Freemasonry is compatible with Christianity?

[oscarmyhre]

Just wondering who told you that Freemasonry was ok? Was it Freemasons, or people from a Christian church?

 

[seebs]

Freemasonry isn't compatible with being a Christian for several reasons, for example even the first commandment. The violation occurs I quote from O.F.F. “This pattern of violating the First Commandment occurs each time they gather around a common altar and stand in agreement of prayer to pagan deities with unbelievers of whom they call brothers while petitioning the "true Supreme Being" -- the God of the Bible -- at the same time.

Er, if they're praying to the "true Supreme Being", then they are not violating the first commandment. Sorta by definition.

Modern Christianity can't decide whether to be henotheistic or monotheistic, but either way, praying to God is praying to God.

The notion that other people praying to "false" gods are merely praying to ours, but confused about the details, has been a common branch of mainstream Christian theology for a very, very, long time.

 

[seebs]

Just wondering who told you that Freemasonry was ok? Was it Freemasons, or people from a Christian church?

Both.

 

[oscarmyhre]

I have read a couple stories from freemasons that have left the organization that definitely weren't positive about it. I put more stock in these testimonies than the ones that come from people who are still a part of the freemasons, just because they obviously saw something bad about it to make them leave. Therefore it can't be entirely compatible.

 

[fejao]

Anyone who has claimed here that Freemasonry is compatible with Christianity is a heretic and much too liberal a Christian. While in fact many "christians" may be members of Freemasonry, that does not make it Jesus approved. During the initiation rites of a new mason, he is asked what he seeks (being that the whole ceremony is scripted he knows what to say) and replies that he seeks light or the light. I would propose, that with the oaths and rites that continue as you move up the scale, into more satanic occult practices, that indeed when an initiate follows the script and asks the "the light" he is indeed asking for Satan, or Lucifer. Lucifer means morning star, or bearer of light. Case mostly closed. Please message me if you disagree or have a point to offer against my argument.

You may find your harsh statement to be against forum rules.


Fejao x

 

[Ave Maria]

Just wondering who told you that Freemasonry was ok? Was it Freemasons, or people from a Christian church?

Nobody told me. I had heard that they are not ok and was just simply questioning that.

 

[Texas Lynn]

I'm not sure whether these occupations require oaths. I know that in the US an oath is not required to practice any profession.

Whether or not an public oath is made, a pledge of ethical conduct is made, which is exactly what masonry requires.

A person who has a conscientious objection to taking oaths (based on Jesus' teaching) is allowed an alternate declaration, affirmation or other form of promise. For example, new lawyers are "sworn in" when they are admitted to the Bar, but no oath invoking any deity is required. If the form being used at a public ceremony is objectionable, the new lawyer may use an alternative form to take on the required obligations.

As far as that goes, many of the same Christians who object to oaths, such as Anabaptists and Quakers, have other reasons for not becoming lawyers. Anabaptists who teach Christian nonresistance often refuse to participate in the state's exercise of its coercive power.

Some Christians would object to taking this sort of oath because our citizenship is in heaven, and we relate to earthly political systems as pilgrims and strangers. I'm not saying most Christians would go that far, but I do think loyalty oaths are highly objectionable to Christians. So as the requirements for such offices have changed from time to time and place to place, each must be examined on its own merits.

But of course, most professionals in the U.S. are Christians and most have either taken public oaths or made specific pledges to perform ethically. So essentially what you have enumerated here is the basis for minority sects objections to public oaths, for which there are alternative procedures available. And while these sects do have a rational basis for their positions here, what you have done is basically make a mountain out of a molehill. No one is suggesting those sects forego these positions; but that is at best a side issue. Most Christians would face no ethical dilemma in undertaking a Masonic Obligation.

I thought they had to do with not revealing secrets. Is this entirely untrue?

Which is like saying a camel has either one or two humps. They do, but the totality of the animal involves many more characteristics. To not reveal secrets of the Order constitutes ethical conduct for Masons. So is to not cheat others on business deals and so forth.

 

[Texas Lynn]

He agrees to be murdered or mutilated if the oath of the degree is violated.

Actually what he agrees to is that should he violate his masonic oath he would be worthy of murder. This part of the oath addresses the shame one would and should feel in such an instance. However, since the "secrets" of masonry are readily available in any public library and on the internet it is obvious many have done so with no negative repercussions. One source of the "secret words" and all is the book Born in the Blood by John J. Robinson. Robinson was a business and military author who became fascinated with Masonry. He did not specifically reveal his sources, however, he was certainly not in any way subjected to negative effects from Masons. He spoke at masonic events and his books are frequently sold by the Grand Lodges. Prior to his death he was raised to the Sublime Degree of a Master Mason.

 

[Texas Lynn]

Anyone who has claimed here that Freemasonry is compatible with Christianity is a heretic and much too liberal a Christian.

Since Christ is the Author of Liberalism, that is not possible.

While in fact many "christians" may be members of Freemasonry, that does not make it Jesus approved.

Nor does it make it Jesus-disapproved. This comment begs the question: would real estate development be "Jesus approved"? Would franchising? Investment counseling? The list goes on and on.

During the initiation rites of a new mason, he is asked what he seeks (being that the whole ceremony is scripted he knows what to say) and replies that he seeks light or the light. I would propose, that with the oaths and rites that continue as you move up the scale, into more satanic occult practices, that indeed when an initiate follows the script and asks the "the light" he is indeed asking for Satan, or Lucifer. Lucifer means morning star, or bearer of light. Case mostly closed.

This is entirely speculation and paranoia, not based on rational things.

 

[Texas Lynn]

I have read a couple stories from freemasons that have left the organization that definitely weren't positive about it. I put more stock in these testimonies than the ones that come from people who are still a part of the freemasons, just because they obviously saw something bad about it to make them leave. Therefore it can't be entirely compatible.

Your conclusion is faulty; it's equivalent to saying "if marital bliss is not possible for Brad Pitt and Jennifer Anniston, what is there for the rest of us to achieve it?"

 

[ahab]

Hi seebs

Er, if they're praying to the "true Supreme Being", then they are not violating the first commandment. Sorta by definition.

They arent praying to the supreme being they are praying to a supreme being, whatever they think or understand is a god. All ideas and understandings of gods are being pettitioned by one man .

Modern Christianity can't decide whether to be henotheistic or monotheistic, but either way, praying to God is praying to God.

Modern Christianity can decide that God is monotheistic God the Father , the Son and the Holy Spirit.

The notion that other people praying to "false" gods are merely praying to ours, but confused about the details, has been a common branch of mainstream Christian theology for a very, very, long time.

Except that Jesus is the way the truth and the life and no-one comes to the Father God except through Jesus.

 

[John16:2]

Hi seebs


They arent praying to the supreme being they are praying to a supreme being, whatever they think or understand is a god. All ideas and understandings of gods are being pettitioned by one man .
Modern Christianity can decide that God is monotheistic God the Father , the Son and the Holy Spirit.
Except that Jesus is the way the truth and the life and no-one comes to the Father God except through Jesus.

Was Grandmaster Freemason Satanist Aliester Crowley compatible with Christianity, or Luciferian Civil war general Albert Pike who was accused of gross atrocities and author of the Freemasons' Morals and Dogma? NO! Please refer to lawfulpath.com, by law officers against Freemasonry, those of you who think they're above suspicion, or that conspiracies are merely nuts.

 

[seebs]

They arent praying to the supreme being they are praying to a supreme being, whatever they think or understand is a god.

And what other supreme beings could there be? If Christianity is true, and there is a supreme being, it is also the supreme being.

Except that Jesus is the way the truth and the life and no-one comes to the Father God except through Jesus.

Indeed, but many walk the road without reading the signs, and many carry the sign with them down other paths.

 

[Texas Lynn]

Was Grandmaster Freemason Satanist Aliester Crowley compatible with Christianity, or Luciferian Civil war general Albert Pike who was accused of gross atrocities and author of the Freemasons' Morals and Dogma?

Crowley was many things, but, if he was indeed a Mason, it was a minor affiliation which meant little when considering his entire resume.

Pike, as he himself said, spoke only for himself.

Please refer to lawfulpath.com, by law officers against Freemasonry, those of you who think they're above suspicion, or that conspiracies are merely nuts.

Sounds like a group which attacked Prince Hall Masonry as an element of their racism.

 

[Rev Wayne]

Part of the problem in trying to hold a rational discussion on these issues, is the difficulty in even finding "compatibility" among the variant views people havea of what constitutes "Freemasonry," or for that matter even "Christianity."

For that reason I find it helpful to establish some basic foundational points, without which a discussion of "Freemasonry" cannot really take place. For one thing, certain pseudo-masonic and quasi-masonic groups are not properly within the frame of "Freemasonry." Though there certainly has been a lot of dispute over whether Aleister Crowley ever truly belonged to "legitimate" or "regular" Masonry, his ideas clearly fall outside the scope of what is generally meant in speaking of "Freemasonry." Masonry certainly has an esoteric side to it, but those who focus on the esotericism to the exclusion of practically all else, generally either get classified as "fringe" Masonry ("quasi"-Masonry) or even farther beyond that to "pseudo"-Masonry, which becomes something other than Masonry altogether.

The general defining mark is whether a group would be considered as having affiliation or affinity with the United Grand Lodge of England.

And then there are the "appendant" groups which, though not properly termed "Freemasonry" in the general sense, have a closer connection with Masonry so that they are not properly termed "fringe" groups either. Eastern Star, Demolay, Job's Daughters, there are a number of these. Of course, no member of these would be Masons, two of them simply because they are female groups, the other because it is a youth group. And the only group from which anyone may move on to actually become a Mason would be Demolay. But many of the principles would be the same or similar. But it is my understanding also that these are more accepted among American Masons than among any other Masonic bodies. Our English brethren, as I understand it, are particularly critical of American acceptance of these groups.

More closely affiliated, but still not considered to be at the heart of the definition of what it is to be a Freemason, are the "higher degrees" of the York and Scottish Rite bodies. Quite often accusations against "Masons" are based on what members would believe or be taught as members of one of these bodies, or more especially, the Scottish Rite, as York Rite members must profess Christian faith as a requirement of membership. Shriners, for instance, one of the most-criticized groups connected with Masonry, would fall on the Scottish Rite branch.

I suppose it was an inevitable circumstance that Albert Pike, a member of Scottish Rite, would become perhaps the most-criticized figure connected with Freemasonry. But it is significant to note that Pike's Morals and Dogma, which is perhaps the most-criticized writing to be found in connection with Freemasonry, was a work written for the Scottish Rite, which is not as properly referred to as "Freemasonry" as it would be to speak of Blue Degree Masonry. The full title, for instance, is "Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry Prepared for the Supreme Council of the Thirty-Third Degree for the Southern Jurisdiction of the United States and Published by its Authority."

That's "prepared FOR the Southern Jurisdiction" of Scottish Rite," and published "BY its authority." That's a work that was never intended to have bearing upon me or many other Masons, the majority of Masons in fact, who are Blue Degree. Nor would it be intended for Masons who have gone beyond the Blue Degrees, but have done so in York Rite Masonry.

Despite this, though, Morals and Dogma has been the subject of misappropriation, misapplication, misinterpretation, and flat out prevarication. And so has the General himself, having many things attributed to him which were the result of an admitted hoax perpetrated by Leo Taxil in the late 19th century, and which still sometimes takes on a life of its own despite Taxil's own detailed and public, written confession.

Add to the confusion the whole question of what constitutes "Christianity," and you have quite a mix of false understanding and confusion. The primary accusers of Freemasonry seem to hail from a small segment of Christianity, generally referred to as "Fundamentalists." This is a term which has all sorts of connotations, depending on what segment of Christianity one might choose to define one's own Christian faith. They were in the ascendancy only a couple of short decades ago, and have become more and more marginalized as they have leaned more and more to the extremes within the bounds of their own group. A pivotal event in marking the inevitable decline of their numbers, IMO, was when certain extremists took it upon themselves to target abortion doctors for death.

Not that such actions would define all Fundamentalists, but the label quickly begins to be applied once it starts, whether justifiable or not. (Believe me, Masons understand this all too well.) Nor would I make the case (nor could I) that "only" Fundamentalists have a problem with Freemasonry.

Now take into consideration another notable point in these discussions, the true meaning of what it is to be "compatible." The nature of many of the accusations raised by Christians is such that, the only way one could be a Freemason, by their standards, would be for every Freemasonic statement on any matter, be 100%, undeniably, indisputably, exclusively evangelical or conservative Christianity in its interpretation. That is, quite simply, not what anyone is saying when speaking of "compatibility with Christian faith." Compatibility has to do with, "does anything conflict with Christian faith.?" Showing something to be not 100%, undeniably, indisputably, exclusively evangelical or conservative Christanity in interpretation, is not showing "incompatibility."

The word "compatible" means, in its most literal sense, "working together with." The things that Masonry teaches most directly are in no way incompatible with Christian faith. The three cardinal tenets are "brotherly love, relief, and truth." If Christianity is in conflict with these, then somebody is re-writing the Bible. Freemasonry is fond of triads, and such triads are not only found in Masonry, they are found in Christianity. One such triad that is very common to both is "faith, hope, and love." Masonry has another of its own, "wisdom, beauty, and truth." Masonry also speaks of the "four cardinal virtues" of "prudence, justice, temperance, and fortitude." This actually corresponds with a Christian emphasis upon the same things, and by the same name, from a time quite ancient to us now. Masonry emphasizes the "true religion" of James 1:27, the "pure principles" of the golden rule, and the central importance of the two "greatest commandments" to love God and love one's neighbor. Masonry teaches the necessity, before undertaking any great task, of "invoking the blessings of Deity."

Someone on another thread no longer active here, has said that Masonry is not a religion, but is more of a "religious overlay." I'd not seen that expression anywhere, but it rings as true as any I've seen. Take the principles of Masonry, that are the truest expression of its heart as those just cited, and "overlay" them on a grid of Christian belief, and the points of similarity/identicality are not in conflict--and are quite often directly identifiable as deriving from the same source: the principles found in the Holy Bible.

For anyone interested in ascertaining the truth, and not merely interested in making accusations, I can't see how they come to other conclusions, except they be based on fringe Masonic groups, pseudo-masonic opinions, misappropriated proof-texting of Masonic writings, or on insistences based on false concepts of "compatibility," false concepts of "Freemasonry," or false concepts of "Christianity."

 

[JamesJD]

I interrupt this masonic propaganda thread to release a Bible news flash about the masonic world disorder of corruption & military madness: The first book of Enoch predicts the world rulers arrested by angels for approriate punishments, & Isaiah 24:21-22 predicts the rulers under arrest for punishment by the Lord.
"The Lord at thy right hand shall strike through KINGS in the day of his wrath; he shall judge among the heathen, he shall fill the places with the dead, he shall wound the heads over many countries"-Psalm 110:5-6 KJV, or 109 other versions.
"In righteousness he doth judge and make war"-Rev 19:11; in verse 19, it's clear it's gov forces being defeated. "they shall fight because the Lord is with them"-Zechariah 10:5.
'against powers, against the RULERS of the darkness of this world, and against spiritual wickedness in high places"-Ephesians 6:12.
The UN flag, with 33 divisions, and the UN conference tables arranged n a "G" shape, is clearly masonic. Mass murders go unpunished by interational law; Pol Pot kiled up to 6 million and Pinochet, up to 1 million, both with CIA backing. See the obviously antichristian emblem logo at the top intel agency DIA; http://www.DIA.gov An upide down cross at the south pole, and a golden bowl at the north, with the proverbial "forbidden apple" in it.
Rwanda, Darfur, up to a million dead Iraqi civilians who had nothing to do with 9/11 after an illegal invasion. Bosnia, etc.
Organized crime flourishes freely, except for the occasional little bust, with Swiss banking secrecy.
Rev 17 & 18 called it; the "harlot of Babylon", "which rules over kings", and seduces them, & "drinks the blood of the martyrs". Babylon was the capitol of Baalism, which is what we see rulers practicing at Bohemian Grove ( http://www.infowars.com/bg1.html ) before a fire altar of sacrifice with the traditional huge statue. They are seduced with gay porn stars and strippers there, which reflects the tradition of temple prostitution of Baalism.
The impact that begins the trib (Rev 18:21) hits during the armageddon war, and condemns the freemasons' world of corruption, permanently (18:21). The 1000 year reign is in the promised "new earth" of 2 Peter 3:13, Rev 21:1 & Isaiah 65:17 & 66:23.
Angels will remove the worst of people (Matt 13:49-50 & Rev 9:15), for the sake of the survivors. The Lord arrives "with his mighty angels"-2 Thessalonians 1:7.
Getting water filters from camping suppliers & distillers is advised...Rev 8 & 16. The seas are dying of red tide now, with dead zones expanding & multiplying, & main ocean currents found oxygen depleted and acidic even.
Reality can be grim. Acts 3:23

 

[Rev Wayne]

I interrupt this news bulletin of Paranoia 101 to bring you great news: God is still on the throne, and He is still in control. The Lord Jesus Christ will soon return as He promised, and receive us into His everlasting Kingdom.

Reality can be very reassuring for those who believe the Lord's promises.

 

[JamesJD]

I interrupt this news bulletin of Paranoia 101 to bring you great news: God is still on the throne, and He is still in control. The Lord Jesus Christ will soon return as He promised, and receive us into His everlasting Kingdom.

Reality can be very reassuring for those who believe the Lord's promises.

Yes the Lord will soon return, and pass judgement on the rulers of the masonic New World Disorder; Isaiah 24:21-22, Psalm 110:5-6 KJV or 109 other versions, Rev 19:11-19.
The tribulation shall condemn the Novus Ordo Secular, permanently (Rev 18:21). The 1000 years is in the promised "new earth" of 2 Peter 3:13 (clearly after the end), and Rev 21:1 (after the end).
"aganist powers, against the RULERS of the darkness of this world, and against spiritual wickedness in high places"-Ephesians 6:12.
The angels shall remove the evilest (Matt 13:49-50), and slay the next evilest third left (Rev 9:15). Halleluyah!
We'll see how many freemasons make the cut into the mere 144,000 redeemed. A true man of God cannot serve 2 masters, unless it be the Lord and his Christ (Rev 11:15, Acts 4:26, Psalm 110:1 KJV or 109 other versions), Zechariah 11.

 

[Rev Wayne]

A true man of God cannot serve 2 masters

Then thank God I serve only the Lord Jesus Christ.

 

[JamesJD]

Then thank God I serve only the Lord Jesus Christ.

Anyone sworn to secrecy with a rope around their neck & blindfold, with a blade to the chest is serving freemasonry, no matter what secret they will learn, they will protect it, no matter what. The oath of mutual protection of other freemasons also serves freemasonry above conscience, disregarding what the other freemasons may be guilty of.