Masonic Profane-ity

[Skip Sampson]

Either believe as I do or you're wrong.

And where have I ever said that? Cordially, Skip.

 

[americanvet]

Skip, I have no desire to get into a debate with you about your views on any subject. I was simply stating you put words in my mouth. I believe you are a professional at twisting the words of others to fit your needs and debating you would be a waste of my time.

 

[Simpleman25]

Skip, I have no desire to get into a debate with you about your views on any subject. I was simply stating you put words in my mouth. I believe you are a professional at twisting the words of others to fit your needs and debating you would be a waste of my time.

Good call brother!

 

[Illuminaughty]

By using the word profane I would assume they are implying that non-Masons have not been initiated into the Masonic way and that they are not in the know about the Masonic teachings. They aren't part of the in crowd. They don't know the secret handshake or own the secret decoder ring so to speak. As a non-Mason I really don't find myself insulted at all by the fact that Masons may have used such a term but I guess some people are more easily offended than others.

Not sure what this has to do with philosophy though?

 

[Simpleman25]

By using the word profane I would assume they are implying that non-Masons have not been initiated into the Masonic way and that they are not in the know about the Masonic teachings. They aren't part of the in crowd. They don't know the secret handshake or own the secret decoder ring so to speak. As a non-Mason I really don't find myself insulted at all by the fact that Masons may have used such a term but I guess some people are more easily offended than others.

Not sure what this has to do with philosophy though?

Love the decoder ring comment.

The reason we're in this section is that the powers that be put us here. Seems as good a place as any other I guess.

 

[circuitrider]

By using the word profane I would assume they are implying that non-Masons have not been initiated into the Masonic way and that they are not in the know about the Masonic teachings. They aren't part of the in crowd. They don't know the secret handshake or own the secret decoder ring so to speak. As a non-Mason I really don't find myself insulted at all by the fact that Masons may have used such a term but I guess some people are more easily offended than others.

Not sure what this has to do with philosophy though?

I have no connection with the moderation staff here but I am a Freemason.

But my best guess why Masonic threads end up here is that Freemasonry is largely a philosophy of life which is promoted by Masonic organizations. Also since it isn't a specifically Christian subject (other than the fact far right fundamentalist Christians like Skip get all hot and bothered by it) it seems as good a place as any.

 

[americanvet]

I requested masonry moved to this section from the unorthodox section. The reasons are what is mentioned above.

 

[circuitrider]

I personally think it belongs here because Freemasonry isn't a theology so it doesn't belong in a theology section, unorthodox or not.

 

[Illuminaughty]

A thread complaining about masons using (allegedly) insulting language to describe non-masons isn't my idea of philosophy but I guess someone might find a way of moving the conversation in a more philosophical direction.

 

[americanvet]

A thread complaining about masons using (allegedly) insulting language to describe non-masons isn't my idea of philosophy but I guess someone might find a way of moving the conversation in a more philosophical direction.

True this particular Masonic topic is not philosophical but Masonry is philosophic in general. The question of this thread was already answered here: http://www.christianforums.com/t7770899-31/#post64255150.

 

[circuitrider]

A thread complaining about masons using (allegedly) insulting language to describe non-masons isn't my idea of philosophy but I guess someone might find a way of moving the conversation in a more philosophical direction.

Skip isn't going to ask questions about Masonic philosophy. His preference is to ask leading or "gotcha" questions. His goal here is to attack Freemasonry and its members. He already thinks he knows what we teach and believe.

 

[Skip Sampson]

Skip isn't going to ask questions about Masonic philosophy.

Indeed. I doubt if many of you could answer them factually or honestly. As an example, I still haven't received a factual reply to this question I posed in post #312, Freemasonry, Separating myth from fiction (still chuckling over the title of that thread, btw):

Masonic Lodges are 'erected to God' and in many GL jurisdictions, the candidate takes his obligations in the very presence of God, according to the rituals in those jurisdictions. To what deity does that refer? Is it the Biblical version, the Koranic version, the Hindu, Buddhist, Mormon version?

His goal here is to attack Freemasonry and its members. He already thinks he knows what we teach and believe.

My goal is to present what Freemasonry teaches in an open forum, using logical conclusions based on the facts presented. All of you are free to dispute either, but choose not to do so. You pass up great chances to prove me wrong, from which fact I conclude that it is because you can't, either through ignorance or fear. As to what I know, yes: I do know what Freemasonry teaches and believes. I've proven that fact on many threads on this forum

Again, you can show me where I'm wrong, if you dare. Otherwise, just stick your heads in the sand and complain in your closed fora. Cordially, Skip.

 

[Albion]

Indeed. I doubt if many of you could answer them factually or honestly.

Then we're done here, right?

With your admission that no responses will be accepted by you, no matter what is said by the Masons here, there is no purpose served by you continuing to interrogate...and obviously there is also none served by anyone bothering to answer you a dozen times over.

 

[Simpleman25]

Indeed. I doubt if many of you could answer them factually or honestly. As an example, I still haven't received a factual reply to this question I posed in post #312, Freemasonry, Separating myth from fiction (still chuckling over the title of that thread, btw):


The title of the thread occurred due to being on a plane and using my phone. The spell check inserted fiction instead of fact.

Nice attempt to divert the conversation with another insult. I've noticed you resort to that when your getting your rear handed to you.

I think Albion hit the nail on the head. No matter what any of us say, your refusal to accept it says everything. Is that the only way you think you can win a debate? I've witnessed high school freshman do a better job.

 

[circuitrider]

Then we're done here, right?

With your admission that no responses will be accepted by you, no matter what is said by the Masons here, there is no purpose served by you continuing to interrogate...and obviously there is also none served by anyone bothering to answer you a dozen times over.

 

[Skip Sampson]

Then we're done here, right?

Only if you are confirming that my doubts about your abilities are well founded. If you feel yourself incapable of factual responses, remain on the sidelines.

With your admission that no responses will be accepted by you, no matter what is said by the Masons here, there is no purpose served by you continuing to interrogate

Well, there we have it: proof positive that you ARE incapable of factual responses. Glad you were able to provide conclusive evidence.

...and obviously there is also none served by anyone bothering to answer you a dozen times over.

They've responded many times, certainly, but have provided no serious answers to my questions or factual challenges to my articles. But be of good cheer: none was expected so my feelings remain unhurt. Cordially, Skip.

 

[Simpleman25]

Your cult leaders must be really happy with you! Rather curious as to how they 'reward' you for being a good little minion. Then again maybe that would just gross us out.

With Albion you spun the merry go round as hard as your little arms could. Problem is that if I know him the way I think I do, he won't be wasting anymore time on you.

With me you resort to your cults time honored tradition of hurling juvenile insults. That's ok little buddy. All I have to do is consider the source, and consider who your handlers are.

 

[Skip Sampson]

Your cult leaders must be really happy with you! ... and consider who your handlers are.

And who might they be? Any names? Or more unsupported nonsense from an average Mason?

he won't be wasting anymore time on you.

I think I've heard that before, yet y'all still wander back in and embarrass yourselves. Just think how interesting the discussion would be if you actually took some time to compose serious responses.

With me you resort to your cults time honored tradition of hurling juvenile insults.

You err greatly: it's not just you, I do my own insulting, and I do not consider them juvenile. I think my responses to many Masons, like you, are more accurately described as 'appropriate.' I really shouldn't, I guess, respond in kind, but some folks just go through life asking for their attitude to be adjusted, just a bit, by timely and precise responses. Call this inability to pass up the opportunity for such responses a personal failing, but I've never been able to resist a good line. BTW, if you'd quit leading with your chin, you wouldn't have to suffer such embarrassment. Just some friendly advice.

That's ok little buddy. All I have to do is consider the source, and consider who your handlers are.

And you don't see the irony, or hypocrisy, in that comment considering the one previous to it? You guys are really something else: walking, talking testimonials that Masonry fails in its claim to make good men better, or that they were 'good' men in the first place. Cordially, Skip.

 

[Simpleman25]

LK is the current head of the cult. DW is either co leader, or whatever title that had been bestowed upon him.

We've offered you serious responses. As Albion has pointed out, nothing any mason says to you is taken that way. That falls upon you and your distorted view of masonry.

If you believe your responses are 'appropriate', well, ok. Again you are following a line of what you think and what you believe to be true. We've offered up factual answers only to be dismissed outright. That's all part of your playbook.

Leading with my chin has worked out very well for me. Both personally and professionally. Taking advice from you would be disastrous on so many levels. I'll pass.

You still can't see through the fog can you? If I offer up something you don't like, I'm not a good man made better. Or I was never good at all. According to you. Then when you do it, it's justified? That's twisted man, just plain twisted.

I would love getting you in front of a panel of debate judges to debate this issue.

 

[Skip Sampson]

LK is the current head of the cult. DW is either co leader, or whatever title that had been bestowed upon him. We've offered you serious responses. ... We've offered up factual answers only to be dismissed outright.

I think any panel of judges would have just laughed you off the platform for those comments.

If I offer up something you don't like, I'm not a good man made better.

I do believe that was an admission you made yourself. I just accepted your conclusion.

Or I was never good at all.

One possible conclusion, being more and more likely with every post you write. In my previous note, though, I was referring to the Masons on this forum in general and not just you specifically. Cordially, Skip.