Taxil or no Taxil, the point remains the same, one only has to look at the symbology used by the Mason's to understand what they are really all about.
Then make a direct reference and explain why. I disagree that this is "all you have to do." I look at the same symbols, and I say the same thing, that I understand what they are all about, but this understanding is different from yours, therefore your statement cannot hold true across the board for everyone who does the same. It's a subjective enterprise steered by individual conceptions, and fueled by a tremendous amount of misinformation--most of which is done deliberately by those who profit from human fears.
With an institution as old as Freemasonry, any attempt to define "what they are all about" must take into account both the history of the order and the history of its symbols.
For instance, I've seen accusations about pentagrams in Masonry. The implication is, of course, that since pentagrams are associated with satanism, that Freemasonry is therefore to be considered satanic in nature. But at the time the pentagram entered Masonry (and I honestly can't even tell you where you'd find it, I certainly never see it), there were no satanic connotations to it at all. The pentagram derivation in Masonry comes from the Christian Church, where it was commonly used as a symbol of the five wounds of Christ. Since the Protestant Reformation, the church has lost a great deal of its symbolism (unless one is Catholic), and this is one which fell into disuse rather quickly. Along with that decline, came a new development: the use of pentagrams as satanic symbols. Accusations of satanism based on the pentagram are anachronistic.
Another accusation involves the use of "so mote it be" to end prayers in the lodge. In reality, "so mote it be" says nothing more or less than "amen." But because (1) someone saw it in a wiccan ritual, (2) because they found somewhere else that wicca may have patterned their rituals after Freemasonry, and (3) because wicca is considered witchcraft, they drew the immediate conclusion that Freemasonry is therefore satanic or wrapped up in it in some way. But "so mote it be" is also of Christian derivation, and is from a time frame in Masonry that predates even the formation of modern Masonry with the founding of the UGLE in 1717. Masonry is very resistant to changing anything in its rituals, and thus they are preserved from some very early times, resulting in several archaisms in their content. I have found at least one example of "so mote it be" appearing at the end of a Middle English version of the Lord's Prayer. It is very hard to read, being a mixture of Middle English and the Latin Vulgate, but it is unmistakable even in English.
You can convince yourself all you like that there is nothing sinister about the Mason's, but it doesn't change the obvious facts blaring in our faces, all you have to do is look.
You keep saying that, but vaguely. I can give you specifics, having seen it from the inside, there is nothing sinister about it. There are church members there also, and even one of the local Baptist ministers. In fact, estimates of Masons who are Christians are generally in the 80's and 90's percentage-wise. We regularly end prayers "in Jesus' name" in my lodge, and with no objection to it at all, contrary to the notion that "Jesus' name is forbidden" in lodge. If one chooses York Rite for the "higher" degrees, there are degrees which have as a primary requirement, a belief in Jesus Christ.
Mason's don't let all their secrets out all at once, that's why they have levels or degree's, thats why you have to be "invited" up to the next level once you reach a certain degree, not all can just go up to the top.
There is only one degree I know of which is "by invitation only," and that is 33rd degree Scottish Rite. All the others are by the choice of the individual, contingent upon completion of the degree work. These days, progression through the degrees can be a snap if one wishes to pursue such a course. There are places where the degrees are put on in a day. I have listened to conversations about it with the guys in my lodge, and I get the idea that in our jurisdiction, the typical practice is to put on half the degrees in one session, and half in another.
People get the wrong impression too, about "higher" degrees. The only place that comes from is misinterpretation of what people read, from sources that most of them are reading only to forage for accusable material they can slant. Past Masters of the lodge frequently fill in at whatever slot they are needed, taking the "lower" offices in degree work, etc. Nor do I see anything in the way of attitude to suggest that anyone considers anything in the degrees a matter of superiority/inferiority. Last Saturday I visited another lodge for a first degree presentation, and before it started, I was engaged in wonderful, informal, light-hearted conversation with a gentleman sitting next to me, who I assumed to be one of the locals who belonged to that lodge. Imagine my surprise, when we were about to start, when he walked over to the Master's chair to preside over the meeting. I was even more surprised later to discover this was a former District Deputy Grand Master as well.
That's just it, we're regular, ordinary folks, we go to your church, we work with you, our children go to school with yours, I'm even finding out more than ever lately there are quite a number of us working with your local fire station.
Just because I don't have the book to look for myself, doesn't mean that it is automatically a "conspiracy theory" or haux. There are other ways and means.
How well I know. I've visited quite a few of them myself. They can be pretty convincing, especially to those who do not bother to listen to anybody else.
It is obvious to me because I am not trying to reconcile Freemasonry with Christianity. I do not want to join the two.
Nor do I. My purpose would be more accurately described as separating the myths from reality, which is hard to do with the abundance of myths out there. We have some prolific accusers who are quite adept at "turning a phrase," in the sense of, twisting the truth with half-truths, insinuendoes, and flat-out untruths in the form of deliberately created accusations.
How about the glaringly obvious sun disk that the priest puts the "eucharist" into and hold it up in his hands, before offering it to the people. The huge Phallic symbol outside the Vatican, (and the Mason's use hundreds of these all over the place too, ie outside the Whitehouse.), representing a huge male member, lining up with the door (the representative of a female member) of the Vatican itself. The Pope wears a fish mitre, the same as the priest of Dagon used to wear when he served in the temple.
I'm not a Catholic, I've never done this or seen this. Nor have I seen what you describe anywhere in the lodge. But at least I see your true colors with the statements of the last paragraph.
I could go on, but all you need to do is look into the Babylonian Mystery Religion Symbology and you just start recognising it everywhere.
Absolutely--only don't mistake "imagining" for "recognizing." You've described nothing that represents anything associated with the lodge at all, and have (and strangely so) pulled in totally irrelevant comments about practices of an institution which has historically been at odds with Freemasonry almost since its inception.
do you believe that the Bible is derived from Pagan theology?
In a word: no. In fact, I don't even believe it is "derived." But neither do I believe it was written in a vacuum.