't. I believe Freemasonry does indeed offer a 'salvation by works' philosophy and teaches that all 'good' Masons go straight to heaven where God will recognize their apron and welcome them warmly, and, one assumes, fraternally.

Not the question. Do they teach that non-Masons are damned to hell? Somehow I don't think so.

The real issue remains: why did a group promoting universal brotherhood deny brotherhood to men on the basis of their race alone? Hypocrisy is the only answer to that question.

Which demonstrates they were as hypocritical as all those white Christians who taught their kids to sing "Jesus loves the little children" while not allowing blacks into their church.

Aside from the above, let us also remember that Freemasonry was supposedly composed of good men being made better. Yet you are pointing out that those good men never did rise above the practices of the general population.

I'm saying they didn't rise above the Christians, not the general population. I don't know that they say they are better than Christians.

I'd suggest such people read their Catechism. If you do not agree with the black-letter doctrine of your church, find another church.

They are not going to take your suggestion because that is not the way Catholics think. They don't pick their religion like you pick out fruit from a supermarket.

The purpose of my ministry is to analyze and discuss false religions and cults, to shine a light, so to speak, on what they teach.

The minute you say 'false' you have already made your decision without even investigating so your investigation would not be unbiased.

 

[light upon light]

The purpose of my ministry is to analyze and discuss false religions and cults, to shine a light, so to speak, on what they teach. With respect to Freemasonry, my goal is to point out why it is inconsistent with Biblical Christianity and is thus a positive danger to the spiritual life of any Christian. As to my life, I'd like to think I've devoted it to service, one way or another. Freemasonry is but a tiny part of that. Cordially, Skip.

I would strongly urge you find a different kind of ministry focused on the love of Christ.

Everyone whose primary mission is demon-hunting in other people and groups seems to turn into a demon themselves over time.

As my spiritual uncle always used to say: "What gets your attention, gets you!"

 

[awitch]

The purpose of my ministry is to analyze and discuss false religions and cults, to shine a light, so to speak, on what they teach. With respect to Freemasonry, my goal is to point out why it is inconsistent with Biblical Christianity and is thus a positive danger to the spiritual life of any Christian.

"Buy our product because everyone else's product is worse" is not the not exactly the best marketing strategy.

Just out of curiosity, can you expand on those dangers?

 

[Simpleman25]

I would strongly urge you find a different kind of ministry focused on the love of Christ.

Everyone whose primary mission is demon-hunting in other people and groups seems to turn into a demon themselves over time.

As my spiritual uncle always used to say: "What gets your attention, gets you!"

You've figured him out faster than most.

What most people haven't figured out is that skip is actually a puppet for the cult of emfj and e511. He hasn't made an intelligent comment on his own for years. Instead he has a list of canned answers and questions that's part of the cults playbook.

For example he has used the old line about how we masons are racists. He fails to recognize that racial Issues were prevalent at the time. He fails to recognize that much like society, freemasonry has grown.

 

[light upon light]

You've figured him out faster than most.

What most people haven't figured out is that skip is actually a puppet for the cult of emfj and e511.

I googled this and can't find anything about it.

What is it?

 

[Simpleman25]

I googled this and can't find anything about it.

What is it?

Ex masons for Jesus.

Ephisians 5:11

Two cults run by Larry Kunk and Duane Washum. Two very evil and vile men that parade themselves as Christians.

 

[light upon light]

It is very toxic to hate and fear.

 

[Simpleman25]

It is very toxic to hate and fear.

Who was that intended for?

 

[Ecclectic79]

I would strongly urge you find a different kind of ministry focused on the love of Christ.

Everyone whose primary mission is demon-hunting in other people and groups seems to turn into a demon themselves over time.

As my spiritual uncle always used to say: "What gets your attention, gets you!"

(this is a long response - don't worry it's not at you, it's general )

I spent some time in the demon-hunting circle myself in reading all the David Flynn, Tom Horn, and Steve Quayle I could get my hands on. The trouble was - I checked and verified only to find out that nothing was what it 'should' be in the sense of finding an organized and pointed at man sort of evil. The occult largely just turned out to be mystics trying to actualize relationships with God where they felt organized religion rand them backwards and refused the wisdom/intellectual aspect of the divine. Otherwise for the most part with a few eccentrics here and there who wanted to do magic for magic's sake. Then on the side you have a small group of go-getter romantic-type atheists who got hurt by organized religion, believe in enough Jung to believe magic works but that they disappear when they die, and aside from just owning their right to be them they tend to have big Lovecraft collections - those would be your Laveyans.

One of the trickiest things about the now popular solo-scriptura and documentary thesis variant of Christianity is that the bible is filled with all kinds of things that will both spiritually and intellectually both run you forward and run you backward, making progress from one end and sabatoging/artificially limiting it from another. The two core commandments of Jesus are the deliverable. So much of the old testament is a combination of symbolic speech for certain ineffable mystic truths and astronomy-deity concordance on one hand and shrewd political import on the other (the Cyrus the Great and Ezra as authors notion seems increasingly plausible). When someone holds it out as a logical framework and checks it against itself - there's nothing wrong with it as a holy text, it's one of the most epic in the world of it's own right and I think the more we drill into it the more layers of knowledge we'll find. Just that, when I hear things like a pastor just blowing over stuff like the four animals in Revelation 4 like "We can't understand it - that's just God's 'thing' man!" or people muddling together some oblong excuse for the phrasing of Proverbs 8 and such a vivid feminine form of Chokmah, it's unbearable. Similarly when the 3's, 7's, and 12's are on loop all day long and no one looks up at the sky or a Ptolemaic astronomy book to see - yep, here's the 7 and here's the 12 - it makes me feel like, while Protestantism did a good thing in striking out on it's own and making Catholicism morally and intellectually accountable to the people rather than a totalitarian theocracy, Protestantism still read the bible with a Catholic understand and from that point got poisoned by the inherited tautologies as withheld data before it could really reinvent itself in full. All of that as well as a massive campaign to wipe out disagreeing history in the middle east and Europe in the 4th century and onward, in my honest opinion, helped to create the climate we're in now. Add the fervor still buzzing from Israel's 1948 emergence as a state and we're seeing, at least as compared to solo scriptura, bible going one way and demonstrable history as well as natural history going the other.

The point of all that being though - if someone believes the bible as if it was written for a 20th/21st century Anglo American or European, and particularly if they believe in the book of Revelation being a document written about a dangling 70th week of Daniel yet to come - they don't have a choice but to constantly try and find the devil and his minions or find organized 'Luciferian' structures. I still, personally don't know and can't prove that there aren't the well known reptilian 'black nobility' out there who believe themselves to be inheritors of an extra-terrestrial bloodline, third strand of DNA, and half the UFO and abduction phenomena (Nordic reptilians roughly equated to 'Pleiadians') as well as well-hidden cyclops and giants at their beck and call with a great Dark Knight Rising-style 'return of the gods/goddesses of Sumeria' take over coming with Gotham being the world. The greater evidence to me against things like is while the proprietors of these stories can put together a very cogent narrative for a book or two, you start to notice little things about the way they think, or how if one book's predictions become mutually exclusive to future events they dart like a beagle right to the next thing with no memory of the last book, or they speak to a Christ whose notably full of their own personal isms. I don't think it's necessarily all their fault that they're out there doing this or skewing things so hard, our culture has somewhat created this environment. They might not be 100% wrong either, just that it creates a dual problem - ie. it causes mass tuning out and makes a great theology sound detatched and paranoid on one hand, on the other for a few million devout believers it sells dehydrated meals and precious metals like hotcakes. Also any truth they might have uncovered is covered back over again by association.

My own logic, anyone's free to agree or completely disagree with it - for God to have given the devil such cart blanc as to plant dinosaur bones, curve the aging of carbon, lead the creation of animals in such a way as to deceive researchers into seeing evidence for evolution of species - then to send his son to die on the cross for all the sins of the world only to have it pretty well settled that there'd be a 5% return on his suffering, a massive 'wash down the river' at the end of man's time with a second coming that can only be fueled by mass damnation - it takes the concept of a God who is the essence of love, justice, and mercy and calumnies it to bits.

 

[light upon light]

Who was that intended for?

Not at you!

 

[Skip Sampson]

I don't believe the God of the Bible literally has a son either, but that is a different subject. Both texts teach the virgin birth. And I believe the denial of Jesus sonship in the Qur'an is a result of Christians taking a metaphor too far.

I think you have to believe what you just said or it wouldn't make any sense to remain in the Baha'i faith.

The Koran explicitly denies that Allah had a son in at least three places, while the Bible specifically states that God did beget a son. The Koran treats Jesus as just another messenger while the Bible is clear that he is the very son of God. You may continue to maintain that they are the same entity, but by doing so, you will remain in error. You are blinded by your worldview, and disregard the things that conflict with it.

Not the question. Do they teach that non-Masons are damned to hell? Somehow I don't think so.

Neither do I (*). But they do teach that 'good' Masons will get to heaven regardless of their religious beliefs. Masons will publicly deny that Freemasonry has a plan of salvation, but it is clear from their rituals and prayers that it does.

Which demonstrates they were as hypocritical as all those white Christians who taught their kids to sing "Jesus loves the little children" while not allowing blacks into their church.

Glad you agree with me that they were hypocrites. I'd agree in general with your comparison, but only to a certain extent. Both groups claimed to be better than the general population and both failed miserably in that regard. But Freemasonry failed everywhere in the U.S. while many churches did accept black members and many more went out of their way to assist developing black churches and to aid and assist runaway slaves. One only has to look at the abolitionist movement in the hundred years after 1776 to see the leading role of Christians, who eventually ended the international slave trade and then abolished slavery itself. It would be an interesting project to see if any Freemasons were in leadership positions among such people. I'd venture to guess very few were involved.

Masons like to trumpet the fact that George Washington was a Mason, despite the fact that he rarely attended lodge. I think he was the perfect example of Masonry in action during his life. While he knew slavery was an evil, he just couldn't bring himself to free his own slaves. He just couldn't afford it, so he let the evil continue to fester. Typically Masonic behavior? Might just be.

But the point remains: Freemasonry claims it was no better than anyone else back then, but in fact it was worse than others in the matter of racism.

I'm saying they didn't rise above the Christians, not the general population. I don't know that they say they are better than Christians.

Freemasons claim that their group is charged with 'taking good men and making them better.' One only has to see the actions of those men with respect to blacks to see how hollow the claim really is. I've never seen them pursue that thought any further, so one assumes the 'better man' is in comparison to the general population around him. Based on what I've seen, I'd say Freemasonry doesn't accomplish very much along those lines.

They are not going to take your suggestion because that is not the way Catholics think. They don't pick their religion like you pick out fruit from a supermarket.

I would say that is up to them. Regardless of religion, if you don't practice its doctrine, either change the doctrine, change your ways or leave. To belong to a church that claims that Jesus Christ is the only means of salvation, for example, but to claim otherwise in your own view is to be the worst kind of hypocrite. Similarly, to join a group that promises to make you a better man and which proclaims the 'brotherhood of man,' yet support the exclusion of black men from its membership is just as bad.

The minute you say 'false' you have already made your decision without even investigating so your investigation would not be unbiased.

Not so. They are false because, after examining their beliefs, I have concluded that such beliefs are inconsistent with the truth, which is Biblical Christianity. What they actually teach makes them 'true' or 'false,' not any subjective view of mine. Cordially, Skip.

(*) Having said that, I'd be remiss in not pointing out the implications of this comment, which was originally made by Albert Mackey in the 19th century:

There he stands without our portals, on the threshold of this new Masonic life, in darkness, helplessness, and ignorance. Having been wandering amid the errors and covered over with the pollutions of the outer and profane world, he comes inquiringly to our doors, seeking the new birth, and asking a withdrawal of the veil which conceals divine truth from is uninitiated sight. (SC GL, AR, 1965, pg. 67)

I'm pretty such that the comment remains in the most recent version of the
AR. One can see that the over-riding view of the candidate is someone without the truth, therefore lost and helpless. Not all GL's that quote, so I would not make a general statement that Freemasonry believes all non-Masons are condemned. But such statements certainly give one pause for thought.