Freemasonry. Separating myth from fiction.

[circuitrider]

Oh Duane, Duane. So you are against Freemasonry, So I call you an anti-Mason, a synonym for your view, so that means it is ok for you to call me "anti-Christian?" Interesting logic since I'm both a pro-Masonic and a pro-Christian and anti-neither. You do know you are violating the forum rules by the way by claiming I'm not a Christian?

Just because you can twist the ritual doesn't mean there is something wrong with the ritual any more than I'd say something is wrong with the Bible just because someone can twist scripture to their own ends.

As to the other comment, that is just a cheap shot. I've also seen churches rent to someone for a wedding and the groom get drunk at the reception. That doesn't mean it is the church's fault if an individual violates their policy without their knowledge.

As to lack book sales, I'm glad to hear that.

 

[duane washum]

Oh Duane, Duane. So you are against Freemasonry, So I call you an anti-Mason, a synonym for your view, so that means it is ok for you to call me "anti-Christian?" Interesting logic since I'm both a pro-Masonic and a pro-Christian and anti-neither. You do know you are violating the forum rules by the way by claiming I'm not a Christian?

Just because you can twist the ritual doesn't mean there is something wrong with the ritual any more than I'd say something is wrong with the Bible just because someone can twist scripture to their own ends.

As to the other comment, that is just a cheap shot. I've also seen churches rent to someone for a wedding and the groom get drunk at the reception. That doesn't mean it is the church's fault if an individual violates their policy without their knowledge.

As to lack book sales, I'm glad to hear that.

But you are not violating rules by claiming that I am opposed to Freemasons? Yes, indeed, the logic does seem to get twisted, doesn't it.

Not a cheap shot, but it sure is a sleezy way to make money.

Re what you claim to be. You have also claimed that I sell books. BTW, I didn't say I was lacking in book sales. I said, I don't sell books. You really do seem to have a difficult time turning loose of that bone, don't you?

 

[morningstar2651]

But you are not violating rules by claiming that I am opposed to Freemasons? Yes, indeed, the logic does seem to get twisted, doesn't it.

Not a cheap shot, but it sure is a sleezy way to make money.

Re what you claim to be. You have also claimed that I sell books. BTW, I didn't say I was lacking in book sales. I said, I don't sell books. You really do seem to have a difficult time turning loose of that bone, don't you?

It's not against the rules to imply that someone is not a freemason. Perhaps that rule would exist at freemasonforums.com ... but this is Christianforums, and I posted the text of the rule in this thread.

 

[Simpleman25]

But you are not violating rules by claiming that I am opposed to Freemasons? Yes, indeed, the logic does seem to get twisted, doesn't it.

Not a cheap shot, but it sure is a sleezy way to make money.

Re what you claim to be. You have also claimed that I sell books. BTW, I didn't say I was lacking in book sales. I said, I don't sell books. You really do seem to have a difficult time turning loose of that bone, don't you?

You need to get your glasses fixed again. He never said you specifically sold books. Just that a lot of antimasons do.

Btw, calling you an antimason is not the same as saying we are not Christians. Read your rules here dw. This isn't your nearly dead website where you can shut others down when you want. Your little buddy john isn't here to save you either.

anti[ an-tahy, an-tee ]
noun plural an·tis.
1.[bless and do not curse]a person who is opposed to a particular practice, party, policy, action, etc.
anti-
unknown
1.[bless and do not curse]a prefix meaning “against,” “opposite of,” “antiparticle of,” used in the formation of compound words ( anticline ); used freely in combination with elements of any origin ( antibody; antifreeze; antiknock; antilepton )

You are just as out of line with the talk about ONE lodge renting to the wrong group.

Must be nice to think your right all the time. Either that or dementia is starting.

 

[circuitrider]

Duane I think you miss how this works. If I claimed to be an atheist and you agreed with me that wouldn't be a violation of forum rules. But if I claim to be a Christian and you deny me as a Christian that is a violation of the rules.

You rather clearly claim to be opposed to Freemasonry. I can use the term "opposed to Freemasonry" rather than "anti-Mason" if you want but it is the same thing.

How can I be violating the forum rules for agreeing with what you say about yourself? I've seen your website. You in no way claim to be a Mason or a friend of Freemasonry.

How about a bit of logic here hmm? It isn't a violation of the rules to agree that you oppose Freemasonry unless of course you've changed you mind and then I'll have someone hunt up a petition for you.

 

[duane washum]

Let me see if I can simplify this for you.

If I was opposed to Freemasons, this necessarily means I would be opposed to my paternal granddad, my dad, my brother, at least one uncle and an assortment of first and second cousins. But you see, circuit, that is a lie. I have never been opposed to any member of my family because of their Masonic affiliations.

I find it very strange that for somebody who professes to be a Christian, such a person would not understand the concept, "Hate the sin, love the sinner."

But then, you know that, don't you?

 

[Simpleman25]

Let me see if I can simplify this for you.

If I was opposed to Freemasons, this necessarily means I would be opposed to my paternal granddad, my dad, my brother, at least one uncle and an assortment of first and second cousins. But you see, circuit, that is a lie. I have never been opposed to any member of my family because of their Masonic affiliations.

I find it very strange that for somebody who professes to be a Christian, such a person would not understand the concept, "Hate the sin, love the sinner."

But then, you know that, don't you?

Let me simplify it for you, again. Per the definition I used from dictionary.com you would be an antimason. By definition alone.

More simply put for you, it is not against forum rules for us to refer to you as an antimason.

I've witnessed you using this circular reasoning before. Didn't believe you then, don't believe it now.

Many, many men have told you they were Christians only to have you laugh in their faces. I find it clearly more offensive for you to 'claim' I'm not a Christian. That's much more offensive than being called an anti anything.

I've read where you mentioned your family in the past. I've read other accounts pertaining to your family as well. Since that is clearly meant to derail the topic, I'll let it alone. For now.

 

[circuitrider]

Let me see if I can simplify this for you.

If I was opposed to Freemasons, this necessarily means I would be opposed to my paternal granddad, my dad, my brother, at least one uncle and an assortment of first and second cousins. But you see, circuit, that is a lie. I have never been opposed to any member of my family because of their Masonic affiliations.

I find it very strange that for somebody who professes to be a Christian, such a person would not understand the concept, "Hate the sin, love the sinner."

But then, you know that, don't you?

You can argue with me about definitions all you want but the truth is that you claimed I was anti-Christianity, a patent falsehood, and violation of forum rules while I have simply accused you of your opposition to Freemasonry, the truth.

 

[Skip Sampson]

Would you want your Dr to be someone that has applied his knowledge, or just read about it.

Apples and oranges. A doctor in medicine has specific cognitive and technical abilities which required for his practice. A Freemason does not. Of importance in our conversations is only what a GL teaches, and anyone can read and understand that from their literature.

For example, we all agree that Freemasonry claims to take good men and make them better, though there is no objective data that proves the claim. Moreover, we can all compare that claim to Jesus' claim that there are no 'good' men and draw conclusions from it.

Anything that is written can be read and understood. Aside from the obvious physical moves in Masonic ritual, one does not need to undergo them to understand their meaning and implication, or to discuss them. Cordially, Skip.

 

[Skip Sampson]

Also not being a Mason means anti-masons don't know what works to actually give credence to.

Untrue. GL literature has all the credence one needs to have for studying it as practiced in a specific jurisdiction. The ritual and training documentation in any jurisdiction is an authoritative source in that jurisdiction. And, of course, we have the MSA and MIC, and other such 'official' sources.

Skip is a professional anti-mason.

Technically, I am anti-Masonry, as the term you used would imply a personal animus against Masons, which is not the case. And yes, I am a professional in that area; thanks for the compliment. Cordially, Skip.

 

[Simpleman25]

The only thing you could consider being a professional at is a internet troll.

You hunt sites that hint at masonry just so you can spew your antimasonic venom.

I've yet to see you post about anything other than masonry.

 

[Skip Sampson]

I've yet to see you post about anything other than masonry.

You should broaden your viewpoint, as I have commented on other things on this forum.

But I'd hate to cause you all that work, so let's try this: Hey, how 'bout them Broncos? Did they pluck the Ravens or what? Cordially, Skip.

 

[morningstar2651]

These "anti-masons" are more like "armchair masons" - they profess expertise in something they have no practical experience in.

 

[duane washum]

You can argue with me about definitions all you want but . . .

Actually, I don't intend to address the issue anymore. Maybe your enjoyment is beating dead horses, but I have too many irons in the fire to join you in such wastes of time.

 

[Skip Sampson]

These "anti-masons" are more like "armchair masons" - they profess expertise in something they have no practical experience in.

Untrue. Duane Washum was at one time a mason and master of his lodge. You should be more careful of throwing generalities around. Cordially, Skip.

 

[Simpleman25]

Untrue. GL literature has all the credence one needs to have for studying it as practiced in a specific jurisdiction. The ritual and training documentation in any jurisdiction is an authoritative source in that jurisdiction. And, of course, we have the MSA and MIC, and other such 'official' sources.

Technically, I am anti-Masonry, as the term you used would imply a personal animus against Masons, which is not the case. And yes, I am a professional in that area; thanks for the compliment. Cordially, Skip.

Untrue. Duane Washum was at one time a mason and master of his lodge. You should be more careful of throwing generalities around. Cordially, Skip.

Now I've officially seen it all. Skip telling someone else to not throw generalities around. Caused me to do a spitake with my coffee!

As far as dw's.credentials, well, they are shaky at best.

You however will forever be known as 'The armchair mason'.

 

[Albion]

Untrue. Duane Washum was at one time a mason and master of his lodge.

Until Jesus told him to quit, wasn't it?

 

[circuitrider]

Untrue. Duane Washum was at one time a mason and master of his lodge. You should be more careful of throwing generalities around. Cordially, Skip.

For some background on anti-masonic pursuits you can look up information about both Skip and Duane on the internet.

Anti-Masonry: Points of View tells quite a bit about specific persons who make it their hobby or business to oppose Freemasonry.

 

[Skip Sampson]

As far as dw's.credentials, well, they are shaky at best.

They were sufficient to convince his lodge brethren to elect him WM. I'd say that's about all the testimony anyone needs about his credentials.

You however will forever be known as 'The armchair mason'.

Wow, that'll cause me to lose a lot of sleep. At least you guys are getting more sophisticated over time. Rev. Wayne once referred to me as "Mr. Potato-Head," an appellation that more reflected his intellect than my actions. Cordially, Skip.

 

[duane washum]

Until Jesus told him to quit, wasn't it?

Basically, yes. I was convicted by the Holy Spirit on Friday, January 13, 1984. That was when I fell to my knees in the dining room of my home and cried out to God for His forgiveness, praying in the Name of my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. He forgave me.

The WM and three Past Masters contacted me, asking me to reconsider. I very carefully and especially considered the statements of two of those Past Masters. It was their remarks which firmed up my decision for me. Among other things, one told me, "Jesus was a good man." The other told me, "There is no historical evidence that anybody by the name of Jesus Christ ever existed."

That pretty much told me everything I needed to know about "what" was being prayed to in lodge.