• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

The Antimasonic Propaganda Machine

Rev Wayne

Simplicity + Sincerity = Serenity
Sep 16, 2003
4,128
101
72
SC
Visit site
✟21,040.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
From earlier on this forum:


Certainly an accurate quote, but a truncated one, and not all Coil has to say on the matter. No one can rightly take this to be a full statement of Coil’s position, when he continues a discourse on the subject of religion from page 511 to page 522. Just before he said this, for example:

There can be religion without the recitation of any liturgy; and the recitation of a formula does not necessarily induce religion. In short, there can be much religion which is neither a religion nor one of the religions.

In other words, he uses the same terms as Masons have used in the same discussion for some time now, and for which they have received much criticism. And he makes this definitive statement against the idea that Masonry is a religion:


Coil also rightly recognizes Masonry’s Christian roots, as we have consistently maintained here and elsewhere against strenuous opposition—ironically, from Coil-quoting antimasons:


So despite what antimasons on this forum have tried to suggest to us about Coil’s position on the matter:

  • Masonry may have religious content, but would not be accurately described as “a religion,” or “one of the religions.”
  • There is no consistency by which it may be described as a religion, being Christian in Christian countries, Muslim in Muslim countries, etc.
  • Its roots are thoroughly entrenched in Christianity.
But then, Coil is a Mason. Why would we expect him to express an opinion contrary to that expressed consistently by Masons on this thread?

Conversely, antimasons have been shown to be liars, mis-quoters, and mis-representers, when it comes to quoting from Masonic sources. Why should we have suspected they would do any differently with Coil?

That's not to say, of course, that the entire lot of them are guilty of lying. Most of them, or so it would seem, are merely guilty of swallowing without chewing. So, if it looks like a wolf, acts like a wolf, and eats like a wolf. . . . . .
 

mark53

Veteran
Jan 16, 2005
1,336
47
72
Ingle Farm, Adelaide, South Australia
✟24,379.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
AU-Greens

I normally don't reply on threads like this so this is a first for me!

There seems to be a rather large group of people who read books and article talking about the evils of ........... (fill in the missing pages) e.g. Freemasons, Roman Catholics, and anything else that one feels is different to their beliefs.

I bet none, or very few, of these people actually speak to and try to really understand where they come from!

Christians were accused, in the 2nd Cent (I think) of being cannibals (because of the very strange rite - to them - of the Lord's Supper / Communion / Mass etc).
 
Upvote 0

Serapha

Well-Known Member
Jun 29, 2003
5,133
28
✟6,704.00
Faith
Non-Denom

Hi there!




Include me in that "large group" of people who read books and articles while seeking the truth.....



Probably 90% of what I know I learned directly from the horse's mouth, either through training within the particular denomination or by instruction from their instruction materials, the teachers of such classes, or the author's of the books themselves.

BTW... I have never been accused of being a cannibal


But this thread is about


The Antimasonic Propaganda Machine

and all I know about masons, I learned from a mason who had been through all the training they offer.



But their teachings have deviated from what the Bible teaches, therefore, whether they are a "religion" or not... they should be avoided by Christian believers.


~serapha~



 
Upvote 0

O.F.F.

An Ex-Mason for Jesus
Jan 22, 2004
1,422
49
USA
Visit site
✟16,848.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
If one looks closely at the quotes, all that is proven by the initial post of this thread, and the quotes contained therein, is the fact the one of the most prolific Masonic authors of all time states that the Religion of Freemasonry is not a mainstream religion but, by his own definition, is religion nonetheless. For Coil in that same passage said:

But let me respond to Wayne’s bottom-line points:
Wayne said:
Masonry may have religious content, but would not be accurately described as “a religion,” or “one of the religions.”
The issue is not necessarily whether Freemasonry is a religion or not, the underlining unavoidable issue is this; if Masonry has religious content is that content compatible with biblical Christianity? Some [Masons] will argue yes, based upon vague definitions of concepts taught in the Lodge. However, true Christians, and those Ex-Masons for Jesus that are grounded in God's Word, would argue that the Bible is very specific about such things as who God is, what constitutes His divine revelation to mankind, and is very explicit about the means to salvation, where Freemasonry is not.

Wayne said:
There is no consistency by which it may be described as a religion, being Christian in Christian countries, Muslim in Muslim countries, etc.
Yes, but speaking as a former Mason, I can testify to the fact that because it appears to be Christian in Christian countries, and Muslim in Muslim countries, etc. its religious teachings create an "all encompassing god," which includes any concept of "God" be it Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, etc. by virtue of the chief requirement of membership of belief in "a" Supreme Being rather than "the" Supreme Being as described in the Bible as God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.

This is the first and most critical problem with the religious teachings of Freemasonry, because to demand belief in merely any Supreme Being of choice for membership in order to establish a universal brotherhood implies that all concepts of God are ultimately one in the same, which according to Grand Lodge authorities is the basis for its universality:

So as biblically discerning readers can see, although Wayne pointed out, it’s Christian in Christian countries, Muslim in Muslim countries, etc. given the above quotes from Masonic Grand Lodge authorities, there are problems with Freemasonry from a biblical perspective. These Grand Lodge positions stated above demonstrate that the Religion of Freemasonry is formed by teaching the commonalities of all religions in order to establish a universal brotherhood that can gather around a common altar and worship a common Deity. For the Mason who claims to be a Christian, this grieves the Holy Spirit, and undermines God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ because it is a clear violation of the First and Greatest Commandment “to love the Lord our God with all our hearts, mind and strength, and to NOT have any other gods before Him.”

Wayne said:
Its roots are thoroughly entrenched in Christianity.
Jesus said in Matthew chapter 7:

If Freemasonry has blossomed into a tree of "religious universalism," it stands to reason that Jesus Christ is certainly not, and never was its root, no matter how much Satan has deceived Masons to think otherwise.
 
Upvote 0

Abbadon

Self Bias Resistor - goin' commando in a cassock!
Jan 26, 2005
6,022
335
38
Bible belt, unfortunatly
✟30,412.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
O.F.F. said:
If Freemasonry has blossomed into a tree of "religious universalism," it stands to reason that Jesus Christ is certainly not, and never was its root, no matter how much Satan has deceived Masons to think otherwise.

So since America has a freedom of religion bit in the law, then America is a country for and by Satanists. I mean, that seems to be the reasoning you're using, since any group that accepts others for differing beliefs is a work of Satan according to your arguement.

Well, I see an American flag in your status bar, so according to using reason to your arguement, you're a Satanist.

Unless you are opposed to Satan, then you hate the US.
 
Upvote 0

O.F.F.

An Ex-Mason for Jesus
Jan 22, 2004
1,422
49
USA
Visit site
✟16,848.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
If that is how you see my post, then your reasoning and logic are flawed, or you are biblically ignorant of the points I made. In either case, don't confuse "religious freedom" with "religious universalism."

The Constitution of the United States protects "religious freedom" in our pluralistic society; Freemasonry, on the other hand, espouses "religious universalism" in its secret society. There is a big difference between the two.

The former allows its citizens to express religion as they see fit without the intervention of the government or other citizens. For Christians that's a good thing, especially when we consider the persecuted Church in other parts of the world. The latter, however, flies in the face of the One True Living God's desire to have an absolutely radically exclusive personal relationship with everyone on this planet through an accurate and saving knowledge of Jesus Christ our Lord.

Masons in America are free to express the religious teachings of Freemasonry, but from a Christian perspective those teachings are anti-Christ and are therefore from Satan, who is the author of all counterfeit gospels.
 
Upvote 0

Rev Wayne

Simplicity + Sincerity = Serenity
Sep 16, 2003
4,128
101
72
SC
Visit site
✟21,040.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Serapha said:
But their teachings have deviated from what the Bible teaches, therefore, whether they are a "religion" or not... they should be avoided by Christian believers.
It would be helpful if you could be more specific as to which teachings you refer to.

Exactly. No one has tried to suggest that Freemasonry is totally non-religious. But you have certainly tried to claim in the past that Freemasonry is a religion in and of itself, which is very different from what you just stated. Your quote of Coil indicates clearly your take on the matter:


The interesting part, as usual, would be th parts you omit with your ellipses, which always tells a different story. For instance, his conclusions on the matter. For some reason, when quoting Masonic authors, you always manage to quote from the discussion, but never from the conclusions. One of which, of course, as already posted, was that Freemasonry is neither "a religion or one of the religions."

You may bluster all you wish on the matter, but this totally contradicts all your earlier claims, along with your attempt to bolster the claim by quoting Coil. Your claim was that Freemasonry is a religion, your definitions you provided for "what a religion is," your entire arguments, the tenor of your debate, everything about your former posts on the matter, indicate that your claim was that Freemasonry is a religion, fully trying to establish it in the sense in which Coil insists it is not. Heck, you even supplied the title along with some of your posts, even (as I recall) started a thread by the same title, "The Religion of Freemasonry." In those posts, you tried your best to make it out to be a religion in the same sense Coil says it is not, and tried to quote Coil to "back you up," even though we find now he clearly does not.

So pardon me for doubting your sincerity when you turn 180 degrees in the opposite direction and start saying:
The issue is not necessarily whether Freemasonry is a religion or not. . .
Kind of hard to believe that something that has been the WHOLE issue with you from Day One is now "not necessarily" the issue at all. You could have stated the matter more fully (and more honestly) by simply stating, "Now that someone has posted what Coil actually said, I need to reverse myself."

Wrong. Freemasonry, in fact, not only "implies," it states just the opposite, that all systemic concepts of God are different, and therefore systematic religion is a matter that is not discussed while Lodge is in session. The only reason belief in God is required is Freemasonry's existence as a system of morality, and they rightly acknowledge that systems of morality depend upon a belief in a Supreme God who has created a moral system and who enforces that system, expecting moral behavior from those He has created. The only idea of universal brotherhood is an acknowledgment that as creaures who have all been created by the same Supreme God, we are united in our common humanity. And within those beliefs, yes, Masonry does affirm that there are certain truths that are to be found in all religions, and the claim is a truthful one, as you have been shown more than once. Your claim that they try to unite in a system in which all concepts of God are the same is a false one, easily shown to be so by Masonry's stated principle of non-discussion of religion. The purpose?--to preserve the harmony of the Lodge!

Now if discussion of one's religion is a topic that would disrupt the harmony of the Lodge, and is thus studiously avoided by the Lodge for that stated reason, then how in the world can you make the absurd claim that they all have religious beliefs that are "one and the same?" The fact is, they have acknowledged in the very principles and by-laws that Masons are from different religions.

Wrong again. They teach the commonalities of religions so as not to state anything about God or about religious belief that will contradict any man's faith. The design and purpose is to teach morality, not religious faith--which of course is left up to the individual and his own beliefs. And to call it a "violation" of the 1st commandment is another absurdity. How can something that is part of a Christian's faith, regardless of whether it is part of the accepted beliefs of any other religion or creed, be said to be in "violation" of what he believes, to "undermine" and "grieve" God at all? We're not talking about contradictions here, after all, you stated yourself they were "commonalities." That is an admission in itself that we are speaking of common--that is, shared--beliefs that transcend the boundaries of the religions you speak of. And there are certainly a great deal more of those shared beliefs than you would prefer to allow. But no one is stating in any way that those common beliefs are lifted out of all the others to form another separate religious system. A Mason's religious preference when he leaves the Lodge is the same as it was before he went in. And for Christians who are Masons that is their Christian faith.

If Freemasonry has blossomed into a tree of "religious universalism," it stands to reason that Jesus Christ is certainly not, and never was its root, no matter how much Satan has deceived Masons to think otherwise.
That's like saying, "Once a Christian organization, always a Christian organization," an erroneous claim right on the face of it.

But your idea that it never had a Christian foundation flies against all evidence from history, even that of your former go-to guy Coil:

What I see significant in this is that (1) the Christian foundation is easily seen, and (2) the development of the ritual may be seen, so that we have at first, in answer to "whence came you," the answer "a Lodge of St. Stephen,", then "the Lodge of St. John," then "the Holy Lodge of St. John." Thus it is easy to see some of the earlier form that this familiar discourse took, and trace its development into the form it has come to have even now.

You've quoted Pike, we have shown PIke was aware of the earlier Christian foundation; you've quoted Mackey, we've shown Mackey was more than aware of it; you've quoted Coil, we've now shown that Coil was even more acaquainted with it than some others.

How many more of the sources from which you quote will it take before you see that it is a commonly known and accepted fact in Masonry, that it once had solid Christian roots?
 
Upvote 0

Rev Wayne

Simplicity + Sincerity = Serenity
Sep 16, 2003
4,128
101
72
SC
Visit site
✟21,040.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Several significant excerpts from Coil’s extended discourse on the topic “Religion”:





Strange, every place Coil speaks of "religion" in comparison/contrast with Freemasonry, he also seems to use the word "church." Not once in his discussion does he mention "synagogue" or "mosque." Can you think of any reason that would be the case?

Well, how about, all the quotes in the rituals are from the Bible, and not the book of some other religion?
Or maybe, Christianity is so firmly at its roots, it would be unnatural to think of anything other than Christianity?

It is very much apparent that even down to Coi's time, the expectation that if one is a Mason, he is also a Christian, is such a normal one that those who speak of Masons as Christians were doing so matter-of-factly. I'd say that expectation has not changed all that much since he penned his encyclopedia.
 
Upvote 0

O.F.F.

An Ex-Mason for Jesus
Jan 22, 2004
1,422
49
USA
Visit site
✟16,848.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
If this is true, then why on earth would the following Grand Lodge authorities suggest so "matter-of-factly" that Masons and Freemasonry are not as Christian as you deceive yourself into thinking? After all, these are Masonic authorities, where YOU and Henry Coil are not.

If a Christian can't see the problem in this, even if he is a pastor, then he is either lying, in complete denial deliberately deceiving himself or he's so pitifully ignorant of the biblical implications that he needs serious help.
 
Upvote 0

Rev Wayne

Simplicity + Sincerity = Serenity
Sep 16, 2003
4,128
101
72
SC
Visit site
✟21,040.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Mike,

You are welcome to take this thread wherever you please. But please don't expect me to continue to run around in circles with you. From a post quite some time ago, p. 33:

Where have I seen that comment made to you before? Oh yeah, that's right, it was my last post to you--dealing with Coil there, just as the one quoted here, and dealing with the same remark, making the same statement to you, noting that Coil presupposes Christianity in every single remark he makes about "religions." He'd have been more accurate saying "denominations," which is the only separation he could accurately make from a basic presupposition of Christianity.

If this is true, then why on earth would the following Grand Lodge authorities suggest so "matter-of-factly" that Masons and Freemasonry are not as Christian as you deceive yourself into thinking?

Wake up and smell the java, Mike, I never said "Masons and Freemasonry are Christian!" Where did you interpret such a strange statement? I was speaking of Coil's estimation of an original foundation of Christianity, not a present reality of it.

If a Christian can't see the problem in this, even if he is a pastor, then he is either lying, in complete denial deliberately deceiving himself or he's so pitifully ignorant of the biblical implications that he needs serious help.
And anyone reading this thread is blind if they cannot see that you are in avoidance when I speak of Coil and you offer a weak rebuttal with anything but Coil.

Your use of monitors that have wording that differs from the mainstream is once again duly noted, and once again duly disregarded. That is, unless you can show, from all the other monitors you "claim" to have in your possessioin, that the above statements are representative of Freemasonry, and not the exception, as is generally the case when you offer such quotes.

And as usual, your own interpretation of what you read, superimposed upon it, gives it an amusing flavor. Besides which, your accusations are in error, being based upon the false standard you have set up, namely, that since Freemasonry is not identical to Christianity, it is to be rejected--a ridiculous notion.

Your false standard of "compatibility," by which you actually intend "absolute uniformity," sets up quite a series of absurdities: when we try to point out that Freemasonry is interpreted, apprehended, and appropriated by the individual, and we as Christian individuals can see Christian interpretations of the symbols, then you bristle at the suggestion, accusing us of "trying to make Freemasonry Christian"--another absurdity. And all the while you are attacking Freemasonry because it is not Christianity, you are on the other hand criticizing it on the strange notion that it should be. Which goes a long ways toward explaining why you still carry the conversation around in circles. What else would we expect from such circular logic?

After all, these are Masonic authorities, where YOU and Henry Coil are not.

Careful there, bud, yer gonna get whiplash with all these quick reversals. Your quote, p. 32, this very thread:

Not only Pike, but other prominent Masonic authors claim that Freemasonry is a religion. Henry Coil was critical of the Craft for denying that it is, indeed, a religion.

So you've gone now from lumping Coil together with Pike and others, and referring to him as a "prominent Masonic author" and quoting him authoritatively--to lumping him together with me, and declaring him not to be either prominent or authoritative, and slamming him?
Your circle seems to be widening, just like in Yeats' "The Second Coming":

Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
__________________________________
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?

Let's face it, you snatch at whatever position happens to be convenient for you. You latch onto Coil when it suits you; when Coil is shown to have said differently, you drop him like a hot coal. You've done the same in the past with Pike, later with Wilmshurst, and Mackey, etc. etc. etc.

Maybe circles work for you, but as the man said, eventually the center cannot hold. You have no rope to pull you up any longer, I cannot help your endless implosions, and I have no desire to follow up on anything else you quote and cause them to implode as well. Establishing the pattern is sufficient, abandoning you to the pattern is the only logical next move to prevent being sucked into an endless abyss of rehashes of things you have refused to see, time and time again. It would serve no purpose other than to be drawn into the vortex with you. I have no desire to engage in it further.



 
Upvote 0

Rev Wayne

Simplicity + Sincerity = Serenity
Sep 16, 2003
4,128
101
72
SC
Visit site
✟21,040.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
But let me respond to Wayne’s bottom-line points:
The "bottom-line points" you referred to with that comment, of course, were not mine but Coil's, I simply summed them up. Typically, you ignore what the quoted material had to say, which you can't refute, and go for the personal attack.

Since Coil obviously has become distasteful for you, your opinions of him residing as they now do, in both sides of your mouth, perhaps you can respond to something far different.

In General Ahiman Rezon and Freemason’s Guide by Daniel Sickels (an 1868 remake of Dermott’s 1772 original), there is no Hiram Abiff. There are many of the usual symbols and interpretations of them, the emphasis on death, burial, and resurrection are still present, King Solomon’s temple is a key focus, and there is the MM lecture as well—but all without any mention of any Hiram Abiff or his death or any other details about him at all. There are the usual symbols of the trowel, the twelve messengers, the acacia-tree, the letter G, the pot of incense, the beehive, the sword pointing to a naked heart, the hourglass, the anchor and the ark, the all-seeing eye, and the 47th problem of Euclid. There is the usual passage from Ecclesiastes 12:1-7. There is the description of the Temple and its dimensions.



But there is no Hiram Abiff, no three ruffians, no acted-out ritual in which Hiram is struck dead, buried, and his body later moved. Consequently, there is no exhortation to “imitate Hiram.”



But guess what? The exhortation is there and intact, even though Hiram Abiff is not. Naturally, the wording is a bit different without Hiram as its object. It reads:





It is easy to see that the wording is preserved intact, though without mention of Hiram Abiff, nor an exhortation to “imitate Hiram Abiff.” Clearly, then, the exhortation as we have it from the MM ritual did not originally contain any mention of Hiram Abiff. Someone has recently mentioned that Hiram Abiff did not appear until around 1725. Yet here we have a strong indication that even as late as 1772 one of the premier versions of the ritual in Masonry did not as yet contain any mention of Hiram Abiff at all.



I don’t know what to make of this in comparison with Mackey’s version, which actually was earlier (1852 compared with Sickels’ 1868 date) and was patterned not after Dermott’s version, but Dalcho’s. I do know that Dermott’s was earlier than Dalcho’s but I know very little of the transmission history before that point.

Just a little food for thought.
 
Upvote 0

O.F.F.

An Ex-Mason for Jesus
Jan 22, 2004
1,422
49
USA
Visit site
✟16,848.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The General Ahiman Rezon and Freemason’s Guide, where the above quote comes from, is an official book that is distributed by the Grand Lodge of South Carolina to Masons who are Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, all of whom are men who have no common faith other than their belief in "a" Supreme Being, as well as men like Wayne who claim to be Christians. How would each of these groups of men interpret this text?

Notice that it clearly states that they will gain entry into heaven. This teaching is applied to ALL Masons, not just those who claim to be Christians. Even if Wayne has not met a Muslim, Hindu, or Buddhist who was made a Mason in his jurisdiction of South Carolina, he cannot prove that none have never been "raised" there, nor can he prove that the Grand Lodge of South Carolina would deny their membership into Masonry, since each would qualify by virtue of their belief in "a" Supreme Being.

Therefore, Jesus Christ cannot be the common denominator among them all. Notice that they speak of the "Lion of the tribe of Judah," but they do not define the term in the guide or monitor. One who attempts to interpret the text from a Christian paradigm would likely equate the "Lion of the tribe of Judah" to Jesus Christ.

Wayne said:
I never said "Masons and Freemasonry are Christian!" Where did you interpret such a strange statement?
Since Wayne admits that Masons and Freemasonry are not Christian, he is misleading readers here by attempting to interpret Freemasonry using a non-Masonic paradigm (i.e. a Christian paradigm). As will become very clear, Freemasonry embraces a different meaning of the phrase "Lion of the tribe of Judah." Consider the words found in the Grand Lodge of Florida's Mentor's Manual:

The Grand Lodge of Pennsylvania is currently circulating a book by Oliver Day Street titled, Symbolism of the Three Degrees. Several statements are made concerning the existence of multiple mediators between God and man, as well as other redeemers:

Wayne has seen these quotes before, and he'll continue to see them everytime he tries to mislead folks into thinking the phrase somehow lifts up Jesus Christ. He knows perfectly well that the Masonic view of the expression "Lion of the tribe of Judah" is used generically to refer to any so-called "savior" of any religion that claims to have one. So don't be deceived by his tactics to try and say that it represents Jesus only.

Why a Christian pastor would join, support, promote and defend an organization that makes such blasphemous claims, after knowing that I Timothy 2:5 declares that "there is one God and only one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus," is beyond Christian comprehension. It must grieve the Holy Spirit to see this happening and it should appall every genuine follower of Jesus Christ who reads this thread. It is a travesty to the "cloth" and an embarrassment to the Christian faith.
 
Upvote 0

Rev Wayne

Simplicity + Sincerity = Serenity
Sep 16, 2003
4,128
101
72
SC
Visit site
✟21,040.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married



Better back up on that one, Michael. As I stated in my post, the version I quoted from is the GENERAL Ahiman Rezon, and Freemason’s Guide by Daniel Sickels, written in 1868, and not only does it not have ANY jurisdiction in South Carolina, it NEVER HAS.



The book in South Carolina is The Ahiman Rezon or Book of Constitutions, was published in 2003, and is a version that was edited by Albert Mackey. Mackey’s is an edit done on Dalcho’s version of 1807, Sickels’ version is an edit of Dermott’s older version from 1772.



Sickels’ version has never had any jurisdiction or even any significance in South Carolina. Maybe you should check your facts before you post off the top of your head, it might save you from going over your head. Or perhaps you should simply read my posts before you respond to them.



Since Wayne admits that Masons and Freemasonry are not Christian, he is misleading readers here by attempting to interpret Freemasonry using a non-Masonic paradigm (i.e. a Christian paradigm).



Circles, Circles, Circles!



You already made the same accusation earlier, and as I pointed out to you then, Masonry expects its members to interpret the symbols according to their own belief system.



Obviously you quote this from the ex-Mason piece, “Who is Hiram Abiff?” They also, I notice, speak of “using a non-Masonic paradigm.” Sorry, but interpreting symbols of Freemasonry from one’s religious viewpoint has always been the Masonic way of doing things. Otherwise, how could you post, as you have just done, about “Buddhism, Brahmanism or Mohammedanism



As will become very clear, Freemasonry embraces a different meaning of the phrase "Lion of the tribe of Judah."



As always, you pull out your one isolated monitor quote to try to “prove” something unprovable. On the “Lion of the tribe of Judah, Masonry is extremely clear, if you will only get your nose out of the Florida Monitor long enough to consult the wide variety of Masonic sources that dispute your claim:





Coil says:





Mackey’s Encyclopedia says:



And:



*



Philip de Thaun, 12th century:





Masonic Bible, Master Mason edition:





Macoy’s Dictionary of Freemasonry:





K.J. Stewart, The Freemason’s Manual, 1851:



[Stewart, who also patterns his manual after Dermott’s Ahiman Rezon, interestingly, does not have any mention of Hiram Abiff in his work either, same as Sickels]



Pike, Morals and Dogma:




Even Arthur Waite:





Carl Claudy, Introduction to Freemasonry:



George Steinmetz, Freemasonry: Its Hidden Meaning:





Missouri Lodge of Research, “Key Masonic Words and Phrases”:



[the “merits” of Solomon or anyone else cannot do this, it is a reference to Christ]



PhoenixMasonry homepage:



Manly Hall, Secret Teachings of All Ages:


“Freemasonry and Catholicism,” Max Heindel





Mackey, Symbolism of Freemasonry:

 
Upvote 0

lismore

Maranatha
Oct 28, 2004
20,965
4,614
Scotland
✟295,365.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Rev Wayne said:

It would be helpful if you could be more specific as to which teachings you refer to.





http://www.apologeticsindex.org/f16.html#incompatible

By taking the Masonic oaths, the Mason is swearing to uphold Masonry and its teachings. Swearing to uphold Masonic oaths is sinful, unscriptural and should not be part of the Christian's life for the following reasons.
  1. They make a Christian man swear by God to doctrines which God has pronounced false and sinful. For example, Masonry teaches a universalist doctrine of "the Fatherhood of God" (John 8:42)
  2. The Christian man is made to swear his acceptance of the lie that salvation, the reward of Heaven, can be gained by main's good works (Ephesians 2:8-9)
  3. The Christian man swears to accept and promote the Masonic lie that Jesus is just one of many equally revered prohets in the world. He does this when agreeing that all religions can lead a man to God (Acts 4:12; Philippians 2:9-11; Colossians 1:16-18)
  4. The Christian man swears he will remain silent in the Lodge and not talk of Christ when God commands every Christian to be a witness (Matthew 28:19)
  5. The Christian man swears that he is approaching the Lodge while he is in spiritual ignorance and moral darkness, when the Bible says that Christians are children of light and are indwelt by the Light of the world (John 8:12; Ephesians 5:8)
  6. By taking the Masonic oath, the Christian is guilty of taking the name of the Lord is vain, because he has sworn unlawfully to things God has forbidden him to swear to. God says He will not leave such a person unpunished (Exodus 20:7)
  7. The Christian falsely swears that the God of the Bible is equally present in all religions (1 Timothy 2:5-6)
  8. The Christian falsely swears to the teaching that true worship can be offered in to Lodge to God without the mediatorship of Jesus (Hebrews 9:14)
  9. By swearing the Masonic oath, Christians are perpetuating a false gospel to other Lodge members who look only to the gospel of Masonry to get them to Heaven (Galatians 1:6-8)
  10. The Christian's spirit, mind and body are the temple of the Holy Spirit, "bought with a price" (1 Corinthians 6:19-20). By taking the Masonic obligations he could be agreeing to allow the polution of his mind and spirit by pagan religion or even occult practices.
 
Upvote 0

Rev Wayne

Simplicity + Sincerity = Serenity
Sep 16, 2003
4,128
101
72
SC
Visit site
✟21,040.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
1. "Have we not all one Father? Has not God created us?" Mal. 2:10
"For we are His offspring." Acts 17:28

2. ". . .with a firm reliance on Divine Providence, we shall gain ready admission into that Celestial Lodge above. . ." (Master Mason degree)
"by the merits of the Lion of the tribe of Judah." (Masonic burial rite)

3. Strange, I have no religion but Christianity and have not been asked to surrender it at all. Masonry is my fraternity, it would make a strange religion indeed, with no church, no "worship service," no preacher, no plan of salvation, and no evangelism. Every Mason, "professing his peculiar religion, sanctioned by the laws, by time, and by climate, must needs retain it, and cannot have two religions" (Pike, Morals and Dogma, 161)

Usually, the allegation that Masonry is a separate religion is helped along by one or more blatant falsehoods-for example, the charge that Masonry has its own path to salvation, through the performance of good works. I never met a Mason who believed that, or who would be able to understand how anyone could ever draw such a conclusion.--John Robinson

4. Wrong. Every Mason, by mutual consent, agrees that politics and religion are not subjects for the times Lodge is in session. And Christians, hopefully, can witness with more than their mouths.
"Preach the gospel at all times. If necessary, use words."--Frances of Assisi

5. You have a totally misunderstanding of the meaning behind the ritual. The first three degrees represent a man in the ages of birth, maturity, and death (or youth, maturity, old age). The "candidate in darkness" is simply symbolic of the starting point we all share--being sprung into the world with everything still to be learned--and "light" is symbolic for knowledge and wisdom.

6. I saw nothing in the oaths taken that is "unlawful" or "forbidden" for me as a Christian. Since you have apparently opted to stand in for Serapha on offering specifics, perhaps you could elaborate?

7. First, there is no place any Mason "swears" any such thing. Second, I don't make any declaration of belief in Masonry that is in any way related to what you have just described. Coming together in fraternal relationship with those of other religious beliefs does not require me or any other Mason to subscribe to anything in their belief system at all.

8. I don't "swear to" any "teaching" about worship at all. Masonry "teaches" nothing about how a person should worship at all, that is left up to a person's religion and not their fraternity.

9. How so? Any man in the Lodge knows that I am a Christian, because sooner or later, even the most casual conversation will get around to "what do you do?" I would think "I pastor a church" would be a dead giveaway. But my membership in the Lodge, his membership in the Lodge, how does that alter anything at all from what it would have been had we never met? And having met, I am free to witness to him in any way I choose, just not for that brief time each month, usually not over 2 hours, when Lodge is in session. If you would berate me for that, keep in mind that the average schoolteacher volunatarily enters into a situation where he/she cannot withness to his/her faith for eight hours or more every weekday. Besides, it would be like an interruption to try to witness to someone in the middle of Lodge business or during degree work. The time that I "cannot witness" is for the most part totally irrelevant, since there would not be the opportunity for it during those times anyway.

The whole notion of "can't witness during Lodge" is a misgiven notion at best, and totally absurd, given the nature of the circumstance to which it supposedly applies. Besides, all the men I've met in Lodge so far have been Christians. How do I know? Some of them I see in church. And almost invariably, when they introduce me to others in Lodge, they automatically add by way of introduction, which local church they belong to.

10. I don't go to Lodge to worship, and I certainly don't invite, encourage, or allow any kind of pagan or occult practices in my church. We worship the Lord Jesus Christ in my church, in Spirit and in truth, the Savior who gave His life for me, who is risen and returning as reigning Lord, who is the only-begotten son of the Father in heaven, who through the gift of His precious Holy Spirit has totally and awesomely and forever changed my heart and my life, the one who thought it not robbery to be in the form of God, but taking the form of a servant, became obedient unto death, even the death of the Cross, for which reason the Father has highly exalted Him, and given Him the name above all names, the name at which every knee shall bow and every tongue confess, that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father
 
Upvote 0
C

cwebber

Guest
They make a Christian man swear by God to doctrines which God has pronounced false and sinful. For example, Masonry teaches a universalist doctrine of "the Fatherhood of God" (John 8:42)

HMMMMM! to swear to take care of People, how is this Doctrine that God would not aprove of?

The Christian man is made to swear his acceptance of the lie that salvation, the reward of Heaven, can be gained by main's good works (Ephesians 2:8-9)

First show me were Freemasonry says Works will get you into Heaven. I can show you were Freemaosnry states you must be without Sin to goto Heaven and the Works Salvation will not get you there

A Direct Quote from Frand Lodge FAQs:


39. Do Masons believe that by doing good works they can gain admittance to heaven?
No. The admittance into heaven falls in the realm of the spiritual, not the fraternal.


York Rite you declare that Jesus Christ is your Lord and Savior before you can even petition the Knight's Templars

The Christian man swears he will remain silent in the Lodge and not talk of Christ when God commands every Christian to be a witness (Matthew 28:19)

You must be talking about a different or clandestain Lodge because no one Swears not to talk about Religion or Politics thou they are asked not to.

But again in the York Rite of Freemasonry you are told to go out and Spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ because it is you Duty to do so.

Masonic Templarism, unlike the preceding degrees of Masonry that a York Rite Mason has come through, is not multi-denominational. While Freemasonry prides itself to being open to all that believe in a Supreme Being, the Chivalric Degrees are a Christian order of Knighthood and the candidate for admission in them must profess a belief in the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. To this end a common motto of the order is "Every Christian Mason should be a Knight Templar."
The Christian man swears that he is approaching the Lodge while he is in spiritual ignorance and moral darkness, when the Bible says that Christians are children of light and are indwelt by the Light of the world (John 8:12; Ephesians 5:8)

Again what have you been reading No swearing that I was in spiritual ignorance or moral darkness, thou I did from a lack of knowledge about Freemaosnry to a knowledge there of. Or from Ignorance (Darkness) of Freemaosnry to Knowledge (Light) of Freemaosnry.

By taking the Masonic oath, the Christian is guilty of taking the name of the Lord is vain, because he has sworn unlawfully to things God has forbidden him to swear to. God says He will not leave such a person unpunished (Exodus 20:7)

What has God said I should not swear to for I have not swore. I have only done as Paul did "As God as my Witness" And I hope that He would punish me for breaking my Promise that Freemasonry tells me to put the Duty I owe to God above all others.


The Christian falsely swears that the God of the Bible is equally present in all religions (1 Timothy 2:5-6)

Really? where?
The Christian falsely swears to the teaching that true worship can be offered in to Lodge to God without the mediatorship of Jesus (Hebrews 9:14)

Agian Where? I do know that many Churches have started in MAsonic Lodges such as the Biggest Church in Texas


By swearing the Masonic oath, Christians are perpetuating a false gospel to other Lodge members who look only to the gospel of Masonry to get them to Heaven (Galatians 1:6-8)

Again Where? Freemaosnry declares that it and Works can not get you to Heaven. Please show me were it states other wise?

You do know were the Lessons of Freemasonry come from don't you. The Holy Bible.

1 Cor. Ch13
2 Peter
Psalms 133
Judges 12:6
Kings 7
Amos 7
Ecc
Isa
Matt Ch 7

And that is just a few many many more
 
Upvote 0

O.F.F.

An Ex-Mason for Jesus
Jan 22, 2004
1,422
49
USA
Visit site
✟16,848.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
cwebber said:
HMMMMM! to swear to take care of People, how is this Doctrine that God would not aprove of?
God would not approve because of the following portion of the oath YOU took as a "Holy Royal Arch Mason" in the so-called "Christian" York Rite of Freemasonry:

Yeah, you swore to take care of people all right, you swore to take care of fellow Masons and their families over any other. Therefore, it is reasonable to expect that means over other Christians too, particularly if they are not Masons.

As the above quote of your Godless, unethical oath states you swore to:

1. Show favoritism in hiring practices, which is against the law according to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

2. Support a Mason's cause, even if he is right or wrong.

3. Keep the secrets of fellow Masons without exception, which means even if he murdered someone you would help conceal his crime of homicide.

So, in effect you made a commitment to sin against God, if necessary, on behalf of fellow Masons. Show me in the Bible where God approves of this unethical, immoral behavior for Christians!

Belief in the doctrine of the Holy Trinity by itself doesn't make one a Christian. If this is all the York Rite requires, than they are way off the mark. There are a lot more essential doctrines that one must believe in order to be a Christian, so this requirement is shallow and meaningless without the rest. And, since they would be required to keep the above oath in the process of becoming a Knight, then their profession of faith is in vain. For God would not want anyone to make a commitment to sin for any reason.
 
Upvote 0

Rev Wayne

Simplicity + Sincerity = Serenity
Sep 16, 2003
4,128
101
72
SC
Visit site
✟21,040.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Yeah, you swore to take care of people all right, you swore to take care of fellow Masons and their families over any other. Therefore, it is reasonable to expect that means over other Christians too, particularly if they are not Masons.
The strange thing is that you criticize Masons for implementing Christian principles. The Christian standard is "Let us do good unto all people, especially those of the household of faith." (Gal. 6:10)

This principle is often expressed as "Charity begins in the home."

Southern colloquial expression renders it "Take care of your own first."

The ramifications of it are simple. What kind of charity would it be if a group gave to help someone outside their fellowship while someone within their ranks was starving?

I'd say it's a solid principle no matter what group one is speaking of. In the case of Masons, I would say to their credit also that they have the emphasis exactly where God has it, when they emphasize the verse, "Pure and undefiled religion before God and the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their trouble, and to keep oneself unspotted from the world." (James 1:27)

I am thankful also that I serve a church with an emphasis on such giving, both nationally and locally. Nationally, UMCOR (United Methodist Committee on Relief) helps worldwide in coordinating disaster relief. Locally, just last Sunday we had one of two special offerings per year in our conference, the Mother's Day love offering, that go towards supporting the Epworth Children's Home in Columbia. On a district level, our churches band together to support Habitat for Humanity ministries. On a local level, we contribute to various needs by both direct benevolence and donation to Total Ministries, a Spartanburg-based local charity.

Church members here have declared the same thing to me that I have always emphasized in principle: before the larger ministries receive support from us, we take care to ensure that local needs are addressed first.

You have continually tried to quote Scripture to Masons on various issues, so I assume you must feel biblical principles are important. Why do you now reverse yourself and criticize us when we follow clear scriptural principles?
 
Upvote 0

Rev Wayne

Simplicity + Sincerity = Serenity
Sep 16, 2003
4,128
101
72
SC
Visit site
✟21,040.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
1. Show favoritism in hiring practices, which is against the law according to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

So what will you say to the same practice when it is Christian preferment? I have known quite a few employers who have shown such preferment. Several years ago, when I first went to seminary, I loaded up every single item I possessed in an old Starsky & Hutch Gran Torino and drove off to Kentucky, where I unloaded box after box from the car, mostly heavy books, and walked up the stairs to the third-floor room I was assigned. Immediately after doing so, I went to the office and discovered that all the loan help and work-study job I had lined up prior to arrival, had fallen through the cracks. I was told, basically, unless you can come up with a job and show us on good faith that you will be able to take care of this bill, we cannot enroll you. And then the real bombshell: "you have two days." I was devastated.

My first impulse was to go load everything back up and drive home. But when I got back to the room, I fell to my knees instead and prayed one of the strangest prayers (for me, anyway) I have ever prayed. It was basically, "Lord, this was your doing, not mine. You led me here, if you want me to stay here, then it's up to you, not me, and I put it in your hands."

I got up the next morning and went to the jobs office on campus and told the director there what I faced and the time constraint. He said he had little to work with in that small amount of time, all he could suggest was that I go drive through nearby Nicholasville, drive up the main strip through town, and keep an eye peeled for a "help wanted" sign at the fast food places and grocery stores, which would be the only places likely to hire me on such short notice. I went all the way through town without seeing any signs and without feeling led to stop at any of the many places I saw. Just as I was about to reach the end of the strip, my eyes were drawn to a Winn-Dixie store, the last building on the street. Something about it felt right, so I stopped. I asked the manager at the desk if I could fill out an application, he said sure, and began looking for the application booklet. After searching around for a few minutes without turning it up, he finally got exasperated and said, "Never mind that, we'll find that later and take care of the paperwork. You're hired for the stock crew, you'll start tomorrow." When he told me the hours I would work, and the pay scale, it was no surprise to me to discover that it was just enough to take care of my tuition and expenses.

It wasn't until later that I found out that the manager of the store, as a matter of personal preference, hired Christians before anybody else, and more especially, that he sought out students from the seminary as his primary targets for hiring. After putting this matter in God's hands and following His leading, I found out that He couldn't have possibly led me to a place more favorable for being hired. It was one of the most tremendous boosts I have ever received to my faith.
That being the case, I find it impossible to criticize any manager or personnel director who has a "Christians preferred" policy. The one I became acquainted with in that instance was truly a tool in the hands of God. I know of quite a great many others who will hire Christians before any other person., simply because they know they have greater dependability. I daresay it is probably done on an even larger scale than it is practiced among Masons--for one thing, there are far more of them. So I would find it hypocritical to denounce a practice among Masons that I do not criticize among Christians.

2. Support a Mason's cause, even if he is right or wrong.
Well, you seem to read the oath differently. All I saw was a promise to come to the rescue if you saw him in trouble. The wording was,

I will assist a Companion Royal Arch Mason when I see him engaged in any difficulty, and will espouse his cause so far as to extricate him from the same, whether he be right or wrong.
Had the oath not included that phrase, I would not have been comfortable with it either. But since it says nothing about the handling of the matter once the "difficulty" is over, I assume the "right and wrong" part of the matter may be addressed after the fact. Without any specifics mentioned as to the nature of the "difficulty," it appears to be some situation in which assistance would be primary and urgent, and thus take priority over determining who is at fault. Otherwise I might find myself hesitating to help someone being triple-teamed in a fight while I ask him first, "What did you do to them?"

3. Keep the secrets of fellow Masons without exception, which means even if he murdered someone you would help conceal his crime of homicide.

I'm sure there's a name for the logical fallacy of your argument, I just am not familiar with it. It appears to be a parallel of the reductio ad absurdum, because it really is a bizzarre bit of logic to immediately jump to a worst case scenario and criticize on that basis (perhaps that's simply more of a straw man or a red herring).

In similar arguments, I have seen statements posted in response, from Masonic laws that exempt unlawful behavior from the oath, particularly more heinous offenses. Your information seems to be lacking on the matter, I should think you would know better. It is very similar to my profession, there are things I get told that cannot be revealed to anyone, at risk of lawsuits. Yet at the same time, we are told that if anyone reports to us information that a crime of a sexual or abusive or violent or unlawful nature has been committed, we are under obligation by law to report it, despite pastoral confidentiality.

So, in effect you made a commitment to sin against God, if necessary, on behalf of fellow Masons.
Again, an accusation of straw, and one on which I'm sure you have better information than you demonstrate.


Show me in the Bible where God approves of this unethical, immoral behavior for Christians!
My, my, your presuppositions are showing, and they don't seem to be any different than we've been suggesting all along. You have just moved from making a statement about Masons, to making a challenge concerning what God approves of in Christians!

But don't sweat it, Mike, it's like we've told you all along, in a country that is so overwhelmingly Christian by majority, it's an easy assumption to make that most Masons are probably Christians too.
 
Upvote 0