Violation of the First Commandment in the name of 'religious tolerance' (placing the God of the Bible on the same 'level' as false gods of false religions)
Wrong. You YOURSELF already admitted that the receipt of the Golden Rule by those of other religions was not only fact, but that it also could only have been by revelation. Surely you didn't think by that, that I meant they received it from a "false god???"
Of course not. What I was intending by that, and still do, is that they could only have received this central truth from the one God who IS true, the creator of all things in the universe. And I am not through with the task of showing just how many concepts there are which ARE common among religions, making "false god" claims even further in error. "False god-concepts," certainly, but even Jesus didn't tell people their gods were false, He just corrected their misunderstandings ABOUT God.
Whatever happened to your "WWJD?" If Jesus did not tell those not of the faith that they had "false gods," why should I? Shouldn't I follow His own practice of pointing out the errors in concepts, rather than stooping to accuse?
Denying the deity, exclusivity and uniqueness of Jesus Christ
I've never done this, so you certainly have not SHOWN that I have. All I have shown is that there are truths, even truths which Jesus taught, which have been taught in other times in other religions, and still are. That does not limit the uniqueness or exclusivity of Jesus. In fact, it does not even address it at all.
Teaching a 'works' based salvation
Gee, I thought you were over this nonsense already. This WAS, after all, totally based on the lambskin apron lecture, and was TOTALLY based on one phrase in that lecture about "purity of life and rectitude of conduct" being "so essentially necessary," and you have been shown beyond all doubt that they ARE so, from clear statements in Scripture (Heb. 14:12, Rev. 21:27). You were also shown clearly that when the Bible speaks of holiness or sanctification, it puts it in terms of "sanctification of the Spirit" (2 Thess. 2:13, 1 Pet. 1:2), so that discussion of the necessary purity is not properly defined in terms of "works" anyway, it being the work of the Spirit and not of man.
Treating the Holy Bible as a piece of furniture, and in the name of religious tolerance, placing it on the same 'level' and veracity as the quasi-sacred writings of false religions
(1) Furniture is a NECESSITY. Besides, it is more often described as the GREAT LIGHT of Masonry, and the "rule and guide of our faith." And you have not considered where the idea of it as "furniture" came from in the first place:
1 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
2 See, I have called by name Bezaleel the son of Uri, the son of Hur, of the tribe of Judah:
3 And I have filled him with the spirit of God, in wisdom, and in understanding, and in knowledge, and in all manner of workmanship,
4 To devise cunning works, to work in gold, and in silver, and in brass,
5 And in cutting of stones, to set them, and in carving of timber, to work in all manner of workmanship.
6 And I, behold, I have given with him Aholiab, the son of Ahisamach, of the tribe of Dan: and in the hearts of all that are wise hearted I have put wisdom, that they may make all that I have commanded thee;
7 The tabernacle of the congregation, and the ark of the testimony, and the mercy seat that is thereupon, and
all the furniture of the tabernacle,
8
And the table and his furniture,
and the pure candlestick with all his furniture, and the altar of incense,
9 And
the altar of burnt offering with all his furniture, and the laver and his foot,
10 And the cloths of service, and the holy garments for Aaron the priest, and the garments of his sons, to minister in the priest's office,
11 And the anointing oil, and sweet incense for the holy place: according to all that I have commanded thee shall they do.
(Exodus 31:1-11)
There are many allusions to and discussions of many things in Masonry that derive straight from the Bible, as I just pointed out in great detail in a recent post. All of these are easily recognizable to anyone familiar with biblical terminology at all, and even MORE recognizable to anyone familiar with KJV, for all the biblical references found in Masonry derive from the KJV Bible. The idea of "furniture" is simply one more example of it.
ANYTHING residing on the altar in the tabernacle was described as "furniture." And where does the Bible reside in many churches, and in all U.S. lodges? On the altar, of course.
So, then, in an institution which has the Bible as its "Great Light," and which has at the center of its allegories the building of King Solomon's Temple:
Why should it come as any surprise to you that from a passage describing Bezaleel, who also finds mention in Masonry as one of the earliest stone workers, that Masonry would adopt the idea of "furniture" to describe those items which are on the altar, just as the OT describes the items on the altar in the tabernacle?
(2) It is not placed on the "same level" as a requirement for ME, nor is it so for any Grand Lodge in the U.S., ALL of which have the Holy Bible as the Book with which their lodges shall be opened, thereby making the Bible the VSL in all U.S. Grand Lodge jurisdictions. Any individual candidate may choose another book for his obligation. And the book of his choice is a choice made ONLY for HIM, he nor the lodge nor the Grand Lodge nor anyone else may determine for ME which book I consider sacred. I choose the Holy Bible, I made that choice LONG before entering Masonry, and that choice has not changed.
And, exercising discriminatory practices
A charge on which you seem to try to exonerate the church, even though it currently is faring much more poorly. Both the church and the lodge teach brotherly love for all, it is the TEACHING we are focused on in issues of compatibility, NOT the SUCCESS RATE.
And you still have not, and will not, make a case for "discrimination" stick with the lodge or with any other CURRENT institution, by pulling out 77-year-old UNOFFICIAL articles to "document" your case. I could do the same thing and "prove" that we only have 48 states and have only had 31 presidents. But my information in doing so would be as outdated as yours is in trying to make a case for discrimination over something which is already out the door in the huge majority of lodges, and is well on the way to being out in the rest of them.
And, since Freemasonry is guilty
There's your problem right there, you have assumed that which you clearly have not shown. It's those false assumptions which get you every time.
SO, since Freemasonry is falsely accused in ALL OF THIS, it is not in conflict with Christianity, no matter what any antimason says to the contrary.