Masons

[Rev Wayne]

Hopefully, now that I've gone the extra mile and shown a willingness to respond when people post, perhaps some reciprocal move might be in order?



You clearly posted the quote from the Alabama Masonic Code with an entire sentence missing, and that omission appears to have been deliberate. That means one of two things:

(1) You had the full quote and deliberately posted it without the key defining sentence, which amounts to intentional misrepresentation.

(2) You cited the quote from another source who had removed the sentence before they quoted it, which is quite a different picture, and only shows laziness or indifference in checking one's sources for accuracy. (Or just lackadaisical and nonchalant, mindless cut & paste methods.)

Is that kind of method compatible with Christianity? (I'd like your answer, but mine is no, based on Romans 5:20-6:2, asking the question, because "where sin abounded, grace abounded much more," whether we should "continue to do evil, that grace may abound?" And the emphatic answer is "by all means, no!"

Or if you like, since you have a known appreciation for Ephesians 5, you might try the chapter before it, which apparently you seem to have skimmed over: "Therefore, putting away lying, let each of you speak truth with his neighbor." Not that you weren't affected by the work of others, I fully realize the attraction so many feel toward that Ankerbergian influence that pervades so much of the conspiracy market today, on more than one front. There just comes a time when you need to cut the cord.

 

[Rev Wayne]

Secondly, the PCA is among the list I posted who has a position statement AGAINST Freemasonry, but as you can see from the "Rev" post below, he placed it among those he claims has no statement.

I can't recall ever having to quote my own post before, so let this be a first, because you have clearly jumped off the deep end with this one. For convenience, I will label for you the two-part chart I posted, since you seem to have confused the top part with the bottom:

As noted earlier, you offered the lament:

As I responded already, your idea of “the rest of Christianity” is a farce.

And now you add to that one a quote from someone claiming:


Considering the list that was offered, the claim is absurd. Do these guys have any idea just how many denominations there are out there??? Wikipedia lists only the most basic categories and has over 300 listings. Then just think of the thousands who fit under those main headings, and it it mind-boggling.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominations

Setting aside the question of the RC and the Orthodox for just a moment, let’s look at what you have chosen to portray as Protestantism in bulk, apart from the UMC and the SBC.

I. THIS IS THE TOP HALF OF THE CHART

(Churches you have listed in the past as having such a statement)

From one of your typical lists, let’s look at the membership you seem to think is a reflection of everybody but these two denominations:

Methodist Church of England : 330,000
Wesleyan Methodist Church : 300,000
Assemblies of God : 2,729,562
Church of the Nazarene : 631,253
Orthodox Presbyterian Church : 19,094
Reformed Presbyterian Church : 7,000
Church of Scotland : 600,000
Grace Brethren 30,000
Christian Reformed Church in America : 300,000
Evangelical Mennonite Church : 5,278
Free Church of Scotland : 12,000
General Association of Regular Baptist Churches : 150,000
Independent Fundamentalist Churches of America : 70,000
The Evangelical Lutheran Synod : 400,000
Baptist Union of Scotland : 15,000
Lutheran Church Missouri Synod : 2,488,936
Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod : 410,000
Presbyterian Church in America : 330,182
TOTAL 8,828,305


II. THIS IS THE BOTTOM HALF OF THE CHART

(Churches which you have NOT included on your lists)

NOT on the list, and presumably with no statement against Freemasonry:


Southern Baptist Convention : 16,439,603
Presbyterian Church-USA : 3,241,309
United Methodist : 8,251,175
Episcopal : 2,320,221
African Methodist Episcopal-Zion : 1,432,795
Christian Methodist Episcopal : 800,000
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America : 4,984,925
United Church of Christ : 1,296,652
China Christian Council : 12,000,000
Christian and Missionary Alliance : 2,644,296
Christian Church (Disciples) : 1,043,943
Christian Churches and Churches of Christ : 1,070,000
Church of God (Cleveland) : 4,000,000
Church of God (Anderson) : 538,986
Church of God in Christ : 8,000,000
Church of God of Prophecy : 400,000
Church of North India : 1,125,000
Church of South India : 2,800,000
Church of Sweden : 7,677,400
Church of the Province of Nigeria : 3,000,000
Churches of Christ : 6,400,000
Churches of Christ (Non-Instrumental) : 1,284,056
90,750,361

I could go on, but I trust you all get the point. So, to save bandwidth suffice to say, Mr. Gentry has overlooked quite a few Christian Churches who have no known statement against Freemasonry. Heck, with these numbers, and with the others that would no doubt be added should we go through the rest of the alphabet and not just stop with the “C’s,” I think we’d easily surpass the Roman Catholics and the Orthodox and that other handful Mike has mentioned, and probably surpass them by miles. Come to think of it, with an estimated 2,200,000,000 Christians worldwide, even with the bulk provided by RC and Eastern Orthodox, it’s still a far cry from all non-SBC/UMC members being defined by a broad sweep like “the rest of Christianity.” Especially when you consider the number of churches who have a statement but still have no problem with their members joining the Lodge, as we saw in the PCA “statement.”

Amazingly, you can do with statistics pretty much what you want to do with them.

I sure hope this was helpful. And I hope you meant it about the week off. Apparently you need it. Anyone can clearly see which side of the chart I located the PCA. That doesn't change the fact that on the site to which you posted a link, just as I quoted earlier, the "statement" you referred to was NOT A STATEMENT, but a PETITION by the Louisiana Presbytery, lamenting the fact that PCA OFFICERS HOLD MEMBERSHIP IN THE LODGE.

Statement or no statement, petition or no petition, their actions and their words certainly do not match up. So maybe you can enlighten us on just what the purpose is of drafting a statement with no teeth in it?

Besides, I've also been involved in another of the denominations on your list, and I can promise you, a lot more of their pastors are Masons than are not.

First of all you cannot find ONE Christian denomination that emphatically supports and encourages its members, in writing, that it is fine for them to be members of the Masonic Order.

I responded to this already, and so I repeat, MOST of them are not so paranoid, there is no need to adopt statements about an organization which is no threat.

Even your own UMC is afraid to do that, I know because I asked them for one.

Well gee, Mike, you certainly must be moving up in importance. Heck, I'm a member, and I doubt if I will ever have such a high opinion of myself that I can expect an organization as large as the UMC to respond to such an individual request--and then turn around and express righteous indignation that theyDIDN'T respond!!Well, that just beats all I've ever seen from anyone, even you.

But maybe I can help, it might just be a matter of going to the proper place to ask. Where exactly did you send this request to? You see, the only body that could draft any kind of statement like that would be the General Conference. If you wanted to do it at a lesser level, you could ask one of the Annual Conferences. But to enact such a statement speaking for all of United Methodism it would have to come either from one of the committees, or in the form of a petition, one which has either been passed and forwarded from an annual conference, or an individual petition, duly signed by the correct number of co-signers, presented at the General Conference and a copy made to be distributed to every member present, and then voted on--or, at the proper moment of business, a motion to that effect could be made from the floor, and then put into effect if passed.

What I'm saying is, MIke, I'm not surprised you did not find anyone to comply with your request, there is no one authorized to speak for a body as massively large as United Methodism in such an arbitrary manner. We have a process by which such things take place, every 4 years at General Conference. So if you still want it, befriend a few Methodists and see if you can persuade them to present it at the next General Conference. You've got plenty of time to do so, they don't meet for another two years.

 

[Abbadon]

I don't have any more time for this now, and will be away for about a week. But before I go, let me address yet another lie from Rev. Wayne:

First of all you cannot find ONE Christian denomination that emphatically supports and encourages its members, in writing, that it is fine for them to be members of the Masonic Order. Even your own UMC is afraid to do that, I know because I asked them for one. Secondly, the PCA is among the list I posted who has a position statement AGAINST Freemasonry, but as you can see from the "Rev" post below, he placed it among those he claims has no statement.

Finally, just because he says they don't have a statement against the Lodge, doesn't mean that they don't have one, nor does it mean that without one they tacitly agree that Freemasonry is compatible with Christianity. I challenge Wayne to provide proof that any of the denominations on his list agree that it is. Find ONE Wayne, just ONE!

Do you like baseball? I bet there aren't any churches that have put in writing "We encourage our members to play baseball." So, there's just as much proof that baseball is evil as there is for your arguement.

Or, try to find writing from a denomination saying that Christian forums is OK. I bet there aren't any denominations that encourage this site, particularly in the way that you want Rev to find in relation to Freemasonry.

Try it for rock? Well, seems to be a lot like Freemasonry there. There's plenty of Christians going on about how harmful it is, and you can find large organizations saying "we're against it, cause it isn't Christian!"

But there are Christian rock bands, and Christians that, with no negative effects on thier faith, listen to rock of all kinds. Hmmm....

 

[Rev Wayne]

Finally, just because he says they don't have a statement against the Lodge, doesn't mean that they don't have one, nor does it mean that without one they tacitly agree that Freemasonry is compatible with Christianity. I challenge Wayne to provide proof that any of the denominations on his list agree that it is. Find ONE Wayne, just ONE!

Pretty neat stuff, to be able to do as he does and simply put all the cards back face down on the table and re-shuffle. Seems to me, though, for it to work we would all have to have severe retention problems, or short-term memory loss.

Seems to me I distinctly remember someone claiming that the SBC and the UMC were the only churches who were not against Freemasonry like "the rest of Christianity."

I'd say that puts the burden of proof that the "rest of Christianity" is anti-Freemasonry as he claims, squarely in his own lap, not mine or anybody else's. All I was doing with the provided list was pointing out how many churches there are who apparently do not have statements against Freemasonry, and thus effectively refuting his claim that "the rest of Christianity" other than UMC & SBC are anti-Masonry.

But don't be surprised at the re-frame and the attempted spin to make it appear as though the claim was that "the rest of Christianity" was pro-Masonry--which, of course, is totally different than saying they are not anti-Masonry; these guys have been doing that for years, they are well-practiced at it. And I shall post very shortly a collection of refuted arguments that were never acknowledged to be in error but have simply been abandoned. It's an eye-opener, and shows how much progress has been made during the last couple of years toward exposing the tactics and errors and falsehoods of the antimason brigade.

 

[O.F.F.]

Seems to me I distinctly remember someone claiming that the SBC and the UMC were the only churches who were not against Freemasonry like "the rest of Christianity."

And, it seems to me that it's been the tendency of a UMC pastor to habitually restate comments of others, in a way, that is NOT the way they were originally intended by the author. Having said that, unless Wayne can prove differently, neither the SBC nor the UMC have official statements in SUPPORT of Freemasonry.

Unless they've declared any position different recently, the UMC has remained completely silent on their position regarding Freemasonry. However, after acknowledging the following, the SBC conclusion is certainly NOT in favor of Freemasonry:

During the annual session of the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC), June 15-17, 1993, the messengers overwhelmingly approved a report on Freemasonry. . . For the first time in the history of the SBC, however, the Convention concluded, “many tenets and teachings of Freemasonry are NOT compatible with Christianity or Southern Baptist doctrine.” The report accepted by the Convention identified eight tenets and teachings of Freemasonry that it concluded were NOT compatible with Christianity. . .

Summary Statement on Freemasonry

There are eight major concerns that the Southern Baptist
Convention has expressed about the teachings and practices of Freemasonry.These are:

(1) Freemasonry uses offensive, non-biblical, and blasphemous terms relating to God.

(2) Freemasonry insists on the use of “bloody oaths” or obligations, which are strictly forbidden by the Bible (Matt. 5:34-37).

(3) Freemasonry urges that occultic and/or pagan readings be used, and that their teachings be appropriated in interpreting such concepts as the Trinity.

(4) Freemasonry includes the Bible as part of the “furniture of the lodge,” but only as an equal with non-Christian symbols and writings.

(5) Freemasonry misuses the term “light” to refer to moral “reformation” as a means to salvation.

(6) Freemasonry teaches that salvation may be attained by “good works” and not through faith in Christ alone.

(7) Freemasonry advocates in many of its writings the non-biblical teachings of universalism.

(8) In some of its lodges, Freemasonry discriminates against nonwhites.

While it is clear that some Christians, moral persons, and outstanding government leaders have been and are members of the Freemasonic movement, several points of the lodge’s teachings are non-biblical and non-Christian. And, while Freemasonry encourages and supports charitable activities, it contains both multireligious and inclusivistic teachings that are not Christian in its religious instruction. Taking the above into consideration, and being consistent with our denomination’s historic deep conviction regarding both the priesthood of the believer and the autonomy of the local church,we recommend that each individual Baptist, as well as each congregation, carefully review the issues of the teachings and practices of Freemasonry. Since, in the final analysis, the Bible alone is the only guide for faith and practice, issues related to Freemasonry and any other fraternal organization, especially secret societies, must be evaluated only in light of the plumb line of Scripture. The divinity and lordship of Christ, the substitutionary atonement of Christ, and salvation by grace through faith are foundational and nonnegotiable doctrines and the teachings of any organization or society in contradiction to such biblical tenets must be evaluated accordingly. It is, therefore, the duty of every Christian to resist and avoid false teachings to speak the truth in love and to embrace only those doctrines which are revealed in the inerrant Scripture, the Bible (see Matt. 7:24-27; John 7-10; 1 Cor. 10:14; Jude 3). (emphasis added)

For more details on these 8 reasons the SBC doesn't support Freemasonry go to:

A CLOSER LOOK AT FREEMASONRY

 

[Rev Wayne]

And, it seems to me that it's been the tendency of a UMC pastor to habitually restate comments of others, in a way, that is NOT the way they were originally intended by the author.

Your intentions were to build a case against Freemasonry by stating how many churches had statements against it, and then make an errant conclusion from a paucity of information, that "the rest of Christianity" besides the SBC and the UMC were anti-masonry.

All I intended was to show from the abundance of denominations (1) just how far off the mark the "rest of Christianity" comment truly was; and (2) just how many churches there are besides the SBC and the UMC who do not take an active anti-Masonry stance.


As for your current round of questions, they are the same ol' same ol' rehashed once more, and refuted more times than I can count. So in brief once again:

(1) If that refers to GAOTU, then all I can say is, "So does John Calvin."
(2) Strictly symbolic, and symbolism is not "forbidden" by the Bible. And Jesus didn't mean for us to pluck out our eyes or cut off our hands for our spiritual improvement.
(3) Not sure of the reference, but it sounds like they don't like Pike any better than most Masons do.
(4) Not an equal. The Bible is the furniture and the Great Light of Masonry, and the Lodges in the U.S. all use it. They are referring to the exception and not the rule.
(5) Light is symbolic and simply refers to knowledge.
(6) A misconception based on less than a handful of misinterpreted, misapplied, and mis-quoted portions of Masonic ritual.
(7) Not "universalism," but universal truths, like God is Spirit, God is Creator, God is Supreme, our chief duty to God is love of God and love of neighbor, to take care of orphans and widows and others who are helpless, and a slew of other things that no one has managed to make a case yet for why they are supposedly "anti-Christian, when Jesus taught these things Himself.
(8) I daresay there are far more churches where this happens, and the pot seems to be calling the kettle black. Or did you (and they) forget about the "most segregated hour of the week?"

 

[Rev Wayne]

Since, in the final analysis, the Bible alone is the only guide for faith and practice, issues related to Freemasonry and any other fraternal organization, especially secret societies, must be evaluated only in light of the plumb line of Scripture.

Yes, and as a matter of fact, they even have the scripture with Amos's plumbline in one of the rituals, quoted word for word. And the Bible, by the way, is the only book considered sacred by any religion that you will find quoted in Masonry, or whose principles are drawn from in Masonry.

The divinity and lordship of Christ, the substitutionary atonement of Christ, and salvation by grace through faith are foundational and nonnegotiable doctrines

I have not denied this at all, nor has any other Christian Mason I know. And the Christians in the lodge are the only ones this could possibly be aimed at, since it would be foolish to berate a non-Christian for what he didn't believe in the first place. The Christian Mason will find these doctrines symbolically portrayed in the Lodge, and will generally be able to do so without very much effort, as they are so obvious that even antimasons admit they see baptism and resurrection represented, and make accusations accordingly.

the teachings of any organization or society in contradiction to such biblical tenets must be evaluated accordingly.

And there's the rub. Outsiders feel they should be able to arrogate to themselves the right to determine for Christians in the lodge, how those biblical tenets and how the Masonic symbols that represent them, will be interpreted. But that's nothing new, that's what the whole format of most of any Christian debate consists of, Christians trying to prove to other Christians why they should have the right to dictate to them what beliefs they should or should not accept in their own personal faith.

It is, therefore, the duty of every Christian to resist and avoid false teachings

Well, let them go ahead and resist brotherly love, relief, truth, the Holy Bible as the rule and guide to faith, a human duty to engage in the pure, undefiled religious actions of taking care of widows and orphans, the exhortation to performing one's moral duty to love God and neighbor, to love one's neighbor as oneself, and all the other non-threatening Christian virtues that the Christian Mason finds in Freemasonry.

But let them at the same time take it upon themselves to understand Masonry as it is and not as they wish to accuse it. Most of the items on the above list are simply straw man criticisms, because they do not provide an accurate portrayal of Freemasonry.

Let them at the same time become more familiar with the history of the lodge, because the relatively little change that has occurred for the nearly 3 centuries of the existence of modern Freemasonry, should be an ample clue to even the most ignorant accuser, that things as described in the rituals of Freemasonry, and more particularly definitions of terms and symbols, are not as things are in the world of 300 years later.

Let them first begin to understand the symbolism of a totally symbolic system, and understand the history of one of the oldest fraternal organizations in the world, and maybe then they can begin to do an accurate study.

 

[Abbadon]

For more details on these 8 reasons the SBC doesn't support Freemasonry go to:

Never mind that they always violate Baptist tradition.
They don't grant autonomy to the individual congregations, they put the ministers above the members (instead of priesthood of the believer), they don't do seperation of church and state (which is the entire reason we split from the Anglican church, and why many of us came over to America), and the SBC was founded to do missionary work NOT doctrinal work, and they now don't do much missionary work except to force hyper-Calvinst (the mean kind, where "God" sends you to hell for holding the Bible and your own opinions over those of older hyper-Calvinists) doctrine. Now, considering that they have proven hypocritical thus far, why should we believe them here? They're right in that Jesus is Lord, but they're screwed up elsewhere. Heck, they thought Disney's The Little Mermaid contained erotic images in it!

(2) Strictly symbolic, and symbolism is not "forbidden" by the Bible. And Jesus didn't mean for us to pluck out our eyes or cut off our hands for our spiritual improvement.

Not only that, but the parables are loaded with symbolism, as is (by it's author's own admission) Revelation, and other parts of the Bible, and the history of the Church.

(5) Light is symbolic and simply refers to knowledge.

And not a substitute for Christ.

(8) I daresay there are far more churches where this happens, and the pot seems to be calling the kettle black. Or did you (and they) forget about the "most segregated hour of the week?"

Many of the people won't accept other people, not simply because of color. Apparently, we get into heaven not by Christ's love, but by showing up to Church wearing something other than jeans and a tee-shirt, and getting a hair cut.

 

[Rev Wayne]

First off, I wish to thank amadeus72 and Rev Wayne. Your posts have been very informative and you both have some very intelligent answers. It's given me a lot to think on and consider on this whole issue. There is so many lies and myth surrounding the Masons that it's difficult for people to understand what is real and what is not. Especially in recent months with movies like The Da Vinci Code and National Treasure coming out. I do have some questions for you that I will pm if you don't mind?

Can't speak for Amadeus, but for my part, sure. Just be aware that some things I am under obligation not to discuss. But even there, I tend to be more open than some Masons. It's a matter of interpretation--some see the obligation as binding us not to reveal in any way; but I tend to view the statement as a whole, not to discuss in such a way that "the secrets of Freemasonry are thereby revealed." And with the ready availability of most of what you find in Freemasonry at the touch of a fingertip, truly there are very few "secrets" left anymore.

 

[Mary_Magdalene]

***********MOD HAT ON***********


There have been many posts in this thread deleted for one of the following rule violations:

2.1 No Flaming
You will not "flame" other members or groups of members. Flaming includes, but is not limited to:
Ridiculing, insulting, or demeaning another member or group of members; Stating or implying that another member or group of members who have identified themselves as Christian are not Christian; Using sarcasm to attempt any of the above; Threats of any sort.


2.2 No Baiting
You will not bait other members. "Baiting" is an attempt to anger another member. Baiting includes, but is not limited to:
Making comments designed to elicit responses that violate the rules; Asking "loaded" questions of another member in an attempt to disguise a flame; Ridiculing or insulting the beliefs of another member.

2.7 Copyright
You will not make posts that violate the copyrights of others. In general, this means that any quoted portion of any work must not exceed 20% of the total work. In the specific case of materials owned by the Associated Press, members shall not quote more than one sentence of the work and provide a link to the work.

~~~~~~~~~

I have cleaned up this thread so it may continue without being closed completely. Please read and follow CF rules while posting.

Thanks.

**************MOD HAT OFF**************

 

[O.F.F.]

Yes, and as a matter of fact, they even have the scripture with Amos's plumbline in one of the rituals, quoted word for word.

But what the "Rev" fails to tell you is, the fact that whenever the Bible is quoted in Masonic ritual it is usually done so out of context; and Amos 7 as quoted in the 2nd Degree is not an exception:

The Symbolism of the Plumbline

The Plumb is an instrument used by operative masons to try perpendiculars, the Square to square their work, and the Level to prove horizontals; but we, as Free and Accepted Masons, are taught to use them for more noble and glorious purposes. The Plumb admonishes us to walk uprightly in our several stations before God and man, squaring our actions by the Square of Virtue, ever remembering we are traveling upon the Level of Time to that undiscovered country from whose bourne no traveler returns.

If the VSL used in the second degree (Fellow Craft) is the Holy Bible, then it is generally opened on the Masonic altar to Amos 7:7-8:

Amos 7:7-8

Thus he shewed me: and, behold, the LORD stood upon a wall made by a plumbline, with a plumbline in his hand. And the LORD said unto me, Amos, what seest thou? And I said, A plumbline. Then said the LORD, Behold, I will set a plumbline in the midst of my people Israel: I will not again pass by them any more.

The Masonic explanation of the symbolism of the Plumb to the Fellow Craft Mason:

Here the Plumb as a Jewel, the Plumb as a working tool of the Fellow Craft, and the Heavenly Plumb in the hand of Jehovah, as told in 'Amos VII', are so inextricably mingled that, while there are many references to them in different parts of the degree, they must symbolically be considered together. The Fellow Craft learns to judge his work by his own plumb line, not by another's; if he erects that which is good work, true work, square work by his own working tools - in other words, by his own standards- he does well.

The Electric Lodge No. 495 of Hamilton, District C, under the jurisdiction of the Grand Lodge of Canada in the Province of Ontario

This is confirmed by MasonicWorld.com:

Thus the lesson from Amos is that we are to judge our work by our own plumblines, not by another’s; if we erect that which is good work, true work, square work by our own working tools - in other words, by our own standard- we will do well. Only when a Fellowcraft is false to his own conscience is he building other than fair and straight.

THE THREE SCRIPTURE READINGS --
SHORT TALK BULLETIN - Vol.IX December, 1931 No.12

So, we see that a Mason is taught to go about establishing his own righteousness, that his life's work is to be based on his own standards, NOT God's standards or by the example of the One True Plumbline -- Jesus Christ. And, as long as he is satisfied with how he is living his life and what he has accomplished, he does well. This is reiterated by the Grand Lodge of Florida:

Masonry teaches the practice of all good morals, leaving the interpretation of right and wrong to the individual conscience.

Lodge System of Masonic Education, Book 1, page 7

Yet, is this appropriate from a biblical perspective? Absolutely not!

Romans 10:3 - "For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God."

Jesus Christ is revealed as the Plumbline in Amos 7:7-8. A plumb line is an instrument used to measure an absolutely perfectly straight vertical line. Jesus Christ is not only 100% God; He is the epitome of human perfection. Therefore, Christ alone is qualified to walk in the midst of His people, measuring and exposing good and bad, true and false (Revelation 2 and 3).

For this reason, we as Christians are to examined ourselves and live according to Christ's standard, being transformed (Romans 12:2) and conformed to His likeness (Romans 8:28-29), being made perfect (Matthew 5:48) by Him as we submit to His Will (Job 22:21) and allow Him to live His life in and through us (Galatians 2:20) to produce His fruit (good works), not ours (Galatians 5:22-23). For our fruit (righteousness), as well as the fruit of the Mason and of all mankind is nothing more than filthy rags (Isaiah 64:6) when compared to the perfect righteousness of God found through Christ Jesus our Lord (2 Corinthians 5:21).

 

[O.F.F.]

It's a matter of interpretation--some see the obligation as binding us not to reveal in any way; but I tend to view the statement as a whole, not to discuss in such a way that "the secrets of Freemasonry are thereby revealed." And with the ready availability of most of what you find in Freemasonry at the touch of a fingertip, truly there are very few "secrets" left anymore.

He is right, by the touch of your fingertip click on the following link to learn:

The Secrets of Freemasonry

 

[Abbadon]

Here the Plumb as a Jewel, the Plumb as a working tool of the Fellow Craft, and the Heavenly Plumb in the hand of Jehovah, as told in 'Amos VII', are so inextricably mingled that, while there are many references to them in different parts of the degree, they must symbolically be considered together. The Fellow Craft learns to judge his work by his own plumb line, not by another's; if he erects that which is good work, true work, square work by his own working tools - in other words, by his own standards- he does well.
The Electric Lodge No. 495 of Hamilton, District C, under the jurisdiction of the Grand Lodge of Canada in the Province of Ontario

So, we see that a Mason is taught to go about establishing his own righteousness, that his life's work is to be based on his own standards, NOT God's standards or by the example of the One True Plumbline -- Jesus Christ. And, as long as he is satisfied with how he is living his life and what he has accomplished, he does well.

Better a man come to Christ of his own free will than being forced by someone else. Better that they realize through their own plumbline that Christ is lord, than to go by someone else's plumbline.

This is actually Christian thinking: it's better that I judge myself, and go by my own Christian standards, than to blindly adhere to someone else's faith.

Here the Plumb as a Jewel, the Plumb as a working tool of the Fellow Craft, and the Heavenly Plumb in the hand of Jehovah, as told in 'Amos VII', are so inextricably mingled that, while there are many references to them in different parts of the degree, they must symbolically be considered together. The Fellow Craft learns to judge his work by his own plumb line, not by another's; if he erects that which is good work, true work, square work by his own working tools - in other words, by his own standards- he does well.
The Electric Lodge No. 495 of Hamilton, District C, under the jurisdiction of the Grand Lodge of Canada in the Province of Ontario

If anyone is taking things out of context, it is you, O.F.F. The Plumbline they are encouraging here is God, and they are saying "go by God's laws, not by O.F.F.'s or Pat Robertson's, or King James the first, or whoever."

He is right, by the touch of your fingertip click on the following link to learn:

The Secrets of Freemasonry

Should we trust second and third hand sources that have been diluded by bigotry, or facts and the source documents themselves?

The Official Monitor of the Grand Lodge of Ancient Free and Accepted Masons, State of Texas.

Duncan's Masonic Ritual and Monitor.

 

[Rev Wayne]

Better a man come to Christ of his own free will than being forced by someone else. Better that they realize through their own plumbline that Christ is lord, than to go by someone else's plumbline.

This is actually Christian thinking: it's better that I judge myself, and go by my own Christian standards, than to blindly adhere to someone else's faith.

Hey, you're pretty good at this stuff! You been reading or sumpin, or does it just come natural?

Should we trust second and third hand sources that have been diluded by bigotry, or facts and the source documents themselves?

The Official Monitor of the Grand Lodge of Ancient Free and Accepted Masons, State of Texas.

Duncan's Masonic Ritual and Monitor.

Ah, yes, Texas. NOW I'm impressed, what an excellent selection!

Masonry teaches the practice of all good morals, leaving the interpretation of right and wrong to the individual conscience.

I've seen the remark in context, and I've seen nothing to convince any differently than, your own religion or religious/moral system is a choice that is left up to you. Meaning, the Lodge teaches lessons in morality, but leaves the specifics up to the individual interpretation of them up to the individual and his own faith.

Again, I emphasize, to understand Masonry, understand its history. Consider the situations in this country at its inception which were key issues of individual conscience:

(1) Freedom of religion: many of the early settlers in America were people who sought escape from persecution for their beliefs. America provided a safe haven where they could come and engage in freedom of religious worship without fear of reprisal

(2) Freedom of Government: Matters of individual conscience came to the forefront in a lasting way with the desire to be free from the crown of England. Certainly it was a difficult matter for Masons, who are taught loyalty to their government. Some, like George Washington and Benjamin Franklin, had to fight an inner as well as an outer battle in determining the course to follow. Certainly "individual conscience" becomes a delicate matter when the choice is not between wrong and right, but between what can easily be described as two rights.

Is it any surprise, then, considering these significant parts of U.S. and U.S. Masonic history, that the two subjects which are off-topic in the Lodge even to this day, are politics and religion? And we still find individual conscience as a key point in Masonry, and still regarding the same topics:

The supreme task of the Church is still the preaching of the Gospel, intensifying the individual conscience and bringing to us the precepts of redemption and eternal life.

Say what? Was that a Mason making that strong statement?

In conclusion, perhaps we have unconsciously merited some opposition from the Church inasmuch as too often a brother declares "Masonry is religion enough for him." But Freemasonry, even though it were a religion, can never satisfactorily answer the four great fundamental questions of every age - God Life, Death, Immortality. Nor can any institution or belief which does not have for its inspiration the life and work of Jesus Christ. Masonry is eternally a quest for light. If, profiting by Masonic intercourse, we have learned to find good in every faith, and if we are truly pursuing that eternal quest for light, we are inevitably led to Him who is indeed the very Fountain of Light - the Man of Galilee, whose teachings have illuminated mankind these two thousand years.
(Leland Kress, New Brunswick, "The Church and Freemasonry," Builder Magazine Vol. 2, #10, @ http://www.phoenixmasonry.org/the_builder_1916_october.htm )

Hmmmm, I guess it was.

Also:

The fact is that I execrate the Hegelian State and the Austinian conception of State Sovereignty, and have very flatly so expressed myself in the book Father Conway attempts to review. It is wholly devoted to the maintenance of the moral supremacy of the individual conscience against the moral supremacy of the State as well as against the moral supremacy of the Pope as defined in the Vatican Conciliar decrees of 1870. ("Mr. Marshall and His Critics," Charles C. Marshall, New York, Builder Magazine Vol. IV #8, @ http://www.phoenixmasonry.org/the_builder_1928_august.htm

There you have both still affirmed, and applied as stated, in arguments urging the assertion of individual conscience when faced with oppressive (1) religions or (2) governments.

There are really very few organizations anywhere in the world that have to be understood within such a large contextual framework. But there are very few institutions who still maintain, essentially unchanged, so much of their heritage and tradition. Freemasonry is certainly one of them. The further I look into their history, the more I find which has been preserved from a time and a culture vastly different from our own--and the more I understand the need to see what is, by studying and understanding more fully what was.

And the more I understand about that history, the easier it becomes to understand that accusations like the one just raised about that particular statement, are out of context. By that I mean, Masonry has a much larger context to consider, by virtue of the fact that so much of "Masonic context" has remained essentially unchanged for so long.

If we approach the concept of "individual conscience" on our own terms and from our own present-day culture, then we might very well come up with an idea like "a Mason is taught to go about establishing his own righteousness." But that interpretation is anachronistic, failing as it does to consider what the term meant when considered from a centuries-old context.

Things get a little easier once you understand.

 

[O.F.F.]

Better a man come to Christ of his own free will than being forced by someone else.

How have I or anyone else in this forum forced or even attempted to force any other member to come to Christ?

Better that they realize through their own plumbline that Christ is lord, than to go by someone else's plumbline.

The point I was making is that we ALL should be going by the plumbline, example or standard set by Jesus Christ Himself; NOT by our own. By your comment, you seem to object to the standard of Christ, and prefer your own OVER His.

This is actually Christian thinking;

Again, obviously based upon YOUR OWN standard of this; and NOT a biblical perspective.

it's better that I judge myself, and go by my own Christian standards, than to blindly adhere to someone else's faith.

Please provide the biblical precedent where there is such a thing as ones "individual" Christian standard(s) as opposed to one standard of morality that ALL Christians are to follow; namely that which has already been set by Jesus Christ our Lord.

If anyone is taking things out of context, it is you, O.F.F. The Plumbline they are encouraging here is God, and they are saying "go by God's laws, not by O.F.F.'s or Pat Robertson's, or King James the first, or whoever.

What "laws" have I dictated? When have I made reference to or brought Pat Robertson into the discussion? And, I clearly stated that Jesus Christ is not only the Plumbline of God, but that He is 100% God. Therefore, please show how I have taken anything out of context.

Should we trust second and third hand sources that have been diluded by bigotry, or facts and the source documents themselves?

The Official Monitor of the Grand Lodge of Ancient Free and Accepted Masons, State of Texas.

Duncan's Masonic Ritual and Monitor.

I don't see the relevance of you trying to provide a copy of the Official Monitor of the Grand Lodge of Texas Ancient Free and Accepted Masons from a SECONDARY SOURCE (http://www.sacred-texts.com/), but the link I provided of the Secrets of Freemasonry are already cited on our website as coming from Duncan, Malcom C. Duncan's Masonic Ritual and Monitor. 3rd ed. New York: Dick and Fitzgerald Publishers. And these "secrets" can be verified by any former Mason or active Mason, including the Rev. Wayne himself. Although he'll probably choose not to confirm or deny their Masonic validity as would other active Masons, since they are THE ONLY REAL SECRETS OF THE MASONIC ORDER!

It appears in your obvious "youthful zeal" as the self-proclaimed, 19 year old "Self Bias Resistor" to become a Mason yourself, it has caused you the tendency to jump to unfounded conclusion. May I suggest you SLOW DOWN and patiently mature to the lawful age of 21 when you will be eligible in most jurisdictions to become a Mason. Lord knows, in these threads on the topic of Freemasonry, you have certainly shown your preference of it over biblical Christianity. Prehaps you can use Rev. Wayne as a reference or even petition his lodge for membership after your 21st birthday. I trust they will gladly welcome you.

 

[Rev Wayne]

I don't see the relevance of you trying to provide a copy of the Official Monitor of the Grand Lodge of Texas Ancient Free and Accepted Masons from a SECONDARY SOURCE (http://www.sacred-texts.com/), but the link I provided of the Secrets of Freemasonry are already cited on our website as coming from Duncan, Malcom C. Duncan's Masonic Ritual and Monitor. 3rd ed. New York: Dick and Fitzgerald Publishers.

"Your website?"

Oh, I see: a SECONDARY source. Your attempt to discredit the link just self-destructed when you acknowledged your own link did the same thing the sacred-texts site did: namely, posted the material exactly as it appears in the original. I can vouch for the accuracy of the sacred-texts.com version of the Texas Manual, having a personal copy of it in my library, as well as several other Monitors from various jurisdictions. I have no question in my mind that you can vouch for Duncan's as well, as found on your website. Duncan's isn't that hard to come by, I know at least two other sites where it is located online.

Prehaps you can use Rev. Wayne as a reference or even petition his lodge for membership after your 21st birthday. I trust they will gladly welcome you.

I'm sure they'd be happy--but not as ecstatic as they were when you left.

I say this with a smile and a friendly reminder to refrain from the personal, lest ye prompt another admonishment. As you can tell, I'm not averse to friendly repartee and one-upmanship, if you wish to go there. But it will serve no purpose to engage in ad hominem arguments. We're doing pretty well here, all things considered, but let's address issues and not people.

I do have a couple of questions, though. For one, in the "Secrets of Freemasonry" page to which you provided the link, you stated:

What's more, after taking the bloody oath that reinforces this fear, the candidate is told that "the penalty of their oath (or obligation) is not literal, but instead, symbolic of what an honest man would rather undergo then to violate his solemn vow." Yet, by then it is too late, the fear factor has already been well instilled. So, it turns out to be a "catch-22," either you fear that some over zealous Mason just might hold you accountable by fulfilling the penalty on behalf of the Craft, or else your pride and honor are at risk of being destroyed. In either case, most Masons choose to take the safest route and keep their mouths shut entirely, rather than risk either consequence.

Yet, in your personal testimony, you never spoke of being afraid. In fact, you spoke of being eager and zealous for the fraternity, which eventuated in your pursuing "all you could be" in Masonry. And when you left the Lodge, according to your testimony, it was from a growing conviction after following the Lodge's admonition to "let the Bible be the rule and guide of your faith," and to be diligent in reading and following its instructions. That growing conviction that, in your opinion, spoke against your lodge involvement, led to your eventual resignation from the Lodge.

So my question is, if Masons are using the fear tactics you describe:

Where exactly was that "Fear Factor" when you were coming up through the degrees?

I don't ask this by way of attack or accusation, mind you. It just seems that you have described something in the above cited paragraph that doesn't seem to have been part of your personal experience. That brings back to my mind another similar situation in a thread that ran on this forum for around 30 pages or so, back in '03 or so, titled "Christianity and Freemasonry." In that thread, there were several comments being tossed around concerning accusations of "satanism" in the Lodge. As I recall, you were pretty quick to accuse, but reticent to defend when it came down to your own Masonic experience. It was such a significant moment to receive such an acknowledgment from so vehement an accuser, that I felt compelled to retain the gist of it for posterity:

Q: When you were a Freeemason did you ever see any Freemason indulge in any Evil or Satanic worship, or was there any mention of Wiccan content in your Lodge...Just your personal testimony for the benefit of Andrew who seems to think Masonry is based on Witchcraft and Satanism.

A: Other than our periodic jolly, tipsy, 'boys-will-be-boys' carousing mayhem of wine, women, and song, that's about as evil as it got. Yes, that was sinful on our part in most cases, but no, I have never personally witnessed deliberate Wiccan, Satanism or Witchcraft. But, that has never been my contention. You and I know that those issues exist, and have existed among some Masons, but if so, they are the exception and not the rule. (CF, "Christianity and Freemasonry, 4/9/04, post #245)

The issues are the same: in both cases, accusations were made which do not seem to be reflected in your own personal experience in Masonry. The gist of the argument in the paragraph cited from the page you linked, is that Masons engage in practices designed to instill fear in new candidates, and these fears are reinforced by both the obligations and by other Masonic practices. Yet there is nothing of the sort in your detailed personal testimony which also appears on the site. So I think the question is valid:

If what you say is true, shouldn't there have been at least a shred of corroboration from something in your testimony?

 

[O.F.F.]

The gist of the argument in the paragraph cited from the page you linked, is that Masons engage in practices designed to instill fear in new candidates, and these fears are reinforced by both the obligations and by other Masonic practices. Yet there is nothing of the sort in your detailed personal testimony which also appears on the site. So I think the question is valid:

If what you say is true, shouldn't there have been at least a shred of corroboration from something in your testimony?

You cannot limit the totality of my Masonic testimony by a portion of which I share on our website anymore than you can limit the totality of my Christian testimony to my Masonic one. The fact is my Masonic testimony is only a small fraction of my Christian testimony and it is not exhaustive as rendered on our website. I didn't have the time or the desire to include every finite detail of my Masonic experience on our website, neither do I here.

Suffice to say, that the Masonic "fear factor" I referred to on the page you cite was what I felt when initiated an Entered Apprentice, and other Masons at the time and since then have told me they felt similar fears. But we all sort of looked at it as a form of emotional and psychological hazing by the fraternity. After initially becoming a Master Mason, I used to have fun instilling the same fears when I served as Senior Deacon in "receiving" new candidates. When done well, this scare-tactic really worked. I had guys tell me afterwards, that they thought I drew blood when I "received them on a point of a sharp instrument piercing their naked left breast."

At the time, I thought is was pretty fun and the brethren observing the ceremony always got a kick out of how well I served in the role and often selected me to do that part of the ritual. But that was during my Masonic years when I was much younger (25 years ago), immature and my thinking at the time was pretty warped.

I also did not include in my Masonic testimony the brutal physical hazing that took place in Prince Hall Military Lodges I attended oversees. These brothers would literally include beating sessions as part of the ceremony, and they too did it as a form of FUN for the initiators and as a form of TRIAL and TESTING of the initiated; as they "traveled" through this rite of passage. While there, I didn't participate in such vicious hazing, because that was not how I became a Mason. But others there were made that way and felt compelled to return the punishment. However, I felt compelled as I witnessed it to stop it as much as I could by covering them with my own body and telling the hazers that I would take the beating for them, or that if they wanted to beat them they had to beat me first. This approach usually helped to slow the hazing down and ultimately minimize the pain suffered by the new candidates.

While I was never beaten on behalf of a new candidate, I did experience similar hazing when I became a Shriner during my military tour in Germany. The hazing I received then also included torturous electric shock treatment. Yet, this was my experience as a Prince Hall Mason, yours and others may have been different. I don't include my Shriner experience in my Masonic testimony either, but it still happened. I do describe it in one of my ministry lectures regarding the Nobles of the Mystic Shrine (Shriners) in a lecture entitled, "Demystifying the Mystic Shrine: Looking Under the Fez."

The point is, as you can see, there is a lot I could have included in my Masonic testimony. But I chose not to because it would have been abundantly too long. In fact, I could tell you more now but this post would also be much too long.

Having said all this, please do not try to steer this thread into a discussion about me. As you said:

We're doing pretty well here, all things considered, but let's address issues and not people.

 

[Rev Wayne]

Having said all this, please do not try to steer this thread into a discussion about me.

That was not my intent, as I stated. The thing was, reading that article and reading your testimony paints two different pictures. On the one you are eager beaver and busting over with desire, an avid "Mason among Masons." On the other you paint a picture of Masons scared to death but even more scared to say anything. The two do not coincide at any point. And even with what you have posted now, there is still a factor of disbelief. One would think, if you are doing an exposee of all of the bad things about Masonry, and sharing your testimony on such a website, that if anything of the sort had ever happened to you, it would be one of the first "evils of Masonry" you would have addressed. But instead, you go--what, five or six years?--without saying anything at all, and then introduce it even now only after being prodded with questions about the inconsistency of the "secrets" article with your own personal testimony?

But with the bizarre nature of what you have just posted, if there are any Masons reading this who can respond to it from a standpoint of knowledge or experience, I invite them to please do so. This is simply bizarre beyond anything I could have imagined your response might be. If I had ever gotten any clue even in the very slightest that anything such as you described, might ever be a part of being a Mason, I would never have joined, and if I got any clue of such things even now that this is true of any more than an extreme fringe part of Masonry, I would be out in a heartbeat.

A couple of years ago, you were trying your best to discourage me from joining. Did it never occur to you at the time that this might be information that would have been pertinent to me, should you really have wanted me not to join? I mean, the circumstances and the timing of you addressing this now, the personal track history of our exchanges, the total non-existence of any comment on anything even resembling what you have just described, would require a suspension of logic on my part to truly believe you.


But as I said, that's just the scope of my own knowledge and experience, and if there is any such thing to be found in Masonry, I shall simply have to let others weigh in. I have also put out some feelers for feedback from some guys that I know have more extensive experience both here and abroad, who are straight shooters and will tell me truthfully if they have heard of any such thing. But for the moment I am reserving comment until I have had time to hear sufficient input from others.

No, this is not about you, this is about claims made on your website that appeared frivolous to me as I read the article. And as I read, it occurred to me that it was inconsistent with what you had described from personal experience, and so I addressed the inconsistency. Currently I remain skeptical, but keeping an open mind as always, will give the benefit of the doubt and see what feedback comes in on this. As you mentioned, perhaps there is that severe a difference between ours and Prince Hall Masonry, perhaps it has more to do with Masonry overseas, perhaps with the Military Lodges, I don't really know. Perhaps, since you mention it occurring to you only in association with Shriners, it could pertain only to that body--which would be a different animal altogether in a thread on "Masons," since not all Masons, in fact far from it, are also Shriners.

I will simply let others respond, because in comparison with anything I have seen or heard of this nature, I'm afraid the number of cases I have ever heard of this description, fall into a category of one.

"More light," anyone?

 

[O.F.F.]

If I had ever gotten any clue even in the very slightest that anything such as you described, might ever be a part of being a Mason, I would never have joined, and if I got any clue of such things even now that this is true of any more than an extreme fringe part of Masonry, I would be out in a heartbeat.

A couple of years ago, you were trying your best to discourage me from joining. Did it never occur to you at the time that this might be information that would have been pertinent to me, should you really have wanted me not to join?

Believe it or not Wayne, I love you with the love of Christ and would want nothing more than for you to resign from Masonry. At the time when I was trying to discourage you from joining, I was trying to do so on the basis of it's teachings being incompatible with biblical Christianity. Personally, I think this is far more evil than it's hazing, racial dichotomy, or all the drinking and carousing that goes on from the Blue Lodge to the Shrine. And, at the time, I thought it's biblical incompatibility would be especially more important to a Christian pastor, like yourself.

Apparently I was wrong. But Wayne, we do not think alike, so you shouldn't have expected me to respond at the time in a way that you would have. I have no reason to lie to you. If what you say is true, if my hazing experience would have made a difference to you then, than it should make a difference to you NOW. Come out and be apart of our ministry. I believe God would use you in a powerful way.

For Christ sake, please consider what I am asking. In the meantime, you do not have to wait for other Masons to get back to you to validate what I am saying. You can do your own research via the Internet. Here are a couple of examples:

Prince Hall Masons in the News

MASONS ACCUSED OF HAZING

FROM: ARLINGTON MORNING NEWS
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 9, 1999
By James Trahan & Ben Tinsley
Staff writers of the Arlington Morning News

The Tarrant County District Attorney's office is investigating allegations that an Arlington man was assaulted during a Masonic induction ceremony at a community center Eric Mitchell accuses Masons Of Thomas H. Routt Lodge No. 639 of bounding, blindfolding and beating him on the legs and buttocks before dropping ice down his pants in September during a ceremonial ritual at the Hugh Smith Recreation Center, 1815 New York Ave. The 32-year old Arlington hair salon owner said the incident occurred while he and five other men were being inducted into the fraternal organization.

"Before we knew it I received three lashes on the right buttock with a board-like object and three more lashes to my left buttock with a steel or iron ball-like object," Mr. Mitchell said Wednesday. "We were blindfolded so I don't know who did it, even to this day Once they got their lashes, the guys pulled my sweat pants open - we had gray sweats and white T-shirts - and they poured ice down my genitals. They mistook my pain as laughter .. So I received three more lashes on my right check with the board, then four more with the blunt steel ball like object." Darrick Staff, one of 17 members of the Lodge suspended pending an investigation . . .

PHYLAXIS NOTES

Published Monthly by The Phylaxis Society Public Affairs Office and Masonic Information Center January 2000 (emphasis added)

To read the article in its entirety you can go to http://www.freemasonry.org/ and do a search on "Masons accused of hazing." For some reason I could only read the article if I click on "Cached" at the end of the listed search. The following is an even sadder, yet more recent article of an incident that took place earlier this year:

Mannheim soldier’s death has element of Masonic mystery: GI found dead hours after scheduled secretive rite


MANNHEIM, Germany — Weeks before Spc. Donald Anthony Wilder was found dead in a barracks shower, his parents say, he told them he knew he was going to be beaten.

On Jan. 7, Wilder, 21, was set to become a third-degree Mason with the Prince Hall Masons in Mannheim. A radio communication security controller repairman with the 512th Maintenance Company, Wilder had become active with the Prince Hall Masons in the fall of 2005. . .

. . .In order to become a third-degree Mason, Wilder knew he would have to endure being beaten on his buttocks with a paddle by fellow Masons.

His plan was to get so drunk for the Jan. 7 ceremony that he wouldn’t feel the pain of the beatings, according to a friend, Spc. Tony d’Ercole. His mother, Diane Wilder, said her son told her that if he got so drunk that he passed out, his fellow Masons would take his blows.

On Jan. 8, just hours after the evening ceremony that took place inside Mannheim American High School at Benjamin Franklin Village, Wilder was found dead in a friend’s shower in the barracks at Spinelli Barracks in Mannheim. . .

. . .The Prince Hall grand lodge that has jurisdiction of the lodge with which Wilder was active issued an edict against hazing just 10 days after Wilder died. . .

by Steve Mraz, Stars and Stripes European edition, Sunday, February 12, 2006 (emphasis added)

One of the ironies of this story is that it demonstrates a recent example of attempts to form racial reconciliation among Masons. When I was a Mason 25 years ago "traveling" in Germany, I met many White Prince Hall Masons, although Prince Hall Masonry is made up of predominately Black men. I would often ask them why come to us rather than a "White" lodge? Most responded with the fact that once they learned that most White lodges did not accept Blacks, they felt that it was more "Masonic" to become a Prince Hall Mason, since they have always accepted men of all races, which this article demonstrates is happening as much now as it did 25 years ago. The problem however, which is another irony that this article shows, is in how they accept its members regardless of race; in a manner that is totally un-masonic.

Speaking of personal testimonies, this is a sad testimony for Freemasonry in general, and Prince Hall Masonry in particular. Wayne, I know this angers you, perhaps as much as it does me -- more now than before. And, while I witnessed such hazing during my tenure as a Mason, I truly believe these brothers never had an intention of really wanting to hurt anyone then, or more recently in the case of brother Donald A. Wilder. Nevertheless, I cried when I read this article, but in my immaturity at the time I witnessed such abusive initiations, I merely offered myself as a substitute for the blows to be inflicted by other Masons. Now I feel I should have done a lot more at the time to stop the abuse permanently. I have many regrets from being a Mason, not the least of which was recommending brothers while oversees to join the Lodge who would subsequently endure such suffering.

Click on the following link to read the article in its entirety:

Stars and Stripes is a daily newspaper published for the U.S. military, DoD civilians, contractors, and their families.

 

[Abbadon]

Hey, you're pretty good at this stuff! You been reading or sumpin, or does it just come natural?

My comment was original gangsta Baptist rhetoric.

Ah, yes, Texas. NOW I'm impressed, what an excellent selection!

Really all I had access to at the moment. I can get all sorts of stuff, I just can't remember where from half the time.

I was just trying to provide your average example. I realize it's not some head document, because there really isn't any sort of Masonic Bible.

How have I or anyone else in this forum forced or even attempted to force any other member to come to Christ?

No, and Freemasonry doesn't push members to of from any religion.

The point I was making is that we ALL should be going by the plumbline, example or standard set by Jesus Christ Himself; NOT by our own. By your comment, you seem to object to the standard of Christ, and prefer your own OVER His.

That was the point from the text: Make God's plumbline your own.

Again, obviously based upon YOUR OWN standard of this; and NOT a biblical perspective.

OK, so, it does not contradict "love thy neighbor" to oppress them by forcing your own morality on them? And it's actually helping them when they follow your own morality blindly instead of developing thier own?

Please provide the biblical precedent where there is such a thing as ones "individual" Christian standard(s) as opposed to one standard of morality that ALL Christians are to follow; namely that which has already been set by Jesus Christ our Lord.

You're just twisting words here. To make it simpler: a Christian should follow Christ for their own self, not following what others say "this is what Christ wants you to do."

Paul, dealt with early Christians who were saying you had to be circumcised to become a Christian. Pretty much anyone that was a known Christian was saying that, but Paul went against them and said "No, that has nothing to do with being a Christian one way or the other."

What "laws" have I dictated? When have I made reference to or brought Pat Robertson into the discussion? And, I clearly stated that Jesus Christ is not only the Plumbline of God, but that He is 100% God. Therefore, please show how I have taken anything out of context.

Let's compare anti-freemasonry with circumcision here... Get where I'm heading already?

And I was just sighting a general thing: follow Christ, not someone else, even if that someone else is a Christian.

Now, to play your game: where did I deny that Christ is not %100 God?

I don't see the relevance of you trying to provide a copy of the Official Monitor of the Grand Lodge of Texas Ancient Free and Accepted Masons from a SECONDARY SOURCE

Sacred-texts.com provides the whole deal, without commentary. Your site wouldn't, because they couldn't twist the words to thier own end that way.

It appears in your obvious "youthful zeal" as the self-proclaimed, 19 year old "Self Bias Resistor" to become a Mason yourself, it has caused you the tendency to jump to unfounded conclusion.

Time served on the earth doesn't mean you grow in mind. Now, if you're done with your age discrimination: I read a heck of a lot more than most 19 year old. I've read both sides of the issue, spend on average 25 hours a week at the library reading.

You don't know who I am. It appears YOU are the one jumping to conclusions here, just off of two digits.

Now, where did you hear that I wanted to become a Freemason? Hmm? I don't recall posting here on this forum that I wanted to do so. Where did you hear about that?